Dachel Media Update: Pesky Pesticides
Best of AofA: The Naked CDC: the Hit and Run Truth about MMR in their Own Words

Outbreaks of Measles: Should We Be Concerned

Measles virusBy Neil Z. Miller

Prior to 1960, most children in the United States and Canada caught measles. Complications from the disease were unlikely. Previously healthy children usually recovered without incident.

In the 1960s, a measles vaccine was introduced. During the next several years, cases of the disease declined. However, a significant reduction in the severity of measles occurred long before the vaccine was introduced. For example, in 1900 there were 13.3 measles deaths in the United States per 100,000 people. By 1955 C eight years before the first measles vaccine became available C the death rate had declined on its own by 97.7% to .03 deaths per 100,000.(1) Data published in International Mortality Statistics shows that from 1915 to 1958 the measles death rate in the United States and United Kingdom declined by 98%.(2)

Eradication of Measles

When the measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, health officials were confident that they could eradicate the disease by 1967.(3) That did not occur. In 1978, the federal government announced its new goal to eradicate measles from the U.S. by 1982.(4) That did not occur. In 1994, health authorities once again targeted measles for elimination from the Western Hemisphere by the year 2000.(5) Although the CDC officially declared that measles was eliminated in 2000, outbreaks continue to occur.

According to the CDC, as of June 27 of this year there were 539 cases of measles in the United States, out of a population of more than 318 million.(6) That is a very tiny number. The last time that somebody died from measles in the United States was 11 years ago.(7)

What is causing these small outbreaks of measles? According to authorities, decreasing vaccination rates are responsible. However, vaccine coverage rates in the United States have remained high and stable since 1996. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), every year for the past 17 years, about 92% of all 1-year-olds eligible for a measles vaccine (MMR) have been vaccinated.(8) Thus, if measles cases are on the rise, it cannot be blamed on decreasing vaccination rates.

Authorities also claim that unvaccinated people are contracting the disease and spreading it to others. However, a study published this year in Clinical Infectious Diseases showed that people who are fully vaccinated against measles can spread the disease to other people who are fully vaccinated against measles. Thus, vaccinated people are vectors for the disease.(9)

Another problem with the measles vaccine is that it may be technologically archaic, inadequate for the 21st century, out of alignment with current scientific knowledge about how the immune system operates. It was made to be given with a Aone dose fits all@ approach. It assumes that everyone is at equal risk of complications from disease and that their immune responses to the vaccine will be similar. However, a recent study confirmed that when healthy children are vaccinated against measles there is a wide variation in their antibody levels. The diversity of these inter-individual antibody responses may determine whether the vaccine is protective or ineffective when the vaccinated person is challenged by the disease.(10)

It is also important to note that in nearly every outbreak of measles, large percentages of the cases occur in people who were fully vaccinated against the disease. For example, in 1988, 69% of all school-aged children in the U.S. who contracted measles were adequately vaccinated.(11) In 1995, 56% of all measles cases in the U.S. occurred in people who were previously vaccinated.(12)

There are several possible reasons to explain why fully vaccinated people are still susceptible to contracting measles. Two of these reasons were already discussed: 1) people who are fully vaccinated against measles can spread the disease to other people who are fully vaccinated against measles, and 2) some vaccinated people will not develop protective antibody levels.

Vaccine failures also occur because of decreasing immunity over time. When the measles vaccine was introduced, authorities promised everyone that one dose would protect for life. But immunity from vaccination is temporary, the reason a booster dose was added to the vaccine schedule C to compensate for the short‑lived boost in antibody production from just one shot. High antibody levels gained through vaccination decline after several years, unlike natural immunity which provides lifelong protection against the disease.

It is also important to understand that artificial immunity conferred through vaccination may be stimulated by regular contact with the natural disease. This is known as exogenous boosting. However, due to widespread measles vaccination, circulation of the natural measles virus is rare, lowering opportunities for boosting immunity among vaccinated persons. Scientists believe that this may contribute to waning antibody levels, loss of population immunity to measles, and an increased ability of vaccinated persons to contract and transmit the disease.(9)

Herd Immunity

In 1933, A.W. Hedrich published a study on epidemiological patterns of measles. He concluded that when 68 percent of children less than 15 years of age are immune to the disease, epidemics do not develop.(13) Authorities retained this general idea C that a precise degree of herd immunity will prevent epidemics C but remain unclear about the level required to achieve it.

In 1991, the CDC concluded that measles outbreaks can be avoided if 70 to 80 percent of two‑year‑olds in inner cities are vaccinated.(14) A 1992 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association also concluded that Aimmunization coverage of two‑year‑olds of 80 percent or less may be sufficient to prevent sustained measles outbreaks in urban communities.@(15)

Today, authorities concede that earlier guesses about herd immunity were wrong. Greater than 90% of all eligible children in the U.S. have been vaccinated against measles yet outbreaks continue to occur. Even two doses of the measles vaccine are insufficient to achieve the elusive herd immunity and authorities are now demanding that nearly everyone must be vaccinated or the people who are vaccinated won't be protected!

Despite extensive evidence showing several problems with the current measles vaccine and measles vaccination strategies, health authorities blame unvaccinated people for outbreaks of disease in vaccinated populations. They instigate irrational fear in the parents of vaccinated children and animosity between vaccinated and unvaccinated families.

Overzealous pro-vaccinators believe that the vaccine is ineffective in those who receive it unless the small percentage of unvaccinated people submit to compulsory vaccination as well. When authorities claim that vaccinated people are at risk of getting measles if some people are permitted to remain unvaccinated, they are essentially arguing that the small number of unvaccinated people are responsible for safeguarding vaccinated populations C the UN-vaccinated are key to whether the vaccinated are truly protected!

Authorities also claim that vaccinated people protect the unvaccinated AND that the unvaccinated are at risk of getting the disease. So the unvaccinated are protected and unprotected at the same time! (Schrodinger and his paradoxical cat would love this argument.)

Food and nutritional supplementation

Although measles is rarely a dangerous disease in developed nations where proper nutrition and access to healthcare are available, in third world nations where pregnant mothers and their babies are malnourished, measles can be a serious disease. However, a measles vaccine may not be sufficient to protect children from excess morbidity and mortality.

Today, most developing nations require their infants to receive several inoculations, including a measles vaccine at 9 months of age. They have very high vaccine coverage rates (a percentage of the target population that has been vaccinated), yet their infant mortality rates are dreadfully unacceptable. For example, in 2011 Gambia, a poor country in Africa, required its infants to receive multiple vaccines, vaccinated 90% to 96% of its infants (91% received measles vaccines), yet 58 of every 1000 infants still died before their first birthdays. Ghana also required its infants to receive several vaccines, vaccinated 91% to 98% of its infants (91% received measles vaccines) yet also had a dismal infant mortality rate: 52 of every 1000 infants died before their first birthdays.(16)

These examples appear to confirm that high vaccination rates are not sufficient to reduce complications and deaths from measles and other causes. Clean water, proper nutrition, good sanitation, and easy access to health care are the most important factors to improve infant mortality rates in unclean, poorly nourished, and impoverished areas of the world.(17-19)

Malnutrition is a global problem and may be the most significant factor requiring immediate attention. It has been linked with a diminished immune function. A weakened immune system often results in an increased susceptibility to infections.(18) Even mild infections have adverse effects on nutritional status. Conversely, almost any nutritional deficiency will lower resistance to disease.

The importance of proper nutrition cannot be overemphasized. For example, several studies have shown that high doses of vitamin A are protective against complications and deaths from measles. A recent paper published by the International Journal of Epidemiology found that vitamin A treatment for measles recommended by the World Health Organization reduced measles mortality by 62%.(20) A randomized clinical trial published in the British Medical Journal found that the death rate in children under 2 years of age declined by 87% in the group that received vitamin A supplementation when compared to the group that only received routine treatment.(21)

Pregnant women and children living in third world nations need to be provided with healthy, nutritious food and supplemented with all the vitamins and nutrients required for building strong bodies and robust immune systems. There are many reasons why outbreaks of measles continue to occur in both developed and developing nations. By refocusing our efforts on addressing archaic vaccination policies while eliminating hunger and malnourishment, childhood challenges from infectious diseases do not have to invoke anxiety and fear. Some infections might even provide advantages. For example, studies confirm that women who contracted measles or mumps in childhood are significantly less likely to develop ovarian cancer as adults.(22,23)

Misplaced priorities

Considering the evidence presented in this paper, perhaps the CDC and other health authorities should stop provoking inordinate concern over 539 cases of measles in the United States out of a population of more than 318 million C 1 case, no deaths, per every 590,000 citizens C and should focus instead on a rising epidemic of type 1 diabetes that has been scientifically linked to vaccinations(24,25) or aluminum adjuvants in vaccines that have been scientifically linked to autoimmune and neurological disorders.(26-29)

Our health authorities could also bring attention to the serious problem of malnutrition in our own great nation. In 2010 (the most recent year with complete figures) 2,948 people died from nutritional deficiencies.(30) Why is there manufactured outrage over 539 cases of measles (no deaths) in the United States but complete silence over nearly 3,000 American deaths annually from nutritional deficiencies?

The FDA, CDC, WHO, and other overzealous pro-vaccinators need to back off from their Aone dose fits all@ technologically archaic vaccination policies and stop blaming non-vaccinators for vaccine failures. If you take an aspirin to ward off a headache and you still feel a throbbing pain, the aspirin didn't work. It failed. The manufacturer made an inferior product. Your headache was not caused by everyone else nearby who refused to take an aspirin. That's ridiculous.

The measles vaccine also poses significant risks of irreversible harm, including the potential for blood disorders, sensory impairments, immune system suppression, brain damage and death. These possibilities are well documented in the medical literature and manufacturer's product inserts.(31) Therefore, no one should be intimidated or coerced into vaccinating against their will. Parents must remain free to accept or reject vaccines for their children.

In summary:

  • A significant reduction in the severity of measles occurred long before the vaccine was introduced.

  • Measles vaccination rates are not declining. They have remained stable and high for the past 17 years.

  • People who are fully vaccinated against measles can spread the disease to other people who are fully vaccinated against measles.

  • The measles vaccine may be technologically archaic, causing a wide variation in eliciting either protective or ineffective antibody levels.

  • In nearly every outbreak of measles, a large percentage of cases occur in people who were fully vaccinated against the disease.

  • High antibody levels gained through vaccination decline after several years, unlike natural immunity which provides lifelong protection against the disease.

  • Due to widespread measles vaccination, circulation of the natural measles virus is rare, lowering opportunities for boosting immunity among vaccinated persons. This may contribute to waning antibody levels, loss of population immunity to measles, and an increased ability of vaccinated persons to contract and transmit the disease.

  • High vaccination rates and two doses of a measles vaccine are insufficient to achieve the elusive herd immunity.

  • Health authorities blame a small number of unvaccinated people for outbreaks of disease in vaccinated populations, essentially arguing that the UN-vaccinated are key to whether the vaccinated are truly protected.

  • Authorities claim that vaccinated people protect the unvaccinated AND that the unvaccinated are at risk of getting the disease C they are protected and unprotected at the same time.
  • In third world nations where pregnant mothers and their babies are malnourished, measles can be a serious disease.

  • In third world nations without clean water, proper nutrition, good sanitation, and easy access to health care, high vaccination rates may be insufficient to reduce complications and deaths from measles and other causes.

  • Malnutrition is a global problem that can lead to nutritional deficiencies lowering resistance to disease.

  • High doses of vitamin A are protective against complications and deaths from measles.

  • Pregnant women and children living in third world nations need to be provided with healthy, nutritious food and supplemented with all the vitamins and nutrients required for building strong bodies and robust immune systems.

  • Health authorities should stop manufacturing inordinate concern over a relatively small number or measles cases and should focus instead on epidemics of diabetes, autoimmune and neurological disorders that have been scientifically linked to vaccinations.

  • Health authorities in the U.S. have instigated outrage over 539 cases of measles but remain silent over nearly 3,000 American deaths annually from nutritional deficiencies.

  • If you take a pill or drug for a particular health condition and it doesn't work, then it failed. It would be absurd to blame your neighbors. The manufacturer made an inferior product.

  • The measles vaccine poses significant risks of irreversible harm.

  • No one should be intimidated or coerced into vaccinating against their will. Parents must remain free to accept or reject vaccines for their children.


