Delay and Selective Vaccine Schedules

A list of delay or selective vaccine schedules for parents who prefer this route:


Dr. Stephanie Cave’s vaccine schedule:

4 months: start Hib with IPV (polio)

6 months: DtaP started

7 months: second series of Hib and IPV

8 months: second series Dtap

9 months: third series Hib

10 months: third series DtaP

15 months: measles

18 months: fourth series Hib, IPV

19 months: fourth series DtaP

27 months: rubella

39 months: mumps

4-5 years: MMR boosters separate from any other boosters only if no titers for immunity.

4-5 years: boosters for DtaP and IPV if needed

Hepatitis B: If  Mother is not positive and baby is not attending child care we would like to postpone until at least school age and only give if mandated by state.

Pneumococcal (Prevnar): Do not want, only discuss if mandated by state only.

Varicella (Varivax): close to school age if mandated by law and if child is not immune to chicken pox based on blood test. Never before 4-5 years.

MMR: to be given seperately

15 months: measles

27 months: rubella

39 months: mumps

4-5 years: MMR boosters separate from any other boosters only if no titers for immunity.



This is from Dr. Miller (Generation Rescue)


1. no vaccines until 2 years old

2. no mercury containing vaccines

3. no live virus vaccines

4. vaccines to be given 1 at a time starting at age 2-

    a. pertussis

    b. diptheria

    c. tetanus

    d. polio


Dr. Sears Selective Vaccination Schedule


2 months-  DTaP, Rotavirus

3 months- Pc, HIB

4 months- DtaP, Rotavirus

5 months- Pc, HIB

6 months- DtaP, Rotavirus

7 months- Pc, HIB

15 months- Pc, HIB

5 years- Tetanus booster

10 years- Blood test(Titer) for Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Chickenpox, Hep A                  Consider vaccinating if not immune. Consider 3 dose Polio series if   traveling to Africa or Asia 

11years- HPV (3 doses)

12 years Hep B (3 doses)



Alternative Vaccine Schedule


2 months-  DTaP, Rotavirus

3 months- Pc, HIB

4 months- DtaP, Rotavirus

5 months- Pc, HIB

6 months- DtaP, Rotavirus

7 months- Pc, HIB

9 months- Polio, Flu (2 doses)

12 months- Mumps, Polio

15 months- Pc, HIB

18 months- DTaP, Chickenpox

21 months- Flu

2 years- Rubella, Polio

2.5 years- Hep B, Hep A

3 years- Hep B, Measles, Flu

3.5 years- Hep B, Hep A

4 years- DTaP, Polio, Flu

5 years- MMR, Flu

6 years- Chickenpox

12 years- Tdap, HPV

12 years 2 months- HPV

13 years-HPV, Meningococcal (once meningococcal approved for age 2-recommend at age 2 and delay Hep B for 6 months)


(Most people are immune after one dose. We continue to get multiple doses that MAY NOT BE NEEDED. Have them check antibody levels via titres blood test.)



 DAN! Guidelines:


  •  Use Thimersol / Mercury free vaccines!!(THAT INCLUDES vaccines that have multiple viruses! Split them up!)

  •  Use single dose vials from which to draw up the vaccines as opposed to multiple-dose vials which provide less uniform dosage.

  •  Use inactivated polio. (IPV)

  • Give RDA (Recommended Daily Allowances) of Vitamin C before and after vaccines
  •  Give a natural form of Vitamin A ( cod liver oil ) to keep RDA’s at level at all times for the age.

  •  Separate the MMR into 3…start with measles at 12-15 months, then mumps at 18-21 months, rubella at 24-27 months.

  •  Do not give live virus vaccines to immunodeficient children.

  •  Do not give vaccines if allergic to any of these components:

i. Yeast – Hep B

ii. Eggs – MMR

iii. Neonycian – MMR or Varicella

  •  Hold off on the Varicella until 10-12 years & if the child is shown not immune to Chicken pox.


  •  Checking vaccine titers before giving boosters



Deirdre Imus: How Do I Find a Green Pediatrician?

Deirdre Imus: How Do I Find a Green Pediatrician?

