Vaccine safety is QUITE relevant to pregnancy...
CDC vaccination czar Walter Orenstein, M.D. co-authored a 1981 rubella study in JAMA Feb 20;245(7):711-3 which reported that 90% of obstetricians had not submitted to rubella vaccination. ("only one of the 11 known susceptible obstetrician-gynecologists was vaccinated.") See Orenstein WA, et al. Rubella vaccine and susceptible hospital employees. Poor physician participation. JAMA. 1981 Feb 20;245(7):711-3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?uid=7463660&form=6&db=m&
Dr. Robert Berkow's Merck Manual indicates that obstetricians are "high risk" for contracting and spreading rubella and should definitely submit to rubella vaccination. ("Efforts should also be made to screen and vaccinate high-risk groups, such as hospital...workers..." http://www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual/section19/chapter260/260m.htm#A019-260-110
Dr. Berkow's Merck Manual also gives good reasons obstetricians should submit to rubella vaccination:
"Effects on the fetus vary from death in utero to multiple anomalies to isolated hearing loss...Women exposed to rubella early in pregnancy should b e informed about the potential risks to the fetus, and termination of pregnancy should be considered."
I am sure that the percent of obstetricians refusing rubella vaccination has plummeted since Orenstein's 1981 JAMA study - especially since rubella vaccination is now required for entry to medical residency. (Joanne Hatem, MD died on September 6, 1997, a victim of rubella (German measles) vaccine administered as a requirement for medical residency in New York state. Reported in Dr. Kristine M. Severyn's Vaccine News, September 1997. )
Death and disability from rubella vaccination are reportedly quite rare; but then again, maybe death and disability from rubella vaccination aren't as rare as reported: MDs have a problem with reporting serious adverse reactions...
In 1986, Congress had to DEMAND that MDs report serious adverse reactions [Smith Pediatrics 1988].
In 1993 - even though such reports are essential for determining safety - MDs were failing to report up to 99% of serious adverse reactions to medications. [Kessler JAMA 1993]
This latter fact is quite relevant because CDC's Vaccine Information Sheets compare vaccine safety (unknown) to medication safety (unknown). It is in part for this reason that I say that CDC Vaccine Information Sheets FRAUDULENTLY indicate that MDs/CDC know vaccines are known to be safe alternatives to risking immunization via natural disease. See "Vaccines/Eugenics/Primatologist apes MD/Small Pox hoax (Jenner's "Spurious Cowpox")"...
Specifically in regard to RUBELLA vaccine safety, MDs and RNs (and other hospital personnel) might be interested in The Chronic Rubella Viremia Support Group, South 20655 Brown Rd., Cataldo ID 83810, (208) 689-3925...
The Chronic Rubella Viremia Support Group is a group of over 200 health care professionals who submitted to rubella vaccination and ended up with chronic debilitating symptoms attributable to rubella vaccine. The founder of the group, Katy Fox, RN, suspects that many other health professionals were adversely affected by the rubella vaccine. When 20/20 did a story on the subject, she says, over 600 people responded.
IMPORTANT NOTE: As alluded to above, pregnant women who choose hospital birth and who are seronegative for rubella can expect be asked to submit to rubella vaccination immediately after birth...
According to Marsha Leen-Mitchell and John Carey, MD et al.:
"It is highly recommended that non-rubella immune new mothers be vaccinated prior to discharge from the hospital."
Teratogen Update GENETIC DRIFT Vol. 12: Fall, 1995
Except for the known 50% adverse reaction rate of rubella vaccination, this would seem to be one way for mothers to confer passive immunity to rubella on their newborns via breastfeeding. (Wouldn't oral rubella vaccination be preferable? See "Breastfeeding/AAP's deletion/Two questions"...http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=503292552 )
Leen-Mitchell and Carey et al. say that CDC says that rubella vaccination in pregnancy is not associated with congenital rubella syndrome:
"Data collected by the CDC suggests that inadvertent use of rubella vaccination in pregnancy or in the three months prior to pregnancy is not associated with congenital rubella syndrome or any increase in the rate of birth defects. However, theoretical risks dictate that the rubella live-virus vaccine be avoided during pregnancy."
Further on, Leen-Mitchell and Carey et al. state that natural maternal infection with rubella disease in the first eight weeks of pregnancy is associated with an 85% risk for congenital rubella syndrome (CRS):
"All TORCH infections have been associated with varying degrees of pregnancy loss...First described in 1941, this prototype of congenital infections [Rubella] is characterized by congenital heart defects, cataracts, deafness and mental retardation. Maternal infection in the first eight weeks of pregnancy is associated with an 85% risk for congenital rubella syndrome (CRS)." http://www.ahsc.arizona.edu/~msrgsn/gd/gdvol12.htm#rubella
(TORCH is an acronym for a group of maternally acquired communicable diseases that include Toxoplasmosis, Other (varicella, Venezuelan equine encephalitis, mumps, coxsackie, parvovirus, HIV), RUBELLA, Cytomegalovirus and Herpes.)
Whatever the risk of congenital rubella syndrome following vaccination in early pregnancy, the risk was not apparently "theoretical" for Tyler Rooks (see below).
Which prompts the following question: Of the obstetricians still refusing rubella vaccination, how many are informing women of the potential risks to fetuses of their failure to vaccinate themselves?
And what about physicians in general who refuse rubella vaccination and who see women who may or may not know they are pregnant? One thing is for sure, rubella risk has been very real for some fetuses -whether by natural disease or by vaccination - though again, according to CDC, natural disease is far riskier for fetuses...
