http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/fail-infant-hep-b-vaccines-perform-shamefully-time-end-them?utm_source=www.GreenMedInfo.com&utm_campaign=dcd1932bbc-Greenmedinfo&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_193c8492fb-dcd1932bbc-86906633#_edn1
FAIL: Infant Hep B Vaccines Perform Shamefully; Time To End Them?
Posted on: Saturday, November 16th 2013 at 1:45 pm Written By: Sayer Ji, Founder
An eye-opening new study published in the Journal of Viral Hepatitis reveals that conventional hepatitis B vaccine- and hepatitis B immunoglobulin-based treatment for infants of mothers who tested positive for hepatitis B infection is nothing near "95% effective in preventing infection and its chronic consequences" that the World Health Organization (WHO) and a myriad of health organizations around the world claim it to be. [i] To the contrary, researchers were able to detect through highly sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNA testing that 42% of the infants still had 'occult' hepatitis B infection, 24 months after initiating treatment at birth, despite the fact that the vaccine reduced the incidence of overt infection.
In the researchers' own words: "The results of this large prospective longitudinal study show that 42% of babies born of HBsAg-positive mothers develop occult HBV infection, which is not prevented by administration of recombinant HBV vaccine to the newborn." [italics added]
This study not only clearly calls into question the standard of care for preventing hepatitis B infection in infants born to infected mothers, but it also challenges core tenets of vaccinology, including hepatitis B vaccine safety and effectiveness.
A closer look at the study
The new study titled, 'Hepatitis B vaccination with or without hepatitis B immunoglobulin at birth to babies born of HBsAg-positive mothers prevents overt HBV transmission but may not prevent occult HBV infection in babies: a randomized controlled trial', tracked pregnant women found to be HBsAg positive (i.e. Hepatitis B surface antigen was found in their blood work) until delivery, and then tracked their babies for 2 years.
The study design and results were as follows:
Immediately after delivery, babies were randomized to receive either HBIG [Hepatitis B immunoglobulin] or placebo in addition to recombinant HBV vaccine (at 0, 6, 10 and 14 weeks). The primary end-point of the study, assessed at 18 weeks of age, was remaining free of any HBV infection (either overt or occult) plus the development of adequate immune response to vaccine. The babies were further followed up for a median of 2 years of age to determine their eventual outcome. Risk factors for HBV transmission and for poor immune response in babies were studied. Of the 283 eligible babies, 259 were included in the trial and randomized to receive either HBIG (n = 128) or placebo (n = 131) in addition to recombinant HBV vaccine. Of the 222 of 259 (86%) babies who completed 18 weeks of follow-up, only 62/222 (28%) reached primary end-point. Of the remaining, 6/222 (3%) developed overt HBV infection, 142/222 (64%) developed occult HBV infection, and 12/222 (5%) had no HBV infection but had poor immune response. All 6 overt infections occurred in the placebo group (P = 0.030), while occult HBV infections were more common in the HBIG group (76/106 [72%] vs. 66/116 [57%]; P = 0.025). This may be due to the immune pressure of HBIG. There was no significant difference between the two groups in frequency of babies developing poor immune response or those achieving primary end-point. The final outcome of these babies at 24 months of age was as follows: overt HBV infection 4%, occult HBV infection 42%, no HBV infection but poor immune response 8% and no HBV infection with good immune response 28%.
The authors concluded, in a startling reversal of conventional wisdom regarding the treatment's efficacy:
The current practice of administration of vaccine with HBIG at birth to babies born of HBsAg-positive mothers is not effective in preventing occult HBV infection in babies, which may be up to 40%.
Known as hepatitis B post-exposure prophylaxis, infants of mothers infected with hepatitis B are administered 4 doses of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine (birth, 6 weeks, 10 weeks and 14 weeks), in combination with hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG). All pregnant women are encouraged today to be screened for hepatitis B, and all are made to undergo this treatment because it is believed to be 'highly effective.' This despite evidence that the hepatitis B vaccine may actually cause liver damage,[ii] and has been linked to over four dozen adverse health effects.[iii]
The recombinant hepatitis B vaccine is produced by isolating hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) from genetically modifying yeast engineered to express this viral antigen-protein. It was, in fact, the first vaccine produced by DNA recombinant technology, i.e. genetic modification.[iv] The HBIG is isolated from the blood plasma of infected donors with high concentrations of anti-Hepatitis B viral antigen antibodies. [v]
Hepatitis B virus infection is a major health problem worldwide, with the WHO estimating that about one third of the world population has been infected at some point in their lives and that it kills 600,000 people each year. The virus contributes to a variety of liver diseases, including acute, fulminant and chronic hepatitis, liver cirrhosis and liver cancer (hepatocelullar carcinoma). It is believed that mother-to-infant transmission accounts for 50% of the chronic infection cases.[vi]
So, what is occult hepatitis B infection, and what causes it?
