Health Care

Vaccinated kids account for 90 percent of child whooping cough cases in Vermont

Editor’s note: This article was updated at 1:18 a.m. to include additional information about the number of pertussis vaccinations that Vermont children have received this year. 

Whooping cough, or pertussis, is spreading across Vermont at a record rate this year, with 310 cases confirmed so far. As that number continues to climb, however, a clear-cut remedy is nowhere in sight.

Officials at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) say the best way to prevent pertussis is to get vaccinated. But data from the Vermont Department of Health (DOH) suggest that going through the pertussis vaccination regimen is not a sure-fire way to ward off the highly contagious disease.

As of Aug. 10, there were 178 confirmed cases of pertussis in Vermont children between the ages of six months and 18 years. Of that number, 90 percent — or 160 kids — had received at least one dose of the child vaccination, while the majority had received five or six doses. According to the DOH, one child had received one or two doses, eight had received three doses, nine had received four doses, 74 had received five doses and 68 had received six doses.

The DOH recommends that all kids under the age of 7 receive five doses of the vaccine known as DTaP, or the diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis vaccine. The DOH calls for children to receive four doses before 18 months of age and another before kindergarten.

The problem with DTaP, as a study published last month in the New England Journal of Medicine shows, is that the vaccine loses its effectiveness. The study compared 277 children, ages 4 to 12, and found that a child’s odds of contracting pertussis increased 42 percent every year after the fifth dose.

Patsy Kelso, a DOH epidemiologist, said the vaccination regimen isn’t producing the desired results.

“The current thinking is that the pertussis vaccination is just not as effective as we’d like it to be,” she said. “Even if you’re vaccinated, it’s efficacy wanes after a few years. Although no vaccine is perfect, this vaccine is less good than we’d like.”

In addition to DTaP, there’s a pertussis vaccine called TDaP, which stands for the tetanus, diphtheria and acellular pertussis vaccine. Kelso said that before kids enter seventh grade, they should receive an injection of TDaP. She advised that adults and some senior citizens over the age of 64 should receive the vaccination, too.

According to the CDC, TDaP is even less effective than DTaP. U.S. officials estimate that the vaccine protects only seven out 10 people. Officials believe that DTaP has an efficacy rate of 80 percent to 90 percent during and right after the five-shot process. After five years, they estimate, the efficacy rate drops to 70 percent.

While Kelso acknowledged that the rise in documented pertussis cases is partially due to a new method used for testing the illness, she said Vermont’s record outbreak this year is not just a matter of calculation.

“In Vermont we started doing a new lab test for pertussis this year and it’s a lot more sensitive than the tests we used to do,” she said. “Even without that, though, there’s still an increase in cases.”

And it’s not just Vermont; every state but Michigan and California have experienced outbreak levels at least twice as high as those recorded by the CDC at this time in 2011. As of the 39th week of 2011, the CDC had recorded 11,969 pertussis cases. That number has nearly tripled this year, as officials have documented 30,908 cases.

In 2012, there have thus far been more cases of pertussis than in any full calendar year recorded since 1959, when roughly 40,000 cases were reported. The last time Vermont saw pertussis cases near this year’s level was in 1997 when 283 were reported. In 1996, 280 cases were reported.

As of Sept. 20 of this year, Vermont had the sixth highest incidence rate in the country, with 42 people per 100,000 contracting pertussis. Wisconsin had the highest incidence rate in the country at 78.6, then Minnesota with 63.5 and Washington with 58.1. The national average is 9.3 people per 100,000.

Kelso said that the current thinking among health officials is that this widespread uptick in pertussis is due to the vaccinations faltering. Nonetheless, she said, the vaccination can help fight off the illnesses when contracted, just as the flu vaccine can.

“We don’t say that it’s necessarily failing people because they might have less severe symptoms,” she said. When asked if she could quantify this observation, she said she couldn’t.

Despite the vaccination’s less-than-perfect track record, Kelso maintains that it’s better to get vaccinated than to not. Furthermore, it’s free.

“In Vermont, we provide no cost vaccines for all children and adults. So people should see their primary care providers because if their primary care providers are enrolled in our program, they get free vaccines.”

For those Vermonters without a primary care provider, Kelso said to contact a local health department office to learn about the numerous ways to obtain free vaccinations.

“The best thing is to get vaccinated,” she said. “And if children have a cough they should not go to school or child care. They should be seen by a health care provider.”

If you read us, please support us.

Comment Policy requires that all commenters identify themselves by their authentic first and last names. Initials, pseudonyms or screen names are not permissible.

No personal harrassment, abuse, or hate speech is permitted. Comments should be 1000 characters or fewer.

We moderate every comment. Please go to our FAQ for the full policy.

Andrew Stein

About Andrew

Andrew Stein is the energy and health care reporter for VTDigger. He is a 2012 fellow at the First Amendment Institute and previously worked as a reporter and assistant online editor at the Addison County Independent, where he helped the publication win top state and New England awards for its website. Andrew is a former China Fulbright Research Fellow and a graduate of Kenyon College. As a Fulbright fellow, he researched the junction of Chinese economic, agricultural and environmental policymaking through an analysis of China’s modern tea industry. He is fluent in Mandarin Chinese and has been awarded research grants from Middlebury College and the Freeman Foundation to investigate Chinese environmental policies. A member of Investigative Reporters and Editors, his work has also appeared in publications such as the Math Association of America’s quarterly journal Math Horizons and When Andrew isn’t writing stories, he can likely be found playing Boggle with his wife, fly fishing or brewing beer.

Email: [email protected]

Follow Andrew on Twitter @andrewcstein

Latest stories by Andrew

Recent Stories

Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Vaccinated kids account for 90 percent of child whooping cough cases ..."
  • merry shernock

    I got the worst case of shingles my health care provider said she had ever seen…two years after I had the vaccine.

  • Jessica Bernier

    The vaccine is, unfortunately, “less good” but, hey, “It’s free”eeeeee! No reason why you shouldn’t get all the free stuff you can. Besides, we have a sh*t ton of inventory to move. Did I mention it’s free?

  • Jessica Bernier

    Will Harry Chen be putting this story on his new, expensive
    educational materials?

  • Suzanne Gagnon

    The word is “regimen” not “regiment.”

    I concur. My kid got pertussis last Dec, having received the recommended regimen of vaccines.

  • Kathryn Kinzel

    The 90% vaccinated is a little misleading – the pertussis vaccine does not confer protection until the primary series is completely administered, which is four shots by the age of ~15 months (or the 18 month mark listed in the story by DOH). So it would be interesting to see how many of the younger children are actually not completely immunized, either because the vaccinations are delayed for whatever reason or the child is too young to have completed the four-dose series.

    Regardless, the efficacy of the vaccine leaves a lot to be desired. Hopefully a better version will come out relatively soon, but until then, a mediocre vaccine is better than no vaccine.

  • Dorian Yates

    Would you buy this product?
    Product—90% failure
    Price— $74.25 to $262.75 ($14.85 to $52.55/shot x5 doses)
    Most stores couldn’t give a product like this away…..
    I am confused as to why we taxpayers are paying for this product?

    • Jason Boyd

      90% failure? It stated 90% efficacy…which in this case means success. What they are saying though is that the effect of the vaccine wears off over time…so maybe you’ll still get it but hopefully not as bad if you hadn’t been vaccinated.

      And where do you get the cost? The story mentions free. That is $0 ($0/shot x 5 doses = $0)

      • Dorian Yates

        Hi Jason- 90% failure because 90% of the whooping cough cases GOT whooping cough—the vaccine failed them—that is they got the vaccine-preventable disease that was not actually prevented by the vaccine.
        The cost numbers are from the VT Dept of Health vaccine purchasing pool FY 2012 budget. That is what the States pays for each dose of vaccine. According to the Vermont DOH, the State costs per vaccine dose for 2012 range from $14.85 to $52.55 per shot depending upon whether it is a straight DTaP vaccine or DTaP combined with other vaccines (private sector pricing can be far higher). The DOH estimated doses for those DTaP vaccines total 31,300 doses at a total cost of $1,361,705 for the year. Our taxes pay for them, even if someone is not paying for them at the moment of injection. If insurers pay for some or all of them, we still pay in our premiums. I fear nothing is truly free from cost.

        • Ghoststar Azul

          Not arguing about the cost but, 90 percent of the people who contracted whooping cough had received the vaccine is not at all the same as 90 percent failure.
          90 percent failure would mean that 90% of the people that received the vaccine contracted whooping cough. The article states that 90% of the people who contracted whooping cough in Vermont had received the vaccine at some point.
          It is interesting to note that 10% had not had the vaccine. That statistic only includes the number of non-vaccinated people that contracted whooping cough. I wonder what is the percentage of the population in that area that has not been vaccinated.

          • Joe Harris

            In California, they found that 87% were fully vaccinated that got the whooping cough.

            11 % were partially vaccinated,that got the whopping cough. And only 8 %, were non vaccinated that got the whooping cough.

            It appears, that the more vaccinated you were in Calif.the more of a chance you had to get the very disease you were vaccinated to prevent?

            That’s not logic, that is insane stupidity!

            Furthermore, the Idiots that said to do the new fad of cocooning your new baby. We now know, by the latest headlines that they were not protecting those babies. They were, by their own admission “guilty” of endangering those babies.

            In other words, to put this in terms that you Idiots defending this stupidity can understand.

            The cocooning, was probably killing and maiming the babies. Instead of protecting them!

            And they appear, to be caught in the web of their own deceit. By now claiming, that the vaccine was giving the immunity to the vaccinated. When clearly, the Calif. data
            shows just the opposite.

            So now we have a vaccine,that clearly does now work. And causes the very epidemics that it was designed to prevent!!!! ??????

            Any wonder why, this Nation is 17 trillion dollars in the hole? It’s because this is their idea, (and model)of public health.

            This kind of incompetence, is not only a public relations nightmare. It’s a National disgrace!

        • Will Workman

          Dorian, your math is faulty. The vaccine didn’t fail 90% of the time. Of the people who got whooping cough, 90% had some vaccination. In order to know if the vaccine is effective, you would have to know what percentage of kids aren’t vaccinated. Let’s say that’s 5% of all kids. If unvaccinated kids make up 5% of the population but 10% of the actual whooping cough cases, then they disproportionately at risk.
          However, by the same reasoning the vaccinated kids make up 95% of the population, but only 90% of the whooping cough cases. There’s a benefit, but you would sure expect it to be higher.

          • Dorian Yates

            Will- it’s about the percentage exposed to Pertussis—the numbers mean nothing if there was no exposure so it is not against the greater population.

