Ten researchers from the CDC’s National Centers for Immunization and
Respiratory Disease (NCIRD) released a paper arguing that because the
immune-boosting effects of breast milk inhibit the effects of the live
oral rotavirus vaccine, nursing mothers should delay breastfeeding their
infants.
This, dear readers, is the kind of convoluted logic that permeates the pharmaceutical industry. To be fair, the paper
does not recommend that mothers stop breastfeeding, merely that they
delay nursing at the time that the vaccine is administered. It also says
that other avenues for boosting the vaccine’s efficacy should be
explored.
Honestly,
I don’t care how nuanced their recommendation is. Do they not realize
what they have stumbled upon? In demonstrating that breastmilk counters
the live vaccine, they’ve shown that breastmilk counters the virus.
A
live vaccine contains a weakened form of the virus that causes the
disease. The idea is that by presenting the weakened virus to your body,
your immune system will develop an immune response to the virus
sufficient to help you fight off a more virulent attack of the virus
later. In other words, when your body is fighting off the live virus, it
is effectively fighting off the virus itself, just in smaller
quantities.
If breastmilk’s immune-boosting properties
fight-off the live vaccine, then that means that breastmilk is fighting
off the virus itself (just in smaller quantities).
Yet
instead of recommending that the best way to fight this disease in
infants is to encourage mothers to breastfeed, they’re recommending that
mothers refrain from breastfeeding so that the vaccine can work!
I’m
troubled by the underlying assumptions these researchers are making.
They’re assuming, for example, that the vaccine should be used
regardless of its efficacy. They’re assuming that the vaccine is better
for the baby than breastfeeding. They’re assuming that the vaccine is
safe.
Or, perhaps they’re not assuming any of those things. They
are single-minded scientists after all. Their sole goal in this paper
seems to simply be to measure the inhibitory effects of breast milk on
the vaccine. They compared the breast milk from mothers in India, South
Korea, Vietnam, and the U.S. Indian mothers had the most potent
breast milk in fighting the vaccine, while U.S. moms had the weakest.
(I wonder if that’s because of our poor diets of overly-processed, industrialized food?)
I
think it’s interesting to note that the researchers aren’t asking about
what’s best for the baby. The question they have in mind is quite
focused: just how much does breast milk neutralize the vaccine?
Arguably, it’s a win for nursing mothers everywhere since it proves just how effective breast milk can be!
And
yet, these researchers didn’t stop there. They took their snazzy
results and had the audacity to call them a “negative effect” of
breastfeeding.
Clearly, they have one goal in mind: to sell more vaccines.
And
therein lies the rub. The pharmaceutical industry could care less about
actual health and wellness. After all, if you are healthy, they don’t
make any money off of you. It is in their financial best interests for
you to be perpetually sick.
I doubt that these researchers sat in
their break room clad in black leather, sipping spiked coffee sporting
evil grins as they plotted about how to take over the world. Most
likely, they’re family folk feeling quite proud about the fact that they
are developing vaccines to use in poor, undeveloped countries.
And
yet despite their noble intentions, they can’t see how their
assumptions influenced their recommendations. For if they were truly all
about the health of the baby, they’d look at their findings and
recommend that more women breastfeed. Or they’d look at their findings
and ask why Indian breast milk is so much more effective than American
breast milk, then start creating studies to unpack all the implications
of that.
But who would fund those kinds of studies? Surely not the
drug companies who are creating and selling vaccines? Surely not the
universities who are also funded by grants from those same drug
companies? Surely not the U.S. government which also receives large sums
of money (as well as employees) from those same drug companies?
Nobody would fund those kinds of studies. (And that’s why they’re not done.)
It’s been said that good health makes a lot of sense, but it doesn’t make a lot of dollars.
Too true, that. Too true.

No comments:
Post a Comment