SOME THINGS TO
THINK ABOUT
SOME THINGS TO
THINK ABOUT
HEALTH - HEALING - WELLNESS
PAGE 543
Scrapping the Entire Childhood Immunization
Program
Scrapping the Entire Childhood Immunization Program
This morning I was talking to a professor of chemistry in one of our local universities in Brazil and it made me remember my rock of chemistry, my chemistry mentor, Dr. Boyd Haley, Professor of Chemistry, University of Kentucky. Chemistry is one of the most basic of sciences and usually we walk on solid ground when we read scientific reports in this field.
Medical science, medical officials and medical organization all have something in common, a disdain for the science of chemistry. When they read in plain English that thimerosal is toxic at doses much lower than are present in vaccines they pretend they are reading about the possibility of monuments on Mars. The grey matter in these people's brains seems to turn to putty when addressing vaccine issues and specifically the thimerosal connection. Stupid is not the word, nor does medical retardation quite cover the insanity of medical officials who insists there is no problem injecting very strong neurological poisons in babies and adults alike.
There is not a doctor in the world today who will inject lead into anyone yet mercury is 100 times more toxic, and when mixed with aluminum and other chemicals and even hormones, mercury can be 1000 times more toxic than lead. Pediatricians have something seriously wrong going on in their heads and certainly in their hearts as they maintain their campaign of terror against the young ones in their charge. Thinking nothing of chemistry they simply continue to poison children as long as the medical officials tell them to do so.
I call this chemical rape but I doubt there is a pediatrician in the world who thinks of himself as a chemical rapist. Babies do die from the chemical assault of pediatricians and that is evident in the official statistics but as long as you have a medical license it does not matter. Modern medicine is proud to be cruel, proud to be wrong, obsessed as they are with their illusion of righteousness in all things medical.
I have said for many years that I am glad when I am wrong, glad when I am in error for then it gives me the opportunity to be right. I am writing this short commentary because I just read an essay by Dr. Haley, which ended with the following comment. "In the recent past I have recommended that parents vaccinate their children with thimerosal free vaccines as I considered them safe. If Schechter-Grether are correct, and vaccines, but not thimerosal, correlate with increased autism rates, then I am in error assuming vaccines are now safer with regards to autism risk than they were in 2000."
I have always thought that Dr. Haley is absolutely correct in his assessments of thimerosal and also on the mercury containing dental amalgam, though it was always difficult to understand his continued faith in the childhood immunization program with his knowledge of thimerosal. I am very glad to see him begin to speculate that he might be wrong and that the entire vaccine program might have to be scrapped because it cannot be trusted. After all thimerosal is not the only toxic chemical in vaccines and importantly, how can we trust anyone or any company or organization or industry insane enough to inject babies with thimerosal? Would you trust a rapist with the day care of your children?
In the case of medical officials at the CDC and FDA it's a situation analogous to children's sexual predators that defend their abuses against children. Psychologists are well aware of the rationalizations that take place in the minds of pedophiles but we do not expect that from medical scientists who defend the indefensible. But we happen to live in a civilization that condones the use of poisons even to the point of dumping them in our water supplies. The fluoridation of water is a prime example; who cares in the United States government except Ron Paul that it's against international law to medicate populations against their will.
Negative side effects of Gardasil, a new Merck vaccine to prevent the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, is what one would expect from pharmaceutical companies looking for killer profits. Parents beware, they are now coming after your teenages as well. A path of suffering and pain from this vaccine is being reported in the District of Columbia and 20 states, including Virginia. The reactions range from loss of consciousness to seizures. "Young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness, temporary loss of vision and some girls have lost consciousness during what appear to be seizures," said Vicky Debold, health policy analyst for the National Vaccine Information Center, a nonprofit watchdog organization that was created in the early 1980s to prevent vaccine injuries.
Two girls have died suddenly after being given the vaccine against the virus which causes cervical cancer, a European drug watchdog agency revealed recently. The deaths, in Germany and Austria, came after the women were given injections of Gardasil. Three women have also died in America after having the vaccine but as is typical in vaccine related deaths the cause of death has not been revealed. Gardasil, is supposed to protect against four strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV), which trigger cancerous tumors and warts.
Washington, DC-based Judicial Watch reported a year ago that 1,637 adverse events involving Gardasil, including three deaths related to the vaccine. "As of May 11, 2007, the 1,637 adverse vaccination reactions reported to the FDA via the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) included 371 serious reactions," Judicial Watch reported in a news release. "Of the 42 women who received the vaccine while pregnant, 18 experienced side effects ranging from spontaneous abortion to fetal abnormalities."
Dr. Mercola reported as of August 2007, a review of the National Vaccine Information Center revealed the following, quite alarming, statistic about this unnecessary vaccine: 2,207 adverse reactions to Gardasil have been reported. Among them:
5 girls died
31 were considered life-threatening
1,385 required a visit to the emergency room
451 of the girls have not recovered as of July 2007
51 of the girls were disabled
I am not afraid or ashamed to call a spade a spade, a beast a beast and arrogant idiots ignorant. I wrote and published The Terror of Pediatric Medicine and gave it away for a very good reason. There are medical beasts on the loose, barbarians in thought and action who are making a lot of money from abusing the young. They deserve our disdain. They deserve jail time. They are the modern day vampires who should be swept from society but put on display as examples of all that is destroying the earth and the health of the people who live on it.
If these deaths had been attributed to a vitamin or a herb it would have been banned immediately and natural health products would have been pilloried endlessly.
When you read about what these young girls are being forced into, the suffering unto the threat of death, tell me please what is the difference between a young girl sitting on a medical table in a concentration camp and a young girl sitting on a medical table in a doctors office when she is approached by a doctor or nurse with an experimental drug vaccine formula. What's the difference when both girls keel over in agony, with severe headaches, dizziness, temporary loss of vision and seizures? When both girls die, what is the difference? The one lesson that history should burn into our brains is that the largest pharmaceutical company in existence built and ran Auschwitz concentration camp. One of the saddest notes in history is being made today by billions of people who have made a religion out of pharmaceutical drugs and modern medical practices. Such a joke to think that the death of such evil, which existed in Germany, ended with the death of one man, the death of Hitler.
For anyone who disagrees with me I ask the question, is it perfectly right to poison babies, rape them with chemicals and damn the consequence? Is the crime any less if it only harms some of the children? Killing and maiming children through chemical means, is that so much different then doing that through sexual means? Yes sexual assault is terrible and leaves wounds that last a lifetime but talk to parents of an autistic child and the terror they face on a daily level with their children. Our sexualities do touch on our deepest vulnerabilities and that is why sexual abuse is so terrible and difficult to recover from. But chemical assault can be as damaging and can cast a family into a hell fire of suffering no one would wish upon another, no one but doctors, nurses and medical officials that is.
Very few of us have been paying attention to the sheer numbers of vaccines given to people these days, which are acting in combination with each other to destroy the immune system. Stimulating the immune system with a myriad of vaccines is becoming the new paradigm in medicine but it seems that they are simultaneously overwhelming our immune systems as well. The amounts and types and combinations of adjuvant substances in vaccines interacting with each other in a young body are not taken into consideration. Ruin of the immune system is what might really be what is going on, destruction of one of the most important things that we need to live healthy and long lives.
Mark Sircus Ac., OMDInternational Medical Veritas Association
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: The communication in this email is intended for informational purposes only. Nothing in this email is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice.
Mary Tocco has been in the health care field for over 27 years and spent 23 years (1981 - 2003) managing and promoting a chiropractic clinic in Michigan. She is currently managing (Nov. 2006 to date) vitalityhealth, Dr. Renee Tocco’s (her daughter) pain relief, anti-aging, weight loss chiropractic clinic in Charleston, SC. Mary has attended numerous Chiropractic seminars as well as Vaccine conferences around the country. She began to intensely investigate childhood vaccines over 27 years ago, spending thousands of hours collecting and organizing the information.
She was married to chiropractor Sam Tocco of Clarkston, Michigan for 23 years and they have 5 healthy children. Before having their first child 27 years ago, they had the opportunity to research childhood vaccines. There was enough evidence back then to convince them to not vaccinate their children.
In 1994, a bill was introduced in Michigan, which threatened to remove the “Philosophical Exemption” to waive vaccines. Mary was very concerned for the families in her state and got involved with Michigan Opposing Mandatory Vaccines (MOM), a non-profit organization dedicated to preserving the right of parents to waive vaccines if they choose. She was asked to testify before the government health policy committee. The group successfully stopped the bill from passing and to date, Michigan is one of a few states that still has the philosophical exemption.
That was the beginning of a dedicated, passionate career of educating and reaching out to parents around the country. Mary has been sharing and encouraging parents to be proactive in the health of their family, utilizing natural, holistic and health promoting ideas for raising their children. She had four of her five children born at home with mid-wives, promotes breast feeding, an active healthy lifestyle, supports home education and is a dedicated Christian. She founded the Precious Health Campaign, LLC to help reach parents across America so that they too would have the same opportunity for healthy families.
Mary Tocco is on the Board of Directors for WAVE, World Association for Vaccine Education, is the Director of Vaccine Research and Education for Michigan Opposing Mandatory Vaccines, is also affiliated with Mothering Magazine as a member of Ask the Experts.
“I have been independently researching this issue and many other health care issues that face the American Family for over 27 years. I have been publicly speaking for the last 12 years and am available to speak to your group or association. I have spoken to thousands of parents in Michigan, Indiana, South Carolina, Florida and my goal is to reach every state with this information. My DVD has gone around the world from Alaska, to Australia, Europe and Canada. It is now available on many web sites and I plan on getting them in major health food stores around the country. I expose the deception and greed that fuels the vaccine industry and help parents to understand what they must do to promote their family’s health without toxic vaccines or drugs. I am passionate about helping families so please refer your friends to my site and purchase my voted #1 DVD called, “Are Vaccines Safe?”.
Mary is always available for an interview on your radio or television program. She is passionate and entertaining...never a dull moment! You will be impressed with the depth of information and the dedication she amplifies. Call 231-642-7984 to schedule Mary for your next interview or conference.
My mission is to reach parents through public lectures, my DVD, radio, internet and other media, in order to assist them in making a fully informed vaccine decision. By exposing the flawed vaccine myth and the deception and greed that fuels the vaccine industry, I will help to change public awareness and attitudes about vaccines and our current flawed health care system.
Because we all love our children and want what is best for them, we must carefully and thoroughly examine all the facts before we assume what is best for our children. My mission is to supply you with all the hidden facts that drug manufactures do not want you to have. It has taken me 27 years to research and investigate this topic and now I want to share it with you. You then can make informed vaccine decisions and make sense out of all the conflicting information. Information is powerful. Ignorance is not bliss and can end in tragedy.
Parents need to know their health care options. By identifying and utilizing the many natural health care choices available, parents are equipped to actively promote health without toxic medications and drugs. I want to see every child express their God given health potential so that they can live a fulfilling life. This knowledge will have a positive impact on the family which will then affect the community and society as a whole.
My goal is to insure that the following governmental institutions are held accountable for vaccine injured children. We have lost control over all of these agencies and they are riddled with conflict of interest. They have abused their authority and need to be dismantled.
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) who has failed miserably to protect our children and benefits financially from vaccines. The Federal Drug Administration (FDA), who approves toxic vaccines and other drugs and is riddled with conflict of interest. The Center for Disease Control (CDC) which supports and benefits financially from vaccines is fueled by financial gain. The people who sit on the regulatory boards who mandate vaccines and also gain financially from them.
My goal is to see that vaccines are no longer mandated. Vaccine choice should be made by parents without pressure. We need non-bias scientific studies in the efficacy and safety of all vaccines, old and new.
My goal is to study the “unvaccinated children” to see how they compare with their vaccinated piers. I currently have a few hundred names of unvaccinated children for the study and am looking for more. (contact me if interested)
My goal is to help organize multi disciplinary health/treatment centers for those injured from vaccines, who suffer with autoimmune disorders like asthma, diabetes, learning problems, seizure disorders, and autism to name a few. The focus will be on rebuilding the immune system, cleanse the body of the vaccine toxins and promote natural health. We will utilize all of the natural health care options available.
My goal is to empower and encourage parents to learn how the human body was meant to grow and function so that they do not live in fear of infectious illnesses. The focus must be on prevention through education with the emphasis on personal responsibility in health care.
To schedule Mary Tocco for your next convention call 231-642-7984. You will get an unforgettable presentation with the latest information. This is the hottest topic effecting families in today’s world! Help families in your community make informed vaccine decisions.
