Vaccines: What Should A New Parent Do?

Key Takeaways

The CDC's ACIP recently voted to change the universal Hepatitis B vaccine recommendation for newborns.
Concerns were raised regarding the scope of vaccine safety research and the liability immunity for manufacturers.
The CDC has updated its statement on vaccines and autism, noting the 'no link' claim is 'not an evidence-based claim'.
Expert testimonies highlighted a lack of definitive studies disproving an autism link for several vaccines.
The discussion covered the benefits and risks of natural immunity versus vaccine-induced protection for various diseases.
The increase in childhood chronic conditions and the government's vaccine injury compensation program were scrutinized.

On December 5th, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted 8-3 to remove the universal recommendation for hepatitis B vaccines for newborns.
The original rationale for universal vaccination targeted transmission from high-risk behaviors, but transmission from a negative mother to a baby is rare, occurring in 1 in 1 million to 7 million cases.
The new guidance shifts the recommendation to a shared clinical decision-making model for newborns, allowing for more individualized choices.

Known risks associated with the Hepatitis B vaccine include fever (1-5% in trials), potential for encephalitis, and autoimmune conditions like Guillain-Barré syndrome.
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 grants vaccine manufacturers immunity, limiting legal recourse for alleged injuries.
Initial safety trials for the Hepatitis B vaccine reportedly monitored children for only five days with no control group, raising questions about data robustness.

Government immunity for vaccine manufacturers is cited as creating inverted financial incentives, potentially prioritizing profit over extensive safety testing.
A leaked memo from FDA's CIBER head, Vinay Prasad, reportedly raised concerns about vaccine safety methodology.
A cost-benefit analysis is advocated for vaccine decisions, weighing the 'number needed to treat' to prevent a disease case against potential risks like fevers.

Measles mortality in the U.S. declined over 98% between 1900 and 1963, prior to the vaccine's introduction, attributed to public health improvements.
A 22-year study in Japan involving 100,000 people found that naturally contracting measles and mumps correlated with a 20% statistically significant decline in cardiovascular disease mortality.
A counter-argument emphasizes that vaccines primarily prevent severe illness and death, and any potential secondary benefits of natural immunity are contingent on surviving the disease.

The number of childhood vaccine injections has significantly increased from three by age one in 1986 to 29 currently, including COVID-19 vaccines.
Medical training asserts the vaccine-autism link has been debunked, but personal research revealed a lack of comprehensive studies, especially comparisons between vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Research on vaccine-autism links has primarily focused on the MMR vaccine and thimerosal, leaving questions unresolved for other vaccines.

The CDC recently updated its wording on vaccines and autism, qualifying the statement 'vaccines do not cause autism' with an asterisk and adding 'not an evidence-based claim'.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has not definitively ruled out a link between vaccines and autism, as noted in reports from the Institute of Medicine in 1991 and 2012.
Attorney Aaron Siri's FOIA lawsuit against the CDC for vaccine-autism studies resulted in a court order after one of 20 provided studies showed an association.

In a 2018 deposition, prominent vaccinologist Dr. Stanley Plotkin admitted telling parents vaccines do not cause autism to prevent hesitancy, despite a lack of definitive studies for all vaccines.
During her deposition, Dr. Catherine Edwards repeatedly stated 'no' when asked if studies exist to show specific vaccines like Hepatitis B and D-Tap do not cause autism.
This aligns with a reported medical expert's admission under questioning that there is no science to back up the claim that vaccines do not cause autism.

Most doctors and pediatricians are reportedly not experts on vaccine ingredients or safety studies, as their training focuses on disease prevention and the established vaccine schedule.
Deposition excerpts indicate a lack of studies definitively supporting or refuting a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, or linking the Hepatitis B vaccine to autism.
Concerns were raised about a perceived lack of open debate on vaccine risks versus benefits, particularly for newborns, suggesting financial incentives may contribute to silence among experts.

The discussion argues for the elimination of vaccine mandates, describing them as tools of coercion, citing Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Australia as countries without mandates.
The role of medical professionals is framed as educating patients on vaccine risks and benefits, rather than compelling vaccination decisions.
Concerns were raised about the rising rate of chronic childhood conditions, now affecting over 40% of children with issues like asthma, allergies, and ADHD, since the 1980s.

Parental observations of changes in children after vaccination are considered valuable data, warranting investigation into potential genetic or environmental factors.
The vaccine market reportedly does not self-correct for safety issues, necessitating parents to conduct their own research due to a lack of comprehensive, unbiased data.
Claims for vaccine injuries are processed through a government compensation program, which is criticized for limitations, including a $250,000 cap on pain and suffering awards.