Vaccine Information For Pregnant Women
Joanna 6 months pregnant with Yanny
No Pregnant Woman Died From Respiratory Illness and Women Vaccinated Against Flu Had The Same Risk For Flu As Unvaccinated Women
The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends influenza vaccination for women who will be in the second or third trimester of pregnancy during the influenza season. We analyzed hospital admissions with principal diagnoses of influenza or pneumonia and influenza-like illness (ILI) outpatient visits to study the effectiveness of influenza vaccine during pregnancy in protecting women and infants from influenza-related morbidity. Estimates of influenza vaccine effectiveness across five flu seasons (Fall 1997 to Spring 2002) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models for women and infant study populations in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Outpatient utilization outcomes included physician visits with a diagnosis of upper respiratory infection, pharyngitis, otitis media, asthma, bronchial asthma, viral infection, pneumonia, fever, cough, or wheezing associated with respiratory illness. Inpatient outcomes included hospitalizations with principal diagnoses of influenza or pneumonia. Women who received influenza vaccine during pregnancy had the same risk for ILI visits compared with unvaccinated women, adjusting for women's age and week of delivery. When asthma visits were excluded from the outcome measure, we also found no difference in the risk of outpatient visits for vaccinated and unvaccinated women. Hospital admissions for influenza or pneumonia for women in the study population were quite rare and no women died of respiratory illness during pregnancy. Infants born to women who received influenza vaccination had the same risks for influenza or pneumonia admissions compared with infants born to unvaccinated women, adjusting for infant's gender, gestational age, week of birth, and birth facility. Maternal influenza vaccination was also not a significant determinant of risk of ILI (excluding otitis media) outpatient visits for infants, nor did it significantly affect the risk of otitis media visits. Influenza vaccination during pregnancy did not significantly affect the risk of cesarean section, adjusting for the woman's age. It also did not affect the risk of preterm delivery. Although the immunogenicity of influenza vaccination in pregnancy in mother and infant has been well documented, in this study, we were unable to demonstrate the effectiveness of influenza vaccination with data for hospital admissions and physician visits. One possible interpretation of these findings is that typical influenza surveillance measures based on utilization data are not reliable in distinguishing influenza from other respiratory illness. Hospitalizations for respiratory illness were uncommon in both vaccinees and nonvaccinees.
Source: Am J Perinatol. 2004 Aug;21(6):333-9.
Vaccination During Pregnancy Does Not Prevent Respiratory Illness in Newborns
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether influenza vaccination of pregnant women prevents visits for respiratory illness in their infants born during the influenza season. DESIGN: Retrospective matched cohort study. SETTING: Four managed care organizations in the United States. Patients A total of 41 129 infants (3160 and 37 969 born to vaccinated and unvaccinated mothers, respectively) born between 1995 and 2001. Main Exposure Maternal influenza vaccination. Infants were considered exposed if their gestational age at birth was at least 30 weeks, if the time from maternal vaccination to birth was at least 28 days, and if they were exposed to at least 14 days of the influenza season. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of acute respiratory illnesses (outpatient, emergency department, and inpatient settings combined) and incident rate ratios (IRRs) for infants exposed and unexposed to maternal vaccination during the following 4 periods: peak influenza, respiratory syncytial virus predominant, periseasonal, and summer weeks. The time to the first acute respiratory illness during peak influenza weeks was also assessed. RESULTS: During the peak influenza weeks, infant visit rates were 15.4 and 17.1 per 100 person-months for exposed and unexposed infants, respectively (IRR, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.02). Adjusted IRRs for the 4 periods found a protective effect of infant female sex, whereas Medicaid status and maternal high-risk status increased infant visit rates. Maternal influenza vaccination did not reduce visit rates during any of the 4 time periods (IRR for peak influenza season, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.07) and did not delay the onset of first respiratory illness. CONCLUSION: We were unable to demonstrate that maternal influenza vaccination reduces respiratory illness visit rates among their infants.
Source: Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006 Dec;160(12):1277-83.
Autism in Children Born to Mothers Who Were Vaccinated in Pregnancy
Autism may be triggered by MMR vaccine in a subgroup of children genetically predisposed to immunological problems, new unpublished research suggests. The research has led to a hypothesis that mothers who fail to develop protective antibodies when they themselves are vaccinated with MMR may have an immune problem which predisposes their children to autism. The study postulates that autism might then be triggered by an immune insult like giving MMR or another live vaccine to the child. Alternatively, a live vaccine booster, given inadvertently to the mother during pregnancy, could cause autism via a teratogenic effect on the fetus. The hypothesis has been described as biologically plausible by a former medical assessor to the UK Committee on Safety of Medicines and a key official at the US Center for Disease Control.
Dr Edward Yazbak, a retired US paediatrician, has presented preliminary results of his study to a conference of the authoritative American Academy of Pediatrics.
The controversial findings are due to be published later this year. Dr Yazbak contacted 400 members of vaccine and parent groups using the internet and newsletters in the UK, Australia and the US. He asked all mothers who had received an MMR or rubella booster after the age of 16, because of a failure to seroconvert to an earlier dose, to complete a questionnaire.
His final results reveal that among women revaccinated with MMR or any other live vaccine just before, during or after pregnancy, 76 per cent had one or more child diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.
A further 17 per cent of these women went on to have children with autistic tendencies, severe attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and significant developmental delays.
Dr Yazbak said: The vaccine from the mother and the immune predisposition of the mother are predisposing factors for the child.
Then the child has its own vaccine which is a precipitating factor - except where the mother is revaccinated (during or before conception) when the child is damaged from birth.
He added: This is a very unscientific study. Im just saying listen, this is something worth pursuing.
Dr Peter Fletcher, who was principal medical officer and medical assessor to the CSM during the 1970s, said the hypothesis was plausible. He said: Its certainly something the immunologists should have a better look at.
Dr Robert Chen, chief of vaccines safety and development at the US National Immunisation Programme at the Center for Disease Control said: Its an interesting hypothesis in the sense that wild rubella is known to be one of the risk factors of autism. This is one of the true causes of autism, which has been well documented.
But he said this would not explain why the same effect may be seen in women revaccinated soon after giving birth.
Dr Yazbak said one explanation might be that the viruses from vaccines could be passed to the infant via breast milk.
Source: Pulse doctor's magazine, 7th July 2001 edition.
We identified 60 rubella-susceptible mothers who were revaccinated in the postpartum period with either the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) or the monovalent rubella vaccine and whose children later received MMR vaccine. Forty-five of these women have children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD); another ten women have children with autistic symptoms, ADD/ADHD or other developmental delays; and four women have children with other health problems, mostly immunologic. These outcomes raise concerns about the practice of postpartum vaccination and suggest that an immune mechanism may increase children's susceptibility to ASD.
Although parents continue to report that their previously typical children begin to display symptoms of autism and lose previously acquired skills after receiving routine childhood immunizations (particularly the MMR vaccine), the medical community has tended to discount the possibility of a link between autism and vaccination. Most medical researchers, in fact, completely dismiss such "anecdotal evidence" as scientifically invalid. While it is true that parents have only the observations of their own children to rely on, there can be no closer monitoring of a child than that done by its own parent. To ignore the information provided by parents of autistic children as desperate conclusions drawn by grieving individuals is pretentious and overlooks potentially valuable data.
Women are routinely tested for rubella immunity before marriage, and those susceptible are promptly vaccinated if they are not pregnant. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that women be tested again at the time of their first obstetrical visit, and that those found to lack rubella immunity be vaccinated in the postpartum period. The vaccine manufacturer states that it has been found "convenient" to vaccinate women in the postpartum period, but adds that "caution should be exercised." The monovalent rubella vaccine was used exclusively in the past. Lately, the MMR vaccine, on the recommendation of the CDC, has largely replaced it.
The intent of this study was to examine what effect the mothers' revaccination during the postpartum period may have had on their children.
