Cleveland Autism Conference 7/22 - 23 Just $75 with Buddy Pass!
UK Mom Who Strangled Son With Autism Cleared of Murder

Hilary Butler on Unanswered Questions about Hep B Vaccine

Part 1 of 3. Unanswered questions about the Hepatitis B vaccine

Hilary Butler - Monday, June 27, 2011

In the early 1990s, the American National Institute of Medicine (IOM) was mandated to enquire into the safety of childhood vaccines. At the time, my concern was Hepatitis B, because New Zealand was one of the few countries in the world implementing Hepatitis B vaccination at birth, as well as doing "catch-up" campaigns in children, adolescents and various adult groups. It seemed logical that what had been learned here, should be presented to the National Institute of Medicine. Dr J. Anthony Morris co-wrote the presentation, which will be the subject of Part 2.

The neonatal Hepatitis B vaccine was removed from the schedule and placed with the 6 week shots because "minor side effects could be confused with more serious Ill health." A study of the language is instructive...

On 9th April, 1992, a New Zealand doctor also wrote a presentation to the IOM. The doctor said that in the decades before Hep B was given at birth, their medical practice had never had to use antibiotics in any babies in their care, before the six week check, and first vaccinations. Neither had they seen serious and abnormally prolonged neonatal jaundice, accompanied by blood tests showing significant, abnormal liver enzyme profiles.

After Hepatitis B vaccine at birth was introduced, the practice had more health difficulties with babies, and was prescribing antibiotics in an age group not previously prescribed for. After the Hepatitis B vaccine was removed from the birth schedule, their practice returned to the "pre-hepatitis B" non treatment normal mode, and neonatal jaundice returned to normal limits.

The doctor then went on to say that after the Hepatitis B vaccine was added to the DPT and Polio at six weeks, the practice then experienced a significant rise in intercurrent infections with some babies going on to be caught in a cycle of recurring ear infections, and sometimes bronchitis, which progressed to asthma. The submission commented on the rise of the numbers of babies constantly coming to the practice with some infection or other, and the doctor offered the opinion that somehow, the Hepatitis B vaccine appeared to cause some form of immune suppression, and therefore the practice had concerns about it's long term safety.

The doctor then wrote to the Ministry of Health asking them to enquire of Merck Sharp and Dohme, to provide the studies looking at the effects of an at-birth Hepatitis B vaccination on neonatal liver function and neonatal immune system function. The Ministry of Health faxed the reply back to the practice, which stated that Merck had performed no studies of the Hepatitis B vaccine on either topic.

That's not particularly surprising, given that at that time, immunologists hadn't yet started studying neonatal immunity, since it hadn't seemed to dawn on the medical research community that there might be a specific difference between adult and neonatal immunity, other than what they saw a baby's defective "inability" to make enough antibodies. The reality is that at the time, no-one had any idea what neonatal immunity was all about.

(If this is your first stop by this blog, please read:

Vaccines and neonatal immune development

How a baby fights infection and develops the immune system

How Vaccines Become Cluster Bombs

Furthermore, if you read transcripts of FDA vaccine safety meetings, (such as this 2002 meeting) you will soon discover that contrary to the assertions that vaccines are thoroughly tested for safety, the FDA didn't even have suitable animal neonatal models defined in order to do basic research, and still doesn't, 9 years later.

The default study mode is still "mice" which are supposedly the "best comparison" vaccine researchers have with human neonates. As of 2002 the FDA still hadn't got it's head around Aluminium, because they consider that it was "IPSO FACTO - safe".

After all, as IMAC so glibly say, we eat it, don't we? It's only now that some researchers are detailing just how different it is, when you inject aluminium, as opposed to eating it!

Worse than the lack of meaningful study on the effects of vaccines on babies, or aluminium toxicity, is that, vaccine trials have always excluded any baby with any whiff of any potential problem. Which is ironic, when you consider that parents of fragile children will have even more pressure to vaccinate, put on them, than parents of healthy babies. Parents of fragile children are told that these vaccines are even MORE important for their children, and of course they are safe, and of course, reactions are the "coincidental effect".

