What is Hepatitis B? Why NOT vaccinate for it? [Part Two]

This post is going to focus on reasons NOT to vaccinate for Hepatitis B. 

How is this vaccine created? 

"A portion of DNA from the hep B virus is integrated into the DNA of some yeast cells that live in a solution of soy, sugar, amino acids, and minerals. The yeast cells then use this DNA to generate a protein that makes up the outer capsule of the hep B virus. The yeast cells are broken up, and the hep B virus is filtered out and purified. Aluminum is then added to help the vaccine work better. It is put in a saline solution. ... Recombivax HB uses formaldehyde to purify the vaccine. Engerix-B does not.

 Note: Adults receive a double dose of hep B vaccine, so each adult dose contains 500 micrograms of aluminum." [3]

"However, the greatest concern about recombinant DNA vaccines is that they may cause the immune system to produce antibodies, which in turn attack the body and cause health problems. Much is still not known about the effects of recombinant DNA vaccines." [4] 

Well, that sounds okay, right? Not so bad. NOT. Very little is known about this type of vaccine (recombinant) and any potential long-term effects of it. It is still a relatively new type of production without hardly any studies done on the potential repercussions. Basically, a recombinant vaccine is a vaccine that is genetically engineered/altered. The potential ethical issues and potential catastrophic fallout with a vaccine that is partially genetically engineered is enormous. It creates a situation where scientists can realistically tinker with DNA and alter genomes...and we just don't know what the long-term effects of it are on DNA or RNA, both human and virus. It is even proposed that this is the method in which Herpes Virus Type 6 crossed over into human telomeres (homologous recombination). I think it is important to think of the possible ramifications this can cause as far as autoimmune disorders and autoimmune reactions. From what we do know, improper homologous recombination can lead to cancer, cancer-related illnesses (such as Bloom's Syndrome), and fetal chromosome variants that lead to such chromosomal abnormalities like Trisomy 18. So think about it this way...if scientists decide to create a vaccine with two or three strains of an illness, and someone mucks up even a little bit, in a way no one could know...we could realistically have a brand-new mutated hybrid strain, or even several. This happens in nature all the time, and why it is almost impossible to completely eradicate any communicable disease.

Vaccine Escape Mutants [1]

Even the WHO (World Health Organization) is extremely concerned about Vaccine Escape Mutants (VEMs) and ADAP-VEMs (antiviral drug-associated potential vaccine escape mutants). VEMs are strains of the virus that have mutated because of overuse of a vaccine, in this case the Hepatitis B vaccine. The WHO page puts it a little more mildly by stating it is "riskier" for highly populated areas (AKA we are overusing this vaccine!!) Also, as a disease that thrives in highly populated areas, does this mean the vaccine is pretty much ineffective since the rate of VEMs is higher in highly populated areas? The WHO has stated that in order for a strain to be truly dangerous it must meet four qualifications; 1. it must be stable, 2. it must be so radically different that it is resistant to the vaccine, 3. it has to be transmissible, 4. it must cause acute/chronic infection. The WHO states: 

"Of these four characteristics, to date we have evidence that three have been fulfilled, although we do not know if ADAP-VEMs have the same propensity to cause disease as do strains of HBV that are already circulating. However, given the high rate of HBV drug resistance and the discovery of ADAP-VEMs in individuals who have received lamivudine therapy, we suggest at least two features of HBV treatment programmes may increase the likelihood that an ADAP-VEM of public health importance will emerge."

"It has been recognized that the administration of hepatitis B vaccine can increase the mutation rate of the virus. In high-prevalence countries such as China, Thailand as well as Province of Taiwan. China, monitoring for more than a decade has shown that hepatitis B immunization programmes have increased the incidence of HBV variants with mutations in the surface antigen protein9,10 even as they reduce the overall burden of chronic hepatitis B infection.11 ... Infection of immunized individuals with a vaccine escape mutant (VEM)20 is therefore possible. Some of these variants are associated with high levels of viraemia and have persisted in the host for more than 10 years, suggesting they are stable and transmissible variants. In addition, the antibody responses against the surface antigen protein elicited by the recombinant yeast-derived vaccine now in use are weaker and more specific than those achieved with the previous plasma-derived surface antigen vaccine.22–24 In Province of Taiwan, China, up to 28% of children with chronic hepatitis B infection also harbour hepatitis B surface antigen mutants. So VEMs capable of causing infection in fully immunized individuals are not uncommon in countries with high rates of endemic HBV infection and universal hepatitis B infant immunization programmes.12,20 However, to date the emergence of VEMs has not had a known negative impact on any country’s immunization programme.25"

The WHO contradicts themselves over and over. "However, to date the emergence of VEMs has not had a known negative impact on any country's immunization programme."? If this were true, why would it affect countries with a high infant vaccination program? The US vaccinates over 95% of its newborn babies with Hep. B before leaving the hospital, or at the first well-check appointment. So this practice IS negatively affecting things if VEMs are capable of infecting fully vaccinated individuals in our country. It means that it doesn't work. If it were true, how would they be able to measure how likely it is in certain areas, how many individuals are affected by VEMs? They wouldn't. Also, since they can't monitor VEMs well enough to know whether a VEM has caused acute/chronic infection (since many don't even know they have Hepatitis B until they are hospitalized), they don't know how prevalent VEMs are, since most will have minor illness and full recovery from Hepatitis B.

There are some other troubling issues surrounding treatment of Hepatitis B and how some of the antiviral agents used can cause a strain to mutate or become stronger and resistant to antivirals and vaccines.

"Lamivudine, although it is relatively inexpensive, has been shown to rapidly result in the selection of primary antiviral drug-resistant polymerase variants. These variants in turn also select for compensatory mutations, some of which may have altered surface antigens.33,34,39 ... All of these newer medications, however, are more expensive and their long-term efficacy is still being established. Consequently, for the foreseeable future many countries, especially in the Asia-Pacific region, will probably continue to treat chronic hepatitis B infection with lamivudine even though it is no longer considered the first-line treatment, and despite the fact that drug resistance may rapidly emerge.41"

Wait wait wait a minute. So these drugs have been contributing to this problem and yet they are still allowed to be used because they are CHEAP? The newer medications have no long-term efficacy studies done? That must also mean we don't know long-term adverse events and effects of these drugs as well. We have bigger issues at hand than a world vaccination program.

