Flexible Approach to Vaccinations Comes Under Fire

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Did you consider that perhaps Dr. Offit's failure to respond to a request for an interview made "late last week" had something to do with the fact that "late last week" was Christmas?

Anonymous of IL 6:09PM December 30, 2008

Thank you so much for this article. I am so upset that the AAP refuses to make any effort to decrease the number of children injured by our current vaccine program. The risks and benefits of vaccines are not being weighed; instead it is all "CYA" and full speed ahead. Dr. Paul Offit should be ashamed of himself. If he believes so much in the safety of vaccines, let's see him get 10,000 vaccines at once.
The "all or nothing" approach will result in more parents choosing "nothing", especially since there is clearly no attempt to address problems.

Twyla of CA 5:03PM December 30, 2008

The Vaccine Book by Dr. Bob Sears is very pro-vaccine. He never discourages parents from vaccinating. He empowers parents with information otherwise hard to come by about the vaccine ingredients they are injecting into their children. Other "mainstream" parents I recommend this book to love it because it doesn't try to terrify parents and intimidate them into not vaccinating (quite the opposite of the tactics of Dr. Offit and the AAP). Sears' just shares the very real risks and benefits along with some suggestions for parents who are already concerned about vaccine safety so that they may find a way to vaccinate with a little less health risk each time. There are very real risks and benefits to vaccines as there are with all forms of modern medicine. The government and public health agencies should start to address vaccines from that perspective and quit attacking parents who are trying to make safe decisions for their families. The adverse reactions of vaccines are more significant and far more frequent than the fine print and AAP make them out to be and the public deserves to know the REAL risk versus benefit trade-off. The accusations and mudslinging need to end and the real scientific discussion needs to begin.

Jessica of TX 2:56PM December 30, 2008

Thank you Deborah for pointing out what many of us have been saying for years -- it's time for the media to stop regurgitating sound bites from so-called *experts* (with obvious conflicts of interest) who are unable render an unbiased opinion on important vaccine issues which may adversely effect uptake rates.
It’s not rocket science – it’s human nature.
Bottom Line: Follow the money.
Kelli Ann Davis
D.C. Political Liaison for Generation Rescue

Kelli Ann Davis of NV 2:17PM December 30, 2008

I am actually quite heartened that the author of this piece has not taken the anti-vaccination approach.I see nothing wrong with a flexible schedule,just so long as every child is fully vaccinated.It is the lack of full vaccination,whether due to unfounded fears of autism,arrogance or plain parental stupidity that will lead to new outbreaks of'cured'diseases.As long as all vaccinations are given,if a parent wants to space them out a little,they should be given that option.

Tim Schubert of IL 1:59PM December 30, 2008

I wish believed that the powers that be had my best interests at heart, but I don't. When resonable debate becomes shrill name calling, I am left with one conclusion; it's about the money (because it sure isn't about the science).

drmithra of VA 11:33AM December 30, 2008

Of course they aren't going to like Dr. Sears alternative vaccine plan, they are paid by drug company lobbyists who want to ensure babies get drugged up as soon as possible. I followed his alternative vaccine schedule with my son, he is getting all the shots (hence it is NOT anti-vaccine) but we aren't letting them administer more than two at a time. Give the poor kid a chance to recover! It also helps us identify which vaccine caused a side affect, if any. Dr. Sears is a great doctor, it is unfair that they attacked him like this.

Scott of IL 11:25AM December 30, 2008

As a chemist with 27 years of experience evaluating material for heavy metals, I find it very frustrating that Dr. Offit is allowed to repeat the same misinformation over and over. He writes about the thimerosal study, "Weight of Evidence Against Thimerosal Causing Neuropsychological Deficits" which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Below is some information on the studies authors which he omits. Is this what he means by perfect, independent studies?
* Dr. Thompson - the lead investigator - is a former employee of Merck.
* Dr. Marcy has received consulting fees from Merck, Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and MedImmune.
* Dr. Jackson received grant money from Wyeth, Sanofi Pasteur, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novartis. He received lecture fees from Sanofi Pasteur and consulting fees from Wyeth and Abbott. Currently, he is a consultant to the FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.
* Dr. Lieu is a consultant to the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.
* Dr. Black receives consulting fees from MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, and Merck, and grant support from MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Aventis, Merck, and Novartis.
* Dr. Davis receives consulting fees from Merck and grant support from Merck and GlaxoSmithKline.
The study then states, "No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this study was reported." The study goes on to report that any child with a preexisting neurological condition, like autism, was eliminated from the study. However, is it not possible, in fact, probable that these children are the most at risk from exposure to thimerosal? Any child who developed certain neurological conditions was excluded. These conditions included encephalitis and meningitis. The possibility that thimerosal might cause these conditions was eliminated from consideration. Children were eliminated for many reasons from the study. One group excluded was children whose birth weight was under 2,500 grams, about 5.5 pounds. How many babies were eliminated for being underweight is not stated. Babies of this weight are hardly rare and they are not excluded from vaccinations. What legitimate reason could be given for this exclusion? In the end, only 30% of the original study participants remained. They weeded out anyone who didn't fit the pre-established criteria.
Offit tells us how aluminum in babies formula dwarfs the amount in vaccines. What he doesn't explain is that aluminum is only dangerous once it's in the bloodstream. Aluminum is not absorbed through the gut. It is 100% absorbed in the blood through vaccination. He ignores the paper published last year linking aluminum in vaccines to Gulf War Syndrome. If it can harm adult soldiers, what is it doing to newborns.
Here is one subject Offit never touches; multi-dose vaccine vials contain 50,000 ug/l of Hg, a level 250 times higher than what the EPA classifies as hazardous waste.

Michael Wagnitz of WI 10:38AM December 30, 2008

You pro-vaccine people are in-sane. Drugs for this. Shot's for that. Cover-up the damage and deaths done to children by the crazy shots.
In-sane.
Make the medics & nurses line up and take all those shots. Let's see how many would do it.

page crow of MO 12:23AM December 30, 2008

Dr. Sears is in an interesting conundrum. He wants to be able to be flexible with the vaccine schedule, promote vaccines and yet questions the schedule at almost every turn.
Dr. Profit, I mean Dr. Offit, is telling him "you are either with us or against us."
What Sears may not appreciate is how much greed has played in setting the schedule, nor does he understand how biologically dirty certain vaccines are (AVL and reverse transcriptase in egg grown vaccine, for example).
So, the vaccine program has much bigger problems than Sears will admit to, but even what he does admit to is almost more upsetting to Dr. Offit than if he were black & White antivaccine.
Essentially, Sears is empowering parents to think for themselves, and you know.... we can't have that happen.
KP Stoller, MD, FACHM

K Paul Stoller, MD, FACHM of CA 11:58PM December 29, 2008