From: Arun1951 <arun1951@gmail.com>
To: indiagroup <ihro@yahoogroups.com>; dsgill <dsgill@sify.com>
Sent: Wednesday, 22 July, 2009 10:10:27
Subject: [IHRO] Andre Maniotis exposes the WHO agenda of mass vaccination
from Andrew J. Maniotis, discussion on what vaccines do and WHO's agenda of mass culling
Dear Hapi.Health (Alliance),
Regarding your fear(s) that:
" The big problem now is the heavy hand of government to carry out mandatory
vaccination on all citizens. I did a wide search to find even ONE country that is not participating in WHO mass vaccine program / agenda and all I could find is 'possibly' a few Arabic countries. WHO has nearly complete lock-step approval from nearly all member states / signatories."
"This next round will be very ugly. As usual, the effects will always be profound to the human at the most essential immunologic level. It looks like ALL school kids will get forced into this program."
"Anyone in "a system" will be victimized (i.e. school, work, military, hospital staff, homes for the elderly, gov workers)"
"I am convinced the next 4-5 years will bring requirements to travel and
passport issuance to be contingent on proof of ALL mandatory vaccines and
boosters verification and that the the new medical records data base being
sold to congress is to facilitate this more than anything else."
Dear Hapi.health (Alliance),
Similar to the email I just sent about Burgermeister's dubious strategy with her lawsuit against Obama, Sebelius, The WHO, and others, versus the "Tenpenny" approach I have advocated we promote (and which I have attached to this email for you to widely circulate if you find it useful), again, I
suggest we approach the problems you address "soberly" (funny for me to
say I know) by not only citing those peer-reviewed publications in the
"Tenpenny" document that I forward to you, but in every exchange/mass
mailing. Also, we should include those sentences from the July 2009 WHO
interview piece (did you read the whole thing? I did-I have attached the
entire thing to this email so that the HIVAIDsPARADIGM FOLKS CAN SEE IT since they can't view attachments on their list-serve).
In the WHO interview of July 2009, there are many tacit admissions of
guilt, ignorance, and assumptions by the WHO officials, and these
admissions reveal unabashedly, the very issue(s) that doctors (on our
side) have been saying for years (like Jane Orient and Chester Danehower
Garth Nicoloson, and others of AAPS-or Gary Goldman of Pearblossom and
Medical Veritas)-that there has been NO testing done-none at all-on
children, pregnant women, or other "targets" of this insane Donald
Rumsfeld-directed crusade and assault on our health, civil liberties, and
futures (I need not remind you that tamiflu is Rumsfeld's Giliad
Bioscience company's drug-and extremely toxic and debilitating one at
that).
One of the most egregious things of all, of course, is that WHO keeps
talking about adjuvants in this new round of vaccines, that we know
involve squalene (as indicated by the WHO document and also the "Tenpenny"
piece I previously attached).
Here is the title of article (the entire once again is pasted below for
your reading pleasure, and because it is a long-winded piece, followed by
reporters questions in a back and forth with WHO officials, I'll quote
only several statements from that just released document):
2009 (July) WHO - Vaccinate Health Care Workers, Pregnant Women, School Aged Children First
[In other words : KILL FUTURE GENERATIONS]
Richard Knox, National Public Radio: "Dr Kieny, you said earlier that you
do not expect safety issues to arise with the pandemic vaccine and tests
but do you think that there is less risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome with
this new swine flu vaccine than there was in 1976 and why? And secondly, I
wonder with the accelerated safety tests that will be necessary, how many
subjects will you expect to have tested and how can experts draw
conclusions about safety from these tests when the vaccine has put into a
hundreds of millions of people."
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "It is not completely known why the vaccine which
was distributed against the swine flu in 1976 induced higher risk of
Guillain-Barre syndrome. There are a number of hypotheses and one of the
hypotheses is that the vaccine was contaminated by a component coming
from a bacterial infection that was inducing antibodies that
cross reacted with self protein and therefore, caused Guillain-Barre
syndrome [NON-SENSE]. The vaccines which are produced now are much better
purified [HORSE-SHIT] than the way they were in 1976, so we really do not
think that it is likely [LIKELY FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE] that
we will have these side effects again, but to be
absolutely honest [ABSOLUTELY HONEST?????] , of course it is only when you
have a large scale distribution of vaccines that you know with certainty
the safety profile of the vaccine [OH YES, OF COURSE-YOU SHILL!]. Modern
vaccines such as those which are used to immunize children and adults
currently in all countries of the world are very safe products [VERY SAFE
INDEED!]. Nevertheless, in a very [VERY VERY VERY VERY] small numbers of
people they do induce adverse reactions and this can be the case as well
for adjuvanted vaccines and non adjuvanted vaccines. So what needs to be
put in place and everyone is working towards this direction is a very good
surveillance system and monitoring adverse effects so that as soon as a
signal [SIGNAL? THEY CALL ADVERSE REACTIONS, "SIGNALS" NOW] pops up it can
immediately be followed-up, investigated and adequate public health
measures be taken to respond to that" [SO THAT LIKE FRANCE REPEALING THE
HEP B VACCINE, IT CAN BE HALTED BEFORE 15,000 PEOPLE CLAIM VACCINE
DAMAGE].
(Non-sense answer to Fox's question: check it out)!
Maggie Fox, Reuters: "If WHO wants to reassess its best case scenario for
how many vaccine doses might be available – I think the last number for
the best case scenario was 4.9 billion. And I am also wondering about
this issue with the virus strain not producing good
results. Was this also the same for the live vaccine or only for the
killed vaccine?"
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "In terms of updating the figures that we have
published for likely vaccine supply over the next 12 months, we will
update these figures but we want to wait to have some further information
to update these with some meaningful changes. First as we
have to have a definite idea of what yield manufacturers are getting with
inactivated vaccines: is it the same as seasonal, which was the assumption
that we took when we made the first calculation, or is it 50%, and these
of course as you may imagine will change the total
output. The other information which is still lacking as what is a dose of
inactivated H1N1 vaccine. Is it, without adjuvant, is it 50 micrograms, is
it 30 micrograms, we don't know [YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROPORTIONS OF
INGREDIENTS ARE IN 4.9 BILLION VACCINES YOU ARE ABOUT TO POISON US WITH?