1. Mendelsohn R. How to Raise a Healthy Child...In Spite of Your Doctor. (Ballantine Books, 1987): 237.

2. Alderson M. International Mortality Statistics (Washington, DC: Facts on File, 1981): 182-83.

3. Sencer DJ, et al. Epidemiological basis for eradication of measles in 1967. Public Health Report 1967; 82: 253-61.

4. Hinman AR. The opportunity and obligation to eliminate measles from the United States. Journal of the American Medical Association 1979; 242(11): 1157-62.

5. Neuzil KM. Eradication of polio, measles, and hib. Third Annual Conference on Vaccine Research 2000.

6. CDC. Measles cases and outbreaks, January 1 to June 27, 2014. www.cdc.gov/measles/cases‑outbreaks.html

7. U.S. health officials report spike in measles cases. The Washington Post 2013 December 5. www.washingtonpost.com

8. WHO. Immunization surveillance, assessment and monitoring. Measles (MCV) immunization coverage among 1-year-olds, 1980-2012 (%): 2012. www.gamapserver.who.int/gho/interactive_charts/immunization/mcv/atlas.html

9. Rosen JB, Rota JS, et al. Outbreak of measles among persons with prior evidence of immunity, New York City, 2011. Clin Infect Dis 2014 May; 58(9): 1205-10.

10. Poland GA, Kennedy RB, et al. Vaccinomics and personalized vaccinology: is science leading us toward a new path of directed vaccine development and discovery? PloS Pathog 2011 Dec; 7(12): e1002344.

11. CDC. Measles. MMWR 1989; 38: 329-30.

12. Gold E. Current progress in measles eradication in the U.S. Infect Med 1997; 14(4): 297-310.

13. Cherry JD. The >new epidemiology of measles and rubella. Hospital Practice 1980 July: 53-54.

14. CDC. Measles vaccination levels among selected groups of preschool-aged children C USA. MMWR 1991; 40: 36-39.


15. Schlenker TL, et al. Measles herd immunity: the association of attack rats with immunization rates in preschool children. JAMA 1992; 267(6): 826.

16. WHO/UNICEF. Immunization Summary: A Statistical Reference Containing Data Through 2011 (The 2013 Edition). www.childinfo.org

17. Wegman ME. Infant mortality in the 20th century, dramatic but uneven progress. J Nutr 2001; 131: 401SB408S.

18. Beck MA. The role of nutrition in viral disease. J Nutri Biochem 1996; 7: 683B690.

19. Scrimshaw NS and SanGiovanni JP. Synergism of nutrition, infection, and immunity: an overview. Am J Clin Nutr 1997; 66: 464SB477S.

20. Sudfeld CR, Navar AM, et al. Effectiveness of measles vaccination and vitamin A treatment. Int J Epidemiol 2010 Apr; 39 Suppl 1: i48-55.

21. Barclay AJG, Foster A, et al. Vitamin A supplements and mortality related to measles: a randomised clinical trial.BMJ 1987 Jan 31; 294: 294-96.

22. Newhouse, M, et al. AA case control study of carcinoma of the ovary.@ Brit J Prev Soc Med 1977; 31: 148-53.

23. West RO. Epidemiologic study of malignancies of the ovaries. Cancer 1966; 19: 1001-1007.

24. Classen JB, Classen DC. Clustering of cases of insulin dependent diabetes (IDDM) occurring three years after hemophilus influenza B (HiB) immunization support causal relationship between immunization and IDDM. Autoimmunity July 2002; 35(4): 247-53.

25. Classen JB, Classen DC. Clustering of cases of type 1 diabetes mellitus occurring 2-4 years after vaccination is consistent with clustering after infections and progression to type 1 diabetes mellitus in autoantibody positive individuals. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 2003 Apr-May; 16(4): 495-508.

26. Shaw CA, Tomljenovic L. Aluminum in the central nervous system (CNS): toxicity in humans and animals, vaccine adjuvants, and autoimmunity. Immunol Res 2013 Jul; 56(2-3): 304-16.

27. Tomljenovic L, Shaw CA. Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism? J Inorg Biochem 2011 Nov; 105(11): 1489-99.

28. Gherardi RK, Authier F. Macrophagic myofasciitis: characterization and pathophysiology. Lupus 2012 Feb; 21(2): 184-89.

29. Petrik MS, Wong MC,et al. Aluminum adjuvant linked to Gulf War illness induces motor neuron death in mice. Neuromolecular Med 2007; 9(1): 83-100.

30. CDC. National Vital Statistics Reports 2013 May 8; 61(4): Table 10.

31. Miller NZ. Vaccine Safety Manual for Concerned Families and Health Practitioners. (New Atlantean Press, 2015): 114-118; 143-154.

 Neil Z. Miller is a medical research journalist and the Director of the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute. He has devoted the last 25 years to educating parents and health practitioners about vaccines, encouraging informed consent and non-mandatory laws. He is the author of several books on vaccines, including Vaccine Safety Manual for Concerned Families and Health Practitioners, 2nd edition (2012), the updated and revised Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective? (2012), Make an Informed Vaccine Decision for the Health of Your Child (2010) with Dr. Mayer Eisenstein, Vaccines, Autism and Childhood Disorders (2003), Immunizations: The People Speak! (1998), and Immunization Theory Versus Reality (1995). He gives talks on vaccines both locally and nationally. Past organizations that he has lectured for include the International Chiropractic Pediatric Association, the International College of Integrative Medicine, Autism One/Generation Rescue, the Hahnemann Academy of North America, the University of Virginia, and the New Mexico Chiropractic Association (continuing education program). He is a frequent guest on radio and TV talk shows, including PBS, Phil Donahue, and Montel Williams. Mr. Miller has a degree in psychology and is a member of Mensa. His children, who are now young adults, were born at home and not vaccinated. He lives in Northern New Mexico.



I think most important prerequisite is clean water, clean food, shelter, when not provided with these essential parts of life various infections, viral, bacterial, fungal, are able to spread.
Vaccinating a population that does not have clean water and clean food might reap big pharma companies profit, and this may be why there interest lie there, instead of doing the morally just thing as previous post mention providing sustainable health giving properties of CLEAN WATER CLEAN FOOD


Beyond the issue of having no true placebos in vaccine safety studies, there is also the issue of comparing adverse events in cases and controls within the context of comparable, cumulative damage from prior exposures. In other words, it is not merely that vaccine X is being compared to vaccine X minus antigen (or vaccine Y), but also that both cases and controls have an accumulated history of damage (or damage-priming effects) from vaccines A, B, C, D, etc.

In tobacco science terms, the first issue ("no true placebo") is like doing a short-term study of cancer rates in smokers who smoke one cigarette per day vs those who smoke one tar-free (or different brand of) cigarette per day. The "base-line exposure" issue is like a short-term study of smokers who smoke 30 cigarettes per day vs those who smoke 29 cigarettes and 1 tar-free cigarette per day.

Of course, the effect of this "base-line exposure" issue is that it creates a large signal of damage common to both cases and controls. Any additional damages suffered by cases due to the extra--but relatively small--marginal exposure can be easily written off as statistical noise.

david m burd

Everybody including Todd W:

Everybody(s) comments' contributions (references, anecdotal, other science, etc.) comprise an essential resource of information of utmost value to anybody thinking about receiving or giving vaccinations to their children. Thinking adults can judge for themselves.

These comments' facts & figures have been dogmatically ignored/censored/opposed by the IACC headed by Tom Insel and his cronies on the IACC (Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee).

The "fix is in" for exonerating vaccine damage/death as clearly seen by 'stacking the deck' by such as the IACC's Dr. Insel. Yet, there are some in Congress who actually seek the facts such as Rep. Posey, Dan Burton, and others that have been cited on this website - though they are completely ignored by an American mainstream media hopelessly comprised by Pharma Ad revenues, and medically illiterate reporters and editors.

It comes down to grassroots awareness - the Federal Agencies have proven to be lackeys to their partners in medical crime: The pharmaceutical industry.

Thus information as supplied by Age of Autism, SafeMinds, Canary Party, Autism One, NVIC, VRAN (Vaccine Risk Awareness Network), and many others, are sources to supply to relatives and friends.

Don't be shy! Our families and our Nation are at stake.


Wow, this is a lot of comments.

In any of these, has anyone discussed whether vitamin A causes encephalitis, since it seems to be such a powerful positive approach to reducing infection rates. Who needs a shot with risks if vitamin A is so beneficial and DOESN'T cause brain swelling.

Just think what could happen if vitamin A AND vitamin C were given at the same time. Could we get a near 100% reduction in down time, serious complications, and reduce measles to a "cold-like" illness.

Does vitamin A in general need refrigeration, or is that only for injectable vitamin A? I'm not sure you even need a doctor to administer it, orally or not. It seems to be a near perfect solution to measles endemic areas in developing nations.

If it helped those folks, maybe it could help us busy, rich, developed nations, too. Honestly, who has time for all these doctor visits! It's such a interference to family time that could be otherwise better spent.

Vaccine Information

The 1/1000 pre-vaccine mortality rate being cited is a mathematical impossibility if Measles is near universally contagious, based on the birth and death rates of the 13 years before vaccine license. The birthrate in 1950 was 3.8 million, and averaged 4 million plus through 1964. Over time all susceptible people would be expected to contract the infection. A 1/1000 mortality rate would have seen average annual Measles deaths rates of 4,000, but the average was 400, which matches Barkin's rate of 1/10,000. However, in that paper Barkin also identified that the mortal risk of Measles infection was not equally distributed but almost completely leveraged to those on the fringe of modern society- poor people without access to healthcare, basic sanitation, and other first world conditions. In counties where more than 60% of the population was below poverty the mortality rate was 8.7 per million, (9.7 per million for African Americans). The mortality rate in counties with less than 19.9% of the population below poverty level was only 1.3 per 1 million.
Recall the time period Barkin was reviewing was the last decade prior to the “vaccine era” - the 1950's – before the Civil Rights movement, before President Johnson's start of the War on Poverty in 1964, and Medicaid a few years later. In 1950 only 70% of farms had electrical service, (only 38% had a phone), even after 11 years of President Roosevelt's Rural Electrification Act. Appalachia dirt floor shacks, Mississippi share croppers, Texas dry farms- Barkin has an incidence map which is quite revealing. 20 plus states experienced 0 to .0154 mortality rates 1958 to 1963- that is zero to one death per 1.5 million population- so Washington state, with just over 3 million population in 1960 ranged from zero to 2 measles deaths annually 1958 to 1963. The high mortality rate states closely follow the Mason / Dixon line.
By the 1950's Measles was no longer a mortal threat to a suburban child who lived in a house with city water, a flush toilet, stay at home mom and a pediatrician conversant with the use of Penicillin. There was a huge disparity in who was dying from Measles, thus Barkin's abstract statement- “ Vaccine should be accessible to all populations, but intensive efforts need to be directed toward groups at high risk of dying from measles who are suffering from a myriad of other health, social, and economic problems”. If some populations are at high risk of dying, other populations are therefore at low risk of dying.
“Robson and Jones documented that in the United States, measles deaths primarily occur in individuals below established height and weight norms. The 10-State Nutrition Survey conducted in the United States in 1968-1970 indicated that evidence of malnutrition increased as income level decreased and was least common in white persons. Death-to-case ratios generally decrease with improving nutrition and health status of a population”. Robson JRK, Jones E: Is the child with poor growth achievement more likely to die of measles? Clin Pediatr (Philadelphia) 10:270-271, 1971
Barkin also had this caution, “Attention must also be focused on the population over 15 who will represent an increasing percentage of measles cases as declining rates of natural infection are observed. The higher death-to-case ratio in this group may be indicative of a greater risk of complications from measles, exposing the unprotected adult to the potential of substantial morbidity”

cia parker

Anne J's answer was detailed and based on a lot of thought and reading. I would go further than she, after having experienced a lot of severe and permanent vaccine damage in my family. Vaccines cannot be made safe. Everyone should just forget about that possibility. EVEN if you could take out all the preservatives and adjuvants like mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, etc., you'd still have foreign proteins that are very apt to stimulate a damaging immune response. Any vaccine ingredient can be interpreted by an individual immune system as a dangerous challenge that must be countered with the most drastic measures, meaning vaccine encephalitis (brain damage, autism, seizure disorders) or autoimmune disease (asthma and allergies for starters). For the vast, vast majority, the vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases.
I've given it a lot of thought too. I would say that parents might want to consider a DT series for children starting not earlier than two years old. The DT is thought by some to be less dangerous than the tetanus vaccine along. No more after the initial series, except maybe in the case of a severe injury more than five years after the series. Protection probably lasts at least forty years. I would promote breastfeeding in the strongest terms possible, for as long as possible. And urge parents to avoid day care for their children, and find a single caregiver it is necessary. No others. Adults are much more likely to get Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, paralysis, or outright death from a flu vaccine than they are to die from the flu.

