Drs Pan, Benjamin, De Rosa & Gordon Interviewed on KALW Parental Vaccination Rights
Control All Delete, Part 1: The Un-American Suppression of the Vaccine Safety Debate

In Perspective: Vaccine Exemptions and Health

MississippiOriginally published at Vaccination News.

By F. Edward Yazbak MD, FAAP


The state of Mississippi where Personal Belief (Philosophic) Vaccine Exemptions are not allowed has the highest pediatric vaccination rates in the Country and so far no measles cases in 2015.    

Sadly, Mississippi also has the highest infant mortality rate (IMR). 

New Mexico where philosophic exemptions are not allowed, has also not reported any measles activity in 2015 unlike adjoining Texas, Colorado and Arizona, where philosophic exemptions are permitted. New Mexico’s IMR is just as alarming as that of Mississippi and has always exceeded that of its three neighboring states.

Blaming young parents claiming philosophic exemptions for the 2015 California measles outbreak seems unfair when vaccinated, partially vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have been affected and when the disease seems to have become more prevalent among individuals older than 20.

Geography rather than exemptions may be the real cause why the present measles outbreak started in California.

Religious exemptions are likely to become the next evil.   

The CDC has the ability to distinguish between wild and vaccine-strain measles virus by PCR testing. It is likely that this testing has already been done. It is unlikely that the findings will soon be revealed.


A newspaper report topped with a large Gold Cup surrounded by many #1s and titled "Mississippi: Last In Everything, First In Vaccinations" was published on October 17, 2014. It boasted "No Mumps in Ole Miss."

"The Magnolia state is used to being last on measures of childhood well-being—but it’s beating the rest of the nation when it comes to immunization rates. Be it wealth, health, or education, when it comes to most measures of well-being, there is one state that reliably comes in last place. Mississippi is so used to trailing the pack in these rankings that it was a surprise when the state moved up to #49 in the annual Kids Count report last year. It was the first time in 24 years, since the Annie E. Casey Foundation first issued its survey that Mississippi didn’t sit at the very bottom. (It fell back to last place in 2014.) But there’s one indicator where Mississippi’s children out perform every other state: childhood vaccination rates."                                                              

Obviously an infant has to turn one to become a toddler and then a child in order to attain wealth, health, education and most measures of well-being.

Sadly, according to another newspaper account on January 18, 2015; "Mississippi’s infant mortality rate, which had dipped below nine deaths per 1,000 live births for the first time in the last decade, has increased to 9.7 per 1,000 live births, according to the latest data. State Health Officer Dr. Mary Currier told members of the House Appropriations Committee she is once again asking for $1.5 million for an infant mortality initiative....“We feel like we could make a difference,” Currier said of having an infant mortality initiative.”

It is only fair to state that Dr. Currier was recently appointed as State Health Officer and that she cannot and should not be blamed for the state's health ills. Her request for serious funding for an urgent infant mortality initiative is laudable and overdue. It should become the state’s #1 priority.

It is equally imperative to assure the Good People of Mississippi that my argument is not with them but with those - including the CDC and previous state health officials– who were more interested in vaccination rates than in addressing Mississippi’s poor indicators of overall Child Health and Well-being.

Maybe it is time for Mississippians to consider the choice between a few cases of measles from time to time and … “HEALTH”.  

Furthermore, parents in the state should know that even with their outstanding and enviable vaccination rates, there were 65 whooping cough reports and 34 reports of Invasive H. Influenzae B disease in 2014, up from 2013. Both illnesses are vaccine-preventable and both are potentially more serious and life threatening than measles or mumps.       


Wild-type measles viruses are classified into distinct genetic groups, referred to as genotypes. CDC experts are confident that the 2015 “California” measles outbreak was started by a patient with measles genotype B3 mostly identified in the Philippines, where thousands have come down with the disease.

The CDC and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) have both acknowledged that the early confirmed measles cases of the 2014-2015 outbreak occurred among vaccinated, partially vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals even though blame was only copiously heaped on cases with philosophic exemptions.

By accurate PCR testing, the CDC can distinguish wild from vaccine-type measles. Although it is likely that the CDC has been performing such tests all along, it is not expected that the test results will ever be made public.  

The most recent CDPH Measles Surveillance Update released on February 27, 2015 reveals that the majority of known cases are strain B3 with a small number (3) of D8 and D4 strains. Of the 130 confirmed measles cases in California, 15 (11.5%) were under the age of 1, 18 were 1 to 4 year old, 23 were 5 to 19 and 74 (57%) were older than 20.

