Trolling Along

New report says 26 percent of Americans admit to being Internet trolls. I feel like I've met 25 percent of them! Or, as Dorit would say, "Please cite evidence for 25 percent figure. Study was not peer-reviewed." -0- Don't look...

How Mercury Triggered The Age of Autism

Conversation with the Authors of Plague

Autism Public Service Announcement

Canary Party Vaccine Court Video

A Glimpse into Autism

Meet Our Advertisers


Olmsted's Original UPI Series

  • The Age of Autism Tag

« Winner Watch Me Learn Autism Video Modeling Series | Main | "Unintended Acceleration" Vaccines: Sales Over Safety »

Weekly Wrap:The “Trutherization” of Vaccine Injury

AofA Red Logo Ayumi YamadaBy Dan Olmsted

It’s interesting – in the sense that a train wreck that leaks toxic fumes and kills an entire town of sleeping souls is “interesting” – to watch the mainstream media descend deeper into denial about vaccines and autism.

The latest round of tut-tutting comes in the wake of a report that Americans are prone to believe in conspiracy theories, in particular that the government, corporations or both are trying to cover up the truth about some health information, USA Today reports.

“20 percent believe doctors and health officials push child vaccines even though they ‘know these Chris Hayesvaccines cause autism and other psychological disorders.’”

Over on MSNBC, Chris Hayes blamed the recrudescence of measles in Manhattan (20 cases or so) on “purveyors of anti-science hokum” like Jenny McCarthy. “This kind of thinking, it spreads like disease.” The segment was dubbed “Anti-Vaccination Trutherism.” Psychiatrist Dr. Gail Salz, laughed off the vaccine-autism connection: "This is essentially a coping mechanism gone awry. It makes us tremendously anxious to feel that we have no control over the possibility that our baby could get autism, and to be life-ruining, it's terrifying. So that idea that we can identify something that makes us less anxious."

And this, apparently, requires belief in extravagant conspiracy theories. Well, what is a conspiracy after all? It’s more than one person working in concert, and in secret, to effect a desired and usually nefarious result.

Clearly, doctors and public health officials do know that vaccines can cause autism, because they couldn’t have missed the press accounts of awards in vaccine “court” for children who developed autism as a result of vaccination. Further, studies have found a much higher rate of autism and other developmental issues in boys vaccinated as newborns with the Hepatitis B vaccine.

There is a concerted effort to keep these truths from emerging and to replace them with the false idea that vaccines have been vindicated as never causing autism. That in effect is the “trutherism” right there.

What I find amazing is the credulity of the press – many journalists are too young, and some apparently too naïve, to run this idea through their Watergate filter. Here’s the truth: Public officials – and putting “health” in between those words doesn’t inoculate them – do conspire to create certain outcomes when their professional mission and personal reputation are on the line. And corporations are not immune, obviously.

I didn’t have to look far to be reminded of how complicit corporations can be in conspiracies. In the same Thursday issue of USA Today that reported on the health conspiracy beliefs, two stories caught my attention.

One – Toyota agreed to pay $1.2 billion to settle a criminal case involving its handling of those deadly accelerator problems a few years back. “Today, we can say for certain that Toyota intentionally concealed information and misled the public about the safety issues behind these recalls,” Attorney General Eric Holder said. “Put simply, Toyota’s conduct was shameful.”

I love this part: Toyota, to save its corporate scalp, agreed to allow a monitor to oversee its “safety communications, its internal handling of accident reports and its processes for handling technical bulletins.” In other words, the government wants to prevent another conspiracy to hide the truth about unsafe products.

Two – GM President Mary Barra penned an op-ed in which she fell on her stick shift to apologize for the mishandling of safety recalls, delays that appear to have caused a handful of deaths.

“Everyone at GM regrets that it took so long to confirm the problem with the Cobalt and similar models and issue a recall. We are deeply sorry for the lives lost and the lives it has affected.”

She’s deeply sorry, in effect, for a conspiracy to conceal safety defects over many years.

What’s so crazy about all this is that drug companies are not held in terribly high regard in the first place, and for good reason (Vioxx, four hour erections, et al). Neither is government. Neither is the media. Yet these three groups team up to treat those with well-earned reasons to be suspicious as “truthers.”

Measles is inconsequential in the fact of the real truth – that the autism epidemic is driven by excessive vaccination. But anti-vaccine truthers get blamed for every illness this side of spring fever, and probably for that.

Take mumps. According to the Daily Beast, “Thanks to anti-vaxxers, mumps are back,” the headline said. “What’s next?”

“Like measles, mumps is another vaccine-preventable illness that’s already back in the news. In fact, there’s an outbreak at The Ohio State University right now,” writes pediatrician Russell Saunders. But he doesn’t do much to help the headline:

“Like some pertussis outbreaks, the clusters of new mumps cases that occur every few years (usually on college campuses) can’t be pinned entirely on vaccine-refusers. Reports from the Ohio outbreak indicate that most of those affected had received at least one mumps vaccine (though complete protection requires two shots), which shows that vaccines aren’t always 100% effective.”

Jesus, Joseph and Mary. The reason the mumps shot is not 100 percent effective is that the vaccine manufacturer, abetted by look-the-other-way public health officials, hid the fact that the mumps vaccine has lost effectiveness. Its own scientists blew the whistle, and the case is now in federal court. We’ve reported on this extensively, but the bottom line is that Merck tried every trick in the book to erase the truth, finally resorting to fake data, and directly triggering outbreaks like the one at Ohio State. Yet the media, the government, and drug companies blame anti-vaxxers for mumps?

Now that’s what I call trutherism.

--

Dan Olmsted is Editor of Age of Autism.

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

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

@ Barry- This is the type of dialog that is helpful. I second those who appreciate your courtesy.

Yes- you are dealing mostly with individuals who are actual eyewitnesses to vaccine injury. That is one thing that the supporters of this blog (mostly) have in common. Thank you for your acknowledgement and sensitivity on that point.

Fact of the matter is that the scientific argument is over. Vaccines cause brain injury, and other lifetime disabilities. The only argument is about how often does it occur- and the medical/gov't/media nexus is fighting like absolute hell to keep a lid on that set of facts.

If I could make a request of you, Barry- it would be this- listen carefully to parents who credibly report vaccine injury. The parents who are on this blog fighting to be heard were at one time completely vaccine compliant and trusting of government health officials. Now, not so much. Ridiculing and belittling them is an act of horrendous cruelty and stupidity. They are sounding an alarm that should be heeded, not discredited.

You write: "The reason I and certain others react negatively to people who do not vaccinate is emotional."

You are absolutely correct- the rabidly indiscriminate pro-vaccine types (your words here demonstrate you are not of that ilk) are not basing their arguments on science. Look at the TV commercial for the shingles shot. It is unabashed, unmitigated fear mongering. A purely emotional appeal to arouse fear and anxiety. Ps- with no necessity for the usual litany of disclaimers that accompany DTP advertising because of VICP.

The shaming of parents who report vaccine injury is also an emotional response ("my god! that can't be true!") as well as a calculated tactic. Vaccines now require coercive tactics to bring up compliance because of another emotional response- parents are terrified of their kids winding up brain injured like the kids next door.

Barry,
Sorry to pull you back in but...
Can you provide a study that states vaccines are effective at any percentage? An Independent study not one juiced up by the CDC/Vaccine/AAP etc. or one like the 14 studies.

Also, you stated:
The issue is that certain diseases can be contracted by visiting certain areas of the world or by someone from those areas visiting here. They can then spread much more easily through unvaccinated children.

That's pretty convoluted. A health disease/illness free robust unvaccinated child is capable of fending off any diseases because their immune system hasn't been impaired as in vaccinated children.

Because of vaccine viral shedding, a know phenomenon the CDC is well aware of, the vaccinated child is the one most likely to spread the virus to a unvaccinated child visiting from somewhere else and that unvaccinated child can take it home with them. So if this happens who do you think the CDC/pharma owned media will write stories about and whine unvaccinated children are infecting others. The CDC/pharma has created the perfect conundrum to keep the masses in fear and confusing. It's about time this message is flipped and people need to start stating the obvious-Vaccinated Children are shedding Viruses and infecting Unvaccinated children.

Barry - the other Barry has been around for a very long time. We know him. His family has been hurt by vaccine reactions, and he knows it.

Yes, if you are not familiar with the area my statement would confuse you sorry.

Louisville, Kentucky is north west of Eastern Kentucky about 100 miles away from the nearest Eastern Kentucky mountain.
I was appalled that Diana Sawyer from Louisville felt it was necessary to tell the world that the kids in Eastern Kentucky was just as smart as the rest of the country.
Pretty close to the area to believe that

But you did understand the reference to Eastern Kentucky -- right?


If I lived in Nigeria would I vaccinate for polio? Absolutely not.

