August 29, 2008

Vice President Sarah Palin, Mother of a Beautiful Boy with Downs Syndrome

I LOVE the sound of that.

John McCain has just chosen the mother of a child with Downs Syndrome as his running mate. Trigs mom, Sarah Palin.

This gives me hope.

August 27, 2008

Taking a Blogging Break

... to catch up with life. Well to try to gain some ground anyway.

Will be back in early September.

August 18, 2008

Raising Disabled Children is Hard

... and heartbreaking... and this is no news to us.  But to me it is telling that the researchers that found out how hard it was, even for upper income families, were "shocked".  

It seems that few people get what we are going through.

Which is probably why it is so easy for the medical community to ignore our children.
UNC study: 'chilling' hardship rates among families raising disabled children
Monday, August 18, 2008
Families with disabled children are struggling to keep food on the table, a roof over their heads, and to pay for needed health and dental care.  But according to a new study from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, these challenges are now falling on middle-income households and not just on poor families as previous research has found.
These latest findings show that long-held federal standards for identifying the nation’s poor are not capturing everyone in need and should be re-evaluated, especially for the financial effects on disabled children, said Susan L. Parish, Ph.D., the study’s lead investigator and an assistant professor in the UNC School of Social Work.

“The bottom line is that U.S. families raising children with disabilities are reporting severe hardships at rates that are chilling, including families that are solidly middle-class,” she said. “We were shocked to find such high rates of hardship among upper-income families.”

The study, which is based on 2002 data from the National Survey of American Families, is being published in this month’s journal “Exceptional Children.” The survey analyzed 28,141 households.

The UNC study found that overall, families across all income levels who are raising disabled children are significantly more challenged by food, housing and health issues compared to families without disabled children. Many also struggled to pay their phone bills.

Most surprising, Parish said, was data indicating that a significant percentage of those struggling are higher-income households. Yet based on federal poverty guidelines – which have remained unchanged since the 1960s and are used to determine eligibility for many income, food, health and disability-related programs – those same households would not be classified as “poor,” she said. They also would not qualify for assistance, despite the higher costs of raising children with disabilities, Parish noted. In 2002, the federal poverty level for a family of four was $18,100.

According to the study, 40 percent of the surveyed families with disabled children who earned between two to three times the federal poverty level (between $36,200 and $54,300 for a family of four, for example) experienced at least one food hardship, including worrying that food would run out or skipping meals because of a lack of money. Fifteen percent of families with incomes at three or more times the federal poverty level ($54,300 and up for a family of four) experienced housing instability, meaning they were unable to pay their rent or had to move in with others.

“These results suggest that state and federal policies that are in place to help families with disabled children are not going nearly far enough,” Parish said. “They are not eliminating deprivation. And these findings are particularly troubling now when the nation’s economy is struggling. Families raising children with disabilities are likely to be hardest hit during this economic downturn.”

Though the study found that children with disabilities were more likely to have health insurance and a usual source of care, they were 61 percent more likely than non-disabled children to have postponed necessary medical care and 83 percent more likely to have postponed needed dental care. The study didn’t examine the causes for those results, but Parish said they likely are related to the expenses of obtaining care – even with health insurance – and other issues, such as limited transportation.

The research results offer a compelling reason to expand eligibility standards for federal programs designed to assist families with disabled children, Parish said. Though more study is needed to determine how best to assist these families, UNC researchers suggest that increasing the income limits for food stamps, housing assistance and federal Supplemental Security Income, which assists low-income people with disabilities, would probably be a good start. Raising the asset limit for  Supplemental Security Income and Medicaid, the federal insurance program for the poor and disabled, so that families are not penalized for saving money in case of a hardship would also help, Parish said.

“These families struggle to provide adequate care for their disabled children,” Parish said, “and stronger supports are vital.”

