Merck Admits Shingles Vaccine Can Cause Eye Damage…and Shingles

Merck Admits Shingles Vaccine Can Cause Eye Damage…and Shingles
Two important FDA approved changes to the warning label of Merck Pharmaceutical’s shingles vaccine, Zostavax, have been made since the controversial drug was introduced in 2006.  The first was in August 2014, when, in addition to potentially causing chickenpox, another side effect was added: shingles! That’s right. The vaccine that had been – and continues to be — aggressively marketed to prevent seniors from contracting this excruciating condition was found to actually cause shingles in some individuals.
In February of this year, the FDA approved a label change to warn those who prescribe the Zostavax vaccine of another potential side effect: “Eye Disorders: necrotizing retinitis.”

Shingles Vaccine Eye Damage
The shinglesZostovax vaccine Merck Pharmaceuticals has been marketing since 2006 now comes with a warning that it could cause eye damage. February 17, 2016, the FDA approved a label change to Merck’s Zostamax vaccine prescribing information. The change to the label added “Eye Disorders: necrotizing retinitis.” Merck consequently faces Shingles Vaccine Lawsuits over this dubious vaccine.
Keratitis Vision Damage from Vaccines
WebMD reported that researchers found 20 cases of keratitis in children and adults that occurred within a month of receiving a chickenpox or shingles vaccine. Keratitis symptoms for adults developed within 24 days of vaccination, while symptoms in children began within 14 days of vaccination. Researchers concluded there is a probable relationship between the vaccine and the eye inflammation, though the study wasn’t designed to prove the vaccine actually caused the condition. (Of course it wasn’t.)
Keratitis causes inflammation and scarring of the eye tissue. If one fails to get treated fast, it can lead to permanent vision loss.
Health Sciences Institute (HSI) points out in a Jan 21, 2016 piece that the researchers say they don’t know why the shingles shot may cause keratitis, but we do know that keratitis has been linked to autoimmune disorders, and that shots like the shingles vaccine can profoundly short circuit the immune system.
The mainstream media didn’t miss a beat, of course, telling us that despite these little “side effects” (hardly worth a mention, really), it’s still a good idea to get the shingles vaccine, and never mind the fact that it barely works at all, or perhaps causes more cases of shingles than it prevents.
Shingles Vaccine causes Shingles
The mainstream failszostovax to tell us that the shingles vaccine causes shingles. Funny they leave that out, because even the FDA is aware now that the shingles vaccine features an absurd problem.  In August 2014, FDA approved a change to the shingles vaccine warnings label to include that the shingles vaccine causes – wait for it – shingles!  Yes, you read that right.
Shingles Vaccine Fails to Work as Advertised
HSI further points out that “UCLA researchers found that only one in 175 people who get the vaccine will be able to dodge a shingles flare-up. And if you’re over 70, you’d be lucky to get those odds.”
So these people from WebMD and other mainstream media outlets who take endless money in advertising from Big Pharma and never see a drug or vaccine campaign they don’t like, are now telling you it’s worth risking eye damage, maybe up to blindness, to take a shingles shot that fails more than 99 percent of the time, and uh, just happens to also give you shingles? That’s a chance worth taking? You take it, friend. We shall pass on the shingles vaccine.

Scientists Prove Those Vaccinated for Shingles Can Infect Others with Chicken Pox
For many years, the US government and mainstream media have continued to blame the unvaccinated community for the spread of infectious disease. We are constantly being bombarded with statements like the one written by Philip Ross and published in the International Business Times, which stated:
“The American classroom has become a battleground for parents who are threatened by the growing number of children not vaccinated against measles, one of the most highly contagious viruses in the world. The ongoing measles outbreak in the U.S. that started at Disneyland and has spread to 14 states has raised concerns over the country’s rising anti-vaccination movement, including whether the decision to vaccinate against such a dangerous disease should be left to parents, and what constitutes responsible childrearing. Should a child whose parents chose not to vaccinate be allowed to share the same pencils and playground as children whose parents did?”
Although the International Business Times had attempted to present the public with a balanced review of the situation facing parents, it is questionable as to whether they presented any real evidence to support their claims and they left many readers with unanswered questions.
Shingles Vaccines Cause Chicken Pox in the Unvaccinated
Duane Pierson stated that:
“Inoculation site samples taken within 10 minutes after vaccination were positive for Zostavax VZV DNA in 18 (50%) of 36 subjects. The VZV DNA copy number per nanogram of total DNA ranged from 28 to 2.1 × 106 (Table 1), possibly reflecting the presence of infectious virus since no alcohol or other agent was used to wipe the skin after inoculation.
No saliva specimen collected immediately before immunization contained VZV DNA. During the first week after immunization, VZV DNA was detected in saliva of 21 (58%) of 36 subjects (13 men and 8 women). During the 28-day study period, VZV DNA was found in 11 (31%) of 36 subjects (5 men and 6 women) at day 14, in 10 (28%) of 36 subjects (6 men and 4 women) at day 21, and in 2 (6%) of 36 subjects (1 man and 1 woman) at day 28.”
The authors concluded:
“Finally, that while transmission of vaccine virus has not been found among vaccine recipients, the detection of VZV DNA in saliva of Zostavax recipients for up to 28 days suggests that contact with saliva of recently immunized individuals represents a potential source of transmission.”

