Thursday, February 22, 2018

The Devastating Derangement Called Autism

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/apr/autism-it2019s-not-just-in-the-head#.UqKwfvRDua8

Autism: It's Not Just in the Head

The devastating derangements of autism also show up in the gut and in the immune system. That unexpected discovery is sparking new treatments that target the body in addition to the brain.

By Jill Neimark|Thursday, March 22, 2007
“There were days I considered shutting the garage door and letting the car run until I was dead,” says Colorado mom Erin Griffin, of the time nine years ago when she learned that both her boys—not just her firstborn—suffered from autism. Brendan, her angular, dark-haired older child, was diagnosed in 1996 at age 4. Kyle, her round-faced, hazel-eyed younger son, was diagnosed in 1998 at age 2½.
But Kyle and Brendan’s story does not have a tragic ending. After interventions that included occupational and speech therapy, as well as dietary change and nutritional supplements, both boys improved significantly. Their tale of slow, steady recovery reflects the changing landscape of autism today. The condition, traditionally seen as genetic and originating in the brain, is starting to be viewed in a broader and very different light, as a possible immune and neuroinflammatory disorder. As a result, autism is beginning to look like a condition that can, in some and perhaps many cases, be successfully treated.
That is astonishing news about a disorder that usually makes headlines because it seems to be growing rapidly more widespread. In the United States, the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders has increased about tenfold over the past two decades, and a 2003 report by the Centers for Disease Control suggests that as many as one in every 166 children is now on the autism spectrum, while another one in six suffers from a neurodevelopmental delay. This explosion of cases has raised countless questions: Is the increase real, is it the result of increased awareness and expanding diagnostic categories, is it due to environmental changes, or all of the above? There may be no single answer. But the public concern about autism has caught the ear of federal lawmakers. The Combating Autism Act, approved last December, authorized nearly $1 billion over the next four years for autism-related research and intervention.
Meanwhile, on the sidelines of that confusing discussion, a disparate group—immunologists, naturopaths, neuroscientists, and toxicologists—is turning up clues that are yielding novel strategies to help autistic patients. New studies are examining contributing factors ranging from vaccine reactions to atypical growth in the placenta, abnormal tissue in the gut, inflamed tissue in the brain, food allergies, and disturbed brain wave synchrony. Some clinicians are using genetic test results to recommend unconventional nutritional therapies, and others employ drugs to fight viruses and quell inflammation.
Above all, there is a new emphasis on the interaction between vulnerable genes and environmental triggers, along with a growing sense that low-dose, multiple toxic and infectious exposures may be a major contributing factor to autism and its related disorders. A vivid analogy is that genes load the gun, but environment pulls the trigger. “Like cancer, autism is a very complex disease,” says Craig Newschaffer, chairman of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Drexel University School of Public Health, “and it’s exciting to start asking questions about the interaction between genes and environment. There’s really a very rich array of potential exposure variables.”
In one way, the field seems like a free-for-all, staggeringly disordered because it is littered with so many possibilities. But one can distill a few revolutionary insights. First, autism may not be rigidly determined but instead may be related to common gene variants, called polymorphisms, that may be derailed by environmental triggers. Second, affected genes may disturb fundamental pathways in the body and lead to chronic inflammation across the brain, immune system, and digestive system. Third, inflammation is treatable.
“I can’t think of it as a coincidence anymore that so many autistic kids have a history of allergies, eczema, or chronic diarrhea.”
“In spite of so many years of assumptions that a brain disorder like this is not treatable, we’re helping kids get better. So it can’t just be genetic, prenatal, hardwired, and hopeless,” says Harvard pediatric neurologist Martha Herbert, author of a 14,000-word paper in the journal Clinical Neuropsychiatry that reconceptualizes the universe of autism, pulling the brain down from its privileged perch as an organ isolated from the rest of the body. Herbert is well suited to this task, a synthetic thinker who wrote her dissertation on the developmental psychologist Jean Piaget and who then went to medical school late, in her early thirties.
“I no longer see autism as a disorder of the brain but as a disorder that affects the brain,” Herbert says. “It also affects the immune system and the gut. One very striking piece of evidence many of us have noticed is that when autistic children go in for certain diagnostic tests and are told not to eat or drink anything ahead of time, parents often report their child’s symptoms improve—until they start eating again after the procedure. If symptoms can improve in such a short time frame simply by avoiding exposure to foods, then we’re looking at some kind of chemically driven ‘software’—perhaps immune system signals—that can change fast. This means that at least some of autism probably comes from a kind of metabolic encephalopathy—a systemwide process that affects the brain, just like cirrhosis of the liver affects the brain.”
In 1943 Johns Hopkins University psychiatrist Leo Kanner first described autism as a now-famous collection of symptoms: poor social engagement, limited verbal and nonverbal communication, and repetitive behaviors. Back then, autism was considered rare; Kanner first reported on just 11 patients, and Johns Hopkins still has records of about 150 patients he examined in total. Even within this small group of patients, other, less visible symptoms were evident. In his 1943 paper, “Autistic Disturbances of Affective Contact,” Kanner noted immune and digestive problems but did not include them in the diagnosis. One reads with a shiver sentences lifted out of various case histories: “large and ragged tonsils . . . she was tube-fed five times daily . . . he vomited all food from birth through the third month . . . he suffered from repeated colds and otitis media. . . .”