The definition of "occult" hepatitis B infection has different meanings to different researchers, but in general it indicates that even when blood tests show a disappearance of HBeAg and HBsAG viral antigens, or antibodies to these antigens, hepatitis B virus remains active (replication capable) within the body. The 'occult' form is often referred to as an 'escaped mutant' and is a version of hepatitis B other than the one(s) being tested for, whose presence is ascertained DNA testing (PCR), which is far more sensitive than antibody- or antigen- based testing.
The new study offered the following definition: "Occult HBV infection is defined as the existence of HBV DNA in the serum, or cells of the lymphatic (immune) system, and/or hepatic tissue in the absence of serum HBsAg [13,14]."
Strangely, even when there is no hepatitis B virus (HPV) DNA detectable through PCR DNA testing, it may still be there lying dormant. For instance:
"[T]he elimination of HBV genomes is usually not complete after acute hepatitis B (even after mild infections) because some HBV genomes remain as cccDNA [covalently closed circular DNA] in an occult form in the liver; but their expression is largely controlled by the immune system. The levels of HBV production are in most cases so low that even with the most sensitive techniques no HBV DNA is detectable in serum."[vii]
In other words, hepatitis B virus can integrate into the DNA of cells in a form (cccDNA) which remains dormant and reactivates only rarely when the immune system is severely compromised. This dormant form does not produce hepatitis B DNA (unless reactivated) and therefore is virtually (if not actually) impossible to detect.
Because conventional criteria for assessing the effectiveness of hepatitis B vaccine and/or hepatitis B immunoglobulin treatment are based solely on the presence or absence of viral antigen or antibodies against viral antigens, their actual effectiveness at clearing all pathogenic variants of the hepatitis B virus from the body is largely unknown. This also means that vaccine policy today is based on outdated criteria. This is now poignantly evident by the fact that 42% of these vaccinated infants had signs of occult infection 2 years later.
Why is the hepatitis B virus so difficult to detect? The hepatitis B virus is a DNA virus with such a high replication and mutation rate, [viii] that it has been described as a 'quasispecies' due to its highly varied (heterogeneous) viral population:
"The HBV population is highly heterogeneous and is comprised of genomes that are closely related, but not identical; hence, it is considered a viral quasispecies, a term commonly associated with RNA viruses. The complex viral replication cycle of HBV may be the cause of this quasispecies nature."
It has been estimated that an infected individual produces mutations of every viral genome base at least two times per day. The so-called mutated version of the hepatitis B virus is known as an 'escape mutant':
"Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reverse transcriptase is an error-prone enzyme, and this results in a large number of nucleotide substitutions during replication. As a result, HBV has a "quasispecies" distribution in infected individuals, meaning that HBV circulates as a complex mixture of genetically distinct but closely related variants that are in equilibrium at a given time point of infection in a given replicative environment. The quasispecies distribution of HBV implies that any newly generated mutation conferring a selective advantage to the virus in a given replicative environment will allow the corresponding viral population to overtake the other variants. Such selection processes occur at any step of infection to allow the emergence of variant viruses, such as precore and core promoter mutants during the natural course of infection, HBs antigen mutants under the pressure of active or passive anti-HBs immunization, or HBV mutants that are resistant to the antiviral action of specific HBV inhibitors."[ix]
Due to its complex nature it is extremely difficult to detect all its variants through conventional serological testing. This is one reason why DNA testing is valuable and more sensitive.
Furthermore:
"The occult HBV infection may be due to infection by HBV variants with mutations in the S gene (escape mutants) producing a modified HBsAg that is not recognized by some or all commercially available detection assays [14]."
