Metabolic Solutions Report
Terry
Chamberlin, B.Sc., C.N.C.,
Something is wrong when regulatory agencies pretend that vitamins are dangerous, yet ignore published statistics showing that government-sanctioned medicine is the real hazard.
Until now, Life Extension could cite only isolated statistics to make its case about the dangers of conventional medicine. No one had ever analyzed and combined ALL of the published literature dealing with injuries and deaths caused by government-protected medicine. That has now changed.
A group of researchers meticulously reviewed the statistical evidence and their findings are absolutely shocking.4 These researchers have authored a paper titled “Death by Medicine” that presents compelling evidence that today’s system frequently causes more harm than good.
This fully referenced report shows the number of people having in-hospital, adverse reactions to prescribed drugs to be 2.2 million per year. The number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections is 20 million per year. The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million per year. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million per year.
The most stunning statistic, however, is that the total
number of deaths caused by conventional medicine is an astounding 783,936 per
year. It is now evident that the American medical system is the leading cause
of death and injury in the
We placed this article on our website to memorialize the failure of the American medical system. By exposing these gruesome statistics in painstaking detail, we provide a basis for competent and compassionate medical professionals to recognize the inadequacies of today’s system and at least attempt to institute meaningful reforms.
LE Magazine March 2004
VACCINATION
OVERVIEW:
c by Alan Phillips
(aphillip@email.unc.edu). Last Revision: February 1997. See the Informed
Parents Vaccination Home Page" on the World Wide Web at URL: http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/vaccine/imformed.htm
*Permission freely granted to copy and redistribute in full for any nonprofit
purpose. Persons concerned with
for-profit distribution, electronic postings, and other concerns should contact
the author at Vaccine Awareness,
INTRODUCTION
Is there a legitimate controversy?
When my son began his routine vaccination series at age 2 months, I did not know there were any risks associated with immunizations. But the clinic's literature contained a contradiction: the chances of a serious adverse reaction to the DPT vaccine were 1 in 1750, while his chances of dying from pertussis each year were 1 in several million. When I pointed this out to the physician, he angrily disagreed, and stormed out of the room mumbling, "I guess I should read that sometime..." Soon thereafter I learned of a child who had been permanently disabled by a vaccine, so I decided to investigate for myself. My findings have so alarmed me that I feel compelled to share them; hence, this report.
Health authorities credit vaccines for disease declines, and
assure us of their safety and effectiveness. Yet these seemingly rock-solid
assumptions are directly contradicted by health statistics, medical studies,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reports,
and reputable research scientists from around the world. In fact, infectious diseases declined
steadily for decades prior to vaccinations.
There are hundreds of published medical studies documenting vaccine failure and adverse effects, and dozens of books written by doctors, researchers, and independent investigators that reveal serious flaws in immunization theory and practice. Ironically, most pediatricians and parents are completely unaware of these findings. However, this has begun to change in recent years, as a growing number of parents and healthcare providers around the world are becoming aware of the problems and starting to question the use of widespread, mandatory vaccinations.
My point it not to tell anyone whether or not to vaccinate, but rather, with the utmost urgency, to point out some very good reasons why everyone should examine the facts before deciding whether or not to submit to the procedure. As a new parent, I was shocked to discover the absence of a legal mandate or professional ethic requiring pediatricians to be fully informed, and to see first-hand the prevalence of physicians who are applying practices based on incomplete--and in some cases, outright mis--information.
Though only a brief introduction, this report contains sufficient evidence to warrant further investigation by all concerned, which I highly recommend. You will find that this is the only way to get an objective view, as the controversy is a highly emotional one.
A note of caution: Be careful trying to discuss this subject with a pediatrician. Most have staked their identities and reputations on the presumed safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and thus have difficulty acknowledging evidence to the contrary. The first pediatrician I attempted to share my findings with yelled angrily at me when I calmly brought up the subject. The misconceptions have very deep roots.
VACCINATION MYTH #1:
"Vaccines are completely safe..." ...or are they?
The FDA's VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System) receives about 11,000 reports of serious adverse reactions to vaccination annually, some 1% (112+) of which are deaths from vaccine reactions. [1] The majority of these reports are made by doctors, and the majority of deaths are attributed to the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine, the "P" in DPT. This figure alone is alarming, yet it is only the "tip of the iceberg." The FDA estimates that only about 10% of adverse reactions are reported, [2] a figure supported by two National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) investigations. [3] In fact, the NVIC reported that "In New York, only one out of 40 doctor's offices [2.5%] confirmed that they report a death or injury following vaccination," -- 97.5% of vaccine related deaths and disabilities go unreported there. Implications about the integrity of medical professionals aside (doctors are legally required to report serious adverse events), these findings suggest that vaccine deaths actually occurring each year may be well over 1,000.
With pertussis, the number of vaccine-related deaths dwarfs the number of disease deaths, which have been about 10 annually for recent years according to the CDC, and only 8 in 1993, the last peak-incidence year (pertussis runs in 3-4 year cycles, though vaccination certainly doesn't). Simply put, the vaccine is 100 times more deadly than the disease. Given the many instances in which highly vaccinated populations have contracted disease (see Myth #2), and the fact that the vast majority of disease decline this century occurred before compulsory vaccinations (pertussis deaths declined 79% prior to vaccines; see Myth #3), this comparison is a valid one--and this enormous number of vaccine casualties can hardly be considered a necessary sacrifice for the benefit of a disease-free society.
Unfortunately, the vaccine-related-deaths story doesn't end here. Both national and international studies have shown vaccination to be a cause of SIDS[4,5] (SIDS is "Sudden Infant Death Syndrome," a "catch-all" diagnosis given when the specific cause of death is unknown; estimates range from 5 - 10,000 cases each year in the U.S.). One study found the peak incidence of SIDS occurred at the ages of 2 and 4 months in the U.S., precisely when the first two routine immunizations are given, [4] while another found a clear pattern of correlation extending three weeks after immunization. Another study found that 3,000 children die within 4 days of vaccination each year in the U.S. (amazingly, the authors reported no SIDS/vaccine relationship), while yet another researcher's studies led to the conclusion that half of SIDS cases--that would be 2500 to 5000 infant deaths in the U.S. each year--are caused by vaccines. [5]
There are studies that claimed to find no SIDS-vaccine relationship. However, many of these were invalidated by yet another study which found that "confounding" had skewed their results in favor of the vaccine. [6] Shouldn't we err on the side of caution? Shouldn't any credible correlation between vaccines and infant deaths be just cause for meticulous, widespread monitoring of the vaccination status of all SIDS cases? In the mid 70's Japan raised their vaccination age from 2 months to 2 years; their incidence of SIDS dropped dramatically. In spite of this, the U.S. medical community has chosen a posture of denial. Coroners refuse to check the vaccination status of SIDS victims, and unsuspecting families continue to pay the price, unaware of the dangers and denied the right to make a choice.
Low adverse event reporting also suggests that the total number of adverse reactions actually occurring each year may be more than 100,000. Due to doctors' failure to report, no one knows how many of these are permanent disabilities, but statistics suggest that it is several times the number of deaths (see "petitions" below). This concern is reinforced by a study which revealed that 1 in 175 children who completed the full DPT series suffered "severe reactions," [7] and a Dr.'s report for attorneys which found that 1 in 300 DPT immunizations resulted in seizures. [8]
England actually saw a drop in pertussis deaths when vaccination rates dropped from 80% to 30% in the mid 70's. Swedish epidemiologist B. Trollfors' study of pertussis vaccine efficacy and toxicity around the world found that "pertussis-associated mortality is currently very low in industrialised countries and no difference can be discerned when countries with high, low, and zero immunisation rates were compared." He also found that England, Wales, and West Germany had more pertussis fatalities in 1970 when the immunization rate was high than during the last half of 1980, when rates had fallen. [9]
Vaccinations cost us much more than just the lives and health of our children. The U.S. Federal Government's National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) has paid out over $724.4 million to parents of vaccine injured and killed children, in tax-payer dollars. The NVICP has received over 5000 petitions since 1988, including over 700 for vaccine-related deaths, and there are still some two thousand total death and injury cases pending that may take years to resolve. [10] Meanwhile, pharmaceutical companies have a captive market: vaccines are legally mandated in all 50 U.S. states (though legally avoidable in most; see Myth #9), yet these same companies are "immune" from accountability for the consequences of their products. Furthermore, they have been allowed to use "gag orders" as a leverage tool in vaccine damage legal settlements to prevent disclosure of information to the public about vaccination dangers. Such arrangements are clearly unethical; they force a nonconsenting American public to pay for vaccine manufacturer's liabilities, while attempting to ensure that this same public will remain ignorant of the dangers of their products. It is interesting to note that insurance companies (who do the best liability studies) refuse to cover vaccine adverse reactions. Profits appear to dictate both the pharmaceutical and insurance companies' positions.
VACCINATION TRUTH #1:
Vaccination causes significant death and disability at an astounding personal and financial cost to families and taxpayers.
VACCINATION MYTH #2:
"Vaccines are very effective..." ...or are they?
The medical literature has a surprising number of studies documenting vaccine failure. Measles, mumps, small pox, polio and Hib outbreaks have all occurred in vaccinated populations. [11, 12, 13, 14, 15] In 1989 the CDC reported: "Among school-aged children, [measles] outbreaks have occurred in schools with vaccination levels of greater than 98 percent. [16] [They] have occurred in all parts of the country, including areas that had not reported measles for years." [17] The CDC even reported a measles outbreak in a documented 100 percent vaccinated population. [18] A study examining this phenomenon concluded, "The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons." [19] A more recent study found that measles "produces immune suppression which contributes to an increased susceptibility to other infections." [19a] These studies suggests that the goal of complete immunization is actually counterproductive, a notion underscored by instances in which epidemics followed complete immunization of entire countries. Japan experienced yearly increases in small pox following the introduction of compulsory vaccines in 1872. By 1892, there were 29,979 deaths, and all had been vaccinated. [20] Early in this century, the Philippines experienced their worst smallpox epidemic ever after 8 million people received 24.5 million vaccine doses; the death rate quadrupled as a result. [21] In 1989, the country of Oman experienced a widespread polio outbreak six months after achieving complete vaccination. [22] In the U.S. in 1986, 90% of 1300 pertussis cases in Kansas were "adequately vaccinated." [23] 72% of pertussis cases in the 1993 Chicago outbreak were fully up to date with their vaccinations. [24]
VACCINATION TRUTH #2:
Evidence suggests that vaccination is an unreliable means of preventing disease.