Vaccine Information

The article “Telling the World About Measles, Case History in Government Information” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1915318/pdf/pubhealthreporig00082-0071.pdf describes the collaboration between Pharmaceutical companies, CBS, and the Public Health Service to drum up support for the vaccine in 1963.
If Measles had been perceived as a mortal threat to an average American child, would this have been necessary?
It is significant from the article that even then they had to use statistics from Africa in persuading the public. “Because many people regard measles as basically a disease of childhood, to be endured and often welcomed as a guarantee of lifetime immunity, it was necessary to stress that measles and its consequences are far from trivial. With more than 400 deaths annually in the United States {out of 189 million plus population at that time = 0.0002%, and the birth rate was over 4 million, higher than we have today, a 1/10,000 mortality rate} and after effects ranging from serious mental crippling to deafness and other defects, it is a major health hazard. Another point was the much more serious health threat that measles poses in the developing nations in Africa and Latin America, where childhood mortality from the disease ranges from 25 to 50 percent. To hammer home this point, we cited the Public Health Service accomplishment in Upper Volta, West Africa, where experimental use of the vaccine, provided by Merck Sharp & Dohme, resulted in more than 700,000 vaccinations, saving the lives of many thousands of children.”

John Stone

Todd W. in his other persona 'Harpocrates Speaks' says he isn't a physician or scientist but he is certainly an inadequate apologist for a great number of official medical and scientific positions. My own guess is that it is not true but if he did claim expertise he would also be obliged to declare his identity to back it up. It is surely significant that when it comes to the entire vaccine culture nonsense there are really very few doctors who want to defend the detail of it under their own name for very long. And look what trouble he has got himself into.

david m burd

Todd W, you say:

"Regarding the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, if you are referring to a prospective, randomized trial, there are some big ethical problems with that."

I say: Your 'ethical problem' is the standard groupthink excuse always given by CDC officials and Tom Insel (heading the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee - IACC). It is utterly without logic, as there have been the last several decades thousands of parents (actually, scores of thousands of parents) who have purposefully refused vaccinations for their infants, and a retrospective study could be quickly done.

As to the prospective trial you refer to, there is no doubt thousands of parents would eagerly sign on, particularly if they were educated to read the vaccine makers' own literature warning of the litany of all the vaccines' acknowledged dire risks.

It seems to me it's your "ethics" that have everything turned on its head. Nature's worst nightmare is INJECTING completely foreign and toxic chemicals into pregnant mothers, their newborns, and relentlessly ever after to fragile infants and growing children - while NEVER providing lifelong immunity, and setting the table for ever-repeating chronically-ill future generations.

It's human nature to refuse to reconsider what one has been taught, especially if a person's position has caused untold grief and permanent harm to children (and their families), but this is clearly your mindset.

Anne J.

@ Todd
You'd asked which vaccines I think children should get, and that's a very difficult question for any parent, given the poor safety studies available for review. Every situation is different, different parts of the world have different disease risks, and individuals have different genetics and family medical histories (which is why 'one size fits all" is not acceptable!). I can tell you which ones I would definitely SKIP: the irresponsible birth dose of Hepatitis B for sure, the MMR (I'd think about the measles vaccine if I could get it separately, but after what my kids have been through, I'd take my chances with natural disease if I only had the choice of MMR), the chicken pox, flu (especially for pregnant women, babies and seniors!), I'd also skip tetanus for babies, and think the rotavirus vaccine is unnecessary in this country. I'd get as few vaccines as possible before the age of 2 or 3 , and stick with only those that offered solid science backing up claims to protect against truly fatal diseases. Unfortunately, the current science is not good, so it's pretty much a crap shoot. We need to do better!
As far as the vaccinated vs unvaccinated study, I'm talking about a retrospective study. No one I know is asking for anyone to withhold vaccines from anyone who might want them! I worked in prestigious research hospital for years. A retrospective study is not perfect, but it can be designed to give you quite a bit of very valuable data (certainly more valuable than the poorly designed Danish Study they are always flaunting as proof of safety!).
And no, I am not "anti vaccine", I am for SAFE vaccines. My stepfather was a surgeon, my grand father was a surgeon, my dad was a pharmacist, all our family friends were doctors, I have been a licensed healthcare worker going on three decades now, and I worked in a research hospital for years. I feel utterly betrayed by the CDC and completely ashamed of the way the medical community as a whole has addressed the autism epidemic. What I am noticing now, however, is a turning of the tide. Doctors and healthcare providers who used to just dismiss any connection between vaccines and autism are now starting to come around. They are asking more questions. Some openly state they now believe in a connection, and some even refer concerned parents to talk to me about my own experience. There is no doubt vaccines contribute. What we need are properly designed studies to tell us WHY some kids have more problems with them than others. Study the kids who got sick, and study the ones who are recovering using biomed treatments. Study the ENTIRE vaccine schedule, not just isolated bits and pieces. And for God sake, acknowledge the kids who have been injured by vaccines "for the greater good" and TAKE CARE OF THEM! They are not a "coincidence" and they are not "acceptable collateral damage". They are innocent children who have had their lives dramatically altered, who deserve so much better. The CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics have failed them horribly. Our country cannot go on like this.


I truly hope Todd responds to the various points, because, contrary to his worries, this discussion is much more respectful and nuanced than anything I ever saw at the "Science"blogs.


Since you threw out the "conspiracy theory" meme, I'm pretty much ignoring the rest of your comment. I will make a couple of statements.

Yes, I copy and paste-so what? It's practical and it saves time. Why reinvent the wheel? Years ago I used to be accused of cherry picking information. This way, you have some information and a link to that information. I think it's important to provide information (copy & paste) not for the person I'm responding to so much but so that others who read the comments are provided with some insights of the topics that's being discussed. They will be more compelled to go to the link and read more so than the person I'm responding to.

Measles continues to be a mild childhood illness. AMS however is not. Also, kids are contracting the illness, measles, from the measles vaccine.
Case of teenager with measles baffles doctors

Case of vaccine-associated measles five weeks post immunisation,
British Columbia, Canada, October 2013: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V18N49/art20649.pdf

Spotlight on measles 2010: Excretion of vaccine strain measles virus in urine and pharyngeal secretions of a child with vaccine associated febrile rash illness,
Croatia, March 2010: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V15N35/art19652.pdf

Measles Outbreak Traced to Fully Vaccinated Patient for First Time: http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2014/04/measles-outbreak-traced-fully-vaccinated-patient-first-time (not the first time and 2 cases were transmitted in the doctors office.

Two Fully Vaccinated Doctors Get Measles (2009)http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/204/suppl_1/S559.full.pdf+html

Major Measles Epidemic in Quebec Despite 99% Vaccine Coverage (1989) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1884314
Outbreak of Measles Despite Appropriate Control Measures (1985)http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=3618578

California Measles: 85% of Those Contracting It Are Fully Vaccinated http://www.naturalblaze.com/2014/06/california-measles-85-of-those.html

I have dozens of articles of outbreaks of every childhood illness there is a vaccine for happening in populations that are highly vaccinated. Why do you think this is????

*You will never look at vaccinated children the same!- Shedding Viruses* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKSeiAs_A4w

In regards to third world countries, the WHO/Gates and their minions are vaccinating everything that moves with live virus vaccines....that shed. They are creating their own market and at the same time engaging in some stealth population control. Another egregious thing they have done to children in the Third World is pump them full of vaccines which are toxic by their very makeup and have full mercury load. At the Simpsonwood conference in 2000, the 52 attendees voted to NOT REMOVE mercury in vaccines going to the Third World. Of course there is no documentation to confirm mercury has been removed from vaccines in the US. It's all voluntary.

Instead of poisoning the population in the Third World with vaccines costing millions of dollars, how about investing that money in: clean water systems, installation of municipal waste disposal system, toilets, plumbing, irrigation system to assist in growing crops,housing,teach the people about nutrition, life skills that will help them become more healthy and independent. All the WHo/Gates & minions are doing is creating in Third World countries what they have done in the US, with the help of our government, create chronically ill children.

More than 32 Million American Kids Chronically Sick: It's Time to Demand Answers: http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/05/more-than-32-million-american-kids-chronically-sick-its-time-to-demand-answers.html
Over 50% of children have a chronic condition and 1 in 6 have a neurodevelomental disorder (aka vaccine caused brain injury). Autism and autoimmune disorders are skyrocketing. Injecting aluminum, mercury, aborted fetal tissue, formaldehyde, MSG, diseased monkey kidney, etc. does not bring health.
Trends in the Prevalence of Developmental Disabilities in US Children, 1997–2008

1976: 1 child in 30 was learning disabled
→2013: 1 child in 6 is learning disabled.

1980: 1 child in 27 had asthma
→2013: 1 child in 9 has asthma.

1990’s: 1 child in 555 developed autism
→2013: 1 child in 50 develops autism.

2001: 1 child in 500 had diabetes
→2013: 1 child in 400 has diabetes.

I wonder what the chronic disease numbers are in children in the Third World counties?

cia parker

Dr. Michaela Glockler, a German pediatrician who has treated many children with measles and had spoken with many colleagues about their experience with it, said that the figure commonly thrown around now of one case of encephalitis per thousand cases of measles is clearly much too high and is not true: she said that it is really one case per ten thousand, one per fifteen thousand cases in toddlers. She said that to the extent the incidence of measles encephalitis may have really increased, that it would be due to the modern practice of reducing fevers, with Tylenol or anything else. The fever caused by measles is high, as high as 105 degrees, but is harmless if not interfered with. The immune system knows what to do, how high to make the fever and how long to hold it there. Going through the experience trains the immune system for a lifetime of competent service (vaccines train it to inappropriate autoimmune responses). It is foolish of people to say that they are uncomfortable with a fever going that high, try to reduce it, and thereby give the enemy, the measles virus the body is trying so valiantly to combat, a huge advantage which may cause serious complications and death. We need to do a study to see how many cases of measles encephalitis there would be in patients well-nursed, who got vitamin A, and no fever reducers.
Langmuir said in 1962 that the mortality from measles was less than one in 10,000 cases. In babies less than two years old it was four in 10,000. In the UK in the '80s it was one or two per 10,000 cases. In Europe three years ago it was three per 10,000. The increase may very likely be from the increased use of fever reducers, but in any case it means that for previously healthy children who are appropriately nursed, measles is NOT a dangerous disease.

david m burd

Todd W: you say,

"Comparing vaccine against a placebo containing all but the antigens allows discovery of adverse events caused by the antigen. But many of the newer vaccines actually are tested against saline placebo--."

You may be correct that 'newer vaccines' have been tested and compared to true saline placebos. Would you care to tell me what newer vaccines you are referring to?

As to the vaccines instituted the last 30 years in the U.S. Immunization Schedule for Children Aged 0 to 6, can you please identify what vaccine tests used a true placebo?

I look forward to being corrected - by the scientific method. Thanks!

Jeannette Bishop

Thank you, the obsessive focus on vaccine uptake, especially in some countries where a transfer of the resources involved to other health measures would actually improve overall mortality and health outcomes, suggests to me that the stated reasons for vaccinating serve more as paving material for other objectives.


Todd W.
Do you think the vaccine industry would have approached Congress in the 1980's demanding that Congress remove liability from vaccines, threatening to close down shop if they didn't, if vaccines were so safe? Do you think Congress would have set up the Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund in 1986, funded with $.75 of each disease of each vaccine sold thereafter to this day, if the healthy could not be harmed by vaccines? Do you think that the $2.8 billion already paid out of that fund was given to people who were not harmed by vaccines? You think the government just paid out $2.8 billion to be nice?

Please. There are too many people here who have lost loved ones or their loved ones health from vaccines, including me. Enough.


the whole pharma - government agencies needs to be cleaned up --los of people needs to go to jail -- and have been for a long time. Crimnnals have made a good living and retired and new criminals have been hired.

Cleaned up and cleaned out - and it won't happen if everybody keeps saying - Oh, but it is vaccines and they are always safe.