INTERESTING ADMISSION I'D SAY]. And we will know as soon as the result of
the first clinical trial will come out [OH YOU MEAN THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY
COMPLETED CLINICAL TRIALS FOR A MEDICAL PRODUCT ABOUT TO BE ADMINISTERED
TO OUR CHILDREN AND PREGNANT WOMEN? INTERESTING ADMISSION I'D SAY],
although
the result will certainly be very adapted or relevant only to the vaccine
which will be tested [UNLIKE THE SECOND VERSION SWINE FLU VACCINE OF 1976
AS ADIMITTED BY THE CDC DIRECTOR INTERVIEWED BY MIKE WALLACE], it will
still give a flavour [A FLAVOUR? IS THIS SOME NEW KIND OF SCIENTIFIC
CERTAINTY-I HAVEN'T HEARD OF IT IN ALL THE LABS I'VE BEEN IN-THE FLAVOUR
OF THE RESULTS SUGGEST..... ..] of what kind of results we will have with
the other inactivated vaccines. You asked a question about the
live-attenuated vaccine, the response and the way this vaccine induces an
immune response is very different because these are replicative organisms
[ORGANISMS?? ? VIRUSES AREN'T ORGANISMS-YOU IDIOT], so they induce
antibodies and also anti-cell response" [OH, SO YOU GUYS ARE AWARE THESE
POISONS INDUCE AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES IS WHAT YOU ARE SAYING-YOU NAZI].
(And what I find most disturbing, as Dr. Jane Orient and others who have
testified in Congressional hearings would agree (I suspect?) are the
following admissions in this document):
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "Although in some countries the pharmaco-vigilance
system [NEW TERM-PHARMACO- VIGILANCE SYSTEM] is working very well [VERY
VERY VERY VERY WELL-LIKE VAERS DID IT IS ASSUMED, THAT IS A COMPILLATION
OF 1-10% OF ADVERSE REACTIONS??? ]and we will pick up signals (ADVERSE
REACTIONS-"SIGNALS") very easily, in other countries there need to be an
increased attention to the pharmaco-vigilance system, notably in the
developing countries and WHO is already working with countries to try
[TRY?????] and use systems in place, like the system that the Polio
Initiative uses to detect cases of acute flaccid paralysis [GREAT
EXAMPLE-WHICH IS WHY NIGERIA, AND INDIA-MOST HEAVILY POLIO VACCINATED
COUNTRIES IN THE PAST 15 YEARS HAVE THE HIGHEST RATES OF ACUTE FLACCID
PARALYSIS] to try [TRY TRY-THE OLD COLLEGE TRY--FOR 4.9 BILLION DOSES????]
and help [HELP DETECT??]detect any signs of Guillain- Barre for example
[FOR EXAMPLE]. We are both strengthening the network as well as working on
new guidelines that will be more adapted to the detection of adverse
events following vaccination with pandemic influenza vaccine."
Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: "I would like to get some information
about adjuvants and children. Obviously [OBVIOUSLY] young people are among
the people hardest hit by this strain so far but I don't think that there
is much [ANY] evidence at all about safety of adjuvants in that group
[RIGHT!] . I was looking at a document yesterday that shows that with
MS59 for instance [THAT IS OTHERWISE KNOWN AS SQUALENE FOLKS], it has
been given to 6 or 700 children which is not a long safety record [NOT
TERRIBLY IMPRESSIVE AS AN N-GROUP GOES I ADMIT]. Are there any other
vaccines – not influenza vaccines –but marketed vaccines with these kind
of adjuvants that children receive now and that might give us a sense of
whether or not they are safe to use in children?"
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: "You are absolutely right that safety data, at least
in terms of numbers are lacking in certain [CERTAIN?]populatio n groups [IT
WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW, AT LEAST, WHAT PROPORTIONS THE COMPONENTS IN THE
VACCINE ARE-AS ADMITTED ABOVE ARE UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME, BY THEIR OWN
ADMISSION]. You mentioned the children [AH YES, THE CHILDREN], certainly
there are no data in children [NO DATA IN CHILDREN!!!! !!!] more than 6
months old and less than 3 years, there are no data in pregnant women [NO
DATA IN PREGNANT WOMEN!!!!!!] , there are no data in asthmatics [NO SAFETY
DATA IN ASTHMATICS!! !!!] , so there are quite a
number of populations [ALL OF THEM] for which there are no data [WOOPS!].
SAGE has also made the point that as quickly as possible data should be
obtained on these populations groups if they are to be vaccinated with
these new vaccines [WHY BOTHER?]. In terms of use of this new novel
adjuvant in children, there is no vaccine for very young children that is
using the
formulation [NO-BUT, THERE IS A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF DATA WITH SQUALENE
IN GULF-WAR VETS RECEIVING BOTH AN EXPERIMENTAL ANTHRAX VACCINE AND AN
EXPERIMENTAL "HIV" VACCINE-WHICH IS WHY THERE ARE NO LESS THAN 300,000
PERMANENT CLAIMS FOR TOTAL DISABILITY AMONG THIS "POPULATION" OF ADULTS].
The closest being the vaccine which is currently developed as the malaria
vaccine, which has been tested in a few thousand children and is being
tested now in Africa [OF COURSE, BECAUSE THEY ARE BLACK] with this
indication for malaria in a few thousand children, but apart from that,
these data are still lacking [DOESN'T REALLY MATTER-JAB EM ANYWAY].
There are NO SAFTEY DATA WITH CHILDREN OR PREGNANT WOMNEN, ASTHMATICS, OR
ANYONE ELSE-AND THEY ARE ADJUVATING THE GODDAMN VACCINE WITH
MF-59-SQUALENE! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! !!!!!
Sincerely,
Andrew Maniotis
>
>
>
2009 (July) WHO - Vaccinate Health Care Workers, Pregnant Women, School
Aged Children First
Filed Under Baxter Worldwide, Big Government, Big Pharma,Pandemic,
Vaccines
Transcript of virtual press conference with Gregory Hartl, WHO
Spokesperson for Global Alert and Response and Dr Marie-Paule Kieny,
Director of the Initiative for Vaccine Research, World Health
Organization
14 July 09
Mr Gregory Hartl: This is WHO Headquarters in Geneva. We welcome you all
to this virtual press briefing today. My name is Gregory Hartl and with
us today is Dr Marie-Paule Kieny, the Director of the Initiative for
Vaccine Research at WHO Headquarters who will make a few opening remarks
about the results of the SAGE Committee meeting of last week
and their recommendations and then we will open the floor to questions.
As always, please, if you have a question to ask please dial 01 to get
into the queue to ask the question and state your name and organization.
