It’s interesting how a discussion about vaccination can quickly turn heated and sometimes even hostile. Would the same debate over an antibiotic or an antihypertensive drug be generated if there was evidence that the drug was causing harm? When it becomes obvious that thousands have been injured by a drug like Vioxx, it is withdrawn from the market. We stop the use of drugs until they are proven safe. And we demand.
Not so with vaccines. Vaccines are hyped until they are statistically proven to cause harm to large numbers of people. The thousands of people who have vaccine reactions in proportion to the millions who have been vaccinated is not considered a mathematically significant statistic. However, the more than a billion dollars that have been paid to people injured by vaccines show that safety is not all that is advertised. Why the double standards?
Vaccination is based on a “belief system.” We believe that vaccines are safe; we believe that vaccines are important for health; we believe the stories that vaccines are solely responsible for the elimination of smallpox and polio. And we really want to believe that our doctors have read all the available information about vaccines, pros and cons, and are telling us the whole truth about vaccines.
However, belief is based on faith, not necessarily on facts. For example, we want to believe that vaccinating our children will prevent them from getting measles or chickenpox. However, there is a plethora of information documenting that this is not necessarily the case.
Why is there an almost desperate need to defend the current belief in and confidence in vaccines? The public’s view of disease seems to be similar to our current view of terrorism: random attacks that are life-threatening. The media tout this view of childhood diseases and the need for vaccines. Pharma sells it, doctors push it, and educational institutions reinforce it. They keep selling it because they are more willing to buy it, no doubt about it. There is a “just in case” or “better safe than sorry” mentality when it comes to vaccines and diseases with children.* After nearly 200 years of use, fear still sells vaccines.
What do we really know about vaccines? A review of the literature and CDC documents reveals the following:
1. Vaccine safety studies are relatively small and include only healthy children. However, when a vaccine trial has been completed, the vaccines are given to ALL children, regardless of their health status, family history, or genetics.
two. Vaccine safety studies are brief. Most clinical trials monitor side effects for a measly 21 days, sometimes as little as 5 days. It can take months for immune system complications to appear. This arbitrary deadline, established by the FDA, prevents associating vaccines with chronic health disorders. “Sure” is a designation given based on limited information.
3. Vaccine safety studies do not use a true placebo.One of the gold standards in medical research is the “placebo controlled” trial. An inactive substance, such as a sugar pill, is given as a placebo to one group of participants, while the treatment group receives the new drug. The data is analyzed to compare the number of side effects that occurred in those who received the drug compared to the number of side effects that occurred in those who received the placebo. However, the “placebo” used in vaccine research is not an inert substance like sterile water; It’s another vaccine. Inert, sterile water does not cause a reaction; as a substitute vaccine can. If both groups of babies in a trial have the same number of reactions, the study reports that the vaccine “is as safe as a placebo.” This is tricky science.
Four. Vaccine-induced antibodies do not correlate with protection. In fact, the esteemed journal Vaccine stated this clearly: “…It is known that, in many cases, antigen-specific antibody titers do not correlate with protection.” The full reference can be found at PMID: 11587808
Vaccination has been accepted as safe, effective, and protective. Injections can be described as a medical treatment. “Sacred cows,” by definition, “a medical procedure unreasonably immune from criticism.” The strong response is the reaction to a suggestion that the “cow” should be “culled”. It is heresy to suggest that the status quo is wrong.
When Copernicus insisted that the sun, and not the earth, was the center of the solar system, he went against the philosophical and religious beliefs held during medieval times. When two other Italian scientists of the time, Galileo and Bruno, embraced the Copernican theory, their comments were considered blasphemy. Bruno was tried before the Inquisition, convicted, and burned at the stake in 1600. Thirty years later, Galileo was presented and faced with the “Best” of him, forced to renounce his beliefs under the threat of torture and death. Even after his confession, he was sentenced to prison for the rest of his days.
The more vaccination is investigated and the adverse effects that have been attributed to vaccines are studied, the more he becomes a Copernican heretic, denouncing the status quo can have deadly consequences. I have personally invested over 8,000 hours in revealing the truth about vaccines. If the result of this investigation and exposure is called a heretic, then I am in wonderful company.
________________________
*My thanks to Judy Converse for these ideas.