There is a ugly belly of the underworld when it comes to vaccines - in which you should be aware -- better be aware. That is what happens when you take rights away - as well as checks and balances.

John Stone


It is not very good is it? I say vaccines aren't monitored - you deny this by saying there is a monitoring system but admittedly it is rubbish. I have no doubt you will now come and say "Well, it isn't as rubbish as all that". Well it is and it is certainly no reassurance. You keep on asking people to prove that the vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases, but if they don't have proper evidence base YOU DON'T EITHER. But it also does not answer the question whether they are as safe as they could or should be, or whether there isn't a toll from the endless expanding schedule which is a grand experiment on the population at large.

I would love it if you could name which vaccines have been thoroughly tested against a proper placebo. Has there been any movement to withdraw the ones which aren't?

You evaded my point that basis for the claims of vaccine safety are based largely on statistics when you accuse me of confusing correlation with cause.

Your defence of nasal flu vaccines is half-hearted and irrelevant. They are licensed and marketed, and in the UK they are now on the schedule - we look forward to only chaos in our schools this fall and sick people being made iller.


@Todd W.: "Comparing vaccine against a placebo containing all but the antigens allows discovery of adverse events caused by the antigen. But many of the newer vaccines actually are tested against saline placebo, too. I'm sorry, but you are wrong about your "absolute fraud" hyperbole."

Can you list the vaccines that have been tested against a saline placebo? I can only find a few flu vaccine studies in older people but not any vaccines on the childhood schedule.

Some examples of newer vaccines:

Gardasil: tested against the aluminum adjuvant
Cervarix: tested against the Hep. A vaccine containing the same adjuvant
Rotateq: tested against a "biologically active placebo"


@Todd, no, all the neurodegenerative (other than Alzheimer's) and the auto- immune conditions are in people in their 20's, or younger = not "age related."
Honestly, as others have mentioned, I don't think you have any clue how ill and learning disabled (that term in the general sense) the children now are in the schools.


@Todd W. : "Every vaccine is tested for adverse reactions. If there are too many, they aren't approved." Haha. Sorry but I have to laugh. Have you looked at vaccine studies and noticed that ALL use either another vaccine or the adjuvant and not saline as the control?

The only thing manufacturers can say is that vaccine X is as safe as vaccine Y or the aluminum adjuvant in it. You are free to take any of these "safe" vaccines in any quantity you want and leave the rest of us to make our own informed decision.


This is the go to rebuttal for the pro-vaccine advocates "conspiracy theory". See this term is suppose to make people shut down when they hear it, not ask questions or question the status quo. Trolls are instructed to use this term freely because of the negative conations associated with it which is what the CDC/vaccine industry wants. If you automatically disregard anything you hear that is labeled a conspiracy theory you won’t ever question the motives of the CDC/vaccine industry and you will be a good little sheep.

Do you know where the term “conspiracy theory” came from? The king of conspiracies, paranoia, and cover-ups himself J Edgar Hoover. He coined the term when he claimed that organized crime did not exist. That’s right, the first ever conspiracy theory was that the mafia was real, turns out J. Edgar was full of it. Why would the FBI create a term that discredits people? Because they didn’t want anyone to believe that there was a mafia, and the best way to accomplish that was by discrediting anyone who said otherwise without actually having to use facts to prove them wrong. See the similarities here. The Pharmaceutical companies, the CDC, FDA, IOH, IOM, WHO, The Task Force For Health, Gates Foundation & The Rockefeller Foundation don't want people to know that they are part of the most egregious fraud perpetrated on mankind-vaccines.

*Gates also delivered a very odd comment at around the 4:30 mark of the linked video where he maintains “if we do a really great job on vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [his initial 2050 global population projection of 9-billion] by perhaps about 10 to 15 percent.” Bill Gates recently pledged $10-billion towards a global vaccine program targeting the “world’s needy children.” http://vanshardware.com/2010/02/bill-gates-we-can-lower-the-worlds-population-with-vaccines/
I'm sure you will mitigate the remark by saying what Gates said was taken out of context. That's what they all say.

*In its 1968 yearly report, the Rockefeller Foundation acknowledged funding the development of so-called “anti-fertility vaccines” and their implementation on a mass-scale. From page 51 onward we read:
“(…) several types of drugs are known to diminish male fertility, but those that have been tested have serious problems of toxicity. Very little work is in progress on immunological methods, such as vaccines, to reduce fertility, and much more research is required if a solution is to be found here.”

The possibility of using vaccines to reduce male fertility was something that needed to be investigated further, according to the Rockefeller Foundation, because both the oral pill and the IUD were not suitable for mass-scale distribution:

“We are faced with the danger that within a few years these two “modern” methods, for which such high hopes have been held, will in fact turn out to be impracticable on a mass scale.”

“A semipermanent or renewable subcutaneous implant of these hormones has been suggested, but whether or not the same difficulties would result has not been determined.

Saying that research thus-far had been too low-grade to produce any substantial results, the report was adamant:THE

“The Foundation will endeavor to assist in filling this important gap in several ways:

1- “Seeking out or encouraging the development of, and providing partial support to, a few centers of excellence in universities and research institutions in the United States and abroad in which the methods and points of view of molecular biology are teamed with the more traditional approaches of histology, embryology,and endocrinology in research pertinent to development of fertility control methods;”

2- “Supporting research of individual investigators, oriented toward development of contraceptive methods or of basic information on human reproduction relevant to such developments;”

3- “Encouraging, by making research funds available, as well as by other means, established and beginning investigators to turn their attention to aspects of research in reproductive biology that have implications for human fertility and its control;”

4- “Encouraging more biology and biochemistry students to elect careers in reproductive biology and human fertility control, through support of research and teaching programs in departments of zoology, biology, and biochemistry.” ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION PRESIDENT'S FIVE-YEAR REVIEW ANNUAL

REPORT 1968 http://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/uploads/files/1496d619-017d-4b13-8a64-fce8ed4f785d-1968.pdf
Global Distribution of Rockefeller-Funded Anti-Fertility Vaccine Coordinated by WHO

Rockefeller Foundation Developed Vaccines For “Mass-Scale” Fertility Reduction- which outlines the Rockefeller Foundation’s efforts in the 1960s funding research into so-called “anti-fertility vaccines”- another series of documents has surfaced, proving beyond any doubt that the UN Population Fund, World Bank and World Health Organization picked up on it, further developing it under responsibility of a “Task Force on Vaccines for Fertility Regulation”.

Just four years after the Rockefeller Foundation launched massive funding-operations into anti-fertility vaccines, the Task Force was created under auspices of the World Health Organization, World Bank and UN Population Fund. Its mission, according to one of its members, to support:

“basic and clinical research on the development of birth control vaccines directed against the gametes or the preimplantation embryo. These studies have involved the use of advanced procedures in peptide chemistry, hybridoma technology and molecular genetics as well as the evaluation of a number of novel approaches in general vaccinology. As a result of this international, collaborative effort, a prototype anti-HCG vaccine is now undergoing clinical testing, raising the prospect that a totally new family planning method may be available before the end of the current decade.”

In regards to the scope of the Task Force’s jurisdiction, the Biotechnology and Development Monitor reported:

“The Task Force acts as a global coordinating body for anti-fertility vaccine R&D in the various working groups and supports research on different approaches, such as anti-sperm and anti-ovum vaccines and vaccines designed to neutralize the biological functions of hCG. The Task Force has succeeded in developing a prototype of an anti-hCG-vaccine.”

One of the Task Force members, P.D. Griffin, outlined the purpose and trajectory of these Fertility Regulating Vaccines. Griffin:

“The Task Force has continued to coordinate its research activities with other vaccine development programs within WHO and with other international and national programs engaged in the development of fertility regulating vaccines.”

Griffin also admitted to the fact that one of the purposes of the vaccines is the implementation in developing countries. Griffin:

“If vaccines could be developed which could safely and effectively inhibit fertility, without producing unacceptable side effects, they would be an attractive addition to the present armamentarium of fertility regulating methods and would be likely to have a significant impact on family planning programs.”

* Between 1963 and 1965 more than 400, 000 Colombian women were sterilized in a program funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. In Bolivia, a U.S. imposed population control program administered by the Peace Corps sterilized Quechua Indian women without their knowledge or consent...(Akwesasne Notes, 1977: 31). In 1967 the American Public Health Association and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists conducted a study and found that 54 percent of the teaching hospitals nation-wide "...made sterilization a requirement for winning approval for an abortion" (Weisbord, 1975: 155). A Look at the Indian Health Service Policy of Sterilization, 1972-1976 by Charles R. England

*UNICEF Nigerian Polio Vaccine Contaminated with Sterilizing Agents Scientist Finds: KADUNA, Nigeria, March 11, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A UNICEF campaign to vaccinate Nigeria's youth against polio may have been a front for sterilizing the nation. Dr. Haruna Kaita, a pharmaceutical scientist and Dean of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Ahmadu Bello University in Zaria, took samples of the vaccine to labs in India for analysis. http://www.sott.net/article/182359-UNICEF-Nigerian-Polio-Vaccine-Contaminated-with-Sterilizing-Agents-Scientist-Finds

*Recombinant Birth Control Vaccine - Patent 5733553: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/49292742/Recombinant-Birth-Control-Vaccine---Patent-5733553

*Polysorbt 80 Causes Infertility An Emulsifier That Can Damage your Reproductive health Joanna Karpases-Jones http://infertility.suite101.com/article.cfm/polysorbate_80_causes_infertility

*Tetanus Vaccines Sterilizing Women In Kenya? Catholic Church There Raises Suspicion.

*Vaccine Wkly. 1995 May 29 - Jun 5:9-10.
Tetanus vaccine may be laced with anti-fertility drug.International / developing countrie http://fastapo.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/tetanus-vaccine-may-be-laced-with-anti-fertility-d-vaccine-wkly-1995-may-29-jun-5-pubmed-result.pdf
*Are New Vaccines Laced with Birth-Control Drugs? http://www.thinktwice.com/birthcon.htm

The quotes of well respected honest scientist are just as important today than in the 50-60's, even more so because the deception, conflict of interest, data manipulation and out right terrorizing the public for profit has created two generations of chronically ill children. The recently released "blockbuster study" that definitely answers the question of vaccine safety is another CON by the CDC/Vaccine industry.

"Safety of Vaccines Used for Routine Immunization of US Children: A Systematic Review.
The report's conclusions are hardly convincing. But what's more troubling, is the immense conflict of interest from which the report itself was written. The authors include Margaret A. Maglione, Lopamudra Das, Laura Raaen, Alexandria Smith, Ramya Chari, Sydne Newberry, Roberta Shanman, Tanja Perry, and Courtney Gidengil, all of the corporate-funded think tank, RAND Corporation.
While the report itself was funded by the US government, the RAND Corporation from which its authors were drawn is funded by the very corporations (.PDF page 70) that manufacture various vaccines, including the MMR vaccine which was the primary focus of the report. Big-pharma sponsors of RAND include GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Merck - that latter of which is listed by the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) specifically as the manufacturer of the MMR vaccine.

Merck has also directly and openly funded other studies put out by RAND (here and here). RAND's other big-pharma sponsor, GSK, has been recently exposed amid a global multi-billion dollar bribing scandal where it was paying off doctors to endorse and distribute their products.

With Pediatrics' report exposed as - at the very least - an irresponsible, unethical exercise in research, and at worst, corporate propaganda masquerading as a scientific paper, those considering whether or not to have vaccines manufactured by deceitful pharmaceutical monopolies injected into their bodies, have an added incentive to hold off and search for alternatives. http://www.activistpost.com/2014/07/big-pharma-vaccines-deemed-safe-by big.html#more

New study ‘disproves’ MMR-autism link? Not so fast: pro-life vaccine expert: SEATTLE, WA – A new study making the rounds claims to definitively disprove the long-rumored link between the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) shot and rising rates of autism. But according to a prominent pro-life vaccine researcher, the study only looked at one MMR vaccine – an ethically-sourced Japanese product that contains none of the human DNA fragments found in more common MMR vaccines produced from aborted fetal cell lines – and doesn’t apply to the MMR available in the United States.