Yet the mantra continues to be played out on autopilot, that vaccines are the best most extensively tested substances ever administered to humans.

With vaccine testing being this bad, and since we are told that vaccines are tested better than any other drug Big Pharma produces.... perhaps that explains why so many drugs succeed in killing and maiming so many people, and why the FDA is constantly having to take drugs off the market all the time.

In 2009, a study was accepted (then removed), showing what happened  when monkeys were given Hepatitis B at birth The results were not pretty, and mirrored exactly what is happening across American babies who are getting Hepatitis B at birth.

Parents who believe their children are "coincidentally" vaccine damaged, asked the question why it was that TOTAL vaccine schedules (let alone single vaccines) had never been tested in this manner before. It was no surprise when the study was pilloried from one end of the globe to another - after all, one of the names was none other than that alleged arch-criminal... Dr Andrew Wakefield. So obviously, it was a load of rubbish, right?

This year,  a Chinese medical study looked at what happens to gene expression and inflammation markers when you administer Hepatitis B vaccine to mice at birth, and showed that the Hepatitis B vaccine significantly altered liver gene expression, indicative of not just "inflammation", but subtoxic adverse effects from the vaccine including subtle liver injury.

Which is presumably why the said doctor had been so alarmed at the abnormal liver function tests, and prolonged jaundice in their practice way back in 1987.

Let's see how long that study STAYS in peer reviewed medical literature. Or maybe the provaccine people are hoping that it won't be noticed amongst all the patsy studies ghost written before hand, to snow storm the issue.

Here's the interesting thing to me. The New Zealand doctor's submission was rejected by the IOM, because they considered it to be of no relevance. There was "no science" to back it up - it was anecdotal.... even though, as the Ministry of Health's fax to the practice admitted, Merck had done no research into the effects on neonatal immunity, or a newborn recipient's liver function.

In 2011, we still have a situation where any country that injects newborn babies with Hepatitis B vaccines, is subjecting those (guineapig) babies to an untested medication.

The WORST part of these guineapig trials, is that because the vaccine has been hailed for decades as the saviour of mankind, and ipso facto safe, no-one is following any of these children to see whether or not the vaccine schedule is causing problems.

Any logical parent, would now ask another question. Has any other vaccine been tested to see what it does to a baby's gene expression? The answer is, "Yes". In 2008,  a medical study testing human blood in a laboratory, found that the DPT vaccine caused gene expression associated with asthma and allergy. Another  study showed that the longer a parent delayed vaccines, the less likely their child was to get asthma or allergy.

The resounding silence continues.

Has anyone done similar studies looking at the whole schedule as given to babies today, and compared those babies gene expression with children who have never had any vaccines? No. and they won't.

Which is why the nuked monkey study was so important.

In order for a parent to make an informed choice based on science - quite apart from any other conviction - you have to know WHAT question to ask. You can't know which questions to ask, unless you know what the relevant issues are, in order to formulate a logical question.

The medical community isn't going to give parents the sort of information (in this blog) which takes them to the point of starting to ask incisive, logical and important questions, .... which the medical community cannot answer.

The information in this post would raise very logical questions in the minds of ANY parent who primary concerns are, "Will these vaccines given to very young babies, cause the immune system to work in a way which is undesirable?" If those parents ask those questions to "Outreach" nurses aligned to IMAC, they will be told that there are no concerns whatsoever.

The stock answer will be, ".... of course not, and because of these vaccines we no longer see children dying of smallpox, or in calipers after Polio."

In 2011, the questions which most worry parents are, "Why do we see such huge increases in asthma, allergy, chronic diseases and autism?"

I was talking about the Hepatitis B issues with some midwives recently, to get a feel for their thoughts. One of them suddenly said, "It's still a real problem though Hilary. There are still a lot of young first time mothers who are shown to be carriers in the pregnancy blood tests." My first reply was, "Given that the vaccine programme with school catchups started in 1980's, are these carrier mothers vaccinated?"

There was a long silence, then I asked, "Have you asked these women for their vaccination records?"

"No" she replied.

