Gardasil Meets Measles: A Coincidence?

I had a feeling there was some ulterior motive behind the reporting of the “high” rate of measles outbreak last week.

by Barbara Loe Fisher

www.vaccineawakening.blogspot.com
www.NVIC.org
www.StandUpBeCounted.org
http://www.vran.org/vaccines/hpv/hpv.htm

The bad news about GARDASIL vaccine keeps getting worse and it was only a matter of time before government health officials promoted an “epidemic” to deflect attention from GARDASIL risks and create an excuse to point accusing fingers at parents who decline to give their children one or more of the 16 federally promoted vaccines. They did the same thing in 1985, when publicity about DPT vaccine reactions prompted officials at the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics to allege there were whooping cough epidemics in eight states due to parents rejecting DPT. Then as now, the cases of disease were divided between vaccinated and unvaccinated children and adults, which is hardly big news.

The government’s dire warnings came late last week after newspaper articles examined the muscle that Merck used to get GARDASIL fast tracked and licensed, followed by an aggressive multi-media advertising and lobbying campaign targeting teenage girls which has already netted the big pharmaceutical company more than $1.5 billion in sales worldwide. The New England Journal of Medicine published an editorial discussed in the Wall Street Journal asking good questions about the evidence for long term protection and cost effectiveness of mass use of GARDASIL vaccine, questions that NVIC first raised in 2007 .
And new concerns are being voiced about whether the vaccine is safe to give to adolescent girls , whose bodies are undergoing hormonal changes, as no studies have been published to evaluate whether there are increased risks for vaccine reactions depending upon when the vaccine is administered during a girl’s monthly hormonal cycle.

Last week, a CDC apparently weary of all the bad publicity about GARDASIL got its taxpayer-funded PR machine in gear and issued a media advisory warning that 131 cases of measles have been reported in the U.S. this year and that half of those cases involved unvaccinated children whose parents homeschooled their children or held religious or philosophical beliefs opposing use of one or more vaccines. National news stories and local news coverage examined the measles outbreaks and allegations of growing parental vaccine refusal.

The New York Times published an editorial and repeated unsubstantiated claims made by the CDC about the numbers of children, who were injured and died from measles in the past, stating that there were 400-500 deaths; 48,000 hospitalizations and 1,000 cases of brain injury out of 3-4 million measles cases every year prior to mass use of measles vaccine. A quick look at MMWR historical charts reveals that the highest number of reported cases of measles in the U.S. since 1945 (and before the measles vaccine was licensed in 1963) was 763,094 cases in 1958. Why don’t CDC officials publicly release the documented cases of hospitalization, injury and death due to measles in that year – or ANY year – instead of demanding blind faith in their version of the facts? (For decades, parents have been waiting for the CDC to document the widely published allegation that there are “36,000 deaths” due to influenza every year in the U.S., a statistic that is promoted to justify new directives that every baby and child through age 18 get annual flu shots.)

The publicizing of 131 cases of measles out of a population of 300 million people in the U.S. and blaming the “outbreak” on 63 cases that occurred in unvaccinated children, whose parents hold religious or conscientious objections to vaccination or homeschool, is a transparent attempt by federal employees to persecute fellow citizens holding religious beliefs, moral convictions, intellectual positions and wellness lifestyles different from their own. Adopting a strategy that “the best defense is a good offense,” CDC officials are whipping up fear of those who do not vaccinate in order to cover up a three decade refusal to scientifically investigate reports of children regressing into autism and other kinds of chronic illness after administration of MMR and other vaccines. They know the truth about vaccine risks is becoming more widely known and are lobbying hard for removal vaccine exemptions they do not control so all Americans will be forced without exception to get every vaccine marketed by industry and mandated by government officials.

The premature licensure and universal use recommendation of GARDASIL is just the latest example of what is wrong with the mass vaccination system. If there is a crisis of confidence in the safety of vaccines, which prompts parents to ask pediatricians more questions and seek alternative health care options for keeping their children well, that crisis of confidence can be laid squarely at the feet of those operating the mass vaccination system for failing to do their job. As Generation Rescue founder J.B. Handley recently commented, “Most parents I know will take measles over autism.

There is a 92 to 100 percent uptake of MMR vaccine and many other federally recommended childhood vaccines among children entering kindergarten in every state. This is one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, especially in such a large population. If the MMR vaccine is so unreliable that a few hundred cases or even a few thousand cases of measles among 300 million people is a cause for panic, then the benefits of MMR vaccine weighed against its risks are far less than industry, government and medical organizations have admitted.

In the 1960’s, when the live virus measles vaccine was licensed, parents were told it would give their babies the same lifelong immunity that having the natural disease confers. By the late 1980’s, it was clear that was not true because measles was occurring in both vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Government officials eventually recommended another dose of measles vaccine (usually given as MMR) for all children even though there were outstanding questions about the multiplication of different genetic strains of measles and how this may affect the vaccine’s ability to prevent measles on an individual and population basis long term.