VACCINATION MYTH #3:
"Vaccines are the main reason for low disease rates in the U.S. today..." or are they?
According to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, childhood diseases decreased 90% between 1850 and 1940, paralleling improved sanitation and hygienic practices, well before mandatory vaccination programs. Infectious disease deaths in the U.S. and England declined steadily by an average of about 80% during this century (measles mortality declined over 97%) prior to vaccinations. [25] In Great Britain, the polio epidemics peaked in 1950, and had declined 82% by the time the vaccine was introduced there in 1956. Thus, at best, vaccinations can be credited with only a small percentage of the overall decline in disease related deaths this century. Yet even this small portion is questionable, as the rate of decline remained virtually the same after vaccines were introduced. Furthermore, European countries that refused immunization for small pox and polio saw the epidemics end along with those countries that mandated it. (In fact, both small pox and polio immunization campaigns were followed initially by significant disease incidence increases; during smallpox vaccination campaigns, other infectious diseases continued their declines in the absence of vaccines. In England and Wales, smallpox disease and vaccination rates eventually declined simultaneously over a period of several decades.[26]) It is thus impossible to say whether or not vaccinations contributed to the continuing decline in disease death rates, or if the same forces which brought about the initial declines--improved sanitation, hygiene, improvements in diet, natural disease cycles--were simply unaffected by the vaccination programs. Underscoring this conclusion was a recent World Health Organization report which found that the disease and mortality rates in third world countries have no direct correlation with immunization procedures or medical treatment, but are closely related to the standard of hygiene and diet. [27] Credit given to vaccinations for our current disease incidence has simply been grossly exaggerated, if not outright misplaced.
Vaccine advocates point to incidence statistics rather than mortality as proof of vaccine effectiveness. However, statisticians tell us that mortality statistics can be a better measure of incidence than the incidence figures themselves, for the simple reason that the quality of reporting and record-keeping is much higher on fatalities. [28] For instance, a recent survey in New York City revealed that only 3.2% of pediatricians were actually reporting measles cases to the health department. In 1974, the CDC determined that there were 36 cases of measles in Georgia, while the Georgia State Surveillance System reported 660 cases. [29] In 1982, Maryland state health officials blamed a pertussis epidemic on a television program, "D.P.T.--Vaccine Roulette," which warned of the dangers of DPT; however, when former top virologist for the U.S. Division of Biological Standards, Dr. J. Anthony Morris, analyzed the 41 cases, only 5 were confirmed, and all had been vaccinated. [30] Such instances as these demonstrate the fallacy of incidence figures, yet vaccine advocates tend to rely on them indiscriminately.
VACCINATION TRUTH #3:
It is unclear what impact vaccines had on the infectious disease declines that occurred throughout this century.
VACCINATION MYTH #4:
"Vaccination is based on sound immunization theory and practice..." ...or is it?
The clinical evidence for vaccinations is their ability to stimulate antibody production in the recipient, a fact which is not disputed. What is not clear, however, is whether or not such antibody production constitutes immunity. For example, agamma globulin-anemic children are incapable of producing antibodies, yet they recover from infectious diseases almost as quickly as other children. [31] Furthermore, a study published by the British Medical Council in 1950 during a diphtheria epidemic concluded that there was no relationship between antibody count and disease incidence; researchers found resistant people with extremely low antibody counts and sick people with high counts. [32] Natural immunization is a complex phenomenon involving many organs and systems; it cannot be fully replicated by the artificial stimulation of antibody production.
Research also indicates that vaccination commits immune cells to the specific antigens involved in the vaccine, rendering them incapable of reacting to other infections. Our immunological reserve may thus actually be reduced, causing a generally lowered resistance. [33]
Another component of immunization theory is "herd immunity," which states that when enough people in a community are immunized, all are protected. As Myth #2 revealed, there are many documented instances showing just the opposite--fully vaccinated populations do contract diseases; with measles, this actually seems to be the direct result of high vaccination rates. [19] A Minnesota state epidemiologist concluded that the Hib vaccine increases the risk of illness when a study revealed that vaccinated children were five times more likely to contract meningitis than unvaccinated children.
Carefully selected epidemiological studies are yet another justification for vaccination programs. However, many of these may not be legitimate sources from which to draw conclusions about vaccine effectiveness. For example, if 100 people are vaccinated and 5 contract the disease, the vaccine is declared to be 95% effective. But if only 10 of the 100 were actually exposed to the disease, then the vaccine was really only 50% effective. Since no one is willing to directly expose an entire population to disease--even a fully vaccinated one--vaccine effectiveness rates may not indicate a vaccine's true effectiveness.
Yet another surprising concern about immunization practice is its assumption that all children, regardless of age, are virtually the same. An 8 pound 2 month old receives the same dosage as a 40 pound five year old. Infants with immature, undeveloped immune systems may receive five or more times the dosage (relative to body weight) as older children. Furthermore, the number of "units" within doses has been found upon random testing to range from 1/2 to 3 times what the label indicates; manufacturing quality controls appear to tolerate a rather large margin of error. "Hot Lots"--vaccine lots with disproportionately high death and disability rates--have been identified repeatedly by the NVIC, but the FDA refuses to intervene to prevent further unnecessary injury and deaths. In fact, they have never recalled a vaccine lot due to adverse reactions. Some would call this infanticide.
Finally, vaccination practice assumes that all recipients, regardless of race, culture, diet, geographic location, or any other circumstances, will respond the same. This was perhaps never more dramatically disproved than an instance a few years ago in Australia's Northern Territory, where stepped-up immunization campaigns resulted in an incredible *50%* infant mortality rate in the native aborigines. [34] Researcher A. Kalokerinos, M.D. discovered that the aborigine's vitamin C deficient "junk food" diet (imposed on them by white society) was a critical factor (studies had already shown that vaccination depletes vitamin C reserves; children in shock or collapse often recovered in a matter of minutes when given vitamin C injections). He considered it amazing that as many survived as did. One must wonder about the lives of the survivors, though, for if half died, surely the other half did not escape unaffected.
Almost as troubling was a very recent study in the New England Journal of Medicine which revealed that a substantial number of Romanian children were contracting polio from the vaccine, a less common phenomena in most developed countries. Correlations with injections of antibiotics were found: a single injection within one month of vaccination raised the risk of polio 8 times, 2 to 9 injections raised the risk 27-fold, and 10 or more injections raised the risk 182 times [Washington Post, February 22, 1995].
What other factors not accounted for in vaccination theory will surface unexpectedly to reveal unforeseen or previously overlooked consequences? We will not begin to fully comprehend the scope of this danger until researchers begin looking and reporting in earnest. In the meantime, entire countries' populations are unwitting gamblers in a game that many might very well choose not to play if they were given all the "rules" in advance.
VACCINATION TRUTH #4:
Many of the assumptions upon which immunization theory and practice are based have been proven false in their application.
VACCINATION MYTH #5:
"Childhood diseases are extremely dangerous..." ...or are they, really?
Most childhood infectious diseases have few serious consequences in today's modern world. Even conservative CDC statistics for pertussis during 1992-94 indicate a 99.8% recovery rate. In fact, when hundreds of pertussis cases occurred in Ohio and Chicago in the fall 1993 outbreak, an infectious disease expert from Cincinnati Children's Hospital said, "The disease was very mild, no one died, and no one went to the intensive care unit."
The vast majority of the time, childhood infectious diseases are benign and self-limiting. They also may impart lifelong immunity, whereas vaccine-induced immunity is only temporary. In fact, the temporary nature of vaccine immunity can create a more dangerous situation in a child's future. For example, the new chicken pox vaccine has an effectiveness estimated at 6 - 10 years. If effective, it will postpone the child's vulnerability until adulthood, when death from the disease is 20 times more likely.
About half of measles cases in the late 1980's resurgence were in adolescents and adults, most of whom were vaccinated as children, [35] and the recommended booster shots may provide protection for less than 6 months.[36] Furthermore, some healthcare professionals are concerned that the virus from the chicken pox vaccine may "reactivate later in life in the form of herpes zoster (shingles) or other immune system disorders." [37] Dr. A. Lavin of the Dept. of Pediatrics, St. Luke's Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio, strongly opposed licensing the new vaccine, "Until we actually know...the risks involved in injecting mutated DNA [herpes virus] into the host genome [children]." [38] The truth is, *no one* knows, but the vaccine is now licensed and recommended by health authorities.
Not only are most infectious diseases rarely dangerous, but they can actually play a vital role in the development of a strong, healthy immune system. Persons who have not had measles have a higher incidence of certain skin diseases, degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, and certain tumors, while absence of mumps has been linked to higher risks of ovarian cancer.
VACCINATION TRUTH #5:
"Dangers of childhood diseases are greatly exaggerated in order to scare parents into compliance with a questionable but profitable procedure."
VACCINATION MYTH #6:
"Polio was one of the clearly great vaccination success stories..." ...or was it?
Six New England states reported increases in polio one year after the Salk vaccine was introduced, ranging from more than doubling in Vermont to Massachusetts' astounding increase of 642%. In 1959, 77.5% of Massachusetts' paralytic cases had received 3 doses of IPV (injected polio vaccine). During 1962 U.S. Congressional hearings, Dr. Bernard Greenberg, head of the Dept. of Biostatistics for the University of North Carolina School of Public Health, testified that not only did the cases of polio increase substantially after mandatory vaccinations (50% increase from 1957 to 1958, 80% increase from 1958 to 1959), but that the statistics were manipulated by the Public Health Service to give the opposite impression. [39]
According to researcher-author Dr. Viera Scheibner, 90% of polio cases were eliminated from statistics by health authorities' redefinition of the disease when the vaccine was introduced, while in reality the Salk vaccine was continuing to cause paralytic polio in several countries at a time when there were no epidemics being caused by the wild virus. (For example, in the U.S., thousands of cases of viral and aseptic meningitis are reported each year--these were routinely diagnosed as polio before the Saulk vaccine; the number of cases needed to declare an epidemic was raised from 20 to 35; and the requirement for inclusion in paralysis statistics was changed from symptoms for 24 hours to symptoms for over 60 days; it is no wonder that polio decreased radically after vaccines--at least on paper.) In 1985, the CDC reported that 87% of the cases of polio in the U.S. between 1973 and 1983 were caused by the vaccine, and later declared that all but a few imported cases since were caused by the vaccine--and most of the imported cases occurred in fully immunized individuals.