School of Social Work contact:
Michelle Rogers, (919) 962-1532, michrog@email.unc.eduThis e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
News Services contact: Patric Lane, (919) 962-8596,

August 15, 2008

Round Up: Too Much To List

So, So many important stories out there and I have not been around to follow up on them, or even my own stories.  Chandler has taken to eating dirt so his lead level has shot through the roof, and our kitty got hit by a car and has a broken pelvis.  It has been a tough week at chez Taylor.

Here are some of the things I have missed:
  • David Kirby follows up on Rene Jenkins 3% and shares with us the Military's 2% stats for serious vaccine injury.  Digg it.
  • Dan Olmsted on the 1979 Wyeth Memo.  Their reaction to the cluster of "SIDS" deaths in TN connected to their vaccine?  Stop shipping so many doses from the same lot to the same place, so health officials can't detect 'hot lots' that kill children.  Tantamount to an admission that Wyeth has known for 30 years that SIDS is a vaccine reaction.
  • Margaret Dunkle proposes an action plan in the AJC in response to the Hannah Poling case.
  • Chicago Tribune brings us more doubts on the safety and efficacy of Gardasil.
  • Barbara Loe Fisher on the Gardasil injury reports that NVIC is receiving. 
  • Drowning is the leading cause of death for children with autism. Christopher Connections.
  • AP notes that it is becoming socially acceptable to be intolerant of children with autism.
  • Even the pro-vaxers are counting the days until Julie Gerberding's tenure at (ruining) the CDC is over.  Watch the video.
  • 8 Drugs Doctors Would Never Take.
  • Paula Dorf "Cake" Mascara's primary ingredient is Thimerosal.
  • Claire Daines may play Temple Grandin.  
  • If Jeffrey Deutch's Building Common Ground is not on the list of blogs you read, it should be. 
  • Pray for my son and my kitty cat. 

August 11, 2008

GMA Confirms Jenkins Comments Were About Autism

Last week GMA ran a piece on vaccines and autism that included a quote by Rene Jenkins of the AAP.
 "Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."
I wrote a piece heavily criticizing AAP for throwing away three percent of the population to serious vaccine injury.

Andrea Keller called GMA to see if they would release the rest of the interview.  They said their policy is not to release unused footage, but that the context of the conversation was Autism.

Daivd Kirby called AAP and asked for comment, and they said that Jenkins 'misspoke' and she was talking about minor vaccine reactions like "localized pain and swelling, and/or fever."

I spoke with the producer of the GMA piece this morning who interviewed Jenkins.  She reiterated that they don't release unused interviews, but she was nice enough to read me the question that was asked and Jenkins full response.

The discussion was about autism and not minor vaccine reactions.  The question was a version of 'can you rule out an association between vaccines and autism', and Jenkins answer was something to the effect of 'you can never rule out an association between anything and anything else, but we don't see an association.... but in the case of Hannah Poling...', (the interviewer had not mentioned Hannah).  And that lead into her quote, "Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."

So ABC DID use the quote correctly and in context.

David Kirby reports:
"I was told [by AAP] that Dr. Jenkins misspoke when she referred to children with “defects.” What she was talking about is the subset of children who have adverse vaccine reactions such as localized pain and swelling, and/or fever."
Jenkins was NOT talking about minor reactions and autism was the subject Autism and Hanna Poling WAS Jenkins reference point.

If Jenkins was misspeaking then that was a pretty out there misstatement.  If someone was asked about about the percentage of people who get brain damage from boxing, how would one rationally include bloody noses in the answer?

I encouraged ABC to follow up on this and help us get a real statement from AAP (or CDC) on what they believe the percentage is for kids who are at risk serious vaccine reaction and autism.

No Child By Two

One of the options for an alternate vaccine schedule is to wait and not begin vaccination until a child is two years old and has a mature immune system.

Dan Olmsted has a great column today on implementing a No Child By Two vaccine policy.

I think it is a great idea.

I have a friend who is taking her two month in to see the doc today and wanted advice on vaccinating.  My advice, as always, figure out what is the biggest threat to the child and work on preventing that.  There were Mumps in Maine last year, so I called CDC to see if that was still going around.  Nope... last case was in February.

