Just Breathe
Dachel Wake Up: Texas Monthly Goes After DA Nico LaHood

Vaccines: Elimination Mandatory!

AofA Op EdNOTE: We encourage you to share your thoughts on Laura's point of view in the comments and to write your own opinion piece and submit it to us for review.  Do you think no one should ever be allowed to vaccinate, or that everyone should always vaccinate, or do you fall somewhere in between?  Send to Olmsted.Dan@gmail.com.  

By Laura Hayes

Why are vaccines a legally permitted medical option? They shouldn’t be.

In a country whose citizens pay trillions of dollars annually to fund government regulatory agencies charged with protecting the public and policing multiple industries, including the pharmaceutical industry, vaccines should be long gone. It is past time to mandate their demise.

Vaccines are medical procedures that never should have been approved. Here’s why:

  • Not one vaccine has ever been tested according to the scientific gold standard, that of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Yes, you read that correctly, not one.

  • The myriad combinations in which vaccines are administered have never been tested, either. For an infant at a “catch up” appointment, meaning they missed a “well-baby” appointment at which vaccines would have been administered, that can mean receiving up to 13 vaccines containing 13 different diseases, at once, injected via 8 separate needles. That is the equivalent of taking up to 13 medications at once whose interactions have never been studied. To make matters even more serious, the number 13 does not include the many other ingredients that accompany and worsen the effects of being injected with 13 diseases, such as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, anti-freeze, phenol, MSG, polysorbate 80, Triton X-100 detergent, food proteins, animal viruses and retroviruses, fetal tissue from aborted human babies, and more. The number 13 also does not include ingredients that are not required to be listed on the label, but which are permitted under the cover of “trade secrets”. Undisclosed ingredients being injected into our children? Unacceptable, unethical, and terribly dangerous. Ask yourself, would you want your baby contracting multiple illnesses, up to 13, at once? Would you want your baby contracting multiple illnesses at once while also being poisoned at the same time? If you are following the CDC’s recommended schedule, you are allowing that.

  • Many vaccines contain mercury in the form of thimerosal. Thimerosal was patented in 1928, and has been used ever since, despite it being tested on humans only once, in 1929…a test in which all 22 subjects died within 2 days of receiving thimerosal. Mercury is a known toxin and neurotoxin, with no safe amount for a human. It can kill when applied externally. With vaccines, it is injected internally. Claims that mercury has been removed from vaccines given to children are false.
  • Many vaccines contain ingredients that have never been clinically approved by the FDA. Defying common sense and violating basic safety and ethics standards, the FDA approves vaccines that contain never-proven-safe and known-to-be-dangerous ingredients. For example, there are two forms of aluminum adjuvants used in vaccines, aluminum hydroxyphosphate salt and aluminum oxyhydroxide salt. Neither has been clinically approved by the FDA, both are known toxins and neurotoxins, yet both are in vaccines approved by the FDA. These are but two examples, there are more.

  • Aluminum is an undisputed toxin and neurotoxin. Its toxicity has been known for some 90 years. The two aluminum adjuvants mentioned above are used in vaccines for the express purpose of inducing toxicity. Permitting the use of aluminum in vaccines is akin to permitting lead paint in government approved toys and teething rings.

  • Aluminum adjuvants (not clinically approved and used to induce toxicity), vaccines (improperly approved and containing unapproved ingredients, including those used to induce toxicity, and containing ingredients known to be toxic and neurotoxic), or a combination thereof are used as the controls in vaccine safety trials. A control is supposed to be a placebo, an inert substance which doesn’t cause harm or therapeutic effect. Neither an aluminum adjuvant nor a vaccine qualifies as a placebo, therefore, no valid safety claims can be made for any vaccine.

  • Vaccine making pharmaceutical companies are permitted by the FDA to do their own safety testing, with no oversight and no verification from a financially independent entity. As mentioned in the point above, they do not use placebos for controls. Nevertheless, when they say that the trial vaccine proved to be no more dangerous or deadly than the aluminum adjuvant or other vaccine against which it was tested, they declare it safe. Is that how you want medical procedures for your children being declared safe? The FDA and CDC accept this current method of testing. They also accept that vaccines are not tested for carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, or impairment of fertility.

  • And the real kicker…there has never been a comparison study of the unvaccinated versus the vaccinated. That is because the vaccine profiteers know that the health, development, fertility, and longevity of the completely unvaccinated are far superior to that of the vaccinated. As a result of that knowledge, they have managed to keep that study from being done for more than seven decades. Without such a comparison study, absolutely no safety, efficacy, or necessity claims can be made.

Let all that sink in for a minute if you will.  Read through that list one more time so you can fully digest and comprehend that our nation’s vaccine program is built on a deceptive and fraudulent house of cards that has nothing to do with scientifically valid truths or the health and well being of our children. 

Yet, these medical procedures, not properly tested, improperly declared safe, known to contain toxic and neurotoxic ingredients, and barbaric as they are, have not only been approved, they have been mandated. That is corruption and insanity at its worst. It is evil, and it is destroying the majority of our citizenry.

For those people who say they just want “choice”…for those people who think it’s okay to have to formally exempt out of vaccination versus simply saying, “No thank you”, and who are willing to beg, plead, and pay in an attempt to avoid or refuse vaccination via exemption…for those people who just want “greener” vaccines, as though it’s ever a healthful or wise idea to purposefully invade, tamper with, and taint our God-given immune systems…for those who just want the mercury removed, as though it is the only problematic ingredient…for those who say we just need genetic pre-screening beforehand, as though any human is designed to have their inner systems and brain assaulted in such a way by so many toxic, neurotoxic, and foreign substances…and for those people who say we just need more “informed consent”, which is not even possible given the unscientific vaccine studies rife with fraud and deception…I contend that those stances are not sufficient or ethical.

In the past, I have called for an immediate ban on vaccine mandates in all 50 states. In reality, however, even that is not acceptable or enough, given the facts of the situation and the complete and utter failure of our government regulatory agencies.

Since our government regulators have failed to require or ensure vaccine safety, it must be assumed, and can be shown, that not one single vaccine is safe or advisable. Therefore:

What is required is an immediate moratorium on all vaccinations, for all people. 

That is what should have happened in 1986, versus Congress passing an Act indemnifying all who make and administer vaccines, at a point in time when vaccines were maiming and killing thousands.

Not demanding an immediate moratorium on vaccinations is no different than accepting any of the following:

  • We know that a particular brand of car has a history of blowing up, harming and killing people, but government regulators say it can stay on the market…and our Congress will indemnify the makers and sellers of that car so victims cannot sue.

  • We know that a particular brand of crib is causing thousands of babies to become trapped between the bars, leading to serious injuries and death, but government regulators say it can stay on the market…and our Congress will indemnify the makers and sellers of that crib so parents cannot sue.

  • We know that a particular brand of canola oil is making people violently ill, causing permanent brain damage, causing immune and nervous system damage, causing severe GI issues, and in some cases killing people, but government regulators say it can stay on the market…and our Congress will indemnify the makers and sellers of that canola oil so that those who consume it cannot sue.

  • We know that a particular medication has a history of inducing heart attacks, strokes, and aneurysms, resulting in disability, mental incapacitation, paralysis, and death, but government regulators say it can stay on the the market…and our Congress will indemnify those who make and administer that medication so that its recipients cannot sue.

Do you see a pattern of absurdity here? Well, that same pattern applies to vaccines.  Government regulators, who regulate many industries including the pharmaceutical industry, should not permit the continued use of vaccine products which they openly admit cause brain damage, immune system damage, nervous system damage, seizures, anaphylaxis, blood disorders, gastrointestinal system damage, paralysis, and death…to name but a few of the health disasters and fatalities that are known and admitted. Yet, these products are approved, recommended, and increasingly mandated for…newborns, within hours of taking their first breath, including those born prematurely…infants…toddlers…young children…teenagers…college students…daycare workers…parent volunteers…hospital workers and those whose business takes them into hospitals…the elderly…everyone…including recommendations for pregnant women. No one now escapes the recommendation of, and for many, the mandate of, these dangerous, potentially-fatal medical procedures.

We need public outrage and criminal proceedings for incompetent, negligent, and corrupt government regulators, and for pharmaceutical company executives who are destroying the health and well being of our children as they rake in billions from their toxic, destructive, and deadly vaccine products. We need steadfast refusal to vaccinate, boycotting of those who administer vaccines, which is in complete and inexcusable violation of their oath to "First, do no harm", and rebellion against vaccine mandates and those who legislate, require, and enforce them.

Are people so “busy” and otherwise preoccupied that the poisoning of all humanity via vaccination is something they are willing to turn a blind eye to, and will mindlessly agree to accept? 

Are our government regulators all so corrupt or cowardly that they are not going to put a stop to that which is causing epidemic after epidemic in our country? And I am not talking about measles, mumps, or chicken pox. I am talking about encephalopathy (i.e. permanent brain damage, the actual and accurate name for vaccine-induced “Autism”), Type 1 diabetes, seizure disorders, asthma, paralysis, SIDS, speech and language delays, OCD, Tourette’s syndrome, attention and behavior issues, life-threatening peanut allergies, food allergies galore, and children who can’t talk, an ever-increasing and tragic phenomenon which originated in the late 1980s in lockstep with the tripling of the vaccine schedule. There is no end to the list of vaccine-induced horrors now plaguing our children and grandchildren, and people of all ages.

Are school board members and school district personnel, including school nurses, who are well aware of the increasing numbers of chronically ill and developmentally delayed students, not to mention the challenges and costs of educating them, going to continue to remain silent? Silence in the face of such obvious student decline is unacceptable and hard to explain. They must acknowledge and publicize this change in the student population in the past 25 years, demand that legislators act on parent reports of vaccine-induced health and development problems, and vaccine-induced death, and refuse to enforce dangerous and tyrannical vaccine mandates.

Are legislators going to continue to set aside upright morals, ethical behavior, and the preservation of liberty as they put their campaign coffers and pharma perks above the health of those they represent and above the well-being and sustainability of our country?

The solution is simple:

To stop the Vaccine Holocaust, we need to stop vaccinating. 

That means an immediate moratorium on all vaccinations for all people. 

Vaccines can no longer be a choice on the menu of medical procedures.  Humanity already faces an extreme uphill battle to try to recover from the horrendous damage done by them to date.

Written by Laura Hayes, mother of vaccine-injured children, including one severely and permanently disabled by vaccine-induced encephalopathy.  She prays this vaccine madness will end on a dime, today…which is not a moment too soon.


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

Anke Zimmermann

I love this article and totally agree on a moratorium for vaccines. Now, that still leaves the question of how to deal with serious infectious disease. What we need is a safer method to prevent those diseases. The amazing thing is that this method already exists.

It is called homeoprophylaxis, the use of homeopathic remedies to prevent disease. It has been practiced for over 200 years and been shown safe and effective for the prevention of many different conditions, including polio, meningococcal meningitis, influenza, cholera, scarlett fever, leptospirosis, malaria, dengue fever, pertussis and Japanese encephalitis.

The Indian government is embracing homeoprophylaxis for the prevention of epidemics. One study which started in 1999 treated 20 million (!) children preventatively against Japanese encephalitis in Andra Pradesh. Deaths fell from 1500+ per year to zero by 2003 and incidence dropped from 5000+ per year to zero by 2004. And all this for pennies per person.

Cuba has run many large-scale studies on homeoprophylaxis, including the treatment of 2.3 million residents against leptospirosis and 9.8 million people - the entire population, against swine flu.

Dr. Isaac Golden in Australia ran a 15-year study in 3000 children comparing unvaccinated, fully vaccinated and homeoprophylactically treated children. The interesting conclusion: Homeoprophylaxis was about 90-95% effective, which is the same as conventional vaccines, but the children treated with this method were actually healthier after 15 years than both the unvaccinated and the conventionally vaccinated one, who were the sickest, not surprisingly.

If you are interested in more information here is a link to a page with a lot of studies on HP http://www.homeopathycenter.org/news/homeoprophylaxis-human-records-studies-and-trials.

Food for thought.