          • Dorian Yates

            I imagine that the 90% of pertussis cases that were vaccinated feel that the vaccine failed them 100%.

  • Danny Weiss

    Katheryn Kinzel says, ” . . . a mediocre vaccine is better than no vaccine.”, when 90% of the cases spawn from vaccinated kids? Umm, me thinks not.

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      Well yeah, because if no one was vaccinated we would be seeing MUCH higher rates of pertussis this year. That’s kindof common sense.

      • Jessica Bernier

        And your proof for that is what? Because it seems more likely that we’d have less than 160 kids and their families being affected by Whooping Cough right now.

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          See Richard’s explanation below.

      • Danny Weiss

        Kathyrn Kinzel, don’t you really mean, if MORE people were vaccinated we would be seeing much higher rates of pertussis? That’s what the logic would indicate from the statistics.

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          That’s not logical at all. If someone is not immunized against pertussis, and they are exposed, then the odds are pretty good that they are going to get sick. If they are immunized, then more often than not they will not get sick.

          We are seeing 85% of cases having been immunized because the vaccine is not 100% effective. But it is more effective than doing nothing.

          • Danny Weiss

            Not logical? I’m scratching my head as to how you establish your logic. The statistics from the Vermont Dept. of Health clearly state that 90% of those effected received the vaccine. That being the case, don’t you mean the odds are not just pretty good, but EXCELLENT that if one contracts this disease, they will have been immunized prior? That is precisely what these statistics indicate.

          • Jon Foote

            Kathryn your logic is fuzzy… 90% of the cases were in vaccinated children. That means if you are vaccinated, you are 9 times more likely to get sick, than if you were not vaccinated.
            So on these numbers it is more effective to not be vaccinated, otherwise 90% of the cases would have been in children that were NOT vaccinated.

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            Guys, what we don’t know here is how many children in the state are immunized versus not immunized. When comparing two groups of people you need to have a common denominator, otherwise the raw numbers mean nothing.

            If we go just by the raw numbers, yes, more people that were vaccinated got pertussis. But there are probably many more people that are vaccinated in the first place, so the actual risk is much lower.

            Let’s say we have a group of 1000 people. 900 are immunized. 125 people get pertussis – 25 in the unimmunized group and 100 in the immunized group. Now, more people in the immunized group got pertussis (75% of the cases), BUT the number “at risk” in each group is different. So 20 out of 100 people got pertussis in the unimmunized group (25%) and 100 out of 900 people got pertussis in the unimmunized group (10%). The overall risk of getting pertussis is 2.5 times higher in the unvaccinated group than the vaccinated group.

            The vaccination bill passed last spring should give a better idea of how many kids in Vermont are immunized, so maybe at some point in the near future we will be able to do these types of analyses.

    • Lisa Mackenzie

      Kathyrn here in Vermont, we do have numbers on vaccinations for all children entering kindergarten and seventh grade- with vaccine breakdown -from school nurses all around the state. These numbers are available on the Department of Health website.
      Vermont is at or above the CDC guidelines for vaccination of every vaccine except Chicken Pox which is the last to be added to the required schedule for school children in Vermont and was introduced as a “convenience” vaccine for employers and working parents.
      Now the Chicken pox which was once a rite of passage for all children, that continued to boost the entire population and provide herd immunity for newborns, pregnant women and elders, has now become a scourge to eradicate, a Vaccine Preventable Disease that must be eradicated. In our attempt to do so, we have spent a god deal of money, exposed children to rare but real adverse reactions and created a need for yet another vaccine, the shingles vaccine, because with universal vaccination for chicken pox, the herd immunity-the real kind-is lost. Oh and guess who manufactures the shingles vaccine? That’s right the company whose chicken pox vaccine created a need for it, Merck, the company that spends millions of dollars lobbying to remove parents rights to opt out of their products.
      The numbers reported above came from the VT DoH. There is no mystery or uncertainty to them.

      • Kathryn Kinzel

        Yes, there are data coming from school nurses, I believe the bill that was passed last spring enabled DOH to standardize reporting and make reporting a little more timely across the board – there were a lot of questions in the legislature about what numbers should be used and this would clear that up a bit.

        Vermont is at CDC guidelines when you look at each vaccine separately, but in terms of everyone getting every vaccine, not as good. And again, there was a lot of doubt in the CDC numbers, which prompted the ultimate action in the bill to improve reporting.

        What really struck me when I was reading the numbers last spring was that there were 10% of students or so that were not up-to-date on their vaccinations but had not formally requested an exemption, just that they were “working on it”. I am wondering how many of those students keep claiming that they are “working on it” when really there either isn’t an intention to get vaccinated or for some reason they are unable to get to the doctor. I want to see better numbers on those students.

        I remember getting the chicken pox, and I also remember how awful it was. I didn’t even have a bad case, but I remember being miserable for a week that happened to include Christmas. You say that there are rare but real side effects – I also say that there are rare but real complications of chicken pox, which are probably more common than any vaccine reaction. When you have a child go from just feeling sick from the chickenpox to dead because of a bacterial infection he got from scratching, you start to think that chickenpox isn’t just “a rite of passage” but an actual disease that can cause harm.

        Now, you are right, decreasing levels of chickenpox in the population makes shingles more likely in the older population. However, eventually, chickenpox will not be circulating and then shingles will be less common. So once we get through this period where people like me are at a higher risk for shingles, the risk will go down. And in the meantime, there’s a shingles vaccine, which isn’t great because it’s trying to prevent a disease when the virus is already lying dormant inside your body, but it helps. And shingles is awful too, so anything I can do to make that less awful is something I will support.

        • Lisa Mackenzie

          Just saw this ~ Kathyrn, the legislators tightened up the length of the “provisional” exemption to get the numbers up; it constitutes a significant chunk of the exemptions, ten percent if I remember correctly.
          The first grade reporting was inserted, as I understand it, to give us a clearer view of the vaccination status of children for there is quite a leap between kindergarten and seventh grade vaccination rates, which may reflect provisional exemptions rather than philosophical, religious or medical ones.
          Because the chicken pox vaccine is a live virus, once it is in the body it can trigger shingles. What universal vaccination does is eliminate the booster effect from the wild chicken pox circulating in communities that makes for little boosters without any illness, the old fashioned way, That was herd immunity, when child got chicken pox, recovered and then continued to be protected into o;g age by the boosts from the wild virus circulating among the young.

          The chicken pox vaccine eliminates the circulation of wild chicken pox but does nothing to prevent shingles.

          Theoretically if chicken pox were eradicated some day, then sure, but given the tenacity of polio and now the vaccine induced flaccid paralysis epidemic in India, Pakistan, Nigeria, the possibility of eliminating these childhood illnesses is uncertain

          This is an interesting look at the decline of chicken pox in Wales before vaccination.

          Another point about the data on the vaccination status of children in Vermont is that the National Immunization Survey results were brought in. As you are probably aware, these apply to children from 19 months to 35 months of age and are for CDC RECOMMENDED vaccines and do not reflect VT school entry REQUIRED vaccines. VT school entry REQUIRED vaccination rates are all in the 90th (ninetieth) percentile, except chicken pox (the newest one)

          And the data for the 2011 – 2012 school year that was submitted in January 2012 indicate that vaccination rates have increased and exemption rates have decreased in Vermont school children.

          Why a crisis was declared is beyond me.

          • Lisa Mackenzie

            Here is the link for more on the challenges of polio eradication for Implications of a Circulating Vaccine-
            Derived Poliovirus in Nigeria

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            There is not a lot of data yet regarding chicken pox vaccination and protection against shingles later – it could be that the kids that we are immunizing now, since they are not infected naturally, will not have virus reside in their body to cause shingles later. It could be that they are at a decreased risk of shingles, or they would get a milder form of the disease. The chicken pox vaccine is a live one, yes, but the virus is not able to infect – that would defeat the purpose of the vaccine.

            Global vaccination campaigns to eliminate diseases are HARD. Smallpox almost wasn’t eradicated due to numerous logistical and societal issues. The fact that we have gotten as far as we have with polio is impressive, in my opinion. And I tried to look up the claim for increased levels of AFP in India, and the only source I was able to find that directly talked about this was Dr. Mercola, and I do not take anything he says seriously. After all, correlation does not equal causation.

            The Wales paper found that “General practitioner consultation rates for chickenpox are declining in Wales except in pre-school children” – so the kids were getting the chicken pox earlier versus later, as those rates were staying the same.

            And I want to point out that the CDC isn’t stupid – the CDC calculates vaccination rates on a number of different measures, and in nearly every combination of vaccines possible. So whenever someone claims that since Vermont’s school entry requirements do not include all vaccines and therefore the CDC’s rates are going to be lower than they actually are, they didn’t look through what the CDC actually was presenting – they have rates for Vermont’s vaccination schedule and requirements. And they are not great. This was why some troubled doctors in the legislature decided to approach the topic – they were seeing what was happening in other parts of the country, and they did not want it to happen here.

          • Lisa Mackenzie

            Kathryn ~ read the package insert for the chicken pox vaccine, under adverse effects, you’ll see it there – varicella.

            I have encountered many folks who had an outbreak of chicken pox right after getting the vaccine.

            Tp compare the data collected in a national telephone survey for children who are 19-35 mos and apply it to Vermont kindergarten children is like comparing apples and oranges.

            Vt school nurses report to the VT department of health by January of each year and if one were to look at the actual data , one would see that the vaccination rates increased and philosophical exemptions decreased for the 2011 – 2012 school year.

            All the information is available. There is no lack of data. If one looks at 7th graders, one sees high ninetieth percentiles for required vaccines in VT.

            The exception is chicken pox, the newest kid on the block.

          • Lisa Mackenzie

            That’s right 47,500 ~ For flaccid paralysis on Pub Med:


            dian J Med Ethics. 2012 Apr-Jun;9(2):114-7.
            Polio programme: let us declare victory and move on.
            Vashisht N, Puliyel J.
            Department of Paediatrics, St Stephens Hospital, Delhi 110054, India. [email protected]
            It was hoped that following polio eradication, immunisation could be stopped. However the synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical. Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere was violated. The authors suggest that the huge bill of US$ 8 billion spent on the programme, is a small sum to pay if the world learns to be wary of such vertical programmes in the future.
            PMID: 22591873 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
            MeSH Terms, Substances

            LinkOut – more resources

          • Lisa Mackenzie

            Kathyrn, check it out Fourth year in a row, Vermont considered the healthiest state in the nation!