Some more troubling quotes:

"The second potentially problematic feature of current treatment programmes is the way patients are selected. ... Antiviral drugs are the only long-term treatment option for chronic hepatitis B infection,40 and many investigators have argued that all patients who are viraemic should be treated. ... In addition to being costly, this approach may generate antiviral drug resistance since current agents never lead to eradication of the virus, but only to control of replication. This effect, in turn, can complicate second-line therapies and may favour the appearance of ADAP-VEMs. ... However, there is no consensus globally regarding which patients to treat, and WHO has not yet produced international recommendations to guide therapy (Daniel Lavanchy, personal communication, 2008). Inappropriate inclusion criteria, improper application of these criteria or lack of compliance with treatment could greatly influence the emergence of both drug resistance and ADAP-VEMs."

So we don't know how to treat this effectively? Just "control" its replication inside the already-infected person's body? Sweet. Let me just inject myself with the vaccine putting this virus into my body when the WHO has already stated that it's not going to effectively lower my chances! What is with all of the "costly" stuff? Why is money an issue when lives are at stake and there is plenty of financial surplus? I'd love to hear this. You can only treat some people, because it's "for the greater good" and "survival of the fittest"? That's the only argument I ever hear, for the record. If the drugs and the vaccines in use are contributing to ADAP-VEMs and VEMs, shouldn't we be spending money on trying to find or create an antiviral agent that can treat this (not "control" it) or some way to help prevent it more reliably, instead of injecting people with a vaccine which will have long-term health effects and still not prevent transmission in a huge amount of people (therefore cannot be counted as a preventative measure)?

"The public health risk of treatment programmes in different populations may also depend upon features of the circulating viral genotype. There is evidence that the genotype of the virus influences the speed and frequency of development of resistance to treatment, which may in turn influence the likelihood that ADAP-VEMs will emerge."

Taken from WHO website. [1]

 So really, we have no control over this at all?

"Among children born to mothers who are HBeAg-positive, 90% will become infected whereas only 10% of children born to HBeAg-negative mothers will become infected."

So we are injecting all newborns with this why? Shouldn't we just be recommending the vaccine for infants most at risk? Oh yeah, let's revisit that CDC quote.

"Infants born to HBV-infected mothers require Hepatitis B vaccine and Hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) withing 12 hours of birth to protect them from infection. However, because errors or delays in documenting, testing, and reporting maternal HBsAg status can and do occur, administering the first dose of Hepatitis B vaccine soon after birth to all infants acts as a safety net, reducing the risk for perinatal infection when infection maternal HBsAg status is either unknown or incorrectly documented at delivery. Also, initiating the Hepatitis B vaccine series at birth has been shown to increase a child's likelihood of completing the vaccine series on schedule." [2]

Hmmm...so in case of a health-care providers muck-up? Because you don't trust mothers and even if their test is negative, they must be positive? Is there really that many errors and false negatives that EVERY American newborn needs this vaccine? If the answer is yes, we  have bigger problems. If the answer is no, why the hell are we still advocating and allowing this? Oh, to further the vaccine schedule. That makes complete sense, since the only reason for the child to complete every vaccine on the schedule is for profit. Every child does not NEED over 50 vaccines by adolescence.

"For example, the efficiency of transmission from an HBeAg-positive mother to her child during the perinatal period creates a very high risk for chronic hepatitis B infection. This risk makes it important to monitor for ADAP-VEMs among treated women of childbearing age, especially if lamivudine is used as monotherapy, since neither hepatitis B immunoglobulin nor active immunization would prevent infection with an ADAP-VEM transmitted from mother to child. In addition, the child may then spread the ADAP-VEM to other children, immunized or not. ... On the other hand, it has been estimated that the proportion of all HBV infections acquired among children more than 5 years of age ranges from 10% where prevalence of hepatitis B infection is high to as much as 90% where prevalence is low.47 These numbers suggest that monitoring for ADAP-VEMs may be needed in other populations in addition to HBV-infected HBeAg-positive women of childbearing age." Note: my emphasis.

So the vaccine and HBIG really don't do anything? If you don't know the rate of what is a common strain and what is a(n) (ADAP-) VEM, how do you know that the vaccine is going to work? What percentage of strains are VEMs? They certainly aren't figured into efficacy rates, no, because that would lower it. Humph. How interesting. So I should vaccinate myself and my child for what reason?

Hepatitis B Immune Globulin (HBIG)

"Anyone who is exposed to hep B-infected blood can be given an HBIG injection, which is made of hepatitis B antibodies filtered out through donated blood units from volunteers who have high antibody levels. This blood product is sterilized and filtered through various techniques. The injection contains the antibodies in a saline solution with polysorbate 80." [3]

Well, if this were so convenient, why do we vaccinate for it? Why isn't this ever mentioned to new mothers who are negative for Hep. B? Instead of putting their babies at risk with toxic ingredients as a (faulty) preventative measure, why not mention a reactive measure she can take if the child is ever exposed (highly unlikely)? We know that it is an acceptable method of prevention for those who are at risk (45-75%), but not everyone is at risk. [15] It is also important to note that this is a blood product - some have religious objections and some are not willing to risk trans-virus contamination (such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease) and/or being infected with Hep. B via the HBIG.

Here's where it gets real interesting. The first-line recommended practice for infants most at risk is to have the newborn receive both the Hep. B vaccine and the HBIG within 12-24 hours after birth. Although it is effective, it has not been tested for pediatric usage, and its possible overdose limits haven't been tested at all. So, we really have no idea what side-effects it can have, especially on infants who aren't at risk anyways. [16]

Okay, phew, now that that's out of the way. So what is polysorbate 80 and why is it in his immune globulin? It is supposedly an adjuvant, a surfactant, something that is supposed to help stabilize a compound. However, it is also considered the most likely candidate for a birth control/sterilization vaccination by several agencies worldwide and is already being used to sterilize horses and cattle. It is known to cause impaired and/or premature development of sexual organs and abnormalities. It is a 'hidden anaphylactoid' and has been linked to anaphylaxis, even resulting in death, in many cases. [17] I am doing a post on Polysorbate 80 very soon. The risks of the HBIG should also be weighed against the benefits closely.

How likely is it my child could catch that from somewhere, anyway?

Very unlikely. See Part One for how it is transmitted.

"Only about thirty infant, thirty children aged one to four, and seventy children five through fourteen are diagnosed every year... Virtually all of these cases are due to transmission from an undiagnosed hep B-positive mother during delivery." [3]

Also, if almost all of those cases are from mothers undiagnosed during delivery, isn't that the care provider's fault? Shouldn't we be strengthening up protocol instead of injecting every infant whimsically because you don't want to teach care providers any better and/or reprimand them?

Maintaining a healthy diet whilst pregnant can help reduce perinatal infection risk (as can avoiding cervical checks and internal interventions during labor and delivery). [13]

An infant's immune system is immature until around six years of age, and the blood-brain barrier isn't mature until adolescence. This leaves infants and young children vulnerable to immunotoxicity and autoimmune reactions.