According to Dr. Kristine M. Severyn's Vaccine News, September 1997, Tyler Rooks was born with "cerebral dysgenesis" because her mother didn't know she was one month pregnant when she obtained her rubella vaccination because of a college enrollment requirement.
Tyler has not been compensated by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). (VICP is the boondoggle Congress set up to free MDs and pharmaceutical manufacturers from most liability from their vaccination behavior. In creating VICP Congress had to DEMAND that MDs make reports of suspected vaccine injury and suspected vaccine death. [Smith Pediatrics 1988] - yet in 1993 then-FDA Commissioner David Kessler, MD published evidence that physicians were failing to report up to 99% of serious adverse reactions to medications.)
According to Dr. Severyn, in 1997, VICP "Special Master" Laura D. Millman was telling Tyler Rook's mother that she couldn't have any money from the VICP program because the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which established the VICP, requires that "an injured person must have 'received' a...vaccine."
VICP "Special Master" Millman told Tyler's mother that Tyler did not 'receive' MMR vaccine "because he was not injected nor did he ingest the vaccine," meaning that an unborn child cannot "receive" a vaccine given to his/her mother!!!
Dr. Severyn, a registered pharmacist with a doctorate in biopharmaceutics, found it remarkable that the government says that an unborn baby is a "person" if s/he is damaged by rubella DISEASE; but if that same baby is purportedly damaged by rubella VACCINE, the government asserts that unborn babies are not "persons" - to avoid paying compensation...
Vaccination and vaccine safety are DEFINITELY relevant to pregnancy - and they are also relevant to what happens after pregnancy, as in misc.KIDS.pregnancy...
In this latter regard, controversial vaccination opponent Viera Scheibner, PhD (see the provocative title of her book) studied the literature on rubella vaccination and concluded that rubella vaccination "simply does not work." [Scheibner V. Vaccination: 100 years of orthodox research shows that vaccines represent a medical assault on the immune system. First Australian edition published in 1993 by Dr. Scheibner, 178 Govetts Leap Road, Blackheath, NSW 2785, fax 047-87-8988.]
It is noteworthy that the December 16, 1995 Globe and Mail (Quebec) reported that Dr. Viera Scheibner had been accepted as a vaccination expert by the Quebec College of Physicians in its investigation of Gylaine Lanctôt, M.D. following publication of Lanctôts controversial book The Medical Mafia. [McFarlane P. A renegade doctor adds fuel to the childhood-vaccination row. (Dec16)1995]
According to The Globe and Mail: the questions Dr. Lanctôt raises over childhood vaccinations have been part of a more mainstream medical debate that is only now coming into the open in Canada.
A side bar to the same Globe and Mail article notes that a group of 180 Swiss doctors oppose mass compulsory measles, mumps and RUBELLA vaccination (MMR) because, they say, natural infections with these diseases help the immune system mature; and because, even with a 95% immunization rate in the U.S., they say, measles epidemics are increasing - with increasing severity of measles cases. (The 1996 Report of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, Guide to Clinical Preventive Services, does not mention increasing severity of measles, but does state that because of immunization failures, a two-dose vaccination protocol...appears necessary.)
One last matter...
When the French government *stopped* recommending hep B vaccination for adolescents (for fear that hep B vaccination was causing multiple sclerosis), CDC joined the World Health Organization in claiming there was no cause for the French action - claiming that hepatitis B vaccination has "demonstrated important benefits including the prevention of cirrhosis and cancer..." See my post to CDC reproduced at the end of "Oregon's 'religious' vaccination game"...http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=476885791
Recently, Cong. John Mica held vaccine hearings.
Coincidentally, soon after Cong. Mica's hearings, CDC (via FDA) discovered that "the mercury dose in vaccines recommended for American babies in their first six months of life exceeds the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) limit for methyl mercury." [Severyn K citing Harvey SC. Heavy Metals - in Goodman LS and Gilman A. The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 5th ed., Mackmillan 1975, p. 937 - in Vaccine News Alert, July 1999, published by Kristine M. Severyn, RPh, PhD, Director, Vaccine Policy Institute, 251 West Ridgeway Dr., Dayton, OH 45459, phone and fax: (937) 435-4750.]
As a consequence of the known toxicity of mercury, CDC stopped recommending hep B vaccination immediately after birth for most babies.
Maybe mercury is the only problem in vaccines. Maybe not. CDC is certainly not the most ethical organization in regard to the promotion of vaccinations...
Which reminds me - CDC czar Walter Orenstein, MD hasn't gotten back to me yet regarding my idea that CDC should end it's fraudulent cancer prevention hep B vaccination promotion. (I think I forgot to mention CDC's behavior and Dr. Orenstein's
reticence in "Vaccines/Eugenics/Primatologist apes MD/Small Pox hoax (Jenner's "Spurious Cowpox")"...
One last matter...
So far, CDC epidemiologist William Atkinson, MD, MPH has responded as follows to "Vaccination/CDC Nazi-like/Atkinson/Humiston"... <http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=519467556>
From: NIPINFO <NIPINFO@cdc.gov>
To: 'Todd Gastaldo' <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Wednesday, September 01, 1999 1:53 PM
Subject: Public comments
Your message has been received by the National Immunization Program. Thank you.
William Atkinson, MD, MPH
National Immunization Program
Earth to CDC...
Dr. Atkinson NIPINFO@cdc.gov... ? Dr. Orenstein email@example.com ...?
Todd D. Gastaldo, D.C.
8948 SW Barbur Blvd. #6
Portland, OR 97219
FAX (815) 366-2814
TEL (503) 640-0456
Posted to the usenet (sci.med, misc.kids.pregnancy,