Ваксини.Полза или Вреда? Ваксинационни Програми.

Не следя темата, случайно попаднах на това:

ИМУНИЗАЦИОНЕН КАЛЕНДАР

В първите 24 часа след раждането-имунизация против хепатит тип В (I прием).

От 48-ия час -Имунизация против туберкулоза .

От 1-ия месец- Имунизация против хепатит тип В (II прием).

От 2-ия месец
Имунизация против полиомиелит ( I прием)
Имунизация против дифтерия, тетанус и коклюш (I прием).

От 3-я месец
Имунизация против полиомиелит ( II прием).
Имунизация против дифтерия, тетанус и коклюш ( II прием).

От 4-ия месец
Имунизация против полиомиелит ( II прием).
Имунизация против дифтерия, тетанус и коклюш ( II прием).
От 6-ия месец Имунизация против хепатит тип В (III прием).

От 7-10-ия месец
Проверка за белег след БЦЖ-имунизацията. На децата без белег се прави проба Манту (5 МЕ ППД-пречистен протеинов дериват) и отрицателните се имунизират. Отрицателна е пробата, когато около инжекционното място не се появи зачервяване или то е по малко от 8мм. в диаметър.

От 13-ия месец
Имунизация против морбили, паротит и рубеола.

От 14-ия месец
Първа реимунизация против полиомиелит ( IV прием).

От 22-24-ия месец
Втора реимунизация против полиомиелит ( V прием).

До 24-ия месец
(поне една година след III прием) Първа реимунизация против дифтерия, тетанус и коклюш ( IV прием)

На 6-7 години (I клас)
Трета реимунизация против полиомиелит ( IV прием)
Реимунизация против дифтерия и тетанус
Реимунизация против туберкулоза ( след отрицателна проба Манту)

На 10-11 години ( V клас)
Реимунизация против туберкулоза ( след отрицателна проба Манту)

На 11-12 години ( VI клас)
Реимунизация против морбили
Реимунизация против рубеола (девойки)
Реимунизация против дифтерия и тетанус

На 16-17 години (Х клас)
Реимунизация против тетанус и дифтерия
Реимунизация против туберкулоза ( след отрицателна проба Манту)

На 25 и 35 г. (при студентите в последния курс)
Реимунизация против дифтерия и тетанус.

От 45-ата година нататък през 10 години реимунизация против тетанус.

Посочените имунизации са задължителни. Те не само осигуряват защитата на вашето дете, но и на вас самите, както и на цялото общество. Това се дължи на т.нар. колективен имунитет. Той е толкова по-силен и ние толкова по-рядко боледуваме, колкото хората около нас са с по-силен имунитет, създаден чрез ваксиниране или някой друг от посочените начини. Обществото изгражда имунна стена, прослойка, която защитава не само отделните хора, но и хората около нас. Установено е, че вирусът на грипа, например, става по-вирулентен (способен да причинява заболяване), когато попадне в организъм с намален имунитет. Ако обаче попадне в силен или имунизиран индивид, неговата сила да заразява и да причинява тежък грип намалява.
 

Ваксините са едно от условията за ликвидирането на инфекциозните заболявания през годините. Така, благодарение на тях и останалите мерки за борба с инфекциозните заболявания, съществуващата в миналото смъртоносна вариола вече е ликвидирана и дори не се прави имунизация срещу нея. Така една от целите на световната здравна организация е да ликвидира заболявания като полиомиелит, дифтерия, коклюш, тетанус, морбили, туберкулоза.
 

Интересен е фактът, че в слабо развитите държави в Африка и Азия най-честата причина за детската смъртност са инфекциозни заболявания, които могат да бъдат предотвратени чрез ваксиниране!
В последните десет и повече години на реформа, обаче приоритетите на лекари и пациенти се отместиха от стремежа към по-добро здраве чрез профилактика, към стремеж за оцеляване. Това води до чести пропуски във ваксинирането и поява на остри заразни заболявания, понякога с тежки последствия. Такъв е примера с двата случая на полиомиелит появили се в България през последния месец. Те, както и много други можеха да бъдат предотвратени само чрез навременна имунизация.

Ми да я беше проследила! И четенето си има достойнства. И не етолкова трудно! Пробвай!

Тц, неам ни нерви, ни желание. И аз, и децата ми си имаме всички ваксини, за чий да чета?... Па ако модовете сметнат, че не е по темата- нека го изтрият, все ми е тая.

Рени,много преписваШ...

   Хомеопатията отрича ваксините и има защо.   