The questionnaire reproduced in Appendix A was distributed by e-mail and newsletter to parent groups in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States and posted on several web sites. The study was also mentioned in a popular book on autism(1) and in publications by the Autism Research Institute and the Autism Autoimmunity Project. A total of 440 questionnaires had been received by the time of this analysis. Each entry was assigned a number, and an immediate effort was made to contact the mother to notify her of her study number and to complete any missing information. Questionnaires were excluded if they were incomplete and contact information was not supplied: about 70 questionnaires had to be discarded for this reason. Of the remaining 370 respondents, sixty had received MMR or rubella vaccine in the postpartum period and were included in this study. All questionnaires are available for review, and the data from the 60 subjects of this report are available in digital format.
Selected Case Presentations
1. Although this patient, a psychologist, born in 1958, had measles and rubella as a child, she was found to be rubella-susceptible when she was pregnant in 1984, 1986, 1992, and 1998. She received no vaccines following the first three pregnancies. Her two older children (a boy, age 16, and a girl, age 13) are healthy. A third infant died at age 2 days from prematurity-related complications. After her fourth pregnancy, the mother received MMR vaccine in the immediate postpartum period. The baby was breast-fed beyond 18 months of age. In the first year of life, he was severely constipated and had three "viral illnesses with generalized exanthems." He was immunized on the recommended schedule and received his first MMR at the age of 12 months. Prior to this time, the boy had appropriate speech and above-average cognitive abilities, but he stopped progressing after his first birthday and then went on to lose previously acquired skills. A developmental evaluation done at a chronological age of 20 months revealed an approximate developmental age of 11-13 months (language, motor and cognitive). Autistic symptoms are now apparent and a diagnosis of autism is forthcoming. The mother developed severe arthritis of her knees, ankles, and hips following her own vaccination.
2. Though she was vaccinated as a child, this patient, who was born in 1957 and is afflicted with scleroderma, failed to develop protective rubella titers. In 1997, she delivered her first child, a son, and was given an MMR booster postpartum. She became febrile and developed a rash but had no joint symptoms. The boy, who was born at full term and was breast-fed, appeared bright, verbal, and sociable during the first year of life. At the age of 15 months, he received his first MMR. He reacted promptly with fever, irritability, and loose stools. Shortly thereafter, he lost previously acquired speech and withdrew from social contact. He currently has persistent diarrhea, sleep difficulties, and extensive eczema. He has been diagnosed with ASD.
3. This mother, who had received all recommended immunizations, delivered her first child, a girl, in 1984 and received rubella vaccine postpartum because she had remained rubella-susceptible. The baby was not breast-fed and is normal. After 3 miscarriages, the patient delivered a boy in September 1987, and received another postpartum rubella vaccine because she still had no detectable rubella immunity. The boy was breast-fed for 4 months and developed normally at first. At the age of 29 months, he received his first MMR vaccine. He lost all language by the age of 36 months and has now been diagnosed with autism. While breastfeeding her third child, a girl, the mother received her third rubella booster in four years, as she was still rubella-susceptible. The child has severe dyslexia, serious learning disabilities, and ADHD.
4. This mother's first pregnancy resulted in a daughter who is now 22 years old, in good health and attending college. Her second child, a boy, died at the age of three months; the cause of death was listed as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). After the birth of the third child, a boy, in 1979, she was told that she had no immunity to rubella and was given MMR vaccine. The child was breast-fed for six months and at first developed normally. He received his MMR vaccine at age 15 months. By age 18 months, he developed chronic diarrhea, stopped talking, and became withdrawn. He has been diagnosed with autism, after an extensive work-up that was otherwise negative, including normal chromosomal studies. Of the mother's subsequent children, one girl and four boys were afflicted with learning disabilities, mental retardation, or pervasive developmental disorder (PDD); one also had Tourette syndrome. The last child, who was premature, had hypoplastic left heart syndrome and a single kidney. She only lived two days. Family history was negative for autism, and the mother had normal chromosomal studies.
5. Despite being vaccinated routinely, this mother, born in 1964, still developed all three diseases: measles, rubella, and mumps. Because of a diagnosis of "some immune problem," she received injections of gamma globulin for a while. In 1983, she received an MMR vaccine because of an outbreak of measles at college. In 1991, 1992, and 1997, she was found to be immune to measles. She was also immune to rubella in 1991, when she was pregnant with her first boy, who is in good health. During her second pregnancy, in 1992, she was found to be rubella-susceptible. After she delivered, she was given yet another MMR "that same day against my will." This boy, who was breast-fed, apparently assumed a fetal position on the 4th day of life and screamed for 24 hours. He was severely constipated through the first year of life but has had diarrhea since then. He has been diagnosed with autism. A third child, a girl, is normal. The mother received the hepatitis B vaccine series in 1998-1999. She reports having several markers for lupus at this time.
6. A mother with a family history of immune disease, who was born in 1959, was routinely vaccinated but "needed" and received a rubella booster shortly after she delivered her first child, a girl, in 1987. This child is developmentally normal and has received all recommended vaccines. After a miscarriage, the patient delivered a boy in 1989. This child has significant speech difficulties; he has received all recommended vaccines except hepatitis B. After a second miscarriage, a boy was born in 1992 and was nursed for 18 months. He was severely constipated but seemed to be developing normally. He was routinely vaccinated, including the hepatitis B series in infancy, an MMR vaccine at age 12 months, and a monovalent measles vaccine at 61 months of age. Between 12 and 15 months of age, he lost eye contact and the few words he had acquired. He has been diagnosed with autism.
All six of these mothers above, and many others like them, remained rubella-susceptible following vaccination. Their postpartum revaccination did not always result in immunity, and was followed by problems with their own health and that of their children.
A total of 60 respondents received MMR (32) or monovalent rubella vaccine (28) postpartum. In 45 cases (75%), children born to these women have been diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). In another 10 cases (17%), there is a child with autistic behaviors, developmental delays, or ADD. Some of these children have been diagnosed on the spectrum since the mothers initial response. Four other women (7%) had children with other medical problems: endocrine, allergic or immunologic with associated frequent infections. One mother in this group had a normal child, an only daughter who was not breast-fed.
In 21 cases, the child born just prior to the revaccination has been diagnosed on the autism spectrum. In 22 cases, a subsequent child born to these women has been diagnosed. One mother has children on the spectrum from both the pregnancy followed by the vaccine and the next pregnancy. There were 3 cases in which a third pregnancy (the second subsequent to revaccination) produced a child who became autistic. There are also many cases in which siblings of the autistic children have been diagnosed with ADD/ADHD, other developmental delays, or other medical problems.
The data are inconclusive on the relationship between breastfeeding and the subsequent diagnosis of ASD. Among the children resulting from the pregnancy followed by vaccination, at least 27 were breast-fed for varying lengths of time. Of these, 17 (63%) became autistic. However, at least two children born just before maternal revaccination developed autism although they were never breast-fed. In one case a male child who was not breast-fed is severely affected on the autism spectrum, has very elevated rubella and measles titers, and has tested positive for Myelin Basic Protein antibodies. There were also cases in which children with autism resulting from subsequent pregnancies were not breast-fed.
No correlation was apparent between the type of vaccine given to the mother (MMR or rubella) and the outcome for the child. Among the children born just prior to revaccination, 13 (41%) of the children born to the women who received the MMR became autistic, and eight (29%) of the children born to women given the rubella vaccine were later diagnosed.
Twelve mothers in this study reported that their autistic children began to display symptoms after receiving their MMR vaccination. Two mothers reported that their children had symptoms of ASD prior to MMR vaccination, but that their symptoms worsened after receiving the vaccine. Only one mother reported that her third child (the second after her revaccination) was displaying significant autistic symptoms prior to his own vaccination. Curiously, three separate mothers reported that one of their children had reacted to DPT vaccination, but none of these children have been diagnosed with ASD. (One boy with "cerebral palsy" has classical behaviors associated with autism but has never been diagnosed.)
Among the children born just prior to their mother's revaccination, the diagnosis of ASD was highly correlated to gender (Table 1), with 49% of the males, 13% females, and one of the two surviving gender-unknown children resulting from the first pregnancy becoming autistic. These numbers include one set of twins in which the male has been diagnosed on the spectrum and the female required significant speech therapy.
The gender selection was also obvious among second children born to these mothers: 69% of the males, 31% of the females (and one gender unknown child) resulting from these pregnancies became autistic (Table 2). These numbers include two sets of twin boys. In one set, both twins have typical autism, while the other set includes one child with ASD and the other with other delays. Tables 1 and 2 together include all the children of the 60 mothers, except those born prior to the pregnancy followed immediately by vaccination.
