By: Jini Patel Thompson
Posted 07 October 2010
|
|
An unpublished study by the World Health Organisation WHO) on a “measles susceptible” (malnourished) group of children showed that the group who hadn’t been vaccinated contracted measles at the normal contract rate of 2.4%. Of the group who had received the measles vaccine (MMR), 33.5% contracted measles. (i)
|
|
|
In 1975 Japan raised the minimum age for infant vaccinations to 2 years. As a result, SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, or, crib death) and infant convulsions virtually disappeared. In the 80’s, Japan lowered the minimum age back down to 3 months and the rate of SIDS returned to previous levels. (ii)
|
|
|
In an Australian study, a group of recruits were immunized for Rubella, and all produced the expected antibodies. When later exposed to the disease, 80% of the recruits contracted it. (iii)
|
|
|
According to the U.S. National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (est.1986): To qualify for compensation, the adverse effects of vaccination must occur within four hours of receiving the vaccine. Despite this extremely severe limitation, as of February 28, 1998 compensatory payments have totalled $871,800,000.00. This figure is even more alarming when it is revealed that only one in four claimants were awarded compensation. (iv)
|
|
|
Some researchers postulate that the use of live viral vaccines introduce foreign genetic material into the human system, which has contributed to the unprecedented escalation of auto-immune disorders (like multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, cancer, Crohn’s disease, asthma, etc.) in recent decades. (v)
|
The above facts each highlight a different facet of the vaccination question; effectiveness, adverse effects, and long-term consequences. The unspoken thread running through each of these is a pressing question: Why haven’t more people been informed of this evidence, and indeed, why is vaccination presented carte blanche as a positive, imperative requisite for our children’s health?
As the mother of a newborn, it became important to find out what is really going on with infant and childhood vaccination and whether it is conclusively a beneficial or necessary procedure. Thus I embarked on four months of research into immunization – squeezed in between the demands of caring for and breastfeeding our new baby Oscar!
DO VACCINES ACTUALLY WORK?
As I researched the issue, I was amazed to discover that there is a large and growing body of clinical studies, fieldwork (in developing nations) and historical data refuting the safety and efficacy of vaccination. Unfortunately, the propaganda campaign for vaccination has been so successful that most of us automatically believe that vaccines are so effective they are responsible for the virtual eradication of serious childhood illnesses. In reality, this is not so, and if you examine the actual rates of incidence for each disease (from mainstream sources such as the Lancet, WHO and UNICEF), the graphs show a clearly different picture.
From the 1800’s to the present, in every case, each disease had been virtually eliminated decades before the introduction of the relevant vaccine; through improved hygiene, better nutrition, clean drinking water and improved sanitation. Basically, as people’s overall health and immune systems improved, they didn’t get sick. As the physician W.J. McCormick summarized in 1950 (before vaccines for measles, mumps, scarlet fever and rheumatic fever were introduced):
“.the decline in diptheria, whooping cough and typhoid fever began fully fifty years prior to the inception of artificial immunization and followed an almost even grade before and after the adoption of these control measures. In the case of scarlet fever, mumps, measles and rheumatic fever there has been no specific innovation in control measures, yet these also have followed the same general pattern in incidence decline.” (vi)
Furthermore, research reveals dozens of cases around the world where there was an outbreak of infectious disease (e.g. measles, polio, tetanus, smallpox, etc.) and contract rates were either similar among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, or higher and more severe among the vaccinated. For example:
|
Massachusetts in 1961 experienced a ‘type II’ polio outbreak and “there were more paralytic cases in the triple vaccinates than in the unvaccinated”(vii)
|
|
|
In 1976, Dr. G.T. Stewart reported in the British Medical Journal that, “of 8,092 cases of whooping cough, 2,940 (36%) were fully immunized, while only 2,424 (30%) were definitely not immunized. (viii)
|
|
|
|
Professor George Dick, speaking at an environmental conference in Brussels in 1973, admitted that in recent decades, 75% of British people who contracted smallpox had been vaccinated. This, combined with the fact that only 40% of children (and a maximum of 10% of adults) had been vaccinated, clearly shows that vaccinated people have a much higher tendency to contract the disease. (ix)
|
If vaccination is not responsible for the eradication of childhood illnesses, and vaccinated children are actually at a greater risk of contracting a disease than unvaccinated children, why is vaccination routinely presented as an effective safeguard for our children’s health? When the historical data is referred to by pro-vaccine parties, it is often skewed and presented out of context. For example, in reference to a mass immunization campaign carried out in Thailand:
“.the immunization coverage for measles has increased from 6% in 1984 to 63% in 1988, leading to a reduction in measles prevalence from 93.7/100,000 in 1984 to 37.1/100,000 in 1986” (x)
However, what the report doesn’t indicate is that in 1987, the infection rate of measles was 87.1/100,000. And in 1988 it was 59.1/100,000 which is actually higher than the rate of infection in 1982 (57.1/100,000) when no one had been vaccinated. These statistics however, are conveniently not included as they don’t support the pro-vaccination stance of the report.
