On Media: Is LA Times' Thomas Maugh Offended By Vaccine Safety Advocacy?

By Anne Dachel

On Oct 16, the Los Angeles Times published the story, Religious leaders call swine flu vaccination 'a moral obligation' (HERE).
 
My first thought was, WHAT DO RELIGIOUS LEADERS KNOW ABOUT THE SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF VACCINATIONS?
 
This story originated at the Washington Post where they had amassed the opinion of 50 religious leaders.  The LA TIMES included comments from two members of the clergy, Susan K. Smith, senior pastor of Advent United Church of Christ in Columbus , Ohio and Rabbi David Wolpe of Sinai Temple in Los Angeles .  Both of them were decidedly pro vaccine.  Also included in the story was the opinion of Thomas H. Maugh II, Science and Medical writer at the LA TIMES.
 
Maugh was very brief, "To vaccinate is a religious obligation. To refuse protection for a serious disease is a sin."
 
My reaction was swift.  How could people make such comments without ever looking at the other side of the issue? 
 
I posted my feelings on the LA TIMES piece:

The comments by Pastor Smith and Rabbi Wolpe would be
appropriate if we were speaking about providing our children
with wholesome food or a loving home.
Sadly Smith, Maugh, and Wolpe are among the many who
simply assume "vaccines are safe, vaccines save lives."
They trust that there is oversight and only well-tested and
beneficial vaccines would ever be allowed on the market. They
believe that health officials have only the welfare of our children
at the center of their work.

They are unaware of the corruption, collusion, and cover-up
that exists when it comes to the damaging side effects of vaccines.
For years, as the autism rate explored and as countless thousands
of parents reported that their normally developing children regressed
into autism following routine vaccinations, CDC officials denied it all.

Autism affects one in every 91 children currently, one in every 58 boys.
In the 1970s, the rate was one in 10,000 children and most people never
heard of the disorder. Today, everyone knows someone with an autistic child
and no one can tell us why. The CDC says it's all due to better diagnosing and
no real increase at all. The agency with countless hundreds of employees who
have conflict waivers because they're also working for the vaccine makers, has
never found a link between vaccines and autism. They've got endless flawed
studies to back their claims.

Smith, Maugh, and Wolpe are saying that parents have a moral obligation
to vaccinate against the H1N1 flu. Are they aware that the majority of these
vaccines contain mercury? The mercury-based vaccine preservative thimerosal
was never tested or approved by the FDA. It's been linked to autism and Parkinson's
and Alzheimer's.

Smith, Maugh, and Wolpe have shown us their ignorance and their naïveté. Parents
clearly have a moral and religious obligation to find out for themselves what the dangers
are when it comes to vaccinating their children.

Anne Dachel
Media editor: Age of Autism

I also sent my remarks to Thomas Maugh to find out what he thought.  After all, someone who’s been at the LA TIMES for 23 years and who has a doctorate in chemistry from UC Santa Barbara should give some consideration to my points.

He answered me a couple of hours later:

“My comment is that you are dead wrong. The idea that vaccines cause autism has been disproved any number of times, and I find such hysterical reactions to be highly offensive.”
 
Thomas H. Maugh II
Science/Medical Writer
Los Angeles Times
202 West First Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
310 649-1300

In two sentences Maugh dismissed the claims of hundreds of thousands of parents with vaccine-damaged children and countless well-credentialed doctors and scientists.  Most of all, it saddened me.  How long will those in the media ignore our children?  How long will they accept the opinion of the CDC and AAP as fact without acknowledging that these people have everything at stake in denying a link between their vaccines and the epidemic of autism? 
 
I looked over the recent LA TIMES coverage of the latest autism numbers: one in every 100 children, one in every 58 boys.  
 
In the story, Proportion of 8-year-olds diagnosed with autism is up 50% in 2 years, CDC says (HERE), the TIMES was quick to tell us that the new numbers “could reflect better detection of the disorder, scientists say, and not necessarily an increase in the number of children affected.”
 