Even the CDC acknowledges in their hepatitis B immunization guidelines that "escape mutants" can replicate even in the presence of treatment-induced anti-HB antibodies:
Mutations in the S gene of HBV can lead to conformational changes in the a determinant of the HBsAg protein, which is the major target for neutralizing anti-HBs. These variants have been detected in humans infected with HBV, and concern has been expressed that these variants might replicate in the presence of vaccine-induced anti-HBs or anti-HBs contained in HBIG (194,195). Although no evidence suggests that S gene immunization escape mutants pose a threat to existing programs using hepatitis B vaccines (196), further studies and enhanced surveillance to detect the emergence of these variants are high priorities for monitoring the effectiveness of current vaccination strategies.[x]
Is the treatment driving the creation of mutant, 'occult' forms of hepatitis B?
Despite the CDC's dismissal of concerns that escape mutants could threaten the effectiveness of existing hepatitis B immunization programs, research published in the Asian Journal of Transfusion Science has raised exactly this concern:
"[Vaccinations] apply selective pressures on HBV in infected individuals leading to the generation and accumulation of mutations in the S gene. Most of these mutations occur in the major hydrophilic region (MHR) of the S gene. These mutations create public health concerns as they can be responsible for reactivation of hepatitis B and occult hepatitis B infection. The inability to detect occult infections means that these individuals may become blood donors."[xi]
FAIL: Infant Hep B Vaccines Perform Shamefully; Time To End Them?
Posted on: Saturday, November 16th 2013 at 1:45 pm Written By: Sayer Ji, Founder
An eye-opening new study published in the Journal of Viral Hepatitis reveals that conventional hepatitis B vaccine- and hepatitis B immunoglobulin-based treatment for infants of mothers who tested positive for hepatitis B infection is nothing near "95% effective in preventing infection and its chronic consequences" that the World Health Organization (WHO) and a myriad of health organizations around the world claim it to be. [i] To the contrary, researchers were able to detect through highly sensitive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNA testing that 42% of the infants still had 'occult' hepatitis B infection, 24 months after initiating treatment at birth, despite the fact that the vaccine reduced the incidence of overt infection.
In the researchers' own words: "The results of this large prospective longitudinal study show that 42% of babies born of HBsAg-positive mothers develop occult HBV infection, which is not prevented by administration of recombinant HBV vaccine to the newborn." [italics added]
This study not only clearly calls into question the standard of care for preventing hepatitis B infection in infants born to infected mothers, but it also challenges core tenets of vaccinology, including hepatitis B vaccine safety and effectiveness.
A closer look at the study
The new study titled, 'Hepatitis B vaccination with or without hepatitis B immunoglobulin at birth to babies born of HBsAg-positive mothers prevents overt HBV transmission but may not prevent occult HBV infection in babies: a randomized controlled trial', tracked pregnant women found to be HBsAg positive (i.e. Hepatitis B surface antigen was found in their blood work) until delivery, and then tracked their babies for 2 years.
The study design and results were as follows:
Immediately after delivery, babies were randomized to receive either HBIG [Hepatitis B immunoglobulin] or placebo in addition to recombinant HBV vaccine (at 0, 6, 10 and 14 weeks). The primary end-point of the study, assessed at 18 weeks of age, was remaining free of any HBV infection (either overt or occult) plus the development of adequate immune response to vaccine. The babies were further followed up for a median of 2 years of age to determine their eventual outcome. Risk factors for HBV transmission and for poor immune response in babies were studied. Of the 283 eligible babies, 259 were included in the trial and randomized to receive either HBIG (n = 128) or placebo (n = 131) in addition to recombinant HBV vaccine. Of the 222 of 259 (86%) babies who completed 18 weeks of follow-up, only 62/222 (28%) reached primary end-point. Of the remaining, 6/222 (3%) developed overt HBV infection, 142/222 (64%) developed occult HBV infection, and 12/222 (5%) had no HBV infection but had poor immune response. All 6 overt infections occurred in the placebo group (P = 0.030), while occult HBV infections were more common in the HBIG group (76/106 [72%] vs. 66/116 [57%]; P = 0.025). This may be due to the immune pressure of HBIG. There was no significant difference between the two groups in frequency of babies developing poor immune response or those achieving primary end-point. The final outcome of these babies at 24 months of age was as follows: overt HBV infection 4%, occult HBV infection 42%, no HBV infection but poor immune response 8% and no HBV infection with good immune response 28%.
The authors concluded, in a startling reversal of conventional wisdom regarding the treatment's efficacy:
The current practice of administration of vaccine with HBIG at birth to babies born of HBsAg-positive mothers is not effective in preventing occult HBV infection in babies, which may be up to 40%.