Study: Varicella Zoster Virus DNA at Inoculation Sites and in Saliva After Zostavax Immunization

Abstract

Analysis of 36 individuals over age 60 years who were immunized with Zostavax revealed varicella zoster virus (VZV) DNA in swabs of skin inoculation sites obtained immediately after immunization in 18 (50%) of 36 subjects (copy number per nanogram of total DNA, 28 to 2.1 × 106) and in saliva collected over 28 days in 21 (58%) of 36 subjects (copy number, 20 to 248). Genotypic analysis of DNA extracted from 9 random saliva samples identified vaccine virus in all instances. In some immunized individuals over age 60, vaccine virus DNA is shed in saliva up to 4 weeks.
Varicella zoster virus (VZV) is a neurotropic alphaherpesvirus. Primary infection usually causes varicella (chicken pox) in children. Airborne VZV enters the nasopharynx and replicates in tonsillar T cells followed by viremia and skin lesions [1, 2]. After primary infection, VZV becomes latent in neurons of cranial nerve ganglia, dorsal root ganglia, and autonomic ganglia along the entire neuraxis. Decades later, VZV reactivates in elderly and immunocompromised individuals to produce zoster (shingles), a syndrome characterized by pain and a vesicular rash on an erythematous base in 1–3 dermatomes. Zoster is common, with ∼1,000,000 cases annually in the United States. Importantly, zoster is often followed by chronic pain (postherpetic neuralgia [PHN]) as well as by meningoencephalitis, cerebellitis, cranial nerve palsies, vasculopathy, myelopathy, and multiple inflammatory diseases of the eye [3].
To prevent zoster and its attendant neurological complications, Zostavax vaccine (Merck) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in individuals at least 60 years of age. Over a 3-year period, Zostavax effectively reduced the risk of zoster by 51% and PHN by 66% in nearly 20,000 healthy adults age 60 years or older [4]. Zostavax contains live attenuated VZV, and the package insert warns newly vaccinated individuals to avoid contact for an unspecified time with newborn infants, immunosuppressed individuals, and pregnant women who have not had chicken pox or have not been immunized for chicken pox. Because VZV DNA is present in saliva of zoster patients for at least 2 weeks [5] and VZV in saliva can also be infectious [6], we examined the inoculation site and saliva of Zostavax-vaccinated subjects for the presence of VZV DNA for 4 weeks after immunization.

Study: Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccine Enhances Colonization of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus in Mice
ABSTRACT
Community interactions at mucosal surfaces between viruses, like influenza virus, and respiratory bacterial pathogens are important contributors toward pathogenesis of bacterial disease. What has not been considered is the natural extension of these interactions to live attenuated immunizations, and in particular, live attenuated influenza vaccines (LAIVs). Using a mouse-adapted LAIV against influenza A (H3N2) virus carrying the same mutations as the human FluMist vaccine, we find that LAIV vaccination reverses normal bacterial clearance from the nasopharynx and significantly increases bacterial carriage densities of the clinically important bacterial pathogens Streptococcus pneumoniae (serotypes 19F and 7F) and Staphylococcus aureus (strains Newman and Wright) within the upper respiratory tract of mice. Vaccination with LAIV also resulted in 2- to 5-fold increases in mean durations of bacterial carriage. Furthermore, we show that the increases in carriage density and duration were nearly identical in all aspects to changes in bacterial colonizing dynamics following infection with wild-type (WT) influenza virus. Importantly, LAIV, unlike WT influenza viruses, had no effect on severe bacterial disease or mortality within the lower respiratory tract. Our findings are, to the best of our knowledge, the first to demonstrate that vaccination with a live attenuated viral vaccine can directly modulate colonizing dynamics of important and unrelated human bacterial pathogens, and does so in a manner highly analogous to that seen following wild-type virus infection.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s