So if there is no immediate viral threat to the baby, and the baby has a 1 in 150 chance of a serious neurological disorder, which vaccines are known to cause among other things, why not wait?

Monsanto Ditching Bovine Growth Hormone Business

So apparently Americans have decided that they prefer their milk with out puss.

They were not buying BGH milk so Monsanto is moving on.

And why were they not buying it?  Because dairys who didn't use it started labeling their product as Non BGH milk, educating the consumer that it was out there.

And who was the first dairy to do this and to have to face down Monsanto's lawyers for it?  OAKHURST DAIRY OF PORTLAND, MAINE!

Our little Maine milk makers started labeling their milk, "Our Farmers' Pledge: No Artificial Growth Hormones Used."  Monsanto did not like that because it implied that there was something bad about BGH milk.  Oakhurst decided that they had a duty to consumers and kept the labeling, and because they stared down the Mean Monsanto, other Maine dairies followed, and dairies followed nationally.

So thanks to Oakhurst for looking out for the consumer, and let's hope that no one is interested in buying the looser product, Posilac, and it goes the way of the dinosaur.

Now can you see why Monsanto is fighting labeling their genetically modified foods as such?  Once people find out what they are eating, they give a damn and won't buy this stuff.

The FDA needs to require GMO labeling.  

Did Dr. Ivin's Vaccines Make Him Sick?

So there is so much out there about Dr. Ivins to be said, but frankly I have not wanted to delve into it as the possibilities in this are just too miserable.

The first thing that jumped into my head when the news stories started on him was Julie Gerberding's statement in the CNN interview when confronted with the idea that government vaccine experts were not being earnest.  Julie wants to remind us that,  "the government is actually composed  of mom's and dad's... they understand the dilemma that a parent feels".  I want to believe that what she is saying is at least mostly true and that Ivins is not in any way representative of what vaccine researchers are capable of.

I will post this one quote from the LA Times today:
Last week, one anthrax expert suggested that Ivins' deteriorating mental state after 2000 might have been affected by the annual vaccinations he would have received over his 28-year career to protect against infection by the potent anthrax spores he cultivated. Ironically, much of Ivins' research was aimed at developing a new vaccine.

Meryl Nass, a Maine physician and expert on the anthrax vaccine, said Ivins complained to her in 1998 that he was suffering from a blood disorder he worried might be a side effect of anthrax vaccinations.

Nass suggested last week that Ivins may have had psychological side effects as well, especially if the vaccines interacted with the antipsychotic drugs he took over the last decade.

The old vaccine has been linked to psychological effects in a report by the National Academies of Science Institute of Medicine. Examining active-duty military personnel who received shots from 1998 to 2000, the study found that the diagnosis rate for psychoses and other personality disorders more than tripled after the vaccinations.

Feel free to discuss.

Maybe I will get the stomach to write about this story more, but not today.

HT: Toto

August 7, 2008

Jon Poling Corrects Paul Offit Again, This Time in the NEJM

A few months ago, Paul Offit told some mistruths about the Poling case in the NYT, and they ran Jon Poling's correction a few days later.

Offit has not stopped lying mistruthing and now Poling is correcting him publicly for a second time, now in the New England Journal of Medicine.

One of the errors that Offit keeps repeating is that the Poling judgment was a court decision (Offit's disciple Amanda Peet repeated this untrue statement on GMA yesterday), which I have heard him state repeatedly since Poling corrected him last spring.  Offit's assertion is that these decisions don't belong in the courts, but that they should only be made by doctors, which is exactly how the Poling case was made.  So then why would Offit be complaining about something that actually worked the way that he said it should work?

At first I thought that he was just not listening, assumed that it was a court ruling and just shooting his mouth off with out thinking.  But then I realized that he is not claiming that the Poling decision was a court case and dismissing court decisions to insulate the vaccine program from the Poling decision, he was doing it to insulate Vaccine Inc. from all the forth coming decisions from the Omnibus hearings and any of the other 5,000 cases pending in vaccine court.

