Marc Joseph Nutrition - Blog

From the January 1, 2007 issue of American Family Physician (AAFP):

2007 Childhood and Adolescent Immunization Schedules - Evolution or Intelligent Design?

“The first childhood immunization schedule was released in 1983 and provided guidance to physicians as to which of the four vaccines recommended at the time (i.e., diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis [DTP], oral poliovirus vaccine [OPV], measles, mumps, and rubella [MMR], and tetanus and diphtheria toxoid [Td]) to administer at each of seven age ranges (i.e., two, four, six, 15, and 18 months, four to six years, and 14 to 16 years). All told, a child born in 1983 would receive 11 vaccine doses between birth and 18 years of age…

…The recommended schedule continues to provide guidance to busy physicians. Today, American children receive 39 recommended vaccine doses by age 18, a 3.5-fold increase over the past 25 years. This explosion of antigens has been associated with a 6.3-fold increase in vaccination-related costs. The estimated 1983 private market cost for one child to receive all recommended vaccines was $254 (adjusted to present day, excluding administrative costs); this amount has grown to $1,601 ($1,744 when optional annual influenza vaccine is added for children six to 18 years of age).2 The vaccine cost alone to fully immunize each U.S. birth cohort (approximately 4 million children) is an estimated $6.4 billion.”

PDF of the 2007 Recommended Child Immunization Schedule

Concerns

Evolution or Intelligent Design? Are those our only two choices?

11 vaccine doses in 1983 vs. 39 doses today. Wow.

I’m not necessarily anti-vaccine. There are some pretty terrible diseases out there (e.g., polio). However, that sure is an amazing increase in antigen exposure over a very short period of time.

My health concerns are two-fold:

1. The cumulative toxin exposure, e.g.:

• Ethyl mercury in the preservative thimerosal, which is still used in 90% of all flu vaccines for children and adults, as well as in other adult vaccines, such as tetanus/diphtheria booster shots. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) still does NOT recommend mercury-free shots to either pregnant women or children, despite the fact that a mercury-containing flu shot has 50,000 ppb mercury, while liquid with only 200 ppb is considered hazardous waste by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
• Aluminum hydroxide, a common adjuvant (immune stimulant) added to vaccines, which is linked to Gulf War Illness and causes motor neuron death in mice.

2. The potential immune system imbalances created by both the increased number of vaccine antigens injected into young children and the interactions between them.

Financial Incentives

As noted above in the AAFP article excerpt, the pharmaceutical industry’s financial incentives for expanding vaccination schedules are significant. $254 in revenue per child in 1983 vs. $1,601 today.

This recent article in the LA Times describes the “renaissance” in vaccine development:

Breakthroughs in technology, increased funding and higher profits are spurring a boom in vaccine discovery and development that could save or improve the lives of millions of people by attacking such scourges as cancer and malaria …

… “It’s clear there is a renaissance going on around vaccines,” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “We have made more progress with some [vaccines] in the past few years than we have in the past 30.” …

… Perhaps the best evidence of a vaccine revival is that the pharmaceutical industry is returning to the market …

… Overall, the number of vaccines in development has risen from 285 in 1996 to 450 today.

Drug executives say they can charge considerably more for today’s vaccines — up to several hundred dollars or more — versus a few dollars for older vaccines.

Might financial incentives and political influence be driving the introduction of some of these vaccines?:

Texas Governor orders anti-cancer vaccine

“Perry has ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company’s three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry’s former chief of staff. His current chief of staff’s
mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government.

The governor also received $6,000 from Merck’s political action committee during his re-election campaign.”

Bottom Line

I’d like to see greater study into the potential interaction between the different vaccine antigens and the effects on the immune system. Creating products that help most people with the risk of potential harm to a small subset of people doesn’t seem like such a good bet when you’re one of the people in the small subset.

With autism and developmental disorders continuing to skyrocket (record numbers in California in 2006 — a topic I’ll cover in a separate future post), we need to better understand the potential risks created by these greatly expanded vaccination schedules.

In this blog, I regularly raise the topic of vaccines and potential toxin and immune injury. The reasoning is that:

1. These injuries affect potentially millions of people in both acute and subclinical ways, with effects that may last lifetimes.
2. The emotional and financial costs of helping family members deal with these illnesses are extremely high.
3. Nutritional and other biomedical interventions can play a significant role in helping people to heal and recover.

