Podcasts about pneumococcus

Dr. Jackie Sherbuk, Assistant Professor of Medicine at the USF Morsani College of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, presents a case-based discussion of gram positive organisms producing disease in humans. Infections discussed include Staphylococcus aureus, Coagulase negative Staphylococcus, Pneumococcus, Streptococcus spp., Enterococcus, Corynebacterium, Bacillus, and Erysipelothrix. Associated clinical syndromes are also discussed.

Dr. Gary Null gives a commentary on his article "It's Time for a Vaccination Reckoning"   Ask any federal health official—whether from the FDA, CDC, NIH, or National Cancer Institute—if vaccines contribute to neurological damage or autism, and their response will be unequivocal: No, there is no evidence of any association. In fact, they might find the very question offensive. After all, these agencies have access to unlimited resources, the brightest scientific minds, and cutting-edge research facilities at institutions like Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and Stanford. If there were any credible link between vaccines and neurological harm, surely, they would have found it by now. And yet, despite decades of investigation and countless opportunities, their stance remains unchanged: vaccines are safe and effective. Any claim to the contrary is dismissed as conspiracy theory and an assault on the very foundations of modern medicine. This has been the dominant narrative for the past forty years. Federal health officials and policymakers have long prioritized private pharmaceutical industry interests and upheld the belief that vaccination is the single most important tool for eradicating infectious diseases. Dissent is neither tolerated nor entertained. The agencies responsible for vaccine safety, such as HHS, FDA, NIAID and the CDC, are ruled by a rigid scientific orthodoxy that allows no room for alternative perspectives. But now, for the first time in modern history, an outsider has entered the room. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the new head of the Department of Health and Human Services, is neither a scientist nor a physician. Unlike his predecessors, he has no allegiance to the status quo. His appointment signals a possible turning point to usher a new opportunity for a truly independent investigation into whether vaccines, either individually or collectively, contribute to neurological damage. If pursued earnestly, this could be one of the most consequential moments in American medical history. The stakes could not be higher. Over the past few decades, childhood chronic illnesses have skyrocketed to unprecedented levels. The rise in autism spectrum disorders (ASD), ADHD, autoimmune conditions, and other neurological and developmental disorders has been explained away as the result of better diagnostic tools or genetic predispositions. But are these explanations sufficient? What if something more fundamental has changed in children's health over the past 30 years? Federal health agencies continue to dismiss environmental factors, including vaccines, as a potential cause. But if we truly care about children's well-being, it is time to ask the hard questions. And we must ask without fear, without bias, and without ideological blinders. The dramatic increase in neurological disorders, including autism spectrum disorders that is now diagnosed in 1 in every 36 children, has often been attributed to improved definitions for ASD and diagnostic tools. However, a closer look at government statistics reveals alarming trends in children's health that go far beyond better diagnostics. Since the early 1990s, there has been a staggering increase in several chronic conditions: ADHD rates have risen by 890 percent, autism diagnoses by 2,094 percent, bipolar disease in youth by 10,833 percent, and celiac disease by 1,011 percent. These numbers beg the question—what has fundamentally changed in our children's health over the past three decades? The media plays a crucial role in reinforcing the official vaccine narrative while systematically silencing dissenting voices. This lack of transparency allows federal health agencies like the CDC, NIAID, and HHS to evade accountability. Instead of safeguarding public health, these institutions have become politically and ideologically entangled with private pharmaceutical interests. Their close ties to the industry have led to the approval of insufficiently tested vaccines, the medicalization of normal childhood behaviors, and the delivery of subpar healthcare—all at a staggering cost of $5 trillion annually. Medical authorities insist that vaccines, even when administered in multiple doses on a single day, are safe and do not cause chronic health problems. They claim that vaccine ingredients are either harmless or present in amounts too small to pose any risk. Any attempt to challenge these assertions is met with ridicule. Despite a sharp rise in childhood neurological disorders, there has been no significant push for reform or independent long-term safety studies on the effects of vaccines. For decades, concerns about vaccine safety have not only come from parents and advocacy groups but also from government investigations. A three-year congressional investigation led by Rep. Dan Burton strongly criticized the CDC, FDA, and HHS for their failure to conduct proper vaccine safety studies. The committee found that federal agencies systematically downplayed risks, ignored growing evidence of vaccine-related neurological disorders, and relied on poorly designed epidemiological studies rather than clinical research. The report also exposed the failure of vaccine manufacturers to conduct adequate safety testing, highlighting decades of negligence. Despite these damning conclusions, little has changed, and concerns about vaccine safety remain unaddressed. While thimerosal has been largely removed from childhood vaccines, it remains in some flu shots and multi-dose vials, and broader concerns about vaccine ingredients and neurological damage continue to grow. One of the most alarming revelations came from the secretive 2000 Simpsonwood meeting, where top CDC officials and vaccine industry representatives discussed an internal study linking thimerosal exposure to increased risks of tics, ADHD, speech delays, and developmental disorders. Instead of alerting the public, the attendees decided to suppress the findings and rework the data to obscure any association. This manipulation, later exposed by Robert Kennedy Jr. through a Freedom of Information Act request, exemplifies the CDC's ongoing pattern of data suppression and scientific misconduct when vaccine safety is called into question. The congressional committee later confirmed that many participants in the vaccine debate “allowed their standards to be dictated by their desire to disprove an unpleasant theory.” Rather than conducting thorough biological studies to assess vaccine safety, federal agencies have deflected scrutiny by blaming autism and other neurological conditions on genetic factors, despite a lack of conclusive evidence supporting this