He knows that petitioners will be awarded judgments by the court and he is trying to use his interviews on the Poling case front load his talking points that delegitimatize the "unusual vaccine court".

This is all IMHO of course.
New England Journal of Medicine  Volume 359:655-656 August 7, 2008

Vaccines and Autism Revisited

"To the Editor: In his Perspective article on a possible connection between vaccines and autism, Offit (May 15 issue)1 speculates about my daughter, Hannah, and repeats inaccuracies from a March New York Times opinion piece that was officially corrected by the Times and our April 5 letter. By omitting critical information from my March 6, 2008, statement, Offit misrepresents my position. I said, "Many in the autism community and their champions believe that the result in this case may well signify a landmark decision as it pertains to children developing autism following vaccinations. This still remains to be seen, but currently there are almost 5,000 other cases pending."

Offit's remarks about Hannah's case are not evidence-based. He has no access to my daughter's personal medical records, legal documents, or affidavits. In contrast, physicians from the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) who studied this information recommended that the government concede Hannah's case. The clinical history Offit presents contains significant inaccuracies, and the resulting conclusions are consequently flawed.

Offit confuses issues by comparing Hannah's case with unrelated decisions in "vaccine court." The Office of the Secretary of DHHS, through the Department of Justice, conceded Hannah's case. There was no courtroom hearing and no decision from the "unusual vaccine court."

Offit is frequently cited regarding the "biologically plausible" theory that simultaneous administration of multiple vaccines is safe. His opinion is unsupported by clinical trials, much less investigations in potentially susceptible subpopulations.

Despite the high frequency of mitochondrial dysfunction in autistic children,2 studies have not established primary or secondary roles. To explore this question, we need an immunization database for children with metabolic disorders to establish safety guidelines3 and improve vaccine safety for minority subgroups of children.

I agree with the statement of Bernadine Healy, former director of the National Institutes of Health, who said, "I don't think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you're afraid of what it might show. . . . If you know that susceptible group, you can save those children.

If you turn your back on the notion there is a susceptible group . . . what can I say?"4 Also commendable is the new 5-year research plan of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee, which will entail the study of minority subpopulations, including patients with mitochondrial disorders.5

A strong, safe vaccination program is a cornerstone of public health. Misrepresenting Hannah Poling v. HHS to the medical profession does not improve confidence in the immunization program or advance science toward an understanding of how and why regressive encephalopathy with autistic features follows vaccination in susceptible children.

Jon S. Poling, M.D., Ph.D.
Athens Neurological Associates
Athens, GA 30606

Dr. Poling is the father of Hannah Poling and reports receiving consulting or lecture fees from Pfizer, Eisai, Ortho-McNeil, Biogen, Teva, Immunex, and Allergan. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this letter was reported."
So now Offit has been twice publicly corrected in two of the highest profile publications in the world, and from here on out if we hear Offit repeat the "court case" misinformation, there can be no doubt that the man knows exactly what he is doing and he is just a flat out liar.

Yesterday at the "Vaccinate Your Baby" press conference Offit said that Bernadine Haley, former head of NIH who believes that the vaccine/autism link may be real and it should be the focus of study, must not have done her research, since she disagreed with him.  He continues to lie about the Poling case despite the recurrent corrections of Jon Poling a respected Neurologist with Johns Hopkins credentials.

I think Offit is so used to just saying whatever he wants about anyone that disagreed with his vaccine stance for a long time, with few consequences, because when he started years ago it was only powerless parents that he was degrading.  He does not seem to have noticed that now that respected people in main stream medicine are waking up to the problem, his blanket smearing of people who take the theory seriously, and lying about the facts is now a slap in the face of people much more respected than he is.

But I guess he has that book coming out in a month so there is no turning back for him.  He is all in and will be going out with a bang.

