Apparently, Jamie McGuire is a best-selling author.
According to Yahoo Lifestyle, she is the “author of 20 books in the New Adult genre (for ages 18-30), including Walking Disaster — which debuted at No. 1 on the New York Times, USA Today and Wall Street Journal bestseller lists — as well as the apocalyptic thriller Red Hill.”
And she wants everyone to know that she does not consent!
Can You Prove That Jamie McGuire Books Don’t Make Teens Do Drugs?
What does Jamie McGuire not consent to?
Since her whole post is about proving this and that about vaccines, which she seems to think are bad, I am guessing that she does not consent to getting vaccinated or to vaccinating her kids.
The thing is though, no one is trying to force her to vaccinate her kids.
You can just say that you don’t want to vaccinate your kids, coming out as another anti-vaccine pseudo-celebrity, without hijacking “I do not consent” messaging.
Anyway, her concerns about vaccines have been addressed. Indeed, they have been talked about a million times. If she were truly aware, she would stop being misled by anti-vaccine arguments that scare parents away from thinking that vaccines are safe, with few risks, and necessary.
“In 1979, the Swedish medical society abandoned whole-cell pertussis vaccine and decided to wait for a new, safer, more effective vaccine – a strategy that was soon adopted as national policy. During 1980-83, annual incidence for children aged 0–4 years increased to 3370 per 100000, with rates of serious complications approaching global rates. In subsequent years, Sweden reported more than 10000 cases annually with an incidence exceeding 100 per 100000, comparable to rates reported in some developing countries.”
Ganarosa et al on Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story.
Pertussis came back.
In fact, endemic pertussis came back.
“Our evaluation of pertussis in the unimmunized child population gave an answer to the question of whether pertussis nowadays is a harmless disease which does not demand general vaccination. The present situation regarding pertussis in Sweden and the low efficacy of the antimicrobial treatment indicate an urgent need to prevent the disease by general vaccination as soon as a safe and effective vaccine is available.”
Romanus et al on Pertussis in Sweden after the cessation of general immunization in 1979.
Wait, why would anyone think that getting vaccinated would make you more likely to get a vaccine-preventable disease?
Because there is a new pertussis outbreak in California and folks don’t understand how attack rates work…
Does Getting the DTaP Vaccine Make You More Susceptible to Pertussis?
We know that the latest pertussis vaccines aren’t the greatest, having issues with waning immunity.
They don’t actually make you more likely to get pertussis though, at least not relative to being unvaccinated.
“Because of linked-epitope suppression, all children who were primed by DTaP vaccines will be more susceptible to pertussis throughout their lifetimes, and there is no easy way to decrease this increased lifetime susceptibility.”
JD Cherry on The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future
What the above quote that anti-vaccine folks are misusing is actually saying is that kids who got DTaP vaccines will be more susceptible to pertussis compared to those who got DTwP, the older version of the vaccine. That’s what the whole article is about!
It is not that they will be more suspecptible to pertussis vs someone who was unvaccinated.
Dr. I: Anti-vax folks are misinterpreting that statement, not understanding that it means relative to kids who got DTwP. They think that you are saying that it is the DTaP vaccine itself that makes it more likely that a child will get pertussis, in general. Even relative to someone who is unvaccinated. I know it shouldn’t be necessary, but can you provide a simple quote to clarify this?
JDC: You are of course correct. I was asked to write-up the talk that I have given many times in the US and in many other countries. In the talk, right at the beginning, I mention that today there is 20 fold less pertussis than there was in the pre-vaccine era and that illness in vaccine failures is much less severe that illness in unvaccinated children. I also remember how wrong they were 30 years ago R/E alleged reactions to DTwP.
And if you read his latest article, The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future, especially if you read more than the abstract, you discover that’s what he is saying.
But what about linked-epitope suppression?
In “linked-epitope suppression,” memory B cells out-compete naive B cells for access to the Bordetella epitopes because they are more numerous and their receptors exhibit a higher antigen affinity. Linked-epitope suppression applies as the immune response to novel epitopes is suppressed by the strong response to initial components if they are introduced together.
JD Cherry on The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future
Basically, the DTwP vaccine included many more epitopes or targets for antibodies to bind to than the newer DTaP vaccine. That’s why it worked better. And you don’t get a good response to non-vaccine epitopes or antigens.
Still, you at least have some memory B cells and antibodies after getting the DTaP vaccine, which is why the idea that getting vaccinated makes you more susceptible to pertussis is silly. You are still protected, even if the protection isn’t perfect.
That’s why Dr. Cherry recommends that folks continue to get vaccinated and protected!
“We should be more vigilant than we have been in the past to recognize and treat pertussis in all age groups so that transmission to young infants is reduced. Most important (although not discussed in this review) is to ensure that all pregnant women receive the Tdap vaccine between 27 and 36 weeks’ gestation with each pregnancy. Also, we should consider routinely administering Tdap vaccine every 3 years to all adolescents and adults who were primed with a DTaP vaccine. This suggestion is contrary to that in the current Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations. However, from the data available, this approach could be expected to decrease the circulation of B pertussis in adolescents and adults. Also, Tdap should be administered to all adolescent and adults exposed to B pertussis during a school or other group outbreak.”