Gems from Dr Prof Farokh E Udwadia, MD

Gems from Dr Prof Farokh E Udwadia, MD, FRCP, FAMS, MFCCP, FACP. Beach Candy Hospital, Mumbai.

"Medicine is an equal measure of art and science. Curing and healing are not exactly synonymous. Curing is science intervening to get rid of a disease or infection. But healing involves the whole mind-body complex. That’s the important distinction.

"Medicine has lost its path because it’s so enamoured of machines and technology. The doctor relates more often to these than to the patient. He's making his diagnosis in the laboratory rather than at the bedside.

"Advances in technology have led to a decline in the profession. If there's one reason for this decline, it's the lack of empathy, or deep caring. Today, the doctor fails to realise that unless he listens to the patient at length, and examines the patient carefully, only then can there be the doctor-patient bond which lies at the core of medicine.

"The old GP asked you probing questions, looked at you, listened to you, and stood by you. And he was pretty good. You must remember that when specialisation started, those great individuals who did neurology or cardiovascular or respiratory disease, were great general physicians too. Meaning, they were well-versed on a whole gamut of diseases. Until very recently, all these specialists had a large general ward and a small speciality unit. Today, you get your MD degree and lose touch with everything except your speciality. Medicine has become compartmentalised, that’s the sadness of it.

"Medicine is learnt at the bedside. It is never learnt from books. I could hand you a huge tome on medicine and ask you to study it for two years. You'd be able to answer everything from it, but would you be a good doctor at the end of it? No. Why? Because you have had no contact with patient.

"If a poor person comes to you and says, ‘Sir, I can’t afford your fees’, you must not say, 'Then I won’t examine you.' There’s a famous quote on this: 'Don't enter the temple of science with the heart of a moneylender.'

"When it comes to a chronic patient — say, one who has cancer — and he’s absolutely against chemotherapy, I tell him I cannot promise that it will cure you, but it will certainly extend your period of quality living. Think about it, ask others, but don’t take a hasty decision. If he comes back and tells me, ‘No, doctor, I still don’t want it’, I will respect his decision.

"Unfortunately, modern medicine, very often, wants to fight death to the very last. This is what is called cultural Iiatrogenesis: A physician-made condition. Ivan Illich, a professor of sociology in Mexico, wrote a fantastic book which I made compulsory reading for my registrars in JJ. It is called Medical Nemesis. The second edition was called Limits to Medicine.

"Active euthanasia -- giving something to a sick patient with the express purpose of killing him -- is unquestionably, in my opinion, morally wrong. Because you lose the respect for life, and that is the basic tenet we doctors live by."

https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/others/sunday-read/dr-farokh-e-udwadia-medicine-is-learnt-more-at-the-bedside-than-from-books/articleshow/62676135.cms?utm_source=mumbaimirror&utm_medium=Facebook&utm_campaign=referral

Wednesday, February 21, 2018

HOW DO VACCINES WORK? Th1 Th2 Imbalance Explained

HOW DO VACCINES WORK? IMMUNE MECHANISMS AND CONSEQUENCES

AUTHOR // Stephen C. Marini, DC, PhDhttp://pathwaystofamilywellness.org/Informed-Choice/how-do-vaccines-work-immune-mechanisms-and-consequences/All-Pages.html


From Dr. Moskowitz’s previous article in Pathways (issue 10), we learned that the theoretical effect of vaccines on the infectious diseases they are designed to protect against is misleading at best.
He also illuminated the potential long-term consequences of vaccines on an individual’s overall health and wellness. I would like to present what is known about the body’s immunologic response when exposed to a microorganism naturally as compared to the response generated by the conventional vaccines. Questions that this discussion will raise are:


