From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Jerri Johnson
*OAH_RuleComments.OAH
Immunization Rules docket 0900-30570
Monday, June 24, 2013 7:14:17 PM
Hep_B_Adverse_Events_--_media_list.pdf
Hepatitis_B_--_Unmitigated_disaster JP Handley and Belkin.doc
Documents on the adverse effects of the hepatitis B vaccine.
Jerri Johnson
Public Relations Coordinator
National Health Freedom Coalition'
651 688 6515
[email protected]
http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/10/hepatitis-b-vaccine-an-unmitigateddisaster-.html
October 09, 2009
Hepatitis B Vaccine: An Unmitigated Disaster
By J.B. Handley
As most readers of AoA know, the Hep B vaccine was added to the CDC’s
childhood immunization schedule in the early 1990s, requires four doses
before a child is eighteen months old, and is the only vaccine on the CDC’s
schedule that is recommended to be given on an infant’s first day of life.
What else do we know about this vaccine? Quite a bit, actually. In no
particular order:
1) A recent study published in the journal Neurotoxicology called “Delayed
Acquisition of Neonatal Reflexes in Newborn Primates Receiving a
Thimerosal-containing Hepatitis B Vaccine: Influence of Gestational Age
and Birth Weight” found that monkeys who received a Hepatitis B vaccine
on the first day of life experienced a significant delay in survival reflexes
versus monkeys who received a placebo.
2) A recent study published in the journal the Annals of Epidemiology titled
“Hepatitis B Vaccination of Male Neonates and Autism” found that “Boys
who received the hepatitis B vaccine during the first month of life had 2.94
greater odds for ASD [autism] compared to later- or unvaccinated boys.”
3) A recent study published in the journal Neurology called “Hepatitis B
vaccine and the risk of CNS inflammatory demyelination in childhood” found
that the Engerix B vaccine for Hep B (the one my son received) appears to
increase the risk of central nervous system inflammatory demyelination.
4) A recent study published in Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry
titled “Hepatitis B triple series vaccine and developmental disability in US
children aged 1-9 years” stated "the odds of receiving EIS [special education
services] were approximately nine times as great for vaccinated boys as for
unvaccinated boys after adjustment for confounders. This study found
statistically significant evidence to suggest that boys in United States who
were vaccinated with the triple series Hepatitis B vaccine, during the time
period in which vaccines were manufactured with thimerosal, were more
susceptible to developmental disability than were unvaccinated boys."
5) In 2002, the Institute of Medicine (which I personally believe is a corrupt
agent of the vaccine industry but many believe is the final word on medical
issues) published a study titled, “Immunization Safety Review: Hepatitis B
Vaccine and Demyelinating Neurological Disorders” in which they reached
the following non-conclusion: “Additionally, the committee found that the
epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between
the hepatitis B vaccine in adults and multiple sclerosis. However, the
evidence was inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between
the hepatitis B vaccine and all other demyelinating conditions.” (Author’s
note: If you’re a vaccine, and you can’t get an “all clear” from the vaccineloving IOM, you’re in big trouble.”)
6) Generation Rescue analyzed the vaccine schedules of 30 first-world
countries. 60%, or 18 countries, have Hep B vaccine on their schedule. That
means 12 countries, or 40% of the countries, DO NOT require the Hep B
vaccine, despite the fact that it has been readily available for 19 years. Of
countries that do require Hep B vaccine, we could only find a few Eastern
European countries like Bulgaria and Latvia who also give the shot to babies
on the first day of life. Many other countries appear to pursue a more
balanced approach to Hep B vaccine, here are some direct quotes from
country vaccination schedules.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Italy: “Hepatitis B vaccine is administered at birth only to children
born to HBsAg + mothers. Otherwise immunisation starts at 3
months of age.”
Finland: “Hepatitis B vaccine is given only to infants of HbsAg
carrier mothers or fathers at the age of 0, 1, 2 and 12 months.”
Denmark: “Vaccination against hepatitis B is recommended to
children of HBsAg-positive mothers starting at birth with both
hepatitis B immunoglobulin and one dose of HepB.”
Norway: “HepB is recommended for risk groups only.”
Sweden: “HepB is only recommended to children considered highrisk groups. Vaccination is given at birth to infants of mothers
positive for hepatitis B.”
The Netherlands: “Only for children born to HBsAg positive
mothers.”
The Hepatitis B vaccine addition to the U.S. vaccination schedule for
children is a wildly destructive disaster for seemingly little benefit to public
health. The science proving what a disaster it is will keep coming.
I’d like to wrap this piece up with two remarkable statements from a very
courageous father, Michael Belkin, who lost his infant daughter to a
Hepatitis B vaccine. And, it’s not only this dad’s command of the facts that
makes his statements remarkable, it’s also because these statements were
delivered in public, to both the Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices, the very group that added Hep B to our schedule, and the U.S.
Congress, TEN YEARS AGO:
Statement #1:
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL BELKIN BEFORE THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE ON IMMUNIZATION PRACTICES -- CENTERS FOR
DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION (February 17, 1999) -- Atlanta
Georgia
My name is Michael Belkin. I am a father, businessman, former quantitative
strategist at Salomon Brothers, and Director of the Hepatitis B Vaccine
Project of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC).