Today’s young mothers do not have qualitatively superior measles antibodies to transfer to their newborns to protect them in the first year of life as past generations of mothers did because most young mothers giving birth today have been vaccinated and never had measles as children, which confers lifelong immunity. So babies born today are vulnerable to measles from birth instead of from ages 15 months to six years, which is when most children in the past experienced measles by age six and severe complications were rare. For several decades, vaccinologists have been attempting to create a “high titer” EZ measles vaccine that can be given to infants under one year that will override any existing natural maternal antibodies and replace them with vaccine induced antibodies but there have been long-standing questions about EZ measles vaccine safety .

Vaccination does not mimic the natural disease process and offers only temporary immunity, which is why vaccine boosters are frequently given. Every vaccine carries a reaction risk that can be greater for some than others. Measles vaccine, which is part of the combination live virus MMR (measles-mumps- rubella) vaccine can cause brain inflammation and permanent brain damage . There have been more than 46,000 reports of health problems associated with MMR vaccination made to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) . However, there is gross underreporting of vaccine- related health problems to VAERS and it is estimated that, for example, fewer than 4 percent of all cases of thrombocytopenia (potentially fatal blood disorder) following MMR vaccination are ever reported to VAERS.

The CDC’s one-size-fits-all, no-exceptions MMR vaccine policies allow almost no contraindications to MMR vaccine use. According to the CDC, a child can be sick at the time of vaccination or recovering from an illness; have a fever; be taking antibiotics; have a history of allergies; or have experienced a seizure or regression after a previous MMR shot and still be eligible for more MMR vaccine. This kind of cavalier disregard for minimizing vaccine risks is one reason why more parents are questioning government vaccine policies.

Parents, whether they do or do not vaccinate their children, should become informed and clearly understand the symptoms and complications of every infectious disease, including measles. Parents who choose to vaccinate should have a 99 to 100 percent guarantee that the vaccine will, indeed protect their child. They should have a similar guarantee that the vaccine will not injure or kill their child.

Like all pharmaceutical products, vaccines should be subject to the law of supply and demand. When people are captive and unable to make informed, voluntary decisions about vaccines that have been rushed to market on greased skids by federal health agencies, where every vaccine reaction is unscientifically labeled a “coincidence,” the first casualty is freedom and the second is the health of innocent children.

Public health officials and pediatricians should explain why 20 percent of America’s highly vaccinated child population suffers with chronic illness and disability rather than blaming parents who refuse to salute smartly and take the risk of watching the child they love become one more victim of vaccine damage.

To report a vaccine reaction to NVIC’s Vaccine Reaction Registry , go to http://www.nvic.org/Report/reaction.htm .

To view vaccine reaction reports, go to the Vaccine VictimMemorial at http://vaccinememorial.org/
__________________________________________

“Ms. Kim and Harvard colleague Sue Goldie concluded that it cost about $43,600 per “quality- adjusted life year” gained, when HPV vaccine is administered to 12-year-old girls. This falls below the $50,000 per quality-adjusted life year threshold that some researchers use as a maximum for cost- effectiveness. Other researchers use a higher maximum benchmark of $100,000 per QALY to gauge cost-effectiveness….. At least one of the factors in the primary Harvard calculations may be a relatively optimistic assumption — that vaccination would produce lifelong immunity. Because the vaccine was only studied for five years and has been on the market for two years, no one knows for certain if its protection is lifelong, or if it wanes over time. The Harvard researchers concluded that the cost per QALY would rise if the vaccine’s effect wanes after 10 years. Merck says the vaccine will offer protection well beyond five years, Dr. Haupt said. The Merck economic model that arrived at the cost per QALY below $50,000 assumed lifelong immunity, he said. Still, the study is likely to fuel skepticism about Gardasil, which has already faced questions surrounding its safety and effectiveness (Merck and the CDC maintain it is safe and effective, with the most common side effect being soreness at site of injection.)” – Peter Loftus, Wall Street Journal (August 21, 2008) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121928503311259059.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

“Why has there not been any mention of the potentially adverse effects of Merck’s cervical cancer vaccination, Gardasil® in relationship to the timing of the vaccination and where a young woman is in her menstrual cycle? This information is especially critical considering the vaccination is recommended for adolescent girls from the age of nine to young women up to 26-years. Why is it that women are constantly forced into a male medical model which blatantly ignores their menstrual health and administers drugs, surgeries, and vaccinations without any regard to where women are in their hormone cycle?….As the female hormone levels of estrogen and progesterone decrease during the premenstrual phase, the female body begins the process of releasing the uterine lining in the act of menstruation. The decrease in hormones actually affects a woman’s energy levels and her emotions. The immune system becomes more compromised, and that translates to a lowered defense system to fight off invading, foreign toxins….. In her 1977 groundbreaking book, “The Premenstrual Syndrome”, Katharina Dalton noted that drug reactions “…..are common during the premenstruum and may follow administration of antibiotics and inoculations. Confusion may occur as to the real origin of such reactions. In double-blind, clinical trials the placebo drugs are often reported to have side effects such as increased drowsiness, headache, nausea, or increased pain; which may be no more than the usual premenstrual symptoms which have not been meticulously observed and reported.” – Leslie Carol Botha and H. Sandra Chevalier-Batik, Holy Hormones (August 21, 2008)
http://holyhormones.com/about-2/articles-by-leslie/now-hold-on-one-hormonal-minute%E2%80%A6/