I agree with Laura. As Dr. Suzanne Humphries has remarked, there is no such thing as a safe vaccine. Laura lists all the reasons and I agree with them. Vaccination is a primitive 19th Century practice. Should we make blood letting standard practice? Or should we be diagnosing people according to the position of the stars and the phases of the moon? Someone is setting the protocols for medical practice based on supposedly good science. The good science does not support vaccination; why should vaccination be standard practice, or part of the protocol. Unfortunately what we have is a situation where we are being forced by law to be subjected to a very bad and archaic practice because it's making money for politicians who are bought by industry. This is not science; this is corruption.

Recently with the new polio like epidemic, someone asked if they were going to create a vaccine for that. The answer was no because the virus would just shift again and the vaccine would be worthless. Maybe the reason so many vaccine preventable diseases are making a comeback is not the lawlessness of the American public (who in fact are very compliant); but the vaccines are shifting and new diseases or versions of old diseases have taken over that eco-nitche. Nature abhors a vacuum. Get you or your kid vaccinated and they will just be more prone to getting the latest version of the old bug.

Unfortunately, I hear hospitals are force vaccinating. And I am reminded of many years ago when I was living on the Sioux Indian Reservation. People were so afraid of the reservation hospital they would never go because going to a hospital probably meant you would die. Now we are in the same situation. I guess I would almost rather die than go to one with all this forced vaccination.

Laura Hayes

FDA link, showing that they allow ingredients in vaccines that have not been clinically approved.


Quote from link:

"How does FDA evaluate adjuvants for safety and efficacy?

When evaluating a vaccine for safety and efficacy, FDA considers adjuvants as a component of the vaccine; they are not licensed separately."

Laura Hayes

Listing of vaccine package inserts:


For but one, click on Pediarix, and read pp. 5-6 to see what "controls" were used as "placebos". I recommend clicking on all of them to read about the "controls" used, length of time vaccine recipients were studied post-vaccination, make-up of the trial group, and reported/observed adverse reactions.

You will be horrified by what you read, no matter which vaccine you click on.

Laura Hayes

Histories of thimerosal:




Laura Hayes

Two items regarding aluminum, aluminum adjuvants, and aluminum toxicity/neurotoxicity:

1. Press Release and link for a very recent study re. aluminum adjuvants:

How might aluminium adjuvants contribute towards vaccine-related adverse events?

The majority of vaccinations use an adjuvant to boost their effectiveness and in most cases the adjuvant is an aluminium salt.
The simplest explanation of how an aluminium adjuvant works is that its injection into the muscle or under the skin produces toxicity.
In most recipients of a vaccine this toxicity is seen as mild inflammation or reddening and swelling of tissue at the injection site. However, in a small minority of individuals the consequences of this toxicity are more severe and can lead to serious adverse events including autoimmune disease and brain encephalopathies.
Research at Keele University led by Professor Christopher Exley aims to understand the toxicity of aluminium adjuvants in vaccinations and their latest findings are now published in Nature’s ‘Scientific Reports’ (http://www.nature.com/articles/srep31578 ).
In a project funded by the Medical Research Council (MRC)and the Dwoskin Foundation the group at Keele investigated the relationship between the physicochemical properties of aluminium adjuvants and the immune response. Specifically they show that the reaction of the aluminium adjuvant at the injection site will determine its subsequent fate and therefore its activity both at the injection site and away from the injection site. One form of aluminum adjuvant which is used in clinically-approved vaccines is an aluminium hydroxyphosphate salt and is more toxic at the injection site than the second form of aluminium adjuvant commonly used in clinically-approved vaccines which is an aluminium oxyhydroxide salt. However, the latter is more easily loaded into immune reactive cells with the possibility to be transported throughout the body. It is suggested by the Keele research that this loading of aluminium into viable cells offers a mechanism whereby significant amounts of aluminium, a known neurotoxin, might be translocated throughout the body and even across the blood brain barrier and into the central nervous system.
Professor Exley adds that there are no clinically-approved aluminium adjuvants only clinically approved vaccines which use aluminium adjuvants. This makes it imperative that all vaccine trials which use aluminium salts as adjuvants must not use the aluminium adjuvant as the control or placebo. This has been common practice for many years and has resulted in many vaccine-related adverse events due in part or in entirety to aluminium adjuvants being unaccounted for in vaccine safety trials.
For further information contact Professor Chris Exley (c.exley@keele.ac.uk), The Birchall Centre, Lennard-Jones Laboratories, Keele University, Staffordshire, ST5 5BG, UK.


2. Excellent article re. toxicity of aluminum, including that aluminum is a teratogen (i.e. an agent or factor that causes malformation of an embryo):

"Perinatal Toxicity of Aluminum" by P Nayak in The Internet Journal of Toxicology, 2005, Volume 3, Number 1.



This website lists dozens of Vitamin C studies in animals: http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/hemila/animals/


I see that Mike Stevens supplied a link today to the actual Bangladesh study which showed how successful vitamin C was in treating tetanus:


You're right, high-dose IV vitamin C is a very effective treatment for everything. I just posted this on Saturday, on vitamin C treatment for tetanus:

All of the tetanus patients in both age groups were given only 1000 mg of C intravenously. The patients were divided into groups in which one group only got the standard treatment and the other group got standard treatment plus vitamin C. 100% of children who got C recovered, while 74.2% of the children who only got the standard treatment DIED. In the over-12 years old group, 40% of the adults who got C recovered. 67% of adults not given vitamin C DIED. If the adults had gotten a larger dose than the low-dose 1000 mg given to all, most of them would have recovered as well.

OK, everybody, look at this. The liar is trying to conceal the HUGE effectiveness of the vitamin C treatment of vitamin C for unknown reasons, but obviously malign.

I said at the outset that I thought parents should give serious consideration to the tetanus series after the age of two, but said that they should also consider that vitamin C treatment was effective if they declined the vaccine and their child got tetanus. And they should consider homeopathic prophylaxis and treatment (ledum and hypericum) to prevent or treat tetanus if they decide to reject the vaccine. I, unlike you, am not trying to bludgeon them into any decision, but wish to provide them with the best information I can.

The next question is why it is not standard allopathic protocol to treat all diseases with high-dose IV vitamin C as at least an adjunct therapy?

Bangladesh Med Res Counc Bull. 1984 Jun;10(1):24-8.
Effect of ascorbic acid in the treatment of tetanus.
Jahan K, Ahmad K, Ali MA.

Violet Harris

Re comments by ciaparker:

I've not seen any comments here regarding the benefit of high dose IV vitamin C for infectious diseases.

Also, the late Dr. Robert Mendelsohn asked, years ago, if vaccines were responsible for the disappearance of these dangerous diseases they supposedly eliminated, then why did those same diseases simultaneously disappear in some places where vaccines had not been used? Some think the answer to that question was improved nutrition and sanitation had more to do with elimination of those diseases than vaccination.

Anyway, in the 70's, two-time Nobel laureate Linus Pauling mentioned that vitamin C had been reported as effective against many of the diseases we're told we need to be vaccinated against--including polio. In his book, "How To Live Longer and Feel Better," he says that Dr. Claus Jungeblut, Columbia University, found in the 30's that vitamin C destroyed the paralysis of polio. Today, Dr. Tom Levy, M.D., J.D., has done much research on vitamin C. His book "Curing the Incurable: Vitamin C, Infectious Diseases, and Toxins," has 1,200 scientific references--and four pages on ebola. Levy says, in the first edition, that there's no need to risk the side effects of vaccines because those vaccines don't need to be given in the first place. The Lew Rockwell web site has a great lecture by Levy posted under, "This Man Wrote The Book On Vitamin C."

In addition to all this, there is the inaccuracy of the Pasteur germ theory of disease--the foundation of vaccination. The late Dr. Archie Kalokerinos and Dr. Glen Dettman, close friends of Linus Pauling, called the Pasteur theory "a dangerous part-truth." Then, there's the massive suppression of the research of American scientific genius Royal Raymond Rife. The 1944 "Smithsonian Annual Report" had an article about his Universal Microscope. Articles about his research and his microscopes were in many other publications including "Science," and "California and Western Medicine" which included a picture of Rife with one of his other five microscopes. Surely, if his research hadn't been suppressed, it would have crushed this outdated Pasteur theory and the idea that vaccination has any merit at all.

Sandy Lunoe

Brilliantly formulated article by Laura Hayes.

A few more issues which could have been included are the unknown but possibly horrific consequences of injecting foreign DNA, the dubious claims that vaccines have contributed towards infectious disease decline and the myth of vaccine derived herd immunity.

Helga Fiederer

In 1990 I was vaccinated with Polio and Tetanus together, my doctor said this was a good thing to do because I wanted to travel to Indonesia. To make a long story short over a time period of three months my immune system became hyperactive, reacting to anything and everything. I was incredibly sick for years, almost died but somehow managed to keep going. 26 yrs later I have my health back due to 10 yrs of homeopathic treatment, I still have a very stiff back and neck when i wake up in the morning. My life has never been the same. My son is not conventionally vaccinated (I did give him a tetanus prophylaxis twice) and I am amazed how much more healthy he is than his vaccinated cousins and friends. Once you study homeopathy the allopathic ideas about vaccines become preposterous, it just shows how completely uninformed people are.

Shawn Siegel

Kudos, Laura - a wonderful, thorough article.

The most fundamental reason vaccines should be illegal, even if the known, included toxins are discounted, is that injection, the route of introduction of 99% of administered vaccines, breaches the proper function of the immune system. Vaccines don't immunize, they bastardize; they interfere with proper immunological response to subsequent exposures to the respective illnesses. In so doing they set the individual up for chronic disorders down the line, and when you add the list of toxic ingredients, undigested proteins and contaminants, it morphs the paradigm into a full blown eugenics strategy.

The most basic insult of the industry is the characterization of infectious disease as the enemy, when in reality it's an essential means of cleanse and detox when the body needs it. The enemy is the malnutrition, squalor and environmental toxins - the most intimate and egregious of which are vaccines - that stifle that mechanism.

Northern Tracey

Polio was never eradicated by vaccines neither was smallpox!! They just changed the diagnosis and names. The germ theory was also a scam and where this all started. Viruses and germs have never ever been proven to be the CAUSE of disease nor the contagion of them either. They cannot 'grow' viruses in a lab because they only emerge in our own live bodies when they are needed. They do not even know the function of viruses and bacteria in the body yet. They cannot see viruses nor filter them they are too small. What they put in vaccines is 'virus-like particles' which they MAKE in the lab. The whole thing is beyond insane and modern medicine needs to get out of the dark ages!!

Alan Inselberg

Thank you Laura for your honest, heartfelt editorial. May God bless your courage to tell the truth.

Myrna de Leon

I'm 77 years old and had four children. The first three were vaccinated on schedule, starting at age two months. They suffered from multiple diseases, mentally, emotionally, physically. Six years after that I gave birth to the fourth one, and by that time I had figured out NOT to vaccinate. She was the only one of my children to be strong and healthy. She is now 48 years old and has a 20-year-old son, also never vaccinated. Both are very balanced and healthy. I wish I could raise my other three children without vaccinations, but in the 1950s and 1960s when they were born this wasn't much of an issue. I only discovered it by getting into homeopathy in 1962. Thank God for homeopathy and I hope humankind wakes up and learns the harm vaccines are doing to its children.



If you put the following address into the Wayback Machine https://archive.org/web/
and then click on 17 November 2014 you can see what Paul Offit wrote about aluminum:


"Aluminum and pregnancy

Aluminum quantities fluctuate naturally during normal cellular activity. It is found in all tissues and is also believed to play an important role in the development of a healthy fetus. This is supported by several findings:
During healthy pregnancies the amount of aluminum in a woman's blood increases.
The amount of aluminum in the blood of the fetus increases between four and a half and six months gestation and again at eight months gestation.
At delivery, the blood of full-term infants contains more aluminum than the mother's, but it decreases shortly after delivery.
The blood of premature infants has more aluminum than that of full-term infants.
The concentrations of aluminum in brain tissue are high during gestation and highest immediately after birth.
The breast milk of moms with premature infants contains more aluminum than that of moms who carried their babies to term. "

Alan Hysinger

RE: Aluminum. See "Scientific Data Gaps" on this aluminum salt safety study:



Stop VAXASSINATIONs please. i think people should have a choice - as that is a freedom i am demanding myself and expect to allow others to have, but there should be FULL MEDICAL DISCLOSURE including the initial grouping of points in this article.

