Greg Dobbs on the Measles Mania
Dr. Paul Thomas, MD: Parents Rights to Choice in Vaccines Threatened Around the Country and in Oregon SB442-3 Amendment

OC Register Publishes Point Counterpoint RE Measles Vaccination

Dr. Bob SearsThe OC (Orange County, California) Register published two sides of the Chemerinksy  measles vaccination panic that is abating but still in the news.

Dr. Bob Sears, pediatrician, offers his point of view. And Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the UC Irvine School of Law advocates mandatory vaccination.

Dr. Sears:

Mandatory vaccination is not the answer to measles

Measles. It used to be just a disease. Now it’s become a banner under which politicians gather to threaten one of our most sacred rights - the right to give informed consent for medical treatment.

Whether you are for vaccines, against them, or neutral, allow me to ask this question: Is vaccination a medical treatment which should fall under the protection of informed consent, or does the government have the right to force them on every American?

As a pediatrician, I give patients the MMR vaccine almost every day in my office. And I follow the guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control which mandate that I provide informed consent. The American Medical Association describes informed consent as a patient’s right of self-decision and a basic policy in both ethics and law that physicians must honor.

If vaccines were harmless to every single person who received them, then I could understand putting this decision in the hands of our elected officials. But here are two salient facts:

• About 2,000 severe reactions are reported to the CDC each year which result in prolonged hospitalization, permanent disability, or death. Most reactions aren’t even reported, so the true number may be even higher. Yet, because they can’t be proven, the medical community denies that they can happen.

• Over $3 billion have been paid out to victims of vaccine reactions. Not $3 million. Not $30 million. Not even $300 million. But $3 billion. Are we paying that much money to victims of pretend reactions? I think not.

You might think it’s the actual measles outbreak that is responsible for the current political hysteria. But it is not. Instead, it is a carefully crafted opportunistic attempt to overstate what measles could potentially do to our nation. It is what politicians, some media outlets, and some in the medical community are trying to portray measles to be. But let’s look at the actual facts of the current outbreak:

• As of Feb. 17, there are 141 cases nationwide. Not thousands. According to the Orange County Public Health Department, no new cases have been reported in the OC since Feb. 4.

• After the initial surge, it is now moving slowly. It is not spreading like wildfire in an exponential explosion of unprecedented proportion.  Read more at Mandatory vaccination is not the answer to measles.

Mr. Chemerinsky:

Require All Children To Be Vaccinated

The California Legislature should enact a law requiring all children to be vaccinated, unless there is a medical reason for not doing so. Last week, a group of California state lawmakers introduced legislation to mandate that all children get vaccinated before they enter school and to end the exemption that allows parents to not have their children vaccinated when that conflicts with their beliefs.

As a matter of constitutional law, parents have no right to not vaccinate their children. However, the government has a compelling interest in stopping the spread of communicable diseases. Totally preventable diseases, like measles and whooping cough, are now spreading in the U.S. because of parents who have not vaccinated their children. This endangers those who cannot be vaccinated, such as those born with compromised immune systems and even babies who are too young to be safely vaccinated. A person’s liberty never includes the right to endanger others.

Moreover, parents never have the right to endanger their own children’s health. The government constantly regulates how parents raise their children, with laws requiring that children be in car seats, prohibiting child labor and mandating schooling. There have been countless court cases throughout the country of parents wanting to deny their children needed medical treatment, even life-saving medical care, on religious grounds. The parents always lose in these cases and the courts order that treatment be provided to the children so that they can reach adulthood and decide for themselves. Not vaccinating children puts them at risk of preventable infectious diseases. No parent has the right to harm his or her children in this way.

Nor is there any remotely plausible medical reason for not vaccinating a child. Parents who have chosen not to vaccinate their children apparently are relying on a fear that vaccinations can lead to autism. This is based on a single article in Lancet, a British medical journal, in 1998. That article, though, was quickly refuted by at least 13 other studies that found no link between vaccinations and autism. Lancet retracted the article in 2010 and the author has since had his medical license revoked. Read the full editorial at OC Register.


cia parker

Unexpectedly limited duration of pertussis immunity from vaccine.

cia parker

I commented earlier today that this case of the woman dying of measles was a lot like the case of Gareth Colfer-Williams, the only one to die of measles in the Wales outbreak two years ago. Both were on immune-suppressing drugs. Both had no measles rash (atypical measles). Both got a secondary pneumonia infection which caused their deaths (very common with atypical measles).