“Measles cases in the U.S. are at the highest level in more than a decade, with nearly half of those involving children whose parents rejected vaccination, health officials reported Thursday. Worried doctors are troubled by the trend fueled by unfounded fears that vaccines may cause autism. The number of cases is still small, just 131, but that’s only for the first seven months of the year. There were only 42 cases for all of last year…..The CDC’s review found that a number of cases involved home-schooled children not required to get the vaccines. Others can avoid vaccination by seeking exemptions, such as for religious reasons…..The vaccine is considered highly effective but not perfect; 11 of this year’s cases had at least one dose of the vaccine. Of this year’s total, 122 were unvaccinated or had unknown vaccination status. Some were unvaccinated because the children were under age 1 – too young to get their first measles shot. In 63 of those cases – almost all of them 19 or under – the patient or their parents refused the shots for philosophical or religious reasons, the CDC reported. In Washington state, an outbreak was traced to a church conference, including 16 school-aged children who were not vaccinated. Eleven of those kids were home schooled and not subject to vaccination rules in public schools. It’s unclear why the parents rejected the vaccine. The Illinois outbreak – triggered by a teenager who had traveled to Italy – included 25 home-schooled children, according to the CDC report.” – Mike Stobbe, Associated Press (August 21, 2008)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080821/ap_on_he_me/med_measles_outbreaks

“He was advanced for his age. He was talking when he was 11 months old,” recalls Edward Delean. The father of 4 says everything changed after his now 9 year old son who has autism was vaccinated against measles, mumps, and rubella or MMR. It was like that was it. He never talked again, he still doesn’t talk. He has about 10 words,” he says, adding, “it really devastated our family. I just destroyed us.” Testimonials like that have led some parents to shun vaccinations altogether. The Centers for Disease Control says measles cases have dramatically increased from 42 cases in all of last year to 131 in just the first seven months of this year because of parents who are rejecting the MMR vaccine for their kids. “It doesn’t serve us well when we have government officials trying to create fear and anxiety” says Barbara Loe Fisher with the National Vaccine Information Center. She says some parents opt out of immunizations for religious or philosophical reasons. Others have said no because their kids have had adverse reactions to the vaccines that are usually given on a set schedule. “Right now we’re seeing a one-size fits all approach to vaccination that doesn’t really recognize that children are different, that children react differently to vaccinations,” she says.” – Nancy Yamada, WUSA9-TV (August 21, 2008)
http://www.wusa9.com/news/health/story.aspx?storyid=75284&catid=28

12 Babies from Poor Families Die in Glaxo Vaccine Trials

Source: Trading Markets.

Buenos Aires, Jul 10, 2008

At least 12 babies who were part of a clinical study to test the effectiveness of a vaccine against pneumonia have died over the past year in Argentina, the local press reported Thursday.

The study was sponsored by global drug giant GlaxoSmithKline and uses children from poor families, who are “pressured and forced into signing consent forms,” the Argentine Federation of Health Professionals, or Fesprosa, said.

“This occurs without any type of state control” and “does not comply with minimum ethical requirements,” Fesprosa said.

The vaccine trial is still ongoing despite the denunciations, and those in charge of the study were cited by the Critica newspaper as saying that the procedures are being carried out in a lawful manner.

Colombian and Panama were also chosen by GSK as staging grounds for trials of the vaccine against the pneumococcal bacteria.

Since 2007, 15,000 children under the age of one from the Argentine provinces of Mendoza, San Juan and Santiago del Estero have been included in the research protocol, a statement of what the study is trying to achieve.

“Only 12 have died throughout the country, which is a very low figure if we compare it with the deaths produced by respiratory illnesses caused by the pneumococcal bacteria,” pediatrician Enrique Smith, one of the lead investigators, said.

In Santiago del Estero, one of the country’s poorest provinces, the trials were authorized when Enrique’s brother, Juan Carlos Smith, was provincial health minister.

According to pediatrician Ana Maria Marchese, who works at the children’s hospital in the provincial capital where the studies are being conducted, “because they can’t experiment in Europe or the United States, they come to do it in third-world countries.”

“A lot of people want to leave the protocol but aren’t allowed; they force them to continue under the threat that if they leave they won’t receive any other vaccine,” said Julieta Ovejero, great aunt of one of the six babies who died in Santiago del Estero.

Fesprosa’s Juan Carlos Palomares said that “in most cases these are underprivileged individuals, many of them unable to read or write, who are pressured into including their children” in the trials.

According to Fesprosa, “the laboratory pays $8,000 for each child included in the study, but none (of that money) remains in the province that lends the public facilities and the health personnel for the private research.”

Hippie midwife shakes up obstetricians

By JUDY SIEGEL-ITZKOVICH, The Jerusalem Post.