…Today I found a great link at Deirdre Imus’ website to the “Integrative Pediatrics Council” HERE which provides a list of “green” pediatricians throughout America (and one in Canada.)

How Vaccinations Work

guinea-pigHow Vaccinations Work


PHILIP F. INCAO, M.D. May 5, 1999

In order to use vaccinations wisely, we need to understand exactly how they work. Until recently, the “mechanism of action” of vaccinations was always understood to be simply that they cause an increase in antibody levels (titers) against a specific disease antigen (bacterium or virus), thus preventing “infection” with that bacterial or viral antigen.

In recent years science has learned that the human immune system is much more complicated than we thought. It is composed of two functional branches or compartments which may work together in a mutually cooperative way or in a mutually antagonistic way depending on the health of the individual.

One branch is the humoral immune system (or Th2 function) which primarily produces antibodies in the blood circulation as a sensing or recognizing function of the immune system to the presence of foreign antigens in the body. The other branch is the cellular or cell-mediated immune system (or Th1 function) which primarily destroys, digests and expels foreign antigens out of the body through the activity of its cells found in the thymus, tonsils, adenoids, spleen, lymph nodes and lymph system throughout the body. This process of destroying, digesting and discharging foreign antigens from the body is known as “the acute inflammatory response” and is often accompanied by the classic signs of inflammation: fever, pain, malaise and discharge of mucus, pus, skin rash or diarrhea.

These two functional branches of the immune system may be compared to the two functions in eating: tasting and recognizing the food on the one hand, and digesting the food and eliminating the food waste on the other hand. In the same way, the humoral or Th2 branch of the immune system “tastes” and recognizes and even remembers foreign antigens and the cellular or Th1 branch of the immune system digests and eliminates the foreign antigens from the body. But just as too much repeated tasting of food will ruin the appetite, so also too much repeated stimulation of the “tasting” humoral immune system by an antigen will inhibit and suppress the digesting and eliminating function of the cellular immune system. In other words, overstimulating antibody production can suppress the acute inflammatory response of the cellular immune system! 1

This explains the polar opposite relationship between acute discharging inflammations on the one hand and allergies and auto-immune inflammations on the other hand. The more a person has of one, the less he or she will have of the other!

A growing number of scientists believe that the increase in America, Europe, Australia and Japan in allergic and auto-immune diseases (which stimulate the humoral or Th2 branch of the immune system) is caused by the lack of stimulation of the cellular or the Th1 branch of the immune system from the lack of acute inflammatory responses and discharges in childhood. 2 3 4 5 We need to identify the factors which cause this shift in the function of the immune system or which cause allergies and auto-immune diseases in childhood to increase!

If we now return to the original question of the mechanism of action of vaccinations, we find what I believe is the key to the puzzle. A vaccination consists of introducing a disease agent or disease antigen into an individual’s body without causing the disease. If the disease agent provoked the whole immune system into action it would cause all the symptoms of the disease! The symptoms of a disease are primarily the symptoms (fever, pain, malaise, loss of function) of the acute inflammatory response to the disease.

So the trick of a vaccination is to stimulate the immune system just enough so that it makes antibodies and “remembers” the disease antigen but not so much that it provokes an acute inflammatory response by the cellular immune system and makes us sick with the disease we’re trying to prevent! Thus a vaccination works by stimulating very much the antibody production (Th2) and by stimulating very little or not at all the digesting and discharging function of the cellular immune system (Th1).

Vaccine antigens are designed to be “unprovocative” or “indigestible” for the cellular immune system (Th1) and highly stimulating for the antibody-mediated humoral immune system (Th2).

Perhaps it is not difficult to see then why the repeated use of vaccinations would tend to shift the functional balance of the immune system toward the antibody-producing side (Th2) and away from the acute inflammatory discharging side (the cell-mediated side or Th1). This has been confirmed by observation especially in the case of Gulf War Illness: most vaccinations cause a shift in immune function from the Th1 side (acute inflammatory discharging response) to the Th2 side (chronic auto-immune or allergic response). 6

The outcome of this line of thought is that, contrary to previous belief, vaccinations do not strengthen or “boost” the whole immune system. Instead vaccinations overstimulate the “tasting and remembering” function of the antibody-mediated branch of the immune system (Th2) which simultaneously suppresses the cellular immune system (Th1) thus “preventing” the disease in question.