Jonas Salk, inventor of the IPV, testified before a Senate subcommittee that nearly all polio outbreaks since 1961 were caused by the oral polio vaccine. At a workshop on polio vaccines sponsored by the Institute of Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Samuel Katz of Duke University cited the estimated 8-10 annual U.S. cases of vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) in people who have taken the oral polio vaccine, and the [four year] absence of wild polio from the western hemisphere. Jessica Scheer of the National Rehabilitation Hospital Research Center in Washington, D.C., pointed out that most parents are unaware that polio vaccination in this country entails "a small number of human sacrifices each year." Compounding this contradiction are low adverse event reporting and the NVIC's experiences with confirming and correcting misdiagnoses of vaccine reactions, which suggest that the actual number of VAPP "sacrifices" may be many times higher than the number cited by the CDC.
VACCINATION TRUTH #6:
Vaccines caused substantial increases in polio after years of steady declines, and they are the sole cause of polio in the U.S. today.
VACCINATION MYTH #7:
"My child had no short-term reaction to vaccination, so there is nothing to worry about..." ...or is there?
The documented long term adverse effects of vaccines include chronic immunological and neurological disorders such as autism, hyperactivity, attention deficit disorders, dyslexia, allergies, cancer, and other conditions, many of which barely existed 30 years ago before mass vaccination programs. Vaccine components include known carcinogens such as thimersol, aluminum phosphate, and formaldehyde (the Poisons Information Centre in Australia claims there is no acceptable safe amount of formaldehyde which can be injected into a living human body).
Medical historian, researcher and author Harris Coulter, Ph.D. explained that his extensive research revealed childhood immunization to be "...causing a low-grade encephalitis in infants on a much wider scale than public health authorities were willing to admit, about 15-20% of all children." He points out that the sequelae [conditions known to result from a disease] of encephalitis [inflammation of the brain, a known side-effect of vaccination]: autism, learning disabilities, minimal and not-so-minimal brain damage, seizures, epilepsy, sleeping and eating disorders, sexual disorders, asthma, crib death, diabetes, obesity, and impulsive violence are precisely the disorders which afflict contemporary society. Many of these conditions were formerly relatively rare, but they have become more common as childhood vaccination programs have expanded. Coulter also points out that "...pertussis toxoid is used to create encephalitis in lab animals."
A German study found correlations between vaccinations and 22 neurological conditions including attention deficit and epilepsy. The dilemma is that viral elements in vaccines may persist and mutate in the human body for years, with unknown consequences. Millions of children are partaking in an enormous, crude experiment; and no sincere, organized effort is being made by the medical community to track the negative side-effects or to determine the long term consequences.
VACCINATION TRUTH #7:
"The long term adverse effects of vaccinations have been virtually ignored, in spite of direct correlations with many chronic conditions."
VACCINATION MYTH #8:
"Vaccines are the only disease prevention option available..." ...or are they?
Most parents feel compelled to take some disease-preventing action for their children. While there is no 100% guarantee anywhere, there are viable alternatives. Historically, homeopathy has been more effective than "mainstream" allopathic medicine in treating and preventing disease. In a U.S. cholera outbreak in 1849, allopathic medicine saw a 48-60% death rate, while homeopathic hospitals had a documented death rate of only 3%. [40] Roughly similar statistics still hold true for cholera today. [41] Recent epidemiological studies show homeopathic remedies as equaling or surpassing standard vaccinations in preventing disease. There are reports in which populations that were treated homeopathically after exposure had a 100% success rate--none of the treated caught the disease. [42]
There are homeopathic kits available for disease prevention. [43] Homeopathic remedies can also be taken only during times of increased risk (outbreaks, traveling, etc.), and have proven highly effective in such instances. And since these remedies have no toxic components, they have no side effects. In addition, homeopathy has been effective in reversing some of the disability caused by vaccine reactions, as well as many other chronic conditions with which allopathic medicine has had little success.
VACCINATION TRUTH #8:
Documented safe and effective alternatives to vaccination have been available for decades but suppressed by the medical establishment.
VACCINATION MYTH #9:
"Vaccinations are legally mandated, and thus unavoidable..." ...or are they?
There are three exemption possibilities in the U.S. and Canada:
1) Medical Exemption: All 50 states in the U.S. allow for a medical exemption. A few states allow licensed naturopathic or chiropractic doctors to issue medical exemptions in addition to medical doctors. However, few pediatricians check for indications of increased risk before administering vaccines, so it is advisable for parents to research this matter for themselves. Epilepsy, severe allergies, and siblings' previous adverse reactions are but a few of the many conditions in child or family history which may increase the chances of an adverse reaction, and thus qualify for a medical exemption;
2) Religious Exemption: Nearly all states allow for a religious exemption. This may or may not require membership in an established religious organization, as individual state laws vary; and
3) Philosophical or Personal Exemption: An increasing number of states allow
one of these exemptions, in recognition of the controversy and/or violation of freedom that mandated vaccination laws impose.
Generally, exempted children may not be banned from attending public schools and colleges except during local outbreaks. It is best to contact local school officials in advance to determine their particular procedure for handling exemptions.
The best source for a copy of your state's vaccination laws is state health officials or your public library. A phone call to the state Department of Epidemiology may be all that it takes to get a copy mailed to you.
VACCINATION TRUTH #9:
Legal exemptions from vaccinations are obtainable for most--but not all—North American citizens.
VACCINATION MYTH #10:
"Public health officials always place health above all other concerns..." ...or do they?
Vaccination history is riddled with documented instances of deceit designed to portray vaccines as mighty disease conquerors, when in fact many times they have actually delayed and even reversed disease declines. The United Kingdom's Department of Health admitted that vaccination status determined the diagnosis of subsequent diseases: Those found in vaccinated patients received alternate diagnoses; hospital records and death certificates were falsified. Today, many doctors are still reluctant to diagnose diseases in vaccinated children, and so the "Myth" about vaccine success continues.
However, individual doctors may not be wholly to blame. As medical students, few have reason to question the information taught (which does not address the information presented in this report). Ironically, medicine is a field which demands conformity; there is little tolerance for opinions opposing the status quo. Doctors cannot warn you about what they themselves do not know, and with little time for further education once they begin practice, they are, in a sense, held captive by a system which discourages them from acquiring information independently and forming their own opinions. Those few that dare to question the status quo are frequently ostracized, and in any case, they are still legally bound to adhere to the system's legal mandates.
SUMMARY
In the December 1994 Medical Post, Canadian author of the best-seller "Medical Mafia," Guylaine Lanctot, M.D. stated, "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...10 years from now we will know that the biggest crime against humanity was vaccines." After an extensive study of the medical literature on vaccination, Dr. Viera Scheibner concluded that "there is no evidence whatsoever of the ability of vaccines to prevent any diseases. To the contrary, there is a great wealth of evidence that they cause serious side effects." John B. Classen, M.D., M.B.A. has stated, "My data proves that the studies used to support immunization are so flawed that it is impossible to say if immunization provides a net benefit to anyone or to society in general. This question can only be determined by proper studies which have never been performed. The flaw of previous studies is that there was no long term follow up and chronic toxicity was not looked at. The American Society of Microbiology has promoted my research...and thus acknowledges the need for proper studies." To some these may seem like radical positions, but they are not unfounded. The continued denial of the evidence against vaccines only perpetuates the "Myths" and their negative consequences on our children and society. Aggressive and comprehensive scientific investigation is clearly warranted, yet immunization programs continue to expand in the absence of such research. Manufacturer profits are guaranteed, while accountability for the negative effects is conspicuously absent. This is especially sad given the readily available safe and effective alternatives.
Meanwhile, the race is on. According to the NVIC, there are over 250 new vaccines being developed for everything from earaches to birth control to diarrhea, with about 100 of these already in clinical trials. Researchers are working on vaccine delivery through nasal sprays, mosquitoes (yes, mosquitoes), and the fruits of "transgenic" plants in which vaccine viruses are grown. With every child (and adult, for that matter) on the planet a potential required recipient of multiple doses, and every healthcare system and government a potential buyer, it is little wonder that countless millions of dollars are spent nurturing the growing multi-billion dollar vaccine industry. Without public outcry, we will see more and more new vaccines required of us and our children. And while profits are readily calculable, the real human costs are being ignored.
Whatever your personal vaccination decision, make it an informed one; you have that right and responsibility. It is a difficult issue, but there is more than enough at stake to justify whatever time and energy it takes.
Do not use this report alone to make your vaccination decision:
FIND OUT FOR YOURSELF!
To obtain a copy of Dispelling Vaccination Myths and the Vaccination Resource Directory (publishers, books, tapes, videos, newsletters, government agencies, nonprofits, vaccination alternatives, internet and WWW sources, etc.), send $5 + $2 P/H (US funds) to: Vaccine Awareness, P.O. Box 62282, Durham, NC 27715-2282, download it free from internet address http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/vaccine/informed.htm, or send email to aphillip@email.unc.edu.
About the Author...
Alan Phillips is an independent investigator and writer on vaccine risks and alternatives. This report appeared in the April 1996 edition of "Wildfire Magazine," as well as numerous newsletters in the U.S. and around the world. It is being used by the Sheffield School of Homeopathy, UK. Alan has written to the Australian Minister for Human Services and Health for the Immunisation Investigation Group and the Campaign Against Fraudulent Medical Research in NSW Australia.
Alan is also the founder of Human Development Services, Inc., an international nonprofit conducting training and research in psychorientology; the designer of a national children's literacy program and materials; and a singer-songwriter and composer with albums of original songs and music in over two dozen countries on six continents. His academic achievements include a B.A. Magna Cum Laude, and election to the Phi Kappa Phi National Honor Society and The National Dean's List.
INFORMATION SOURCES:
(1) National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161, 703-487-4650, 703-487-4600.
(2) Reported by KM Severyn,R.Ph.,Ph.D. in the Dayton Daily News, May 28, 1993. (Ohio Parents for Vaccine Safety, 251 Ridgeway Dr., Dayton, OH 45459)
(3) National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), 512 Maple Ave. W. #206, Vienna, VA 22180, 703-938-0342; "Investigative Report on the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System."
(4) Viera Scheibner, Ph.D., Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research Shows that Vaccines Represent a Medical Assault on the Immune System.