Toxic Vaccine Ingredients:
Aluminum,Acetone,Phenol,Lead,MSG, Aborted Baby Tissue,SV40 Cancer Virus,Pig Blood, Rabbit Brain, Formaldeyde,Glycerin, Puss, Retro Virus, Fecal Matter, Micoplasm, Stealth Virus, Human Diploid Cell Cultures,Sucrose, Soduim Chloride, MSG, Sodium Phosphate Dibasic, Potassium Phosphate Monobasic, processed gelatin, EDTA, Neomycin, Fetal Bovine Serum,Aluminum Phosphate,2-phenoxyethanol, Formaldehyde, Glutaraldehyde, Barium Chloride, Polysorbate 80, thimerosal, Tri(n)butyl Phosphate, Polysorbate 80Human diploid lung tissue, Amino Acids, Fetal Bovine Serum,Neomycin, Sorbitol, Hydrolyzed Gelatin, 2-phonoxyethanol, sodium dihydrogen phosphate dihydrate, mineral salts,Phenol Red,chicken proteinsqualene, benzethonium....
How will you know if your infant or baby is allergic to any of these toxic ingredients? Your new baby will get the same vaccine as a grown child with no consideration for body weight or health.
I want you to take the exact injections you ask all the children to take, only you must make the injections appropriate to your body weight. Then get on the same schedule with all the boosters...let us see how well your brain and body function!!!
The Rotavirus vaccine was designed specifically to avoid a common childhood condition, diarrhea, which can lead to dehydration in young babies and children. It is recommended for babies six weeks or older. I find that this vaccine, like many others, has not been thoroughly studied before being released. When the first rotavirus vaccine, Rota Shield was released in 1998, there were also concerns about the inadequate safety studies prior to licensing. I attended a conference in Washington sponsored by the National Vaccine Information Center where this concern was discussed in great length before it was recommended in the childhood schedule. Despite concerns, the Rota Shield was quickly licensed and on the vaccine schedule. As history documented, it was released and recalled within six months due to the number of babies who suffered with intussusception, which is when the colon becomes inflamed, swells and folds in on itself often requiring surgery, air enemas or other intrusive measures to correct. Babies collapse in severe pain and need emergency care. How can this happen? I often wonder how the babies who went through that terrible experience are doing today. Were their families compensated for all the suffering and pain?
Dr. Paul Offit, a very outspoken proponent of vaccines and a member of the Center for Disease Control (CDC) Advisory Committee disclosed in Congressional Record that he received $350,000.00 in grant money to develop the RotaTeq vaccine from Merck and also co-owns the patient! My personal opinion is that this is why the vaccine was approved prematurely without adequate safety studies.
I admit I am skeptical and very concerned with the licensing and mandating of the new RotaTeq for many reasons: The following quotes were obtained off of the FDA web site from Merck & Co.Inc. RotaTeq #9714301 Pages 1, 4, 5 & 6, my comments and concerns follow:
1. “No safety or efficacy data are available for administration of RotaTeq to infants with a history of gastrointestinal disorders including infants with active acute gastrointestinal illness, infants with chronic diarrhea and failure to thrive, congenital abdominal disorders, abdominal surgery and intussusception. There fore caution is advised when considering administration of RotaTeq to these infants.”
The studies have not been done! Considering the rate of immunocompromised people/children in this country, the question every parent must ask is, “How would I know if my 6 week old baby is immune compromised? Many children born at this time are predisposed or hyper sensitive to the toxins in vaccines because their birth mother was exposed through her vaccines. It is my opinion that we have “increased the toxic load” and have caused genetic predisposition to sensitivity to the toxins in vaccines by requiring so many vaccines for very underdeveloped immune systems. If any family member suffers with a chronic immune illness, parents need to understand the risk involved. These weaknesses may be passed down genetically to your baby. Unfortunately Mom and Dad, if your child is one of the unlucky ones, you won’t find out until it is too late and they suffer a severe reaction.
2. Because this vaccine was administered with other vaccines, it is really difficult to see the real outcomes. In the clinical studies, 52 deaths were reported! I cried when I read this because that means that 52 families have been the victims of science, their children used as guinea pigs for a condition that is usually part of childhood and rarely results in death. The cause of death was reported as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). This is the cover all reason for infant death whenever the doctors do not understand the cause. I believe the death certificates should read, “Vaccine Induced Death” and the parents should be compensated, if there is such a way to compensate for a child who dies.
Intussusception was also noted in both 8 recipients of RotaTeq and the 9 who received placebo. That brings up another question: Could other vaccines cause intussusception? Why are we not using the unvaccinated children as our placebo control group? I personally know hundreds who are completely vaccine free and are willing to be part of a test. How many unvaccinated children suffer with intussusception? Is this really truthful, ethical science supporting these studies when all the children are administered multiple vaccines in conjunction with the new vaccine being studied? Sorry, I do not trust this kind of study.
3. Under Patient Information- (pg.2) “The most common side effects reported after taking the RotaTeq were diarrhea, vomiting, fever, runny nose and sore throat, wheezing or coughing and ear infections. These are NOT all the possible side effects of RotaTeq” Sounds like what the vaccine is supposed to alleviate!
According to Dr. Incao, a well respected doctor who supports natural immunity says that these normal childhood illnesses can help to develop strong immunity for life. He encourages parents to allow their children to experience the illness. By overcoming the illness they strengthen and develop the immune system. This is how I raised my five children and I know many hundreds of families who are doing the same thing. Immunologist and Chiropractor, Dr. Marini, shows how the immune system reacts completely different when the child is allowed to experience the illness compared to when a child is vaccinated. I reference this on my DVD which is available from my web site, “Are Vaccines Safe?”
The ingredients in the RotaTeg are as follows:
Active ingredients: 5 live rotavirus strains.
Inactive ingredients: sucrose, sodium citrate, sodium phosphate, monobasic monohydrate, sodium hydroxide, polysorbate 80 and also fetal bovine (cow) serum.
As with all vaccines, I believe that the vaccine immunity theory is terribly flawed and the parents and children of this country are victims of shrewd marketing. The whole industry is riddled with greed, conflict of interest, and miss-information from the governmental agencies down to the doctors’ offices that push them on un-informed parents who are following instructions. We all must get involved by thoroughly investigating every shot they say is required and make informed decisions. Most importantly, you must understand that as a parent you have the final say…there are exemptions available in every state if you want to avoid vaccines. Call your local health department and ask what the legal exemptions for vaccines are in your state. Get it in writing so you understand how to utilize them. For those who want to use the religious exemption, I have a list of “Biblical Reasons to Avoid Vaccination.” You may email me from www.marytocco.com and request a copy.
I do not like politics but I must say that Senator Ron Paul, physician and republican candidate for president, supports the parent’s right to make medical decisions. He has been an honorary member of Michigan Opposing Mandatory Vaccines since the group’s inception in 1994. I am the Director of Vaccine Research for that group and have respected Ron Paul because he is not afraid to take a stand for what is right. He does not agree with mandating vaccines and completely understands the risks to the American family. He is opposed to big government, the IRS and he wants to eliminate the Department of Education as they are failing miserably. He is about freedom, constitutional rights and the sanctity of human life. As our rights erode and big government intrudes in our life, I believe it is time for Ron Paul to lead this country back to its roots…The American Constitution. If we do not make critical changes soon, we will all lose our right to make the vaccine decision for our children and ourselves!
As for me and my family, we will continue to avoid all vaccines. I will continue to promote a vitalistic approach to health where the body is nurtured and encouraged to develop naturally. I am not anti-medical; I believe drugs belong in crisis care and the emergency room! I believe that healthy children do not need drugs to grow and develop. As a parent, I encourage you to proceed with caution and do your own investigation. Unfortunately, medical healthcare decisions are very complicated and the facts are not always obvious. When it comes to vaccines, it is extremely hard to sift through all the mis-information. I make it easy for you! My DVD is packed with congressional records, scientific medical research and fully documented.
TO VIEW THIS VIDEO CLICK ON:
www.vetshelpcenter.com/AV/Videos/AreVaccinesSafe/tabid/810/Default.aspx
The lethal brew called the vaccinations made from disease cells and so many obnoxious ingredients do not build up immunity. Rather these vaccines are introduced to create more diseases. As I have said in my new doctor’s oath, vaccinations are worse than rape. It is heinous and those who have made vaccination mandatory, like in USA and in the EU countries, are the mass murderers. Hitler pales into insignificance when it comes to genocide of small children due to vaccinations.
So many clandestine events are planned behind the closed doors of the medical laboratories which have a set agenda to follow, namely population control. For example, how many people (including doctors, parents, planners, politicians, advocates, administrators, consumer rights organisation) are even aware that now the required number of childhood vaccines has increased to dangerous levels. These are the weapons of mass destruction.
1980 20 vaccines
2003 40 vaccines
2004 53 vaccines
2005 58 vaccines
2006 63 vaccines
2008 68 vaccines
Why is this number going up every year and it is never reported or discussed in the media or in the parliaments of the nations? Earlier, vaccinations were given only to small children. Now they are recommended even to senior citizens and there are 73 vaccines for adults.
As a result people are getting sicker. Issues like, (a) Sudden Infant Death, (b) Autism, (c) Measles (d) Human Papilloma Virus Vaccine, (e) Flu Shots and Mercury in Vaccines, (f) Why infant deformities and deaths are increasing are deliberately not discussed.
New vaccines are being invented every year and routinely included in the “Mandated Immunization Schedule”.
Who has made them mandatory and on what basis? Money decides everything. See how Bird Flu scare is created and then inadequately tested or costly Tami Flu is promoted. But cancer and AIDS vaccine is nowhere
in sight. Because these two diseases are created by infecting bloodline itself.
Today, there are 68 vaccines mandated for use before a child is eighteen years old. And yet, our infant mortality rate and the health of our children are appalling. The incidence of both infectious diseases and degenerative diseases among Americans is skyrocketing. Allopathy is a pseudo science and allopathic vaccinations are based not on scientific premise but greed and more greed. The role of vaccinations over the past 100 years has been grossly exaggerated and the harm done has been carefully hidden from public view. Life-changing information is deliberately hidden by the immoral greed-driven industry. BBC recently removed the website on CAM. When I complained to them, they wrote saying they are improving it and it will be up again shortly. By the same token
the Modern Medicine website, which gives much more misleading and dangerous information is not removed, I countered.
Veggie vaccines, urine vaccines, homeopathic vaccines (nosodes) are never discussed even though they are cheaper, safer and without any side effects. Likewise, the role of good diet and nutrition, as also herbs, fruits and vegetables (God’s pharmacy) is never discussed. Now you require a doctor’s prescription even to buy vitamins and minerals, even though banned and bannable drugs are freely available off the shelf.
Wake up folks, wake up. In this information explosion age if you do not get proper information or if you do not use your common sense than you are an educated fool. If you wish to remain in fool’s paradise that is your look out. But do not rape your children willy-nilly.
I would like to once again remind you of what I wrote in December 2007:
Like formal education stunts the mental growth of a child;
Like religions stunt the spiritual growth of an individual;
Vaccinations and Drugs stunt the growth of the wondrous human body.
Stay Free from this Unholy Trinity.
www.healthwisdom.org
How To Legally Avoid Unwanted Immunizations Of All Kinds
As you read this work and put its principles into practice, there are two basic axioms you never want to forget. They are the rock upon which all your actions are based.
1. Nobody, anywhere or any time and under any circumstances has the right or power in this country to immunize you or your children against your will and conviction. If they attempt to do so, you can legally charge them with “assault with a deadly weapon” and have the full resources of our laws behind you.
2. At all times in attempting to avoid unwanted immunization, you have the Law of the Land behind you. Those who would try to vaccinate you against your will are on very shaky ground. Into every compulsory immunization law in America are written legal exceptions and waivers which are there specifically to protect you from the attempted tyranny of officialdom. It is not only your right, but your obligation to use them, if this is what your conscience tells you.
Article I
In all your contacts with any member of the school, public health, or legal
establishment, always remain calm, courteous, and humbly reverent toward their
position. You are only asking of them that which the law duty binds them to give
you. There is no reason, or advantage, to be gained by antagonizing them.
Most of these officials believe they are discharging their trust as outlined by law. If they are overstepping the law, then you must very diplomatically bring the true facts to their attention, but without attempting to belittle them.
The more you can preserve their ego, the more easily and quickly you are likely to get what you desire - a waiver of immunization.
