This post was inspired(?) by the following article:
“The number of people being diagnosed with measles in Australia hit a 16-year-high in 2014, as scores of travellers brought the potentially fatal disease into the country and unvaccinated children fell victim to it.
Health department data shows a total of 340 measles cases were recorded in Australia during the year, the highest number since 1998. The rate of measles cases also peaked in 2014, with about 15 cases for every million people in Australia.
Australia’s measles vaccination program has seen the incidence of the disease fall since the 1990s.
While numbers are a fraction of those recorded in the1990s, National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System figures show there were just 10 cases in 2005, the best year on record.
Measles is a highly infectious disease that can cause serious illness, including inflammation of the brain, particularly in very young children and adults.
A couple of thoughts on this issue include the somewhat similar occurrence in the US which has incited a full-scale war on citizens who criticize indiscriminate vaccinations, leading to legislation to remove any non-medical exemptions for refusing vaccinations. In that instance there is much reason to argue the validity of the particular measles incident as a legitimate basis for such draconian measures.
In this instance, were “scores of travellers” the major cause of these outbreaks? Later we come to the “potentially fatal” remark. Did only “unvaccinated children” become affected? Insufficient evidence available to answer these questions but they need to be answered.
Who’s the bigger threat when it comes to spreading infectious disease: the vaccinated or the unvaccinated? If you listen to the mainstream media, unvaccinated children are the archetypal lepers of the modern age, a societal scourge responsible for all disease and the only real obstacle to peace on earth.
But if you can wade through all this mindless propaganda, you’ll discover that vaccinated children are the real danger, at least when it comes to disease spread. Contrary to popular belief, just because you’ve been jabbed doesn’t mean that you’re immortal — the science shows that live-virus vaccines like MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) actually shed for weeks, and sometimes months, following vaccination.
This means that children who were recently injected with MMR, oral polio vaccine and/or other live attenuated vaccines (LAV) are walking disease-carriers. And no, this isn’t some random conspiracy theory spread through one of those mythical Jenny McCarthy chain emails we keep hearing about — it’s a fact that’s widely recognized, albeit quietly, throughout the greater medical community. (http://www.naturalnews.com/048940_measles_outbreak_virus_shedding_disneyland.html)
Parents concerned about their vaccinated children potentially contracting measles from unvaccinated children may want to consider the fact that the bigger health threat is technically the vaccine, not the disease itself. Comparative data provided by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reveal that nobody has died from measles in more than 10 years, while at least 108 deaths reported in VAERS during the same time frame have been linked to measles vaccines. (http://www.naturalnews.com/048518_measles_vaccines_cdc_data.html)
So much for “potentially fatal”. Political brainwashing! In reality, zero deaths from measles in more than 10 years? 108 VAERS reported (?substantially under-reported) vaccine-related deaths in the same time, is scientific information, failure to mention that, is political!
Now it seems that this type of public control by the government is surfacing in Australia.
“PARENTS who refuse to vaccinate their kids will be denied up to $15,000 a year in childcare rebates and welfare under tough new rules won by The Sunday Telegraph. (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/anti-vaccination-parents-face-15000-welfare-hit-under-no-jab-reforms/story-fnpn118l-1227300073570)
Well, I support those who are offended by this attack on civil liberties, not only in principle, but because there is so much legitimate evidence that there is insufficient justification for such policies, reasons to suggest that there are real political agendas involved and evidence to suggest that the claimed health benefits are not achievable, even possibly negative rather than positive.
This following post is a good source of supporting material for the public to assess and make up their own minds:
“Measles vaccine introduction
Measles vaccination in the US and many other countries started in the early 1960s, at the time when measles was naturally abating and was heading for the 18 year low. That’s why the vaccine seemingly lowered the incidence; however, this was only coincidental with the natural dynamics of measles.
As one of many examples involving all infectious diseases of childhood against which vaccines have been developed, ever since any measles vaccines have been introduced and used in mass proportions, reports of outbreaks and epidemics of measles in even 100% vaccinated populations started filling pages in medical journals.
Reports of serious reactions including deaths also appeared with increasing frequency. They are the subject of a separate essay.
Atypical measles – a new phenomenon only in the vaccinated
It is less well known to the general public that vaccinated children started developing an especially vicious form of measles, due to the altered host immune response caused by the deleterious effect of the measles vaccines. It resisted all orthodox treatment and carried a high mortality rate.
It has become known as atypical measles. (AMS)”
and some other reasons to consider natural immunity as a preferred solution to public health: (From Part II)
Well-managed natural infectious diseases are beneficial for children.
When infectious diseases of childhood are not mismanaged by the administration of antibiotics, or by suppressing fever, the diseases prime and mature the immune system and also represent developmental milestones.
Having measles not only results in life-long specific immunity to measles, but also in life-long non-specific immunity to degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, sebaceous skin diseases, immunoreactive diseases and certain tumours as demonstrated by Ronne (1985).
Having mumps protects against ovarian cancer (West 1969).
This is the area that should be researched and the results heeded instead of trying the impossible: to eradicate infectious diseases.
Approaching childhood diseases with common sense and wisdom.
The already quoted large group of Swiss doctors that formed a working committee questioning the Swiss’ Health Department’s policy of mass vaccination with the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine, wrote that up to 1969, at the Basel University Paediatric Clinic, artificial infection with measles was used to treat successfully the nephrotic syndrome (Albonico et al. 1990).
This is a huge issue with so many aspects, for and against and probably neutral. Sufficient reason to consider all these aspects instead of immaturely honing in on politically desired outcomes. Absolutely insufficient justification for mandatory vaccinations because there are too many adverse factors.
Not to be forgotten is that statistics can mislead either deliberately or not. Each country has different environmental health standards and conditions, food, water, sanitation, health education etc. . Often the use of global averages are worse than useless, and again, unscientific.
If the subject of adverse reactions is also considered, the argument for caution and for a clearly independent scientific approach is extremely strong and just.