The NVIC has studied Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act covering the last nine
years on hepatitis B vaccine adverse events -- and in 1996 there were more
than three times as many reported serious adverse reactions as reported
cases of the disease in the 0 to 14 age group. Of the total 2,424 adverse
event reports made between 1990 and October 1998 in children under age
14 who only received hepatitis B vaccine, there were 1,209 serious events
and 73 deaths. Thus, one half of the reports for children under age 14 who
received only hepatitis B vaccine were for serious events that required an
emergency room visit, hospitalization, or caused life-threatening health
problems or permanent disabilities.
As a UC Berkeley graduate and advisor to some of the largest financial
institutions in the world, I am qualified to analyze and make conclusions
about statistics. Based on that experience, I am astonished that the
scientists on this Committee would disregard or cover up data showing the
number and severity of adverse reactions to this vaccine. Science is
observing and learning from what is observed. The assertions of the CDC
that the many reported adverse reactions to this vaccine do not exist or are
a coincidence violates the basic principle of science, which is rooted in the
observation and analysis of data.
A benefit/risk analysis of the hepatitis B vaccine for the average infant in
America, not born to infected parents, must conclude that the VAERS data
on adverse reactions shows the real-world risk of a newborn infant dying or
being injured by the hepatitis B vaccine is a greater threat than the remote
chance of contracting the primarily blood-transmitted disease.
My 5-week old daughter, Lyla Rose, died within 16 hours of her hepatitisB
vaccination, which she received because of the universal vaccination policy
this Committee instituted in 1991. At her death, Lyla had four of the eight
highest-reported symptoms in the VAERS hepatitis B vaccine adverse
reaction data. The NY Medical Examiner observed brain swelling at the
autopsy but refused to record that or mention the hepatitis B vaccine Lyla
received in the autopsy report.
I hold each one of you who participated in the promulgation or perpetuation
of that mandated newborn vaccination policy personally responsible for my
daughter's death and the deaths and injuries of all the other beautiful,
healthy infants who are victims of the hepatitis B vaccine. Your negligence is
the proximate cause of my daughter's death and you have failed to exercise
reasonable care.
At the NVIC, we are overwhelmed following up constant new reports of
deaths, seizures and autoimmune reactions following hepatitis B
vaccination. Because the CDC refuses to acknowledge this large number of
serious adverse reactions, hospitals and doctors who have been misled
about the risks continue to administer the vaccine and then deny any
vaccine connection when children die, get ill or have seizures within hours
or days. CDC officials tell parents they have never heard of hepatitis B
vaccine reactions.
That is a lie. For this government to continue to insist that hepatitis B
vaccine adverse reaction reports do not exist is negligent, unethical -- and is
a crime against the children of America.
It is a sad day for the U.S. when the nation's children need protection from
the official medical authorities who are charged with protecting them from
disease.
Thank you.
Statement #2:
MICHAEL BELKIN TESTIMONY TO U.S. CONGRESS (Tuesday May 18,
1999)
My daughter Lyla Rose Belkin died on September 16, 1998 at the age of
five weeks, about 15 hours after receiving her second Hepatitis B vaccine
booster shot. Lyla was a lively, alert five-week-old baby when I last held her
in my arms. Little did I imagine as she gazed intently into my eyes with all
the innocence and wonder of a newborn child that she would die that night.
She was never ill before receiving the Hepatitis B shot that afternoon. At her
final feeding that night, she was extremely agitated, noisy and feisty -- and
then she fell asleep suddenly and stopped breathing. The autopsy ruled out
choking. The NY Medical Examiner ruled her death Sudden Infant Death
Syndrome (SIDS).
But the NY Medical Examiner (Dr. Persechino) neglected to mention Lyla's
swollen brain or the hepatitis B vaccine in the autopsy report. The coroner
spoke to my wife and I and our pediatrician (Dr. Zullo) the day of the
autopsy and clearly stated that her brain was swollen. The pediatrician Dr.
Zullo's notes of that conversation are "brain swollen ... not sure cause yet ...
could not see how recombinant vaccine could cause problem."
SIDS is a diagnosis of exclusion ..it wasn't this, it wasn't that, everything has
been ruled out and we don't know what it was. A swollen brain is not SIDS.
Through conversations with other experienced pathologists, I subsequently
discovered that brain inflammation is a classic adverse reaction to
vaccination (with any vaccine) in the medical literature.
I set out to do an investigation of the Hepatitis B vaccine and attended a
workshop at the National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine on
"Neo-Natal Death and the Hepatitis B Vaccine," the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP) February meeting, and a debate in New
Hampshire between the Chairman of the ACIP, Dr. Modlin, and Dr.
Waisbren about the safety of the Hepatitis B vaccine. I also obtained the
entire Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database on
Hepatitis B vaccine adverse reactions and have investigated it thoroughly.
These are my conclusions, supported by the following pages of text and
analysis that are too lengthy to present in entirety in the time allotted for this
appearance. Please read the results of my investigation, as it will help you
understand the magnitude of the hepatitis B vaccine issue.
* Newborn babies are not at risk of contracting the hepatitis B disease
unless their mother is infected.
* Hepatitis B is primarily a disease of junkies, gays, and promiscuous
heterosexuals.
* The vaccine is given to babies because health authorities couldn't get
those risk groups to take the vaccine.
* Adverse reactions out-number cases of the disease in government
statistics.
* Nothing is being done to investigate those adverse reactions.
* Those adverse reactions include numerous deaths, convulsions and
arthritic conditions that occur within days after
* The CDC is misrepresenting hypothetical, estimated disease statistics as
real cases of the disease.
* The ACIP is recommending new vaccines for premature infants without
having scientific studies proving they are safe.
* The U.S. vaccine recommendation process is hopelessly compromised by
conflicts of interest with vaccine manufacturers, the American Academy of
Pediatrics and the CDC.
