Washington Post Query

[Anonymous]

Thanks, interesting site.

[Anonymous]

penguinsix wrote:Dr. Sears (the younger) and Dr. Mercola, two taboo names to many in the health community, are often hoisted aloft as doctors opposed to vaccines. But before someone thinks of following either I'd suggest reading:

Dr. Sears: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=512
Dr. Mercola: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=2116

The doctor blogger's critique of Mercola comes with a personal story of his own pediatric ICU that is somewhat chilling:

If I sound upset, it is for good reason. For while Mercola and Sardi, drowning in their arrogance of ignorance, spread their misinformation with the expressed intent of undermining the public trust in vaccination and modern medicine, my colleagues and I will be forced to deal with the aftermath. [b]This season has already been an unpleasant one in my pediatric ICU. During what is traditionally the slowest part of the year, we are running at near our capacity of 26 beds. The fraction of our patients who are in the ICU with 2009 H1N1 has steadily increased since the school year began, from roughly 5-10% of our census being flu positive over the summer (which is odd in itself), to now between 30-50%. The need for prolonged....

Please see http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/2009/09/four-swine-flu-vaccines-approved-by-fda.asp

Dr. Sears is pro-vacccine, not anti vaccine. I don't know anything about Mercola and have never even heard of him... But it seems Dr. Sears has a healthy respect for vaccines but believes in spacing them out in an appropriate was, even if it means more trips to the doctor. I think it's great that with his vaccine book, he can get parents who are anti-vaccine and are not even sure why to swing around to getting the vaccines but in a pattern they will accept as safe. That means more kids around vaccinated with essential vaccines.

Re the Swine Flu, it doesn't sound like he recommends against it at all. His main concerns are that the vaccine has not been tested on pregnant women (is this still current?) and that some brands may be of better quality than others.

"What safety and efficacy testing has been done on these vaccines?

Here is where we are flying by the seat of our pants, so to speak. The product inserts make it VERY clear that the “swine” flu versions of these vaccines have NOT undergone any testing to demonstrate whether or not they are safe and whether or not they even work. They are relying on the fact that they are so similar to the regular flu shots that they should work just as well.

Although I don’t like that approach, I must admit that they may be right. I don’t see any reason to doubt that our immune systems won’t respond to this vaccine the same way they respond to regular flu shots. And I don’t expect that the side effects would be any different either."

[Anonymous]

penguinsix wrote:First, here is a list of all the trials for the H1N1 vaccine, trials completely ignored by Dr. Sears "seat of our pants" comment in his recommendations.

http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/news/QA/vteuH1N1qa.htm

In regards to your specific question about pregnant women, yes there has been a study on pregnant women. The initial testing group was small (about 120). I don't know if another one is underway but it wouldn't surprise me. Here is a media story about it, and you can find the technical details in the NIH link above.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125719471168823679.html

Second, Dr. Sears...

Dr. Sears is not anti-vaccine, he's 'I'm ok with vaccines....but...' and then spreads his unscientific observations to promote his view, preying on many irrational fears rather than rebutting them with facts. For example his comment about H1N1 is just his style "We Don't Know!!!" which creates FUD--fear, uncertainty and doubt. The facts are "we know enough" to make a decision you have X% risk from the vaccine and >X% risk from the flu, which is why most doctors recommend that you should take the shot.

Sears is generally a pariah to many pediatricians, not because he offering an 'alternative vaccination schedule' but because his "research" is so loose, so unscientific, and yes, even dangerous that it creates problems for many youngsters, including an increased risk of death. He is not a research pediatrician but one who has played up the 'I'm just a doctor' schtick interspersing anecdotal evidence, cherry-picked facts and his own personal opinions to sell thousands of copies of his book. It essence, it's shoddy work.

I would encourage you to read not only the above article, in full, but several other criticisms of Dr. Sears before you consider his advice in any way:

http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2009/08/many-problems-with-dr-bobs-alternative.html
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/06/dr_sears_lets_his_flag_fly.php
http://www.injuryboard.com/national-news/alternative-vaccine-schedule-criticized.aspx?googleid=254196
http://sciencebasedparenting.com/2009/02/05/interview-on-vaccines-with-dr-ari-brown-author-of-baby-411/
http://sciencebasedparenting.com/2009/01/01/dr-offit-vs-dr-sears-a-copypaste-blow-by-blow/

And the most detailed criticism of his alternative schedule:

http://www.immunize.org/concerns/offit_moser2009.pdf


Please feel disagree with everything I wrote. I don't mind. In fact, I would encourage it. Read those postings and the comments that take issue with the criticisms (i.e. the pro-Sears bits). It's just I feel that if you rationally and scientifically examine the evidence, you'll come to the conclusion Dr. Sears' advice is highly suspect.

