Whooping Cough Vaccine May Not Give Long-Term Protection - Fully vaccinated children at risk.

[mzmolly]

Whooping Cough Vaccine May Not Give Long-Term Protection
Study Suggests Protection From the Vaccine May Lessen After 3 Years
By Charlene Laino
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

Sept. 20, 2011 (Chicago) -- The protection provided by the vaccine against whooping cough may wane after only about three years, a preliminary study suggests.

The findings come from a survey of about 15,000 children in Marin County, Calif., where an outbreak of the highly contagious bacterial disease killed 11 infants and sickened about 9,100 people in 2010.

In 2006, there were only about 13,300 new whooping cough cases in the entire country, according to the CDC.

"The attack rate is the highest in California in 50 years," says researcher David Witt, MD, chief of infectious diseases at Kaiser Permanente Medical Center in San Rafael, Calif.

The bulk of the cases occurred among "fully vaccinated children" aged 8 to 12, he tells WebMD.

"That was a surprise to us," as it was thought most cases would be among unvaccinated children, Witt says.

More at link: http://children.webmd.com/vaccines/news/20110920/whooping-cough-vaccine-may-not-give-long-term-protection

[LeftishBrit]

1. Sounds like the vaccine needs some improving...

however, even if it's imperfect, it's still well worth giving it to infants, as if you must get whooping cough, it's much better to get it at age 10 than age 1.

[Warpy]

3. It's deadly to infants and toddlers

and the vaccine given to them was not safe to give kids over 5. Now there's an adult vaccine available and I'd urge anyone who is going to be around infants and toddlers to get it. Whooping cough can be so mild in adults that it's brushed off as allergies or a mild cold and they go ahead and hold the baby.

Whooping cough can be serious in adults with underlying illnesses, too, but it's generally not deadly. It is deadly to very small children.

[mzmolly]

8. I haven't heard that toddlers are at an increased

risk?

http://public.health.oregon.gov/DiseasesConditions/DiseasesAZ/pertussis/Documents/pertfacts.pdf

"• The illness can be very dangerous for infants, who have the highest risk of pertussis-related
complications and death.."

Not a nice disease to have, regardless. Not to mention, if the vaccine is wearing off after three years and it's only considered protective after the third booster, it must be much more wide spread than we know.

[Warpy]

20. Infants have to wait to be vaccinated.

Toddlers who aren't vaccinated and catch it have a serious and occasionally fatal illness which can kill and has a 2 year recovery period. TWO YEARS.

Pertussis is an extremely serious matter. Not vaccinating your kids against it is crazy.

[mzmolly]

21. Anyone can have a fatal illness from

pertussis under certain circumstances. Toddlers are no different. Infants differ however, because they don't have fully developed lung capacity.

If not vaccinating is crazy ... so is not vaccinating every three years (according to the latest research.) I hope you follow your own advice.

[Warpy]

24. I have zero contact with infants and toddlers

and I had the disease as an adult. So I do hope you're following your own advice and are getting vaccinated if you are going to be around young children.

[mzmolly]

27. I too have lasting,

natural immunity.

[jwirr]

23. I had whooping cough when I was around 3 but that may have been

a weaker bug since that was back in 1944.

[mzmolly]

29. Could be. I have heard that a newer more resistant strain

is circulating.

[mzmolly]

7. It isn't considered fully protective until the third booster.

The CDC claims that we vaccinate with pertussis to protect others, because those at most risk (under six months of age?) are too young to be personally protected from the vaccine series. Now that there is an adult booster, it's recommended that parents, medical professionals and siblings partake in order to protect those at risk of complications from the disease.

[midnight]

2. It takes antibiotics and about ten weeks to recover from this horrible cough.

[mzmolly]

9. Sometimes longer than

ten weeks. I've heard it deemed the 100 day cough. That was our experience.

[thereismore]

4. You only find if the vaccine works and whether it's safe when you use it on millions. nt

[TheWraith]

5. No, not even close. Vaccines are tested extensively long before they're used on the public.

No vaccine is ALLOWED to be used on the public unless it's proven safe and effective.

[pnwmom]

11. Although there is extensive testing, the final stage of testing IS after release

because many adverse effects aren't discovered until a drug or vaccine has been given to millions under a variety of non-controlled conditions.

[TheWraith]

13. Data is collected after release to check for previously unknown side-effects.

But that's not quite the same thing as testing, since very rarely are serious side-effects discovered after the fact.

[mzmolly]

15. VAERS data is dismissed as follows.

"...coincidences make it difficult to know whether a particular adverse event resulted from a medical condition or from a vaccination."

http://vaers.hhs.gov/data/index

Ho hum.

[pnwmom]

17. When I told my doctor that my son had a fever for a full week

after his DTP, my doctor said that that couldn't be because of the vaccine because the vaccine doesn't cause that adverse effect. So, of course, he didn't file a report on it, and I was too dumb at the time to press the point. The next time, my son had seizures. (And not due to a high fever, since his only reached 102.)

So the adverse effects reported are probably greatly understated, since doctors are filtering them through their idea of what is a "real" adverse effect and what isn't.