Article 2
All compulsory laws concerning vaccination (including the military) contain
exceptions and waivers. It is these protections placed in the laws that you may
legally use to exclude yourself and your children. Surprisingly, these
exceptions were placed there, not for your sake (although you may take advantage
of them), but for the protection of the establishment.
How is this? Let us assume that these exceptions were not there and everyone was actually forced to be immunized. Should a child die or become mentally or physically disabled, the parent would have the perfect case to sue the doctor, the school, the health department, and even the state legislature for enormous damages.
Since they allowed no exceptions, they must accept full responsibility for all the adverse consequences of the law.
However, if exception waivers are placed in the law, the responsibility is then transferred back to the parent. If a child should be injured by immunization, the officials can say, “Well, the parent should have exempted him if they thought there was any danger.”
Therefore, there is in truth no such thing as a compulsory vaccination law in this country. They are ALL, in essence, voluntary. The problem is that practically no one in authority will let you know this fact.
Rule No. 2: There are no compulsory vaccination laws. All are voluntary, and you are held responsible for the adverse results upon you or your children.
Article 3
While all immunization laws have exceptions you can use, the wording in each
state differs, and you must know the exact wording for your state to make the
proper request of waiver. This information can be obtained in one of two ways.
1. Go to the reference section of your local library- look in the State Statute Revised Law Book under Public Health Law or Communicable Disease sections. The list of immunization requirements will appear first and then the exemptions will be given. Usually one or two provisions will be listed: either on religious or medical grounds or both.
2. You may call or write your state representative and ask for a copy of the immunization laws in your state. Making this available is part of his job, and it will be sent promptly.
Rule No. 3: Know your own state law so that you can conform to its exact requirements for exemption.
Article 4
There are two basic reasons for exception - medical or religious. Which one you
choose will often depend upon the wording of the law in your state and your
personal convictions.
We shall discuss medical exemption first. While laws do vary, nearly all states require that a note or certificate of waiver be submitted by a physician licensed in the state of residence. In some areas where states are small and people continually travel from one to another for business, a statement from a physician in a contiguous state will be accepted.
In this letter it is usually necessary to state the reason for the requested waiver and the length of time it should extend. Many laws limit all such letters to a school year and they must be renewed each fall.
The two most valid reasons for medical waiver are “the fear of allergic reaction in a sensitive child” and “to prevent possible damage to a weakened immune system.” Both of these can occur in a child who has been immunized, and since no one but the physician and the parent will be held responsible for their consequences, it is up to them to protect the child.
It is possible that some states may require the letter from an M.D. or D.O., but many will allow an exemption letter from a chiropractor if it is courteously and properly written, as outlined above.
Rule No. 4: Medical waivers are always valid but must be written to fit each state law and often need to be renewed annually.
Article 5
The foregoing may work for school exemptions, but are there any such waivers in
the Armed Forces? Yes. All branches of the Service provide “immunization
waivers.”
Again, if they did not you could sue them for millions of dollars if a reaction occurred from their immunizations. Because of these waiver provisions, you become responsible if you react.
When you first sign up or enlist, you must state your objection to the vaccinations and tell whether it is “religious conscience” or medical reasons, such as allergies or a low tolerance to medication of any kind. If you do not show objection at this time, you have given the military the right to do what they will with you.
If there is any difficulty, the same rules apply here as in the school program. Never forget, even though you may be in the Service, no one has the right to immunize you against your will. You do not give up your constitutional rights when you join the Armed Forces.
Rule No. 5: The rules that govern school vaccination exemption also apply to the military. Never let anyone tell you otherwise. They do not know, or are hiding, the facts of the law.
Article 6
What about international travel? May I go around the world without vaccination?
The World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva grants American visitors the right to REFUSE shots when traveling internationally. However, if an area you wish to enter is infected, you may be detained until the public health servant gives you the “go” (at his discretion).
Thousands travel world-wide each year without shots - so you may if that is your choice. Many of our co-workers have traveled over much of the world and have never taken any immunizations, nor were they ever detained.
It would be wise to request a copy of Foreign Rules and Regulations, Part 71, Title 42, on immunization when you receive your passport. Never forget the basic rule, “No one will vaccinate you against your will because by doing so they assume full responsibility for the consequences both legal and medical.”
Rule No. 7: You may travel wherever you wish in the world without vaccination. The worst that can happen is that in very rare circumstances you may be detained temporarily.
Some
Important Details
The above articles constitute all the basic rules. However, there are many
important little “tricks of the trade” to having your legal requests honored.
These will now be discussed.
While waivers and exemptions are written into all laws on immunization, most public health officials, doctors, and especially school officials are loathe to discuss their existence when questioned, and rarely, to our knowledge, volunteer such information.
A top Philadelphia school official was on the radio with the unequivocal statement, “NO SHOTS, NO SCHOOL.”
This statement is of course completely counter to state law, with which presumably he is familiar. Such unwarranted dogmatism is common in the people you will encounter. Once the end of their legitimate authority has been reached, they will use their next most powerful weapon - INTIMIDATION.
They will threaten to keep your child out of school, take him from you, or send you to jail. These are all idle threats because they can do none of these thing, if you follow our simple instructions.
The basic rules have been given to you, but there are a few important details to be considered if the officials start on this course of unlawful intimidation.
1. You must send a letter to the school to inform the education officials of your stand. A phone call is not legal. It can be a note from your doctor, minister, or a notarized letter from you stating your sincere objections to the immunization. If you do not do this and fail to have your child immunized, it could be construed as negligence on your part and in some states there is a possibility of legal action against you.
2. If the school should refuse to honor your letter, request that they give you a statement in writing outlining their reasons for refusal. If they won’t, their refusal is legally invalid, and your letter stands; they must enroll your child. If they do (they rarely will) they take the risk of incriminating themselves, especially if they are acting contrary (as is common) to what is specified in the law concerning your rights for exemption. Remember they are on tenuous ground, not you. They are your servants, you are not their servant. If worst comes to worst and you have a very knowledgeable official who writes you a refusal and states accurately the lawful reasons for refusal, he will also in a negative way tell you what the accepted exemptions are, and then you can go about meeting them, by one of the routes suggested in this handout.
3. Child neglect is the one legal point you want to avoid at all costs. No legal parent or guardian can be charged with neglect unless he shows complete lack of concern or action to be more informed. Stripped of legal jargon, this simply means that if you can show that you have investigated the situation, have come to a specific decision concerning immunizations, and have informed the authorities of the same, no neglect charge can be brought. Neglect can be brought only when it can be shown that you have failed to have your children immunized, not out of respect for their medical or spiritual integrity, but only because you were too concerned with other matters.
4. At times there may be a question of whether you have given or withdrawn legal consent. Legal consent is dependent upon being properly informed on both the advantages and the risks in any choice or decision you make. In other words, if a physician were to tell you that vaccination is perfectly safe and effective to obtain your consent, such consent would not be legal because he lied and you have not been properly informed. Conversely, it could be argued that non-consent is not legal if you are not fully informed about the risks and advantages of immunizations.
5. What do I do if everyone refuses to give me a waiver?
This would be an extremely rare circumstance. But should it happen, you are not left without resources. Here is where we pull out one of our big guns. Send notarized letters by certified mail to the vaccine laboratory which makes the shot (ask your doctor for the address), to the doctor who is to administer the shot, to your school principal, to the school board, and to your local health department.
In these letters make it clear that since they have refused to give you a duly requested waiver, you can no longer be held responsible for what may happen to your child if they force these shots upon him. You then state that you will allow immunization if each will present you with a written signed guarantee of safety and effectiveness of the vaccine and that they will consent to assume full responsibility for any and all adverse reactions that your child may develop from the required shots. Of course none will give you such a guarantee. They cannot do so because all vaccines are considered potentially highly toxic. We have yet to hear of an instance of further harassment of parents after such letters have been sent.
That’s about all that is needed to obtain the necessary exemptions for your children. All that has been said in this last section (1 to 5) is also applicable to the military and international travel, if required.
Potpourri of
Ammunition
”As long as each individual who opposes vaccines has sincere objections, states
them in writing, and signs his name - it is considered legal and proper action
and must therefore be honored.”
“Since many medical controversies exist surrounding immunization, drugs, and various other medications, it mandates that each individual have the right to control his own decisions and freedom of choice; anything less would be contrary to the constitutional laws that protect the citizens’ rights. “
“When you deal with school officials and lawyers, you are playing with legal terminology - move the wrong words around and you get hung.” The terminology used in this booklet has worked before and should work again.
“It is important to state your objections in such a way that it complies with your state’s exemption provisions. They must then accept your request; if they do not, they are breaking their own law.” That is why it is absolutely essential that you know your own state law word for word before submitting your objection.
“According to CDC (the federal Communicable Disease Center in Atlanta, Georgia), physicians are required to first inform their patients of the risks involved before they consent to vaccines.” If they do not do so, it is prima facie evidence of deceit or negligence on the part of the physician.
This regulation by the federal government would also seem to assume that the patient has the right to refuse if he feels that the risks are too great. If this is so, is not the federal government on record as supporting voluntary immunization and, by obvious implication, against state-enforced compulsory immunization?
Should you ever have to go to court, or what is more likely, to appear before a “kangaroo” court of school and health department officials, here is some class A evidence you might find useful to mention.
· No vaccine carries any guarantee of protection from the laboratory that produced it or the doctor who administered it.
· The U.S. military allows no-nonsense “immunizations waivers.”
· There is NO FEDERAL LAW on immunizations. They don’t dare. Their lawyers know the consequences.
· Your rights have been infringed upon by officials attempting to use force against your will.
Most state officials like a nice, stress-free job. When you send in your objections and refuse to fit their ordered world by not having your children immunized, you make waves.
This rocks their quiet existence, and there are only two ways their life can become orderly again: either by forcing you to their will or acquiescing to yours. What you must do to obtain an early waiver is to make the latter the easiest path for them.
At first, however, an attempt will usually be made to bend you to their will by some form of intimidation. Many uninformed parents give in to this tack, and so it is tried again and again.
If you are adequately informed, as a reader of this publication should be, you will let the officials know in no uncertain terms that you understand your rights under the law and will not stand for any such shilly-shallying. Invariably, once they discover you are adamant and acquainted with the state law, your waiver will be rapidly forthcoming.
An
Acknowledgment
The greatest part of the material on the first four pages is taken from the work
of Mrs. Grace Girdwain, of Burbank, Illinois. Our staff has rearranged and
edited the information, but we wish the full credit for its existence to go to
this courageous woman who has for twelve years worked arduously, without
compensation, to help her fellow Americans obtain their legal rights.
The following is an example of the state of Illinois law (where I live) relating to immunizations. Illinois, like most states has no philosophical objection, but does have a religious one.
Illinois
Administrative Code Title 77: Public Health
Chapter I: Department of Public Health
Subchapter i: Maternal and Child Health
Part 665 Child Health Examination Code
Subpart E: Exceptions
Parent or legal guardian of a student may object to health examinations, immunizations, vision, and hearing screening tests, and dental health examinations for their children on religious grounds. If a religious objection is made, a written and signed statement from the parent or legal guardian detailing such objections must be presented to the local school authority.
General philosophical or moral reluctance to allow physical examinations, immunizations, vision and hearing screening, and dental examinations will not provide a sufficient basis for an exception to statutory requirements.
The parent or legal guardian must be informed by the local school authority of measles outbreak control exclusion procedures per IDPH rules. The Control of Communicable Diseases (77 Ill. Adm. Code 690) at the time such objection is presented.
a) Any medical objections to an immunization must be:
1) Made by a physician licensed to practice medicine in all its branches indicating what the medical condition is.
2) Endorsed and signed by the physician on the certificate of child health examination and placed on file in the child’s permanent record.
b) Should the condition of the child later permit immunization, this requirement will then have to be met. Parents or legal guardians must be informed of measles outbreak control exclusion procedures when such objection is presented per Section 665.510.
Neil Z. Miller
Medical health authorities, including doctors, nurses, and other members of the allopathic fraternity, employ a number of strategies designed to elicit parental submission to vaccine guidelines. Currently, parents are expected to grant authorities permission to toxify their children’s pure and sacred little bodies with more than 30 blends of rare germs, bacteria, and other foul substances—all before they enter school!
To adequately assess the relevance of vaccine-related news, or the perils of vaccine-related situations you may find yourself in—and to increase your knowledge about how to protect your loved ones—several of the more common vaccine-related schemes you’re likely to encounter are included in the following section, along with samples of each.