Leading scientists affiliated with the Council for Responsible Nutrition, Mount Sinai Hospital (Toronto), and Creighton University published a review article in the most recent issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition calling for a five-fold increase in the recommended tolerable upper intake level (UL) of vitamin D.

(UL = the maximum level of daily nutrient intake that is likely to pose no risk of adverse effects)

The current vitamin D UL is 2000 IU (50 micrograms/day). The article’s authors review the existing research and make the case that the UL should be raised to 10,000 IU (250 mcg/day).

The UL established by the FNB [Food & Nutrition Board] for vitamin D (50 mcg, or 2000 IU) is not based on current evidence and is viewed by many as being too restrictive, thus curtailing research, commercial development, and optimization of nutritional policy. Human clinical trial data published subsequent to the establishment of the FNB vitamin D UL published in 1997 support a significantly higher UL.

The authors note that the initial UL was set based primarily on research associated with the function of vitamin D in bone formation, but that more recent research has shown vitamin D to play important roles in other areas (e.g., immunity), and that potentially higher necessary levels may be necessary for optimal function. The authors cite several clinical trials using as much as 1250 mcg/day of vitamin D with no observed negative side effects.

The primary source of vitamin D is sunshine, with the average diet providing less than 10 mcg (or 400 IU/day) — and that’s only in people regularly consuming significant amounts of vitamin D fortified foods, such as some dairy products.

As discussed frequently in this blog, vitamin D deficiency is widespread, with some estimates suggesting as much as 60 percent of people in Northern latitudes aren’t getting enough. Deficiency rates are also high among certain groups at all latitudes, such as among the elderly and people who work inside all day.

See this recent post for more vitamin D discussion and embedded links to several other posts relevant to the topic:

Higher Vitamin D Levels May Help Protect Against Multiple Sclerosis

Hopefully the Food and Nutrition Board, which is responsible for setting recommended intake and ULs, will seriously consider this call for an increase in vitamin D levels.

It’s long been suspected that viral infections, such as those caused by Epstein-Barr virus and cytomegalovirus, play a primary role in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

Recently, in a small, preliminary clinical trial, researchers at Stanford University found that chronic fatigue patients treated with prescription anti-viral medications for a relatively long period of time (6 months) experienced significant improvement (21 out of 25 treated patients). Now, the same researchers are going to perform a larger, randomized study in an attempt to replicate the study’s results.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome currently affects more than 1 million people in the U.S. alone, and results in debilitating, long-term fatigue. Other common symptoms include insomnia, digestive problems, swollen lymph nodes, memory loss, inability to concentrate, and depression.

The condition often, but not always, begins after the onset of flu-like symptoms, which suggests that infections may play a role. Interestingly, the researchers in the study above found that chronic fatigue sufferers who did not experience flu-like symptoms prior to the onset of the condition, did NOT improve significantly after the anti-viral treatment. Perhaps there are different subgroups of affected individuals.

There is also clinical evidence that suggests viral infections are involved in many cases of autism. This factor would make sense, as impaired immune function is present in that condition as well. Many parents and clinicians have seen improvement in autistic children when given prescription and over-the-counter (OTC)* anti-virals, especially in combination with other treatments, such as methyl-B12, proteolytic enzymes, and heavy metal detoxification.

* Olive leaf extract is a potent and often helpful OTC anti-viral substance.

It’s unclear exactly what is causing the immune impairment in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and autistic cases, but heavy metal toxicity is a primary culprit. There is often significant symptom overlap in heavy metal toxicity and chronic fatigue cases.

You can learn more about treatment approaches for both Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and autism here and here.

Beginning this year, 200,000 members of the U.S. military will be required to get the anthrax vaccine or lose their jobs.

The Pentagon is reviving its mandatory anthrax vaccinations despite allegations that the shots have contributed to as many as 23 deaths and sickened hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of soldiers.

How many of them will have a similar experience as James Francis?:

[M}erchant seaman James Francis and his mates got an ultimatum: Take anthrax and smallpox vaccinations or lose your jobs.

Francis’ Seattle attorney, Russell Williams, described the shipboard scene the next day off the isle of Crete as: “Wham, bam. ‘Get in line. Take your shots.’”

Within days of taking the two shots, Francis’ feet began to tingle and burn. When he later took the second in a series of six anthrax shots, his health slid downhill. Since then, the 45-year-old messmate from Las Vegas has fought a rare nervous system disease known as Guillain-Barre Syndrome, along with chronic pain, pneumonia and a life-threatening blood clot.