Well said, thanks. i've been fighting this issue for years now - about 4 yrs ago i realized that mandatory vaxassination was going to be the metaphorical SWAT assault that shatters the doors of your freedoms and MUST be stopped for that reason alone. Add the proven damages, proven lack of safety - and mandatory vaccinations are the most dangerous thing the wealthy parasites have imposed on their slaves in a long time....

Kitt McComb

My daughter was an extremely healthy baby. Then, after her first birthday, she began to decline. By the time she was three she was diagnosed with Type 1 Diabetes. An endocrinologist stated that the first kicker might very well have been vaccines.

My grandson, a healthy happy baby, very lively and bright eyed, is now eight. He has autism. Symptoms began to become evident by the time he was four.

My stillborn granddaughter died two weeks before birth. The OB doctor strongly advised my daughter to have the whooping cough vaccine just a week before. My daughter, the one with Type 1, became very ill, swollen, slightly jaundiced, and her blood sugars were uncontrollable. Then, a perfectly health little girl never got to live.

Why for these three cases? I'm firmly convinced vaccines are the culprit.


Hi Laura,
Do you have source material available?


Thank you Laura, for your service to the World...

Alice Becker

Thank you Laura for your well thought out and very complete article as to why vaccines should be taken off the market. After studying this for several years I have come to the conclusion that vaccines are not safe, not effective, and not necessary. They have never been tested to the standard of other drugs and are put on the market making all of us the Guinea pigs in a huge experiment with no placebo control group. We don't even track for long term effects. It is unconscionable that such a product is not only available for use but also mandated in order to participate in society.



Dr Paul Offit would disagree. He claimed on his CHOP website that aluminum "plays an important role in the development of a healthy fetus"!
Seriously? Paul Offit is making aluminum out to be a vitamin now? Unbelievable.


THANK YOU Laura❤️ You are a hero!!!!


I want to give Laura's article a BIG “THUMBS UP”!

Her thoughts have been my thoughts for a long time but there is such a “terrible battle” out there. The anti-vaxxers vs. the vaxxers is strong.

I really do believe in “choice” BUT….(and that’s a big “but’) only if people have fully educated themselves. Truly then, I can’t see how anyone would be pro-vaccine but I guess it’s possible.

We have been sold a bill-of-goods by so many of the organizations that should be protecting us. Why do we have such a hard time accepting this? Because many people are trusting, kind-hearted people that have a hard time believing they are not there for us! It is hard - we want to trust someone! They know that and capitalize on that.

Thank you for a great article!

Angela Coral Eisenhauer

Birgit Calhoun et al. You are correct, mothers vaccinated with Dtap do not have real antibodies to pass on to their babies in breastmilk, and maternal antibodies. IF however, they have had the vaccine say within an average of 3 years, they can be a symptomless carrier, and actually infect their own infant without even knowing.
Yes, acellular pertussis vaccine is the biggest fraud. It was known in 2010, in Albany Western Australia, that the vaccine was failing, ie 5 jabs in 5 years, add an average 3 years, it fails. By 2011, with 98.5% vaccination rate, our whooping cough rate had gone from 340 a year (1991) to 40,000 a year, and it hasn't stopped. All fully vaccinated, all vaccine failures, all aged 6-12.
In 2010, the WA Health Department tested the younger vaccinated kids, yes they also all had whooping cough bacteria, in their throats, just no symptoms, YES< in Australia now we have around 1 in 8 fully vaccinated kids, per year, spreading whooping cough, most like 75% of these, doont have any physical symptoms, the working aP vaccine, just allows them to be carriers, NOT JUST ONCE< over, and over again for 6-12 years. To HIDE this truth, instead of BANNING this vaccine (or switching back to DTP< which worked, well they didn't constantly spread whooping cough for 6-12 years??) they decided to vaccinate babies, before birth, with a vaccine that kills them if given at birth. Brazil, was the first controlled experiment, and the outcome wasn't good. Every pregnant woman got Tdap from May 2015, from 20 weeks, and 20 weeks later, 5,000 vaccine damaged babies, got blamed on FOUR also having zika.
USA rates of microcephaly: 2004 400 cases
2006-10 800 -4,800 cases per year

Flu vaccines in pregnancy? from 2010, Tdap in pregnancy from 2011. By 2012, the rate of microcephalic babies in USA is 25,000 a year........................................ and not zika in sight.
I think CDC, are desperately trying to blame zika, despite, their own CDC zika page, clearly showing stats, that actually prove ZIKA infection in pregnancy, REDUCES THE RISK of birth defects, while still sending 20 million to mates in Japan, to develop a vaccine? Blatant outright fraud...............

CDC have yet to acknowledge the 25,000 microcephalic births a year, elsewhere in the support groups in USA< quoted as 2.3% of all births, worried about autism? Well since 2012, MORE THAN 1 in 50 babies, ARE BORN MICROCEPHALIC.



Thank you Laura. My sentiments exactly. Humanity needs more brave people like you.

Cindy Griffin

As an alternative practitioner who has devoted most of my practice to undoing vaccine injury, I'm not legally allowed to say any of what you said.

And I may be painting a big, huge target on my back, front and head, but I can only say, "HEAR, HEAR!!!!"

Thank you for stating what, to some of us, has been obvious for some time. Would that more people would find the backbones to say what you have.



It's not just better nutrition and hygiene, but that a lot of diseases have evolved to become less virulent, and populations which have gotten diseases over centuries acquire non-specific ways to cope with them, so that when the children get them, the coping mechanisms go into action. One of the dangers of our not getting measles anymore is that we're losing those coping mechanism on a population level.

I recognize that before the mid-twentieth century, measles, diphtheria, pertussis, and scarlet fever were extremely dangerous diseases, at their peaks killing tens of thousands of children a year, many of them from wealthy families and well-nourished. We should not forget that or think that it couldn't happen again.

That being said, I've said in many places that at this time in the US I think the DT series might be a good idea after the age of two, and the polio series if and only if polio came back here. DT only because Hillary Butler said that there's evidence that the DT is less reactive than the T by itself. Completely voluntary, but most people would voluntarily take them. I don't think any of the others are both common and dangerous enough to warrant the risk of the vaccines for them. But all of the diseases occasionally can be very bad or fatal, and I'd allow people to get them if they wanted them.

I would just like people to remember just how bad contagious diseases can be, and not think that it couldn't happen here and now, and be prepared to consider all options if one or more did come back. Good nutrition would not necessarily prevent epidemics of severe disease.

Raymond Hauglustaine

Almost one century ago, Gandhi published a book (”A guide to Health”) where he explained the dangers and lack of effectiveness of vaccines. His voice rings true now more than ever: VACCINATION IS A BARBAROUS PRACTICE AND IS ONE OF THE MOST FATAL OF ALL THE DELUSIONS CURRENT IN OUR TIME.

Laura Hayes

Hans Litten,

Thank you for the link to Janine Roberts' testimony about the heinous contaminants knowingly allowed in vaccines and the heinous, filthy way in which they are made. A real eye-opener for those who think vaccines are safe as can be with no undisclosed and potentially-fatal health consequences?

Here is the video link once again:


david m burd


You say: "You've got to look at the big picture and try to consider both risks and benefits on both sides, but this is a case of looking at the best way to safeguard children's lives, and millions of children have died over the centuries from diseases that could now be prevented by vaccines."

What? This looks like a quote taken from Paul Offit or the CDC zealots. What you fail to say is that by the 1950's child mortality truly caused by childhood diseases had fallen to basically zero in light of the recognized need of good nutrition (vitamin C, etc.) together with a few newly implemented antibiotics. As thoroughly documented here on AoA (by Dan and Mark and others with many books dating back 60 years); child "diseases" such as polio in the 1950's were in fact the result of mammoth applications of hundreds of millions of pounds employed (every year) by American farming use of neurological poisons; BUT, but actually the consequence the dramatic increase of transient or permanent paralyses politically blamed on an enterovirus.

Vaccines are the exact opposite of "best way to safeguard children's lives."

Hans Litten

Laura , this video may be worth a view . Thanks for the excellent link .
We need permanently manned street protests outside all parliaments in my view .
I challenged a Baroness the other day , she asked me in a certain fashion "why would they do that ?"
Her demeanour (just like others I have asked) , suggests "they know" .


"Hidden ingredients" is being polite in my view . Secret time bombs more like .

John Stone


I think Bolen did have some points of substance at the end. It is pity it was necessary to wade through so much animus and abuse to get to it.

Laura Hayes

Here is an article from 2009 regarding some of those "undisclosed" vaccine ingredients that do not appear on the label (and some of these ingredients fall in the category of "unknown", meaning vaccine manufacturers don't even know what all heinous ingredients their vaccines might contain):


Anyone want to allow any of these animal viruses, retroviruses, and DNA fragments to be injected into your children? What about into your aging parents? How about into yourself, as vaccine mandates for adults are increasing, and will continue to do so if we can't stop this vaccine insanity?


How sad. See at minute 17. Jill Stein is so smart or seems so, but falls on her face with the vaccine question.



Re the FDA's nonresponse to glyphosate found in vaccines. They can't very well address that now - not with an election coming up and all. Can't take a break from the election show to focus on the mass poisoning of every single American, pregnant women, infants, children, men, military, seniors, multiple times. Just can't. Priorities you know. The show must go on.

Zen Honeycutt

Great article.
To add to the toxic mess: Glyphosate weed killer has been detected in vaccines. The FDA has not responded about this news for a week. The fact is that GMO Chemical farming and the negligence of the EPA and FDA has caused our medical treatments to be contaminated.
This is especially concerning because glyphosate has been shown to increase the harmful impact of other environmental toxins and to weaken the immune system via destroying the gut bacteria.

Article on ECOWatch here: http://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-vaccines-1999343362.html

Press release and article on Moms Across America.

PLEASE be sure to comment today regarding revoking the license of glyphosate to the EPA before their 4 day meeting about glyphosate.


Dawn Winkler

I could not agree more with Laura. The road to the place I am at now has been a long one. Twenty one years. I tried very hard to convince myself with peer reviewed medical literature that I should indeed vaccinate my son after having lost my daughter to them. My path was much like many others in that at the beginning, I just thought I would delay them. Then only do a few. Then only tetanus. But ultimately, after years of solid research I came to the conclusion that no vaccine is safe, effective, or necessary. Vaccines are flawed by design. They cannot be made "safe". All one has to do is read Tetyana Obukhanych's "Vaccine Illusion" to understand the reasons why. I see some arguing here, still hanging on to that little thread of "well we need tetanus vaccines" and other such opinions. All that tells me is that you haven't researched the issue enough because if you had, you would understand why tetanus vaccine is not safe, effective or necessary. On the issue of efficacy, the simple truth is that scientifically you cannot EVER prove that vaccine prevented a disease in any individual person. You just can't. Any person exposed to a disease who doesn't contract it could have either not had enough exposure to contract it or could have been exposed prior and made their own antibodies without a clinical course of the disease. Efficacy for vaccines is determined by the presence of antibody titers alone, not by decreased rate of any given disease. We now know that the presence of antibodies is no guarantee of immunity just as the absence of antibody titers is no guarantee of susceptibility. We are in the infancy of understanding the immune system. To be playing God with it by injecting all kinds of known toxins, antigens, DNA, etc, is absolutely insane. Laura is correct. No vaccine should have ever been approved as no vaccine would have ever held up to the gold standard of science, the true double-blind placebo controlled study.

For those in the "this stance is over the top" or the "eliminating vaccines will never happen" category, may I remind you that in both the UK and in Canada, in the late 1800's and early 1900's respectively, national statutory and Constitutional exemptions were won by citizens who chose to call themselves Anti Vaccine. They did not pussyfoot around with the word "choice" and the idea of making vaccines "safer". The stood up and they demanded the freedom to say no and the end of the smallpox vaccine.