“The MMR all the news are talking about is from Japan and was made in animals, not aborted fetal cells. Therefore, we would not expect that study to show any link between animal based MMR and autism,” explained Dr. Theresa Deisher, a Seattle-based genetic research scientist. “We only see a link between aborted fetal manufactured vaccines and autism.” http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/new-study-disproves-mmr-autism-link-not-so-fast-pro-life-vaccine-expert

"In fact, most deaths seen when measles outbreaks occur in the United States occur either in children in which vaccination was contraindicated, the vaccine did not work or in children with chronic, immune-suppressing diseases. In fact, in most studies these children catching the measles or other childhood diseases have been either fully immunized or partially immunized. The big secret among "vaccinologists" is that anywhere from 20 to 50% of children are not resistant to the diseases for which they have been immunized. THE TRUTH BEHIND THE VACCINE COVER-UP By Russell Blaylock, M.D.

more later

Todd W.


I'm sorry you had that experience. I don't know the details, so I won't attempt to address it. If you are not anti-vaccine, I will ask you, too: which vaccine(s) would you say that people should get? Regarding the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated, if you are referring to a prospective, randomized trial, there are some big ethical problems with that. (More detail on the problems here: http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2011/03/vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-rct-overview.html [part 1 of 4]). And I've tried to keep my comments on the MMR, since the original post is about measles.

"You are obviously here just to argue with anyone who disagrees with you."

No. I made a comment to correct a misrepresentation of the facts. Mr. Miller has yet to comment that I am wrong in my interpretation of his words. As to the rest of my comments, I have simply been responding to what others have directed at me and to clarify where people appear to be misrepresenting or misinterpreting the science.

"more and more science supports my position rather than yours."

Okay. Give me one scientific study that clearly supports your position.


First, I said "on average". Of course there are outliers who live longer, as well as those who have a shorter lifespan. Cancer, neurodegenerative conditions, etc. are largely associated with aging. In the past, there were fewer cases because there weren't as many people living long enough to suffer from them.


I'll repeat to you what I've said multiple times and what I just asked of Anne: give me one valid, scientific study, just one, that supports your contention that healthy individuals are sacrificed, that the vaccines are worse than the diseases they prevent.

You're the second person to express lack of surprise that I was banned in the past. If your threshold for banning someone is just voicing disagreement, then the impression I formed back then that this is little more than an echo chamber is confirmed. I have been civil and respectful. I have not insulted anyone or called anyone names. I have not used profanity. And I have done my best to stay on topic. I appreciate that the editors have allowed my comments through; it shows that there seems to have been some change in policy. I'll note that in this thread, I was accused, in a thinly veiled fashion, of profiting from vaccines or Big Pharma. In other threads, far worse things have been said about those who support vaccinations.

david m burd

Anne, nicely and concisely stated. Thanks!

david m burd (born in the USA 1940-1955 - thank God!)


Todd W.,

"Except that there's no evidence to support your assertion that "healthy individuals [are]...SACRIFICED"."

If you were someone with no prior knowledge of vaccination, I'd politely correct that statement, but you've been round and round with this for years, and unless you have a defective memory, you definitely know better.

No wonder you've been banned in the past.


Todd, maybe I have missed someone's response to your noting that those born in /40 to /55 having a life expectancy of 63- 69 years but my experience certainly shows this to be otherwise. My parents (born in late 20's) are in their mid 80's and they and most of their friends (though to be sure some had succumbed to Alzheimer's and fewer to cancer or heart problems) seem MUCH healthier than the people in their 50's and younger. Now these people seem to be much more plagued with cancer, neurodegenerative conditions, auto-immune problems. It's very noticeable. Now I do realize that in recent decades, we have more premies which can account for certain problems but there is no way that today's adults are "healthier" than those born in the early 20thcentury, especially when sanitation, plumbing and penicillin were in place.


Encephalitis is not the only concern with the MMR, and the MMR is rarely given in isolation. It's given with multiple other vaccines in the same visit. Speaking from my own personal experience, my kids experienced their most significant regressions after each round of vaccines that included the MMR (though new symptoms appeared shortly after EVERY "well baby visit" that included vaccines). I do not feel the need to go into every symptom, but I will tell you that two of my children continue to suffer daily from injuries that they would not have, if I had not followed the CDC vaccine schedule. I am not anti-vaccine (such a lame label, given the fact that every vaccine injured child obviously received vaccines). I want the proper safety studies done before I will ever subject any of my family members to any more vaccines. You are obviously here just to argue with anyone who disagrees with you. The fact of the matter is, it's all just your opinion, given the fact that proper safety studies comparing fully vaccinated vs NEVER vaccinated children have NEVER BEEN PROPERLY DONE. You can bet that those studies would have been done years ago, if they thought it would clear vaccines. Since they continue to refuse to do this most basic study, one can only assume they're avoiding a very unpleasant truth. The MMR is certainly not the only culprit, and again, it's rarely given in isolation, so we need to be looking at the entire schedule. The CDC has no one to blame but themselves for losing public trust. People like you, who don't seem to have a dog in this fight, don't really matter to me. You just muddy the waters. The science will eventually settle the issue, but unfortunately proper studies are long over due. One size definitely does not fit all. You are entitled to your opinion, but that's all it is. I know what my children have experienced and more and more science supports my position rather than yours.

Todd W.

@David M Burd

Comparing vaccine against a placebo containing all but the antigens allows discovery of adverse events caused by the antigen. But many of the newer vaccines actually are tested against saline placebo, too. I'm sorry, but you are wrong about your "absolute fraud" hyperbole.

Some of the excipients are in the bulk materials but are removed during the manufacturing process (e.g., by diluting out, etc.). You say that the excipients are all toxic, but there is no valid evidence that the amounts in vaccines, administered in the manner of vaccines, is dangerous.

@Anne J.

Funny you call VAERS a joke, when anti-vaccine activists rely so heavily upon raw VAERS data. It has a lot of weaknesses, true. It is meant as a means of generating hypotheses for further study, not as a be-all/end-all way to demonstrate causation, since it cannot show causation.

@John Stone

How many of those deaths were investigated and found to be causally linked to the vaccine? Just skimming the reports, I note one includes twins. One twin was found face down (infants shouldn't be put to sleep like this as they can suffocate). Also fractured ribs with hemorrhaging. The vaccine can't do that. Suggests other causes of death. I also note that some reports are hearsay, with no details about the patient. Are you starting to see why VAERS should not be used as evidence of causation? Rather than go on and on here, here's a link to my further thoughts on VAERS: http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2013/11/vaers-few-things-we-need-to-discuss.html



You don't know the "true" story about the Aruba MMR now do you?

The mumps part of this type of MMR vaccine was causing meningitis in Canada, so Canada banned it.

UK picked it up - cause they could get it cheap. However; the pharma that made it - did not want to sell it to the UK government because they could get sued. The UK guys fixed it up that the pharma would not be sued and parents with damaged kids had no way to sue.

I bet you think end of story - after all there are no problems at all with vaccines.

Nope, it was not because this MMR vaccine caused such a rise in the number of meningitis in UK children (surprise - UK race is about the same as Canada) that UK had to with draw the vaccine. Now UK was stuck with all this supply of useless vaccine -- OH, what to do. It is an island nation and they should have dumped this MMR vaccine into the sea --- like the British Navy did the anthrax vaccine on their way out to go fight in the second invasion of the Middle East -- the one after 911.

Instead they looked around and found Brazil - that gladly bought it cheap. Again the rates of meningitis rose sharply and one of the health professionals -- you know the kind of person who chose a compassionate profession -- was heard to say - that the next time something like a defective vaccine comes along -- that it should be mixed up in with other kinds of MMR safer vaccines, and distributed at random and over long periods of time -- to keep those spikes from showing up.

Once again Todd, it is hard for honest men to get our heads wrapped around this: I know it is hard -was hard for me ---

"If you were responsible for the rise of autism 6,000 percent wouldn't you hide it too" J.B. Handley.

No, I wouldn't but there are a lot of things I won't do for money-- but I know what Handley means. We all do - now don't we.

The people running this program are so corrupt that it is way out of control. There needs to be jail sentences - and it needs to be cleaned up

John Stone
Todd W.

@David M Burd

Except that you haven't demonstrated that vaccines are causing injury at anywhere near the rate of the diseases they prevent, let alone more frequently.

As to the 1 in 1,000,000 number for serious AEs after MMR, that's what the evidence shows. If you have evidence that it is much higher than that, show it.


The rotavirus vaccine was likely withdrawn because, even for these expert liars, it's too hard to hide a dramatic increase in babies who emergently need life saving bowel surgery. It isn't as easy to dismiss that kind of harm as it is to dismiss parental reports of developmental regression, changes in behavior and loss of health.

Todd W.

I managed to find a copy of the full Barkin paper. Here are a couple other choice quotes:

"Contrary to earlier expectations, measles has not been eradicated (12). Until eradication becomes a reality, programs must be directed at prompt epidemic control combined with vaccination of susceptible populations, particularly those at greatest risk of suffering serious complications."


"The primary goal of measles vaccination should be the prevention of measles cases, but perhaps even more importantly, a reduction in complications secondary to measles."

Anne J.

@ Todd
The VAERS system is a joke and only reflects a small fraction of those injured. None of my three kids were listed in VAERS. Everything is always just chalked up to a"coincidence" when it comes to vaccine injury. There is no real accountability. They talk a good talk about "monitoring vaccines for safety", but in reality they choose to ignore those injured and deny vaccines play any role. The MMR is a perfect example of a challenge-re challenge test. How many times have we heard that a child regressed after the first MMR (chalked up to "coincidence", of course, so no report to VAERS), he proceeds to improve over the next months, so the mom allows the 2nd MMR, and the child regresses into full-blown autism. That was our story, but I've heard the same thing over and over and over from many other parents. Just how many "coincidences" do we need to experience before the CDC admits a problem. It's criminal really!

david m burd

Todd W, you say:

"Every vaccine is tested for adverse reactions. If there are too many, they aren't approved."

I not happy to inform you that ALL vaccine trials compare the tested new vaccine in a cohort to a second cohort also receiving the new "vaccine" but absent only the pathogen antigens (such as measles viral fragments).

BUT, the so-called placebo is an absolute fraud as the "placebo vaccine" still has all the toxic excipients including adjuvants such as Aluminum compounds, salts, preservatives, antibiotics, sulfactants, oils, proprietary chemicals, on and on.

You are incredibly naive when you say these excipients are not in the final vaccine vials. Pray tell me how they are all removed?

Thus, comparing the trial-vaccines cohorts' adverse reactions (your words) to each other is, I repeat, a complete fraud.

And then there are terrible contaminants in countless batches of vaccines, only discovered when "Hot Batches" are reported when their incredibly toxicity cannot be suppressed by the lock-step pediatric world.

Todd W.


The risk of encephalitis from measles is about 1-2 per 1,000. The risk of encephalitis from MMR is about 1 in 1,000,000. If you have evidence that the risk of encephalitis is greater from the vaccine, show it.

Regarding separating combination vaccines out, this makes no sense from the anti-vaccine viewpoint, since it means 3 times the number of skin punctures (infection risk, if done improperly), 3 times the excipients, 3 times the chances for an adverse reaction. Plus there's the risk of not completing the series to get full protection. It's possible that separating them out into separate injections might be safer, but I'd need to see the evidence. One thing where we do have evidence that separating shots out is MMRV vs. MMR and varicella separately. MMRV has a higher risk of febrile seizures. So for now it appears wiser to keep those as separate injections.


Except that there's no evidence to support your assertion that "healthy individuals [are]...SACRIFICED". As to the death rates, I'm not sure where you are getting that current estimates are very different than historical figures. I've shown how from 2000-2013/4 we had a death rate of 1.5 per 1,000 or so. That's well within what we expect to see.

What evidence do you have that the measles virus has mutated to become more virulent? Can you provide a link to the study that examined the genetic makeup of the virus to show which mutations have occurred?

@Vaccination Information

First, it helps to provide at least the year (1975 - why must you folks always go for such old studies?) of the study. Thank you, though, for pasting the abstract, as I wasn't able to see it, even on the Oxford Publishing site. The author argues in favor of vaccination, especially among those with greatest risk of death (lower income, health problems, etc.). This is in line with what I'm arguing: vaccination to protect both the individual and the, as Linda1 put it, "weak".

@John Stone

I never said that VAERS was a succes. I said it was a monitoring system. You said vaccines weren't monitored, but they are. RotaShield was not developed by Dr. Offit. He did not benefit from that vaccine. By the way, I really don't understand why you people villify someone getting paid for the work that they have done. I assume that none of you get paychecks and just altruistically donate your time to your employers. That's the only explanation I can think of.