Conclusion: If (as with the recently-recommended rotavirus vaccine)
Hepatitis B vaccine was recommended in 1991 without scientific proof that it
was safe in a broad sample of racially and genetically diverse babies less
than 48 hours old before they established that recommendation, then the
CDC has been experimenting on babies like guinea pigs and this Committee
should suspend that universal immunization policy.
The Hepatitis B vaccine was effectively mandated in 1991 for universal
immunization of newborn babies by the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices (ACIP) -- an adjunct of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC). Paradoxically, the CDC's own Fact Sheet on
the Hepatitis B disease does not include newborn babies as a risk group for
that disease. That Fact Sheet lists the risk groups as injection drug users,
homosexual men, sexually active heterosexuals, infants/children of
immigrants from disease-endemic areas, low socio-economic level,
sexual/household contacts of infected persons, infants born to infected
mothers, health care workers and hemodialysis patients NOT NEWBORN
BABIES.
Question: Why then, did the ACIP establish a policy mandating that
newborn babies not at risk of the disease be automatically administered the
3-shot Hepatitis B vaccine as their first involuntary indoctrination into the
pediatric care of America?
Answer: Here is that rationale from the original ACIP 1991 statement
establishing the official vaccination policy "Hepatitis B Virus: A
Comprehensive Strategy for Eliminating Transmission in the United States
Through Universal Childhood Vaccination ..." "In the United States, most
infections occur among adults and adolescents ... The recommended
strategy for preventing these infections has been the selective vaccination of
persons with identified risk factors ... However, this strategy has not lowered
the incidence of Hepatitis B, primarily because vaccinating persons engaged
in high-risk behaviors, life-styles, or occupations before they become
infected generally has not been feasible ... Efforts to vaccinate persons in
the major risk groups have had limited success. For example, programs
directed at injecting drug users failed to motivate them to receive three
doses of vaccine ... In the United States it has become evident that HBV
transmission cannot be prevented through vaccinating only the groups at
high risk of infection ... In the long term, universal infant vaccination would
eliminate the need for vaccinating adolescents and high-risk adults ...
Hepatitis B vaccination is recommended for all infants, regardless of the
HBsAg status of the mother ... The first dose can be administered during the
newborn period, preferably before the infant is discharged from the hospital,
but no later than when the infant is 2 months of age ..." (emphasis added).
So in the CDC and ACIP's own words, almost every newborn U.S. baby is
now greeted on its entry into the world by a vaccine injection against a
sexually transmitted disease for which the baby is not at risk -- because they
couldn't get the junkies, prostitutes, homosexuals and promiscuous
heterosexuals to take the vaccine. That is the essence of the Hepatitis B
universal vaccination program.
Question: What are the risks and benefits for administering this vaccine to
infants?
Answer: Hepatitis B is a rare, mainly blood-transmitted disease. In 1996,
only 54 cases of the disease were reported to the CDC in the 0-1 age group.
There were 3.9 million births that year, so the observed incidence of
hepatitis B in the 0-1 age group was just 0.001%. In the Vaccine Adverse
Event Reporting System (VAERS), there were 1,080 total reports of adverse
reactions from Hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0-1 age group, with 47
deaths reported. Total VAERS Hepatitis B reports for the 0-1 age group
outnumber reported cases of the disease 20 to 1.
Question: Why don't they just screen the mother to see if she is infected
with Hepatitis B (since that's about the only way a baby is likely to get the
disease), instead of vaccinating all infants?
Answer: Selling vaccines is extremely profitable and the process of
mandating vaccines is fraught with conflicts of interest between vaccine
manufacturers, the ACIP and the American Academy of Pediatrics. The
business model of having the government mandate everyone must buy your
product is a monopolist's delight.
Question: What studies are being done on the data from the FDA's Vaccine
Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)?
Answer: Absolutely nothing. The 25,000 reports are going into a drawer
and being forgotten.
How many reports are enough to show a drug or vaccine is dangerous -2,500? 25,000? 250,000? Chen of the CDC and Ellenberg of the FDA
monitor this data, write reports and deliver speeches about how VAERS
Hepatitis B adverse reaction reports show nothing out of the ordinary and
show "the relative safety of HB vaccine when given to neonates and
infants." VAERS shows nothing of the kind. TAKE A LOOK AT THE VAERS
DATA YOURSELF.
The health authorities continue to negligently downplay the steady stream of
serious adverse reactions to this vaccine and more infants and adults
continue to die and suffer central nervous system and liver damage after HB
vaccination.
Question: Why do the CDC, ACIP and Merck say that there are 140,000320,000 new infections/yr (70,000-160,000 symptomatic infections/yr) when
their own CDC data shows only 10,000 reported cases year?
Answer: They are passing off estimated, hypothetical numbers as actual
cases. This is statistical fraud. In the financial world such mis-representation
would lead to criminal charges. If a company inflated its earnings or
revenues by 300% (as the CDC does hepatitis B disease statistics) and
foisted those figures off as official data (and not some back-of-the-envelope
guess-timate) -- that company would be investigated by the SEC and sued
by shareholders. Why doesn't that happen in the medical world? There's no
regulator to keep the CDC honest. They do not say those figures are
hypothetical estimates, they misrepresent the data. Go try to audit those
320,000 supposed new infections/yr. You will not find them. The whole
exercise is designed to increase public hysteria about the risk of a low-risk
disease so the CDC can extend it's pervasive influence and Merck can
increase it's $900 million/year vaccine revenues.
