Home > Parent Perspective, Science & Research > A Shill For Science

A Shill For Science

Today we are featuring a guest post from one of our blog readers.  We hope you will appreciate her contribution as much as we do!

I’m the mother of two young children and I have a great guy to call my hubby.  I love running (training for a half marathon!) and baking, and like many moms, I do my best to balance the responsibilities of work and family.  In fact, for the past two years I’ve been working full time, second shift so that I can be at home with my kids during the day.

As a parent, I have my personal views and opinions about things, just like everyone else.  But at times, I’ve felt a bit like a contradiction.  See I’m a science-loving (nerd alert), breastfeeding, pro-vaccine, Christian mom.  I consider myself an “attached” parent since I believe in positive discipline, I co-sleep with my children, and I practice extended breastfeeding.  I always try to make natural choices for my children by mashing my own baby food and opting for locally grown produce when possible.  However, these characteristics don’t preclude me from having a great deal of respect for the medical field and the value of science.  The two don’t have to be mutually exclusive.   The truth is, I am so enamored by science that I consider myself lucky to live at a time when I can protect my child from so many vaccine preventable diseases.

To be honest, because of my specific views, I’ve often found it difficult to find other moms who’ve been willing to respect all my choices as a parent.  Thankfully, through online social groups, like the Vaccinate Your Baby Facebook page, I’ve begun to make connections with other like-minded moms that I can relate to – which led me to write this post.

As I began engaging in various parenting forums, I found myself frustrated by the way in which some people adamantly argue against vaccinations.  They often spout off inaccurate information and misrepresent the science.  They claim that doctors, scientists and the government are all out to cause harm.  They sometimes even suggest a “Big Pharma” conspiracy.

But here’s the real kicker.    I work for “Big Pharma”. 

Yup, I admit it.

And you know what?  I’m pretty darn proud of it too. 

I test vaccines for safety in the lab, utilizing various microbiological assays.  Before products are released to market, every lot undergoes rigorous quality control assessments to determine safety, purity, potency, etc.  Not only do we test the final product, but raw materials, components, and several points along the production line are pulled and tested, as well.  The microbiology labs, in particular, are responsible for ensuring all facets of vaccine production, and the fill and final product are free from bacterial, fungal and mycoplasma contamination.  So, before anything is released to the general public, each and every single lot goes through my lab.  It’s a fairly large responsibility, but a greatly rewarding one.  And I must admit, saving babies is neato!

While I do get paid to show up and do my job, everything I do outside of work is purely out of passion.  I don’t get paid to read immunization blogs or comment on pro-vaccination Facebook pages.  It’s absolutely absurd to insinuate that my company would actually pay employees to argue for vaccines on social networking sites.  I don’t make more, or less, based on the number of parents who vaccinate their children.  And I certainly don’t appreciate it when people who’ve never studied science, or worked for a pharmaceutical company, claim a “Big Pharma” conspiracy is out to get them.  Frankly, it hurts to hear people verbalize that anyone working in this industry is callous and “money-hungry”, and only out to get the big bucks.

The truth is, I work with some of the most brilliant and compassionate people I know.  Many of my co-workers are parents themselves, and are dedicated to supporting the production of vaccines for the world.  In fact, we have posters up around the plant site with pictures of employees’ children on them.  The posters include a photo of a child either receiving a vaccine, or simply smiling and then introduce the child, as well as the department the child’s relative works for.  The caption reads,

“Thank you to all of you who have worked on my vaccine.  Thank you for saving my life!”

It’s wonderful to have visual reminders of the children we are helping to protect.  It’s a really nice touch, and it’s nice to be reminded of why we do what we do, and why we are so passionate about our work.  Historically, I have always been pro-vaccine.  However, working for my pharmaceutical company has further bolstered my dedication and passion about vaccination.  I don’t just want to ensure that my children are up to date on their shots, but I also speak out so that children around the globe are, too.  I may be a “shill” for vaccines, but I am one for the passion in my heart, and not the money in my wallet.

So yes, I work for “Big Pharma”.  But I’m also a human a Christian, science-loving, breastfeeding, pro-vaccine, attached-mom human.

And I sincerely hope that others – like me – will realize that they are not alone.  There are lots of other parents who believe in the same things you do.  And who respect you for it.

If you would like to make a contribution to this blog, please contact us at shotofprevention@gmail.com.  We want to share your stories and encourage others to support the science and immunizations that protect us all.      