Let met ask you this...where has the past 30 years of fence sitting, mamby pamby approaches and campaigns like "Green Our Vaccines" gotten us? I will tell you. California is now the North Korea of the West. The CDC is about to gain the power to detain us anywhere, anytime, indefinitely and quarantine and vaccinate us. The vaccine schedule has more than tripled. Millions of children and adults have been harmed and killed. Mine being one of them twenty one years ago.

Leaders are always ahead of their time. Change is always evoked by statements and positions that at first seem crazy, impossible, and out of reach. The time has come to either learn from our history and the brave people who stood up and ended compulsory vaccination in other countries or keep on with the same strategies we've been using and let all 50 states become like CA, WV and MS, all in the name of not offending people, being politically correct, not offending our friends and family, and trying not to seem "radical". I can assure you that never in the history of the world has anything major changed for the better without people getting out of their comfort zone and being willing to do whatever it takes to make society understand that their desired goals are the opposite of radical. Ending vaccination is common sense. It is destroying the human race. We are bearing witness to the greatest Holocaust ever to take place in a civilized society and we either stop it now or we are done as a species.

Lastly, I am at the point that I do view vaccination as child abuse. I really do. In this day of information, ignorance about vaccines is a choice. People who refuse to look at widely available information regarding the truth on this issue are almost consciously harming their children at this point. The doctors who administer them should be in prison. That said, it begs the question, should child abuse be a choice? I think not. What doctors are doing to children every single day in offices across the world makes them a bunch of unwitting Dr. Mengeles.



"If my mother was here, she'd think this vaccine hysteria is insane and completely foreign"

My mother who is in her 80s would no doubt agree and so would my father and grandparents if they were still alive. Young people today have been so indoctrinated into believing that without vaccines we would all be blind, deaf, mentally-retarded, crippled or killed by infectious diseases that they do not ask themselves how the human race or their own ancestors managed to survive without them.

How many unquestioningly accept the propaganda, and live unnecessarily in fear? How many have looked at their family trees to see how many of their ancestors actually died from these diseases so often described as vaccine-preventable and dangerous? Zero in my family. What protected my relatives who lived into their 80s and 90s without vaccines to protect them? Those who didn't live that long, died from cardiovascular disease, were killed in wars or road accidents and others died from medical negligence.

Instead of producing vaccines for everyone, and as Grace Green says "harming the world's fittest members", they should have looked at exactly what makes some people vulnerable to disease complications.

Zika: Brazil Admits It’s Not the Virus

"Data compiled by Marinho and colleagues, which has been submitted for publication, suggest socio-economic factors may be involved. Most of the women who gave birth to babies with microcephaly were poor and lived in small cities or on the outskirts of big cities.

In addition, the outbreak occurred in a largely poverty-stricken agricultural area of Brazil that uses large amounts of banned pesticides.

Between these factors and the lack of sanitation and widespread vitamin A and zinc deficiency, you have the basic framework for an increase in poor health outcomes among newborn infants in that area."

Grace Green

I think this argument, wherever it appears, is always fear based - what do you fear most for your child. We are not looking at the ethical or public health considerations. I believe that for the healthy survival of our species, and the ecology of the planet, naturally occurring infectious diseases would be better than vaccination. We can never defeat all viruses, nor do I think it would be advisable if we could. Nature always fights back. And from an ethical point of view, if someone is harmed by a disease that is no-one's responsibility, but if a perfectly healthy individual is harmed by a medical proceedure all those who put that into effect must be responsible. The argument of "vaccine preventable diseases" was thought up to obscure that fact. I hate to say it, but nature has a way of mercifully shortening the suffering of those who start out compromised, whereas our medical "profession" are deliberately harming many of the world's fittest members.


My parents generation had few vaccines in childhood. My father as a vet did receive a slew of vaccines during WWII. It's on his record (and he also had health problems that could have been vaccine injury). But as children, my mother had whooping cough and she told me my grandmother said it was a frightening time. But she survived and was a healthy child and adult until she got hypertension which was probably caused by diet - they didn't know to watch sodium until she was a lot older. But the point is, they both did just fine without all the vaccines given to babies today. Yes, my mother had whooping cough and it wasn't pleasant, but she then was very strong and had true immunity that benefited her children and community. They were never vaxxed for polio and I don't remember it being an issue. I would guess that they were both immune from wild exposure. Our generation had a few more vaccines very young (I only remember the sugar cube - no other vaccines) and then had the childhood diseases like everyone else. If my mother was here, she'd think this vaccine hysteria is insane and completely foreign - which is how I think of it. It's overkill, and that's not just an expression. Compared to then, vaccinations are a big part of childhood now, as is the intrusive role of the pediatrician whose visit schedule is predatory. The pediatrician is demanding more presence, more authority, more influence, power and of course, money, all while pushing parents to the side. What we're witnessing is really unbelievable.


To those who believe that vaccines prevent illnesses like measles, chicken pox, and whooping cough I have to add a footnote: in some people and not in others. My daughter was possibly immune compromised from an early age. She was vaccinated against whooping cough but when she was in nursery school the whooping cough cycled through her school and she caught it. It was not a mild case, as nothing with her was ever mild. She was sick in bed for four months. She didn't get the MMR until 4 years of age, and I wouldn't have given it to her had the doctor not said it was totally harmless. She knew immediately though that she was in trouble because she said afterward, "that doctor hurt me." And I said, you mean the shot hurt, and she shook her head in bewilderment because she didn't know how. Shortly afterward she descended into chronic illness that lasted for twenty years. Even though she was diagnosed with an autoimmune disease and is being treated I am still afraid that her chronic strep might be undermining her health. What does it mean when children carry so many viruses and bacteria. With the MMR she lost her balance and the ability to hold a pencil, although she always could type and that has saved her. Vaccines are not tested on the immune compromised, and they may or may not even work on the immune compromised. This is one of the reasons herd immunity is bogus. In some kids the vaccine doesn't take and in some kids it just gives them the disease because they are too sick to mount an immune response.

All I can say is that in my generation we got everything and we ran outside in near sub-zero weather with runny noses. I had a cough that lasted for a year. Yet I didn't even own health insurance or see a doctor until I gave birth. I think vaccines for the most part are useless because there are enough kids that don't respond to the vaccine, so there is no protection to the herd. Kids get the measles shot and get the measles, and the same goes for chicken pox. The whooping cough vaccine doesn't work, it just gives those vaccinated a symptom free form of the disease and they still shed bacteria. How many untold thousands of kids get diseases that are never reported. When I got the measles and chicken pox no one contacted a doctor because it was within the norm--a childhood disease, not dangerous. When my kids got the chicken pox I didn't report it. I don't think my pediatrician reported my daughter's whooping cough. He wasn't even concerned.


I think in the US at this time, even if you gave no vaxxes, you would probably be safe anyway. I would like to see what would happen if no one gave any vaxxes (or some less drastic variation of that), and what people would think about it and do in the case of the resurgence of dangerous diseases, especially if they occurred on an epidemic scale.



Excerpt of Jon Rappaport interviewing a vaccine researcher (the whole article is worth reading):

"Q: Looking back now, can you recall any good reason to say that vaccines are successful?

A: No, I can't. If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination. I would move out of the state if I had to. I would change the family name. I would disappear. With my family. I'm not saying it would come to that. There are ways to sidestep the system with grace, if you know how to act. There are exemptions you can declare, in every state, based on religious and/or philosophic views. But if push came to shove, I would go on the move."


I think it was one of Dr. Bark's interviews where she said that pertussis was unusual in small infants because of maternal immunity back in the days when mothers had natural immunity to pertussis.


"Aluminum is an undisputed toxin and neurotoxin. "

Dr Paul Offit would disagree. He claimed on his CHOP website that aluminum "plays an important role in the development of a healthy fetus"!

Here's what Dr Wakefield had to say about aluminum at the Vaxxed Austin Q & A @1:00:40


"The Head of adjuvants for GlaxoSmithKline in Europe said that if we tried to get it put into vaccines as an adjuvant now it would be turned down on safety grounds."


Cia Parker, "I would not want the vaccine taken off the market entirely, but think its use should be limited to babies born to mothers positive for hep-B. In those babies it can be lifesaving. "

Is that a fact?

When the Vaxxed team attended a meeting with Senator Pan last month, filmed on Periscope but no longer available, a doctor stated that the Hepatitis B vaccine at birth does not protect babies of Hep B positive mothers. If that is true, we shouldn't be giving Hep B vaccine to any babies.


"Many people prefer the tetanus series (preferably after the age of two) to prevent tetanus. Dr. Mendelsohn said that protection lasted at least forty years, much longer than the ten they say. "

Tetanus was the last vaccine that Dr Mendelsohn abandoned:


Tetanus Vaccination by Dr Mendelsohn MD (The People’s Doctor Newsletter 1976-1988)

"No one I knew or ever heard of got pertussis before the acellular vaccine was introduced in the mid-'90s, because virtually everyone got the DPT vaccine. "

Cia, Many DPT vaccinated children got whooping cough but because they were considered immune, they were diagnosed with something else like the 100-day cough, viral asthma, or bronchitis. My son was diagnosed with bronchitis by seven different doctors because they all said that being fully-immunised he couldn't have whooping cough. Their diagnosis was influenced by their belief that the vaccine worked. And measles? When laboratory confirmation of the clinically diagnosed and reported measles cases was introduced, up to 97% of them were measles look-alikes.


@ Ted Kuntz,

To whom you propose reconciliation? To criminals who have medically holocausted millions of innocent children and adults? There can't be any reconciliation with them, they all must face the Nuremberg II trial for their crimes against humanity. What we need is a global revolution against this medical tyranny.

david m burd

@ Ciaparker, et al.

You say: "The CDC has not added a new vaccine to the schedule in years."

Wrong. What "years" are you referring to? The HPV has destroyed countless live in recent years.

The HepA vaccine's toxicities have wrought havoc for the last 10 years.

The Swine Flu/H1N1 vaccine wrought its havoc and death.

The ever-greater promotion of Flu Vaccines' toxicities have wrought ever greater destruction every year to those in the womb, and at babies 6 months' old.

The recently employed DTap vaccine for Mothers-to-be have immense toxicity -- resulting in damaged or aborted babies.

It is beyond rational: Injecting pregnant mothers with vaccines laden with toxic excipients that go right to their developing fetuses.


I've also read that it's unusual for infants to get pertussis. When they do get it, it causes death in one in 200 infants less than three months old. Those who die are usually from low-income groups, which may mean overcrowding and more exposure to the germs? since they are breast- or formula-fed at that age, and are unlikely to be malnourished. Breast feeding provides no protection, which is unusual. But you're right, it may be that almost no one now was never vaxxed for it, which prevents them from getting permanent immunity even if they get it, so maybe they have no immunity to give through breast milk. There's an average of ten deaths a year from pertussis in the US, 19 in an upsurge year about five years ago, about half of them young babies. There were 40,000 diagnosed with it that year, many more undiagnosed.


It is simply not possible for *any* vaccine to work.

Viruses infect us chronically so it is logically impossible to develop immunity to them.

Let me explain.

If harbouring the virus makes us vulnerable to the virus in the future (and that is what the concept of chronic infection stipulates) then clearly harbouring the virus cannot possibly make us *invulnerable* to the virus in the future as well.

That is known as two mutually exclusive events.

We cannot be made simultaneously vulnerable and invulnerable to something.

All of the statistics that you guys are basing your beliefs in their efficacy on are circular nonsense. Self-fulfilling prophecies (because doctors simply refuse to diagnose the condition in the vaccinated).

These stats have bamboozled the entire world - but that is because they really really wanted to be bamboozled.

They were brainwashed into believing that disease could be spread from one person to another (another logical impossibility (you cannot have a self-replicating pathogen)) and from there they couldn't handle the idea that vaccines couldn't save us from a massive epidemic.

In short, the germ theory (contagious disease) is impossible. And even if it were valid, it is impossible to have a working vaccine because the entire theory of immunity too is logically impossible (even if you accept the idea of germ theory).

All you have to do is ask yourself this one question:

"Why don't doctors have the lifespan of a fruitfly?"

