Why Whooping Cough Vaccine Does Not Work As Advertised

Why Whooping Cough Vaccine Does Not Work As Advertised

Dees Illustration

A newly published article written by a former WHO vaccine committee
member has revealed that estimates for pertussis vaccine efficacy have
been greatly inflated because of inaccurate case definitions adopted by
the WHO in 1991 which required laboratory confirmation and 21 days or
more of paroxysmal cough, excluding and therefore concealing a veritable
submerged iceberg of vaccine-resistant cases of pertussis infection.


He states:
<blockquote class="tr_bq">I was a member of the WHO committee and
disagreed with the primary case definition because it was clear at that
time that this definition would eliminate a substantial number of cases
and therefore inflate reported efficacy values. 4–11 Nevertheless, the
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research of the Food and Drug
Administration accepted this definition, and package inserts of the
US-licensed DTaP vaccines reflect this.</blockquote>The article, written
by James D. Cherry, and published in the July. 2012 edition of
Pediatrics, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics,
pointed out that following the 2010 pertussis epidemic in California,
"there was considerable concern in the press and in public health
communications about the possible contribution of vaccine failures to
the problem." At that time, the media and government health officials
focused on the lack of sufficient vaccine coverage and subsequent
waning herd immunity, without questioning whether pertussis vaccination
actually results in effective immunization, which clearly it was not.

Perhaps already a tacit acknowledgement that the
vaccines are much less effective than what the manufacturers state is
the fact that the CDC recommends infants and children get the DTaP
vaccine no less than 5 times by age 6 (2 months, 4 months, 6 months, and
15 months through 18 months of age, with a booster at 4 through 6 years
of age).


The reality is that pertussis vaccines have failed many times in the
past, and will continue to do so. In three major outbreaks in Great
Britain (1974-5, 78-78 and 82) 30% of infected children had received all
three required doses of pertussis vaccine.[i]
Worse yet, in the 1993 pertussis epidemic in Cincinnati, OH, infection
occurred primarily among children who had been immunized. The authors
concluded:
<blockquote class="tr_bq">Since the 1993 pertussis epidemic in
Cincinnati occurred primarily among children who had been appropriately
immunized, it is clear that the whole-cell pertussis vaccine failed to
give full protection against the disease.[ii]</blockquote>More
recently, in Kings County Washington, between 2002-2007, of the 176
cases of pertussis in infants under age one, 77% were age-appropriately
vaccinated.[iii]

Ultimately,
the World Health Organization's arbitrary and vaccine-friendly case
definitions distort and occlude the fact that the incidence of pertussis
is actually rising in many countries – which is all the more
disturbing considering that primary immunization with 3 doses of the
pertussis vaccine within the first 6 months of life now exists in most
countries because of the WHO's global push towards universal
vaccination.[iv]

This is all the more suspect considering that crowded conditions, poor
nutrition, lack of hygiene and sanitation, and other environmental
factors which affect immune function (immune state determines
susceptibility to infection) are not even part of the discussion.

Furthermore, a great number of serious, if not also sometimes fatal adverse effects have been identified to be unintended, adverse effects of pertussis and DPaT vaccination.
How can we continue to justify, therefore, the use of a vaccine that
lacks effectiveness which may also cause severe harm to children who are
in their pre-vaccinated state already healthy?


Source:-
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/07/why-whooping-cough-vaccine-does-not.html