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            It actually says “varicella-like rash” – so if it is actually an activation of the vaccine, it is not causing full-blown chicken pox, just a couple of little spots (because right under “varicella-like rash” is “average number of lesions”, which is 2-5.

            I don’t doubt that you know people that got the chicken pox shortly after the vaccine, I am just not sure if it came from the vaccine. It is the same with people that claim that the flu vaccine gave them the flu – it takes a couple of weeks for immunity to take hold after a vaccination, and so it could happen by chance that the person was exposed to the virus just after vaccination and happened to get sick. There is no causal link between the vaccine and the illness, it just happens close enough together that we, as humans, want to make a connection, even though there isn’t one.

            I believe that I looked at the 2012 data from the VT Dept of Health, and yes, exemptions went down. Provisional allowances were the same, though, and I would be interested in seeing what those people were doing, as I have mentioned before on this thread. And yes, interviewing and collecting records from 30 month olds is not the best indicator of how kindergartners are doing, but it does give a baseline to see where progress can be made – there is a long time between 30 months old and kindergarten, so vaccination rates should be much higher in the kindergartners (which is not true for all schools in the state).

            Also, regarding the AFP increase – from the paper that you list above, it appears that the authors themselves are not sure what happened to cause such an increase. They note that there is a connection between the number of doses of vaccine given and the occurrence of disease, but they also note that water safety and sanitation might have been better if more resources that were given to the vaccination campaign were instead put towards better cleaner water – they note the connection between the two occurrences, but they do not link them as fact, which is the right thing for them to do as scientists. The increase in AFP is awful, and should be looked at, along with a number of other preventable illness, but I do not think it was irrefutably linked to the vaccine.

            Vermont is a great place to live and I am not surprised that it is considered the healthiest state in the nation. However, even healthy states occasionally have health issues that need to be addressed, be it vaccine related, health care coverage, or obesity rates. 🙂

          • Lisa Mackenzie

            Gosh Kathyrn you seem to have that malady shared by the medical/pharma industry that if YOU say it ain’t so, it ain’t so. Look again.

            1. Read the Package insert where you will find this language below that I just cut and pasted directly from Merck’s VARIVAX package insert:

            “The following additional adverse reactions have been reported since the vaccine has been marketed:
            Body as a Whole
            Anaphylaxis (including anaphylactic shock) and related phenomena such as angioneurotic edema, facial edema, and peripheral edema. Hemic and Lymphatic System
            Aplastic anemia, thrombocytopenia (including idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP)).
            Infections and Infestations
            Varicella (vaccine strain).
            Encephalitis; cerebrovascular accident; transverse myelitis; Guillain-Barré syndrome; Bell’s palsy; ataxia; non-febrile seizures; aseptic meningitis; dizziness; paresthesia. Respiratory
            Pharyngitis, pneumonia/pneumonitis.
            Stevens-Johnson syndrome; erythema multiforme; Henoch-Schönlein purpura; secondary bacterial infections of skin and soft tissue, including impetigo and cellulitis; herpes zoster.”

            Notice it states Varicella (vaccine strain)

            2. Vax Data for Vermont
            2011-2012 school year philosophical exemptions – go read the numbers. Exemptions down, Vaccinations up. It is all there in plain english. ( I suppose if you can’t read a package insert than an Excel file might be daunting)

            3. Enough said.

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            I don’t consider education to be a malady. I am just trying to convey what I have learned as a biologist and epidemiologist in an attempt to get others to really look at the data and think for themselves.

            I did read the package insert, and your list of various reported conditions comes right after the clinical trial information. I focused on the clinical trial because those studies are often regarded as the gold standard, and side effects that occur in those studies are a good representation of what will happen among the entire population.

            Here’s where that list of conditions comes from – the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, or VAERS. You can report to VAERS for any reason, for months after vaccine administration. Develop an illness seven months after vaccination? You can report it to VAERS.

            As a result, there is absolutely no way to say that there is a cause and effect relationship between the vaccine and the illness. And that disclaimer is on the VAERS website – “Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.”

            I am sticking with the clinical trials report about the vaccine causing the chickenpox – it mentions that a small rash could occur in a very small percentage of the population that is vaccinated, which I imagine would cause some parents to report that to VAERS as full blown chickenpox. In other cases of chickenpox, it could be coincidence that they got the chickenpox right after vaccine administration, because they were already infected with a natural strain (which could match the vaccine strain) and they happened to get sick from that infection. Of course, it would look like they got sick from the vaccine, but remember, correlation does not equal causation.

            Thank you for your concern, but I do know my way around Excel files, and yes, philosophical exemptions decreased. If you recall my last comment made on this thread, that was not my issue – I was concerned about the provisional acceptances, which are higher than the exemptions. But now that you have drawn my attention to the entire Excel sheet, I also see that private school exemptions are much higher than public school exemptions. This concerns me as well, because infectious disease does not care what school you go to, and when those children are not in school, they are out in the community.


    Less good than they would like it. Or less good for you, period. Like any of them are.

  • Richard Hopkins

    Assume a vaccine is 90% effective and a population of 1000 people has 95% vaccine coverage. There will be 50 people who are unprotected because they were not immunized and 95 people are not protected because of vaccine failure. So about 2/3 of the susceptible people are among the immunize, and if the disease agent is introduced about 2/3 of the cases will be among the immunized. The vaccine is STILL 90% effective — that is, the rate of disease is 90% lower in the immunized than in the immunized.

    • Dorian Yates

      I am following your numbers up until “2/3 of the susceptible people are among the immunized, and if the disease agent is introduced about 2/3 of the cases will be among the immunized.”
      That would mean that 66% of the cases would be in the fully vaccinated and 33% in the non-vaccinated. But only 9% of the cases were in unvaccinated kids not 33% of the cases.

      When the numbers are compared to what the state considers to be appropriately vaccinated by age group the fully vaccinated group comes to 76% of the cases, rather than the 66% or 2/3 you suggest in your calculation. Those not appropriately vaccinated, but with some vaccines is another 15% of the cases. Interestingly the lowest number of cases are in those with only 1-2 doses of vaccine and the highest number of cases are in those receiving 5-6 doses. Maybe less is more? As many epidemiologists have stated the vaccine is just not terrifically effective.

      • Kathryn Kinzel

        The calculation was an example, showing that when the vast majority of the population is immunized, you will see a higher case count in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated – purely because there are more of them. If everyone that was not protected in Richard’s example got sick, then 50/50 unvaccinated (100%) would be sick and 95/950 (10%) would be sick. I would rather have the hypothetical 10% chance versus the 100% chance.

        We can’t use the numbers from the state on their own – we have no idea how many people in the state are in each group, so it is impossible to determine an attack rate for each group. Less is not more for this vaccination.

        • Dorian Yates

          Kathryn, I have heard that example many times and it is a straight percentage example based on an assumption of a certain percentage efficacy rate of a vaccine, so Richard’s example is correct in his math based on the 90% efficacy rate, but the vaccine is not 90% effective.That is the evidence.So that is why the example is not useful.

          If we “can’t use the numbers from the state on their own” what numbers are we supposed to use? These ARE the numbers. This is the outbreak. The State Dept of Health does indeed have numbers of kids vaccinated and has a detailed breakdown of this outbreak by age and number of vaccine doses received. The State has the numbers, I don’t know why you think the State doesn’t.

        • Dorian Yates

          Kathryn, I have heard that example many times and it is a straight percentage example based on an assumption of a certain percentage efficacy rate of a vaccine, so Richard’s example is correct in his math based on the 90% efficacy rate, but the vaccine is not 90% effective. That is the evidence.So that is why the example is not useful.

          If we “can’t use the numbers from the state on their own” as you say, what numbers are we supposed to use? These ARE the numbers. This is the outbreak. The State Dept of Health does indeed have numbers of kids vaccinated and has a detailed breakdown of this outbreak by age and number of vaccine doses received. The State has the numbers, I don’t know why you think the State doesn’t.

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            I have explained this fully in a comment below.

    • Will Workman

      Richard I get your example as an example, but you start with the assumption that a vaccine is 90% effective, and I think the effectiveness is what’s being questioned.
      To calculate effectiveness, it seems we just need to compare rates of the disease in immunized vs non-immunized to their proportion of the general population. If vaccinated kids make up 90% of the population and 90% of the cases, and non-immunized kids make up 10% of the population and 10% of the cases, there would appear to be no benefit to the vaccine.

    • Megan McCormick

      The problem with this example is the assumption that every single susceptible person (regardless of whether they are unvaccinated or the vaccine “protection” wore off) will contract pertussis when exposed to it. I have one partially vaccinated child (vaxed until 8 months of age when they were stopped due to health issues), one completely unvaccinated child, I am an adult who hasn’t had a booster shot since I was in middle school, and a military husband who is forced to get every vaccine under the sun and stay up to date. We recently found out that all four of us were exposed three separate times to pertussis, but none of us got it; not even the three of us that are “susceptible”.

  • Palmer Peet

    The best defense to any communicable disease is to keep your body’s own inborn innate resistance as high as possible. Health comes from within, not from some pill, shot, or potion. One should remember that all immunizations have potential serious side effects. Does it make sense to risk those injuries with an immunization that is so ineffective?

    • Kkathy Slaughter

      Finally a voice of reason! It is our immune systems that are designed to protect us against disease, and the healthiest people are those who make the best effort at strengthening theirs through diet, exercise, healthy lifestyle, and doing their best to avoid toxins and other environmental assaults. And immunizations are detrimental to the immune system. For example: “A recent study from the New England Journal of Medicine of May 1996 revealed that tetanus vaccine disables the immune system in HIV patients. Tetanus vaccination produced a drop in T cells in 10 of 13 patients, a classic sign of immune deficiency. … Finally, white blood cells from 7 of 10 uninfected individuals became more susceptible to HIV infection following tetanus vaccination.” This is a quote from (Good article on this topic)

      • Kathryn Kinzel

        That study from the New England Journal of Medicine wasn’t looking to see if vaccinations were causing this effect, just that any common antigen would have this effect! Anything would do this – a cold, parasitic infections, stomach bugs, anything!!

        Scientifically, you cannot look at these results and somehow only be able to blame vaccinations. It’s irrational and irresponsible.

  • Bonnie Newfield

    I know of a man who as a child got a SINGLE DOSE of DPT. He went into convulsions! He became paralyzed! As he grew older his left leg didn’t grow as fast as his right (it is now about 3/4″ shorter); and most importantly the paralyzes continued into adulthood!

    None of my kids had these injections! Look at polio where kids inoculated with the vaccine still got it.

    These shots are only money makers for the manufacturers and taxpayers should not bear the costs!

