The CDC claims the shingles vaccine is safe, but a letter the FDA wote to Merck paints a different picture.
I recently wrote about the news of a suit against Merck over damage from the shingles vaccine. There are claims of serious side effects, including death associated with this vaccine.
Big Pharma's ever ready answer was to vaccinate the adults to replace the natural immune boosting presence of circulating wild virus.
Essentially, the VZV vaccine shifted the disease from children to an older age group and the vaccine lost efficacy in the childhood age group as well for the same reason - vaccinated children benefited from exposure to their peers who caught wild chicken pox.
In other words, while it would not be in Big Pharma's interest to let kids opt out of the VZV vaccine it would benefit those who did get vaccinated if there were a lot of other kids who weren't vaccinated.
But to Big Pharma this isn't about disease control this is about money only. The cost-benefit of universal VZV vaccination needs to take into account the risk of off-setting the natural balance that results in continual disease and expensive remediation’s for illnesses that would never have taken place without the vaccination being given in the first place. With the meningitis vaccine is it worth killing three children and making 1000 more seriously ill to prevent one case of the disease?
This is a perfect example to demonstrate that vaccinology is far more nuanced than physicians and the public understand. It is not that vaccines are bad, it is you don't force them on everyone, because you end up working against public health interests. The goal should not be to vaccinate everyone, the goal should be to protect the public health and in this case we get better disease control if everyone isn't vaccinated. Additionally, most people think that most vaccines control the spread of disease, but they don't. Many control how sick any one person gets should they come down with the disease, but the vaccine does not control the spread of that disease.
This is just not information Big Pharma wants politicians and the public to know. They want to sell their vaccines to everyone and many times over and over... it is all about the money to them. The IPV vaccine for polio is not capable of stopping the spread of polio, so why force it on the population? I could keep listing examples, but I think I made my point.
Zostavax is NOT a covered vaccine under the NCVIA and, therefore, cannot be subject to a claim for compensation for vaccine injury under the VICP. The vaccine could be covered under NCVIA, but it is not yet...that could change.
The herpes zoster vaccine that is covered under NCVIA/VICP is Varivax, or varicella, also manufactured by Merck. As you know, this is the vaccine that is included in the ACIP/CDC recommended childhood vaccine schedule. (Usually, but not always, when ACIP recommends a vaccine, steps are taken to add the vaccine to the NCVIA/VICP Table of covered vaccines.) Both Varivax and Zostavax are diploid human cell line manufactured vaccines, manufactured using the MRC-5 (Medical Research Council cell strain 5) cell line. The Varivax has been shown to contain human DNA contamination. Zostavax also likely contains human DNA contamination. It has been theorized that the DNA contamination can cause injury by either DNA insertion or by provoking autoimmunity, although this theory is controversial and unaccepted to date in science or legal venues. There is an Omnibus proceeding pending in the VICP in which claimants allege that the diploid human cell line vaccines cause autism.
Thank you to Dr. Stoller for this explanation.
Given the obvious risk of serious injury from the Zostavax vaccine, any person over 50 should proceed with caution regarding the commercially promoted recommendation to get this vaccine. While shingles can sometimes be serious in rare cases, my view is that efforts to maintain good health and a strong immune system will serve us better than obtaining this vaccine, which has the undeniable risk of serious injury. There are almost 5000 reports of adverse events after Zostavax. The vaccine contains substances that can provoke autoimmunity, including human DNA contamination, gelatin, neomycin and other problematic substances. As with many other vaccines, I am not convinced that the vaccine or its components have been properly tested.The promotion of Zostavax on television and other places is as irresponsible as it is inappropriate. The value of the vaccine is overstated, while the risk of adverse reactions is downplayed. This skews the benefit/cost analysis that all of us must employ when we individually decide to take any vaccine or drug.The result of all this is that an individual’s right to make informed decisions about his or her health is being overridden by bloated claims of efficacy and safety coupled with risks that are hidden from view. Because of misinformation, our informed consent is, effectively, being overridden. This is not an acceptable situation for any American.Our emerging experience with Zostavax mirrors our experience with childhood vaccines. Benefits are exaggerated while risk is minimized, all in the context of relentless promotion. The difference with Zostavax is that we can more easily see when injury occurs as compared with developmental injuries that are difficult to recognize and diagnose, and are often confused with unrelated disorders. The result is the same for both adults and children: unnecessary injury and suffering, often lifelong.It is the policy of our nation that vaccine injuries do occur and the victims of vaccines should be compensated. For the most part, it is unknown how such injuries occur and how often they occur. Despite this reality, there exists relentless commercial promotion of vaccines. For the sake of the health of our people, this must stop. Public education regarding vaccine risk should be increased, and more rigorous testing of all vaccine brought to market should be applied. Unless this happens, the disturbing trend of increasing vaccine injury will persist as new and exotic vaccines are introduced into the marketplace with dubious justification, except for the bountiful commercial windfall it confers on vaccine manufacturers.