Although the mothers' reactions were not a focus of this study, several mothers reported reactions to MMR or rubella vaccine. Two women reported short-term reactions such as fever and rash; four women reported joint pain/arthritis; and three women reported other long-term health problems. Only two of the women who noted their own reactions indicated that they had any health problems prior to their revaccination. Six of the mothers in this study, who had no prior obstetrical difficulties, reported having miscarriages after receiving the postpartum vaccination. There were also two cases of difficult pregnancies, and one case in which a woman carrying twins lost one of the children.
Prospective studies to investigate problems with vaccines are not feasible in the United States at the present time because of mandates. Retrospective studies should include very large samples to be meaningful. This is extremely difficult because of the need to identify and contact participants with no assurance of response. The individual researcher is therefore left with the case presentation approach to illustrate unusual and unexpected outcomes. These cases are self-selected women who read materials that focus on suspected adverse effects of vaccines.
The study design does not permit a calculation of the incidence of the severe effects reported nor any comparison with their incidence in mothers who were not revaccinated. However, even the rare occurrence of such severe effects following postpartum vaccination warrants careful examination and a search for a possible mechanism.
As is frequently stated, any risk from vaccines should be viewed in perspective with the danger from vaccine-preventable disease. The prevention of Congenital Rubella Syndrome (CRS) in future pregnancies is the main indication for postpartum revaccination. Maternal rubella infection during the first trimester of pregnancy may affect the fetus and result in the development of CRS, a terrible complication which is manifested by somatic, developmental, neurological, cardiac, and sensory defects and disorders.
Autism is not any less devastating a disease than CRS. It is also a lifetime sentence of pain and suffering to the involved child and parents and an unending burden on the community. If, in any way, maternal revaccination contributes to the children's autism, then it is imperative that a complete and true disclosure of the risks and benefits be made to the mother before she is revaccinated. A review and definition of the present dangers and risks of CRS is therefore in order.
Rubella and the CRS became nationally reportable diseases in 1966, and the CRS is currently tracked through the National CRS Registry of the National Immunization Program. In 1969, there was a large rubella outbreak with approximately 57,686 cases. The rubella vaccine was licensed that year and has been used ever since, singly or in the MMR. Since 1983, there have been fewer than 1,000 cases of rubella per year nationwide except for two small outbreaks in 1990 and 1991 in California and in Pennsylvania's Amish Country. Since 1992, only around 200 cases of rubella are reported nationally every year. Except during early pregnancy, rubella is a relatively mild disease.
There is no exact count of CRS cases prior to 1969, when the vaccine was introduced in the United States. In 1970, there were 67 cases reported to the registry, the largest number ever, in a single year. Since 1980, however, only five to six cases of CRS on average have been reported each year, except during the 1990 and 1991 outbreaks, when there were 25 and 33 cases. Only 9 cases of CRS were reported in 1997. The mothers of all 9 infants were born in Latin America or the Caribbean.(2) The recommendation to revaccinate rubella-susceptible women was issued in 1977. There were only 22 cases of CRS nationwide the year before.
The administration of rubella (and MMR) vaccine in the postpartum period is convenient for the medical practitioners, and little consideration is given to the viral transmission between the mother and her infant child.
Although vaccine virus may be isolated from the pharynx, vaccinees do not transmit rubella to others, except occasionally in the case of the vaccinated breast-feeding woman. In this situation, the infant may be infected, presumably through breast milk, and may develop a mild rash illness, but serious effects have not been reported.(3)
Though the Physicians' Desk Reference states that "caution should be exercised" when Meruvax II (or MMR II) is administered to a nursing mother,(4) not a single woman in the study recalled being informed that such viral excretion occurred, nor asked if she was planning future pregnancies.
While there have been no reports of possible viral transmission between mother and child except via breast milk, the cases of two children in this study, who were not breast-fed and developed autism, suggest that direct transmission may occur.
It is not known whether measles and mumps viruses are excreted in breast milk, but a report in the veterinary literature seems to suggest that the canine distemper virus, a morbillivirus closely related to the measles virus, may have caused distemper in nursing pups.(5)
Is there a mechanism that could account for the induction of autism in children of these sixty mothers? Comi and coworkers6 have reported a higher incidence of autism in families with immune disorders. They also found that the more immune defects in a family, the higher the incidence of autism, and that a mother who has an immune disease has a nine-fold increased chance to have a child with autism.
The failure of certain women to develop or maintain protective antibodies after immunization may be an expression of an immune defect, which may predispose their children to autism. This risk may increase if the mothers are given added vaccines or if the children are exposed to early, combined, or severe antigenic insults, namely their own immunizations. Preser-vatives in some vaccines may also contribute to further toxic and immune injury and lead to more damage.(7)
Others have adduced evidence of the immunological aspects of autism. Notably, Dr. Vijendra Singh has made a compelling argument for autism being considered an autoimmune disorder.(8) The mechanism by which a developing brain might be affected would likely be an immune response resulting in antibodies against the brain or neurological tissue. It has been theorized that certain viruses may induce this autoimmune response. Evidence of antibodies to Myelin Basic Protein (MBP),(9) neuron-axon filament proteins,(10) and serotonin receptors(11) have been found in autistic children. More specifically, Dr. Singh and his colleagues have also found that measles virus and human herpesvirus-6 viral antibody levels were higher in the blood of autistic children, and that they often co-occurred with brain autoantibodies. They found a 90% correlation between the presence of measles-IgG-positive sera and MBP autoantibodies, which confirms reports from parents, including at least one family in this study. This relationship between measles antibodies and MBP is particularly troubling in light of parental reports that their children became autistic following their MMR vaccination. Recent research has also shown live vaccine strain measles virus in the intestines of autistic children.(12-14) It has also been found that the measles virus (or vaccine) can cause immunosuppression.(15)
There have been no studies on the possibility of cumulative effects of a mother's revaccination or the second generational effects on their children when they are themselves vaccinated. The cases reported here suggest cause for concern.
The mothers in this study were also adversely affected by their revaccination in some cases. The reports of joint problems and arthritis are not surprising as rubella vaccination has been linked to arthritis in several studies.(16-18) However, the reports of miscarriages and difficult pregnancies, reported here for the first time, were unexpected and alarming. As we have no theory to explain this finding, further study is clearly needed in this area.
In the light of the information obtained through this study and the supportive findings of other researchers, we make the following recommendations:
1. The routine administration of a live virus vaccine booster, during the postpartum period, to previously vaccinated women who have remained rubella-susceptible, should be reconsidered. The present minute risk of CRS does not justify revaccination of women at such a critical time. Indeed, the same caution should be exercised in the case of all women who have failed to produce or maintain adequate protective titers after vaccination.
2. When obtaining "informed consent," medical practitioners should clearly explain to mothers that it is known that the rubella virus from vaccine may be excreted in their nose, throat, and breast milk.
3. Further research into the possibility of viral transmission through close contact between a mother and infant child should be done.
4. The excretion of the measles virus from vaccine in breast milk should be investigated.
5. Whether "routine" hepatitis B vaccination in the newborn period is an antigenic insult which increases the risk of developing autism should be examined.
6. Early and combined frequent vaccinations of children should be reviewed.
1. Seroussi K. Unraveling the mystery of autism and pervasive developmental disorder: a mother's story of research and recovery.
Simon & Schuster, 2000.
2. Atkinson W, Humiston S, Wolf C, Nelson R, eds. Epidemiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, ed 5. National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), January, 1999, pp. 178-179.
3. Atkinson W, et al. op. Cit., p. 185.
4. Physicians' Desk Reference 1999; pp. 1820, 1834.
5. McCandlish IAP, Cornwall HJC, Thompson H, Nash AS, Lowe CM. Distemper encephalitis in pups after vaccination of the dam. The Veterinary Record 1992;130(2): 27-30.
6. Comi AM, Zimmerman AW, Frye VH, Law PA, Peeden JN 1999. Familial clustering of autoimmune disorders and evaluation of medical risk factors in autism. J Child Neurol. 1999;14(6):388-94.