I replied, "Well, don't you think you should? And don't you think that if all these women were vaccinated that you midwives should be asking more questions?" It's very plain to me that midwives don't even want to "go there"... and neither does anyone else.

Parents have believed, and taken it upon faith, that vaccinating their baby with the Hepatitis B vaccine, means they won't catch Hepatitis B, or become a carrier, and that vaccine is safe - and none of the health problems which their children have, are in any way related to the vaccine. Yet no-one has studied it - it's just been taken "on faith" that this would be the result.

On the subject of removing studies because of supposed professional fraud by one of the authors, none of the vaccine pushers like IMAC/Offit et al, have yet emblazoned across their website, the fact that the author of the key provaccine studies which supposedly prove the MMR has nothing to do with autism, is being indicted for far more serious "Fraud" than anything ever tossed Wakefield's way. Thorsen's articles are still much too useful to the vaccine machine, for them to worry about "taint by association".

They assume that so long as they don't talk about it, the provaccine parents won't hear about their hypocrisy.

There is one rule for doctors who threaten the maximum use of vaccines - and silence and protection for those who really do commit intellectual, medical, ethical and fraudulent "crimes", not just against the American CDC, but by proxy, against ALL parents as well.

One thing you can guarantee, is that parents will get no definitive scientific answers to any of the above, any time soon.

to be continued.

Hilary Butler is the author of the blog Beyond Conformity.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Joy Lamb

I am an adult. When I started nursing in a Care Home for Alzhiemer Patients I was recommended to have the course of 3 Hep B injections. I was in Devon, England. Within hours of having this injection I suffered a mighty headache and high fever temperature. i asked the Manageress if I could have contracted Hep B from the injection, she said no. The fever persisted with the headache, nothing helped. A fur coat to bed did not assist. 2 weeks later my doctor took a blood test. I had antigens for Hep B. The hospital sought to ask about my blood donation. Findings found that I already had a minute antibody against Hep B. Several weeks after a blood test revealed that I was 1,000 units antibodies against Hep B! I wrote to NZ Health Director Northland. He said that the Hep B injection is a synthetic solution. "You must have contracted Hep B at the Care Home". The high temperature and fever was as a result of the injection. Liver tests usually show unusual reading. This all took place in 1997. What do you think happened?


Cherry Sperlin Misra ,

If the mercury containing vaccines are being delivered in multi-dose vials, then there is also another source of poisoning to consider.

From what I have read, if a multi-dose vial was used but not shaken after each use, then the mercury will settle to the bottom of the vial. So the child who receives the last dose in that vial, could potentially receive from 125 up to 250 mcg in a single dose.

According to EPA guidelines (.1mcg/kg of body weight per day), you would need to weigh 550 pounds to 'ingest' 25 micrograms of mercury at "a level not likely to cause harm". So injecting a 22 pound baby with 25 micrograms of mercury defies all logic. But the very real possibility of injecting up to 250 micrograms of mercury into a 22 pound baby.... is morally reprehensible.

Cherry Sperlin Misra

This is a very timely article for me at this time, as there has been a newspaper report of 17babies dying in a Calcutta hospital in a period of 36 hours. Details given indicate that this hospital is regularly losing babies at a high rate. Once again, there is no mention of Hep B vaccine, which should be the first thing to look at in such a case. Our Indian hospitals use Serum Institute of India vaccines that contain25 microgams of ethylmercury in each pediatric dose. It is to be noted that most babies in Calcutta would be born already high in body burden of mercury due to the fact that many Bengali moms eat fish daily and have done so all their lives. Rivers of Bengal have been shown to be highly contaminated with mercury.
It is also the greatest medical disgrace to have high levels of mercury in pediatric vaccines, because it means that simple nursing error or manufacturing error will easily take the life of babies. What I refer to here is the possibility of the manufacturer putting higher amounts of mercury in their product and the possibility of a nurse injecting one CC rather than half cc into a tiny baby. this would result in a newborn infant being injected with the amount of mercury suitable for a 1,000 pound individual. Both types of errors could happen so easily .
Im sure that any manufacturer or nurse could confirm this.