I'm going to try to be as concise as possible here. We don't know enough about our own microbiomes, the human immune system, and mother nature's design - the bigger picture, to be tampering in this way. It's playing with fire. We just now are beginning to appreciate how important foreign microbes are to our health and existence as a species. We are by cell count 90% foreign microbes and 10% human. We now know that our guts are involved in thought, that our brain tissue is not just in our skulls, and to change gut flora impacts our minds. NO ONE fully understands how this all works. To manipulate mother nature is foolish and arrogant. We are going on 2 generations of very sick children growing into very sick adults, and it's getting worse. Dementia before age 60, not just Alzheimer's, is becoming common. It wasn't this way 40 years ago. What's happening? Humanity is being destroyed by stupidity and greed. What can potentially poison us and our children? Toxic chemicals in the environment, toxic chemicals and viral and bacterial particles injected directly into ourselves and our precious children, genetic modification of our food that has been doused with glycophosphate (Round-Up), the tons of Round-up and other agricultural poisons in our air, water and soil that we ingest that gets into our gut and makes our body unable to manufacture and absorb nutrients (that's how it kills weeds), and last but not least, the blanketing of the earth with EMFs and RFR that is a trillion times what humans have evolved with. That anyone thinks that all of a sudden out of no where, humans can instantaneously adapt to wireless, is beyond my comprehension.

We are literally causing our own extinction. So, if I lived in Nigeria, I might try to move, or I'd try to eat pure food, stay away from industrial and agricultural chemicals and electrosmog, but no way would I take any vaccine - not knowing what I know.

What better illustration could there be than the Katie Couric business? She simply gives air time to a couple families and their experience after HPV vaccine and she reaps the professional whirlwind. She is attacked in every corner of the media - by people with no expert knowledge and a lot of big science rhetoric - while a host of "sceptic" bullies set up camp on her website led by CDC surrogate Dorit Reiss to see off and insult the multitude of correspondents with horrific similar experiences.

It is not only deeply repulsive it is, of course, also a warning to anyone else who steps out of line. What has happened is deeply coercive and has nothing whatever to do with science. If there were any stable benefits to the vaccine program they would not have to be defended in this outrageous and distasteful way.

Barry

But this is what I said:

"You think your position is practical, but actually it is dependent on a romance about highly defective institutions, state repression and media manipulation. You don't want people to report certain things which offend against your schema. For decades, whatever the benefits of vaccination, the system has been tilted towards abuse: with all the blue skies thinking in the world it is absolutely destined to go wrong and harm huge numbers of people because of the absence of real checks and balances. An aeroplane falls out of the sky and everyone wants to know why - a rare event these days because the risks that used to be involved in air travel were simply not tolerable. Meanwhile, another child suffers an encephalopathy which is "accompanied" by what the HHS HRSA calls "a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures" and it becomes another meaningless statistic.

"Let us be clear that the reputation this ever expanding list of mandated products has for being safe and effective is based not on any certain principle or observation, but on the brutal denial of reality - on people using their discretion to "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil". Everything inconvenient has to be air-brushed. We all believed in the system once. That it is why you are here lecturing us.

"An aeroplane manufacturer cannot get away with dismissing an aeroplane crash as "just one of those things" but that is exactly what vaccine manufacturers and health officials expect to do. The vaccine program is so important that no one must say anything bad about it: it requires a bubble of confidence or people simply will not jump into line. It has to be cocooned by lies, half truths, and mass complicity. Yes, it is an ideology. Our delusional politicians made over too much power to an industry and washed their hands. What they did was against centuries of political wisdom and our children have reaped the consequences.

"An astonishing and revealing discussion of the "garbage (in), garbage out" global manipulation of data can be found here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24021304/#cm24021304_2881
"

I am describing a system which is very good at passing over its own harms and you haven't dealt with the issue. You only have to look at media harassment of Katie Couric when she stepped out of line, or Jenny McCarthy when she was given a job on "The View". Or the deceitful campaign against Andrew Wakefield:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/02/cnn-runs-scared-from-the-truth-about-andrew-wakefield.html

It is hard to imagine anything more deeply unspontaneous. People are simply ridiculed for standing up for truth and fairness. The term "truther" which Dan invokes is a sarcastic weapon in the vocabulary of people who want lies to prevail.

You are skipping the hard part because I am describing people and systems behaving in very bad ways.

Vaccination is pushed with too many assumptions, directly stated and implied. One is if disease A is "bad," then automatically, vaccinating against A is better.

Here's one view of how complicated polio history is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twch-T-n8Ns
http://www.scribd.com/doc/125897205/Polio-Dr-Suzanne-Humphries-clear-slides

How many people think vaccines work in a large part because of the seemingly contrived polio/vaccine narrative?

I hope any generally pro-vaccine advocate is truly informed, but it is a frustrating process, for me now post destruction of one of my highly vaccinated daughters' health and subsequently becoming more acutely aware of the widespread non-health of her peers. It's frustrating mostly due to ascertaining how little effort has been made to get and convey accurate data, and to therefore minimize vaccine injury and promote alternative disease protection and treatment practices with better outcomes.

While I wouldn't blame someone for still wanting to vaccinate knowing what I know now, when someone expresses much confidence in the practice, I can't help but suspect that they haven't researched the practice enough to be truly able to give informed consent for themselves or their children.

Benedetta,
I don't know the reference to Louisville Kentucky. I don't think "Barry the visitor" is a good designation for me. How about "Barry that we don't adore as much as the other Barry but who's still a great all round guy" :)

Linda
Simple question: If you lived in Nigeria, would you vaccinate your children against polio? I think we all know the answer. And the reason that in this country you have the luxury of not vaccinating is because of people like me.

OK now I really promise this is my last post.

Barry, I have to hand it to you, you did stick around a bit and were polite. For that I thank you.

OMG I feel like Al Pacino in the Godfather: "Just when I thought I was out...they pull me back in." Ok I'm joking. John Stone: Obviously disease-free unvaccinated children cannot infect vaccinated children. But some vaccines are not 100% effective. The issue is that certain diseases can be contracted by visiting certain areas of the world or by someone from those areas visiting here. They can then spread to the general population. I don't swallow everything the government is saying, as you can infer from my comment about income redistribution (um, if the NSA is monitoring this thread, I'm just kidding about that... gulp). PS I like the word poseur.

Again Barry, you're position is based on assumptions, not on the facts. Only a thorough review of the literature, the politics, the history and the business end of medicine and vaccination will reveal what's really going on.

You said you didn't want to vaccinate your children but you did to protect them and society, but that others haven't done it is not fair. Because you took medical risks with your kids' health and future, others should be compelled to do that too or it isn't fair? No, you get to decide for your children, not anyone else's. That's fair. And if the vaccines that you gave your children work, then they'll be protected. If they don't work, then you took that risk for no benefit, but don't go trying to force your decision on anyone else.

In this discussion, you have been presented with several weaknesses and problems with vaccines and the vaccine program that you have ignored. You want to believe what you want to believe, which is a shame. Maybe there will come a time when you will look outside the box. I hope so.

Barry the Visitor;
I should use that one because we have a Barry here that we all truly adore.

You said you agreed with me. Enough said.

Then you are prepared to live a in the condition like unto - Eastern Kentucky then?

YOu are prepared to hear Diana Sawyer from Lousiville Kentucky declare that the kids - (I suppose on the whole) are just as smart as anybody else.

The sterotype is strong is it not.

Barry

"John Stone
You are not fighting state repression. Try advocating income redistribution, and you'll see what real state repression looks like."

You are just making up the terms of a debate you would prefer to be engaged in. It doesn't respond with any evidence to the things I said. Of course, it is quite easy to be a poseur having swallowed anything and everything the demonstrably lying government agencies tell you. Enough abuse has been hurled in our direction (and for pointing out the obvious).

Ok last post from me. This has been a really interesting discussion I must admit.

I understand that vaccines carry risks. I just believe that the alternative is far riskier. Along those lines, vaccination is more important in urban areas where one is constantly coming into contact with others as opposed to more suburban and rural areas. I also don't believe that parents need to vaccinate their children against all diseases, only the most serious ones like polio and whooping cough.

To address some of the comments here:

Danchi
Disease-free unvaccinated children cannot infect vaccinated children: Obviously. The issue is that certain diseases can be contracted by visiting certain areas of the world or by someone from those areas visiting here. They can then spread much more easily through unvaccinated children. Also I suspect the CDC didn't answer your letter because they figured out your position from the contents of the letter. I'm not making an excuse, for them, as a public agency they have a duty to respond to everyone, whether they agree with them or not.