    1. Can the immune responses generated by the vaccines create a pattern of immune imbalance that actually compromises the child’s immune system?
    2. Does the resulting pattern of immune imbalance promote imbalances in other body systems resulting in chronic health issues?
    3. What is known about reversing the imbalance generated by vaccines and/or other immune stressors?
    We have known for decades that getting the childhood diseases naturally results in a permanent immunity to the specific microorganism. Getting the vaccines results in a temporary immunity, meaning that susceptibility is deferred and repeated booster shots will be required for the ENTIRE life of the individual. In the 80s, the specific immune mechanisms involved in vaccine-induced immunity was discerned. In the 90s, the same mechanisms in humans were explored. T cells (thymus cells) are the major cell in the immune system; they direct and control all immune responses as well as immune memory. Subsets of T cells are the T-helper cells (Th). T-helper cells coordinate and direct the safest and most effective immune response. Using Moskowitz’s measles example, we know that, when infected with the measles virus naturally via the nasopharyngeal route, the body produces a Th1 response that externalizes the infection and provides permanent immunity.1 Fever, rash, coughing, sneezing, etc are signs of the body ridding itself of this infection. Bypassing the normal body lines of defense by injecting a vaccine forces the immune system into an emergency-based Th2 response which serves to internalize the infection. You don’t get the disease but are susceptible to the disease later since the Th2 response results in poor immune memory. So, if a natural, viral (measles) infection results in a Th1 response, why don’t we make vaccines that could elicit the same response.
    In 1995, Golding and Scott,2 published the need for strategies to make vaccines that would generate the “required” Th cell to the corresponding microorganism. Since that time, attempts to produce vaccines that would generate a “natural”- type response have failed. So, we are left with vaccines that generate “protective” responses as a second choice. How does this work? In vaccine-induced Th2 responses, called humoral responses, the body produces large quantities of specific antibodies that block the virus from entering cells. This response is why a vaccinated child doesn’t get a full blown infection and why the child won’t spread as many viruses into the environment. However, antibodies cannot get into cells to eliminate viruses once the viruses are in the cells or cannot kill infected cells themselves. Therefore, the body has no choice other than to internalize the virus and be chronically infected when the body is forced into a Th2 antibody response. The body is essentially constipated with viruses that it cannot expel!
    Unvaccinated children who are exposed to measles will generate the immune response that is required to make permanent immunity as well as kick out the virus from the body. The normal, healthy body’s response to viruses is to externalize them. To suppress this natural response can be as hazardous to our health as suppressing waste elimination from the bowel or toxin release from the skin. Natural Th1 responses generate cell-mediated responses that serve to both neutralize viruses by producing antibodies and most importantly stimulate the immune cells necessary to kill any cells infected with viruses. The body works to externalize and eliminate viruses when the Th1 response is generated. So we understand now that when a Th2 response is induced, “it drives the infection deeper into the interior and causes us to harbor it chronically.”3 It is commonly held that the presence of antibody to viruses is a sign of a chronic on-going infection not a sign of immunity.4 Our bodies generally need to have Th1 cells to defend against viral, Gram-negative bacterial, and fungal infections, and tuberculosis, as well as to protect against cancer. Th2 response is necessary to protect against Gram-positive bacterial, parasitic infections, as well as to neutralize toxins from microorganisms and the environment. A balance of Th1/Th2 cells in the body is defined as immunostasis (or immune balance) and is required for optimum health and wellness. Vaccines promote a failure in immunostasis by making the Th2-type cells dominant.
    Can the immune responses generated by the vaccines create a pattern of immune imbalance that actually compromises the child’s immune system?
    We saw how a vaccine-generated Th2 response can burden the body and exhaust the immune system by forcing the body to deal with a chronic ongoing infection. A Th2 response to a specific virus infection will specifically suppress Th1 cells from becoming activated against the same virus. With the resulting failure to generate a Th1 response, cells infected with virus cannot be destroyed. Chronically infected cells, like nerve cells, can occasionally trick the immune system into reacting to and attacking similar nerve cells resulting in autoimmune disease such as multiple sclerosis, Guillain BarrĂ©, etc. Cells chronically infected with live vaccine viruses also risk having the viruses mutate, trade genes with each other, as well as interact with the host cell DNA.5 The live vaccines used presently include, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella (chickenpox), and flu-mist. Overactive Th2 activity, underactive Th1 capability, chronic infection, potential for novel virus infection and autoimmunity characterize failed immunostasis or Th-cell imbalance in vaccinated children.
    The classic work by Ader & Cohen,6 taught us that the immune system can be classically conditioned. Like Pavlov training dogs to salivate at only a ringing bell, the immune system can be conditioned into inappropriate responses through repeated vaccinations. Natural exposure to the environment and infectious diseases conditions immune responses to be more Th1 dominant; whereas repeated vaccine exposure conditions responses to be more Th2 dominant. A child with Th2-dominance is more susceptible to intracellular organisms such as viruses and is therefore more prone to chronic ear, respiratory, and gastrointestinal infections. Children need a vibrant Th1 response to appropriately deal with the childhood intracellular viral infections, whooping cough, and hemophilus. Healthy immune systems are said to be in Th1/Th2 balance or “immunostasis.” Unhealthy immune systems are said to have a failure in or an imbalance in “immunostasis.” Parris Kidd,7 has compiled a fascinating review indicating that there may be a link between Th1/Th2 balance and disease. Diseases such as allergies, asthma, atopic dermatitis, systemic lupus erythematosus, cancer, tuberculosis, and AIDS, appear to result from a Th2-dominant immune response. It is imperative that we discern the impact of conditioning children’s immune responses to be more Th2 dominant and the consequences of this pattern on the incidence of the Th2-dominant diseases listed by Parris Kidd. When we become Th2 dominant, the antibody-producing part of our immune systems gets derailed like a freight train going a hundred miles per hour, out of control. E. Hurwitz et al has shown that unvaccinated children have less incidence of respiratory conditions, such as asthma and allergies, when compared to their vaccinated counterparts,8 thereby supporting Kidd’s hypothesis.
    The focus of much current research is the role of inflammatory responses of varying degrees of severity serving as precursors to cancer, cardiovascular disease, and chronic degenerative diseases being influenced by the different Th cells. Th2 immune responses direct and support bad, excessive inflammation whereas Th1 cells promote healthier type inflammation.
    With evidence to support the adverse effects on the immune system by the vaccines, then why do we continue to vaccinate? The role of public health office is to reduce the incidence of infectious disease in the pediatric population. Vaccines generate protective immune responses on a temporary basis and reduce the incidence of infectious disease in the vaccinated kids as well as the unvaccinated kids. Why are the unvaccinated kids protected too? The risk of exposure to the disease is lessened when more individuals are vaccinated. As described, that happens because vaccinated children have tons of antibodies which neutralize infectious virus thereby lessening their ability to spread viruses to others. The phenomenon of unvaccinated children being protected by the vaccinated is known as herd immunity. Herd immunity is a welcomed effect of the vaccination process from a public health perspective. But, according to physicians like James Taylor,9 this may not be a good thing. Unvaccinated children progress into their adult years with a diminished chance of exposure to childhood diseases.
    With the passage of time and the vaccinated population not getting their boosters, all become susceptible to the disease. Susceptibility to childhood diseases when we are adults greatly increases severe morbidity and mortality from those diseases. Parents and the powers that-be desire this vaccination approach in order to defer infectious disease to a later date so they do not have to stay home, miss work, and care for a sick child. Th2 dominance from vaccinations results in children being at risk of diseases arising from chronic ongoing infections as well as being vulnerable to the damaging effects of the infectious disease they were vaccinated against when they age and forget about getting booster vaccinations. On the other hand, there are parents anxious to expose their children to the childhood diseases through measles and chickenpox parties so a natural (Th1) immunity can be established early, provide lifelong immunity and appropriately condition the immune system to the natural environment.