I also found something from the TIMES on July 15, 2008, Autism — who pays? (HERE) The TIMES reported, “With rapidly increasing rates of autism, more and more families are frustrated by a disjointed system of care and support. Health plans take seriously our commitment to cover medical interventions for Autism Spectrum Disorder, which fits within a system of care that includes education and regional centers.

“We must all effectively coordinate our responsibilities to children and families. However, private health insurance has not and should not bear the sole responsibility of financing and providing all of the needed and valuable services.”
 
It sounds like the TIMES acknowledged the growing autism numbers but didn’t quite have an answer for how we should pay for it. 
 
In January 2009 the TIMES published, Autism researcher: 'Time to start looking' at the environment (HERE). The article stated, “The seven- to eightfold increase in the number of children with autism born in California since 1990 cannot be explained by changes in how the condition is diagnosed or how statistics are gathered.”
 
Next I looked at what Thomas Maugh as a science and medical reporter has said about autism and the link to vaccines. 
 
January 31, 2008 in Study shows vaccine-autism link unlikely (HERE), Maugh wrote, “New studies in infants show that the mercury used as a preservative in vaccines is cleared from the body at least 10 times faster than researchers had previously believed, a finding that casts further doubt on the theory that the preservative causes autism.”

It seems Maugh missed the research by Thomas Burbacher, PhD at the U of WA.   Burbacher said, ‘Just because it came out of the blood doesn't mean it is excreted from the body. It could have gone to the brain.  In primates, you actually get more mercury in the brain after exposure to ethyl mercury than with methyl mercury -- it has an easier time crossing the blood-brain barrier.’

It always amazes me when reporters show no alarm over the very fact that something as deadly as mercury is even used in our children’s vaccines.  Just once I’d like one of them to find an independent toxicologist to back the claim that injecting the second deadliest element in the world into pregnant women and children can’t hurt them. 

One of the hundreds of wonderful autism advocates I’m in touch with thanks to the Internet sent me a note that said, “I believe it was Congressman Dan Burton who said at the April 2004 autism rally that the United States is the most technologically advanced country in the world and the best we can do to prevent contamination of vaccines is to use a poison like mercury?  His comment was made as a challenge to the pharmaceutical and medical industries to develop something better.”
 
That’s a brilliant point.  Ten years ago health experts called for the removal of mercury from vaccines.  TEN YEARS AGO.  It’s still there at horrendous levels in TWO FLU SHOTS RECOMMENDED FOR PREGNANT WOMEN AND LITTLE CHILDREN THIS FALL.
 
The day will come when this country realizes the true extent of the damaging effects of unsafe vaccines.  It’ll probably take the impact of hundreds of thousands young adults applying for SSI at age 18 before that happens, but the day is coming.  I can’t imagine how history will judge us for this terrible mistake.
--
Anne Dachel is Media Editor of Age of Autism.
 
 
 

Comments

[Elizabeth]

I laughed when I read his piece. I knew how hard he had to look for religious leaders that would say this.

[Johanna Bonnell]

I know I read that the Dept. of Homeland Defense, Janet Napolitano, met with religious leaders about the H1N1 pandemic and vaccination, I think in August. My only point is, it would be nice to trust what leaders say but they were already primed by the pharm companies and government.

[Autism Dad in PA]

I know this thread is a few days old, but i wanted to add a few words just in case people are still reading these posts.

I am a conservative Christian father of a mildly autistic child. I have supported Dr. James Dobson in the past and i do like the positions he takes with many social issues today.

One thing to keep in mind is that he comes from a pediatric background. He has the title "Dr" that precedes his name. Therefore, the chance is good that his mindset may mirror that of the general medical community. I'm not defending this, i'm just explaining what may be the case with him.

I also want to add that he has had Lynn Hamilton, author of Facing Autism, on his program a few times and has even recommended her book; a book that discusses the biomed option. However...

However, I too, wish he would have a few of his staffers do some research, so as to update the stuff he says on the air in relation to autism and vaccine issues.

