“Chronic illnesses are now so common, having a sick child seems to be the “new normal.”Children are supposed to be vibrant, healthy, free of disease.” – Janet Levatin MD, Pediatrician.
Medical theory is that if your child is exposed to a weakened version of the disease, he will produce antibodies to that disease and become ‘immune’, so that he will never contract the illness.
At first glance, this sounds like a solid principle, BUT it only focuses on one small aspect of the immune system, the antibodies, and fails to look at all the other functions responsible for protecting your child’s health.
So, how does the immune system work?
The immune system is also made up of the skin, mucous membranes in the nose and throat, ears and eyes, nasal hairs, saliva, the spleen, intestines, tonsils, the thymus gland and even the brain. All of these parts work together in a holistic way to bring about a whole body immunity, which is only in part to do with antibodies.
• The skin acts as a barrier to prevent bacteria entering the body. It also filters out toxins through fever, which is the purpose of a fever when your child is ill.
• The nasal hairs prevent foreign particles from travelling up the nose, and the mucous membranes excrete a substance which is anti-bacterial.
• Tonsils help prevent respiratory diseases and illnesses such as Polio, and saliva contains substances which destroy and neutralise microbes.
• The spleen and intestines, among other organs, deposit fats and vitamins around the body and protect against viral and bacterial invasion.
• The thymus gland produces thymus cells, known as ‘T’ cells, which are antibodies to infection.
• There are various glands (nodes) in the body that drain it of toxins and useless material. For instance, the cervical nodes drain the head, neck and chest.
• The pituitary gland in the brain directs all of the systems above, so if the brain goes wrong, so does the immune system. It sends electrical impulses to all areas of the body, stimulating cell re-generation and muscle growth. These electrical impulses also stimulate the thymus gland – the centre of immune function.
What effect does vaccination have on this immune function?
Vaccination – the act of artificially acquiring a disease so as to become immune to it – is flawed in a number of ways. Firstly, a vaccine contains many hazardous chemicals and not just the viruses to immunise against. These each have their own toxic affect on the body. Secondly, the route of entry is different to a naturally occurring disease. Most natural diseases would enter through the mouth or the nasal cavity, not the skin.
Vaccination breaks the skin with a needle and injects foreign matter into the blood supply.
This bypasses the skin’s role in immune function, as well as the tonsils, the mucous membranes, and so on.
Normally, the body produces extra antibodies after being primed by the tonsils that there is impending infection. Therefore, if the infection takes hold, there will be an army of white blood cells, ready to neutralise the infection.
In the case of vaccination, this infection goes straight to the blood, with no prior build up for the body, and there are no extra immune cells to deal with it.
Also, with vaccination there is more than one disease present (e.g. measles, mumps, rubella all in one), whereas naturally a child would never contract 3 diseases at the same time. This puts additional strain on the immune system.
What problems can this cause?
Injection of vaccine via this unnatural route can use up 70% of the immune system’s resources, instead of the usual 3 to 4% with a wild occurring disease (according to Cynthia Cournoyer, ‘What About Immunizations?’, Dennis Nelson Publishers, 1991).
Because the body has no extra antibodies waiting to counter the vaccine, it can go into overdrive in an attempt to deal with the situation, taking much needed vitamins away from bones and other organs, to use for the production of more antibodies. This means that the other vital systems go short on vitamins, in extreme cases leading to bone fractures caused by the immune response leaching vitamins to cope with the vaccine. This lack of vitamins can also cause bruising and retinal bleeding and haemorrhaging, which is why some vaccine damaged babies have been falsely labelled as ‘shaken baby syndrome’ cases. These type of vaccine injuries are similar to those caused by trauma.
The massive surge of antibodies created by the vaccine can also cause the body to become hypersensitive and this is responsible for the increase in allergies and auto-immune diseases. Allergies are an over-exposure to toxic elements which the body is unable to cleanse itself of.
If the adrenals, which include the pancreas, the pituitary gland and the spleen, become over-stimulated, for instance, by vaccination, this can cause the body to become toxic and unable to regulate itself. This has been linked to heart disease, diabetes, asthma and bronchitis, to name a few. Over-stimulating the adrenals also causes a decrease in circulation of blood round the body, and atrophying of vascular vessels.
It is in this state of dysfunction and chemical overload, from vaccines, pollution, junk food, pharmaceutical drugs and so on, that our bodies become less able to stay healthy.
‘When the body is in its ideal state of harmony, there is no need for “immunity.” In such a state of harmony and balance, the thymus functions properly as the central regulator for the proper digestion of elements and all that is taken into the body is digested and excreted.’ – (Stonebridge Associated Colleges, 2005).
In the time immediately following vaccination, when extra vitamins are being used up to fight the vaccine, this may actually make the person more susceptible to the disease. For instance, in the Merck, Sharp and Dohme LTD product information for HIB vaccine, it states: ‘Cases of Haemophilus B disease may occur in the weeks after vaccination’, and in Lederle Hibtiter information sheet, ‘Cases of HIB disease, although rare, may occur after vaccination.’ This is known as ‘PROVOCATION disease’, i.e. disease caused by vaccine.
Live vaccines are more likely to pass on the disease to their recipient or his close contacts, as the viruses are excreted in urine, faeces and saliva for upto 3 weeks after each shot.
The polio vaccine was changed from the live oral vaccine to part of the injectable, killed 5 in 1, because the only cases of polio in western countries were caused by the vaccine.