    Does the resulting pattern of immune imbalance promote imbalances in other body systems resulting in chronic health issues?

    The 80s and 90s also brought us an explosion of research describing the various chemicals released by cells, especially the Th cells and the receptors on cell membranes capable of reacting to these chemicals. The chemicals (cytokines, interleukins) released by T cells act as signals interacting with satellite dish like receptors on all cell membranes, especially the cells of the nervous system. Similarly, chemical communication signals from the nervous system (neurotransmitters, neurohormones) can react with T-cell satellite dishes. T-cell chemicals can react and effect the entire brain.10 The concept that science now employs is psychoneuroimmunology. So, what you think can affect your nervous and immune systems as well as the immune and nervous system affecting how you think. So, when the immune system is out of balance and depressed, it sends out interleukins which react with the brain, generating depressed behavior, depressed moods and depressed thinking.11 This depression theme excites the sympathetic (flight or fight) nervous system and the cycle keeps on streaming out of control. Patterns of immune imbalance as seen with a Th2 vaccine-conditioned immune responses beget patterns of abnormal neurological and psychological patterns which can then affect all other body systems. Patterns of subluxation have been shown to result from and enhance sympathetic activity. Therefore, patterns of immune imbalance can generate subluxation and vice versa. Other factors that condition as well as support a Th2-dominant immune pattern and should be avoided are negative consciousness patterns, which generate stress, and antibiotics, which delete the normal Gram-negative bacteria and suppress Th1 cells, sugar, caffeine, trans-fatty acids, progesterone, antibiotics, mercury, oxidative damage etc.7

    What is known about reversing the imbalance generated by vaccines and/or other immune stressors?

    We know that a fetus thrives in a progesterone-rich maternal environment that is Th1 suppressive. But nature solves this by first exposing the baby to normal, probiotic bacteria while coming through the birth canal. These friendly Gram-negative bacteria from the mother stimulate Th1 activity in the neonate. Secondly, breastmilk contains the normal probiotic bacteria as well as the prebiotic chemicals that selectively supports the growth of the good bacteria and Th1 activity and discourages the growth of the bad fermenting-type bacteria. Colostrum and breast milk are also rich in the interleukins necessary to stimulate Th1 activity. It is understandable from this knowledge that breastfeeding is recommended for at least one year. Lastly, exposure to environmental viruses, other Gram-negative bacteria, and fungi will also stimulate neonatal Th1 activity. It is apparent that newborns who are delivered by C-section, not breastfed, and receive their baby shots have a remarkable squashing of their Th1 capability. Repeated vaccinations, poor nutrition, and nerve interference from subluxations, serve to support this failure in immunostasis. Things to do to reinforce Th1 activity and assist in reversing the immune imbalance generated by vaccines, C-sections, formula-only feeding, and other immunostasis disrupters, include developing positive, affirming consciousness behavior patterns and choices individually as well as within the family unit. Antioxidants, mushroom extracts, melatonin, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), probiotic bacteria such as Lactobacillus acidophilus and GG, phytosterols and sterolins, and omega-3-fatty acids (fish oils) are just a few things that have been shown to increase Th1 levels. Chiropractic adjustments are also recommended to reduce the sympathetic nervous system influence on Th1 suppression. The summary table will review the roles of the Th1 and Th2 responses as well as list what is known to increase their respective levels.
    Concerns for the future well being of our children should include yearly evaluations of their immune balance either through direct T-cell assessment or indirect analyses through cytokine evaluation. If children must submit to the current vaccine schedule12, their immune systems need to be evaluated for T-cell imbalances and all steps necessary employed to restore immune balance prior to the onset of chronic health issues. On the vaccine strategy end, it appears that the future focuses on the “dream vaccine.” This vaccine will consist of a large viral DNA strand containing spliced genes from all the microorganisms desired for vaccination. The genetically engineered DNA will be injected into the baby and then be integrated into the child’s cells. Once inside the cell, the vaccine DNA will be treated like the cell’s own DNA allowing the host cell to produce vaccine components over a prolonged period. So, the child’s cells will serve as their own vaccine manufacturing plant supplying the body with continuous booster stimulation for the immune system. Such implantation technology has already been implemented with the use of the Norplant device designed to release birth control medication over a 3 to 5-year period. Will the vaccine device generate the appropriate Th response? I cannot see how it can, but the real issue, from the public health standpoint, is not whether the appropriate Th response is generated but is a protective, antibody-generating response stimulated. So, we will end up where we began with regard to having vaccines generate Th2 responses only to replace that strategy with an implanted device that will condition the immune response the same way. The prospect of having our children implanted with a DNA-based vaccine device that promote an immune conditioning outcome over years is harrowing. Maintaining immunostasis as a result of this vaccine strategy will be a challenging struggle for years to come.