Which would make vaccinating an infant for these diseases pretty useless for long term-protection. An infant is mostly incapable of developing TH1/TH2 cells (needed for immunity) until after six to nine months of age, and from then on slowly matures. So to inject a newborn to six/nine month old with up to 24 vaccines is pointless, since the premise of vaccination is to develop antibodies that will last long enough to protect the infant! Even afterwards, the infant still cannot produce enough immune reaction to make enough antibodies to be considered "immune."

"The infant immune system matures during the first year, and is more mature at age two, but the immune system does not reach full maturity until the child is around six years old." [7]

The "critical window of exposure" for chemicals to damage the fragile immune system is birth to one year. This includes benzopyrene which is a main component of cigarette smoke, and dioxin, a main ingredient in disposable diapers. Being vaccinated during pregnancy or vaccinating your infant exposes them to harmful chemicals as well, which can suppress the immune system rather than help it. I'm just giving an example here.

"Women can mount a stronger T-cell immune response and produce higher levels of antibodies, higher titres  These are estrogen-driven traits. However, there's a price to be paid for this difference in females. Women are considerably more prone to develop autoimmune disease. ...But at pharmacological levels this is immunotoxic. And at very low levels of exposure the same is true of dioxin. These latter two compounds produce a very prolonged postnatal immunosuppression. A recent concern, and a new concern of the NIH (which sent out a related RFA not long ago) is that exposure to these compounds may induce or exacerbate autoimmune disease in the human population." [14]

According to Mary Barbera, RN, MSN...

"The blood-brain barrier isn't intact until at least six weeks of life. This is why a newborn with a fever must be subjected to a spinal tap to rule out meningitis. Any virus or bacteria that a newborn is exposed to can go directly to the immune system.
This is why the Hepatitis B vaccine at birth is so dangerous. Between 1991 and 1999, when the shot contained thimerisol, giving it at birth would have resulted in mercury crossing into the brain since the blood-brain barrier was not yet intact.  As a nurse, I'm concerned that this information about the normal timing of a blood-brain barrier forming is not more readily known.
I think this normal delay in the forming of a blood-brain barrier is an important piece of the puzzle and one of the reasons for the surge of autism in the 90's."

The blood-brain barrier is semi-permeable, it however can be forced to "open" and "close." One way scientists do this is via the agent Polysorbate 80, (and other Polysorbates). Basically, certain things attach to polysorbate 80 which forces the BBB "open" to permissible and pass what is attached to P80 through. That means all of the toxins, foreign DNA, and viruses. It cannot get back through without being forced "open" again and even then there is little on the subject of actually ridding the body of it once it has crossed the BBB. It is considered incredibly improbable to impossible. This includes MSG and other chemicals in food too - so commercial infant formula, rice cereal, and other drugs commonly given to newborns unnecessarily. For example, Erythromycin is smeared onto newborn's eyes to "protect" from infections and "Vitamin" K is injected at the same time that the Hep. B vaccine is administered, making the newborn also at risk for passing the Erythromycin and synthetic "Vitamin" K through to the brain.

"Polysorbate 80 is a very effective surfactant used to trick and open the blood-brain barrier, and allow nano-drugs to be dragged through to the brain." -- Hilary Butler

It is not very well know exactly how these agents cause autoimmunity, but evidence is mounting that it does in fact cause autoimmunity. Some theories are that it attacks the brain, and when our antibodies are sent to protect the brain, it attacks the brain as well, unable to determine which is foreign and which is self due to the nature of P80 and the trace of foreign invaders on the brain. Another is that the foreign agents attach to the brain specifically, and antibodies are sent to "kill" them, however since it's now technically part of the brain that is an ongoing battle (forever). [18]

In addition, there are other ways to help prevent this illness (well, illness in general). Yippee! Ways to be healthy!

Avoid hand sanitizers and anti-microbial/anti-bacterial products. But, why, my dears? Yes indeed they are perpetuated to make thinks much "cleaner" and get rid of "germs." However, they are also helping superbugs form because they only kill 99.9% of "germs." So that 0.1% that does seem so insignificant, will now become antibiotic resistant meaning there will be NO WAY to treat it. Now THAT'S a deadly disease after several hundred lifecycles. Not just for that reason though; we don't know much about the microbiome (all of the microbes on each of our bodies is its own microbiome) that mostly helps protect us. Brand new research (just this month!) has come out on the microbiome basically explaining how little we know, but what we do know is that it plays a MAJOR role in preventing disease.

"But when the normal composition of the microbiome is thrown off balance, researchers say, the human host can get into serious trouble—especially because the 5 million to 8 million different microbial genes in our bodies vastly outnumber the 20,000 or so human genes. Indeed, recent research has implicated microbiome imbalances in disorders as diverse as cancer, obesity, inflammatory bowel disease, psoriasis, asthma, and possibly even autism (Science, 26 November 2010, p. 1168; 1 April 2011, p. 32)." [5]

So altering your microbiome can be harmful; which is what hand sanitzers, anti-microbial and antibacterial products do.

In infants, method of delivery/birth (vaginal vs. cesarean), breastfeeding vs. formula-feeding, and weaning age determine variance outcomes of the microbiome. So it is important to have a vaginal birth (if possible; including VBACs), and to breastfeed as long as inherently possible. It's not just that breastfeeding increases the health of microbiome, but that it actually gives passive immunity to the infant for many diseases and is also more nutritionally sound (nutrition is an important part of health).

"The microbiota of the infant is seeded at birth and is initially undifferentiated across the various body habitats. A variety of factors—including method of delivery (vaginal versus Cesarean section), breast feeding, and weaning—influence the infant microbiota (Fig. 1). For example, the microbiota of babies delivered vaginally are dominated by Lactobacillus, Prevotella, and Atopobium, whereas babies delivered by Cesarean section have a microbiota that more closely resembles that of the maternal skin community, with staphylococci being a dominant early member (4)." [6]

"Human milk has been found to contain 90 different oligosaccharides forming over 900 different chemical structures, each of which can block infection by preventing a particular strain of bacteria from sticking to the gut wall. ... Unlike antibodies, they are able to protect a baby from bacteria or viruses that a mother has never been exposed to. What is more, oligosaccharides are just one in a class of human milk components -- there are others called glycoproteins and glycolipids -- that work by blocking the attachment of microbes to the cells of the gut, so preventing infection." "For example, it was found that the thymus -- a central organ of the immune system -- is twice as big in breastfed infants compared with formula-fed infants at four months. The size difference was also seen at ten months." "Since breastfeeding is the biological norm, and since organs of the immune system like the thymus can only develop to their full potential through breastfeeding, an inevitable conclusion must be that people who were never breastfed (or those who were weaned too early) will have deficient immune systems -- not just in infancy but for the rest of their lives." [7]