Jen
I agree with you. With combo shots, there is no easy way to pick and choose which vaccines you want. I strongly believe the certain ones (hate to keep bringing up polio) should be mandatory.

david m burd
You noted that polio has been endemic for recorded time as a mild, passing affliction that morphed into the paralyzing version of it after the advent of toxic chemicals. I don't know enough about that, but until these chemicals are removed from the environment, what choice is there? In fact, I would guess that these environmental chemicals have a much greater effect on the rise of autism that anything else and I believe eliminating them should be where people should be focusing their energy.

Linda and Hera
I believe the risks of non-vaccination far outweigh vaccination risks, however there is nothing I could really say to any parent whose child has been harmed by vaccines. I'll just come across as completely callous and patronizing, which I am not.

John Stone
You are not fighting state repression. Try advocating income redistribution, and you'll see what real state repression looks like.

Benedetta
I agree that vaccines have risks and that vaccine companies have it way too easy and are totally driven by the profit motive. All pharmaceutical companies are. But that shouldn't stop you from using certain drugs.

samaxtics
You said that up to 95% of all polio infections are inapparent or asymptomatic. True. But risk assessment is based on risk multiplied by consequence. So in the case of polio, a low risk of 1% multiplied by a severe consequence justifies immunization. Actually now that you show the numbers, I see that vaccines are very profitable, but all drugs are very profitable, that's the society we live in.

Jenny
I don't think you can compare the effects of attenuated measles virus that would be transmitted from vaccinated children to unvaccinated children with the transmission of full blown measles in the other direction.


Final Thought
I didn't like the thought of vaccinating my children. I did it in large part to protect them and in small part to protect others. The reason I and certain others react negatively to people who do not vaccinate is emotional. I know that if their children lived in countries where certain of these diseases were endemic, they would vaccinate them. But they have the luxury of not vaccinating by counting on the fact that the majority of the population is vaccinated. Others have taken these risks, to protect themselves for sure, but also to protect the general population. And that's just not fair.

Well, now it looks like vaccine measles strain can cause vaccine strain measles infection way beyond the historical timeframe upon which viral shedding and vaccine surveillance guidelines are based. 37 days, instead of the defined upper range of 21 days incubation.

So Barry, based on this, will you contact the pharmaceutical companies to change their approach to safety monitoring? Right now they and/or the government only look at adverse affects for around 30 days, right? Should they extend the monitoring period? Do you think they should limit MMR administration to the summer months when kids are not in school yet, so they won't accidently be incubating & viral shedding around each other, since it's easy to control the time of vaccination?
Hmm, maybe this means everyone around you be giving you written notice of when their kids get their shots? Will you be keeping them on file? You'll need to have them all sign HIPPA notices. If you provide the forms you can copy them for .15 each. You'll want that notification, right, so that you can protect your child from any unwanted exposure from vaccine viral shedding, exposure to which strain may be more common than exposure to wild measles.
And of course, you'll need to provide notice to all your local grocery stores, preschools, malls, parks, neighbors, and friends anytime your child leaves the house for the first 37 days after he gets an MMR, right. Because your child is a carrier and transmitter during that time, too. That's a lot of copies you'll need, but you seem like you really want to get in front of this whole contamination idea. Of course maybe you could just quarantine your child for 37 days. Make sure you let us know when the government takes steps to cut back on this mode of infection and starts selling yellow signs to hang in your car window with crossbones on them that say: "Danger, recently vaccinated baby on board."

http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=20649

Barry the visitor,
“The point is to weigh the risks of a vaccine vs. the risks and consequences of the disease it prevents. If the anti-vaccination movement would take a less "all or nothing" approach, for example saying that they will not vaccinate their children against manageable diseases such as chicken pox or mumps but would vaccinate against the 3 or 4 serious ones like polio, I think you would find most pro-vaccination people to have a much more flexible position towards you.”

There is no anti-vaccine movement. No one is campaigning to remove your choice to vaccinate. There is however, a growing awareness of human and patient rights that threatens the profits of corporations and challenges the dogma that “doctor knows best”.

It is the medical industrial complex (which influences government policy) that has the all or nothing approach. What you see is parents and patients pushing back and trying to protect a fundamental human right; the right to make their own medical decisions.

“It's true that pharmaceutical companies make a lot of money from vaccines, but if you think about it, the medical/pharmaceutical complex would make a lot more money from treating patients who contract these disease. For example, the polio vaccine costs 15 cents a dose, but a polio patient's treatment costs can easily top $1 million over a lifetime.”

Wrong. Here’s what the CDC’s PinkBook says about Poliomyelitis:
“Up to 95% of all polio infections are inapparent or asymp- tomatic.”
“Approximately 4%–8% of polio infections consist of a minor, nonspecific illness without clinical or laboratory evidence of central nervous system invasion. “
“Fewer than 1% of all polio infections result in flaccid paralysis.”
“Many persons with paralytic poliomyelitis recover completely and, in most, muscle function returns to some degree.”
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/polio.pdf

So pharmaceutical companies would definitely not make any money on 95% of people exposed to polio. However a mandate that everyone be vaccinated receiving 4 doses by 4-6yrs of age with roughly 4 million births a year isn’t exactly chump change especially at the $27.44 a dose.
Private sector cost of a dose of IPV = $27.44
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-management/price-list/index.html?s_cid=cs_000

If you look at the auto-immune diseases that could be caused by vaccines such as diabetes, eczema, asthma, cancer and autism, you’re looking at a lot of coin coming towards the pharmaceutical/medical industrial complex.

Barry is the 70 percent.
How to reach the 70 percent and have them rethink that vaccine companies have it WAY TO EASY. How to convince him and others that vaccine researches are not being forced to do any new research to find safer ways of making vaccines or to be cautious of how many boosters can be given before it the vaccine becomes dangerous.

Text books in the 70s said a good vaccine was one that did not require boosters. That a vaccine that required boosters were considered dangerous. AND They gave the example of the typhoid vaccine in the literature on how dangerous and unsafe a vaccine it could be.

And of course with out boring all those that read my blogs on this before; typhoid vaccines were given in the fall of the year, it contained three different types of typhoid vaccines, required a booster four weeks later after the first vaccine, and - had to be revaccinated every two years in the mountian regions of the United State, where typoid was stubborn because of unsafe disposal of waste.

In which there has been jokes for the past 70 years of how slow, and lazy and unintelligent the people of these areas are.

One thing about it -- the 3 to 4 million that left these regions had some where else to go and President Kennedy and the rest of the United States sent lots of money to the area -- Now is money going to come in to help the whole United States -- I doubt it.

And it will come out in the end that every vaccine given damages the hypothalamus -- which messes up the entire endocrine system -- on top of that it makes us allergic to all kinds of food and additives, which gets us into inflammation/mitochondria; and all that means with heart attacks, thyoid probems and on and on.

Eileen;
My cousin and I had pertussis at the same time; and we had been vaccinated.

We whooped all year -but I don't remember feeling all that bad.

Barry; I do appreciate that you are reading and commenting here.
Risk versus benefit ethically is something people get to decide for themselves.
And you may see the equation differently if your family members were injured.
If someone loses a child to a death from a vaccine can you with a straight face tell the family "the benefit outweighed the risks?" if their child becomes brain damaged, can't ever speak again, can't provide basic self care ( and costs millions to care for over a life time) then who did the benefit outweigh the risk for?
Not for the child.
Not for the family. Not even for society, who has to care for what has been described as an upcoming tsunami of children becoming adults and needing life long care. Maybe your own child had a little less chance of not catch the flu, but your child like all of the U.S. is going to be bearing the cost of the increasing numbers of people permanently disabled from vaccines.
My son was born with multiple birth defects. My husband had the anthrax vaccine. Neither of us carried the genetic mutation that my son had ( they tested us.)The doctors asked us about any exposures we might have had; pesticides, cleaning products; anything at all. When we mentioned the anthrax vaccine, and the vaccine reaction where he was allergic to his own sweat for 9 months, they looked at each other and put the pen down. It is not recorded in his chart, so my sons birth defects will never be linked to anthrax. We found several other military families with children with the same birth defects.
A friend told me that in some army units, men are warned by their Sargeants not to try to have kids after the vaccine. Of course, its not the doctors talking about the risks and benefits. Just some of the men starting to notice what happens.
So ; could you tell me do you know anyone who would try and gat a theoretical reduction in risk for an illness that they may or may not ever be exposed to; at the cost of permanent lifelong disability in their child?

Benedetta, yes there are problems with the pertussis vaccine. Paul Offit even discussed this in chapter 2 of his book Deadly Choices. About 10 years ago I got pertussis because my childhood vaccine had worn off. I almost called 911 on my way home from work just before midnight, but instead went straight to my HMO emergency service. I think it was Augmentin they gave me, which did save my life, and I realized that pertussis can be especially dangerous for children. I think I agree with you though that the vaccine may be more dangerous than the disease.