I think many of those who call themselves conservative Christian and know that is foolish to completely trust anyone wearing a suit or a collar, don't make the connect that it is equally foolish to completely trust anyone wearing a white lab coat.

Not everyone who holds a Bible is teaching truth, nor is everyone working with petri dishes or bunsen burners bringing us safe and scientifically accurate medical treatments/cures.

I've learned through the process of dealing with autism and learning of all the possible causes and treatments, to be careful who i trust with my child's health, and future development; and i'm still learning.

Still, instead of labeling Dobson as a hypocrit, why not send an email or two to Focus on the Family. Maybe he might just be open minded enough to mention ARI and others on his next program that deals with autism and health issues.

[Elucidatus]

I can see it now bald headed Sinead Oconnor ripping Maugh's picture live on SNL while saying "Fight the real enemy."

[Sylvia]

No wonder the LA Times is going down the tubes! It can't be soon enough with bizzaros like Maugh steering the ship. Buh-Bye!

[John Stone]

Very often (and here) people bring up religion on our side as well, and also it comes into play in the US because one of the ways out are "religious exemptions". But while vaccination doesn't seem to be an entirely modern practice, it is unlikely that many religions have an historical line on it except in relation to products used, which may be proscribed on an ethical or dietary level. This may be more relevant with Catholicism or Islam than Judaism where medical benefit would outweigh dietary prohibition - though I am not sure this would remain the case if Khosher products were available.

There seem to be two main intellectual arguments for vaccination - the proposition the benefits far outweigh the risks, and that it is some kind of civic obligation (for the greater good).

The reality as we found is somewhat different. Something which might be of public benefit has become a universal racket. The testing of products is invariably pitifully inadequate and benefit risk ratio is in virtually all cases, at best conjectural, because the science has never been done. The fact that the science is not done means with near certainty that the risks are much higher than official medicine will ever have any knowledge of, and moreover, as we know all damage is instantly deniable.

So, despite the intellectually flattering arguments there are no rules. It is a bit like someone signing a treaty on the basis that the other side will be stupid enough to stick to it, and that is where we all are with public health and the vaccine industry.

The truth is that if they were ethically in earnest products would be tested to the same levels as other medicines are supposed to be (particularly given their universal use), the medical profession would actively and sympathetically moniter all adverse reactions and their sequelae, and they would listen with respect and concern to parents reporting adverse events. But, of course, not only do they not do any of these things - they aggressively dismiss everybody who dares speak up, and hide behind a fortress of legal obstructions to guard their positions.

And then, of course, there is the Praetorian guard in the media, of which Thomas Maugh is a particularly egregious example - no discourtesy spared. The way he conducts himself surely does his and their cause no good whatsoever.

[michael framson]

In Oregon, as part of the Oregon Revised Statutes(ORS) for religious exemption from vaccination is the definition of religion:
"any system of beliefs, practices or ethical values." As Robert Krakow pointed out, "vaccination is indeed a religion".... a dogmatic religion. An unethical religion, A corrupt religion, misguided religion, shortsighted religion, dangerous and unhealthy religion, a religion which corrupts medicine, doctors, governments, people, corporations (of course they maybe inherently corrupt.) Vaccinations maybe the ultimate religion, bigger than God, or the universe in the eyes of all those who want their religion obeyed even if it kills or injures you or your child.

It seems, the only ones who most keenly understand "ethical values", or the lack of, are the parents at this site, who seek to protect their children, themselves from so much of our world that behaves so ugly, so unethically, when it comes to this religion.

As we know all too well, we've seen every kind of ethical injustice when it comes to those who foist their vaccination religious beliefs on others.

Our "beliefs, practices and ethical values" represent the only place that vaccinations have not perverted and destroyed.

Thanks Anne!

[Autisticliving.com]

I'm gonna steal/alter a verse from Billy Joel....

They say there's a heaven, when you vaccinate.
Some say it's better but I say it ain't.
I'd rather laugh with the sinners,
than cry with the saints.

The sinners are much more fun.

You know that only the good die young.

