A groundbreaking study published in 2013 in the journal Vaccine titled, "Comparison of virus shedding after lived attenuated and ​pentavalent reassortant rotavirus vaccine," referenced the fact that rotavirus vaccines contain live viruses capable of causing infection, shedding and even transmission to non-vaccinated subjects:

"In fact, transmission of these two rotavirus vaccines or vaccine-reassortment strains to unvaccinated contacts has been detected [9 - 13][1], even in the absence of symptoms."

One of the five studies referenced in the passage above confirming that the vaccinated can infect the non-vaccinated, "Sibling transmission of vaccine-derived rotavirus (RotaTeq) associated with rotavirus gastroenteritis," published in 2009, is the first report in the literature to identify the transmission of rotavirus vaccine-derived virus to unvaccinated contacts resulting in symptomatic rotavirus gastroenteritis requiring emergency medical attention:

"We document here the occurrence of vaccine-derived rotavirus (RotaTeq [Merck and Co, Whitehouse Station, NJ]) transmission from a vaccinated infant to an older, unvaccinated sibling, resulting in symptomatic rotavirus gastroenteritis that required emergency department care."

The study also indicated that two of the 5-strains of rotavirus within the Rotateq reassorted to produce a more harmful virus either within the vaccinated infant or within the subsequently infected unvaccinated sibling:

"Results of our investigation suggest that reassortment between vaccine component strains of genotypes P7[5]G1 and P1A[8]G6 occurred during replication either in the vaccinated infant or in the older sibling, raising the possibility that this reassortment may have increased the virulence of the vaccine-derived virus."

This phenomenon of Rotateq vaccine strain ​reassortment and subsequent gastoenteritis infection in vaccine recipients was also observed in a 2012 study in 61 infants.[2] Additionally, A Nicaraguan study published in 2012 found "the widespread use of the RotaTeq vaccine has led to the introduction of vaccine genes into circulating human RVs.," revealing that the widespread introduction of the vaccine strain has altered the genetic makeup of wild-type rotavirus that now infects exposed populations.[3]

It has been estimated that between 80-100% of infants shed rotavirus at some point during 25-28 days after vaccination.[4] [5] This reveals that the vaccinated, contrary to widespread assumptions about the the risks represented by the non-vaccinated, pose a clear risk of infecting the non-vaccinated, and may be producing the ideal virological conditions for the recombination of diverse rotavirus strains into vaccine-resistant 'super viruses.'

Another case study, reported on in the National Vaccine Information Center's document on vaccine viral shedding:

"In 2010, a case report was published in Pediatrics describing a 30-month old healthy boy who had never received rotavirus vaccine and was infected with vaccine strain rotavirus. 237 He ended up in the emergency room with severe gastroenteritis 10 days after his healthy two-month old brother was given a dose of Merck's RotaTeq vaccine. A stool sample was taken in the emergency room and came back positive for RotaTeq vaccine derived strains after RT-PCR testing."

The authors of the case report noted that "transmission of RotaTeq strains to unvaccinated contacts was not evaluated in the pivotal [pre-licensure] clinical trials." They added that both RotaTeq and Rotarix [GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals] vaccines have "the potential for vaccine-virus transmission to contacts."

The Rotateq vaccine: Tip of the festering iceberg

The Rotateq rotavirus vaccine was co-created by Dr. Paul Offit, widely recognized as the vaccine industry's leading promoter and apologist. He is the co-patent holder of one of two live rotavirus vaccines the FDA has approved, and which the CDC recommends should be administered to infants in 3 doses at ages 2 months, 4 months, and 6 months.

Historically incapable of self-recusal, despite his glaring conflicts of interest, Offit regularly positions himself as an expert on vaccines, even though he personally gains from presenting his product (and the CDC's vaccine schedule as a whole) as safe and effective. Case in point, in one notorious interview in Parenting magazine he claimed a child can receive 10,000 vaccines simultaneously without harm (corrected from 100,000 which he suggested in a previous interview).

An article published in Age of Autism summarized Offit's dubious history:

• Paul Offit, vaccine patent holder for Rotavirus for Merck, was appointed to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, God knows why
• He voted to add the Rotavirus vaccine to the schedule (it wasn't Merck's, because his vaccine wasn't ready for market yet)
• That Rotavirus vaccine damaged a bunch of kids and was pulled from the market, but Offit abstained from recommending its removal
• A couple years later, rotavirus got added back to the schedule, with Offit's vaccine leading the way
• Offit made tens of millions of dollars from the sale of the Rotavirus patent he held to Merck.

