The national debate over vaccine safety and childhood vaccination exemptions gained further attention this week as California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill to restrict exemptions for childhood vaccinations required to attend school in California. A Miami area Congresswoman, Frederica Wilson (D), has proposed a similar legislation at the national level, furthering the push to force medical treatments with recognized and unrecognized risks on healthy people. This type of force led the actor Jim Carrey to call Governor Brown’s actions “fascist” in his social media tweet.
Vaccine manufacturers acknowledge that there is some level of risk of adverse effects from using their shots, while the amount of risk involved has been widely debated, with the vast majority of adverse reactions to vaccines either never reported or never recognized, due to the reporting and association bias created by medical claims that vaccines are safe and that the adverse events must be due to some other cause (without investigation or proof obtained to support that assertion). Despite the obstacles to reporting and having a vaccine injury acknowledged, there are many cases of payouts from the Federal Government’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and thousands of parents who report they have no doubt that their children were harmed, sometimes severely, by routine vaccinations. The law which established the compensation program was designed in part to protect vaccine manufacturers and medical institutions from legal liability and financial repercussions for harm occurring due to vaccinations.
There are also conflicting research studies and epidemiological analyses being presented to back the arguments presented by vaccine defenders and vaccine critics. With so many vaccinations being given and so many additional environmental hazards that children are exposed to it is hard to design research that can truly ascertain the effects of individual vaccines and of cumulative exposure to vaccines. Results that have suggested a possible link between vaccines and health issues such as autism and allergies have been ignored or discounted by those defending vaccine safety, citing study design weaknesses or differing results presented by industry-linked studies. Unfortunately, few people have the expertise or understanding to thoroughly analyze research and discern the weaknesses in a study or detect methods used to manipulate data to alter the statistical significance of correlations and effects that appear. Many people claim that the science behind vaccine safety and efficacy is clear, but from a true scientific perspective of careful investigation this is a gross misstatement. The evidence that has accumulated showing that there are serious risks involved with carrying out vaccinations is hard to refute, so those defending coercive vaccination laws routinely ignore the evidence and refuse to publicly debate knowledgeable vaccine critics.
One major element of the arguments used to defend vaccines is the claim that they have been a major public health advance, which reportedly brought an end to epidemics of polio and smallpox. Many people take those assumptions for granted, without realizing that there was never any controlled scientific research done which confirms those claims. Infectious illness epidemics follow patterns and cycles where they appear and dissipate with or without medical intervention. Historically, vaccines were introduced to the population mass when the diseases were already naturally dissipating, and it has even been suggested by some researchers that vaccines help perpetuate epidemics further by creating cases of an illness generated by exposure to the microbe in the shots.
Most modern polio cases, for example, are triggered by the vaccination for polio, with many cases of polio type illness and paralysis occurring after vaccination but being given a different diagnostic name. Deaths and injuries due to polio or a polio equivalent are still occurring but are getting renamed in order to perpetuate the illusion that vaccines successfully eradicated polio and to hide the reality that these deaths and illnesses are currently being triggered by the vaccine exposure. This occurs even as the public has not been told that doctors successfully treated polio with IV vitamin C in the 1940s. In fact, complications occurring from illnesses such as measles and polio and influenza are known to be strongly correlated with malnutrition. Provide proper nutrition and people are much less likely to fall ill when exposed to microbial illness agents and less likely to have any complications if they do get sick. Since the science is pretty clear on that, why isn’t there a government push to make sure children get enough nutrients to prevent illness? It is well documented that a majority of the population have nutritional deficiencies, and supplementing needed nutrients would be an obvious measure to prevent illnesses, yet the public health authorities are ignoring this issue while focusing on forcing people to take injections that carry risks and cannot create a healthy immune system.
Herd immunity is another plank in the foundation of arguments for forced vaccination, yet it too is an idea based upon false assumptions and deception. As immunologist Dr. Tetyana Obukhanych states “Although the evidence for vaccination-based herd immunity is yet to materialize, there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. Just a single publication by Poland & Jacobson (1994) reports on 18 different measles outbreaks throughout North America, occurring in school populations with very-high vaccination coverage for measles (71% to 99.8%). In these outbreaks, vaccinated children constituted 30% to 100% of measles cases. Many more similar outbreaks, occurring after 1994, can be found by searching epidemiologic literature. The herd-immunity concept is based on a faulty assumption that vaccination elicits in an individual a state equivalent to bona fide immunity (life-long resistance to viral infection). As with any garbage in-garbage out type of theory, the expectations of the herd-immunity theory are bound to fail in the real world.”
The basic theory underlying vaccination is to foster a specific type of immune system response in the presence of a particular pathogen. That type of immune triggering is just one facet of how our immune system is designed to manage and protect against harmful organisms. Thus, the full natural immune response is not what vaccines are leading the immune system to exhibit. By promoting a limited and imbalanced immune response, vaccines may actually foster greater vulnerability to infection when future exposures to pathogens occur. The form of immunity that is fostered by vaccines is a weaker or more limited immunity than naturally obtained immunity – this is why people are told they need “booster” shots, as the previous shots don’t really provide strong, lasting immunity. The best way to build immunity is to have a healthy balanced immune system and have natural exposure to a pathogen while you are in that healthy state. Then, your body will respond properly so that you don’t become ill and you are now protected against that organism if there is a future exposure. Vaccines cannot create a healthy, balanced immune system – they can only trigger an imbalanced and limited form of immune system response. When this occurs, you may only have mild symptoms or no symptoms of an illness, even though the pathogen is now chronically present in your body because your body failed to launch a full, balanced immune response. This can lead to chronic weaknesses in the immune system and autoimmune illnesses. Researchers have found a pattern of hyperimmune antibody response to the measles virus strain from vaccines in autistic children, suggesting that the vaccination leads to an imbalanced reaction to the viral material that inhibits the body’s ability to effectively neutralize an infection, with resulting complications associated with the virus and the abnormal immune system activity.
There are many studies showing evidence supporting the hypothesis that vaccines are often fostering imbalances in the immune system. Even in the latest research by those studying proposed HIV vaccines, it is admitted that the effects of vaccines can be a “double-edged sword.” While attempting to trick the immune system to respond to injected microbial materials may appear to foster some form of immunity, the risk of adverse systemic effects occurring as a result of this attempt to outsmart the natural intelligence of our body and its immune function is quite significant. Since vaccines can only stimulate the body to apply a portion of its own intelligence to neutralize a pathogen, our body is able to perform that job just as well or better without vaccines. The idea that we need vaccines to prevent illnesses is a form of delusion, as when we are healthy in our immune function and are exposed to a pathogen we won’t get the illness, regardless of whether or not we were previously vaccinated for the illness. Rather than trying to stimulate an imbalanced immune response to several specific pathogens out of thousands that we could possibly encounter, why not focus on building a healthy body and balanced immune functioning so that we will properly handle any potential threat that the mind-body system may encounter?