At the pediatrician's office, whilst helping hold our babies down for vaccinations, we've abandoned our instincts; we override the gut feeling that we should not be doing what we're doing, based on a constant stream of information from trusted sources; we've chosen information over instinct. The choice is not a good one. The information we've been given is terribly misleading; the sources, untrustworthy. We've been seduced into a false reality.
Had we never heard of vaccination, and someone suggested we inject disease into our babies, we'd spurn the idea, and perhaps the person. But we've learned, we've been taught, to simply assume that the paradigm works; that the theory of vaccination is sound; that vaccines are safe and effective; and, most recently, that the vaccinated protect those around them.
Vaccines aren't safe. The government maintains a list of acknowledged vaccine injuries, dependent upon the respective shots: brain damage; convulsions; chronic arthritis; anaphylactic shock; paralytic polio, idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura; brachial neuritis; intussusception, and all the complications and aftereffects associated with those injuries. To date $3 billion has been awarded in compensation for vaccine injuries, beyond the above mentioned including: Guillain Barré Syndrome; transverse myelitis; neuromyelitis optica; chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy; ventricular fibrillation; cardiac arrest; and death.
That's a partial list.
Many parents are aware of at least some of the risks, yet vaccinate, simply believing it's safe in the sense that it just won't happen to their kids. There's no sound reason for that belief. Kids and adults alike have suffered severe damage from vaccination, including death, despite a track record of apparent non-reaction to previous shots. The toxins from vaccines accumulate, shot to shot, and any subsequent vaccine can push a person's tolerance past the breaking point, or introduce a new ingredient for which no tolerance exists.
Beyond the stated and terrible list of injuries, are scores of lesser vaccine effects: upper and lower respiratory infections, sleep apnea, ear infections, facial tics, and many more.
Vaccines simply aren't safe.
There is a long history of statistical manipulation on the part of the vaccine industry, carried out to create the public perception of reduction in disease incidence, where none exists, the most blatant example and, ironically, also one of the two most touted: polio. Diagnostic bias also plays a role in the illusion of disease reduction. In measles outbreaks, for instance, there have been instances where all the kids involved were vaccinated, and some in which few were vaccinated. The point: when an MD's presented with a child with an actual case of measles, the likelihood that the child was vaccinated is 50/50. Yet, doctors are taught that if the child's vaccinated, measles is very unlikely, and will lean toward diagnosing something like roseola instead, which includes a rash that often mirrors measles. The most insidious reason for the illusion of vaccine effectiveness, however, is the true effect of the existence of artificial antibodies. That is, antibodies produced as a result of the artificial, unnatural exposure that is vaccination. These have been adequately shown to interfere with the natural immunological reaction to potential pathogens after subsequent exposure, and to allow asymptomatic or atypically symptomatic infection, which not only masks the actual disease, which therefore, undetected, goes unreported, but can leave the infected a Trojan horse, able to surreptitiously infect others, for an undetermined period of time.
Vaccines protect no one, least of all the vaccinated, for all the reasons stated above, and more. Diseases manifest to a purpose: to thoroughly cleanse the body of infection and attendant cellular waste. We know that the vaccinated can develop a measles infection without the rash; that the skew in response can result in ruminating intracellular infection; which in turn can lead to degenerative diseases, tumors and other chronic disorders later in life. Vaccinated kids can develop asymptomatic whooping cough infections and infect others for six weeks. We must assume the same type of scenario can apply to other diseases as well. It's been well demonstrated that vaccinated kids can still experience mumps, for instance, but must consider the possibility that they can also develop a mumps infection without the typical swelling of the parotids. But traditionally symptomatic mumps has been shown to be protective against ovarian cancer, so it follows that for some kids an atypically symptomatic case will forfeit that protection. Cases of chickenpox in vaccinated kids are termed breakthrough, as though overcoming the sturdy protection of the vaccine, and attendant studies point out that not only are the number of pox in such instances reduced, but in some cases they never even reach the vesicular stage. The vesicular stage, however, is the fruition of the cleanse, and failure to reach it likely an indication of a truncated, unproductive response, rather than a sign of the benefit of vaccination.