Тъй като хомеопатия е мръсна дума за много хора (аз лично съм голям нейн почитател), бих констатирала: ЛЕКАРИ, завършили МЕДИЦИНА отричат също ваксините и пишат доста статии и филми по въпроса. Има много примери в тази и другата тема.

Принципът на хомеопатията "Подобното се лекува с подобно" не се ли покрива с принципа на ваксинирането?
Просто се опитвам да разсъждавам, позицията ми за ваксините и хомеопатията вече съм я изказвал.

 - Не, не се покрива!

 - Едното е подобие а другото - идентичност.
 - Второ: Лечебното в Хомеопатичните лекарства не е материален носител, а Информацията.
 - Ваксината прилича на т.н. в хомеопатията Саркоди, но е, както казах материален - бактерия или вирус.

ФДА предупреждава zа странични реакции(zапуШване на червата) от новата си ваксина среЩу Рота вируси.(диариите при бебета)
http://www.fda.gov/cber/safety/phnrota021307.htm

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8N90TRO0.htm


Хората се опьлчват среЩу ваксината Гардасил(zа рака на матката)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251751,00.html

В Канада  http://www.ecanadanow.com/science/health/2007/02/13/parents-agai … l-cancer-vaccine/

Моля за съвет, ставаме на три месеца и ни предстои др,гата седмица имунизация за полио и противохепатитната ваксина, нашата лекарка иска да ги постави наведнъж, но този месец лежахме в болница за вирусна инфекция, с увеличен черен дроб и слезка, пихме антибиотик...? Незнам дали е уместно, особено да се поставят едновременно, ще ме извините за недоверието, но някой лекари си гледат статистиката и да спестят навалица пред кабинетите. На предното полио не заведох синът ми, защото имаше хрема и те доста се разсърдиха, защото трябвало да я изхвърлят?! Благодаря предварително!

Опитайте да отложите ваксините колкото се може по дьлго докато всички параметри на детето са ок.Особено чернодробните.
Нека се сьрдят и да псуват на воля.Това вас не ви zасяга.Здравето на детето ви е по важно от финансовата zагуба zа дьржавата zа момента.

siren
 - В никакъв случай не ги слагайте заедно! Рискувате много!
 - И отлагайте максимално дълко.
 - За Полио - искайте убита, а не както ви предлагат жива полио ваксина!

 - Поне за това може да се преборите за беззащитното си дете. 

- Държавате не губи, както и ваксините не са безплатни.
 - Всичко се смъква от гърба на хората.

 - А бездънната паст на Ламята - ЗОК се бори - от 6% - да захапе 10% от доходите ни, а за в бъдеще, защо пък да не стигнат и до 50%!
 - И в това има резон, нали официалната Медицина ни "радва" с все поголямо годишно покачване на  болестите и заболелите!

 Ето още един "Шедьовър" - за да ви е ясно - за какво става въпрос!

Търся съвет - на коя ваксина за полиото да заложа, тъй като след многото разговори с познати майки и лекари, и след прочетеното във форума тотално се обърках. Бях решила да си купя пентаксим, после някой каза, че имувакс е по-добра за полиомиелит, после чух, че и двете били слаби за нашата балканска традиционна мръсотия като начин на живот и околна среда. Мира Кожухарова ми каза вчера, че от март ХЕИ вече ще дава на педитата инжекционните форми на полиото, които се поемат от държавата, в зависимисимост коя фирма ще спечели търга - дали нза имувакса, или другата. Синът ми е на 3 м и една седмица и втория месец пропуснахме заради грипната епидемия. Утре сме на консултация и не съм решила какво да правя с ваксинирането. След хепатита и туберкулозата нищо не сме слагали. Имувакс ли да си купя, пентаксим ли или е важно на тази възраст да има защита и срещу менингита? Моля, крайните противници на ваксинирането да не ми отговарят, тъй като, дори и да имат своя резон, смятам, че без всякаква защита детето ми може да се зарази от други деца, когато тръгне на детска ясла или градина. Един подвъпрос: като се тръгне с една от ваксините, само с нея ли трябва да се кара до края?

http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUV … xN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXky  За аутиzма.


http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070214/rot … 070214?hub=Health

ФДА предупреждава,че ваксината zа Ротавируси може да навреди  на бебетата.

И неЩо zа така гореЩо дискутирана ваксина Гардасил

THE NEW VACCINE Gardasil®–
DOES IT PREVENT CANCER?
A GUIDE FOR INFORMED CONSENT
©Medical Ethics, Inc.

