Court Upholds New York's Right to Mandate Vaccination
Letter to The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations RE: Alex Spourdalakis

Meet The Authors: Vaccines 2.0 The Careful Parent's Guide to Making Safe Vaccination Choices for Your Family

Vaccines 2.0Come hear Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted discuss their new book, and the tough vaccine choices parents face today.
 
Buy Tickets Now to hear Mark and Dan at the Vaccine Author Symposium in Minneapolis in January 24th at The University of Minnesota, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, Cowles Auditorium.10 Authors on Vaccines, Science, Politics & Media.  $25 includes the full day event and one signed book. Plus savings on book packages.

Science for Sale / Dr. David Lewis

Vaccine Injuries / Louis Conte

Plague / Kent Heckenlively & Dr. Judy Mikoitz

Vaccines 2.0 / Mark Blaxill & Dan Olmsted

The Vaccine Court / Wayne Rohde

The Autism War / Louis Conte

Vaccine Injuries/ Louis Conte

The Big Autism Cover-Up / Anne Dachel

Vaccine Epidemic / Mary Holland & Kim Mack Rosenberg

Author Presentations, Meet & Greets, Signings, Panel Discussions and more!

Comments

Donna K

I am looking forward to reading Mark's and Dan's book. My interpretation from the title is that the book supports choice - and having observed the efforts of these two men over the past decade I have no doubt it will support informed choice with the truth.

cia parker

Twyla,
I like your title with the word Careful vaccine choice in it. I was turning over better titles in my mind, things like Making Safer Vaccine Choices, or Vaccines: You Decide. It may be that immunocompromised children couldn't cope with the childhood diseases as well as healthy ones can, but I think their conditions make vaccines even more dangerous for them to get, and I think it's unacceptable to damage everyone's children with vaccines hoping possibly to protect the immunocompromised few (more now that vaccine damage has added so many to their ranks). I wish today's parents realized how healthy children used to be before most of today's vaccines, and would have been even healthier without the DPT (see Sweden's, Germany's, and Japan's stories of how much healthier their children were WITHOUT the pertussis vaccine). That leaves the smallpox vaccine: always useless and extremely dangerous, and the polio, diphtheria, and tetanus vaccines, which all have their uses in certain times and places.

Twyla

Nobody is throwing "self-righteous rhetoric" at you Barry. And making choices doesn't imply choosing to get the vaccines. The word "choices" implies that you have decisions to make. It is a sign saying, "Stop and think about this. You decide. Don't just blindly follow a schedule." Since at this point we truly don't know what is the safest choice for any given individual or even for society as a whole, perhaps a better title would be: "Vaccines 2.0 A Parent's Guide to Making Careful Vaccination Choices". At any rate, I look forward to reading this book. I am sure that it is chock full of important information on all sides of these issues. If I had a baby now I would have a really hard time deciding what to do, and I would appreciate having this book.

Vaccine enthusiasts like to split everyone into two groups:
1) people who uncritically receive all recommended vaccines, have blind faith in the CDC and their pediatrician, and don't question anything (and don't believe their eyes when they witness a vaccine injury), and
2) people who raise any concerns at all about vaccines, who are all labeled "anti-vaxers".

Now it seems that some on our side of the fence want to split everyone into two groups:
1) people who are against any and all vaccines for everyone, and
2) people who either get all vaccines, vaccinate on a delayed and selective schedule, stop vaccinating their own children due to family history of adverse reactions but don't feel they can decide what's best for everyone, or who are very critical of our vaccine program and those in charge of it but are not totally against all vaccines for anyone. These are all lumped together as chicken-hearted lame-brained ignorant sellouts.

These issues are not black and white. This isn't like a sport with for or against.

David Metcalf

Pay me $25 and I'll give you a book to tell you how bad vaccines are. Buy my all natural, guaranteed safe (but useless), homeoprophylaxis water vaccine, just $59 a bottle. Come to my 'health' seminars about vaccine TRUTH, just $200 a ticket.

They always something to sell...

Jenny Allan

@Greg "We already have the pro-vaxx controlled media touting the benefits of vaccines and they are not shy about doing so in the most deceitful manner."

EXACTLY Greg! .......and that's why we need an HONEST appraisal of all child vaccines, and this MUST include the proven benefits of vaccines, as well as any adverse side effects and other concerns, proven and otherwise.

