Vaccinated Children Not at Higher Risk of Infections or Allergic Diseases, Study Suggests
ScienceDaily (Mar. 4, 2011) — “Do vaccinations put too much strain on or weaken children’s immune systems? Roma Schmitz and her colleagues from the Robert Koch Institute investigate exactly this research question in the current issue of Deutsches Ärzteblatt International.” …
In sum: In this study, vaccinated and unvaccinated children and teens experienced the same rates of bronchitis, eczema, colds, and gastrointestinal infections while the unvaccinated children and teens experienced higher rates of vaccine-targeted illnesses, including whooping cough, measles and mumps.
General non-specific morbidity is reduced after vaccination within the third month of life–the Greifswald study. Otto, et al.
Our study revealed that children who received vaccination against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, HiB and poliomyelitis simultaneously within the third month of life do not exhibit enhanced frequencies of infectious disease-associated symptoms. In contrary, the frequencies of infection-associated symptoms were found to be significantly reduced. This might be caused by a vaccination-associated unspecific enhancement of immunological activity (e.g. mediated by interleukin 2) or by other presently still unknown factors.
“On-time Vaccine Receipt in the First Year Does Not Adversely Affect Neuropsychological Outcomes”
by Michael J. Smith, MD, MSCE, and Charles R. Woods, MD, MS
February 5, 2010
“Objectives: To determine whether children who received recommended vaccines on time during the first year of life had different neuropsychological outcomes at 7 to 10 years of age as compared with children with delayed receipt or nonreceipt of these vaccines.” …
“Conclusions: Timely vaccination during infancy has no adverse effect on neuropsychological outcomes 7 to 10 years later. These data may reassure parents who are concerned that children receive too many vaccines too soon.”
“Ethical and Scientific Reflections on Studying Alternative Vaccination Schedules”
by Robert ‘Skip’ Nelson, MD PhD Senior Pediatric Ethicist/Lead Medical Officer Office of Pediatric Therapeutics, Office of the Commissioner Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring MD
February 9, 2012
This paper was presented to the FDA. It describes the feasibility and ethics of conducting a vaccinated versus unvaccinated health study, starting with the strongest type of scientific study design: randomized (randomly selecting who would be vaccinated and who wouldn’t) , controlled (having a placebo group that receives a “fake” vaccine), and blinded (parents wouldn’t know if their child received active or placebo vaccination). Here are a few pertinent summary statements:
“Randomization independent of parental preference would not be ethical nor feasible.”
“Declaration of Helsinki (2008) permits a placebo control if it is scientifically ‘necessary to determine the efficacy or safety of an intervention and the patients who receive placebo or no treatment will not be subject to any risk of serious or irreversible harm.”
“The purpose of blinding is to reduce bias, for example, in the reporting of adverse events as related to the intervention. – Absent randomization, blinding the parent is not an option.”
“Absent randomization and blinding, prospective observational studies are subject to confounding and bias (as are retrospective epidemiological studies).”