The rotavirus vaccine was dirty from the start

The first rotavirus vaccine - Rotashield - comprised of four reassorted rhesus-human rotaviruses was approved in 1999, only to be withdrawn from the market by the FDA nine months later when it was found to increase the risk for a deadly form of bowel obstruction known as intussusception in a small subset of highly vulnerable children.[6]

Offit's Rotateq, which consists of 5 reassorted human-bovine retroviruses (yes, that means GMO), was believed to be a safer alternative when it was approved by the FDA in 2006, but newly published research reveals his vaccine suffers from the same exact deadly problems.

Published this month in Vaccine and titled, "Intussusception risk after RotaTeq vaccination: Evaluation from worldwide spontaneous reporting data using a self-controlled case series approach", the study evaluated worldwide reports to the manufacturer of Rotateq up to May 2014, adjusting for the phenomenon of under-reporting. The study found that the relative risk of intussception associated with the administration of Rotateq vaccine increases "3-7 days following vaccination, mainly after the first dose and marginally after the second and third doses." The increase in relative risk reached 3.45 fold in the period 3-to-7 days after the first dose, relative to the 15-30-day period control period.

Another study linking Rotateq to intussusception was published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine finding approximately 1.5 (95% CI, 0.2 to 3.2) excess cases of intussusception per 100,000 recipients of the first dose.[7]

Live vaccines: A Pandora's box of adventitious viruses

Death or debilitation by bowel obstruction rapidly following Rotateq vaccination is an acute adverse effect that is unlikely to be overlooked or ignored. This is why the Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS): a passive, vaccine post-marketing surveillance system, has found it to be a significant side effect. VAERS, however, is believed to capture as little as less than 1% of the actual damage being done by vaccines, indicating that the extent of harm of the Rotateq is several orders of magnitude than presently indicated by this report.

Exposure to Rotateq therefore suffers - like many live vaccines - from a darker side, as far as adverse effects go, which may take months, years, or decades to manifest as part of the multifactorial smog cloud of modern day toxicities and exposures that eventually make their way into the bottleneck of a classical diagnosis.

Rotateq, for instance, has been identified to be contaminated with a number of adventitious viruses; that is to say, viruses that contaminated the live cells and/or biological components involved in the original vaccine manufacturing process. These surreptitious agents, unknown to the manufacturers and regulatory agencies that approved them, infected the vaccines the children given them. These viruses include:

• Porcine Circovirus 1 (PCV-1): In 2010 the FDA suspended the Rotarix vaccine due to the discovery that it was contaminated with PCV-1 virus, a pig virus, the implications of which as far as human exposure are still unknown. Considered less a risk than PCV-2, known to cause a debilitating wasting disease in piglets, the FDA determined, after review, that PCV-1 does not represent a risk to the millions of children exposed to it.
• Porcine Circovirus 2 (PCV-2): A 2014 study conducted by CDC researchers and published in Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutcs titled, "Detection of PCV-2 DNA in stool samples from infants vaccinated with RotaTeq®," found for the first time that PCV-2 is shed in the stool of those vaccinated with Rotateq. They found "A total of 235 (28.5%) samples from 59 vaccine recipients were positive for PCV-2 DNA by one or more assays used in this study." Additionally, "Twenty-two of the 102 vaccine recipients (21.6%) shed RotaTeq® vaccine strain and 10 of these vaccinees (9.8%) were shedding both PCV DNA and rotavirus vaccine RNA." In pigs, PCV-2 has been linked to serious health problems including, "PCV2-associated pneumonia, PCV2-associated enteritis, PCV2-associated reproductive failure, and Porcine Dermatitis and Nephropathy Syndrome (PDNS)." [source]. In 2010, The FDA ruled, against the precautionary principle, that neither "PCV1 or PCV2 are known to infect or cause illness in humans, however PCV2 may cause illness in pigs."
• Baboon endogenous strain 7 retrovirus DNA: a 2014 study published in Advances in Virology titled, "Screening of Viral Pathogens from Pediatric Ileal Tissue Samples after Vaccination," found evidence of contamination with a baboon retrovirus.
• Class D Simian Retovirus: a 2010 study published in Journal of Virology revealed that the Rotateq vaccine contains simian retrovirus DNA (with a 96% match of certainty), which Judy Mikovits, PhD, confirms may contribute to adverse health effects, regardless of whether it is a self-replicating virus or not.