John Stone

It is obvious that Dan and Mark are not trying to open new ground. A few years ago we even had the the 'Green Our Vaccines' rally. Some of us may have thought the concept was a little optimistic: what you might hope for was a much reduced schedule, choice, better monitoring, no mercury, aluminium salts etc. What it did not do was break us all apart. In those days we managed to live with a range of opinion.

And look how government/pharma still hate Jenny McCarthy!

david m burd

Dan & Mark's book title is as ambivalent as it gets.

But, that's THE problem, as parents simply perusing the title, without delving further, can by default assume many vaccination shots are OK, not to be questioned, and they will probably never buy/read the book to be further enlightened.

That being said, after reading it I might have more to say.

Barry

Barry

Well, that's something else, but I take it you have not had a chance to look at the book and judge its arguments - so maybe it is premature. It is quite possible that I won't agree with everything (I haven't read it either).

******

No, it's not something else at all.

I don't need to read this book to know that it's void of scientific proof of vaccine safety and efficacy. Because I known for some time that this proof simply doesn't exist. It never did. And if it did, commenters would be throwing THAT at me me right now, instead of all their self-righteous rhetoric.

The bottom line John, is that I am the parent of a vaccine injured child. Yet as you so clearly pointed out below, I will never know for sure if he was injured by a single vaccine, by a harmful toxic synergy from receiving multiple vaccines in a single doctors visit, or if he was simply ravaged from the cumulative effect of receiving 31 poisonous vaccines before he was 21 months of age (.. feel free to pause John, and give some serious thought to that last one).

Just so we're clear. Do you honestly expect me to tell the next generation of parents, to go ahead and make the same medical mistakes that I did … just make them more "safely", based on the advice in a book that was written by a couple of journalists ???

Twyla

re: "I'm not sure why you're so afraid to admit to being anti-vaccine," and "But you're definitely not 100% anti vaccine-lobby."

I myself believe that for some vaccines, for some diseases, for some people, the benefits outweigh the risks. Diseases can be disabling and fatal. When I was growing up in the 1960's, we received far fewer vaccines - for a few very serious communicable diseases - and had much lower rates of autism, asthma, allergies, diabetes, bipolar, etc. than now. It seems to me that a lot of people can tolerate a small number of vaccines, but that as more and more vaccines keep being added to the schedule, more people suffer adverse reactions. And some people can suffer adverse reactions to even one vaccine.

I know that some people who have spent more time studying these issues in more depth than me have come to the conclusion that no vaccines for anyone is better than any vaccines. That is their right.

It is one thing to argue these issues. It is another thing to say that anyone who is not totally anti-vaccine is a hypocrite or scared or a compromising sellout. The fact is, sometimes people have different opinions. This needs to be respected.

I hope that we can cooperate on advocating for the right to make choices on vaccines for ourselves and our minor children. This is so important.

And for better research on adverse reactions, for the sake of prevention and treatment. I have no doubt that the current vaccine schedule has caused a lot of autism. We need to be focussed more on fighting the govt-pharma-mainstream medical establishment than on fighting each other.

Greg

John, I think many here is simply having a difficult time dealing with the dissonance of Dan and AoA cursing vaccines to Dan and Mark now promoting them. Seriously, have we been listening to ourselves of late? It’s like: ‘OMG we have 1 in 6 chronically sick kids and vaccines are sending us all to hell, but – hey – how about that smallpox vaccine, didn’t it do such a real bang-up job eradicating smallpox’?

This book is being heralded as seeking to educate new parents, struggling with the vaccination issue, by offering a balanced discussion on vaccines’ risks and benefits, yet we already have the pro-vaxx controlled media touting the benefits of vaccines and they are not shy about doing so in the most deceitful manner… We have virtually every public health figure and doctor parroting how awesome vaccines are… Then there is also the vast majority of the unquestioning public sheepishly echoing how great vaccines are… We have all these parties touting vaccines, and now we also want to weigh in and point out their benefits?!? Can someone pleeeasse explain to me how this scenario will leave that pondering parent with a ‘balanced’ take on the matter?!?

And seriously, are we so naïve to believe that this book will get through to that confused parent, who is likely forewarned to be wary of us ‘anti-vax cranks’, and, nevermind, ‘cranks’ that are now appearing to be so conflicted about the benefits of vaccines? As I mentioned before, wouldn’t it be better if this ‘balanced’ message were to come from more neutral sources such as Dr Sears or Dr Gordon?