What in reality is prevented is not the disease but the ability of our cellular immune system to manifest, to respond to and to overcome the disease!

There is no system of the human being, from mind to muscles to immune system, which gets stronger through avoiding challenges, but only through overcoming challenges. The wise use of vaccinations would be to use them selectively, and not on a mass scale. In order for vaccinations to be helpful and not harmful, we must know beforehand in each individual to be vaccinated whether the Th1 function or the Th2 function of the immune system predominates.

In individuals in whom the Th1 function predominates, causing many acute inflammations because the cellular immune system is overreactive, a vaccination could have a balancing effect on the immune system and be helpful for that individual.

In individuals in whom the Th2 function predominates, causing few acute inflammations but rather the tendency to chronic allergic or autoimmune inflammations, a vaccination would cause the Th2 function to predominate even more, aggravating the imbalance of the immune system and harming the health of that individual. This is what happened in Gulf War Illness.

The current use of vaccinations in medicine today is essentially a “shotgun” approach which ignores differences among individuals. In such an approach some individuals may be helped and others may be harmed.

If medicine is to evolve in a healthy direction, we must learn to understand the particular characteristics of each individual and we must learn how to individualize our treatments to be able to heal each unique human being in our care.

Based on the preceding explanation of how vaccinations work, here are my answers to your questions:

Vaccinations are usually effective in preventing an individual from manifesting a particular illness, but they do not improve the overall strength or health of the individual nor of the immune system. Instead, vaccinations modify the reactivity of the immune system, decreasing acute discharging inflammatory reactions and increasing the tendency to chronic allergic and auto-immune reactions.

Epidemiologic studies 7 8 9 have shown that as families improve their living conditions, hygiene, nutrition, literacy and education, the risk of life-threatening acute infectious , inflammatory diseases very much decreases. Families with poor living conditions, hygiene, nutrition and literacy would generally be most likely to benefit from vaccinations. Families with good living conditions, hygiene, nutrition and education probably would benefit from vaccinations very little or not at all. Individuals with a tendency to allergic or auto-immune diseases are likely to be harmed by vaccinations.

Side effects of vaccination are usually allergic or auto-immune inflammatory reactions caused by the shift of the immune system’s reactivity from the Th1 side to the Th2 side. Modern medicine is just beginning to recognize this. 10

Modern medicine has not scientifically measured the risk/benefit ratio of any vaccine. 11 Research into the risks of vaccines is very inadequate, according to two comprehensive reports on vaccines by the U.S. Institute of Medicine in 1991 and 1994.

My preceding explanation of how vaccinations affect the immune system is true also in animals. Vaccinations cannot make animals healthier, but only good handling, environment and nutrition can make animals healthy and resistant to disease. Vaccinating pigs may prevent them from having illness from one particular strain of virus but will not improve their overall resistance to other illnesses nor even to other strains of the same virus.

It is important to remember that an infection with a particular virus or bacterium does not necessarily cause illness unless the resistance of the individual is low. In the case of Japanese Encephalitis Virus (JEV), most infections cause no symptoms and fewer than 0.1% of infected individuals develop severe encephalitis. 12 Individuals living in poor conditions, with poor hygiene, nutrition and education are at higher risk of serious illnesses from JEV or any other infection. In such individuals a vaccination would most likely be helpful.

Each individual should inform himself or herself: just how widespread is the disease outbreak? How many have become seriously ill or died? Does the outbreak affect all levels of society or mainly those in poor living conditions?

Very often the media exaggerate the extent of such outbreaks. Each individual should freely decide, based on knowledge and not on fear and hearsay, whether he or she or a child would benefit from a vaccination.


1 Parish, C.R. “The Relationship Between Humoral and Cell-Mediated Immunity.” Transplant. Rev. 13 (1972):3.

2 Ronne, T. “Measles Virus Infection without Rash in Childhood is Related to Disease in Adult Life.” The Lancet Ltd. (1985):1-5.