And my apologies for not addressing your nasal flu vaccine thing. I was trying to stay relatively on topic. I'll note a couple things: 1) the nasal vaccine is being made available, but from the quick read I gave your post, is not being mandated; 2) the risk of spreading the weakened virus can be mitigated if the instructions for administration and warnings are followed. Also, it is a weakened virus, so it is less likely to shed and cause infection in others than the wild virus. You won't find this an adequate response, but my comment is already getting long and unwieldy.

One last thing: what vaccine(s) would you recommend people should get? Which ones do you think are safe and effective? I noticed you didn't answer that.

david m burd

Todd W, Thanks for your response.

A couple of counterpoints: You say serious complications by receiving a measles vaccination are 1 in 1,000,000. What indeed have you been smoking? What hubris!

Second point: Life expectancy in my generation was indeed less than the 80 years old you cite for more recent generations. BUT, my generation virtually all smoked cigarettes, cigars, etc. (of course severely affecting longevity by dying from heart attacks and cancer). On top of that, auto fatalities soared for my generation because we ALL zoomed around with our own cars, without seat belts and other safety factors instituted the last 30+ years.

To me it's clear that life expectancy is not a defensible rationale for the the onslaught of horrific vaccine-damage that has been inflicted by a dogmatic Medical Industry that you promote.

"Quality of Life" is immensely much, much, more important - eclipsing longevity, in my experience. Particularly, as vaccine-damage goes on forever to end of life at 80+.

John Stone

I am sorry Todd, that's eyewash. It takes considerable nerve to hold up VAERS as a success. OK they withdrew one vaccine once - the greatest beneficiary was Paul Offit btw - and by now there are nearly half a million reports in a passive system!!! You ducked out of explaining nasal flu vaccines altogether. It is getting a bit thin, frankly...

You suggest I confuse correlation with causation but the defence of vaccines depends largely on statistics and even then you have to fiddle them.

Vaccine Information

This article is behind a paywall, but you can get it through your library. Barkin, R. M. (Bureau of Epidemiology, CDC, Atlanta, GA 30333). Measles mortality: A retrospective look at the vaccine era.Am J Epidemiol102:341–349, 197

However, even in the abstract you can glean that the author recognized that universal measles vaccine is unneeded.

"Measles mortality provides an indicator in defining the population at greatest risk of experiencing serious complications from measles as well as serving as a parameter in assessing the impact of immunization programs. Efforts to vaccinate susceptible children have helped to reduce measles morbidity and mortality in the United States. Mortality rates were highest in children 6–11 months of age. Higher mortality rates were noted in places with less than 10,000 people and in counties having a large percentage of the population with incomes below poverty level. Vaccine should be accessible to all populations, but intensive efforts need to be directed toward groups at high risk of dying from measles who are suffering from a myriad of other health, social, and economic problems."

Consider all of the language available to a CDC employee regarding universal vaccination- Imperative, Essential, Crucial, Necessary, Vital, Indispensable, Important, Requisite, etc.

How does that compare to "vaccine should be available"? What could be a lesser endorsement, than merely "made available"?
That is certainly a far cry from universal mandate, isn't it?


Todd W.,
"People who have compromised immune systems due to other illness... This is the second role of vaccination: to prevent the spread of the virus among the community, including to those who would very likely die or be severely and permanently injured by the disease. That's one of the more frustrating parts of this whole thing, is that those of you who are opposed to vaccines very frequently dismiss or ignore the people who cannot be vaccinated who would be very, very seriously impacted by the spread of disease."

That's what is frustrating about this whole thing - is that public health officials and those lapping up their perspective, don't give a thought to those healthy individuals, newborns, children and adults, SACRIFICED, in order to theoretically save the weak. No...thought...at...all.

"Today, in the U.S., the risk of death is 1 in 1,000 to about 1 in 3,000."

The new and improved measles mortality rates need explanation, because by all accounts, they are so far from historical figures as cited by Danchi (thank you, Danchi), that they are baloney. Unless, like pertussis and similar to what has occurred with antibiotics, the measles virus has morphed into something much more virulent because of man's tampering - what scientists call "vaccine pressure".

"The only way we know of so far to prevent infection and to protect the individual in the first place is vaccination."

Wrong. Modern sanitation coupled with good nutrition and a strong immune system is the best way to prevent or fight off infection.

"Those born today have an average life expectancy of closer to 80 years."

A crystal ball factoid. That remains to be seen, doesn't it?

Todd W.

@John Stone

I have no problem questioning a program if the evidence warrants, but you actually need to have solid evidence to support your questions. You have a lot of stories that confuse correlation and causation, but you don't have any sort of controlled research that shows that there really is a connection. What's left is that some of the accounts reflect unfortunately timed coincidence, and some that have morphed as the teller read about the vaccine-autism idea.

Every vaccine is tested for adverse reactions. If there are too many, they aren't approved. Once approved, they are monitored for less common reactions that didn't show up in the clinical trials. Again, if there are too many, approval is removed (see RotaShield, a vaccine that was properly withdrawn). You say that vaccines aren't monitored, but they are. We have passive surveillance in the form of VAERS. That's a decent early warning system to prompt further research of possible AEs. It's not great, lots of flaws and is open to skewing of the picture, but it is better than nothing. We also have the VSD, which is a real-time surveillance system that can pick up on AEs pretty quickly. Then there are studies FDA mandates companies perform post-licensure to continue tracking the safety and efficacy of their products. Vaccines are the most-studied, most-surveilled medical product ever, at least here in the U.S. It may be different on your side of the pond.

You say that you are not against vaccines per se. So let me ask you, which vaccines do you think are valuable and should be given? I've never gotten a straightforward answer to that question.


I love how those defending the MMR always use encephalitis as a complication of measles, therefore everyone should vaccinate, yet they completely dismiss the encephalitis CAUSED by vaccines. My three kids ALL experienced significant adverse reactions to their MMR vaccines (and my son was hospitalized for a week after his birth dose of Hep B, and admitted to the ER with symptoms of encephalitis shortly after his DTap). If I had it to do over again, I would NEVER follow the current CDC vaccine schedule. It's simply not safe. As a country, we now have 1 in 6 kids with developmental delays. 1 in 6! More and more, it's looking like our overly aggressive vaccine schedule plays a significant role in that devastating figure. Yes, the measles can be serious for some, but certainly does not cause brain damage to 1 in 6, like our current vaccine schedule seems to. Maybe if we had the option to get the measle vaccine separately, rather than a dangerous 3 in 1 combination, more people might choose that option. Until then, I'd skip the MMR rather then take the risk. It's a dangerous vaccine, in my own personal experience. By the way, I am a healthcare provider and have a degree in biology (I am not a doctor, but I am perfectly capable of recognizing a vaccine reaction in my own children).


Todd - You may think you know everything about vaccines -- You may have read all the NIH, and CDC stuff --

Do you really think all the stuff that you read - can compare with being in the trenches and living with family members that have suffered vaccine injuries?

I may never have figured it out myself - if my family had not had some immediate reactions -- it made me pause and think that vaccine reactions can be much slower -- and it is documented that they are slow even up to six months if not longer.

Now how long did they test that MMR before giving it to every child in the --------- World?

My favorite quote:

"If you had caused the rise of autism 6000 percent, wouldn't you try to cover it up too"
J. B. Handley.

John Stone


But we have many, many children now with neurological impairments and parents whose stories are simply for the most part being ignored (by people who are responsible for the program). You say your route is safer, that the vaccine is always the lesser risk, but it has not been shown and the monitoring does not take place.


Thanks for sharing.

My kids reacted to DPT shots, then later my duaghter reacted to the Hep B, and the flu shot.

But I always said the MMR --my kids did not even break a fever.

However; there was a time that my daughter had big huge swollen hives all over her body. I had never seen anything like it -- I was beside myself with something that horrible. The ped was unconcerned - said it was a virus of somekind.

Well how come a virus that had such noticable symptoms of length wise - size of golf ball swellings -- no one knew about, or it did not have some kind of name?

It passed but I have never forgotten and have wondered so often what it might be.

John Stone


Not everyone here is opposed to vaccines per se: it is about due care, ever expanding schedules etc. But health officials don't blink at programs which actually expose the population to risk when it suits them:


Todd W.


I'm not going to bother with your conspiracy theory stuff, but those snippets from 19502-1960s era papers, there are some things you may not have noticed in there: "mild" was because "only" about 2-3% of patients in the 1958 outbreak suffered complications. Also note this bit: "However, it is necessary to consider the encephalitis which follows measles in about 0.1% of cases," for though the risk may be slight for an individual child there will be a significant number of cases of encephalitis in the country during the biennial measles epidemics." Encephalitis, in case you weren't aware, is swelling of the brain. It can often lead to permanent brain injury of varying severity.

You might draw attention to the fact that few doctors at the time recommended trying to prevent the disease. That is largely due to the fact that there were no good means of prevention available. The only thing that worked to any degree was gamma globulin, but that only provided enough protection to get through an outbreak. Immunity waned extremely rapidly. Most advised modulating the disease by administering gamma globulin a certain amount of time after exposure so that the course of disease would be milder and the risk of complications lower (http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2014/06/pre-vaccine-declines-in-measles.html). By that time, as well, antibiotics helped decrease some of the risk of complications due to secondary bacterial infections.

As to what constitutes an epidemic, you (or the person you copy-pasted from) is using the wrong denominator. It's not 400 cases out of the entire population that's cause for concern. It's 400 cases out of the susceptible population that's a concern. That susceptible population consists of those who refused vaccination and those who, for medical reasons, could not be vaccinated. It's those people who couldn't be vaccinated who also happen to be at greatest risk of severe complications. Personally, I care about protecting them. Not sure why you appear to ignore or dismiss them.

Todd W.

@David M Burd

Good nutrition will help mitigate some of the complications from measles, but not all. The risk of severe complications goes up if the patient is malnourished. Clean water/sewage won't do anything to prevent measles; the best it does is lower the risk of other, non-respiratory illnesses (e.g., diseases spread by the fecal-oral route). However, neither of those will prevent a person from getting measles if they are susceptible and exposed to the disease. The only way we know of so far to prevent infection and to protect the individual in the first place is vaccination.

Second, and this is something that I find quite common among those opposed to vaccines, is that while a healthy child may have a lower (but non-zero) risk of serious complications, what about the unhealthy? People who have compromised immune systems due to other illness (e.g., cancer), treatment (e.g., immunosuppressants to prevent rejection of transplanted organs), age, and so on. This is the second role of vaccination: to prevent the spread of the virus among the community, including to those who would very likely die or be severely and permanently injured by the disease. That's one of the more frustrating parts of this whole thing, is that those of you who are opposed to vaccines very frequently dismiss or ignore the people who cannot be vaccinated who would be very, very seriously impacted by the spread of disease. The common cold is a mild disease (generally); the measles is not. Today, in the U.S., the risk of death is 1 in 1,000 to about 1 in 3,000. That may not seem like a lot, but when you start to get large outbreaks affecting thousands of people (or, if the MMR vaccine stops being used, hundreds of thousands of people), you will start seeing a lot more deaths from the disease. Since measles elimination in the U.S. (which is different from eradication, by the way), we have had about 1,300 cases of measles, not counting the latest big outbreak. Among those 1,3000, there were two deaths, giving a mortality rate of about 1.5 per 1,000 (http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2014/05/anti-vaxers-and-math-dont-mix.html). But there have been a lot more non-fatal complications leading to significant expenditures by families and public health agencies. In the 2011 measles outbreak in Minnesota, 14 out of 21 patients were hospitalized (http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2011/11/report-on-mn-measles-outbreak-from-idsa.html). That outbreak, by the way, resulted because parents in the Somali community stopped vaccinating after being addressed by DAN! doctors, Generation Rescue and Andrew Wakefield. Contrast those numbers with the risk of serious adverse reaction to the measles vaccine: around 1 in 1,000,000.

You say that your generation was the healthiest in history, yet those born around 1940-1955 have an average life expectancy of 63-69 years. Those born today have an average life expectancy of closer to 80 years. That speaks to being, on average, healthier today than back then. You also say that you "easily sailed through" all the childhood illnesses, except you ignore those who didn't. The ones who died, the ones left blind or deaf, the ones who suffered permanent disfigurement because of those diseases. And not knowing about autism is very different from there being no autism. That's like saying that because some bacterium hadn't been identified yet or wasn't known to the majority of people means that it didn't exist.