UPDATE:  Don't miss Anne Dachel's post on the matter over at Age of Autism

Posting Without Comment

August 5, 2008

Failure to Disclose Conflicts of Interest in "Vaccinate Your Baby" Kick Off

The American Academy of Pediatrics, Every Child By Two and Dr. Paul Offit, whom I have now decided to refer to as the Axis of Conflict of Interest, forgot to mention something during the press conference this morning, when they were encouraging everyone to "Vaccinate Your Baby".

They forgot to mention their conflicts of interest.

This after having the CBS Evening News expose their serial nondisclosure of their financial ties to vaccine makers only ten days ago!

From Jane Johnson director of DAN!, whose account of the event was on AOA this morning when I asked if the Axis disclosed their financial ties to vaccine makers:
"Not a peep.  Amanda referred, vaguely and defensively, to 'following the money trail,' but if you hadn't seen Sharyl Attkisson's CBS news piece you wouldn't have known what she was talking about.  She made an analogy to Boeing investigating airplane safety that was mystifying--I'm still trying to remember what she said and make sense of it.  There was no mention by anyone else that they make a penny off of anything relating to vaccines."
This the day after Paul Off it made a statement to Inside Autism claiming that he discloses his vaccine profits.
"Do we ever hide information? Of course not. I have declared my potential conflicts of interest regarding my relationships with Merck on the development of the Rotavirus vaccine ever since I was on the (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) starting in 1998. Every time I’ve written an article, whether it was for the New York Times or the New England Journal of Medicine, I’ve declared that, because I’m not ashamed of it. Quite frankly, I’m proud of it. I’m the co-inventor of a vaccine that’s currently in five developing countries and clearly has already made a difference in this country."
Apparently he was not proud enough of his patent this morning to mention it to the press covering the event.

Don't miss the part where Offit flip flops on CBS's story on him.

First Attkisson lied:
“Did (reporter Sharyl Attkisson) lie about whether or not we provided materials? Of course,” said Paul Offit"
But when pressed for specific errors, he only can object to the "tone" of the story.
"Asked whether any specific facts in the story were wrong, he said it was primarily the tone he objected to. But he did say that the hospital owns the patent, not him (though he received a share of royalties from it). Also, when Attkisson noted that he had been quoted as saying children could safely take up to 10,000 vaccines at once, “what I actually have said is at least 10,000. It’s probably closer to 100,000."
So I guess Attkisson did get one thing wrong... Offit's claims of vaccine safety are WAY crazier than she gave him credit for.

Posting the video again:

AAP Decides that Three Percent of Children are Throw Aways

Today Amanda Peet appeared on on GMA to show the world how little show knows about vaccines.  More on Amanda's statements later, but for the moment I want to focus on the story that ran before her interview and the current head of the AAP, Renee Jenkins', statement on vaccine safety and the charge that vaccines play a role in autism:
"Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."
Ergo, for 3% of children, who have these "defects", the risks DO outweigh the benefits?  What are the "defects" and what is the outcome of vaccinating those with "defects"?  Who are those three percent?!

What are you doing to find out who those three percent are so you can keep from hurting them!

If you KNOW that three percent of vaccinated children will fall ill, why are you not moving hell itself to find out who those kids are?  AND WHY ARE ARE YOU OK WITH VACCINATING ALL NEWBORNS  BEFORE THEY EVEN LEAVE THE HOSPITAL KNOWING THREE PERCENT WILL BE INJURED!!!

Four years ago my son turned out to be the one in 33 kids that had such a "defect" and for him, the risks of vaccinating FAR outweighed the benefits.  If he had been unvaccinated and exposed to EVERY serious illness, I don't think his chances of death or life long disability would have been as high as three percent.