:-P

God I'm glad I'm an atheist.

[Monica]

If I'm dead wrong about my child's vaccinations linked to his encephalopathy and autism, then why doesn't Mr. Maugh have an explanation for my child's 105.5 fever for 2 days following his MMR, then petit-mal seizures, the total loss of speech language, fine motor skills, etc. If there's no risk to vaccination, then why do parents have to sign consent and release of liability forms prior to them??? What's his problem?!?! His pharmaceutical stock portfolio still hurting from the last DOW drop? Dead Wrong? -- Why doesn't he just drop dead.

[Joanna]

I think when the vaccine industry has to stoop to calling you in a sinner if you don't get a vaccine reveals their desperation. Calling something your moral obligation means that they know the science can't stand on its own. Put vaccine safety up there w/ intelligent design (and insult to scientists and Christians) and call it a day...

[Benedetta]

Pat Robertson on the 700 club has said for years that the vaccines were causing the rise in autism.

I remember one time he even quoted a Bible verse about the end of times that so many women were hanging onto one man's coat tails (indicating that men were scarce - many people think this verse means many men died in battle), But Pat Robertson said he thought it could just as easily mean that more boys than girls were being harmed by vaccines????!!!!!
Yes, he said this years ago while I was crying and pleading to God. If ever you believe in a message of God coming through to help some one --- well there it was for me!

[Michael B Schachter MD, CNS]

Has Mr. Maugh been checked for brain damage? Is he up-to-date with all vaccines containing thimerosal and aluminum? Perhaps he is homozygous for the Apolipoprotein E4 gene resulting in an inability to detoxify toxic metals from his body with resulting brain damage. This might explain some of his absurd comments. Otherwise, has anyone checked into any connections he might have to pharmaceutical companies that are promoting vaccines?

[Bob]

Most of the large national religious groups that are comprised of a blend of denominations tend to be theologically liberal. That's because most of them are rooted in "social gospel" or "liberation theology" and are, therefore, predisposed in favor of big government (and global government) "solutions".

As a Christian (and a conservative), I am offended when one of these purported "Christian leaders" deigns to tell Americans that getting a flu shot is a "moral" issue.
They have ZERO scriptural basis for such an absurd proclamation.

The problem is that people who are not Christians are probably turned off by such unscriptural "moralizing", and most faithful Christians ignore such pronouncements because those loudmouths are are not considered to be leaders by rank-and-file Christians. They are seen for what they are -- a bunch of nutball moralizing liberals.

Having said that, those of us who are concerned about vaccines tend to run the gamut politically, from liberal to conservative (which I happen to be). What we have in common is that we are free thinkers who have been burned one-too-many times by a patronizing doctor or government that is "here to help."

For instance, I disagree with RFK Jr. on probably EVERYTHING except vaccine safety. He is *the man* when it comes to that issue, however, and I respect him for taking a stand that is at odds with the current administration.

Likewise, the Bush administration was no better. So it's not a "liberal" or "conservative" issue -- it's really a battle of common sense (us) versus "group-think" (them).

[Josh]

Maurine and the others who wrote in and got a response from this clown, just imagine what it's like working with the asshole. Ha!

You guys who are getting these asinine replies from this "journalist / scientist" may want to forward them up to the editor who's above him. Not like that would do anything per se, but any editor worth his or her salt would be embarrassed by this guy's little love notes he's sending out to readers.

[Kathy Blanco]

Didn't the bible warn us of pharmacopia as sorcerers? Liars? Enough said...

[Maurine Meleck]

I, too, wrote to Maugh after reading the article. Here is what he wrote back to me(very mature-NOT)
" I find such ignorance to be truly astounding. Somewhere a village is missing its idiot."
I don't think I have ever received such a disgusting statement from someone of his stature(if you can call it that).
The article really troubled me. My sister knows the rabbi in L.A.(a very well respected rabbi with a very large congregation) and she too was shocked by his comments and the whole piece. Thanks Anne for this post.
Maurine

[kathleen]

What do they think of the people, like myself, who have prayed for guidance on this issue and been firmly lead away from the swine flu vaccine?
Are they saying that my answer in prayer is not worthy? Though answered by God?