Dr Kieny over to you:
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Thank you very much Gregory. It is a pleasure to be
with you again to give you this update on the recommendation of the SAGE
on H1N1 vaccine and vaccination. The SAGE is the Strategy Advisory Group
of Experts, that is the highest level of advisory body in WHO on
immunization matters and they met last week on 7 July to be
updated about the epidemiological status and the clinical status of H1N1
as well as being provided with an update on expected vaccine
availability. They also reviewed the status of production of the current
seasonal epidemic vaccine.
As you know we are coming to the end of the production campaign for the
vaccine which is meant to be used to fight seasonal epidemic of influenza
in the northern hemisphere starting this fall and they also met to review
various vaccine options that would be available both for seasonal
immunization and for H1N1, and to make recommendations to the
Director-General. The SAGE, which was helped by a number of experts and
also by another committee that we have established in May, which is more
specific about the expertise in the area of influenza, so the group
together came together with recommendations that were endorsed by the
Director-General on Friday. In general these recommendations
take into consideration as I said the epidemiology, the severity of the
disease, the expected availability of H1N1 vaccine and have come up with a
number of recommendations.
I will be very happy to detail them following questions but just to give
you an idea of how they go.
First, the Committee recognized that the H1N1 pandemic is unstoppable and
therefore that all countries will need to have access to vaccines.
Second, the Committee also recognized, really acknowledged the fact that
different countries have different epidemiological and other situations
and therefore that the countries themselves will have to take decisions
that are best adapted to their own national situation but in terms of
giving indicative consideration and guidance to countries, SAGE
recommended first that healthcare workers should be immunized in all
countries in order to maintain functional health systems as the pandemic
evolves. So there are several reasons to protect health workers when they
put themselves
at risk, when they care for patients; the other one is because they need
to remain in good health condition to care for pandemic influenza sick
people and the third is because during the time of a pandemic people will
continue to be ill with other diseases and these diseases will also need
to be taken care of. Second the SAGE considered the of the disease in
various groups and considered that countries gravity may have different
strategies when they implement immunization campaigns. So the first one
would be to try to stop transmission and if you want to stop transmission
as much as you can, and this may still be possible, in certain settings at
least to mitigate transmission, you target different population groups,
and if you just want to have other objectives: So the first objective is
to reduce transmission as much as possible. Another objective might be to
reduce morbidity and mortality and the third objective, but there is no
priority in order, would be as I said, to protect the health care
system.
In view of these three objectives countries might have, and depending on
their own decision, they may consider immunization of several different
groups - one of them being pregnant women e.g. as I am sure you have
followed in the news, pregnant women are at elevated risk of severe
diseases and death; other groups would be anybody over 6 months
of age with chronic health conditions and these induced variety of
conditions which are putting more people more at risk from having severe
illness. This could be chronic respiratory disease - it could be obesity
which has been now shown as being a risk factor. Another group to be
considered would be healthy adults of over 15 years of age and less than
49 which have been shown also to be surprisingly, although were healthy,
at risk of death. Yet another group would be healthy children and this is
mainly to reduce transmission as we discussed because children are
amplifiers of infection because they
meet in groups. Yet another group would be healthy elderly adults and all
country conditions need to be taken into consideration when
countries make decisions.
The SAGE also then, to further go into decision and in going out with
recommendation for target groups, considered the safety of adjuvant
vaccines and they noted that there was, so far, no concern of the safety
of vaccine adjuvanted with the new oil-in-water adjuvants but that it was
urgent to collect safety data in groups for which safety data is not
available in numbers for the time being. They also noted that because
these vaccines are novel, use for some of them, a very good post
marketing surveillance and pharmaco- vigilance has to be
implemented when the vaccine is deployed and that international
cooperation is requested to have results of any signal that some vaccine
might not be safe, which we don't expect but you never know, be shared
with the international community as soon as possible.
Finally, they considered recommendations on seasonal influenza
vaccination. They were informed that the campaign for preparation of
seasonal vaccine for the northern hemisphere were close to completion
with more than 90% of production being finalized by end of July and
therefore considered that there was no need to recommend a switch from
seasonal to H1N1 vaccine. They also considered that at the current time
there would be no change in recommendation of WHO for the seasonal
vaccine for the next season for the northern hemisphere, that
preparations should continue for this immunization as if there would
not have been a pandemic. So these are the main messages and I will be
most happy to answer your questions.
Mr Gregory Hartl: Dr Kieny, thank you very much. Before we go to
questions can I remind journalists that the audio file and transcript
will be available shortly afterwards as usual on the WHO website. In
addition, a web update outlining in summary, the conclusions of the
SAGE meeting will be posted shortly. Once again, journalists who want to
ask questions please press 01 on their keypad.
Fergus Walsh, BBC: Regarding the southern hemisphere can you tell me were
there any decision made to ask companies like CSL and Sanofi Pasteur who
will, in the general run of things, make seasonal flu vaccine for the
southern hemisphere, they would normally expect in the autumn, to get the
strain from you and do that. Whether or not you are planning to allow
next winter's southern hemisphere seasonal flu vaccine to go ahead or
whether you consider the pandemic is serious enough and that they should
just concentrate on the
pandemic vaccine and secondly, when would you expect the first doses of
pandemic vaccine from cell culture to arrive?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of southern hemisphere, this was of course
discussed and SAGE considered that it was too early to make
recommendations on the upcoming production of the southern hemisphere
vaccine. Indeed, the southern hemisphere seasonal epidemic has started and
now we are in the middle of it. It seems that there is still a
significant proportion or number of cases which are caused notably by
H3N2, one of the seasonal strains. There really needs to be more data
accumulated on what is circulating in terms of the new virus or the
traditional H1, H3 and B strains. So we expect that all these data, much
more data and evidence will be available in September when traditionally
WHO will hold its meeting to determine which strain should be put into the
seasonal vaccine and by that time we hope that we will be able to be more
explicit in giving recommendations in one
direction or another. I still need to note that seasonal influenza is a
severe disease in certain population groups, like the elderly or the very
the young and nobody would want to have an epidemic of severe and
preventable seasonal epidemic in nursing homes when winter comes in the
southern hemisphere. So this is something which is watched very carefully
but it is too early to give any recommendations.
On when the first doses of pandemic vaccine made from cell culture would
be available, there are already vaccine doses available. They are
produced but they are by no means ready to be licensed yet. So both the
doses are available for clinical trials, from both manufacturers who have
been making vaccines from cell cultures but also coming very soon or are
already there, as you may know, from manufacturers who are making vaccines
from egg products.