:hi:

[pnwmom]

16. It is part of the research routinely carried out for investigational

new drugs and vaccines.

And since the fast track approval process was set up several years ago, there have been an increasing number of drugs withdrawn from the market due to serious unanticipated adverse effects.

[mzmolly]

14. And any saftey issues

are denied, so ???

Hello pnwmom. :hi:

[mzmolly]

12. The efficacy of the pertussis jab

wasn't tested for its duration of protection. I think all vaccines should undergo such testing. It's one thing to be satisfied that vaccines are safe, it's another to assume they offer long term protection without adequate studies.

I hope to see more like studies in the future.

:hi:

[madrchsod]

6. adults need to take "booster shot`s" because the vaccine wears off with age

in fact i better get mine because i have a two month old granddaughter and a one week old great grandson!

[mzmolly]

10. True. It's good to finally have an adult booster

shot for pertussis. Let's hope that medical professionals are getting their boosters as well. My pediatrician told me that peds are the number one carrier or pertussis. At the time she noted this, she lamented that there was no adult booster.

[Fresh_Start]

18. its now being required for admission in public high schools out here

to handle the fact that the protection decreases substantially between the original series and middle/high school

[mzmolly]

19. If the date above is correct, efficacy appears to decrease substantially by the time children

are in early grade school.

[mzmolly]

22. Unrec'ing such important health news?

How sad that information is buried if it's loaded with lofty, often misleading generalizations.

[indepat]

25. My wife and I both had whooping cough at age five: probably the sickest we've ever

been. ;)

[PADemD]

26. Absolutely!

Vaccinated as a young child and still got the whooping cough at age 11. When I heard that it was going around again, I got a booster shot last year.

[mzmolly]

28. Interesting to see how many people wish to bury this

important, presumably life saving information by un-recommending this thread.

[CanSocDem]

30. Why not?

It reads like a long winded pharmacuetical advertisement for the latest SURE-CURE wonder drug. As touching as the testimonials are they all seem to be scripted to emphasis the enduring authority of the pharmacuetical industry.

"It's not them...it's me!"

I will neither "rec" or "un-rec" because I believe that people can "believe" what they want. If they want to give up on their own abilities to keep themselves healthy, that is fine. They will eventually learn.

I object to industry coming here and undermining the power of the individual to further their own goals of control. Feeling powerless is just a stage....

This OP was why we banned pharmacuetical advertising in Canada.

.

[mzmolly]

31. The point is that a vaccine that is sold as offering long lasting protection

does not do so. We're all supposed to buy in to protect others, and we're only getting three years of protection per jab. We need a new vaccine, given we can't expect adults to comply with a three year window, don't we?

Hey, any relation to socalgirl?

[mzmolly]

34. Pardon me I meant can we

vs. don't we.

I'm glad Canada banned drug advertisements. Many people here are like walking billboards for big pharma, regardless. ;)

[laconicsax]

32. Looks like a booster should be given every 3 years. n/t

[mzmolly]

33. It looks like we've assumed things about this vaccine that were not

based in science. As you stated, it looks like adults (who don't have natural immunity) will have to comply with a three year booster, if they're going to demand the same compliance from school children and infants. It looks like all the fear and blame surrounding a single child not being vaccinated is misplaced, given most are devoid of protection after three years regardless. Yeah, it looks like many things will need to be reconsidered.

I wonder how many other vaccines don't offer the lasting protection we assume they do? I hope to see more like studies, in the future so we we're not assuming going forward. The blind faith in lasting vaccine efficacy has always puzzled me.

[laconicsax]

37. Are you suggesting that we don't take steps to ensure continued immunity?

:shrug:

[mzmolly]

40. No. I'm suggesting that we have to understand how long a vaccine

is effective, before we can attempt to establish reasonable standards for herd immunity. I'm also suggesting that arguments indicating that one non-vaccinated child, is cause for panic are absurd given masses of adults are apparently unprotected.

[OnTheOtherHand]

35. just got my Dtap booster

I'm not really sure that's what mzmolly had in mind, but it seems like an easy call to me.

[mzmolly]

36. What I had in mind was sharing accurate information.

I'm not sure what you had in mind, by questioning my motives?

And, I think you mean Tdap? http://children.webmd.com/vaccines/dtap-and-tdap-vaccines

DTaP is a vaccine that lets children younger than 7 develop immunity to three deadly diseases caused by bacteria: diphtheria, tetanus, and whooping cough (pertussis). Tdap is a booster immunization that offers continued protection from those diseases for adolescents and adults.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mzmolly]

39. Please provide

documentation for your claim.

Frankly, I'm not familiar with you. So, I can't say I much care what you think about the information I share, regardless.

[OnTheOtherHand]

41. well, there you have it

Either you're interested in why you get unrecs, or you aren't. It doesn't matter much to me. (In case you're curious, I neither recced nor unrecced your post.)

[mzmolly]

42. I understand that some truthful information is buried to suit an agenda.

I simply noted that it's a shame. Especially considering many claim an interest in promoting accurate, science based information as it relates to public health.