Because live vaccines are manufactured through co-culturing cells and biological fluids from various different species, there is plenty of opportunity for viruses to adapt to, and recombine to produce infectious agents capable of far greater virulence. Rotateq is just one of many vaccines in the CDC's immunization schedule that contain live viruses capable of infecting those given it, including retroviruses, which have been called a modern-day Plague owing to the fact that they are capable of infecting the host as non-HIV acquire immunodeficiency viruses. For more information read Dr. Judy Mikovits and Kent Heckenlively's new book Plague or listen to my interview of Dr. Mikovits on Fearless Parent Radio.

Clearly, given the evidence revealing the potential unintended, adverse effects of the Rotateq vaccine, especially the potential for it to infect those exposed to it with adventitious viruses, the implementation of the precautionary principle requires the immediate suspension of its use until proper toxicological reevaluations can be made. Anyone who questions the safety of the present CDC immunization schedule should be able to point to the Rotateq as a perfect example of why the schedule is not at all evidence based but rather founded in a mythological belief in the safety and effectiveness of products that have never been proven sound.

References

[1] [9] Phua KB, Quak SH, Lee BW, Emmanuel SC, Goh P, Han HH, et al. Evaluation of RIX4414, a live, attenuated rotavirus vaccine, in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial involving 2464 Singaporean infants. J Infect Dis 2005;192(Suppl. 1):S6 - 16.

[10] Dennehy PH, Brady RC, Halperin SA, Ward RL, Alvey JC, Fischer Jr FH, et al. Comparative evaluation of safety and immunogenicity of two dosages of an oral live attenuated human rotavirus vaccine. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2005;24:481 - 8.

[11] Payne DC, Edwards KM, Bowen MD, Keckley E, Peters J, Esona MD, et al. Sibling transmission of vaccine-derived rotavirus (RotaTeq) associated with rotavirus gastroenteritis. Pediatrics 2010;125:e438 - 41.

[12] Boom JA, Sahni LC, Payne DC, Gautam R, Lyde F, Mijatovic-Rustempasic S, et al. Symptomatic infection and detection of vaccine and vaccine-reassortant rotavirus strains in 5 children: a case series. J Infect Dis 2012;206:1275 - 9.

[13] RiveraL,Pen ̃aLM,StainierI,GillardP,CheuvartB,SmolenovI,etal.Horizontal transmission of a human rotavirus vaccine strain - a randomized, placebo- controlled study in twins. Vaccine 2011;29:9508 - 13.

[2] J Infect Dis. 2012 Aug 1;206(3):377-83. doi: 10.1093/infdis/jis361. Epub 2012 May 21.

Identification of strains of RotaTeq rotavirus vaccine in infants with gastroenteritis following routine vaccination. Donato CM1, Ch'ng LS, Boniface KF, Crawford NW, Buttery JP, Lyon M, Bishop RF, Kirkwood CD.

[3] Infect Genet Evol. 2012 Aug;12(6):1282-94. doi: 10.1016/j.meegid.2012.03.007. Epub 2012 Apr 2.

Vaccine-derived NSP2 segment in rotaviruses from vaccinated children with gastroenteritis in Nicaragua. Bucardo F1, Rippinger CM, Svensson L, Patton JT.

[4] Phua KB, Quak SH, Lee BW, Emmanuel SC, Goh P, Han HH, et al. Evaluation of

RIX4414, a live, attenuated rotavirus vaccine, in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial involving 2464 Singaporean infants. J Infect Dis 2005;192(Suppl. 1):S6 - 16.

[5] Comparison of virus shedding after lived attenuated and pentavalent reassortant rotavirus vaccine

[6] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Intussusception among recipients of rotavirus vaccine - United States, 1998 - 1999. JAMA 1999;282:520-1CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science

[7] N Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 6;370(6):503-12. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1303164. Epub 2014 Jan 14 Intussusception risk after rotavirus vaccination in U.S. infants. Yih WK1, Lieu TA, Kulldorff M, Martin D, McMahill-Walraven CN, Platt R, Selvam N, Selvan M, Lee GM, Nguyen M

Source: http://www.sott.net