[DCannon]

Why all of us do not send an email to this guy..does someone has it? We just copy our comments here next to the letter written by the author of this article.

[John Stone]

What astonishes me most is the scientific illiteracy of Maugh's comment, followed by it's unreasoned rudeness:

“My comment is that you are dead wrong. The idea that vaccines cause autism has been disproved any number of times, and I find such hysterical reactions to be highly offensive.”

There are of course no studies that disprove that vaccines cause autism - at best the studies that he likes suggest that vacines might not cause autism. The crass style scarcely suggests that he understood what was involved in the first place. Perhaps he feels offended because he knows who is really out of his depth, not to mention hysterical.

[Terramuggus]

Is receiving a pig vaccine even Kosher?

[Teresa Conrick]

"Religious leaders call swine flu vaccination 'a moral obligation'"

Yikes- who said it first?

Obama Calls Health Plan a ‘Moral Obligation’

By JEFF ZELENY and CARL HULSE
Published: August 19, 2009

"WASHINGTON — President Obama sought Wednesday to reframe the health care debate as “a core ethical and moral obligation,” imploring a coalition of religious leaders to help promote the plan to lower costs and expand insurance coverage for all Americans."

Did these "religious leaders" take the message to mean vaccines or was that the message they were given?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/20/us/politics/20obama.html

[Craig Willoughby]

Oh, one other thing.

There is a reason why I call vaccination dogma the Church of the Immaculate Vaccination. The comments from Maugh and quotes from the clergy that he interviewed makes my moniker very appropriate, doesn't it?

[Craig Willoughby]

Well, let's look at our bibles and see what it says about sin, shall we?

Killing? Check.
Stealing? Check.
Worshiping another god other than the Christian god? Check.

Now, let's look at the definition of sin:
1. A transgression of a religious or moral law, especially when deliberate.
2. Theology
a. Deliberate disobedience to the known will of God.
b. A condition of estrangement from God resulting from such disobedience.
3. Something regarded as being shameful, deplorable, or utterly wrong (like what is happening to our children, yes?)

I could go on, but I don't see anything in there about non-vaccination being an afront to God. In fact, it is an inalienable human right to refuse any medical procedure. That is a God-given right.

Julie, don't worry about me....I'm a recovering Catholic ;)

[Beth]

"We've got newspaper editors telling us what sin is; religious groups telling us what science is...

It must be Halloween because everyone's dressing up and role playing. What fun."

Brilliant take! Thanks for sharing!

[Robert J. krakow]

The corollary to "Not to Vaccinate 'is a sin'" is "Vaccination is religion", not science or even medicine.

Mr. Maugh has helped reveal the imperative behind vaccination policy.

[Richard]

Any supposed clergy who would be silly enough to weigh in the vaccine issue were either duped into being quoted or are profoundly stupid.
I wonder if they are even aware that some vaccines contain aborted fetal tissue?

[samaxtics]

What about the moral obligation of pharmas to admit that some people will be harmed by vaccines and what about the moral obligation to compensate them for their injuries without making them travel to Hades and back for it?

Speaking from my own Christian standpoint: Jesus healed a lot of people, but He never vaccinated anyone.

[Mr T]

Why did't brother Maugh call Rev. Lisa Sykes (with the Methodist women)and get their take? Instead he get two cleryman who don't know anything about vaccines. What a LOSER!

[Frank for Aidan]

To be religious you need to have faith - the belief in something without proof.

To be a scientist you must believe only what can be repeatedly proven using the scientific method.

Yet we have the following:

The Archdiocese of Rockville Center doesn’t think that a well researched objection to vaccines based on religious grounds has enough scientific foundation.

Some religious leaders preach that it’s a moral obligation to vaccinate against the novel H1N1 2009 influenza – because the CDC says so.

