Loading...

Monday, November 14, 2011

Is Vaccination Really Responsible for the Eradication of Fatal Childhood Disease?


Is Vaccination Really Responsible for the Eradication of Fatal Childhood Disease?
                One of the biggest arguments from people who are advocates of immunizations is that we have seen such a drastic reduction in deadly childhood diseases since vaccinations have been being used.  Unfortunately for them, there is evidence that vaccination didn’t have anything to do with the reduction in illnesses of this nature. In this chart, you can see that the number of people who died from several of the more common devastating diseases were declining before the introduction of vaccines to the population.
        



The Evidence
                A paper published in 1977 from the Lancet, “VACCINATION AGAINST WHOOPING-COUGH: Efficacy versus Risks” (bystianyk/Stewart) reveals, ““There was a continuous decline [whooping cough deaths], equal in each sex, from 1937 onward.” They report that Vaccination was started on a small scale around 1948 and then nationally in 1957. The findings were that it did not affect the rate of decline in deaths due to disease. The results instead point to the bilogy of disease where the decline between 1930 and 1957 is due to the weakened parts of the population already being removed and the spread of the disease lessening because the population was left with stronger immunity. The reports determines, “With this pattern well established before 1957, there is no evidence that vaccination played a major role in the decline in incidence and mortality in the trend of events.” Furthermore, this study shows that since 1977, the scientific community has been aware that vaccines were not the reason that diseases ceased to exist in our communities. These declining numbers came about during a period when the public health agencies spread a wide campaign about hand washing and hygienic practices to help reduce the risks of infection as suggested by Dr Palevsky in the Documentary, A Greater Good. (Manookian) Dr. Palevsky
Do the Vaccines Work for Future Outbreaks?
                Dr. Lopez-Duran, an advocate for vaccination, claims that children of parents that refused vaccinations were at risk for pertussis 2000% more than children that received the vaccination. The writer than goes on to give the results of a study stating, “Of the 156 children who acquired pertussis, 12% were children of parents who refused vaccination.” This statistic leads me to question who then were the other 88% of the children with pertussis? Were they vaccinated? The research participants were all part of a large health care insurance company.  This statement is not followed with information about the ages of these children when they were infected either. The pertussis vaccination wears off in the teens, requiring continued vaccination to be effective. The way Dr. Lopez-Duran states his claim leads me to believe that the vaccination is not effective.
It Can’t Hurt to Be Safe, Vaccination is Preventative!
                Supporters go on to state that there is no scientific evidence to prove that the cause of the severe reactions that are blamed on vaccinations are in fact from vaccinations. This is a flawed statement as all the studies the CDC uses to determine the safety of current vaccinations are not only paid for by the companies producing them but are epidemic and not scientific investigations with in depth looks t the ingredients and their affect on the human body, including neurological health.  Dr. Lopez-Duran goes on to state, “Parents who agreed to vaccinate their children were 2 times more likely than vaccine-refusing parents to visit the doctor for upper respiratory infections.”  His interpretation of this statement is that the participants were biased and that parents who refused vaccination were less likely to seek the help of a family physician when their children were sick than those who voluntarily received the vaccinations. I find there to be fault with this statement in the sense that if the vac-refusing parents were less likely to seek the help of a physician when their kids were sick and they didn’t die of severe infection, then maybe the help of the physician wasn’t needed to begin with.  If the children did acquire pertussis, as the writer assumes is likely underreported for the same bias reasons, and they didn’t die or need hospitalization, maybe pertussis isn’t as lethal as much of the literature would like to convince you it is. This also shows that studies cite children who are vaccinated have increased visits to doctor’s offices. Let’s examine this.
                If there is a higher incidence of return patients in the vaccinated category, and these patients were not reported to (VAERS) The Vaccination Adverse Events Reporting System, than what were these kids seen for?  It is suggested that an increase in the common cold, asthma realted illness, reoccurring ear infections, and other chronic illnesses are what bring these kids in. Is this not because of the reduction in immune system function directly after the immunizations are administered? Studies from India show that there is an increase in fevers, diarrhea and coughs in the month following vaccinations. (Neustaedter)
                Dr. Neustaedter reports in his article, “Do Vaccinations Disable the Immune System” that  in 1950, studies linked receiving the DPT vaccination. The study confirmed that out of the almost 4000 kids in New York that year that were infected with polio, that they were twice as likely to have received the DPT vaccination 2 month before the onset of the Polio.
                Doctors interviewed for the documentary, A Greater Good, stated that doctors are not trained in how to detect a reaction from vaccinations. The VAERS claim that their statistics are flawed because of the severity of under reporting from doctors and individuals. Doctors often will not associate the side effects with the vaccinations because it has been ingrained in them that they are 100% safe and save people’s lives.
What are the Real Risks of Vaccination?
Each Vaccination is a combination of aluminum, formaldehyde, mercury, antibiotics, and a minute amount of the disease being vaccinated against. None of these ingredients have ever been tested individually in comparable doses on human children or babies.  Dr. Sears advocates that the FDA should have done this job before these vaccinations were ever allowed to enter the market and be injected into our bodies.
                Dr. Chris Shaw, a professor of neuroscience says aluminum is used in vaccinations to make the injection last longer in the body, because the body doesn’t process it out when injected instead of eaten. He conducted a study with mice where he injected comparative quantities of aluminum and reported that there was a significant decline in behavior, motor skills and cognitive abilities. Upon autopsy of the injected mice, findings included severe damage to motor neurons that were associated with long term development of Parkinson’s, Lou Gehrigs Disease, and Alzeimer’s 20-50 years down the road.  4 Years later, no one has tried to refute Dr. Shaw’s study and when approached about the results, the FDA responded that it “does not believe that this particular paper brings to light the need for additional research that is not already underway.” (Manookian)
Conclusion
            If we know that the reason the common diseases that caused death and severe illnesses at the turn of the century declined was largely due to hygienic practices and the biological fact that the strong survived and left us with a population of people that are resistant to the disease, why then should we be worried about an epidemic of that nature again? If there is clear evidence that the safety of vaccinations in the entire population is questionable, why are we accepting legislation that is making vaccination mandatory to all who are not using exemptions of religious or medical nature? Why has the FDA approved the injection of chemicals into infants if they haven’t been tested? Even if vaccinations, alone aren’t responsible for the severe reactions that are becoming more and more common in our society, shouldn’t there be more testing to assure people that they are indeed safe and be offered on a voluntary basis? These are the types of questions I want to raise to motivate you to find your own answers to what is really the right way to handle this issue for you and your family. There are many factors involved to why we are seeing 1 in 10 children diagnose with Autism in today’s society. It could be a combination of an overload of toxins and vaccinations are what drives the damage over the top, it could be because of the reduction in breastfeeding, the increase use of neurologically damaging drugs during labor, heavy metals in our food supply, pollution in the air.  The answers are not yet clearly defined and until they are, routine vaccination of over 30 diseases before 6 years old should come to a halt and be examined more thoroughly on an individual basis and the choices left in the hands of the parents, not doctors and politicians.

No comments:

Post a Comment