Question: What process does the Center for Disease Control employ to
make a vaccine recommendation?
I attended the February Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
(ACIP) meeting in Atlanta and was absolutely appalled. Every vote by the
Committee on new vaccine mandates was unanimous (except for one
dissenting vote on Rotavirus vaccine for premature infants). There was
hardly any discussion of adverse reactions, the ACIP simply rubberstamped every proposal on the agenda. I call it Vaccination Without
Representation. In one instance, the ACIP passed a recommendation for
Rotavirus vaccine for premature infants even though no scientific studies
had been done showing it was medically safe. Dr. Modlin, (Chairman of the
ACIP), said in a pro-Hepatitis B vaccine debate in New Hampshire "How do
we determine whether something is scientifically valid or not? ... 1) Is the
theory biologically plausible? 2) Has it been tested by appropriate methods?
3) Is the study well concluded? 4) Are the results statistically sound?" But at
the February ACIP meeting, when it came time for the ACIP to rubber-stamp
approval of Rotavirus vaccine for premature infants, here are Modlin's
quotes from the official transcript: "... available data are insufficient to fully
establish the safety and efficacy of rotavirus vaccine in premature infants ...
there is a section under Adverse Events that details what little information
there actually are with respect to premature infants ... To my knowledge we
don't have data from a clinical trial specifically ... Some bit of information
from Seattle, as I recall, that had suggested there was a slight increase in
relative risk for hospitalization for premature infants ... Obviously a situation
where we have to make a judgment in the absence of data, and with a
vaccine that has not yet been tested in the group ..." (ACIP transcript, pages
102-112) Modlin then held a vote and the recommendation for premature
infants passed nine to one -- Modlin voted yes, Dr. Glode against. This is a
clear example of how the medical bureaucracy (led by the CDC and ACIP),
is recommending vaccines without scientific evidence that those vaccines
are safe in a broad sample of racially and genetically diverse infants.
What Should Be Done? This Committee should investigate the 1991 ACIP
recommendation establishing universal hepatitis B vaccination of newborn
babies in the hospital -- and if (as with the Rotavirus vaccine example
above) no studies were done to prove this was safe in a broad sample of
racially and genetically diverse babies less than 48 hours old before they
established that recommendation, then the CDC has been experimenting on
babies like guinea pigs and this Committee should suspend that universal
immunization policy.
VAERS ANALYSIS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System)
I studied statistics at the University Of California at Berkeley and went on to
develop sophisticated proprietary risk/reward statistical models at Salomon
Brothers from 1986-91 -- and in my subsequent, ongoing business provide
statistical economic and financial forecasts to mutual funds, investment
banks, pension funds and hedge funds.
I studied VAERS Hepatitis B vaccine data obtained by the National Vaccine
Information Center (NVIC) under the Freedom of Information Act. The data
has some flaws (incomplete fields, some multiple reports) but any qualified,
impartial quantitative analyst or statistician not affiliated with Merck,
Smithkline, the CDC, the FDA or the AAP who examines these reports will
find a clear and undeniable pattern of central nervous system (CNS) and
liver disease striking thousands of people within 0-4 days after vaccination
with Hepatitis B vaccine. These reports have been ignored, explained away,
or considered "acceptable" by the FDA, CDC and drug companies. This
Committee should launch an investigation of the VAERS Hepatitis B data by
a team of independent scientists not beholden to vaccine manufacturers or
the FDA/CDC bureaucracy. The following is intended to be a starting point
for such an investigation. This does not profess to be a complete,
exhaustive analysis -- simply an overview, highlighting aspects of the data
that may not previously have been brought to your attention.
The total 24,775 VAERS Hepatitis B reports from July 1990 to October 31,
1998 show 439 deaths and 9673 serious reactions involving emergency
room visits, hospitalization, disablement or death. Therefore, more than one
third of total reports were serious events. 17,497 of those total reports were
for Hepatitis B vaccine only, the remainder were vaccine cocktails where
hepatitis B was administered along with DPT, HIB, IPV, OPV, etc.
The Hepatitis-B-vaccine-only reports show a shocking cluster of reactions in
females starting in their teenage years (the male/female reporting ratio is
balanced before age 16). For ages 16-55, 77% of VAERS reports are
women -- more than three times as many women as men are reporting
adverse reactions to Hepatitis B vaccine. The median onset of adverse
event after vaccination is one day, 70% of reactions happen within four days
of vaccination. Independent scientists should investigate why females are
more disposed to have adverse reactions to Hepatitis B vaccine and/or
report them to VAERS. One possible explanation is that nurses have to take
this vaccine for their jobs and are thus more exposed than most adults to
Hepatitis B vaccine adverse reactions. Rather than dismiss that factor as an
"over-reporting bias" as Dr. Chen of the CDC did at the February ACIP
meeting, perhaps investigators might consider that nurses are alert health
care workers and ought to be listened to with regard to the dangers of
adverse events with any vaccine (rather than ignored). Personal case
studies reported to the author have showed many teenage girls getting
severe, debilitating adverse reactions to Hepatitis B vaccine, having nothing
to do with nursing. Do women have a greater vulnerability to auto-immune
reactions to Hepatitis B vaccine? Is the government discriminating against
women by administering this vaccine without regard for genetic risk of CNS
and liver disease? Those are questions that independent scientists should
investigate.