There is no sensible answer to this question that doesn't involve rejected the idea of contagion.

Birgit Calhoun

Ted Kuntz!
The "Truth and Reconciliation Commission" in South Africa exhonorated people who had committed horrible crimes. It would not serve anyone in the autism community. Whom would you exhonorate in this case?

Ted Kuntz

Laura, as I reflect further on how destructive this "medical" practice is and how pervasive the harm, it strikes me we need the modern equivalent of a civil rights movement. The difference is the systemic harm isn't directed at only one race of people or one Nation. The harm and destruction of human life is universal and world-wide.

I believe it is time to call forth a 'Truth and Reconciliation Movement' similar to what took place in South Africa. We need to create a massive forum for truth to be told and reconciliation to be offered.

I know this will eventually happen. The question is how many more children need to be harmed first.

Birgit Calhoun

When I had whooping cough (pertussis), tiny babies were not known to get it. I remember being told that most kids were over 2 years old. I don't know if that had to do with the fact that the mother bestowed some immunity to very small infants. My hunch is that vaccination with the attenuated vaccine causes mothers not to give their very young infants the protection that the unadulterated virus used to give before the pertussis vaccine was invented. But I am willing to be educated on that. Does any one know statistics about that?



I never said that I thought it was a good thing that we no longer have measles, mumps, or rubella because of the vaccine. I think it's a bad thing that children no longer get them, and a bad thing if a woman has not gotten rubella antibodies before she's pregnant. I just said it's a fact that no one gets them any more because of almost universal vaccination for them. The vaccines for them are effective. But it would be better if children still got them naturally.


I think they should do the best they can in studying vaccine safety, certainly more than they do now. But if it's a choice between the fairly good or nothing, I would take fairly good. If thousands of children across the country were again being paralyzed by polio, I'd take the vaccine for myself and my daughter, even if it were only as good as it is now. If I were going to a yellow fever zone, I'd try to get out of it, but if I couldn't, I'd take the vaccine, even though we know already that it's a dangerous vaccine. Same for rabies. It's silly to get vaccines for things that aren't likely to be a threat to you or your child, but if I thought the alternative was worse, I'd take the vaccines even as they are today.



For hundreds of years, close to 100% of children got measles, including when I was a child and had it at six. As soon as the measles vaccine was introduced, measles incidence started falling, until now it's close to 0% getting measles. Same with chickenpox. Same with polio. The shills refuse to ever admit that any reaction is caused by a vaccine, no matter how immediate the reaction, or how like it is to thousands of similar reactions in the same time frame. I think we're doing the same thing if we try to say that no vaccine has ever prevented any disease. Of course they have. I think denying it is ideological, but it's refusing to look at deaths and disability caused by disease dramatically dropping as a result of vaccination. Of course the vaccination often causes damage. You've got to look at the big picture and try to consider both risks and benefits on both sides, but this is a case of looking at the best way to safeguard children's lives, and millions of children have died over the centuries from diseases that could now be prevented by vaccines. How many people here, if they were bitten by an animal which was definitely rabid, would just sit at home and wait to get and die of rabies? We know that the rabies vaccine is dangerous and can cause a lot of severe and dangerous reactions, including encephalitis and death. But would we rather refuse it and just die of rabies?



My neighbor, born in 1928, got pertussis in the '30s. No one I knew or ever heard of got pertussis before the acellular vaccine was introduced in the mid-'90s, because virtually everyone got the DPT vaccine. Even the other side recognizes that the old whole-cell vaccine was very effective in preventing pertussis, while the acellular version is very ineffective.

Pertussis means coughing ten coughs per breath for a long time, at least a couple of weeks at ten coughs per breath, but reduced coughing bouts lasting longer, at least a month. If you don't have that kind of coughing fit, then there is no problem, since the problem is only that young infants aren't able to handle coughing the mucus out of their lungs or getting enough oxygen when they can't breathe during the fits. And no one had fits like that during the years of the DPT (very few anyway), because the vaccine prevented them. The disease was no longer dangerous to any but the youngest newborns and a few immune-compromised people, while the vaccine was very dangerous, but as far as the disease itself went, the old vaccine did a good job in preventing it.



I'd like to see what the children are like who are said to have developed autism from EMFs or exposure to certain chemicals. I just read one thing that said that some of the children had been treated and recovered from autism in six months, which makes me think that they did not have classic autism. Do these children have severe, stroke-like damage to the language center of their brain? My daughter did the classic confusion of I/you when she was little, and also the word-for-word echolalia of long passages. She still just cannot structure sentences above an extremely short, simple level, because the inborn grammatical structures programmed into her neurons were destroyed by the vaccine encephalitis, which caused stroke-like damage and aphasia. How could you rebuild destroyed brain structures by stopping the factors which caused the damage?

Vaccinating pregnant women could certainly cause autism the old-fashioned way, and should be stopped.

Tim Lundeen


Re "I think it's an exaggeration to say that half of all children will be autistic in ten or twenty years. If the triggers for autism (vaccines and number of doses, and vaccine uptake) don't increase, I don't think the rate of autism will either."

The problem is that environmental triggers have increased since the most recent stats we have (for 8-year olds, reported after a multi-year delay), they are still increasing, and they will increase for the foreseeable future. For example, they are now vaccinating pregnant Moms, allowable glyphosate limits are increasing, and EMF exposure continues to rise.

There is an excellent talk about EMFs and chemical toxins, and how they work together, by Dr Pall at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yydZZanRJ50 You can follow along with the slides from https://www.dropbox.com/s/5e617kju8v9pkh1/MartinPall.pdf?dl=0

Birgit Calhoun

Here is my point of view once again. Making a general statement of completely eliminating all vaccination is not likely to win anyone friends, especially among the population that really likes vaccines. They also happen to be in the vast majority. There is good reason why certain vaccines should be used. At the moment the only way to prevent death from rabies is to be vaccinated. Getting vaccinated against tetanus is also a really good idea. Most of you people probably have never seen tetanus. I have. It is a very serious illness with death as a possible outcome. My objection regarding tetanus vaccine in its current form is that it is being given as a combination with diphtheria and pertussis. There is really no reason for giving that combination. Pertussis vaccine should also be given separately. I also object to the method used for attenuation. It's not as gross as it used to be; but it's still gross. The attenuation process, in my view, is somewhat unpredictable. And then adding adjuvants to sort of undo the attenuation is truly weird.

I would like to see another article written that is not as categorical as the one above. To me the suggestion of eliminating all vaccines will never fly. There is no need for many vaccines. But to say all are bad is over the top.



Even though it is artificial and often harmful, vaccination usually works at preventing the targeted diseases. I agree that no one should just get all of them "just in case," and should thoroughly research the diseases, how severe they are both usually and in the worst case, how common they are where you live at that time, how common and harmful they were before the vaccine, and how dangerous the vaccine has been reported to be, reading both studies (like those cited in Dr. Eisenstein and Miller's books) and the reports of those who have gotten them and been injured.

But after you do that, most people are still going to want some of them for their children, and they should be allowed to get them. I've already mentioned the ones I think many people would justifiably want to get, but of course it should be voluntary: every vaccine has injured or killed, and no one should be forced to take the risk. After reading about the ravages of polio in the US in the '40s and '50s, and how polio disappeared within a short time of the vaccines' being introduced, it's hard for me to see how anyone could say that thousands of children being paralyzed for life is preferable to any of them getting the polio series. Everyone remembers that children in the '60s were all vaxxed, with very few of them injured, and none of them crippled by polio. Tetanus is a terrible disease, and often fatal even with the best of treatment. The vaccine is well-tolerated by most, and it has eliminated tetanus in developed counties (with a tiny number of exceptions). Diphtheria is a terrible disease, called the children's angel of death in the nineteenth century. Meningitis is terrible, but I"d like to see what the rates would be if no one used the unnecessary pertussis vaccine. I think it would almost eliminate cases of meningitis.

I also have a severely vaccine-damaged child, but I could not in good conscience recommend that because she had obvious severe reactions to two of them, that all vaccines be eliminated. It would mean the suffering and death of other people's children. I think all of us need to study the question as much as possible, but I think seeking a path of moderation rather than elimination, between suffering caused by vaccines and that caused by vaccine-preventable diseases, would be the wisest course.

Linda, I agree that everyone should be aware of cases of vaccine failure, and vaccines causing other serious syndromes to develop, and I appreciate your making us aware of many. I'm against the Hib and Prevnar vaccines, but only if the mother can breast feed, keep the baby at home, and refuse the pertussis vaccine. Otherwise, it's still a question of balancing the pros and cons: if five babies are harmed, but five thousand are helped by a vaccine, it's necessary to consider that the advantages of the vaccine might outbalance the harms caused.



I agree. I, like you, had natural measles, rubella, and chickenpox in the sixties, at a time when almost all children did, and for most of us they were beneficial. I don't see the point in trying to deny that the vaccines have almost eliminated them from countries with routine vaccine programs. Vaccines usually work, for good or ill, but they cause the production of antibodies which usually protect from getting a severe form of the targeted disease.

To deny it, or to try to deny that bacteria and viruses (spores in the case of tetanus) cause these diseases is to take a position outside of scientific reality, and will be rightfully rejected by most people. The problems with vaccines are many, and I think we should limit ourselves to teaching people about what can be demonstrated.

But again, banning all vaccines would mean there would be no way to prevent birth defects from rubella (unless all girls were deliberately given rubella until they produced antibodies, which would be the best route), no way to prevent tetanus beforehand, no treatment to prevent rabies if you were bitten by a rabid animal, no almost foolproof way to prevent crippling from polio if it came back. I wouldn't want to live in a world so primitive as to sanction that. It must be left to the well-informed individual to make the decision.

Linda, again, I think it must be left to the individual. If you wait until someone develops tetanus, it's too late for the vaccine: you'd have to rely on human gamma globulin given very quickly, and all the other treatments for tetanus: muscle relaxants, antibiotics, and other kinds of organ support, because the only treatments are supportive, not direct cures. And high-dose IV vitamin C, of course. It would be painful and expensive, and in most cases take weeks to effect recovery. Many people prefer the tetanus series (preferably after the age of two) to prevent tetanus. Dr. Mendelsohn said that protection lasted at least forty years, much longer than the ten they say. He said all servicemen in WWII had gotten the vaccine, and, as of forty years later, when he was writing, none of them had ever gotten tetanus.



There has to be a cause. In 1987, when the only vaccines routinely given were DPT, MMR, and polio, the autism rate in the US was three in 10,000. The rate started to rise steeply as more vaccines were added to the schedule, so that now the rate is one in forty. For it to be one in two, it would require a cause that multiplied the autism rate by a factor of twenty. The rate probably directly depends on the number of vaccines given and the number of children who receive them. Those both skyrocketed in the last thirty years, probably for those reasons.

The CDC has not added a new vaccine to the schedule in years. The new meningitis vaccine is only for high-risk babies at this time, also the RSV. I'm certain that huge numbers would revolt if they tried to add another vaccine in the Age of Autism. I think the one in forty with autism now is bad enough that we need to work on that without invoking a near future of one in two.


I totally agree with Laura. No vaccine has been shown to be safe and effective, hence no vaccine should be mandated or even offered to the public. I am for a total ban of all vaccines, until independent, unbiased safety studies are conducted to prove their safety and efficacy. And all vaccine pushers from the government, Congress, media, and pharma corporations must be put on trial for vaccination holocaust of US and world children and adults.



Organic methods of farming many crops depend on having a huge amount of land, so that some can remain fallow to become fertile again after using it a few times. I read an interesting book many years ago, Maybe One, by Bill McKibbin. Sort of like Jared Diamond in plunging the reader into the depths of despair at how overpopulation is ruining the natural world, with hundreds of pages of minutely-referenced details. McKibbin goes into detail in describing technological fixes enabling increased agricultural production. He mentions hybridization which has permitted the production of more grain or fruit-bearing stems on each plant. Unfortunately, we've reached the point at which any more stems would cause the plant to topple over. But without the "new and improved" plants, there wouldn't be nearly as much yield, and many would starve.