1. Calling the Shots “Immunizations.” Numerous studies indicate that vaccines cannot be relied upon to boost the immune system and protect an individual from contracting the disease the vaccines were designed to offset. For example, the Minnesota Department of Health reported 769 cases of mumps in school children. But 632 of these cases (82 percent) occurred in children who were previously vaccinated against this disease.(119) The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that 89 percent of all school-age children who recently contracted measles had been vaccinated against the disease. And the New England Journal of Medicine published a study revealing that the pertussis vaccine “failed to give...protection against the disease.” In fact, more than 80 percent of cases in a recent epidemic occurred in children who had received regular doses of the shot.
According to Dr. Sandra Huffman, head of Nurture: The Center to Prevent Childhood Malnutrition, “Increasing Americans’ breastfeeding rate would prevent more childhood diseases—and deaths—than [vaccination programs endorsed by the government].” A distinction must therefore be made: breastfed babies are immunized; children who are injected with germs and other toxic substances are vaccinated.
Calling the shots “preventive medicine” is deceptive as well. According to Dr. Kenneth Cooper, pioneering author of Aerobics, “My concept of preventive medicine is trying to prevent the things that kill us. Infectious disease is way down the list.” (Dr. Cooper was ostracized from the medical community for promoting exercise to improve health!)
2. Rationalization and Denial. Medical personnel find it difficult to confront the vaccine issue head-on. It is much easier to falsely justify the use of vaccines or simply reject the idea that they may be unsafe and ineffective. Some doctors become so agitated when the topic is raised, they refuse to even discuss it. Doctors who are willing to exchange ideas and concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of vaccines often rely upon rationalization and denial.
The rationalization and denial ploy can be blatant or veiled. Blatant rationalization is easier to spot. For example, in a recently published pediatric legal paper, a Canadian neurologist candidly writes, “In this article [on vaccine-induced brain injury], I will...offer some suggestions for pediatricians to rationalize this emotional controversy.” He also plainly states, “A vigorous effort is required to dispel the myth of DTP-induced brain damage.” He makes his recommendation in spite of the horrendous amount of literature in the medical journals indicating a causal relationship between this vaccine and severe mental impairment.
The veiled Rationalization and Denial ploy is harder to detect. At first it appears logical and sound. But it merely represents a more intricate attempt at suppressing and confounding the truth. For example, according to some researchers, the DPT vaccine does not cause seizures; instead, “fever from the DTP vaccine may trigger one of these seizures.” Or, according to an experienced vaccine policymaker, Ed Mortimer, M.D., “These kids already had underlying problems and DTP was the first fever-producing insult that occurred to the child.” Again, it wasn’t the vaccine that caused the brain damage; it was the fever from the vaccine.
More examples of the rationalization and denial ploy:
When the incidence of a disease is low, authorities claim high vaccination rates are responsible. When outbreaks occur, we are told not enough people received the shots. For example, prior to a recent measles outbreak in a Hobbs, New Mexico, school district, authorities boasted a 98 percent vaccination rate. Then, when 76 cases of the disease broke out, researchers claimed that “vaccine failure was associated with immunizations that could not be documented in the provider’s records.”
Although the Food and Drug Administration was legally bound to establish and oversee the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and even though every year about 12,000 reports of adverse reactions to vaccines are made to the FDA, authorities refuse to follow up on these cases because “the agency could not possibly investigate each report,” and besides, “a cause and effect relationship is not presumed.”
By November 10, 1999, the Vaccine Injury Compensation System had already paid out more than $1 billion to settle claims of vaccine-induced damage or death. However, because vaccine manufacturers and the federal government are not required to admit responsibility, even when a claim is paid, they are able to assert that “the settlement of a claim does not necessarily establish liability.”
3. Double Talk and Creative Logic. Medical advisers were using this ploy as far back as 1806. In that year Edward Jenner, the dubious “father of modern vaccinations,” was under examination by a College of Physicians committee. Numerous members of the English population who had recently been vaccinated with Jenner’s concoction, and who were therefore considered immune to smallpox, had caught the disease. Many were afflicted with painful skin eruptions and died. When the commonly relied upon denial ploy was no longer effective, it was revealed that “spurious,” or phony, cowpox was the cause. As the number of vaccinated people afflicted with the disease grew, so, too, did public fear. How, Jenner was asked, could spurious cowpox be identified and avoided? Spurious cowpox, he explained, wasn’t meant to describe irregularities on the part of the cow, but rather certain quirks in the action of cowpox on the part of the vaccinated. In other words, when the vaccinated recovered from the ordeal, and did not contract smallpox, the cowpox was genuine; otherwise it was spurious.
Current uses of the double talk ploy may be found at almost any forum or seminar where vaccine policymakers congregate. For example, at a recent FDA workshop officials indicated they were justified in administering new and unproven vaccines by claiming it is unethical to withhold them!
Here is another example of the “unethical” argument: A recent study found that the AIDS virus directly causes cancer. You’d think this would stifle the researchers’ goal of creating an AIDS vaccine. In fact, Gerald Myers, director of the HIV Sequence Database Analysis Project at Los Alamos National Laboratory, warrants that a live vaccine would carry a risk of causing cancer—both in the vaccinated person and in their offspring. Nevertheless, he claims that “the risk might be worth it” to prevent the spread of AIDS. “It could be unethical not to try it.”
A common use of the double talk and creative logic ploy may be found whenever health officials make the outrageous claim that unvaccinated children are a threat to the rest of society. This argument indicates how little faith authorities place in their own vaccines. If the vaccines were truly effective, only the unvaccinated would be at risk. This argument also overlooks the potential for vaccinated individuals to spread the virus to unvaccinated populations. For example, in separate scientific studies, the new rubella vaccine introduced in 1979 was found to be a cause of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, an immunological disorder first reported in the United States in 1982. Given to children, the vaccine was shown to linger in their systems for years and the vaccine virus can be passed on to adults through casual contact.
In an attempt to conceal vaccine failures, medical authorities will often resort to the double talk ploy, sometimes in conjunction with the scare tactics ruse. In spite of their enterprising babble, however, they can’t always hoodwink the public. For example, the international Medical Observer states that “a new strain of measles resistant to vaccine” has been discovered. This is immediately contradicted by the statement: “Those who have been lax about vaccination will be unprotected.” Although the implication is that everyone should get vaccinated, a vaccine is obviously useless if a new strain of measles is resistant to it!
More examples of the double talk ploy:
Scientists seeking human volunteers to test a new experimental AIDS vaccine try to assuage fear and mistrust by claiming there is “no evidence” it will cause AIDS. How could there be evidence? It is new and experimental and hasn’t been tested yet! And, of course, there is “no evidence” that it won’t cause AIDS.
In an attempt to convince the public that vaccines offer the best of all worlds, medical researchers, and the journalists who quote them, often get tangled in their own webs of deception. For example, in a recently published pro-vaccine article, the author claims that unvaccinated children are susceptible to infection. He then contradicts himself by claiming that vaccinated children “insulate” or protect, the unvaccinated. The illogical implication is that when unvaccinated children contract an infectious disease it is because they are unvaccinated. However, if they remain free from disease, it is because the vaccinated are providing them with immunity.
Every so often the double talk employed by authorities is so transparent it’s bewildering that so few people question its validity. In a recent promotional blitz, flu vaccine manufacturers and public health officials made the claim that the new and improved flu vaccine “is prepared from inactivated flu virus [Translation: “dead” flu virus—see Euphemisms addressed below] and cannot cause the disease.” (A rare admission that earlier versions did cause the disease.) In the same paragraph they warn that “some individuals might develop a mild fever and feeling of malaise” for a few days after receiving the shot.(148) (Sounds like the flu to me!)
Other times the double talk employed by vaccine researchers is remarkably elaborate. Although it is a simple matter to determine the efficacy of a vaccine—give it to people who want it, withhold it from those who don’t, and tally the incidence of disease—some scientists have other ideas. One writes: “Under heterogeneity of vaccine effect, a general expression for a summary vaccine efficacy parameter is a function of the vaccine efficacy in the different vaccinated strata weighted by the fraction of the vaccinated subpopulations in each stratum. Interpretation and estimability of the summary vaccine efficacy parameter depends on whether the strata are identifiable, and whether the heterogeneity is host- or vaccine-related.” To support this garrulous babble, a full-page mathematical model is provided.
A final look at the double talk and creative logic ploy yields the following revelations: children who keep to “appropriate” vaccine schedules are “protected,” unless they haven’t yet received the full battery of shots and contract the affliction—in which case they are evidently “still susceptible to the disease.”(150) In such instances the vaccine does not fail, or worse, cause the disease; these become “non-preventable” cases!
4. The “I Forgot to Mention” ploy is a common tactic used by health and medical authorities with an interest in omitting vital information. For example, a spokesman for the Ohio Department of Health supplied the Dayton Daily News with these statistics: 2,720 cases of measles were reported in Ohio during a recent year. This figure was used in conjunction with the godfather ploy (an offer hard to refuse) when the following threat was made as well: “Get shots or forget 7th grade.” What the official failed to mention was that more than 72 percent of these cases occurred in vaccinated people.(152) This figure is comparable to other outbreaks around the country, where a majority of measles cases often occur in vaccinated children, “sometimes in schools with vaccination levels of greater than 98 percent.”
A concerned individual recounts her personal experience with the measles vaccine and the “I forgot to mention” ploy: “Fort Lewis College had a measles epidemic and the school closed down for a short time. The following year, I returned as a postgraduate for a teacher’s certificate and was denied reentry until I submitted to a measles vaccine—even though I had been fully vaccinated as a child. This fall I reentered Fort Lewis College, and they wanted me to get another measles shot! They told me the one I had already taken ‘didn’t work.’ I refused the shot and told them I was refusing all other shots as well. They replied, ‘Okay, just sign this waiver.’ No one ever tells you that the shots may be declined by signing a personal waiver.”
Another example of the “I forgot to mention” ploy may be found in official evaluations of Reye’s Syndrome, an often fatal disease of the brain and liver. According to Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, the CDC is “quick to suggest a relationship between [this childhood disease] and certain flu outbreaks,” but they make no mention of “an association between this disease and the flu vaccine itself.”
5. Gimmicks. Devising strategies to boost vaccination rates is a prime preoccupation of vaccine policymakers. Without doubt, the gimmick ploy is a proven winner. In fact, the AMA recently admitted that “adult vaccines need a gimmick.” CDC physicians recommend catchy slogans, like “Vaccines are not just kid stuff.”(158) Shari Lewis and her puppet, Lamb Chop, were seen delivering pro-vaccination messages to the public on TV. Even Bill Clinton was seen in print ads imploring parents to be sure their children receive “All their shots while they’re tots.”
6. Bribes. Within the same family of wily maneuvers, one may find the bribe ploy. For example, in England the National Health Service pays a “bonus” to doctors with vaccination rates above specified percentages.(161) Here in the United States, former president Jimmy Carter was seen on TV offering free Michael Jackson concert tickets to parents who agreed to vaccinate their children. In Saginaw County, Michigan, children were promised “a free order of french fries” if they were one of the first thousand people to receive their shots. And in Taos, New Mexico, “all students who return consent forms and receive vaccinations will be entered in raffles for great prizes!”
7. Skewed Statistics. Researchers are trying to develop a new vaccine to combat respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) -- even though Dr. Bill Gary of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) admits that “an RSV vaccine was developed 10 to 15 years ago, but was unsuccessful and made many people ill.” To foster interest in this obscure project, and to improve the illusion that we need the vaccine, a recent report released by the CDC indicates that “about half” of the 69 labs that track diseases for the agency reported a 16 percent increase in RSV cases. Stating “about half” is deceptively vague, and choosing not to list the percent increase or decrease of RSV cases in the other “about half” of the 69 labs is manipulative and dishonest.
Another good example of the skewed statistics ploy came from the Clinton administration. Goaded by the medical community, federal authorities announced their dubious goal to vaccinate all U.S. children. To accomplish this feat, Clinton sought $300 million from Congress. To bolster his case he made the bogus claim that “we can prevent the worst infectious diseases of children with vaccines and save $10 for every $1 invested.” But he failed to supply facts and figures to support his claim. Perhaps this was because the administration chose instead to invoke the “I forgot to mention” ploy, conveniently neglecting to factor in the millions of dollars the government had already spent compensating families of children damaged or killed by the vaccines.