A second area of concern is the VAERS reports involving Hepatitis B
vaccine administered with other vaccines (vaccine cocktails). Health officials
are fond of dismissing those reports as being attributable to Hepatitis B
vaccine, because of the multiple other antigens present (almost as if they
wanted to cloak Hepatitis B vaccine reactions from scrutiny). Let's avoid that
controversy and focus on the extremely disturbing VAERS data of Hepatitis
B vaccine with other vaccines. These reports amount to only one third of
total reports (7,275), but account for two thirds of total deaths (291). The
median onset of those deaths was 2 days after vaccination -- displaying a
clear temporal association. The median age of death was 0.5 years in this
group. 50% of all Hepatitis-B-vaccine-cocktail reports were serious (died,
emergency room, hospitalized, disabled). I grouped convulsive reactions
together from the Hep-B-vaccine-cocktail data and found a deeply disturbing
pattern. These were anything labeled convulsions, seizures or tremors in the
VAERS Hep-B-cocktail data. Of the 1189 such reports, fully 80% (950) were
serious (died, ER, hospitalized, disabled) median age 0.5 years, median
onset after vaccination 0 days (less than one day). Someone should do
follow-up and find out what happened to those poor infants who suffered
severe convulsions after a Hepatitis B-multi-vaccine cocktail. In the personal
reports I've taken of similar adverse reactions, the children were left braindamaged and developmentally disabled. Looking beyond the debate over
whether VAERS reports of vaccine cocktails can be attributed to Hepatitis B,
the data strongly suggests combining multiple vaccines may be convenient
and profitable for pediatricians -- but fatal or debilitating for infants. Where
are the scientific studies showing Hepatitis B vaccine is safe to administer
with DPT, HIB, IPV, OPV, etc.? Did anyone doing cost/benefit analysis for
those studies include data showing the higher mortality and serious
reactions present in the VAERS data? Why not? Is there an identifiable
genetic marker in those who suffered convulsive reactions to screen out
those vulnerable in the future? These are all matters for independent
scientists to audit.
Another area that leaps out of the VAERS database is something I dubbed
arthritic reactions. These are joint pains, tingling, numbness, aching, fatigue,
etc. I found 2,400 of those reports in just a quick survey of the first reporting
column of VAERS (Hepatitis B vaccine only). Almost one half of those are
serious, involving an ER visit, hospitalization, death or disablement. These
are the type of adverse reactions reported by many adults who are forced to
take the Hepatitis B vaccine for their jobs. In the reports of such adverse
reactions I've taken, the symptoms do not go away, most patients complain
it gets worse over time. Scientists not corrupted by drug company or
CDC/FDA institutional bias should examine the thousands of VAERS
Hepatitis B arthritic reaction reports and develop a diagnosis of their
Hepatitis B vaccine-related illness.
Anyone who doubts if Hepatitis B vaccine adverse reactions exist should sit
down and read the symptoms and text comments of a random selection of
VAERS reports. When one does so, they will find a similar but wide-ranging
list of CNS and liver reactions that occur within days of vaccination. The
Merck package insert claims "Injection site reactions and systemic
complaints were reported following 17% and 15% on the injections,
respectively." The standard rule of thumb is only about 10% of reactions are
reported to VAERS. So the actual number and full horror of the Hepatitis B
vaccine reaction story is potentially much larger than even VAERS
suggests.
J.B. Handley is co-founder of Generation Rescue.
in JB Handley, Vaccines | Permalink
Technorati Tags: Adverse Reactions, Autism, Hepatitis B Vaccine, J.B.
Handley, Michael Belkin, NVIC, Safety
Digg This | Save to del.icio.us
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8357f3f2969e20120a5d0
31ee970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hepatitis B Vaccine: An
Unmitigated Disaster :
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Washington State, USA
Vaccines - http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm or
http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccine.htm
Vaccine Dangers, Childhood Disease Classes & Homeopathy Online/email
courses - next classes start October 28 & 29
http://www.wellwithin1.com/vaccineclass.htm or
http://www.wellwithin1.com/homeo.htm
PARTIAL LIST OF ADVERSE EVENTS
FOLLOWING HEPATITIS B VACCINATION
REFERECNES FROM THE MEDICAL LITERATURE
March 12, 2011
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM
Autoimmune problems
1. Arthritis – adult and juvenile
• Christau B, et al. B]Ugeskr Laeger. 1987 Jul 6;149(28):1882. Danish.
• Gross K, et al. Report of three cases. Scand J Rheumatol. 1995;24(1):50-2.
• Vautier G, Carty JE. Br J Rheumatol. 1994 Oct;33(10):991.
• Hassan W, Oldham R. BMJ. 1994 Jul 9;309(6947):94.
• Cathebras P, et al. Arthritis, hypercalcemia, and lytic bone lesions after hepatitis B
vaccination. J Rheumatol. 1996 Mar;23(3):558-60.
• Sebag O, et al. Arch Pediatr. 1998 Sep;5(9):1046. French.
• Grasland A, et al. Juvenille Rhuematoid Arthritis. Rev Med Interne. 1998
Feb;19(2):134-6. French.
• Casals JL, Vazguez MA. Ann Med Interna. 1999 Nov;16(11):601-2. Spanish.
• Treves R, et al. Presse Med. 1997 Apr 26;26(14):670. French.
• Mamoux V, Dumont C. Arch Pediatr. 1994 Mar;1(3):307-8. French.
• Bracci M, Zoppini A. Br J Rheumatol. 1997 Feb;36(2):300-1.
• Soubrier M, et al. Presse Med. 1997 Feb 1;26(2):75. French. No abstract available.
2. Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)
• Fineschi S. Lupus. 2001;10(11):830.
