<http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/how-vaccinated-kids-infect-non-vaccinated>http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/how-vaccinated-kids-infect-non-vaccinated
How Vaccinated Kids Infect The Non-Vaccinated
Posted on: Sunday, February 8th 2015 at 3:45 pm
Written By: <http://www.greenmedinfo.com/gmi-blogs/sayer%20ji>Sayer Ji, Founder
With the thousands of mainstream media articles
blaming the non-vaccinated for disease outbreaks,
this article will provide a necessary
counterbalance by showing the vaccinated can (and
do) infect the non-vaccinated...
A groundbreaking study published in 2013 in the
journal Vaccine titled,
"<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24076325>Comparison
of virus shedding after lived attenuated and
pentavalent reassortant rotavirus vaccine,"
referenced the fact that rotavirus vaccines
contain live viruses capable of causing
infection, shedding and even transmission to non-vaccinated subjects:
"In fact, transmission of these two rotavirus
vaccines or vaccine-reassortment strains to
unvaccinated contacts has been detected
[9–13][1], even in the absence of symptoms."
One of the five studies referenced in the passage
above confirming that the vaccinated can infect
the non-vaccinated,
"<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20100758>Sibling
transmission of vaccine-derived rotavirus
(RotaTeq) associated with rotavirus
gastroenteritis," published in 2009, is the first
report in the literature to identify the
transmission of rotavirus vaccine-derived virus
to unvaccinated contacts resulting in symptomatic
rotavirus gastroenteritis requiring emergency medical attention:
"We document here the occurrence of
vaccine-derived rotavirus (RotaTeq [Merck and Co,
Whitehouse Station, NJ]) transmission from a
vaccinated infant to an older, unvaccinated
sibling, resulting in symptomatic rotavirus
gastroenteritis that required emergency department care."
The study also indicated that two of the five
strains of rotavirus within the Rotateq
reassorted to produce a more harmful virus either
within the vaccinated infant or within the
subsequently infected unvaccinated sibling:
"Results of our investigation suggest that
reassortment between vaccine component strains of
genotypes P7[5]G1 and P1A[8]G6 occurred during
replication either in the vaccinated infant or in
the older sibling, raising the possibility that
this reassortment may have increased the
virulence of the vaccine-derived virus."
This phenomenon of Rotateq vaccine strain
reassortment and subsequent gastoenteritis
infection in vaccine recipients was also observed
in a 2012 study in 61 infants.[2] Additionally, A
Nicaraguan study published in 2012 found "the
widespread use of the RotaTeq vaccine has led to
the introduction of vaccine genes into
circulating human RVs.," revealing that the
widespread introduction of the vaccine strain has
altered the genetic makeup of wild-type rotavirus
that now infects exposed populations.[3]
It has been estimated that between 80-100% of
infants shed rotavirus at some point during 25-28
days after vaccination.[4] [5] This reveals that
the vaccinated, contrary to widespread
assumptions about the the risks represented by
the non-vaccinated, pose a clear risk of
infecting the non-vaccinated, and may be
producing the ideal virological conditions for
the recombination of diverse rotavirus strains
into vaccine-resistant 'super viruses.'
Another case study, reported on in the
<http://www.nvic.org/CMSTemplates/NVIC/pdf/Live-Virus-Vaccines-and-Vaccine-Shedding.pdf>National
Vaccine Information Center's document on vaccine viral shedding:
"In 2010, a case report was published in
Pediatrics describing a 30-month old healthy boy
who had never received rotavirus vaccine and was
infected with vaccine strain rotavirus. 237 He
ended up in the emergency room with severe
gastroenteritis 10 days after his healthy
two-month old brother was given a dose of Merck's
RotaTeq vaccine. A stool sample was taken in the
emergency room and came back positive for RotaTeq
vaccine derived strains after RT-PCR testing."
The authors of the case report noted that
"transmission of RotaTeq strains to unvaccinated
contacts was not evaluated in the pivotal
[pre-licensure] clinical trials." They added
that both RotaTeq and Rotarix [GlaxoSmithKline
Biologicals] vaccines have "the potential for
vaccine-virus transmission to contacts."