The FDA approved it, TV commercials plug it, news highlights tout it, but
there are serious concerns about the new vaccine Gardasil® from Merck.
Medical Accountability Network Executive Director Dr. Moira Dolan has
reviewed the information made generally available to physicians and outlines
here the essential components of informed consent for what is being billed
as a miracle anti-cancer vaccine.

Gardasil® vaccinates against four types of human papillomavirus (HPV). The
vaccine targets the HPV types that are the cause of many cases of genital
warts and the virus infections that are closely associated with cervical
cancer.

Physician Duty

The prevention of genital warts and cervical cancer is an extremely
worthwhile effort. However, like any drug, the vaccine is not a cure-all and
it has some potential downsides. There is an urgent need for full informed
consent for potential human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. It is the role
of the administering physician to remind the parent or patient that FDA
approval does not equate to safety. The FDA also turns a deaf ear to the
fantastically misleading direct-to-consumer advertising claims. It is the
duty of the physician to sort through the hype and government approval and
official pronouncements, to provide full informed consent to each and every
patient. The essential components of informed consent are:

• what the drug (vaccine) is,
• what is known and not known about how well it works,
• what is known and not known about safety,
• alternatives to the vaccine,
• the consequences of choosing to take or not take the vaccine.

Gardasil® vaccine is Merck's first big drug development since the Vioxx®
disaster. The basis for many Vioxx® lawsuits is that Merck withheld
information that clearly showed the dangers of the drug. The company's
record does not inspire trust.

The Vioxx® situation revealed a more treacherous problem existing within the
FDA itself. FDA insiders exposed how the agency deliberately ignored
abundant test information showing that Vioxx® was dangerous to cardiac
patients. The systemic failure of the FDA to weigh the risks and protect the
public without undue influence of the manufacturers was brought to light by
Vioxx® but it has not yet led to any meaningful changes at the agency. In
spite of thousands of Vioxx® product liability suits still unresolved,
Gardasil® has gotten fast track FDA approval, soon to be followed by Glaxo's
Cervarix®.

What is Human Papillomavirus disease?

The HPV infection that is under discussion is a virus that is transmitted by
skin to skin or genital to genital contact during sexual activity. It
commonly causes genital warts, although infection may occur completely out
of view on the cervix, where it is not apparent and does not show any
symptoms. There are some 150 named HPV types. Newer testing methods that
detect the DNA sequence of viruses demonstrate that there is actually a lot
more variation in viral types than this 150, with some suggesting that there
are thousands of distinct viral types.

What is the Merck HPV vaccine?

The Merck vaccine contains recombinant-generated Virus Like Particles from
four strains of human papillomavirus (HPV), numbered 6, 11, 16 and 18. It is
approved for females age 9 to 26. It is given in 3 doses over 6 months, at a
drug cost of $360.

Condom use dramatically reduces chance of infection from all types of HP
viruses, by as much as 70%. There is no specific anti-viral treatment for
infection, but the majority of infections are cleared by the immune system
anyway. Of women who contract HPV infection, 90% will clear the infection
through the body's natural immune processes. The younger the patient the
more rapidly they naturally clear infection.

What is cervical cancer?

Cervical cancer is cancerous growth on the lower portion of the womb, the
part that extends into the vagina. Between 1955 and 1992, the number of
cervical cancer deaths in the United States dropped by 74%. The death rate
continues to go down by about 4% per year. Half of the cases of cervical
cancer occur between the ages of 35 and 45. It is rare under age 20. U.S.
statistics show 3-4 cervical cancer cases per year per 100,000 women age
9-26. These are the ages on which the new vaccine was tested.

The American Cancer Society reports that cervical cancer is responsible for
about 1% of cancer deaths per year. Some claim that this low number is due
to effectiveness of routine Pap screening, which results in the detection
and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions so that they never get to the cancer
stage. However the big drop in cervical cancer also coincides with an
increased use of condoms, so it is more likely a combination of the two
factors. Nutritional deficiencies, especially vitamin A and folate, mineral
deficiency (zinc, selenium, calcium and iron), smoking, birth control use
and douching have been shown to be associated with cervical cancer. Increase
in number of sex partners is a major risk factor for cervical cancer. HPV
infection is highly associated with cervical cancer, yet there remains
debate as to whether the virus actually causes cancer.