As I have mentioned, my father his little brother and their father both got polio at the height of the epidemic and my grandfather died as a result.  So my grandfather was 1 in 60,000 for loosing his life to the disease, my father and uncle were each 1 in 3000 for getting the disease (both recovered and went on to be decorated Naval Aviators), but my son in 1 in 33 for being damaged by a vaccine against such diseases.  (Note, I have been as generous as I can to polio rates, I used the highest rates of infections and death I could find, and then rounded up)

Why would any parent vaccinate their child knowing they have a 1 in 33 chance of that vaccine doing damage?!  And you can't tell them in advance if they are more likely to be part of that three percent or not!

Especially when AAP, who recommends they vaccinate anyway, treat that three percent like throw aways.  They don't try to protect them in advance, they don't treat or even acknowledge the injury once it has happened, and they teach doctors how to throw a child out of a practice if the parents won't vaccinate.

So, in effect, AAP saying to hell with those at the bottom of the bell curve.  The genetically weakest three percent.

Would it be wrong for me to suggest that Rene Jenkins is at risk for spending three percent of her afterlife in hell?

UPDATE:  Andrea Keller contacted the producer of the piece at ABC who said that they do not release unused footage so we don't get to hear the rest of what Jenkins said.

David Kirby contacted the AAP who said that the 3% she was referring to was minor reactions like fever, swelling at the injection site, etc.  If that is the case, then why did ABC use the quote in a piece about serious neurological disorders?

ABC needs to share the rest of that interview.  They have opened a can of worms and we need to know what exactly Jenkins was saying.

Another UPDATE:

I spoke with the producer of the GMA piece who interviewed Jenkins.  She reiterated that they don't release unused interviews, but she was nice enough to read me the question that was asked and Jenkins full response.

The discussion was about autism and not minor vaccine reactions.  The question was a version of 'can you rule out an association between vaccines and autism', and Jenkins answer was something to the effect of 'you can never rule out an association between anything and anything else, but we don't see an association.... but in the case of Hannah Poling...', (the interviewer had not mentioned Hannah).  And that lead into her quote, "Ninty Seven plus percent of children don't have these defects, so, when you look at what the risk and the benefits to children are, and, you really weigh the risks, then the benefits far outweigh the risks that occur."

So ABC DID use the quote correctly and in context. 

David Kirby reports:
"I was told [by AAP] that Dr. Jenkins misspoke when she referred to children with “defects.” What she was talking about is the subset of children who have adverse vaccine reactions such as localized pain and swelling, and/or fever."
Jenkins was NOT talking about minor reactions and autism was the subject Autism and Hanna Poling WAS Jenkins reference point.

If Jenkins was misspeaking then that was a pretty out there misstatement.  If someone was asked about about the percentage of people who get brain damage from boxing, how would one rationally include bloody noses in the answer?

I encouraged ABC to follow up on this and help us get a real statement from AAP (or CDC) on what they believe the percentage is for kids who are at risk serious vaccine reaction and autism.

August 4, 2008

AAP, ECBT, Offit and Peet Hold A Press Conference to Tell You To Vaccinate

You have to admit, they have balls.

A week after having CBS hold the spot light on their conflict of interest and all the cash they get from vaccine manufacturers, AAP, Every Child By Two and Paul Offit will hold a press conference together, along with Amanda "Parasites" Peet, to tell everyone "The Facts About Vaccination®" and to kick off their "Vaccinate your Baby" campaign.

I guess they have decided that the best defense is a good offense, rather than simply responding to CBS and addressing their credibility problems.

I am reminded of Ken Lay's assertions that Enron was just dandy when the press started asking questions after Jeff Skilling took his money and ran.  August 24th 2001, two months before the stock hit the fan:

Business Week: "There has been some concern among investors that perhaps there is more to his resignation than meets the eye, perhaps accounting or other issues that have yet to come to light. Is there anything more?"

Ken Lay:
"There are absolutely no problems that had anything to do with Jeff's departure. There are no accounting issues, no trading issues, no reserve issues, no previously unknown problem issues. The company is probably in the strongest and best shape that it has ever been in."
JB Handley has unearthed more info on Every Child By Two, turns out half their income is from Pharma.

