kim

eamom, I hate even going into the HPV vaccine cause I'm in serious stroke territory. I was going to respond to your earlier question by saying that a total guess would be that there is some cross reactivity going on btwn the vaccine and different strains that an individual may be carrying prior to vaccination (as opposed to serotype replacement which has been a problem with vaccines like PCV 7 now 13). The more I thought about what I was going to say, the more I thought, "that does sound like "original antigentic sin." So i did what I do and up popped this http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2014-06/HPV-02-Luxembourgpost.pdf page 28 I only saw the words, don't have any idea what they are referring too there. edit....as soon as I lose my job altogether, get divorced and my kids totally stop trying to communicate with me, i'll try to figure more of that out unless you want to take it over!

eamom,. What I found stunning was the fact that the study included so few women. Forty-eight pregnant women aged 18 to 45 years received Tdap (n = 33) or placebo (n = 15) at 30 to 32 weeks’ gestation, with crossover immunization postpartum Yet, that was the study the Calif. dept of public health cited. They know you have to use these things in large populations to get any kind of reliable safety data (not that we'll know what it truly looks like anyway). Munoz says that herself in the interview. http://medicalresearch.com/author-interviews/tdap_vaccine_during_pregnancy_safety_and_efficacy/5128/ excerpt near the bottom MedicalResearch.com: What recommendations do you have for future research as a result of this study? Dr. Munoz: We did not aim to study the efficacy of vaccinating pregnant women in preventing infant pertussis infection. Therefore, larger studies to document the safety and efficacy of Tdap vaccination during pregnancy are needed. The next question that I have is how many of the moms of the infants that were hospitalized (77) or diagnosed during the outbreak that occured Jan-April 2014 had received the vaccine? It looks like the rec to vaccinate pregnant moms was added in February of 2013 http://www.acog.org/Resources-And-Publications/Committee-Opinions/Committee-on-Obstetric-Practice/Update-on-Immunization-and-Pregnancy-Tetanus-Diphtheria-and-Pertussis-Vaccination I wonder if this is the kind of research that "Hillary grandma knows best," spends her free time looking at. again, if you want to yourself right off, start reading about the infant and maternal programming naturally here. http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/hilarys-desk/vaccines-and-neonatal-immune-development. Engaging the immune system repeatedly with vaccines that force an unnatural immune respone takes on a whole new meaning. I don't want the government owning any childs immune system.

after reviewing again, I think this is my take away > A crucial antigen from natural infection is Adenylate cyclase toxin (ACT) >No ACT with aP vaccine very little with wP vaccine >Body does not make ACT antibodies on reexposure because it was primed with vaccine antigens (the original sin) >In vaccinated animals colonization is not prevented upon reexposure, pertussis capable of mutating because it was not cleared and infected capable of transmitting. >Pertactin free strain may not necessarily make it harder to clear, it may just make the vaccine less effective. The ability of the strain to infect vaccinated as opposed to naturally infected (who recovered) individuals and mutate would have been the sin committed by the original sin of prompting a suboptimal immune response. That last sentence is my own jargon. On the pregnancy issue. I decided to see what I could find in Califonia on what happened to infants during recent outbreaks. Vaccinating every pregnant female with each pregnancy seems radical. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/HealthInfo/discond/Documents/CDPH%20pertussis%20health%20alert%20May%2016%202014.pdf 2nd paragraph Under 3 mos. old? Ok, so we'll vaccinate the kids six times, the health care workers, dads, aunts, uncles, care givers, librairians, butchers, bakers and candlestick makers and then we'll vaccinate the pregnant mom. Oh, and if you didn't catch her while pregnant get her before she goes home. Be sure to read on the clickable about the "no adverse events," of vaccination during pregnancy. Notice the first name on the study then read here http://medicalresearch.com/author-interviews/tdap_vaccine_during_pregnancy_safety_and_efficacy/5128/ Tdap Vaccine During Pregnancy: Safety and Efficacy Posted on May 16, 2014 Flor M. Munoz, MD Department of Pediatrics Department of Molecular Virology and Microbiology Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas MedicalResearch.com Interview with: Flor M. Munoz, MD So the baboon study doesn't apply to humans or they are confident that the vaccines (mom and then the series that starts at 2mos) will result in less severe illness in infants or they just don't know what else to do?????? How about massive media coverage to tell what is known or unknown at this point and giving everyone a heads up to try to protect those infants from people who appear to have a cold or full blown whooping cough? Does this seem ok to anyone?