Barry, I think you (and many others) don’t understand the seriousness of autism. My new primary care doctor cheerfully told me, “but autism is treatable,” and she pointed out Temple Grandin as an example. I told her about my 51-year-old son, who has written two memoirs with me (available on amazon.com or barnesandnoble.com). He is high functioning, but not able to live independently. I rented an apartment for him for a few months. Sadly, he was not able to manage. For example the patio door blew into the room in a snow storm. When I asked my son why he didn’t call me, he told me he was OK as long as he kept his coat on.

Barry

You think your position is practical, but actually it is dependent on a romance about highly defective institutions, state repression and media manipulation. You don't want people to report certain things which offend against your schema. For decades, whatever the benefits of vaccination, the system has been tilted towards abuse: with all the blue skies thinking in the world it is absolutely destined to go wrong and harm huge numbers of people because of the absence of real checks and balances. An aeroplane falls out of the sky and everyone wants to know why - a rare event these days because the risks that used to be involved in air travel were simply not tolerable. Meanwhile, another child suffers an encephalopathy which is "accompanied" by what the HHS HRSA calls "a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures" and it becomes another meaningless statistic.

Let us be clear that the reputation this ever expanding list of mandated products has for being safe and effective is based not on any certain principle or observation, but on the brutal denial of reality - on people using their discretion to "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil". Everything inconvenient has to be air-brushed. We all believed in the system once. That it is why you are here lecturing us.

An aeroplane manufacturer cannot get away with dismissing an aeroplane crash as "just one of those things" but that is exactly what vaccine manufacturers and health officials expect to do. The vaccine program is so important that no one must say anything bad about it: it requires a bubble of confidence or people simply will not jump into line. It has to be cocooned by lies, half truths, and mass complicity. Yes, it is an ideology. Our delusional politicians made over too much power to an industry and washed their hands. What they did was against centuries of political wisdom and our children have reaped the consequences.

An astonishing and revealing discussion of the "garbage, garbage out" global manipulation of data can be found here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24021304/#cm24021304_2881

Barry, Agreed - risks and benefits should be weighed - but by the individual who is to receive them, not by anyone else for that individual unless that individual is incompetent and has formally given someone else legal health care power of attorney. But there's another problem, in addition to the government attempting to mandate these drugs and usurp individual authority over one's body, and that is that it is very difficult for any individual (including MDs and RNs) to conduct a risk/benefit analysis because the medical profession in concert with Pharma and the media don't inform the public of the facts about any disease and about any vaccine for each disease. It is accepted practice for researchers to hide negative data and to only publish that which will make their products look good, and busy physicians in the field are fed very carefully packaged marketing materials designed to push products. Not only that, but Pharma now controls medical research and the kind of research that needs to be done, like a study comparing the health of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals, which is sorely needed, isn't done, even though Congress has asked for it. I think we all know that the results of such a study would not be good for vaccine sales and that's why it isn't done.

Like Toyota and GM with their cars, the medical/vaccine industry isn't exactly forthcoming about what the risks are with vaccines. They even go so far as to make sure that they distribute vaccine lots geographically far apart to avoid the recognition of adverse events related to any particular lot - to avoid disease clusters that can be traced back to their products. The VAERS is supposed to be where reactions are reported and analyzed, but it is a defective system that the government doesn't take seriously, so we don't even have a good tracking system to know the full extent of the harm that this vaccine program is doing.

You seem to be saying that it's ok to not take some vaccines but that others should be mandatory. Barry, there are people who want everyone to take ALL of them, without exception, those on the market now, and all 200+ coming down the pike as soon as Pharma can get them on the market(ka-ching).

Why don't I trust anymore? My own and other childrens' vaccine reactions, SV40 in the polio vaccine, the Simpsonwood meeting cover-up involving thimerosol (and that there is still thimerosol in our vaccines AND that the AAP fought to keep thimerosol in vaccines headed to developing countries - which is beyond criminal), giving hepatitis B vaccine to infants in the first day of life - all risk, no benefit to them (with studies clearly showing a statistically greater risk of autism in those receiving the hep B vax at birth), giving flu vaccine to pregnant women in any trimester (which would have been malpractice 20 years ago), giving flu vaccine to children less than 2 years of age when there is absolutely no scientific justification because studies show that the flu vaccine is ineffective in that age group, giving yearly flu vaccine to the entire population when there are no long-term studies showing safety, giving combination flu vaccines when there are no safety studies - well, there are studies, but they show that they are NOT SAFE - that the H1N1 component makes pigs and people sicker and yet the vaccination program continues full speed ahead, oh yes, and pertussis - the baboon study, can't forget the baboon study - vaccinated baboons harbored pertussis and infected unvaccinated baboons. I think I already said that. Sorry. And re the flu, how do they know that kids don't need to have immune experience with wild influenza in order to grow strong and healthy and to have greater immunity in adulthood? The answer is that they don't know. Then there's the fact that some of the new vaccines have (among other nasty ingredients) genetically modified cells.

You said that if it was about money that Pharma would rather treat polio than vaccinate for the disease. They rake it in on both sides. First they sell the vaccine, ideally for them, to every human being as many times as they can, then, they sell the treatments required from the resulting autoimmune and neurological disease and long-term inflammatory response that can go on for years.

I just want to add too, that with regard to polio...I remember very well that era. I also remember that kids at that time were sprayed with DDT by mosquito trucks passing by as they were playing in the street. It's hard to believe that people could be so stupid as to spray kids with pesticide, but they did, not just once but often. Some think that the ridiculous overuse of these chemicals like DDT had something to do with the devastating polio outbreak and the degree of illness that it caused.

Barry, in response to your statement that nonvaccinators are freeloaders, John Stone said what about the children who are harmed as a result of this campaign against disease? You said you want everyone to get vaccinated to protect your children. Do you realize that John has a boy whose health was permanently devastated by vaccination? What do you think your position would be if you were wearing his shoes?

All, Today's public are still ignorant ('especially Barry) that "polio" has been endemic for recorded time, a mild, passing affliction, yet indeed tempering an infant for future health.

Modern medicine termed it "infantile paralysis" - but indeed only a rare ill-nourished few had the "transient muscle paralysis" -- UNTIL the advent of toxic agricultural chemicals as documented by authors Olmsted and Blaxill and all their documented sources.

Vaccination advocates such as Barry need to reappraise their polio dogma. Fat chance - .

Good observation, Ottoschnaut!
@Jenny- what would happen of all these moms got together? I think we're starting to see this happen. Witness the comments on Katie Couric's Gardasil article. It seemed that a lot of autism moms supported them and I know I have seen the Gardasil moms support general vaccine concerns in places. It is a natural evolution and it all points to the fact of vaccine safety not being scrutinized enough. We need more physiological evidence that vaccines are safe.

In fact I can safely say that if I as a parent were offered the choice of Pediarix or not doing the series altogether (ie. no dpt vaccine) I would feel forced to not vaccinate.

In fact Barry, it wouldn't surprise me if they took even the regular dtap vaccine away and forced a newer combo shot like "Pediarix" (a 5 in 1 - dpt, hep and hib?) on parents. I am reading about this on some mothering sites and it is disturbing. I don't think you realize what parents these days are up against in terms of the amount of shots and the little choicein their delivery- all or nothing indeed! How old are your children?

But Barry, what do you think of the mandated American hep b at birth vaccine series?
I agree with you about the "all or nothing" aspect toward vaccination but mandated vaccination seems to be heading toward an "all or nothing" policy and all the combo shots also reflect this as well (ie you can't just opt to get measles but not mumps.
I think the pro- vaccine camp has "shot themselves in the foot" (haha) with their forced approach. Now they want to exclude exemptions. It is the "pro- vaccine side" that is more "all or nothing," in my opinion.

"Canadian Parents outraged after Shool Officials Vaccinate girl without Parental Consent."

It seems a girl from british Columbia was sought out by a school nurse and coerced into a vaccination. Her parents had not vaccinated this child due to concerns about vaccine reaction from a sibling who had previously died. The parent is livid, understandably so. If they would vaccibnate a child such as this, where the parents had consciously made a decision not to vaccinate, who wouldn't they prey upon? What about a child with known allergies to certain vaccine ingredients? They did not even care to look into this or consult the parents, but instead circumvented them by some "adult child provision" clause which deems parental permission unnecessary for 14 year olds. Police state? We're there!

Linda
I (as most people) agree that vaccines carry risks, some know (illness or death from the vaccine itself), some possible (autism), and some unknown that we will discover in the future (such as the polio vaccines from the 60's that you mention). The point is to weigh the risks of a vaccine vs. the risks and consequences of the disease it prevents. If the anti-vaccination movement would take a less "all or nothing" approach, for example saying that they will not vaccinate their children against manageable diseases such as chicken pox or mumps but would vaccinate against the 3 or 4 serious ones like polio, I think you would find most pro-vaccination people to have a much more flexible position towards you.