"Childhood malnutrition is a global health problem that cannot be attributed to food insecurity alone. The gut microbiota may contribute to this devastating health disorder. ... This effort will require elucidation of the interrelationships between breast milk composition and the development of the microbiota and immune system in the context of the maternal-infant dyad." [8]

In children and adults, nutrition is so incredibly important. You don't want things to enter your body that can disrupt your symbiotic microbiome. Yet, we consume these things every day...genetically modified food, pesticide-laden fruits, veggies, and other products, meat treated in ammonia coming from sick and unhealthy cows, cow's milk laden with antibiotics, growth hormones, disease, and pus, overly processed food containing multitudes of chemicals (many banned in most other countries), and other things. Maintaining a truly healthy diet diverse in organic and natural foods will greatly boost the immune system and help prevent disease. [9] Also, supplementing your diet with probiotic-rich foods such as yogurt or over-the-counter probiotics has been said to improve gut functionality (micriobiome) and help the immune system.

Vitamin A deficiency and excessive intake are shown to hinder immune system functions, and it is well-established that it is an essential vitamin to overcoming illness and developing immunity. Long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) are also essential nutrition that should be consumed in healthy amounts as they function to help innate and acquired immunity. These include n-3 PUFA (α-linolenic) and n-6 PUFA (linoleic acid). You may have seen "DHA" and/or "ARA" or "EPA" marketed in supplements, baby formula, etc. and they are synthesized from a type of fermented algae and soil fungus, of which neither are native to the human diet and processed with a neurotoxic petrochemical called hexane (hexane is a byproduct of gasoline refinement and is highly processed. Even organic formulas have been guilty of adding this "substitute" into their formulas, which has repeatedly been shown in meta-analyses to have no effect on infant brain and eye development. Almost four years ago, it was finally announced that a plan to remove this additive from infant formulas and foods was going to be developed (still no updates on that) and both the National Organic Program and FDA have admitted that this is something that violates the USDA organic standards and is not allowed to be in an organically-labelled product as it is considered genetically modified. In addition, recent studies mothers in the Amazon have a healthier n-3:n-6 ratio than mothers in the United States due to diet (which consists of no processed foods, freshwater fish, locally grown staples, and game.) As it is critical in brain development and other aspects of health, it is essential to try and maintain healthy levels from natural sources. Vitamins B6, B12, C, D, and E, as well as Iron, Zinc, and a host of other nutrients, are entirely crucial to the immune system. [10][11]

"Vitamin A is essential for cells of the immune system. The considerable immune benefits (to cells of the innate and acquired immune system), which would contribute to reduce the risk of various pathogen-mediated diseases, warrants a recommendation to supplement individuals with minimal or poor vitamin A status." [10]

"Feeding EPA and DHA has been shown to modulate specific functions of innate and acquired immunity." [10]

"Clearly the essentiality of vitamin C to cells of the immune system has been established. Although not all clinical data agree with an effect of vitamin C on viral infections, there is convincing evidence from feeding studies in humans and animals and experiments done on primary cultures that vitamin C has a positive effect on host defense." [10] Note: Vitamin C can be taken in very high doses without any negative effects.

"Vitamin E and Se are essential to immune function and are supplemented routinely in the diets of domestic animals for their immune benefits [94]. These nutrients have long been known to have anticarcinogenic effects by means of their antioxidant properties." [10] Note: Vitamin E And Selenium (Se) word synergystically (work together but separately), so it is a good idea that if you supplement with Vitamin E to find a supplement with Selenium, too.

Keeping a healthy weight and body-mass index (BMI) also helps immune response. In obese health care workers, their antibody response to Hep. B vaccination was significantly lower than those with lower BMIs. Why obese people have lowered immune response is not well studied, but studies are clear that there is a significant number more hospitalizations for viral and bacterial infections in obese individuals. [12]

Resources

[1] Clements, John, et al. (2009, October 23). Global control of hepatitis B virus: does treatment-induced antigenic change affect immunization? World Health Organization Int. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2010;88:66-73. doi: 10.2471/BLT.08.065722. http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/88/1/08-065722/en/index.html

[2] CDC. (2012, January 1). Hepatitis B Information for Health Professionals. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/HBV/HBVfaq.htm#overview

[3] Sears, MD, FAAP, R. W. (2007). The Vaccine Book. New York, New York: Little, Brown & Company.

[4] Cave, MD, FAAFP, Stephanie. (2001, September). What Your Doctor May NOT Tell You About Your Children's Vaccinations. New York, New York: Warner Books, Inc.

[5] Balter, Michael. (2012, June 6). Taking Stock of the Microbiome and Disease. Science. doi: 10.1126/science.336.6086.1246. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6086/1246.full

[6] Nicholson, J. K., et al. (2012, June 6). Host-Gut Microbiota Metabolic Reactions. Science. doi: 10.1126/science.1223813. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6086/1262.full

[7] Ochert, Ayala. (2009). The Science of Mother's Milk. New Beginnings; Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 28-29. http://www.llli.org/nb/nbiss3-09p28.html

[8] Gordon, J. I., et al. (2012, June 6). Malnutrion; The Human Gut Microbiota and Undernutrition. Sci. Transl. Med. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3004347 http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/4/137/137ps12.abstract

[9] Hooper, L. V. (2012, June 6). Interactions Between the Microbiota and the Immune System. Science. doi: 10.1126/science.1223490 http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6086/1268.full

[10] Field, C. J., et al. (2002, January). Nutrients and their role in host resistance to infection. Journal of Luekocyte Biology Vol. 71, No. 1, pp. 16-32. http://www.jleukbio.org/content/71/1/16.full

[11] Keusch, G. T. (2003, January 1). The History of Nutrition: Malnutrition, Infection, and Immunity. Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 133, No. 1, 336S-340S. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/133/1/336S.full

[12] Karlsson, E. A., et al. (2010, December). The burden of obesity on infectious disease. Experimental Biology and Medicine, Vol. 235, No. 12,  pp. 1412-1424. doi: 10.1258/ebm.2010.010227 http://ebm.rsmjournals.com/content/235/12/1412.full

[13] Goldenberg, R. L. (2003, May 1). The Plausibility of Micronutrient Deficiency in Relationship to Perinatal Infection. Journal of Nutrition, Vol. 133, No. 5, 1645SS-1648SS. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/133/5/1645S.full

[14] Development and Maturation of the Immune System: Vulnerability to Toxins. http://oehha.ca.gov/public_info/public/kids/pdf/Holladayed.pdf