JD Cherry on The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future
He does recommend that we work on new pertussis vaccines though.
“Future cohorts would benefit from the development and use of live vaccines and less-reactogenic DTwP vaccines.”
JD Cherry on The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future
But why are we using a vaccine that doesn’t work as well as the previous vaccine we had?
“Despite the fact that in all but 2 of the efficacy trials the DTwP vaccines had greater efficacy than did the DTaP vaccines being studied, DTaP vaccines were licensed and used in many countries throughout the world; DTaP vaccines had replaced DTwP vaccines. The urgency to adopt DTaP vaccines was driven largely by antivaccine activist groups such as “Dissatisfied Parents Together.” During the rush to adopt DTaP vaccines and tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis vaccines for adults (Tdap), much of the history relating to human pertussis was overlooked.”
JD Cherry on The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future
“The results of a number of controlled studies between 1979 and 2004 indicated that no risk of severe neurologic disease after DTwP vaccinations existed. It was noted by myself and Shields (a pediatric neurologist) that what was being called pertussis vaccine encephalopathy was not an encephalitis-like event but, instead, the first seizure or seizures of infantile epilepsy.”
JD Cherry on The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future
No, the cases of encephalopathy that were being reported were not caused by the DTwP vaccine. And neither did the DTwP vaccine cause SIDS, as was also reported at the time.
“Since 1997, the DTaP vaccination policy has created a cohort of people (the number of which is expanding yearly) who are more susceptible to repeated clinical illness with B pertussis infection than are DTwP-vaccinated children. There is no feasible way to make this cohort less susceptible.”
JD Cherry on The 112-Year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future
And now, after helping create the current DTaP vaccination policy, anti-vaccine folks want to scare folks away from using the vaccine. Don’t let them. Don’t skip or delay this vaccine and leave your kids susceptible to getting diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis.
More on Does Getting the DTaP Vaccine Make You More Susceptible to Pertussis?
“When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.”
Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data
They can’t be used to prove causality or definitively say that an adverse reaction or side effect was caused by a vaccine.
Did 79.4% of the Reported Child Deaths to VAERS Get a Vaccine on the Day They Died?
Still, it might be surprising to learn that in the majority of reports to VAERS about deaths in children, most had been vaccinated on the day they died.
The idea for the statistic comes from a report, Deaths Reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, United States, 1997–2013, that was published in the 2015 issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases.
“No concerning pattern was noted among death reports submitted to VAERS during 1997–2013.”
Moro et al on Deaths Reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
Wait.
How do we get to “no concerning pattern was noted” to 79.4% of the kids were vaccinated on the day they died?
“For child death reports, 79.4% received >1 vaccine on the same day.”
Moro et al on Deaths Reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
All the report is saying is that for kids who were vaccinated, 79.4% of them received more than one vaccine on the same day. It wasn’t the day they died though.
That kids would get more than one vaccine on the same day isn’t surprising. Few parents skip or delay vaccines so much that they just get one shot at a time.
“In our VAERS review, we did not detect any concerning patterns that would suggest causal relationships between vaccination and deaths.”
Moro et al on Deaths Reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
If anything, this report confirms that vaccines are safe and with few risks.
“The number of death reports in children exceeded those in adults in all years, and in both groups the number of reports has decreased in recent years.”
Moro et al on Deaths Reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
It will soon be obvious that anti-vaccine folks don’t really read vaccine inserts…
Would they really be happy if we handed them the entire vaccine insert before every visit?
Would they read the entire vaccine insert?
Which part of the vaccine insert do anti-vaccine folks even read?
Or would they continue to only believe the parts that they think justify their decisions to leave their kids unvaccinated, unprotected, and at risk for getting life-threatening diseases?
Show Me the Vaccine Insert!
Let’s see what’s really in these package inserts…
“Measles, mumps, and rubella are three common childhood diseases, caused by measles virus, mumps virus (paramyxoviruses), and rubella virus (togavirus), respectively, that may be associated with serious complications and/or death. For example, pneumonia and encephalitis are caused by measles. Mumps is associated with aseptic meningitis, deafness and orchitis; and rubella during pregnancy may cause congenital rubella syndrome in the infants of infected mothers”
“The impact of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination on the natural history of each disease in the United States can be quantified by comparing the maximum number of measles, mumps, and rubella cases reported in a given year prior to vaccine use to the number of cases of each disease reported in 1995. For measles, 894,134 cases reported in 1941 compared to 288 cases reported in 1995 resulted in a 99.97% decrease in reported cases; for mumps, 152,209 cases reported in 1968 compared to 840 cases reported in 1995 resulted in a 99.45% decrease in reported cases; and for rubella, 57,686 cases reported in 1969 compared to 200 cases reported in 1995 resulted in a 99.65% decrease”
MMR II Package Insert
Full stop!
How can they say vaccines don’t work when the package insert provides these stats showing it does and goes on to say that “M-M-R II is highly immunogenic and generally well tolerated.”