I agree with Ronald Kostoff. Perfection is not attainable in this world. If you demand it, a lot of people will die quickly as a result. Low levels of contamination with different toxic products usually means that only the most susceptible are injured, and usually not to a severe degree. Everyone must be aware of what the situation is and make the choices which seem the best for him or her. If you even go to Baskin Robbins once a year, you're consuming a lot of toxins in the delicious ice cream. Is that a reason to never go? For some it would be, but for most it wouldn't.

And it really doesn't matter that most Americans have yards much bigger than those who live in most other countries. Who's going to come in and convert our yard to a field and cultivate food in it to be shipped in toto to the Third World? Who's going to pay for it, and who's going to compensate us for appropriating our yard? Say I generously agree so that a family of eight children in the Third World may be fed. Then who's going to pay to feed those eight children when they grow up and have eight children each? Will we have to cultivate the grassy strips between the sidewalks and the street wherever they exist anywhere in the world? And again, who's going to do the work and ship it to the hungry ten thousand miles away? Bentham was right: he is much anathematized, but it is shooting the messenger. He only explained the regrettable reality. At this time, we do not need to be shackled to suffering and starvation, but it depends on most of us limiting our family size to what can be supported by locally-produced food.


From the Washington Post, no less. Read it before it is removed:

"Poliovirus has returned to Europe after a five year reprieve, paralyzing a 4-year-old and 10-month-old in the Ukraine, the World Health Organization said Wednesday.

The WHO said the two cases were in the southwestern part of the country -- bordering Romania, Hungary, Slovakia and Poland -- and that the strain responsible, vaccine-derived poliovirus type 1 or cVDPV1, may still be a threat to the region.

cVDPV is a rare, mutated form of the virus that comes from the vaccine itself."



What idiots.

"Prevnar, however, is losing its punch because strains not covered by the vaccine are filling the biological niche that the vaccine strains used to occupy, and they are causing disease.

Big trouble

One strain in particular, called 19A, is big trouble. A new subtype of it caused ear infections in the nine Rochester children, ages 6 months to 18 months, that were resistant to all pediatric medications, said Dr. Michael Pichichero, a microbiologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center"



That happens to be the right question. Samsel reported a few parts per billion of glyphosate, depending on the specific vaccine. Suppose he had found one part per billion? One part per trillion? One part per quadrillion? One part per septillion? At what point does his finding transition from a curiosity to a matter for concern?

Size matters! You need to focus on the major issues, and not get distracted by your ideology.


With all due respect, I think you should take your own advice when it comes to being distracted by your ideaology

No one here, including you, can prove that any vaccine has ever prevented a disease of any kind. Yet we all know children who's health has been assaulted by one ore more vaccines.

Size definitely matters, especially when we're talking about the smallest and most defenseless among us. Who are completely dependent on their parents to protect them.

I applaud Laura, for being the first contributor that I've seen on this forum, with the courage to say what desperately needed to be said


Brigit & Linda,
From what I've read about the Rabies Vaccine-if you are infected the vaccine is useless. Also, in some of the literature on the vaccine for animals it states the Rabies Vaccines doesn't protect the animal from Rabies. So, what's the point. So if you are bitten by an animal and they can't find the animal to test than you must decide if you want the series of shot. Think about this-if you don't have Rabies like all vaccines you are injecting a series of toxins in your body. An animal can have Rabies but it doesn't necessarily mean it will be transmitted to a human if bite.

Many of Pasteur's contemporaries call the vaccine a fraud: http://www.vaccinationinformationnetwork.com/rabies-pasteur-and-the-rabies-vaccine/

Ronald Kostoff


"The claim that there is not enough land to feed the world's population is ridiculous."

Read the references I posted previously about organic farming vs conventional farming, and then respond. Arm-waving only goes so far!

Ronald Kostoff


"I'm astounded that you can raise such a question - how much herbicide can we get away with injecting into babies (or anyone). The answer is we shouldn't be asking that question."

That happens to be the right question. Samsel reported a few parts per billion of glyphosate, depending on the specific vaccine. Suppose he had found one part per billion? One part per trillion? One part per quadrillion? One part per septillion? At what point does his finding transition from a curiosity to a matter for concern?

Size matters! You need to focus on the major issues, and not get distracted by your ideology.



"There is a reason for rabies vaccination. It might save my life. It does not hurt anyone when I get a vaccine no-one else gets. It's presumptuous to say there is no place for vaccination because any time you expose yourself to an illness you have a chance to be vaccinated without knowing it. It is important to have an option for a tetanus vaccine when you stepped on nail near where horses have been grazing."

Good points. I think the difference is that with rabies and tetanus, is that one is treating a condition that exists (after being bitten by a rabid animal or stepping on a rusty nail on a horse farm). That's different from injecting the entire population, including pregnant women and preemies, with a long list of poorly tested, potentially contaminated, vaccines. In both cases you cite, it could be argued that the benefits outweigh the risks because without the rabies treatment, the person will immediately die, and without the tetanus toxoid, serious illness is likely to occur.

I have to say though, that I am not knowledgeable about the true effectiveness, safety or need for the rabies vaccine. I just know what we've all been told.


Dr. Kostoff,

"Your referenced article about glyphosate contamination in myriad vaccines raises a number of questions. Unfortunately, the article does not place these contamination levels in perspective. How much contamination has been shown to have adverse effects? How do the numbers presented in the article compare to these threshold levels?"

Of course the discovery raises questions. Of course he found glyphosate only because he was looking for it. Dr. Seneff may have an idea of how much contamination causes adverse effects. I would say any contamination is completely unacceptable for injection. I'm astounded that you can raise such a question - how much herbicide can we get away with injecting into babies (or anyone). The answer is we shouldn't be asking that question. If we had any sense or decency we would immediately stop injecting people with poison and we would put all our efforts into ameliorating the damage already done.


Dr. Kostoff,
Re organic farming not able to feed the world... Baloney. Take a walk around your own neighborhood. How much land is being devoted to growing grass? How many trees could be producing fruit or shrubs that could be producing berries that now produce nothing to eat? The claim that there is not enough land to feed the world's population is ridiculous. Organic methods work just fine. Organic food production is not only productive, it doesn't destroy the topsoil, which takes 500 years to replace. It builds it. We are running out of topsoil because of so-called "conventional" agriculture. Organic methods also don't destroy the water supply and poison every organism from man on down to those in the soil. "Conventional" agriculture is like "routine immunization". Man's imagination and ability to deceive himself and others knows no limits.

Hans Litten

Do you think no one should ever be allowed to vaccinate, or that everyone should always vaccinate, or do you fall somewhere in between? Send to Olmsted.Dan@gmail.com.

really ? why Dan ?

Ronald , do you see Autism as part of the global economy ? I bet you do !


I am a great believer in organic food products. Most of my diet is organically grown. I believe that if the global population ate strictly organically grown food, many diseases would either be eliminated or ameliorated.


Not of they continue to receive vaccines.

Ronald Kostoff

Michael S,

"Here are some studies that show otherwise"

One can cherry-pick articles ad infinitum showing organic farming can or cannot support the world's population. My comment reflected the experiences of people who had been doing organic farming for years, were committed to organic farming, and were trying to give a realistic picture of what organic farming could reasonably produce. However, there is an extensive technical literature comparing organic to conventional farming. I have appended the titles of some papers in the peer-reviewed literature addressing this issue. The quoted text at the end of the last paper is its conclusion.

I am a great believer in organic food products. Most of my diet is organically grown. I believe that if the global population ate strictly organically grown food, many diseases would either be eliminated or ameliorated. However, we now have a global population that is not sustainable, and is becoming even less sustainable with each passing day. One consequence, at least according to the actual organic farmers who are getting their hands dirty, is that the less efficient practices of organic farming are not adequate to feed the unsustainable population we now have, and which will get worse.

Organic agriculture cannot feed the world

The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture

Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture


Flaws and criteria for design and evaluation of comparative organic and conventional cropping systems
("A more sustainable production of sufficient food and fibers for a growing human population is one of the greatest contemporary challenges and deserves our wholehearted attention. Projections of population growth and awareness that arable land is a limited resource globally indicate that intensification of agricultural production on existing arable land is the way to produce sufficient food. Cropping systems with lower intensity (e.g. organic ones) demand more land to produce the same amount of food. The key goal of intensified and sustainable agriculture is to increase yields with minimal environmental disturbances. This review provides evidence that systems based on scientifically verified best agronomic practices are superior over organic ones with respect to yield, nutrient leaching, greenhouse gas emissions and conservation of biodiversity.")

Michael S.

@ Ronald Kostoff: "Given that the latter exposures are more or less on a daily basis, I would suspect in total they swamp the amounts contained in vaccines in total (recognizing there may be differences in direct injection vs ingestion)."

Of course some of us are inundated with glyphosate-based herbicides and that the amount in a vaccine would be relatively small, but as you say "there may be differences in direct injection vs ingestion." That opens up a Pandora's Box of possibilities and warrants intensive studies. The reason any toxin injected directly vs. ingested would be more harmful is that our digestion system is designed to remove toxins more efficiently through digestion than straight injection. At least that is a reasonable deduction absent the studies that should be done to compare the two processes. So what we need are long-term studies that compare vaccine ingredients vs. the same ingredient ingested. Unfortunately, that will never happen. Let's be safe and leave the toxins out of the vaccines.

Jenny Allan

@ciaparker"Measles disappeared within a few years of the introduction of the vaccine (not a good thing, but true)"
@Danchi "Not so. The Measles Vaccine had nothing to do with the reduction in Measles cases or deaths. By 1963, the death rate from measles in the United States had already dropped by approximately 98% Vital Statistics of the United States 1937, 1938, 1943, 1944, 1949, 1960, 1967, 1976, 1987, 1992; Historical Statistics of the United States."

I don't know about the US, but in the UK there's no question child measles cases reduced dramatically following the introduction of the measles vaccine in 1968. Rubella cases also fell following the intro of a girls only pre puberty vaccine. These days, the very few cases of Rubella infant damage during pregnancy, are almost exclusively linked to immigration. Measles complications can be quite nasty, but during the 1950's virtually ALL children contracted measles. Also virtually ALL mothers stayed at home, and knew how to nurse their children through those childhood diseases. I never heard of any deaths or disabilities caused by measles, even in the post war baby boom (45 children in my primary 1 class). Polio and Diptheria were much feared and YES I did know of a few 'iron lung' polio victims. My husband survived Diptheria pre vaccine. Rubella is a fleeting mild disease, rerely causing any problems other than the pregnancy one.

We won't win this war by attempting to ban all vaccines, regardless of their immediate and long term efficacy or claims of vaccine damage. Such polarisation, although understandable coming from parents of vaccine damaged children, simply provides an excuse to dismiss us all as 'anti-vaccine' cranks and weirdos. The 'establishment' aided and abetted by a bought press and media have no problems dismissing all our concerns, either with denials, using those flawed Madson/Thorsen statistical stitch ups, and any number of ridiculously contrived so called 'scientific studies' involving wiring up babies' heads and inventing non existent adult autism cases to 'prove' autism is genetic and any increases in the population are down to better diagnoses. It's a sad fact that the proletariat is more inclined to believe the likes of Paul Offit or any other quasi medical doctor or so called professor with a fancy job description. The promotion of medically and scientifically unqualified persons like Brian Deer as 'attack dogs' was a mistake, which will eventually come back to haunt them, but he has been replaced by the likes of Dorit Reiss who is claimed to be a university lecturer in law, whilst apparently not qualified to practise it.

Only public outrage can put the brakes on the vaccination excesses of incestuous political/ pharmaceutical cartels. I am an optomist by nature and am hoping the US efforts of Andy Wakefield, Polly Tommey and Del Bigtree to promote their movie Vaxxed throughout the US , is having a desired effect upon parents and prospective parents. I don't need to repeat the issues, which Dr Wakefield and his friends are pushing home. Anyone can view the videos which are ongoing. AoA, thankfully independent of political interference and pharma cash, needs YOUR support, including donations, in order to spread the word. The issues which I believe are of most importance in terms of influencing public opinion are listed below:-

1. The MMR vaccine is NOT as effective as it should be in order to be licenced. The measles outbreak at Anaheim Disney, demontrated a significant percentage of measles vaccinated persons contracted the disease. Also, there is currently an apparent epidemic of mumps cases amongst MMR vaccinated young adults in universities and colleges. Only the Rubella MMR component could possibly be called a 'success' in terms of long term immunity. There is a very good case MMR vaccine has caused more harm than good amongst the population. Both mumps and rubella are benign diseases, best caught in infancy in order to convey life long immunity.