The idea that the unvaccinated are any more of a threat in any way than the vaccinated is simply illogical, silly, were it not for the divisiveness of the notion. Various hospitals advise immunocompromised patients to avoid contact with anyone recently vaccinated with a live vaccine, and make no mention of the unvaccinated whatsoever, because there's no reason to mention them. Anyone, vaccinated or not, can develop an infection, and sometime during the typical incubation period of three or four days to a week or more begin infecting others, surreptitiously. Soon thereafter symptoms will begin to display, and appropriate precautions can be taken, both by the infected and those around them. that's the natural course of disease contraction and transmission. In those cases where the existence of vaccine-induced antibodies skew the immune response, however, traditional symptoms simply won't display, and surreptitious transmission of the infection can continue well past the typical incubation period.
Beyond that, anyone, vaccinated or not, can transmit a potential pathogen to someone else. We all are constantly exposed to potentially pathogenic organisms, and, regardless of whether we ourselves become infected, can transmit them to others, through breath and through touch.
A benign disease is one which is generally without complications, and a good prognosis, or outcome, is usual. Withdraw from the hyperbole of mainstream vaccine propaganda, research, and you'll find that the diseases against which vaccines supposedly protect are almost universally benign.
Share the above on Facebook
|Dr Lucija Tomljenovic: Vaccines Hamper Brain Development
||Sara F: My Baby Died 14 Hours After Multiple Vaccinations
There are few things in life more awesome than a mother's protective instinct. What follows is dedicated to that love, and the power of discernment that accompanies it.
If vaccines were advertised on television, an ad for, for instance, the DTaP vaccine, would have to include the following, accurate disclaimer:
"Check with your doctor... This vaccine is contraindicated in some circumstances; for instance, if you've had a prior adverse reaction to the DTaP vaccine, or are immunocompromised. Some people experience nausea immediately following vaccination, or within a few hours. The aluminum adjuvant in the vaccine, used to stimulate the immune system, may leave a hard lump at the injection site, which may be hot to the touch. This will typically dissipate in a few days, but has been known to effect muscle pain and chronic fatigue, and, though rare, may trigger development of autoimmune disease, such as multiple sclerosis (MS) or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease); consult with your doctor at the first sign of any such reaction. The vaccine recipient may issue a high-pitched shriek sometime within the twenty-four hours following vaccination, which may indicate brain inflammation, and may be followed by a lengthy period of regression. Consult with your doctor. The DTaP may cause bulging fontanelle in infants. This typically subsides after a few days, but may indicate brain damage; be alert for unusual behaviors, and call your doctor should you detect any. Also in infants, reports associate SIDS with the vaccine; for a period of about three weeks following vaccination, do not place your infant face-down. And, you may experience any combination of the following reported reactions, some of which may require hospitalization: abdominal pain, anaphylactic shock, apnoea, autism, bacterial/viral infections, convulsions, disintegrative disorder, coma, abnormal EEG, blood disorders, diabetes, eye movement disorder, hearing loss, trouble walking, narcolepsy, paralysis, pneumonia, impairment of psychomotor skills, screaming, and speech disorders. This vaccine has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility."
The above disclaimer is based on the information provided in the manufacturers' own inserts (1), a search on the national Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for officially recorded reactions (2), and information on macrophagic myofasciitis, a syndrome related specifically to injected aluminum adjuvant (3,4), an ingredient in the DTaP (5). Still, it is incomplete, for it is a fact that many adverse vaccine reactions are never reported to VAERS; technically a mandatory system, but with no provision for penalty for non-compliance - if for no other reason than the reluctance or refusal of doctors to acknowledge vaccine-induced illness. Unfortunately, ads for the other vaccines would be similar.
The list is also incomplete because it comprises only the most often reported DTaP reactions, but though it's not at the top of the list, death, the kingpin of adversity, is also recorded.
Many of the injuries for which the national vaccine court has awarded a total of over $2.7 billion over the years, were, indeed, DTaP-related, typically involving vaccine-induced epileptic seizures and other neurologic disorders, in some cases resulting in death. To quote from the court records in one such case: "Within one day [of the DTaP vaccination], he developed a fever, which led to a complex febrile seizure. Subsequently, [the child] developed epilepsy. This fact pattern is commonly seen in the Vaccine Program." (6)
This fact pattern is commonly seen in the Vaccine Program. Why, then, is this "fact pattern" not common knowledge? Government public health entities, the medical profession, pharmaceutical companies and the mainstream media; they all play their role in guarding the health of the nation, and, to varying degrees, they are all aware of the VAERS reports, the vaccine inserts on which the manufacturers list the historical adverse reactions to their products, and the billions of dollars that have been awarded for vaccine injury.