    References:
    1. Abbas AK, Murphy KM, Sher A.  Functional Diversity of Helper T Lymphocytes.  Nature: 1996: 383  pp.787-793
    1. Golding S., Scott DE.,  Vaccine Strategy: Targeting Helper T Cell Responses.  Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 754:126-137,  May 31, 1995
    1. Moskowitz R., How Do Vaccines Work?  Pathways, Is. 10: 5-9, 2006
    1. Taylor,J.  Which Arm of the Immune Response most Likely Plays the Predominant Role in Host  Defense Against Influenza Virus: humoral or cell-mediated?  Medscape Feature, 1998, 08.98, p.443
    1. Urnovitz H.,  Archiving of Live Viral Vaccines.  From Proceedings of the First International Public Conference on Vaccination.  September 13-15, 1997.
    1. Ader R., Felten D., Cohen N.,  Psychoneuroimmunology.  Academic Press, 2nd edition, 1991.
    1. Kidd P., Th1/Th2 Balance: The Hypothesis, its Limitations, and Implications for Health and Disease. Alt. Med. Review, Vol.8 #3, 2003, p223-246.
    1. Hurwitz E., Morgenstern H. Effects of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis or Tetanus Vaccination on Allergies andAllergy Related Respiratory Symptoms Among Childern and Adolescents in the U.S.  JMPT Vol. 23#2 Feb. 2000
    1. Taylor, J .  Herd Immunity: The Varicella Vaccine Is it a Good Thing?  Archives Peds. Vol 155#4 Apr. 2001.
    1. Pert C.  Molecules of Emotion.   Touchstone, 1997.
    1. Watkins A. Mind Body Medicine  - A Clinicians Guide to  Psychoneuroimmunology. Churchill Livingstone, 1997.


    This article appeared in Pathways to Family Wellness magazine, Issue #13.
    View Author Bio.
    To purchase this issue, Order Here.

    Friday, February 16, 2018

    Why I Blame Pediatricians

    Why I Blame Pediatricians
    In my long campaign I have always targeted the system and refrained from targeting doctors. However when it comes to pediatricians I feel they ought to shoulder the blame. They treat the most vulnerable section of the society; infants and children. In their attempt to expand the market they have also decided to ruin the health of adolescents by recommending adolescent vaccinations and worse vaccines for pregnant women. Now, why do I blame them?
    1. If I was a pediatrician I would be very careful with my subjects
    2. I would go the extra mile to protect their HEALTH
    3. I would be very critical of what I was prescribing for them
    4. I would be extra critical of what I was INJECTING into them
    5. I would not put profits from commissions before their health
    6. I would fight with my association if I found conflict of interest
    7. I would ask damning questions to the office bearers of the IAP
    8. I would refuse to attend the 7 Star PEDICONS
    9. I would be worried about the epidemics of chronic diseases in children and adolescents
    10. I would become a whistleblower
    I find only 3 pediatricians doing the above. They are being branded spoilsports. We need a vaccine for the Peds. One that would put them out of business and bring back the GP's once again.

    Doctors condemn suspension of whistleblower

    TNN | Updated: Feb 4, 2017, 11:13 IST
    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/doctors-condemn-suspension-of-whistleblower/articleshow/56963221.cms?from=mdr

    Doctors associations and paediatricians have condemned the suspension of whistleblower Dr Vipin Vashishtha from the Indian Academy of Paediatrics (IAP) for his questioning of attempts by some pharma companies to influence IAP’s immunisation guidelines. They have urged the IAP leadership to respond with facts and figures to Dr Vashishtha’s charge that its Action Plans and its continuing medical education programmes are being funded by vaccine manufacturers.

    Several paediatricians who attended IAP’s national conference in Bengaluru expressed dismay at the way Dr Vashishtha was suspended at the conference without giving him a chance to put forward his point of view. The Alliance of Doctors for Ethical Healthcare (ADEH) and Medico Friends Circle (MFC), a group of health professionals and workers engaged in developing a pro-people’s vision in health care, expressed shock at the way the immunization schedule approved by the association’s Advisory Committee was removed from it’s journal Indian Paediatrics “under the influence of some office bearers of IAP who seem to be affiliated to some vaccine manufacturers”.