3 Odent, M.R., Culpin, E.E., Kimmel, T. “Pertussis Vaccination and Asthma: Is There a Link The Journal of the American Medical Association 272(1994):588.

4 Cookson, W.O.C.M., and Moffatt, M.F. “Asthma: An Epidemic in the Absence of Infection?” Science 275(1997):41-42.

5 Martinez, F.D. Role of viral infections in the inception of asthma and allergies during childhood: could they be protective? Thorax 1994;49: 1189-91.

6 Rook, G.A.W., Zumla, A. “Gulf War Syndrome: Is It Due to a Systemic Shift in Cytokine Balance Towards a Th2 Profile?” The Lancet 349 (1997): 1831-1833.

7 McKeown, T. The Modern Rise of Population. New York: Academic Press, 1976.

8 McKeown, T. The Role Of Medicine: Dream, Mirage, or Nemesis? New Jersey: Princeton University Press 1979.

9 Sagan, L.A. The Health of Nations. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1987.

10 Rook, G.A.W., Zumla, A. “Gulf War Syndrome: Is It Due to a Systemic Shift in Cytokine Balance Towards a Th2 Profile?” The Lancet 349 (1997): 1831-1833.

11 Robin, Eugene, M.D. “Some Hidden Dimensions of the Risk/Benefit Value of Vaccine” from the First International Public Conference on Vaccination. Alexandria, Virginia September 1997.

12 Solomon, T., Kneen, R., Dung, N.G., Khanh, V.C., Thuy, T.T.N., Ha, D.Q., Day, N.P.J., Nisalak, A., Vaughn, D.W., White, N.J. “Poliomyelitis-like illness due to Japanese encephalitis virus” Lancet 1998; 351: 1094-97

Vaccine Information Sheet (VIS)

Vaccine Information Sheet (VIS)

 Vaccine information sheets are produced by the CDC.  In the US, it is a federal law that the VIS sheet be signed prior to any vaccine administration. It became a requirement with the passing of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The VIS sheets purpose is to describe a brief overview of the vaccine, the benefits, and the risks.


  It is NOT an informed consent sheet. A parent signs the sheet simply as an acknowledgment that they were informed of the benefits and risks.


There is no Federal requirement for informed consent. VISs are written to fulfill the information requirements of the NCVIA. But because they cover both benefits and risks associated with vaccinations, they provide enough information that anyone reading them should be adequately informed. Some states have informed consent laws, covering either procedural requirements (e.g., whether consent may be oral or must be written) or substantive requirements (e.g., types of information required). Check your state medical consent law to determine if there are any specific informed consent requirements relating to immunization. VISs can be used for informed consent as long as they conform to the appropriate state laws. (bolding mine)


According to an AAP survey regarding consent and immunizations: (bolding mine)


  • The majority of pediatricians distribute written information on these vaccines the first time they are administered: 73.0% always distribute written information on the DTP vaccine; 63.8% always do so for MMR; 60.6% always do so for HIB; and 65.4% always do so for OPV.
  • The majority of pediatricians also document provision of information in the patient’s record the first time a vaccine is administered. for the DTP vaccine, 61.3% of pediatricians said they always document provision of benefit/risk information, 56% reported always documenting information on the MMR, 53.8% always do so for the HIB vaccine, and for the OPV, 59.1% always do so.
  • Two-thirds of the pediatricians reported they never record a parent’s specific verbal consent in the patient’s record the first time a vaccine is administered. For the DTP vaccine, 19.1% of the pediatricians said they always record parent’s specific verbal consent and 15.6% said they sometimes do so. For MMR, 17.1% said they always do and 13.3%, sometimes. For the HIB vaccine, 16.4% said they always record the parent’s verbal consent in the record and 13.8% said they sometimes do so; for OPV, 18.9% always and 13.0% sometimes do so.

One-half of the pediatricians always obtain the parent’s signature as evidence of consent the first time a DTP, MMR, or OPV vaccine is administered; 47.5% do so for the HIB vaccine. Most of the balance of pediatricians said they never do so (39.8% DTP, 43.0% MMR, 46.3% HIB, and 42.9% OPV).