Notably, CSL in the southern hemisphere has really been rushing to prepare
for clinical trials. So when we hear that vaccine is available already,
certainly, yes, vaccine has been produced but it is still an experimental
vaccine awaiting results of both pharmaceutical characterization to be
licensed as well as upon request of regulatory authority clinical trials.
Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: If I could ask 2 questions. The first is
a clarification. Dr Kieny you talked about a variety of different groups
who might be vaccinated - am I correct in thinking that what you are
saying is that the SAGE did not say these people should be
first, these people should be second, these people should be third, but
that it put a strong priority on health-care workers but after that its
somehow left in the hands of individual countries? And I would have a
follow-up question.
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: So you are right: the SAGE identified the health-
care workers as a main priority group for the three reasons that I already
have given. In terms of the other group it really depends on the strategy
that each country wants to follow. In certain cases, as I
mentioned countries may want to try to mitigate transmission and
therefore, children would be an obvious target. In some other cases, they
want to rather concentrate on reducing morbidity and mortality and then
some other groups may be more the target. But there is
identification on various options but no ranking and no priority are given
to these options.
Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: The follow-up I wanted to ask in your
presentation to that made in last week, you refer to the fact WHO has
done a survey of vaccine manufacturers asking them about their plans and
if I read the slides correctly, only 12 of the proposed pandemic vaccines
are planned to have adjuvants in them. Is WHO getting a sense
that a number of manufacturers are not planning of using adjuvants? And
do you have a position on whether or not that is appropriate under the
circumstances?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Indeed it is very difficult in a situation like in
a pandemic when you want to have a vaccine which can be distributed safely
to the population in the shortest possible time, it is very difficult to
say that you take the adjuvant of one company and you mix it with antigens
of another company when they have never been tested together. So we know
for example that clinical trials financed by the US Government have looked
at some of these combinations but these are very specific combinations. So
it is very difficult to imagine because as you have seen in the slides,
manufacturers are actually, although the vast majority of vaccine doses is
coming from companies in certain areas of the world, there are actually
vaccines manufacturers in other parts of the world, and these are
producing less vaccines in terms of output in number of doses, but it
would be very difficult to say let
us just for the sake of taking an example that you take vaccines from
country X in Asia which has never been a mix of any of this new adjuvant
and then you just make the mix and you say that this is my vaccine and it
will be safe because the safety of adjuvant is not only
depending on the adjuvant itself, it is quite often combined fact between
the purity of the antigen of a certain characteristics of the antigen and
the adjuvant. So this is why a number of manufacturers who currently have
never made any other vaccines than non adjuvanted vaccines are still
planning to go with non-adjuvanted vaccines. I may also add a comment on
that for the time being there is still the question to know whether the
immunogenicity of the A(H1N1) vaccine will be more like that we are used
to for seasonal vaccine where no problem with 15 micrograms not
adjuvanted, just one dose is fine or will it be more like H5N1 where all
the trials have shown that you either need to have a very potent adjuvant
or you need to increase the dose quite significantly, so in the absence of
theses responses, yes a number of manufacturers are planning to go ahead
with 50 microgram without adjuvant.
Martin Enserink, Science Magazine: Helen Branswell reported this morning
or late last night from those presentations that the virus is not growing
very well. I wonder if you can comment on that, and whether that will
cause any delay? Secondly, has SAGE made any
recommendations with regard to international solidarity? Is there any talk
of any recommendations to create equity between countries, for instance
you mentioned that countries can have different strategies but would it
not be recommendable that they use only the vaccine for those high-risk
groups and save vaccines for other countries?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: First, in terms of yields, maybe there is some
confusion between the reality that is in the slides, that is now
recognized by the manufacturers and the regulatory authorities and the WHO
Network that we have a strain which are currently available to
make inactivated vaccine, the manufacturers only get moderately affected
yields. This is not to say that the viruses grow poorly, it is that for a
reason or another the hemagglutinin they can produce is
either not stable or very low. It is not known what is exactly happening
but in terms of output that they have of hemagglutinin at the end when
they grow a virus, they have poor yields, poor as between 25 and 50
percent of the normal yields that they have with good
yielders. What is the reason for this is difficult to know, that it is
well known that some strains are good yielders and some are bad yielders,
it happens that for the first series of strains which were generated and
unfortunately, we did not come up with a good yielder.
So that in order to remedy to that the WHO laboratory network is again
trying to generate new vaccines viruses from wild type virus isolated
from patients, and these will be tested again by the manufacturers and we
hope that at least one of them or more than that we hope will be giving
higher yields that would be comparable to the ones obtained with seasonal
vaccines. So for the time being, these are strains which are available and
are still giving of course enough production yields in order to make
clinical batches into test immunogenicity of new vaccines. We understand
that the regulatory authorities have said that when better yielders are
available there will not be a need to have bridging studies between the
results obtained with the strains available now and the new strains
because actually there will be
difference in yields and not in antigenicity or immunogenicity. So we hope
that as soon as possible the situation can be improved upon but for the
time being there is no reason to be really anxious about that.
In terms of equity, yes of course, SAGE has also made a note that WHO
should try to help with as much equity as is there in the distribution of
vaccines. We are all committed to that, we have several strategies, we are
discussing with the industry and we have already, this was
announced in the press, we have already secured a number of donations
from industry, we have also secured access to real time production during
the pandemic. WHO at the highest level is discussing with Governments to
see how much they can help to either help negotiate some doses with
industry but also help finance these vaccines and finally, but very
importantly, we are also discussing with new manufacturers who have
started to acquire the technology to make influenza vaccines in the past
three years with technical and financial support from us, to help them
accelerate their preparation and be able to produce some vaccines for
their own country. So this is the situation in terms of trying to ensure
equity for vaccines.
Richard Knox, National Public Radio: Dr Kieny, you said earlier that you
do not expect safety issues to arise with the pandemic vaccine and tests
but do you think that there is less risk of Guillain-Barre syndrome with
this new swine flu vaccine than there was in 1976 and why? And secondly, I
wonder with the accelerated safety tests that will be necessary, how many
subjects will you expect to have tested and how can experts draw
conclusions about safety from these tests when the vaccine has put into a
hundreds of millions of people.