I said that the take-home point here is that people who are taking immunosuppressant drugs or who are chronically immunocompromised shouldn't go to a doctor's office which is a hotbed of infectious disease. Duh! If the medical cartel cared about people's health, it would reinstitute the tradition of doctors making house calls, as my grandfather did for several decades and as they still do in the UK (I think). People taking these drugs must be aware of the danger they incur going into public places (or being close to infectious friends and family members at home). Weigh the risks and act accordingly, and get off the drugs as soon as possible. Don't expect every single person in the outer world to get every possible vaccine because it might possibly protect them. There are hundreds of kinds of pneumonia and meningitis (etc.) for which there is no vaccine. Everyone is exposed to them all the time, and most people develop permanent immunity to those most common in his environment through subclinical exposure. But the immunocompromised can easily catch their death from any one of these multitudes of serotypes for which there is no vaccine, no way to guilt people into risking their lives by taking the vaccine.

But it requires public education and a change of mindset. Sort of like teaching people that the pertussis vaccine does NOT protect infants because their immune system hasn't developed enough yet. You're just preparing the ground for later, possibly more effective doses. And the pertussis vaccine protects less than half of toddlers who get it, less than a quarter of school-aged children. I'll get the link in a minute. That means that BY NO MEANS can a parent EVER feel confident that now his child is safe from getting pertussis. A HUGE number of vaccinated people get and transmit it anyway. The buck stops with the parent, parents MUST be taught the crucial importance of keeping newborns at home the first few months and being mindful of the number and health status of those who come in close contact with the baby. So why even bother with the dangerous vaccine, which causes asthma, allergies, seizure disorders, SIDS, and autism? Shelter young infants and then don't worry about older babies and children getting it. It's a drag and lasts a long time, but is only dangerous to a few of the youngest newborns. And high-dose intravenous vitamin C will treat it even in the very youngest babies. Back shortly with a link to the study showing how ineffective the acellular pertussis vaccine is in children.


Breaking News my behind. What is the woman's name? She died "this year"? When? Her parents say she was vaccinated? When did they say she was vaccinated? How long before she developed atypical measles was she vaccinated?

If this woman died of measles "this year", are we supposed to believe that public health officials are just now saying so?

Are they exhuming bodies now to do autopsies and find measles?

Is this "woman in her 20's" who died "this year" real? Or is this news story timed for release days after Brown handed his constituents over to Pharma on a silver platter part of the government's get everyone vaccinated campaign?

I smell propaganda.


BREAKING NEWS: confirmed measles death in Clallun County in Washington State

George Bjornson

The Cause of Autism

Key evidence regarding the cause of autism can be found by comparing identical and fraternal twins with autism. If one identical twin has autism, there is about a 60% probability that the other twin will be autistic, but for same-sex fraternal twins the probability is about 20% [*]. After conception, identical twins experience the same environment as same-sex fraternal twins. Hence the environmental factor creating the autism-prevalence difference between identical and fraternal autistic twins must occur prior to conception. This means that the basic autism disorder must be created prior to conception, and so must be genetic.

But how can there be an autism epidemic if autism is genetic? Unlike normal genetic disorders, which develop over many generations, autism must develop in a single generation for it to evoke a severe epidemic. How can this occur? We must assume that an unknown factor damages a sex chromosome in at least one of the parents of an autistic child. The child produced by that damaged sex chromosome inherits the basic autism disorder, and thereby becomes a “vulnerable child”.

There are two major aspects of autism: (1) neurological damage, and (2) immune system damage. It is reasonable to assume that the basic autism disorder gives the “vulnerable child” a weak immune system. Vaccines are designed to operate on people with normal immune systems. Hence, when a “vulnerable child” with a weak immune system is vaccinated, a severe reaction can occur, which produces the neurological damage of autism. According to this explanation, vaccines do not cause autism, but without vaccines there would be no autistic neurological damage.

In short, all parents should avoid vaccinating their child unless they have proof that their child has a strong immune system, and they should delay vaccination as long as possible.

*Hallmayer J, et al, “Genetic Heritability and shared environmental factors among twin pairs with autism”, Arch Gen Psychiatry, Nov 2011, 68(11): pps 1095-1102 Abstract on Internet: (

cia parker

These are the relevant incidence and mortality statistics:

Charts from Dr. Langmuir's 1962 article (in children 3-10 death rate less than one in 10,000 cases), from the UK 1945-present (in '80s one or two deaths per 10,000 cases), and a great Vaxtruth article, 450 deaths a year out of three to four million cases total, many unreported because most people didn't go to a doctor for it, and measles has never been a reportable disease with penalties for not reporting.


I don't get it. So far no one has died from the measles, but something like ten deaths are reported from Offit's vaccine. Shouldn't be be discussing that on the Nightly News?

Nancy McCallum

Dr. Sears for President!


Nice work, autismmom and Birgit Calhoun. Thanks for those links.