  • Deborah Kahn

    One thing that no one has mentioned is that many of the unvaccinated children are probably immune at this point and for several years to come. Why? Because if you’ve never been vaccinated and you catch pertussis you’ll end up with long-term immunity.

    On the other hand, if you get the vaccine you run into an interesting problem which used to be called “original antigenic sin”. This is a phenomena where the first variety of a bug that the body encounters sets the immune response. Unfortunately, the vaccine version of the pertussis bacteria sets up an incomplete immune response which results in short-term immunity or sometimes immunity that disguises the illness with symptoms that make a diagnosis trickier. This is ideal for spreading pertussis far and wide, of course.

    My guess is that the low rate in VT among the completely unvaccinated is due to natural and lasting immunity in kids who had pertussis.

  • Jason Dowd

    Vaccines should be a cost-benefit analysis, just like any other drug that you would take to treat something. I remember taking an Rx drug about 15 years ago to treat a GI problem I was having, and it gave me horrible diarrhea after one dose. So, naturally, I stopped taking it. Thus the cost of that drug to me outweighed the benefit.

    The problem with vaccines is two-fold; one, there are no accurate numbers on what the “cost” of a vaccine is in terms of health. There is far too much evidence that vaccines can have more serious side effects than the manufacturers admit (mostly because most current vaccines have been insufficiently studied). The second problem is that once you get a vaccine shot, you can’t “stop taking it”. Even one dose causes a major immune reaction in a person’s body, and that cannot be undone.

    So, the question is…is the risk to a child greater by letting them get these diseases and develop a natural immunity, or by taking a “drug” that has never really had long-term studies done and once they take it they can’t stop? For me, that question has a clear answer: I’d rather risk the disease (which for the most part has a very low mortality — the biggest danger is in the very young) than risk long-term damage to her health.

  • cia parker

    My daughter got the DTaP at 2, 4, and 6 months, and should have been protected, but caught pertussis at a La Leche League meeting at 8 months old. And then she gave it to me! It was alarming, ten coughs per breath, she coughed up vast sheets of clear, slippery mucus at the end of each fit, and coughed for over a month, I for over two months. But the disease is very rarely dangerous in those over four months old, and it was not dangerous for us. We eventually recovered and now have permanent, or almost permanent immunity (30 to 70 years according to a recent study). The DTaP is ineffective, often gives no protection at all, often loses whatever protection it may have given in as little as three years, and is dangerous. My daughter got the DTaP booster at 18 months, and it instantly wiped out her only two words, uh for up and uff for dog, and she was diagnosed with autism at 20 months. The DTaP causes most cases of asthma (see Manitoba study about it doubling asthma rates at seven when the series is started at 2 months, as it usually is), allergies, also seizure disorders, SIDS, and autism. Since the disease is not very dangerous, I think it’s better for those over a year old or so to just go ahead and get the disease, and thereby join a genuinely immune herd that will eventually limit the disease. Parents of young babies must be aware that they need to keep them in quarantine at home if there’s any pertussis in town in their first four or five months. See Dr. Suzanne Humphried for treatment protocol (vitamin C!) if they get it anyway.

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      I am actually a little astonished that with your first hand experience with pertussis you still think getting the disease isn’t that bad. Pertussis can be very serious for all age groups, especially if there are any underlying medical conditions – I have seen kids between 1 and 5 be hospitalized because they can’t breathe.

      With this new vaccine even three doses may not be enough, which is why the fourth is scheduled for between 12 and 15 months to complete the series. And that’s the main problem with this vaccine, it doesn’t produce the results that we would like. However, natural infection with pertussis also does not result in 70 years of immunity – some people may be set for 30 years but many others lose their immunity early, and it is definitely not life-long.

      Finally, there is no link between vaccines and autism. Zero. None. Nada. Nor is there substantial evidence linking vaccines to other conditions, like the ones you mentioned. This vaccine is actually safer than the first version that was available from the 60s through the mid 90s, and does not have too many side effects.

      • Debra DeWitt

        If there is no link between autism & vaccines why has our government paid awards to families for vaccine injury that injury including autism? What about the court in Italy?

        If vaccines are safe & effective…why are any fully vaccinated children getting the disease?

        I think just as no one person has the same height, blood type or freckles, we are going to find eventually that not all immune systems work exactly the same.

        I’m not anti-vaccine. I did vaccinate my children. Both have autism. Both were hospitalized within days following vaccination. Both diagnosed before 1998.

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          There may have been one case that actually got paid, but there will never be any more – the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program had several lengthy proceedings that ultimately concluded that there was no link.

          The Italian court made a mistake. The evidence presented was in no way strong enough to show a causal relationship between the vaccine and autism, and they are going to look stupid when they have to go back on their ruling.

          Vaccines are safe and effective – no medicine or drug or vaccine is 100% effective and 100% free from side effects.

          • Eileen Foster

            It is interesting to see that anyone questioning the use of Vaccines is vigorously smacked-down with definitive statements such as, “Vaccines are safe and effective!”


            Vaccines are an *uninsurable* risk which distinguishes them as markedly different from other medications.

            No insurer will underwrite vaccines due the known, documented, fact that a certain percent of children who are vaccinated will be harmed, even killed.

            We have VAERS because Vaccine Manufacturers can not insure themselves against lawsuits due to damages from vaccines.

            An uncomfortable truth, but there it is.

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            I’m not sure what you mean by “uninsurable”. My insurance covers vaccines all the time. And VAERS is in place mostly as a surveillance system, to make sure that vaccines are performing well after they have received FDA approval. VAERS caught the connection between the first rotavirus vaccine and intussusception, which was not a common reaction but was found to be linked to the vaccine, and the vaccine was removed within weeks of it being released.

            The actual uncomfortable truth? If everyone was able to sue the vaccine manufacturers for every adverse reaction they could think of, no one would make vaccines. And that would lead to a public health crisis, which is why you as an individual cannot sue the manufacturers.

      • Sarah White


        There is a link. It’s the mitochondria which are very vulnerable to environmental stressors (chemical and viral). If your child has a hidden underlying mitochondrial problem then they are at risk for aderverse reaction. The fact of the matter is children have been injured by vaccines and there are thousands of vaccine injury cases that have been quietly settled by the US government. Many of those injured children have an autism diagnosis. One of those cases is Hannah Poling, a child who regressed into autism after getting a series of shots she received as a baby. The HHS conceded that the vaccines Hannah recieved as a baby aggravated an underlying mictochondrial disorder triggering a mitochondrial dysfunction that resulted in Hannah autism. Her father, Dr. John Poling, a neurologist and researcher, has stated that there could be thousands of children just like Hannah. .

        Subsequent to the Poling concession, many children with autism were found to have had a mitochondrial dysfunction which is a problem with cellular energy metabolism. Mitochondria supply cellular energy to all organs of the body and if they are not working properly the organ, particularly the brain, will not grow or function properly.

        Mitochindrial dysfunction is not rare. According to experts, mitochindrial dysfuction is at the core of many common neurodegenerative and neuropsychiatric diseases like autism, Parkinsons, MS, Schizophrenia, Alzheimers, bipolar disorder.

        The bottom line is that, parents should have the full picture (risks and benefits) not just one sided arguments when it comes to vaccination.

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          The problem with linking these cases together is that there is simply not enough evidence to prove that the vaccines were the triggering event for these diseases. Often times it just happens that the disease manifests itself around the same time as vaccination. Naturally, we would want to connect those two dots, but scientifically, they cannot be connected.

          The mitochondrial disease mechanism that you are mentioning is a fairly new way of thinking about diseases – however a lot of them are not caused by damage to the mitochondria themselves, but are regular genetic mutations, so I don’t tend to lump them in with true mitochondrial dysfunction. In either case, they would have been activated irregardless of vaccine status, and in fact most mitochondrial groups encourage vaccination unless there are other underlying factors (allergies, other reactions, etc.)

          I agree that parents should have the full picture when deciding what to do for their children’s health, but it is so easy to distort the facts and terrify parents about the “dangers” of vaccination that a balanced conversation is not possible. The comments on this story show that.

        • “Her father, Dr. John Poling, a neurologist and researcher, has stated that there could be thousands of children just like Hannah.”

          One in six kids have some form of neurodegenerative disease.

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            There could be thousands of children like Hannah, since the 2010 estimate of autism prevalence was 6 in 1000. Which is far from 1 in 6.

  • Steven Smith

    Hard to say what percent effectiveness the pertussis vaccine has because, as the study pointed out, that number changes with time since vaccination.

    I’d like to see more data on the delayed onset of disease and the mortality rates from the disease. While I am skeptical about the claims of vaccinated but infected people getting less severe disease than unvaccinated infected people, it does look like the data on the dept of health website suggested the age spread is shifted to catching the disease later in life. This is important since most deaths from pertussis are in the first year. Back when 1/15000 of us died of pertussis each year (equivalent to 40 Vermonters a year at today’s population), 90% were under 1 year of age.

  • Melissa Curry

    Interesting. My non-vaccinated 13 month old was exposed to pertussis in his church nursery last month (from a baby who had 2 doses of DTaP so far), but never contracted it. Sounds to me like no vaccine is better than having it. 🙂 I know, anecdotal evidence doesn’t hold water to scientific research, unless it’s YOUR anecdotal evidence! 🙂

    • Johanna Sharpe

      I love this post, it’s been my experience there are better ways to deal with these illnesses then vaccinations. Of course these are personal experiences not scientific “fact”.

  • Machell Klee

    I choose to not vaccinate after my oldest had a status seizure that lasted over 6 hours add fried her 21 month old brain after a dtap vaccine. Her neuro at that point exempted her from all further vaccines. She developed hypsarrythmia, progressive encephalopathy, became a quad, non verbal and was having 200 to 300 seizures a day. I choose not to vaccinate my other two because I couldn’t live with myself if they were injured too. One must keep in mind that most parents who choose not to vaccinate don’t make that decision lightly and take it very seriously. When we make that decision we also change our lifestyle to support and boost our immune systems and ramp up efforts at sign of illness. I think we need to be respectful of each others choices to vaccinate or not to vaccinate because you do not know how one came to that decision.

  • jay davis

    Although this may sound a bit paranoid and cynical, through the years I have seen the medical profession offer snake oil after woodchuck juice and claim it worked.

    Recall if you can follow the history of mediciane and all its praised treatments and prventions, how many given true scientific ebidence can they praise today.
    Maybe the polio vaccine, yet if this virus were loosed today, given nobody is immunized anymore, what would be the result. The same could be said for dread smallpox.