A further example of the skewed statistics ploy:
The use of control subjects (individuals utilized as a standard of comparison for verifying the results of an experiment) is an established procedure in most fields of scientific inquiry. Not so within the vaccine research community. New experimental vaccines that are tested on a group of people are rarely matched against an equal number of untested people. Indeed, after a new AIDS vaccine was tested on hundreds of people, some of the volunteers were found to be infected with HIV. However, because the number of control subjects was suspiciously small (38 people) -- and therefore worthless—the National Institutes of Health (NIH) was able to claim “there is no statistical basis for concluding that the vaccine has contributed to an increased vulnerability to infection.”
8. The Fraud ploy has proven to be an early and consistent success. In 1956, soon after the Salk polio vaccine was introduced, officials decided to determine how safe and effective it really was. The results of this study—the now infamous Francis Field Trials—would help determine the feasibility of continuing to vaccinate millions of young children. What they discovered would have stopped most ethical people from continuing: large numbers of children were contracting polio after receiving the vaccine. Clearly, the vaccine was either unsafe (it was causing the disease it was meant to prevent) or ineffective (it failed to protect). Instead of removing the vaccine from the market, however, officials decided to exclude from the statistics all cases of polio that occurred within 30 days after vaccination on the pretext that such cases were “pre-existing.”
The NIH, an influential branch of the vaccine oligarchy, was recently placed under investigation for interfering with charges of scientific fraud within its own ranks. According to a New York Times report, Walter W. Stewart and Dr. Ned Feder, scientific fraud investigators for the NIH, were summarily dismissed from their duties following the release of a report critical of other NIH scientists. Without warning their offices were closed and sealed, along with all the files of current investigations. The two scientists were then transferred to jobs unrelated to their work of previous years. This incident reveals how studies and reports critical of official dogma may be suppressed, and highlights “the continuing ethical battles over how government and universities should monitor scientists.”
9. Fortune-telling. When medical and health authorities are at a loss to explain the cause of injury and death that occurs soon after a childhood shot, and denial is insufficient, they may resort to the fortune-telling ploy. In fact, the FDA’s official position is that “the ‘event’ [Translation: adverse reaction to a vaccine—see the Euphemism ploy] may have been related to an underlying disease or condition...or may have occurred by chance at the same time the vaccine was administered.” In other words, the child was destined to be damaged or die at the time of the shot anyway.
The past director of the Ohio Department of Health, and other vaccine authorities, label vaccine-induced injury or death as “only temporal.: Once again, this translates to mean the damage was coincidental; it would have occurred anyway.
More examples of the fortune-telling ploy:
“Bad Flu Season Forecast” blared the headlines. “A severe flu season is at hand; get flu shots right away.” Who are these doomsday prophets, and where do they get their psychic news?
According to the U.S. government’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), the efficacy of a flu vaccine depends upon whether the government has correctly “predicted” [Translation: guessed] which viruses should be placed in that year’s vaccine. There has to be a “good match” between the flu virus actually present in the community at the end of the year and the vaccine that was produced several months earlier.
10. “Pardon Me.” Medical institutions wary of vaccine reactions often protect their members by enforcing the “pardon me” rule, exempting doctors from their own regulations. For example, in Evanston, Illinois, a 46-year-old social worker was fired from her job when she refused to take a rubella shot. Hospital policy requires all employees—except physicians—to be vaccinated against rubella. Doctors are not considered “employees.”
A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association reports that obstetrician-gynecologists are the least likely of all doctors to submit to the rubella vaccine. Fewer than 10 percent are inoculated, and blood tests indicate they are susceptible to rubella. The researchers conclude that a “fear of unforeseen vaccine reactions” lead these specialists to invoke their self-exempting “pardon me” rule.
Some doctors refuse to vaccinate their own children as well. According to Dr. Jerome Murphy, former head of Pediatric Neurology at Milwaukee Children’s Hospital, “There is just overwhelming data that there’s an association [between the pertussis vaccine and seizures]. I know it has influenced many pediatric neurologists not to have their own children immunized with pertussis.”
The FDA recently lost an important legal battle when they permitted the live virus polio vaccine, manufactured by Lederle Labs, to be released to the public even though it did not meet existing safety standards. As a result, several people were severely damaged. After losing the U.S. Supreme Court case, the FDA immediately implemented the “pardon me” ploy, and rewrote its safety procedures so that previously unacceptable safety measures would be allowable. Consequently, Lederle can continue to produce and the FDA can continue to sanction the same kind of polio vaccine that caused injuries in the first place.
11. Delusions of Grandeur. Doctors, medical scientists, allopathic policymakers, and vaccine manufacturers, are prone to experience delusions of grandeur. This occurs whenever they take credit for a drop in nearly every communicable disease. But a greater than 95 percent decline in the incidence and severity of many of these diseases already occurred before the introduction of the vaccines. Such conceit also disregards the many diseases—like scarlet fever and the plague—that declined on their own, even though vaccines were not developed against them.
Health officials claim high vaccination rates are required to disrupt the spread of a disease and eliminate its occurrence. For example, they take full credit—delusions of grandeur—for the current low incidence of polio in the United States. However, in many European countries that refused to mandate polio vaccines a fraction of the people were vaccinated, and polio disappeared.181 To explain this enigma, officials rely upon the double talk and creative logic ploy: evidently enough people were vaccinated “to interrupt the virus’s normal lines of transmission through the population.” Yet, countries like Finland used the killed-virus vaccine, which officials do not credit with the ability to confer immunity upon the unvaccinated!
More recently, Finland has claimed to have “eradicated” measles, mumps, and rubella—even though only 30 percent of the people were vaccinated. Also, although researchers claim these diseases were “eradicated,” they note that there are about “ten cases of each disease a year, most of them ‘probably imported’ [from another country].”
Vaccine policymakers promised that by 1982 measles would be eradicated from the Earth, delusions of grandeur.184 Today, in the 1990s, it has returned with a vengeance. The death rate for measles is more than 20 times higher than before the vaccine was in widespread use.
Medical policymakers are unrelenting in their efforts to play God. After realizing “the number of visits to a healthcare provider [for vaccines] is an impediment” to receiving the entire battery of shots, they proposed the development of a single vaccine to provide “lifelong immunization” against many common childhood diseases. They call this single shot a “supervaccine” or “magic bullet” and have lobbied Congress for funds to continue research along these lines. When we consider the medical community’s inability to provide lifelong immunity against a single disease, their dismal success rate with current multiple vaccines (DPT and MMR), and the number of vaccine-related injury and death claims clogging the courts, this latest “mad science” venture clearly demonstrates their wicked propensity toward delusions of grandeur.
12. Surprise Attack. Parents often report they are harassed by medical personnel wishing to vaccinate their children even when they visit their medical health care provider for other reasons. In fact, some doctors appear to be so obsessed with the vaccination status of their clients that they disregard the stated purpose of the visit. Therefore, anticipate the surprise attack.
The surprise attack is actually taught to members of the medical fraternity, as noted in the Journal of the American Medical Association: “Each encounter with a health care provider, including an emergency department visit or hospitalization, is an opportunity to screen immunization status and, if indicated, administer needed vaccines. Before discharge from the hospital, children should receive immunizations for which they are eligible. In addition, children accompanying parents or siblings who are seeking any service should also be screened and, when indicated, given needed vaccines.”
The consequences of being unprepared for the surprise attack can be severe indeed. The Jonathan story published elsewhere on this site illustrates one parent’s reaction to being ambushed by the medical profession.
Another concerned mother describes her surprise attack in these words:
“My husband and I chose a midwife and had a homebirth, which was wonderful. The midwife insisted that I take our daughter to a local pediatrician for a newborn exam.... The reason I’m telling you this is because we were treated like trash. I was told that a homebirth is an automatic ‘red flag.’ The doctor reported us to Social Services, and we were subjected to a painful interrogation. I was [also] interrogated as to my beliefs about immunizations. My daughter was only two weeks old...and yet they wanted to inject her with multiple vaccines.
“How can I find a doctor for my daughter? I do not want to repeat this horrible experience...for fear Social Services will again be sent to investigate us because we don’t take our daughter to doctors for regular ‘well-baby’ checkups, which is really a ploy to force vaccines on innocent babies and unsuspecting parents.”
13. Intimidation and Coercion. Doctors often claim vaccines are mandatory. Many threaten to withhold treatment, or they frighten parents when they reject the shots. As one mother puts it: “The pediatrician I have refused to service me because I am not willing to follow medical ‘rules.’ Another M.D. agreed to work with me, but only after I listened to him warn me [in very explicit terms, about all the dangers that could happen to my child.]”
Another mother writes: “I am a concerned parent who has not vaccinated my 13 month old. I am met by my baby doctor in a critical and almost attacking nature. There seems to be no room in his mind-set for a choice on this issue.”
Putting this in clearer perspective, another mother writes: “I am an Australian citizen [living in the United States]. I never realized what an issue [vaccinations are] in this country until I had my own children, and how much pressure the medical world puts on you, and above all else, how much clout the schools have. I really don’t know of any other country that makes this into such a difficult decision, and so one-sided in regard to information. Where I’m from, you either do, or you don’t, immunize. The question is asked, the decision made, and that’s it forever, unless you change your mind! Incidentally, a large majority [of parents in Australia] do not immunize [their children], and we don’t have a higher incidence [of disease] than in the U.S.”
Note: The United States has one of the worst infant mortality rates among developed countries. In fact, the rate at which babies die in the first year of life has consistently increased since the 1950s when mass immunization campaigns were initiated. Today, infant mortality rates in some U.S. cities match those in developing countries.
Public school officials—the unwitting henchmen for the medical profession—often warn parents their children will not be able to enter school without complying with vaccine mandates. Each state, however, offers one or more exemptions to the shots. In spite of these exemptions, one mother was told by authorities that she would need to write a letter explaining why her son was not vaccinated, and that she would accept full responsibility for any epidemics that occurred while her child was enrolled at the school!
A concerned father tells this story: “I applied for religious exemption for my son at his public school in Totowa, New Jersey. The school nurse reported the exemption to the Board of Health. The New Jersey State Immunization Supervisor then sent a letter to the school principal. In it he stated that my letter of exemption was ‘not good enough,’ and that my son is not to be admitted into the school building at all. The school principal wrote me a letter confirming that my son would not be permitted to enter school, and threatened that ‘I had better begin immunizing’ my son. I must meet the August deadline to register my son for school, but they won’t even let him in the building. Time is running out, and my son’s education is being denied.”
Note: This story is often told by parents throughout the nation. Evidently, state laws are immaterial to authorities intent upon using the intimidation and coercion ploy to deny parents their legal rights. For example, a clause in the New Jersey State Sanitary Code, Chapter 26:1A-9.1, allows for “exemption for pupils from mandatory immunization if the parent or guardian objects thereto in a written statement signed by the parent or guardian upon the ground that the proposed immunization interferes with the free exercise of the pupil’s religious rights.”
An apprehensive California mother reports that when her child was rushed to the hospital emergency room for a minor mishap, medical personnel were more interested in the child’s vaccination status than in the nature of her injury [the surprise attack]. Upon learning the child was not “up-to-date” on her shots, they refused to release the child to her mother until she gave her permission for the shots to be administered. When she refused, these doctors reported her to Social Services, claiming she was “abusing her child.” Soon thereafter the State Attorney General joined in the case and sought to prosecute the mother—even though the vaccine laws in her state permit parents the option to refuse vaccines based on personal convictions against them!
Many parents report that doctors and nurses are intimidating them into vaccinating their newborns immediately after birth. One mother reports: “The very first time I heard about the hepatitis B vaccine was at the hospital after giving birth to my second child. They told me all babies must receive this vaccine before they can be released from the hospital. Needless to say, I refused it, although they persisted in badgering me. Later, when I took my baby to the pediatrician for her two-week checkup, he tried to frighten me into giving her the shot. He said hepatitis is very contagious and my child could easily catch it from other kids or infected adults. When I told him that I didn’t feel right about giving the vaccine to my infant, he informed me that I would need to find another doctor because he would not treat my baby.”
On November 20, 1993, a nationally syndicated prime-time TV news magazine, The Crusaders, aired a gutsy show on the dangers of the DPT vaccine. Parents of vaccine-damaged children were interviewed, and rare, emotionally wrenching footage of their severely disabled children was shown. While most of the American medical community denies a link between the shots and brain damage or death, listeners heard vaccine expert Dr. Michael Pakickero warn parents that some batches of the DPT vaccine are more toxic than others. And, Dr. John Menkis, the former head of pediatrics and neurology at UCLA, candidly acknowledged, “You will have permanent, irreversible brain damage, which was not present before [DPT] vaccination.” Meanwhile, Michael Settonni, the show’s premier research journalist, estimated from government sources that “at least two children are reportedly killed or injured by the vaccine every day.”