theory. Today's CDC childhood immunization schedule recommends over 27 vaccines by the age of two, with some visits involving up to six shots at once. Parents are expected to trust that these vaccines are rigorously tested and proven safe. However, a review of hundreds of toxicology and immunology studies fails to reveal a gold standard of long-term, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials proving vaccine safety. There is also no comprehensive epidemiological study comparing the long-term health outcomes of fully vaccinated versus unvaccinated children. Without this research, public health officials rely on inconclusive data, which is shaped more by policy than by science. Humans possess unique biochemical makeups that make them more or less susceptible to toxins. While one child may experience minor effects from environmental toxins, another may develop autoimmune disorders, learning disabilities, or neurological impairments. Vaccine safety cannot be proven simply by stating that not every vaccinated child has autism. Given the dramatic rise in autoimmune diseases, food allergies, encephalitis, and conditions like Crohn's disease, it is imperative to investigate environmental toxins' role in childhood health. Independent research suggests that ingredients in vaccines, even in small amounts, may contribute to these illnesses, particularly as the number of required vaccines continues to grow. Ironically, the U.S. government's own Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has awarded settlements to families whose children developed autism-like symptoms following vaccination. High-profile cases such as Hannah Poling, who developed ASD after receiving nine vaccines in one day, Ryan Mojabi, whose vaccines caused severe brain inflammation, and Bailey Banks, who suffered vaccine-induced brain inflammation leading to developmental delays, demonstrate that vaccine injury can, in some cases, result in autism spectrum disorders. A broader analysis of VICP cases revealed that 83 children with autism were compensated for vaccine-related brain injuries, primarily involving encephalopathy or seizure disorders with developmental regression. These cases contradict federal health agencies' claims that no connection between vaccines and autism has ever been recognized. The National Library of Medicine lists over 3,000 studies on aluminum's toxicity to human biochemistry. Its dangers have been known for over a century. Early FDA director Dr. Harvey Wiley resigned in protest over aluminum's commercial use in food canning as early as 1912. Today, aluminum compounds, such as aluminum hydroxide and aluminum phosphate, are found in many vaccines, including hepatitis A and B, DTP, Hib, Pneumococcus, and the HPV vaccine (Gardasil). In the 1980s, a fully vaccinated child would have received 1,250 mcg of aluminum by adulthood. Today, that number has risen to over 4,900 mcg, a nearly fourfold increase. Aluminum exposure is further compounded by its presence in municipal drinking water due to aluminum sulfate used in purification. A 1997 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that premature infants receiving aluminum-containing intravenous feeding solutions developed learning problems at a significantly higher rate than those who received aluminum-free solutions. Dr. James Lyons-Weiler at the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge has criticized vaccine aluminum levels, pointing out that dosage guidelines are based on immune response rather than body weight safety. Alarmingly, aluminum exposure standards for children are based on dietary intake studies in rodents rather than human infants. He notes that on Day 1 of life, newborns receive 17 times more aluminum than would be permitted if doses were adjusted per body weight. Despite these findings, federal agencies continue to dismiss concerns over aluminum toxicity in vaccines. The refusal to conduct comprehensive long-term safety studies, coupled with regulatory agencies' deep entanglement with the pharmaceutical industry, has led to a public health crisis. The growing prevalence of neurological and autoimmune disorders in children demands urgent, unbiased investigation into environmental and vaccine-related factors. Until federal health agencies commit to transparency and rigorous scientific inquiry, parents will be left to navigate vaccine safety decisions without the full picture of potential risks. Christopher Exley at Keele University analyzed brain tissue from children and teenagers diagnosed with ASD and found consistently high aluminum levels, among the highest recorded in human brain tissue. The aluminum was concentrated in inflammatory non-neuronal cells across various brain regions, supporting its role in ASD neuropathology. In a systematic review of 59 studies, Exley found significant associations between aluminum, cadmium, mercury, and ASD, further underscoring aluminum's neurotoxic impact. His research strongly advocates for reducing vaccine-derived aluminum exposure in pregnant women and children to help mitigate the rise in autism. Despite the CDC's consistent denials, researchers at Imperial College London found a significant correlation between rising ASD rates and increased vaccination. Their 2017 study in Metabolic Brain Disease showed that a 1% increase in vaccination rates correlated with 680 additional ASD cases, raising urgent concerns over vaccine components as environmental triggers. CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson provided thousands of pages of internal research revealing a cover-up of vaccine-autism links. His documents proved the CDC had prior knowledge that African American boys under 36 months had a significantly higher autism risk following the MMR vaccine and that neurological tics—indicators of brain disturbances—were linked to thimerosal-containing vaccines like the flu shot. Yet, instead of acknowledging this risk, federal agencies buried, in fact shredded, the findings, ensuring that vaccine safety concerns were dismissed as conspiracy theories rather than investigated as public health imperatives. The official denial of a vaccine-autism connection has become entrenched dogma, unsupported by a single gold-standard study definitively disproving such a link. Meanwhile, the health of American children continues to decline, ranking among the worst in the developed world. Neurodevelopmental disorders like autism and ADHD are at crisis levels, yet federal agencies remain unwilling to conduct the comprehensive safety studies that could expose the full impact of mass vaccination on childhood health. Now, with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the helm of the Department of Health and Human Services, a long-overdue reckoning may finally be at hand. Unlike his predecessors, Kennedy is an advocate for transparency and accountability. If pursued earnestly, Kennedy's leadership could potentially reshape public health policies and exposing the truth about vaccines' role in the rise of neurological disorders, including autism. The question now is: Will the truth finally be allowed to come to light?