[15] Palmer Beasley, R., et al. (1981, August). Hepatitis B Immune Globulin (HBIG) Efficacy in the Interruption of Perinatal Transmission of Hepatitis B Carrier State. The Lancet, Vol. 318, Issue 8243, pp 388-393. http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(81)90832-1/abstract

[16] Talecris HyperHepB S/D Manufacturer's Insert. http://www.talecris-pi.info/inserts/hyperhepb.pdf

[17] Karpasea-Jones, Joanna. Polysorbate 80 Causes Infertility. http://suite101.com/article/polysorbate-80-causes-infertility-a60320

[18] Singh, Vijendra K. Evidence suggests a pathogenic role of brain autoimmunity in central nervous system diseases. http://www.aarda.org/infocus_article.php?ID=55

The Awe of Breastfeeding, Lactivism by Chance

I know that it has been months since my last post. I am working hard on it, it is really long and comprehensive...it's really informative. So please be patient! :)

I just wanted to share an experience I had on the bus today. I was really upset at first about it - I had planned a really last minute get-together with my friend and she cancelled when I was in the middle of my trip (taking public transport AKA "the T" as it is called here). I was really frustrated but after sleeping on it; in hindsight my trip had a purpose. It seems kind of extravagant for the purpose it entailed - but I really think that a conversation I had with the woman on the bus really need to take place for her sake; and it was just before my friend cancelled on me. I am glad I was there to inform her. I really wanted to ask her name and I wish I did; but I didn't get the chance. We'll call her Ana. So here is kind of how it went:

Ana: "Oh, please sit here, you shouldn't have to stand!"

I sat next to her, pulling my daughter's carriage close. "Thanks!"

Ana: Your daughter is soooo cute! How old?

Me: Almost a year! She is so big, I can't believe it!

Ana: Yes, it goes fast! I have one, he is almost five! You look so youuung!

Me: Really?? That's great. So you know how it is. I am a bit young!

Ana: I had mine when I was in high school, his father and I separated last year. I am glad that I had help and was able to go to college after though. Is her father still in her life?

Me: That's okay, sometimes it doesn't work out. Yes, we're still together! Are you going to "the local" [I am excluding the actual name] college?

Ana: Yes! I got a degree from somewhere else first, and graduated from it early. I'm trying to go on more.

Me: That's fantastic! I bet you love it! -- My daughter interrupts at this time and starts babbling to Ana, who talks a little back.

Ana: She is so big and healthy! My son was always so small and always slept! Does she wake for bottles in the night?

Me: No, never. She's a great sleeper!

Ana: That's great, my son was always a good sleeper too, I was lucky! Formula is just so expensive, that I would have had to buy a lot more if he woke at night!

Me: We actually breastfeed so we don't have to buy any, which is great because the money for it is awfully pricey.

Ana: Really? You are still going?? I could only breastfeed my son for one month. It hurt me so bad for him to suck! And I was always dripping dripping, I couldn't even pump. - Ana looked really bummed, so I thought I'd see how open she was to a few pointers.

Me: Oh, I'm sorry! Did you see any lactation consultants about figuring out the problem?

Ana: No, what is that? -- I was a bit bewildered she wasn't offered one at the hospital.

Me: They are trained in breastfeeding and can help figure out problems like latch for sucking, and tongue and lip ties.

Ana: Really? So breastfeeding doesn't have to hurt? What is a lip tie?

Me: No, I never had any pain! Lip ties are when the little piece of skin doesn't let him use his lip right for latching. Usually the pediatrician or dentist will just snip it. -- I showed her my daughter's lip tie, which is not clipped.

Ana: Oh, my son has that! He clicked a lot too. Does that mean that any other babies I have will have a tie?

Me: No, but it's very possible. If you think that this is a problem with your next baby, you can have it clipped and it will help.

Ana seemed so hopeful and excited that maybe next time she could breastfeed! She offered up some more.

Ana: I have a new boyfriend and we have been talking about more kids. But, what do I do when I have to work? I can't breastfeed there.

I laughed a little. Me: Of course not, but your work has to give you time to pump, and you can store that milk for the next day for daycare.

Ana: And what about dripping all the time? Don't you still drip?

Me: No, I dripped a lot in the beginning. After 2 months I only dripped sometimes, and after six months I never dripped anymore.

Ana: Really? That is great! It is so healthy instead of formula, I wanted to do it more with my son. They say it helps with infection and them not to be sick. Does she bite? I am afraid the teeth will hurt.

Me: A little, when they get used to having new teeth. It hurts, but you just teach them No! and put them off and wait five minutes, and try again. After a few days she never bit me again on purpose. Yes, my daughter has never been sick. It is really good for the immune system.

Ana: Wow, I am so happy that maybe I can breastfeed! Thank you. And you are so young and knowledgeable. Wow. -- Ana proceeded to talk to my daughter who was getting a little fussy from not having attention. haha!

We sat in silence for a minute or two and then my stop came. I apologized for having to get off, and that she should have a nice day. I told her if she ever needs help, to ask for it! There is a lot she can do give herself the best chance! I am sure we chatted a little more about other things, but this is mostly what I remember.







In hindsight this was very humbling for me. It is a stark reminder of how uninformed women are, and how little help they really are offered. How are women supposed to achieve their goals if no one gives them the pointers they need to find the path that leads them there? I am so thankful that I was able to help "Ana" and I am thankful that she will get a chance to do something she really seemed to care about. I love helping women and I'm glad to be blessed with knowledge to do so. It does sadden me how little help "Ana" was offered, but I am glad to make a difference. Perhaps she will pass this knowledge to her friends, and they will pass it to theirs. And perhaps their children will then be encouraged to make that decision for their children. You never realize how important and far-reaching a five minute conversation can be until after it happens. I am very privileged and lucky to have had this information to give her.

Thank you "Ana" and I hope you got the information you were seeking, even if it was five years late.

What is Hepatitis B? Why vaccinate for it? [Part One]

Hepatitis means 'liver inflammation' itself, and there are five prominent strains. One of these is called 'B' virus, therefore, Hepatitis B.

For those who don't know or have forgotten, the functions of the liver are as followed.

• Helps remove harmful chemicals from your body by filtering the blood
• Helps fight infections
• Helps digest food
• Stores vitamins, nutrients, and energy 



Copyright WebMD, LLC 2009

• Metabolizes drugs

Hepatitis B is caused by a virus. Anyone can catch Hepatitis B however their is a 'high risk' group of people who are at higher risk to catch it. 

