Life-threatening Pneumonia Caused by Pneumonia Vaccine

by Heidi Stevenson, BSc, DIHom, FBIH

Prevnar, an anti-pneumonia vaccination given in the United Kingdom, likely causes a significantly worse form of pneumonia to develop. This life-threatening lung disease, called Serotype 1, has become ten times more prevalent in ten years.

Serotype 1 pneumonia causes the pleura, the lining of the lungs, to become infected. The disease is suffered primarily by children, who experience fear from difficulty breathing and severe pain. Treatment consists of surgical debridement, that is, scraping, of the pleura to remove the noxious material.

In the UK, where the Prevnar vaccine has been aggressively and widely disseminated, pediatrician David Spencer has said, “It looks as if the Serotype one is becoming more virulent.”

Testing Prevnar for Ear Infections

Although intended as an anti-pneumonia vaccine, Prevnar’s manufacturer, Wyeth, has sold it largely for prevention of ear infections, otitis media. They developed a novel approach to testing for this purpose.

Rather than giving the control group a placebo, the guinea pigs received a different vaccine, the meningococcal group C conjugate vaccine (MnCC). The result was that the MnCC group, the so-called control group, had a 6-7 percent higher incidence of ear infections.

Aside from the fact that the difference in incidence of ear infections between the two groups is not great, an assumption was made that both vaccines prevent it. However, without comparison with people who did not receive either vaccine, there is no reason to believe that either one prevented disease. In fact, it could be that both actually cause otitis media, but that MnCC causes it more than Prevnar.

As it turns out, this may be exactly what is happening. Though sold as an ear infection preventative and tested in an excruciatingly twisted manner to “prove” it does prevent the disease, reports have been coming out showing that Prevnar actually causes otitis media. Worse, it’s now a superbug.

On September 17, 2007, ABCmoney.co.uk reported an outbreak of ear infections caused by drug-resistant strep bacteria. What appears to be happening is that prevention of some kinds of pneumonia is allowing other, more virulent ones, to proliferate.

There are dozens of types of pneumonia bacteria. Prevnar prevents only seven of them, and far from the worst forms of the disease. As a result, some of these more virulent strains of pneumonia, which had been held in check by competition with the seven types that Prevnar destroys, are running rampant in children who have received the Prevnar vaccine. In other words, its success is creating a greater danger.

Prevnar is a perfect example of the law of unexpected consequences. Or were they unexpected?

According to an Associated Press report, Wyeth “anticipated” the spread of new strains of pneumonia and ear infection bacteria as a result of their vaccine! They are in the process of testing another one, and plan for its use by the general public in the next year or two. This one would address 18 strains of pneumonia-causing bacteria.

What happens then? There are more than 18 strains of pneumonia bacteria. What’s the likelihood of even more virulent strains becoming prevalent as a result of “success” of the new vaccine? No one knows. Sadly, it appears that no one is going to address the issue. The FDA has given the go-ahead to Wyeth to do trials.

New Pneumonia Strain’s Prevalence

Scientists analyzed over 21,000 samples from various places in the U.S. They found that incidence of the drug-resistant bacteria, called 19A, has been increasing. Worse, in children under age two, a full 15% of children carried 19A, up from 4% during the previous three years.

In 2004-2005, researchers at the University of Iowa found that 35% of penicillin-resistant infections were caused by 19A. The year before, 19A caused only 2%.

If this isn’t bad enough, GlaxoSmithKline has yet another pneumonia vaccine in final testing in Europe.

Thanks to Wyeth, the FDA, and the entire medical system, we have a developing virulent and deadly pneumonia that’s likely the direct result of a vaccine. Rather than taking a step back and considering withdrawing Prevnar, the approach in both the U.S. and U.K. has been to up the ante: develop another vaccine, presumably to cover more bacteria. There is no reason to believe that this won’t result in an even more virulent strain of pneumonia than the one already created.