• Grezard P, et al. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 1996;123(10):657-9. French.
• Tudela P, et al. Nephron. 1992;62(2):236.
• Lilic D, Ghosh SK. Lancet. 1994 Nov 5;344(8932):1292-3.
• Finielz P, et al. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1998 Sep;13(9):2420-1
• Guiserix J. Nephron. 1996;74(2):441.
• Shapiro E, Kopicky J. Report of 5 cases of SLE. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2000
Dec;30(3):215-6. Review.
3. Hives
• De Silva L, et al. Med J Aust. 1985 Sep 30;143(7):323-4.
• Lear JT, English JS. Lancet. 1995 May 13;345(8959):1249.
4. Others disorders
• Arthus reaction. Froehlich H et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Sep 15;33(6):906-8. Epub 2001
Aug 21.
• Cytolysis. Lasheras Carbajo MD, et al. Rev Clin Esp. 1999 Jan;199(1):49-50. Review.
Spanish.
• Erythromyalgia. Rabaud C, et al. J Rheumatol. 1999 Jan;26(1):233-4.
Blood/blood vessel problems
1. Thrombocytopenia purpura
• Nuevo H, et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004 Feb;23(2):183-4. Review.
• Muller A, et al. Eur J Pediatr. 1999 Dec;158 Suppl 3:S209-10.
• Ronchi F, et al. Arch Dis Child. 1998 Mar;78(3):273-4.
• Poullin P, Gabriel B. Lancet. 1994 Nov 5;344(8932):1293.
• Lliminana et al.Med Clin (Barc). 1999 Jun 12;113(1):39. Spanish.
• Conesa V, et al. Haematologica. 2001 Mar;86(3):E09.
2. Vasculitis
• Allen MB, et al. Thorax. 1993 May;48(5):580-1.
• Beretta L, et al.(Brain inflammation) Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2001 Nov Dec;19(6) :757.
• Cockwell P, et al. BMJ. 1990 Dec 1;301(6763):1281.
• Le Hello C, et al. J Rheumatol. 1999 Jan;26(1):191-4. Review.
• Le Goff P, et al. Presse Med. 1988 Oct 8;17(34):1763. French. (Periarteritis nodosa)
• Vanoli M, et al. Churg-Strauss vasculitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998 Apr;57(4):256-7.
(small blood vessel inflammation)
• Zaas A, et al. (2 cases). J Rheumatol. 2001 May;28(5):1116-20.
• Bui-Quang D, et al.Presse Med. 1998 Sep 12;27(26):1321-3. French.
• Kerleau JM, et al. Rev Med Interne. 1997;18(6):491-2. French.
• Masse I, Descoffres MC. Presse Med. 1998 Jun 6;27(20):965-6. French.
• Saadoun D, et al. (3 cases) Rev Med Interne 2001 Feb;22(2):172-6. French.
3. Pericarditis
• Bensaid J, Denis F. Presse Med. 1993 Feb 20;22(6):269. French.
• Peyriere H, et al. Rev Med Interne. 1997;18(8):675-6. French.
4. Pancytopenia
• Ashok Shenoy K, et al. Br J Haematol. 2001 Sep;114(4):955.
• Viallard JF, et al. Br J Haematol. 2000 Jul;110(1):230-3.
5. Additional blood problems
• Cryoglobulinemia. Mathieu E, et al. N Engl J Med. 1996 Aug 1;335(5):355. (abnormal
proteins in the blood)
• Eosinophilia. Nagafuchi S, et al. Lancet. 1993 Oct 16;342(8877):998.
• Even’s syndrome. Martinez E, Domingo P. Clin Infect Dis. 1992 Dec;15(6):1051. (an
autoimmune disorder where the body makes antibodies that destroy the red blood cells,
platelets and white blood cells.)
• Kawasaki disease. Miron D, et al. Clin Rheumatol. 2003 Dec;22(6):461-3. Epub 2003
Oct 07.
• Mastocytoma. Poulton JK, et al. Cutis. 1999 Jan;63(1):37-40. (white blood cell tumor)
• Serum sickness. Arkachaisri T. J Med Assoc Thai. 2002 Aug;85 Suppl 2:S607-12.
Review.
• Takayasu’s arteritis. Castresana-Isla CJ, et al.J Rheumatol. 1993 Aug;20(8):1417-8.
Neurological disorders/disease
1. Myelitis/Transverse myelitis
• Albitar S, et al. Nephrol Dial Transplant.Oct;12(10):2169-70. 1997
• Fonseca LF, et al. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2003 Jun;61(2A):265-8. Epub 2003 Jun 09.
• Iniguez C, et al.Rev Neurol. 2000 Sep 1-15;31(5):430-2. Spanish.
• Karaali-Savrun F, et al. Eur J Neurol. 2001. Nov. 8(6): 711-5.
• Mahassin F, et al. Presse Med. 1993 Dec 18;22(40):1997-8. French.
• Renard JL, et al. Presse Med. 1999 Jul 3-10;28(24):1290-2. French.
• Senejoux A, et al. Gastroenterol Clin Biol. 1996;20(4):401-2. French.
• Stewart O, et al. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999 Oct;83(10):1200-1.
• Trevisani F, et al. J Hepatol. 1993 Sep;19(2):317-8.
2. Demyelination
• Creange A, et al. Autoimmunity. 1999;30(3):143-6.
• Herroelen L, de Keyser J, Ebinger G. Lancet. 1991 Nov 9;338(8776):1174-5.