7. Redwood, L. Mercury and Autism: Coincidence or cause and effect? Autism/Asperger's Digest 2000; July /August.
8. Singh VK. Autism, Autoimmunity and immunotherapy: a commentary. The Autism Autoimmunity Project Newsletter, 1999;1(December).
9. Weizman A, Weizman R, Szekely GA, Wijsenbeek H, Livni E. Abnormal immune response to brain tissue antigen in the syndrome of autism. Am J Psychiatry 1982;139(11):1462-5.
10. Singh VK, Lin SX, Yang VC. Serological association of measles virus and human herpesvirus-6 with brain autoantibodies in autism. Clin Immunol Immunopathol. 1998;89(1):105-8.
11. Todd RD, Ciaranello RD. Demonstration of inter- and intraspecies differences in serotonin binding sites by antibodies from an autistic child. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1985;82(2):612-6.
12. Wakefield AJ, Murch SH, Anthony A, et al: Ileal-lymphoid hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet 1998;351:637-41.
13. O'Leary JJ, Uhlmann V, Wakefield AJ. Measles virus and autism. Lancet 2000; 356(9231):772.
14. Kawashima H, Mori T, Kashiwagi Y, Takekuma K, Hoshika A, Wakefield A. Detection and sequencing of measles virus from peripheral mononuclear cells from patients with inflammatory bowel disease and autism. Dig Dis Sci. 2000;45(4):723-9.
15. Halsey NA. Increased mortality after high titer measles vaccines: too much of a good thing. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1993;12(6):462-5.
16. Howson CP, Katz M, Johnston RB Jr, Fineberg HV. Chronic arthritis after rubella vaccination. Clin Infect Dis.1992;15(2):307-12.
17. Tingle AJ, Mitchell LA, Grace M, Middleton P, Mathias R, MacWilliam L, Chalmers A. Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study on adverse effects of rubella immunization in seronegative women. Lancet 1997;349(9061):1277-81.
18. Weibel RE, Benor DE. 1996. Chronic arthropathy and musculoskeletal symptoms associated with rubella vaccines. A review of 124 claims submitted to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Arthritis Rheum. 1996;39(9):1529-34.
F. Edward Yazbak, MD, FAAP, and Kathy L. Lang-Radosh, MS, TL Autism Research, West Falmouth, MA, E-mail: TLAutStudy@aol.com.
This article was originally published in the Medical Sentinel 2001.
Swine Flu Vaccine Can Damage The Brains of Unborn Babies
View the article, "Swine Flu Can Change Genes of Unborn" published July 27, 2009 at Blisstree.com suggesting that swine flu in pregnant women may change the genes of unborn children resulting in damage to the hippocampus. According to the article, neuroscientists found that the H1N1 changes the genes that control brain growth and development in the unborn child. The scientists published their report in the medical journal, European Neuropsychopharmacology, listing more than a dozen genes that the swine flu virus adversely affected.
Geneticists want to know how some of those genes are tied to the development of the hippocampus, a component of the brain involved in long term memory and spatial navigation.
If the flu itself damages the hippocampus, the result could be linked to autism, Alzheimers and schizophrenia. Let's take a logical look at the original study, published in the medical journal, European Neuropsychopharmacology.
The team of researchers and lead scientist, Hossein Fatemi as part of the experiement, injected pregnant female mice with the H1N1 and studied the brains of the newborn mice. Mice exposed to the H1N1 virus in the womb had a fifteen percent reduction in the size of their hippocampus. Scientists also found twelve other genes that the flu virus negatively affected.
The study has been done on mice, not people. But does the study confirm the public health recommendation that pregnant women need to be vaccinated against the H1N1 virus? If so, the question consumers need to ask is whether getting flu shots of the killed virus do anything to the brains of the infants yet unborn when the pregnant women get the recommended shots? On one hand, you don't want to get the flu when pregnant. Your immune system is compromised when you're pregnant. You want protection.
On the other hand, the question is how is your unborn baby's brain going to be affected by the dead virus, the mercury in the shot, or any other factor? You don't want the flu, and vaccination is a priority for pregnant women. But what will the hippocampus of your baby's brain look like? You're not going to be given the live virus up the nose because you'll be shedding it for days after vaccination to other family members, people standing next to you in the stores you shop at, and co-workers.
Read the article, "Scientist Says H1N1 Flu Virus Could Damage Brains of Unborn Children," published July 24, 2009 at Lifenews.com. The article reports, "A neuroscientist at the University of Minnesota medical school has published a paper saying the H1N1 swine flu virus could pose problems for unborn children."
Hossein Fatemi has published a new paper saying the virus, which is causing the deaths of people across the globe, could damage the developing brains of babies before birth." Notice that the article is about the flu, not the vaccine. But consumers are wondering what happens to your unborn baby's brain when you get the vaccine, even if the virus is dead.
And what happens when your other young children or those you come in contact with daily get the live virus flu mist vaccine up their nose? When children recently vaccinated start shedding the virus for up to 21 days, will you catch the flu while pregnant? Those are questions consumers ask. Could other recently vaccinated children infect the pregnant mother and her unborn baby with the flu?
Did you get a receipt verifying that the adverse reaction to a vaccine had been reported to a government agency? Or did your doctor tell someone at your HMO your symptoms and you have no knowledge of how to track your response through the HMO system to the government agency and to the drug or vaccine manufacturer. Who keeps tabs on your adverse reactions to vaccines or other prescribed medications or even over the counter remedies? Who is in charge of taking note of adverse reactions to supplements or individual allergies? Is there a database of information where you can report your symptoms?
If you're not getting the results you want, you are encouraged to report negative side effects of prescription drugs or vaccines to the FDA. First go to the FDA website called MedWatch or call 1-800-FDA-1088. If you're going to get vaccinated for any reason, talk to your health care professional about situations you may need to avoid. Some medications and vaccinations have interactions with other environmental or medicinal issues or even the foods you eat.
For example, eating grapefruit or drinking grapefruit might interrupt the way certain medications work or eating certain vegetables such as avocados or aged cheeses. It all depends on what you're taking. Talk to your doctor about what effects a vaccination or certain foods will have on you if you are taking specific medications. Find out whether you're allergic to any ingredients in a specific medication or vaccination serum such as eggs or neomycin, or any other item related to the specific type of vaccination.
Don't forget, if you have a negative reaction to any prescribed drug or vaccine given to you for your health, you can report the side effects to the FDA. One example might be that you had chickenpox as a baby. But when you're over age 60, you may not realize that the virus is till in your body and could give you shingles as you age. There's a vaccine to prevent shingles.
You need to know whether you're allergic to any of its ingredients such as neomycin or gelatin. What if you have a weakened immune system? That's why it's important to ask questions before you take any type of vaccine. Know what's in the vaccine, and whether or not you have an allergy to any substance in it. For example, before you take a flu shot, you're usually asked whether you're allergic to eggs because the vaccine is grown in eggs. Same goes for prescribed medications.
Nutritionists can research foods, but when it comes to looking at vaccines in a logical way by finding out how they're produced, you need to go beyond foods that help your health to find out whose watching the watchers. How do vaccines work?
If the media isn't watching the watchers quickly enough, then it's up to the people, the consumers, even the citizen journalists to watch the credible, logical, and validated research. What did you always want to ask about vaccines?
When it comes to vaccines, you need to know how they work. According to the October 21, 2009 Planet News article, "Vaccines: How do they work?" there's an excellent report on how the flu vaccine is produced. For example, flu vaccines are made by introducing an inactivated strain of flu (hypodermic) or a weakened live virus (nasal spray), an immune system can be taught which particular type of invasive cells to be looking for and how to eradicate them, thereby building an immunity to that strain of flu. The technology has been in use for 60 years. Nasal sprays, sold under the name FluMist, were approved for use in 2003.
The article reports how the vaccine shot form is produced "by growing the virus in chicken eggs. New research is currently being explored that will use canine kidney cells, insect eggs, and retinas from aborted fetal tissues. In 2005, the Bush administration allocated more than $7 billion to pharmaceutical companies for the production of these cell line factories. The virus is rendered inert by either the addition of formalin (an aqueous solution of formaldehyde) or by exposure to UV rays. The current swine flu vaccine used both methods to deactivate the virus."