    Now does anyone want a very healthy circumcision?

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      Just FYI, we still immunize for polio.

      And we have gotten better at medicine over the centuries because our understanding of the world around us has gotten better – changes in practice are probably going to be smaller as time goes on compared to the larger jumps of medicine changes from ancient Greece to today.

      • Jakob Kostic

        Thank you Kathryn! You are the only logical and right minded person here. Thank you for not being an idiot like the rest of these morons!

  • There are several Pertussis articles linked at the S 199 info attached.
    I think most critical is the documentation of fully vaccinated children being asymptomatic carriers. Australia has abandonded the “cocooning” strategy. What is a greater risk to an infant- an older sibling who is obviously ill and whose parents will prevent his interaction with the baby or a vaccinated infected and contagious yet symptom free older brother or sister playing kissy face? Last article in
    More VT vaccine information

  • Alice Bedford

    I think it would be interesting to see how our behaviors have changed in regards to infants and their care.

    Are we increasing risk by presenting infants to a greater risk profile by , day care , medical center visits , shopping malls …

  • “Now does anyone want a very healthy circumcision?”

    Yes and also

    “How about some toxic fluoride in your water. You know that stuff you drink, cook with, shower in and feed to baby.”

    “How about some mercury in your “silver” fillings,” You know the second most toxic crap on this planet.”

    “How about some degenerative GMO “foods”, You know that crap produced by Monsanto shown in honest testing to start to destroy your organs in hours of ingestion.”

    And lastly how about a federal police force headed by a “lady” who believes those who believe in our Constitution and fight for our country are “Terrorist” suspects?

  • “Just FYI, we still immunize for polio.”

    No actually we do not. We “vaccinate” for polio. Immunization is a natural process that can only be accomplished by contracting the wild polio naturally.

    And we would do well to see just what a mess the “polio vaccination” has brought us.

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      From Merriam-Webster, “immunize” simply means to make immune, and “immune” is “having or producing antibodies capable of reacting with a specific antigen”. Which is done with either natural infection or vaccination.

      The website that you linked to provides very misleading and sometimes completely wrong information, so I would suggest that you get your information from a better source.

  • William Koch

    I do wonder how old Lou Monter is. My mother’s generation feared paralytic polio every summer, and one need look no further than President Roosevelt to see the result of infection. To state that polio vaccination has been “a mess” is simply ridiculous and scientifically unfounded. And, before there is a call for my head, please imagine a world with unbridled poliomyelitis.

    The simple truth of the numbers is that, with the extremely high vaccination rates we have, there are very few unvaccinated children in the population. There is, however, a known failure rate for every vaccine. At the extreme, if 100% of the population were vaccinated, then all infections would be in that singular group, and the claim could be: “100% of all pertussis patients were vaccinated”. In such a situation, the rate of incidence would equal the failure rate. It’s like saying all birds have wings. Another way to say it: The higher the vaccination rate, the higher the rate of vaccinated individuals in the newly infected population.”

    Our society enjoys a peace of mind that was non-existent 70 years ago. We owe that peace to the pioneers of vaccine science.

  • Cynthia Maurer

    Vaccine science is grossly flawed. Natural immunity produces a different type of antibody than that induced by the introduction of an organism or denatured organism through vaccine. The antibody of natural immunity is much more effective in fighting a disease than the antibody artificially produced by vaccination.

    Then there are all the carcinogens introduced into a young child’s body, some so young their immune systems are not completely matured, that can poison them. Chemicals like formaldehyde, squalene, mercury, etc.

    If you truly love your child, you don’t inject poisons into their little bodies. Too many parents are intimidated and buy into the hype. The truth of the matter is that big Pharma is making tons of money from the use of vaccines and that is the bottom line that matters most. It is totally unethical and proof of that is all the new vaccines that keep getting introduced on the market and for very young children. Why let your child’s welfare be jeopardized for the benefit of chemical companies profits. You know what is best for your child. Educate yourself and do what is right in refusing these intrusions and assaults on those who depend on us to do the wise thing and the right thing. Don’t wait until a vaccine damages your child before you acquire the wisdom of a good parent.

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      Antibodies are antibodies – whether created due to infection or due to vaccination, they do the same thing and are made from the same amino acids. Infection often produces a more systemic response than a vaccine and so might be considered a little “stronger”, but in those cases vaccination is done over a couple of shots, to get the same reaction without the illness.

      The chemicals that may be present in vaccines are present in such a low amount that they will not to any harm at all to a child. You ingest more chemicals every day than what would be received over the course of a full vaccination series. And most vaccines are not huge money makers for pharmaceutical companies, which is leading to a serious shortage of vaccines in this country and around the world.

  • Cynthia Maurer

    Vaccine science is grossly flawed and endangers our children.

    • Yes and not only our children although they are currently bearing much of the assault.

      We currently have an Alzheimer’s epidemic raging. Guess what is at the root of this epidemic?

      “We have found that clinically normal individuals aged 60-65 who receive influenza vaccine three or four times during a five-year period, will five years later have an incidence of Alzheimer’s disease 10-fold greater than age-matched individuals who did not receive it.” Doctor H. Hugh Fudenburg, MD, Note and CDC cannot figure out where Alzheimer’s is coming from. Right! 90% of our seniors are getting the “flu vaccine” toxin.

      Old folks if you do NOTHING else but reject this USELESS TOXIC Alzheimer’s producing “Flu Shot” you will have eliminated 90% of your Alzheimer’s risk. Think your loving CDC wants to give you Alzheimer’s? It sure looks that way to me.

      How to Produce Alzheimer’s

      “The fluoride/aluminum association is of particular importance as it relates to Alzheimer’s Disease. Aluminum by itself is not readily absorbed by the body. However, in the presence of fluoride ions, the fluoride ions combine with the aluminum to form aluminum fluoride, which is absorbed by the body. In the body, the aluminum eventually combines with oxygen to form aluminum oxide or alumina (53). Alumina is the compound of aluminum that is found in the brains of Alzheimer’s disease.” Ronsivalli, LJ, “Addenda to Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies”, Note I don’t think things can be clearer than this.

      So if you want to produce Alzheimer’s just feed the old people water with fluoride put in it and “vaccinate” the hell out of them. Know any country where this is being done? Yeah right here in the land of the free.

      Ever wonder where the neuron tangles of Alzheimer’s come from?

      • Kathryn Kinzel

        I can’t find any paper published in a respectable journal that contains that quote. Which means that this is something that this particular person thought, which cannot be used as evidence.

        The flu kills hundreds of thousands of people every year, mostly those 65 years of age and older. The flu shot helps to prevent many cases and should be given to everyone, not just to people at risk.

        There is no evidence at all that links Alzheimer’s to flu vaccine. There is also no evidence that fluoridation of water has any negative effect, which would be known by this point because water has been treated for decades.

        Stop with the scare tactics – aside from being completely unsound scientifically, they can do real damage and harm public health.

        • “The flu kills hundreds of thousands of people every year, mostly those 65 years of age and older. The flu shot helps to prevent many cases and should be given to everyone, not just to people at risk.”

          Well Kathryn please show me the articles in “respectable journals” supporting you statement.

          The CDC has CONTINUOUSLY overstated the mortality of seasonal influenza often by over 100 fold. They are NOW saying they have no idea how many die from the seasonal flu. We know it is less than 700/year for MOST years, perhaps MUCH less if based on serological results. Honest figures from the UK imply about 300/year die in the USA from influenza.

          The scare tactics have ALL come from the CDC who has lied to us for decades about the number of influenza deaths in the US.

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            So, I’m not sure that something is completely honest when it uses inflammatory terms like “Damned Lies”. I can also see a glaring mistake in the first table, where whomever was reading the death certificates forgot to include pneumonia due to influenza as a flu death – so that flu death number is deceptively low.

            The 2010 ACIP recommendations, which for the first time recommended flu vaccination to everyone over 6 months of age, cites 552 references which were reviewed to make that decision. Here are a selection which show the burden of disease on the population (All in respectable journals like the Journal of the American Medical Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, and the Lancet):

            Thompson WW, Shay DK, Weintraub E, et al. Mortality associated with influenza and respiratory syncytial virus in the United States. JAMA 2003;289:179–86

            Thompson WW, Shay DK, Weintraub E, et al. Influenza-associated hospitalizations in the United States. JAMA 2004;292:1333–40.

            Smith NM, Shay DK. Influenza vaccination for elderly people and their care workers. Lancet 2006;368:1752–3.

            Walter ND, Taylor TH, Shay DK, et al. Influenza circulation and the burden of invasive pneumococcal pneumonia during a non-pandemic period in the United States. Clin Infect Dis 2010;50:175–83.

            Simonsen L, Taylor R, Viboud C, et al. US flu mortality estimates are based on solid science. BMJ 2006;332:177–8.

            Neuzil KM, Mellen BG, Wright PF, et al. The effect of influenza on hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and courses of antibiotics in children. N Engl J Med 2000;342:225–31.

            And of course, the full list and discussion of the flu and flu vaccine is here:

  • Char Spoon

    “Before the vaccine was developed, whooping cough was considered a childhood disease. Now whooping cough primarily affects children too young to have completed the full course of vaccinations and teenagers and adults whose immunity has faded.” Via MayoClinic.
    It is spread by being around someone who has it. SO, if the vaccinations have turned this into something we get when we’re OLDER now, it begs to reason more CHILDREN are going to be exposed. I understand it can be fatal (rarely so) in infants… yet they don’t receive “enough” of the vaccine to be immune?! So wait, other than the drug companies making millions, WHY do we make it worse?!

  • Jennifer Fisk

    I can think of a lot of reasons for this. Perhaps the virus has mutated just a bit thus rendering the antibodies from the vaccination useless.
    We have learned that puppies should not be vaccinated until they have been weaned for about 4 weeks. The maternal protection gained from nursing interferes with antibodies being formed via vaccination. Perhaps, nursing human babies have a similar situation.
    Rather than revaccinating, why not run titers on kids at around the onset of puberty. That’s the best recommendation in the dog world. Why not humans.
    And the bottom line is follow the money.

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      Jennifer is on the right track about a couple of the thoughts she’s presented – vaccines that contain a weakened pathogen are given after two years of age, because of lingering maternal antibodies from the placenta and from breastfeeding that could inhibit the response from the vaccination. This is not the case with dead or subunit vaccines, of which pertussis is a member.

      The trouble with the new vaccine is that it only contains a few subunits of protein from the pertussis bacterium – the one that used to be given before the mid 1990s was the entire pertussis bacterium, and that vaccine worked pretty well but also had higher rates of side effects, like fever, pain, etc. So this new vaccine was created to cut down on side effects, but as a result, the protection it gives is not the greatest.