Vaccine caused diseases are often more severe than the naturally occurring disease. For instance, ATYPICAL measles, only got by vaccinated children, is much more serious because the vaccine suppresses the child’s rash, which is his means of excreting the toxins, and this leads to the toxins being pushed deeper into the body and affecting the major organs and sometimes the brain, as atypical measles encephalitis.
Vaccine viruses can also attach themselves to cells, organs and brain tissue and cause cancers, disabilities and brain injury, as in the case of a boy who became autistic and had a seizure disorder after his MMR jab at 15 months. Great Ormand Street Children’s Hospital tested him at 13 years of age and found remains of vaccine viruses in the injured parts of his brain. (The Sunday Express, 6 October 2002).
Antibodies to brain tissue have also been found in blood tests of autistic children.
Even with inactivated vaccines, it is possible for the killed virus or bacteria to mutate into a different form of the disease. For instance, a 16 year old Canadian girl died of Meningitis B after her boyfriend had been given the Meningitis C vaccine. Lab tests confirmed that the vaccine can mutate into B form and infect both the recipient and his or her close contacts. (Pulse, doctor’s magazine, 20th November 1999).
Large numbers of chronic diseases have evolved in the place of infectious disease, since the introduction of mass vaccination, including ME, Lupus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Autism (previously known as Kanner Syndrome, discovered by Dr. Kanner in the 1940’s), MS, Ebola virus, AIDS, Lichen Planus, Vulvodynia and other hypersensitivity conditions, not to mention the rife and uncontrollable rates of cancer, heart disease, asthma, eczema and other allergies. Even meningitis was extremely rare before the 20th century.
We are killing ourselves in our quest to ‘prevent’ childhood illness, as mother nature is stronger than man, so tampering with immune function can have disastrous consequences for all.
Vaccines Cause Immune Suppression
Immunostimulation Versus Immunosuppression after Multiple Vaccinations: the Woes of Therapeutic Vaccine Development
Three articles in this issue of Clinical Cancer Research show how multiple vaccinations can lead to immunosuppression. Moreover, two studies in patients show that granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) as an adjuvant immunostimulant to different kind of vaccines can lead to adverse outcome in terms of relapse-free and overall survival. Modulation of regulatory T-cell activity may be required to overcome this outcome and may be crucial for the successful development of therapeutic vaccines.
Source: (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(22):6745–7)
Cancer Patients Injected With Cancer Vaccine Caused ‘Early Melanoma Deaths’
Ninety-seven patients with resected melanoma (stage II-IV) were enrolled, stratified by stage, and randomized to receive a cellular melanoma vaccine with or without GM-CSF. The primary endpoint was delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) response to melanoma cells. Antibody responses, peripheral leukocyte counts, and survival were also examined.
Results: The GM-CSF arm showed enhanced antibody responses with an increase in IgM titer against the TA90 antigen and increased TA90 immune complexes. This arm also had diminished antimelanoma cell delayed-type hypersensitivity response. Peripheral blood leukocyte profiles showed increases in eosinophils and basophils with decreased monocytes in the GM-CSF arm. These immune changes were accompanied by an increase in early melanoma deaths and a trend toward worse survival with GM-CSF.
Conclusion: These data suggest that GM-CSF is not helpful as an immune adjuvant in this dose and schedule and raise concern that it may be harmful. Based on the discordant findings of an immune endpoint and clinical outcome, the use of such surrogate endpoints in selecting treatments for further evaluation must be done with a great deal of caution.
Source: (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(22):7029–35)
Partial CD4 Depletion Reduces Regulatory T Cells Induced by Multiple Vaccinations
Results: Multiple vaccinations, rather than boosting the immune response, significantly reduced therapeutic efficacy of adoptive immunotherapy and were associated with an increased frequency and absolute number of CD3+CD4+Foxp3+ T regulatory (Treg) cells. Anti-CD4 administration reduced the absolute number of Treg cells 9-fold. Effector T-cells generated from anti-CD4–treated mice were significantly (P < 0.0001) more therapeutic in adoptive transfer studies than T cells from multiply vaccinated animals with a full complement of CD4+ cells.
Conclusion: These results suggest that CD4+ Treg cells limit the efficacy of multiple vaccinations and that timed partial depletion of CD4+ T cells may reduce suppression and “tip-the-balance” in favor of therapeutic antitumor immunity. The recent failure of large phase III cancer vaccine clinical trials, wherein patients received multiple vaccines, underscores the potential clinical relevance of these findings.
Source: (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(22):6881–90)
1 in 5 Americans Suffer From Allergies
If springtime breezes bring you sniffles, you can take comfort in the knowledge that you are not alone.
For reasons that researchers do not fully understand, allergies to pollen, dust, pet dander and food have become more prevalent among Americans in recent decades. Today, one out of every five Americans suffers from allergies, according to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America.
“We don’t know why the incidence of allergies is on the rise,” said Maya Jerath, M.D., Ph.D., an assistant professor in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine and director of the UNC Allergy and Immunology Clinic.
Nor do researchers understand why an allergy develops in the first place. “That has baffled people and continues to baffle people in this field a lot,” she said.
An allergy is an immune reaction to a harmless substance, such as a pollen grain or peanut protein. Instead of ignoring the substance, the body produces antibodies to mount a fight against it. Allergy symptoms can range from itchy eyes and sneezing to life-threatening anaphylactic reactions.
The causes of allergies remain elusive in part because the immune system’s role is complex, Jerath said. The system must defend the body from countless foreign invaders in food, water and the air around you.
Significantly for allergy sufferers, the immune system must also learn to distinguish particles that are dangerous from those that are not. For most people, this learning occurs during early childhood.