According to "Vaccines: How do they work?" the article reports that a "2009 study in Current Topics Microbiology Immunology reported that Center for Disease Control (CDC) officials conceded the ability of flu vaccines to generate sufficient antibodies and effectively reduce symptoms and prevent death is only about 30 to 50 percent. Other experts say most years the efficacy is 70 to 80 percent."
Also see the article, "The American Flu Charade by Bill Sardi." According to this article, millions of doses of flu vaccine will go unused. The article reports, "With a Consumer Reports poll showing nearly 2/3rds of U.S. parents will hold off on having their children vaccinated with the H1N1 late-2009 season flu vaccine, health authorities are likely to resort to scare tactics as they have in past years to induce parents into having their children vaccinated. You cant cry wolf every year. The Consumer Reports telephone survey shows 50% of U.S. parents are delaying their decision to have their children vaccinated and another 14% will forego vaccination altogether."
What happens to the vaccines not used in the USA? Are they shipped overseas to places that have a higher rate of illness for children? The big worry in this article notes that, "The first flu vaccines in use will be nasally-administered Flumist® which utilizes "live" viruses. Flumist®-vaccinated individuals will shed viruses for 5 days following inoculation and are likely to spread the virus to family members."
What fears are spreading is that the children shedding the live viruses will spread the flu to older adults who come in contact with their grandchildren and from there it could sweep through nursing homes for the frail elderly. The article notes, " senior adults living in a home with others who have received Flumist® are at greater risk to become infected, though no warning is issued over this."
The point made about any vaccine is to find out which facts actually can be validated and evaluated. View the interview with Barb Loe Fisher, Founder of the National Vaccine Information Center video at the HealthyAgain site. You also can compare this video with the 60 Minutes 1977 video also on that site about that swine flu issue. The Doctor Yourself site offers an article, "Why Flu Shots Don't Work." Another article takes a different view in, "How to be a swine flu vaccine zealot (satire) by Mike Adams." Another article states, "60 Percent of Doctors Don't Get a Flu Shot: Why Medical Experts, Parents and Others Avoid the Flu shot. The reason usually stated is, "I'm too busy." Most medical professionals are encouraged to promote vaccines. View the article by Victoria Anisman-Reiner written for Suite 101 August 5, 2009.
The big push against vaccines, according to the article, may come from some of the holistic practitioners telling people that vaccines damage the immune system "by acting as an immunosuppressant which hinders the natural immune system response and contributes to immune system disorders," according to the article, "60 Percent of Doctors Don't Get a Flu Shot: Why Medical Experts, Parents and Others Avoid the Flu shot."
The problem for the consumer is to debunk myths with facts. But where do you find reliable facts and resources? Read the article, "Flu Shots Work Best in Married Senior Citizens, Worst in Those Sad. This article notes, "Senior citizens who are happily married show stronger responses to flu shots that those who are unmarried, especially those who are widowed. And, flu shots do not work as well in older adults who have recently experienced the death of a family member or close friend, a new study shows." Also read the article, "Vaccinated Senior Citizens Less Likely to Die from Pneumonia."
Another article states, "Don't Use Amantadine or Rimandatine to Treat Flu, Warns CDC," because "evidence indicates Influenza A viruses in US are resistant to these drugs." So who do you believe? It's not so much about belief, but about results and validations.
Source: Ground Report by Anne Hart, 22 October 2009.
Israeli Health Ministry DOES NOT Recommend Swine Flu Vaccine For Pregnant Women
The Health Ministry has decided to hold off on giving the swine flu vaccine to pregnant women and chronically ill children because vaccine stocks now in Israel contain a substance whose safety and effectiveness in pregnant women has not been fully substantiated.
An estimated 80,000 women in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy, along with chronically ill children between 6 months old and 3 years old, will be offered a swine flu vaccine in November that does not contain the additive. That vaccine is manufactured by the French drug company Sanofi Pasteur.
The questionable ingredient has been added to vaccines against both seasonal flu and swine flu and is being sold in Europe and Canada. In laboratory testing on rats in the United States, the presence of the ingredient reduced by 50 percent the amount of vaccine necessary to create an immunity reaction. Although the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved the use of the additive, the comparable European agency has done so.
Since the beginning of the week, about 250,000 doses of vaccine produced by the Swiss Novartis pharmaceutical company have arrived in Israel. They have been sent to a warehouse for inspection and preparation for nationwide use. An additional 100,000 vaccine doses with the additive, which are manufactured by Novartis and by the British firm GlaxoSmithKline, are expected to arrive by the end of the month.
A nationwide vaccination program against swine flu will begin in Israel within two weeks. Health care workers and chronically ill patients older than 3 will be the first to get vaccinated.
Thirty-two deaths in Israel have been attributed to swine flu.
Source: Haaretz.com, by Dan Even, 22 October 2009.
Miscarriages and Stillbirths After Swine Flu Vaccine!
Krissi Danielsson reporting from About.com quotes an article from the Minneapolis Star Tribune which showed how some pregnant women are skeptical of the new H1N1 vaccine. Several women blogging at the end of the article had experienced miscarriages with the H1N1 vaccine.
Pregnant women are considered one of the "high risk" groups, but many women are less than thrilled about the idea of getting the shot, reporting concerns about the safety of the vaccine and possible effects for the unborn baby.
I can definitely see where they are coming from, being someone who was concerned about safety of pretty much everything when I was pregnant. And there's not much research on the safety of any type of flu vaccine during the first trimester, much less thimerosal exposure in the first trimester, although the CDC says that flu vaccination is advisable in any trimester during a pandemic. As with most cases, all you can really do is weigh the risks and benefits of both courses of action and discuss your concerns with your doctor - then make an informed choice on how to proceed.
What are your thoughts? Do you plan to get the H1N1 flu vaccine, especially if you are currently pregnant or hope to become pregnant in the near future?
Comments (from readers)
October 9, 2009 at 2:41 pm
(1) Jo says: I got the flu vaccine (regular not H1N1) at 8 weeks pregnant. Three days later I miscarried. I am not going to get the H1N1.
October 26, 2009 at 11:07 am
(2) Regrets says:
I got both vaccines on Thursday. I was 9 weeks pregnant. I miscarried on Sunday. I was told by several doctors to get these vaccines. Now I wish I followed my gut feeling and not get them at ALL!
October 29, 2009 at 8:33 am
(3) says: i work in a hospital like setting and was told 'the benefits outweigh the risks" 1am i got the vaccine, 3am i started bleeding and craming, 3pm miscarried. you decide
October 31, 2009 at 1:29 pm
(4) sue says: I had the H1N1 vaccination and 24 hours later had a miscarriage.
October 31, 2009 at 8:25 pm
(5) Linda Hill says: My daughter in law was 10 weeks pregnant and had the H1N1 vaccine on Friday that night she miscarried.
November 1, 2009 at 9:58 pm
(6) Stephanie says: I received the H1N1 over a week ago. I am now 5 weeks. I am doing well so far.
November 2, 2009 at 10:52 pm
(7) SoSorry says:
I was so ready to get the H1N1 vaccine last week and they were only giving them to pregnant women. I was 6 weeks along and got it and the next day I started cramping and miscarried. I already had two healthy pregnancies and never miscarried or had any problems. My doctors think I am crazy to think it was the H1N1 but if no one looks into this than other women will not know. I am so sorry that I got it.
November 3, 2009 at 4:30 pm
(8) Connie says:
I also received the H1N1 vaccination on October 22nd, 2009 and went into labor on October 25th, at 16 weeks pregnant and we just heard the heartbeat and everything was fine with my pregnancy on October 16th, 2009, then on October 28th my water broke then on October 29th, I delivered a stillborn baby boy, and no one can tell me why
Everyone wants to say it did not come from the shot but I believe it did. My baby was growing at the correct pace and everyone wants to brush off the vaccination. I say if you have the vaccination and suffer a miscarriage if they are able to perform an autopsy have it done.