Known as hepatitis B post-exposure prophylaxis, infants of mothers infected with hepatitis B are administered 4 doses of recombinant hepatitis B vaccine (birth, 6 weeks, 10 weeks and 14 weeks), in combination with hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG). All pregnant women are encouraged today to be screened for hepatitis B, and all are made to undergo this treatment because it is believed to be 'highly effective.' This despite evidence that the hepatitis B vaccine may actually cause liver damage,[ii] and has been linked to over four dozen adverse health effects.[iii]
The recombinant hepatitis B vaccine is produced by isolating hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) from genetically modifying yeast engineered to express this viral antigen-protein. It was, in fact, the first vaccine produced by DNA recombinant technology, i.e. genetic modification.[iv] The HBIG is isolated from the blood plasma of infected donors with high concentrations of anti-Hepatitis B viral antigen antibodies. [v]
Hepatitis B virus infection is a major health problem worldwide, with the WHO estimating that about one third of the world population has been infected at some point in their lives and that it kills 600,000 people each year. The virus contributes to a variety of liver diseases, including acute, fulminant and chronic hepatitis, liver cirrhosis and liver cancer (hepatocelullar carcinoma). It is believed that mother-to-infant transmission accounts for 50% of the chronic infection cases.[vi]
So, what is occult hepatitis B infection, and what causes it?
The definition of "occult" hepatitis B infection has different meanings to different researchers, but in general it indicates that even when blood tests show a disappearance of HBeAg and HBsAG viral antigens, or antibodies to these antigens, hepatitis B virus remains active (replication capable) within the body. The 'occult' form is often referred to as an 'escaped mutant' and is a version of hepatitis B other than the one(s) being tested for, whose presence is ascertained DNA testing (PCR), which is far more sensitive than antibody- or antigen- based testing.
The new study offered the following definition: "Occult HBV infection is defined as the existence of HBV DNA in the serum, or cells of the lymphatic (immune) system, and/or hepatic tissue in the absence of serum HBsAg [13,14]."
Strangely, even when there is no hepatitis B virus (HPV) DNA detectable through PCR DNA testing, it may still be there lying dormant. For instance:
"[T]he elimination of HBV genomes is usually not complete after acute hepatitis B (even after mild infections) because some HBV genomes remain as cccDNA [covalently closed circular DNA] in an occult form in the liver; but their expression is largely controlled by the immune system. The levels of HBV production are in most cases so low that even with the most sensitive techniques no HBV DNA is detectable in serum."[vii]
In other words, hepatitis B virus can integrate into the DNA of cells in a form (cccDNA) which remains dormant and reactivates only rarely when the immune system is severely compromised. This dormant form does not produce hepatitis B DNA (unless reactivated) and therefore is virtually (if not actually) impossible to detect.
Because conventional criteria for assessing the effectiveness of hepatitis B vaccine and/or hepatitis B immunoglobulin treatment are based solely on the presence or absence of viral antigen or antibodies against viral antigens, their actual effectiveness at clearing all pathogenic variants of the hepatitis B virus from the body is largely unknown. This also means that vaccine policy today is based on outdated criteria. This is now poignantly evident by the fact that 42% of these vaccinated infants had signs of occult infection 2 years later.
Why is the hepatitis B virus so difficult to detect? The hepatitis B virus is a DNA virus with such a high replication and mutation rate, [viii] that it has been described as a 'quasispecies' due to its highly varied (heterogeneous) viral population:
"The HBV population is highly heterogeneous and is comprised of genomes that are closely related, but not identical; hence, it is considered a viral quasispecies, a term commonly associated with RNA viruses. The complex viral replication cycle of HBV may be the cause of this quasispecies nature."
It has been estimated that an infected individual produces mutations of every viral genome base at least two times per day. The so-called mutated version of the hepatitis B virus is known as an 'escape mutant':
"Hepatitis B virus (HBV) reverse transcriptase is an error-prone enzyme, and this results in a large number of nucleotide substitutions during replication. As a result, HBV has a "quasispecies" distribution in infected individuals, meaning that HBV circulates as a complex mixture of genetically distinct but closely related variants that are in equilibrium at a given time point of infection in a given replicative environment. The quasispecies distribution of HBV implies that any newly generated mutation conferring a selective advantage to the virus in a given replicative environment will allow the corresponding viral population to overtake the other variants. Such selection processes occur at any step of infection to allow the emergence of variant viruses, such as precore and core promoter mutants during the natural course of infection, HBs antigen mutants under the pressure of active or passive anti-HBs immunization, or HBV mutants that are resistant to the antiviral action of specific HBV inhibitors."[ix]
Due to its complex nature it is extremely difficult to detect all its variants through conventional serological testing. This is one reason why DNA testing is valuable and more sensitive.