The vast majority of abnormal Pap tests do not equate to cancer. Even
abnormal Pap tests showing pre-cancerous cells of the CIN II grade clear by
themselves with no treatment 40% of the time. Treatment of pre-cancers has
limited the progression to cancer to only 1%. So Merck's vaccine is coming
out at a time when cervical cancer is already on the decline. This is
similar to the polio vaccine, which came out when polio was already rapidly
going away on its own.

How is HPV infection related to cervical cancer?

30 types of HPV have been found in association with cervical cancer. HPV
type 16 is currently found in 50% of cases of cervical cancer, and type 18
is found in 20% of cases of cervical cancer. Some cervical cancers don't
have associated HPV, and most people infected with HPV do not get cancer,
so HPV cannot be the full cause of cancer. Some researchers and FDA
scientists wonder if the abnormal cells (cancerous or pre-cancerous) may
simply be a friendly environment for viruses to grow around, so the virus
infection may occur after the changes that cause cancer rather than the
other way around. Smoking is has more to do with the progression of HPV
infection to cervical cancer than any other single factor. Smokers with HPV
go on to develop cervical cancer much more frequently than infected
non-smokers.

Does the vaccine work?

Who studied the vaccine in humans?

It is a crucial part of full informed consent to let patients know that all
human studies submitted to the FDA were done by or financed by the drug
manufactures. It cannot be brushed aside that these studies have limited to
no independent scientific review. In fact, it takes a formal Freedom Of
Information Act request to obtain the exact study reports and statistical
analyses that the drug manufacturer gave to the FDA.
What is the effect of the vaccine on HPV infection?

• In the general population the Merck vaccine prevented genital warts that
were due to vaccine-type strains.
• The vaccine prevented human papillomavirus infection with four HPV
subtypes in people who weren't already infected with these types.
• The vaccine did not prevent infection with the HPV types that are not
contained in the vaccine.
• HPV disease due to one of the many subtypes NOT included the vaccine
still occurred. Vaccinated subjects got infected with non-vaccine HPV types
at the same rate as non-vaccinated subjects.
• In subjects who were already infected with a particular vaccine virus
type, the vaccine did not prevent disease due to that type, but it did
prevent new disease caused by the other vaccine subtypes.
• The studies that the drug maker gave to the FDA did not tell if condom use
was tracked; this is very important missing data, since condoms alone are
responsible for a 70% reduction in all types of HPV. The vaccine gives 100%
protection against four HPV types and no protection against other HPV types,
whereas condoms give 70% protection against all HPV types.

What is the effect of the vaccine on cervical cancer?

Since HPV is found in connection with most cervical cancers, the theory was
that a vaccine against HPV would prevent cervical cancer. However the
vaccine studies couldn't demonstrate this, simply because there were no
cases of cervical cancer in the vaccinated group or in the group that got
dummy shots. So they used a substitute measure (a 'surrogate marker') for
cancer. They compared abnormal pre-cancerous Pap results in people who were
vaccinated versus not vaccinated.

The vaccine is nearly 100% effective in preventing four types of HPV
infection. Two of the four subtypes included in the vaccine are currently
responsible for 70% of cervical cancer. So we would expect a 70% reduction
in precancerous Pap results, right? However pre-cancerous Paps only went
down by 12% to 45%, depending on which population was studied. (See below
for the different populations and the reasons for this spread.) Why didn't
the vaccine cause a 70% reduction in pre-cancers in the general population?

This could be explained by some method of viral shift. Since the vaccine
HPV types got pretty much wiped out as being a cause of pre-cancers
SOMETHING must have taken their place because pre-cancers only reduced by
12.2%. The alternate explanation (raised by an FDA scientist) is that the
theory that 'HPV causes cancer' could be backwards. Maybe HPV is just a
so-called 'opportunistic infection' that is allowed to flourish un-checked
in the vicinity of cancer cells.

U.S. statistics show there are 30 to 40 cervical cancer cases per year per
one million women age 9-26, the ages the vaccine was tested on. Gardasil®'s
reduction of pre-cancers by 12.2% in the general population would mean that
instead of 30 to 40 cases of cancer, there would only be 26 - 35 cancers. So
it would take vaccination of a million girls to prevent cancer in 4 to 5
girls. About 37% die from cervical cancer, so that would prevent 1 to 2
deaths. So $360 million in vaccine would prevent 1 to 2 deaths.

However this is all conjecture. In the Merck studies the follow up was too
short and the numbers too few to prove prevention of cervical cancer.