It's true that pharmaceutical companies make a lot of money from vaccines, but if you think about it, the medical/pharmaceutical complex would make a lot more money from treating patients who contract these disease. For example, the polio vaccine costs 15 cents a dose, but a polio patient's treatment costs can easily top $1 million over a lifetime.

Jen
I agree with you, people should be able to choose any vaccine they want their kids to receive, with the exception of the few extremely serious diseases whose resurgence can put the whole population at risk.

cia parker
It is true that the majority of people did not contract full scale polio before widespread vaccination, but a large enough number did get it to make it one of the most dreaded diseases of the time. So the risk of contracting the disease far outweighs the risks from the vaccine itself.

Not an MD
I don't know enough about the vaccines you mention, but I don't believe they are mandatory.

John Stone
My position is not ideological, it's practical in the sense that I want to protect my own kids from other people's actions (or inactions in this case).

Barry-your response:

Unvaccinated children are a danger to society because they are much more prone to catching diseases that are still rampant in other parts of the world. And since some vaccines are not 100% effective, they can then transmit those diseases to the general population.

Barry-my question:
Please explain how a unvaccinated child who is free of any illness/disease or virus, is healthy and robust infects a child who is vaccinated? If the vaccine works what is there to be concerned about? Please explain this scientifically and medically in details.

Barry: You did not answer my question in any way shape or form. That is the standard CDC/Vaccine Industry-pro-vaccine zealots response. It is not acceptable and an insult to people who use critical thinking and common sense, not to mention intelligence.

Now Barry: Please answer the question using scientific and medical studies, reports, diagrams, graphs etc. Whatever is available from an Independent verifiable scientific organization, lab, research group etc.

Just to let you know, I have asked various Doctors at the CDC via email to answer the same questions. That was about 2 years ago. After I received the standard we received you email yada yada yada, I've not heard back from them. I'm sure they would love it if someone would tell them how it happens. Looking forward to a REAL SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION WITH VERIFIABLE DATA TO THE QUESTION.

Barry,
And measles is a beneficial disease to get for the vast majority of previously healthy, well-nourished children. It gives permanent immunity, trains and strengthens the immune system to react appropriately to all future threats, allows women to protect their infants through placental immunity and breastfeeding, brings developmental strides, and protects against several cancers and degenerative diseases in later life. I had it when I was six, as did all my classmates and cousins. 95% of children in the '60s got it, 99% of army recruits showed serological evidence of immunity before the vaccine. The vaccine is very dangerous, often causing autism, bowel disease, thrombocytopenia, and dozens of other serious conditions listed on the package insert. Therefore, no one should be compelled to take the vaccine for themselves or their children. Even in Third World countries (developing sounds as though their goal should be to reach our pinnacle of perfection), many parents would rather take their chances with the disease than with the vaccine, for instance émigré Abdulkadir Khalif. Accurate facts and statistics should be given to everyone, but not even the highest WHO official should have the authority to mandate a measure that will permanently disable or kill so many for the "greater good."

Barry, I very much appreciated your honesty in mentioning you didn't think vaccinating against mumps or chicken pox is necessary. I feel the same way. I also don't think hep b at birth is in any way justifiable if the mother has the test done and no family members have the disease. No other country routinely does this. I also wouldn't give my children any HPV vaccine like Gardasil. What are your thoughts on the routine, widespread administration of hep b toAmercan infants?
I just don't think most of the medical people understand that most parents actually put a great deal of thought into this issue and the schedule has simply got too out of hand for parents' comfort level (too many vaccines and too many in combo's making it an 'all or nothing' proposition).

@Bob and Linda,
One of the things that scares me most about our future is the way we fund higher education. The very best colleges, especially the small private ones, are all meeting 100% of need for their students. College is so expensive that there's a lot of need! That sounds like a good thing until you think about where the money for those need-based scholarships come from. I've watched as one liberal college implemented a world and community public health major, adding a high profile vaccination supporting Who official as a professor - really no qualifications as a professor before. I can't say for sure, but I guess that dollars provided to the college were given with some "suggestions" on where the money should be spent. We all know that medical schools and research institutions are at the mercy of dollars from outside sources and their curriculum seems to be dictated by big pharma interests, but now I see that colleges are affected as well. Without the influx of money, they lose their ranking pretty quickly. It's probably always been that way, but I just didn't notice. Still, I think curriculum control is practiced much more purposefully these days.

@ Barry --
Well, then, let's discuss the recent case of the Neisseria Meningitidis B outbreak at Princeton University, shall we? The vast majority - close to 100% of students and staff took the first Bexsero vaccine. Then about three hundred less individuals took the second Bexsero vaccine dose recommended, perhaps because of side effects from the first dose.

Two weeks after the second round of MenB/Bexsero vaccines were given to the Princeton students and faculty, a Drexel University student named Stephanie Ross, who had just had close contact with students from Princeton (who were vaccinated against MenB not once, but twice), not only caught the exact strain of MenB circulating in Princeton University, but died from it.

The Bexsero vaccine did not keep the MenB carrier Princeton student, or students, from transmitting the deadly MenB bacteria to Stephanie Ross at Drexel University. It is clear that Stephanie's death was not caused by an unvaccinated person, but by one or more vaccinated Princeton students, who were likely vaccinated twice against MenB! This is a perfect and tragic example of how a vaccinated person can still transmit the disease they have been vaccinated against to others, due to what is in their own nose and throat.

Barry

The point you raise is not nonsensical - it is about the sinister matter of scientists synthesising diseases for their own purposes or the purposes of governments. However, you are still ducking the original point which I raised about your ideological indifference to the harms caused by vaccines. I emphasise it is ideological: it is about propaganda, and bureaucracies that hold legitimate public concerns about real damage at bay. And it is also the case that whatever benefit there is it as the expense of significant numbers of people.

http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/dunnweb/rprnts.omelas.pdf

Taximom2,
And you should read the book The Age of Autism, from p. 216 on, showing that rubella didn't cause autism until gamma globulin preserved with mercury-containing thimerosal was used to treat women exposed to rubella, causing the birth defects occurring in some of their babies to suddenly become much more serious.

Barry,
Freedom of choice as to getting or rejecting vaccines must be respected everywhere, even in developing countries. Nearly everyone used to get polio, usually subclinically, but enough to get permanent immunity. Those who got clinical cases usually had mild ones like flu. Yes, in spite of the Cutter incident (dozens killed), SV-40 contamination which has caused innumerable cases of cancer, paralysis from the Sabin vaccine, and tens of thousands of vaccinated children in India being paralyzed by polio (let's just call a spade a spade), if polio came back in my region, I'd probably get the vaccine for my daughter. But I would not force anyone in any country to make the same choice. There are just too many risks involved with vaccines. The same goes for all the other VPDs and vaccines. I'm all for educating everyone as to all the relevant known facts regarding risks and benefits, but after that people must be allowed to make their own choices for themselves and their children. The stakes are too high to decree that anyone MUST get a vax, even if it disables or kills him, in order to possibly protect someone else.

Ottoschnaut and Dan, There is no doubt that the most common way to dismiss a woman's point of view is to call her a nut or a slut. I don't think you can blame this on "liberal correctness". Michelle Bachman got plenty of heat from the right on Gardasil. http://www.businessinsider.com/conservatives-blast-bachmann-alarmist-hpv-vaccine-retardation-argument-2011-9. I really haven't met a person who doesn't believe in conspiracies. We have so many examples; Tuskegee, Watergate etc, etc. And then there are some theories that are resoundingly rejected (by most). For instance, the theory Sandy hook was staged and there was no shooting. The reason that vaccines and vaccine choice are not a feminist issue is that a whole lot of people think they are helping their children by getting them. That's why I did it. The problem is, is that most people think vaccines are safe, because their doctor says so. And doctors are usually pretty nice people. Especially pediatricians. I don't see it as a right/left issue. "Vaccines are completely safe", to a great many people is on the same level of 'truth' that "smoking is bad for you." Not too many investigative reporters are going to spend much time looking into the dangers of smoking OR the dangers of vaccines. There's still a lot of work to be done explaining a complex issue.....

John Stone,
The article you cite is nonsensical. It claims that polio can never be eradicated because the polio virus can be synthesized in vitro. Eradication means it is no longer found in the human population. Same idea with smallpox. The smallpox virus exists in laboratories, but smallpox is eradicated. That's why people no longer get the smallpox vaccine.

My new friend Barry,
I'm thankful for the discussion and for your civil tone. I do think you are falling for a scam though. I don't mean to insult your intelligence, sincerely, because those responsible for manipulating you are very good at what they do, have all the resources in the world at their disposal, and they are working 24/7 to keep their scam going.