Ina May Gaskin’s Spiritual Midwifery and Dr. Grantly Dick-Read’s Childbirth Without Fear inspired me to power through a long and hard labor without medical interFEARance. What really helped was going on all fours like Gaskin recommends, but which hospitals discourage you to do. They don’t like you to move around when they’ve got you hooked up like Frankenstein’s monster to all the monitors. Is this any way to birth? I’m surprised feminists hardly comment on how most women take such a passive, obsequious attitude toward birth and doctors.

Ina May Gaskin – the woman widely described as the “most famous” and “most authentic” midwife in the world – never even took a formal midwifery course. Nevertheless, obstetricians, who in most of the developed world prefer to deliver all babies themselves, have given her the ultimate honor – naming an obstetric procedure that literally saves life and limb after this unusual woman.

Observing how uneducated, poor women deliver babies under primitive conditions in Guatemala, Gaskin formulated what she claims is the most effective way to deal with shoulder dystocia, in which the baby’s head has already emerged but its shoulders are too broad to get out of the birth canal. Doctors try an incision on the perineum, pulling and twisting, but this can lead to fractures of the infant’s bones, brachial plexus injuries and more. Instead, Gaskin suggested putting the mother on all fours – a position common in indigenous cultures – and in the vast majority of cases, the baby will pop out “within a maximum of six minutes.”

SHE WAS brought to Israel earlier this month by Great Shape, a Jerusalem exercise studio based in the capital’s majestic YMCA building and with expertise in workouts for pregnant and post-natal women. Hundreds of women from around the country, including midwives, dolas, nurses, pregnant women and new mothers packed the auditorium to hear the folksy Gaskin being introduced by Great Shape director and co-founder Rachelle Oseran. Most of the audience were either modern Orthodox or secular Jewish women – and some brought along their babies whom they breastfed in a nursing corner where the sound was piped in so they wouldn’t miss out on Gaskin’s lectures between 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. If there had been a large number of obstetricians guarding their territory, opposing home births and demanding that midwives get academic training, however, the reception would probably have been cooler.

Widely known only by her first and middle names, Ina (pronounced eye-na) May was born in 1940 to a Protestant farming family in Iowa. She recalled that she was a tomboy who delivered papers; because of the birthing of farm animals she witnessed from an early age, she was interested in how creatures enter the world. She had initially planned to become an engineer, but a turning point came at age 16, when she borrowed from a library the classic natural-childbirth guide by British obstetrician Dr. Grantly Dick-Read called Childbirth Without Fear.

“It made sense. If you’re not afraid of childbirth, you breathe better and your muscles are more relaxed so you can have the baby more easily,” she said from the YMCA stage.

AFTER GRADUATING from her hometown high school, she attended a community college, married charismatic “hippie guru” Stephen Gaskin at 19 and enrolled at the University of Iowa to study English. The idealistic Ina May and Stephen enlisted in the Peace Corps and lived for a time in Malaysia, where she taught English, but they returned to the heartland of America for her to earn her master’s degree in English.

While still a graduate student in 1966, she first gave birth in a hospital, attended by an obstetrician, but found the experience nothing like what Dick-Read had described in his book.

Ina May – a grandmother of two with long gray hair and dressed in a calf-length peasant skirt and blouse – recalled that she had been left alone most of her time in the delivery room. When her contractions intensified, doctors came in armed with forceps to pull out the baby, even though she had wanted to have hers naturally. She wasn’t permitted to see her daughter for a day and a half. “I wanted to have my next baby at home.”

Many US obstetricians of that era who encountered shoulder dystocia performed the Zavanelli Maneuver, in which they rotated the baby’s head and pushed it back into birth position before performing a Cesarean section.

“They decided to do this based on only 10 cases, and two of the women needed an immediate hysterectomy. I was surprised that it was even published in a medical journal. The Zavanelli Maneuver is sometimes still performed today!” said Ina May.

America’s obstetricians then believed that “all women need a big episiotomy” (incision in the perineum, sometimes even to the anus) to avoid injury to babies and mothers during birth. “Every first baby had to arrive by a forceps delivery. As a farmer’s daughter, I saw how animals were born – with no forceps. As I had read so many romantic 18th-century English novels, I thought I could escape my fate in the delivery room by being quiet, but it didn’t help. I wasn’t aware then that there were any midwives in the US. The profession had nearly been wiped out. There were 4.3 million births per year – almost all attended by obstetricians. Today,” said Ina May, “fewer than 10 per cent of US births are performed by midwives, and home births constitute less than 1%. Even so, this situation is very threatening to the American Medical Association, which is always trying to push through laws to prevent all home births by preventing payment for it.”

SHE WOULD probably envy Israel, where most babies are born with the help of midwives, and obstetricians are called in only if there is risk or if the couple pay privately. But there are few home births, as the Health Ministry says this is unnecessary and can endanger infants. Hospitals, which depend on per-baby payments from the National Insurance Institute, are not keen on losing the business, and women receive NII grants for delivering in a hospital.