The Science and Medical editor for the LA Times, who has a doctorate in chemistry, is trying to influence people with pop-dogma.

And this is the same LA Times that recently published the article “Bringing science back into America’s sphere” by Lori Kozlowski lambasting us poor, stupid Americans for not listening to the opinions of scientist!

“Oh what a tangled web we weave…”

[Randy]

Her response to the Archdiocese of Rockville Center could have stated that much research has been done on Creationism by Evolutionary Biologists (and others) who determined that Catholics use "faulty logic" and that their "assumptions" about our very existence are "not based in science".

Hypocrites...

[Jack]

A couple months ago I took a shot at what I thought the Bible would make of mandatory vaccination. I saw it bit different:

http://thelenseofautism.blogspot.com/2009/07/modern-day-moloch-on-forced-vaccination.html

[Maggie]

OMG. They are so desperate. If I were a church-going person, I'd be very offended by this. I guess this is what George Bush's Faith Based Initiatives bought us. Paid off churches.

[Garbo]

As an Angeleno, I can tell you that good old Mr. Maugh is either a complete kool-aid drinking throwback to the stone age of "vaccines only save lives, never take them", or else he is a sponsored shill. I have for years been sending responses to his half-sided articles but have yet to see a letter make it into print. According to VAERS, here in California in 2009 the seasonal flu vaccine is associated with 60 ER visits, 17 hospitalizations, 1 permanent disability and 3 deaths (2 of them in the 6-17 age range). The H1N1 vaccine just rolled out has been associated with 4 ER visits and 1 death (in the 6-17 age group). In the last ten years in California, 14,800 adverse event reports overall, 2446 of them associated with flu vaccine including 66 with death or permanent disability. I can just about guarantee that we won't see Mr. Maugh or the Times reporting on any of that, however. They're too busy schmoozing with the rabbi, clapping for the fairies and rewriting press releases while they scratch their heads and wonder what's happened to their circulation.

[Kathy Blanco]

One of the principles at least taught in our church is the law of free agency. And personal revelation. If you don't feel it's right for you, then by all means, don't do it...love that....

That said, I know our church helps to vaccinate african children with measles vaccine...maybe the ONLY instance where I give them a pass on that, because, they have no hygeine and sanitation. But, I know even church leaders can be deceived, they are human. I know this is the first place that the vaccinators hit because they feel we have "compassion" upon our fellow man. We do, but it's misplaced by the lies they tell them. Church leaders can be rather manipulated in that department, and feed upon their own experiences, not science.

This is where the personal revelation comes into play. Ask God if it's right, and if it isn't, then don't partake. Funny how I didn't listen to that still small voice then however...it was faint, but audible, take your baby and run sort of thing...but I didn't have the faith to do it, and now look where it got me?

[nhokkanen]

So, is Thomas H. Maugh II an unbiased investigative journalist, or an omniscient religious messenger who yearns to sitteth at the left hand of God?

If he has a doctorate in chemistry, why is he not working in that profession?

And has he had any serious mercury toxicity conversations with other chemists such as Boyd Haley, PhD?

Given the massive amount of Thimerosal toxicity studies extant, how can he possibly speak with such certainty?

[Stacie]

And this is why I am a Christian who does not attend church. I feel that hopefully God can see what a hot mess this world is in and not fault me for it. Why should I go every Sunday to listen to someone spew Merck proganda. No thanks!

[Gatogorra]

We've got newspaper editors telling us what sin is; religious groups telling us what science is...

It must be Halloween because everyone's dressing up and role playing. What fun. Ask Maugh if we can play to. We can all come to the party as members of the FDA, the Supreme Court, the DOJ and the CDC.

[AnaB]

So these clergy are telling us it is a sin not to take a drug? And they wonder why church attendance is at an all time low. Yes, clergy you know more about how we should live our lives than we do----I believe that mindset went out in the dark ages, but apparently your need to control others did not.

[julie]

Screw the Catholic Church, look how they covered up the molestation scandals all these years. Think they give a damn about children? Catholic charities are big on pushing vaccines on developing nations. As for the LA Times they are simply an infomercial.