“If it doesn’t get adequate exposure to certain things, those regulatory mechanisms don’t get set up,” Jerath said.
For that reason, some researchers believe that a lack of exposure to microorganisms early in life may precondition a person to allergies. This explanation, called the “hygiene hypothesis,” suggests that growing up surrounded by many other children, dirt or livestock helps the immune system develop a tolerance to harmless irritants.
Source: Physorg.com, by Sara Peach, 24 February 2010.
The spectrum of post-vaccination inflammatory CNS demyelinating syndromes
A wide variety of inflammatory diseases temporally associated with the administration of various vaccines, has been reported in the literature. A PubMed search from 1979 to 2013 revealed seventy one (71) documented cases. The most commonly reported vaccinations that were associated with CNS demyelinating diseases included influenza (21 cases), human papilloma virus (HPV) (9 cases), hepatitis A or B (8 cases), rabies (5 cases), measles (5 cases), rubella (5 cases), yellow fever (3 cases), anthrax (2 cases), meningococcus (2 cases) and tetanus (2 cases). The vast majority of post-vaccination CNS demyelinating syndromes, are related to influenza vaccination and this could be attributed to the high percentage of the population that received the vaccine during the HI1N1 epidemia from 2009 to 2012. Usually the symptoms of the CNS demyelinating syndrome appear few days following the immunization (mean: 14.2 days) but there are cases where the clinical presentation was delayed (more than 3 weeks or even up to 5 months post-vaccination) (approximately a third of all the reported cases).
In terms of the clinical presentation and the affected CNS areas, there is a great diversity among the reported cases of post-vaccination acute demyelinating syndromes. Optic neuritis was the prominent clinical presentation in 38 cases, multifocal disseminated demyelination in 30, myelitis in 24 and encephalitis in 17. Interestingly in a rather high proportion of the patients (and especially following influenza and human papiloma virus vaccination-HPV) the dominant localizations of demyelination were the optic nerves and the myelon, presenting as optic neuritis and myelitis (with or without additional manifestations of ADEM), reminiscent to neuromyelitic optica (or, more generally, the NMO-spectrum of diseases). Seven patients suffered an NMO-like disease following HPV and we had two similar cases in our Center. One patient with post-vaccination ADEM, subsequently developed NMO.
Overal, the risk of a demyelinating CNS disease following vaccination, although non-negligible, is relatively low. The risk of onset or relapse of CNS demyelination following infections against which the vaccines are aimed to protect, is substantially higher and the benefits of vaccinations surpass the potential risks of CNS inflammation. This does not in any way exempt us from “learning” the lessons taught by the reported cases and searching new and safer ways to improve vaccination techniques and increase their safety profile.
Source: Autoimmunity Reviews, Volume 13, issue 3, March 2014.
MODERN CHILDREN ARE SICKER THAN THEY WERE IN THE 1940’s AND 50’s
“In 1947 I was a nursery nurse student working in a nursery for little babies whose mothers needed to work as they were illegitimate and so no fathers were getting a wage.
The babies were very well and very sweet. There were colds and flu occasionally and scabies now and again.
There was NO asthma, eczema, epilepsy, hyperactivity, cardiac disease or cot death. Cot death started in 1957 after DPT was started.
You need to be in your 80’s to remember what life was like. Babies died of pneumonia because the houses were so cold but NOT of the awful diseases they have now.”
Mrs B – Retired Nursery Nurse.
Autoimmune Tissue Scurvy Misdiagnosed as Child Abuse
Source: Michael D Innis, Autoimmune Tissue Scurvy Misdiagnosed as Child Abuse, Clinical Medicine Research. Vol. 2, No. 6, 2013, pp. 154-157. doi: 10.11648/j.cmr.20130206.17
Biology Video Explains Benefit of Fever and Childhood Diseases (it is pro-vaccine but interesting). Section starts at minute 33.43
Section on how fever kills viruses and how childhood diseases are ‘vital’. Segment is only tiny but interesting, even if video is pro-vaccine. (VAN does not agree that vaccines are harmless or that antibodies always mean you are immune).
American College of Pediatricians issues a statement to parents and primary care doctors about concerns regarding the safety of Gardasil and HPV vaccines.
I encourage whoever reads this to check out this article and video on The CDC, Vaccines and Autism: Truth In Media: The CDC, Vaccines and Autism . I tried to post the video here, but I couldn’t find a direct link that was in the right format for WordPress.
Here is the article without the video along with the two links to the documents from Dr. Thompson who is the CDC whistleblower regarding the issue of the relation of the number of Autism cases of African American males under the age of 36 months who received the MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) vaccine.
The debate over whether vaccines cause autism has become one of the most controversial disputes in this country. In this episode of Truth In Media, the focus is not on whether vaccines are responsible for autism. The issue at hand here is a study that was performed at the CDC and the question of whether the agency was complicit in a cover-up over a decade ago.
For nearly two years, Truth In Media has explored the allegations of Dr. William Thompson, a CDC scientist who came forward in 2014, hired a whistleblower attorney, and claimed that important data regarding a study on vaccines and autism was eliminated.
Thompson’s claims have led to a divide among Americans, with some believing that Thompson’s allegations are credible and should be investigated further, and others convinced that the documents Thompson handed over mean absolutely nothing. In December 2015, Ben Swann was the first journalist to obtain the documents from Congressman Bill Posey.
In this episode, Swann further examines not only Thompson’s claims, but also the documents related to the study, with the assistance of doctors, journalists, authors and former CDC specialists who joined Swann in discussing every document that was handed over.