A few days after this show aired, Mr. John Butte, executive producer of The Crusaders, received a scathing letter from Thomas Balbier, Jr., Director of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), demanding a retraction. He asserted that the number of current vaccine injury and death claims filed by parents during the past few years represent claims of damage “for virtually the entire 20th century.” He also blasted the show for directing listeners to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) -- a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving vaccine safety and supporting a parent’s right to choose for or against vaccines. He claimed that NVIC is “not sanctioned” by the federal government, and therefore is “not the official spokesperson” for information on vaccine safety. He also made what appeared to be a veiled threat by noting that copies of his letter were being sent to the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission.
Note: On January 8, 1994, The Crusaders aired a retraction by quoting the medical industry’s most cherished—and fraudulent—data on the DPT vaccine: a controversial study conducted in Great Britain during the 1950s. Even though 42 of the babies in the study had convulsions within 28 days of receiving the shots, 80 percent of the babies were 14 months of age or older, and the tests were designed to test the efficacy (not safety) of the vaccine, U.S. health authorities still use these results as evidence that the vaccine is safe to give to babies as young as six weeks of age.199 Obviously, the intimidation and coercion ploy was, once again, a wicked success.
On March 19, 1992, Rolling Stone magazine published a remarkable story documenting potential correlations between the first polio vaccines and AIDS. Many independent researchers considered the expos forthright and extraordinarily well investigated. Several months later, however, the magazine printed a half-page “clarification” indicating that any connection between early polio vaccines and AIDS is “one of several disputed and unproven theories.”200 Evidently, future vaccination campaigns and scientific reputations were jeopardized by the original story.
More examples of the intimidation and coercion ploy:
An Ohio woman with two children killed by the DPT vaccine received threatening letters from the Ohio Department of Health informing her that her only surviving child had to be vaccinated.201 A grieving mother whose baby died 17 hours after receiving a DPT shot was threatened with losing her WIC benefits for refusing to vaccinate her other children.
A Kansas mother who objected to the vaccines was told that the state would seize her child, force the vaccinations upon her, and place her in a foster home. The child was vaccinated and is now permanently disabled as a result of the shot.
This final example of the intimidation and coercion ploy clearly illustrates the arrogant and insensitive nature of the medical community. Grieving and dejected parents who personally contact the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System to report how their child was damaged or killed by a vaccine should be forewarned to expect an envelope in the mail with the following bold red letters emblazoned across the front: IMMUNIZE EARLY!
14. The Godfather ploy is an extreme variation of the intimidation and coercion maneuver. It may involve blackmail. For example, poor mothers on state aid in Maryland must now get their children vaccinated or the state will take $25 from their monthly welfare checks for every preschool child not up to date on shots and checkups. A family sanctioned for three months will receive a call from a social service worker, who will request to visit the home to “help resolve the situation and any other problems.” Whereas child advocate groups claim Maryland’s new law is punitive and unfair, the state’s human resources secretary argues that “many [of these welfare recipients] just needed a push to do what is expected of them as responsible parents.”
Here is another example of the godfather ploy: Health insurance companies are threatening to cancel policies when parents refuse vaccines for their children—unless parents sign a form absolving the insurance company from liability if the child contracts certain diseases.
An extreme version of the godfather ploy—framing the parents—is now being reported with increasing regularity by frantic family members. Apparently, medical personnel intent on maintaining the vaccine deception will do anything to deflect blame. Moms and dads who are still grieving over their dead babies following the shots, are now being charged with homicide. For example, one mother, whose healthy baby died just 2 days after receiving DPT and MMR vaccines, was so outraged at this government sanctioned criminal activity, that she tried to fight back with a lawsuit. Authorities responded by charging her with the murder of her child.
15. Scare Tactics. Whenever medical policymakers and their media pawns embark on a promotional blitz to increase vaccination rates, they invariably rely on the scare tactics ploy. Although this stratagem is similar to the intimidation and coercion ploy, subtle differences exist. Practitioners of the intimidation ploy seek mainly to dominate parental decision-making through the sheer force of their will. The scare tactics ruse attempts primarily to manipulate emotions and influence behavior by overstating sad and frightening stories about the unvaccinated.
One recently published pro-vaccine article describes in frightening detail the dangers of nonvaccination. First, readers are informed that “even adults can be killed from preventable infectious diseases.” Next, an emergency room nurse graphically recounts her attempts to restart the heart of a man who had contracted measles and continued to get sicker: A bacteria that usually causes strep throat “had invaded the small holes in the man’s skin” left by his measles rash. The man’s heart couldn’t be restarted, and he died from the secondary infection. Then, to clinch our emotions, we are told that he left three small children.
Note: This very same measles vaccine that authorities claim could have prevented this tragedy, very likely caused it. Prior to the introduction of the measles vaccine, measles was a relatively tame childhood illness, and was virtually unheard of in infant, adolescent, and adult populations. But the vaccine changed all that. Now measles is contracted by age groups more likely to experience extreme complications, including death.
A chickenpox vaccine has been available for years; however, authorities have been reluctant to approve it, for many people agree the disease is relatively harmless. Nevertheless, medical forces were prepared to approve it because “the U.S. could save five times as much as it would spend on the vaccine” by avoiding the costs incurred by moms and dads who stay home to care for their sick children. In response to the medical industry’s grand plans to promote this vaccine, media pawns rushed to print fearful stories detailing the dangers of this “serious” disease. For example, one newspaper published a personal story that started with “How my son died from chickenpox.” This scare tactic ruse was coupled with the “I (almost) forgot to mention” ploy, because the child had a preexisting condition that left him vulnerable to infection.
Note: On March 17, 1995, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it had approved a chickenpox vaccine.(212) Shortly thereafter, the American Academy of Pediatrics began recommending it for all infants.
16. Euphemisms. Medical personnel often attempt to conceal the facts by using vague terms with hidden meanings—the euphemism ploy. For example, doctors have been notified by the CDC that cases of Hib may occur after vaccination, “prior to the onset of the protective effects of the vaccine.” [Translation: Our vaccine may give your child the disease.] Other studies warn of “increased susceptibility” to the disease in the first 7 days after vaccination. [Another veiled confession that the vaccine may give a child the disease.] In addition, children who contract a particular disease, even though they have received their shots according to the recommended schedule—an earlier schedule that has since been changed (see the variable recommendations ploy) -- aren’t the victims of an ineffective vaccine, or a vaccine failure; instead, they were “inappropriately vaccinated.” These are labeled “nonpreventable” cases.
In 1993, in England, two of the three MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccines in use at the time were quietly withdrawn because of what health authorities claim was a “slight” risk of “transient” meningitis.217 A recent study in the United States has determined that the risk of illness and death from childhood shots is real but “extraordinarily low,” leading authorities to conclude that these are “very rare events.”(218) Such remote and fleeting possibilities stand in stark contrast to the words employed by authorities interested in promoting their cause. Then we must be wary of the “poorly developed” immune systems of young children (as an argument in favor of the vaccines!), the “extremely infectious” nature of the virus, and the “grave risk of complications” associated with contracting the disease.
More examples of the euphemism ploy:
Researchers are trying to develop a “magic bullet” super-vaccine “that could be given once at birth to immunize infants to all childhood diseases”-- delusions of grandeur. Perhaps they call it a “magic bullet” because infant deaths from the “shot” will remain a mystery to the medical scoundrels who pull the trigger.
The public is informed that vaccination rates increase by the time children enter school because parents are “motivated”—not compelled—to have their children vaccinated.
Finally, be wary whenever authorities announce that an “unprecedented” or “experimental” vaccine will soon be available. What they really mean is, “we’re seeking human guinea pigs to study the effects of our newest concoction.”
17. Outright Lies. Lying is an established ploy of the medical community. It is a quick and easy way to promote the vaccine cause without having to rely upon honesty, morality, or ethics. Shrewd members of the medical fraternity know that very few people question doctors and their comrades.
The American Nurses Association recently collaborated with Every Child by Two, the Rosalynn Carter/Betty Bumpers Campaign for Early Immunization, “to educate nurses, parents, business leaders, civic organizations, and educators about the urgent need to immunize children.” Their aggressive stance against unvaccinated children includes a news release with the following claim: several childhood diseases—including polio, diphtheria, rubella, mumps, and tetanus—are undergoing a “resurgence.” This statement is an outright lie, obviously made to scare parents into vaccinating their children. None of these diseases is making a comeback. In fact, all are at their lowest rates of occurrence since records on their existence have been kept.
According to Donna Shalala, President Clinton’s secretary of Health and Human Services, “This year’s flu, the Beijing strain, is expected to hit very hard.” She also claimed that 10,000 to 45,000 Americans lose their lives to influenza each year. However, official government statistics, which Donna Shalala oversees, contradict her claim. In 1991, the CDC reported just 990 deaths attributable to influenza; in 1992, 1,260. Americans die at rates 3 or 4 times greater from common diseases such as asthma (4,650 deaths in 1992), stomach ulcers (5,770 deaths in 1992) and nutritional deficiencies (3,100 deaths in 1992).
18. Variable and Illogical Recommendations. Our children are being used as guinea pigs. To conceal this fact, authorities frequently change their recommendations. New and experimental vaccines replace old and ineffective ones. The number of doses and ages to receive them are altered on a regular basis as well, often with little rationale to justify either the original recommendation or the switch. For example, in 1985 the first Hib vaccine (haemophilus influenzae type b) was approved for general use in the United States and was quickly recommended for all children two years old and up—even though 75 percent of all Hib cases occur before two years of age! In 1988, a new “conjugated” Hib vaccine was approved for use in children at least 18 months of age. By 1991, its recommended use was extended to infants as young as two months old. Today, a genetically engineered Hib vaccine has replaced all earlier versions.
In 1963, the recommended age for measles vaccination was 9 months. In 1965 it was changed to 12 months. In 1976 it was changed to 15 months. However, since fewer moms have natural immunity to measles today—due to the large number of mothers who received childhood shots in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s—and therefore cannot pass protective antibodies on to their infants, outbreaks of cases are now occurring in children under 15 months of age. In fact, by 1993, more than 25 percent of all measles cases were appearing in babies under one year of age. As a result, in some areas of the country the recommended age to receive the measles vaccine was lowered again, bringing us full circle to initial recommendations—when most children were, according to medical authorities, “inappropriately vaccinated!”
Recent data indicates that a large majority of measles cases are occurring in vaccinated people. To conceal this fact, authorities rely upon the variable recommendations ploy and now recommend a measles booster shot at 4 to 6 years. Some schools are requiring proof of revaccination before children can enter the 7th grade. Many colleges are refusing to admit students who have no evidence of revaccination. Yet, earlier studies—one recently published in the Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal—demonstrated that booster doses of the measles shot are relatively ineffective.
Are altered recommendations based on sound science or personal convenience? Vaccine policymakers anxious to introduce the chickenpox vaccine were stymied by the number of vaccines already in existence. They could not decide at what age to recommend their new product. They wanted to make room for it at 15 months, but that would necessitate changing the third of four recommended ages to receive the oral polio vaccine from “15 to 18 months” to “6 months.” However, because there is “more leeway” with the MMR vaccine, they considered changing the first of three recommended ages to receive it from “15 months” to “12 to 15 months.”
A “plasma-derived” hepatitis vaccination was introduced in the 1970s. In 1987, a genetically engineered “yeast-derived” vaccine was developed. In 1991, the CDC and AAP began the process of mandating the new vaccine for all infants—even though adult IV drug users, not children, are most at risk of contracting this disease!
Here is one final example of the variable and illogical recommendations ploy: Authorities are so incensed by the number of people claiming vaccines damaged or killed a family member, that they are seeking to further restrict the stringent criteria for entering the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. For example, the newly revised rules stipulate that a severe reaction to a DPT vaccine—such as anaphylactic shock—must occur within 4 hours! In other words, if your previously healthy child receives the vaccine at 10 o’clock in the morning, has a violent allergic reaction—gasps for air, collapses into unconsciousness—at 3 o’clock that afternoon, and is later diagnosed as brain damaged, the federal government will say that the damage is not related to the shot and therefore you don’t have a claim. Other criteria for entering the program have been restricted as well, or removed altogether.