You brought up polio. That's a can of worms that I haven't fully wrapped my head around yet. But there are a few things that I do know: It is a fact that the polio vaccines that were given in the 60's were made from monkey kidneys some of which were contaminated with at least one simian virus, called SV-40, that has turned up in cancers in my generation (born in the 50's) and in our offspring, as the virus doesn't know that it shouldn't jump from person to person once it gets into the host via vaccination. The vaccine makers discovered early in the vaccination campaign that there was contamination, first covered it up and then announced that the viral contamination would have no effect on humans. Right. A marked increase in cancer followed. That's all fact. There is an excellent book out, The Virus and the Vaccine by Bookchin and Schumacher. I recommend that you also get a copy of Dr. Suzanne Humphrey's book, _Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History_. Dr. Humphries is a nephrologist who after many years of practicing and seeing patients inappropriately given flu vaccine that harmed them, has spoken out. She also has a good article about polio, "Smoke, Mirrors and the Disappearance of Polio" at http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2011/11/17/smoke-mirrors-and-the-disappearance-of-polio/.

Dan Olmsted and Mark Blaxill also have an excellent thought provoking series on polio here on AOA http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/02/pesticides-and-the-age-of-polio.html

Finally, I just want to say that there are some 200 vaccines in development. The profiteers would like nothing more than to stir the public into a panicked hysterical mob demanding that all citizens from cradle to grave take every single one of them, as often as possible. This is fear and disease mongering on a scale never before seen. If you look at the Pharma business sites, you will see that vaccines are their hope for a better tomorrow, for their shareholders, that is. I hope that you will come to understand how important it is to always have the right to choose what medication, including vaccines, that you and your family will take.

"Does anyone know if Kevin Trudeau's 'Weight Loss Book' harmed anyone ?"

That's the argument that the defense made, but ultimately, he was sentenced for criminal contempt, not false advertising. He had several opportunities to avoid this outcome.

Barry

You haven't responded to the point that you are free-loading vaccine damaged children and their families. Somehow any kind of carnage becomes acceptable in the war against disease. To quote from the paper polio eradication in India by Vashisht and Puliyel.

"It was hoped that following polio eradication, immunisation could be stopped. However the synthesis of polio virus in 2002, made eradication impossible. It is argued that getting poor countries to expend their scarce resources on an impossible dream over the last 10 years was unethical. Furthermore, while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere was violated. The authors suggest that the huge bill of US$ 8 billion spent on the programme, is a small sum to pay if the world learns to be wary of such vertical programmes in the future."

http://www.ijme.in/~ijmein/index.php/ijme/article/view/110/1065

Carol

I think the pattern might be a bit different in the UK from US. There is little doubt that in the US the media are fundamentally bought out: in the UK they are intimidated and particularly so the editors

http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/12/leveson-inquiry-submission.html

It is just not worth the trouble. But they are incompetent and not doing their job.

John

Danchi,
Unvaccinated children are a danger to society because they are much more prone to catching diseases that are still rampant in other parts of the world. And since some vaccines are not 100% effective, they can then transmit those diseases to the general population.

Linda,
I agree with you that mumps and chicken pox are mild diseases of childhood and probably should not be vaccinated against. However certain people also don't vaccinate against polio, which is a devastating disease. And yes, those people are freeloading, because I guarantee you that if they lived in Nigeria where polio is still rampant they would vaccinate their kids. But because they live in the US, they are counting on the fact that most other people have vaccinated their children.

Not an MD,
I'm not sure I understand what you mean. I'm talking about communicable diseases whose spread can be prevented through vaccination, not every possible germ that a human body can harbor. And the reason anti-vaccine proponents are not getting a "fair hearing" is not because most people are trying to defend the medical establishment or the pharmaceutical companies, but because not vaccinating one's children is not a "personal choice" since it risks reintroducing diseases into society that affect everyone, not only the unvaccinated.

Maybe I'm giving journalists and pundits too much credit, but I think they often rely on sources who have lulled them into complacency by giving them good information, setting them up for the bad information they're going to give said journalists and pundits when it suits them.

Eileen;
Antibiotics will take care of pertussis.
I know - bad for a child under one month of age - the mother's immune system should be protecting it at that time - if all is normal.

There is something bad about that vaccine - and because of that - they have no bussiness putting it in the Hib vaccine as an adjuant, or adding booster after booster of the DPT onto the schedule.

Kapoore:

I love your Russian Roulette analogy. However, instead of one bullet many of us had two or more rounds in the chamber. Given the importance placed on vaccines in regards to world health and national security I'm amazed that such a 'vital" program is in the hands of private industry.

Yesterday I attended a film festival at Harvard on brain injury. Striking to me was the compassion portrayed toward family members overcome with grief.

My son suffered a cephalhematoma at birth. On page 611 of CG Tedeschi’s 1970 textbook of Neuropathology is a drawing of him in the newborn nursery. I contacted Dr. Towbin, author of the chapter on neonatal brain damage (pp 609-653), who confirmed that the picture was drawn by an artist in September of 1962. It is a beautiful portrait, except for the large hematoma on his head.

In September 1962 I also became the target of abuse. The birth was difficult for me too, and the doctor told me I needed a blood transfusion, but then I was discharged without any further doctor visits. I could not walk without support from my husband, but a stern nurse told me “It’s not about you anymore, you have a child to take care of.”

The hostility began when my husband asked about the huge lump on our son’s head. The hostility persists still, 51 and a half years later. I see the same hostility against parents today whose children regressed into autism following vaccination.

Autism is far more prevalent (and far more tragic) than cases of measles or mumps. Families of children with autism deserve at least as much compassion as those dealing with polio during the epidemics of the early 20th century. Diphtheria and pertussis vaccines may be important, but better to just get sick with chickenpox, mumps, and measles.

Looking at the "Disagree" column, I'm taking a little more hope from this survey (if a well-earned lack of public confidence is a hopeful thing, but you're not likely to fix something you don't know needs fixing...) than I got from the news reports:

https://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1835348

Forty-four percent disagree that "Doctors and the government still want to vaccinate children even though THEY KNOW these vaccines cause autism and other psychological disorders." I'm not sure how I would have answered this survey. I would want to say "agree," but I know there are a lot of doctors who will be THE LAST to KNOW this...but I know there are some who do know, so...

Only 32% disagree that "the Food and Drug Administration is DELIBERATELY preventing the public from getting natural cures for cancer and other diseases because of pressure from drug companies." I would be thinking, "not just the FDA," "not just natural cures," and "probably not just the drug companies..."

The headlines regarding this survey should have read something like... "Less than half of Americans trust their government, health agencies, doctors, and corporate media... "

Doctors, and drug companies prey on young families who are the most vulnerable people in the society. I am afraid nothing will change until Congress repeals the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act so that the injured can sue. At one time the medical philosophy was the more antigens floating around the blood stream the better--right?? But then AIDS hit and many of us realized that "high viral titers" aren't necessary so good. Maybe all those viruses (alive and dead), bits and pieces of bacteria, human DNA, and tons of industrial chemicals might not be so good to inject into tiny infants, or even adults. People leaving the pharmaceutical labs described how filthy the conditions are under which these products are made, and if someone becomes extremely ill from getting an injection of contaminated lot they can't necessarily get compensated. We may not want to play Russian roulette with a needle, and those who taunt us and put us down because we're chicken are like the bullies who want to push their peers into taking risks with drugs, alcohol and car racing. It feels awful to be taunted but worse to take a risk that doesn't feel safe.

Michelle Obama talking about free speech! LOL! Free speech is nearly dead at this point. The medical industrial complex has shut it down.

people who do not vaccinate their children are not simply making a personal medical decision, but are jeopardizing the rest of society,

Barry,
I am assuming you are using the CDC/Vaccine industry mantra of "unvaccinated children are infecting vaccinated children".
Please explain how a unvaccinated child who is free of any illness/disease or virus, is healthy and robust infects a child who is vaccinated? If the vaccine works what is there to be concerned about? Please explain this scientifically and medically in details.

Actually, its the unvaccinated child that needs to be keep away from a a vaccinated child who has been injected with live viruses and is contagious for 28 days or longer with the pertussis vaccine. You should take a look at this video:You will never look at vaccinated children the same!- Shedding Viruses-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKSeiAs_A4w

If anyone is putting people at risk, it's people who think like you.

A busy week in the mainstream media and crime.

Does anyone know if Kevin Trudeau's "Weight Loss Book" harmed anyone ? I would think most anyone could lose a few pounds by doing only a few things in the book. Of course he was telling things ... "they don't want you to know" ....which is certainly happens in the Autism community.

Michelle Obama / free speech in Beijing,,, Of course, this is the reason why the CDC has placed all their vaccine injury database information into private hands, so it is out of reach of the Freedom of Information Act and all those who would like to look at it...

The Chris Hayes MSNBC “Anti-Vaccination Trutherism.” / was just a collection of the "Vaccine Mafia" who do not believe anyone will ever figure out what they have done and continue to do.

Kevin Trudeau made a few million, Vaccines involve billions and now have done Trillions in damages with little signs of slowing down.