    “That this schedule was approved by the editorial board of Indian Paediatrics and was published in the online edition of this journal, but was subsequently withdrawn shows the brazenness with which (the) expert committee’s recommendations are being kept aside mostly under the influence of some vaccine manufacturers,” stated ADEH
    Dr Vashishtha as a former convenor of IAP’s Advisory Committee on Vaccines and Immunisation Practices (ACVIP) had sent an open letter to the IAP president on December 16 marked to over 23,000 IAP members. He raised several issues including the failure of the current president Dr Anupam Sachdev and joint secretary Dr Ajay Gambhir to submit conflict of interest declarations, the extensive funding of IAP activities by vaccine manufacturers and the withdrawal of the immunisation schedule approved by the ACVIP, allegedly under pressure from some vaccine manufacturers.
    IAP president Dr Sachdev in a letter to the members stated that Dr Vashishtha was being suspended for lowering the dignity of the paediatric fraternity and for painting every paediatrician as a black sheep. However, ADEH and MFC pointed out that Dr Vashishtha had been forced to write the open letter only after he failed to get any response from the IAP leadership on the issues he had raised several times.
    ADEH and MFC have urged IAP to withdraw the suspension and to explain why the immunisation schedule was withdrawn and to respond to the issues raised by Dr Vashishtha in his open letter. They have also asked IAP to reconsider the widespread practice of paediatricians directly supplying vaccines to parents to pocket hefty discounts offered by vaccine manufacturers, instead of prescribing them.


    Can Vaccines Cause Cancer?

    Could the fact that cancer has now become a leading cause of death in children be connected to vaccinations?
    One benefit of having measles is that a person so infected will then have lifelong, permanent immunity to it. Mothers transfer antibodies against measles to their babies, which protect them from this disease during their early critical months of life. The MMR shot, however, does not provide lifelong immunity to measles. It only lasts several years, and successively less effective booster shots are required.
    There is a second, major benefit of measles that health authorities overlook. Measles helps a child’s immune system grow strong and mature.
    Once past the immunologic barriers of skin and mucosa, our (2-trillion-cell) immune system has two components: An innate system, which all animals have; and an evolutionarily more recent adaptive system that vertebrates have. The childhood diseases—measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox—play a constructive role in the maturation of the adaptive immune system. Two kinds of helper T-cells (Th) manage this system: cellular T-cells (Th1); and humoral T-cells (Th2), which make antibodies. The Th1 cellular T-cells are especially important because they attack and kill cells in the body that run amok and become cancerous. And they also kill cells that become infected with viruses.
    Measles (and other viral childhood diseases) stimulate both the Th1 and Th2 components. The MMR vaccine stimulates predominately the Th2 side. Overstimulation of this part of the adaptive immune system provokes allergies, asthma, and auto-immune diseases. Since the Th1 side thwarts cancer, if it does not get fully developed in childhood a person can wind up being more prone to cancer later in life. Women who had mumps during childhood, for example, have been found to be less likely to develop ovarian cancer compared with women who did not have mumps. (This study was published in the mainstream medical journal Cancer.)
    Could the fact that cancer has now become a leading cause of death in children be connected to vaccinations? Only a well-controlled, randomized, blinded, long-term scientific trial would be able to conclusively answer this question. But societal entities that could fund such a study, like the government’s National Institutes of Health (NIH), drug companies that make the vaccine, or the CDC do not feel that it is necessary to conduct one.
    The benefits of having measles (at the right age) trumps the MMR vaccine’s benefits, for these two reasons: 1) suffering through the disease bestows lifelong immunity to it; and 2) measles strengthens and helps mature a child’s helper T-cell adaptive immune system, and most importantly its cancer-preventing Th1 side.
    - Dr Donald Miller is a retired cardiac surgeon and Emeritus Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle.

    Do Vaccines Cause Cancer?


    by Louise Kuo Habakus
    I know people will be immediately furious with the title — do vaccines cause cancer? Absolutely irresponsible! What’s wrong with you? This is why your movement will never get anywhere! You think everything bad is caused by vaccines!
    Be mad, if you must, but keep reading. Progress never happens by silencing contrarian voices. This post is for parents… because the hardest time to learn about cancer is when someone you love has been diagnosed. It’s difficult to come from a place of empowered strength when panic and fear set in. The second hardest time to learn about cancer is when no one is sick. Why spend precious free time on something so terrifying? I’ll tell you why. Cancer is part of our new normal. One in two men and one in three women will receive a cancer diagnosis in their lifetime. But it’s not just adults. If you can’t bring yourself to focus on this topic for you, please do it for your children.
    I’m writing this article because the best way to learn is together, through community. I know how tough it is to go against the herd when talking about vaccines. The same is true about cancer. And you might be intrigued to learn that there’s a connection between the two.
    There’s a big opportunity to hear — for free — from the world’s leading cancer experts. The real experts who are independent, courageous, and cutting edge. I know many of these people. They are my friends and colleagues, they are my family’s doctors. Or I know them through their work. I’m helping to promote this docu-series because it’s all part of the same issue.
    We aren’t able to make informed decisions without real information. And, the more people that understand, the closer we get to real societal change… and healing.