Update, January 26, 2016, 2:16 p.m.: Due to a high volume of requests, the CDC documents given to Truth In Media are available below, split into two folders.
This is damning evidence against vaccines. Here is a description of the video from the interviewer, Candyce Estave.
This is is the most shocking & damming interview I have watched regarding vaccine injury. Released only 1 day ago it should go viral. Dr Judy Mikovits, PhD is a Biochemist, cellular and molecular biologist with over 30 years of scientific expertise. She has directed programs on HIV, cancer, epigenetics, and neuroimmune disease, with a focus on development of novel drug and diagnostic technologies. Dr. Mikovits holds a PhD in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology from GeorgeWashington University. Her dissertation was on HIV latency and mechanisms of immune activation in monocytes. Dr. Mikovits was a Postdoctoral Scholar in Molecular Virology at the Laboratory of Genomic Diversity, National Cancer Institute under Dr. David Derse.
Over the past 26 years, she has published 51 scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals, and worked as a government scientist for many years developing viruses and vaccinations. In 2011 when she made a horrifying discovery that was contaminating all vaccinations, she presented her data to government officials and was threatened & told to destroy all her data. When she did not she was jailed, her career systematically destroyed, and a gag order put in place for 4 years threatening that if she spoke out she would be thrown back in jail. That gag order has just lifted, and she’s dumped the government right in it! She speaks about how autism is associated with vaccines, also cancers, chronic fatigue syndrome, alzheimers, auto immune diseases, allergies and more. She discusses how the cocktail of vaccinations pumped into babies mutate to develop months and years down the track into new viruses, cancers and diseases, some they don’t even know about yet. She explains how the viruses injected through vaccines tear open our DNA and insert their own DNA to mutate our genetic makeup and be passed on generation after generation. She has been threatened with a suicide murder cover up, she doesn’t care, she wants it all exposed. The act of the Australian government making vaccinations mandatory is an act of genocide. If your jaw didn’t drop you obviously need to listen to it again. Via Jasmine Yuzwak
by GM Watch
Findings of new study need confirmation in animal tests
Roundup is an endocrine disruptor and is toxic to human cells in vitro (tested in culture dishes in the laboratory) at levels permitted in drinking water in Australia, a new study has found.
Glyphosate alone was less toxic to human cells than glyphosate in a Roundup formulation; both glyphosate and Roundup caused cell death which resulted in decreased progesterone levels – a form of hormone/endocrine disruption. Endocrine disruption did not precede the toxicity to cells but occurred after it. The decreases in progesterone concentrations were caused by reduced numbers of viable cells.
A 24h exposure to a concentration of glyphosate (in Roundup) similar to that recommended as an acceptable level for Australian drinking water caused significant toxicity to the cells in vitro, which supports a call for long-term in vivo (in live animals) studies to characterise the toxicity of Roundup.
The possibility that Roundup has endocrine disrupting activity independent of its ability to kill or disable cells needs further study.
Endocrine disruption and cytotoxicity of glyphosate and roundup in human JAr cells in vitro
Fiona Young, Dao Ho, Danielle Glynn and Vicki Edwards
Department of Medical Biotechnology, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia
Integr Pharm Toxicol Genotoxicol, 2015 Volume 1(1): 12-19
The toxicity of the active molecule in herbicides has been used to determine safe concentrations, because other components are considered inert. Roundup, which contains the active molecule Glyphosate, was described as an endocrine disrupter because non-cytotoxic concentrations inhibited progesterone synthesis in vitro. Human chorioplacental JAr cells synthesise progesterone, and increase synthesis when stimulated by chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), or the transduction molecule cAMP.
JAr cells were exposed to two Roundup formulations, and compared with the same concentrations of glyphosate ± cAMP, or ± hCG for 1, 4, 24, 48 or 72h. The surviving viable cells were quantified using an MTT assay, and progesterone was measured in an ELISA. hCG and cAMP stimulated progesterone synthesis by cells in vitro as expected. In contrast to previous reports, JAr cell death preceded decreased progesterone synthesis, and steroidogenesis was unaffected by low, non-cytotoxic concentrations of Roundup or glyphosate. Roundup was more cytotoxic than glyphosate alone; the 24h EC50 was 16mM for glyphosate, but 0.008mM when glyphosate was in a 7.2g/L Roundup formulation. Significant cytotoxicity was caused by glyphosate in Roundup (p<0.01) after 24h, and cytotoxicity was observed in vitro after exposure to a range of concentrations comparable to the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines.
Endocrine disruption effects were secondary to cytotoxicity. Roundup was more cytotoxic than the same concentration of glyphosate alone, indicating that the other constituents of the herbicide are not inert. There is a compelling need to conduct in vivo studies to characterise the toxicity of glyphosate in a Roundup formulation, to facilitate re-evaluation of existing public health guidelines.
Have Bill Gates and his eugenicist foundation’s crimes against humanity finally caught up with him? If the Supreme Court of India has anything to say about it, he will face the ramifications of poisoning millions of Indian children with vaccines.
A recent report published by Health Impact News shows that a vaccine empire built on lies can only go on for so long. The reports states
“While fraud and corruption are revealed on almost a daily basis now in the vaccine industry, theU.S. mainstream media continues to largely ignore such stories. Outside the U.S., however, the vaccine empires are beginning to crumble, and English versions of the news in mainstream media outlets are available via the Internet.
One such country is India, where the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and their vaccine empire are under fire, including a pending lawsuit currently being investigated by the India Supreme Court.”