I hope I haven't offended any Catholic AoA readers.

[Twyla]

Excellent response, Anne, and thanks so much for your continuing advocacy. Maugh's response to you was reactionary and unscientific -- and how could he call your arguement hysterical? You were not the least bit hysterical. I don't know how people like Maugh can consider themselves to be so logical, rational, and scientific when they are actually ignorant, biased, and close minded.

[Josh]

Check out Ginger Taylor's tour-de-force for more on this Maugh the "II."

http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2009/09/chris-mooney-sheril-kirshenbaum-lori.html

[RobinRowlands]

A of A,
No intelligent person would deny the need for vaccines as such, however in the light of what we already know only a fool would not be concerned about the the nature of those vaccines, and their mode of use.
---
Ask the LA Times for the names of the religious leaders they contacted.
---
Rowan Williams - the Archbishop of Canterbury has recently stated that he believes the Governments of George Bush and Tony Blair were in league with the Devil.
---
It wasn't just the War he knows something your Religious Leaders dont. Perhaps your religious leaders should ask him what he knows.
---
When your Religious Leaders know more about what has gone on and the truth is coming, I wonder what they will think.
---
I have a fair idea what their judgement will be, and a good idea of how the vast majority of decent Americans will react.
---

Robin Rowlands

[Jenna Smith]

Interesting about the Catholic school being reticent about accepting exemptions. I've heard that the James Dobson crowd and Joni Eareckson Tada have both come out in favor of vaccines containing aborted human fetal tissue because vaccines "save so many lives". And when you point out the utter inconsistency between this logic and their position on stem cell research (using embryos that would be thrown away by IVF clinics) which may lead to treatments that "save so many lives", they will simply say the issues aren't parallel. Complete intellectual dishonesty-and from the church no less.

[Angela]

Wow - here I thought that "religion" was the "opiate of the masses" and meant for silly, easily manipulated people. Of course it's not for smart, logical, scientific people, right?

But wait - I thought it was all those smart scientific types who dogmatically proclaim the safety of vaccines?

Hmmmm . . . dogma, religion, mandatory vaccines - no questions asked. Starting to see a pattern here.

Pathetically transparent. "If we can't reach these idiots with the science we'll appeal to the only thing they'll listen to - religion."

That is how they condescend to us "peons."

[Terri Lewis]

Here's my answer:

To vaccinate when the known risks outweigh the known benefits is a sin.

To choose all appropriate protections for serious disease is a moral obligation.

This moral obligation includes: reasonable avoidance of known (serious) disease; reasonable avoidance of others when you yourself are sick; clean water and nutritious food, including organic food as much as possible; full knowledge (to the extent possible) of all known and reasonably suspected risks and benefits for each vaccine; full knowledge (to the extent possible) of all known and reasonably suspected risks and benefits for all vaccines as given in combination.

The ignorance shown by the original remarks is stunning.

Since vaccines are known to cause brain damage, and autism is a form of brain damage, it is grossly sinful and, in fact, criminal as well, to suggest that vaccines cannot cause the type of brain damage known as autism.

They can, and they do.

The only question is, how much of the autism we're currently seeing is caused by vaccination?

None as blind as the ones who refuse to look and see.

[Bob Moffitt]

While the LA Times included comments from TWO members of the clergy who were decidely pro vaccine..I suspect there are many religions... and... thousands of clergy members ... that would disagree that parents have a "religious" moral obligation to vaccinate their child."

In any event....it is ludicrous to give any religious significance or credence to the "opinion" of the "science and medical" writer of the LA Times, Thomas H. Maugh II ....who foolishly declared that "vaccination is a religious obligation" and "to refuse protection for a serious disease is a sin."

I prefer to believe that most religions would not willingly sacrifice the "few" in order to protect the "herd".