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: It is not completely known why the vaccine which was
distributed against the swine flu in 1976 induced higher risk of
Guillain-Barre syndrome. There are a number of hypotheses and one of the
hypotheses is that the vaccine was contaminated by a component coming
from a bacterial infection that was inducing antibodies that
cross reacted with self protein and therefore, caused Guillain-Barre
syndrome. The vaccines which are produced now are much better purified
than the way they were in 1976, so we really do not think that it is
likely that we will have these side effects again, but to be
absolutely honest, of course it is only when you have a large scale
distribution of vaccines that you know with certainty the safety profile
of the vaccine. Modern vaccines such as those which are used to immunize
children and adults currently in all countries of the
world are very safe products. Nevertheless, in a very small numbers of
people they do induce adverse reactions and this can be the case as well
for adjuvanted vaccines and non adjuvanted vaccines. So what needs to be
put in place and everyone is working towards this
direction is a very good surveillance system and monitoring adverse
effects so that as soon as a signal pops up it can immediately be
followed-up, investigated and adequate public health measures be taken to
respond to that.
Now, in terms of these new vaccines, new adjuvants there is one
manufacturer who has had an oil-in-water adjuvanted influenza vaccine in
use for many years for seasonal vaccination and the safety database for
this particular antigen is very large although mainly in elderly
people and there does not seem to be any signal for any unexpected severe
event like Guillain-Barre. But as I said, all must be put in place to
detect any signal as early as possible.
Journalist, Sky Television: Your referred previously that the obese people
should probably be among those that the national government should
consider to vaccinate. On what scientific basis are made these
recommendations and if you could elaborate more on the body mass
index? And the second question is, if we have the vaccine later than
October in the Northern Hemisphere, don't you think it would be too late
to protect the people from the second pandemic wave?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of obesity, obesity has been observed as
being one of the risk factors for more severe diseases other than H1N1
influenza. This is an observation. We still don't know exactly if it is
obesity itself which is a risk factor, or if it is other health
conditions which arise because of obesity. For the time being it is an
observation and a lot of investigations are conducted to try and
understand this better.
It has been observed in several countries that people with a body mass
index over 30, and even more, over 40, have a higher chance of having a
severe disease than noon obese people. This is why one of the groups that
was mentioned, that was listed by SAGE, and that was worth considering for
pandemic influenza vaccination contains all populations over 6 months of
age with risk factors, and one of the risk factor listed is obesity. Its
not the only one of course, you have asthma, chronic lung disease. All
these are considered as being
risk factors based on observation so far. About availability of vaccines,
all the manufacturers and the regulatory authorities are working to have
vaccine available as soon as possible. Vaccines will be available starting
from September or October. If the situation remains as it is, of course
the regulatory authorities will certainly want to have a better handle at
the safety in clinical trials and dosing in clinical trials and these
clinical trials will take some time, and therefore, to have a full
license of this new vaccine may take until the end of the year. This
being said, many countries have provision in their law, so if there is an
emergency they can invoke an emergency situation to use vaccine for which
you would have already good characterization in terms of pharmaceutical
data but not yet, all the data on clinical trials. We certainly look
towards seeing how the epidemic evolves and when it unfolds, to see what
is the situation in countries and we will take our own decisions on
whether or not to use vaccine under an emergency provision as compared to
waiting for full registration of these vaccines.
Maggie Fox, Reuters: If WHO wants to reassess its best case scenario for
how many vaccine doses might be available – I think the last number for
the best case scenario was 4.9 billion. And I am also wondering about
this issue with the virus strain not producing good
results. Was this also the same for the live vaccine or only for the
killed vaccine?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: In terms of updating the figures that we have
published for likely vaccine supply over the next 12 months, we will
update these figures but we want to wait to have some further information
to update these with some meaningful changes. First as we
have to have a definite idea of what yield manufacturers are getting with
inactivated vaccines: is it the same as seasonal, which was the assumption
that we took when we made the first calculation, or is it 50%, and these
of course as you may imagine will change the total
output. The other information which is still lacking as what is a dose of
inactivated H1N1 vaccine. Is it, without adjuvant, is it 50 micrograms, is
it 30 micrograms, we don't know. And we will know as soon as the result of
the first clinical trial will come out, although
the result will certainly be very adapted or relevant only to the vaccine
which will be tested, it will still give a flavour of what kind of
results we will have with the other inactivated vaccines. You asked a
question about the live-attenuated vaccine, the response and the way this
vaccine induces an immune response is very different because these are
replicative organisms, so they induce antibodies and also anti-cell
response.
So for the time being, the results that we have from the manufacturers who
make live-attenuated vaccines, is that in terms of yields, and this is
yields in terms of growth this time – how these vaccine strains grow –
there does not seem to be any surprise and they grow
with the same titres as the seasonal vaccine that they have obtained in
normal production for a seasonal vaccine. Still there need to be clinical
trials to know what titres of these live-attenuated vaccines will have to
be used in a dose to make an effective dose. So the quick
response is that we don't know, but in terms of growth they seem to be
behaving normally.
Journalist, Scrip Pharmaceutical News: When the new pandemic vaccine
becomes available later this year, will WHO or Member States have any new
pharmaco-vigilance initiative to pick up ADRs (ADVERSE REACTIONS) to this
new vaccine. For example, in some countries, they allow patients to
report ADRs as other do not. Is WHO thinking about this or are you quite
happy with existing pharmaco-vigilance systems?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: Although in some countries the pharmaco-vigilance
system is working very well and we will pick up signals (ADVERSE
REACTIONS) very easily, in other countries there need to be an increased
attention to the pharmaco-vigilance system, notably in the developing
countries and WHO is already working with countries to try and use
systems in place, like the system that the Polio Initiative uses to
detect cases of acute flaccid paralysis to try and help detect any signs
of Guillain- Barre for example. We are both strengthening the network as
well as working on new guidelines that will be more adapted to the
detection of adverse events following vaccination with pandemic influenza
vaccine.
Helen Branswell, Canadian Press: I would like to get some information
about adjuvants and children. Obviously young people are among the people
hardest hit by this strain so far but I don't think that there is much
evidence at all about safety of adjuvants in that group. I was
looking at a document yesterday that shows that with MS59 for instance,
it has been given to 6 or 700 children which is not a long safety record.
Are there any other vaccines – not influenza vaccines –but marketed
vaccines with these kind of adjuvants that children receive now and that
might give us a sense of whether or not they are safe to use in children?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: You are absolutely right that safety data, at least
in terms of numbers are lacking in certain population groups. You
mentioned the children, certainly there are no data in children more than
6 months old and less than 3 years, there are no data in pregnant women,
there are no data in asthmatics, so there are quite a
number of populations for which there are no data. SAGE has also made the
point that as quickly as possible data should be obtained on these
populations groups if they are to be vaccinated with these new vaccines.