Furthermore:
"The occult HBV infection may be due to infection by HBV variants with mutations in the S gene (escape mutants) producing a modified HBsAg that is not recognized by some or all commercially available detection assays [14]."
Even the CDC acknowledges in their hepatitis B immunization guidelines that "escape mutants" can replicate even in the presence of treatment-induced anti-HB antibodies:
Mutations in the S gene of HBV can lead to conformational changes in the a determinant of the HBsAg protein, which is the major target for neutralizing anti-HBs. These variants have been detected in humans infected with HBV, and concern has been expressed that these variants might replicate in the presence of vaccine-induced anti-HBs or anti-HBs contained in HBIG (194,195). Although no evidence suggests that S gene immunization escape mutants pose a threat to existing programs using hepatitis B vaccines (196), further studies and enhanced surveillance to detect the emergence of these variants are high priorities for monitoring the effectiveness of current vaccination strategies.[x]
Is the treatment driving the creation of mutant, 'occult' forms of hepatitis B?
Despite the CDC's dismissal of concerns that escape mutants could threaten the effectiveness of existing hepatitis B immunization programs, research published in the Asian Journal of Transfusion Science has raised exactly this concern:
"[Vaccinations] apply selective pressures on HBV in infected individuals leading to the generation and accumulation of mutations in the S gene. Most of these mutations occur in the major hydrophilic region (MHR) of the S gene. These mutations create public health concerns as they can be responsible for reactivation of hepatitis B and occult hepatitis B infection. The inability to detect occult infections means that these individuals may become blood donors."[xi]
Forced Vaccination
By Michael Manley
Are you aware that 30 percent of doctors in the U.S. do not vaccinate their children and that number is as high as 60 percent in other countries around the world? Are you aware that some countries do not even allow children to be vaccinated until they are at least two years old because of their immature immune systems? Are you aware that most vaccinations contain thimerosal, which is so dangerous that if the same amount of thimerosal the average child receives before age two (directly into his bloodstream) were to be dropped into twenty-three gallons of water that it would be considered unsafe for human consumption according to the EPA? And are you aware that the Hepatitis B vaccine causes genetic changes? Were you ever told that some vaccines contain tissue from aborted fetuses?
Let me ask you a very personal question. Do you have the right to raise your own child, or should a doctor, judge or social services decide what is best for him? What is the true story about vaccinations? That is something you will have to conclude for yourself. Now let me tell you my story.
I thought I was living in a free country until the evening of April 3, 2003 when my child was given a harmful vaccination against the wishes of my wife and me in the city of Grand Junction, Colorado. Inaccurate screening test results on my wife led the neonatologist to believe that my wife had hepatitis B. As he believed there was a high risk of transmission to our child during birth, he urged us to allow him to inoculate our newborn with the hepatitis B vaccine. Knowing the dangers vaccinations pose, especially to newborns with immature immune systems, we repeatedly refused to authorize the doctor to administer the vaccine. We stood firm on the grounds that we could not in good conscience abdicate our God given role to protect our child from medical treatment known to be harmful and dangerous. After threats by hospital social worker Joni Vohs that we could lose custody of our child if we did not comply, we found ourselves in an after-hours mock hearing at St. Mary’s Hospital, denied the right to procure any sort of competent defense.
Just the day before, my wife had given birth to our first child. We were allowed fifteen minutes notice of the hearing about to take place at the hospital. The judge and lawyers were already present at the hospital before we were notified. District Court Judge Charles Buss repeatedly denied our plea to postpone the hearing until the next day to allow us time to present specific evidence to support our position. The neonatal physician, Dr. Noel Carrasco, was declared an expert witness and led the judge to believe that little or no risks were posed to our baby by administering the vaccine. Further, the judge was persuaded that waiting for a second confirmatory test on my wife (to arrive the next day) could reduce the effectiveness of the vaccine enough to warrant giving it immediately without waiting for further testing or even a proper medical diagnosis. Meanwhile the President/CEO of St. Mary’s Hospital, Robert Ladenburger, stood by and watched as all these events were transpiring. He did nothing to stop them. My request to him for an opportunity to meet with him to appeal the decisions and actions being implemented was unmet, due to the “emergency” nature of the hearing.