Another AAP survey:

 Vaccine administration practices vary as a function of practice setting, practice area and region of the country. For example, pediatricians in group practices (45%) are less likely than pediatricians in hospital/clinic practices (59%) or solo practices (51%) to say they discuss vaccine risks/benefits with every dose of at least six of the seven vaccines (p<.01). Pediatricians practicing in rural areas and those in the Midwest and South are more likely to distribute VIS at every dose than are pediatricians practicing in other areas (70% rural vs. 55% inner city vs. 64% other urban vs. 59% suburban, p<.05) or regions of the country (72% Midwest vs. 68% South vs. 54% West vs. 49% Northeast, p<.001). practitioners in rural areas (65%) also are more likely to document provision of VIS with every dose of each vaccine than are practitioners in urban inner cities (43%), other urban areas (58%) or suburban areas (54%) (p<.01).


Doctors “firing’ Patients


Refuse to get your child a vaccine and get ‘fired’ by your Pediatrician. Who would of thunk?

 Refuse Vaccine, Get ‘Fired’ by Pediatrician?

 Well over a third of pediatricians — 39% — say they would “dismiss” families that refuse all vaccinations, a new study suggests. That’s surprising, says study leader Erin A. Flanagan-Klygis, MD, assistant professor of pediatrics at Chicago’s Rush Medical College.

But another finding surprises Flanagan-Klygis even more. More than one in four pediatricians — 28% — say they would fire families that agreed to some vaccinations but refused one or more other vaccinations.

This study is based on questionnaires filled out by 302 randomly selected members of the American Academy of Pediatrics who give recommended childhood vaccinations. Ref: October issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.


Dismissing the Family Who Refuses Vaccines

A Study of Pediatrician Attitudes

Results Fifty-four percent faced total vaccine refusal during a 12-month period. Pediatricians cited safety concerns as a top reason for parent refusal. Thirty-nine percent said they would dismiss a family for refusing all vaccinations. Twenty-eight percent said they would dismiss a family for refusing select vaccines. Pediatrician dismissers were not significantly different from nondismissers with respect to age, sex, and number of years in practice. Pediatrician dismissers were more likely than nondismissers to view traditional vaccines (diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and acellular pertussis; inactivated poliovirus; Haemophilus influenzae type b; measles, mumps, and rubella) as “extremely important,” but they were no more likely to view newer vaccines (7-valent pneumococcal conjugate, varicella-zoster virus, hepatitis B) as “extremely important.”

Conclusions Pediatricians commonly face vaccine refusal that they perceive to be due to parent safety concerns. In response, many pediatricians say they would discontinue care for families refusing some or all vaccines. This willingness to dismiss refusing families is inconsistent with an apparent ambivalence about newer, yet recommended, vaccines. The practice of family dismissal needs further study to examine its actual impact on vaccination rates, access to care, and doctor-patient relations.


Logically though, how can you as a parent or your child be ‘fired’?  They provide a service to YOU. You don’t work for THEM. Without YOU, who would THEY WORK FOR? Would you honestly want a physician that didn’t TRUST and RESPECT YOU to KNOW what is best for YOUR child?  Would you really want a physician that didn’t RESPECT your RIGHT to choose what you believe to be in the best interest of your child? Patients can fire their doctors. Doctors can only refuse to see you as a patient in the future. :)


 According to the American Medical Association, doctors have “an obligation to support continuity of care for their patients” and “should not neglect a patient.” But if a doctor must end the relationship, they have to provide enough notice so the patient can secure another health care provider.”

I’ve often found that doesn’t happen. Doctors simply tell patients to find a new doctor and in not so nice words. 

Take care when firing a patient

 A physician may legally and ethically decide not to continue treating a patient as long as the patient is not in need of immediate care and has been given a reasonable opportunity to find another doctor, which is consistent with the recommendations of the American Medical Association Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs.


According to the AAP:

Responding to Parental Refusals of Immunization of Children

Douglas S. Diekema, MD, MPH and the Committee on Bioethics

 The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly endorses universal immunization. However, for childhood immunization programs to be successful, parents must comply with immunization recommendations. The problem of parental refusal of immunization for children is an important one for pediatricians. The goal of this report is to assist pediatricians in understanding the reasons parents may have for refusing to immunize their children, review the limited circumstances under which parental refusals should be referred to child protective services agencies or public health authorities, and provide practical guidance to assist the pediatrician faced with a parent who is reluctant to allow immunization of his or her child.