eamom, Did you make it to Hilary's remark at the very bottom about the response only being reset when the additional antigens are presented decoupled from the antigens in the acellular vaccine? edit..another 2 quick thoughts. The natural infection has now mutated in many cases. And how does all of this factor in with vaccinating pregnant moms? They are obviously hoping that antibodies will be passed on to the infant and get them through that first crucial year. They are probably figuring that a mom vaccinated after giving birth could still colonize and transmit to the infant (which is what they were pushing before actually vaccinating while pregnant) cacoon the infant with everyone around them getting vaccinated. I'm reading here right now. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/842151 I'm trying to wrap my head around how those passive maternal antibodies would affect an infant if those antibodies make it harder to fight a mutated strain. Is it an experiment where they are just hoping, or am I missing something?

from that page, click on this and be sure to read to the bottom where there is remark by Hilary regarding the reset. I'm not sure how that would work if a exposed and recovered from natural infection after vaccination. It seems you would revert back to long lasting immunity, but that's just my take on it. Good question

Pertussis (eamom, which thread,lol) http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/hilarys-desk/whooping_cough_and_chameleons

No, that was my fault, I kind of poped it into the wrong thread. She just has so much really good info on that site and explains things in a way that you can grasp, complete with the sci literature. Hey, we might have been cross posting. Did you see this response Posted Today, 12:48 PM eamom, that video is a " WOW." I watched it after I responded to you. I just read where one of the outbreaks of measles was among somilians who had become fearful of the vaccine. We discussed the higher incidence of autism in the somalian children on this forum when all of that was happening. Another irony, that they can use an outbreak in that population to force vaccination for education. That video was dated ROCHESTER, Minn. — Feb. 27, 2014. It's amazing how much new info is coming to light as these bills are all going on.

EAmom, I don't think she is saying that it can't be spread to others in fact the opposite. If you were vaccinated with the aP vaccine which contains pertactin as an antigen, the antibodies will be trying to respond to that component and it's not there anymore. That is the original antigentic sin part. The people who recover from natural infection won't become colonized upon re exposure at all, so the bacteria would have never hung around in the body and had a chance to mutate. I think the part that confused you was It can only mutate in the vaccinated, but can be spread to others. It would be interesting to know if the unvaccinated kids in outbreaks were recovering faster with less severe illness. If vaccinated kids are having a harder time throwing it off, it would be good evidence that the imprint on the immune system with pertactin wa hindering their recovery. Does that make sense?

eamom, that video is a " WOW." I watched it after I responded to you. I just read where one of the outbreaks of measles was among somilians who had become fearful of the vaccine. We discussed the higher incidence of autism in the somalian children on this forum when all of that was happening. Another irony, that they can use an outbreak in that population to force vaccination for education.

eamom, I started something on the Hep b thread and kind of dropped the ball. I think you might get a lot out of some of Hilary Butler's work on the immune system. http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/hilarys-desk/vaccines-and-neonatal-immune-development about 1/3 of the way down, you'll see this What was so enlightening about this series was the fact that some of the vaccines were forcing a T cell dependent response when a baby is programmed not to have that response. Remember when I linked to the offit paper about how he acted like forcing that to happen was just the greatest thing? If you take polysaccharides and attach a protein and absorb it on aluminum, you get an anamnestic or memeory response (rise in titer after challenge/re exposure). When polysaccharides alone are used in infants or elderly, that doesn't work very well and you can actually get hyporesponsiveness. Think S pneumonia here and HiB. She also explains in "going viral," how the pertussis vaccine allows the mutation of the virus. I kept reading about the vaccinated being more susceptible and how the mutation was in response to the vaccine, but I didn't know how or why. http://www.beyondconformity.org.nz/hilarys-desk/going-viral-part-2