I've looked at the CDC list of excipients, most of which are not present in the finished vaccine product. Those that are are present in small enough amounts that they are not toxic. There has been no good evidence to suggest that the vaccine is worse than the disease, and no valid research showing any link between MMR and autism. I am all for making vaccines as safe as they can be and for reducing the adverse reactions even more, but it has to be based on science and evidence.

P.S. To the editors, there seems to be something wrong with your Captcha verification. When I click "Post", no image appears until I click to get another one.


Measles and measles vaccines: fourteen things to consider. ~by Roman Bystrianyk (co-author Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History) http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2014/06/24/measles-and-measles-vaccines-fourteen-things-to-consider-by-roman-bystrianyk-co-author-dissolving-illusions-disease-vaccines-and-the-forgotten-history/
With citations.

Some quotes:
-In 1967 (several years after the introduction of the first measles vaccine), D.J Spencer co-authored a paper that stated the following:

“For centuries the measles virus has maintained a remarkably stable ecological relationship with man. The clinical disease is a characteristic syndrome of notable constancy and only moderate severity. Complications are infrequent, and, with adequate medical care, fatality is rare. Susceptibility to the disease after the waning of maternal immunity is universal; immunity following recovery is solid and lifelong in duration.”(2)

Why is that particularly noteworthy?

Dr David J Spencer was the longest serving director of CDC, a highly qualified and respected professional. So much so the CDC now have a museum dedicated to him. D. J. Sencer, H. B. Dull, and A. D. Langmuir. Epidemiologic basis for eradication of measles in 1967. Public Health Rep. 1967 March; 82(3): 253–256.

-"Before large-scale vaccination against measles is undertaken certain problems must be considered. There can be no doubt that an effective vaccine is needed for children who are especially liable to develop severe measles-for example, mentally defective children in institutions or children in underdeveloped countries. But the need or desire for a vaccine for the general population of Great Britain is much less certain.

Measles is now a mild disease, and many parents and doctors may feel that no protection against it is required. However, it is necessary to consider the encephalitis which follows measles in about 0.1% of cases," for though the risk may be slight for an individual child there will be a significant number of cases of encephalitis in the country during the biennial measles epidemics. Br Med J. Sep 28, 1963; 2(5360): 759–760.

Measles Epidemic
Measles epidemic [page 354]

Br Med J 1959;1:351.2 (Published 07 February 1959)

In the first three weeks of this year about 41,000 cases of measles were recorded in England and Wales. This is well above the corresponding figures of the last two years – namely, about 9,000 in 1958 and 28,000 in 1957 – though it is below the highest levels reached in the last nine years. To give some idea of the main features of the disease as it appears today and of how it is best treated, we invited some general practitioners to write short reports on the cases they have seen in their practices recently.

These appear at p.380 (extracts from this page follow this article). It is interesting to note, first, that the distribution of the disease is rather patchy at present. It has not yet reached the areas where two of these doctors practise (in South Scotland and Cornwall), and other areas are known to be free of the disease so far. On the other hand, in Kent it is reported to have arrived in time to put the children to bed over Christmas. These writers agree that measles is nowadays normally a mild infection, and they rarely have occasion to give prophylactic gamma globulin. As to the treatment of the disease and its complications, the emphasis naturally varies from one practice to another. Amount of bed-rest, when to administer a sulphonamide or antibiotic, the use of analgesics and linctuses – all these may still be debatable problems in the treatment of what is said to be the commonest disease in the world. But there is probably much in the opinion which one of the writers expresses: “It is the frequent visiting by the interested clinician and not the therapy which produces the good results.”


Br Med J 1959;1:380 (Published 07 February 1959)

EXTRACTS [pages 380-381]

We are much indebted to the general practitioners whose names appear below for the following notes on the present outbreak of measles.

Dr G. I. WATSON (Peaslake, Surrey) writes:

Measles was introduced just before Christmas by a child from Petworth …….

Treatment of Attack. – No drugs are given for either the fever or the cough; if pressed, I dispense mist. salin. B.N.F. as a placebo. Glutethimide 125 mg. may be given in the afternoon if the child is restless when the rash develops; 250 mg. in single or divided doses at bedtime ensures a good night’s sleep in spite of coughing. I encourage a warm humid atmosphere in the room by various methods: some electric fires and most electric toasters allow an open pan of water to rest on top; an electric kettle blows off too much steam to be kept on for more than short periods. Parents, conscious of the need to darken the room and to forbid reading, may carry this to an unnecessary extreme, starting even before the rash appears. To save a mother some demands, the wireless is a boon to children in darkened rooms. They are allowed up when the rash fades from the abdomen-usually the fourth or fifth day-and may go outside on the next fine day. Apart from fruit to eat, solid food is avoided on the day the rash is appearing; fruit drinks or soups are all they appear to want.

Complications. – So far few complications have arisen. Four cases of otitis media occurred in the first 25 children, but only one had pain. No case of pneumonia has occurred, but one child had grossly abnormal signs in the chest for a few days after the fever subsided, uninfluenced by oral penicillin. One girl had a tear-duct infection and another an undue blepharitis. Of three adult males with the disease, two have been more severely affected than any of the children.

Dr. R. E. HOPE SIMPSON (Cirencester, Glos) writes:

We make no attempt to prevent the spread of measles, and would only use gamma globulin to mitigate the severity of the disease in the case of the exposure of a susceptible adult or child who is already severely debilitated. Bed rest, for seven davs for moderate and severe cases and of five to six days in mild cases, seems to cut down the incidence of such complications as secondary bacterial otitis media and bronchopneumonia. We have not been impressed by the prophylactic or therapeutic use of antibiotics and sulphonamides in the first week of the disease. As soon as the patient is out of bed we allow him out of doors almost regardless of the weather. Otitis Media and Bronchopneumonia.-These conditions often appear so early, sometimes even before the rash, that in such cases one can only conclude that the responsible agent is the virus itself. Despite their initial alarming severity, they tend to resolve spontaneously, and treatment apart from first principles seems useless. When, on the other hand, otitis media or bronchopneumonia comes on after the subsidence of the initial symptoms of measles, it is probably due to a secondary bacterial invader, and we find antibiotics or sulphonamides useful…..


Dr. JOHN FRY (Beckenham, Kent) writes:

The expected biennial epidemic of measles appeared in this region in early December, 1958, just in time to put many youngsters to bed over Christmas. To date there have been close on 150 cases in the practice, and the numbers are now steadily decreasing. Like previous epidemics, the primary cases have been chiefly in the 5- and 6-year-olds, with secondary cases in their younger siblings. No special features have been noted in this relatively mild epidemic. It has been mild because complications have occurred in only four children. One little girl aged 2 suffered from a lobular pneumonia, and three others developed acute otitis media following their measles. In the majority of children the whole episode has been well and truly over in a week, from the prodromal phase to the disappearance of the rash, and many mothers have remarked ”how much good the attack has done their children,” as they seem so much better after the measles.

A family doctor’s approach to the management of measles is essentially a personal and individual matter, based on the personal experiences of the doctor and the individual character and background of the child and the family. In this practice measles is considered as a relatively mild and inevitable childhood ailment that is best encountered any time from 3 to 7 years of age. Over the past 10 years there have been few serious complications at any age, and all children have made complete recoveries. As a result of this reasoning no special attempts have been made at prevention even in young infants in whom the disease has not been found to be especially serious.

400 or less cases of measles in the US is not an epidemic in a country of 300 million plus. 41,000 and no one broke a sweat in England in the late 1950's when a real epidemic hit. According to the CDC National Vital Statics Report there has been less than 10 measles deaths in the US since the year 2000. There have been 0 measles deaths in the last three years in the US. I am speaking of lab confirmed. In the outbreak in Wales in 2012-13 there were no measles deaths despite all the pants on fire drama of the health department that had to walk back all the fear mongering that the populace was subjected to.

The real problem with measles in the DMV created a new strain called Atypical Measles. This is a mutation of the vaccine. CDC likes to call it a altered host immune response rather than saying the virus mutated, which is their nature. The disease is characterized by fever, pleural effusions, pneumonia, and swelling of the extremities. The rash of atypical measles is different from measles in that it may have an urticarial component (hives) and usually appears first on the ankles and wrists. AMS only comes from the vaccine. It was originally thought that it was a manifestation of only the DMV vaccine but numerous medical writers state it has been observed in children who only had the LMV vaccine.


None of the WHO links work. Considering the WHO is in collusion with the following;
-Task Force for Global Health
-Centers for Disease Control
-The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
-Centers for Disease Control Foundation
-The Rockefeller Foundation

The creditability of the statistic quoted by the WHO are questionable if not downright fraudulent. Who's going to challenge it? All of the above have engaged in eugenics activity for over 50 years, beginning with the Rockefeller Foundation. All have been involved in developing vaccines for population control via vaccines as stated by Bill Gates in a TED video. His parents were well know eugenics and there are documents online confirming the Rockefeller Foundations goal to control the worlds population via vaccines. So the creditability of your sources is moot.

cia parker

Why don't we educate people with the facts on both sides of the issue and let us all decide for ourselves? I'll bet if people knew how universal measles used to be, how 99% of children got it until the '70s, and nearly all of us recovered just fine, with permanent immunity etc., most people would just want off the whole autism/bowel disease merry-go-round, and just let their kids catch it, stay in bed, no Tylenol, give them vitamin A, and then get well, just like when I was a child. (Well, we didn't know about vitamin A.) It wasn't a big deal then, no one gave it a second thought, and, if it came back, it wouldn't be a big deal now. Yes, it's an unpleasant illness, high fever, bad cough, rash, but it's just for a few days out of a long life. Adults would have to decide whether to go on with the whole blood titering, booster shots thing or get measles and deal with it. Should we be concerned about measles outbreaks? No. Why?

cia parker

Has any study been done to see if children who react to vaccines with fever have a higher incidence of permanent damage than those who don't? More autism or seizure disorders than those who don't? There was no autism in Africa until vaccines were introduced there. Adbulkadir Khalif said that he would prefer that his child get and recover from (as several of his children did) and even die of measles than that he develop autism as a result of the vaccine (the way his young son in Minnesota did a few years ago). Has any survey been done to see how many African parents agree with him?

The fact that many African mothers breastfeed for much longer than is common in western countries could mean that the maternal antibodies would prevent the desired reaction to the vaccine from creating immunity: that's why they moved giving the MMR to over one year old in western countries.

david m burd

Todd W,

I read your thoughtful positions - thanks for your url. I think you are missing what provides true health: That being proper nutrition from birth (breastfeeding), clean water/sewage systems, obviates what are called immunizations.

All the infant/child shots have dozens of toxic excipients (ingredients) INJECTED into just-born babies, toxins never remotely experienced through the evolutionary process of life, birth, and death. Just google "cdc vaccine excipients".

Haven't you known of adults (not just fragile newborns) that have been stricken, perhaps paralyzed/died from vaccinations?

My generation 1940-1955 was virtually vaccine-free, and we've been the healthiest in history --- and immune forever after easily sailing through all the child illnesses. And the autism spectrum unknown to 99.99% of us.

Why! do you not understand the horrendous bio-molecular damage brought about by injected toxins? Not only in fetuses and newborns and babies, but also to adults?


Todd W.
You're refusing to look at the big picture. I brought up the microbiome and you ignored that huge topic. I brought up the lack of epidemiological data pre and post vaccine era and you ignored that huge topic. I said that the assertion that post vaccination fever is harmless is an assumption and you said prove it. I say prove that it is harmless. You can't, because it is not known to be harmless. It is only assumed to be harmless. As John Stone correctly pointed out, Hannah Poling's vaccine induced fever turned out not to be so harmless, and we don't know how many children are like Hannah Poling because public health authorities refuse to investigate that question, a question that Hannah's pediatric neurologist father, implored the scientific community to explore after what he saw happen to his daughter.

It's impossible to reason with someone who insists on wearing blinders.


John Stone -- Excellent reply, thank you very much.

John Stone

Todd W.

Some of us are in a bad spot - families, friends, co-workers - because we came into contact with vaccines. You talk like a CDC commercial.

Todd W.

@David M Burd

I don't derive any benefit from pharmaceuticals or vaccine manufacturers. I just care very strongly about public health, because I have people in my life (family, friends and coworkers) who would be in a very bad spot if they got infected with a preventable disease. I also care about the people I pass and interact with in my everyday life. If you want to know more about why I do this, read this: http://www.harpocratesspeaks.com/2013/03/why-do-i-do-this.html

Todd W.