Janet Levatin

I have been speaking out about the dangers of giving Hepatitis B vaccine to newborns since the time this unnecessary and harmful practice began 20 years ago. I have attempted to get parents to understand that it is completely unnecessary, as their infants and toddlers will not be engaging in sex with a carrier or sharing needles with a carrier. Not only is it unnecessary, the time frame of its use in newborns (the last 20 years) correlates exactly with the surge in autism. This is a shameful, criminal legacy for which the American health care machine will be held accountable in the future.
Janet Levatin, MD

Jeannette Bishop (JenB)

@david burd: Thanks for that info. I keep wondering what "health" authorities are going to do now that the those born in 1991 are adults and the most thoroughly vaccinated with this series are soon to be, and at least 20% of them may consider or come to consider this vaccine a major contributor to significant health problems in their lives.

@Benedetta: I first heard of the shot on the radio before I was married with children. They were celebrating the eradication of smallpox I think, and/or perhaps polio in part of the world, and declaring how this was just the beginning, and that they would begin a major effort giving infants this shot series on the day of birth, among others. I remember thinking this sounded like one of those potential medical disasters that one occasionally hears about, but I believe I expected if that would be the case it would have become shortly evident and of course public.


My son was given the 3part course of hep B vaccinations when he was born, plus all of his other so called immunisations. They have also been on at me for about a yr or so to have my 2yr old daughter done too, i've refused, and keep refusing.
My son has some quite odd and unmanageable behaviours, and presently he's on a CP plan due to this, and social services/paediatricians are trying to put it down to attachement disoreder, almost 95% sure.
I totally disagree with this and having to fight social services now to keep my children in my care and not foster care. My son has had a sedated ct scan, which apparantly is normal, we're still waiting on results from the O'Connors screenings for ADHD/Autism.
I've always known that my son has been difficult from a very young age, constantly on the go, running wild, fcan be violent and very spiteful, all in all a bloody Handful, and what with the stresses of social services, gets to me.
Do Ct scans or anything of the sort show autism in a child??


The fetal(in utero)and neonatal(newborn)immune system is
is immature and function differently (inhibited)in order to PROTECT the
the child from the excessive and destructive inflammatory responses during this important developmental stage.Breast-
feeding is the number one priority at this point to support
the newborn's immune system maturation,as the mothers antibodies and immunological memory passes to her infant,
also a healthy gut flora gets established.


Everytime that medical cliche comes up, even though I had heard it a thousand times before

The Benifits outweighs the risk

The time that this cliche stung the most was when it came form my best X friend. She was the class valevictorian - made very high on the ACTs- had a very high IQ. By concindence she moved back to our home town the same year I did! than anyone in the our area before. At 49 she had gone back to school and made a nurse.

She watched my son like a hawk, waiting for him to show his disabilty and her showed through her attitude on numerous occaions that her daughters were too good for my son to even lick their shoes.

No the risk did not outweigh the benifits in my case - how dumb she really was!


Raising my kids, I did not know what Hep B was?????
Then just as my kids or almost teens I suppose the ped's office started having signs all over the place.

The medical cliche is:

The Benefits outweighs the risk

well not in my case, how about yours?

Another thing; Boosters!
A famous vet is telling the world that boosters are not nessacary for the vast majority of animals after the intial shot and additional shots only cause furhter problems.

Sure enough the boosters are determined by the very few that are unable to build immunity the first time or second time or third time around.

So if it is life style that spreads Hep B then let the older people take it - like my daughter that wanted to be a nurse. But my daughter should have stopped at the first one knowing her immune system was what it was.

david burd

JenB, A few more comments are important. The U.S. CDC (who advocate shots for everything ad nauseum) says maybe 4,000 annual deaths are associated with HepB, with liver cirrhosis the major symptom (back to alcoholism); further the CDC states male homosexuals, drug-addicted mothers, and Asian-descent mothers comprise the "risk groups."

