The Appropriateness of Treatment

written summer 2009/2010.

Time has let another year slip away and the state of people's health: physically, mentally emotionally and financially is still questionable.

The financial security within the economy still rides the wave of uncertainty, as does the health of the planet which affects both the earth and the earthlings it houses.

The health of human beings once again appears to have been a 'major risk' with the much spoken about 'swine' flu or now a it is called H1N1 virus, and the most vulnerable are those under 24 yrs. (Scalera & Mossad, 2009)

If the young are so vulnerable then what are all these vaccines that the young from birth to teenager years ( and beyond is the plan now), doing to their immune system. One could tend to think that perhaps the immune system is not allowed to develop to it's own potential, so that the individual may resist a disease with its own immune response.

And now in the 21st century there is another vaccine that has 'magically' manifested to help combat this apparently dangerous disease. How long has this strand of virus existed?

In 1918 the H1N1 flu originated and killed millions of people . T the same time there was a vaccine given to the soldiers of which was ceased due to the illness soldiers experienced after the vaccination. This period of time was also vulnerable because of the war and its influence. The war had left medical and food supplies limited, therefore poor nutrition and medical supplies would have compounded the pandemic outbreak.

In this millennium, the H1N1 virus revisited in 2009 and by July 31st the number of deaths associated with the flu was 1154, note I said 'associated' not the cause (Petrosillo et al 2009). Once again the vaccine treatment approach attempted to cure the disease (Scalera& Mossad 2009).

Have we forgotten about the swine (H1N1) outbreak in 1976, when the vaccine for another H1N1 outbreak caused paralysis; Guillian Barr Syndrome, (GBS), in certain participants (Miller 2009). The incidence of paralysis occurred in one in 100k vaccinated. Therefore, the authorities knew that potentially 2,500 were going to have paralysis with the vaccine if the population of approximately 250 mill people all participated.. Do these figures warrant the risk?

What level of research has been done and over what time frame? The one or two grading in the Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) criteria has a limited time frame because of the limited amount of time each strand has existed. And although there are randomised control tests been done, further questions are raised: has there been and double blind randomised tests( level 2 EBM) or better still meta-analysis research (level 1 EBM) on that or any other vaccine?

The Health Department of Australia recently ( at time of this original publish) issued the vaccine for H1N1 at one per population and the priority 'targets' to be administered first included; the respiratory impaired, elderly and pregnant women.

When critiquing the accessible research, my first question to any f you daring to read my work ( and thank you for doing so ) is just how much testing has been performed on this or any vaccine to even consider administering to the unborn, undeveloped child. After all, is there any tests that have studied the years and decades of that child that participated in any vaccine. It is now as if this vaccine has been around for centuries or longer, unlike a lot of the so called 'unscientific' traditionally used herbs used for children's diseases. Although herbs are not classed as scientifically researched by many, certain members of the medical profession including Dr Kerryn Phelps, a past AMA president agreed that herbs have an acceptable level of safety when used appropriately (60 minutes 2006 cited in Verma 2006:12). However, this H1N1 as well as many other vaccines have been around for only decades at the most and the safety of their use is still being questioned today.

It is interesting to note here that four conditions that occur predominantly in children, of which Dr Brock describes as the "The 4 ' A' disorders", have increased by the following % over the last few decades ( by 2009 with original published work): asthma 300 %, autism 1500%, ADHD 500% and allergies 700 % (Brock 2007:6).. In fact another report by Mariea and Carlo (2007) reported autism to have increased by 60 fold over the last decades with the greatest incline being in the last decade (1997 - 2007). In addition, these reports have associated heavy metals including mercury contained in certain vaccines as known toxins to the immune system, as well as having a contributing neurotoxic affect ( Mariea & Carlo 2007:3).

I have researched PubMed database which is one of the leading medical research sites with over 15 million citations ( 20 mill by 2017), on any health issues for clinical trials on H1N1 research. What I found was that Inluenza A, of which H1N1 is a subtype, actuallu has many different subtypes strains that have originated from; pigs, birds, horses, humans. In addition, what was found is that H1N1 human trand is one of the few (H2, H3 also) that have been known to cause pandemics (Capua et al 2009:1). Understanding the necessity of this health/disease issue, there are questions that still arise when discussing vaccinations.

How is it that vaccinations for say flu,or children's concerns, get approved so quickly with little or no grade 1 EBM research, when vaccines or medications that also have a 'positive' affect on the community, such as PLX 4203 for Melanomas still take years before the general public can access its productivity ( 60 minutes, Australia: Nov 2009?)? Yes safety is an important issue to address, however how safe or accurate is the information being told to the public?

In a Melbourne paper, Miller (2009) reported a myth buster to reassure the people the safety of the swine flu vaccine. In the answer to safety for pregnant women it was suggested that the swine flu was incredibly dangerous to this group and therefore on this evidence the pregnant women should be vaccinated.

Excuse me... how is it that because one disease is dangerous the exclusive chioce of prevention being directed is automatically safe. That's not science.. Is this principle to be applied to road toll assessment when research has shown tha driving a car between 18 - 25 has the highest risk of accidents? Does this mean that the previously mentioned age group should NOT drive? I am not sure this age group would favour this suggestion, nor should pregnant women be guinea pigs to a suggestion based on an opinion rather than scientific evaluation.. Yes there are research papers on pregnant women and the H1N1 vaccine, however how long should the test for the unborn warrant it to be safe?