After moving to San Francisco in 1970, the Gaskin family decided to start a commune in the center of the country. Some 250 people traveling in a bus caravan put down roots in Summertown, Tennessee and called the settlement near a forest The Farm. They grew their own food, but had no health insurance, ideologically refused to accept government help and had to manage without physicians.

“As lots of women were pregnant by the time we settled down in the commune” remembered Ina May, “they were having lots of babies.” She helped bring children into the world – her first one on a bus in a parking lot – without any formal training. The Farm’s population quadrupled in four years to 1,000 people.

Eventually, based on what she learned and recognized as a Certified Professional Midwife by a layman group as she lacked academic study, Gaskin wrote her best-selling books Spiritual Midwifery (1976) and Ina May’s Guide To Childbirth (2003) – both of which promoted natural childbirth and the home birth movement. Via her midwife quarterly, the Birth Gazette, she has promoted a woman-centered, low-intervention method of delivery.

AFTER GETTING some pointers from a kindly physician, she was so calm and collected while delivering babies that her fellow residents at The Farm asked her to attend them, often in their own bedrooms. Ina May believes that midwives like her who have learned from experience (“direct entry”) rather than from formal training should get a license like academically trained midwives, and pushed for this as a founder of the Midwives’ Alliance of North America.

When a terrible earthquake hit Guatemala, the Gaskins went there to help the victims by building homes and outhouses, capping springs and other tasks. “The average life expectancy there was 44 years. I met a foreign midwife, from Belize in Africa, who was living there and working as the district midwife,” Ina May recalled. “She supervised illiterate Mayan women, but found that when the baby’s shoulders got stuck, the natives knew better what to do than she herself had been taught. The woman turned onto her hands and knees and was able to push the baby out easily.”

Back at The Farm, there were 30 babies to deliver each month. “Shoulder dystocia had become America’s most feared birth problem. Victims had useless, even permanently paralyzed arms. Doctors were afraid of being sued.” Ina May was on hand to deliver the second child of her friend, Barbara. “His head was out, but she couldn’t push because his big fat cheeks were against the perineum. I remembered what I had seen in Guatemala and turned her over. She thought I was crazy, but her 10-pound [five kilo] baby was born immediately.”

INA MAY demonstrates on the YMCA stage why her maneuver is successful. Holding the front and back of her pelvis when standing straight, she instructs her audience to stand up and copy her. Bending forward, as if on all fours, they felt that the distance between the front and back of the pelvis expanded, leaving more room for the baby to get out.

“Another reason is when in the womb, the baby isn’t glued in any particular position. When its mother rolls over, the inertia of the baby’s weight can knock loose the wedged shoulder like a little ship inside a bottle.”

Her most exciting achievement was when she collaborated with Prof. Joe Bruner of Vanderbilt University and published an article about the Gaskin Maneuver in the May 1998 issue of the Journal of Reproductive Medicine; obstetricians who read it were gradually persuaded that perhaps it could be of use when dealing with shoulder dystocia. Yet she knows of hospital departments where the chief of obstetrics forbids women to go on all fours “because they regard this as a sexual position that has no place in a hospital.”

IN ANY delivery, Ina May advises, the midwife or obstetrician should “always take a very deep breath before saying anything. Then say it in a very quiet voice so you don’t scare the mother. Understanding the ring-shaped sphincter muscles that surround the natural openings in the body and can open or close them is also a very important part of childbirth, she continued. In addition to sphincter muscles in the heart, gastroenterological system, urethra, anus and mouth, the cervix and vagina are also sphincters.

“There are many women so afraid of birth that without knowing it, they close these sphincters during labor. They can remain contracted when the mother is tired or shy,” said Ina May. “When her mouth is open and smiling or laughing, you can feel the cervix and vagina soften and open. Fear can stop labor, and the baby can be drawn back into the uterus due to the adrenalin produced.”

Many Aztec or Mayan birthing figures, she noted, show stylized women with their mouths and vaginas open that were used to promote quicker delivery. She told of cases in which women were so frightened by the arrival of obstetricians that their babies went back into the birth canal for minutes, hours and even weeks.

Some women are so afraid that they will defecate, urinate or release gas during their labor that they involuntarily hold the fetus in, said Ina May. Some of these fears originate in their toilet-training period when they were derided or punished for “accidents.” Such women can have great difficulty delivering babies.

“If you suspect such trauma,” she told her audience, “make jokes about pooping, peeing or farting. ‘Shit’ is a perfectly acceptable word; Shakespeare and Chaucer used it. If a midwife can’t say these words during delivery, she’s in deep shit!” said Ina May in her typical homespun manner. “Our bottom parts work better when our top parts – our minds – are either grateful or amused at the antics or activities of our bottoms. Humans are the only animals disgusted by their own poo.”

This is not the style of most obstetricians, but it will be interesting to see whether women’s growing demands for more natural childbirth will bring “direct-entry” and academically trained midwives and physicians closer in their outlooks, choice of procedures and language.

“Well” Baby Visit Vaccines = One Dead Baby?