my response would be..... How could it possibly be a good thing? I'm taking a chance that I'm imprinting my childs immune system to recognize pertactin. If it is a pertactin free strain, I may make it harder for them to fight infection. It will not provide my child with any type of long lasting immunity, so they will just be vulnerable again at an older age, they can be very dangerous to others i.e. infants and immunocompromised and when they become parents themselves, they will be more dangerous to their own children, if Merck and Johns Hopkns Dr.s got it right. http://www.jabfm.org/content/19/6/603.full Pertussis Infection in the United States: Role for Vaccination of Adolescents and Adults Dennis A. Brooks, MD and Richard Clover, MD Author Affiliations Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY Corresponding author: Dennis A. Brooks, MD, Merck & Co., Policy Public Health and Medical Affairs, 770 Sumneytown Pike WP97-B352, West Point, PA 19486 (E-mail: dennis_brooks2@merck.com) excerpt I know the trolls like to spout #'s about natural immunity not being long lasting and the vaccine being close to natural immunity, but that is falling flat on it's face. Parents aren't being told. Also, if your child is going to have to miss school due to pertussis, would you rather that happened in the higher grades or kindergarden? After widespread vaccination started, going back to the whole cell days, the only #'s that would really count in light of the baboon study would be infant illness/deaths. They will give you numbers on how the diagnosed cases fell, but we know that they did become colonized and were able to transmit. There would have been fewer pertactin free strain circulating then, so possibly milder symptoms in the vaccinated, and possibly less transmission due to less coughing (and they are admitting the vaccine was replaced due to adverse events, so infant transmission would have to be off set by other children's illness due to the vaccine) plus we were removing maternal passive immunity. We google scholars, selfish baby killers are the ones causing the problems hau?

Jan it has been thought that the whole cell pertussis vaccine was more effective but the carriage issue i believe has always been there. The infant baboons showed that when they recovered from the illness naturally they were not colonized upon reexposue. The inactivated whole cell vaccine animals cleared colonization faster (18 days) than the aP vaccinated animals (35 days). So in the real world, if I'm going back to work and dropping my 6 week old infant off at a day care, is my child going to be protected? I think I would feel a lot more comfortable knowing my baby was surrounded by kids who had recovered from natural infection than highly vaccinated children who could transmit to my infant. That's what makes me so angry. Parents are given such a false sense of security and then when an infant dies they beg everyone to get vaccinated. A least if childen are coughing their heads off (or grandma or mom) you know enough to keep them away from babies. Seems we need a mainstream medicine to embrace a better treatment option (vit c?) and look at studies using it. You don't see any mention of vit a in the media for measles either. PAN has to be aware of this. nicklemama, You have to remember this push has failed in other states. Even if it takes making parents aware one at a time, it's better than nothing. I know that peds in our area don't know this stuff. It doesn't do them any good because they have to follow the recommendations anyway. I do believe that the majority want to protect our children. How uncomfortable are you going to be as a medical professional insisting that a child get all of these vaccines when parents come in and confront them with studies like this? I would also like an explanation on why I wasn't warned. They need to be the ones that we put pressure on. The Hep b vaccine is another one that I would feel just ridiculous trying to defend as a Ped. Just use the CDC pink book info and try to make a case for vaccinating every infant. There is something new out on HPV too. http://www.livescience.com/50563-hpv-vaccine-infections-prevalence.html Women Who Received HPV Vaccine May Need Another Shot That negative finding has been bugging the watchdog groups and it looks like it has come home to roost, yet the chief of gynecologic oncology is surprised. this spells a lot out http://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/2008/JWReportFDAhpvVaccineRecords.pdf Starting on page 4 and these http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3565961/ Infect Agent Cancer. 2013; 8: 6. Published online 2013 Feb 1. doi: 10.1186/1750-9378-8-6 PMCID: PMC3565961 HPV vaccines and cancer prevention, science versus activism Lucija Tomljenovic,corresponding author1 Judy Wilyman,2 Eva Vanamee,3 Toni Bark,4 and Christopher A Shaw1 excerpt Crucially, these assumptions failed to take into account several important real-world factors such as: (1) reliability of surrogate-markers (i.e., whether they can accurately measure what they are purport to measure); (2) efficacy against oncogenic HPV strains not covered by the vaccine; (3) possibility of increased frequency of infections with these types; (4) efficacy in women acquiring multiple HPV types; (5) effects in women with pre-existing HPV infections http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23016780 Curr Pharm Des. 2013;19(8):1466-87. Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines as an option for preventing cervical malignancies: (how) effective and safe? Tomljenovic L1, Spinosa JP, Shaw CA. We carried out a systematic review of HPV vaccine pre- and post-licensure trials to assess the evidence of their effectiveness and safety. We find that HPV vaccine clinical trials design, and data interpretation of both efficacy and safety outcomes, were largely inadequate. Additionally, we note evidence of selective reporting of results from clinical trials (i.e., exclusion of vaccine efficacy figures related to study subgroups in which efficacy might be lower or even negative from peer-reviewed publications).