Anyone in the Boston area, this Feb 25 event is open to the public


It is simply amazing that some think their right to (theoretically) avoid measles some how trumps someone else's right to avoid taking a substance that carries a risk of injury or death - and has complete product liability protection...

How does anyone capable of logical thinking reconcile this?


Why does Dr. Chemerinsky have to say about AMA recognize philosophical and religious exemptions of its physician members??????

From the AMA web Site:

Opinion 9.133 Routine Universal Immunization of Physicians

"As professionals committed to promoting the welfare of individual patients and the health of the public and to safeguarding their own and their colleagues’ well-being, physicians have an ethical responsibility to take appropriate measures to prevent the spread of infectious disease in health care settings. Conscientious participation in routine infection control practices, such as hand washing and respiratory precautions is a basic expectation of the profession. In some situations, however, routine infection control is not sufficient to protect the interests of patients, the public, and fellow health care workers.

In the context of a highly transmissible disease that poses significant medical risk for vulnerable patients or colleagues, or threatens the availability of the health care workforce, particularly a disease that has potential to become epidemic or pandemic, and for which there is an available, safe, and effective vaccine, physicians have an obligation to:

(a) Accept immunization absent a recognized medical, religious, or philosophic reason to not be immunized.

(b) Accept a decision of the medical staff leadership or health care institution, or other appropriate authority to adjust practice activities if not immunized (e.g., wear masks or refrain from direct patient care). It may be appropriate in some circumstances to inform patients about immunization status. (I, II)"

Issued June 2011 based on the report "Routine Universal Immunization of Physicians for Vaccine-Preventable Disease,"PDF FIle adopted November 2010.

Ernesto Lyon

Ironically, supporting vaccine mandates is going to hurt the democrats with the upper income liberal voters who are their mainstay.

Birgit Calhoun

Also, did Chemerinsky forget that he produced the following brief?

Birgit Calhoun

The Chemerinsky argument is likely to drive some parents to stay away from doctors' offices and to start homeschooling or whatever it takes to not comply with a governmental order that is based on arbitrariness. Apparently when it actually comes to vaccine liability issues, the law ducks and says nothing. Is "unavoidably unsafe" really too touchy a subject? I am not sure what I would do if I had to get all the natural protection I have via the artificial route of injection. I have had all the shots I need to get into elementary and all other schools, too. But I would not trust the pediatricians my children had to diagnose the conditions that would keep them from being vaccinated, and believe me I have lots of experience with many many doctors. We live in a world that's based more on greed than on care. So, whose children would conveniently be judged to be immuno-compromised?

cia parker

Parents never have the right to endanger their children's health? Did Unser Fuhrer Chemerlinsky rebut Dr. Sears' factual statement that billions have been paid out for patients having experienced severe vaccine damage, with most vaccine damage never being reported or compensated? No. Just another fascist out to damage children for money.


When I was growing up in the Fifties and Sixties every single child got the measles. No mom called up an official government office to report that her kid had the measles. We didn't have a family pediatrician back then nor well baby visits. So think about it: every person alive today who was born before the Sixties got the measles, got over them, and now have lifetime cellular immunity. Vaccine science is not infallible; and in fact it is in chaos. Vaccines are failing including the measles vaccine. It does not confer long standing immunity like cellular immunity. So as the antigens fade a person can get the measles and create an epidemic of measles. Also sometimes recently vaccinated people shed the measles and that can create an epidemic of measles. With fading antigens from the measles shot not conferring herd immunity, with recently vaccinated capable of shedding viruses, and with those with real herd immunity dying out; we are setting ourselves up for a massive epidemic of measles in the future.

Doctors cannot say to any individual parent who is responsible for that child's health that the vaccine will not cause harm. The CDC has never studied children who fall ill after vaccination, not one single child. Their broad based epidemiological studies are too broad to isolate risk factors for individual groups of children. Unless there is an oops and a risk factor group shows up like the African American males who were at 300% risk if vaccinated under 36 months of age. So accidentally a risk subgroup showed up and that required a speedy tweaking of the statistics to make the group go away. By systematically eliminating any possible of a risk group in their easily manipulated statistical studies, the CDC has eliminated any genuine reason for a medical exemption other than someone who has just got a bone marrow transplant. There is no little box on an form in any doctors office, there are no long family histories taken. Let's face it a doctors visit (as I remember them with my kids) was a real slam, bam, thank you mam type affair--do what doctor says and don't waste my time.

If you live in California, write your letters, make your calls, tell your friends. This is a clear case when the doctor does not know best. Parents will have to leave the state because of this legislation if it should pass, and that will not be good for California. Many states have long been trying to lure California's entrepreneurs away and this might just do the trick. Hello Texas!