This episode features an interview with vaccine scientists and executives from Vaccines Global Clinical Development at Merck, Dr. Heather Platt, MD, Distinguished Scientist and Pneumococcal Vaccine Lead; and Dr. Ulrike Buchwald, MD, Scientific Associate Vice President, Global Clinical Research and Pneumococcal Vaccine Section Head.Over the past ten years, Dr. Platt has worked across both infectious disease and vaccines products in both early- and late-stage clinical research. In her current role at Merck, she leads the product development team for V116, an investigational pneumococcal conjugate vaccine. Dr. Platt completed her training in Internal Medicine at Rutgers/Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, and Infectious Diseases Fellowship at New York Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center.Dr. Buchwald applies her experience in public health and basic science research to expand Merck's pneumococcal vaccine franchise and the development of next generation adult and pediatric pneumococcal conjugate vaccines. Since 2017, Dr. Buchwald has focused on pneumococcal disease prevention in various roles at Merck. Dr. Buchwald received her MD and Dr. med degree from the Freie University in Berlin, Germany, and completed her Internal Medicine residency and Infectious Diseases fellowship at New York University. She continues to see patients at Johns Hopkins University.Merck recently announced results from STRIDE-3, a Phase III trial evaluating the immunogenicity, tolerability and safety of V116, the company's investigational 21-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, which is specifically designed for the protection of adults against pneumococcal infection.In this episode, hear more about V116, pneumococcal infection, Merck's vaccine development program and the company's approach to addressing the specific needs of different populations, including infants and children, adults and at-risk subgroups.For more life science and medical device content, visit the Xtalks Vitals homepage.Follow Us on Social MediaTwitter: @Xtalks Instagram: @Xtalks Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Xtalks.Webinars/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/xtalks-webconferences YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/XtalksWebinars/featured