• Kaplanski G, et al. CNS. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1995 Jun;58(6):758-9.
• Leukoencephalitis (brain). Manna R, et al. J Hepatol. 1996 Jun;24(6):764-5
• Leukoencephalitis (brain). Konstantinou D, et al. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Nov
15;33(10):1772-3. Epub 2001 Oct 10.
• Song HK, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 1997 Jun;12(3):249-51.
• Tartaglino LM, et al. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1995 Mar;16(3):581-2.
3. Guillian-Barre syndrome
• Kakar A, et al. Indian J Pediatr. 1997 Sep-Oct;64(5):710-2
• Sinsawaiwong S, et al. J Med Assoc Thai. 2000 Sep;83(9):1124-6. Review.
• Tuohy PG. NZ Med J. 1989 Mar 8;102(863):114-5.
4. Neuropathies and paralysis
• Facial nerve paralysis. Ganry O, et al. Therapie. 1992 Sep-Oct;47(5):437-8. French.
• Peripheral neuropathy. Bantz PM, et al. QJM. 2003 Aug;96(8):611.
• Sindern E, et al. J Neurol Sci. 2001 May 1;186(1-2):81-5.
• Reutens DC, et al. Muscle Nerve. 1990 May;13(5):461.
• Vital C, et al. (3 cases). J Peripher Nerv Syst. 2002 Sep;7(3):163-7.
5. Encephalitis
• Cabrera-Gomez JA, et al. Rev Neurol. 2002 Feb 16-28;34(4):358-63. Spanish.
• Marsaudon E, et al. Presse Med. 1996 Oct 26;25(32):1561-2. French.
• Neurotoxicity. Pirmohamed M, et al. Postgrad Med J. 1997 Jul;73(861):462-3.
6. Seizures
• Hartman S. J Paediatr Child Health. 1990 Feb;26(1):65.
• Kaygusuz S, et al. Scand J Infect Dis. 2002;34(4):314-5.
7. Additional neurological problems
• Acute cerebellar ataxia. Deisenhammer F, et al. Acta Neurol Scand. 1994 Jun; 89(6):
462-3.
• Complex regional pain syndrome. Jastaniah WA, et al. J Pediatr. 2003 Dec;143(6):802• Macrophagic myofasciitis of CNS. Authier FJ, et al. Brain. 2001 May;124(Pt 5):974-83.
• Myasthenia. Louzir B, et al. Therapie. 2003 Jul-Aug;58(4):378-9. French.
• Myasthenia gravis. Biron P, et al. Arch Intern Med. 1988 Dec;148(12):2685.
• Unilateral papilloedema. Fledlius,HC. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1999 Dec;77(6):722-4.
8. Multiple sclerosis.
• Hostetler L. N Engl J Med. 2001 Jun 7;344(23):1795.
• Nadler JP. Clin Infect Dis. 1993 Nov;17(5):928-9.
Skin problems
1. Lichen planus
• Agrawal S, et al. J Dermatol. 2000 Sep;27(9):618-20.
• Al-Khenaizan S. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001 Oct;45(4):614-5.
• Aubin F, et al. Arch Dermatol. 1994 Oct;130(10):1329-30.
• Ciaccio M, et al. Br J Dermatol. 1990 Mar;122(3):424.
• Daramola OO, et al. Tropical Doct. 2002 Apr;32(2):117-8.
• Ferrando MF, et al. Br J Dermatol. 1998 Aug;139(2):350.
• Pemberton MN, et al. Oral Surg Endod. 2000 Jun;89(6):717-9. Review.
• Rebora A, et al. Dermatology 1999;198(2):222.
• Saywell et al. Australas J Dermatol. 1997 Aug;38(3):152-4. Review.
• Schupp P, Vente C. Int J Dermatol. 1999 Oct;38(10):799-800.
• Stavrianeas NG, et al. Dermatology. 2002;205(2):166-8.
• Trevisan G, Stinco G. Acta Derm Venereol. 1993 Feb;73(1):73.
• Usman A, et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2001 Mar-Apr;18(2):123-6.
• Lefort A, et al. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 1995;122(10):701-3. French.
• Gisserot O, et al. (3 new cases). Presse Med. 1997 May 17;26(16):760. French.
2. Polyarteritis nodosum
• Bourgeais AM, et al. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2003 Feb;130(2 Pt 1):205-7. French.
• De Keyser F, et al. Two cases. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2000 Jan-Feb;18(1):81-5.
3. Erythema nodosum
• Di Giusto CA, et al. Lancet. 1986 Nov 1;2(8514):1042.
• Goolsby PL, et al. N Engl J Med. 1989 Oct 26;321(17):1198-9.
• Rogerson SJ, et al. BMJ. 1990 Aug 11;301(6747):345.
4. Erythema multiforme
• Di Lernia V, et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 1994 Dec;11(4):363-4.
• Loche F, et al. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2000 Mar;25(2):167-8.
• Wakeel RA, White MI. Br J Dermatol. 1992 Jan;126(1):94-5.
5. Hair loss
• Central hair loss. Bardazzi F, et al. Acta Derm Venereol. 1999 Jan;79(1):93.
• Hair loss. Wise RP, et al. JAMA. 1997 Oct 8;278(14):1176-8.
6. Other skin disorders
• Acrodermatitis. Andiran N, et al. Gianotti-Crosti syndrome. Dermatology.
2002;204(1):75-6. Review. (redness and itching of hands and feet)
• Anetoderma. Daoud MS, et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1997 May;36(5 Pt 1):779-80. (An
area of slack "baglike" skin due to a local absence or loss of elastic fibers in the skin.)