The HepB shot is irrationally dangerous, or more accurately homicidal, except to those pushing $Billions of dollars of vaccines and/or medical "authorities" such as Dr. Paul Offit and his robotic pediatrician minions.

david burd

JenB, Other countries by rote followed the U.S. initiation of HepB shots for infants but then stopped when it became crystal clear how destructive the shot is/was.

Sweden, today is somewhat typical and says the HepB shot is OK but only for mothers confirmed to have active HepB, then but a SINGLE SHOT at 2 months - NOT the godawful series the U.S. does starting at birth.

At any rate, annual U.S. HepB mortality is about 5,000 and virtually all are adult alcoholics and similar other IV drugees in their mid-years, and it's pretty likely the vast majority acquired HepB as adults.

Don't forget, immunization by vaccine shots is transient. There's 4 million babies born each year in the U.S; to harm even a small percentage permanently or cause death (i.e: SIDS or SUID) via HepB shots is medical arrogance at its worst.

Bob Moffitt

When the day comes .. and .. trust me on this ... THAT DAY WILL COME .. those responsible for administering the HEP B to newborn infants over DECADES .. will be denied any opportunity to claim their crime against humanity was simply a case of "good intentions gone horribly awry".

NON-FEASANCE is UNKNOWINGLY failing to do what is required.
MIS-FEASANCE is MISTAKENLY failing to do what is required.
MAL-FEASANCE is DELIBERATELY failing to do what is required.

Deliberately avoiding doing the research to guarantee this particularly vile vaccine is "safe" .. is MAL-FEASANCE .. AND .. WHEN ALL IS SAID AND DONE .. IT WILL BE EXTREMELY HARD TO DEFEND ONESELF IN A CRIMINAL COURT OF LAW.

Maurine Meleck

My youngest grandson had an ear infection at the tender age of 6 days. I'll neveer forget the hospital said he was the youngest baby they'd ever had with an ear infection. Anti-biotics at 6 days old and that was only the beginning.
Terrific piece. Thanks, maurine


Please make some copies of the study before it disappears
from the net.Well,well Merck is always in trouble.When the
monkey studies were done we found out the Hep B vaccine causes significant developmental delays.Now from
this new study from Huazhong University we are informed
that it is "subtoxic,causes subtle liver injury, also gene changes".Researchers believe the damage is caused by the aluminum adjuvant.The newborns have immature liver to detoxify and immature kidneys to excrete the toxic aluminum.
Have a home birth,stay away from hospitals.How can they inject your baby without your written consent???


@ Diane Farr

That's exactly what happened to me. I had explicit written instructions, plus both the OBGYN's okay and the pediatrician's okay, that our second son was NOT to be given the hep B vax in the hospital.

The nurses vaxxed him when I was in the shower, and came into my room with the form for me to sign, and an "oops!" (yeah, right.)

I didn't let my third child out of my arms the whole time I was in the hospital.


This is a brilliant article, and it's as confusing as is it is enraging,. Especially when you read it in the context of an FDA that honestly protects and promotes public health.

In my opinion, it's that very paradigm which continues to enable the big pharma industries. The FDA is nothing more than a front organization for these big pharma sociopaths, and their perpetual bumbling of important health matters is anything but accidental.

They routinely make egregious errors when it comes to dangerous drugs, but vaccines are by far their biggest and most successful crime.

The long term, detrimental effects of vaccines are no accident. In fact, they represent the foundation of big pharma’s most lucrative strategy of all. It’s called “creating patients for life”. Vaccines are the tools being used to create autoimmune disorders….. by the same companies who will later make trillions selling drugs designed to treat (… but never cure) them. And it doesn’t even end there; because all of these drugs carry lists of harmful side effects, some of which are actually treated with prescriptions for additional pharmaceuticals.. which themselves carry lists of yet more harmful side effects.

If you’re a pharmaceutical company, it’s an incredibly lucrative scheme. And it's anything but complicated:

- Healthy immune systems = healthy people
- Healthy people = no need for pharmaceuticals

And the best way to guard against healthy people with healthy immune systems, is to vaccinate the population as early and as often as possible.

