Efficacy of vaccines info?
mkrol at macc.wisc.edu
Tue Apr 18 04:48:00 EST 1995
In article <jwayne.798171503 at mars>, you wrote:
> OK, all of you virii gurus. I've been encountering more and
> more arguments that are anti-vaccine, and haven't heard good
> counter arguments (i.e., pro-vaccine). Here are some of the
> things I have come across recently from folks like Eva Sneed:
> 1) Vaccine cultures inevitably have other indigenous viruses
> that grow on the culture and which are ultimately introduced
> into the population during innoculations.
This is not inevitable, merely the worst cases are highlighted by those
with a point to make.
> a) the original polio vaccine was cultured on green monkey
> kidneys, human cancer cells, serum from calves and horses, and
> pig stomach. One of companion virii introduced was SV40
> (simian virus 40), which causes an aids-like disease in
> hamsters. Oral polio vaccine is now tested for SV40 but the
> injectible isn't. MMR is not tested for it.
> b) Epstein-Barre virus has been purposefully put into the
> culture medium as it causes cells to reproduce rapidly,
> which is desirable from a financial consideration. This is a
> primary reason for the widespread chronic fatigue syndrome that we
> see today.
EBV infection is extremely common in all areas of the world, including
areas which are not vaccine-heavy, and infection rates are about 35% (US)
to 90%(tropical areas) by age six. There is a negative correlation between
socioeconomic status and age of infection (the higher you are in class, the
later you get infected) which in and of itself is a very strong argument
against any realimportance of vaccine caused infection. I believe that one
of the first incidences of a good virus-cancer link was Burkitt's lymphoma
and EBV, in africa in the 50's. Also, it is the causitive agent for
infectious mononucleosis, amongst other things. The relation between EBV,
whose infection rates amongst adults is probably near 100% and Chronic
Fatigue Syndrome, the last i heard, was at best unclear.
> c) RSV (respiratory sensitivity virus) is now widespread in
> kids. It is a common contaminant in vaccines.
RSV has alway been common in kids, from Huston to Trinidad to Uganda to
> 2) Vaccines have never been proven to be effective and safe.
> On the contrary, they are ineffective and unsafe.
> a) 1942: Hepatitus vaccination in the military resulted in
> the worst hep epidemic in US - over 50,000 cases.
True. This led to improved regulation of vaccines by the FDA.
> b) Almost every polio case in last 15 years have been a
> result of vaccination or contacted via relatives living in same
> house. (Cited: JAMA 3/13/87: 1973-84 76% of polio cases from
> polio vaccine)
However, because of the polio vaccine, polio is no longer pandemic...hence
the growing tendancy to stop immunizing...'natural' polio simply doesn't
exist in most developed nations anymore, but continues to be a serious
problem in developing nations. If you compare the absolute numbers of
poliomyelitis cases in the reported for the 1980's (less than 10 cases per
year in the US) to the prevalence of the disease in the early 1950's
(21,000 cases of full blown poliomyelitis per year in the US) you will be
impressed at the difference that an effective vaccine can make. I was!
Gosh...just think of all those obsolete Iron Lungs!!
and yes, the vaccine CAN cause poliomyelitis...the vaccine consists of
live, non-virulent virus strains. The viruses are non-virulent because of
one or several mutations. Viruses mutate at random, and occasionally the
non-virulent form will revert to the virulent form. However, the rate of
this is much lower than the rate of non-protection by the original killed
virus vaccine. I'm grateful we don't have to deal with this crippling
affliction much in this modern age.
> c) 1967: The adeno virus vaccine resulted in up to 38% more
> men coming down with rubella than the unvaccinated.
Rubella is not related to adenoviruses...what was the question?
> d) 1976: swine flu vaccination resulted in 14-24% becoming ill
> with flu
Was this actually the flu, or the very common 'flu-like' symptoms caused by
one's body reacting to something it recognises and doesn't like...these
sorts of responses are due to various cytokines, fer instance, if you
inject someone with interferon...they develop typical flu-like symptoms.
As an asthmatic, i get vaccinated every year (and have since i was a young
child)..Every few years i feel poorly for a day or two, but nothing like
full blown flu. This year, even though i was vaccinated i still got the
flu (not unexpected, as vaccines are not 100% effective) and i was in bed
for a week, with a fever going up to 104F (quite dangerous for a 29 yearold
like myself, and i also experienced a common complication of
flu+asthma...pneumonia). All in all, these vaccines (different ones
annually) have served this virologist quite well.
> e) 1985-86: 60% of measles from measles vaccine (Cited: NEJM 1989)
Again, compare the absolute numbers of cases in the US now (aprox 1% of
pre-vaccine levels) to those of pre-vaccine days (Nearly 100% of children
got the disease, of which i was one, with 1 in 3000 dead from the disease,
of which i wasn't...in underdeveloped countries, there are about 1 million
deaths/year from measels)
> 3) Separate point about DPT, cuz there seems to widespread
> anti-DPT sentiment:
> DPT affects breathing for almost 60 days after innoculation.
> Crib deaths are almost always after DPT. There is no way to
> distinguish between crib death and vaccination death (and death
> certificates never say vaccine death). In Australia, DPT was
> made optional and 50% of families opted out; the incidence of
> crib death then dropped by 50%. In Japan, DPT was prohibited
> in infants less two years of age; this resulted in the lowest
> incidence of sids in the world. It was later made optional,
> and crib death quadrupled (reported by Cherry in 1988 Pediatric
> Supplement, p 973).
I wouldn't know.
> 4) All studies claiming vaccine efficacy were performed in the last
> 10 years of a natural decrease of the disease. In many cases,
> there was a 90% decline of diseases before the introduction of
> the vaccine.
In the case of polio, mentioned above, the incidence of paralytic polio was
actually increasing until the first vaccine was made available in 1955. In
actuality, the number of total infections was probably declining, because
of improved hygine and sanitation. This decline in infection is thought to
be the cause of the increase in paralytic polio, as young children infected
with polio rarely have neurological involvement, whereas older children and
young adults are much more likely to have the debilitating and life
threatening paralysis polio is known for. For many other diseases it is
certain that improved education, hygine and sanitation, people are less
frequently afflicted by such pandenics. But when they do occur in what has
developed into a pathogen-naive population, the disease outbreaks can be
much more dramatic and the disease itself more virulent.
> I hate one-sided arguments, but haven't heard direct counters
> to these statements. How about filling in the other side of
> the coin? (I have cross-posted this on misc.health.alternative
> as a number of skeptics seem to hang out there).
My data come from the virologist's bible...Virology, 2nd edition, edited by
Bernard Fields (who recently passed away) and David Knipe, published in
1990 by Raven Press NY. You may wish to consult this tome as well.
Hope this helps!!
Yup, these opinions are only my own, and sometimes not even that. So
please don't blame them on anyone else, not even my Mom.
PGP public key available on request...I prefer to recieve letters that are
in envelopes over those on postcards
More information about the Virology