In terms of use of this new novel adjuvant in children, there is no
vaccine for very young children that is using the
formulation. The closest being the vaccine which is currently developed as
the malaria vaccine, which has been tested in a few thousand children and
is being tested now in Africa with this indication for malaria in a few
thousand children, but apart from that, these data are still lacking.
Journalist, German Television: If I understand correctly, talking about
the doses for the next winter, do we have to go for a mid- seasonal
vaccine and then also to go for two other doses for the new pandemic
vaccination, will there be enough vaccine for all the
countries then?
Dr Marie-Paule Kieny: The vaccine against seasonal influenza for the
Northern Hemisphere is finishing production. We expect to have more than
90% of doses which were planned to be produced, so this is very close to
the number of doses that were produced in 2008. We don't envisage changes
in the recommendation for seasonal vaccination, so vaccination will still
target the same persons and as in the previous national recommendations
mainly in most countries these people will be the elderly, over 60 or 65
years of age, also in some countries children as well, so yes, certain of
these groups may receive during
the upcoming fall three shots which could be one of seasonal vaccine and
two for the pandemic vaccine.
Mr Gregory Hartl: Dr Kieny, thank you very much. That closes our virtual
press conference for today, 13 July, from WHO headquarters in Geneva. And
just before we say goodbye, one last reminder that there will be 3 things
posted on the WHO website shortly: the normal audio file and transcript
and in addition, a web update which outlines recommendations from the
SAGE meeting will also be shortly available.
Goodbye.
So it is OK to vaccinate pregnant women, and children with or without
asthma, but please write the WHO so that at least our dogs and cats will
not be injured...
March 2nd, 2009
http://www.dogsadve rsereactions. com/scienceVacci neDamage. html
Science of Vaccine Damage
by Catherine O'Driscoll
A team at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine conducted
several studies (1,2) to determine if vaccines can cause changes in
the immune system of dogs that might lead to life-threatening
immune-mediated diseases. They obviously conducted this research
because concern already existed. It was sponsored by the Haywood
Foundation which itself was looking for evidence that such changes in
the human immune system might also be vaccine induced. It found the
evidence.
The vaccinated, but not the non-vaccinated, dogs in the Purdue studies
developed autoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including
fibronectin, laminin, DNA, albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and
collagen.
This means that the vaccinated dogs -- "but not the non-vaccinated
dogs"-- were attacking their own fibronectin, which is involved in
tissue repair, cell multiplication and growth, and differentiation
between tissues and organs in a living organism.
The vaccinated Purdue dogs also developed autoantibodies to laminin,
which is involved in many cellular activities including the adhesion,
spreading, differentiation, proliferation and movement of cells.
Vaccines thus appear to be capable of removing the natural
intelligence of cells.
Autoantibodies to cardiolipin are frequently found in patients with
the serious disease systemic lupus erythematosus and also in
individuals with other autoimmune diseases. The presence of elevated
anti-cardiolipin antibodies is significantly associated with clots
within the heart or blood vessels, in poor blood clotting,
haemorrhage, bleeding into the skin, foetal loss and neurological
conditions.
The Purdue studies also found that vaccinated dogs were developing
autoantibodies to their own collagen. About one quarter of all the
protein in the body is collagen. Collagen provides structure to our
bodies, protecting and supporting the softer tissues and connecting
them with the skeleton. It is no wonder that Canine Health Concern's
1997 study of 4,000 dogs showed a high number of dogs developing
mobility problems shortly after they were vaccinated (noted in my 1997
book, What Vets Don't Tell You About Vaccines).
Perhaps most worryingly, the Purdue studies found that the vaccinated
dogs had developed autoantibodies to their own DNA. Did the alarm
bells sound? Did the scientific community call a halt to the
vaccination program? No. Instead, they stuck their fingers in the air,
saying more research is needed to ascertain whether vaccines can cause
genetic damage. Meanwhile, the study dogs were found good homes, but
no long-term follow-up has been conducted. At around the same time,
the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Vaccine-Associated
Feline Sarcoma Task Force initiated several studies to find out why
160,000 cats each year in the USA develop terminal cancer at their
vaccine injection sites.(3) The fact that cats can get vaccine-induced
cancer has been acknowledged by veterinary bodies around the world,
and even the British Government acknowledged it through its Working
Group charged with the task of looking into canine and feline
vaccines(4) following pressure from Canine Health Concern. What do you
imagine was the advice of the AVMA Task Force, veterinary bodies and
governments? "Carry on vaccinating until
we find out why vaccines are killing cats, and which cats are most
likely to die."
In America, in an attempt to mitigate the problem, they're vaccinating
cats in the tail or leg so they can amputate when cancer appears.
Great advice if it's not your cat amongst the hundreds of thousands on
the "oops" list.
But other species are okay - right? Wrong. In August 2003, the Journal
of Veterinary Medicine carried an Italian study which showed that dogs
also develop vaccine-induced cancers at their injection sites.(5) We
already know that vaccine-site cancer is a possible sequel to human
vaccines, too, since the Salk polio vaccine was said to carry a monkey
retrovirus (from cultivating the vaccine on monkey organs) that
produces inheritable cancer. The monkey retrovirus SV40 keeps turning
up in human cancer sites.
It is also widely acknowledged that vaccines can cause a fast-acting,
usually fatal, disease called autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (AIHA).
Without treatment, and frequently with treatment, individuals can die
in agony within a matter of days. Merck, itself a multinational
vaccine manufacturer, states in The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and
Therapy that autoimmune haemolytic anaemia may be caused by modified
live-virus vaccines, as do Tizard's Veterinary Immunology (4th
edition) and the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine.(6) The
British Government's Working Group, despite being staffed by
vaccine-industry consultants who say they are independent, also
acknowledged this fact. However, no one warns the pet owners before
their animals are subjected to an unnecessary booster, and very few
owners are told why after their pets die of AIHA.
A Wide Range of Vaccine-induced Diseases
We also found some worrying correlations between vaccine events and
the onset of arthritis in our 1997 survey. Our concerns were
compounded by research in the human field.