This should be a disturbing reality for any parent; vaccine injury --much of it serious, some of it catastrophic, and some of it fatal-- is a reality, yet neither the government, the pharmaceutical companies, the medical profession nor the mainstream media has stepped up to the plate to declare that vaccination is not actually "safe", as it is described. According to Merriam-Webster (7), "safe" means, free from harm or risk; secure from threat of danger, harm or loss. That's also what it means to those millions of parents who, having been told repeatedly that vaccines are safe, naturally assume they can do no harm. But vaccination can result in childhood diabetes - it is not "safe"; vaccination can cause epilepsy, as has been ruled by the vaccine court - it is not free from risk; it is not "safe". As recorded in VAERS by medical doctors, vaccination can induce autism or disintegrative disorder, in the process transforming forever family life. That is not freedom from harm. That is not "safe".
There is a terrible dichotomy between the information we as parents should expect from all the above-named sources, and what they give us, especially when you consider that there's not a doctor, pharmaceutical researcher or CVS pharmacist who can tell you, on a per-vaccination basis, whether your child will be susceptible to injury from the next administered vaccine, regardless of vaccination history; because they don't know. Given the severity of the illnesses that can result from vaccines? There's a terrible dichotomy between the information we as parents should demand from our health information sources, vs. what they give us.
This is a matter of trust. We don't even know the real extent of the adverse reactions associated with the vaccines they ask us to inject into our children. There is no doubt that the actual number of reactions is many times the number recorded in VAERS; the only question is, how many? 10 times?; 100 times? Our medical authorities are quick to point out that correlation isn't causation; that, just because a reaction is temporally associated with a vaccination does not prove one was caused by the other. Their assumption that they can even offer such a rationale is unacceptable. They are public servants; when in asking us to vaccinate they ask us to subject our kids to the possibility of diabetes, learning disorder, epilepsy, death! We demand they be straightforward in their reportage about the associated risks, make no assumptions and offer no rationales.
This is a matter of trust, and there is no question here. The CDC, the FDA, the nation's department of Health and Human Services, the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, state health agencies, the American Academy of Pediatrics, some doctors (would it were all of them!) and many journalists are well aware that there are extreme and catastrophic vaccine reactions, and that many more thousands of vaccine recipients are going to suffer them, yet, with a few notable exceptions, they say nothing; more egregiously, in literally portraying vaccination as safe they knowingly mischaracterize it. They not only betray our trust, they show it great disdain.
It's not that diseases can't be seriously damaging; it's that the choice as to whether your child will be exposed to severe risk from vaccines is yours, not theirs. Your decision cannot be informed, because they will not tell the whole truth. Moreover, if they snub their noses at their responsibility to give us complete information in one area of vaccination, we cannot trust them to be truthful in other areas: vaccine history; vaccine effectiveness; and the true nature of the threat of disease. They can only be trusted to advance the vaccination paradigm.
Investigate. Research. They're your kids.
Beyond essential, emergency care, the medical system --mainstream, allopathic medicine-- is rotten to the core. It was created by a hierarchy interested only in forwarding the sales of its pharmaceutical divisions, and the evidence is all too compelling that monetary greed has been usurped by even darker motivations. The only saving grace is the good will of most of its practitioners, and that's all too often hamstrung by the various systemic coercions, from plain old job security to the same cognitive dissonance experienced by so much of the general public; an understandable terribly unfortunate inability to entertain the notion that their educations were not only seriously deficient, but corrupt. There's no excuse for the medical establishment teaching nothing about nutrition in medical school. The fundamental definition of a doctor is a healer, and you can't heal the body if you don't know how the body heals. There's no excuse for the medical establishment teaching nothing about the reality, nature or extent of vaccine damage in medical school, to the very doctors upon whom we are then told to rely to fully inform our vaccine decisions. A white coat and a stethoscope do not a healer make. We're beyond asking questions. We must educate ourselves. - Shawn Siegel
More powerful commentaries from Shawn Siegel:
May 25, 2014: The Great Divide: Spanning the Chasm Between Truth and Egregious Lies
Oct 19, 2013: Revelations
Sep 19, 2013: Disinformed Consent
Recent articles at Facebook.com/shawn.siegel.7/notes
Older articles at TheVaccineMyth.wordpress.com
The Vaccine Debate
The reasoning behind the so-called vaccine debate is illusory. We have a cascade of misinformation thrown at us by the government, the medical establishment, the media and the manufacturers - who pretty much stay out of the picture themselves, allowing our supposed public health services and the media to propel the paradigm, to do their dirty work - all based at the root on statistical manipulation and withholding of critical information; and we have the truth, as best they can determine it, brought to us by people whose primary interest actually *is* the health of their kids.