The update does not identify how many individuals came from abroad with the infection and how many were native Californians. If those older than age 20 or 57% of all cases were Californians, then it is unfair to accuse informed young parents in the state who are concerned about the number of presently recommended pediatric vaccines.

It seems that the Good people of Mississippi would have been better served if the state’s regrettable health issues, infant mortality rate (IMR), vaccination status and the absence of measles had not been revealed.

Was it so important to boast about Mississippi’s “#1”vaccination rates if it also meant telling everyone in the other 49 states that more Mississippi babies never reach their first birthday? Besides, it is a fact that many other states have also not reported a single measles case this year even though they had lower pediatric vaccination rates and a number of philosophic and religious exemptions.

It is near certain that Mississippi would have already recorded several measles cases if the state had a huge international airport where non-stop flights from Manila landed frequently, day and night.

It is also likely that even if California’s vaccination rates were identical to those of Mississippi that infected visitors from the Philippines going to visit relatives in Minnesota would have left a trail of statistics by spending a few days near Disneyland before proceeding to the cold weather.

Lastly it would be naïve to think that a parent visiting the United States for the first time  would want or be able to keep a busy child, who is not too sick, in a hotel room when Mickey and the Magic Mountain Ride are around the corner.  


Another attempt to publicize Mississippi’s outstanding vaccination rates came in an NBC News Report in February that boasted that Mississippi was “leading the fight against the spread of measles”.

The NBC Atlanta GA reporter who filed the report in Jackson MI, just a mere 381 miles away, must have been reassured that measles cannot and would not cross state lines.

The incidence map attached to the NBC News article reveals confirmed measles cases in WA, OR, CA, AZ, NV, UT, CO, TX, SD, NE , MN and IL. Of those states, Nevada, Nebraska and Illinois do not allow philosophic waivers.

Regardless of their vaccination rates and their vaccination waivers, all of the remaining continental states have not reported measles cases so far this year.

A list of up to date exemptions by state is available


There were no measles cases reported in New Mexico in January while adjoining Texas, Colorado and Arizona reported a few.  According to its DOH, "New Mexico’s most recent case of measles was confirmed in December 2014 in a baby who did not receive the first measles vaccination. It was not determined where or how the baby was exposed. The baby was hospitalized and recovered." (It would be safe to guess that unless the baby was out of state for a while, the “exposure” occurred in New Mexico)

The report went on: "Measles is a very contagious respiratory disease caused by a virus. It is so contagious that if one infected person has it, 9 out of 10 exposed people who are not immune will also become infected. It spreads through the air when infected persons cough and sneeze. It can live for up to two hours in an airspace where the infected person was coughing or sneezing, and on surfaces."

According to the Department of Health, New Mexico law allows parents to request vaccination exemptions for their children based on medical need or religious beliefs. The exemptions registered with the Immunization Program at the Department of Health are as follows:

  • 2012 – 2,845 exemptions
  • 2013 – 3,195 exemptions
  • 2014 – 3,335 exemptions

"The New Mexico Department of Health is concerned that the number of vaccine exemptions among school-aged children increased again in 2014. An increase in vaccination exemptions can increase the risk for outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, such as measles...Since measles is still common in many parts of the world and travelers with measles continue to bring the disease into the US, we want all New Mexicans to know that it can spread when it reaches communities where groups of people are unvaccinated.

The population of New Mexico is now over two million yet the NM DOH is warning about the grave danger that those exempted from vaccination (less than 0.2% of the 2 million) pose because they dare have certified medical contraindications or serious religious issues with certain vaccination(s).

This in a state where 1, 000 truckloads of Cold War-era nuclear waste from the grounds of Los Alamos were moved to a salt cavern deep under the Southern New Mexico desert."

In 2012, when NM population was 2,092,432, the leading cause of death was cancer (3422 deaths), followed by heart disease (3306 deaths) and accidents (1331 deaths.)

This is unlike the rest of the country where the leading cause of death is heart disease followed by cancer.


A 1994 report on Firearms in New Mexico revealed: 

  • That the presence of young children in the home did not appear to improve firearm storage safety
  • That Household firearm ownership did not vary with the presence of young children
  • And that 24% of households stored guns unsafely


More importantly, New Mexico has also been competing with Mississippi for last place on the aforementioned KidsCount in the last three years: 49th in 2012, 50th in 2013 and 49th in 2014 while Mississippi rated 50th, 49th and 50th those years.


