An Interview With Research Immunologist Tetyana Obukhanych PhD, part 2

Part 2 of 3

Catherine J Frompovich

Dr. Obukhanych’s passion is educating herself and others about immunity. One of Tetyana’s ways of doing that is teaching small one-on-one-type classes in Menlo Park, California to help parents make their own informed vaccination decisions (http://naturalimmunity.blogspot.com). Her classes cover the ‘waterfront’ on vaccine issues and include: if, and when do, vaccines prevent and not prevent disease—something probably disputed by many; dangers in vaccines, especially the effects of aluminum, a neurotoxin and adjuvant in many vaccines that might be sensitizing children to be allergy-prone; the principles and the flaw of the vaccine design; the lack of scientific knowledge of natural immunity (a very important topic for this interviewer) along with nutritional factors that lower susceptibility to disease—just to mention a few.

Catherine’s comments are in italics.

Dr Obukhanych’s comments are in normal font.

I’ve promised to address vaccine injuries. Let’s do it now.

The potential of a vaccine injury is a legitimate concern that people have when faced with vaccination. Databases of vaccine adverse effects (such as VAERS in the U.S. and similar databases in other countries) are replete with reports of complications that come in close temporal proximity to vaccine administration. These adverse effects range from numerous but seemingly small effects, such as inflammation at the side of injection or fever, to more rare but also more adverse or irreversible conditions, such as allergic reactions or Guillain-Barré syndrome to mention a few, to perhaps even more rare fatal cases.

How do public health officials approach the concerns of citizens about vaccine safety in general? They point to scientific publications that claim to have found no statistical associations between a certain vaccine and a suspected injury, despite case reports that have initially instigated such studies.

A typical statistical study that aims to look for an association between a certain vaccine and a certain adverse effect might answer the following question: can we find the association by looking at a limited and randomly selected pool of people from the general population? The answer quite predictably comes out as: no statistically significant association has been found that way. However, this is the right answer to the wrong question.

The question that should be sought instead: is the association likely to be found in a group of people who are similar (genetically, nutritionally, metabolically, immunologically, etc.) to the person who had suffered from an adverse effect?

Such studies are very expensive to execute, they are unlikely to be funded by governments / funding sources with biased vaccination agendas, despite the fortunes accumulated by vaccine sales. Therefore, such studies are simply not being performed.

What are the consequences for society of relying on the wrong type of study when addressing vaccine safety concerns?

The consequences are that important moderators (i.e. predisposing factors) to vaccine injuries are not being uncovered in time, a vulnerable segment of the population continues to be unnecessarily injured by vaccines, while references to the “lack of evidence” studies are being misused to silence the dissenters.

Page 1 of 4 | Next page