(Editor's note: This detailed comment from Cia Parker about an earlier story, like so many of the 119,000 (!) comments we have published over the past seven years, deserves wide attention. Here it is, with some elaboration provided by Cia. Thanks, Cia, and all who take the time to comment and add so much to the richness of AOA's content)
I think a good way forward would be for both physicians and parents to read the same books, and then discuss them at a sort of book club meeting. Some states have already passed into law a requirement that patients attend an educational presentation by a doctor about the value and safety of vaccines. It would seem reasonable to require that physicians attend such meetings to discuss a book on vaccines which everyone had read, and would be more respectful than a lecture which privileges the physician's understanding of vaccines over that of those concerned about the rising tide of the vaccine-injured.
A discussion of one book which everyone had read would also keep it objective, so as not to get into "I've always been told that ... is a deadly disease, and the one in a million severely damaged by the vaccine is worth it," on one side, and "My child was healthy and normal until he got the ..., and then all hell broke loose and now he's ...., it would have been better to let him get ..., and what's more, ten children on my block reacted severely to the same vaccine," on the other. Talk about never the twain shall meet.
There are dozens of excellent books which could be discussed, most of them exhaustively referenced, with extensive lists of works and studies cited, so that doctors wishing to refute them would have to attempt to do so while respecting the rules of professional debate.
It would be great to discuss Judy Converse's When Your Doctor is Wrong: the Hep B Vaccine and Autism? Get the doctors' opinion on Judy's doctors blowing her off when her son reacted to the hep-B vaccine just the way mine did, with prolonged inconsolable screaming (he had severe bowel symptoms as well, which my daughter did not). Get everyone's opinion on the extremely high number of children irreparably damaged by the vaccine, many times higher than the number of children diagnosed with hep-b in the US.
A little boy whom a physician said had definitely reacted to the hep-B vaccine and had a severe seizure disorder, had died several times but was resuscitated. The mother said they had run out of insurance, and had no one who would help provide his round-the-clock, 24/7/365 care. Didn't qualify for Medicaid because her husband had a low-paying job.
Get their opinion on the safety hearing in 1999 at which Judy testified, after which Merck said it would stop making the hep-B vaccine with mercury, as of September 1999, and yet it continued to sell the mercury-containing version for another two years (causing my daughter's vaccine encephalitis when it was given to her at midnight the day she was born, without permission, and her later-diagnosed autism). Judy's case was compelling enough for the congressional committee to invite her to testify on it, and yet she lost her case in Vaccine Court, which is all about dismissal and denial and cares not a jot about the vaccine-damaged.
It's SO important to keep Americans from realizing how common and devastating vaccine damage has become, because what would happen to vaccine profits then? I would love to hear what the doctors have to say about that, and about its having been routine as recently as three years ago, maybe still is, to give that vaccine to newborn babies their first day of life, without even asking the parents' permission. In some hospitals. reactions to it became so common that nurses started carrying adrenaline injections around with them to intervene as soon as the newborn went into shock reacting to the vaccine for prostitutes and drug addicts.
Have everyone read Randall Neustaedter's The Vaccine Guide and Dr. Mayer Eisenstein's Make an Informed Vaccine Decision, with statistics on the diseases, lists of vaccine side effects, descriptions of the most important recent studies on the dangers of the vaccines, discussions of the most common serious vaccine reactions for each vaccine, and descriptions of about twenty true VAERS reports with their case numbers.
And then ask the doctors why they think the benefits of the vaccines outweigh the risks. I'd like to ask you (an earlier commenter on the original post) the same: is it just because that's what they always say or is it what you honestly think based on your own research? If that's the case, which vaccines do you think are so life-saving that they're worth the risk? At this time we have one in nine kids with asthma. The Manitoba study showed that if you start the pertussis series at two months, as is usual, it causes one in nine kids to have asthma when they're seven. If you don't start till the baby is five months old, it lowers the risk of asthma to one in twenty.
Other studies have shown that those who don't get the pertussis vaccine at all have a risk of less than one in a hundred. In the US, 2300 people a year die of asthma. So the next question is whether pertussis is so deadly that these victims can be written off. Sweden did not give the pertussis vaccine for seventeen years, 1989 to 1997, and Arthur Allen says that pertussis did come back there, and that 60% of Swedish children got pertussis during those years, but there was less than one death a year from pertussis, less than the death toll from reactions to the DPT had been.
Japan stopped giving it because so many babies were killed or brain-damaged by it, and immediately saw its SIDS rate plunge to lowest in the developed world, while it had been in the middling range before. I let my baby get the DTaP three times, then she caught pertussis anyway at eight months and gave it to me. And it was no big deal. Alarming, uncomfortable, strange, long-lasting, yes, but not dangerous. She had started saying a few words by 18 months, but as soon as she got the DTaP booster at that time, they were erased immediately, and she was diagnosed with autism two months later.
Dr. Jay Gordon told his patients last year that measles is simply not dangerous to well-nourished, healthy children, and that's the bottom line. Measles is good for healthy children to get, gives permanent immunity, a stronger, better-trained cellular immune response, the ability to protect future infants, and protection from numerous diseases and cancers in later life. Febrile illnesses also produce developmental strides in young children, a welcome change from the developmental delays so often caused by vaccines. I had measles when I was a child: everyone did, everyone I knew had had it, and no one I knew or ever heard of had had a serious case of it.