Microbes have existed on Earth for almost 4 billion years; 3x as long as multicellular organisms and 1000x longer than humans. So what does the future hold? Will recent advances in genetic engineering enable us to create bacterial ‘drug-delivery' machines or self-replicating microbial vaccines? What will the first human-created lifeform mean for our understanding of biology? Will humanity end with a ‘microbial bang', or might microbes perhaps be the solution we need to spread our wings beyond this planet?A lecture by Robin May recorded on 10 May 2023 at Barnard's Inn Hall, London.The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/watch-now/microbial-futureGresham College has offered free public lectures for over 400 years, thanks to the generosity of our supporters. There are currently over 2,500 lectures free to access. We believe that everyone should have the opportunity to learn from some of the greatest minds. To support Gresham's mission, please consider making a donation: https://gresham.ac.uk/support/Website:  https://gresham.ac.ukTwitter:  https://twitter.com/greshamcollegeFacebook: https://facebook.com/greshamcollegeInstagram: https://instagram.com/greshamcollegeSupport the show

COVID-19, pandemic influenza and tuberculosis are examples of the remarkable ability of infections to use the respiratory route of transmission. Infections which use this route can often spread very quickly, especially in crowded indoor environments. Human behaviours and engineering should be seen as much a part of our defences against respiratory infections as drugs and vaccines.A lecture by Professor Sir Chris WhittyThe transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/respiratory-infectionsGresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website. There are currently over 2,000 lectures free to access or download from the website.Website: http://www.gresham.ac.ukTwitter: http://twitter.com/GreshamCollegeFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/greshamcollegeInstagram: http://www.instagram.com/greshamcollege