********
Of course, Toyota was also in trouble this week in the USA. Do you think the BILLION DOLLAR FINE will get passed on to their CUSTOMERS ???

For a few extra dollars they could set up a "Toyota Court" similar to the ...Vaccine Court... WHICH WORKS LIKE THIS..

*********
In 1986, Congress removed the product liability from the vaccine industry that was about to collapse with their "10 vaccines by age 5" schedule, mostly due to litigation with the DTP vaccine.

The DTP vaccine was found to have major faults, was removed from market, and replaced by the somewhat safer, DTaP vaccine. ( parents were correct on the DPT issue / Shot in the Dark / by Barbra Loe Fisher http://www.nvic.org/ )

Since 1986, the CDC toddler vaccine schedule has grown from 10 to 36 "liability free vaccines," which can be mandated in all 50 states.

A 75 cent tax per vaccine is now placed into a Vaccine Injury Fund. A "vaccine court" in Washington DC was created to hear all vaccine injury cases. Parents are expected to travel to Washington, hire attorneys and pay for experts to testify for their case. American parents, not the CDC, have to prove that a vaccine is unsafe.


Since 1990, nearly 2.8+ billion dollars has been paid out to vaccine injured children by the Vaccine Court. This could indicate a problem with the CDC vaccine schedule.

Anyone who might see a problem with the above situation would be considered "Anti-Vaccine..."

The "CDC vaccine court" is similar to having a single, separate "Toyota court" in Washington D.C. where the same (accelerator) issue would have to be proven over and over again by each Toyota owner.

Even after a MILLION CRASHES.

And also, to Barry who is visiting,
It could be argued that those who vaccinate against measles, mumps and chicken pox endanger all of society by not allowing children to tackle these usually mild diseases in childhood and developing life long immunity. Those born before 1957 are all considered to be immune to measles because all had wild measles. Vaccination does not produce the same type of immunity if it induces immunity at all. So the immunity can wear off during pregnancy and at any time in adulthood when these diseases can potentially be more serious. People are told to get boosters, but exactly when immunity wears off isn't an exact science. It was much safer for society before 1957 when every child developed natural immunity. Now you have a generation of adults born after 1957 whose immunity to these diseases is unknown. We also know from recent studies with baboons that those who were vaccinated with pertussis were able to harbor pertussis and infect other baboons. People who get the shingles vaccine, the up your nose flu vaccine, and the oral polio vaccine, are all infectious after receiving those vaccines. So, no, people who do not vaccinate are not free loading on those who do.

Hi Barry,
Laughing off other people's vaccine-poisoned babies is cause to revoke an MDs license I would think - especially a psychiatrist's license.

Hi Barry who is visiting,
The simplistic argument that "people who do not vaccinate their children are not simply making a personal medical decision, but are jeopardizing the rest of society, in effect free loading off the fact that most others are immunized to keep their children safe" does not hold water for many reasons. First, keeping children safe via the act of vaccination is a highly flawed assumption, since many are immediately injured by vaccination, the full cost of vaccination to the individual in terms of long term adverse side effects are unknown, and the cost to society of tampering with everyone's immune system so early, extensively and recklessly is also unknown. The fact is that it's all a big experiment, Barry. Oh, and how could I forget, that the actual effectiveness of each vaccine is questionable and it is known that some even make people sicker. The H1N1 vaccine is one example. There are very good studies that show that people who get the H1N1 vaccine got sicker than those who didn't. Imagine that.

Now, if given all the information, you decide that you want to go ahead and inject you and yours with every pharmaceutical offered to you under the promise that it will make you healthy, you go right ahead. But I reserve the right to decide for me and mine what we will and will not accept. And it could just turn out that the refusers will be the ones to save the human race, because they didn't allow themselves to be contaminated and altered.

Or perhaps Barry society is freeloading on the children that get injured by vaccines and their families. One thing is certain they are not getting a fair hearing, such is the prejudice, deceit, corruption, denialism and sheer empty-headedness behind the vaccine program.

PS there are two Barrys posting this evening, or perhaps one of them has used the name to confuse people.

@ Barry--
Surely you cannot make the claim that people who do not vaccinate themselves or their children are free-loaders. That would imply that all those who are vaccinated are not silently harboring the very types of germs they are being vaccinated against. That is a ridiculous and outrageously incorrect claim.

Have you ever had the pathogens up your nose and down your throat analyzed to see what's festering within you, personally, Barry? Do you have any idea what bacteria and viruses you--Barry-- you-- are carrying up your nose and in your mouth that might infect others right now?

Do you understand that you, yourself, are an enormous reservoir of pathogens, and that you, regardless of how many or how few vaccines you take, are capable of killing an immuno-compromised individual all by your lonesome, without any help from an "unvaccinated" person if you sneeze on one, or spit when you speak to one, or kiss or hug one such person, or even just neglect to wash your hands prior to shaking theirs? Do you get that? It doesn't seem that you do.

You, Barry, may be a silent, asymptomatic carrier of the dreaded Neisseria Meningitis, like 15% of the population is at any given time. Or, you may be a carrier of MRSA, right up your very nose, or any other pathogen. Do you know that if you smoke cigarettes, you are more likely to secretly harbor Meningitis? Hope you don't smoke. You are a filthy, dirty, germy person, Barry, no matter how many vaccines you take. We all are. Sorry if the truth hurts you. Now go take shower, if you think it will make you feel better. It won't make you less infectious internally, but you may smell a bit nicer for a while.

The reason that the ant-vaccine movement is attacked is not simply a media or corporate conspiracy, but because it is clear that the people who do not vaccinate their children are not simply making a personal medical decision, but are jeopardizing the rest of society, in effect free loading off the fact that most others are immunized to keep their children safe.

Here Here, Ottoschnaut!
There is a good documentary out there called MissRepresentation which is all about the various types of discrimination & stereotypical portrayal against women in the media & elsewhere and the organization does great things.
I keep wondering if the makers and supporters of the film have ever stopped to wonder what happens at the intersection of such embedded discrimination and the medical industry, a concept that wasn't addressed in the film.

For instance, why has so much money gone into the promotion of the HPV vaccinations despite their rate of injury and for a disease that only ranks 15 or so for cause of death in the U.S.? (And the other population targeted is the homosexual population)

How is it possible that we have spent decades and billions of dollars on breast cancer, using technology that causes breast cancer, and the only solutions to come have been defiling surgery that makes a woman's chest look like a man's or debilitating chemo that makes a woman bald (like so many dehumanized bodies in a concentration camp), while the simple risk reduction effects of hormone D3 sit silently by.

What about the new rise of "hysteria" and "psychosomatic" and its insidious application to women when it comes to medical conditions, and the long slow fight of those with chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia, even in the face of sound scientific hypothesis and research showing possible medical origins? Why to the laws of physics get thrown out the window when it comes to these issues but not others, and who is doing the throwing?

And what happens to the families when a child suffers from serious vaccine injuries? With women still earning less than men most of the time and a dearth of medical practitioners (a male dominated industry) willing to step out on a limb to claim and treat it as medical rather than psychological issue, I suspect that women who would normally be working are driven back into the house and out of the financial arena and "main stream" society simply from the need to preserve the higher earned income in the family. Wham, that will put an end to women's lib pretty fast, because although the desire to earn and contribute to society is strong, the instinct to protect and heal your own offspring may be even stronger. Autism can handily put an end to the dual income financial stability that emerged in concert with the expansion of voting rights, adding another nail to the coffin of the middle class, a class that was born out of those rights. Not that the elite would blink an eye, as without a middle class income to advocate for the lower class income, from which many middle income people emerged in the 20th century, the 1% will remain unchallenged and unworried. It's no wonder that the conservatives aren't stepping up to the plate more often to fight for those "parental rights" they claim to value so much, when it is woven within so many other issues that they have no intention of supporting and even take steps to block. And the liberals have allowed themselves to be highjacked by any stray conservative that walks in the room waving a checkbook as long as they're disguised in jeans and an untucked shirt, even as the check writer tells them Rachel Carson (a female) was a nobody.

What would happen if all the autism moms and ADD/ADHD moms and Lyme moms and Gardasil moms, etc joined the National Organization of Women (regardless of their stance on abortion or political party) and the League of Women Voters and made "Freedom FROM medical intervention" as big an issue as freedom of access TO medical intervention, bringing to light the abomination against the progress of the female role in society that autism has become?

What would happen if all those autism dads joined those organizations, too, to bring autism as a women's rights issue, to the attention of NOW and the League of Women Voters?

Womens' health freedom does not just encompass the right to decide whether or not to terminate a pregnancy, it includes the right to the health approach of one's choice, and right to freedom from forced medical intervention, and the right to control the health of one's offspring - and they all affect the female's ability to work and take part in the political system. But as autism parents know, it's hard to be politically active when the child that should mature into a certain level of self sufficiency instead remains or reverts into complete dependency.