Sorry, but I honestly feel that if Dan wants to assist the public in taking a more cautious approach with vaccines then it would have been wiser to not point out their risks and benefits, but for him to ‘stay on message’ and keep hammering home the point that vaccines are dangerous and untested. Seriously, we hear talk of how the anti-vaccine movement is gaining steam with more and more people becoming sceptical of vaccines, yet did this development come about by parents pointing out the pros or cons of vaccines, or by thousands upon thousands of them sharing their raw, gripping stories of how their children were destroyed immediately following vaccines?

Finally, has anyone contemplated the conflict of interest aspect of the book? How do we think it will go over with it appearing that as we stroke parents’ fears about vaccines, we now seek to capitalize by marketing alternative vaccination schedules? Anti-vaxxers’ motives are already being criticized when we advertise treatment options for autism, but at least in these cases we cannot be charged with creating autism or the demand.

John, it’s nothing personal against Dan or Mark but I also call BS on this book. And, lest it appears that I am being a ‘bully’, I will officially end this rant and promise never ever to revisit the topic.

cia parker

I don't think the word "safe" in "safe vaccination choices" should have been used. We all know that any person can react to any vaccine unexpectedly with a long list of dangerous reactions. I accept that most vaccines can give long-lasting immunity to the targeted pathogen, but the real question is how likely it is that the individual person experience a disabling or fatal case of the disease in question. We should give the statistics for people with whatever pre-existing conditions and lifestyle conditions the person has, both for experiencing serious effects from the disease if not vaccinated and from the vaccine, in that specific place at that time. And then let parents decide. But they should be told how relatively mild and inconsequential measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis, chickenpox, rotavirus, hepatitis-A, HPV, and flu nearly always are, how rare polio, tetanus, and diphtheria are. How rare serious cases of meningitis are, and how most people develop immunity to the most common kinds of meningitis through subclinical exposure by the time they are adults.

I don't agree with telling people that if they follow these recommendations, it will be "safe" to let their children get these vaccines, and that is what having the word "safe" on the cover says. Everyone must realize and accept that it's always a gamble either way, and we haven't even scratched the surface of how many kinds of severe and life-altering vaccine damage there are.

Jenny Allan

I was appalled by the number of adverse comments generated by 'friendly' AoA commenters, in response to the launch of Dan and Mark's book. The following is from an earlier AoA article, entitled 'The bullies within', authored by Dan Olmstead.
http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/12/age-of-autism-weekly-wrap-the-bullies-within.html#comments

“Well, Mark Blaxill and I have a book coming out next month called Vaccines 2.0 (it went to press Friday – yay!) that is subtitled, “A Careful Parent’s Guide To Making Safe Vaccine Choices For Your Family.” We labored on this for over a year, and we developed our own Reward-Risk Rating for each vaccine; parents can refer to it as they make their own choices – note well, their own choices. And their choice might be not vaccinating at all, an option to which we give considerable and respectful attention. The book opens and closes, in fact, with a father who decided not to vaccinate his daughter.”

My comments on that thread also generated some 'stick', on account of my accepting an annual free flu jab for seniors in the UK. I was told this choice on my part was foolish and dangerous, and would certainly result in my succumbing to dementia and becoming a burdon on the state!! This was all earnestly backed up with some obscure Pub Med papers. I'm still in charge of my 'faculties' and no flu yet. This year's flu jab was not as effective as usual, but was still around 50% effective! If I deflected some adverse comments which would otherwise have been aimed at Mark and Dan. then that's fine-I've got a thick skin. A sneaky comment on a later completely different thread, ridiculed me and insinuated I was a hypocrite, but I don't campaign against flu jabs, just the mercury in vaccines, particularly in vaccines administered to young children.

I am not against all vaccines, but have concerns about a few of them. Most of all I am in favour of informed choice. Ourselves and our children are not here for the sole purpose of increasing the profits of the vaccine manufacturers. If parents choose not to vaccinate their children, then their choices should be respected. Advice and instructions on how children should be nursed through childhood diseases would be useful.

Ranting trolls regularly accuse AoA editors of dangerous anti-vaccine quackery. They love it when we appear to attack each other.


John Stone

Barry

Well, that's something else, but I take it you have not had a chance to look at the book and judge its arguments - so maybe it is premature. It is quite possible that I won't agree with everything (I haven't read it either).