(5) W.C. Torch, "Diptheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT) immunization: A potential cause of the sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)," (Amer. Adacemy of Neurology, 34th Annual Meeting, Apr 25 - May 1, 1982), Neurology 32(4), pt. 2.
(6) Confounding in studies of adverse reactions to vaccines [see comments]. Fine PE, Chen RT, REVIEW
ARTICLE: 38 REFS. Comment in: Am J Epidemiol 1994 Jan 15;139(2):229-30. Division of Immunization, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA 30333.
(7) Nature and Rates of Adverse Reactions Associated with DTP and DT Immunizations in Infants and Children" (Pediatrics, Nov. 1981, Vol. 68, No. 5)
(8) The Fresno Bee, Community Relations, 1626 E. Street, Fresno, CA 93786, DPT Report, December 5, 1984.
(9) Trollfors B, Rabo, E. 1981. Whooping cough in adults. British Medical Journal (September 12), 696-97.
(10) National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), Health Resources and Services Administration,
Parklawn Building, Room 7-90, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 800-338-2382.
(11) Measles vaccine failures: lack of sustained measles specific immunoglobulin G responses in revaccinated adolescents and young adults. Department of Pediatrics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20007. Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal. 13(1):34-8, 1994 Jan.
(12) Measles outbreak in 31 schools: risk factors for vaccine failure and evaluation of a selective revaccination strategy. Department of Preventive Medicine and Biostatistics, University of Toronto, Ont. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 150 (7):1093-8, 1994 Apr 1.
(13) Haemophilus b disease after vaccination with Haemophilus b polysaccharide or conjugate vaccine. Institution Division of Bacterial Products, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Bethesda, Md 20892. American Journal of Diseases of Children. 145(12):1379-82, 1991 Dec.
(14) Sustained transmission of mumps in a highly vaccinated population: assessment of primary vaccine failure and waning vaccine-induced immunity. Division of Field Epidemiology, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. Journal of Infectious Diseases. 169(1):77-82, 1994 Jan. 1.
(15) Secondary measles vaccine failure in healthcare workers exposed to infected patients. Department of Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, PA 19104. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 14(2):81-6, 1993 Feb.
(16) MMWR, 38 (8-9), 12/29/89).
(17) MMWR (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) "Measles." 989; 38:329-330.
(18) Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). 33(24), 6/22/84.
(19) Failure to reach the goal of measles elimination. Apparent paradox of measles infections in immunized persons. Review article: 50 REFS. Dept. of Internal Medicine, Mayo Vaccine Research Group, Mayo Clinic and Foundation, Rochester, MN. Archives of Internal Medicine. 154(16):1815-20, 1994 Aug 22.
(19a) Clinical Immunology and Immunopathology, May 1996; 79(2): 163-170.
(20) Trevor Gunn, Mass Immunization, A Point in Question, p 15 (E.D. Hume, Pasteur Exposed-The False Foundations of Modern Medicine, Bookreal, Australia, 1989.)
(21) Physician William Howard Hay's address of June 25, 1937; printed in the Congressional Record.
(22) Outbreak of paralytic poliomyelitis in Oman; evidence for widespread transmission among fully vaccinated children Lancet vol 338: Sept 21, 1991; 715-720.
(23) Neil Miller, Vaccines: Are They Safe and Effective? p 33.
(24) Chicago Dept. of Health.
(25) See Note 23 pp 18-40.
(26) See Note 23 pp 45,46 [NVIC News, April 92, p12].
(27) S. Curtis, A Handbook of Homeopathic Alternatives to Immunization.
(28) Darrell Huff, How to Lie With Statistics, p 84.
(29) quoted from the internet, credited to Keith Block, M.D., a family physician from Evanston, Illinois, who has spent years collecting data in the medical literature on immunizations.
(30) See Note 20, p 15.
(31) See Note 20 p 21.
(32) See Note 20, p 21 (British Medical Council Publication 272, May 1950)
(33) See Note 20, p 21; also Note 23 p 47 (Buttram, MD, Hoffman, Mothering Magazine, Winter 1985 p 30; Kalokerinos and Dettman, MDs, "The Dangers of Immunization," Biological Research Inst. [Australia], 1979, p 49).
(34) Archie Kalolerinos, MD, Every Second Child, Keats Publishing, Inc. 1981
(35) Reported by KM Severyn,R.Ph,Ph.D. in the Dayton Daily News, June 3, 1995.
(36) Vaccine Information and Awareness, "Measles and Antibody Titre Levels," from Vaccine Weekly, Jan. 1996.
(37) NVIC Press Release, "Consumer Group Warns use of New Chicken Pox Vaccine in all Healthy Children May Cause More Serious Disease".
(38) See note 35 (quoted from The Lancet)
(39) Hearings before the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, 87th Congress, Second Session on H.R. 10541, May 1962, p.94.
(40) Ullman, Discovering Homeopathy, p 42 (Thomas L. Bradford, Logic Figures, p68, 113-146; Coulter, Divided Legacy, Vol 3, p268).
(41, 42) See Note 27.
(43) Golden, Isaac, Vaccination? A Review of Risks and Alternatives.
---------------------
Dispelling Vaccination Myths: Reprints/Reprint Requests:
A. Internet Postings:
1)Sumeria Virtual Library, Jan. 1996 - present: http://www.livelinks.com/sumeria/health/myth2.html
2) Informed Parents Vaccination Home Page, Sept. 1996 - present: http://www.unc.edu/~aphillip/www/vaccine/informed.htm
3) Dispelling Vaccination Myths Mirror Site, Jan. 1997 - present: http://www.ideasign.com/chiliast/vaccine/dvm1.htm
A
recent report from BBC News outlined in
very simple terms some of the procedures involved in vaccine production, which
most people are completely unaware of. Very likely, most people have an "out of sight - out
of mind" mentality when it comes to vaccines. All they see is a clear liquid in a syringe and
they don't want to know what is really in there or how it got there.
Particularly
surprising to many people might be the wide use of animal-based ingredients
used to mass-produce vaccines. This has caused some problems in the past and
continues today. Recently, a "scare" has arisen in
Virus Nurseries
One
of the main uses of animal cells is as "nurseries" for the modified
viruses that constitute the main or "active" ingredient of a vaccine.
The animal cells serve as medium in which the virus in question will replicate
and produce more copies of itself. Scientists have various "cell
lines", which are "immortal" cells that can keep on dividing
indefinitely. These cells are derived originally from a variety of animal and
human sources, including monkeys, hamsters,
chicken fetuses or even human fetuses.
Vaccine Soup
However,
this is not the only use of animal-derived substances. The virus-infected cells
are bathed in a "soup" made up of ingredients such as glucose for
energy, and other chemicals such as growth factors, which can help the cells to
develop faster. Although human growth factors can be extracted, these do not
provide as reliable or cost-effective results as other sources, such as fetal
calf serum, which is widely used. Dr Deborah Scopes, a spokesman for
the British Society of Immunology, said of the vaccine 'soup': "It's a big
broth which helps growth." Once sufficient numbers of the virus have been
replicated, the manufacturers use complex filtration and purification processes
to try to remove as much of the substances other than the viruses from the
vaccine. "You don't want to produce an immune response to cow tissue - you
want to produce the biggest immune response possible to the viruses, to make
the vaccine effective," said Dr. Scopes.
Vaccine
Fillers and Ingredients
In
addition to the viral and bacterial RNA or DNA that is part of the vaccines,
here are the fillers:
aluminum
hydroxide
aluminum phosphate
ammonium sulfate
amphotericin B
animal tissues: pig blood, horse blood, rabbit brain,
dog kidney, monkey kidney,
chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg
calf (bovine) serum
betapropiolactone
fetal bovine serum
formaldehyde
formalin
gelatin
glycerol
human
diploid cells (originating from human aborted fetal tissue)
hydrolized gelatin
monosodium glutamate (MSG)
neomycin
neomycin sulfate
phenol red indicator
phenoxyethanol (antifreeze)
potassium diphosphate
potassium monophosphate
polymyxin B
polysorbate 20
polysorbate 80
porcine (pig) pancreatic hydrolysate of casein
residual MRC5 proteins
sorbitol
sucrose
thimerosal (mercury)
tri(n)butylphosphate,
VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells
washed sheep red blood cells
And you thought you were
just getting a viral vaccine. In many cases the vaccine additives are far more
toxic than the viral component. This is particularly true for thimerosal, which
is mercury.
The best web site I know for vaccine related information is the
Dr. Classen's excellent vaccine site
Immunizations
http://www.pcslink.com/~klove/immunize.htm
Concerned Parents for Vaccine Safety
http://home.sprynet.com/~gyrene/index.htm
The best site for Anthrax
Vaccine Information
http://www.anthraxvaccine.org/
PRESS RELEASE
http://www.vaccineinfo.net/autismHg.htm
An announcement was made today by the law firm of Waters & Kraus, the firm that filed the first known lawsuit alleging that a mercury preservative in children's vaccines caused neurological damage to an infant ultimately diagnosed with autism. Waters & Kraus is leading a consortium of ten firms in as many states that are actively prosecuting cases of this nature (firms listed below). Andy Waters, the lead attorney in the cases, announced that his firm is now in possession of a previously unreleased confidential report authored by Centers for Disease Control scientists which studied autism as a potential neurological injury caused by mercury in children's vaccines.
A different version of the report was made public and has
been cited by the recent
In the
Waters indicated that, in many of the cases his firm has evaluated, including the case filed in a Texas state court on behalf of the Counter family, the affected child received more than 62.5 micrograms of mercury through pediatric vaccines in the first three months of life.
The confidential report, which was obtained by the SAFEMINDS support and advocacy group, states: "As for the exposure evaluated at 3 months of age, we found increasing risks of 'neurological developmental disorders' with increasing cumulative exposure to thimerosal ... within the group of 'developmental disorders'... for the sub-group called 'specific delays,' and within this sub-group for the specific disorder 'developmental speech disorder,' and for 'autism,' 'stuttering' and 'attention deficit disorder.'"
The report also contained the graph depicted below which illustrated the report's findings of a child's increasing risk of developing the neurological symptoms of autism after receiving increasing amounts of thimerosal.