November 3, 2009 at 4:34 pm
(9) Connie says:
I also agree something needs to be done and looked more into with this vaccination because most women are being advised it's just something that happens, but I also had two healthy children normal pregnancies and when I received this vaccination with my third pregnancy, my baby is gone. Contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org
November 4, 2009 at 10:12 pm
(10) sioux falls, south dakota says:
I received the H1N1 vaccine on October 16th and started experiencing cramping on the 22nd. I was nearly 17 weeks pregnant and gave birth to a stillborn baby boy on the 23rd. Like many of the other women here, the first thing I suspected was the H1N1 vaccine. I immediately asked a nurse at the hospital if that would have anything to do with it. Without hesitation, she told me "absolutely not." I had reservations about getting the vaccine, but followed the advice of my long trusted family doctor. In a follow up appointment with my doctor 3 days after I lost my baby, I asked him if the vaccine would have had any adverse effects on my baby. He also said that it was not possible. I don't believe that my doctor was necessarily lying to me, he was simply following the accepted practices and opinions of his field. I do, however, believe that as a nation, we are being lied to. This vaccine is NOT safe during pregnancy. There has not been enough testing done to determine this and there are far too many "coincidences" for this to be anything but a result of a vaccine that was hastily pushed into production and distribution in an effort to stop widespread panic. I have read so many stories in defense of the vaccine that will talk about how common miscarriages are, but I would challenge you to ask ANY health care professional how common second trimester miscarriages are. My baby was doing perfect developmentally and I had felt him move earlier that day. My heart goes out to all of you out there who have had to go through the same heartache and loss that I have had in the last couple of weeks. There is no reason that any woman or family should have to go through this. Get the word out to all of the pregnant women that you know. I know that if I had heard that women had been losing their babies shortly after they received the vaccine, I would have followed my gut and not gotten it myself. Maybe then Wyatt would have had a chance at life.
November 5, 2009 at 11:51 am
(11) sue field says:
If you read the novatis or baxter pkg insert available on the web you will find that 1. there is not sufficient testing on pregnant women so they dont know how safe it is
.its not recommended for children under 2 is not a fetus a child under 2? there is no conclusion on safety with breastfeeding
.. Md's just want to scare the hell out of you for the 1% that can get very sick..If folks would just wash hands frequently, stay away from sick contacts as much as possible and take supplements and live a healthy way
you likely can avoid the flu altogether
SOOOOO Sorry for your losses
.my heart breaks for you all.
Source: Prevent Disease.com, date not shown.
Two Pregnant Women in Portugal Lose Their Babies After Swine Flu Vaccine, At 34 Weeks of Pregnancy
A pregnant woman who took the swine flu jab on Friday was rushed to the CUF Descobertas on Monday but lost her baby, according to the Jose de Mello, a Portuguese health official.
TV42.pt reports that the 34-year-old woman is still in hospital and has yet to give birth to the lifeless fetus.
Conceca Talhado, the head of the gynaecology department at CUF Descobertas said that an autopsy would be needed to establish whether there was a link between the swine flu vaccine and the death of the fetus.
On Sunday, another baby, also in the 34th week died in Portalegre hospital after the 31-year-old mother took the swine flu jab.
French Woman Loses Her Baby At 38 Weeks After H1N1 Vaccine
A French woman. a health care worker, has lost her baby at 38 weeks two days after taking the Pandemrix swine flu jab.
Source: Le Parisien, 20 November 2009 - reported by the flu case.
Pregnant Woman Paralysed By H1N1 Vaccine Suddenly Dies - Her Baby is Delivered By C Section, Alive
According to a Finnish tabloid Ilta-Sanomat, a baby boy of a 26-yeras old braindead woman was saved using a caesarean section in the University Hospital in Kuopio Finland.
The section took place last Thursday only a couple of hours later after the brain activity of the mother, who was already recovering from paralysis, suddenly stopped. It was 28th week of her pregnancy.
"The clot on her brain during the pregnancy couldn't be cured at any stage, and that eventually caused the brain death", tells the head physician Jorma Penttinen.
Deceased woman from north Karelian, Finland, had paralysed only a couple of hours after she had received the swine flu vaccine on her home town at the end of last month.
The University Hospital (KYS) denied all the suspicions of possible link between the vaccine and the paralysis symptoms already at the beginning of this month.
More True Life Accounts of Miscarriage and Stillbirth From Previously Pregnant Women
If you havent had a miscarriage, you shouldnt comment about someone that has. This is my second miscarriage. I know my first miscarriage had absolutely nothing to do with the H1N1 shot (because it was in 2003), however, this time I believe there definitely could be a connection. I had 3 healthy babies after my first miscarriage. When I went to have my H1N1 shot (which was HIGHLY recommended by the Health Office workers since I WAS pregnant and I higher risk of H1N1), I was around 5 weeks pregnant. When I went in for my next ob appointment, I had an ultrasound that showed I was only 5 week and 2 days, although by that point I was almost 9 weeks pregnant. I never had any symptoms. The baby just died. Instead of reading about how pregnant women shouldnt get the shot, the ONLY thing I read about pregnant women and the H1N1 shot is that they were top priority for the shot and should have it done as soon as possible. My doctor thought I may have just miscalculated and waited another few weeks to test levels (once a week) until we knew for sure what was going on. Three weeks later (should have been 12 weeks pregnant), I was told that the ultrasound was still showing 5 weeks and 2 days and that the baby was no longer living. I had to have a D&C. Not only was the physical pain traumatizing but the emotional pain was beyond bearable. Something needs to be done. PLEASE, take all of this into consideration before deciding if you are going to get the shot. I wish I wouldnt have
There seems to be WAY too many stories for this to be a coincidence. If this is what our country is coming to, God, please help us all!
I got the H1N1 vacc. when I was 4 and a half weeks pregnanat. I started bleeding 2 weeks later and went to the doctor and was tol my pregnancy looked perfect for a 4 and a half week pregnanacy! Sounds like to me that everything was perfect until I got the vacc. We were completely devistated and I wish I knew the risks before I got it, but the docs will tell you miscarriages happen everyday, but that is not good enough for me.
#3) Canada Also:
We were in our 6 month of pregnancy, and we also got the vaccine, We also lost our baby, within 10 days of taking the vaccine. We also asked our Dr what could of caused this, they gave us many reasons, then we brought up H1N1 Vaccine, and before we could get the INE out in vaccine, they dismissed it as possible cause. I asked how could it be everthing else, and this is not even considered and dismissed immediately, I think if they did a study and found out that it does cause miscarriages, they entire health system would be under scrutiny and law suits.
It was our second child of which we do not have history of miscarriages or any medical or health issues. Upon delivery the baby looked pefect and no ambilical chord around its neck.
Last month on Nov.16th I had my son premature at 22 weeks along in my pregnancy he lived 5 hrs and then died of heart failure. About a week prior I recieved the H1N1 Flu vaccine. I began cramping in my lower abdomin and bleeding heavily on thursday night and after 75 hrs of labor trying to keep my son inside me as long as posible I delivered him on monday morning. After reading many of these storys I am convinced that I would still be pregnant if I would have denied the vaccine!
I should be 11 weeks and two days pregnant today. I had an appointment with my OB/GYN today and was told (from info of ultrasound) that my baby stopped growing on the exact day I had my H1N1 vaccine! This is a very sad day for my family and I. This would have been our first baby. I have submitted a report of my adverse event on the following site: https://vaers.hhs.gov/esub/index
To all those that have had problems with the vaccine I would suggest to report your event as well so the government can track this.
After researching the H1N1 vaccine (which I WISH I would have done before I took the vaccine), I cannot believe that all these officials and medical professional would think for a minute that injecting a drug that may contain mercury, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (associated with infertility), triton X100 (a strong detergent), phenoxyethanol (antifreeze) and many other toxic ingredients would be SAFE!
It seems as if there is a hidden agenda out there. Just think of the billions of dollars these pharmaceutical companies are making! Could THAT be the agenda??? I wonder
. HOW can the Pharmaceutical companies get away with giving vaccines that can cause death?! To anyone else that would be a crime!
I think we ALL need to join together and try to change the law so that we can protect this from happening to others. We should all push for legislature that will protect ourselves AND our unborn from this crime.