The most recent National Vital Statistics Report (2012) was released in September 2014. It includes international comparisons of infant mortality rates and related factors among 26 selected industrialized countries.

The first graph of the report is truly shocking.

It sadly illustrates how the United States – with the highest per capita health coast in the world, is listed last with an Infant Mortality Rate of 6.1/1,000 live births. Slovakia, New Zealand, Hungary, and Poland and many other nations actually had a lower IMR than the US.

It is certainly strange that certain interests are boasting about the absence of measles cases in Mississippi when the state’s IMR is higher that that of many nations. 

If we do not improve our infant mortality rate soon, many children will not be around to get their 18-month-booster.


The current outbreak of measles is occurring against a background of impressively good vaccination rates. Using it to restrict the rights of parents to choose whether or not to vaccinate their children carefully and selectively seems dictatorial.

Our vaccination rates are impressively high already and it has become clear that small outbreaks of disease will occur from time to time in populations with near 100% vaccination rates.

There are immensely more pressing health issues to address than trying to maintain near 100% vaccination rates when the risk of disease importation into well vaccinated areas is, as the CDC so frequently warns, JUST A PLANE RIDE AWAY

Pediatricians and other Primary Care Physicians and Allied Professionals should continue to encourage parents to vaccinate their children. 

On the other hand, it seems unfair that in this Great and Free Nation some individuals or groups want to strip parents of their right to decide what is best for their children.

Philosophic exemptions should remain available for the small number of parents who would prefer to use them.

Religious wishes concerning vaccination should also be respected.

Of course, certified medical contraindications to vaccines should be carefully noted.      

With the excellent vaccination rates we now have, it is extremely more important to turn our attention to improving health conditions, education, nutrition and hygiene.

F. Edward Yazbak MD, FAAP



Anyone else wonder what the rates of hospital acquired flu/viral infections are in the places where they mandate flu shots for all the workers?

As far as I know, the hospitals are willing to accept the live nasal flu shot as proof of vaccination.

That would be the one that sheds weakened live flu virus for up to six weeks..but that would only effect people with weakened immune systems..

And hospitals are full of people with weakened immune systems..

I do wonder if all the press releases about the poor match of the flu shot this year are to provide an excuse if anyone decides to crunch the numbers, to see how many infections the mandate has actually "prevented"

Jenny Allan

"Infectious diseases are not inflicted by an individual, and therefore any injuries which result can't be blamed on anyone."

Your point was vaccine preventable infectious diseases and injuries so caused, 'can't be blamed on anyone'.

My point is these diseases and any injuries and deaths attributed to them, ARE being 'blamed' on those of us who question ANY aspect of vaccine safety, efficacy or necessity, and I agree this is not a 'joking' matter.


Thank you so much for this very informative article!


"No, Jenny, I'm not joking. Infectious diseases are NOT inflicted by humans, they are a natural biological phenomenon. The existence of a man-made prophylactic "treatment" -and one which most people here think does more harm than good - does not mean that anyone choosing not to use it has deliberately caused the disease. That is a false argument made by those doctors and their supporters who are acting as if they think they are God.

I'm afraid I don't entirely agree with the argument for informed consent, although I can see the present dilemma facing those in the USA who are fighting to protect themselves. But surely if we believe that vaccines are causing the injuries and suffering that we've seen we should not be advocating that parents/doctors should be permitted to choose that for any children."




I'm curious about the 6000 Canadian children who've had measles this year. Do you have a reference? I found several reports but they only mentioned 100 or so cases, and a measles tracker which appears to have stopped at 137 cases on 11 March - perhaps it's only tracking the laboratory-confirmed cases:

Measles outbreak 2015: tracking the Canadian cases

This may be of interest:


Remaining measles challenges in Australia

"Med J Aust 2007;

When is clinical measles not measles?

As measles is now rare, most sporadic cases of fever and non-vesiculating rash will not be due to measles; thus, the “measles clinical syndrome” alone has a low positive predictive value and requires laboratory confirmation to guide public health action.

A host of other infectious agents can present as a febrile illness with a maculopapular rash:

Viruses: Measles virus, Rubella virus, Parvovirus B19, Human herpesvirus type 6, Flavivirus spp., Adeno-associated virus, Coxsackie virus, Echo virus

Bacteria: Streptococci, Meningococci, Spirillum minus, Rickettsiae spp.