In the early 1960s, before the vaccine, the death rate from measles was less than one in 10,000 cases in children between three and ten. There were four million cases a year, because 99% of American kids got it by the age of 18. For most children it was a minor disease which they recovered from in about ten days. We need to have frank discussions about whether it's better to allow measles to come back, at least for those more afraid of the vaccine than the disease, or to continue disabling so many of our children with neurological and autoimmune disease caused by vaccines.
Mumps and measles are usually trivial diseases, but also good for training the immune system to appropriately strengthen the Th-1 response (vaccines skew it to an inappropriate preference for a Th-2 response, which can cause autoimmune disease).
We could all read and discuss Heather Fraser's The Peanut Allergy Epidemic, very dense and exhaustively referenced historical and present day analyses. And I'd love to see what the doctors would say about it. They've known for over a century that injecting anything into the body is liable to create an allergy to whatever injected substance the body reacted to.
When vaccine developer Maurice Hillemann developed Adjuvant 65-4 (65% peanut oil) he knew that it was likely to create peanut allergies where none had existed before, but he believed the risk/benefit analysis meant that even if it DID create peanut allergies, he believed the lives saved by vaccines which used it would outweigh the lives damaged or lost.
We could discuss what he would say if he knew that as a result of his judgment call, that the vaccine is causing massive levels of peanut allergies within a couple of years of its introduction in dozens of countries.
We could discuss whether society has a right to insist that, for the sake of saving a certain number of children from dying of Hib meningitis, all babies be vaccinated with the Hib vaccine, when it is also aware that doing so is going to cause one in fifty American children to have peanut allergy, and some of them die from it. And discuss how Hib meningitis rose to become a real threat to American babies by the 1980s. It was rare in 1940, but became four times more common by 1950; it is thought that the huge increase may have been from the introduction of either antibiotics of the DPT at that time. Children who had recently gotten the DPT in the early 1950s were much more likely to get a paralyzing case of polio in the subsequent month, so much so that DPT vaccination was suspended during polio outbreaks.
During the years when Sweden did not give the pertussis vaccine routinely, it trialed the new DTaP vaccine there in the '80s, and immediately saw a great increase in its incidence of meningitis in these children. Japan, when it stopped giving the DPT, immediately saw its incidence of SIDS and meningitis plunge. Vaccines weaken overall immune response, with unintended negative results.
We could discuss how everyone carries several types of meningitis bacteria around with them at times, usually in the back of their throat, carrying, transmitting, and exchanging them. Most adults have achieved subclinical immunity to several kinds of meningitis without ever having become sick from them. Women give the antibodies to the kinds of meningitis to which they have been exposed to their babies when breast feeding. Only those who are unusually weak immunologically get clinical cases of meningitis, but that weakness is often caused by vaccination itself.
Is it justified to damage everyone's immune system and prevent them from achieving permanent subclinical immunity, for the sake of preventing a small number from being damaged or killed by the disease(s)? And the meningitis vaccines are notorious for the many kinds of damage they often cause, including death.
Then we could discuss autism. One in 36 American children is now diagnosed with it (U. of Minnesota 2013), up from three in 10,000 in a South Dakota study done in 1987. Discuss J.B. Handley's article "Autism not really on the rise? 96.4% Impossible!" in which he discusses the meticulous South Dakota study which looked at the records of every single child in the state, to make sure they didn't miss any autistic children. A hundred-fold increase in 30 years.
I love the book The Age of Autism, with detailed, fully-documented evidence on how mercury, whether medicinally used or otherwise, has caused the destruction of the bodies and minds of millions of people, from the all-purpose calomel of bygone days, the Tylenol of yore, the use of mercury to treat syphilis (and it really did control symptoms) while it also eventually caused paralysis and dementia, the nineteenth-century version of Alzheimer's. How it killed children when used in teething powders, caused the first cases of autism when used as a preservative in the diphtheria vaccine, created new kinds of mental illness which for the first time, in districts of industrial pollution, exploded and blew the roof off.
Then Evidence of Harm, with detailed accounts of babies who regressed into autism shortly after getting their vaccines. One father called Merck, whose agent explained to him patiently that thimerosal, 50% ethylmercury by weight, was just an innocuous germ-killer sort of like lemon juice. Also detailing how hard the government has fought to conceal the overwhelming and irrefutable evidence of the harm mercury has done to so many millions of people. And let the people describe what happened to our children as a result of vaccination.
It would be fun to discuss these texts and hear what the doctors thought of them. Look at the big picture, and go way beyond a cut-and-dried "This many children died of --- in 19--, but now it's only ---. Indisputably owing to the introduction and use of the vaccine. Therefore everyone has to get the vaccine."
But we know ahead of time that the only possible conclusion would be that it is the well-informed parents who would have the right and the duty to make the final decision whether to accept or reject some or all of the proffered vaccines. It would be a GREAT way to inform the parents and the doctors as well. We could even discuss some of Dr. Offit's books, I've read several of them and have underlined passages on every page with notations as to why what he says is demonstrably untrue. So far Dr. P. has refused to publicly debate anyone from our side about vaccines, most recently Dr. Toni Bark. Why do you think that is?
Cia Parker is the mother of a fifteen-year old daughter who had encephalitic reactions to two vaccines which caused her autism and severe language disability. She homeschools her now, since the public schools have no method for instructing autistic students.