I have a healthy 1yr old boy no complication or history of miscarriages. I got the H1N1 vaccine to protect me and the baby at 7weeks pregnant. I lost the baby a week and a half after
I was 4 1/2 weeks pregnant when I got the H1N1 shot. I started spotting 2 days later, then a 2 weeks later lost my baby. I have 2 kids, with no history of miscarriage. If I could take back getting it I would because I think it caused my miscarriage. My doctor does not believe it does.
I was 5 weeks pregnant when my doctor suggested I get the H1N1 vaccine. I received the shot on a Thursday and was very sore and achy on Friday. I miscarried my baby on Sunday, just 3 days after receiving the shot. This was my first pregnancy and I thought I was doing the best thing for myself and my baby by getting the shot. I was encouraged to get the shot by my doctor and was not told that I should wait until I was further along. Also, I was not warned of any side affects accept for a sore arm where I got the shot. I was given the Novartis shot.
i was 14 wweks pregnant almost and took the H1N1 shot because my dr. said to and a few minutes afterwards i had severe headaches and shortness of breath,i called everywhere but no one would tell me nothing, then a couple of days after that i started spotting blood and had to be taken to the emergency room for a threatened misscarriage,then 4 days later i went to the OBGYN for an ultrasound my baby was fine until a couple of days later when i went back for an ultrasound and my baby had died it was a missed miscarriage ihad to wait 2 days for them to do a dnc. I had my baby and placenta sent to the lab for testing ,the results came back my baby was healthy,my choromasones were fine everything was fine,even the sex ,she was a little baby girl!my baby girl! and i think we have all been misinformed by our doctors, and i think the H1N1 shot killed my baby! and i will fight to get the answers because i want justice for my baby!
If you have lost your baby after H1N1 vaccine, please contact:
She is putting together a team of professionals to monitor the H1N1 vaccine in pregnancy with the aim of preventing other babies dying after their mothers are vaccinated.
Doctors in Taiwan Say Pregnant Women Should Not Have H1N1 Vaccine In First Trimester
As the number of pregnant women suffering problems after receiving influenza A (H1N1) shots has increased, Taiwan Association of Obstetrics and Gynecology Chairman Tsai Hong-te suggested yesterday that women in their first trimester of pregnancy should not receive H1N1 shots.
Women in subsequent trimesters should take the advice of their doctors when deciding whether to get vaccinated, Tsai said.
Tsai, who is also director of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at Changhua Christian Hospital, said that as it is the first time Taiwan has produced H1N1 vaccine, pregnant women should be clearly advised of the possibility of negative reactions before they receive the shots.
According to a weekly monitoring report released by the Central Epidemic Command Center a day earlier, there have been 16 cases of " suspected adverse events" among local pregnant women following H1N1 vaccinations, although initial investigations show that all the cases were unrelated to the vaccine.
Source: Taiwan News, 14 January 2010.
VAN UK's Comment: Authorities NEVER admit that an adverse event was caused by a vaccine, any and all adverse events are a 'coincidence'.
Woman Has Stillborn Baby After H1N1 Vaccine
A 37-year-old woman's child was stillborn on Tuesday - just weeks after she received a vaccination against human swine flu (H1N1).
The woman was 28 weeks' pregnant when she was admitted to Tuen Mun Hospital after she reported decreased fetal movement and no heart sound could be detected.
A spokesman for the Centre for Health Protection said there is "no medical evidence presently to suggest that the intrauterine death was related to the vaccination."
But he said cases of stillbirths following swine flu vaccinations have also been recorded overseas.
Source: The Standard, 21 January 2010.
Pregnant Women Warned Not to Get H1N1 Shot or Any Vaccine
A top mainland infectious diseases expert says women who are less than three months pregnant should not be vaccinated against human swine flu H1N1.
But Hong Kong health chiefs have no plan to change their position of advising moms-to-be to get the jab, despite the warning from Zhong Nanshan, director of the Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Diseases.
Speaking in Beijing yesterday, Zhong said it was "not advisable" for those who are less than three months pregnant to receive any vaccinations, including H1N1.
But Zhong believes the recent cases of stillbirth in three Hong Kong women who had received H1N1 vaccines were only "individual cases."
Zhong said stillbirths and miscarriages could happen easily in the first three months of pregnancy, as women are more vulnerable to the risk of side effects from medicines and vaccines.
In response, the Department of Health defended its policy of advising the high-risk groups, including pregnant women, to receive vaccinations for seasonal flu and H1N1.
The department reiterated that the World Health Organization and overseas health authorities have reaffirmed that the swine flu vaccination is safe for pregnant women.
However, doctors find themselves caught in a difficult position when giving advice to patients in view of conflicting views on the issue.
Veteran obstetrician-gynecologist Lau Kwok-lam said doctors would usually not take the initiative to advise pregnant women whether to receive the vaccination.
Source: The Standard, 5 March 2010.
Pregnancy May NOT be a Risk Factor for H1N1 Flu
Two women required intensive care unit admission, but there were no fatalities among 98 pregnant women admitted to one hospital for 2009 influenza A (H1N1), according to findings from a Spanish cohort presented here at the 50th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
Pregnancy is classically considered a risk factor for severe influenza disease based on previous research data, said Jose R. Pano-Pardo, MD, of the University Hospital of La Paz in Spain, who presented the findings. We wanted to investigate the risk factors for severe disease among a cohort of pregnant women and non-pregnant women of child-bearing age, which we determined was 15 to 45 years.
The prospective cohort trial was conducted at 13 hospitals in Spain belonging to the REIPI (Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases). Eligible participants included 98 pregnant women and 112 non-pregnant women, all of reproductive age. All participants had a proven diagnosis of the 2009 strain and were admitted to a participating hospital between June 12 and Nov. 10, 2009.
Diagnosis was based on real-time [polymerase chain reaction] testing, Pano-Pardo said. Early antiviral therapy was defined as being administered less than 48 hours after onset of symptoms, and severe disease was defined as ICU admission or death.
Non-pregnant women were more likely than pregnant women to be admitted to the ICU, 18% vs. 2% (P<.001). There were also more deaths among non-pregnant women, five vs. zero, (P=.06).
Non-pregnant women had more associated comorbid conditions than pregnant women, 44% vs. 18% (P<.001). The most commonly observed condition in both groups was asthma, at a rate of 20% among non-pregnant women and 13% among pregnant women. We also observed fewer severe symptoms among pregnant women at presentation, Pano-Pardo said.
The time between onset of symptoms and hospital admission was 3 days among non-pregnant women and 2 days among pregnant women (P<.001). Fewer non-pregnant women received antiviral therapy, 52% vs. 28%, (P=.001).
Regarding clinical outcomes, the length of hospital stay was shorter in pregnant women, Pano-Pardo said. Also, a higher number of non-pregnant women received early antiviral therapy.
Results of a multivariate analysis and a matched cohort analysis indicated that pregnancy was not associated with complicated influenza. Chronic pulmonary disease and morbid obesity were risk factors for severe disease, but not pregnancy, Pano-Pardo said.
A lower threshold for hospital admission in pregnant women might partially explain the results, since less severely ill patients were considered in the pregnant women subcohort, Pano-Pardo said in an interview. Nevertheless, an increased awareness among clinicians regarding pregnant women might have warranted a higher proportion of early antiviral therapy, which is the main modifiable favorable prognostic factor recognized to date.
In summary, the data presented show a lower risk of severe disease among pregnant women with influenza 2009 A (H1N1) than previously suggested but are in coherence with other studies including consecutive admitted patients, he said. These data suggest the need and opportunity to perform a systematic review of outcomes of influenza 2009 A (H1N1) among pregnant women.
Source: Infectious Disease News, 15th September 2010.
Pano-Pardo J. V-652. Prognosis of 2009 A (H1N1) Influenza in Admitted Pregnant Women in a Context of Early Diagnosis and Therapy. Presented at: 50th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy; Sept. 12-15, 2010; Boston.
Newborn Dies after Mother was Vaccinated Against Flu in Pregnancy
Three patient deaths have been reported to the State's drugs monitoring agency relating to administration of the swine flu vaccine Pandemrix in the past two years, according to figures obtained by irishealth.com
The deaths occurred in a baby whose mother was given the vaccine, and in two elderly people.