Am I 'high risk'? Those at 'high' risk are:

• Infants born to mothers with Hepatitis B
• Sexual partners to those with Hep. B
• Sexually active homosexual men are the most likely to catch it of all sexually active groups
• Injection drug users
• Household contact with a person with chronic Hep. B [my own emphasis]
• Healthcare workers who deal with blood or bodily fluids
• Hemodialysis, end-stage renal disease patients
• Travelers in countries with medium-high Hep. B rates
• Staff in care facilities for the developmentally delayed

You cannot contract Hepatitis B from shaking hands or coming into 'normal' contact with another infected person. It is not airborne. Hepatitis B can live for 7 days outside of the body. The incubation period for Hepatitis B ranges from 60-150 days. [1][2]

What are the symptoms?

Tell-tale symptoms include jaundice, dark yellow urine, light-colored stool, diarrhea, upset stomach, loss of appetite, fatigue, weakness, fever, problems halting bleeding or long time for wounds to cease bleeding, easy bruising, swollen ankles/stomach, angiomas, weight loss, and nausea. [2]

How is it diagnosed?

Hep. B is diagnosed by either a blood test or a liver biopsy, sometimes both. If your doctor tells you that you are positive for Hepatitis B surface antibodies (anti-HBs), this is a good thing, it means you have already recovered or are immune to Hepatitis B. [1][2]

Is it treatable? Is it curable?

It is treatable, but not curable if it becomes chronic. There are three stages. Acute infection, which is asymptomatic or very mild nearly all of the time with full recovery expected of most adults. Acute infection has a death rate of about 0.5%.  Infants and small children are more likely to develop chronic infection from acute infection, with the chances being 90% of infants and 25-50% of children.

With Chronic illness there are medications to help support the condition and those with chronic infection should be screened regularly to make sure liver damage is not occurring and carcinomas are not developing. Then there is perinatal infection which occurs during the birth process transferred from the mother.

Why vaccinate my newborn or infant for Hep. B?

"Infants born to HBV-infected mothers require Hepatitis B vaccine and Hepatitis B immune globulin (HBIG) withing 12 hours of birth to protect them from infection. However, because errors or delays in documenting, testing, and reporting maternal HBsAg status can and do occur, administering the first dose of Hepatitis B vaccine soon after birth to all infants acts as a safety net, reducing the risk for perinatal infection when infection maternal HBsAg status is either unknown or incorrectly documented at delivery. Also, initiating the Hepatitis B vaccine series at birth has been shown to increase a child's likelihood of completeing the vaccine series on schedule." [1]

In layman's terms, they believe that even if a mother tests negative, they may still be positive and it is just an error in testing. Considering pregnant women are tested long prior to delivery, this is highly unlikely. While I'm sure this does happen, it should not happen so often they must administer the vaccine as a safety measure in case they make a mistake.., or else we have a larger issue on our hands. It is also wise to note no such conclusion can be made about the vaccine schedule being completed on time if the Hep. B vaccine is given at birth. They are manipulating this statement. It is possible that it is true that those given Hep. B at birth are more likely to complete the vaccination schedule simply because they have no health contraindications, philosophical, or religious objections. Those who have such objections and contraindications are less likely to vaccinate at birth or to stop immediately thereafter.


An infant is recommended to be vaccinated three times before they are a year and a half. They will receive a shot at birth, one at their 2 month well visit, and another between 6-18 months old. [4]

So, if you, a partner, or a close family member or caretaker have Hepatitis B, you should have your child vaccinated. If not, there is no point as there is an IgG antibody injection that you can get should your child ever become exposed.

I'm pregnant or nursing. Is it safe for me to be vaccinated for Hep. B?

"Yes. Hepatitis B vaccine contains no live virus, so neither pregnancy nor lactation should be considered a contraindication to vaccination of women. On the basis of limited experience, there is no apparent risk of adverse effects to developing fetuses when Hepatitis B vaccine is administered to pregnant women. Meanwhile, new HBV infection in a pregnant woman might result in severe disease for the mother and chronic infection for the newborn." [1]

The CDC has really no idea whether or not it is actually safe, but they are making an assumption based on mostly epidemiological and animal studies. It is not known whether it would affect nursing but it is probable the infant will be slightly affected as other pharmaceutical drugs are deposited in small amounts into the milk via the mother's blood.

There is a system set up, called VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) which is not analyzed or monitored by the CDC. The number of adverse events are only 1% of the projected 10% of adverse events due to care providers not knowing when an adverse event is occurring. The number of associated adverse events related to the Hepatitis B vaccine number over 50,275, including 979 deaths as of October 2011. There have also been spontaneous abortions (miscarriages), and birth defects listed in VAERS as adverse events to Hepatitis B vaccinations. [3]

Also noted, however, is that on the manufacturer package inserts of the vaccines manufactured by the two vaccine-makers who make Hep. B vaccines, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline, list inadequate or a lack of safety trials done on expecting or nursing women.

"Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with the vaccine. It is also not known whether the vaccine can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. The vaccine should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed. -- "It is not known whether the vaccine is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when the vaccine is administered to a nursing woman." Recombivax, Merck [5]

----

"Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with COMVAX. It is also  not known whether COMVAX can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. COMVAX is not recommended for use in women of childbearing age." Comvax, Merck [6]

 ----

"Safety and effectiveness of ENGERIX-B have not been established in pregnant women and nursing mothers. ENGERIX-B should only be given to a pregnant woman if clearly needed." Engerix-B, GlaxoSmithKline [7]

 ----

"No clinical data on use during pregnancies are available with Fendrix. 

Animal studies do not indicate direct or indirect harmful effects wit respect to pregnancy, embryonal/foetal development, parturition, or postnatal development. 

Vaccination during pregnancy should only be performed if the risk-benefit ration at individual level outweighs possible risks for the foetus." -- "Adequate human data on use during lactation are not available. In a reproductive toxicity study in animals which included post-natal follow-up until weaning (see section 5.3), no effect on the development of the pups were observed. Vaccination should only be performed if the risk-benefit ration at individual level outweighs possible risks for the infant." Fendrix, GlaxoSmithKline [8]

 ----

 "Pregnancy Category C -- Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with PEDIARIX. It is not known whether PEDIARIX can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or if PEDIARIX can affect reproduction capacity." Pediarix, GlaxoSmithKline [8] 

---- 

"The effect of Twinrix Adult on embryo-fetal, peri-natal and post-natal survival development has been assessed in rats. This study did not indicate direct or indirect harmful effects with respect to fertility, embryonal/fetal development, parturition or post-natal development."

The effect of Twinrix Adult on embryo-fetal, peri-natal and post-natal survival and development has not been prospectively evaluated in clinical trials. 