So much for the Hippocratic Oath. Or respecting a parents RIGHTS under the LAW. Perhaps they have even forgotten that vaccines are not mandatory. They are only mandated for school or daycare attendance, without an exemption.


Parents often feel they have to explain their reason for not vaccinating. Why? If a physician’s belief  is to vaccinate everyone under the sun, nothing you say will make a difference to them. If not vaccinating is your choice, own it. If you do not vaccinate for religious reasons, simply state it. You owe no further explanation and it is against the law for a physician to question your faith or religious beliefs further. If it is against your philosophical beliefs, much like religion, simply state it, and no further discussion needed. You don’t question their religious beliefs, so nothing gives them the right to question or discriminate against yours.

Bullying? Yes, I’ve heard this one too. Remember, only you allow a physician to bully you. If a physician is unethical and unprofessional enough to start it, calmly leave without comment. A physician has no right to bully, yell, discriminate, name call, harass or threaten you, ever. We would call those descriptions ‘abuse’ and that is exactly what they are doing, and they are not above the law.


Finding the Right Physician

1. Make a list of physician’s names and get references from friends or families who have similar views as yours.

2.  Call and ask the receptionist if non-vaccinating/selective/delay patients are accepted before making the first appointment.  If you are comfortable with the answers to your questions, book an appointment.

3. Direct any further questions directly to the physician at the appointment.

National Vaccine Registry

National Vaccine Registry


Vaccines are now recorded and registered with your state’s vaccination registry.


According to the CDC:


Immunization Information Systems are confidential, population-based, computerized information systems that attempt to collect vaccination data about all children within a geographic area. IIS are an important tool to increase and sustain high vaccination coverage by consolidating vaccination records of children from multiple providers, generating reminder and recall vaccination notices for each child, and providing official vaccination forms and vaccination coverage assessments. One of the national health objectives for 2010 is to increase to 95% the proportion of children aged <6 years who participate in fully operational population-based IIS.


If you look further down the page you will find this statement:


State law requires that information in the IIS be kept confidential. Only you, your doctor, or healthcare workers who can assist you have access to the information. The information will not be shared with any other people or any other agency. If you are not interested in having your child in the IIS, all you would need to do is contact your state IIS and request to “opt-out” of the registry.


Healthcare workers would include Department of Health, CDC, and other government monitoring agencies. Is your child’s school a healthcare agency? Last I knew they were in the education field, yet they have access to it as well. Even the WIC program has linkages. See also: WIC Policy for Immunization Screening and Referral


Is this “opt-out” provision true? Not entirely. New York State no longer allows an ‘opt-out’ provision. That means, all children regardless of whether they are vaccinated or not, are in the system. If this vaccine registry was solely for its stated purpose above, why would nonvaccinated children need to be in it? They don’t need reminder notices or updated vaccination forms, etc.


Will children with medical or religious exemptions need to be included in NYSIIS?

  • These children will be entered in NYSIIS and their records noted with the appropriate exemption. NYSIIS is a valuable tool to identify and protect these children in the event of an outbreak of a vaccine preventable disease. (bolding mine)


Why not call it what it is: identify, track, control, and discriminate.

I have heard many stories over the last few years of parents who ‘opted out’ in other states, yet they have found their child in the vaccine registry. Wouldn’t that be a clear violation of the HIPPA law?  No, and here is why:


Shalala Will Decide Privacy Rights If Congress Does Not Meet Deadline

 HIPAA provided that, if Congress does not enact legislation to create standards to protect individually identifiable health information in medical records by August 21, 1999, then the Secretary of HHS is required to establish rules governing how much information the government and other third parties can get out of private medical records by February 21, 2000. Currently, there are four medical privacy bills in the House and Senate, including the Health Care Personal Information Nondisclosure Act of 1999 (S.578-Senators Jeffords/Dodd); the Medical Information Protection Act of 1999 (S.881-Senator Bob Bennett) and the Medical Information Privacy and Security Act (S.573/H.R. 1057-Leahy/Kennedy).

