From: pautrey2 on
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/06/vaccine-failure--over-1000-get-mumps-in-ny-in-last-six-months.aspx



Vaccine Failure -- Over 1000 Got Mumps in NY in Last Six Months Posted
by Dr. Mercola | March 06 2010 | 22,052 views Email this to a friend
Share this article Previous Article More than 1,000 people in New
Jersey and New York have been sickened with mumps since August.

Almost all of those infected with the virus are of the Orthodox or
Hasidic Jewish population. The mumps outbreak began at a summer camp
for Orthodox Jewish boys in Sullivan County, New York. Health
officials have linked the outbreak to an 11-year-old boy at the camp.
He had recently returned from the United Kingdom, where a mumps
outbreak had spread to 4,000 people.

The boy had been fully vaccinated against the mumps, as had 77 percent
of the patients in New Jersey. The vaccine is not 100 percent
effective, according to the CDC.

Mumps is a contagious disease caused by a virus. Initial symptoms
include fever, headache, muscle aches and loss of appetite, and the
disease can cause your jaw and cheeks to swell, with further
complications including the inflammation of the brain, testicles or
ovaries, and deafness.
Sources:
CNN February 8, 2010



Dr. Mercola's Comments:


In what is being described as the largest mumps outbreak in the United
States since 2006, more than 1,000 people in New Jersey and New York
have come down with mumps.

In the United States, children typically receive their mumps
vaccination as part of the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advises
children to receive their first dose between 12 and 18 months, and
their second between the ages of 4 and 6.

This vaccine is supposed to make people immune to measles, mumps and
rubella … yet 77 percent of the 1,000+ who have recently been sickened
with mumps were vaccinated.

You Can Still Get Mumps if You’ve Been Vaccinated

This leaves a glaring question … does the MMR vaccine -- which is one
of the most controversial shots on the CDC’s schedule -- even work?

Well, according to the CDC, maybe yes, maybe no.

They say the vaccine is not 100 percent effective, but rather 76-95
percent effective.

In fact, the second MMR dose is necessary because up to 20 percent of
individuals do not develop measles immunity after the first dose. The
second dose is intended to provide a “second chance” for the vaccine
to work, which is further evidence of this shot’s ineffectiveness.

Even so, the CDC’s estimates of efficacy seem to be rather generous,
given that 77 percent of those currently infected with the mumps on
the East Coast have been vaccinated. And in 2006, when mumps infected
more than 6,500 people in the United States, cases occurred primarily
among college students who had received two doses of MMR vaccine.

At that time, just about the only people who were truly immune to
mumps were older Americans who had recovered from mumps as children,
and therefore had received natural, lifelong immunity.

So just how does the CDC determine a vaccine’s efficacy?

The CDC’s former head, Dr. Julie Gerberding, described the process in
a press briefing during the 2006 mumps outbreak. As you’ll read, it’s
hardly a scientific process:

“There are several different methods for determining vaccine efficacy,
but when we have cases of mumps, the first question to ask is, is this
person not vaccinated, have they had one dose of vaccine or do they
have two doses of vaccine?

One thing we can do is compare people with mumps to people like them
who did not have mumps, and by comparing the frequency of vaccination
in the people who have the disease with people who do not have the
disease, we have tools that allow us to estimate vaccine efficacy in
that context.

So that really is the simplest way, and those are the kinds of things
that our teams are looking at with the state health officials in the
field as we speak.”

Again, even she went on to say that “even when the vaccine is optimal,
it is never 100-percent protective.”

The Problem with Artificial Immunity (Vaccination)

Vaccines are never 100 percent protective because they provide only
temporary, typically inferior immunity compared to that your body
would receive from naturally contracting, and recovering from, a
disease.

In the case of mumps, for instance, immunity is typically permanent
for those who get it in childhood. As Barbara Loe Fisher, president
and co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center, explains:

“Vaccines are supposed to fool your body’s immune system into
producing antibodies to resist viral and bacterial infection in the
same way that actually having the disease usually produces immunity to
future infection.

But vaccines atypically introduce into the human body lab altered live
viruses and killed bacteria along with chemicals, metals, drugs and
other additives such as formaldehyde, aluminum, mercury, monosodium
glutamate, sodium phosphate, phenoxyethanol, gelatin, sulfites, yeast
protein, antibiotics as well as unknown amounts of RNA and DNA from
animal and human cell tissue cultures.


Whereas natural recovery from many infectious diseases stimulates
lifetime immunity, vaccines only provide temporary protection and most
vaccines require "booster" doses to extend vaccine-induced artificial
immunity.

The fact that manmade vaccines cannot replicate the body’s natural
experience with the disease is one of the key points of contention
between those who insist that mankind cannot live without mass use of
multiple vaccines and those who believe that mankind’s biological
integrity will be severely compromised by their continued use.”

This knowledge leaves many open-ended questions about the vaccine
process in the United States, and whether it is ultimately causing
more harm than good. Barbara Loe Fisher continues:

“First, is it better to protect children against infectious disease
early in life through temporary immunity from a vaccine or are they
better off contracting certain contagious infections in childhood and
attaining permanent immunity?