      • Lisa Mackenzie

        Kathyrn, you are wrong. The problem with the old DPT/DPTT vaccine was not just fever and pain. The vaccine killed hundreds of children each year

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          I get my facts from epidemiological studies. The old DPT vaccine frequently caused fever, pain, drowsiness, lack of appetite, and sometimes vomiting. There was also a less common reaction of very high fever and convulsions (about .05% risk), and it was this reaction that doctors wanted to reduce. There may have been a connection between encephalopathy and the DPT vaccine, but if there was, the risk would be between 0% and .0001% and it may have been due to other causes.

          So, hundreds of children being killed? Unlikely.

          • Lisa Mackenzie

            If you are interested in conversation rather than an argument in which you must prove yourself to be right, go to the VAERS page and search death from DPT and you will find nearly 700 claims for death following the DPT shot. The deaths and the loss families suffered is real.

            Even Paul Offit, patent owner for one of the Rotavirus vaccines and golden boy representative of the vaccine industry, acknowledges that grave harm has been done by vaccines on his page:

            The arrogance of representatives of the medical industry,deeply imbued in the culture of fear and drugs, along with the “smacking down” of parents who are knowledgable and informed (which often comes out of personal experience of vaccine harm as described above), is astonishing.

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            I am interested in a conversation – whenever I try to mention my view of things I am slapped around by people who think that vaccines are awful and I must be brainwashed from Big Pharma. This comment thread is evidence of that, and honestly, a comment thread is not the best place for a good conversation. But I am all for having an open discussion where people can say what is on their minds and what they feel.

            Multiple times on this thread I have acknowledged that vaccines are not perfect. In some rare instances they have caused problems, and in more common instances they have annoying side effects. I got a vaccine for work last May that made me feel AWFUL for a day, but I knew that my body was responding to it and giving me immunity so I toughed it out. If I was two years old, I would have been an awful mess and any parent would be both fed up with me and concerned that something awful was happening, so it’s completely understandable that parents are a little skeptical about vaccinations due to their own experiences of watching their children go through reactions to vaccines.

            If I am coming off as arrogant, I am sorry. It is because I have a lot of experience both reading medical studies and dealing with data pertaining to vaccines, and I am trying to share that information with others. A lot of anti-vaccine people are just scientifically wrong, and I use that as an opportunity to explain the science behind vaccines. Not everyone knows or likes science, and that’s fine – I just want to stop the misinformation that is being promulgated by people who are intentionally lying about scientific fact to take advantage of people.

            That being said – VAERS is a pretty good system, but it has serious flaws. All of the information that we get from VAERS is passive, meaning that people have to know that it exists in order to report to it. So we are potentially missing a lot of cases, and additionally, we do not know exactly how many vaccine doses were given out over that time period. We can guess, based on the population of the US, but that’s not a good guess. Some of these potential adverse reactions are caused by other things too, and we don’t have enough information about how often THAT happens. So VAERS is a start, but we are missing a lot of additional information that would make it easier to say “Yes, this is caused by the vaccine” or “No, this is coincidence”.

  • Dr Wes Hill

    I think everyone is forgetting the entire premise of vaccines. It’s said to give immunity. What these numbers and stats show is that it in fact does NOT give immunity. The whole it wrists off thing is CYA. Any human being can deduct easily that it is a tactic. Throwing numbers out there like its 90% effective, or maybe 80, well actually 70 is obviously made up. They state that the vaccine does not WORK, but it’s free so it’s the best way to prevent, yet they state earlier that the rise in numbers is due to better testing. All of this being known one can easily deduct that it has NEVER in fact worked. Tax payers pay for this FREE shot, trust me they make their money. The morbidity rate of pertussis is extremely low. The number of morbid cases has NOT increased, it’s the same. This is scare tactic cover up vaccine company tactics.

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      There have been and currently are many studies being done to look at vaccine efficacy – as with many medicines, sometimes what works in a trial or in the lab doesn’t work when given to the general population. We know that the vaccine doesn’t work as well as we would want it to, but we also know that it is better than not being protected at all.

      I think by morbidity you actually mean mortality, and yes, with access to medical care, pertussis deaths are not what they used to be, but that doesn’t stop it from being a really awful disease for children. We know that the vaccine protects people from the disease – maybe not everyone 100% of the time, but still better than nothing at all. That’s why we are encouraging vaccination.

      • Dear Madam

        Anyone with eyes to read KNOWS the “pertussis vaccine” is a complete and TOTAL failure. One of the prime reasons for this failure is, the failure of the mothers “vaccinated” for pertussis. to produce the immunity in their mother’s milk that is REQUIRED to protect their babies from pertussis.

        The “pertussis vaccine” does not confer immunity from the wild pertussis and appears prevent so “vaccinated” mothers from protecting their babies.

        So the problem we are having with pertussis IS the “VACCINE”.

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          I think I am able to parse out what you are saying in your comment – the pertussis vaccine does what any vaccine does, which is to stimulate antibodies against that particular pathogen. Antibodies do carry over through the placenta and breast milk, so as long as the mother has high enough antibody levels, the breastfeeding infant will have some protection.

          The problem with this particular vaccine is that antibody levels drop faster than we would like, which leads to increased infections. So a mother that has not had the vaccine in several years will not have enough antibody passing through the breast milk, and the infant will not be protected. Which is one of many reasons why it is recommended that pregnant women receive a booster shot, as well as anyone else that expects to have contact with infants (family members, child care workers, etc).

          Also the link you posted refers people to take Vitamin D instead of a flu shot, and that has been widely debunked in the medical community. FYI.

          • “So a mother that has not had the vaccine in several years will not have enough antibody passing through the breast milk”

            Yes but a mother who has contracted the wild pertussis will produce FULL immunity for at LEAST 30 years. This immunity will be passed on to her baby.

            All kinds of things have been “debunked” by the “medical community” including by for profit offit and the totally vaccine industry owned IOM. The epidemiologics of the pertussis outbreak are ineluctable. “Vaccination” is NOT the answer!

            “A placebo-controlled trial of acellular pertussis vaccines in Sweden compared vaccinated children with un-vaccinated children of the same birth grouping. During the trial, an invasive bacterial infection occurred among the vaccinated group resulting in numerous deaths. A review of the trial data led researchers to conclude that ‘The hypothesis of an immunosuppressive effect of the vaccines, which would explain the deaths…could not be refuted by the data.’ (xvi)” Vaccines as ‘Cluster Bombs’

            If you look hard at the composition of the “pertussis vaccine” you may find out why this immunosuppressive toxic soup can help to kill.


          • Kathryn Kinzel

            Immunity from infection with pertussis may not last the full 30 years – there have been papers that show that natural immunity varies from person to person. Which would not help this mother if she was infected as a toddler and is pregnant in her early 30s.

            The epidemiology of the current pertussis outbreak simply tells us that the vaccine we are currently using is not as good as we want it to be. Which has been stated in this article and also in the comments I’ve posted. Should we get a better vaccine? Yes, ideally, we should. But these things take time and so for now we should work with what we have.

            As for the pertussis trial in Sweden, your source “conveniently” forgets to mention this key sentence: “The results of this analysis provide no evidence for a causal relation between vaccination with the studied acellular pertussis vaccines and altered resistance to invasive disease caused by encapsulated bacteria.”

            The whole “cannot be refuted” part is science’s way of saying that something out of the ordinary appeared, and perhaps this was entirely due to chance, but there is no way to prove that it was chance – it just wasn’t due to the vaccination.

  • Cynthia Maurer

    I had pertussis as a child. I survived, but was still subjected to receiving the live pertussis vaccine. Mountains are often built from molehills. vaccines are as unnatural as GMOs. And, yes, Kathryn, the antibodies of natural immunization and the ones induced by vaccination are different. One is IgM and the other is IgG
    You don’t really know the harm until your child is the one who is damaged. Let those parents who wish to not vaccinate their children alone and don’t bully them.

    • Louis Sullivan

      The human immune response produces both of these antibodies and both are effective regardless of whether the exposure was natural or not. IgM antibodies are short term responses to an infection and fight off the existing pathogen. Then, IgG antibodies are produced and stay in the body to protect against future exposure. The immune response doesn’t differ when a vaccine triggers it. Both antibodies are produced.

  • Why is there almost no data from 1982-1992?


  • “and “immune” is “having or producing antibodies capable of reacting with a specific antigen”. Which is done with either natural infection or vaccination.”

    No again. Possessing antibodies has NEVER been shown in clinical trials (honest ones) to have any effect on disease.

    “While the medical, pharmaceutical, and vaccine industries are busy pushing new vaccines for practically every condition under the sun, a new study published in the journal Immunity completely deconstructs the entire vaccination theory. It turns out that the body’s natural immune systems, comprised of both innate and adaptive components, work together to ward off disease without the need for antibody-producing vaccines. The new research highlights the fact that innate immunity plays a significant role in fighting infections, and is perhaps more important than adaptive immunity at preventing or fighting infections. In tests, adaptive immune system antibodies were shown unable to fight infection by themselves, which in essence debunks the theory that vaccine-induced antibodies serve any legitimate function in preventing or fighting off infection.” Bedrock of vaccination theory crumbles

    • Louis Sullivan

      Your comment clearly demonstrates a lack of understanding of how the immune system works and what that study even reported. If vaccines in no way affected immunity, then why are they effective throughout history? Even back to the very first vaccine for cowpox.

      • The “effectiveness” of “vaccines” is a clear fraud.

        • Louis Sullivan

          Did you even read that? Nowhere does it provide evidence that vaccines are ineffective throughout history. Most of those graphs show trends before vaccines were introduced, and many of the others show decreases in mortality and infection rates after. As for the later sections, they show no causation or even the most remote hint at causation between vaccination rates and other afflictions.

          • “Nowhere does it provide evidence that vaccines are ineffective throughout history.”

            It is difficult to prove a negative but how about this.