Graph 3: Relative risk – 95 % CI of Autism after different exposure levels of thimerosal at 3 months of age, NCK & GHC
(See “Autism-thimerosal graph” jpeg)
Waters called the report's contents and the fact that it was kept from the public as "shocking, but unfortunately not surprising, given the political influence of pharmaceutical companies and the tremendous liability they face if they are forced to compensate thousands of families for the costs of care that these children require." Waters added that "no amount of money can give these children back the potential that they were born with, and no amount of money will comfort the parents that watched helplessly as their children literally just slipped away." The purpose of the lawsuits his firm is currently prosecuting, said Waters, is "to bring to the surface the truth on this issue, a truth that government agencies seem unwilling to admit, perhaps for fear that parents will stop vaccinating their children, and to force the companies that profited from this disastrous mistake to shoulder the responsibility that so many families now bear on their own, often without even the aid of health insurance benefits."
Media inquiries should be directed to Melissa Miles at 214-357-6244. Client inquiries should be directed to Victoria Gibson at 800-226-9880, or to the firms listed below.
Other firms working with Waters & Kraus to prosecute individual cases involving thimerosal exposure are:
ANDERSON & KRIEGER, APLC
Telephone: 909-296-5090
DOGAN & WILKINSON
Telephone: 228-762-2272
DORAN & MURPHY, LLP
Telephone: 716-884-2000
EVERT & WEATHERSBY, L.L.C.
Telephone : 404-233-8718
HENDRICKSON & LONG
Telephone: 304-346-5500
JONES, MARTIN, PARRIS, & TESSENER LAW OFFICES, PLLC
Telephone: 919-821-0005
LEACH, SCHWARZ &STRASSBERG
Telephone: 610-668-7964
MARTZELL & BICKFORD
Telephone: 504-581-9065
WISE & JULIAN, PC
Telephone: 618-462-2600
Babies whose mothers were vaccinated against measles as children may be
more susceptible to measles than those born to mothers who were not vaccinated.
The investigators believe that this might have contributed to the increase in
the number of cases of measles in the
Infants up to 15 months of age represented only 2% of the
Women who are vaccinated against the disease have lower levels of
infection-fighting antibodies in their blood than those who were infected
naturally. Therefore, vaccinated mothers pass on less immunity to their
infants, and these children may be more susceptible to infection.
To test this theory, Papania's team interviewed the mothers of 128
infants who were 15 months or younger and had been exposed to measles between
1990 and 1992. In infants whose mothers were born after the measles vaccine was
licensed in 1963, the measles rate was 33%. In infants born to older mothers,
the rate was only 12%.
Pediatrics November 1999;104:e59
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
Well folks, here we have it straight from the experts at the CDC and
published in the journal of Pediatrics no less. This is the first evidence I
have seen which clearly documents generational complications of immunizations.
What really floors me is that the investigators take this observation
and use it to promote even more aggressive immunization practices.
How can they be so blind?
There are clearly many short-term complications of immunizations as
this newsletter has described, but one must also contend with generational consequences
of immunizations. This study clearly shows that if you immunize your female
child you will TRIPLE her likelihood of raising a child who will eventually
come down with measles.
I believe this is a classic study and do not plan on losing it as it is
powerful evidence of the damage of these vaccines. The CDC is so blinded that
they never realized it could be used against them.
http://www.mercola.com/2001/nov/24/measles.htm
Government Database on
Vaccine-Damaged Children
The general
public is essentially unaware of the true number of people (mostly children)
who have been permanently damaged or killed by vaccines. In fact, most parents
would be surprised to learn that the government has a computer database filled
with thousands of names of disabled and dead babies, children who were healthy
and alive just prior to receiving the vaccines. (39) Of course, the medical
establishment and federal government don't readily disclose this information
because they know it may
frighten
parents into seeking other ways to protect their children. In other words,
parents just might think this issue through on their own and decide to reject
the shots
The
information in this article was excerpted from "Immunization Theory vs.
Reality: Expose' on Vaccinations" by Neil Z. Miller. Copyright 1996.
Federal
Admission of Vaccine Risks:
In 1986,
Congress officially acknowledged the reality of vaccine-caused injuries and
death by creating and passing The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (Public
Law 99-660). The safety reform portion
of this law requires doctors to provide parents
with
information about the benefits and risks of childhood vaccines prior to
vaccin-ation, and to report vaccine reactions to federal health officials.
Doctors are required by law to report suspected cases of vaccine damage. To
simplify and centralize this legal requisite, federal health officials
established the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) -- operated by
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA). (40)
Ideally,
doctors would abide by this federal law and report adverse events following the
administration of a vaccine. However, the FDA recently acknowledged that 90
percent of doctors do not report vaccine reactions. (41) They are choosing to
subvert this
law by
claiming the adverse event was, in their opinion, not related to the shot.
[Numerous examples of this may be found on pages 96-98]. Nevertheless, in just
three-and-a-half years -- from July 1990 to March 1994 -- more than 34,000 adverse
events were reported. These figures include hundreds of cases of irreversible
brain damage and over 700 deaths. (42) Considering that these numbers represent
just 10 percent, the true figures during this period could be as high as
340,000 adverse events with about 7,000 deaths.
Maybe it
doesn't matter that doctors won't report vaccine reactions, because the federal
government won't investigate them. (43) Government officials claim VAERS was
designed to "document" suspected cases of vaccine damage. No attempt
is being made to
confirm or
deny the reports. Parents are not being interviewed, and the vaccines that
preceded the severe reactions are not being recalled. Instead, new waves of
unsuspect-ing parents and innocent children are being subjected to the damaging
shots. (44)
Who Pays for
Compensation?
In order to
pay for vaccine injuries and deaths, a surtax is levied on mandated vaccines.
When parents elect to have their children vaccinated, a portion of the money
they spend on each vaccine goes into a congressional fund to compensate them if
their child is hurt or killed by the shot. This insurance fee ranges from
several dollars per dose (for the DPT and MMR vaccines) to several cents per
dose for some of the others. (45)
The
compensation portion of the law awards up to $250,000 if the individual dies,
or millions of dollars to cover lifelong medical bills, pain, and suffering in
the case of a living (but brain damaged) child. By February 3, 1995, more than
$522 million had
already been
paid out for hundreds of injuries and deaths caused by mandated vaccines.
Thousands of cases are still pending. (46)
The
government's estimated future liability for pre-1988 vaccine damage exceeds
$1.7 billion, with complete settlement of claims not expected until 1998, at
the earliest. (47) For the majority of claimants, there is no money available.
Also, Vaccine Injury Compensation Claims "do not include private
settlements, or the many families that become dependent on public assistance
for medical and living expenses because of vaccine injuries."(48)
Therefore, taxpayers subsidize vaccine manufacturers and the federal government
by paying for their vaccine-liability expenses.
How Are
Vaccines Made?
Vaccine
production is a disgusting procedure. To begin, one must first acquire the
disease germ -- a toxic bacterium or a
live virus. To make a "live" vaccine, the live virus must be
attenuated, or weakened for human use. This is accomplished by serial
passage --
passing the virus through animal tissue several times to reduce its potency.
For example, measles virus is passed through chick embryos, polio virus through
monkey kidneys, and the rubella virus through human diploid cells -- the
dissected organs of an aborted fetus! (49-51) "Killed" vaccines are "inactivated"
through heat, radiation, or chemicals. (52)
The weakened
germ must then be strengthened with adjuvants (antibody boosters) and
stabilizers. This is done by adding drugs, antibiotics, and toxic disinfectants
to the concoction: neomycin, streptomycin, sodium chloride, sodium hydroxide,
aluminum
Hydroxide,
aluminum hydrochloride, sorbitol, hydrolized gelatin, formaldehyde, and
thimerosal (a mercury derivative). (53,54) Aluminum, formaldehyde, and mercury
are extremely toxic substances with a long history of documented hazardous
effects.
Studies
confirm again and again that microscopic doses of these substances can lead to
cancer, neurological damage, and death. (55-58) Yet, each of them may be found
in childhood vaccines.
In addition
to the deliberately planned additives, unanticipated matter may contaminate the
shots. For example, during serial passage of the virus through animal cells,
animal RNA and DNA -- foreign genetic material
-- is transferred from one host to another. Because this biological
matter is injected directly into the body, researchers say it can change our
genetic makeup. (59-61) Undetected animal viruses may jump the species barrier
as well. This is exactly what happened during the 1950s and 1960s when millions
of people were infected with polio vaccines that were contaminated with the
SV-40 virus undetected in the monkey organs used to prepare the vaccines.
(62-69) SV-40 (Simian Virus #40 -- the 40th such virus detected since
researchers began looking), (70) is considered a powerful immunosuppressor and
trigger for HIV, the name given to the AIDS virus. It is said to cause a
clinical condition similar to AIDS, and has been found in brain tumors,
leukemia, and other human cancers as well. Researchers consider it to be a
cancer-causing virus. (71,72)
DPT
Reputable
studies show correlations between the pertussis vaccine and asthma. In fact,
children vaccinated with pertussis were shown to be 5 times more likely to
become afflicted with this serious respiratory ailment. Michael R. Odent, et al.,
"Pertussis Vaccination and Asthma: Is There a Link?," Journal of
American Medical Association (August 24/31, 1994). T. Kemp,
A recent
study published in The Journal of Infectious Diseases showed that children who
received the DPT vaccine were significantly more likely to contract paralytic
polio than children who were not vaccinated with DPT. Roland W. Sutter, et al.,
"Attributable Risk of DTP (Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids and Pertussis
Vaccine) Injection in Provoking Paralytic Poliomyelitis during a Large Outbreak
in Oman," The Journal Of Infectious Diseases (1992);165: pp. 444-449.
The pertussis
vaccine has been used in animal experiments to help produce anaphylactic shock,
and to cause an acute autoimmune encephalomyelitis (allergic encephalitis).
Drs. Cherry, Brunell, et al., "Report of the Task Force on Pertussis and
Pertussis Immunization," Pediatrics, 81:6, pt. 2 (June 1988), p. 943.
The DPT
vaccine contains diphtheria bacterium, pertussis organisms, and tetanus toxoid.
It also contains sodium chloride, sodium hydroxide, formaldehyde, hydrochloric
acid, aluminum, and thimerosal (a mercury derivative). Physicians' Desk
Reference, (Montvale, NJ: Medical Economics Data Production, 1995).
Studies show
correlations between the DPT vaccine and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS).