  1. Cara
    January 13, 2012 at 2:05 pm

    Thank you for this! I — a spiritual, PhD scientist, breastfeeding, pro-vaccine, tree-hugging, attached-mom human — can relate.

    Like

  2. Snoozie
    January 13, 2012 at 2:44 pm

    This article serves as a reminder that Big Pharma is not a faceless orb of oppression, but is a place where actual people work on behalf of other people. Thank you for being the human face of a pharmaceutical employee and for reminding us that you are working to make a safer world for our children!

    Like

  3. Amy
    January 13, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    LOVE LOVE LOVE! Thank you so much for writing such a great piece. Thank you also for all the work you do to keep mine and everyone else’s children safe and protected. Vaccines are a privilege that not every child in the world is privy to. I feel blessed to know that my kids have access to vaccines and I have the ability to help protect them from so many horrible diseases. We can’t protect our kids from everything but knowing that I can do my best to not only protect them but others in the community as well makes me happy. I don’t understand people who refuse to vaccinate their children. It makes no logical sense whatsoever. Playing with fire is a dangerous game and eventually people get burned. The sad part about vaccines is that by choosing not to vaccinate it isn’t always you or your children who get burned. Sometimes it is innocent bystanders :(.

    Like

  4. Leahona
    January 13, 2012 at 2:51 pm

    Thanks so much for all you do to protect our children. It is people like you who are so important to us as parents. Thank you Thank you THANK YOU!!!

    Like

  5. Krissy M.
    January 13, 2012 at 2:56 pm

    Great post. I hope that putting a face to a “shill” helps the pro-vaccine movement. Sometimes I think that anti-vaxers picture Scrooge McDuck in an office at Merck counting money, but in reality, it’s usually people who care deeply about public health.

    Like

  6. M
    January 13, 2012 at 3:09 pm

    Thanks for reminding us that there are moms working at “Big Pharma” and those moms vaccinate their kids!

    Like

  7. January 13, 2012 at 5:37 pm

    Thank you for all the work you do and have done to keep children safe from what can be devastating diseases.
    My son is severely autistic and I’d say vaccinations are exceptionally important for him as illness, though, thankfully infrequent, causes him huge distress and frustration as it is difficult to give him medicine and he can’t understand what’s happening to him. He goes to special school where there are many children who can’t be vaccinated because of underlying medical conditions. I feel happy that he is protected and helps protect others too.
    Keep up the good work xx

    Like

  8. Mary 'Mimi' Broderick
    January 13, 2012 at 5:40 pm

    Thanks for standing up for what you believe & are proud of where you work. Thanks for being a mom like so many of us who embrace her children, family & friends to live along side nature, the world and a better life with immunizations that protect our loved ones. Never forget where we came from & where we are going for a disease-free life with immunizations.
    mcb

    Like

  9. Steve Michaels
    January 13, 2012 at 8:06 pm

    And my local bank manager is a great guy, but that doesn’t mean that suddenly Bank of America isn’t falsifying foreclosure documents or cheating it’s customers. The difference between an employee and a principle is that as an employee, you are, by definition, not in a position to see the big picture. In fact, as a matter of cognitive dissonance, you may be more unlikely to see the big picture because it would so dangerously challenge your whole belief system. I don’t for a second believe that you are ‘out to cause harm’, but that does not mean that you could be causing harm without realizing it. As a matter of basic logic (I mean in the mathematical sense), your intentions are completely unrelated to your results. As such, while your entire blog is heart wrenchingly emotional and from the Heart, it really does not add up to anything of substance in the debate about vaccines.

    Like

  10. Annette B.
    January 13, 2012 at 9:01 pm

    Steve you have used the usual anti vaccination dribble that I have come to know and love.

    Do yourself a favour……..ask to have a tour of a Pharma company that not only makes vaccines, but all life saving drugs,

    Love the Blogg, you are doing a great job.

    I myself was in Pharma for 22 years, and was so proud of my drugs and what they meant to so many. We often received phone call, emails and letters from patients who thanked us for bringing the drugs to market that not only improved the quality of life, for them or their family, but in many cases saved it.

    Steve that is the BIG picture!

    Like

  11. Chris
    January 13, 2012 at 11:51 pm

    Last week my adult son was taken by ambulance to the emergency department, and spent two days in the hospital for a suspected stroke. It turned out he had a complex migraine (disordered speech, numbness in arm), but they needed to be sure since he has a genetic heart disorder.

