Measles outbreak in Europe

[bubbleymummy]

Interesting that there was a large outbreak in Bulgaria in 2009/2010 despite a vaccination rate of 96% Figures here

Measles in the US is generally confined to imported cases, cases where unvaccinated individuals are exposed to imported cases, and outbreaks where communities that are not vaccinated (usually for religious reasons) are exposed. SSPE has not occurred significantly there since the advent of measles vaccine in the 1960s.

Here's a synopsis of the first study mentioned in the link.
"Using genetic analysis, the researchers demonstrated that only wild-type measles virus strains caused these cases of SSPE.
The researchers found an incidence off SSPE of 22 per 100,000 cases of measles; adjusting for under-reporting they estimated that the incidence of SSPE was likely to be between 7 and 11 cases per 100,000 cases of measles." This is the only study in the vaccineinjury that supports any conclusion whatsoever, and it is the opposite of what the vaccineinjury author wants to suggest. 'There is no way to make this consistent with the idea that measles containing vaccine cause SSPE.' Yes to this.

From this study, not mentioned in the link -- 'Measles virus (MV) is an important human pathogen that induces a generalized transient immune suppression that accounts for most of the mortality associated with measles as well as a specific immune response that provides life-long protection (41). This paradoxical effect is most likely due to early interactions of MV with cells of the immune system, including conventional and plasmacytoid dendritic cells (cDC and pDC). Manifold functions of DCs are compromised by MV infection, which is proposed to contribute to immune suppression (19). A particularly remarkable feature of MV is the ability to shut down IFNα production in response to TLR7 and TLR9 ligands in infected human pDC in vitro, as we could show previously (48).'

The vaccineinjury article suggests that other viruses also contribute to suppression of the immune response before exposure to MV.

The Th1/Th2 article mentioned in the link basically speculated that Th2 biased response to the vaccination might not confer lasting immunity and didn't proceed even to speculate about transition from Th1 to Th2 transition. (I think a slightly different interpretation of this article was reached by the vaccineinjury author).

Paragraph 6, beginning 'Wakefield and Co', is speculation based on the discredited theories of Andrew Wakefield (see 'The Crash and Burn of an Autism Guru' article from the New York Times). In a nutshell -- 'his belief, based on a paper he wrote about 12 children, is that the three vaccines {MMR}, given together, can alter a child?s immune system, allowing the measles virus in the vaccine to infiltrate the intestines; certain proteins, escaping from the intestines, could then reach and harm neurons in the brain.'

Par. 7, ('When considering at which point...') arising from Par. 6, is based on the same speculation. 'This could be the reason why it would be better not to vaccinate against the measles but at least not to vaccinate MMR.' This is a highly dubious conclusion therefore.

Paragraph 8, with the link to a study in Africa draws a conclusion that is not warranted by the study imo.

What I find interesting about the article is that it shows the danger of not checking your sources very carefully before citing them, because the conclusions the author drew are not supported by all of the studies he cited. A parent scanning the internet for information on a child's malaise might be taken in by the appearance of serious and reasonable science-based conclusions in an article like this, and that is sad.

thank you Mathanxiety. The author of that piece does not have a very good command of English. I am guessing* he took the references from other German-speaking vaccine critics that misrepresented the content of those papers.

*this is an educated guess, since I have extensively corresponded with that web site's owner about SSPE in the early 2000s

Yes, using 'measle' as a singular noun was a bit of a giveaway.

www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=201107281824dowjonesdjonline000835&title=update-fda-faults-merck-plant-for-charred-shrink-wrap-in-vaccine-vials

Anyone care to comment on this?

yuck! despicable blunder!

I wasn't sure it could even be true. Mind you, they haven't denied it.
If MMR jabs in the UK were affected, we would, of course, have been told. We would then have been told it's nothing to worry about.............

otoh, there have been no reports on adverse effects from the sterilised bits of charred shrink wrap and they have been found at a reported rate of one in 6 million vials of vaccine. The vaccine afaik is transferred into syringes from the vials so any particles would most likely not end up in a person.

By contrast, the average human eats 1 to 2 lbs of insects every year along with the processed food products they are encased in. Plus rodent hair and faeces.

still such blunder should be avoided...

Nie effort but you can't make this out to be an isolated blunder.

"the latest quality problem identified by U.S. regulators at the company's biggest vaccine-making plant...

"In 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a formal warning letter about deficiencies at Merck's West Point plant. Since then, FDA inspection reports have cited more problems: the presence of metal particles in certain products, cracks in vaccine vials and delays in Merck's reporting to the FDA of adverse events from products made at the plant...

"...the drug industry has experienced a series of manufacturing-quality difficulties in recent years, which observers have blamed on aging equipment and budget cuts. ..Other FDA inspection findings included the following:

• In August 2010, an FDA inspector accused Merck of not reporting to the agency certain adverse events associated with patients' use of its drugs within the required 15 calendar days.

• In February 2009, an inspector cited the presence of metal particles in certain products, as well as cracked vials. The report said Merck should have done more to investigate and address the causes of these problems. Also, Merck had received complaints from doctors regarding bubbling and foaming in vials of certain vaccines.

And this company (like most pharmaceuticals) spends about the same on advertising and marketing as research and development, that's after slashing ad budgets.. Advertising alone is still 750 million without marketing, market research and so on.

wrt reporting of adverse effects -- patients are supposed to report an adverse effect to their doctor, who in turn is supposed to report to the CDC. When yo take your child for shots in the US they give you a sheaf of papers with phone numbers to call in case of side effects and encourage parents to call if they are worried about their child after a shot. It is not a question of the CDC relying on Merck or any other manufacturer, and no other source, for reports of adverse effects.

wrt the shrink wrap -- 'Since November 2009, Merck has submitted to the FDA at least 12 reports of the charred shrink wrap being found in vaccines, according to the FDA report. Eight arose from consumer complaints, and four stemmed from Merck's internal sample testing.' Apart from wondering about the phrase 'at least 12 reports' (is it 12 or is there some confusion over the number of reports?) 12 reports in 3 years is not that much considering the number of vials of vaccine manufactured (sales of $3.8 billion). No, it is not great to have any foreign objects in vaccines, but otoh, the article features a deafening silence on the question of how many patients have suffered any adverse effects as a result.

Re: adverse effects - Merck has a responsiblity or the FDA wouldn't point out that it was avoiding its responsibility.

I think you miss the point Bruffin: poor equipment, many problems and a general slack attitude to the children who are their customers is the impression.

Your impression -- will be of an isolated incident.