In one study,
serious reactions to the DPT vaccine (including grand mal epilepsy and encephalopathy)
were shown to be as high as 1 in 600. In another study, approximately one out
of every 200 children who received the full DPT series suffered severe
reactions. Immunization: Survey of Recent Research, (United States Department
of Health and Human Services, April 1983), p. 76.
"Nature
and the Rates of Adverse Reactions Associated with DTP and DT
immunizations." Pediatrics, Volume 68, No. 5 (Nov 1981), pp. 650-59.
Numerous
studies indicate that children vaccinated against pertussis are still susceptible
to the disease: S. A. Halperin, et al., "Persistence of Pertussis in an
Immunized Population: Results of the Nova Scotia Enhanced Pertussis
Surveillance Program," Journal of Pediatrics (Nov. 1989), pp. 686-693.
Whooping
Cough, the DPT Vaccine and Reducing Vaccine Reactions (Vienna, VA., National
Vaccine Information Center 1989), p. 3.
20th Immunization Conference Proceedings,
In 1993,
during a highly publicized pertussis outbreak, 82 percent of children stricken
with the disease had received regular doses of the vaccine. D. C. Christie, et
al., "The 1993 Epidemic of Pertussis in
Susceptibility
to pertussis 12 years after full vaccination may be as high as 95 percent. M.
E. Pichichero, et al., "Diphtheria-Pertussis-Tetanus Vaccine:
Reactogenicity of Commercial Products," Pediatrics (Feb. 1979), pp.
256-260.
Hepatitis
In the
Less than 1
percent of all hepatitis B cases occur in children younger than 15 years.
Alter, M.J.,
Health
workers who are frequently exposed to infected individuals may become naturally
immunized rather than infected. Dienstag, J.L., and Ryan, D.M. "Occupational
exposure to hepatitis B virus in hospital personnel: infection or
immunization?" American Journal of Epidemiology 1982; 115(1): pp. 26-39.
Babies are
very unlikely to contract hepatitis B if the mother is not infected.
Neustaedter, R. The Vaccine Guide.
Dr. J.
Barthelow Classen, M.D., a former researcher at the National Institutes of
Health, analyzed vaccination and disease statistics in foreign countries and
reported that there was a 60 percent increase in juvenile diabetes (Type I)
following mass hepatitis b vaccine campaigns. Classen, J. B.,
Classen, J.
B., Infectious Diseases in Clinical Practice, (October 22, 1997).
Studies have
investigated the probability that recipients of the plasma-derived hepatitis B
vaccine may have received inoculations contaminated with undetected viruses,
especially HIV, a precursor to AIDS.
Jacobson,
Herroelen,
L., et al. "Central nervous system demyelination after immunisation with
recombinant hepatitis B vaccine." Lancet 1991; 338: pp. 1174-1175.
Shaw, F.E.,
Graham, D.J., et al. "Postmarketing surveillance for neurologic adverse
events reported after hepatitis B vaccination." American Journal of
Epidemiology 1988; 127(2): pp. 337-352.;
Ribera, E.F.,
Dutka, A.J. "Polyneuropathy associated with administration of hepatitis B
vaccine."
Poullin, P.,
Gabriel, B. "Thrombocytopenic purpura after recombinant hepatitis B
vaccine." Lancet 1994; 334: p. 1293.; Lilic, D., Ghosh, S.K. "Liver
dysfunction and DNA antibodies after hepatitis B vaccination." Lancet
1994; 344: pp. 1292-1293.;
Trevisani,
F., et al. "Transverse myelitis following hepatitis B vaccination."
Journal of Hepatology 1993; 19: pp. 317-318.
Gross, K., et
al. "Arthritis after hepatitis vaccination: report of three cases."
Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology 1995; 24: pp. 50-52.
Vautier, G.,
Carter, J.E. "Acute sero-positive rheumatoid arthritis occurring after
hepatitis vaccination." British Journal of Rheumatology 1994; 33: p. 991.
Hachulla, E., et al. "Reactive arthritis after hepatitis B
vaccination." Journal of Rheumatology 1990; 17: pp. 1250-1251.
In one study
of 773 individuals vaccinated with the hepatitis B vaccine, after 5 years
antibody levels (presumed to correlate with immunity) in 42 percent of the
recipients declined sharply or no longer existed. In addition, 4.4 percent
became infected with the virus!
In another
study of the hepatitis B vaccine, 48 percent of the vaccine recipients had
inadequate antibody levels after four years. Pasko, M.T., Beam, T.R.
"Persistence of anti-HBs among health care personnel immunized with
hepatitis B vaccine." American
Journal of
Public Health 1990; 80: pp. 590-593.
In a separate
study, fewer than 40 percent of vaccine recipients had protective antibody
levels after five years. Street, A.C., et al. "Persistence of antibody in
healthcare workers vaccinated against hepatitis B." Infection Control and
Hospital Epidemiology 1990; 11: pp. 525-530. The medical literature contains
other case studies documenting vaccine failures: Ballinger, A.B.,
Despite
immunization programs targeting high-risk groups, the incidence of hepatitis B
has risen 37 percent since the introduction of the vaccine. Freed, G.L., et al.
"Reactions of pediatricians to a new Centers for Disease Control
recommendation for universal immunization of infants with hepatitis B
vaccine." Pediatrics 1993; 91: pp. 699-702.; Plunkett, J. "Hepatitis
B becoming more prevalent." Medical Economics Publishing April 8, 1992.
Surveys
indicate that a majority of pediatricians and family practitioners (87 percent)
do not believe the hepatitis B vaccine is needed by their newborn patients.
Freed, G.L., et al. "Reactions of pediatricians to a new Centers for
Disease Control recommen-dation for universal immunization of infants with
hepatitis B vaccine." Pediatrics 1993; 91: pp. 699-702. Freed, G.L., et
al. "Family physician acceptance of universal hepatitis B immunization of
infants." Journal of Family Practice 1993; 36: pp. 153-157.
In addition
to the hepatitis B vaccine studies noted above, researchers and other concerned
web site visitors may be interested in acquiring a copy of the following
booklet: "Hepatitis B Vaccines: What You Should Know", now available
from New Atlantean
Press
(505-983-1856). This small booklet contains important information about the
hepatitis B vaccine. It includes studies, personal stories of adverse
reactions, and other little-known data.
Polio
A recent
study in "Clinical Infectious Diseases" concluded that every case of
polio in the United States since 1980 was caused by the polio vaccine. Peter M.
Strebel, et al., "Epidemiology of Poliomyelitis in the United States One
Decade After the Last Reported Case of Indigenous Wild-Associated
Disease," Clinical Infectious Diseases, (2/92).
Science
reported on a possible link between polio vaccines and the origin of AIDS. Tom
Curtis, "Possible Origins of AIDS," Science, (May 29, 1992), pp.
1259-1261.
MMR/Measles-Rubella
A recent
study in Lancet found a significant link between the measles vaccine and bowel
disease. Those who received the vaccine were 3 times more likely to develop
Crohn's disease and more than twice as likely to develop ulcerative colitis. N.
P. Thompson, et al., "Is Measles Vaccination a Risk Factor for Inflammatory
Bowel Disease?," Lancet, (April 29, 1995), pp. 1071-1074.
Lancet
recently published an article showing evidence that the measles-mumps-rubella
(MMR) vaccine may be linked to autism. A. J. Wakefield, et. al.,
"Ilcal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive
developmental disorder in children," Lancet, (February 28, 1998). pp.
637-641.
The United
Kingdom quietly withdrew 2 brands of MMR vaccine following several confirmed
cases of mumps-meningitis after administration of the vaccines. Alaric Colville
and Simon Pugh, "Mumps Meningitis and Measles, Mumps, and Rubella
Vaccine," Lancet, (September 26, 1992), p. 786.
180 Swiss
medical practitioners denounced, and presented evidence against, the USA
practice of forced MMR vaccinations. "The Immunization Campaign Against
Measles, Mumps, and Rubella: Coercion Leading to a Realm of Uncertainty -
Medical Objections to a Continued MMR Immunization Campaign in
Switzerland," JAM, Volume 9, Number 1 (1992).
A recent
study in British Medical Journal concluded that MMR vaccine is associated with
an increased risk of arthritis. C. M. Benjamin, et al., "Joint and Limb
Symptoms in Children After Immunization With Measles, Mumps, and Rubella
Vaccine,"
British Medical Journal, (April 25, 1992), pp. 1075-1078.
Rogue virus in the vaccine
Early polio vaccine harbored
virus now feared to cause cancer in humans
William Carlsen, San Francisco Chronicle Staff Writer
A growing number of medical researchers fear that a monkey virus that contaminated polio vaccine given to tens of millions of Americans in the 1950s and '60s may be causing rare human cancers.
For four decades, government officials have insisted that there is no evidence the simian virus called SV40 is harmful to humans. But in recent years, dozens of scientific studies have found the virus in a steadily increasing number of rare brain, bone and lung-related tumors - the same malignant cancer SV40 causes in lab animals.
Even more troubling, the virus has been detected in tumors removed from people never inoculated with the contaminated vaccine, leading some to worry that those infected by the vaccine might be spreading SV40.
The discovery of SV40 in human tumors has
generated intense debate within the scientific community, pitting a handful of
government health officials, who believe that the virus is harmless, against
researchers from
In April, more than 60 scientists met in
"I believe that SV40 is carcinogenic
(in humans)," said Dr. Michele Carbone of
But scientists at the National Cancer Institute say their studies show almost no SV40 in human tumors and no cancer increase in people who received the contaminated vaccine.
"No one would dispute there's been a widespread, very scary exposure to the population of potentially cancer-causing virus," said Dr. Howard Strickler, NCI's chief investigator. "But none of our studies and other major analyses have shown an inkling of an effect on the population."
Critics charge, however, that the few studies done by the government are scientifically flawed and that health officials have downplayed the potential risks posed by SV40 ever since they learned in 1961 that the virus contaminated the polio vaccine and caused tumors in rodents.
"How long can the government ignore this?" asked Dr. Adi Gazdar, a University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center cancer researcher. "The government has not sponsored any real research. Here's something possibly affecting millions of Americans, and they're indifferent.
"Maybe they don't want to find out."
The recent SV40 discoveries come at a time of growing concern over the dangers posed by a range of animal viruses that have crossed the species barrier to humans, including HIV, which scientists now believe came from chimpanzees and ultimately caused the AIDS epidemic.