This right to control one's own body should not be compartmentalized, but it is, and those in power strive to keep it that way. It is the exact same right that allowed for the end to slavery, that demands justice against pedophiles and rapists and kidnappers, that gives all adults the right to vote & control the laws that control our boundaries so that we all may coexist, that allows for conscientious military objection, that allows the right to be gay, and that demands limits to environmental contamination when it impinges on one's health and property and joint resources. People do not have the right to force others to do with their bodies something they don't want to do. But politicians do their best to keep these issues separated, despite the fact that they are the same issue over and over and over again.

In the end, I'll be surprised if the health freedom groups, LGBT groups, women's rights groups, parental rights groups,anti-war groups, minority rights groups, and environmental rights groups, and even religious rights groups don't end up forming some kind of issues trade union to expand their bases of influence. It could happen, if only they can each see beyond the blinders that the most powerful and elite have so effectively donated that they unwittingly don when they advocate in their windowless silos.

Psychiatrist Dr. Gail Salz, laughed off the vaccine-autism connection: "This is essentially a coping mechanism gone awry. It makes us tremendously anxious to feel that we have no control over the possibility that our baby could get autism, and to be life-ruining, it's terrifying. So that idea that we can identify something that makes us less anxious."

******************

Since psychiatrists aren't really doctors, I generally ignore them and anything that have to say.

But I'm pretty sure this narcissist will be reading these comments, because …. you know, thats what narcissists do. And I'd like to point out to her , that laughing off other people's vaccine-poisoned babies, is a MUCH better example of a coping mechanism gone terribly awry.

Another GREAT Weekly Wrap, Dan. Thank you.

20 percent is disappointing.
But I have to look at my own slowness - of understanding what vaccines were doing.

I had my nose rubbed in it.

Dr. Poling basically said the same thing -- he would never have believed it unless he had seen it himself.

I meet one of my old teachers this week at the doctor's office when I took my Mother in. I went to school with her daughter. They have had horrible trouble with her grandson - this past year - to the point it ended up in the local paper and prison.

She was looking for answers of why?

And I gave answers - she will have to think on it long and hard - and will she believe it in the end?
I don't know.

She said her grandson was so talented (that is what my old high school chemist teacher said about his grandson too). Above average - seems to be something bipolar people are.

It is a double blow - I think -- just as hard as the blow of atuism -- to have a child good in school and then suddenly the teenage years and the 20s - you end up with mood disorders (only you are not really sure of that either), and drugs.

Although I will say while raising an above average child - at least while you are raising them you have this calm, serene, relief in our chest that this one will succeed in life and be alright -- and you have that feeling for at least 16 or 20 years sort of reprive I suppose.

I told my old teacher that autism was the very tip of the iceberg of lay down beneath.

ottoschnaut, you raise a very interesting question.

I wonder if things play out differently for fathers reporting adverse reactions to vaccines, as opposed to mothers, who are nearly always characterized as over-protective, over-reacting, hysterical fools by doctors, whether they report vaccine reactions or not.

Is there a way to track this?

Dan

Conspiracy is a prosecutable offence. I suppose the traditional alleged "conspiracy theorist" is someone who makes wild connections, but what happens if the connections are plausible or even largely established? It reminds me of Groucho avoiding trying to pay his employees (in which film did he have any?). "If I paid you, you'd be wage slaves. Do you want to be wage slaves?" One thing which is going on is misappropriation of terminology. In the film the good people only wanted to be paid. We want an end to the screen of lies protecting hit and run mass vaccination. It is perfectly reasonable.

John

Yes Bob,
And the training of all future journalists begins on day 1 of kindergarten, or earlier, as soon as the public school system can get their hands on them. They are trained in what and how to think, that they are to accept ideas from above, be tested on them and incorporate them into their consciousness, that those who don't are defective and are to be shunned. The molding of a Chris Hayes begins just after he's out of diapers. Thirteen years later wouldn't be as effective.

"But the core experience of the last decade isn’t just political dysfunction. It’s something much deeper and more existentially disruptive: the near total failure of each pillar institution of our society. The financial crisis and the grinding, prolonged economic immiseration it has precipitated are just the most recent instances of elite failure, the latest in an uninterrupted cascade of corruption and incompetence."

Written by non-other than Chris Hayes in Twilight of the Elites: America after Meritocracy.

The recent and escalating tirades against Jenny McCarthy and other females who publicly discuss vaccine safety have to be called out for what they are- liberally correct slut shaming. Women are viciously attacked and ridiculed- men are left alone (apologies to Andrew Wakefield- some exceptions to the general rule). The nexus of this deplorable practice is the Slate-Wash Post-Daily Beast Bill Gates boot licking crowd.

Katie Couric, the former anchor of CBS Evening News fer Christ's sake, is called "the next Jenny McCarthy" for daring to do a story on vaccine injury. Her years of experience as a tough, fair minded journalist anchoring Today Show as well as CBS are instantly trumped by her gender and blond hair when she does a vaccine injury story. The leftie blogosphere launched a coordinated attack on Couric for being a female- the facts of her story were not challenged. The lefties kind of forgot to report that Japan, France, and Israel governments have all withdrawn recommendation for HPV series due to adverse reactions.

Dr. Diane Harper got tthe same business after the Couric story She is blond, so damn her credentials and let the slut shaming begin! Lucija Tomljenovic gets publicly ridiculed but her co-author Chris Shaw is strangely left alone- see a pattern here?

The difference in how men are treated is striking. Consider what happened to Morley Safer back in 1976 when he did the CBS 60 Minutes segment on swine flu causing over 40,000 Americans to become ill. Nothing happened. No media stories of his erectile dysfunction and tinfoil hats. His vaccine injury story was taken seriously.

When it comes to other women's issue- this same leftie clique rushes to the defense. The Commonwealth of Virginia tried to impose state mandated, medically unnecessary transvaginal probes on women seeking abortion services- the alarm bells went off and the earnest hand wringing began. The term "state sponsored rape" was actually floated. Wonder where Isaac Hayes stands in that issue?

Unfortunately the rape analogy is only too appropriate. A few hundred thousands women take their kids to the doctor and accept the vaccine schedule. When these same women report eyewitness accounts of vaccine injury, they are immediately transformed into hysterical, ignorant, inept caricatures who are "asking for" a vaccine injury diagnosis to cover up their own genetic or other shortcomings....they are slut shamed for daring to speak out.

All the fuss in the press about measles and mumps is meant to distract us from the logical fallacy of: "take this vaccine that doesn't work so well, in order to protect other children for whom it didn't work."

"Oh, and please ignore the fact that congenital rubella syndrome--one of the only accepted causes of autism--has been replaced with vaccine-induced autism."

Meanwhile, Michelle Obama is speaking about free speech in Beijing:

In a 15-minute speech she delivered before a mix of American students studying at Peking University and Chinese students who have studied in the United States, she called on young people to be “citizen diplomats” and stressed the importance of the free flow of ideas over the Internet and through the media.

“That's how we discover the truth,” she said to the crowd of about 200, which included a handful of officials from major universities in the U.S. and China. “That’s how we learn what’s really happening in our communities, our country and our world. And that’s how we decide which values and ideas we think are best — by questioning and debating them vigorously.”

--http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/michelle-obama-touts-cultural-exchange-and-free-speech/2014/03/22/ef138078-e4af-4bf8-9442-0a979b147bb5_story.html

"Truther" is another term of abuse and ad hominem used by liars and bullies to escape having to deal with substance.

“20 percent believe doctors and health officials push child vaccines even though they ‘know these vaccines cause autism and other psychological disorders.’”

You know what they really fear?

That another 60% suspect that the 20% are right.

Dan writes:

"What I find amazing is the credulity of the press – many journalists are too young, and some apparently too naïve, to run this idea through their Watergate filter."

I respectfully disagree that youth and naivite are responsible for the disappearance of honest, hard-working, courageous "investigative reporters" .. as evidenced by recent resignation of Sharyl Attkison from CBS news.

Unfortunately, I think those graduating with degrees in journalism are now trained in what is called "advocacy journalism" .. which means .. the profession of journalism has adopted the premise that most divisive issues .. be they .. social, economic or political .. have only ONE side .. therefor .. presenting BOTH sides in a "fair and balanced" manner .. is considered UNPROFESSIONAL.

In my humble opinion .. any justification for abandoning "fair and balanced" in favor of "advocacy for ONE SIDE" .. can be found in Orwell's "some pigs ..(issues and the people reporting on them).. are more equal than others".

I suspect the Founding Fathers would never have guaranteed a "freedom of the press" .. had they known it would WILLINGLY become so corrupted by powerful interests .. both government as well as corporate.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

Working...
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.

Working...

Post a comment

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