2. Vaccinations with 'live' viruses can become 'vectors' which spread disease.

3. Flu vaccines are admitted to be ineffective, with average efficacy 50% at most. They also often contain mercury.

4. I believe the US is almost alone in vaccinating newborns with Hep B vaccine. Only babies born to Hep B carriers are at risk and this can be ascertained before birth.

There's more, but you get the idea. All these points have been OFFICIALLY admitted so OFFICIAL denials can be exposed as lies and misinformation.


Michael S.

@ ciaparker and Ronald Kostoff re: Needing conventional (toxic-based) agribusiness to feed the world.

Here are some studies that show otherwise:





Here's my wisdom of experience: The prevailing "consensus" that is most readily available about a topic that could affect the profits of massive corporate industries is usually greatly skewed in favor of the corporations. Quite simply, they own the discussion. Think about it: We are all here on a daily basis discussing how much "deadly" misinformation is available in the public about vaccines, so don't you think that the same methods of deception are utilized by other similarly "evil" corporations like Monsato? The agri / biotech business is as big and as influential as Big Pharma, so what proof do you see that makes you believe all the hype going around? Vaccines, the tobacco industry, the medical industry etc. - you name it - and they control the public's perception about their products and have the means and the motives to do so. Of course the prevailing "consensus" is that without "poisons" we couldn't feed the world, but a huge section of the world is starving anyway and we waste 30% of our production now. We can feed the world without poisoning the planet but it's a matter of choice, and others are making that choice for us because it is profitable.

The cell phone industry, vaccines, allopathic medicine, geo-engineering, big agribusiness, the nuclear energy industry etc. are killing us. Unless we move to stop them soon we will lose a sizable portion of our population. That doesn't mean just faceless starving third-world children, that means our children and grandchildren will be the ones "genocided." Our bloodlines may just end in just a few generations if the vaccine mandates don't stop.

It's the poisons, stupid !

Ronald Kostoff

Linda1/Michael S,

Your referenced article about glyphosate contamination in myriad vaccines raises a number of questions. Unfortunately, the article does not place these contamination levels in perspective. How much contamination has been shown to have adverse effects? How do the numbers presented in the article compare to these threshold levels?

I did a short sweep on Google searching for vaccine contaminants. Most studies I saw were single contaminant studies. How well those studies can be extrapolated to the real-world situation of multiple contaminants acting synergistically is unknown. I have seen other studies that show when toxic stimuli are combined, much less of each one is required for adverse effects compared to what is required for each toxic stimulus in isolation.

Another question relative to glyphosate is: how much is the vaccine component relative to the other sources of glyphosate exposure? At a minimum, we would be getting more or less direct glyphosate exposure from foods we eat sprayed with this substance, and from animals we eat who themselves eat foods sprayed with this substance. Given that the latter exposures are more or less on a daily basis, I would suspect in total they swamp the amounts contained in vaccines in total (recognizing there may be differences in direct injection vs ingestion).

Finally, the glyphosate reference raises a more troubling issue. Samsel found the glyphosate contamination because he was specifically looking for it. More generally, in order to find a contaminant, one has to have the interest in searching for particular contaminants, and the apparatus required to measure the contamination levels. How many contaminants in total exist in vaccines, and what fraction of these have been actively sought for measurement? More generally, how many contaminants in total exist in drugs, and what fraction of these have been actively sought for measurement. Far more generally, how many contaminants in total exist in the air we breathe and the food we eat and the water we drink, and what fraction of these have been actively sought for measurement?

When I was doing the research for my eBook on Pervasive Causes of Disease, it became clear to me that what was in the published literature for any disease was only the tip of the iceberg of potential causes for that disease. Only a modest number of investigators were searching for potential causes, since sponsor interest in identifying contributing factors was relatively limited. I suspect the same is true for contaminants affecting our air, food, medicine, and water supplies.

Jeannette Bishop

I've spent forever juggling in my mind whether this is a call for legislating morality or just stopping legislated (or something very like legislated) immorality...I'm in an exhausted state so...

I get these profound, ironic thoughts in such a state, like we should get some really super mandate-loving California legislators to add a mandated addendum to SB 277 that every vaccine on the list (and those to be mandated in the future) has to first undergo gold standard safety testing with true placebos and true controls for any group to which the mandate is to be applied and of course, mandate a robust demonstration of safety for any mandated group receiving the vaccine prior to receiving the vaccine, and of course the whole state legislative body would fall over each other to support such a rational act, and then the rest of us probably wouldn't want to hold our breaths waiting for the SB 277 mandates to fall upon our heads. (Oh, wait ... they would probably mandate our children participate in those trials..., actually, I guess with SB 277 they already can mandate that... I just don't think they would honestly study the risks in those trials... we ARE in such a mess...)

Frankly, if vaccines underwent such testing, and were never recommended without providing whatever info about risks that were found, as well as the limitations of existing research, and coercion was never applied...I can't call for anyone wanting a vaccine to not have the option.

But if I felt like mandating, I think people would benefit in getting diverse info about various alternatives for boosting immune system health and improving disease outcomes, as well. Yeah, California should lead the way in mandating we go there, if they can do so without somehow undermining a beneficial educational process.

Michael S.

Here's a good reason to ban vaccines now: http://www.activistpost.com/2016/09/another-vaccine-bombshell-glyphosate-think-monsantos-roundup-confirmed-in-most-vaccines.html

Roundup is in most vaccines. Need any more reason?

Laura Hayes


How can bypassing the first parts of the immune system, purposefully invading a latter part of it, a part which is strategically designed to be enclosed and protected from outside assaults that have not been filtered and processed first in the nasal, respiratory, and digestive tracts, and contaminating this latter part with a slurry of toxic, neurotoxic, and disgusting ingredients, prepared in heinous and morally repugnant ways, in improperly monitored locations which are hidden from the public's view, be in any way protective, healthful, beneficial, or wise?

If disease and illness are of concern, strengthening and protecting the immune system must be the goals, not invading, contaminating, poisoning, and destroying it.





"Measles disappeared within a few years of the introduction of the vaccine (not a good thing, but true):
Not so. The Measles Vaccine had nothing to do with the reduction in Measles cases or deaths. By 1963, the death rate from measles in the United States had already dropped by approximately 98% Vital Statistics of the United States 1937, 1938, 1943, 1944, 1949, 1960, 1967, 1976, 1987, 1992; Historical Statistics of the United States.
- Colonial Times to 1970 Part 1; Health, United States, 2004, US Department of Health and Human Services; Vital Records & Health Data Development Section, Michigan Department of Community Health; US Census Bureau, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 2003; Reported Cases and Deaths from Vaccine Preventable Diseases, United States, 1950–2008.)
By Robert D. Grove, Ph. D. and Alice M. Hetzel

According to the CDC's Measles Pink book the transmission of the ENDEMIC Virus occurred with the spreading of the FIRST Killed measles Vaccine back in 1963 Endemic means-NATURAL or Wild Measles. The first Measles vaccine mutated or as the CDC likes to say children had an altered host immune response caused by the deleterious effect of the measles vaccines". (In English-children were infected by the virus in the vaccine and it had also mutated into a new strain)

The KMV was removed from the marketplace in 1967 because it caused significant problems:
high fever, unusual rash and pneumonia and encephalopathy. This form of Measles became know as Atypical Measles or AMS (Syndrome) was though to be limited to the KMV. Unfortunately AMS has been documented in children who have received only the Live Measles Vaccine:
Nichols (1979) wrote that atypical measles is generally thought to be a hypersensitivity response to natural measles infection in individuals who have previously received killed measles vaccine, although several investigators have reported AMS-like illness in children who had been vaccinated only with live measles vaccine.

Keep in mind the CDC stated in 1966 that Measles would be eradicated by 1967 when it introduced the Live Measles Vaccine:
“Measles To Be Eradicated in 1967 With 55% Vaccine Coverage”

The single or double dose vaccine strategy hasn't worked. In 1994 Dr. Gregory Poland wrote:
-Arch Intern Med. 1994 Aug 22;154(16):1815-20.
Failure to reach the goal of measles elimination. Apparent paradox of measles infections in immunized persons. Poland GA1, Jacobson RM.
Conclusion: The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons. Because of the failure rate of the vaccine and the unique transmissibility of the measles virus, the currently available measles vaccine, used in a single-dose strategy, is unlikely to completely eliminate measles. The long-term success of a two-dose strategy to eliminate measles remains to be determined. http://archinte.jamanetwork (dot) com/article.aspx?articleid=619215.

In 2012 he wrote this:
The measles vaccine has failed (http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/lawrence-solomon-vaccines-cant-prevent-measles-outbreaks) he explained two years ago in a prescient paper, “The re-emergence of measles in developed countries.” In that paper, he warned that due to factors that most haven’t noticed, measles has come back to be a serious public health threat. Poland sees the need for a major rethink, after concluding that the current measles vaccine is unlikely to ever live up to the job expected of it: “outbreaks are occurring even in highly developed countries where vaccine access, public health infrastructure, and health literacy are not significant issues. This is unexpected and a worrisome harbinger — measles outbreaks are occurring where they are least expected,” he wrote in his 2012 paper, listing the “surprising numbers of cases occurring in persons who previously received one or even two documented doses of measles-containing vaccine.” During the 1989-1991 U.S. outbreaks, 20% to 40% of those affected had received one to two doses. In a 2011 outbreak in Canada, “over 50% of the 98 individuals had received two doses of measles vaccine.”

To date, despite multiple efforts, the reality is that for the practical, socio-cultural, and immunologic reasons outlined above, we have not eradicated measles. As a result, measles is re-emerging as a public health threat, and our current tool for prevention has limitations that increasingly look to be significant enough that sustained elimination, much less eradication, are unlikely. Perhaps it is time to consider, in earnest, the development of the next generation of measles vaccines.
Paper: The Re-Emergence of Measles in Developed Countries: Time to Develop the Next-Generation Measles Vaccines? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905323/

"and chickenpox has disappeared since the introduction of the varicella vaccine in 1995."
Chicken Pox has not disappeared. The cases just aren't being documented because many parents know that of all the childhood illnesses Chickenpox is the mildest and in most instances if the child isn't experiencing dire symptoms-they never contact their kids Peds-just like back in the day when childhood illness were rites of passage to strengthen the immune system. What has happened because of the Varicella Vaccine is Shingles have gone off the charts not only for adult there is now children with shingles. Something unheard of two decades ago.
-Primary Versus Secondary Failure Following Varicella Vaccination: Implications for Interval between Two Doses Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal 11 February 2013
Conclusions: Literature to-date indicates a relatively high rate of primary vaccine failure and limited evidence of secondary vaccine failure amongst one-dose varicella vaccine recipients, suggesting that a short interval between two doses might be preferable in countries considering implementation of universal varicella vaccination to reduce breakthrough varicella. However, any potential disruption to well-established vaccination schedules should be considered.
- Peer-reviewed studies documenting cases of shingles following varicella vaccination.
by Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D 2009 Nov. http://whale.to/vaccine/peer1.html
- Disingenuous CDC Study Confirms Danger of Chicken-pox Vaccine -Chicken-pox
By John Stone: http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/11/disingenuous-cdc-study-confirms-danger-of-chicken-pox-vaccine.html

"Pertussis disappeared after the vaccine was introduced"
Pertussis cases actually increased with both vaccines. FDA and the CDC can no longer hide the fact that the vaccines has always caused outbreaks and will continue to do so because they will continue to use it DESPITE knowing that it's a problem:
-Meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors, Office of Infectious Diseases Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tom Harkins Global Communication Center Atlanta, Georgia December 11-12, 2013.
***FDA issued a warning regarding this crucial finding. Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up to date for their DTap boosters (see appendix) for the CDC document Item#3), meaning that people who are up to date are more likely to be infected and thus contagious than people who are not vaccinated.