    He did not receive much in medications at all, but the pharmacy bill was $700! The total charges were over $15000 (yes, our insurance has been billed).

    Many kids who get vaccine preventable diseases end up in the hospital, especially measles and infants with pertussis, not to mention toddlers with Hib. When my son was little he ended up in the emergency department when he was dehydrated with rotavirus.

    The argument that vaccines are a big money maker for pharmaceutical companies is ludicrous. They prevent diseases, and reduce the probability of kids ending up in the hospital. And having had a kid in the hospital as a newborn, as a toddler and now as an adult, the costs are not just financial. It takes an emotional toll on the whole family.

    Thank you “science-loving (nerd alert), breastfeeding, pro-vaccine, Christian mom” for your work in “Big Pharma”! Not only do you save babies, but you also save their parents money and emotional rips in their hearts.

    (Steve Michaels, don’t give me grief about autism causing “rips in their hearts”, my son is also disabled due to medical issues before he ever had his first vaccine!)

    Like

  12. Matt
    January 14, 2012 at 1:59 am

    Hun, make sure you deposit that check from work quick so I buy something nice 😉

    Like

  13. Chris
    January 14, 2012 at 2:18 am

    ?

    Like

  14. Steve Michaels
    January 14, 2012 at 6:00 am

    Thank you for letting all see that my comment, which wasn’t anti-vaccine ‘dribble’ but a thoroughly valid point about the author and the logical train behind this blog entry, has only been met with ad hominem and zero substantive disagreement. The points are valid and not really up for dispute. One person’s employment and lifestyle choices is completely irrelevant to the overall workings of a given multi-national corporation or an entire industry.

    And thanks for pointing out how pharma make all of those ‘life saving’ drugs. Unscrupulous doctors, lax regulatory control and failure of doctors to spot potentially lethal interactions mean that while pharma does create life saving drugs, their products are also the fourth leading cause of death, killing more people than car accidents. This fact has been widely reported.

    http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/17/local/la-me-drugs-epidemic-20110918
    http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/167/16/1752?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=prescription+drug+deaths&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

    The BIG picture is a lot more complex than a few phone calls and letters!

    Like

  15. Steve Michaels
    January 14, 2012 at 6:08 am

    I love the way you try to portray me as stupid by suggesting that I would believe that congenital disorders were related to vaccines. Nothing like trying to pre-empt a comment by attacking the person first! My only point for you is that you contradict yourself and your argument entirely. First you point out how expensive the hospital bill was WITHOUT pharma products and then you argue that ‘preventing illness’ and hospitalization somehow is reducing revenue for pharma. Which is it? Does pharma profit from hospitalization or not? I would submit to you that long term illness management, the current medical paradigm, is much more profitable than illness treatment to cure.

    Like

  16. Chris
    January 14, 2012 at 1:57 pm

    Which is it? Does pharma profit from hospitalization or not?

    Considering that a great deal of pharmaceuticals are used in management of ill patients, it does gain by having more sick people. Though since much health care is provided by governments, that puts a strain on the economy. So vaccines actually prevent profits by pharmaceutical companies, and are not a big part of their business.

    Something you would have known if you ever answered my question on what number was next to the word “vaccines” on page 30 of this.

    Now answer the following:

    Is it cheaper (and not just for the pharmaceuticals) to treat a person who comes down with measles with pneumonia, mumps (and sometimes the subsequent deafness and/or sterility), the effects of congenital rubella disease, the meningitis from haemophilus influenzae type b, polio (and post polio syndrome), chicken pox with infection (and later shingles), diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (the latter three requiring lots of antitoxin, and respiratory support) in a hospital? Or just getting a vaccine?

    Of course the problem with most bacterial diseases is that a person does not become permanently immune even after getting the bacterial infection. So yes, there is a requirement for boosters like the Tdap.

    Now what makes more sense: preventing disease and the chronic conditions they create with a few vaccines, or letting the diseases come back? You need to tell us that, with actual citations. But I’ll leave a few to show what is real science, and to help you find the answers on how vaccines do not save on health care costs (some you may recognize):

    Pediatric hospital admissions for measles. Lessons from the 1990 epidemic.
    West J Med. 1996 Jul-Aug;165(1-2):20-5. (this one tells how much the hospitalizations cost)

    Economic Evaluation of the 7-Vaccine Routine Childhood Immunization Schedule in the United States, 2001
    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2005;159:1136-1144.