Hate to sound like an inquisitor, but this is indeed a sincerity trial, and all we have to do is look at the CDC's Verstraeten study to determine that the only sincerity in the hearts of those who control the CDC was their sincere effort to cover up the study's damning finding: that mercury's indeed directly, significantly associated with speech and learning disorders and autism. And make no mistake about it; the effort was sincere. They re-formatted the collected data multiple times, over two years, each time resulting in a less statistically significant correlation, until they were able to announce that no correlation had been found. It was a purposeful, sustained effort to withhold from American parents the evidence that vaccinating their kids was an horrible mistake, and that's such an incredible and obvious slap in the face, to everyone.
That's all you need to know - at least, for starters - to take you aback. Anyone who can avoid speaking to this, or to so many similar deep breaches of the public trust, and continue to spout the "provax" message either has a terrible case of cognitive dissonance, or worse - much worse - and it's always so apparent. - Shawn Siegel
|Shawn Siegel & Marcella Piper-Terry on Vaccine Dangers
||Joshua Coleman on his Journey from Pro-vax to Team Vaxxed
|Shawn Siegel & Robert O Young ND: Key to Healing All Disease
||The Ebola Hoax, False Pandemics and How Vaccines and Fear of
Disease Fit Into Global Population Reduction Programs.
There is an aspect of the vaccine industry of which we must all be aware: the behavior of the public health authorities dictating the schedule.
The polio vaccine was introduced in 1954. At the time, paralytic and non-paralytic cases were all being reported as polio - non-paralytic cases actually made up around 55% of the reported cases. In the few years immediately following the introduction of the vaccine, the CDC changed the definition of paralytic polio drastically - from 24 hours of paralysis to 60 days. Since most sufferers of paralytic polio actually recovered within a few weeks, this had the effect of eliminating more than two thirds of the cases to be reported. There was also a change in labeling protocol for non-paralytic poliomyelitis, which had constituted the majority of polio cases reported; it was thenceforth to be labeled viral or aseptic meningitis. Between those two changes, 90% of all cases of polio to be reported were automatically eliminated - eliminated, not eradicated. Indeed, by 1965 the reported cases of polio had decreased by 90% - and the reported cases of aseptic meningitis had increased accordingly. Since that time, local and state public health authorities have had to send all reported cases to the CDC for final analysis before they could officially be declared polio. Coincidentally, the number of cases of polio reported soon dwindled to zero.
Interestingly, concurrently with the diagnostic changes the CDC also changed the definition of a polio epidemic - from 20 in 100,000 to 35 in 100,000 - cutting almost in half the likelihood that any future outbreaks would be so labeled.
In 1960 the Illinois Medical Society hosted a panel of experts - three PhD statisticians and an MD - to discuss the ongoing problems with the polio vaccination campaign. The changes I mention above - in particular the changes to the diagnostic parameters of paralytic polio and the definition of polio epidemic - are discussed in the transcript of that proceeding, which was published in the Illinois Medical Journal, and can be accessed at:
Vis-a-vis the re-labeling of non-paralytic polio as meningitis, you'll find the correlation plainly stated - "The Pennsylvania Department of Health's most recent report is of a case of non-paralytic polio (aseptic meningitis) in a 36-year-old,..." in the following CDC MMWR supplement:
There is also a fascinating statement made by the guardians of health of our neighbors to the north in 1959, with whom the CDC here in the States typically acts in concert. I provide it to accent the hubris of the medical industry in its manipulation of statistics, and will gladly offer the identifying information of the document to anyone who wants it. Published by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, out of Ottawa:
"It may be noted that the Dominion Council of Health at its 74th meeting in October 1958 recommended that for the purposes of national reporting and statistics the term non-paralytic poliomyelitis be replaced by 'meningitis, viral or aseptic' with the specific viruses shown where known."