The Rotateq Vaccine: Shot Through with Conflict of Interest
The Rotateq rotavirus vaccine was co-created by
Dr. Paul Offit, widely recognized as the vaccine
industry's leading promoter and apologist. He is
the co-patent holder of one of two live rotavirus
vaccines the FDA has approved, and which the
<http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/vaccination-agenda-implicit-transhumanismdehumanism>CDC
recommends should be administered to infants in 3
doses at ages 2 months, 4 months, and 6 months.
Historically incapable of self-recusal, despite
his glaring conflicts of interest, Offit
regularly positions himself as an expert on
vaccines, even though he personally gains from
presenting his product (and the CDC's vaccine
schedule as a whole) as safe and effective. Case
in point, in one notorious interview in Parenting
magazine he claimed a child can receive
<http://www.whale.to/vaccine/Parenting-Offit.pdf>10,000
vaccines simultaneously without harm (corrected
from 100,000 which he suggested in a previous interview).
The Rotavirus Vaccine Was Dirty from the Start
The first rotavirus vaccine -- Rotashield --
comprised of four reassorted rhesus-human
rotaviruses was approved in 1999, only to be
withdrawn from the market by the FDA
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25066368>nine
months later when it was found to increase the
risk for a deadly form of bowel obstruction known
as intussusception in a small subset of highly vulnerable children.[6]
Offit's Rotateq, which consists of 5 reassorted
human-bovine retroviruses (yes, that means GMO),
was believed to be a safer alternative when it
was approved by the FDA in 2006, but newly
published research reveals his vaccine suffers
from the same exact deadly problems.
Published this month in Vaccine and titled,
"<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X15000067>Intussusception
risk after RotaTeq vaccination: Evaluation from
worldwide spontaneous reporting data using a
self-controlled case series approach", the study
evaluated worldwide reports to the manufacturer
of Rotateq up to May 2014, adjusting for the
phenomenon of under-reporting. The study found
that the relative risk of intussception
associated with the administration of Rotateq
vaccine increases "3-7 days following
vaccination, mainly after the first dose and
marginally after the second and third
doses." The increase in relative risk reached
3.45 fold in the period 3-to-7 days after the
first dose, relative to the 15-30-day period control period.
Another study linking Rotateq to intussusception
was published last year in the New England
Journal of Medicine finding approximately 1.5
(95% CI, 0.2 to 3.2) excess cases of
intussusception per 100,000 recipients of the first dose.[7]
Live Vaccines: A Pandora's Box of Adventitious Viruses
Death or debilitation by bowel obstruction
rapidly following Rotateq vaccination is an acute
adverse effect that is unlikely to be overlooked
or ignored. This is why the Vaccine Adverse
Effects Reporting System (VAERS): a passive,
vaccine post-marketing surveillance system, has
found it to be a significant side effect. VAERS,
however, is believed to capture as little as less
than 1% of the actual damage being done by
vaccines, indicating that the extent of harm of
the Rotateq is several orders of magnitude than
presently indicated by this report.
Exposure to Rotateq therefore suffers – like many
live vaccines – f“ from a darker side, as far as
adverse effects go, which may take months, years,
or decades to manifest as part of the
multifactorial smog cloud of modern day
toxicities and exposures that eventually make
their way into the bottleneck of a classical diagnosis.
Rotateq, for instance, has been identified to be
contaminated with a number of adventitious
viruses; that is to say, viruses that
contaminated the live cells and/or biological
components involved in the original vaccine
manufacturing process. These surreptitious
agents, unknown to the manufacturers and
regulatory agencies that approved them, infected
the vaccines the children given them. These viruses include:
*
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21569811>Porcine
Circovirus 1 (PCV-1): In 2010 the
<https://www.vaccines.mil/documents/1335Dear%20HCP-FINAL%20Revised%203%2023%2010.pdf>FDA
suspended the Rotarix vaccine due to the
discovery that it was contaminated with PCV-1
virus, a pig virus, the implications of which as
far as human exposure are still unknown.