If you aren’t aware of the key players in the vaccine mayhem being driven into African countries, they are:
- The World Health Organization
- The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
- PATH (Program for Appropriate Technology in Health, funded by the Gates’ foundation), and
- GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, also funded by the Gates’ foundation)
All four of these organizations will now be expected to explain themselves due to a writ of petition originally submitted to the Supreme Court of India in 2012, by Kalpana Mehta, Nalini Bhanot, and Dr. Rukmini Rao, which has finally been heard by the courts.
The petitioners stated:
“BMGF, PATH and WHO were criminally negligent trialling the vaccines on a vulnerable, uneducated and under-informed population school administrators, students and their parents who were not provided informed consent or advised of potential adverse effects or required to be monitored post-vaccination.”
Furthermore, though absent from most mainstream U.S. media outlets, the Economic Times of India published their report in August 2014, stating that young tribal girls were tested with HPV vaccines. This involved not a handful of children, but 16,000 individuals in Andhra Pradesh, India, where they were given the Gardasil vaccine.
KP Narayana Kumar reported that within a month of receiving the vaccine, many of the children fell ill, and by 2010, five of them had died. Another two children were reported to have died in Vadodara, Gujarat, where another 14,000 tribal children were vaccinated with another brand of the HPV vaccine, Cervarix, manufactured by GlaxoSmitheKline (GSK), who incidentally, has been accused of dumping polio virus into a Belgium river.
Consent forms to administer the HPV vaccine were ‘illegally’ signed by wardens form youth hostels, showing that the Gates’ prey on the indigent without parents. For those who had parents, most were illiterate, and the true potential dangers of the vaccines were not explained to them.
SAMA, an organization in India which promotes women’s health discovered this insidiousness, and reported it, but only now will Gates and his cronies have to answer for their misdeeds. Approximately 120 girls reported epileptic seizures, severe stomach cramps, headaches, and mood swings, of those who did not die. Other girls receiving the Gardasil vaccine have experienced infertility.
The Economic Times further reported:
“The SAMA report also said there had been cases of early onset of menstruation following the vaccination, heavy bleeding and severe menstrual cramps among many students. The standing committee pulled up the relevant state governments for the shoddy investigation into these deaths.
It said it was disturbed to find that ‘all the seven deaths were summarily dismissed as unrelated to vaccinations without in-depth investigations …’ the speculative causes were suicides, accidental drowning in well (why not suicide?), malaria, viral infections, subarachnoid hemorrhage (without autopsy) etc.”
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation declared their little vaccine project a total success. I guess the Supreme Court of India will decide that now.
|Christina Sarich is a humanitarian and freelance writer helping you to Wake up Your Sleepy Little Head, and See the Big Picture. Her blog is Yoga for the New World. Her latest book is Pharma Sutra: Healing the Body And Mind Through the Art of Yoga.|
Most of the medical profession claims the issues surrounding vaccination have been “settled long ago, and laid to rest.” After my experiences in the hospital system and thoroughly examining both sides of the vaccination debate, it is clear that that isn’t the case.
The history of vaccination is more complicated than most people understand. The anti-vaccine movement is hundreds of years old. It heated up in the 1800s, when parents in the U.K. became fed up with watching their healthy infants and children become ill or die shortly after getting smallpox vaccinations, or later get sick from smallpox anyway. Parents and doctors who refused smallpox vaccines risked losing their homes, furniture and livelihoods if judges ruled against them.
The smallpox vaccines were made from pus scraped off of diseased cows’ belly sores, contaminated with disease matter from a variety of animals (and in some cases, humans). The smallpox vaccine history is not what you think it is, if you think vaccines wiped out smallpox.
Doctors and those administering vaccines are supposed to obtain “informed consent” before vaccinating. Informed consent is not possible, because parents are not given all the information they require to understand the most important issues.
I do not consider it my place to tell anyone whether to vaccinate or not. It is my place to understand as much as I can about vaccines and give people a more complete understanding from which to make their choices. This has never been a priority to the public health services. In fact there is ample documentation that the priority was quite the opposite, and actually to quell “any possible doubts, whether well founded or not” regarding vaccines. That priority has placed many lives in jeopardy, as major problems with vaccination were and are overlooked by vaccine policy makers.
There are many problems with the science that underpins vaccine information. I’ve yet to meet a pediatrician who is informed enough to offer informed consent. Infant immunity has been misunderstood by immunologists, as the immunology literature admits to. Only recently have some important questions been answered about why infant immune systems don’t function like adult ones. There is good reason for the tolerance that an infant has, and the answer is not to interrupt the program with aluminum and vaccines to ramp it up. Doing so is now known to have long-term consequences.
There is a paucity of studies comparing nevervaccinated children with partially or fully vaccinated children. In terms of safety studies, a major issue is that most vaccine studies use another vaccine as the control placebo, or use the background substance of the vaccine. There is a recent study, published in 2012 by Benjamin J. Cowling in Clinical Infectious Diseases, where a true saline placebo was used. That study showed no difference in influenza viral infection between groups, but, astonishingly, it revealed a 5–6 times higher rate of non-influenza viral infections in the vaccinated. It is no small wonder more true placebos are not used in vaccine research.
In the 2012 article “Neonatal outcomes after influenza immunization during pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial,” published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ), we see a clear example of how false placebos are regularly used. Needless to say, giving untested vaccines which can be unknowingly contaminated, and with unproven effectiveness, is a “medical experiment,” and in my opinion, violates the core principles of the Nuremberg Code (informed and unambiguous consent). Most vaccines have never undergone carcinogenicity testing, for example, and likewise are rarely studied in pregnant women, which results in people taking vaccines, either by a proclaimed “emergency”; by a “public health” order from the WHO; by threat of imprisonment or loss of rights over one’s children; or by threat of being abandoned by the medical professionals providing care.