Most pirochaetes, Treponema pallidum, Borrelia spp.,Fungi, Coccidioides immitis "

What are the usual symptoms of polio? Most people think polio means permanent paralysis and iron lungs because that is what we we've been led to believe, but that is not so.


What I am trying to say is that I don't think we can possibly know how effective the vaccines have been when mandatory reporting wasn't introduced until after the vaccines were in use so initial case numbers were estimates, and since, diseases have been re-defined and cases counted differently. Like polio:



Re vaccines being effective but also causing harm.

Vioxx was an effective painkiller, but in some caused heart attacks, strokes and death. It was taken off the market.

cia parker

And Grace, I agree. Many of the VPDs were, some still are, sometimes to always horrible, painful, disabling, and often fatal. We have to bear that in mind. It's not just that the pharma goons are exaggerating the dangers of mild diseases to sell their products, though of course they do that too.

cia parker

I don't think vaccines are a failed technology. They usually do what they are supposed to do, and prevent the targeted diseases for some years. They also cause horrible health problems, permanent disability, and even death. Both are true.


But surely if we believe that vaccines are causing the injuries and suffering that we've seen we should not be advocating that parents/doctors should be permitted to choose that for any children



Grace Green

No, Jenny, I'm not joking. Infectious diseases are NOT inflicted by humans, they are a natural biological phenomenon. The existence of a man-made prophylactic "treatment" -and one which most people here think does more harm than good - does not mean that anyone choosing not to use it has deliberately caused the disease. That is a false argument made by those doctors and their supporters who are acting as if they think they are God.
I'm afraid I don't entirely agree with the argument for informed consent, although I can see the present dilemma facing those in the USA who are fighting to protect themselves.
But surely if we believe that vaccines are causing the injuries and suffering that we've seen we should not be advocating that parents/doctors should be permitted to choose that for any children.

John Stone

Hi Cia

I believe the 1200 cases were alleged to have occurred in the Welsh city of Swansea (pop 239,000) during March/April 2013 however the final tally for the whole of Wales (pop. 3.1m) over the period 1 Nov 2012-16 June 2013 was only 432 (if even that is to be believed).


Note also my article in January:




I think back in the day, measles was so common that our mothers could and did diagnose it - I think correctly. They knew what they were looking at. It was just common knowledge back then. And while it is possible to get a nasty case of chicken pox, it was also possible to get such a mild case that it would be barely noticed and maybe even go undetected. Chicken pox for most kids was not a big deal at all.


"Personally, I think it would be easier to accept that one's child had been unfortunately effected by a virus, rather than harmed by a doctor."

Completely agree.

Viruses don't come pre-packaged with a First Do No Harm creed.

Instead, what many of us have heard along the years are the proclamations, "they'll grow out of it," or "he's a boy, he's just a little behind his peers," or "don't worry Mom, he'll catch up to his peers when he's ready."

I heard a lot of those proclamations years ago and I know many of you, here, have as well.

When I ran my support group years ago, my 'fantasy' if you will, was to see biomedical centers pop up all around the country when they finally acknowledged the damage they were causing with vaccines. How naive was I? But that was my dream - to see all these kids (and adults)...FIXED.

A girl can dream...

cia parker

Did the 1200 children who caught measles in Wales two years ago have a fever and a measles-like rash? The 160 people in the U.S. this year radiating out from the California outbreak? The 6,000 children who have had measles in Canada this year? I assume they did, or their parents would not have taken them to the doctor for a diagnosis. It's possible that some people get measles without a rash, or without any symptoms, but I don't think we're going to get anywhere if we say measles, polio, etc., may occur without any of the usual symptoms, and some theorize that there has always been just as much measles and polio as there was sixty years ago. People won't know what to watch out for and how to treat it if we blur the contours so much that we sink into a slough of despond without the possibility of knowing, identifying, or treating anything appropriately. And I don't believe it. I don't believe there have been significant numbers of measles or polio cases in the U.S. in the last fifty years, and I think that for better or for worse, that it is because of the vaccines.

cia parker

But the only way to get back to normal is to let as many children as possible go through the natural childhood diseases. I wouldn't force or withhold vaccines on or from anyone, but just give everyone the best and most complete information available and let them make the decisions for their children. Most people would choose the natural diseases.


Grace Green,

"Personally, I think it would be easier to accept that one's child had been unfortunately effected by a virus, rather than harmed by a doctor. "

I agree, especially when we were party to that harm by not only blindly trusting our doctor's word that the procedure was safe, effective and absolutely necessary, but by holding our children down for it.