[chrissie]

My cousin just enrolled her daughter in a Catholic kindergarten on Long Island. She filed a religious exemption to vaccination for her daughter with the school. It was a well-written, well-researched, thoughtful objection, the basis being that this child was born with a functioning, healthy immune system given to her by God which was then destroyed by vaccination. Her daughter is not on the spectrum, but has immune dysregulation, numerous allergies (environmental and food) and terrible eczema. Given that an ingredient in many vaccines is aborted fetal tissue, she really thought the church would back her up. Not so much. Her exemption was granted for 1 year, she has to refile every year. The response sent to her from the Archdiocese of Rockville Center stated that much research has been done on vaccination by the National Catholic Bioethics Center, who determined that she used "faulty logic" and her "assumptions" about her daughter's conditions were "not based in science". That's funny, since her pediatrician was the one to recommend no more vaccines. The response went on to say that many Catholics object to the use of aborted fetal tissue as an ingredient, but the church is ok with it because the cells are from an extinct line of fetal tissue originally propagated in the 60's. Maybe the fetus wasn't a Catholic, would that make it ok? These are the same people who encourage the middle class to vote against their own interests tax and health insurance-wise so that abortion can be illegal for everyone, even people without the same belief system.

Our first reaction was to try and find out how the Catholic Bioethics Center is funded. My bet was Merck.

[Penny]

Forgive them (Smith, Maugh, and Wolpe), Father, for they know not what they say.

[Natasa]

Well said Anne. And we haven't even touched on the oil based adjuvant that is present in swine flu vaccine.

This is what happens to animals when they are given vaccines containg oil adjuvants:

Vaccination-induced systemic autoimmunity in farmed Atlantic salmon

Over half of the salmon consumed globally are farm-raised. The introduction of oil-adjuvanted vaccines into salmon aquaculture made large-scale production feasible by preventing infections. The vaccines that are given i.p. contain oil adjuvant such as mineral oil. However, in rodents, A SINGLE I.P INJECTION OF ADJUVANT HYDROCARBON OIL INDUCES LUPUS-LIKE SYSTEMIC AUTOIMMUNE SYNDROME, characterized by autoantibodies, immune complex glomerulonephritis, and arthritis. In the present study, whether the farmed salmon that received oil-adjuvanted vaccine have autoimmune syndrome similar to adjuvant oil-injected rodents was examined. Sera and tissues were collected from vaccinated or unvaccinated Atlantic salmon (experimental, seven farms) and wild salmon… Autoantibodies were common in vaccinated fish vs unvaccinated controls and they reacted with salmon cells/Ags IN ADDITION TO THEIR REACTIVITY WITH MAMMALIAN Ags. Diffuse nuclear/cytoplasmic staining was common in immunofluorescence but some had more specific patterns. Serum total IgM levels were also increased in vaccinated fish; however, the fold increase of autoantibodies was much more than that of total IgM. Sera from vaccinated fish immunoprecipitated ferritin and approximately 50% also reacted with other unique proteins. Thrombosis and granulomatous inflammation in liver, and immune-complex glomerulonephritis were common in vaccinated fish. Autoimmunity similar to the mouse model of adjuvant oil-induced lupus is common in vaccinated farmed Atlantic salmon. This may have a significant impact on production loss, disease of previously unknown etiology, and future strategies of vaccines and salmon farming. J Immunol. 2008 Oct 1;181(7):4807-14.
PMID: 18802084

similar data in rodent studies...

Now could someone please explain why and how an oil-based adjuvant would NOT produce the same results in humans? I would be very grateful for a detailed explanation, backed with INDEPENDENT human safety data (not carried out and published by the manufacturer!), that includes the same types of biological biomarkers/immunological tests such as those performed in salmon.

Thanks in advance.

[Val from Ohio]

I'm getting to the point where people like Thomas H. Maugh don't even offend me anymore. He has drunk the kool-aid and really, truly believes that "official" science = good science and consensus = truth. And that we who dare even to raise the question of vaccine safety are nuts. I was like that too until the scales were viciously torn from my eyes. The sad thing is that is what it seems to take for many people - having your own child affected - to wake up and smell the vaccine damage.