In spite of our short notice of the hearing, we were able to obtain specific information about the inaccuracy and unreliability of the screening tests. This evidence was presented to the judge but disregarded in light of the doctor’s “expert opinion”. By court order, our daughter was given the shot. Charges of Dependency and Neglect were ordered by the judge to be filed against us. We became prisoners in our own town as we were ordered not to leave the county without approval by the court.
When we finally received the court order a week later, it stated that the court found by “clear and convincing evidence” that my wife had hepatitis B, and thus the court had to intervene because of the risks posed to the child. I would like to know what this evidence was, since the only test that had been presented was a screening test that says on its face: “This test using the DPC 2000 HbsAg assay is for screening purposes only. All positive and indeterminate results will be confirmed by another method.” The more accurate test did arrive and proved that my wife did not have hepatitis B, as did the independent tests we had run at another hospital. There was never a proper diagnosis by a qualified physician!
If that was not enough, gross disrespect was shown to us from the moment we arrived at the hospital until after we left. Our rights as parents to make decisions regarding the care of our child were repeatedly denied as tests and treatments were given to both my wife and child without our authorization, many times against our clear instructions to the hospital staff.
This is not a story from some far off corner of the world. This happened right here in “the land of the free.” Our “limited” government believed they knew how to raise our child better than her God given parents. Her life was put in danger while the objections of her parents who had spent countless hours researching and seeking God to determine what is best for their child were completely disregarded.
In closing, please consider these questions:
1.Who defines what a life threatening situation is (the law leaves this term undefined)?
2. What is being done to comfort the families whose children have suffered from autism, learning disabilities, immunological disorders and even death resulting from these dangerous injections?
3. Are we as parents, complacently willing to entrust the health and safety of our children to the powers that be? Or will we do our homework, and research the facts that hard science presents, enabling us to make informed decisions?
4. Who will be next, and what will be inflicted on them?
5. What other freedoms will be taken away from the family in the near future?
Today we witness diverse attacks upon our children, including damaging vaccinations. A forced vaccination is an abominable assault on our precious child and a usurpation of God given parental rights and responsibilities. We as Christians should “render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21). Our “children are an heritage of the LORD” (Psalms 127:3).
For more information, please check out our site at www.forcedvaccination.com
August 23, 2008 01:39am
Article from: AAP
A SYDNEY couple are in hiding after the Department of Community Services (DoCS) took out a court order to have their three-day-old boy vaccinated against hepatitis B.
The parents, from Croydon Park, fled their home on Thursday to avoid police and DoCS officers after refusing to have their son vaccinated at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital.
They told Fairfax newspapers they believe aluminium in the vaccine can cause him more damage than contracting the disease.
The infant's mother, who is from China, was diagnosed with hepatitis B several years ago, but both parents believe the illness, which can cause liver cancer and cirrhosis, can be managed more effectively than any potential neurological damage from the vaccine.
Vaccinations are not compulsory in Australia but it is NSW Health policy that babies born to hepatitis-B mothers are given the immunoglobulin within 12 hours of birth.
The treatment is followed up with four more doses of the vaccine over six months.
The father, a financial adviser, is seeking an injunction against the court order.
He told Fairfax doctors and midwives on the post-natal ward told him he and his wife would be arrested and they would lose custody of their child if he left the hospital without being vaccinated.
The Supreme Court order, obtained by DoCS, states the baby must be vaccinated by midnight on Thursday but the father is adamant they will stay on the run indefinitely.
The case will be back in court on Monday.
Hep B mum's baby won't get vaccine: August 26, 2008
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24244520-26103,00.html
A COUPLE in hiding after they refused to have their newborn baby vaccinated against hepatitis B is now free to return home.
The New South Wales Department of Community Services (DoCS) today decided not to pursue further action against the couple after the timeframe for an effective vaccination lapsed. DoCS, with police assisting, was unable to locate the couple, despite having spoken with the mother on a number of occasions and urging her to come forward.The parents fled their home in Sydney's Croydon Park on Thursday to avoid police and DoCS officials, after refusing to have their three-day-old son vaccinated at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital. The baby's mother, who is from China, was diagnosed with hepatitis B several years ago. On medical advice, DoCS took a recommendation to the NSW Supreme Court last week and ordered the parents to vaccinate the baby. But DoCS today decided to discontinue action because the vaccination would no longer be effective. "It appears that the parents of a newborn at risk of contracting hepatitis B have not presented their baby for medical treatment," DoCS said today in a statement.