Jeannette Bishop (JenB)

I don't know if many people want to go here, but I'm worried about the really small minority, I guess, although admittedly without data. I'm not sure that we are not sometimes assuming that the HepB vaccine at birth benefits outweigh the risks for the babies of positive mothers based possibly only on a tendency to err on the side of "doing something."

Babies given both the thimerosal containing vaccine and immune-globulin(?is that correct?) treatments because their mothers tested positive in the 90s, and those treated after the "removal" of thimerosal, how have they fared? It seemed like I read that the 1990s group was removed from the Verstraeten study because of they had very high rates of disability.

I don't hear anyone saying whether or not cases of liver damage have been reduced by the use of this vaccine, and knowing how they "looked" for the few cases to justify the use of Hep B in the first place (and I think part of the logic was that some mothers were probably getting infected too close to delivery to test positive, so some infected babies were missed for treatment and a vaccine might be better than nothing) and also knowing how prone the healthcare industry is to diagnose based on vaccination status, do we have data showing this vaccine has generated any protective immunity in newborns at all, and if so, has that benefit outweighed the adverse effects even for those carrying the virus?


I have a consent (NOT INFORMED) form from when Gianna was a newborn - I did not know there was mercury in the shot. I had natural childbirth without so much as an aspirin to keep my babies "clean." Under no circumstances would I have allowed mercury into my infant. Not even the "good kind." Ha ha ha. KIM


To this day I wonder if my kids were given Hep B at the hospital over our explicit objections. Funnily enough, the hospital's records are "lost/missing pages".


HepB at birth is the one that angers me the most . . . and even pro-vaccine people I know question that one now.

Pharma and "public health" over-reached, and they may be paying the price for it. Once parents realize the obfuscation, they start questioning the entire schedule. Despite massive PR campaigns, parents are still not sure (though most do vax).

As long as there is uncertainty it is much more difficult to enforce mandates.


One of the questions that never seems to get answered is this: If you can test every pregnant mother to see if she is positive for Hep B, then why not just DO THAT and then give the vaccine to only those newborns who have been exposed by their carrier mothers in utero? Why give the vaccine to every baby when it can be clearly established that most babies have virtually zero risk of acquiring Hep B (unless they are in fact sexually ASSAULTED at birth by a carrier)?

Other than the billions it makes for Merck and the Hep B vaccine-pusher, there appears to be no logical answer to this burning question.


The cycles of infections???

Before I pass away on this earth I would like to know ---

Is it that the vaccine that is inhibiting the immune system allowing pathogens to take over?


It is a natural immune response "there is no pathogen" and it is some kind of re- occurring serum sickness?

But then again I suppose it really doesn't matter now does it - unless it is some little virus like the XMRV that we could throw off normally.

Dr. Wakefield in his recent speech at Jake Crosby's university said that the Hep B was only tested for saftey for four days!!!!!!

And Dr. Wakefield was complaining at the time he found out - about the MMR that was tested for a short three weeks!

Ohhhhh the inhummanity!
Ohhh in the words of from the book "Heart of Darkness" Oh the horror!

Diane W Farr

Glad my kids are in camp this week cuz I dropped the "f" bomb several times this morning. I read that in one year 67 babies never made it home to their nursery. The quickest way to piss a nurse off in a maternity ward off is to refuse the Hep B and promise to keep your child away from dirty needles and unprotected sex. Do not take your eyes off your baby if you do not want them to get the Hep B. The nurses will do it out of spite and give you a smug "oops". I am shocked at how many times I've heard parents refusing the Hep B and they do it anyway.

Diane W Farr

Glad my kids are in camp this week cuz I dropped the "f" bomb several times this morning. I read that in one year 67 babies never made it home to their nursery. The quickest way to piss a nurse off in a maternity ward off is to refuse the Hep B and promise to keep your child away from dirty needles and unprotected sex. Do not take your eyes off your baby if you do not want them to get the Hep B. The nurses will do it out of spite and give you a smug "oops". I am shocked at how many times I've heard parents refusing the Hep B and they do it anyway.

Mary W Maxwell

I said "Jesus Christ" four times out loud while reading this article, and I am someone who never uses the holy Name like that.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)