Based on dozens of interviews and a review of the medical research, this is the story of how the campaign to eradicate polio may have inadvertently permitted another potentially deadly monkey virus to infect millions of people - and why the government for years discounted the accumulating evidence suggesting that SV40 may be a health risk for humans.
Polio epidemic, 1955
During the first half of the 20th century,
polio struck down hundreds of thousands of people, leaving many paralyzed -
some in iron lung machines - and killing others. The worst year was 1952, when
more than 57,000 polio cases were reported in the
Then on April 12, 1955, Dr. Jonas Salk, a
slightly built, soft-spoken researcher from
Salk's vaccine was made by growing live polio virus on kidney tissue from Asian rhesus monkeys. The virus was then killed with formaldehyde. When the vaccine was injected in humans, the dead virus generated antibodies capable of fending off live polio.
Dr. Dwight Murray, then chairman of the American Medical Association, called Salk's announcement "one of the greatest events in the history of medicine."
Within weeks, the stockpiled vaccine was being injected into the arms of millions of people worldwide.
Virus and the tumors, 1959
Four years later, Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, noticed something strange while looking through her microscope. Monkey kidney cells - the same kind used to make the vaccine - were dying without apparent cause.
So she tried an experiment. She prepared kidney extracts from eight to 10 rhesus monkeys and injected tiny amounts under the skin of 23 newborn hamsters. Within nine months, "large, malignant, subcutaneous tumors" appeared on 20 of the animals.
On July 6, 1960, concerned that a monkey virus might be contaminating the polio vaccine, Eddy took her findings to Dr. Joseph Smadel, chief of the NIH's biologics division. Smadel dismissed the tumors as harmless "lumps."
The same year, however, at a Merck
laboratory in
Immunization campaign, 1961
By then, the nation was winning the war against polio. Nearly 98 million Americans - more than 60 percent of the population - had received at least one injection of the Salk vaccine, and the number of cases was plummeting.
At the same time, an oral polio vaccine developed by virologist Albert Sabin was in final trials in Russia and Eastern Europe, where tens of millions had been inoculated, and it was about to be licensed in the United States. Unlike the Salk vaccine, the oral version contained a live but weakened form of polio virus and promised lifelong immunity.
But U.S. Public Health Service officials were worried. Tests had found SV40 in both the Sabin and Salk vaccines - it was later estimated that as much as a third of the Salk vaccine was tainted - and that SV40 was causing cancer in lab animals.
In early 1961, they quietly met with the agency's top vaccine advisers. The agency found no evidence that the virus had been harmful to humans, but in March, the officials ordered manufacturers to eliminate SV40 from all future vaccine.
New procedures were adopted to neutralize the tainted polio virus seed stock and SV40-free African green monkeys were used to produce the bulk vaccine instead of rhesus monkeys.
But officials did not recall contaminated Salk vaccine - more than a year's supply - still in the hands of the nation's doctors.
And they did not notify the public of the contamination and SV40's carcinogenic effect on newborn hamsters.
Hilleman would later explain that government officials were worried that any potentially negative information could ignite a panic and jeopardize the vaccination campaign.
The first public disclosure that the Salk vaccine was contaminated came in the New York Times on July 26, 1961. A story on Page 33 reported that Merck and other manufacturers had halted production until they could get a "monkey virus" out of the vaccine.
When asked to comment, the U.S. Public Health Service stressed there was no evidence the virus was dangerous.
No cause for alarm, 1962
The next year, a young Harvard-trained epidemiologist named Dr. Joseph Fraumeni joined the National Cancer Institute and was assigned one of the agency's most important projects: to determine if there was any cancer increase among those injected with the Salk vaccine.
His research would form the basis of the government's position for decades.
Working with two colleagues, Fraumeni tested stored vaccine samples from May and June of 1955, the first months of the national immunization campaign, then ranked the samples according to how much SV40 they contained - no, low or high amounts.
It would be the only time
Fraumeni identified the states where the
SV40-contaminated vaccines had been distributed during those two months.
The study looked at cancer mortality rates for 6- to 8-year-old children vaccinated during that narrow time frame, tracking the group for four years.
The findings, which were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, showed no significant difference in cancer deaths in states with high or low levels of SV40 in the vaccine when compared with cancer deaths in states with no SV40 in the vaccine.
Fourteen years later, after isolated reports linking the virus and human cancers, Fraumeni decided to look at another group that had received contaminated vaccine.
The group had been the subject of
experiments conducted in the early 1960s at
The experiments took place over three years and involved 1,073 infants. Most were given Sabin oral vaccine later determined to contain SV40.
From 1976 to 1979, Fraumeni and his associates sent letters to the children - now age 17 to 19 - but fewer than half responded. The researchers found no SV40-related health problems from exposure to contaminated vaccine.
However, their 1982 report published in the New England Journal of Medicine acknowledged the study's limitations: A majority of the children had not responded; SV40-related cancers might take longer than 17 to 19 years to develop, and SV40 appears less likely to infect humans through the oral vaccine.
Nevertheless, they called their findings "reassuring and consistent with the prevailing view that SV40 is not carcinogenic in human beings."
Then they decided to end the study, citing "the mounting complexities and obstacles in tracing this particular group and the negative results to date."
The study's closure appeared to end the government's research into the virus. But a few years later there would be a tectonic shift in SV40 research.
First discovery, 1988
In
Dr. Robert Garcea and his assistant, Dr. John Bergsagel, were using a powerful new tool called polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, to look for a pair of common human viruses in children's brain tumors.
But a different DNA footprint kept popping up in more than half the tumors. They finally realized they were seeing SV40.
For more than a decade, scientists had reported sporadic findings of SV40- like proteins in human tumors. But the earlier tests were primitive and the results suspect. PCR, however, is capable of amplifying infinitesimal fragments of DNA, which makes detections far more credible.
The findings were troubling. The researchers noted in their published report that the children were too young to have received the contaminated vaccine. But somehow the virus had infected them and embedded itself in their tumors.
Mesothelioma, 1988
That same year, Dr. Michele Carbone was
surprised to find a milky, rindlike tumor in a laboratory hamster at the
National Institutes of Health in
The animal was one of a group given an SV40 injection directly into their hearts. Sixty percent of those hamsters developed the fatal cancer called mesothelioma.
Carbone, a postdoctoral fellow at the institute, knew that SV40 caused tumors in hamsters but only in specific locations where large doses of virus were injected. Here the mesothelial membrane lining the lungs apparently became cancerous from minuscule amounts of SV40 shed by the tip of the needle on the way to the hamsters' hearts.
So he tried another experiment, this time injecting SV40 directly into the thin mesothelial walls of another group of hamsters. Within six months, every animal developed mesothelioma.
Carbone was puzzled. Mesothelioma is a rare
cancer. Few human cases were reported before the 1950s, but its incidence had
been increasing steadily, reaching several thousand cases a year in the
Studies had linked mesothelioma to asbestos exposure - with tumors usually appearing many decades later. Yet 20 percent of victims had no asbestos exposure.
Carbone decided to use PCR to test 48 human mesotheliomas stored at the NIH.
He was stunned: 28 of them contained SV40.
More cancers, 1996
PCR unleashed a wave of SV40 discoveries.
By the end of 1996, dozens of scientists reported finding SV40 in a variety of bone cancers and a wide range of brain cancers, which had risen 30 percent over the previous 20 years.
Then, Italian researchers reported finding SV40 in 45 percent of the seminal fluid samples and 23 percent of the blood samples they had taken from healthy donors.
That meant SV40 could have been spreading
through sexual activity, from mother to child, or by other means, which could
explain how those never inoculated with the contaminated vaccine, such as the
Government assurances, 1996
At the National Cancer Institute in
The findings were of particular interest to Fraumeni, who had been promoted to director of NCI's Division on Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics. His earlier studies concluding that SV40 posed little or no health risk were now under challenge.
But the scientific community was skeptical of the recent SV40 discoveries. As a potent carcinogen in lab animals, SV40 had been used for years as a tool to study cancer. Therefore, the powerful PCR test was suspected of finding stray SV40 fragments that might have contaminated laboratories.
So Dr. Howard Strickler, one of Fraumeni's epidemiologists, led a study using PCR on 50 mesotheliomas from Armed Forces hospitals across the country. And he found no SV40.
Although the findings bolstered the government's long-standing position that SV40 did not appear to be a health risk, federal officials decided to convene a conference on the virus.
In January 1997, 30 scientists gathered at
the National Institutes of Health in
Strickler presented his mesothelioma study, as well as new research he had just completed, this time working with Fraumeni.
Their new study compared 20 years of cancer rates of people born between 1947 and 1963, and therefore likely to have been exposed to the contaminated polio vaccine, with people born after 1963, who they believed weren't exposed.
Their study found no significant difference between the two groups.
Letter of protest, 1998
But when Susan Fisher read Strickler and Fraumeni's study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, she fired off a letter of protest to the publication.
An epidemiologist at
Using the same 20-year national cancer database for the two groups, Fisher compared people of the same age - "because these cancers are highly correlated with age" - and she came up with very different results.
Studying 18- to 26-year-olds who probably had been exposed to the contaminated vaccine, Fisher found a 19.6 percent greater incidence of the two major brain cancers linked to SV40 when compared with the incidence in people the same age who were not exposed. She also found 16.6 percent more bone cancers and 178 percent more mesotheliomas among those exposed to the vaccine.
But Fisher cautioned against comparing the two groups. She argued that if SV40 is being transmitted and circulating in the population, then many people in the "unexposed" group would also be carrying the virus and that would undermine the comparison.
Two types of SV40, 1999
For years, researchers had believed that all SV40-contaminated Salk vaccine made between 1955 and 1963 had been used or discarded.
Then in 1999, Carbone was contacted by a
former public health director in
Carbone, who had left the NIH and joined
the faculty at
Although manufacturers switched from rhesus monkeys to SV40-free green African monkeys to grow the bulk vaccine in 1961, they have continued to use potentially contaminated polio seed strains originally grown on the rhesus monkey tissue to start the bulk vaccine process.
Manufacturers check the purity of their vaccine with a series of 14-day tests to detect whether any SV40 slipped through.
But when Carbone replicated the tests, he found that the second, slower- growing "archetypal" strain took 19 days to emerge.
It was possible, Carbone noted in a published report, that this second strain of SV40 had been evading manufacturers' screening procedures for years - and infecting vaccine recipients after 1962.