Second, do vaccine complications ultimately cause more chronic illness
and death than infectious diseases do? Both questions essentially pit
trust in human intervention against trust in nature and the natural
order, which existed long before vaccines were created by man.”

A Serious Decision

There are basic differences between naturally acquired immunity and
temporary vaccine-induced antibody production. But few are willing to
look at this issue -- least of all conventional medicine, which in
reality is ruled by pharmaceutical companies.

Unfortunately, if we as a society continue down the road they’re
paving for us, and they’re wrong about the efficacy, safety, and
overall long-term side effects of vaccines, then we’re on extremely
dangerous ground.

Mumps used to be a routine childhood disease. Many of you reading this
likely had your turn, the virus ran its course while you stayed at
home in bed, and you’ve been rewarded with lifelong immunity. In most
cases mumps, like many of the childhood diseases we’re now vaccinating
our children against, is not a serious disease.

In rare cases, serious complications can develop, but you must weigh
this risk against that of the vaccine, which, for one, definitely
contains substances with known toxic properties. The other aspect to
the equation is that even if you get the vaccine, you may still get
the mumps, which means you’ve accepted the risk of the vaccine itself
with no benefit whatsoever.

I believe it’s the time is ripe for an open conversation about
vaccines, one that addresses the glaring questions about efficacy and
side effects, and leaves room for real, honest answers -- and
alternatives.

In the meantime, healthy dietary habits and a robust immune system are
two important factors that influence your ability to successfully
combat viral assaults like mumps.

All of the information you need to boost your immune system and health
is available, for free, on my Web site in a clear, concise format that
is broken down for beginners, intermediate, and advanced. I encourage
you to browse through this information today for tips on how to stay
healthy, naturally.



Related Links:
Why is the Epidemic in Learning Disabilities Linked to This Failed
Policy?

Case Not Yet Closed on Vaccines and Autism

Why We Need a Fearless Conversation about Vaccines



http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/06/vaccine-failure--over-1000-get-mumps-in-ny-in-last-six-months.aspx
From: Mike on
Happy Oyster wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:07:59 -0800 (PST), pautrey2 <rpautrey2(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/arc
>

Subject restored.

Link restored:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/06/vaccine-failure--over-1000-get-mumps-in-ny-in-last-six-months.aspx

>
> <quote>
> Mercola advertises for murder � Threadansicht

irrelevant nonsense snipped.

H.O. cannot say anything on the topic because it is true:
MMR vaccination does not prevent mumps outbreaks. But he wants
to say something, so he spews some BS.

The outbreak has been described as the largest in the USA since 2006.
It is a safe bet that more and bigger outbreaks are coming.
From: Mark Probert-Drew on
On Mar 10, 11:01 pm, Mike <M...(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote:
> Happy Oyster wrote:
> > On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:07:59 -0800 (PST), pautrey2 <rpautr...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/arc
>
> Subject restored.
>
> Link restored:http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/06/vaccine...
>
>
>
> > <quote>
> > Mercola advertises for murder » Threadansicht
>
> irrelevant nonsense snipped.
>
> H.O. cannot say anything on the topic because it is true:
> MMR vaccination does not prevent mumps outbreaks. But he wants
> to say something, so he spews some BS.
>
> The outbreak has been described as the largest in the USA since 2006.

No one has ever claimed that the mumps vaccine is 100% effective. The
problem here was that the outbreak was in an under immunized closed
community with generations of limited breeding. A booster shot may
have been effective. I am certain that this is under consideration.



> It is a safe bet that more and bigger outbreaks are coming.

From: Mike on
Mark Probert-Drew wrote:
> On Mar 10, 11:01 pm, Mike <M...(a)localhost.localdomain> wrote:
>> Happy Oyster wrote:
>>> On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:07:59 -0800 (PST), pautrey2 <rpautr...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/arc
>> Subject restored.
>>
>> Link restored:http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/03/06/vaccine...
>>
>>
>>
>>> <quote>
>>> Mercola advertises for murder � Threadansicht
>> irrelevant nonsense snipped.
>>
>> H.O. cannot say anything on the topic because it is true:
>> MMR vaccination does not prevent mumps outbreaks. But he wants
>> to say something, so he spews some BS.
>>
>> The outbreak has been described as the largest in the USA since 2006.
>
> No one has ever claimed that the mumps vaccine is 100% effective.

The medical authorities and the industry do not say it is 100% effective
but make an effort to get people think that it is. This is why mumps
infections are such a big surprise for the patients and their families:
they were led to believe it cannot happen.

> The
> problem here was that the outbreak was in an under immunized closed
> community with generations of limited breeding.

What does limited breeding have to do with mumps???

As for "under immunized" community - guess what? 83% of the sick
had 2 shots of MMR.

> A booster shot may
> have been effective. I am certain that this is under consideration.
>

What, a third one? Under consideration by whom? Anyway, you cannot know.

>
>
>> It is a safe bet that more and bigger outbreaks are coming.
>