to continue this rant, nicklemama, I found some notes on a piece written on the Michigan situation http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2014/12/michigan_vaccinations_risk_imm.html excerpt . I would think the first question that they would be asking is if the strains were typed. To be fair, the authors in the 2012 articles didn't have some of the information that this one had (or not quite as much right at their finger tips). You are never going to get 93% immunity to whooping cough. http://novaccine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/R17-PNAS-2014-Warfel-787-92.pdf Acellular pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model The infant baboons were vaccinated at 2 4, 6, mos and challenged at 7 mos. so I guess you could make a case for the finding of less severe symptoms in an infant vaccinated with the current aP vaccine but you can't show that vaccinating older children is going to help (the whole case of mandatory vaccination... to protect the vulnerable). One study looking at vaccine effectiveness in a Wisconsin outbreak for those vaccinated one year before the outbreak, the effectiveness was thought to be 34.5% http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/210/6/942.abstract Estimating the Effectiveness of Tetanus-Diphtheria-Acellular Pertussis Vaccine (Tdap) for Preventing Pertussis: Evidence of Rapidly Waning Immunity and Difference in Effectiveness by Tdap Brand sources and other reading http://cid.oxfordjournals.org/content/38/4/502.long Determination of Serum Antibody to Bordetella pertussis Adenylate Cyclase Toxin in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children and in Children and Adults with Pertussis http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm FDA study helps provide an understanding of rising rates of whooping cough and response to vaccination http://thinkingmomsrevolution.com/an-open-letter-to-legislators-currently-considering-vaccine-legislation-from-tetyana-obukhanych-phd-in-immunology/ An Open Letter to Legislators Currently Considering Vaccine Legislation from Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD in Immunology http://dr-king.com/docs/20140326_PGK_sDrftResponseTo_Blind%20eye%20to%20scientific%20fraud%20is%20dangerous_final_b1.pdf pertussis http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/15/whooping-cough-vaccine-may-have-lost-its-punch-as-bacterium-evolves

nicklemama you need to be mad, not scared (believe me..i do know what you meant by that tho). When you discuss that Tdap with your Dr. print what the CDC/FDA are saying and take it! all bolding and underlining mine http://www.cdc.gov/maso/facm/pdfs/BSCOID/2013121112_BSCOID_Minutes.pdf Meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors, Office of Infectious Diseases Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tom Harkins Global Communication Center Atlanta, Georgia December 11 -12, 2013 Page 6 Resurgence of Pertussis. As reported at the May 2013 BSC meeting, the recent resurgence in pertussis cases has been associated with waning immunity over time in persons who received the acellular pertussis vaccine (which is administered as the pertussis component of DTaP vaccine). However, a recent study suggests another explanation for decreased vaccine effectiveness: an increase in Bordetella pertussis isolates that lack pertactin (PRN)-- a key antigen component of the acellular pertussis vaccine. A study that screened B. pertussis strains isolated between 1935 and 2012 for gene insertions that prevent production of PRN found significant increases in PRN- deficient isolates throughout the United States.2 The earliest PRN-deficient strain was isolated in 1994; by 2012, the percentage of PRN-deficient isolates was more than 50%. To assess the clinical significance of these findings, CDC used an IgG anti-PRN ELISA and otherassays (PCR amplification, sequencing, and Western blots) to characterize 752 B. pertussis strains isolated in 2012 from six Enhanced Pertussis Surveillance Sites 3 and from epidemics in Washington and Vermont. Findings indicated that 85% of the isolates were PRN -deficient and vaccinated patients had significantly higher odds than unvaccinated patients of being infected with PRN-deficient strains. Moreover, when patients with up-to-date DTaP vaccinations were compared to unvaccinated patients,the odds of being infected with PRN- deficient strains increased, suggesting that PRN-bacteria may have a selective advantage in infecting DTaP-vaccinated persons. Ask him why he is insisting on giving your child the SIXTH aluminum adjuvanted vaccine when he (she) now knows that it will not result in protecting an infant because the short term boost your son may get is not going to prevent colonization/infection and transmisssion to a vulnerable infant/immunocompromised, but may mask symptoms that will encourage transmission. Not only that, ask him if he's ever read Cherry's paper about "original antigentic sin," or how it is thought that the original imprint on the immune system makes it harder to fight the mutated strain. Going back to the underlined Vermont outbreak underlinedlined above...here is what a couple of people reported http://vtdigger.org/2012/12/17/mullin-whooping-cough-numbers-show-vaccine-rates-need-to-be-higher/ excerpts and http://vtdigger.org/2012/10/08/90-percent-of-whooping-cough-cases-in-vermont-among-vaccinated-children/ excerpt To see Pan stammer about vaccinating for pertussis in the video posted in response above, it seems CRIMINAL that a periatrician is not warning parents of what's going on here and using it to perpetuate the situation by forcing the vaccine to attend daycare and pubic school. If i were a Dr. being forced into this situation and an infant in my practice died or a child in the community, I just can't imagine sleeping at night. They need to speak up!