Controversial study, 2000
Meanwhile, a new study led by Strickler had bogged down in bitter internal conflict.
After the NIH's 1997 conference, nine laboratories were recruited to participate in a government-sponsored study to determine if tests were really finding SV40 in tumors or whether earlier detections were the result of laboratory contamination.
Carbone and other researchers considered
the study unnecessary. A similar multilab study led by Dr. Joseph Testa of
But Strickler pressed on.
An independent laboratory in
When tests revealed almost no SV40 in the
tumor samples, some participants questioned the preparation methods used by the
If Strickler was right, the earlier SV40 detections were probably the result of stray SV40 in the labs. But critics argued that the study was scientifically flawed and should be scrapped.
The dispute became so contentious that FDA officials were forced to intervene and a neutral arbitrator assigned to mediate.
Finally, in early 2000, more than two years after the study was initiated, a carefully rewritten report emerged for publication.
It concluded that contamination was an unlikely explanation for earlier SV40 findings. Then it struggled to explain the discrepancy between earlier detections of SV40 in about half of all mesotheliomas tested and the fact that the nine labs found the virus in only slightly more than 1 percent of the study's tumor specimens.
The report noted that discrepancy might be
because of the inefficiency of the method used by the
The
The report concluded by calling for further research.
Despite the study's ambivalent conclusions and technical problems, the NCI submitted it to Cancer Research, the journal that had published Testa's study.
It was rejected.
Further discoveries, 2000
In laboratories around the world, researchers continued to find SV40 in a widening range of tumors that now included pituitary and thyroid cancers and some lymphomas.
Meanwhile, an NCI investigator named Dr. David Schrump was able to gut a common respiratory virus and use it to deliver genetic material called "antisense" into SV40-infected mesothelial cells and stop the cells' malignant growth.
His discovery, which was patented by the government, strongly suggested that SV40 contributed to mesothelioma and that a treatment might be possible.
Then in August, Carbone and several colleagues published a major study providing a "mechanistic" explanation of how SV40 contributes to the uncontrolled growth of mesothelial cells. The key, they found, was the large number of "tumor suppressor" proteins found in the mesothelial cells that makes them unusually susceptible to SV40.
In most human cells, they said, the virus reproduces itself and kills the infected cell in the process. But in mesothelial cells, SV40 is especially attracted to the "tumor suppressor" proteins and binds to them, knocking them out of action. The virus then lives on in the cell.
The result, they said, is a rate of malignant cell transformation in tissue cultures 1,000 times higher than has ever been observed.
In a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Carbone further explained that asbestos fibers appear to act as a co- carcinogen in mesothelioma by somehow suppressing the immune system's response, which is designed to kill the infected cells.
Carbone and others believed that the time had come for another conference on the virus he calls "a perfect little war machine."
In April, more than 60 scientists gathered
on a warm weekend at the
Carbone opened the conference by confronting the question of whether SV40 is present in humans.
"Sixty-two papers from 30 laboratories from around the world have reported SV40 in human tissues and tumors," he said. "It is very difficult to believe that all of these papers, all of the techniques used and all of the people around the world are wrong."
For two days, scientists from as far away
as
One of the newest discoveries came from Dr. Jeffrey Kopp, an NIH scientist who reported finding SV40 in a high percentage of patients with kidney disease. The virus was also present, he said, in 60 percent of a new "collapsing" type of renal disease that was unknown before 1980 but has since increased rapidly in incidence.
There were also reports on efforts to develop a vaccine, recently funded by the NCI, that would allow the immune system to target and eliminate SV40.
At times, the meeting took on almost revivalist overtones as scientist after scientist said he or she was initially very skeptical of SV40's presence in human tumors but was now a believer.
"I was a hard sell," said Testa,
the
Gazdar, the cancer researcher from
The conference concluded with a consensus among the leading scientists that SV40's presence in human tumors was no longer in question. They were more circumspect about the virus' possible role in causing cancer.
If SV40 is a human carcinogen, they said, the virus probably requires interaction with other cancer-causing substances like asbestos.
Dr. Janet Butel from
But even renowned tumor biologist George
Klein from
"This strongly suggests that the virus plays a role (in causing tumors)," said Klein, a former chairman of the Nobel Assembly.
Low priority, 2001
In May, shortly after the conference, Strickler's multilab study was published in a small journal called Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.
Carbone and other SV40 experts dismissed the study.
"A garbage paper in a garbage journal," said Garcea, now on the faculty at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.
But Strickler strongly defends the study. He said it was the first to use strict controls not used in other studies. He acknowledged, however, that the study "doesn't prove that SV40 is not out there."
Strickler, who now teaches at Albert
Einstein School of Medicine in
But the NCI recently acknowledged that there is evidence to suggest that SV40 "may be associated with human cancer." The NCI statement, released last month, also said that SV40's interaction with "tumor suppressor proteins" indicates "possible mechanisms that could contribute to the development of cancer."
Top NCI officials declined to be interviewed on the record for this report. Fraumeni also declined several requests for an interview.
Dr. James Goedert, the chief of the NCI's Viral Epidemiology Branch who supervised Strickler's work, said that if SV40 is in human tumors, it must be at extremely low levels. To critics who claim the government has downplayed SV40's potential health risks, Goedert responded: "Absolutely not."
He acknowledged that research is needed to resolve the question of whether SV40 is prevalent in the human population and, if so, how it might be spreading. But Goedert said he has no plans for such studies.
"It's not our highest priority," he said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key figures in developing vaccines and tracing SV40
Dr. Jonas Salk Developed the first polio vaccine using killed virus in 1955.
Virologist Albert Sabin Developed an oral vaccine using weakened live virus.
Dr. Robert Garcea Used new technology to trace SV40 in children's brain tumors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q&A on polio vaccine contaminated with SV40 Q: How widespread is the SV40 infection?
A: Scientists and government health officials don't know because no comprehensive studies have addressed the question.
What is known: During the 1950s and '60s, more than 100 million people worldwide were given SV40-contaminated polio vaccine. The virus also has been found in people who did not receive contaminated vaccine, as well as laboratory workers and monkey handlers. No studies, however, have examined how SV40 might be transmitted between people, or if somehow humans might have become infected with SV40 before the introduction of the tainted vaccines.
Q: Can I be tested for SV40?
A: An accurate blood test does not exist. Current antibody blood tests can be inaccurate, scientists say, because they may also detect the presence of other closely related viruses, and SV40 may be present at such a low level that no antibodies are produced. Researchers are working to create an effective test.
Q: Is the current
polio vaccine safe?
A: Vaccine producers, health officials and most scientists believe that it is safe. Manufacturers say they take elaborate steps to test their vaccine for SV40, and the government says it recently tested vaccine samples back to 1972 and found no trace of SV40.
Some scientists, including Dr. Michele Carbone, have raised questions about whether manufacturers' testing techniques have been adequate. Carbone, however, tested vaccine from 1996 and found no SV40. He has had his children inoculated.
Q: In which kinds of cancers has SV40 been found?
A: The virus has been detected in rare cancers:
-- Mesothelioma, a fatal tumor of the
membrane surrounding the lungs. Few cases were reported prior to 1950, but the
incidence has grown in the
-- Brain cancers: Primarily ependymoma and
choroid plexus tumors, but also astrocytoma, glioblastoma, medulloblastoma and
meningioma. These make up a total of less than 1,000
-- Bone cancers: Primarily osteosarcoma but also chondrosarcoma and giant cell tumors. These also make up less than 1,000 cases annually.
-- Other cancers: A few detections in pituitary and thyroid tumors and lymphomas.
Report sources
The sources for this report include the books "The Saga of Jonas Salk" by Richard Carter and "The Health Century" by Edward Shorter; articles in Atlantic Monthly and New York magazine; newspaper archives at The Chronicle and the New York Times; transcript of the 1997 National Institutes of Health Conference in Bethesda; a review of dozens of scientific journal articles and scores of interviews.
Related series: Quest for the Origin of AIDS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How SV40 contaminated polio vaccine
When Dr. Jonas Salk introduced the first
polio vaccine in 1955, it was hailed as "one of the greatest events in
medicine." Within 10 years,
Making the Sabin vaccine: 1955-1961 Starting in the mid-1950s, both Sabin and Salk vaccines are made by growing polio virus on kidney tissue from Asian rhesus monkeys, which are natural hosts for the simian virus known as SV40. Special weakened seed strain of polio virus developed by Sabin is grown on rhesus kidney tissue to make large bulk amounts of vaccine. SV40 from the kidney tissue contaminates the vaccine. .
Making the vaccine safe: 1961 In 1961,
after SV40 is discovered in the vaccines,
Testing Manufacturers check the safety of the vaccine pools by using a series of 14- day growth tests to see if SV40 is present.
Making the Salk vaccine: 1955-1961 Full strength polio virus is grown on rhesus kidney to make bulk Salk vaccine. SV40 from the kidney tissue contaminates the vaccine. The polio virus is then killed with formaldehyde, but some SV40 survives. .
Making the vaccine safe: 1961 In the original vaccine, the SV40 survives, contaminating up to 30 million Americans. But after 1961, African green monkeys are used to grow bulk vaccine and SV40 is eliminated.
Sources: Children's
BIBLIOGRAPHIC NOTE
For more information about the simian virus SV40, the following studies or scientific reviews were published during that past year:
A multicenter evaluation of assays of detection of SV40 DNA and results in masked mesothelioma specimens. Strickler H, Goedert J., Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Vol. 10, 523-532, May 2001.
Simian virus 40 and human cancers, Strickler H., Einstein Quarterly J. Biol. and Med. (2001) 18:14-21. This includes a detailed bibliography that will lead readers to earlier scientific articles.
Oral polio vaccine and human cancer: a reassessment of SV40 as a contaminant based upon legal documents. Kops S., Anticancer Research (2000) 20: 4745-4750.
Human mesothelial cells are unusually susceptible to SV40-mediated transformation and asbestos cocarcinogenicity. Bocchetta M, Di Resta I, Powers A, Fresco R, Tosolini A, Testa J, Pass H, Rizzo P, Carbone M., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 97, Issue 18, 10214-10219, Aug. 29, 2000.
In addition, a bibliography of journal articles by leading SV40 researcher Dr. Michele Carbone can be viewed by clicking on the following link: www.chestsurg.org/carbone7.htm
E-mail William Carlsen at wcarlsen@sfchronicle.com.