Here we have a disease that had been made the scourge of the medical world, and doctors were being asked to simply eliminate over half the reported cases by literally renaming them all of them. I have to assume they used the quotation marks around "meningitis, viral or aseptic" to keep the doctors focused on the new label, rather than the breach of medical ethics they were being asked to implement.
And as for the CDC now being the final arbiter of polio diagnoses, it is well set out - CDC compiles and summarizes clinical, epidemiologic, and laboratory data concerning suspected cases - in the following CDC document:
That's not the only time the medical establishment has changed the name of a disease to effect the illusion of the success of a vaccine, but this one was followed by the ballsy hoist of the illusory eradication of polio as a banner of the industry.
Educate. Research. It's really a matter of trust.
Dr. Fred Klenner, MD, was curing cases of polio with injections of vitamin C well before the advent of the Salk vaccine. The medical establishment was certainly aware of the success, for Dr. Klenner had announced and described it at a 1949 AMA conference, yet the American public wasn't made aware of the treatment, and in the headlines it deserved, for this was when the polio fright was beginning to reach its zenith. To this day, officialdom won't mention it - you have to be told by your digital neighbors, or good doctors like nephrologist Suzanne Humphries.
MD Dr. Thomas Levy was astounded when he read the history, and at the page linked in the first comment below described one particularly incredible case:
In 1951, Dr. Klenner, MD, treated a five-year-old girl stricken with polio. She'd already been paralyzed in both her lower legs for over four days - the right leg was completely limp, and the left leg was determined to be 85% flaccid. Pain was noticed especially in the knee and lumbar areas. Four consulting physicians confirmed the diagnosis of polio. Other than massage, vitamin C was the only therapy initiated. After four days of vitamin C injections the child was again moving both legs, but with only very slow and deliberate movement. Klenner also noted that there was a "definite response" after only the first injection of vitamin C. The child was discharged from the hospital after four days, and 1,000 mg of oral vitamin C was continued every two hours with fruit juice for seven days. The child was walking about, although slowly, on the 11th day of treatment. By the 19th day of treatment there was a "complete return of sensory and motor function," and no long-term impairment ever resulted. Vitamin C not only completely cured this case of polio, it completely reversed what would undoubtedly have been a devastating, crippling result for the remainder of this girl's life.
Dr. Levy adds: For such elegant results, in the days before widespread use of either antibiotics or vaccination, one may wonder why Klenner was not awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine.
One may wonder, indeed - or one may feel justified anger that a proven effective treatment for an illness that was disabling so many kids was never made public; or that, instead, a conscious campaign of deceit was mounted to create the illusion that the vaccine eliminated the disease.
Vaccines can never work because they are based on an incorrect theory of disease. The "immune stimulation" purported to be evidence of vaccine benefit is nothing more than a non-specific allergic reaction to toxins. An intoxication of the terrain; setting the stage for disease.
|GERM THEORY (PASTEUR)||CELLULAR THEORY (BÉCHAMP and BERNARD)|
|1. Disease arises from micro-organisms outside the body.||Disease arises from micro-organisms within the cells of the body.|
|2. Micro-organisms are generally to be guarded against.||These intracellular micro-organisms normally function to build and assist in the metabolic processes of the body.|
|3. The function of micro-organisms is constant.||The function of these organisms changes to assist in the catabolic (disintegration) processes of the host organism when that organism dies or is injured, which may be chemical as well as mechanical.|
|4. The shapes and colours of micro-organisms are constant.||Micro-organisms change their shapes and colours to reflect the medium.|
|5. Every disease is associated with a particular micro-organism.||Every disease is associated with a particular condition.|
|6. Micro-organisms are primary causal agents.||Micro-organisms become "pathogenic" as the health of the host organism deteriorates. Hence, the condition of the host organism is the primary causal agent.|
|7. Disease can "strike" anybody.||Disease is built by unhealthy conditions.|
|8. To prevent disease we have to "build defences."||To prevent disease we have to create health.|
|Germ Theory (Pasteur) vs Terrain Theory (Bechamp)
||Do Viruses Exist? The Truth Exposed with Sofia Smallstorm