Re: Fevers

Following measles vaccination, fever is not all that common (5%-15%) and generally resolves without any problems. As noted by that LeBaron study cited by Mr. Stone, no medical interventions were required due to fever. Compare that to measles, where fever is a feature and common first symptom and can last for days.

Fever isn't some bogeyman to be feared and prevented at all costs. It's certainly a concern in young infants (e.g, under 4 months), but in older infants and children, a fever that's below 104F probably isn't something you need to worry about unless it's accompanied by other symptoms, like a rash. Call your Dr. and they'll advise accordingly.

As for measles vs. vaccination in developing nations, consider that measles has about a 90% infection rate for susceptible people, so where measles is endemic, you're almost guaranteed to get measles, along with its fever and other complications (pneumonia, diarrhea, ear infection/deafness, encephalitis, etc.). Balanced against a relatively low risk of fever that typically resolves without any apparent negative effects, it is much safer to get the vaccine than the infection.

If you think that fever following MMR vaccination is a greater risk than the risks measles itself presents, please show me your evidence.


I followed the rules of the blogs I was on too. I had freinds I enjoyed discussing things with -- but when the conversation opened up that what happened to my family would not be off topic -- I told.

You say Age of Autism has a reputation - of not letting in tolls -- at least they have never turned away a greiving parent of an injuried child.

There is a difference Todd.


Wow! Great article! Thank you!

david m burd

Todd W,

Would you please tell me and other readers here your profession (without mentioning specifics if it would cause you trouble)?

Do you have a professionally vested business activity that depends on vaccinations?

thanks, david m burd


Todd W,
There is no evidence to prove that post vaccination fevers are benign. This is an assumption. As I pointed out earlier, long term sequelae have not been adequately tracked or determined.

John Stone

Todd W.

In my opinion you misread it. I note in your favour that Dan Burns also mistook the line of argument at first.

Apart from anything else there are quite different ethical considerations to inducing a high fever than treating one as it comes up. That we don't know the long term outcomes for the subgroup of those that experienced it is troubling.

Todd W.

@John Stone

I addressed exactly what the author stated and the impression that his words give. He is free to correct me if my interpretation is incorrect.

As to your link regarding fevers, from the conclusions (emphasis added):

An estimated net 95 (18%) experienced measles-mumps-rubella vaccine-associated events (median onset 5–10 days postvaccination, duration 2–5 days), with high fever (temperature ≥39.5°C) occurring in 33 (6%). None required medical attention.

Also note that measles infection itself frequently has high fevers, peaking at 103°–105°F. In fact, high fever is one of the first signs of a measles infection. (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/meas.pdf)

John Stone

Todd W

It is easy to see why we banned you before. Even in this instance you began not with disputing what had been said, but something which hadn't been said while personally attacking the integrity of the author.

As to suggesting that there is no greater risk in underdeveloped countries from vaccinating similarly to the US I only cite my re-published article today in which it is recorded that 6 in 100 US toddlers developed a temperature of 39.5C (103F) or greater after receiving MMR. Nursing that in 3rd world conditions might not be any joke.


Todd W,
I had the same thoughts about the Ghana/Gambia death rates - that the measles vaccine won't decrease deaths from other causes. What is missing from this equation is the effect of the vaccine program on the short and long-term health of these populations. In looking at the author's reference for that statement, we see immunization and child mortality rates listed by country, but there is no data on chronic disease rates, rates that are known to have skyrocketed in the developed world with the increase in vaccination. That missing data is necessary to correctly evaluate the value and safety of any vaccine program. Myopic reductionist methods of analysis conceal answers to important questions that public health authorities refuse to explore - that is, what are the true health costs of administering these vaccines to whole populations? What is the trade-off?

As only one example, scientists are recognizing the importance of the human microbiome which is unique to each individual, believed to be crucial for human health and is passed down through generations. Anything that disrupts or alters the microbiome has the potential to irreversibly alter the health of the individual and the individual's offspring. To go into a continent with drugs that will alter the microbiome of an entire population in ways that are not yet fully understood is reckless and goes against the wisdom of the latest science. Enthusiasm for wiping out measles should be tempered by the responsibility to first, do no harm. It is not at all clear that these vaccines are not doing more harm than good.

Not an MD

John Stone, it is so very strange that I still cannot get either page to appear from clicking on the links. I just tried again, and I once again got the WHO header at the top of the pages, but a big message "Page not found", etc.

Todd W.


I'm impressed by the editors because, a number of years ago, they banned me, or at least stopped letting any of my comments through, even though I followed the commenting guidelines. Age of Autism has a reputation for not letting through comments that offer even a modicum of dissent from the party line.

@Bob Moffitt

Based on the abundance of research from many different sources around the world, I feel that the children of Gambia could handle, quite well, a measles immunization schedule similar to the U.S. It's interesting that the first dose there is given at 9 months, rather than 12 months, and a second dose was added only in the last couple of years. The vaccine is more effective when it is given at 12-15 months of age, and the second dose improves efficacy to nearly 100%. There is no evidence to suggest that the children of Gambia would respond any differently than the children in the U.S.

John Stone

Not an MD

Just to confirm I can still rouse that page from the WHO website.


Todd W;
You have no ideal about the number of editors that will kick you off of websites and not letting your comment through, since it questions the integrity of the authors,heads of federal agencies, doctors the establishment, --- when as a parent you have witnessed your child -- no in my case children and husband have vaccine injuries.

--- and many commentors on this website have seen here - not will we see ----if they have the courage to face valid criticism - well they don't.

You are talking to a lot of people on this website that have been backed into a corner till they have no place left to go -- so don't be suprised that here in the last refuge we are snarling - position that we have not choice in the fight and flight -- to fight.

So, your comments on how you are impressed wit them letting a comment through is hardly impressing me.

Juat thought you should know.

John Stone

Todd W

No, Miller's point was surely that vaccines were at best marginal to reducing mortality when the WHO keeps on maintaining it is critical. We were already into the historic era of low infant mortality in the developed world before measles vaccines were introduced. I also suggest that if there are significant risks to vaccination as well as benefits in the developed world that the gamble would simply be greater among the immune compromised of the developing, with only rough and ready means for monitoring it, even if there was the will and interest to do so.

Not an MD

Well, that's interesting, Todd W. The two links you provided are suddenly "not found" on the WHO website. Perhaps the word "estimates" is in the process of being removed after John Stone's comment?

I find it interesting that you are concerned about being attacked, when parents who don't vaccinate their children, or who stop vaccinating their children, or who delay the vaccine schedule for their children, or who space out the vaccines their children receive are often called "anti-vax nutters" and "anti-vax morons." Just what, exactly, are you afraid of here? You won't get that kind of disparaging comment out of me. I will never reduce myself to that level. Prepare yourself to be surprised.

I would like to ask you how you explain the very dismal infant mortality rate in the USA, when we have the most highly vaccinated population in the world with the most vaccine mandates for our infants and allegedly the best healthcare system in the world, and what your thoughts are pertinent to how Japan went from a ranking of 34th to a ranking of 3rd in infant mortality merely by delaying the vaccines they give to their babies until two years of age?

Bob Moffitt

@ Todd W

"Vaccines have, in fact, been quite effective at reducing the burden of disease in poor countries like The Gambia."

I would be curious to know if you believe there is such a thing as a "one size fits all" vaccine?

As I understand it .. infants inherit an immune system .. which is an unique to that infant as are his/her DNA or fingerprints. Am I wrong?

Do you believe that infants born in Gambia .. where you state major causes of death are perinatal conditions, respiratory infections and diarrheal illnesses .. will respond to the same "one size fits all MMR vaccine" administered to infants born in the USA?

I think .. putting the "one size fits all vaccine" aside .. it would be extremely difficult to compare vaccine effectiveness between developed and undeveloped countries .. because much depends on how vaccines are administered, stored, recorded, etc.

Dan Burns

Todd W, on first reading of "Outbreaks of Measles: Should We Be Concerned," I shared your misgivings over the author's glaring omission of causes of infant death in The Gambia and Ghana. The omission struck me as manipulative,though on re-reading I see it may not have been intended that way. The actual cause of mortality speaks to the author's larger point: the need for better nutrition, sanitation, and access to health care. A little editing would clarify and strengthen an already well-documented essay.

Still the question Neil Z. Miller asks is valid: Should we be concerned about measles outbreaks? Or, more pointedly, why should we be concerned?

Todd W.

Wow. I'm impressed. The editors actually let my comment through!

@John Stone

Miller's post is all about how vaccines don't work and we shouldn't be scared of measles. In that context, he cites the immunization rate in Gambia and Ghana and follows that by saying how high the infant mortality rate is. And actually, I did not put any words in his mouth, nor attack a straw man, as evidence by Miller's very next sentence:

"These examples appear to confirm that high vaccination rates are not sufficient to reduce complications and deaths from measles and other causes."

Miller's point, and he can clarify if I'm wrong, is that vaccinations do not work to reduce the burden of mortality and morbidity from measles. In that particular example, he tries to support his claim by citing all-cause mortality (which is quite high), rather than measles mortality itself (which is quite low). That is dishonest and misrepresents the facts.

And, yes, I know that the numbers I cited are estimates (as are, I would note, Miller's, so I don't see that problem here). If you feel that my conclusions are in error, please feel free to link to evidence showing that's the case.

Editors, you've impressed me by allowing my first comment through. Keep it up and allow this one through, too.

John Stone

Todd W.

You attack the integrity of the author while putting words in his mouth - how he might have been blameworthy if he had been making a different point from the one he did. Or, shall we say "a straw man" argument. But while you cite WHO statistics about how many children died from infectious diseases of 1 in 10,000 in note the word "estimates" on th pages linked to.

Of course, the WHO can make up any figures it likes:



Laura Hayes

Fantastic article! Thank you, Neil Miller, for your continued work to raise awareness about the dangers and inefficacies of vaccines, and about the critical necessity of medical choice freedom. I will be sharing this great article far and wide!

Todd W.

The editors probably will not let this comment through, since it questions the integrity of the author, but we'll see if they have the courage to face valid criticism.

The article is full of quite a bit of misinformation and dishonest spin, but I'll point out just one example:

"They have very high vaccine coverage rates (a percentage of the target population that has been vaccinated), yet their infant mortality rates are dreadfully unacceptable. For example, in 2011 Gambia, a poor country in Africa, required its infants to receive multiple vaccines, vaccinated 90% to 96% of its infants (91% received measles vaccines), yet 58 of every 1000 infants still died before their first birthdays. Ghana also required its infants to receive several vaccines, vaccinated 91% to 98% of its infants (91% received measles vaccines) yet also had a dismal infant mortality rate: 52 of every 1000 infants died before their first birthdays."

The implication here is that vaccines don't work, in particular measles vaccine, but what is left out is what the actual causes of infant death in The Gambia and Ghana actually are. For instance, from the WHO Neonatal and Child Health Profile of The Gambia for 2010 (http://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/epidemiology/profiles/neonatal_child/gmb.pdf), a significant cause of under-one mortality has to do with the birth itself. Children are either born prematurely or suffer trauma or injury during birth itself, leading to death. The next biggest cause of under-5 deaths is malaria, for which there is no good vaccine.

In fact, looking at the WHO's 2011 report for causes of death in 2008 by country (http://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates_country/en/), the largest causes of death were malaria, perinatal conditions (1.5/1,000 each), respiratory infections (1.3/1,000), and diarrheal illnesses (0.9/1,000) for children under 14 years of age. Childhood infectious diseases (for which they have vaccines) only accounted for 0.1/1,000 deaths.

Vaccines have, in fact, been quite effective at reducing the burden of disease in poor countries like The Gambia. Certainly they are not the only improvement needed (improvements in infrastructure, medical care and nutrition will go a long way to improving childhood mortality rates), but they have a major impact on improved health outcomes.

I have no doubt that if the editors allow this comment through, I expect I will be insulted and attacked, but that won't surprise me.


The only reason to give the MMR to all babies in the first place was because some times a Mother of an unborn fetus ran into rubella and some times she had no immunity for rubella so it caused heart breaking birth defects.

Same for the mumps and boys in puberty --

Instead of the gardisil vaccine -- maybe just maybe they should have for gone the MMR vaccine in preteens instead?

Maybe they should have paid attention to Dr. Wakefield's research when he found measles in the gut and encourage further research instead of covering it up .

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.)