            “Vaccination programs in the late 19th and early 20th century decimated the populations of many countries where government sponsored vaccination programs were introduced. Japan suffered 48,000 deaths from smallpox vaccination; England and Wales experienced 45,800 smallpox deaths in a population that was 97% vaccinated against smallpox. Australia and Germany combined with a total of 120,000 deaths from the very smallpox for which they had been vaccinated. European deaths amongst the vaccinated portion of the population totaled 3,000,000. Deaths from smallpox vaccination programs began to decline when a revolt against mandatory vaccination programs emerged from the chaos. Within twenty years mandatory smallpox vaccination laws in England were repealed. In 1919 the death rate from smallpox promptly plummeted to a total of 28 deaths in a population of almost 40,000,000 people. Previously, with mandatory vaccinations they had averaged over 44,000 deaths from smallpox.” Vaccination History

            “A huge outcry amongst the public ensued Over 100 union parished ripped up the local vaccination ordinances in 1872, and instead called in the Sanitary engineers, and started putting in sewage disposal plans, rubbish dispose, proper corpse disposal and jointed pipes to ensure uncontaminated water. Those were the measures officially adopted under the Public Health Act in 1875. the offical records states that those parishes were the ones that by and large escaped the 1878 smallpox epidemic.”

            In 1871-2, England, with 98% of the population aged between 2 and 50 vaccinated against smallpox, it experienced its worst ever smallpox outbreak with 45,000 deaths. During the same period in Germany, with a vaccination rate of 96%, there were over 125,000 deaths from smallpox. The Hadwen Documents

            “In 1862, Anglican church missionaries Rev. John Sheepshanks and Robert Brown inoculated interior Salish Indians in B.C. with a live smallpox virus that wiped out entire native communities within a month, just prior to the settlement of this native land by gold prospectors associated with these missionaries and government officials.” Canadian Genocide by Vaccination

            “By 1853, Parliament began passing laws to make the untested vaccine compulsory throughout the British Empire. Other countries of Europe followed suit. Once the economic implications of compulsory vaccinations were realized, few dared to disagree. Then, as now, the media were controlled by the vaccine manufacturers and the government, who stood to make huge money from the sale of these spurious vaccines…” Tim O’Shea, D.C.

            “In 1853 England introduced compulsory vaccination. Before this time the highest death rate from smallpox was 2000 for any two year period. However 20 years later there were 23,062 deaths in England and Wales with smallpox spreading over Europe in all the countries where vaccination was practiced on a large scale. During the same epidemic in Germany 124,948 people died of smallpox. Of the 155 persons admitted to the Smallpox Hospital in the Parish of St. James, Piccadilly, 145 had been vaccinated.” Doctor Phillip Incao MD

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            No, this is more mortality data for the most part – you have to take into account that hygiene got better during this time period and that led to more people not dying from their illness – it still means that they got the illness!

            And smallpox vaccination in the 1800s consisted of cutting the arm of the person to be vaccinated and rubbing smallpox (or cowpox) pustules into the wound. It hurt, it wasn’t clean, and it didn’t always work. The good news is that we don’t do vaccination like that anymore! So it’s impossible to compare the health of people in the 1800s to the vaccination practices of the 20th century.

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          This is the most ridiculous PDF I have ever read.

          1) Disease MORTALITY decreased since 1900 because we got very good at recognizing that hygiene was important in keeping people alive, and other public health efforts were starting to be put in place to keep people alive. You know what would be a better measure to look at? INCIDENCE! How many people were actually getting sick?!? And how did THAT number go down after vaccination? (Hint – A lot)

          2) All the percentages of people vaccinated in various outbreaks of disease is the same problem that we have above – we do not know the number of people in each group. The attack rates for these various illnesses was probably much higher in the unvaccinated group, per the examples I gave above.

          3) Vaccination data in other countries is limited – sometimes vaccine cannot get to all areas of a country, particularly in Africa, which is why you may see little jumps in cases. There is not enough information provided in these graphs – there could be many, MANY reasons for the “increase” in disease.

          The rest of the graphs are cases of “Look, I found a correlation between two completely different things! It must be causation!!” To which I will simply point out that correlation does not equal causation. In any way, shape or form.

          This PDF is basically propaganda designed to scare and trick people into thinking that vaccines are bad. It is completely irresponsible.

    • Kathryn Kinzel

      Lou, this paper was demonstrating that IN ADDITION to neutralizing antibodies, there are pathways to immunity that do not involve antibodies, and in fact lead to potential new ways to produce vaccines. There is no need to have a knee-jerk reaction denouncing decades of HONEST science.

      • Kathryn, oh yes there are! We have learned antibodies play a VERY SMALL role in disease prevention. The whole “science” of “vaccination” was developed and implemented on a FALSE premise. Not only are “vaccines” essentially worthless at preventing disease they are extremely TOXIC. Autism is but one horrible result.

        Kathryn there is nothing honest about “vaccination”

        • Louis Sullivan

          A very small role? Would you kindly take a high school level biology class? That study was referencing the immune response to one type of virus. There are other types of viruses, as well other pathogens out there. And antibodies definitely play an appreciable role.

        • Kathryn Kinzel

          There is no link between autism and vaccination. I do not know how many times I need to say this, but well over 20 epidemiological studies have shown no link at all.

          A recent study actually shows the opposite, that in families with an older autistic child that decided to not vaccinate a younger child, that younger child’s risk of getting autism was higher! That tells me that there is no connection!

          And as having recently been in academic research looking for new vaccine targets on various bacteria, let me tell you with 100% certainty that antibodies mediate immunity. Maybe not 100% of the time, but for many instances of disease, yes they do. Vaccines are not extremely toxic, because otherwise they would have never been approved for use – and the people that make vaccines are not evil, they have kids too, and they want what’s best for everyone.

          • “There is no link between autism and vaccination.”

            Yes perhaps if we keep repeating this mantra we can forget that autism is DOUBLING about every 3.5 years.
            Yes perhaps if we keep repeating this mantra we can relax as ALL our children are sick and dying.

            “They won’t let us do the research; they don’t want to hear the research; and even if we do it no one sees it.” Autism Researcher

            “The MMR vaccine was not adequately tested and should not have been licensed.” Journal of Adverse Drug Reactions Jan 2000, Note how in heavens name are we supposed to “trust” these people?

            “The medical authorities keep lying. Vaccination has been a disaster on the immune system. It actually causes a lot of illnesses. We are actually changing our genetic code through vaccination…100 years from now we will know that the biggest crime against humanity was vaccines.” Guylaine Lanctot, M.D

            “But my second realization was even sadder: vaccines are recommended for the entire childhood population. Overwhelming scientific evidence now exists of their potential for permanent neurological and developmental damage – these sources are carefully evaluated in my new book. Yet the only parents who are interested in learning about their kids’ chances of vaccine injury seem to be those whose lives have already been directly affected, usually as the result of permanent damage to their own child. When it’s too late, they study it. Or as Sascha Sarnov says, the child goes to sleep as the parent wakes up.” The Psychology of Vaccine Injury Awareness

            “I have not seen major studies that focus on 300 kids who got autistic symptoms within a period of a few weeks of the vaccines.” Dr. Bernadine Healy, Former Head of the NIH

          • “And the people that make vaccines are not evil, they have kids too, and they want what’s best for everyone.”

            Well here is something on which we can agree. The evil that exists in “vaccination” is not in the good honest people implementing the evil policy. It is right up at the top. And these people I can assure you do not get “vaccinated” or let their kids get “vaccinated”.

            Of course I recall Jerry Ford getting his “flu shot” on national TV. We were later to learn that the “flu shot” caused thousands of times more damage than it supposedly prevented. They canceled the whole fraud in a week or so after the hospital beds started filling with “flu shot” victims. Remember?

          • Kathryn Kinzel

            “Yes perhaps if we keep repeating this mantra we can forget that autism is DOUBLING about every 3.5 years.”

            I’m not arguing that autism isn’t increasing, I’m just saying that there is no connection to vaccination. In fact, autism rates WOULDN’T be doubling if it was linked to vaccination, it would have the same steady rate as vaccination. So there you go, not connected.

            I think there should be plenty of research into autism, and there is a lot going on already. Trust me, no one from the government is holding back research findings they don’t want revealed – it’s not like the government controls how a research lab announces their findings (unless you think the government controls all media outlets, which is a bit blasphemous to say on the Digger). There haven’t been any major discoveries because this is a very difficult disease to unravel.

            Regarding Ford’s swine flu shot – cause that’s what it was, not the regular seasonal flu shot – it was a mistake. It was a rushed vaccine spurred by a panic, and it wasn’t as safe as it should have been. There have been times that has happened with other vaccines – Salk’s polio vaccine that wasn’t actually inactivated and the first rotavirus vaccine come to mind. But in those cases, the systems we have set up caught the fact that something weird was going on, and they could be removed quickly from the market. Those same systems are indicating that everything is fine right now, so there is no reason to be trying to spread panic and fear and lies about vaccination as a whole.

          • “I’m not arguing that autism isn’t increasing, I’m just saying that there is no connection to vaccination.”

            Kathryn we can try to deny the evidence and repeat the mantra but does this help? A scientist as yourself has an OBLIGATION to the helpless babies of America. Please open your eyes!


            “I have not seen autism with the Amish. You’ll find all the other stuff, but we don’t find the autism. We’re right in the heart of Amish country and seeing none, and that’s just the way it is.” Doctor Frank Noonan Lancaster County, Pa.

            “The rate of autism in northeastern Ohio, the nation’s largest Amish community, is 1 in 10,000. I should know I’m their neurologist.” Doctor Max Wiznitzer MD 2005, Note the Amish are under intense pressure to “vaccinate” and many are starting

            “The autism rate for U.S. children is 1 in 166, according to the federal government. The autism rate for the Amish around Middlefield, Ohio, is 1 in 15,000.” Doctor Heng Wang 2005

            “Almost every Amish family I know has had somebody from the health department knock on our door and try to convince us to get vaccines for our children. The younger Amish more and more are getting vaccines. It’s a minority of children who vaccinate, but that is changing now.” Julia Inion

            “Vaccination in pregnant women results in drastically higher risk of autism and autoimmune disease in the child.” Doctor Russell Blaylock MD, Note this is the beginning and end of this argument IMO

            “Mercury has also the unfortunate ability to transfer from pregnant woman to their unborn babies. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, mercury passed on to the fetus during pregnancy may have lasting consequences, including memory impairment, diminished language skills and other cognitive complications.” Dumbing Down Society Mercury in Foods and Vaccines, Note for decades they told us NOT to “vaccinate” pregnant women for just this reason. What has changed?

            The Danger of Excessive Vaccination During Brain Development: The Case for a Link to Autism Spectrum Disorders Russell L. Blaylock, M.D.