Jenny McCarthy has sent a shout out to all available hands that can get into NYC tomorrow to picket and get our mesage out.

I will go ahead and repost the CBS piece from last week to remind us that what is on tap for tomorrow is merely a commercial brought to you by the good folks who sell vaccines:

And a blast from the past so that you may remember the bravado and seduction that was Enron, when in their last days they promised that they could protect you from the weather:

The lesson?  If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

If someone promises you that your child can be free of all diseases, down to the common flu, with no side effects... buyer beware.


The press release mentions that the mother of a child with autism will be there.  Apparently it will be Ann Hotez whose husband Peter Hotez is a vaccine researcher and President of the Sabin Vaccine Institute.   So it looks like Amanda Peet will be the only one there not getting a check from Vaccine Inc.

Honda/Acura Pulls Savage Ads

Honda's response to one dad's complaint letter:
The following is the response I received today from American Honda regarding sponsorship of the Michael Savage Radio Program. If you are considering purchasing a new automobile, please consider Honda products.  Please share this message with other advocates so they will be aware also. - Derrick

Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 13:49:57 -0700
Subject: RE: Michael Savage

Dear Mr. Jeffries,

Your communication regarding Michael Savage has been referred to me.

An American Honda automobile radio commercial mistakenly ran in the
Michael Savage “Savage Nation” radio program in the San Diego and New
markets. We have taken immediate steps to ensure that all national
and regional Honda advertising be pulled from this program permanently.

Jeffrey Smith

Jeffrey A. Smith
Assistant Vice President
Corporate Affairs & Communications
American Honda Motor Co., Inc.
1919 Torrance Boulevard
Torrance, California, 90501

  Derrick Jeffries

August 2, 2008

CDC Reiterates that They Want ALL Newborns to Get Hep B Shot Before Leaving Hopsital

From Reuters:
"... Delivery hospitals play a key role in the national strategy to prevent hepatitis B transmission and should have policies and procedures in place to ensure that hepatitis B vaccination is administered to all newborns before they leave the hospital, they emphasize."
And by ALL they mean babies who weight 4 and a half pounds and are "medically stable".

So they remain bullish on their one size fits all vaccine schedule, even for babies who have no medical history yet, even for a disease that the vast majority of them are not at risk for, even for a vaccine which many adult health professionals (who are required to get it because they come into contact with blood products of high risk individuals) report multiple health problems after receiving.

Note the rational given for this.  Not the good of the individual infant, but as a key in their "national strategy to prevent hepatitis B transmission".

So your baby is drafted into the CDC's war on Hepatitis B, whether or not you want him to be, and whether or not it is in his best interest.

Mine was, and after his first Hep B shot he was left with three months of fevers and crying, and two years of bowel problems (until we put him on GFCF).  And even though all this was reported to his doctors, they continued giving him the Hep B shot (contraindicated for any one who has reacted to it before) until he regressed into autism at 18 months following the FOURTH time they gave him the shot.
Hypersensitivity to any component of the vaccine, including yeast, is a contraindication (see DESCRIPTION). This vaccine is contraindicated in patients with previous hypersensitivity to any hepatitis B-containing vaccine.
Yes there is yeast in the vaccine.  Also some combination of:
Aluminum Hydroxide, Phosphate Buffers, Thimerosal, Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate, Amino Acids, Dextrose, Formaldehyde or Formalin, Mineral Salts, Potassium Aluminum Sulfate, Soy Peptone, Aluminum Phosphate, Amino Acids, Inorganic Salts, MRC-5 Cellular Protein, Neomycin Sulfate, 2-Phenoxyethanol, and Polysorbate 20.
Depending on what brand of the shot.

The Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund even pays for "anaphylactic shock and death" as a result of getting a Hep B vaccine".

CDC knows full well that some children will get very sick and a few will die from this shot, yet they want ALL children to have it with in 48 hours of birth.