Results vary in different populations

The vaccine studies were analyzed in several different ways. One analysis
looked only at girls whose pre-vaccine testing did not show any evidence
of current or past infection with the HPV types that are in the vaccine.
In people who did not already have one of the four types of HPV, the
vaccine was 91 - 100% effective in preventing pre-cancers that were
associated with the four vaccine HPV types. They still got pre-cancer
associated with non-vaccine HPV types at the same rate as un-vaccinated
girls.

The only way to know if you are going to get this response is if you
have never had sex before the vaccine, or you have been tested for evidence
of prior infection. The HPV test is recommended by the American Cancer
Society as part of cancer screening every three years in women older than
30, but it is not yet widely covered by insurance plans outside of these
recommendations.

The more useful analysis was called “the general population”. This is
all study participants analyzed together, without separating out the ones
who had tests showing current or prior infection with vaccine-type HPV.
The results for the general population are much different. Because most
women are not getting pre-vaccine HPV tests, these numbers apply to all but
virgins. In the general population there was little over 12% reduction
in pre-cancer associated with any type of HPV.

Is the HPV vaccine safe?

Can the HPV vaccine actually make infection worse?

The study showed an increase in pre-cancer related to the vaccine types in
the people who already had these infections before they got the vaccine. It
is possible that when infected girls whose immune systems have not cleared
the virus from their bodies are vaccinated, the vaccine may lead to an
increased number of cases of a pre-cancer. This is very concerning, because
there is no routine test you can get in your doctor's office that will tell
if you are already infected by a vaccine type HPV before you get the
vaccine.

How does the HPV vaccine affect fertility? Birth defects? Risk of cancers?
Breast milk?

Five subjects who got the Merck vaccine around the time of conception had
babies with birth defects, whereas no birth defects occurred in this time
period in the subjects who got dummy shots. The manufacturer also specifies
that the vaccine has not been tested to see whether it could cause cancer.
It is not known if the vaccine virus-like proteins or the antibodies pass
into the breast milk. Merck says that it should not be given to pregnant
women.

The longest portion of the study only lasted just under four years. Thus
there is no long term data on how it affects the ability to become pregnant
(fertility). This is especially concerning because the FDA has approved the
vaccine for as young as 9 year old girls. The effect of artificially
influencing the immune system during a time of tremendous hormone shifts of
puberty is unknown. The package insert specifies that the vaccine has not
been tested for altering genes in the patient or her future children
(genotoxicity).

Comparison to other vaccines

Hepatitis B vaccine was rushed to the market and broadly administered to
young people in the absence of adequate human safety testing. It is now one
of the most common vaccines reported to the Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting
System, particularly for gastrointestinal problems, arthritis and multiple
sclerosis. The new HPV vaccine uses aluminum and polysorbate, two substances
known to cause cancer in laboratory animals and to alter immune responses.

What are the consequences of declining the vaccine?

The ultimate prevention of HPV is abstinence. Condom use is at least 70%
effective in preventing all types of genital HPV infection. HPV infection is
often eliminated by the body's natural immune mechanisms. Abnormal Pap tests
often return to normal on their own. Cervical cancer is on the decline as
are cervical cancer deaths, but it still occurs in about 10,000 women a year
with 3,700 dying. Pap tests are required whether or not you take the
vaccine.

Who would benefit from the vaccine?

If you have risk factors for HPV infection such as multiple sex partners and
no condom use, and you are not already infected by one or more of the
subtypes targeted by the vaccine, this vaccine protects you from HPV
infection by the four subtypes, but not non-vaccine HPV types.

If you have cervical cancer risk factors such as nutritional deficiencies,
multiple sex partners or smoking, the vaccine prevents some episodes of
growth of pre-cancerous cells and it may prevent cancer. The vaccine is
12.2% effective in the general population in reducing pre-cancer Pap
results. The vaccine is 45% effective over the short term in girls who have
never had any of the vaccine-type HPV infections.

The long term safety and effectiveness of Gardasil® is unknown. Effects on
causing cancer, infertility, gene mutations, birth defects and effects in
breast milk have not been adequately studied in humans.

References

websites:
American Cancer Society, http://www.cancer.org, accessed Jan 2007
http://planning.cancer.gov/disease/Cervical-Snapshot.pdf, accessed Jan 2007
http://www.fda.gov/cber/label/hpvmer060806LB.htm, accessed Jan 2007
http://www.hhs.gov/asl/testify/t990316b.html , accessed Jan 2007


http://www.fda.gov/cber/approvltr/hpvmer060806L.htm   Внимателно четене е нужно.