    An economic analysis of the current universal 2-dose measles-mumps-rubella vaccination program in the United States.
    J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1;189 Suppl 1:S131-45.

    Impact of universal Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccination starting at 2 months of age in the United States: an economic analysis.
    Pediatrics. 2002 Oct;110(4):653-61.

    Impact of specific medical interventions on reducing the prevalence of mental retardation.
    Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006 Mar;160(3):302-9. Review.
    (shows that there are “chronic” conditions after diseases)

    Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis: more cases of this fatal disease are prevented by measles immunization than was previously recognized.
    J Infect Dis. 2005 Nov 15;192(10):1686-93. Epub 2005 Oct 12. (the kids need lots of expensive supports near the end of their short lives, pictures here)

    Lack of association between acellular pertussis vaccine and seizures in early childhood.
    Pediatrics. 2010 Aug;126(2):263-9. Epub 2010 Jul 19.

    Encephalopathy after whole-cell pertussis or measles vaccination: lack of evidence for a causal association in a retrospective case-control study.
    Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2006 Sep;25(9):768-73.

    Childhood vaccinations, vaccination timing, and risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus.
    Pediatrics. 2001 Dec;108(6):E112.

    On-time vaccine receipt in the first year does not adversely affect neuropsychological outcomes.
    Pediatrics. 2010 Jun;125(6):1134-41. Epub 2010 May 24.

    Like

  17. Chris
    January 14, 2012 at 2:27 pm

    Here is an interesting article:article about a case of measles in France. It says:

    The patient had … no documented history of measles vaccination.

    And also:

    The authors report that five days after receiving outpatient care with initiation of an anti-infective agent and oral prednisone for fever, cough, coryza, diarrhea, and weight loss, the patient was admitted to the hospital with persistent illness. ….The patient was treated with ribavirin, corticosteroids, and intravenous immunoglobulin…

    So, would the French health system have paid more or less to “Big Pharma” on two MMR doses, or what was given in the hospital to the patient?

    (read the article, learn the outcome and why it was unusual, and more likely to have spread to others)

    Like

  18. Chris
    January 14, 2012 at 2:30 pm

    I am having issues with block quotes today… the last part should not be in quotes:

    So, would the French health system have paid more or less to “Big Pharma” on two MMR doses, or what was given in the hospital to the patient?

    (read the article, learn the outcome and why it was unusual, and more likely to have spread to others)

    The article was posted in the comments in Orac’s last article in Respectful Insolence on a special list Wakefield is on.

    Like

  19. beans and weenies
    January 14, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    Parents may have “inaccurate” information because they are denied informed consent by their Pediatricians who do not provide a copy of the vaccine labels.
    It is well known among immunologists that the human immune system does not mature enough until at least 12 months to produce antibodies, so what is the purpose of so many doses of vaccines prior to that age? Does this make sense to someone who is so “science” oriented?
    Also, on page 11 of the Tripedia label, it lists autism as a potential adverse effect in the post marketing data, yet “experts” are saying that no evidence exists to support a link and that “correlation does not equal causation.” This seems only to apply to autism however, since the label lists many other conditions such as Guillain Barre’, encephalopathy etc that are well known to be risks and adverse effects and vaccine related.

    Like

  20. Nathan
    January 14, 2012 at 6:07 pm

    It is well known among immunologists that the human immune system does not mature enough until at least 12 months to produce antibodies

    I would just adore a citation for this one.

    Also, on page 11 of the Tripedia label, it lists autism as a potential adverse effect in the post marketing data

    No, it doesn’t. It said that autism has been reported after vaccination. No kidding. But “after” does not mean “because of”, and the insert is quite clear about that, as is the research, which to date has shown no association between vaccines and autism.

    the label lists many other conditions such as Guillain Barre’, encephalopathy etc that are well known to be risks and adverse effects and vaccine related.

    And much less frequent from the vaccine than the disease. That’s the whole point of the vaccine. To decrease your risk.

    Like

  21. Steve Michaels
    January 14, 2012 at 6:12 pm

    Two points, firstly this is nothing more than a single anecdote. In fact, the cited article states explicitly that this particular case was unusual. Secondly (but not unrelated), cost analysis of a single case is worthless as there have been thousands of other cases where no vaccine was given and no medical intervention was needed. The conclusion you are trying to draw can NEVER be made based on a single case.

