PEDIATRICS Vol. 63 No. 6 June 1979, pp. 941-942
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Katz, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Wilfert, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Katz, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Wilfert, C. M.

New Thoughts on Pertussis

Samuel L. Katz M.D.1 and Catherine M. Wilfert M.D.1

1 Department of Pediatrics, Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC 27710

The success of initial pertussis immunization programs resulted not only in a sharp decrease in the incidence of the disease but also in a diminution of interest in and research on the organism, and complacency with regard to the vaccine itself.

Concern and apprehension about both the efficacy and the safety of pertussis vaccine have recently stimulated a renewed investigative interest in the biology of Bordetella pertussis. This occurs at a time. when cases of pertussis reported in the United States are at an all-time low (less than 2,000 in 1978 contrasted with more than 150,000 in 1950). This infrequency of clinical whooping cough contributes to our desire for a more critical examination of the rare serious complications attributed to the immunizing procedure.