This free iTunes segment is just one tiny snippet of the fully-loaded 3-hour monthly Peds RAP show. Earn CME on your commute while getting the latest practice-changing peds information: journal article breakdowns, evidence-based topic reviews, critical guideline updates, conversations with experts, and so much more. Sign up for the full show at hippoed.com/PEDSRAPPOD. Pediatric ID specialist Michael Neely, MD, and Michael Cosimini, MD discuss how cephalosporins work and which bugs they do and do not kill. Pearls: In general, cephalosporins do not cover anaerobes, enterococcus, listeria and MRSA. Oral cephalosporins are generally not first line in pediatrics.  Some exceptions include the treatment of UTIs and some skin and soft tissue infections; group A strep and sinopulmonary infections in penicillin allergic patients are other common indications. 1st generation cephalosporins do have gram positive coverage, but do not work well against strep pneumo, MRSA, enterococcus. They do cover some enteric gram negative bacteria, the “PECK” organisms.   What are cephalosporin antibiotics and how do they compare to penicillins?  Chemically, both penicillins and cephalosporins are beta-lactam antibiotics, with the beta-lactam portion responsible for bacterial killing.  The chemical portions off the beta-lactam ring make the antibiotics different. Beta-lactam antibiotics work by binding to the penicillin-binding protein on the bacterial cell wall.  These proteins have structural functions that maintain the integrity of the bacterial cell wall and therefore, when these antibiotics bind, the penicillin-binding protein is disrupted, the cell wall falls apart and the bacterial dies.       How do you keep a straight spectrum of activity for antibiotics?  To help with this, think of bacteria into big categories: gram-positive, gram-negative and “other”. Gram-positive bacteria include: Staph aureus (MSSA, MRSA), Streptococcus (Group A Strep, Group B Strep, Strep pyogenes, Strep viridans), Enterococcus, Pneumococcus, Listeria Gram-negative bacteria are a much bigger group and can be divided into: Respiratory gram-negatives include Moraxella, Haemophilus, Meningococcus Enteric gram-negatives include the “PECK” bacteria: Proteus, E.coli, Klebsiella What bacteria do cephalosporins not cover?  In general, cephalosporins do not cover anaerobic bacteria, enterococcus, listeria and MRSA.  There are a few exceptions to this rule. Cefoxitin (a second generation cephalosporin), for example, does have anaerobic coverage.  It is commonly used in the treatment of PID as it covers enteric anaerobes and Neisseria gonorrhea. There is a 5th generation cephalosporin that does cover MRSA (discussed later). Are cephalosporins well absorbed?  Generally speaking, cephalosporins in oral formulations are not as well absorbed as penicillins and are more difficult to get where they need to go outside the urinary tract. Also, generally speaking, no beta-lactam really gets into the spinal fluid in very high concentrations; all of them do have better penetration when there is inflammation.  Practically, remember that the penetration into the CSF between ampicillin and ceftriaxone is negligible. What bacteria do first generation cephalosporins cover?  Although the classic teaching is that cephalosporins are good for gram-positive coverage (staph and strep), this is not a hard and fast rule.  As stated, enterococcus is not covered by any cephalosporin and MRSA is not covered by most cephalosporins.  First generation cephalosporins are also good for coverage of the “PECK” enteric gram negative bacteria, but not good for coverage of other gram negative bacteria.  These organisms tend to cause UTIs and therefore, first generation cephalosporins (for example, cephalexin) are frequently used for UTI treatment. Of course, resistance can occur.    Even though strep pneumo is a gram-positive organism, when it comes to first generation cephalosporins, it acts like a gram-negative organism and therefore, first generation cephalosporins do not work well against strep pneumo.   What about bacteria that develop resistance?  A patient with an E. Coli UTI, for example, may have a microbiology laboratory report stating that the E. Coli is resistant to a first generation cephalosporin but the patient is still getting better.  This may have to do with the type of infection the patient had; for example, a healthy patient with a simple cystitis may have been able to stay well hydrated and the normal immune system was able to clear the E. Coli. This question can also be answered in the context of breakpoints, that is when the bacteria become susceptible or resistant to the antibiotic depending on the site of infection.  Some labs will actually label a bacteria resistant or susceptible depending on whether the infection is in the urine, spinal fluid or blood. Therefore, if a lab that reports site-specific breakpoints suggests that an E. Coli is resistant to a first generation cephalosporin in the urine, the lab has already taken into account the higher concentration of drug in the urine.  Similarly, a pneumococcal isolate that may be resistant to ceftriaxone in the CNS may be susceptible to ceftriaxone as a pneumonia because there are much higher concentrations of ceftriaxone in the lungs than in the spinal fluid. When should a skin or soft tissue infection be treated with a first-generation cephalosporin?  When should MRSA be suspected? This can be a tricky question as an outpatient, but there are some clues to gauge whether or not the infection may be caused by MRSA.   One, it is helpful to know the community prevalence of MRSA.  In some communities, community acquired staph aureus infections are up to 80-90% MRSA.  In these communities, MRSA coverage should of course be given. If the prevalence is much lower, using a first generation cephalosporin, such as cephalexin may be reasonable.   Other clues can be more specific to the patient the their families.  Is the patient or family known to be colonized with MRSA? Have they had an MRSA infection in the past? If MRSA coverage is needed, either trimethoprim-sulfa or clindamycin generally is a good approach.  A randomized controlled trial published in the NEJM showed no difference in outcomes when treating a known MRSA infection. Miller LG et al.  Clindamycin versus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for uncomplicated skin infections.  N Engl J Med. 2015 Mar 19;372(12): 1093-103. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25785967 In general, the quality of the infection does not help point to MRSA or not.  There is some suggestion that if there is a soft-tissue abscess this is more likely staph aureus and if there is just pure erythema, tenderness and warmth without abscess, this is more likely to be Group A strep.   Remember, no matter what antibiotic is started for cellulitis (or any infection, for that matter), follow up is essential.  If you are on the right antibiotics, cellulitis should be improving within 24 hours.