In fact, there’s reason to believe that the situation could become far worse. Bacteria have the ability to transfer successful genes across species. Thus, antibiotic-resistant varieties can provide their resistance to other species of bacteria. As Baylor College of Medicine doctor, Daniel Musher, said, “New types may emerge that can both escape containment by vaccine and spread throughout the world.”

It looks like a pharmaceutical firm has created the perfect vaccine, at least from their point of view. They make millions of dollars by convincing governments and doctors that it’s going to save lives. Then, the vaccine creates an even worse disease. Of course –- from their point of view –- this “requires” the creation of yet another vaccine, from which they can make even more millions. It sounds like the perfect endless money-making by disease-creation loop –- at least, from the point of view of the drug companies.

Flu Vaccine Doesn't Protect Seniors From Pneumonia

Flu vaccine may not protect older people from pneumonia once they get the disease, researchers report.

Older, frail adults are more susceptible to getting the flu, even if they have been vaccinated, and once getting the flu, they are more susceptible to such complications as pneumonia. It had been thought that flu vaccine would prevent flu -- and pneumonia -- across all groups of seniors, but this benefit appears to be largely confined to younger, healthier seniors.

"In seniors, flu vaccine was not linked to a reduced risk of pneumonia," said lead researcher Michael L. Jackson, a postdoctoral fellow at the Group Health Center for Health Studies in Seattle.

Jackson still recommends that seniors get flu vaccine, however. "There have been good randomized trials that show, at least in healthy seniors, that the vaccine reduces the risk of influenza," he said. "However, earlier studies have overestimated how well the vaccine works in reducing complications of influenza. So, the vaccine may not reduce the risk of complications as much as previously thought," he said.

Among young healthy seniors, the vaccine reduces the risk of flu, Jackson said. "When you look at the total population of seniors, which includes people over 75 and people that have chronic health diseases -- lung disease, heart disease, diabetes, and things like that -- we don't know if the vaccine is effective in the seniors," he said. "People with these chronic diseases are more susceptible to getting the flu, and they are more likely to develop pneumonia if they do get influenza."

The report is published in the Aug. 2 issue of The Lancet.

For the study, Jackson's team collected data on 1,173 people between the ages of 65 and 94 who developed pneumonia They compared these individuals with 2,346 people who did not get pneumonia. Both groups had similar rates of flu vaccination over the three seasons of studies, the researchers say.

The researchers found that vaccinated seniors who got the flu were as likely to develop pneumonia as unvaccinated seniors who got the flu.

Dr. Pascal James Imperato, dean of the master of public health program at the State University of New York Downstate Medical Center in New York City, was not surprised by these results.

"We know that elderly people do not form sufficient antibodies to certain vaccines, the flu vaccine included," Imperato said. "In addition, people in their 70s and 80s and 90s are more prone to pneumonia with or without influence. A number of these pneumonias may be secondary to other causes aside from influenza."

Even though many of the elderly will not develop sufficient antibodies to the flu vaccine, getting the shot is still worthwhile, Imperato said. "Having many people vaccinated builds up a herd immunity to disease, and you create barriers to transmission," he added.

Dr. Marc Siegel, a clinical associate professor of medicine at New York University School of Medicine in New York City, said the results of this study fly in the face of prevailing wisdom.

Siegel noted that 36,000 people in the United States die each year from the flu. "Over 90 percent of them are elderly," he said. "We give the flu shot primarily to prevent elderly deaths.

The effectiveness of the flu vaccine varies year to year, however, depending on how good a match it is for the circulating strains of influence. "In the best years, the flu vaccine is really only 40 to 60 percent effective," Siegel added.

In addition, Siegel thinks that the flu vaccine protects against other complication including respiratory diseases, which can also be fatal. "There are plenty of flu-related complications that are life-threatening besides pneumonia," he said.

"This study is a reminder that flu vaccines are not a panacea, but they are valuable, because they cut down on the incidence of influenza," Siegel said. "Flu shots definitely cut down on the number of flu-related deaths."

More information

For more about seasonal flu vaccine, visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.