The New England Journal of Medicine, for example, reported that it is
possible to isolate the rubella virus from affected joints in children
vaccinated against rubella. It also told of the isolation of viruses
from the peripheral blood of women with prolonged arthritis following
vaccination. (7)
Then, in 2000, CHC's findings were confirmed by research which showed
that polyarthritis and other diseases like amyloidosis, which affects
organs in dogs, were linked to the combined vaccine given to dogs.(8)
There is a huge body of research, despite the paucity of funding from
the vaccine industry, to confirm that vaccines can cause a wide range
of brain and central nervous system damage. Merck itself states in its
Manual that vaccines (i.e., its own products) can cause encephalitis:
brain inflammation/ damage. In some cases, encephalitis involves
lesions in the brain and throughout the central nervous system. Merck
states that "examples are the encephalitides following measles,
chickenpox, rubella, smallpox vaccination, vaccinia, and many other
less well defined viral infections".
When the dog owners who took part in the CHC survey reported that
their dogs developed short attention spans, 73.1% of the dogs did so
within three months of a vaccine event. The same percentage of dogs
was diagnosed with epilepsy within three months of a shot (but usually
within days). We also found that 72.5% of dogs that were considered by
their owners to be nervous and of a worrying disposition, first
exhibited these traits within the three-month post-vaccination period.
I would like to add for the sake of Oliver, my friend who suffered
from paralysed rear legs and death shortly after a vaccine shot, that
"paresis" is listed in Merck's Manual as a symptom of encephalitis.
This is defined as muscular weakness of a neural (brain) origin which
involves partial or incomplete paralysis, resulting from lesions at
any level of the descending pathway from the brain. Hind limb
paralysis is one of the potential consequences. Encephalitis,
incidentally, is a disease that can manifest across the scale from
mild to severe and can also cause sudden death.
Organ failure must also be suspected when it occurs shortly after a
vaccine event. Dr Larry Glickman, who spearheaded the Purdue research
into post-vaccination biochemical changes in dogs, wrote in a letter
to Cavalier Spaniel breeder Bet Hargreaves:
"Our ongoing studies of dogs show that following routine
vaccination, there is a significant rise in the level of
antibodies dogs produce against their own tissues. Some of these
antibodies have been shown to target the thyroid gland, connective
tissue such as that found in the valves of the heart, red blood
cells, DNA, etc. I do believe that the heart conditions in
Cavalier King Charles Spaniels could be the end result of repeated
immunisations by vaccines containing tissue culture contaminants
that cause a progressive immune response directed at connective
tissue in the heart valves. The clinical manifestations would be
more pronounced in dogs that have a genetic predisposition
[although] the findings should be generally applicable to all dogs
regardless of their breed."
I must mention here that Dr Glickman believes that vaccines are a
necessary evil, but that safer vaccines need to be developed.
Meanwhile, please join the queue to place your dog, cat, horse and
child on the Russian roulette wheel because a scientist says you
should.
Vaccines Stimulate an Inflammatory Response
The word "allergy" is synonymous with "sensitivity" and
"inflammation". It should, by rights, also be synonymous with the word
"vaccination". This is what vaccines do: they sensitise (render
allergic)an individual in the process of forcing them to develop
antibodies to fight a disease threat. In other words, as is
acknowledged and accepted, as part of the vaccine process the body
will respond with inflammation. This may be apparently temporary or it
may be longstanding.
Holistic doctors and veterinarians have known this for at least 100
years.
They talk about a wide range of inflammatory or "-itis" diseases which
arise shortly after a vaccine event. Vaccines, in fact, plunge many
individuals into an allergic state. Again, this is a disorder that
ranges from mild all the way through to the suddenly fatal.
Anaphylactic shock is the culmination: it's where an individual has a
massive allergic reaction to a vaccine and will die within minutes if
adrenaline or its equivalent is not administered.
There are some individuals who are genetically not well placed to
withstand the vaccine challenge. These are the people (and animals are
"people", too) who have inherited faulty B and T cell function. B and
T cells are components within the immune system which identify foreign
invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that they
cannot cause future harm. However, where inflammatory responses are
concerned, the immune system overreacts and causes unwanted effects
such as allergies and other
inflammatory conditions.
Merck warns in its Manual that patients with, or from families with, B
and/or T cell immunodeficiencies should not receive live-virus
vaccines due to the risk of severe or fatal infection. Elsewhere, it
lists features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies as food allergies,
inhalant allergies, eczema, dermatitis, neurological deterioration and
heart disease. To translate, people with these conditions can die if
they receive live-virus vaccines. Their immune systems are simply not
competent enough to guarantee a healthy reaction to the viral assault
from modified live-virus vaccines.
Modified live-virus (MLV) vaccines replicate in the patient until an
immune response is provoked. If a defence isn't stimulated, then the
vaccine continues to replicate until it gives the patient the very
disease it was intending to prevent.
Alternatively, a deranged immune response will lead to inflammatory
conditions such as arthritis, pancreatitis, colitis, encephalitis and
any number of autoimmune diseases such as cancer and leukaemia, where
the body attacks its own cells.
A new theory, stumbled upon by Open University student Gary Smith,
explains what holistic practitioners have been saying for a very long
time. Here is what a few of the holistic vets have said in relation to
their patients:
Dr Jean Dodds: "Many veterinarians trace the present problems with
allergic and immunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV
vaccines..." (9)
Christina Chambreau, DVM: "Routine vaccinations are probably the worst
thing that we do for our animals. They cause all types of illnesses,
but not directly to where we would relate them definitely to be caused
by the vaccine." (10)
Martin Goldstein, DVM: "I think that vaccines...are leading killers of
dogs and cats in America today."
Dr Charles E. Loops, DVM: "Homoeopathic veterinarians and other
holistic practitioners have maintained for some time that vaccinations
do more harm than they provide benefits." (12)
Mike Kohn, DVM: "In response to this [vaccine] violation, there have
been increased autoimmune diseases (allergies being one component),
epilepsy, neoplasia [tumours], as well as behavioural problems in
small animals." (13)
A Theory on Inflammation
Gary Smith explains what observant healthcare practitioners have been
saying for a very long time, but perhaps they've not understood why
their observations led them to say it. His theory, incidentally, is
causing a huge stir within the inner scientific sanctum. Some believe
that his theory could lead to a cure for many diseases including
cancer. For me, it explains why the vaccine process is inherently
questionable.
Gary was learning about inflammation as part of his studies when he
struck upon a theory so extraordinary that it could have implications
for the treatment of almost every inflammatory disease -- including
Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, rheumatoid arthritis and even HIV and AIDS.