lydiasmum, After reading this review, I would say YES (i have no medical background whaat so ever). http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/135604-overview#aw2aab6b2b1aa I think your post is important to this forum and hope you will update on any findings. Did the Dr. who is treating your DD have an opinion?

read page 6 with the heading Resurgence of Pertussis http://www.cdc.gov/maso/facm/pdfs/BSCOID/2013121112_BSCOID_Minutes.pdf added this link to post right above sf mom's post

This morning I'm working on an e mail to send to a state senator who proposed legislation to make vaccination rates in our schools publically displayed. I also know legislation is coming to go the way of CA as I sat in on a 5 minute discussion by our local commisioners who rapidly supported the proposal which will be sent on to the state. These things start in your local communities by people who have no idea what they're talking about. I have watched the entire education hearing in CA but have only started watching the first meeting (health). I'm concentrating on what I feel is a totally dangerous scam being promoted regarding Pertussis. I don't know if it's discussed else where in the meeting yet or not but if you watch this segment of Pan speaking, he presents this in a way that I think is totally deceiving. The links to the FDA news release in 2013 below don't even address the concern of the mutating strains (pertactin free) which is being largely attributed widespread use of vaccines. (i'll be providing links) remarks by any of you dedicated parents would sure be welcome about the 10:04 mark http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm FDA study helps provide an understanding of rising rates of whooping cough and response to vaccination The study http://novaccine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/R17-PNAS-2014-Warfel-787-92.pdf excerpt By comparison, previously infected animals were not colonized upon secondary infection. Although all vaccinated and previously infected animals had robust serum anti- body responses, we found key differences in T-cell immunity. Pre- viously infected animals and wP-vaccinated animals possess strong B. pertussis-specific T helper 17 (Th17) memory and Th1 memory, whereas aP vaccination induced a Th1/Th2 response instead. The observation that aP, which induces an immune response mis- matched to that induced by natural infection, fails to prevent colo- nization or transmission provides a plausible explanation for the resurgence of pertussis and suggests that optimal control of pertus- sis will require the development of improved vaccines If you have a newborn infant or an immune compromised child, this will be of interest, I would think. If you are looking at it from a perspective of newly developing adjuvants or vaccine design, it would be of interest too. edited to add this link read page 6 with the heading Resurgence of Pertussis http://www.cdc.gov/m...OID_Minutes.pdf

EAmom, A headline blurb about this study was on our local news last nite. My response was that it just doesn't matter now. When you have a senior scientist at the CDC making the claims that he did (with no media coverage and states like CA pushing this legislation through) and you read documents like this......Pay particular attention to the first email in this string. The blacked out heading is "It just won't go away." This is discussing the thimerosal findings. How are we supposed to trust any of this now? http://www.safeminds.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Verstraeten-emails-1999-2000-regarding-VSD-data.pdf The only thing that I looked at in the study you're asking about, was who was involved Funding/Support: This project was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, and the US Department of Health and Human Services under contract HHSN-271-2010-00033-C These studies can so easily be designed or later manipulated to give the result that's desired, they just don't phase me any more. I'm sure there will plenty of discussion coming by people who are better equiped to take it apart than I am.