Members of the military often have the additional problem of receiving multiple vaccinations on the same day (some of which contain the mercury-containing preservative thimerosal). Is it any wonder that soldiers develop neuro-immunological and auto-immune diseases at such high rates?

To-date, the FDA has recorded more than 4,700 reports related to anthrax shots over the last 16 years, but acknowledges that the reports will “inevitably be underreported.” One doctor quoted in the article above notes that she alone has treated approximately 2,000 cases.

There is a little recourse for military personnel if a negative vaccination reaction occurs. Vaccine makers cannot be sued, and military personnel are prohibited from suing the federal government.

The controversial anthrax vaccine is called BioThrax, and its use and potential negative effects have been debated for years:

In 2004, lawyers for sick soldiers won a court injunction blocking the mandatory shots until the Food and Drug Administration reviewed the license of Maryland-based vaccine manufacturer Emergent BioSolutions. In December 2005, the FDA declared the vaccine safe and restored the license.

Despite testimony from military doctors regarding negative anthrax vaccination effects, the Pentagon decided in October 2006 to reinstate mandatory smallpox and anthrax shots. This despite the fact that:

Numerous public health experts believe BioThrax causes a range of problems, particularly among women and people prone to autoimmune diseases. They list Guillain-Barre, which can kill or paralyze; other neurological disorders; diabetes; arthritis; chronic fatigue syndrome; chronic muscle and joint pain; respiratory ailments; vision problems; memory loss, and depression …

… [A]s recently as May, the Government Accountability Office said that the vaccine’s long-term safety “has not been studied.”

In December 2006, the lawyers who succeeded in getting the earlier injunction filed another suit seeking a new injunction.

It’s truly a shame that the members of our military are being used as guinea pigs in this vaccination experiment. Can you blame soldiers like Retired Army Capt. B. David Hodge for saying:

“I love my country,” Hodge said. “It’s my government I don’t trust.”

Surely, he’s not alone in that thought.

In this American Journal of Clinical Nutrition editorial, the authors discuss the important issue of vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy.

The authors mention a recent study of women in the Netherlands, and note that the study found that >50% (!) of darker-skinned women were deficient in vitamin D (whereas only 8% of fairer-skinned women were).

But the numbers were likely even worse than those. The study used a very conservative level of vitamin D to indicate vitamin D deficiency, one that was likely much too low.

The correct vitamin D form to measure for deficiency is 25-hydroxyvitamin D. The study used 25 nmol/L as the cut-off, while levels closer to 80 nmol/L are increasingly being shown in research to be optimal.

As the editorial notes, Vitamin D levels during pregnancy and the early years of development are critical not only for bone development, but also for the immune system and nervous system development — and may have lifelong implications.

It is difficult to get adequate vitamin D through the diet, since dairy is really the only food category that contains significant amounts of the nutrient.

The primary source of vitamin D is from sunshine. The sun’s UV-B rays hit the skin and a molecule is converted that starts a multi-step process toward the formation of active vitamin D in the body. Exposure to mid-day summer sun at the beach can generate up to 20,000 IU of active vitamin D.

In Northern latitudes during the winter months, the sun’s rays are not strong enough to generate sufficient vitamin D levels. Also, individuals with darker skin require significantly greater levels of sun exposure to generate adequate amounts of vitamin D.

Unfortunately, the U.S. government’s current recommended adequate intake level for vitamin D (200 to 600 IU) is set way below the level necessary to maintain vitamin D near optimal levels. As discussed here, adequate daily intake levels may be at least 2,000 IU/day, and possibly higher, for individuals not getting regular, limited sun exposure*.

During the winter months and in groups of people with limited sun exposure (e.g., infants, the elderly, darker-skinned people spending lots of time indoors), supplementation with vitamin D, either in the form of cholecalciferol or obtained via a good quality (toxin-free) cod liver oil will likely be important in helping to maintain adequate vitamin D levels.

(Vitamin D is a critically important nutrient that is commonly deficient. I’ll regularly revisit this topic in future posts.)

* Note: Neither vitamin D researchers or I are suggesting that you should spend a lot of time in the sun. Excessive exposure to the sun’s rays can damage the skin. The amount of exposure required for adequate vitamin D formation is brief — 10 to 15 minutes a day on the exposed arms/neck/face a few times a week during spring, summer, and early fall.