“Informed consent” is devoid of all meaning when people are tricked into taking vaccines by the use of misleading or frightening “information.”
Parents must learn the ways to take care of their children when they get the common childhood illnesses, whether they vaccinate or not, since vaccinated children can still get the diseases they were vaccinated against. In the case of unvaccinated children, who experience childhood maladies, effective home nursing most often allows children to recover naturally, and in most cases, the child will have long-term immunity.
Some vaccine policies have robbed teenagers and adults of the opportunity to get re-exposed and continue with natural immunity. For example, in mothers who were vaccinated against measles, placental transfer of antibodies is limited to a few months instead of more than a year in naturally immune mothers. Sometimes, mothers’ breast milk is devoid of the necessary antibodies they need to protect their newborns—especially if those mothers were vaccinated in childhood.
The above exemplifies but one of the many potential consequences we face as a result of vaccination for measles and other childhood illnesses, such as rubella.
Medical schools do not educate about the contents, dangers, effectiveness or necessity of vaccines. Most medical doctors are fearful of the natural childhood illnesses because they don’t have any idea how to safely assist patients through them. The limited mainstream treatment options I learned often caused the diseases to be worse than they had to be. Yet surprisingly, I discovered other methods which work extremely well, but were never presented as part of my medical education.
In a short article from Stanford Medicine, “Tapping the Immune System’s Secret,” the limitations of immunology are plainly spelled out. The public is repeatedly deceived in order to maintain participation in vaccination. All sorts of tactics are used. One of the most popular is to say that everyone should get vaccinated in order to protect the unvaccinated. This is commonly known as “herd immunity.” I have written an extensive article on herd immunity that can be accessed in the Pathways resource section.
Doctors repeat the advice, “We have to vaccinate them while they are young so the ‘take rate’ is high.” A case in point is an article for which I was interviewed in which one of Maine’s supposed top experts is giving misleading advice. In an article from Bangor Metro titled “A Shot to the Heart,” author Joy Hollowell also interviewed Dr. Jonathan Fanburg, president of the Maine Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics:
Concerns about how much a young child’s immune system can handle at one time have prompted some parents to stagger vaccinations. But Fanburg points out that there is no medical data to support the practice, adding that it’s actually more beneficial to vaccinate infants, rather than wait until they are older. “Children have a better ‘take’ of vaccines in their first two years of life,” he says. “There is a higher rate of immunogenicity, which is the child’s ability to produce antibodies to the vaccine antigen.”
Dr. Fanburg seems to lack understanding as to how an infant’s immune system develops and why. If he understood, he would pause for some time before making such a dogmatic statement.
A baby’s immune system produces only very small amounts of IL-1B and TNF-alpha. There was a time when experts thought that this was simply a defect in all newborn humans. In 2004, a study published by Lakshman Chelvarajan suggested that if vaccine manufacturers added various immune system kickers into vaccines, this would solve the problem and fix these perfectly normal children’s immune systems, which are so often described as being “defective” or “inadequate,” although they are completely age-appropriate, with characteristics shared by all land mammals.
Subunit vaccines like HepB, Strep Pneumo, Hib and Meningococcal have potent “adjuvants,” such as aluminum. Without them, the baby’s immune system sits there and does nothing. An adjuvant creates a red-alert situation, forcing the infant’s innate immune system to respond opposite to the way it should function in the first year of life. Pro-vaccine immunologists see nothing wrong with this.
By 2007, Chelvarajan was seeing things differently. In the last paragraph of a study published in the Journal of Leukocyte Biology, he wrote that whereas in the past, he had considered this a “defect,” he now considered it an important developmental program:
This anti-inflammatory phenotype may be beneficial to the neonate at a time when tissue growth and remodeling events are taking place at a rapid pace…thus the inability of the neonate to respond to infection with encapsulated bacteria may be the risk the organism takes for successful development.
In order to adjust to the world appropriately, an “anti-inflammatory phenotype” is critical to an infant. Breast milk acts as a stand-in innate immune system, which protects the baby from toxin-mediated and other diseases by supplying anti-inflammatory substances in the milk, along with other immune particles. These prevent bacteria and viruses from adhering, or kill them outright.
This protects the baby, acting as “in loco” defense while the infant immune system is being programmed to know self from non-self. This same pattern of development is seen in laboratories where they study non-human mammals, and is ubiquitous across mammals, showing that the anti-inflammatory phenotype is crucial to successful survival both short and long term.
A more recent article published in Nature by S. Elahi in 2013 shows that infant immune cells have full functional capacity, but are clamped down by design, while the infant immune system is learning to distinguish between “self,” healthy commensal microorganisms, and what should later be attacked by the activated and trained immune system.
During this period of “clamping,” which according to Dr. Elahi, is approximately two human years, the infant is well compensated by the mother’s human milk, which continues the educational process and kills unwanted organisms. What then, is the effect of vaccines, which interfere with the quiescent state of the infant immune system’s master plan, adding large amounts of aluminum?
With breast-milk support, an infant immune system develops appropriately and systematically— in its own due time, according to the genetic program placed in the baby at conception. What is that master plan? To enable the infant to safely transition into immunological independence with the minimum level of inflammation possible. Can that system be derailed? Yes it can. What can derail it? Anything which triggers an inflammatory response in the mother while she is pregnant, and in the baby by the use of a vaccination.