    Like

  22. Kelly
    January 14, 2012 at 7:03 pm

    Parents may have “inaccurate” information because they are denied informed consent by their Pediatricians who do not provide a copy of the vaccine labels.

    The package inserts are publicly and freely available on the FDA website, so your claim that parents are denied this information is incorrect.

    It is well known among immunologists that the human immune system does not mature enough until at least 12 months to produce antibodies, so what is the purpose of so many doses of vaccines prior to that age? Does this make sense to someone who is so “science” oriented?

    I think you just made that statement up. Why would incorrect information be “well-known among immunologists”? What is well-known amongst immunologist is that there is evidence that the fetus can most definitely produces antibodies before 12 months of age. So no wonder vaccinating infants doesn’t make sense to you. Your facts are wrong. Furthermore, the very fact that the infant immune system is immature is the reason to vaccinate. The infant immune system needs all the help it can get in order to successful defend against pathogens. This textbook chapter on “Vaccine Immunology” explains: http://www.who.int/immunization/documents/Elsevier_Vaccine_immunology/en/index.html

    This seems only to apply to autism however, since the label lists many other conditions such as Guillain Barre’, encephalopathy etc that are well known to be risks and adverse effects and vaccine related.

    “Correlation does not equal causation” applies to all the conditions listed unless additional evidence supports causation. There is very strong evidence that autism is not caused by vaccines, so yes, in the case of autism “correlation does not equal causation”. Again, your interpretation is incorrect. Experts are not advising parents of the “risk” of autism from vaccines, but that risk doesn’t exist.

    I think parents are getting the correct information from their pediatricians. It’s the antivaxers that seem to have a wealth of inaccurate information.

    Like

  23. Steve Michaels
    January 14, 2012 at 7:48 pm

    Kelly:

    I think you just made that statement up. Why would incorrect information be “well-known among immunologists”? What is well-known amongst immunologist is that there is evidence that the fetus can most definitely produces antibodies before 12 months of age.

    Since you have attacked me previously for mispeaks, I must ask you where you found a 12 month old fetus or any studies of 12 month old fetuses?

    Like

  24. Kelly
    January 14, 2012 at 7:58 pm

    LOL. Unlike you Steve. I can acknowledge that I misspoke. I agree that should be that an infant can most definitely produce antibodies before 12 months of age.

    Like

  25. Kelly
    January 14, 2012 at 8:00 pm

    As per Steve’s correction, that should read “there is evidence that the infant can most definitely produce antibodies before 12 months of age”.

    Thanks Steve.

    Like

  26. Jenny McKay Cooper-Butler
    January 14, 2012 at 9:19 pm

    The avatar totally makes me believe this person is real! This post totally convinced me that everyone that works at pharmaceutical company is just a nice, normal person and I should go vaccinate my child just because this one person says so. Yay science!

    Like

  27. Kelly
    January 14, 2012 at 9:30 pm

    Jenny, this blog post isn’t science. It is one mom’s story. Nobody’s saying this is a reason to vaccinate your child, although the science to support vaccination can be found on reputable and credible sites like those listed here: http://www.who.int/immunization_safety/safety_quality/approved_vaccine_safety_websites/en/index.html

    I do hope you have a chance to review the scientific literature and see that the anti-vaccine position is based on misinformation, misconception and logical fallacies.

    The recommendation to vaccinate is not based on one person’s opinion. It is based on a mountain of scientific literature that is so overwhelming I have yet to see a knowledgeable person refute vaccines.

    Like

  28. Jenny McKay Cooper-Butler
    January 14, 2012 at 9:45 pm

    Wow Kelly, you aren’t condescending at all and super friendly. So basically if I read anything (including the IOM report showing evidence that convincingly supports a causal relationship between specific vaccines and adverse reactions) and still decide to not vaccinate, then I am not considered knowledgeable? I see how that works, I’m smart if I agree with you, dumb if I don’t.

    http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/adverseeffects.pdf

    Also, why does the CDC show a 1 in 20 risk of diphtheria although diphtheria isn’t endemic to the United States. That one always stumps me.

    Like

  29. Kelly
    January 14, 2012 at 10:01 pm

    From your own citation:

    For the vast majority, (135 vaccine-adverse event pairs), the evidence is inadequate to accept or reject
    a causal relationship. In many cases, the adverse event being examined is an extremely rare condition, making it hard to study.