All of these medical “privacy” bills allow extensive exemptions for unrestricted access and use of personal medical information in an individual’s medical records by anyone who invokes a right to access and use this information in the name of the public health including government officials, researchers and law enforcement officers. Citizens can be enrolled without their informed consent as research subjects in medical experiments if researchers make the case that the study will contribute to the public health.

This means that, without the individual’s informed consent, researchers working with government, industry and private physicians will be allowed unrestricted access to personal medical records for the purpose of enrolling unsuspecting patients in medical research experiments. Scientific researchers of the future could experiment on citizens with new drugs and vaccines. The elderly will not know whether the nursing home doctor urging the use of a new antidepressant or the family pediatrician recommending to a mother that her infant get 15 vaccines in one day, is making that recommendation because it is in the best interest of the individual or because the doctor has enrolled his patients in a government-endorsed medical experiment.


 Often, when these parents have requested to opt-out, they have been given false information from the Department of Health or have had to jump through hoops to get their child’s name removed. I seriously question if their name is ever entirely removed.


 The AAP’s stance:

The American Academy of Pediatrics continues to support the development and implementation of immunization information systems, previously referred to as immunization registries, and other systems for the benefit of children, pediatricians, and their communities. Pediatricians and others must be aware of the value that immunization information systems have for society, the potential fiscal influences on their practice, the costs and benefits, and areas for future improvement.


Yes, the almighty dollar sign right in the first paragraph…cha-ching!


How did the National Vaccine registry come about? Who or where does it get its funding from?

 All Kids Count

 The All Kids Count II program, funded by The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) from 1998-2000, sought to make 16 immunization registry projects based in local, county, and state health departments fully operational by January 1, 2000. The program also sought to develop a long-term policy to ensure registries are implemented and sustained nationwide. The program built on progress made under All Kids Count Phase I, 1992-1997, an RWJF program to begin the development of registries.

The national program office was based at the Task Force for Child Survival and Development in Atlanta With guidance from the program’s National Advisory Committee, the national program office gave grants ranging from $300,000 to $700,000 to 16 projects.

RWJF’s Board of Trustees authorized up to $11.25 million for phase II beginning in 1997.


…In late 1997, public policy set the stage for All Kids Count projects and other state and community registries to take a giant step forward. President Bill Clinton issued a presidential directive to Secretary of Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala “to start working with states on an integrated immunization registry system … we have to do it and do it right.”


As a result, an Initiative on Immunization Registries was undertaken by the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC), with support from the National Vaccine Program Office (NVPO) and the National Immunization Program of the CDC.

At the same time, more communities and states were developing or implementing registries. In 1998, when All Kids Count II began:


All 50 states had begun developing immunization registries.

Some 18 states had a law or rule authorizing immunization registries.

Ten states and several cities had mandated private provider reporting of immunizations to registries.

In 2001, 25 states had a law or rule authorizing immunization registries, and several states planned to introduce legislation or rules authorizing registries.

 …Educational Effort
All Kids Count began an intensive effort with immunization partners, especially the National Immunization Program, American Academy of Pediatrics and Every Child by Two (a non-profit organization that raises awareness of the importance of getting children fully immunized by the time they are two years old) to inform policymakers about the benefits, costs, and savings of registries, and the need to find a sustained source of funding if the promise of registries were to be realized.

 …The education effort culminated in a legislative briefing held May 1, 2000, in Washington, D.C. Hosted by former First Lady Rosalynn Carter and Mrs. Betty Bumpers, co-founders of Every Child by Two, the briefing had bi-partisan sponsorship from members of the Senate and House. Leading health organizations, health care professional organizations, and education organizations co-sponsored the briefing.

Carter and Bumpers urged legislators to find the political will and financial backing for development of immunization registries.

 New Federal Attention and Funding

…The education effort paid off. At the July 2000 National Immunization Conference, Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala promised support through the Medicaid program.

In Fall 2000, Medicaid announced its commitment to fund development and implementation of immunization registries at an enhanced rate of up to 90 percent matching funds for registry costs associated with Medicaid-eligible children (approximately 26 percent of children under age 7).