Useful information.......

Jeannette Bishop

Thank you, Dr. Sears.

Thank you, Linda1. I've been hearing significantly different measles mortality stats and that helps provide some explanation.

I think we see the ~40% young adults who are against mandatory vaccination commenting under Chemerinsky's piece (at least in the couple of pages I waited to view. My computer is again under the weather. There's no such thing as a measles spy virus is there?)

Laura Hayes

"A person’s liberty never includes the right to endanger others." Unless, of course, you are a doctor, politician, or one of their biggest benefactors: a pharmaceutical company, a chemical company, a big "food" company, or Monsanto.

"Moreover, parents never have the right to endanger their own children’s health." Well, allowing their children to be vaccinated would definitely violate that statement.

"Nor is there any remotely plausible medical reason for not vaccinating a child. Parents who have chosen not to vaccinate their children apparently are relying on a fear that vaccinations can lead to autism." Clearly, Mr. Cheminsky is completely unconcerned about the MILLIONS of children worldwide who have either died from their vaccinations, or been permanently harmed.

What a total ignoramus this man is.


Danchi, you may be right about pharma buying the Democratic party, although I think it would make more sense to buy both parties. I think another reason why Dems may seem more warm to vaccine mandates is because they have been the party in office since much of the time that vaccine injures are starting to come to the forefront. Vaccines mandates simply are a tactic to cover up the crime and their asses. As I said before, the biggest political blunder facing Obama's legacy is not the pulling out of Iraq that led to the creation of ISIS- although that was monumental -- but his handling of the autism crisis. Obama may be a good chess player but he will never be a great leader. To be one, you must be able to bite the bullet and make the 'tough' but right calls.

Who is William Thompson ?

Excellent work Linda1 - very pleased with that stat

John Stone

Yes, Chemerinsky trots out the usual rubbish about the Wakefield paper. If they had a decent defense they would use it. And he's the head of a law school.

Truthseeker 2

Chemerinsky looks to be too old to know what's really happening to our kids. Oh and too "bought."


"Moreover, parents never have the right to endanger their own children’s health."

Well, vaccinating children according to the CDC schedule is endangering their health. So I guess what she is saying is that parents do not have the right to vaccinate. I don't think that's what she meant to say, but that is, in fact, what she said.

I have been reading more studies this past week. Did you know that a study in France offered CONCLUSIVE evidence for a strong link between Hep B vaccine and multiple sclerosis? (see link below)

There is also clear and convincing evidence of a strong link between Dpt and asthma.

In addition, vaccines appear to be conclusively linked to the rise of Type 1 diabetes in children.

This list could go on and on. The only responsible thing for parents to do now is to refuse vaccination. Parents do not have the right to put their children in harms way.


Parents who have chosen not to vaccinate their children apparently are relying on a fear that vaccinations can lead to autism. This is based on a single article in Lancet, a British medical journal, in 1998

In the last month I have read this or similar statements online by every pro-vaccine zombie. This clearly demonstrates that these people are not reading or listening to what parents are saying. They have been given talking points and they are unable to deviate from them which clearly indicated that are stuck on STOOPID!

I read an interesting post by Tim Bolen and he said something that resonated with me as being true: The pharmaceutical companies (most likely Merck) has offered to fund the Democratic Party in the next election if they push forced vaccination onto the country. Hmmm. I don't know about anyone else but this clicked in my head why so many Dems are hooking their wagon to this path of destruction for the country. Think about it. Democratics are still stinging from mid-term losses and the thought of big pharma with their bottomless wallet is a wet dream to them. Some of them will do anything to stay in office and reap all the lifetime benefits that go along with it. With pharma behind them, they have it made in the shade. Pharma to them is like the Koch Brothers and Mitt Romney to Scott Walker. Why are so many Doctors going along with this. Other than the fact many are just zombies following their intrinsic nature of eating anything alive, this video clearly states why: John Oliver (The Daily Show) takes on the Pharmaceutical Companies HYSTERICAL -


Dr. Sears:

"It has killed no one. It can kill about 1 person in every 1000 cases."

From 1956-1960 the measles mortality rate as reported by the CDC in 2003, was 1 per every 1,000 REPORTED cases, when there were estimated to be 4 million cases per year and approx. 542,000 cases reported, which equates to 1 death per 10,000 cases. I wish people would stop saying 1/1,000. It isn't correct.


Dr Bob Sears you have written the finest report I have yet read on this debate, in favour of freedom of choice. It was a joy to read - clear, concise, eminently sensible, and reassuring. Thankyou. I wish we could publish it globally in the mainstream media.

As for Mr Chemerinsky......who does he imagine he is.....GOD??

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.)