    The risk of adverse reactions from the diseases are orders of magnitude greater than the risk of adverse reactions from the vaccines. Of course, if you were knowledgeable, this wouldn’t stump you, would it? It’s pretty embarrassing that you claim to be knowledgeable and your own citation shows that you are not.

    You don’t provide a link to your claim that the CDC shows a risk of 1:20 of diphtheria. My guess is that you are misreading the information. I have seen the CDC quote a risk of death from diphtheria as low as is 1:20 and as high as 1:5. Diphtheria is no longer endemic in the US due to vaccination.
    http://cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/dip.html

    Your sarcasm isn’t very becoming. I suggest that if you want people to be friendly to you, you shouldn’t be so hostile and arrogant. I also don’t see any indication from your posts that you are at all knowledgeable on vaccines never mind more knowledgeable than those that do recommend vaccination.

    Like

  30. Chris
    January 14, 2012 at 11:12 pm

    Jenny McKay Cooper-Butler:

    Also, why does the CDC show a 1 in 20 risk of diphtheria although diphtheria isn’t endemic to the United States.

    Where is that stated so we can get it in context, please?

    Some of the data of diseases does come from outbreaks in areas outside of the USA. Since there are people entering the USA from other countries there is still a possibility of a disease outbreak even though it is not endemic.

    For instance there was an interruption of services when the USSR broke up into independent states: Diphtheria in the former Soviet Union: reemergence of a pandemic disease.

    Do you think that if we reduced vaccination with the DTaP and Tdap that the USA would not have a similar outcome? What measures outside of vaccination should we adopt to prevent the return of diphtheria?

    Like

  31. Chris
    January 14, 2012 at 11:49 pm

    When I look at it, I think the CDC was saying there was a 1 in 20 chance of fatality with diphtheria. In another paper about the former Soviet republics outbreal, Successful Control of Epidemic Diphtheria in the States of the Former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: Lessons Learned, there is a paragraph on “Case Fatality Ratios” (CFR). These would be how many deaths per cases:

    Due to the lack of diphtheria antitoxin and delayed treatment, the CFR was very high (>20%) in some countries at the beginning of the epidemic. In 1994, the CFR (excluding Estonia, from which no deaths were reported among 10 cases) ranged from 2.8% in Russia to 23% in Lithuania and Turkmenistan. Since 1995, the international community has provided antitoxin and antibiotics, and the CFR decreased on average to 5%–10%. In Russia, where diphtheria antitoxin was always available, the CFR was ∼3% [8]. Variation of CFRs may also be caused by regional differences in surveillance: Less severe cases of illness are more likely to be reported in some countries than in others due to differential availability of laboratory resources and access to medical care [8].

    So where there was actual care available the CFR was as low as 5%, and in Russia about 3%. The ratio of 1 in 20 is 5%, and 3% is about 1 in 33. Which fits what Kelly found in the CDC Pink Book chapter on diphtheria.

    So even though you may be protected from diphtheria by herd immunity in the USA, if you actually catch it (and there are people who have brought it back from their travels) you would still have about a 3 to 5% chance of dying.

    The vaccine for diphtheria is combined with tetanus, and even though it is hard to get it exists in the environment, so there is not herd immunity protection. Then there is pertussis, which is circulating and very dangerous for babies too young to be vaccinated and up to when they get the full set of DTaP vaccination at about a year old.

    Like

  32. Nathan
    January 15, 2012 at 12:21 am

    Aw, we don’t attack you for misspeaks, Steve. We attack you for fundamental errors in scientific fact that you then backtrack and claim are misspeaks. “12 month old fetuses” is clearly a misspeak.

    However, your classic “Pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but there are absolutely NO vaccines for bacterial infection,” is a quite forcefully asserted error of fact. If it was a misspeak, you would have told me what you meant to say. Perhaps you meant to say there are absolutely NO vaccines for fungi infection. 🙂 But that would have made no sense in our conversation.

    https://shotofprevention.com/2011/03/15/improving-measles-vaccine-efficacy-with-the-help-of-a-rat/#comment-2380

    Like

  33. Kelly
    January 15, 2012 at 1:41 am

    Chris, if I’m reading the Pink Book correctly, there is no herd immunity for diphtheria. The bacteria still circulate in the US and vaccination is key for prevention.

    Although diphtheria disease is rare in the United States, it appears that Corynebacterium diphtheriae continues to circulate in areas of the country with previously endemic diphtheria. In 1996, 10 isolates of C. diphtheriae were obtained from persons in an Native American community in South Dakota. Eight of these isolates were toxigenic.