In June 2000, the Institute of Medicine issued Calling the Shots: Immunization Finance Police and Practices, a report on the future of the nation’s immunization system. It noted that community immunization information systems are an important tool to help keep children from but that a commitment must be made to ensure their success.


The report, approved by NVAC in January 2001, recommended:

 Continued and increased support for registries through the federal immunization grant program.

Wide promotion of use of Medicaid funds for registries.

Seeking approval to use the CDC’s Vaccines for Children operational funds for registries.

Discussions with insurers/health plans urging them to provide support for registries.

Development of a five-year, $60-million a year grant program to support further development and initial operation of registries.


…As All Kids Count II closed in 2001, The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation funded All Kids Count for three years to develop a vision for information systems that will integrate data about multiple health services.


 Immunization Registry Strategic Plan 2002-2007

Medicare and Medicaid funding

Federal Direct Assistance Grant Funds

Research Grants

Autism, Vaccines and Human Nature

Autism, Vaccines and Human Nature  By Lisa Jo Rudy

For decades, the magical team of Penn and Teller have been traveling the world, making TV programs, and entertaining Vegas audiences with a show that specifically and effectively debunks the idea that “seeing is believing.” The Amazing Randi has offered $1000000 to anyone that can demonstrate paranormal abilities under laboratory conditions – a prize which is still outstanding.

Despite these high-profile efforts to convince the public that seeing is not believing, many, many people believe wholeheartedly in scientifically unproven phenomena ranging from UFO’s to ESP to communication with the dead. Many of those people will tell you flat out that scientific studies can’t possibly trump the fact that they experienced those phenomena themselves. Some will even say “seeing is believing,” and they will mean it.

Despite a basic understanding of probability, untold millions believe, wholeheartedly, that they will beat the odds in the lottery or at the casino. Millions are presented with convincing studies and public education campaigns that make it crystal clear that smoking, poor diets and lack of exercise lead to life-threatening illness – yet they believe that they will beat the odds.

Knowing all this, I can’t help but feel that doctors and researchers have a strenuous uphill battle on their hands as they strive to explain the science behind vaccines, and the math behind risk analysis.

I just received a book called Do Vaccines Cause That?! by Drs. Martin Myers and Diego Pineda. The purpose of the book, as I understand it, is to demystify vaccines – and thus to make it clear to parents that the risks inherent in avoiding vaccines are far, far greater than the risks inherent in having their children vaccinated. To make the book friendlier, the authors include cartoons – and the publisher created a fun, engaging cover and selected a relatively large font. This really does make the book easier to read, and friendlier to approach.

Flipping through the table of contents, I was impressed by the chapter titles. “Vaccine Side Effects and Risk Perception: What if My Child Is the One in a Million?” and “Cause or Coincidence: How Do I Tell Whether or Not a Vaccine Caused That?!” While the use of exclamation points and question marks may be a little overwhelming, the topics, I thought, were right on.

But when I actually read the chapters, I found that the book was going in a direction quite different from what I expected. The question “What if My Child Is the One in a Million” is unlikely to be resolved, for example, by the authors’ discussion of relative risk. Of course it’s true that we’re taking a greater risk by driving our child to the doctor for a vaccination than we are by allowing the doctor to inject our child. But if our knowledge of relative risk really influenced our behavior, casinos, cigarettes and Keno games would have long since perished from the Earth.

If we live in the world, we can’t avoid cars. We CAN avoid vaccines. So… the real question here is not “what’s riskier than vaccines?” but rather “is there any reliable way to know whether my child is likely to have an adverse reaction to vaccines, and if so – will you, my pediatrician, use that technique to ensure the safety of this shot?”

It’s one thing to involve your child in the daily risks of modern life. It’s another to knowingly and deliberately subject your child to a medical procedure that (at least according to some) could lead to serious consequences. I know, I know – risk analysis tells me there’s virtually nothing to worry about. But were I, today, faced with the question of vaccinations for a newborn infant, would I be comfortable in “just saying yes?” Being a human mother living in today’s world, I’m not sure the choice, even for me, would be simple.