Considered less a risk than PCV-2, known to cause
a debilitating wasting disease in piglets, the
FDA determined, after review, that PCV-1 does not
represent a risk to the millions of children exposed to it.
*
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24104203>Porcine
Circovirus 2 (PCV-2): A 2014 study conducted by
CDC researchers and published in Human Vaccines &
Immunotherapeutcs titled, "Detection of PCV-2 DNA
in stool samples from infants vaccinated with
RotaTeq®," found for the first time that PCV-2
is shed in the stool of those vaccinated with
Rotateq. They found "A total of 235 (28.5%)
samples from 59 vaccine recipients were positive
for PCV-2 DNA by one or more assays used in this
study." Additionally, "Twenty-two of the 102
vaccine recipients (21.6%) shed RotaTeq® vaccine
strain and 10 of these vaccinees (9.8%) were
shedding both PCV DNA and rotavirus vaccine
RNA." In pigs, PCV-2 has been linked to serious
health problems including, "PCV2-associated
pneumonia, PCV2-associated enteritis,
PCV2-associated reproductive failure, and Porcine
Dermatitis and Nephropathy Syndrome (PDNS)."
[<http://vetmed.iastate.edu/research/labs/pcv2>source].
<http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/ucm205544.htm>In
2010, The FDA ruled, against the precautionary
principle, that neither "PCV1 or PCV2 are known
to infect or cause illness in humans, however PCV2 may cause illness in pigs."
*
<http://www.greenmedinfo.com/sites/default/files/pdf/ML-Hewitson_2014_Advances_in_Virology.pdf>Baboon
endogenous strain 7 retrovirus DNA: a 2014 study
published in Advances in Virology titled,
"Screening of Viral Pathogens from Pediatric
Ileal Tissue Samples after Vaccination," found
evidence of contamination with a baboon retrovirus.
*
<http://www.greenmedinfo.com/sites/default/files/pdf/Viral_Nucleic_Acids_in_Live-Attenuated_Vaccines.pdf>Class
D Simian Retovirus: a 2010 study published in
Journal of Virology revealed that the Rotateq
vaccine contains simian retrovirus DNA (with a
96% match of certainty), which Judy Mikovits,
PhD, confirms may contribute to adverse health
effects, regardless of whether it is a self-replicating virus or not.
Because live vaccines are manufactured through
co-culturing cells and biological fluids from
various different species, there is plenty of
opportunity for viruses to adapt to,
and recombine to produce infectious agents
capable of far greater virulence. Rotateq is just
one of many vaccines in the CDC's immunization
schedule that contain live viruses capable of
infecting those given it, including retroviruses,
which have been called a modern-day Plague owing
to the fact that they are capable of infecting
the host as non-HIV acquire immunodeficiency
viruses. For more information read
<http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/plague-one-scientist-s-intrepid-search-truth-about-human-retroviruses-0>Dr.
Judy Mikovits and Kent Heckenlively's new book
Plague or listen to this
<http://fearlessparent.org/radio-blog-human-retrovirus-chronic-illness-scientific-prejudice-episode-59/>interview
of Dr. Mikovits on Fearless Parent Radio.
Clearly, given the evidence revealing the
potential unintended, adverse effects of the
Rotateq vaccine, especially the potential for it
to infect those exposed to it with adventitious
viruses, the implementation of the precautionary
principle requires the immediate suspension of
its use until proper toxicological reevaluations
can be made. Anyone who questions the safety of
the present CDC immunization schedule should be
able to point to the Rotateq as a perfect example
of why the schedule is not at all evidence based
but rather founded in a mythological belief in
the safety and effectiveness of products that have never been proven sound.
REFERENCES
[1] [9] Phua KB, Quak SH, Lee BW, Emmanuel SC,
Goh P, Han HH, et al. Evaluation of RIX4414, a
live, attenuated rotavirus vaccine, in a
randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
phase 2 trial involving 2464 Singaporean infants.