Keep your baby alive by not taking her to “well” baby visits with pediatricians. Family Practice doctors that don’t push shots and meds are a safe bet. Choose one whose office doesn’t contain Big Pharma posters, pens, and notepads.

By Kia Carter, WQAD.

QUAD CITIES — Wednesday all Genesis Medical Center Pediatric Clinics suspended their use of childhood vaccines. The decision comes after a baby received routine vaccinations on Tuesday, then died several hours later at home. Genesis Health Group says its suspending pediatric vaccinations merely as a precaution until the cause of the baby’s death can be determined.

Tuesday morning a 4-month-old baby boy came to the Genesis East Pediatrics Clinic in Silvis for a routine checkup that included several vaccinations. The seemingly healthy baby boy was brought in for a “well baby” visit, that’s a check up that includes routine vaccinations like pneumonia, and DPT, which is for diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough) and tetanus. Then Tuesday night his parents found him dead with no obvious cause for his death. Now all childhood vaccinations at Genesis clinics in Silvis, Bettendorf and Davenport have been temporarily suspended. A Genesis spokesman says hospital administration have no reason to believe the vaccines caused the baby’s death, but they want to be overly cautious.

“They’ll be a coroner’s examination of the baby and we’ll get a report. At that time we’ll most likely resume our vaccinations, because we don’t think there was a link between them and the child passing,” says Craig Cooper, Genesis Health Group spokesman.

Genesis has also sent the batch of vaccines the boy received off to the Food and Drug Administration and to the makers of the vaccines for testing. This is the first time Genesis has ever suspended pediatric vaccinations at it’s clinics. We’ll continue to bring you the latest as Genesis finds answers.

Heel prick blood tests DO hurt your baby, says study

File under “duh.”

Source: David Derbyshire, Mail Online.

Babies may find heel prick blood tests far more painful than doctors realise, a study suggests.

Researchers say some procedures often carried out on newborn infants trigger a pain response in the brain – even though the children appear to be unperturbed.

The findings could have implications for the way seriously ill babies are treated in hospital, particularly those given repeated injections or blood tests.

Past studies have shown that babies who do experience a lot of pain in the first few months of life can develop extreme sensitivity to pain as they get older.

Dr Rebeccah Slater, who carried out the study at University College London, said doctors needed better methods for assessing the suffering of babies.

Conventional measures of infant pain, which look for changing heart rates and grimaces, may underestimate what they are feeling.

‘Some babies go through many painful procedures each day,’ she said. ‘There is a risk it can change the way that they respond to pain in the future.’

Dr Slater and colleagues studied the reaction of 12 premature babies in hospital while having a heel prick test, a technique used to take blood from the feet of infants.

Every newborn baby is given the heel prick within the first couple of days of birth.

The blood samples are used to detect a range of rare life-threatening diseases including cystic fibrosis, sickle cell disease and congenital hypothyroidism.

Some babies cry and grimace when having the heel prick test. But others appear oblivious.

The scientists looked for signs of pain during 33 heel prick tests.

The researchers compared the results of standard techniques of measuring pain – such as changing heart rate, grimacing, flared nostrils and narrowed eyes – with near infra-red spectroscopy brain scans, a technique that detects changes in brain activity.

They found that the scans of parts of the brain involved in handling pain recorded far higher pain levels than the standard tests, they report in the journal Public Library of Science Medicine.

On ten occasions the brain scan revealed that the baby was in pain even though they did not grimace or cry.

Although the study was small, the scientists say doctors could underestimate the pain experienced by babies.

‘We really don’t know what a baby is feeling when it appears to be in pain,’ said Dr Slater. ‘But in adults, activity in the same part of the brain is strongly correlated with pain.

‘We want to develop better techniques to understand infant pain. Adults can tell each other when they are in pain, but babies cannot.’

Sensing pocketbook threat, AMA Seeks To Outlaw Home Births

In some states midwifery is illegal. The way to get around that is to have an unassisted or free birth at home. Laura Shanley’s BornFree site has more information and some amazing UC videos.

Source: Amie Newman, RHRealityCheck.

Update, 2:45pm, EDT: Wanted – Ricki Lake! Apparently the AMA has issued Resolution 205 partially in response to none other than Ricki Lake and her campaign to promote midwifery and natural childbirth as a safe option for healthy women via her documentary, The Business of Being Born. Safe Birth Ohio notes that, in Britain, mainstream medical associations like the Royal College of Gynecologists have come to very different conclusions about the safety of home birth as an option for healthy, laboring women. And, yet, the AMA has swung the pendulum in the opposite direction deciding homebirth should be outlawed and that Ricki Lake is dangerous to mamas everywhere.

In an unmistakably insecure and aggressive move, the American Medical Association (AMA) adopted a resolution at its annual meeting last weekend to introduce legislation outlawing home birth – according to The Big Push for Midwives.