Barry

John,

You're free to believe to believe whatever you want, as am I. Which if I'm not mistaken, was the premise for advising us to keep an open mind about this book.

But my firm belief, based on what my life experience has shown me, is that vaccines are neither safe, nor effective.

If someone wants show me scientific proof that any vaccine is safe and effective, then i might just change my view on that.

But until someone can, books like this one will receive zero endorsement from me.

John Stone

Barry

I am sorry, this really does not do. No one here is lobbying for the vaccine industry and it is a false allegation. It is also a perfectly proper thing to examine individual products rather than simply condemn them as a class. Obviously you have - if I am correct - expressed the view that none of the products work at all so obviously nothing is going to satisfy you if others do not concur with you 100% (and few others actually hold that position), but as to making false and unfounded allegations about people's motives that is something else.

I see no reason why everybody has to agree about everything.

Barry

I am very sceptical of the program but have never declared myself to be "anti vaccine" as a matter of principle: what I am is firmly, 100%, hard core "anti vaccine lobby".

********

I'm not sure why you're so afraid to admit to being anti-vaccine. If you want "free, open and tolerant" discussions, then you should practice what you preach, and set an example that creates more of it in the world.

But you're definitely not 100% anti vaccine-lobby. If you were, you would recognize that this book was created to lobby for vaccines from our side of the argument.

We're being used John, by desperate people who need our endorsement to put forth a dishonest solution. When the only real solution, is no vaccines at all.

Followed of course, by criminal prosecutions for all those who have used vaccines to create a sickened, Rx dependant public.

Benedetta

I appreciate all those involved in taking a chance to save a few baby brains.

They do have us - don't they -they have all the weight behind them of authority and are so self rightious. They love to quote - something about gambling with baby brains?? Benefits outweighs - the - danger - Oh risks.

No one calls them on what exactly are those odds. Except it is rare, really, really, really rare.

Jenny Allan

My youngest grandson came home from secondary school today with two letters in his schoolbag addressed to his parents; both letters came from the Scottish Government Health dept.

One of the letters, came with an expensively produced glossy booklet, (at the taxpayers expense that is). This explained, teenage children in his year group at secondary school, were shortly to be 'offered' vaccinations against Diptheria, Tetanus, Polio and Meningitis. I'm not sure whether these were contained within one or more vaccine. Enclosed was a parental consent form.

The second letter was more 'sinister'. The Scottish Government were seeking consent to vaccinate my grandson with TWO separate doses of MMR vaccine. There was no glossy leaflet this time; my grandson has been individually targeted for an MMR 'catch up' campaign, since he has never received ANY MMR vaccine. Instead he was immunised privately with single injections of Mumps, Measles and Rubella. vaccines.

There were two sinister 'one liners' contained within the 'small print'. One of them stated monovalent vaccines apparently 'don't count' as far as the Scottish Government is concerned. The other stated the child could consent to the vaccinations himself. In other words, parental consent, is not actually required for any of these vaccines.

My daughter has already written to and telephoned the school stating her son is not to receive ANY vaccinations, but this is being ignored by a system which seeks to indoctrinate these young minds with all the supposed benefits of vaccines, without telling them the risks.

My grandson DID receive his Diptheria, Tetanus and Pertussis vaccines as a baby, plus a pre school booster (plus mercury). I believe he also got a meningitis jab then. My daughter sees no good reason for getting any more of these vaccines now. Tetanus vaccine is available at any time at our local health centre, if my grandson cuts himself or stands on a rusty nail etc. We believe the MMR vaccine is unsafe to give a sibling of an autistic brother, diagnosed with the Wakefield Syndrome. My grandson knows this, and won't be bullied or persuaded into any 'injections'.

The huge amount of money being expended by Governments worldwide, in promoting vaccines, deperately needs to be countered by public information, providing honest balanced information about the REAL risks and benefits. I note Dan and Mark's book is available via Amazon in the UK, and I strongly advise potential and actual parents to buy this book. Congratulations to Skyhorse for publishing this and other excellent books, some of which have pride of place on my bookshelf.