Pneumococcus takes centre stage this week

Most diagnostic tests look for a single microorganism, or at most a limited panel of microorganisms. Charles Chiu discusses his research on metagenomic sequencing as a diagnostic tool that can identify all potential pathogens in a given patient sample. Links for this Episode: MTM Listener Survey, only takes 3 minutes! Thanks;) Charles Chiu Profile at UCSF Chiu Lab at UCSF Validation of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Tests for Universal Pathogen Detection The Eukaryotic Gut Virome in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: New Clues in Enteric Graft-Versus-Host Disease HOM Tidbit: Dochez and Avery. The Elaboration of Specific Soluble Substance by Pneumococcus during Growth. Journal of Experimental Medicine 1917. HOM Tidbit: Kozel and Burnham-Marusich. Point-of-Care Testing for Infectious Diseases: Past, Present, and Future. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2017.    

Episode 5: A Shot of HealthToday we focus on four adult immunizations: tetanus, pneumonia, shingles, and influenza.Tetanus - a tetanus (Td) booster is needed every 10 years or less. Every adult should get Tdap once to protect against pertussis (whooping cough). Tetanus can be acquired from a skin puncture by rusty metal, and is also present throughout the environment, especially in soil.Pneumonia - pneumonia is a lower respiratory tract infection / infection of the lungs. It can be caused by Pneumococcus bacteria, which has a thick outer shell that makes it more difficult for our immune system to fight. Generally pneumonia vaccines are started at age 65. They are given earlier for patients with a decreased immune system, compromised respiratory system (such as in asthma or COPD), and some other conditions. PCV 13 is the vaccine generally given first at age 65, and PPSV23 is given 1 year later. If given before age 65, they are given 8 weeks apart.Shingles - shingles is caused by the chicken pox virus. After clearing chicken pox, the virus is dormant near the spine in nerve roots. Later in life, especially in situations of immune compromise, the virus can reactivate and cause shingles. The rash will affect one dermatome of the skin, which is the area of the skin supplied by nerves from a single nerve root. The older vaccine for shingles, known as Zostavax, was a live vaccine. Because it was live, certain populations couldn’t receive it. It also had lower efficacy, especially in older adults. The newer vaccine, Shingrix, is not live and has better efficacy.Influenza - influenza is a viral infection that largely affects the airways and is worrisome when it causes viral pneumonia. Symptoms include fever, cough, body aches, runny nose, and headaches; this can progress to shortness of breath and difficulty breathing. We recommend the influenza vaccine yearly for everyone. Influenza can be life threatening even to healthy individuals. Yearly flu vaccines reduce mortality and severity of influenza infections.Health Pearl: Tasty Lentil TacosFollow us on Facebook and Twitter:If you like what you hear, please rate, review, and subscribe to our podcast. Please help us spread the word!

Dr. Katherine Julian, UCSF Professor of Clinical Medicine, looks at vaccines for adults. She looks at who should get vaccinated for measles, flu, whooping cough, pneumococcus, and shingles. She also discusses vaccines for young adults and teens: human papillomavirus and meningococcus. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 29279]

Dr. Katherine Julian, UCSF Professor of Clinical Medicine, looks at vaccines for adults. She looks at who should get vaccinated for measles, flu, whooping cough, pneumococcus, and shingles. She also discusses vaccines for young adults and teens: human papillomavirus and meningococcus. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 29279]

A Finnish randomized trial assessing the efficacy of a 10-serotype pneumococcal vaccine.