AskDrSears - The Vaccine Book: November 2007

Alternative Vaccine Schedule vs. Regular Vaccine Schedule: How do I switch?

Thursday, November 29, 2007

How do I switch to the Alternative Vaccine Schedule if I’ve already started my baby on the regular vaccine schedule?

All of you have expressed so much interest in switching to the alternative vaccine schedule, but you aren’t quite sure how to do it since you’ve started getting some shots already. I suppose I should have foreseen this situation when I wrote the book.

The most common situation I hear about is a parent who has already given their baby the 2 and/or 4 month shots, and now wants to switch to an alternative schedule. Here’s how to do that. Make a copy of my alternative schedule and cross off everything that your baby has already had, no matter when it is due on my schedule. Then at your baby’s next checkup continue with whatever is due according to my schedule. This most likely will be DTaP and Rota, then Pc and HIB a month later.

What about the shots that your baby already had at 2 and/or 4 months that are NOT on my schedule until later during infancy or childhood? The two shots this mainly applies to are Hep B and polio. If your baby already had polio at 2 and 4 months, you would not get any more until 2 years. If your baby only had one polio shot, you’d pick up the next one at 12 months.

As for Hep B, you will notice I don’t usually give this until age 2 or 3 years. If your baby has already had 2, then you would just wait to get the third between age 3 and 4. If your baby has only had 1 Hep B, get the second at 2 ½ and the third at 3 years.

Here are a few other things to know. It’s fine to switch brands of vaccines anytime you want. You can also switch from any combination vaccine to using individual ones. The hard part will be convincing your doctor to order a different brand just for you. If you have a few other friends with similar age kids going to the same doctor, that might make it easier if you all gang up on your doctor together. (Kidding, of course). Alternatively, the doctor can give you a prescription for a single dose through a pharmacy. Hopefully as more patients make these requests doctors will become more compliant.

Second, don’t worry if you mess up the actual spacing of each series of shots. The spacing is flexible. For example, even though the first three DTaP shots are supposed to be 2 months apart each, don’t worry if this gets spaced out further. And if you get only one or two polios or Hep Bs early on, but then delay the rest for some years, you don’t have to start the whole series over. You just pick up where you left off.

Third, if you are starting the schedule late, such as at 4 or 6 months, don’t hurry to catch up. Just start the schedule as if your baby was 2 months old, and you’ll go through the whole thing but always be 2 to 4 months behind.

Here’s an example of someone who already had the 2 and 4 month shots but who now wants to switch. At six months you would just get DTaP and Rota, then at 7 months HIB and Pc. By nine months, you would skip polio because you’ve already gotten it at 2 and 4 months. You may get the flu shot though. At 12 months get mumps, but NOT polio again since you already got the 2nd dose at 4 months. At 15 months it’s Pc and HIB, and at 18 months it’s DTaP and Chickenpox. You continue on from there according to the schedule.

I hope this makes sense. Your doctor will be able to help you figure out the details.

Labels: Alternative Vaccine Schedule

Dr. Bob Sears Featured in the NY Times

Friday, November 16, 2007

Dr. Bob Sears Featured in the NY Times Review of a New CDC Study Demonstrating the Effectiveness of Vaccines Over the Twentieth Century

A CDC study published today, Nov 14, 2007, in the Journal of the American Medical Association discussed how vaccines are responsible for a 90% drop in fatalities from some diseases and a 100% elimination of fatalities from other diseases. The same also applies to the actual number of cases of the diseases as well.

Now, I know what you’re thinking if you are part of the anti-vaccine crowd – this study is just more propaganda launched by the CDC to quell the opposition. Pretty much every anti-vaccine book or website I’ve read discusses how diseases were already declining before its vaccine was ever introduced. They say that measles was already on the way out, and we didn’t need the vaccine. Polio was on the decline and would have gone away without the vaccine. And the list goes on. They even show statistical flow charts of the disease trends to back up their point.

As you know, I’m typically quite sensitive and sympathetic toward the worries and issues that parents have about vaccines. And in The Vaccine Book I’ve tried to help parents get better informed about these issues so they can understand how to more safely vaccinate their children. But I must say, when it comes to the question of whether or not vaccines work and have eliminated or decreased disease, it’s pretty clear to me that the CDC and the American Medical Association have it right.

Now I don’t just say this because I believe the medical establishment. I’ve looked at all the data myself. I’ve reviewed disease statistics and trends over the twentieth century, seen when each vaccine was introduced, and to me it’s obvious that as soon a vaccine began, the disease sharply declined and in same cases eventually disappeared.

Cases in point:

Pertussis – this vaccine was introduced in the 1940s, and there was an immediate decrease in the disease.

Polio – this vaccine was introduced in the 1950s with an immediate impact, and eventual eradication of the disease from the entire western hemisphere.

Measles and Rubella – these two diseases decreased significantly with the vaccine and are now extremely rare.