-Study titled: “Acellular Pertussis vaccines protect against disease but fail to prevent infection and transmission in a nonhuman primate model,”
used infant baboons to test the hypothesis that “current acellular pertussis vaccines fail to prevent colonization and transmission” of B. Pertussis. (there is no vaccine for Bordetella Pertussis bacteria) http://www.pnas (dot) org/content/111/2/787.

Lead author Tod Merkel did comment to the New York Times that when exposed to B. Pertussis after recently getting vaccinated, you could be an asymptomatic carrier and infect others, saying: “When you’re newly vaccinated, you are an asymptomatic carrier, which is good for you, but not for the population.” According to Tod Merkel of the FDA, it has now become clear that the vaccine does almost nothing to prevent the spread of whooping cough. Although it does seem to prevent about 80 percent of people from showing symptoms of the disease, it does not prevent them from catching it or spreading it.

-Study: Whooping cough resurgence due to vaccinated people not knowing they’re infectious? clinicalnews(dot)org/2015/06/24/study-whooping-cough-resurgence-due-to-vaccinated-people-not-knowing-theyre-infectious/comment-page-1/. From study/article:
“a detailed epidemiological model of whooping cough transmission to conclude that acellular vaccines may well have contributed to — even exacerbated — the recent pertussis outbreak by allowing infected individuals without symptoms to unknowingly spread pertussis multiple times in their lifetimes.

‘There could be millions of people out there with just a minor cough or no cough spreading this potentially fatal disease without knowing it,’ said Althouse. ‘The public health community should act now to better assess the true burden of pertussis infection.’ What’s worse, their model shows that if the disease can be spread through vaccinated, asymptomatic individuals essentially undetected.

"We need to look at what it would be like if vaccines were no longer given to anyone, and if we would think it was worth it if a large number of people were once again disabled or killed by the diseases"
Do you have studies or data to support this statement?

"thousands of babies being born with severe birth defects from congenital rubella syndrome"
Data please.
-Does rubella vaccination prevent congenital rubella syndrome?
-Government figures show that cases of congenital rubella syndrome (CRS) increased after the rubella vaccine was introduced. Source: CDC, MMWR (October 25, 1996). Vaccine Safety Manual by Neil Z. Miller. p178. Chart bottom of this page-http://whale.to/vaccines/rubella3.html
-Rubella Vaccination: a failure by Michael Nightingale

80% of babies born to mothers with Rubella suffer NO birth defects. If the Mom is tested for Rubella early enough in her pregnancy anti-virals help to reduce the chances of birth defects. Rubella vaccination which would come in the form of the MMR is far more dangerous than Rubella. If the Mom is vaccinated for Rubella after she is confirmed to have it the vaccine is ineffective. Like all live viruses Rubella stays in the body indefinably . It has been confirmed to be in the nasal passages of vaccinated people as long as 6 weeks post vaccination and as well as in breast milk.




I completely agree.

There isn't one person here, who can prove that any vaccine has ever prevented a disease of any kind.

But every single one of us, can point to at least one defenseless child who has been horribly injured by one.

This holocaust has to be stopped now. And waiting for the 'right' time to act, makes no sense whatsoever.

For Ronald

You've probably already seen this

Cynthia Cournoyer

I am very glad that you believe "the overuse and very early use of vaccines, has created a tragic situation of millions of severely disabled children." But that it's a good thing that we don't have measles, mumps, rubella and chickenpox because of vaccines is debatable. Prior to the vaccines, they were considered mild uncomplicated illnesses. It is only the advent of the vaccines that made them scary. What have we traded in terms of overall health by accepting this particular form of medicine? In the case of rubella, we could argue that we have made the population less immune to the disease, pushing susceptibility into adult, childbearing years where it is indeed dangerous. Before the vaccine, 85% of adults were naturally immune. After the vaccine, 36% of vaccinated adolescent females lacked proof of immunity. (What About Immunizations? Exposing the vaccine philosophy, pp. 129-135.)

But arguing historical facts never changes minds. You either believe them or you do not. The reason neither of us is convinced of the others' point of view is the subjective interpretation and the counter balance of other facts that we feel make sense, given our respective perspectives on life.

As far as pertussis is concerned... with the renaming of conditions (underdiagnosing the vaccine failures), and the fact that a vaccinated child can still spread the disease and that highly vaccinated populations are still contracting the illness, whether it was a new vaccine or not, I think it's time to wonder whether the risks actually outweigh the so called benefits.

david m burd

I have just had a small family reunion, and it was promoted that all uncles/aunts, great-uncle/aunts attend the near-future weddings of such nieces and nephews. And, it is a "family obligation" to attend.

Of course these good old fashioned weddings (in my family) result in CHILDREN being born.

Upon cogitating on this mandate, I shall respond that, yes, I will attend upcoming weddings, but only on the contingency that such couples being married read this AoA Post by Laura Hayes (and I will send them this entire Post).

And, IF such marrieds can't - or won't - respond intelligently they are not only out of my substantial will, but immensely most critical, their children will be destroyed. They have been forewarned. And, they are out of my will if I am ignored.

We now have to "play hardball", and now it's the "world series of a lifetime" - and we seniors have our role to play to stop this Autocratic Vaccine Insanity.

In the know

This excellent article should be sent to every agency that administers to the disabled, every daycare, school system, hospital, doctor/nurse/health professional, senior center, nursing home and especially every legislator in America.

I know from experience that information such as this does not appear on the regular news and most people are totally clueless about these problems. Even people who have autistic children! For some it may provide the missing piece to the autism puzzle that they have been wondering about.

We have reached a tipping point where some of us need to care for our disabled elderly and disabled children at the same time. As this continues or even increases, it is weakening our nation as some people will become financially fragile by giving up their jobs to care for their loved ones.

Let us band together and make our voices heard:

To contact your Senators and Representatives:
Put in your zip code under - Find your elected officials or contact them via Twitter or Facebook

If enough people express their negative opinions on vaccines and they want to be re-elected they will act upon it. They need to hear your opinion.

Ronald Kostoff

Bob Moffit,

"you are "reluctant" to accept Laura's "moratorium on vaccines because ......"

Where did I state I was 'reluctant'? My position hasn't changed, and I have repeated it many times. If we have a new technology, it should not enter the market until safety has been demonstrated adequately. That is the Precautionary Principle. This is in contrast to the present policy of doing shallow half-assed safety studies on new technologies, and shoving them in the market-place as fast as humanly possible.

I posed a specific question to Laura. If we applied her moratorium to all potentially toxic technologies whose safety has not been adequately demonstrated, we would tank the global economy. Was she comfortable with that? In fact, if we applied her moratorium to the top handful of toxic technologies on my list, we would tank the global economy.

But, I never said that's the only way we would tank the global economy, as some commenters on my initial comment have implied. If we continue on our present path of increasing autism and many other chronic diseases, we will have more than enough disabled to also tank the global economy.

So, where are we? If we continue using these myriad toxic substances in increasing amounts, we will tank the global economy. If we immediately discontinue using these substances, we will tank the global economy. When both ends of the spectrum give such a dismal prospect, that's not a good sign.

Additionally, tanking the global economy has its own set of consequences. Over the years, I've read articles by people involved in organic farming. To a person, they've stated that proper organic farming practices could not begin to support the present global population, much less that projected by mid-century. So, eliminating pesticides, other chemicals that allow mass production, fossil fuels to protect against climate change, et al, means essentially condemning many people to early death. These, of course, will be the poorest and most vulnerable on the globe, what Fanon called the Wretched of the Earth.

To return to the initial issue, I view Laura's recommendation as one example of what is necessary to follow the Precautionary Principle. We could provide exemptions for those who truly want vaccines; this would reverse the present exemption procedure!

go Trump

Well written Laura,

About all that is left of industry in the US of A is supported by the glorious fascists in Washington DC.

We have a medical / media / defense / energy / insurance & law industrial complex. They own the government and pay for the campaigns.

They do not like boycotts, if all the California “well baby visits” were simply cancelled for a few months, the pediatric industry in would collapse.



It's the primary issue now that the overuse of vaccines has become rampant. It is still the case that most vaccines work as billed to prevent certain diseases. Measles disappeared within a few years of the introduction of the vaccine (not a good thing, but true), and chickenpox has disappeared since the introduction of the varicella vaccine in 1995. Pertussis disappeared after the vaccine was introduced (until the much less effective acellular version was introduced in the nineties). None of these vaccines was necessary by the time the vaccines were introduced. (I say that, but recognize that some children would have died if they had not gotten the vaccines, while others would not have been disabled had they not gotten them).

But if it were the case that children were still dying or being crippled by polio, the situation would be different. We need to look at what it would be like if vaccines were no longer given to anyone, and if we would think it was worth it if a large number of people were once again disabled or killed by the diseases. I completely agree that at this time the overuse and very early use of vaccines has created a tragic situation of millions of severely disabled children. The parent must think very carefully before permitting any of them. But if we once again had thousands of babies being born with severe birth defects from congenital rubella syndrome, would it be better to look at possible consensual use of the rubella vaccine to prevent the defects, or say that it's better to have thousands of deformed babies rather than permit women to get the vaccine?

Birgit Calhoun

I am a pro-choice person when it comes to vaccines. But vaccines going through a manufacturing process that allows for all kinds of contamination and fudging with ingredients should not be forced on any one. I do not accept the fact that I cannot get a mono-valent vaccine. The only reason why Thimerosal is in any vaccine is the practice to draw from a multi-dose vial.

There is a reason for rabies vaccination. It might save my life. It does not hurt anyone when I get a vaccine no-one else gets. It's presumptuous to say there is no place for vaccination because any time you expose yourself to an illness you have a chance to be vaccinated without knowing it. It is important to have an option for a tetanus vaccine when you stepped on nail near where horses have been grazing.

To categorically deny me the right to be vaccinated is not in my best interest.

Dorito Reiss

I think vaccines should be banned. At the very least, they should be opt-in rather than opt-out. No one should need to jump through bureaucratic hoops to beg for permission to make personal medical decisions, and no one should be coerced into making medical decisions either.

Ronald Kostoff

Cia Parker,

"I think it's an exaggeration to say that half of all children will be autistic in ten or twenty years. If the triggers for autism (vaccines and number of doses, and vaccine uptake) don't increase, I don't think the rate of autism will either."

The 'half of all children will be autistic in ten-twenty years' statement was generated in a specific context. I saw this estimate in articles by Stephanie Seneff. She has correlated the rapid increase in autism over the past two decades with the rapid increase in the use of glyphosate.

"At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.” She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder."

So, in her view, the 'triggers' for autism are not the vaccines you propose, but rather the use of glyphosate. She also identifies mechanisms that would link the two. If she is correct, then a sufficiently rapid increase in glyphosate use would lead to the rapid increase in autism she projects.

Martin Pall views the main triggers for autism as exposure to EMF, and he also identifies mechanisms to link the two. There have been correlations between the number of cell phones and the increasing incidence of autism.

So, everyone has their 'pet' concept as to what is mainly responsible for autism, and everyone believes their pet concept should be outlawed to prevent this disease.

I've stated my own view before. Any theory has to take into account the macro (large-scale effects) and the micro (detailed biological mechanisms). I believe the EMF and glyphosate, and possibly other toxic stimuli with similar growth patterns, are contributing factors to autism, because of both good correlation and plausible mechanisms. Given many parents' observations that their children regressed shortly after vaccination, the vaccine must be acting as an enabler. So, even though the vaccine dose is not increasing in the same pattern as the autism incidence rate, the vaccine functions as a 'catalyst' for the glyphosate et al contributing factors to exert their adverse effect.

Could the glyphosate, EMF, and other potential contributing factors result in autism without the vaccine? Who knows? Their rapid increase in growth occurred within the context of mass vaccination, and it's hard to deconflate these different potential contributing factors. The safety of each of these potential contributing factors has not been demonstrated individually, much less in combination. Until that safety has been demonstrated, long-term as well as short-term, each should be removed from the market. That is the Precautionary Principle.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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

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

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

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

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

Your Information

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