This post re-appeared on FaceBook and in re-reading it myself, I became aware of how valuable this is in presenting the “other” side of the vaccination “debate”.
There are clearly two sides. A blanket statement or approach to arriving at the real picture “Vaccines are needed for the greater good”, “Vaccines are dangerous”, or “Vaccines are Safe” do not help in a proper understanding. BTW ” the U.S Supreme Court exempted physicians and pharmaceutical companies from vaccine liability in their infamous landmark case that declared vaccines to be “unavoidably unsafe.” ”
The detail must be included. No leaving out any relevant compromising information. All factors need to be considered, including vested interests and biassed reporting, such as the article instigating the ‘Living Whole’ response. That it is biassed, is well explained here.
Is this article also biassed? It is presented from the opposing viewpoint and concentrates on that theme, but is the information
incorrect correct? Perhaps not perfectly, but the substance is true, meaningful and convincing. Comments are invited!
We are invited to share this post, I hope the blatant copying below is an acceptable method.
It is copied complete except for normal post peripherals and all the comments. To gain a full understanding of the picture presented here, of peoples’ understanding of it, reading the comments and the original source article is recommended.
Filling in the holes together…
Dear parents, are you being lied to?
April 7, 2014 by Megan 315 Comments
I came across a post last week entitled “Dear Parents, you are being lied to. “ In it the author attempted to essentially tell parents who choose not to vaccinate that they are wrong, victims of a deceitful web of lies, and the equivalent of “vaccine preventable disease receptacles.” I was so hoping this article would not be popular because to be honest, I didn’t want to address the flaws in her argument (where does one start?) and I certainly didn’t want to increase her blog traffic.
But reading that article was like dangling a carrot in front of a ravenous rabbit or a carcass in front of a starving wolf. Okay, maybe it’s more like throwing a red flag at an attorney (can someone say charge!). Either way, this article got shared, and posted on my wall, and posted on other walls, and people began to wonder “Are they being lied to?” Well, yes…you are…if you actually believe what you read in that article.
Here is how the article should have read:
You are being lied to. There are pharmaceutical companies who claim to be acting in the best interests of your children, but they’re putting your health and even lives at risk for the sake of profits. There are some doctors, who, despite not being trained on the history of, lack of science behind, adverse reactions, or additives in vaccinations, refuse to read the package inserts and contrary scientific evidence, and do not inform you of the true risks of a vaccine so you can make an educated decision. You’re being lied to…because you’re told you’re just a parent, and you don’t have a say.
They say that measles is a deadly disease. But it’s not…unless you look at a fact sheet from the World Health Organization (cited in the opposing article) which looks at measles rates globally. You know what else is deadly in third-world countries? A sneeze. Do you know how measles presents most of the time? A rash.
They say that chickenpox is a big deal.But it’s not.
Before the licensure of the vaccine, only 4 million cases of chicken pox occurred annually and the varicella mortality rate was only 0.4 deaths per 1 million people. In the 25 years prior to vaccine licensure, only 2,262 people died (about 90 people per year). Let’s put that into perspective…more than 1,000 people die every year falling down their stairs and 200 people die each year from accidentally drowning. I think the real epidemic here centers around your staircase.
They say the flu is dangerous. But it’s not.
The data on influenza statistics is a mess. Currently influenza/pneumonia is the 9th leading cause of death. According to the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, “influenza and pneumonia” took 62,034 lives in 2001. Most people would hear that number and run out and get a flu shot. Funny how they lump two “illnesses” in together like that. What they should have said was “61,777 people died from pneumonia and 257 from the flu and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”
Since the flu shot is ineffective and often exposes one to the flu. I’ll opt out and take my chances.
They say the vaccine prevents whooping cough. But it doesn’t. According to the pertussis prevalence data, incidence of pertussis was decreasing before the licensure of the vaccine in 1949. After licensure pertussis incidences increased, stabilized, and then reached a 50-year high in 2013. (Do check out the lovely chart on p. 64 here). And now, the CDC admits they’ve discovered vaccine-resistant pertussis and that children who receive the vaccine can become asymptomatic carriers and spread the bacteria. What? So the vaccine is to blame for the outbreaks occurring in an almost exclusively vaccinated population? I’m shocked (okay, not really).
Here are your real options: increase your child’s chance of getting (and spreading) whooping cough by getting a harmful, ineffective vaccine associated with brain damage (DTP), one that may cause autism and enhances the growth of parapertussis bacteria, which can cause a typically milder strain of whooping cough (DTaP) or makes one an asymptomatic carrier (Tdap). No thanks. I don’t want my child to get pertussis (or give it to anyone else) so I’m running as far away as I can from that vaccine.
