The parental decision to vaccinate has been a heated debate for years. It seems there are always new pros and cons being put on the table for discussion.
Whatever your stance may be on childhood immunizations, the sacred parental role of choosing what you think is best for your child is a right that should be honored by the medical community.
Our children’s safety is of the utmost concern, and with poorly tested immunization protocols trying to be put into common practice, it seems trying times may lie ahead.
The left-wing agenda aims to have all children vaccinated, regardless of the parents’ position on the matter, or long-term testing for child safety.
As research for immunizations explodes, many newly vaccinated diseases and delivery methods are being implemented.
United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund(UNICEF) reported:
“Since the year 2000, the global vaccine market has almost tripled – reaching over US$ 17 billion in global revenue by mid-2008, and making the vaccine industry one of the fastest growing sectors of industry.”
Global initiatives for childhood immunizations and physician incentives have given vaccination research endless funds.
This surplus of revenue has giventhe David H. Koch Institute at MITroom for radical ingenuity to develop a new delivery method of vaccinating babies that could have dire ramifications.
WIVB News 4reported:
“A discovery at MIT could change the way childhood vaccines are given.
Engineers have come up with a way to deliver multiple doses of a drug long after the initial injection.
The new micro-particles resemble tiny coffee cups sealed with a lid.
They’re programmed to release a vaccine at specific times.”
The goal of this research has future implications, but presently researchers say they aim to provide all the vaccines a baby would need in the first two years of life in just one injection.
According to vaccine.org, that would currently be about 32 vaccinations and boosters in one injection; made to release at various designated times.
This number would likely increase greatly if all the vaccinations were available in a single injection.
UNICEF reported:
“Over the past decade, immunization programmes have added new and underused vaccines to the original six – diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, measles, polio, and tuberculosis – given to young children. They include vaccines against hepatitis B, Haemophilus in uenzae type b (Hib) disease, mumps, pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, rubella, and – in countries where needed – yellow fever and Japanese encephalitis.”
MIT News reported on the materials used to make the receptacles for the vaccine:
“The particles are made of a biocompatible, FDA-approved polymer that can be designed to degrade at specific times, spilling out the contents of the “cup.””
The polymer encasing is made using a 3D fabrication method. This is like a 3D printer that makes the “cups” and “ lids” according to the specifications programmed.
The polymer material that would be injected into the child would be a PLGA, or poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid). This is used for its ability to break down in the body and not harm tissue.
You would commonly see this material in implants, sutures, and prosthetic devices – items that are generally designed not to breakdown or disintegrate in the human body.
Although it is FDA approved and commonly used, one could develop health complications because it is a foreign substance being put into the body.
This is called the foreign body reaction. It is shown responding to PLGA in a study by the National Institute of Healthtitled, “Microspheres Size Influences The Foreign Body Reaction.”
Professor Rober Langer, a chemical engineer working on the vaccine delivery method, stated:
“We can create a library of tiny, encased vaccine particles, each programmed to release at a precise, predictable time.”
In “Factors Affecting the Clearance and Biodistribution of Polymeric Nanoparticles” by Frank Alexis, Eric Pridgen, and Omid C. Farokhzad, published in Molecular Pharmaceutics,research showed that using these polymer particles cannot be timed as precisely as Langer claimed:
“factors which can influence nanoparticle blood residence time and organ specific accumulation…have been shown to substantially affect the biodistribution and blood circulation half-life of circulating nanoparticles by reducing the level of nonspecific uptake, delaying opsonization, and increasing the extent of tissue specific accumulation.”
There are many variables to consider on the casing alone; and this is not even considering the unpredictability of a child’s body temperature, metabolism, and immunity.
MIT News reported:
“One challenge to developing long-term vaccines based on such particles, the researchers say, is making sure that the encapsulated drug or vaccine remains stable at body temperature for a long period before being released.”
As all mothers know, a child’s temperature does not remain stable. Children are not strangers with the occasional “bug”, or even the week-long flu.
Even if the vaccine was able to reach a point in research development where it remained stable at a level body temperature, the flux caused by childhood illnesses could cause the vaccine to be released prematurely.
The potential damage caused to the child could be catastrophic if two years’ worth of vaccines and boosters challenged a child’s immature immunity simultaneously.
The result would be unprecedented and should remain that way.
The history of vaccination has been riddled with many mortalities, many of which have been hidden or downplayed.
National Vaccine Information Center reported:
“From the first human vaccines developed two centuries ago, smallpox and rabies vaccines, death has always been a complication of vaccination.In 1933, the whole cell pertussis vaccine’s ability to kill without warning was first reported in the medical literature when two infants died within minutes of a pertussis shot.In 1946, American doctors detailed the sudden deaths of twins within 24 hours of their second diphtheria-pertussis shot.In 1986, the U.S. Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and has awarded over $2 billion dollars in compensation for deaths and injuries caused by vaccines.”
The mentioned vaccines weren’t dozens given at once. It could be a dangerous venture for our children if the proposed research were used.
There is inadequate testing to propose immunizations by the polymer casing, delayed release delivery method.
There are influential organizations, like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that has funded the MIT research, that wish to push immunization advances into the field quickly.
Their reasoning seems valiant, with the vaccination of children dying from disease in developing countries, but the unknown risks may cause more harm than good.
As for application in the U.S., this method limits parental choice on the vaccinations they wish to have administered to their child.
Parental liberties are being compromised daily by the pressures of those with influential funds and voice.
Scientific research is remarkable, but as with all things should be tempered by practicality and reason. Just because we have the ability to do something, doesn’t mean we should.
Please let us know in the comments section what you think about the MIT research and its application to the public.