Aside from establishing that vaccines are not the reason infectious childhood illnesses have virtually disappeared, and that vaccinated children are actually at a greater risk of contracting disease, there are also the adverse effects and long-term consequences of vaccination to be considered.
EFFECTS OF VACCINATION
Immediate Side Effects
Immediate or short-term effects of vaccination can include the following: encephalopathy (irreversible brain damage), ataxia (incoordination of voluntary muscle movements), mental retardation, aseptic meningitis (inflammation of the membranes of spinal cord or brain), seizure disorders, hemiparesis (half-body paralysis), retinopathy and blindness, hyperactivity, anaphylaxis, high pitched (encephalitic) screaming/prolonged crying, learning disorders, hay fever, asthma, sudden infant death (SIDS), brachial plexus neuropathy (disease affecting nerves which serve the arm, forearm and hand), and abdominal pain. Secondary complications can include juvenile-onset diabetes, Reye’s syndrome and multiple sclerosis.
Unfortunately, it’s virtually impossible to determine the real incidence of damaging adverse reactions. For example, a British government report claims the rate of permanent neurologic damage from the DPT vaccine to be 1 in 300,000.(xi) However, other researchers indicate the permanent damage level to be anywhere from 1 in 62,000 to 1 in 300. Research by Coulter and Fisher on the 3.3 million children vaccinated yearly in the U.S. found there to be a total of 33,006 cases of acute neurological reactions (encephalitic screaming, convulsions, collapse) within 48 hours of receiving the DPT shot.
When the problems with vaccination are addressed in a serious manner by the pro-vaccination side, it usually involves a member of the bio-medical field qualifying that the dangers of vaccination, although real, are very rare, for example:
“Parents must be informed of the rare possibility of serious adverse effects, including seizure and allergic reaction. Every physician who administers vaccines therefore needs to become familiar with the reactions that may occur with each immunologic agent used. The best safeguard against litigation, when and if a serious reaction follows vaccination, is the indication that these considerations were discussed and that an informed choice was made.” (xii)
However, there is no scientific evidence as to the actual frequency or incidence of vaccine-induced injury, so in fact we have no idea whether reactions are indeed rare, or, statistically significant. In articles such as the one above, no verifiable statistical evidence, reflecting reliable reporting or monitored studies for this ‘rarity’ is ever presented. As shown in the official minutes of the 15th session of the US Panel of Review of Bacterial Vaccines and Toxoids with Standards and Potency:
“Many physicians are not cognisant of the importance of reporting untoward reactions, or may be unaware of their clinical features. Further, both physicians and manufacturers have been held liable for damage suits by patients who may suffer adverse effects from established vaccines. All of these factors undoubtedly discourage reporting; without some other form of surveillance, definition of the rates and significance of untoward reactions to current and future vaccines cannot be ascertained.” (xiii)
For this reason, it is suspected that the number of adverse reactions and vaccine-damaged children is actually much, much higher than is currently presented by the medical/pharmaceutical community. Instead, there is a growing number of mothers and lay people, whose children have been irrevocably damaged, forming vaccine risk awareness groups. There continue to be incidents like the one in West Germany in 1967, where smallpox vaccination damaged the hearing of 3,296 children, and of these 71 were rendered completely deaf. (xiv) At the extreme end of the spectrum, we have occurrences like the one in Australia’s Northern Territory where malnourished aboriginal children were vaccinated and in some areas 50% of them died. (xv) According to Dr. B. Bloom at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, there’s even an emerging reluctance to further develop vaccines because financial losses due to the liability of established vaccines actually exceed the profits derived from them.
Whether these adverse reactions are caused by the vaccines themselves or the number of highly toxic additives contained in vaccines (e.g. formaldehyde, mercury, acetone, etc.), or a combination of the two, remains to be determined. As yet, no research has been carried out to resolve this question.
Read the entire article here.
Leave a Reply