J Infect Dis 2005;192(Suppl. 1):S6–16.
[10] Dennehy PH, Brady RC, Halperin SA, Ward
RL, Alvey JC, Fischer Jr FH, et al. Comparative
evaluation of safety and immunogenicity of two
dosages of an oral live attenuated human
rotavirus vaccine. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2005;24:481–8.
[11] Payne DC, Edwards KM, Bowen MD, Keckley E,
Peters J, Esona MD, et al. Sibling transmission
of vaccine-derived rotavirus (RotaTeq) associated
with rotavirus gastroenteritis. Pediatrics 2010;125:e438–41.
[12] Boom JA, Sahni LC, Payne DC, Gautam R,
Lyde F, Mijatovic-Rustempasic S, et al.
Symptomatic infection and detection of vaccine
and vaccine-reassortant rotavirus strains in 5
children: a case series. J Infect Dis 2012;206:1275–9.
[13] RRiveraL,Pen
̃aLM,StainierI,GillardP,CheuvartB,SmolenovI,etal.Horizontal
transmission of a human rotavirus vaccine
strain—a randomized, placebo- controllled study
in twins. Vaccine 2011;29:9508–13.
[2]
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22615314>J
Infect Dis. 2012 Aug 1;206(3):377-83. doi:
10.1093/infdis/jis361. Epub 2012 May 21.
Identification of strains of RotaTeq rotavirus
vaccine in infants with gastroenteritis following
routine vaccination.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Donato%20CM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Donato
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Donato%20CM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>CM1,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Ch%27ng%20LS%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Ch'ng
LS,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Boniface%20KF%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Boniface
KF,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Crawford%20NW%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Crawford
NW,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Buttery%20JP%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Buttery
JP,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lyon%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Lyon
M,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bishop%20RF%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Bishop
RF,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kirkwood%20CD%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22615314>Kirkwood
CD.
[3]
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22487061>Infect
Genet Evol. 2012 Aug;12(6):1282-94. doi:
10.1016/j.meegid.2012.03.007. Epub 2012 Apr 2.
Vaccine-derived NSP2 segment in rotaviruses from
vaccinated children with gastroenteritis in
Nicaragua.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bucardo%20F%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22487061>Bucardo
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Bucardo%20F%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22487061>F1,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Rippinger%20CM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22487061>Rippinger
CM,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Svensson%20L%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22487061>Svensson
L,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Patton%20JT%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=22487061>Patton
JT.
[4] Phua KB, Quak SH, Lee BW, Emmanuel SC, Goh P, Han HH, et al. Evaluation of
RIX4414, a live, attenuated rotavirus vaccine, in
a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled
phase 2 trial involving 2464 Singaporean infants.
J Infect Dis 2005;192(Suppl. 1):S6–16.
[5] Comparison of virus shedding after lived
attenuated and pentavalent reassortant rotavirus vaccine
[6] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Intussusception among recipients of rotavirus
vaccine—United States, 11998–1999. JAMA
1999;282:520-1
<http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/external-ref?access_num=10.1001/jama.282.6.520&link_type=DOI>CrossRef<http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/external-ref?access_num=10450702&link_type=MED>Medline<http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/external-ref?access_num=000081919100010&link_type=ISI>Web<http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/external-ref?access_num=000081919100010&link_type=ISI>
of Science
[7]
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24422676>N
Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 6;370(6):503-12. doi:
10.1056/NEJMoa1303164. Epub 2014 Jan 14
Intussusception risk after rotavirus vaccination
in U.S.
infants.
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Yih%20WK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Yih
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Yih%20WK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>WK1,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lieu%20TA%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Lieu
TA,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kulldorff%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Kulldorff
M,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Martin%20D%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Martin
D,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=McMahill-Walraven%20CN%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>McMahill-Walraven
CN,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Platt%20R%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Platt
R,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Selvam%20N%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Selvam
N,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Selvan%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Selvan
M,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Lee%20GM%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Lee
GM,
<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Nguyen%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=24422676>Nguyen
M