19. Adjustable Diagnoses and Exaggerated Epidemics. Health officials realized early on that vaccine efficacy rates could be maximized by creative diagnoses. Remember, “the credit of vaccination is kept up statistically by diagnosing all the [cases of smallpox after vaccinations] as pustular eczema [or anything else] except smallpox.” In other words, if the nonvaccinated contract the disease, call it one thing; if the vaccinated become ill, name it something else.
The medical profession often goes to great lengths to create the illusion of extraordinary vaccine efficacy rates. As an example, the standards for defining polio were changed when the live-virus polio vaccine was introduced. The new definition of a “polio epidemic” required more cases to be reported (35 per 100,000 instead of the customary 20 per 100,000). At this time paralytic polio was redefined as well, making it more difficult to confirm, and therefore tally, cases. Prior to the introduction of the vaccine the patient only had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for 24 hours. Laboratory confirmation and tests to determine residual (prolonged) paralysis were not required. The new definition required the patient to exhibit paralytic symptoms for at least 60 days, and residual paralysis had to be confirmed twice during the course of the disease. Finally, after the vaccine was introduced cases of aseptic meningitis (an infectious disease often difficult to distinguish from polio) were more often reported as a separate disease from polio. But such cases were counted as polio before the vaccine was introduced. The vaccine’s reported efficacy was therefore skewed.
More recently, two siblings contracted a bad cough, and they were brought to the family doctor for a checkup. In a separate visit, their 2 cousins, who also contracted a bad cough, were brought to the same doctor. Prior to being examined, the doctor asked each set of parents the vaccine status of their children. The first 2 children, who were not vaccinated, were diagnosed as having pertussis. The other 2 children, who had been vaccinated against pertussis, were diagnosed as having bronchitis. No clinical test was performed on any of the children. This tactic serves two functions: 1) it inflates whooping cough statistics suggesting the need for a pertussis vaccine, and 2) it suppresses the truth that the vaccine is ineffective.
Babies who die soon after receiving vaccinations are often diagnosed with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). In fact, this tactic is so handy that coroners are permitted to use this term to certify toddler deaths up to the age of 24 months.
Vaccine epidemics are often “created” when health officials misdiagnose ailments, or overstate the number of cases. As an example, when television programs challenged the safety of the pertussis vaccine, the Maryland Health Department deceived the public by blaming a new “epidemic” of whooping cough on the impact of these shows. When Dr. J. Anthony Morris, former top virologist for the U.S. Division of Biological Standards, analyzed the original data, however, he concluded the Maryland epidemic didn’t exist. In only 5 of the 41 cases was there reasonable evidence to correctly diagnose whooping cough. And each of these 5 children had received from one to four doses of the pertussis vaccine.
In Placitas, New Mexico, headlines warned parents of a dangerous whooping cough “epidemic” in that town. But only three cases of whooping cough were discovered, two of them in siblings, all three of them in children who were vaccinated.
20. Patriotic Duty and Social Responsibility (also known as the Guilt Trip). According to Dr. Martin Smith of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), “children of the nation are soldiers in the defense of this country against disease.” Vaccine advocates maintain that some children must be sacrificed “for the welfare, safety, and comfort” of the nation. One mother, whose child was permanently brain damaged within hours after receiving a DPT vaccine, was told by the family doctor that this was the price her child had to pay to keep other children safe. According to Dr. George Flores, Sonoma County public health officer, parents who reject vaccines “don’t consider the effect of their child on the rest of society.” Apparently, unvaccinated children are a danger to everyone who is vaccinated, even though the vaccinated are supposed to be “protected.” (We are told that for the shots to work, everyone must play along.) And families who decline the shots, we are told, are somehow reaping the benefits from those who dutifully have their children vaccinated.
21. Unethical Experimentation. In December 1990, a federal regulation was adopted whereby the FDA gave permission to the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to circumvent U.S. and international laws forbidding medical experiments on unwilling subjects. This is the decree that allowed the DoD to inject American Gulf War troops with unapproved experimental drugs and vaccines without their informed consent by deeming it “not feasible” to obtain the soldiers’ permission. Today, many of these vets, their spouses, and their children, are crippled by unknown diseases.
In a class action lawsuit, American Indians in South Dakota are suing the FDA and CDC for testing a new hepatitis A vaccine on their infants. Health officials did not warn the parents the exposed children would be at risk for cancer, convulsions, eye disorders, or death. Authorities now plan to test hepatitis A vaccine on remote Northwest Alaska villagers.
Simultaneously administered vaccines have not been proven safe, yet authorities continue to recommend them and medical health practitioners continue to inject them. A recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association found lowered levels of pertussis antibodies in children who were simultaneously given the DPT and Hib vaccines. According to the author of the study, “This concern must be addressed, for obviously we do not want to expose our children to the risk of vaccines without providing them with optimum benefit.”
Every year during the fall and winter seasons a new flu virus is thought to circulate throughout the community. To produce a vaccine for this virus, health officials must correctly predict nearly a year in advance which virus will arrive (causing some people to speculate that when officials guess correctly, it’s really the vaccine itself that may be spreading the disease). With production usually beginning in January, and the final product licensed by the FDA in August, just a month or two before the shots are distributed, who does it seem the vaccines are being tested on?
Vaccine researchers perform unethical experiments on human populations whenever their newest creations are ready to be tested. Therefore it comes as no surprise to learn of their plans to add foreign substances—viral matter—to the food supply. In fact, biotechnology firms have been experimenting with adding vaccines to bananas, lettuce, potatoes, tomatoes, and soybeans for several years now. Who do you think these vaccines will be tested on?
22. Mandates. If vaccines are so wonderful, why does the government need to mandate them? You’d think that everyone would be lining up to get the shots. But vaccination rates are modest. The Clinton administration claimed that the price and accessibility of vaccines were hindering parents from maintaining vaccine schedules. However, according to a survey conducted by The Gallup Organization on behalf of Lederle Laboratories, a major vaccine manufacturer, the “cost and time involved are least important” considerations for parents deciding whether to vaccinate their children. “The possibility of side effects is most frequently rated as important in making the decision.”
State laws require children to be vaccinated before they can enter public school—unless a parent signs a waiver indicating opposition to the shots. While some states offer a philosophical or religious exemption, all provide a medical exemption—if contraindications exist. But parents should not have to sign a waiver objecting to mandatory vaccines. Instead, those who elect to have their children vaccinated should be obligated to read the full range of possible adverse reactions. Then, parents who still elect to have their children vaccinated should be required to sign a form indicating that they understand all the risks involved.
Mandating vaccines is also an unscrupulous means of extorting money from trusting parents. Imagine the exorbitant profits of any company that produces a product everyone is required by law to buy—even against their will. Moreover, the extreme wealth acquired through this medical racket is not hoarded by the drug makers alone; common doctors share in the booty. According to the late Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, world-renowned pediatrician, vaccines are the “bread and butter” of pediatric practice. Others speculate that the damage caused by the shots may be responsible for new ailments and rare diseases -- enough to keep medical specialists affluent and busy for years to come.
Imagine for a moment a group of nutritionists who develop a multivitamin. They place their own people in a position to evaluate the benefits and risks of the product. It is now “officially” declared safe and effective. In fact, children who take this new multivitamin are reported to be 50 percent healthier than other children. But there is a catch: the costly vitamins must be taken at regular intervals and everyone must take them or they won’t work. They won’t enhance health, we are told, because the disease-prone “unprotected” children—progeny of irresponsible parents—will pass their germs on to the “protected” children—children of “responsible” families. So the nutritionists lobby government officials to mandate their product. Busy lawmakers study the “official” study results, determine that “protecting” children is a high priority, and decide to support the goals and ambitions of this powerful lobbying force.
Imagine any coalition of professionals with an agenda to pursue. Say, a guild of hypnotists has determined that children can be hypnotized to perform better in school than children who are not hypnotized. But again there is a catch: the children must be taken from their parents at regular intervals to be hypnotized, and all children must be hypnotized or the effects will be incomplete. Would you agree to this practice? Mind control, body control; who has authority over our children?
23. Refusing to Report Vaccine Reactions. Despite a federal law passed by Congress in 1986 -- the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act—requiring all doctors who administer vaccines to report vaccine reactions to federal health officials, many choose to ignore this legal requirement. Doctors often justify their refusal to report vaccine reactions by claiming the shot had nothing to do with the child’s injury or death. The will of Congress is being subverted, resulting in a gross underreporting of vaccine injuries and deaths.
The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) is the federal program designated to tally reports of vaccine injuries and deaths. By the year 2002, tens of thousands of reactions to vaccines, including deaths, were reported—despite the medical boycott against reporting incidents.(269) Still, one must magnify these figures tenfold, because the FDA estimates that 90 percent of doctors do not report incidents.
To further confirm the degree of underreporting that occurs, in 1988 and 1989 Connaught Laboratories conducted a study to determine the true rate of adverse events associated with the vaccines they produce. During this period of time, unsolicited (“spontaneous”) reports of adverse events occurred at the rate of 20 per million doses. However, when they supplied the vaccine to doctors with a request to report any adverse event that occurred within 30 days of a vaccination, provided that it resulted in a physician visit, the rate of adverse events skyrocketed to 927 events per million doses. According to Dr. Jim Froeschle, director of clinical research at Connaught Laboratories, these differences indicate “a fifty-fold underreporting of adverse events.” Yet, even this figure may be conservative. According to Dr. David Kessler, M.D., director of the Food and Drug Administration, “Only about one percent of serious events [adverse drug reactions] are reported to the FDA.”
The following testimonials from parents and relatives of vaccine-damaged children illustrate how easily doctors can dismiss apparent vaccine reactions and thus justify not reporting them:
“Our son had his 2nd DPT shot and oral polio [vaccine] at four months of age on September 22, 1989. He had reacted to his 1st DPT immunization two months earlier with prolonged high-pitched screaming and projectile vomiting.... After his 2nd shot he immediately started the high-pitched screaming again. He could no longer hold his head up and could not keep his food down. He couldn’t sleep or stay awake, he had absence seizures, dozens to hundreds a day. He deteriorated daily and died April 14, 1990.” The doctor would not report this reaction. He did not feel that it was related to the vaccine.
“Our 16-month-old grandson received his 4th DPT shot on December 5, 1989, and he died 24 days later. He also received the MMR and oral polio vaccines at the same time. Within 24 hours his legs were red and swollen, he had a fever of 103 degrees, and he was very fussy and irritable.... His previous shots had similar reactions.... We know the shot contributed to his death.” The doctor would not report this reaction. He did not feel that it was related to the vaccine.
“We lost our beautiful, precious and adored 4-month-old son 26 hours after receiving the DPT vaccination and oral polio [vaccine] at his well-baby checkup on January 25, 1990.... We were aware our son’s behavior patterns changed after the shot.... He was staring, looked spacey, only took short naps, vomited his bottle.... The doctor was insistent that this was a SIDS death.” The doctor would not report this reaction. He did not feel that it was related to the vaccine.
“Our son had his 1st DPT vaccination and oral polio vaccine at 14 months old on February 22, 1990. That evening he started high-pitched screaming. The next two days he had a temperature of 101 degrees and slept for 15 hours. When he awoke he was extremely irritable.... My son was in a lot of body pain. At times he looked like he had a stroke. At other times he was curled up in a hard knot we couldn’t straighten. He was having seizures and we didn’t know it.... He continues to have seizures. The doctor, even though law required him to record manufacturer and lot number, did not record the number.” The doctor would not report this reaction. He did not feel that it was related to the vaccine.
“My son had his first DPT shot at his 2-month checkup on May 8, 1990.... Four hours later he started crying.... I noticed he was pale and like a statue.... He stopped breathing. I picked him up and shook him and he started breathing again. A friend was visiting and called 911. My son stopped breathing 8 to 10 more times with me shaking him out of it each time before the paramedics arrived. He was ash white...screaming when we got to the hospital.... I have another child who had severe reactions from his shots. He had a seizure after each of his first three DPT shots and was on medication for three years.” The doctor would not report this reaction. He did not feel that it was related to the vaccine.
“My 16-month-old grandson had his 2nd DPT shot, MMR, and polio at his well-baby checkup on August 16, 1990. In less than 48 hours he had a temperature of 105 degrees and went into convulsions.... My grandson has deteriorated daily. He walks stiff-legged, or his knee collapses on under him.... He has trouble with his bowels, constipation one minute followed by diarrhea running down his leg the next minute. We look at our old videos and realize how much he has changed.” The doctor would not report this reaction, nor would he give the parents the manufacturers, and lot numbers of the vaccines he administered.