    Let’s start with some basic facts

    Vaccines are a universal exposure. Not all children eat the same food or breathe the same air. But they’re largely all getting the same vaccines.
    • Over 99% of American children have received at least one vaccine and 90-95% are fully vaccinated (CDC MMWR 10/17/14).
    • If you’re over, say 30 years of age, this is more than three times the number of shots you got. Over 50 years? More than four times.
    • Every single state mandates vaccines as a condition of daycare and school admission.
    • The vaccine schedule has never been tested as administered for safety or efficacy.
    • Children are sicker than ever — with chronic, autoimmune, neurodevelopmental disorders that are through the roof and of “unknown etiology” (i.e., no one knows why).
    • Incidence of all chronic pediatric conditions escalated after we sharply increased the number of vaccines.
    This doesn’t prove anything. It doesn’t disprove anything either. More to the point, it does not validate what we are doing.
    What we are doing is unprecedented in the history of mankind. We did not evolve, over thousands of years, with this kind of exposure. I’m not just talking about the human body’s ability to handle what’s in the vaccines. I’m also talking about this degree of artificial manipulation of the immune system. Human babies did not encounter the simultaneous, repeated, and cumulative injections of many dozens of different kinds of bacterial and viral material — whether attenuated live or inactivated toxoid or genetically engineered recombinant — during their peak neurodevelopmental window, starting on the day of birth through three years of age.
    Parents who know this are understandably puzzled when they are accused of being crazy because they assert their right not to vaccinate their children.

    Cancer in children is a big problem

    You will hear that there have been major advances in the cure rate of cancer but that obscures a single compelling fact. The incidence of childhood cancer is up. A lot. The following information is courtesy of CureSearch.org:
    • Cancer occurs across all ages, ethnic and socio-economic groups and remains the number one cause of death by disease in children.
    • The number of diagnosed cases annually has not declined in 20 years. The average age is six.
    • 12% of children diagnosed with cancer do not survive.
    • There are 375,000 adult survivors of children’s cancer in the United States (1 in 530 adults ages 20-39) — 60% suffer late-effects, such as infertility, heart failure and secondary cancers.
    What we are talking about is an epic amount of suffering.

    What does vaccine safety research say?

    WHAT RESEARCH?

    The outright inadequacy of vaccine safety research is acknowledged by the federal government. Here is a sampling of the language used by the government-hired think tank, The Institute of Medicine, in their Reports on Vaccine Safety over a fifteen-year period:
    “[M]any gaps and limitations in knowledge… inadequate understanding of the biological mechanisms… insufficient or inconsistent information… inadequate size of length of follow-up… limited capacity of existing surveillance systems…few experimental studies…”
    “Clearly, if research capacity and accomplishment in these areas are not improved, future reviews of vaccine safety will be similarly handicapped.”
    You can read more in our book, Vaccine EpidemicThere you can also find out the percentage of the total vaccine budget that’s spent on safety versus promotion and distribution. (All right, I’ll tell you… it’s 1/2 of 1%.)

    NOT TESTED FOR CANCER

    Vaccine makers don’t test vaccines for their potential to cause cancer.
    Yup. It’s not on them. They are crystal clear about it. Every single vaccine package insert says it. I know because I looked. As an example, here’s what Merck says about its MMR vaccine:
    M-M-R II has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility.
    Parents should know that every vaccine administered to their children has not been evaluated for its ability to cause cancer, genetic mutation, or infertility.
    I urge you to go look, too. Here are package inserts for every FDA-approved vaccine.
    What you’ll find is sobering. Let’s take the Hepatitis B vaccine as an example. If you open Merck’s RECOMBIVAX HB Hepatitis B vaccine package insert (go to page 4, under ADVERSE REACTIONS), you’ll see data for sample size and observation period used to justify licensure of this product given to newborns:
    In three clinical studies, 434 doses of RECOMBIVAX HB, 5 mcg, were administered to 147 healthy infants and children (up to 10 years of age) who were monitored for 5 days after each dose. Injection site reactions and systemic adverse reactions were reported following 0.2% and 10.4% of the injections, respectively. The most frequently reported systemic adverse reactions (>1% injections), in decreasing order of frequency, were irritability, fever (>101°F oral equivalent), diarrhea, fatigue-weakness, diminished appetite, and rhinitis.
    If this vaccine was associated with increased cancer incidence, how much of it do you think they’d capture in 5 days?
    I will also add that, in my lectures, parents are horrified to learn that safety testing for a vaccine given to newborns was conducted on only 147 children, and these children were significantly older and prescreened for health.

    But can vaccines cause cancer?