According to the hard-working women of The Big Push for Midwives campaign, faced with the sisyphean task of convincing the American mainstream medical establishment that midwifery is a viable option for birthing women:

“It’s unclear what penalties the AMA will seek to impose on women who choose to give birth at home, either for religious, cultural or financial reasons-or just because they didn’t make it to the hospital in time,” said Susan Jenkins, Legal Counsel for The Big Push for Midwives 2008 campaign. “What we do know, however, is that any state that enacts such a law will immediately find itself in court, since a law dictating where a woman must give birth would be a clear violation of fundamental rights to privacy and other freedoms currently protected by the U.S. Constitution.”

In other words, advocating for legislation of this kind has the eery ring of familiarity. Legislative attempts at “criminalizing motherhood” have at their core coercive control over pregnancy and childbirth. Regina McKnight was recently released from jail after a judge overturned her homicide conviction for giving birth to a stillborn baby.

Likewise, Colorado’s ballot initiative in support of a “personhood amendment” would have untold consequences for pregnant women who accidentally or otherwise miscarry a pregnancy. If a fertilized egg is conferred “personhood” status why would a miscarriage not be investigated as potential murder?

The legal issues surrounding “fundamental rights to privacy” also, of course, reverberate throughout the discussions around Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to have an abortion in this country. Those who fight rigorously to strip away womens’ legal right to an abortion somehow seem to skirt the issue of what might happen to a woman if she does choose to access an illegal abortion.

What the AMA’s resolution and these other kinds of potential and actual legislation do is to open the door to penalizing motherhood, in effect. Because most of these legislative attempts do not directly address the issue, they leave the door dangerously open to criminalizing women for making the decisions they feel are best for themselves, their fetuses and their families.

Proposing this kind of legislation would also force women to birth in government-approved settings, a scenario that seems almost unbelievable. According to the Big Push for MIdwives:

Until the AMA proposed ‘Resolution 205 on Home Deliveries,’ no state had considered legislation forcing women to deliver their babies in the hospital or limiting the choice of birth setting. Instead, states have regulated the types of midwives that may legally provide care. Currently, 22 states already license and regulate CPMs, who specialize in out-of-hospital maternity care and have received extensive training to qualify as experts in the types of risk assessment and preventive care necessary for safe and high-quality care for women who choose give birth at home. Certified Nurse Midwives (CNMs), who are trained primarily as hospital-based providers, are licensed in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

The resolution did not offer any science-based information for the AMA’s anti-midwife or anti-home birth position.

Steff Hedenkamp, Communications Coordinator for The Big Push for Midwives says, “Maternity care is a multi-billion dollar industry in the United States. So it’s no surprise to see the AMA join the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in its ongoing fight to corner the market and ensure that the only midwives able to practice legally are hospital-based midwives forced to practice under physician control. I will say, though, that I’m shocked to learn that the AMA is taking this turf battle to the next level by setting the stage for outlawing home birth itself-a direct attack on those families who choose home birth, who could be subject to criminal prosecution if the AMA has its way.”

If you’d like to help The Big Push for Midwives fight this please visit their web site and push back against attempts to “deny American families access to safe and legal midwifery care.”

Hospitals do poorly on breast-feeding support

According to the CDC. I can’t believe so many hospitals are still giving sugar water to newborns! WTF are they thinking?!

By MIKE STOBBE, AP via Yahoo News.

ATLANTA – Most U.S. hospitals don’t do very well when it comes to promoting breast-feeding, according to the first national report to look at the issue. The average hospital scored 63 out of 100, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Thursday.

The researchers did not attach letter grades to the scores, but the results were clearly disappointing, said Deborah Dee, a CDC epidemiologist who co-authored the report.

“There is a lot of room for improvement,” said Dee.

States in New England and on the West Coast scored highest, and the South did the worst. Vermont and New Hampshire topped the list, tied with a score of 81. Arkansas had the poorest score, 48.

But practices unfriendly to breast-feeding were common throughout the country, the survey found.

About a quarter of hospitals reported giving formula or some other supplement to more than half of their healthy, full-term newborns. The practice was common even when mothers were able and willing to breast-feed, Dee said.

Of hospitals who gave supplements, 30 percent gave sugar water and 15 percent gave water.

Experts say there are no good nutritional reasons to use those, but it is commonly done to quiet crying babies separated from their mother. Sometimes it’s done to test a baby’s ability to feed — even though such a test is usually not necessary, Dee said.

Breast-feeding is considered beneficial to both mothers and their babies. Breast milk contains antibodies that can protect newborns from infections, and studies have found breast-fed babies are less likely to become overweight that those fed with formula.

But breast-feeding can be frustrating for new mothers because of nipple pain or the misperception that they’re not producing enough milk. It’s crucial that moms get proper breast-feeding advice and encouragement those first few days after birth, said Dr. Sheela Geraghty, a lactation expert at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center.

“It’s wonderful that hospitals and birth centers are being examined because if moms aren’t helped right there, where are they going to be helped?” Geraghty said.

The research was based on questionnaires filled out last year by about 2,700 U.S. maternity hospitals and birth centers. Hospitals were scored on supportive efforts, like offering breast-feeding tips and keeping the mother and the infant together. They also were evaluated on practices detrimental to breast-feeding, including supplemental feedings or including infant formula samples in gift packs for mothers.

