Unvaccinated kids fueled whooping cough
By The Los Angeles Times
Published: Sunday, Oct. 6, 2013, 5:45 p.m.
Children who did not get vaccinated against whooping cough contributed to the 2010 outbreak of the illness, when more cases were reported than in any year since 1947, researchers said.
Researchers who looked at the geography of the cases suggest that clusters of “nonmedical exemptions” to immunizations were one of several factors in the California outbreak. They reported their findings on Monday in the journal Pediatrics.
In California in 2010, there were 9,120 cases of the illness known as pertussis — one-third of the U.S. cases. Los Angeles had 1,000 of those cases. Whooping cough is a respiratory ailment marked by bouts of coughing that are accompanied by a noise that can frighten parents — hence the name.
An earlier study published in the New England Journal of Medicine suggests that the DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) vaccine loses some effectiveness after the fifth of the five recommended doses. That, too, was part of the reason for the outbreak, the Pediatrics scientists said. They list the cyclical nature of pertussis and improved diagnosis as reasons for the high numbers.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ‘Patriots’ back Nevada rancher; Reid labels them ‘domestic terrorists’
- Drug crime reclassification to help ex-cons get vote rights
- Health care law enrollee passwords at risk for Heartbleed Internet security flaw, feds warn
- IRS, other agencies award contracts to license plate tracking company
- Del Taco customers mistakenly charged thousands for fast-food meals
- Mauling puts bears back on firing line in Central Florida
- Washington’s snowy owl recovers from apparent bus crash, returns to wild
- Recovery expert believes wreckage of missing plane located
- Automaker GM’s wait on Saturn Ion safety recall took years
- First date in New Jersey ends with him pilfering her TV and Yorkshire terrier
- Ex-stripper eligible for death penalty in hammer killing