Data on outcomes of a limited number of pregnancies in vaccinated women do not indicate any adverse effects of Twinrix Adult on pregnancy or on the health of the fetus/newborn child. While it is not expected that the recombinant hepatitis B virus surface antigen would have adverse effects on pregnancies or the fetus it is recommended that vaccination should be delayed until after delivery unless there is an urgent need to protect the mother againts hepatitis B infection." -- "It is unknown whether Twinrix Adult is excreted in human breastmilk. The excretion of Twinrix Adult in milk has not been studied in animals. A decision on whether to continue/discontinue breastfeeding or continue/discontinue therapy with Twinrix Adult should be made taking into consideration the benefit of breastfeeding to the child and the benefit of Twinrix Adult therapy to the woman." Twinrix, GlaxoSmithKline [9]

 ----

"The effects of Ambirix on foetal development has not been assessed. Ambirix should not be used during pregnancy unless clearly necessary." -- "The effect on breastfed infants on Ambirix administered to the mothers has not been evaluated in clinical studies. Ambirix should not be used during lactation unless clearly necessary." Ambirix, GlaxoSmithKline [10]

What are the ingredients? Is it true fetal cells and aluminum are used?

It is true that most vaccines are cultured using human diploid cells and also true that nearly all vaccines contain aluminum. Many of the ingredients are common in each of the following vaccines and other vaccines. Ingredients used in the culture medium but is removed or is left in trace amounts are marked with an asterisk (*). [11-16]

Recombivax: Yeast protein, soy peptone, dextrose, amino acids, mineral salts, potassium aluminum sulfate, amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, formaldehyde, thimerosal, gelatin.

Comvax: Yeast protein, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide, hemin chloride, soy peptone, dextrose, mineral salts, amino acids, formaldehyde, potassium aluminum sulfate, amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, sodium borate.

Engerix-B: Aluminum hydroxide, yeast protein, phosphate buffers.

Fendrix: 3-O-desacyl-4'-monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL), yeast protein, sodium chloride, aluminum phosphate, water.

Pediarix: Aluminum hydroxide, formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, neomycin, 2-phenoxyethanol, polymyxin B, polysorbate 80, yeast protein, Bovine protein*, Lathan medium (bovine casein)*, Linggoud-Fenton medium (bovine extract)*, monkey kidney tissue vero (Vervet or African Green monkies)*, Stainer-Scholte medium*.

Twinrix: Formalin, yeast protein, aluminum phosphate, aluminum hydroxide, amino acids, phosphate buffer, polysorbate 20, neomycin sulfate, MRC-5 human diploid cells, 2-phenoxyethanol.

Ambirix: Aluminum phosphate, hydrated aluminum hydroxide, sodium chloride, MRC-5 human diploid cells, yeast protein, water.

My child or I have an allergy to one of the ingredients. What should I do?

If you or your child has an allergy to one of the ingredients in any vaccine you should alert your care provider and refuse any vaccines with the ingredient. If your allergy is not serious and you would like to vaccinate, talk to your care provider about your options. Unfortunately, there are not many for those who are allergic.

My child's school/my work requires me to be vaccinated for Hepatitis B. I have a health/religious/philosophical contraindication or objection. What should I do?

Check your local or state laws of exemption. All states have medical exemptions, 48 states have religious exemptions, and 18 states have philosophical exemptions.

Information on your state's exemptions can be found here.

My child goes to private school/I work in a privately-funded workplace. Can I still use an exemption?

Yes and no. If the private school or workplace receives any government funding at all, then they must accept an exemption. Unfortunately, if they are exclusively privately funded, they can accept or reject an exemption on their own basis.

Resources

[1] http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/HBV/HBVfaq.htm#overview

[2] http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/hepb_ez/
[3] http://vaers.hhs.gov/data/data
[4] http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/downloads/child/0-6yrs-schedule-pr.pdf
[5] http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/recombivax_hb/recombivax_pi.pdf
[6] http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/c/comvax/comvax_pi.pdf
[7] http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_engerixb.pdf
[8] http://www.medicines.org.uk/EMC/medicine/16906/SPC/Fendrix/
[8] http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_pediarix.pdf
[9] http://www.medicines.org.uk/EMC/medicine/2061/SPC/Twinrix+Adult+Vaccine/
[10] http://www.medicines.org.uk/EMC/medicine/20491/SPC/Ambirix+suspension+for+injection/
[11]http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf
[12] http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-1.pdf
[13] http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/000550/WC500021704.pdf
[14] http://www.medicines.org.uk/guides/fendrix/hepatitis%20(all%20types)
[15] http://www.medicines.org.uk/guides/ambirix/Vaccinations%20(all)/
[16] http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/000426/WC500024579.pdf

Whaaat? You don't Vaccinate? Part 1

Nope. Never. Not once. This has to be one of the most 'controversial' parenting decisions that people say I have made.

You're a terrible parent! You're putting your child at risk! Child protective services should take your kid!

No, not really. I have continually done close to, or over, 200 hours of research in peer-reviewed medical articles, web resources (including the CDC, WHO, NCBI), and continually read debates on the subject in attempt to gain perspective or see if I can't come across any information I have yet to look into. As far as CPS taking my child...if parents called CPS for every little thing they didn't like about another parenting style, no child would be left in their parents' care. I have determined the risks outweigh the benefits for us. You may have come to another conclusion. And that's okay. 

You're just another anti-vaccinator. You're ignorant and you just want to bash my parenting skills for vaccinating.

On the contrary. I am not inherently "anti"-vaccination. Also, sharing opinions on something ≠ judging/bashing opposing opinions. If you are insecure in that you feel that way, you should re-evaluate why you made that decision and firm your confidence in that decision, or change it.

But....you're taking away from herd immunity!!!

This is one thing we don't know for absolute certainty. 'Herd immunity' is a phrase that sprung up in 1933 in reference to the natural life-long immunity cattle received after getting an illness naturally in the American Journal of Epidemiology. It is just theories when it comes to humans at this point. Researchers and doctors can't even agree on what percentage of the population needs to be immune for artificial 'herd immunity' to be effective if it exists. Some say 80%, some 85%, others 95%. We just don't know. Any studies that use 'herd immunity' as a given fact are basing their study on assumptions, which negates their study by definition.

There have been studies since the dawn of time on herd immunity. You're lying! The government wouldn't tell us this if it wasn't true.

Again, incorrect. There has been a total of one study done on artificial herd immunity in humans. [1]

It is not a true placebo-controlled study. They use the Hepatitis A vaccine as their placebo to the flu vaccine, which negates the placebo. A true placebo would have no relation or ingredients that the drug/vaccine/etc being tested may share. Since the Flu vaccine and HepA vaccine share similar ingredients, then any reactions or responses caused by those shared ingredients cannot be identified. How would they know what is 'normal' then? They don't.

