The Dangers of the Recommended Vaccine Schedule & the Importance of Informed Consent
Where does one even start when talking of vaccines? I always like to start with questions. Are they necessary? Are they safe? Are the infections they target treatable? How effective are they and how long do they last? Can we credit them with the eradication of certain illnesses?
Let's see if we can answer these questions one by one.
Are they necessary?
Many of us just need to look into the faces of our healthy, vaccine-free children and we can answer that with a confident, "No!" But let's glance at the science. About 2% of the population is completely unvaccinated. We don't have any large-scale government or pharma-funded vaccinated versus completely unvaccinated studies. But a few small ones have been done, all with the same results: Unvaccinated children are healthier overall.
Dr. Paul Thomas recently had a scientist look at the data collected in his practice over the past 10 years of children born under his care, measuring health outcomes of the vaccinated against the unvaccinated, and their conclusion was:
"We could detect no widespread negative health effects in the unvaccinated other than the rare but significant vaccine-targeted diagnosis. We can conclude that the unvaccinated children in this practice are not, overall, less healthy than the vaccinated and that indeed the vaccinated children appear to be significantly less healthy than the unvaccinated." [1]
I think we begin to understand why the larger entities in charge of health, with a vested interest in vaccine sales, are reluctant to do a large-scale study on this topic.
Are they safe?
Well, to make that claim, I would assume a few things: Vaccines go through clinical trials at least as rigorous as drugs. Every single ingredient in vaccines has been tested to see how our bodies react to them. They’ve been studied together, to see how our bodies react to multiple vaccines at one time. The CDC schedule itself has been tested thoroughly to make sure that giving different adjuvants (like aluminum and polysorbate 80, for example) at the same time does not cause harm. There has been at least one safety study on each ingredient and each vaccine as a whole using the scientific method to see what the outcomes are when measured against an inert placebo. Long-term studies are looking at overall health outcomes that show they do not cause autoimmune conditions, neurological damage, infertility, or cancer.
What if I told you none of this has been done? Not a single statement in the above paragraph is true and, on top of that, vaccine manufacturers are not held liable for injury or death related to vaccines. [2] What if I told you a car seat manufacturer couldn't be sued if they make a faulty seat that doesn't protect children? What if I told you they were responsible for all of their safety testing, and the government and citizens alike have all chosen to just blindly trust them to be honest in those studies? No accountability, no third-party testing to make sure they're not fudging the numbers. Just overall approval.
What if I further told you that the system set in place to catch injuries, where cops could report on accidents where children were seriously harmed or were killed, was so faulty and inept that it only captures 1% of the injuries? [3] That most cops don't even know the system exists or how to file a report if they did witness an injury.
On top of no liability, clinical trials that measure adverse outcomes for only four or five days instead of looking at outcomes for years at a time (like they do with all other drugs), [4] there are conflicts of interest and signs of corruption throughout the entire system of the approval process. For example, Paul Offit was a member of the ACIP (Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices) at the CDC and voted yes for the approval of a rotavirus vaccine while he was manufacturing a rotavirus vaccine. [5, 6]
I think it is reasonable that given the information above (and this is only a tiny peek at the safety question), we can conclude that the safety of vaccines has not been proven at all. I have found more evidence that vaccines can be harmful than to support their safety. Studying the package inserts, reading up on the harms caused by injected aluminum, and listening to mothers who have children injured and killed by vaccines are voices much louder in my ears than the media droning the same words over and over without any basis in actual science or truth.
Are these infections treatable?
Yes! There are so many ways to build strong immune systems and healthy bodies, and support them if one happened to catch one of the 16 infections we vaccinate against along with the thousands more out there they will probably contract. This topic is so vast, so I will only address three of the known treatments. But please know that there are so many things we can do for our children when they're sick. We are not helpless in the face of bacteria and viruses.
Measles can be treated with vitamin A. If you give 200,000 IU (or half that for infants) per day for two days, it can bring the complication rate to practically zero. [7]
Whooping Cough is treated with vitamin C (a high dose of sodium ascorbate). (Suzanne Humphries has an amazing PDF with a protocol that you should be able to locate online.)
Tetanus is treated with vigilant wound care. It's the most important thing. The wound must be thoroughly cleaned and irrigated. Tetanus spores cannot survive in oxygenated places. That's where the rusty nail myth comes from. Puncture wounds are harder to clean out and can cause the opening to close before it heals from the inside out, allowing bacteria to turn into an infection. But if you can cleanse the wound well, there's almost no chance of developing tetanus.
Are they effective and how long do they last?
Efficacy is measured by one standard and only one. It would be unethical to vaccinate people and then deliberately expose them to an infection, so we measure antibodies. Antibodies are part of the immune response, but they are a very small part. When you are exposed to a pathogen naturally, it's usually through the eyes, nose, and/or mouth. Every layer of both the respiratory and digestive systems are set up with immune system triggers and layers of defense. A vaccine bypasses all of that (except for oral polio and the rotavirus vaccine, both of which are given by mouth) and targets only one part of the immune system, which is antibodies. The problem with this method is that it is far from an exact science and the immune system is proving extremely complex and difficult to predict. People with robust antibody counts are often still infected and there have been accounts of immunocompromised people completely incapable of producing antibodies still being protected from illness even when exposed.
I separate them into two categories when answering the question of how long they last because I think live vaccines are much more effective than inactivated ones. Live vaccines have part of the actual virus in them so your body has a more robust response and you may get 20 years. Some people get less than that, some don't respond at all (2-10% [8]). Very rarely you'll get more than 20 years. Scientists who are skeptical of vaccines predict that most people get 2-10 years of protection.
Inactivated vaccines don't last long at all. The flu shot must be an annual event, pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine lasts 2-3 years at most, and each booster is less effective. [9] The meningitis vaccine targets college-age teens who live in dorm rooms and they first recommended it to 12-year-olds. But when they discovered it lasts less than four years, they then started recommending a booster to 16-year-olds.
Without going into more detail, I just want to make it clear that assuming vaccines are effective or long-lasting is varied by the vaccine, by the response of the individual, and that one size does not fit all – thus, making blanket, sweeping statements of vaccines as a whole (as the media often does) is uneducated and inaccurate. One must do detailed studies of the science on each vaccine being considered before being able to make an educated decision. Doctors should go over these things with each patient and each vaccine, but this is increasingly rare as most doctors do not know the details either. The education found in medical textbooks is extremely limited. The only way they become fully educated on the science is if they take the time to research on their own. However, most of them do not find the time or the inclination to do so. It's not that they have bad intentions. They simply trust in a system that has not fully lived up to that faith.
Can we credit them with the eradication of certain illnesses?
Vaccines have taken the credit for the eradication of smallpox, the elimination of polio, and the decrease of many more illnesses – although none of the rest has been fully eradicated. Smallpox has been eradicated over the entire world. Polio still exists in Africa, India, and elsewhere. But the way it stands now, the oral polio vaccine is causing more of a problem than the wild virus. [10]
As for the rest, I leave you this graph and one last question: If vaccines are solely responsible for the fall in disease rates, what about scarlet fever?