"Have you heard of any children getting a blotchy full-body rash with a high fever, that the doctor diagnosed as something other than measles? "

In the following article from almost twenty years ago only 2.5% of reported cases were actually measles, so far from being a distinctive disease there are other diseases that look like measles, and always have, so how could anyone possibly know how many people had true measles before cases were confirmed by laboratory testing?

"97.5% of Measles Diagnoses are Incorrect

From Europe Today, April 1998 comes an interesting report about the level of error occurring in the diagnosis of measles. The feedback comes from the UK's Public Health Laboratory Service, which found that 97.5% of the time, British doctors are wrong in their diagnosis of measles. This conclusion was reached after saliva tests were performed on 12,000 person diagnosed with measles. Roger Buttery, an advisor on transmissible diseases at the Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Department, said "a majority of doctors say they can recognize measles 'a mile off' but we now know that this illness occurs in only 2.5% of the cases."

If the information offered by Buttery et al. is correct, then the true incidence of measles in the UK is not the reported 6,000 per year, but more like 150."
(The link is an old one, but the article can still be found online)

"There's chickenpox too, which also went from being 100% of children...."

How can this be true when some children and adults report a negative history? But the other disease I mentioned was whooping cough because you said, " in the '40s to the '90s there was close to no pertussis in developed countries, because the old whole-cell vaccine was very effective".

Although graphs may depict low rates of pertussis infections in most developed countries (not Australia) when the DwPT was used, how accurate do you think those graphs might be when the vast majority of doctors believed that the vaccinated couldn't catch it? It was for this reason, in the early 1990s, that half a dozen doctors flatly refused to consider that my fully-vaccinated son, and other vaccinated children and adults in the area, had pertussis. My son's "bronchitis" lasted for three months; a friend's fully-vaccinated daughter had "viral asthma" until she was tested for whooping cough at her mother's insistence, and the adults had "the hundred-day cough".

It was the unvaccinated that were diagnosed almost immediately with pertussis. So how effective was the vaccine and how reliable can the pertussis graphs be when many cases in the vaccinated were not counted?


".. - many of them stated to me IT. WAS. ONE. VACCINE. ONLY. which plummeted their children into autism and/or other severe chronic health issues."


Thank you Bayareamom.

In one short sentence, you've nailed the point that I've been trying so hard to get through.

Anyone who reads what you've written above, and STILL doesn't get it…. doesn't want to get it.


"I don't think the rash is the illness. Isn't a rash just a visual cue that the body's immune system is doing what it should, and getting rid of something that shouldn't be there?

If the rashes have disappeared since the introduction of the vaccine, maybe it means that vaccines are interfering with the normal human immune system response to diseases like measles..."

YES. But rashes appearing post-vaccination is also indicative that something is in there that shouldn't be in there. It's your immune system kicking out something which doesn't belong there...

Barry - I'm with ya all the way.

And absolutely - if the argument is that that one ingredient and one ingredient only is what's causing this generation of autism (and other issues), that argument is not an intellectually honest argument. It's not just the mercury...

PERHAPS TIMING, i.e., spacing out vaccines will help SOME from spiraling into full on autism, but as I've come to know from over 30 or so moms' testimonies, interviewed when I used to run my support group - many of them stated to me IT. WAS. ONE. VACCINE. ONLY. which plummeted their children into autism and/or other severe chronic health issues.

Betty Bona

I have seen that quote from Dr. Seneff before. That's the reason I am confused about the lack of mention of vaccines in the paper on diminished brain resilience. Having more than one culprit (GMOs and vaccines) confuses the real problem. Maybe that's the reason for excluding vaccines.


Dr. Seneff: "I don't, in fact, believe in vaccines, period. I mean, I think at this point in my life I would say that no one should be getting any vaccines..."


Betty Bona

I believe that vaccines were a wrong turn in the historical development of our current medical system. Maybe it was reasonable and even heroic at the time, but with 20/20 hindsight, we now know much better ways to protect people from the devastations of diseases. It seemed the most expedient at the time when we knew so little about the intricacies of the immune system and the balance between ourselves and nature, but I find Dr. Humphries' presentation of the history of vaccines to be credible. My take-home from the book, Dissolving Illusions (Humphries-Bystrianyk), is that advances such as clean water and much greater availability of good nutrition were already greatly decreasing the devastation of diseases before most vaccines hit the market, and newer pollutions may have been increasing the devastation of diseases like polio at the same time. I think we would have been better off if, instead of the polio vaccine, with it's SV40 and other contaminants, we had looked at what was keeping us out of balance with nature (DDT and other pollutions). In an ideal world, I would like to see all vaccines abandoned for a disease fighting approach that puts us more in sync with nature and our long evolutionary history.