    None of the infected persons had classic diphtheria disease, although five had either pharyngitis or tonsillitis. The presence of toxigenic C. diphtheriae in this community is a good reminder for providers not to let down their guard against this organism.

    Like

  34. NT
    January 15, 2012 at 4:17 pm

    If this person is so proud to work for Big Pharma and to advocate vaccination why does she hide behind a cutesy avatar? LOL
    Yup totally believable, not.

    Like

  35. Chris
    January 15, 2012 at 8:57 pm

    Here is a hint.

    Like

  36. Chris
    January 15, 2012 at 9:12 pm

    And another hint, or this classic.

    Like

  37. Chris
    January 15, 2012 at 9:16 pm

    Oh, and then there is this and then there was this teenager.

    Do you understand now?

    Like

  38. January 16, 2012 at 5:24 am

    Testing:
    There is no testing for long term side effects, cancer causing properties, mutagenicity nor for genotoxicity.
    There is extremely limited testing in connection with concomitantly administered vaccines.

    In pharmaceutical production there are never two batches which are the same with respect to test results, be they physical, chemical or microbiological etc. This applies to all injections/vaccines.
    One operates in regions, for example: the amount of an ingredient must be within +10% to – 10% of the stated amount.
    A certain (small) percentage from each batch is tested and it is deduced from these results whether or not the whole batch should be approved.

    Like

  39. James
    January 16, 2012 at 12:36 pm

    Steve Michaels :
    Two points, firstly this is nothing more than a single anecdote. In fact, the cited article states explicitly that this particular case was unusual. Secondly (but not unrelated), cost analysis of a single case is worthless as there have been thousands of other cases where no vaccine was given and no medical intervention was needed. The conclusion you are trying to draw can NEVER be made based on a single case.

    Measles has a 10 to 25% hospitalization rate and a 0.02 to 0.1 % fatality rate. both in the developed world. In between those two figures there are the long term effects which can range from mild (scarring) to less mild (blindness) to extreme (permanent disability).

    In other words, somewhere between 1 in 10 and 1 in 4 measles cases leads to a hospitalization and somewhere between 1 in 1000 and 1 in 5000 cases result in death.

    Without vaccination the base rate of measles disease would be in the hundreds of thousands of cases per year in the US alone.

    The cost effectiveness of vaccination is well established and has been for decades.

    Like

  40. Chris
    January 16, 2012 at 3:36 pm

    In pharmaceutical production there are never two batches which are the same with respect to test results, be they physical, chemical or microbiological etc. This applies to all injections/vaccines.

    [citation needed]

    Like

  41. beans and weenies
    January 17, 2012 at 6:06 pm

    “Another example is that of measles
    immunization in 6-month-old infants. These infants fail to raise
    antibody responses because of immune immaturity and/or the
    residual presence of inhibitory maternal antibodies, but generate
    signifi cant IFN-γ producing CD4+ T cells.”

    Thanks for that link Kelly but it only supports what I said regarding immune immaturity. It even states that as an issue on the graphs. In any case, it certainly doesn’t fall in line with what Offit said about newborns being able to handle 10,000 or 100,000 vaccines at the same time. Good try though.

    And no, Pediatricians do not provide parents with informed consent as they should. People are not expected to research their medication side effects online prior to filling a prescription, they are provided with that info from the pharmacy. To imply that the parents should find the vaccine ingredient labels for themselves is absurd.

    Like

  42. beans and weenies
    January 17, 2012 at 6:12 pm

    Also the graphs indicate this:

    “Mechanisms (presumed)”

    Like

  43. Kate
    January 18, 2012 at 12:15 am

    mindanoihaMindanoiha :
    In pharmaceutical production there are never two batches which are the same with respect to test results, be they physical, chemical or microbiological etc. This applies to all injections/vaccines.

    What is the point you are trying to make here?

    .A certain (small) percentage from each batch is tested and it is deduced from these results whether or not the whole batch should be approved.

    Yes, that is generally how testing is performed, what is the point you are trying to make?

    Like

  44. January 26, 2012 at 2:53 pm

    Thank you for this. I am a mom who lost her son to a strain of Pneumococcal Meningitis that is now covered in the current vaccine. I try to share his story in hopes to help parents realize the importance of vaccinating their children.

    Like

  1. January 13, 2012 at 5:40 pm
  2. January 18, 2012 at 1:00 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s