"According to medical advice, there is no longer sufficient evidence of the effectiveness of any vaccination." Back to pageDoCS said it would keep the case open until it was able to verify the welfare of their children. The parents also have a three-year-old child who DoCS believe has also not been vaccinated against hepatitis B. The parents believe the illness, which can cause liver cancer and cirrhosis, can be managed more effectively without vaccination. They fear the vaccination could cause their child neurological damage, despite assurances from medical experts the vaccine is safe. Vaccinations are not compulsory in Australia, but it's NSW health policy for babies born to hepatitis B mothers to be given the immunoglobulin injection within 12 hours of birth. The vaccination loses efficacity as time lapses and is considered ineffective by about one week after birth.
Why Hep B vaccines for infants?
Why Hep B Vaccines at day one and for the first ten years or more of their usage complete with organomercury brain destroying toxins in an impure mix of ethyl and methyl compounds? Safe today, if unsafe ten years ago, except as yet, no one admits brain destroying chemicals are dangerous to the one day infant. No one except for EVERY chemist that believes in the PROPERTY OF MATTER. Evidently NO medical Doctor seems to be a chemist with apologies to those who have brains still working.
A significant number of ADULT medical workers REFUSE even ONE Hep B injection despite it being considered NECESSARY to practise as a medical worker today. Now that’s SENSIBLE!
This means per se, a significant number of doctors are administering these injections to infants while not practising the same disease prevention strategy themselves.
In that oft quoted remark. WE ARE/WERE JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS.
Hepatitis B is not a nice disease to get and the aim of the vaccine to get rid of this salopery is a fine aim. But the idea of giving an organomercury vaccine to an infant as soon as they are born and then repeat this toxic insult twice more before the infant is four months of age and still at least to the eye an extremely fragile and vulnerable being is STUPID. It actually makes a healthy child less healthy. When they (Well Visit nurses and doctors) fail to do simple before and after checks like measuring to see, as does happen, the head blows up to twice its size is STARTLING.
Naturally the incidence of this illness has descended post vaccinations and it is a moot point to say if the vaccine played a role or better hygiene and nursing care.The Hep B figures for this illness in USA are hard to find and even harder to get reliable figures. There is even hint of them being massaged or ‘quality reviewed’. On the good side, from some sources, 9 out of 10 who get the illness recover and are protected for life. This disagrees with some other claims that 9 out of 10 go on to die from liver cancer. 73 000 new cases each year in 2009 USA according to some figures would imply that the numbers are less than when vaccines commenced by a factor of three to four fold.
Looking at a white person’s risk before the vaccines commenced for one day babies there was a 1 in 100 000 risk for this population in USA again from some sources and in this case CDC. This means that you are giving 99 999 vaccines to white children that just DON’T need that vaccine at this age. Looking at SIDS running at 0.5 to 1.5 deaths per 1 000 you might be killing 150 + babies each time you give this vaccine in order to prevent one person becoming infected at birth or in life and with some quotes of a 90 per cent complete recovery with FULL lifetime protection. 3 lots of injections by 4 months might leave a death trail of nearly 500 + USA children for that one tenth of a person that might get the disease and rest chronically ill but still leading a life of perhaps 70 plus years in goodish but could be better health.
I think the idea of a sledge hammer to crack a nut looks relevant. But exactly who or what is the NUT?
We have in association with DEATH, a rate of ten times as many walking wounded. So along with the 500 dead by 4 months comes an estimated 5 000 neurologically or otherwise affected USA children.
On top of all this is the fact that vaccine type fragments turn up in the Hep B cases showing the infection does not come from anywhere but past Hep B vaccinations gone wrong.
Gone wrong on top of the 500 dead and 5 000 neurological cases.
The CDC can supply more on the proliferation of illness direct from vaccines and Hep B in this case.
Let’s take a closer look at the one tenth person who didn’t make a full recovery with life time protection. That’s one person who may get Hep B at birth or later.
Look at the birth case. An infected mother gives birth to a child. Before you give or miss giving the Hep B vaccine there are ISSUES.
We have full testing for infection and for the natural antibody protection.
Strange but 9 out of 10 of those UNCLEAN will have recovered and give their child IMMUNE PROTECTION, natural and long lasting for this illness. So why the vaccine for this group? Disease is often SELF LIMITING and with good hygiene a huge reduction can be achieved especially as the pathways of infection are relatively clear and unambiguous. If the mother is infected while pregnant, then special practices can ensure the risk of infection is REDUCED for the infant.