“The recommended age for primary vaccination is 12 to 15 months.”
MMR II Package Insert
Why are some of these folks delaying or skipping their child’s MMR vaccine? The package insert says to give it at 12 to 15 months!
“Individuals first vaccinated at 12 months of age or older should be revaccinated prior to elementary school entry.”
MMR II Package Insert
That’s the part of the package insert that says to give a second dose before kids enter kindergarten.
“There are no reports of transmission of live attenuated measles or mumps viruses from vaccinees to susceptible contacts.”
MMR II Package Insert
And that’s the part that says they can stop talking about shedding.
“The following adverse reactions are listed in decreasing order of severity, without regard to causality, within each body system category and have been reported during clinical trials, with use of the marketed vaccine, or with use of monovalent or bivalent vaccine containing measles, mumps, or rubella:”
MMR II Package Insert
Do anti-vaccine folks understand that some of the things that are listed in the adverse reactions section of the package insert haven’t actually been proven to be caused by the vaccine? They are listed “without regard to causality.”
What about all of the “hidden” ingredients that are listed in the package insert?
The ingredients that are so well hidden, they are listed right in the vaccine’s insert? Where does it mention all of the toxins that anti-vaccine folks are always talking about?
“…M-M-R II is highly immunogenic and generally well tolerated.”
There are a lot of things about the latest anti-vaccine bombshell that won’t surprise you…
For one thing, the “bombshell” isn’t recent. Anti-vaccine folks are just re-posting it now because a new hexavalent vaccine just got FDA approval.
The Latest Anti-Vaccine Bombshell on Infanrix Hexa is Just Another Dud
What about the 1,271 page confidential GSK document that was leaked to the press?
It was actually a document that was submitted as part of an Italian court case.
What about the idea of “missing deaths” and under-reporting of vaccine deaths?
“Before specifically addressing your analysis, it’s important to note that the issue of whether there is an increased risk of Sudden Infant Death following vaccination generally and following vaccination with DTP-containing vaccines more specifically is one that has been considered and thoroughly evaluated not only by GSK but also by a number of world-renowned regulatory agencies and public health authorities, including the European Medicines Agency, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization. The clear consensus amongst such agencies and authorities is that one cannot reasonably conclude, based on available data and information, that there is a causal relationship between vaccination generally or vaccination with Infanrix hexa and Sudden Infant Death.”
Dr. Norman Begg, Chief Medical Officer, GSK Vaccines on Infanrix hexa and sudden death: a review of the periodic safety update reports submitted to the European Medicines Agency
It’s no bombshell that this is all propaganda and these issues have been thoroughly investigated. Or that someone got a “study” that manipulated and misinterpreted data published in a predatory journal.
The idea that the hexavalent vaccines could be causing unexplained cases of sudden infant death shortly after vaccination began after a few case reports from Germany in 2003. Further studies, including a large study in Italy, found no risk.
What about the idea of “missing deaths” in safety reports from the manufacturer?
If there are so many “missing deaths,” then why is the cumulative number of deaths higher in the latest report?
Of course, there are no missing deaths.
I found the “missing deaths” that Puliyel talks about in his Infanrix hexa paper – in the GSK report he used to write his “study.”
The GSK report explains that twelve deaths were excluded from analysis, apparently eight from the first year (101 cumulative) and three from the second year (five cumulative), which is why the cumulative deaths dropped from eight to five.
Why?
“A cumulative review of Sudden Death (SD) since launch has been performed. Follow-up information received for older cases was taken into account. Design of the below observed to expected analysis was revisited in view of comments EMA expressed in the assessment report of PSUR 15-16 (dated 26 April 2012).”
GlaxoSmithKline Biological clinical safety and pharmacovigilance’s confidential report to the EMA: PSUR 19, page 440
Keep in mind that these are cumulative deaths since they began using the vaccine in 2000, and which are below the expected background rates of SIDS.
For them, it is an easy choice. They know that vaccines work, that vaccines are safe, and that vaccines are necessary.
Making the Right Choice About Vaccines
Some folks aren’t so sure though. They may either be against vaccines or might still be on the fence, not knowing for sure what to do.
“When my third child was born, I had more questions than answers and a huge reluctance to choose immunizations without certainty that the benefits outweigh the risks.”
Suzanne Walther on A Parent’s Decision on Immunization: Making the Right Choice
Mark Zuckerberg posted a photo when he took his daughter to their pediatrician for her vaccines.
Parents can be confident that all of the evidence points to the facts that:
Vaccines are effective at preventing disease. Vaccines work.
After they are approved, there are ongoing clinical trials and safety systems in place to rule out the possibility that vaccines could cause diseases later in life.
With all of the anti-vaccine information that is regularly posted on Facebook and anti-vaccine books listed on Amazon, it is no surprise that some parents would be scared though.
“I have discovered along the way that it is easy for parents to be misinformed. It is a real challenge to be well informed.”
Suzanne Walther on A Parent’s Decision on Immunization: Making the Right Choice