“My grandson had his 1st DPT shot and oral polio [vaccine] at his 2-month well-baby checkup on June 8, 1990. Within 21 hours he was dead. After the shot he started crying [high-pitched screaming].... My grandson began projectile vomiting and continued the high-pitched crying.... At 7 A.M. my daughter awoke and found my grandson to have a purple color on one side of his face, clenched fists, blood coming from his nose and mouth and not breathing. My grandson was dead. I have promised my daughter that his death will not be in vain and just another statistic labeled SIDS.” The doctor would not report this reaction. He did not feel that it was related to the vaccine.
24. Suppress Information/Prohibit Conflicting Testimony. On April 1, 1993, several bills were introduced in Congress to establish a federal “tracking and surveillance” system that would monitor parents who choose not to vaccinate their children. A few weeks later, Representative Henry Waxman and Senator Ted Kennedy chaired “public” hearings on this legislation, but prohibited input from individual parents, parent organizations, and healthcare professionals concerned about vaccine safety. Instead, only groups with a vested interest in ratifying these bills were permitted to attend: White House sponsors, several presidents of multibillion dollar companies that produce vaccines, agents of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and public health officials.
The Salk “inactivated” or “killed-virus” vaccine was actually regulated to permit 5,000 live viruses per million doses. Yet, because the vaccine was promoted as being incapable of causing polio, cases that occurred following administration of the vaccine were denied, and it was excluded from the Vaccine Injury Table. The CDC also refuses to acknowledge occurrences of encephalitis and seizure disorders following administration of the oral polio vaccine, even though encephalitis has been known to occur following polio contracted under natural conditions.
More examples of the suppression ploy:
A recent report published in Lancet notes that some people contract meningitis after receiving the MMR vaccine. Nevertheless, the author concludes that “because of the extreme rarity of this complication, parents need not be told about the risk before deciding on vaccination.”
Even though a national drug evaluation committee (ADRAC) recommended that children should be observed for a sufficient period of time after vaccination to monitor reactions, authorities fought against the suggested period of observation on the grounds that it causes inconvenience to parents and increases anxiety about the safety of childhood shots.
When the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 was passed into law, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was ordered by Congress “to develop and disseminate vaccine information materials for distribution by health care workers.” This material was to include information on adverse reactions, contraindications, and the availability of a federal compensation program for people who are injured or die from a mandated vaccine. HHS was to satisfy this legal requirement by December 22, 1988. By March 4, 1991, this matter was still unsettled. When HHS eventually submitted the required information, “they failed to meet even minimal standards of scientific rigor, candor, and fairness.” Vaccine risks were systematically understated or ignored.
Although medical personnel are required by law to provide their clients with information booklets explaining the benefits and risks of vaccinations before they receive their shots, few doctors offer these booklets to their clients. The following story illustrates the type of damage that can occur when healthcare providers choose to suppress lifesaving information:
“I am a 29-nine-year old female who received an MMR vaccine required by [the medical center where I work]. Since receiving that vaccine I’ve experienced a number of side effects: dizziness, headaches, numbness of my feet and ankles, shortness of breath, chest pain, and aching joints.
“I have seen several doctors over the last six months, more times than I can count. Those doctors that admitted the vaccine may have something to do with these symptoms felt that within six months the symptoms would subside. Unfortunately, this is not the case. In fact, some symptoms have gotten worse. My ankles are numb almost continuously, the chest pain has begun to include pain in my left arm and jaw, accompanied by difficulty breathing.
“Every aspect of my life has been affected by this, including my work ability, which is the reason I had to have the vaccine in the first place. I was told I either had to get it, or I wouldn’t have a job. Unfortunately, by this time I have already given up the job I held for over five years.
“I was not given any information prior to receiving the vaccine. [I later learned] that people allergic to eggs should not receive this vaccine. I am allergic to eggs, but the hospital staff never asked or told me anything. My primary care physician is at a loss about what to do with me. But I continue to suffer.”
25. Psychological Projection. Medical personnel are notorious for seeing in others the very thoughts, feelings, and actions they deny in themselves. This subtle and unconscious defense against anxiety and guilt is what psychologists refer to as projection. Vaccine researchers, for example, are disappointed that women and minorities have been reluctant to be experimented on with a new AIDS vaccine, even in light of recent revelations about Cold War radiation tests on unwitting subjects. The reluctant volunteers—not the researchers—were blamed for harboring a “mistaken belief” that the vaccine could cause AIDS, despite what the scientists say.
Note: Less than 5 months later, researchers were forced to acknowledge that “at least five volunteers in the government’s principal AIDS vaccine study have become infected with the AIDS virus after receiving the vaccine.” One of the subjects is said to have undergone “an unusually rapid decline in the number of white blood cells, the standard measure for the progress of AIDS.” This has raised researchers’ concerns “not only about how well the vaccine works but whether it may have increased the likelihood of their infection and...even accelerated the progression of disease.”
Medical policymakers and some lawmakers claim parents are abusing their children by not allowing them to be vaccinated. Some parents have been accused of child abuse—“shaking baby syndrome”—after their children had seizures or went into a coma following vaccinations. In fact, the authorities who allow these dangerous vaccines to be administered are abusing the children and implicating the parents. Parents have lost custody of their loved ones in this manner.
26. Organized Propaganda. Community organizations and parent groups are often enlisted by medical associations to help organize campaigns against unvaccinated children. “Volunteers” rarely question the cult-like doctrines the pro-vaccinators foist in their direction. But are these organizations, and their helpers, really doing the community a service? How honest are vaccine campaigns that omit mention of the thousands of families affected every year by adverse reactions to vaccines? Why are the true facts prohibited from being revealed? And why can’t parents be trusted to weigh the facts for themselves?
The medical-industrial complex is well-prepared for almost any unfavorable eventuality that may occur. For example, soon after the NBC television show “NOW” broadcast a story about the dangerous DPT vaccine, a DPT manufacturer sent telegrams to health professionals throughout the nation reassuring them of the vaccine’s safety. After the show aired a second time, the CDC organized a propaganda blitz by swiftly faxing biased pro-vaccine information to doctors and other concerned people throughout the nation. In this fax, the CDC had the audacity to claim that “Almost all infants with any medical illness, including death, will have been vaccinated earlier in their life.... [and] Almost all infants with any medical illness, including death, will have drunk milk earlier in their life,” implying that receiving shots is as benign as drinking milk.
27. Legal Immunity. When the FDA tested a batch of DPT vaccine, they found the entire lot to be 200 percent more potent than regulations allowed. Instead of immediately destroying it, the agency allowed health authorities to “test” it on hundreds of children in Michigan. This proved to be a tragic gamble. Later, when the parents of children who were paralyzed and brain damaged from the mandatory shots tried to sue the state, the courts disallowed their case because the “doctrine of sovereign immunity” protects the government from claims arising from services that only the government can provide.
A 13-year-old Pennsylvania girl suffered irreversible brain damage from a measles vaccine received during a mandatory mass vaccination program at her school. However, a court decision made it clear that neither the vaccine manufacturers nor the government could be held responsible because the vaccines were “unavoidably unsafe.” [Translation: Parents are compelled to play the medical establishment’s unique brand of Russian roulette.] The court also claimed the vaccine maker adequately delineated risks on its package insert. Consequently, these parents were deemed solely responsible for the care of their now mentally retarded daughter—even though they, like most parents, were not warned about vaccine dangers, were not told about these inserts, and withheld permission for their daughter to be vaccinated!
Drug companies are legally immune against most claims of vaccine damage, and their incentive to produce safer vaccines was removed when the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 was passed. This law states that “no vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” Incredibly, the original draft also stated: “The term vaccine-related injury or death means an illness, injury, condition or death associated with one or more of the vaccines listed in the vaccine injury table except that the term does not include an illness, injury, condition or death associated with an adulterant or contaminant intentionally added to such a vaccine.”
28. Threats to go out of Business. Before the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 was enacted, vaccine manufacturers were being sued so often and for so much money, that many threatened to—and did—go out of business. When the government began accepting liability for vaccine injuries and deaths, the enterprising drug companies succeeded in removing an important incentive to produce safe and effective vaccines.
29. Stonewalling. Vaccine officials use the stonewalling tactic whenever they want to delay or avoid accepting accountability. For example, when one mother, whose son died four days after his second polio shot, studied his provisional autopsy report, she noted that there were major findings of myocarditis, and hepatitis, and that the polio virus had been extracted from these diseased organs—conditions not inconsistent with a vaccine reaction. But when she questioned the pathology department’s initial conclusion—Sudden Infant Death Syndrome—and requested additional tests to determine whether the polio virus was a wild or vaccine strain, she was led into a nine-year battle with the CDC to secure the results. (Medical authorities were forced to concede the truth: the vaccine caused the child’s polio.
When a child is killed by a mandated vaccine, the government is expected to compensate the parents, awarding them up to $250,000. However, if the child is seriously injured by the vaccine, continues to live, and requires lifetime care, several million dollars may be awarded. Government officials may be reluctant to settle cases quickly, hoping the damaged child will die, thereby lowering the payment. This is exactly what millions of people learned when The Crusaders, a television newsmagazine, aired a gutsy show on the dangerous pertussis vaccine. The father of a young boy who suffered severe and permanent brain damage just hours after a DPT shot could not get the government to settle his case. The family needs the money to pay for the child’s specialized care, but “if something were to happen to him and he did not live, they would not have to pay for his life care.”
30. Secrecy. If vaccines offered benefits only, the government wouldn’t need to mandate them, and the ploys noted in this chapter wouldn’t be necessary. Instead, parents would be lining up to get the shots. Members of the medical fraternity realize this, and have banded together to conceal how the vaccines are made, who they’re tested on, how effective they really are, and the true rates of adverse events. Even the manufacturer’s cost to market vaccines is considered a “trade secret or confidential information.”
Doctors who have dared to publicly question vaccines, “have been warned that their careers are at stake and they risk [losing their license to practice medicine].” Others are discredited.
After one family’s son was damaged by a DPT shot, they obtained, through the Freedom of Information Act, a computerized record of more than 34,000 adverse reactions to vaccines over a three-year period. They had a hunch their son had received a bad vaccine—from a “hot lot”—and wanted to see if they could protect other children from being hurt.
After a great deal of research, they discovered that their son had been vaccinated from a hot lot. The death rate associated with this batch was three times higher than that linked with other lots. Ten children had died from it. But when the parents spoke to officials at the FDA to determine if the agency would conduct an investigation, they were told that “due to the size of the lot, the deaths did not warrant significant investigation.” When they inquired about the size of the lot, the FDA flatly stated, “That’s confidential.”
Parents everywhere would like to know how many deaths would be enough to warrant an investigation. If ten isn’t enough, is twenty? Thirty? Forty? What’s enough? What industry is permitted to operate in secrecy, and put out a product to the public without accountability? Concerned citizens cannot even find out from the government what the mechanism is to institute a recall, if indeed one even exists.
Drug company awards for vaccine damage are usually settled out of court. Parents who expect to receive compensation for their child who was damaged or killed by a vaccine are often obligated to remain silent as a condition of the agreement. Parents seeking compensation from the Federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program are often counseled to refrain from discussing their cases, and settlements, as well. To learn how difficult it is to break the secrecy pact, try to obtain specific vaccine information from the CDC or FDA. They’ll be happy to send you their official propaganda but will quickly turn apprehensive and restrained when you start probing for additional information. These public organizations, supported by taxpayer dollars, have all sorts of information. However, they’re unlikely to share it with average citizens, for then we’d be able to make our own rational, informed decisions regarding the shots. But the American people are entitled to know the answers to their questions before submitting their children to “mandated” vaccines.
“We could kneel on broken glass and give the American Medical Association (AMA) everything it wanted, and still they will oppose it. They are going to push us as far as possible, and then they are just going to screw us.”—Federal Healthcare Task Force Member, Time, (September 20, 1993), p. 61.
“Every doctor will allow a colleague to decimate a whole countryside sooner than violate the bond of professional etiquette by giving him away.”—George Bernard Shaw
This article was excerpted from the vaccine archives of Neil Z. Miller.
See Immunization Theory vs. Reality for more information.
www.thinktwice.com/ploys.htm
Thanks
to the many sources and the teachers for this knowledge
and wisdom that is helping us on our journey.
SITE INFORMATION - SITE DISCLAIMER - PRIVACY STATEMENT
THANKS FOR STOPPING BY.
All rights reserved.