• Childhood bullous pemphigoid. Erbagci Z. et al. J Dermatol. 2002 Dec;29(12):781-5.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Eczema. McKenna KE. Contact Dermatitis. 1999 Mar;40(3):158-9.
Eczema. Ring J. Lancet. 1986 Aug 30;2(8505):522-3.
Eosinophilia. Koh KJ, et al. Australas J Dermatol. 2003 Aug;44(3):199-202. (infiltration
of blood cells that cause itching allergic reaction in hands and feet).
Epitheliopathy. Bourges JL, et al. J Fr Ophtalmol. 1998 Nov;21(9):696-700. French.
Granuloma annulare. Wolf F, et al. Eur J Dermatol. 1998 Sep;8(6):435-6. (chronic,
degenerative skin disease)
Henoch-Schonlein purpura. Chave T, et al. J Dermatolog Treat. 2003 Sep;14(3):179-81.
Juvenile dermatomyosiitis. Fernandez-Funez A, et al. Med Clin (Barc). 1998 Nov
21;111(17):675. Spanish.
Localized scleroderma. Schmutz JL, et al. Presse Med. 2000 May 27-Jun 3;29(19):1046.
French.
Macrophagic myofasciitis. Guis S, et al. Arthritis Rheum. 2002 Oct 15;47(5):543-5.
Necrobiotic granuloma. Ajithkumar K, et al. Clin Exp Dermatol. 1998 Sep;23(5):222-4.
Peristent nodules. Skowron F, et al. Contact Dermatitis. 1998 Sep;39(3):135-6.
Hearing problems
1. Acute tinnitus and permanent audiovestibluar damage.
• DeJonckere PH, de Surgeres GG. Int Tinnitus J. 2001;7(1):59-61.
2. Sudden hearing loss
• Orlando MP, et al. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1997 Dec 29;830:319-21.
3. Sensorineural hearing loss
• Biacabe B, et al. Auris Nasus Larynx. 1997 Oct;24(4):357-60.
4. Fluctuant hearing loss
• Bonfils P, et al. Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac. 1996;113(6):359-61. French.
Eye problems/blindness
1. Central vein occlusion
• Berkman N. Presse Med. 1997 Apr 26;26(14):670. French.
• Granel B, et al. Presse Med. 1997 Feb 1;26(2):62-5. French.
• Devin F, et al. Lancet. 1996 Jun 8;347(9015):1626.
2. Neuritis
• Voigt U, et. al. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd. 2001 Oct;218(10):688-90. German.
• Berkman N, et al. Presse Med. 1996 Sep 28;25(28):1301. French.
• Fried M, et al. Lancet. 1987 Sep 12;2(8559):631-2.
3. Other disorders
• White dot syndrome. Baglivo E, et al. Am J Ophthalmol. 1996 Sep;122(3):431-2.
(transitory vision loss)
• Vision loss. Brezin A, et al. Lancet. 1993 Aug 28;342(8870):563-4.
• Corneal graph rejection. Steinemann TL, et al. Am J Ophthalmol. 1988 Nov
15;106(5):575-8.
Kidney problems
1. Nephrotic syndrome.
• Ozdemir S, et al. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1998 Jul;13(7):1888-9.
• Islek I, et al. Pediatr Nephrol. 2000 Jan;14(1):89-90.
• Macario F, et al. Clin Nephrol. 1995 May;43(5):349.
2. Glomerulnephritis
• Pennesi M, et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2002 Feb;21(2):172-3.
3. Hemodialysis complications
• Janzen L, et al. Vaccine-induced hepatitis B surface antigen positivity in adult
hemodialysis patients: incidental and surveillance data. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1996
Aug;7(8):1228-34.
Hepatitis B infection after vaccination
1. Acute infection after vaccination
• Ballinger AB, Clark ML. Lancet. 1994 Nov 5;344(8932):1292.
• Brodersen HP, et al. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1997 Dec;12(12):2756-7.
• Schwarzwald H, et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2001 Nov;20(11):1101-2
• Goffin E, et al. Lancet. 1995 Jan 28;345(8944):263.
• Yoshida EM, et al. 2000 Oct;20(5):411-4.
• Diaz B, et al. Med Clin (Barc). 2001 Oct 27;117(13):518-9. Spanish.
2.
Antigenemia (HBsAg)
• Lunn ER, et al. Pediatrics. 2000 Jun;105(6):E81.
• Challapalli M, et al. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1993 May;12(5):408-9.
• Janzen L, et al.. J Am Soc Nephrol. 1996 Aug;7(8):1228-34.
• Lovestad A, et al. Scand J Infect Dis. 1997;29(6):645.
• De Schryver A, et al. J Viral Hepat. 2004 Jan;11(1):88-90.
• Kear TM, Wright LS. ANNA J. 1996 Jun;23(3):331-337.
• Davis AR, Wylie BR. Med J Aust. 1996 Apr 15;164(8):510.
• Davis AR, et al. Transfusion. 2003 Apr;43(4):545.
Misc. problems
1.
2.
3.
4.
Yeast sensitivity. Brightman CA, et al. Lancet. 1989 Apr 22;1(8643):903.
Asthma and hives. Lohiya G. West J Med. 1987 Sep;147(3):341. No abstract available.
Subacute thyroiditis. Toft J, et al. Endocr J. 1998 Feb;45(1):135.
Liver inflammation. Ranieri VM, et al. Intensive Care Med. 1997 Jan;23(1):119-21.