Vaccinations May Increase Death Toll

[Guest guest]

SSRI-Research@

Fri, 16 Jun 2006 21:52:40 -0400

[sSRI-Research] Vaccinations May Increase Death Toll

 

 

 

 

Vaccinations May Increase Death Toll

 

By Helen Pearson

 

http://www.mercola.com/display/PrintPage.aspx?docid=25916 & PrintPage=yes

 

Inadequate vaccines can encourage the emergence of nastier bugs,

placing the unprotected at risk, a new mathematical model shows. The

effect could undermine future vaccination programs.

 

Many vaccines save people from dying of a disease, but do not stop

them carrying and transmitting it. Over a few decades this may cause

more virulent strains to evolve, predict Andrew Read and his

colleagues of the University of Edinburgh, UK(1).

 

In some situations, such as in areas endemic for malaria, deadlier

disease strains could kill more people than vaccination saves. Most of

the time the benefits of vaccination will be eroded.

 

Vaccines for HIV, and hepatitis B and C " give most cause for concern " ,

says immunologist Charles Bangham, of Imperial College in London.

These viruses are difficult for the body's immune system to eradicate,

leaving them time to reproduce and evolve. Tearaway strains of flu

also emerge regularly and evade existing vaccines.

 

Infections that linger in the body are more likely to meet a second

bug, explains evolutionary biologist Dieter Ebert from the University

of Fribourg in Switzerland. The competition drives pathogens to evolve

faster, nastier killing tactics to get the most from their host.

 

Don't Encourage Them

 

Vaccines that encourage evolution include those that slow a

disease-causing organism's growth or target its harmful toxin. These

types are being pursued to fight diseases such as anthrax and malaria.

The possibility that these might save individuals but harm populations

" has not been considered before " , says Ebert, and should be a factor

in public-health policy.

 

Most existing vaccines, such as those for smallpox, polio and measles,

are very effective as they use a different strategy. They stimulate a

natural immune reaction which either kills off subsequent infections

or blocks pathogen reproduction and transmission altogether.

 

Read does not advocate halting such programs. New vaccines should

similarly aim to prevent pathogens getting a toehold, says Bangham;

many in the pipeline do not.

 

Several different vaccines are being developed to fight malaria:

results of clinical trials for one that interrupts the life cycle of

microorganism Plasmodium falciparum were announced last week(2).

'Multivalent vaccines' that target several different parts of a

pathogen or life cycle at once are the better choice, Read suggests.

 

Nature December 13, 2001

 

-------------------------

 

Dr. Mercola's Comment:

 

Many people will not realize that Nature is one of the most

prestigious scientific journals in the world. I point that out to

highlight the fact that the concern with vaccines is actually starting

to be voiced by some well respected scientists.

 

Additional Comment from Dawn Richardson of PROVE:

 

Being healthy becomes an even more elusive goal if you primarily rely

on vaccines to get there. When you read this article, keep in mind

that children now receive as many as 39 doses of vaccines for 12

different viral and bacterial illnesses and there are literally

hundreds of new vaccines in development.

 

It is also interesting to keep in mind that the bacteria strains

chosen for inclusion in the pnuemococcal vaccine for children were

specifically chosen because they are the strains that have evolved to

be the most antibiotic resistant. It is very difficult to do fair and

comprehensive risk/benefit analysis when there is so much about the

unintended consequences of vaccines that have yet to even be studied.

 

More is not better - educated parents everywhere will continue to

demand having options for their individual children and the legal

right to exercise those options.