Ironically the medical research is very clear about one thing. It’s not the “infection,” per se, that causes problems. It’s the activation of the immune system. How do they know it’s not just the infection? Because stress, toxins and other non-infectious antigens can trigger the immune system cascade in very similar ways to infection.
If it is important for successful development of a baby to allow the risk of infection by not allowing two key parts of the primary infection defense to “fire,” what’s the other risk you might take, if you force an immune system to do something it’s not supposed to do? A vaccine, by definition, causes repeated, chronic inflammation at set time intervals. Vaccines are designed to create peripheral inflammation, and vaccine adjuvants and antigens can cause brain inflammation, and create allergies and autoimmunity—resulting in constant inflammation all around the body. For some children vaccines can also cause mitochondria to stop working properly.
You might now be thinking: If a baby’s default position is to not respond to toxin-mediated bacterial diseases, what chance does a baby have to survive in this world? If you would like to learn more about neonatal immunity, I invite you to read a three-part article accessible in the Pathways resource section, and take note of the medical articles referenced.
Pro-vaccine doctors sometimes cite “peer-reviewed literature” to supposedly prove their point, yet a closer look at their own literature often proves otherwise—as does a closer look at the sick population of vaccinated children they supposedly care for. Furthermore, a close look at medical textbooks through the decades reveals a very interesting trend. In the 1920s and ’30s, doctors were often quite relaxed over diseases which today are presented as more deadly than the plague. Many grandparents today are completely bemused at the way the medical profession describes infections which were, to most of them, straightforward holidays off school.
This is not stating that there were never serious consequences. There sometimes were. However, today, most parents erroneously believe that every child will die from diseases which most grandparents found were nuisance value only.
The medical system now considers measles more dangerous than the plague, and the most dangerous disease known to man. Yet there is no need to be afraid of measles, because well-nourished children who get adequate vitamin A have an unremarkable course to recovery. Boredom might be their biggest whine.
I have discovered that whooping cough isn’t something to be scared of either. In the days when my only tool was an antibiotic, whooping cough occasionally caused me considerable concern, but not today. I’ve watched many parents all over the world treat whooping cough simply by using high doses of vitamin C and occasionally homeopathy. They see rapid improvement and no serious complications. But you will not read about these cases in peer-reviewed literature and your doctor doesn’t know about them, because sick children—the ones they see and often create—are the only ones counted in the morbidity statistics. Healthy children who uneventfully recover are not seen by the medical system, and therefore are not counted.
The serious consequences from most childhood diseases come from just a few things: infant formula, cow’s milk, common medical drugs (especially antibiotics), malnutrition, vaccines and a lack of knowledge about simple methods of home nursing.
All of these barriers to recovery are completely avoidable in the United States and many other countries, and that is why we see so many healthy children who were never vaccinated, when we take the time to look.
In the accompanying chart, you can see how mortality for the common illnesses declined significantly long before the vaccines were created.
There a few common misconceptions about not vaccinating:
1. You are putting other people at risk by not vaccinating.
At risk for what? Chicken pox? Ask your grandmother if she knew anyone who died from measles. Different diseases have different degrees of severity in different age groups. The misconception that “if you don’t vaccinate, you place others at risk” is based on an assumption that vaccinated people do not get the disease they were vaccinated for. Did you know that a controlled study published in BMJ in 2006 showed that of all the whooping cough that was diagnosed, over 86 percent of the children were fully vaccinated and up-to-date for the whooping cough vaccine? There are similar studies showing that mumps and measles outbreaks often affect the vaccinated. People who are vaccinated can have their immune systems altered in a manner that leads to susceptibility to other infectious diseases, and can also leave them vulnerable to the disease they were vaccinated for, due to a phenomenon called “original antigenic sin.” Original antigenic sin is where an injected vaccine antigen programs the body to react in a manner that is incomplete, and different to the natural response to infection. When the vaccinated contact that disease again, they are unable to mount an effective response to the pathogen because vital first steps are missing. The whooping cough vaccine is an example of this.
A noteworthy study was published by Jason Warfel in 2013, looking at baboons, which are susceptible and manifest whooping cough like humans do. In the Warfel study, baboons who were either vaccinated or not vaccinated were later exposed to pertussis (whooping cough) bacteria, something that cannot be done experimentally in humans (due to ethical considerations), but which yields very important data. Expectedly, the baboons that had never been infected got the cough and remained colonized with bacteria for a maximum of 38 days. Baboons that were previously vaccinated and immune vaccine-style, became colonized upon later exposure for a longer time than the naïve baboons: 42 days. However, unvaccinated baboons that recovered naturally and were later exposed to the bacteria did not become colonized at all—zero days.
So, who is providing better herd immunity in the face of bacterial exposure? Vaccinated individuals who presume they are immune, yet remain asymptomatically colonized for 42 days, spreading bacteria? Unvaccinated kids who get infected and remain colonized for 38 days? Or the naturally convalesced who are not able to be colonized and therefore do not spread bacteria at all upon re-exposure? Better still: Natural convalescence makes for decades-longer, more solid immunity than vaccination.
Many vaccine enthusiasts like to invoke the term “herd immunity” to make the argument that the non-vaccinated pose a risk to the vaccinated. But the concept of herd immunity has no relevance to the vaccinated, as it was coined in reference to natural immunity in populations and what level the least epidemics occurred. There is no evidence whatsoever that having an 85 percent or 95 percent vaccination rate protects from outbreaks. This theory has been disproved time and again in highly vaccinated populations.