They give credit to vaccines for eradicating diseases, but they didn’t. Polio (licensed in 1955), hepatitis A (1995) and B (1991), mumps (1967), measles (1963), and pertussis (1949), were all on the decline before the vaccines were introduced. Small pox and pertussis ultimately saw an increase in prevalence after the vaccine and rubella and tetanus was practically nonexistent prior to the vaccine. Mortality in all areas with all diseases were significantly decreased before the vaccine came on the scene. Instead of looking at deceptive CDC graphs that give credit where credit’s not due, try plugging in the year of licensure on both prevalence and mortality charts and discover where the decline occurred for yourself. (For prevalence of polio refer to “Incidence of poliomyelitis in the USA from CDC, 1972 and for measles prevalence use healthsentinel.com).
What eradicated and decreased the prevalence of these diseases? Considering “germs only live in environments conducive to their growth,” the stark declines in disease can be attributed to better living conditions, quarantine programs, hygiene, clean water, indoor plumbing, and better access to acute care. But if you want, we can pretend that maggots, parasites, microbes, and other germs don’t respond to changes in their environment. They’d much prefer a clean house to a rotting trash can.
They say vaccination is better than “natural infection.” But they’re wrong.
Yeah, it completely makes sense that we are all born with immune systems that have absolutely no clue how to function. Instead of exposing ourselves to viruses in nature which build our immune systems (like every other mammal) and give us lifetime immunity, we’ll expose ourselves to the mutated, live, and attenuated viruses and harmful additives in a vaccine, that may or may not work, and if it does only affords temporary immunity. Makes complete sense.
They say that vaccines have been rigorously tested for safety and are subjected to a higher level of scrutiny than any other medicine. But they’re wrong.
Medical drug approval is rigorous and requires pre-clinical testing in animals, an application and review, three phases of testing, and another review before it is approved. Studies are usually done with inactive placebos (like a sugar pill or saline solution) to determine side-effects, and then later compared to other treatments for the same disease, but not without passing the prior phase first. The dying cancer patient who did not get into the clinical trial will not get their hands on that experimental drug until it’s licensed and approved. Period.
Vaccine approval is a cake-walk in comparison. Usually two small studies (where test subjects are followed for a mere 5-15 days) are all that a pharmaceutical company needs to have before approval is granted (except in the case of the meningitis vaccine, which is being distributed without a license and is not approved for use in the United States). Most studies are not even done in this country – they are done in other countries and disposable children in Africa. Oh, the CDC conveniently leaves out the part about clinical trials being done with prior vaccines, adjuvants, or complex vaccines.
Indeed, the FDA has never even spelled out in regulations the criteria it uses to decide whether a vaccine is safe and effective for its intended use. – Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC
They say doctors readily admit the side effects of vaccinations, that side effects are well-known, and except in very rare cases, are “quite mild.” Actually, most doctors haven’t read the package inserts, don’t inform the patient of side-effects that go beyond “redness, pain, and swelling at the injection site, dizziness, or fainting” and in all actuality, they don’t have to because the U.S Supreme Court exempted physicians and pharmaceutical companies from vaccine liability in their infamous landmark case that declared vaccines to be “unavoidably unsafe.” [my emphasis]
So the side-effects of a vaccine are “quite mild” but the rash associated with chicken pox isn’t? Tell that to the recipients of rewards from the Vaccine Compensation Injury Act or the parents of children listed on the VAERS database. Yeah, I know you got paralysis, cancer, guillain barre, and your baby died of SIDS but hey…good thing your baby didn’t get that 3-5 day flu people used to get or that ugly red rash.
They say vaccines are safe. But they’re not.
The DTP vaccine caused brain inflammation and death in children. The oral polio vaccine crippled children and adults with vaccine-strain paralytic polio and caused cancer. The pertussis vaccine causes pertussis, the MMR vaccine causes irritable bowel diseases and neurological disorders, the flu shot causes paralysis, and they’re all associated with hundreds of side-effects you can find by reading the package inserts, court cases, and studies.
Until vaccines are subjected to double-blind placebo controlled studies using an inert saline solution (the standard of evidence-based medicine) and until the benefits outweigh the risks…they’re not safe.
They say MMR doesn’t cause autism. But it might.
Even the vaccine court has rule that evidence of a causal relationship between autism and MMR exists and that MMR can cause brain encephalopathy leading to permanent brain injury or death. Study after study after study, vaccine inserts, and countless court cases have confirmed this link. I don’t know about you, but I am not a fan of the “inject now worry about it later” mentality and I certainly didn’t choose my stance because I saw an unsubstantiated, inflammatory media attack on Dr. Wakefield. It’s time to stop bashing Wakefield and start addressing autism.