Stagmom

ALWAYS proud of my colleagues and friends, Dan and Mark. It's easy to forget the young versions of ourselves - when I had ZERO idea of vaccine side effects. And today's young parents and parents-to-be are fed a STEADY diet of propaganda telling them there ARE no reasons to actually think about vaccinations. JUST GET THE DAMN SHOTS to paraphrase Dr. Nancy Snyderman. This book has a title that says, "Oh, here, learn something so you can make a choice." I can buy it for a baby shower gift. I can give it to the mom to be who says, "What do I do?" If I say "NEVER TOUCH A VAX" she will likely shut me down. I would have in December of 1994. Of course most of us who have seen our kids fall into the pits of hell thanks to vaccination will never touch one again - but we are in the boiling water - as frogs - those outside our community can not FATHOM the danger and like a religion - like the Cosby apologists, "injury" simply can NOT be true. So we must spoon feed. use a Trojan horse, educate one by one with a gentle hand. Not bend them over sans lube. Bob Sears' book cause controversey for being "Too soft." It's a good book. The AVERAGE Mom outside of our world NEEDS and DESERVES info so she can make informed choices for her baby. Thank you to Skyhorse for taking the risk to publish this book when 99.9% of "Autism publishers would have run away screaming. Screaming - side effect of Birth Dose Hep B for my Gianna......

Cynthia Cournoyer

Looking forward to reading. What is the release date again?

Bayareamom

@JB,

I don't think anyone who is so-called anti-vaccine feels that in our lifetime, vaccines are going to stop being used. I do believe in freedom of the press, free speech, etc. But I cannot personally support ANY vaccine program, given the research I have uncovered in the past 21 years or so. I just cannot do it.

While I can agree that - possibly - the overall health of our world's children may be better off with a drastically reduced vaccination schedule, MY hope and prayers are that some day in the future, the full risks behind a program that has been proven and documented to be more harmful than good, will be stopped...period.

That's how I feel. I'm certainly not stating that all others here or elsewhere need feel the same way.

Overall, freedom to CHOOSE should be the mantle we all can agree upon and yes...I do believe THIS option MAY be a realistic endeavor in our lifetime.

Dr. William Gaunt

I feel that this book is desperately needed by parents who want some balanced and logical information on vaccines. Mostly what is available now is either totally for the entire vaccine schedule or totally opposed to any and all vaccines. Imagine the drastic improvement in children's overall health if this book can break the strangle hold of the full vaccine schedule. I think that we should all help this book get off to a great start by getting it to our loved one with small children or children coming soon.

JB Handley

I think it's awesome that Mark & Dan are promoting a rational discussion about the risks and benefits of vaccines. No one who invented vaccines originally thought they were going to cause the Autism epidemic....

I really hope we see a day where children are evaluated in advance of being vaccinated and for some children "Not able to tolerate vaccines" becomes an acceptable outcome.

Also, if you really think that vaccines are going to stop being used in our lifetime you are unrealistic, so we all need to deal in reality, as Mark & Dan are...

By the way, the thoughts above make me an "anti-vaccine crank"!!

JB Handley

jen

John, I couldn't agree more with what you said. Congrats on the book, guys.

Linda1

Well said John.

Greg

John, I always like reading you because you really do come across as a straight shooter. Perhaps then I will pose this blunt argument. Some applaud Dan's efforts for seeking to present a balanced argument on vaccines. Do you not fear though that our balanced approach will result in the pendulum greatly swinging in the other sides' favour as they continue to counter by exaggerating, conflating, obfuscating, and outright lying. From a strictly strategic move wouldn't it be better to stick to our argument that vaccines are dangerous and untested, and knowing fully well that our 'foes' will continue to sing a completely different tune? Isn't this the best scenario, after listening to both sides, for fence-sitters to reach a balanced consensus?

John Stone

Just to say I have not yet had the opportunity to read Dan and Mark's book, but I see nothing wrong with having a dispassionate review of individual products and certainly take very well Dan's point that there are just too many of them, which not only means a cumulative challenge, potential harmful synergies etc, but also makes it deliberately impossible to detect which individually may be doing harm. I am very sceptical of the program but have never declared myself to be "anti vaccine" as a matter of principle: what I am is firmly, 100%, hard core "anti vaccine lobby".

Nor is it that there are no potential benefits, it is that the industry as it stands at the moment is a vicious racket and a global menace which has effectively denied the discussion of its products in mainstream debate - pillories personally anyone who raises the least criticism. The lobby is pernicious and I have no good words for it.

Long live free, open and tolerant discussion.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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

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

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

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

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

Your Information

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