But hey, it's a free country.

Penguin person -- you rock.

[Anonymous]

I realize that the moms on the forum are mostly intelligent, over-educated types but I just don't see it this way. I parent with my instincts and when cold medicine was "safe" for my young children I never gave it to them because it just didn't seem like a great idea to give my baby drugs for something as normal as a cold. Now they are considered extremely unsafe for toddlers etc.

Why does a position in the vaccine argument have to be academic? When my first child was born I thought the nurse was insane for trying to vaccinate her for a sexually transmitted disease. At a later ped appointment when she finally got the Hep B shot a week followed of fever lethargy etc etc which is ok but why on earth would you want to do this in the first week of life when you are watching your baby like crazy for signs of good health? What is wrong with spacing our vaccines? We are talking months.

I guess this is not the forum for me. Fire away ladies.

[Anonymous]

PP - the Hep B vaccine is recommended at birth because it can be transmitted from an infected mother to her newborn...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I realize that the moms on the forum are mostly intelligent, over-educated types but I just don't see it this way. I parent with my instincts and when cold medicine was "safe" for my young children I never gave it to them because it just didn't seem like a great idea to give my baby drugs for something as normal as a cold. Now they are considered extremely unsafe for toddlers etc.

Why does a position in the vaccine argument have to be academic? When my first child was born I thought the nurse was insane for trying to vaccinate her for a sexually transmitted disease. At a later ped appointment when she finally got the Hep B shot a week followed of fever lethargy etc etc which is ok but why on earth would you want to do this in the first week of life when you are watching your baby like crazy for signs of good health? What is wrong with spacing our vaccines? We are talking months.

I guess this is not the forum for me. Fire away ladies.

The issue with Dr. Sears is that, if you read his book, which I did, he never provides one shred of evidence for what he is basing his alternative schedule on. Whereas, the AAP schedule is based on a leading group of scientists and experts - ACIP (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice). The schedule is based on studies that take into account ideal immune response, etc.

Dr. Sears is not an expert on vaccines or infectious disease, and in fact, never claims that he is. He is a pediatrician. And yet, thousands of parents have bought his book, take it to their dr., and say they want to follow HIS schedule. Your pediatrician is likely not a vaccine expert either; however, he/she is following recommendations from a group of experts. Dr. Sears is essentially winging it.

The blog postings cited above give a good description of this. I feel Dr. Sears is capitalizing on the anti-vaccine fears. There is actually a section in his book where he tells parents who decide to skip or space out the MMR, not to tell other parents in the neighborhood because once enough people don't vaccinate, all these diseases appear. That is actually one of the only intelligent items in the book because it has been proven again and again - these diseases appear in clusters or unvaccinated communities, and while the ones who are hit hardest are the unvaccinated kids, vaccinated kids can also be affected. Further, there are some pediatricians, also mentioned in the blog postings, who make kids coming in for sick visits who are unvaccinated call ahead and go to a separate waiting area. I prided myself on going to a pediatrician who is open to spacing but since doing more research, we stayed on par with the AAP schedule. If I have another child I will seriously consider switching practices, or at least asking for stats of unvaccinated kids in my practice, because I will not want to expose a newborn to unvaccinated kids. There was a measles outbreak in Montgomery County this spring.

[Anonymous]

Well, Dr. Sears and Dr. Offit (you do know who he is and where he made his money, right?) aren't the only people talking about vaccine safety, but since someone posted Offit's editorial, here is Sears' rebuttal.

http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/archives/2008_12_01_archive.asp

[Anonymous]

I think Dr. Sears tries to please everyone - his real motive is to make $$$, and he certainly has. Everyone has heard of his alternative schedule.

Yes he not anti-vaccine, but he is a genius in that he came up with the idea to take advantage of parent's fears. There is really no evidence that spacing out vaccines leads to any desirable outcome. It is been demonstrated that infants' immune systems can handle this load of vaccines. In fact, due to advancements in technology, the vaccines our kids get are actually healthier than the vaccines we were given, in that they are loaded with less of the virus, etc.

As for Dr. Offitt, he is in it for public health. Dr. Sears actually recommends Offitt's patented vaccine, for rotavirus, as a vaccine parents should get for their children. So the many parents opting for the alternative schedule are getting Offitt's vaccine. Dr. Offitt would have no reason to go after Dr. Sears in terms of profit. He could sit silently and still have the same number of kids getting vaccinated.