And the Irish Medicines Board (IMB) has told irishhealth.com that 139 deaths were linked to medicines in the top 10 list* (see below) that had the highest number of reported adverse reactions from January 2010 to December 2011.
The IMB has stressed that that three deaths reported to it in patients exposed to Pandemrix does not necessarily indicate a direct link between the vaccine and the deaths.
The Medicines Board says in many cases where patients' deaths were linked to drug or vaccine reactions, the death may have been caused by other factors, such as underlying illnesses or progression of the patients' disease, and many of the patients taking drugs where fatalities were reported were already seriously ill.
However, the Medicines Board cannot state for certain exactly how many of the deaths reported to it among those taking medicines may have been directly linked to a reaction to a particular drug/vaccine.
It says of those fatal reports received in relation to Pandemrix, two of the patients were aged over 80 years and were reported to have had pneumonia.
In the third case, the death reported was of a newborn infant.
Howwever, the IMB said the baby, whose mother had previously been given the Pandemrix vaccine, was seriously ill and had multiple post-birth complications. It said the infant's death was unlikely to have been a direct fatality as a result of an adverse reaction to the vaccine.
The deaths were recorded among 779 reports of adverse reactions to pandemic flu vaccines given to the IMB over the two-year period.
There have been reports of a possible link between Pandemrix and the sleeping disorder narcolepsy in young people.
The IMB said many people who received the H1N1 vaccines had chronic underlying medical conditions which put them at greater risk of developing serious complications.
Source: Irish Health, 29th February 2012.
Maternal thimerosal exposure results in aberrant cerebellar oxidative stress, thyroid hormone metabolism, and motor behavior in rat pups; sex- and strain-dependent effects
Methylmercury (Met-Hg) and ethylmercury (Et-Hg) are powerful toxicants with a range of harmful neurological effects in humans and animals. While Met-Hg is a recognized trigger of oxidative stress and an endocrine disruptor impacting neurodevelopment, the developmental neurotoxicity of Et-Hg, a metabolite of thimerosal (TM), has not been explored. We hypothesized that TM exposure during the perinatal period impairs central nervous system development, and specifically the cerebellum, by the mechanism involving oxidative stress. To test this, spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) or Sprague-Dawley (SD) rat dams were exposed to TM (200 μg/kg body weight) during pregnancy (G10-G15) and lactation (P5-P10). Male and female neonates were evaluated for auditory and motor function; cerebella were analyzed for oxidative stress and thyroid metabolism. TM exposure resulted in a delayed startle response in SD neonates and decreased motor learning in SHR male (22.6%), in SD male (29.8%), and in SD female (55.0%) neonates. TM exposure also resulted in a significant increase in cerebellar levels of the oxidative stress marker 3-nitrotyrosine in SHR female (35.1%) and SD male (14.0%) neonates. The activity of cerebellar type 2 deiodinase, responsible for local intra-brain conversion of thyroxine to the active hormone, 3',3,5-triiodothyronine (T3), was significantly decreased in TM-exposed SHR male (60.9%) pups. This coincided with an increased (47.0%) expression of a gene negatively regulated by T3, Odf4 suggesting local intracerebellar T3 deficiency. Our data thus demonstrate a negative neurodevelopmental impact of perinatal TM exposure which appears to be both strain- and sex-dependent.
Source: Cerebellum. 2012 Jun;11(2):575-86 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22015705
Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
Influenza vaccination during all trimesters of pregnancy is now
universally recommended in the United States. We critically
reviewed the influenza vaccination policy of the CDCs Advisory
Committee on Immunization Practice (ACIP) and the citations that
were used to support their recommendations.
The ACIPs citations and the current literature indicate that
influenza infection is rarely a threat to a normal pregnancy. There is
no convincing evidence of the effectiveness of influenza vaccination
during this critical period. No studies have adequately assessed the
risk of influenza vaccination during pregnancy, and animal safety
testing is lacking. Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative present
in most inactivated formulations of the vaccine, has been implicated
in human neurodevelopment disorders, including autism, and a
broad range of animal and experimental reproductive toxicities
including teratogenicity, mutagenicity, and fetal death. Thimerosal is
classified as a human teratogen.
The ACIP policy recommendation of routinely administering
influenza vaccine during pregnancy is ill-advised and unsupported
by current scientific literature, and it should be withdrawn. Use of
thimerosal during pregnancy should be contraindicated.
Source: Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons Volume 11 Number 2 Summer 2006.
Full article here: http://www.jpands.org/vol11no2/ayoub.pdf
Embryonic exposure to thimerosal, an organomercury compound, causes abnormal early development of serotonergic neurons
Even though neuronal toxicity due to organomercury compounds is well known, thimerosal, an organomercury compound, is widely used in pediatric vaccine preservation. In the present study, we examined whether embryonic exposure to thimerosal affects early development of serotonergic neurons. Thimerosal (1mg Hg/kg) was intramuscularly administered to pregnant rats on gestational day 9 (susceptible time window for development of fetal serotonergic system), and fetal serotonergic neurons were assessed at embryonic day 15 using anti-serotonin antibodies. A dramatic increase in the number of serotonergic neurons localized to the lateral portion of the caudal raphe was observed in thimerosal group (1.9-fold increase, p<0.01 compared to control). These results indicate that embryonic exposure to thimerosal affects early development of serotonergic neurons.
Source: Neurosci Lett. 2011 Nov 14;505(2):61-4 - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21669256
Maternal transfer of mercury to the developing embryo/fetus: is there a safe level?
Mercury (Hg) exposure is ubiquitous in modern society via vaccines, fish/crustacea, dental amalgam, food, water, and the atmosphere. This article examines Hg exposure in the context of primary exposure to pregnant women and secondary exposure experienced by their unborn babies. Babies in utero are particularly at risk of higher Hg exposure than adults (on a dose/weight basis through maternal Hg transfer via the placenta), and are more susceptible to adverse effects from mercury and its biologically active compounds. It is, therefore, critical that regulatory advisories around maximum safe Hg exposures account for pregnant women and secondary exposure that children in utero experience. This study focused on standardized embryonic and fetal Hg exposures via primary exposure to the pregnant mother of two common Hg sources (dietary fish and parenteral vaccines). Data demonstrated that Hg exposures, particularly during the first trimester of pregnancy, at well-established dose/weight ratios produced severe damage to humans including death. In light of research suggestive of a mercuric risk factor for childhood conditions such as tic disorders, cerebral palsy, and autism, it is essential that Hg advisories account for secondary prenatal human exposures.
Toxicological & Environmental Chemistry
Volume 94, Issue 8, 2012, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02772248.2012.724574
Comparison of VAERS fetal-loss reports during three consecutive influenza seasons: was there a synergistic fetal toxicity associated with the two-vaccine 2009/2010 season?
The aim of this study was to compare the number of inactivated-influenza vaccine-related spontaneous abortion and stillbirth (SB) reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database during three consecutive flu seasons beginning 2008/2009 and assess the relative fetal death reports associated with the two-vaccine 2009/2010 season. The VAERS database was searched for reports of fetal demise following administration of the influenza vaccine/vaccines to pregnant women. Utilization of an independent surveillance survey and VAERS, two-source capture-recapture analysis estimated the reporting completeness in the 2009/2010 flu season. Capture-recapture demonstrated that the VAERS database captured about 13.2% of the total 1321 (95% confidence interval (CI): 815-2795) estimated reports, yielding an ascertainment-corrected rate of 590 fetal-loss reports per million pregnant women vaccinated (or 1 per 1695). The unadjusted fetal-loss report rates for the three consecutive influenza seasons beginning 2008/2009 were 6.8 (95% CI: 0.1-13.1), 77.8 (95% CI: 66.3-89.4), and 12.6 (95% CI: 7.2-18.0) cases per million pregnant women vaccinated, respectively. The observed reporting bias was too low to explain the magnitude increase in fetal-demise reporting rates in the VAERS database relative to the reported annual trends. Thus, a synergistic fetal toxicity likely resulted from the administration of both the pandemic (A-H1N1) and seasonal influenza vaccines during the 2009/2010 season.
Source: Hum Exp Toxicol. 2013 May;32(5):464-75. doi: 10.1177/0960327112455067. Epub 2012 Sep 27. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23023030