passed by the education committee this morning. http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article19227906.html California vaccine bill approved by committee on second try You can watch the hearing that preceded todays vote (last week) here http://www.jeffereyjaxen.com/blog/lobbyist-calling-the-shots-for-sb277-community-outpour-ignored

something else that I wanted to mention in regards to Hep B. If you read the vax insert it warns of allergy to yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) as the surface antigen for hep b is cultured on genetically engineered s cerevisiae (and absorbed on alum. in most? cases...it's been a while since i looked at these). CONTRAINDICATION #4 Description #11 https://www.gsksource.com/pharma/content/dam/GlaxoSmithKline/US/en/Prescribing_Information/Engerix-B/pdf/ENGERIX-B.PDF If you want check more (all) here are the others http://www.immunize.org/packageinserts/pi_hepatitisb.asp I know I have seen it mentioned that some have tested positive to yeast in allergy testing on these forums. If you do a search of saccharomyces cerevisiae and irritable bowel or crohn's, there is some interesting reading. Just one example http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0004-28032010000300006&script=sci_arttext Antibodies anti-Saccharomyces cerevisiae (ASCA) do not differentiate Crohn's disease from celiac disease

ajcire, Your post reminded me of another document. If you read a generous inch down, you will see a paragraph that starts out ; http://www.thinktwice.com/Hep_Hear.pdf This is from a subcommittee hearing in 1999. This is a great overview of the illogical risk that this vaccine creates for the majority of our infants/children in IMO.

Tiny Treasures, So glad to hear things are better. I was waiting to hear if others had any good things to say about increasing a dose of a drug that was having negative reactions too. It always makes me shudder when that rec. is made. I have read stories of children doing horrible criminal things and drug companies stepping in to assist attorneys in "why the drug," couldn't have been responsible when it clearly was. That's scarey business. I wanted to ask you if you have every visited this site (or any of the linked groups/books etc) in regards to the food neophobia? That seems to be an area that there is just no help or understanding of in main stream med. http://mealtimehostage.com/2012/11/28/food-neophobia-scale-and-category/

For anyone interested in understanding Hep B titers, what is known about what is thought to be "protective levels," and fury over the continued practice of the birth dose, these excerpts are a good place to start. The "low incidence," was not a good enough excuse to leave my newborns/infants alone, but it "seems," unnecessary to worry about it now. http://npin.cdc.gov/news/hepatitis-b-infant-immunization-protects-through-adolescent-years Hepatitis B Infant Immunization Protects Through Adolescent Years UNITED STATES: Viral Hepatitis Healio , 05/23/2014 Higher baseline antibody to HBV titer, older age at first dose of vaccine, higher test dose, nonwhite race, interactions of test dose, and marijuana use were independently associated with higher GMT response to the challenge dose of vaccine. The researchers concluded that the findings and the low incidence of acute HBV in the United States make a booster dose of vaccine seem unnecessary as part of routine immunization for adolescents. The researchers suggest follow-up tests with a similar population 20–25 years after HBV vaccine during infancy to investigate further duration of protection. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/483473_4 Our findings of the loss of anti-HBs over time in children vaccinated in infancy differ from those reported by some others. West et al[18] screened children at 12 years of age who had received a plasma-derived vaccine in infancy and were at low risk for hepatitis B exposure. None had anti-HBs <10 mIU/mL. Faustini et al[19] followed children at low risk who were vaccinated in infancy with a recombinant vaccine. By 5 years of age, only 7% had titers of anti-HBs <10 mIU/mL. A major difference between the children in those studies and ours is their age at initial vaccination. Those subjects were 2-3 months of age or older when they began their hepatitis B vaccine, whereas the infants in our studies began their series in the first week of life, a schedule recommended by ACIP. Indeed a study from Hawaii of low risk infants given recombinant vaccine starting at birth showed that only 19% had anti-HBs =10 mIU/mL at 6 years, yet all responded to a booster dose.[20] This suggests that starting the initial vaccination series later in infancy may result in better persistence of anti-HBs. However, starting at 2-3 months of age would not protect infants of HBsAg-positive mothers from perinatal transmission of HBV. Forgot to include this (for US-born 16- through 19-year-olds who received a recombinant HB vaccine 3-dose series). http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/133/6/e1500.short RESULTS: At baseline, 24% had protective anti-HBs levels of ≥10 IU/mL;

ophelia, I watched the video of Dr. Najjar and Susannah Cahalan last night on the AE all. site. Of the emotions that you're feeling, I hope you can hang onto excited. The way he kept questioning the physical symptoms instead of sweeping it into the psyc pile was so refreshing. I'm praying you have just as amazing of an out come as Susannah did.

dasu, Ahhh, now I understand why that fella initially said he would be happy to drink the glyphosate. It doesn't look like it hardly affected those protesters at all (what a way to protest)! He probably just thought better of getting any of that "froathing at the mouth," on his suit.