Hospitals may regard the gift packs as benign, but the practice interferes with breast-feeding, said Laurence Grummer-Strawn, chief of the CDC’s nutrition branch.

“They don’t understand they’re implicitly endorsing a product and they’re giving an easy out for when parents are tired” to use the formula, he said.

The highest score for a hospital or birth center was 98; the lowest was 12. The CDC did not release individual scores.

___

On the Net:

CDC report with state list: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr

High Levels of Formaldehyde Found in Baby Furniture

Source: By Dennis O’Brien, Baltimore Sun.

A number of cribs and changing tables commonly sold at retail outlets contain unhealthy levels of formaldehyde, a consumer advocacy group reported yesterday.

A lab tested the furniture in sealed chambers and found formaldehyde levels in four changing tables and two cribs in excess of air quality standards set by California this year, according to Johanna Neumann, director of the Maryland Public Interest Research Group. Six of 21 cribs and other nursery products gave off formaldehyde at levels that increase the risk of asthma and respiratory problems, the group reported.

PIRG posted the report online yesterday after a news conference in Baltimore. The testing was conducted by Berkeley Analytical Associates, an environmental testing firm in Richmond, Calif.

“If anything, their calculations are on the conservative side,” said Thad Godish, an environmental management professor at Ball State University who was not involved in the report.

Newborns and toddlers are more sensitive than adults to formaldehyde in cabinetry and other wood-finished furniture, he said, but cribs may be where babies are the most exposed.

Concerns about formaldehyde vapors were heightened in 2006 after tests conducted on hundreds of trailers supplied to shelter Hurricane Katrina survivors showed excessive levels of the gas.

An additive used in wood products, drapes and home furnishings, formaldehyde is considered a probable carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency. Studies show that excessive exposure increases the risk of asthma and respiratory problems.

The report says the Child Craft Oak Crib, made by Indiana-based Child Craft Industries, had the highest formaldehyde of the 21 items tested, emitting 3,680 micrograms per hour. California’s standards will require building products to emit no more than 259 micrograms per hour by January 2009, Neumann said.

Child Care President Bill Suvak said the firm’s crib meets the latest safety standards established by industry experts and federal consumer protection mandates. He said he is confident the tests he is conducting will refute the advocacy group’s findings.

The report is available at: http://www.marylandpirg.org/report.

Stupid Mainstream Parent Products: Hands-Free Car Seat Carrier & bottle holder

I’m not providing a link—why encourage buying this useless thing? Those ubiquitous car seat carriers are bad enough; but do parents really need one more way NOT to hold their babies?

Here’s another product designed to help moms and dads maintain contact-free parenting: bottle holders. Why use a rolled up baby blanket:

When you can have this cute rice-filled one? It makes alienating parenting oh-so-fashionable!

Possible biological explanation for C-section-linked allergies and asthma found

Another reason, among many, not to choose c-sections.

Source: PhysOrg.

Scientists believe they may have identified a biological explanation for the link between cesarean-section delivery and risk of allergy and asthma in childhood. They will present their findings at the American Thoracic Society’s 2008 International Conference in Toronto on Tuesday, May 20.

Several studies have shown immunological differences between children with and without allergy at the time of birth. For example, increased cord blood levels of IL-13, a Th2 type cytokine, have been positively associated with allergy among children with a family history of allergy.

Regulatory T cells are a subgroup of T lymphocytes with immune suppressive properties on effector T cells, which in turn regulate cytokine secretion and the development and function of the immune system. Evidence suggests that CD4+CD25+ T regulatory (Treg) cells in those with asthma or allergy may be functionally impaired.

“Our research looked at the effect of cesarean-section versus vaginal delivery in newborns to determine whether cesarean-section was associated with reduced regulatory T-cell function,” said lead researcher Ngoc Ly, M.D., M.P.H., who is assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco.

In a previous study Dr. Ly and colleagues demonstrated an association between cesarean section and increased neonatal secretion of IL-13. In this latest study, the researchers measured the expression and function of specific regulatory T-cells in the cord blood of 50 newborns born by cesarean section, and 68 delivered vaginally, all of whose have at least one parent with allergies and/or asthma. They found that babies born by cesarean section showed a reduction in the suppressive function of their regulatory T-cells. There was a trend for lower level of TGF-ƒÒ, a cytokine secreted by tregs, and higher level of IL-4 and IL-13 among children born by c-section as compared to children born by vaginal delivery.

“This finding is exciting because it suggests that the mode of delivery may be an important factor influencing immune system development in the neonate,” said Dr. Ly, who postulated that the stress and process of labor itself or exposure to specific microbes through the birth canal in vaginal as compared to c-section delivery may influence neonatal immune responses.

“These findings are preliminary and further work is needed to explore potential mechanisms for the association between mode of delivery and neonatal immune responses,” she/he” explained. “However, this finding provided a potential immunologic basis for previous reports of the association among cesarean section, elevated IL-13 and allergy and asthma.”

Source: American Thoracic Society