2. The non-vaccinated spread disease.
Actually it is the opposite. Live vaccines are known to spread to close contacts. One example published in 2011 in Science Direct addresses this, concluding that in a mumps outbreak in the Netherlands, “the risk of a close contact becoming infected by vaccinated patients was small, but present.”
We also know that in pertussis those who are vaccinated are more likely, due to original antigenic sin, to be carriers of the bacteria longer than the nonvaccinated, even when asymptomatic. In his article published in Clinical Infectious Disease in 2004, author James Cherry pointed out that adults, re-vaccinated against pertussis, don’t develop any antibacterial activity whatsoever. He went on to explain why: The current vaccines contain a few antigens, which create original antigenic sin, whereby the immune response to the vaccine is abnormal. That first-learned response then becomes the default position the immune system takes, on future booster shots. So in the case of the whooping cough vaccines, there are key protein virulence factors which have not been included in the vaccines, including ACT, TCF, TCT, BrkA and DNT.
Because the first three are not included, the default immune response does not prevent colonization. Furthermore, Cherry stated that the original antigenic sin results in the vaccinated being unable to clear the bacteria from their lungs. The non-vaccinated have immunity to all the front-line virulence factors, and very quickly clear the bacteria on re-exposure.
Mothers who have been vaccinated may develop surrogate markers which can be measured in a laboratory, but these do not guarantee efficient immune responses after exposure to the natural disease, because their first “learned response” was incorrect. Furthermore, they are still not sure what the surrogate marker actually is for pertussis.
There is similar information on measles, the other disease that has been portrayed by the media as a danger to the population due to non-vaccinated children. But this information is not accurate, nor is measles a dangerous disease in people who have sufficient vitamin A. Another author, B. Damien, pointed out in the September 1998 issue of the Journal of Medical Virology that the vaccinated are 5 to 8 times more susceptible to asymptomatic infection than the non-vaccinated. How then, are the non-vaccinated solely responsible for the recent outbreaks in measles?
Many vaccines are said to be “attenuated,” or modified-live, and supposedly do not infect, but over the decades we have seen how those attenuated viruses mutate once they are in a human and can spread more virulent disease than what is being vaccinated for. The oral polio vaccines in Nigeria today are a case in point. But this can happen with any attenuated viral vaccine.
The original Salk polio vaccines were supposed to be killed vaccines, and yet they infected thousands of people, killing and paralyzing more than 200 of them. This figure is thought to be a gross underestimate of the damage done.
It is not uncommon to see a child recently vaccinated for chicken pox develop shingles or chicken pox. I’ve also seen the shingles vaccine (which has 14 times the amount of virus as the chicken pox vaccine) provoke shingles in an elderly woman days after the vaccine was given. Strangely enough, it sent all of her doctors to start reading to see if shingles vaccines can cause shingles, because medical doctors know almost nothing about vaccines.
Here are things to consider when you hear of an outbreak of an infectious disease: How many of the affected were fully vaccinated, and how many people died or were put in the hospital? Were the cases verified with laboratory tests, or are the reports based on community doctor reports?
Another question to bear in mind is, Were the people hospitalized because the disease was really serious, or because the family didn’t know how to deal with it and responded to a medical profession hard-wired to believe everyone with that disease can die? In other words, was the admission to the hospital really necessary?
3. Deaths from these terrible diseases that once plagued humanity will return to pre-vaccine levels if we do not keep up the vaccines.
We can see from the graph on the opposite page that the mortality of these diseases was drastically declining prior to vaccination. In addition, you might want to know the more rational explanation for deadly disease decline in modern times. It’s not vaccination; it’s hygiene. In a 2002 article published in The Lancet, “What is the evidence for a causal link between hygiene and infections?” authors Allison E. Aiello and Elaine L. Larson offer the epidemiological evidence between hygiene practices and infections.
Here is something else you may not have been informed of by your healthcare professional: All the reduction, even for tuberculosis, was achieved before vaccines of any sort were offered in the U.S., and most of the reductions for all diseases were achieved before antibiotics became commercially available in about 1950 as well. So what did that? It wasn’t vaccines. Yet all the countries which used the BCG as front-line protection saw an identical decline to the one which we saw in the U.S. using no TB vaccine.
If you compare graphs for death declines in diphtheria and scarlet fever, they are almost identical. Yet there never was a widely used vaccine for scarlet fever. Scarlet fever—and its resulting complication, rheumatic fever—has clearly been shown in the medical literature to be nutritionally driven. This is why people who have had scarlet fever are primarily in war-torn, hungry and impoverished countries. In developed countries where rheumatic fever is an issue, it’s primarily seen among less-educated groups, whose nutritional understanding or access to good food is limited.
Yet undereducated people in stable social environments, without much money, who understand and follow effective nutritional pathways, will be on the scale of low susceptibility. It really is the nutrition and well-being that counts. It just so happens that low education, homelessness and poverty often coexist.
The reason rheumatic fever is a significant problem among poorer, less-educated, less-nourished groups is because poor nutrition is historically correlated with higher rates of rheumatic fever. All of us carry strep A regularly, but the well-fed amongst us don’t get scarlet fever, let alone its complication, rheumatic fever.
This point is documented enough to lay aside any concern over whether or not correlation implies causation.
Historically, in the case of infectious diseases, good nutrition has been and still is a major preventive factor. That has led to enormous declines of morbidity and mortality from most infectious diseases.
It’s not my place to tell anyone whether to vaccinate or not. But if people are going to choose wisely, they need to know the full ramifications of their options.