It itself only claims to be "experimental proof" and not definitive; it states "Selectively vaccinating youngsters against influenza may interrupt virus transmission and protect those not immunized." May. As in, 'we're not sure.'

 It only follows the children for six months following vaccination, and therefore many adverse reactions and side effects will not have been included in the experiment. It also does not measure the immunity 1 year, 3 years, or any amount of time into the future to see how it affects flu transmission and the child's overall health over time. Natural herd immunity is supposed to be life-long with no side-effects, and artificial herd immunity must be kept up on (a great deal of the population must receive regular boosters) and at a price. Do you know many adults who run out to get booster shots every 3-7 years? A very small portion of adults get boosters, and therefore, we wouldn't have artificial herd immunity to begin with.

[1] M Loeb et al. Effect of influenza vaccination of children on infection rates in Hutterite communities. JAMA 303:943-50 DOI: 10.1001/jama.303.10.943 (2010)

The government doesn't lie to us? If you are that naïve to think the government doesn't lie or promote its own agenda, you are well-deserved to get duped.

But....smallpox! Polio! I suppose vaccines didn't get rid of those diseases. You're out of your mind.

As far as smallpox. Smallpox was well on its way to eradication well before the vaccine was ever introduced. Only a small portion of the population ever got vaccinated for smallpox, and many of the trials had catastrophic side effects, such as leprosy. Even before vaccination, smallpox had less than a 1% mortality rate worldwide although secondary problems from smallpox arising from pre-existing conditions have a maximum estimated mortality rate of 30%. So, that's right...if you're healthy, even smallpox has a very very small chance of killing you. And if artificial herd-immunity isn't protecting you (since we no longer vaccinate for smallpox, not that the population would have any immunity), what is?

Even the modern vaccine has a serious adverse reaction statistic from 1/100 to 1/1000 people including spreading smallpox to other individuals. 1-2 people in 1 million will die as a result of smallpox vaccination. [2] And that's the modern vaccine, which isn't regularly in use.

[2] http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/smallpox/vaccination/facts.asp

With polio there are some important facts you need to know.

1. There were successful insecticide programs with DDT, BHC, lead, and arsenic which surpassed FDA approvals in the 1940's by a hell of a whole lot and persist in our environment in the form of neurotoxins. The symptoms of illness associated with this match that of polio almost exactly. Including temporary paralysis. [3]

[3] 'Images of Poliomyelitis; A Critique of Scientific Literature. Pesticides and Polio'  http://www.harpub.co.cc/overview.htm

2. The clinical definition (which they used to diagnose Polio) changed the year that the vaccine was introduced. The criteria was reduced and therefore reflected less cases of polio. So the CDC graphs are skewed to look in favor of the vaccine. 

3. Even using the newer clinical definition, 95% of people who contract the illness never even knew they had it. 4% had cold-like symptoms and 1% got very ill and SOME were paralysed. Less than .1% of people died from polio. Sound scary? I didn't think so. Considering they say 95% of people never even knew they had it, how were they diagnosing these people? How do they know how many people ACTUALLY got polio and lived? If they don't know how many actually contracted polio, how could they draw up a mortality rate? Their current rate is just guesstimation.

But but but but.........you're just a lousy conspiracy theorist!!!

No. Everything I've stated is fact or is based in fact.

You're just afraid of Autism!

You're right. I am afraid. I am afraid for our generation's children. I am saddened that many with severe Autism will never experience life, that some will never be able to communicate and run on the playground as children...never hold a fulfilling job, never find a spouse, never have children and grandchildren. Anyone who has a severely Autistic (or moderately, or mildly) child will tell you...it is HARD. It is worth it and they don't love their child less, but if they could undo their child's Autism, I'm sure all of them would say yes. Not because it is tough on them...but because their child deserves better.

And for those Autistic who can live a nearly-normal life, what is their quality of life health-wise?  For those who can't live on their own or function without help, what will the cost of their care be? How will it impact taxpayers? How will we fill those jobs up?

I am afraid of the future. The number of children with Autism is 1 in 86. Who wouldn't be afraid? Who wouldn't be afraid how Autism will impact their non-Autistic child? Who wouldn't be afraid they are going to have an Autistic child who has a myriad of health and/or mental issues which they now have to try and afford care to and help with? Who wouldn't be afraid their child will never speak 'Mommy!' or be able to tell you where it hurts when they are in pain? Who wouldn't be afraid their Autistic child will become too old, heavy, big for them to be able to care for? Who wants to put their child in hospice care? It doesn't mean I think vaccines cause Autism, and it's not even a great concern. But Autism isn't a joke, and the concern about it isn't something to throw around as an argument for why someone is a bad parent.

My question is.... Who wouldn't be afraid? If you're not, you should be.

I'm A Mommy

First and foremost, I'm a mommy. I change diapers. I feed, burp, and soothe. I laugh, play, rejoice, and cry. That's what's the most important.

While those are most important, they are not the only things that are important. There are a lot of other things I consider important and I will be discussing them. A lot of what I do is considered "controversial" because it does not concede to what is popular or accepted. I don't have to do what everyone else is doing or do it because they don't know any different. I make choices that others don't agree with. I am okay with that. I respect others' choices even if I don't agree and I expect the same courtesy here.

Why is this a big deal to me?

Well, along with changing, feeding, burping, playing, and soothing...I feel it's important to respect my daughter. I expect respect from others and if it is received, it is returned. If it is not received, there is a chance it may not be given. I feel respect is extremely important to teach and I will strive for that on this blog. So don't come to troll, you won't get a rise out of me, and likely your comments will be deleted. An advanced warning.

Now that that's over with.

My name is Ashley but I prefer to go by Rose, although those that know me refuse that preference. So I will take either interchangeably. I have an almost-9 month old daughter, Mairead. That rhymes with parade, FYI. I have a loving partner who is the love of my life, Jeff.

So, you're probably wondering what type of mom I am. At least, if you're another mom...you're wondering. I'm one of the nuts. The crunchies. The granola hippies. 'Attached' parent. Whatever you'd like to call it, I prefer to be called a 'mommy.'

Do we co-sleep? Yes.
Do we breastfeed? Yes.
Do we CIO? No.
Do we vaccinate? No.
Do we homebirth, homeschool, or homeopath? Not yet. But we will.
Do we do other controversial things? Of course. But that's not to say others who do not do what we do are wrong. They're just other parents, doing their thing.

This is going to be an open forum of my thoughts and topics I want to talk about; and I welcome suggestions for topics, advice, as well as opinions, comments, and people of all kinds.