Known side effects:
ENGERIX-B is generally well tolerated. As with any vaccine, however, it is possible that expanded commercial use of the vaccine could reveal rare adverse reactions.
Ten double-blind studies involving 2,252 subjects showed no significant difference in the frequency or severity of adverse experiences between ENGERIX-B and plasma-derived vaccines. In 36 clinical studies, a total of 13,495 doses of ENGERIX-B were administered to 5,071 healthy adults and children who were initially seronegative for hepatitis B markers, and healthy neonates. All subjects were monitored for 4 days post-administration. Frequency of adverse experiences tended to decrease with successive doses of ENGERIX-B. Using a symptom checklist,† the most frequently reported adverse reactions were injection site soreness (22%) and fatigue† (14%). Other reactions are listed below.
Incidence 1% to 10% of Injections:
Local Reactions at Injection Site: Induration; erythema; swelling.
Body as a Whole: Fever (>37.5°C).
Nervous System: Headache†; dizziness.†
†Parent or guardian completed forms for children and neonates. Neonatal checklist did not include headache, fatigue, or dizziness.
Incidence <1% of Injections:
Local Reactions at Injection Site: Pain; pruritus; ecchymosis.
Body as a Whole: Sweating; malaise; chills; weakness; flushing; tingling.
Cardiovascular System: Hypotension.
Respiratory System: Influenza-like symptoms; upper respiratory tract illnesses.
Gastrointestinal System: Nausea; anorexia; abdominal pain/cramps; vomiting; constipation; diarrhea.
Lymphatic System: Lymphadenopathy.
Musculoskeletal System: Pain/stiffness in arm, shoulder, or neck; arthralgia; myalgia; back pain.
Skin and Appendages: Rash; urticaria; petechiae; pruritus; erythema.
Nervous System: Somnolence; insomnia; irritability; agitation.
Postmarketing Reports: Additional adverse experiences have been reported with the commercial use of ENGERIX-B. Those listed below are to serve as alerting information to physicians. 8
Hypersensitivity: Anaphylaxis; erythema multiforme including Stevens-Johnson syndrome; angioedema; arthritis. An apparent hypersensitivity syndrome (serum sickness–like) of delayed onset has been reported days to weeks after vaccination, including: arthralgia/arthritis (usually transient), fever, and dermatologic reactions such as urticaria, erythema multiforme, ecchymoses, and erythema nodosum (see CONTRAINDICATIONS).
Cardiovascular System: Tachycardia/palpitations.
Respiratory System: Bronchospasm including asthma-like symptoms.
Gastrointestinal System: Abnormal liver function tests; dyspepsia.
Nervous System: Migraine; syncope; paresis; neuropathy including hypoesthesia, paresthesia, Guillain-Barré syndrome and Bell’s palsy, transverse myelitis; optic neuritis; multiple sclerosis; seizures.
Hematologic: Thrombocytopenia.
Skin and Appendages: Eczema; purpura; herpes zoster; erythema nodosum; alopecia.
Special Senses: Conjunctivitis; keratitis; visual disturbances; vertigo; tinnitus; earache.
Note that in their safety study they only follow children for 4 DAYS to see if they will have adverse reactions to the shot!
 "Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility: ENGERIX-B has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility."
Does it cause cancer, alter genes, make people infertile?  They can't tell you, they've never checked to find out.

But they want EVERYONE to have it the day they are born.

How in the hell are then not in jail for this?

August 1, 2008 Lists "Autism" as Known Adverse Reaction to DTaP Vaccine Tripedia

In's "A to Z Drug Facts" section the entry on Diphtheria / Tetanus Toxoids / Acellular Pertussis Vaccine contains the following Central Nervous System Adverse reactions for Sanofi Pasteur's Tripedia:

Drowsiness (29%); irritability (25%); anorexia (10%); fussiness (6%); autism, convulsion, encephalopathy, grand mal convulsion, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence (postmarketing)."

Hats off to for actually providing informed consent to consumers. To my knowledge they are the first to do it.

HT: Allison Chapman