They say thimerosal in vaccines doesn’t cause autism, but it might.
There are over 15,000 articles in the medical literature describing the adverse health effects of mercury exposure on the human body, so it seems logical that one might be concerned. Although thimerosal has been reduced or removed from most vaccines, it is still present in the yearly influenza vaccine (unless you request one without) and was present in three vaccines (DTaP, Hep b, and Hib) all of which either listed autism, brain encephalitis, or neurological damage as possible adverse reactions. Considering the most recent autism statistics are from 2010 and aluminum was the replacement of choice for thimerosal – the verdict is still out. Is replacing something harmful with something harmful any better? We should probably make sure there’s no chance of autism before we go injecting any neurotoxin into our children.
They say a child gets more exposure to aluminum in breast milk and that aluminum is safe. Wrong again.
A minute amount of aluminum (0.04 mg/L) may be present in breast milk (which differs from mother to mother and goes through the digestive tract and easily exits via feces), but 0.1 – 0.5 mg/L is present in each dose of a vaccine and gets carried through the blood stream to be eliminated by the kidneys. That’s alarming considering a baby doesn’t obtain full kidney function until they are 1-2 years old and can’t properly excrete aluminum. So a child gets 49 doses of various vaccines injected into the bloodstream before age 6 and that’s not concerning? Can you say, heavy metal toxicity?
Regardless, there is no logical justification for exposing a baby to more of something that is harmful. Aluminum is classified as a hazardous substance that triggers an immune system pathway response associated with all sorts of chronic medical conditions like allergies, eczema, lupus, inflammatory bowel disease, autism, hyperactivity disorders, dysfunctional immune system, neurotoxicity, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, brain encephalopathy, bone disease, and interferes with a variety of metabolic and cellular processes in the nervous system. Here’s a good read on the toxicological profile of aluminum.
They say that claims made to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) and National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) don’t prove vaccines are harmful. But they do.
VAERS is a database that one can go to report an adverse reaction to a vaccine. It is estimated that only 1% of the population actually reports these side-effects. And it’s true, no “cause and effect” relationship has ever been established between the millions of reported side-effects and deaths associated with vaccinations. How convenient, no “cause and effect” relationship was established in the clinical trials either, or on any other pharmaceutical or government-funded study. Doing otherwise would de-regulate the entire billion dollar vaccine industry. Besides, its much easier to blame your child’s brain encephalitis or post-vaccine seizure on the weather anyway.
As for the NVICP, this program was founded because there was so much tort litigation as a result of vaccine injuries that an attempt was made to stabilize the vaccine market. There’s a tax on each vaccine that goes into a fund to pay these claims which a petitioner will not get compensated for unless their condition has no other proven cause but the vaccine. “As of December 1, 2011, the program had awarded $2.35 billion in 2,810 separate claims, including compensation for 390 deaths.” And so many people have reported the development of autism post-vaccine that the Autism Omnibus Proceeding was established to handle these cases.
Even the U.S Supreme Court recognizes vaccines have risks (including death). Let’s get on board guys and stop ignoring the millions of vaccine-injured children who live among us.
They say unvaccinated children put vaccinated children at risk. But they don’t.
Yes, that’s completely logical. How about I take birth control so you don’t get pregnant. Maybe I should run an extra mile too so you can lose weight. Put your burger down…it’s going to go straight to my butt. Seriously, if you’re vaccinated and you believe you’re protected then you have nothing to worry about right?
They say unvaccinated children are causing outbreaks of “vaccine preventable diseases.” But that’s impossible to prove and the opposite could be true. Someone please tell me how one can scientifically prove a disease outbreak is caused by an unvaccinated child, when the “outbreaks” are occurring almost exclusively in the vaccinated population? In some cases, vaccination rates have been at 100%. It’s like trying to figure out which of your 600 cows pooped in the pasture and coming to the ultimate conclusion that the cow poop came from your chicken.
Now…we know from reading the studies and vaccine package inserts that vaccines can cause the very diseases they’re designed to prevent. We know from studies conducted on MMR that some children experience vaccine-strain measles post-vaccination. We know that chicken pox vaccine can cause chicken pox, Tdap can cause outbreaks of pertussis, and the oral polio vaccine caused vaccine-associated paralytic polio. We know that meningitis is a side effect on several package inserts and that the old HiB meningitis vaccine was removed from the market because it caused meningitis. We know that mumps outbreaks have occurred in the fully vaccinated population. And finally, we know that live-virus vaccines like yellow fever, MMR, and varicella shed and that people who get inactivated viral vaccines can become asymptomatic carriers.