Gary's theory questions the received wisdom that when a person gets
ill, the inflammation that occurs around the infected area helps it to
heal. He claims that, in reality, inflammation prevents the body from
recognising a foreign substance and therefore serves as a hiding place
for invaders. The inflammation occurs when at-risk cells produce
receptors called All (known as angiotensin II type I receptors). He
says that while At1 has a balancing receptor, At2, which is supposed
to switch off the inflammation, in most diseases this does not happen.
"Cancer has been described as the wound that never heals," he says.
"All successful cancers are surrounded by inflammation. Commonly this
is thought to be the body's reaction to try to fight the cancer, but
this is not the case.
"The inflammation is not the body trying to fight the infection. It is
actually the virus or bacteria deliberately causing inflammation in
order to hide from the immune system [author's emphasis]." (14)
If Gary is right, then the inflammatory process so commonly stimulated
by vaccines is not, as hitherto assumed, a necessarily acceptable
sign. Instead, it could be a sign that the viral or bacterial
component, or the adjuvant (which, containing foreign protein, is seen
as an invader by the immune system), in the vaccine is winning by
stealth.
If Gary is correct in believing that the inflammatory response is not
protective but a sign that invasion is taking place under cover of
darkness, vaccines are certainly not the friends we thought they were.
They are undercover assassins working on behalf of the enemy, and vets
and medical doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators. Worse, we
animal guardians and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to
unwittingly betray our loved ones.
Potentially, vaccines are the stealth bomb of the medical world. They
are used to catapult invaders inside the castle walls where they can
wreak havoc, with none of us any the wiser. So rather than
experiencing frank viral diseases such as the 'flu, measles, mumps and
rubella (and, in the case of dogs, parvovirus and distemper), we are
allowing the viruses to win anyway - but with cancer, leukaemia and
other inflammatory or autoimmune (self-attacking) diseases taking
their place.
The Final Insult
All 27 veterinary schools in North America have changed their
protocols for vaccinating dogs and cats along the following lines;
(15) however, vets in practice are reluctant to listen to these
changed protocols and official veterinary bodies in the UK and other
countries are ignoring the following facts.
Dogs' and cats' immune systems mature fully at six months. If modified
live-virus vaccine is giver after six months of age, it produces
immunity, which is good for the life of the pet. If another MLV
vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the first vaccine
neutralise the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or
no effect. The litre is no "boosted", nor are more memory cells
induced.
Not only are annual boosters unnecessary, but they subject the pet to
potential risks such as allergic reactions and immune-mediated
haemolytic anaemia.
In plain language, veterinary schools in America, plus the American
Veterinary Medical Association, have looked at studies to show how
long vaccines last and they have concluded and announced that annual
vaccination is unnecessary. (16-19)
Further, they have acknowledged that vaccines are not without harm. Dr
Ron Schultz, head of pathobiology at Wisconsin University and a
leading light in this field, has been saying this politely to his
veterinary colleagues since the 1980s. I've been saying it for the
past 12 years. But change is so long in coming and, in the meantime,
hundreds of thousands of animals are dying every year - unnecessarily.
The good news is that thousands of animal lovers (but not enough) have
heard what we've been saying. Canine Health Concern members around the
world use real food as Nature's supreme disease preventative,
eschewing processed pet food, and minimise the vaccine risk. Some of
us, myself included, have chosen not to vaccinate our pets at all. Our
reward is healthy and long-lived dogs.
It has taken but one paragraph to tell you the good and simple news.
The gratitude I feel each day, when I embrace my healthy dogs,
stretches from the centre of the Earth to the Universe and beyond.
About the Author:
Catherine O'Driscoll runs Canine Health Concern which campaigns
and also delivers an educational program, the Foundation in Canine
Healthcare. She is author of Shock to the System (2005; see review
this issue), the best-selling book What Vets Don't Tell You About
Vaccines (1997, 1998), and Who Killed the Darling Buds of May?
(1997; reviewed in NEXUS 4/04).
She lives in Scotland with her partner, Rob Ellis, and three
Golden Retrievers, named Edward, Daniel and Gwinnie, and she
lectures on canine health around the world.
For more information, contact Catherine O'Driscoll at Canine
Health Concern, PO Box 7533, Perth PH2 1AD, Scotland, UK, email
catherine@carsegray .co.uk , website
http://www.canine- health-concern. org.uk.
Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide
from Dogwise at http://www.dogwise. com.
Endnotes
1. "Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of
Dogs, Phase II", Purdue University, November 1,1999, at
http://www.homestea d.com/vonhapsbur g/haywardstudyon vaccines. html.
2. See www.vet.purdue. edu/epi/gdhstudy .htm.
3. See http://www.avma. org/vafstf/ default.asp.
4. Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) Working Group on Feline and
Canine Vaccination, DEFRA, May 2001.
5. JVM Series A 50(6):286-291, August 2003.
6. Duval, D. and Giger,U. (1996). "Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated
Hemolytic Anemia in the Dog", Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine
10:290-295.
7. New England Journal of Medicine, vol.313,1985.
See also Clin Exp Rheumatol 20(6):767-71, Nov-Dec 2002.
8. Am Coll Vet Intern Med 14:381,2000.
9. Dodds, Jean W.,DVM, "Immune System and Disease Resistance", at
http://www.critterc hat.net/immune. htm.
10. Wolf Clan magazine, April/May 1995.
11. Goldstein, Martin, The Nature of Animal Healing, Borzoi/Alfred A.
Knopf, Inc., 1999.
12. Wolf Clan magazine, op. cit.
13. ibid.
14. Journal of Inflammation 1:3,2004, at
http://www.journal- inflammation. com content/1/1/ 3.
15. Klingborg, D.J., Hustead, D.R. and Curry-Galvin, E. et al., "AVMA
Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents' report on cat and dog
vaccines", Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
221(10):1401- 1407, November 15,2002,
http://www.avma. org/policies/ vaccination. htm.
16. ibid.
17. Schultz, R.D., "Current and future canine and feline vaccination
programs", Vet Med 93:233-254,1998.
18. Schultz, R.D., Ford, R.B., Olsen, J. and Scott, P., "Titer testing
and vaccination: a new look at traditional practices", Vet Med
97:1-13, 2002 (insert).
19. Twark, L. and Dodds, W.J., "Clinical application of serum
parvovirus and distemper virus antibody liters for determining
revaccination strategies in healthy dogs", J Am Vet Med Assoc
217:1021-1024, 2000.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
No comments:
Post a Comment