HIB meningitis – this severe disease used to kill babies left and right, but as soon as the vaccine began in the 1980s there was a sharp decline and it is now almost unheard of.

Chickenpox – this shot became universally used in the 1990s, and we’ve seen a dramatic decline ever since.

With this clear association between disease trends and vaccines, why are vaccine opponents still skeptical of the vaccines’ effectiveness? Why do they claim the diseases would probably just have gone away anyway, or at least decreased dramatically? It’s because some of the above diseases were beginning to decline before the shot was started, due to improved sanitary conditions and better healthcare. But I don’t believe the diseases would have gone away completely (like polio and smallpox) without the vaccines. And we wouldn’t have seen the diseases decrease to the point they are today.

Take chickenpox, for example. This disease has been around for centuries, and everyone used to get it. If sanitation and quality healthcare were going to help decrease chickenpox, we should have seen a decline by the 1970s or 80s. But we didn’t, until we began using the shot in the mid 1990s. And the same can be said of HIB. In fact, MOST vaccine-preventable diseases aren’t even related to poor sanitation, poor living conditions, or healthcare access. Virtually all these diseases occur equally among the rich and the poor, the clean and the dirty, those who have good access to healthcare and those that don’t.

Another factor to consider is that many vaccine-preventable diseases aren’t actually treatable. These include measles, mumps, rubella, polio, rotavirus, hepatitis A, and human papillomavirus. Some diseases can improve with treatment, but sometimes don’t respond well to current treatment options, including chickenpox, pertussis, tetanus, hepatitis B, and the flu. Therefore, the quality of healthcare doesn’t have a significant effect on preventing fatalities in many of these diseases. Victims can still die even with the best care in the world. The best way to prevent the deaths is to prevent the diseases from occurring in the first place.

So, in my opinion, vaccines have played a tremendous role in eliminating or limiting the diseases in our country. I also know there is much more than just this one issue that goes into deciding whether or not to vaccinate, and how to vaccinate in the safest manner possible. There is so much that parents need to know and think about. I encourage all parents to become informed and educated as they begin their baby’s vaccinations.

Click here to view the New York Times Article

Labels: Vaccine News

Do Vaccine Brands Matter? How to make sure your baby is getting the brands with the lowest chemical contents

Friday, November 9, 2007

Most doctors don’t think much about what brand of a particular vaccine to use in their office. And up until now, parents never gave it a second thought either. But thanks to The Vaccine Book, parents and doctors are now becoming aware that not all vaccines are created equal.

Now some vaccines only have one manufacturer, so doctors don’t even have a choice on what brand to use. These include pneumococcal vaccine, MMR, Chickenpox, polio, HPV (another brand is on its way), Rotavirus (another brand is coming), and meningococcal vaccine.

But the other 5 vaccines have more than one maker, and parents and doctors should take the time to look at the various ingredients to determine which one may be the safest to use. The Hepatitis A and B vaccines are fairly similar when you compare the two makers. But the DTaP, HIB, and Flu vaccines have some striking differences:

DTaP – one brand has a high aluminum content and uses cow serum in manufacturing. Another brand uses the lowest amount of aluminum, but has a trace of mercury and also uses cow serum. A third brand has a moderate amount of aluminum, but does not use cow serum and has a lower amount of pertussis germ components than the others (it is thought that the pertussis germ components are responsible for many of the side effects). So which one should you use? Logic would dictate that either the one with the lowest aluminum, or the one with moderate aluminum but less pertussis and no cow serum would be the two best choices.
HIB – one brand uses aluminum and the other brand doesn’t. As you have read in The Vaccine Book, it is prudent to give infants the lowest amount of aluminum possible. Doctors should consider this as they choose what brand to order for their office.
Flu – all flu shots are made in a similar manner, except for the use of mercury. Some flu brands still contain a full dose of mercury. Some filter out the mercury, leaving only a tiny trace amount in the injection. Only one brand makes a completely mercury-free flu shot in single-dose small vials. BUT that same brand also makes a flu shot in a large 10-dose vial with the full dose of mercury. Logic would dictate that doctors would make sure they are providing mercury-free flu shot to infants, children, and pregnant women. If this is unavailable, then a brand with only a tiny trace of mercury is a good second choice.
Large combination vaccines – there are two new vaccine formulations that just came on the market. These combine 3 vaccines all into 1 injection. While this may sound like a good thing, one of the brands has a fairly large dose of aluminum. I prefer to stay clear of the large combination vaccines.

You have noticed that I didn’t actually tell you which brands are the best choice for each of these three. I’m going to make you do you homework – this information is clearly spelled out in The Vaccine Book.

What can parents do if their doctor doesn’t offer a particular brand that you want to give your baby? Make an appointment with your doctor and explain to him or her the reasons you want a particular brand. Hopefully over the next several months more doctors will become award of this issue and provide parents with appropriate vaccine brand choices.

Labels: Vaccines and their diseases