Logically and scientifically, I am having a really hard time blaming the chicken for the cow poop.
They say vaccine herd immunity exists. But it doesn’t.
Herd immunity 101: Herd immunity is the belief that if a certain portion of the population becomes immune to a disease the rest of the population will be protected from infection. Sounds great, except herd immunity only applies to diseases derived naturally that give one lifetime immunity. A vaccine is deemed effective if it introduces an antigen but that antigen may not cause an antibody response but if it does, won’t necessarily give one immunity, but if it does, only provides temporary immunity. In other words, effective doesn’t equal protective. You can have the antibodies and still get sick. Major fail.
A.W. Hedrich, founder of the herd immunity concept found that a 68% exposure rate was all that was needed (not 95% as people have been mistakenly led to believe). By that definition, even if herd immunity did apply to vaccinations we should not see outbreaks of any vaccine preventable diseases especially in exclusively vaccinated areas. (For more on herd immunity check out this article and this book).
They don’t believe the body’s immune system serves any useful purpose. But it does. They say vaccines are one of the greatest public health achievements but they’re not. They say injecting 49 doses of 14 vaccines by age 6 is safe, but it’s not. They believe vaccines are the only way to prevent disease, but it’s not. They say “anti-vaccine activists” aren’t educated and haven’t done their research, but just because one comes to a different conclusion, doesn’t mean they haven’t. They say vaccines are science-based, while ignoring conflicting scientific studies.
So why are they lying to you? Pharmaceutical companies are doing it for profit, and are scared out of their minds of the liability that would fall upon them if vaccines were the admitted cause of any number of medical conditions (think asbestos and tobacco litigation). The government won’t question because of their conflict of interests and profit margin. Some doctors don’t want to admit they’re wrong. Some people are looking for someone to blame. A few people truly think vaccines work and have made their choice but don’t think you have the right to make yours. And some people…hate others who don’t vaccinate more than they hate bad science.
Like the original article suggests, I too encourage you to educate yourself. Of course there are parameters:
First, pretend that there is no split among the scientific community on this issue. Next, pretend that the hundreds of brilliant doctors and researchers who have spoken out against vaccines are all quacks. Then, pretend that vaccines are the only drugs in the world that conveniently have no harmful side-effects. And finally, if you don’t know where to start, look to the media, people who haven’t done their research, and internet blogs that spread nothing but hate towards parents and their unvaccinated children.
As the original article quoted, an astrophysicist once said “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.” Great quote, but might I point out that sometimes people refuse to acknowledge the real science because of what they believe.
If you gained something from this article, please like it, share it, and follow livingwhole.org on Facebook.
This article has some serious issues. The claims that diseases like chickenpox, measles, and the flu aren’t serious are ones we’ve seen before, of course, and you can make a cost-benefit analysis. However, saying that the 60,000+ deaths due to influenza aren’t really caused by influenza since people die from pneumonia instead of the flu itself is intentionally misleading – we don’t say that cancer doesn’t kill people, even though cancer patients usually die from organ failure. The organs wouldn’t fail without the cancer, and the flu victims wouldn’t have died from pneumonia without the flu.
I really take issue with the assertion that the vaccine is causing outbreaks in this article. “After licensure pertussis incidences increased, stabilized, and then reached a 50-year high in 2013. (Do check out the lovely chart on p. 64 here)” I did check out that chart, and it is again, intentionally misleading. That chart starts in 1975, long after the initial vaccine for pertussis was available, so it intentionally omits the successful portion of the virus’ history. It also ignores this lovely chart: http://www-tc.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/assets/img/autism-vaccine-myth/image-01-large.jpg
Which clearly shows that pertussis vaccination coverage plummeted before the spike in cases. When people stop using a vaccine, how do you still blame the vaccine for the outbreaks?
That and the fact that it brings back the autism boogeyman makes me think that I’m not going to learn anything new reading this article like I did that one that made me reply on my blog (http://blog.douglips.com/2015/05/25-questions-that-will-not-likely.html), so I gave up.
Hope to get back to you Doug. Don’t rest on your laurels just yet 🙂
Initial response Doug. Please explain what you mean about the “autism boogeyman” and consider carefully what you say.
Second, off-the-cuff comment: when quoting mortality statistics, are you looking at total global statistics? Realistically, we are looking at “local” statistics where living conditions provide major improvements in health issues and some feedback on adverse reactions.
Sensible people would not judge local health needs on issues in under-developed countries.
Another look at your comment, Doug.
Sorry, but I cannot actually see that what you say has much substance.
Maybe another reader would like to comment?