Perhaps if there was more awareness towards health during pregnancy , then diseases would be less likely to affect them. how about education programs with a non biased focus towards creating a better health system, eg. 'Lifestyle prevention' specifically directed to pregnant women. This would include suggestions like; limit coffee or avoid , avoid smoking, alcohol consumption, stimulants that affect sleep and burden the adrenals, liver, heart etc. Overall focus on the healthy mum and bub scenario.

In July 2009 it was reported that the first trials commissioned by the Australian Federal Government (AFG), would take about 7 months for flu vaccines to be available for general distribution. To add fuel to the burning desire of passion for appropriate evaluation, the AFG had already ordered 21 million dosages before the trials had been completed on the vaccine.

If you still choose to be vaccinated then know that the nasal mist spray and the single vial dose of vaccine DO NOT contain mercury, however the multi via applications do. Therefore you may avoid the dangerous thimercol and its effects (WEBMD 2009).

A further example for addressing the ramification of disease via vaccinations, rather than educating the potential predisposing factors can be observed in the vaccination program for cervical cancer.

The possible etiological factor for cervical carcinoma includes; the human papilloma virus and perhaps the herpes simplex II ( Bierman et al 2003:456; Wong 2009). An important reason to establish a healthy immune system that will address these dormant virus if present in your physiology.

Research has also shown that the education about the vaccine was a contributing factor to the outcome of participants ( Wong & Sam 2009). Screening for cervical cancer is the best way to detct the disease before its a problem. Therefore rather than focus on vaccine education, perhaps lifestyle education directed to young women and men about the risk associated with many sexual partners may be more beneficial, possibly lowering genital warts which is a known possible cause ( Wong & Sam 2009; Brinkman et al 2005). In addition regular PAP smear examinations all of which could help to prevent Cervical cancer. Through providing lifestyle preventative measures for preventing sexual diseases, there is the possibility of educations to prevent unwanted pregnancies as well.

The above suggestions will take away the focus of vaccine reliance and redirect the responsibility back to the individual care. Although certain companies may not appreciate this focus, however perhaps these companies could re-focus their attention education, just a thought :)

Whether it is H1N1 or cervical or any other vaccine that is associated with the prevention of a disease, remember that the introduction of any substance via the blood stream as in an injection will by pass some of the protective measures in the GUT. AsK yourself have I sought any areas to find out if there is a better choice. Know your stated of health, be conscious and Be Aware TM

YOU already have an immune system why not build it up with a healthy body/mind/emotional focus, through health food, water, exercise, relaxation, rest, air and living. If these are not available then it is up to YOU to seek them. The question to ask yourself is which one is appropriated for your lifestyle.

namaste and love always Annmaree

References

ABC news wed 22 2009, 'Swine flu vaccine trials underway.' ABC news, retrieved 19 Nov 2009 from Google database.

Beirman, R. 2003. Handbook for Clinical Diagnosis. R.Beirman et al. IBSN. 1-86408-805-2.

Bock K.A. 2007, Healing the New Childhood Epidemics: Autism, ADHD, Asthma & Allergies.' Journal of Australian Integrative Medicine Association, vol 1, no. 3, pp 6-7.

Brinkman, J.A. Caffrey, A.S. Muderspach, L. I, Roman, L.D. & Kast, W.M. 2005, ' The impact of antiHPV vaccination on cervical cancer incidence and HPV induced cervical lesions: consequences for clinical management.' European Gynaecological Oncology, vol 26, no. 2, pp. 126-142. Abstract retrieved 27 Nov 2009 from PubMed database.

Capus, I. Kapjaste- Rudnitski, A, Bertoli, E. & Vicenzi, E. 2009, Pandemic Vaccine Preparations - Have we left something Behind,' PLoS Pathology, vol. 5, no. 6. e 1000482. Retrieved 27 Nov. 2009 from PubMed database.

Mariea,T. J & CarloG. L. 2007, 'Wireless Radiation in the Etiology an Treatment of Austism; Clinical Observations and Mechanisms', Journal of The Australiasian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine, vol. 26, no. 2, pp.3-7.

Miller, N. 2009, ' Swine flu vaccine myths 'busted' by experts,' theage.com.au Retrieved 19 Nov. 2009 from Google database.

Petrsillo, N. DiBella, S.Drapea, C. M. & Grilli, E. 2009, 'The novel influenza A (H1N1) virus pandemic', Annual Thorac. Medicine, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 163- 167. Abstract retrieved 25 Nov. 2009 from PubMed database.

Scalera, N.M & Mossad, S.B. 2009, 'The first pandemic of 21 century: a review of the 2009 pandemic variant influenza (H1NI) virus', Postgraduate Medicine, vol.121, no. 5, pp. 43-47.. Abstract retrieved 25 Nov. 2009 from PubMed database.

Verma, A. 2006,' The relevance of Integrative Medicine', Journal of Australian Integrative Medicine Association, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 12-13.

Web MD, 2009, 'Is the H1N1 swine flu vaccine safe?' Web MD Physician Directory. Retrieved 19 Nov, 2009 from Google database.

Wong, L.P., Sam, I. C. 2009, 'Ethically diverse female university students' knowledge and attitudes towards human papilomavirus (HPV), HPV vaccination and cervical cancer', European Journal of Obstetrician and Gynaecological Reproductive Biology, Epub. Abstract retrieved 20 Nov, 2009 from PubMed database.