In a world where forced medication is practiced such as fluoride in our water or compulsory vaccines it might be thought that recovery from the Hep B might proceed the birth; We do have abortion on demand in USA almost at a whim and running at numbers so high no one wants to publicize them but lets give a figure of 1 child KILLED out of 3 by doctors before it gets a chance to breath FRESH air.
Assuming now the worst and the child is born to an infected mother and is suffering from Hep B will a vaccine actually work? So why the vaccine for this group? Surely the deed is done. How does a vaccine prevent infection already rampant?
99 999 vaccines given at day one not appropriate as NO RISK to infant and now we have the one case where there is INFECTION but it’s now too late for a vaccine. So why the vaccine for this group?
Why therefore do we give the vaccine?
To kill 500 babies each year?
To have 5000 babies with long term neurological illness?
To mothers who pass on lifetime Hep B protection to their child?
To Hep B mothers who give birth to a child at birth with rampant Hep B?
In this case possibly to add a bit of extra man made GMO bits of Hep B to an infant already complete with millions of Hep B virus in the hope that you might make a new strain more infectious, more dangerous and possibly of use to the MILITARY?
The only thing likely to help this child is:
Good and conscientious nursing and delivery.
Use of protective globulin which will help fight and destroy the illness and not add to the child's problems.
A vaccine theoretically is for protection from illness and is absolutely counter indicated if you have the illness.
Why Hep B Vaccines at day one and for the first ten years or more of their usage complete with organomercury brain destroying toxins in an impure mix of ethyl and methyl compounds ?
Why Hep B vaccines for infants?
John Fryer (I love this guy)
Three newborn babies die after routine vaccination
Three newborn babies died on July 20 soon after they were given vaccination shots against Hepatitis B, at the General Hospital in Huong Hoa District in the central province of Quang Tri.
Relatives of dead baby cry a lot (Photo: SGGP) The three babies were vaccinated under the National Expanded Program on Immunization, informed Tran Van Thanh, director of the provincial Department of Health.
The vaccine was produced in 2012 with expiry date until 2015 and distributed by the Preventive Medicine Center on July 18.
Soon after the babies were vaccinated, their condition deteriorated.
The babies were children of Nguyen Dinh Dao and Nguyen Thi Nga from Dong Chin Village in Huong Hoa District; Nguyen Minh Tien and Tran Thi Ha from Khe Sanh Town of Huong Hoa District; Ho Van Hang and Ho Thi Du from Village 7 in Thuan Commune of Huong Hoa District.
Nguyen Dinh Dao spoke with tears in his eyes that he and his wife had decided to have a second child after 12 years.
Many relatives of the babies gathered at the hospital to gather more information. On the same afternoon, forensic experts of the provincial police force arrived at the hospital to investigate. Later, relatives of the babies took the bodies back home for burial.
After this incident, the provincial Department of Health has informed medical units to seal the remaining vaccine batches for further investigation.
The health sector has also sent people to visit the babies’ families for consolation and financial support.
Three newborn babies died on July 20 soon after they were given vaccination shots against Hepatitis B, at the General Hospital in Huong Hoa District in the central province of Quang Tri.
Relatives of dead baby cry a lot (Photo: SGGP) The three babies were vaccinated under the National Expanded Program on Immunization, informed Tran Van Thanh, director of the provincial Department of Health.
The vaccine was produced in 2012 with expiry date until 2015 and distributed by the Preventive Medicine Center on July 18.
Soon after the babies were vaccinated, their condition deteriorated.
The babies were children of Nguyen Dinh Dao and Nguyen Thi Nga from Dong Chin Village in Huong Hoa District; Nguyen Minh Tien and Tran Thi Ha from Khe Sanh Town of Huong Hoa District; Ho Van Hang and Ho Thi Du from Village 7 in Thuan Commune of Huong Hoa District.
Nguyen Dinh Dao spoke with tears in his eyes that he and his wife had decided to have a second child after 12 years.
Many relatives of the babies gathered at the hospital to gather more information. On the same afternoon, forensic experts of the provincial police force arrived at the hospital to investigate. Later, relatives of the babies took the bodies back home for burial.
After this incident, the provincial Department of Health has informed medical units to seal the remaining vaccine batches for further investigation.
The health sector has also sent people to visit the babies’ families for consolation and financial support.