    Vaccines are biologics. They are a pharmaceutical product derived from animals, humans, or insects. There are many different types of vaccines (i.e., live attenuated, killed, inactivated toxoid, subunit/conjugate), and they are produced from different types of cells (i.e., primary, diploid, continuous cell lines).
    Biological vaccines are not safe in any form. Anyone who takes issue with that is going to apply a relativist argument. There are things that can be done to make them safer but parents must know that this is a different discussion. Vaccine makers do not prioritize safety above all else — they try to balance a number of competing variables. In order to improve a vaccine’s effectiveness, price, or time to market, it almost always comes down to a tradeoff with safety. For example:
    • The antigenic material in vaccines is expensive. To use less of it, they’ll add an aluminum adjuvant.
    • Single dose vials are expensive. To reduce cost, they’ll add the mercury-based preservative thimerosal to multi-dose vials (yes, they’re still doing this in some vaccines, including the flu shot given to babies as young as 6 months of age).
    • Cells cannot replicate indefinitely. They reach what’s called the Hayflick Limit  and this is the reason that vaccine makers love to culture viruses on continuous or immortal cell lines.

    CONTINUOUS CELL LINES?

    Normal cells can only divide a finite number of times before they break down by apoptosis (programmed cell death). Some cells, however, mutate and keep going and going. We’re not talking about stem cells here. We’re talking about cancer. Some vaccines are grown on cancerous tissue. The most prominent example of this is the HeLa cell line. Jonas Salk’s polio vaccine used these cells. The story of Henrietta Lacks at the hands of the medical establishment is so reprehensible that it makes me hyperventilate just thinking about it. If you haven’t read the book about her life, go get it now. It will give you some insight into the varied ways that ethical shades of gray in medicine become black and white.
    So… if you get a shot that is cultured on continuous cell lines, then you are injecting biologic material grown on neoplastic or cancerous tissue. And there are deep, deep concerns that these cells might be contaminated with occult oncogenic agents that can cause cancer. You can read what the FDA says about it here and here. And in this Scientific American article, a professor who studies a contagious cancer says that injecting someone with cancerous cells can cause cancer.
    The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products provided this 2001 position statement on the use of tumourigenic cells of human origin for the production of biologics, highlighting harrowing risks including gene mutation, translocation generating a novel gene, or the presence of biologically active bacterial or viral oncogenes. While EMEA’s focus was on cells of human origin — which happen to be used in the rubella, hepatitis A, chickenpox, polio, rabies, and the smallpox vaccines — these risks also exist for biologics, including all remaining vaccines, made from cells of animal and insect origin.
    The inactivated polio vaccine is cultured on Vero or kidney cells from the African green monkey. The Vero cell line is a continuous cell line. (Read what former Merck vaccine chief Maurice Hilleman had to say about how the polio vaccine caused cancer via SV40 contamination from the “greens” (monkeys).
    We are moving away from primary and diploid cell culture systems and towards the use of continuous cell lines. (Read about CCLs in History of Vaccine Development.) This should not come as a surprise, as pandemic vaccine development requires large scale manufacture with process parameters that can be ramped up very quickly and run smoothly and cost-effectively.

    ADVENTITIOUS AGENTS?

    Adventitious agents are bacteria, viruses, mycoplasma, fungi, and other pathogenic material that are unintentionally introduced. It happens. It causes cancer (among other problems). It cannot be prevented. The problem is that you can’t screen for something that you don’t know (or won’t admit) exists. And there’s that pesky tradeoff with cost again. It’s expensive to screen and filter these things out.
    Peek at this FDA presentation called Unexpected Finding of Adventitious Agent in a Biological Product (just in case it gets taken down, access the PDF here). It explains in some hair raising detail what our government knows. See below. For example, note their repeated use of quotations around “free” of adventitious agents… their admission that they missed adventitious agents in the past and that new agents are being discovered… and the risk/reward tradeoff they’re making for us.
    • Stringent regulatory requirements in place to ensure, to the extent possible, that products are “free” of adventitious agents. (slide #4)
    • New technologies have the potential to detect adventitious agents not previously known or detected… (slide #10)
    • Formalin inactivation did not completely inactivate SV40 (slide #11)
    • More sensitive PCR assay showed that previously undetectable quantities of reverse transcriptase [from endogenous avian retrovirus] were present in some vaccines (e.g. measles) produced in avian cells. (slide #11)
    • [B]enefits of vaccination far outweigh any remote risk of vCJD [human form of mad cow disease]. (slide #13)
    Sometimes, when government and industry are caught flat-footed, as happened with the pig viruses found in the rotavirus vaccine, they’ll argue that it’s not known to cause disease in humans. They might use the word safe. But we know they mean “safe” and that you’d prefer to make the decision for your children rather than have them make it for you.

    The truth about cancer


    Vaccines are just the tip of the cancer iceberg. We have a lot of inconvenient questions that disturb a $125+ billion industry. Many people are afraid to tell the truth but not all. If you want to know more, then you’ll want to check out this new docu-series. Here’s the trailer:

    Resources

    Louise Kuo Habakus is the founding director of Fearless Parent™, lead host and producer of Fearless Parent Radio™, and mom of two. She is a published author and runs the non-profits Center for Personal Rights and Health Freedom Action. Louise was a Bain consultant and a C-level executive in the financial services industry. She holds two degrees from Stanford University. She is an advisory board member of GreenMedInfoS*HE Living TV, and The Documenting Hope Project.