            “Findings suggest that U.S. male neonates vaccinated with hepatitis B vaccine had a 3-fold greater risk of Autism Spectrum Disorder. risk was greatest for non-white boys.” Annals of Epidemiology, Carolyn Gallagher and Melody Goodman, Stony Brook University Medical Center

            “Children who receive the entire 3-shot series of Hepatitis B Vaccine have a 9x higher rate of developmental disabilities than unvaccinated children.” Fourteen Studies

            “John O’Leary, Ph.D., a world-class researcher and molecular biologist from Ireland, using state of the art sequencing technology, showed how he had found measles virus in the gut of 96% of autistic children, compared to 6.6% of normal children. This virus did not come from the natural disease; it came from the measles vaccine.”

            “When these children get the MMR vaccine, their vitamin A stores are depleted and they cannot compensate for blocked pathways. Lack of vitamin A, which has been called “the anti-infective agent,” leaves them immunosuppressed.” Mary Megson, MD


          • Kathryn Kinzel

            Sorry, I’m not going to get my science from Robert Kennedy and Joe Scarborough. I have no idea what science Kennedy is thinking of, but there have been a multitude of studies that show zero connection between vaccines and autism or mercury and autism.

            If it was the mercury in the vaccines, shouldn’t we have seen a drop in autism cases? Mercury hasn’t been in vaccines in years! Why still the sudden increase? Basic epidemiology will tell you that if you remove the exposure and the outcome still occurs, then the exposure was not a necessary component – something else is causing the outcome.

            You mention the Amish – there are several things that the Amish are not exposed to that the rest of us are, maybe one of those is the culprit.

            The rest of your ramblings show no evidence of coming from “credible” sources – the measles in the gut evidence sounds a lot like the basis of Andrew Wakefield’s made-up study that was retracted from the Lancet for being a fraud. You say there are 14 studies that show HepB vaccination being linked to developmental disorders – I couldn’t find a single one during a regular literature search. I did find the website devoted to these papers however, and I realized why I didn’t find them during a normal search.

            The main paper that cites the 9x increase of disease in male babies that had the HepB vaccine has several flaws. 1) The data source they used is a cross-sectional survey, which cannot take into account any sort of cause and effect 2) The numbers they have are relatively small and it looks like they did numerous ad hoc analyses to get the answer that they wanted which is shown by 3) it is published in a chemistry journal, instead of a medical or public health journal – this is because the editors of those journals would have laughed these people out of the room for their methods, 4) they did not control for enough confounders and their methods by which they controlled are not clear in the paper, which makes me think they made it up.

            So in short, your greatest evidence is not strong at all, and is in fact quite weak. And you are right, we all have an obligation to help figure out what is causing the rise in autism, but I am going to do so using sound science, and not at the cost of numerous cases of vaccine-preventable diseases.

          • “So in short, your greatest evidence is not strong at all, and is in fact quite weak.”

            Kathryn can you tell me how monkey viruses have entered hundreds of millions of humans? Kathryn what do you know of SV-40?

            Please play fair madam.

            “The top UK government expert present at this conference, Dr Phil Minor of the National Institute of Biological Standards and Control, added that the polio vaccine had originally been so polluted that it’s doses contained as much monkey virus as poliovirus! I had no idea that so much monkey virus was in this vaccine given to hundreds of millions of children. Then there was another shock for me. I had been assured two years earlier at the SV40 Workshop that the polio vaccine was no longer contaminated with SV40 – and consequently I had so assured the UK public in our resulting Channel 4 television documentary. Now I learnt I had been misled and consequently had seriously misinformed the public. Scientists reported to this meeting that ‘SV40 sequences’ remained in the poliovirus seed used for the current polio vaccines.” From official US transcripts of recent unreported meetings of US and UK vaccine safety scientists

            “It was thus that I learnt that our vaccines are a veritable soup, made up not just of viruses that should or should not be there, but also thousands of bits of viruses and of cells, DNA and RNA genetic codes, proteins, enzymes, chemicals and perhaps oncogenes and prions. The vaccine was monitored for the presence of only a very few of these particles and vaccine lots are thrown away only if these are found. In other words, the vaccines we give our children are liquids filled with a host of unknown particles, most of which came from the cells of non-humans: from chickens, monkeys, or even from cancer cells. Truly we do not know what we are doing or what are the long-term consequences. All that is known for sure is that vaccines are a very cheap form of public medicine often provided by governments to ensure the public that they really do care for the safety of our children.” From official US transcripts of recent unreported meetings of US and UK vaccine safety scientists

            “It’s a very common polyoma virus of old world monkeys, and particularly rhesus macaques. The difficulty with this was that, when the rhesus macaque monkeys are sacrificed and a primary monkey kidney culture made from him or her, as the case may be, a silent infection is set up. So there is evidence of infection [found] just by looking at the cultures. In fact, these cultures can throw out as much SV40 as they do polio [virus].’ The problem was that the cell cultures didn’t show any sign of having defects, when they were actually infected with SV40. It seemed that SV40, and its accompanying proteins and genetic codes, would never have got into so many humans if they had not contaminated the vaccine – and that they were only dangerous when moved into a species for which their presence was not natural – such as into humans and into cynomolgus (African Green) monkeys. Wild caught monkeys were being used extensively in vaccine production. Up to a half of the cultures would have been thrown away because of adventitious agent contamination, mainly foamy virus, but certainly other things as well.” Dr Minor, UK’s top vaccine safety officer

            “Latent viruses were such a problem with primary monkey kidney cells that a worldwide moratorium on the licensing of all polio virus vaccines was called in 1967 because of death and illnesses that occurred in monkey kidney workers and vaccine manufacturing facilities’. The contaminating virus then blamed was the deadly Ebola. This was most serious, but again I could find no record of the public being informed about this suspension or the Ebola.” From official US transcripts of recent unreported meetings of US and UK vaccine safety scientists


          • Kathryn Kinzel

            I’m sorry, I thought I was playing fair – I am taking your arguments and showing you where there are holes in your logic, and you are attempting to do the same. That sounds evenly matched, right?

            Regarding the SV40, there has not been enough evidence to show that its presence causes cancer. Some laboratories have picked up on it, and others have not. However, the FDA has mandated that polio vaccines be screened for SV40 and since the mandate in 1972, they have not detected anything.

            I believe this falls under a comment that I have made before, where like all manufacture of drugs, vaccines have not been completely infallible. Early on there were mistakes, and as our knowledge of medicine has improved over the last several decades, we have gotten better at it, so that today’s vaccines are very safe.

        • Louis Sullivan

          That article presents several falsehoods about the purpose and function of vaccines in relation to our immune system. A vaccine is designed to be a “safe” infection (we can argue about safety later, but for now we’ll assume that it is safe). They contain dead pathogens or pieces of a pathogen. That way, the disease cannot actually make you sick and put your life in jeopardy. Since the inactivated pathogen is still foreign matter, the immune system mobilizes to attack it. Macrophages and T-cells attack it and bring antigens back to the B-cells, which produce antibodies which confer a level of immunity. This is what happens during a normal infection with a live pathogen as well. The difference is that if the immune system is not fast enough, the infection could cause damage before being repelled, thus making the immunity received pointless. That is why vaccines were invented in the 1700’s. So to take the home invasion analogy from the article, an infection is like a burglar breaking into your house; he steals your stuff, and afterwards you get a security system. A vaccine is like paying a professional to break into your house but not steal anything; you get the security system, but you still have your stuff.

          Next, the method of introduction. The article makes a lot of references to the blood stream and how it is this sacred “endzone” of sorts. First, the blood stream is where many of the immune cells of our bodies are located. How do you think macrophages get around the body? Through the blood. So the immune response is not to prevent the infection from reaching the blood stream, it is to get it OUT of the blood stream. Second, vaccines do not introduce the pathogen directly into the blood stream like the article claims. Ever had an IV or medicine injected directly into a vein? The nurse must search your arm for the vein and carefully insert the needle. When getting a vaccine, they just stick you. The vaccine is injected into fat and muscle where it can be slowly absorbed.

          As for the claims that vaccines trigger autoimmune diseases: I have an autoimmune disease. Maybe you can tell me how a vaccine-introduced antigen for a disease could cause my immune system to attack my thyroid hormones? Or how my father who grew up before this recent vaccine increase has more autoimmune diseases than I do?

  • Paul Donovan

    Thank you, Kathryn, for your reasoned responses and patience. It’s a thankless job to present facts to those whose ears are stopped.

  • D.J. Csaszar

    I am a physician in PA. I wanted to comment on a few areas. Kathryn, great job providing high quality sources. People who had varicella (chicken pox) as a child still get Shingles. People who have had varicella vaccine can still get varicella. This is from several reasons. One they did not produce immunity. Two, they were exposed to the disease before immunity occurred. Three, the live attenuated vaccine can mutate and cause active disease. Immunosuppression may occur after vaccination, which can allow new infection with live, native varicella or reactivation. The circulating varicella vaccine can mutate. There are many other reasons. One can not get influenza virus from the flu vaccine that is intradermal or intramuscular. It is a dead virus. Some people do get an immune response from the vaccine but it is not influenza. The intranasal flu vaccine is a live attenuated vaccine and flu is possible. In terms of autism and Alzheimer’s, doctors are trained better at diagnosing these diseases so rates increase. This is similar to increased rates of concussions. There is no 100% safe or effective vaccine or medicine. This is true from tylenol to antibiotics to multivitamins. Everything has a risk, but for many of the vaccines and medicines, the benefits outweigh the risks. Ask your doctor or pharmacist. Read legitimate, peer reviewed scientific journals for your info, that are only a few years old. Remember any thing you put into your body may have the potential to cause harm. Be open minded and look at all points before making your decision.

  • Jessica van Garderen

    Thank you for all of your posts providing actual studies and for taking the time to read all the links people have provided , pointing out their flaws using science and reasoning. It has been very helpful. It can be confusing and time consuming to sort through all of the information out there. At first I was against vaccines, but I started to notice that most of the websites that were anti-vaccine were citing very old information, or when I took a closer look at the studies there were obvious flaws. I still had my doubts though, which is how I ended up here. You have really helped me to sort through the misinformation so I can feel better about the choices I have to make. I feel like vaccines have come along way since the 80s and are much safer than they used to be.

    I did notice on the CDC website that you should not get vaccinated if you have a low platelet count. Can you tell me why this is?

  • David Winiecki

    I think the gist of the argument presented here (or a possible takeaway) is that the pertussis vaccine does not lower rates of pertussis or that it possibly even increases rates of pertussis.

    I’m going to believe there is a lot of evidence to the contrary, like


    Also, citing incomplete data from *one* year (the 90% number) to make a claim about the effectiveness or safety of a vaccine is relatively unconvincing. Show me a multi-year study that claims the pertussis vaccine is worthless or increases rates of infection, and then you’ll keep my attention.