My only worry about discontinuing vaccines entirely is that we have so many immune compromised people (from vaccines, GMOs, overuse of antibiotics, contaminating vaccine viruses, and other toxic insults), that some may be less able to handle the infectious diseases we older posters all suffered through as children. Who knows how weakened the masses are by all the toxic insults. Like Benedetta, I believe that the increased autism in our population is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to damages from vaccines and other modern sources. How will all these victims fair with childhood diseases we now vaccinate against.

Dr. Seneff has a very interesting paper about diminished brain resilience which illustrates my worry. She says that people are less able to recover completely from brain injuries because of toxic exposure (I think she is mainly implicating glyphosate, though she mentions the synergistic affect of aluminum without mentioning vaccines - don't know what that's about, but maybe her coauthor didn't want to dive into the vaccine debate). My worry is that people with diminished brain resilience will also have a tougher time with the childhood diseases. Maybe the diminished brain resilience is why we are seeing some paralysis with Enterovirus 68. I want to see the elimination of vaccines, but I also think it is important to eliminate the other toxins that are decimating our immune systems. One without the other will not restore us to the relatively good health we experienced in the 50s. It all becomes so complicated, that I will support anyone who shines a light on potential problems with vaccines, and definitely support anyone who fights against mandates whether they totally match my position or not.

Here's Dr. Seneff's paper that I mentioned.

Diminished brain resilience syndrome: A modern day ...

Or is it this (I am so bad at links!):


If I didn't get it, just google Seneff and diminished brain resilience. I confess that I have not read the whole paper. It is so long and technical, but very interesting.

Who is William Thompson ?

Jenny , vaccines are a failed technology .

Maurice Hilleman described them as a "bargain basement healthcare" .

They are being used to sterilise millions of women in Kenya - you know that ! (Phillipines, Mexico , Venezuela , Sri Lanka)

Maurice Hilleman linked them to Aids - not me .

If you think vaccines cause Autism like I assume you do - then that is 50M children whose lives have been destroyed .
And you are still talking about vaccine safety - ridiculous !

I could go on , the obesity epidemic, the diabetes epidemic , the cancer epidemic - its goes on and on . It really does .


Hera; The scientists at the CDC knew they had another way out other than the vaccine and that was antibiotics.

Just as my children - after they were over one month old could also have had an antibiotic if they got whooping cough - but noooooo we had to get booster after booster, after booster right on up into adult hood, beyond adulthood right on into old age.


If one puts a child's hand to a hot stove, we would all agree that is child abuse. Many whose children have been burnt by vaccines see vaccination as the same thing - child abuse. They should not be marginalized as though there is no sense or science behind their argument, in order to suppress that point of view or to make others more comfortable in their decision to vaccinate. Parents like Barry will understandably speak out because they see a hot stove and people putting their children's hands to it. That is not fanaticism. He is doing what is rational and responsible from his viewpoint.

He is 100% correct when he says:

"In a rational world, there wouldn't be any vaccine injured children."


Interesting discussion. Cia, I like some of your points, and do think moderates help win the argument for freedom of choice.

Personally after finding out about the many cases of acute flaccid paralysis caused by the "successful" polio vaccine in India, I was left wondering how much it the polio vaccine actually helps if as a result of a vaccine your child is left paralyzed.

The fact that some scientist somewhere can celebrate the fact that "polio" isn't causing the paralysis matters not at all if the real life result is that the vaccine "protected " kids are paralyzed or killed.

It seems a good way to see how effective vaccines as a medical intervention are when you take away good nutrition and clean water. The answer seems to be "not very"

And then there was the study of different types of MMR vaccines amongst children in Africa. The children who received the high titre vaccine were at a higher risk of death than unvaccinated children in a place where poor health and measles was running rampant.

It did make me question whether the vaccines are really "saving lives" in most contexts?

And when the CDC had the anthrax scare, and the scientists there were at actual risk of dying from anthrax, about 50% of them, per the newspapers chose NOT to get the vaccine. For them, the risk of dying from anthrax was a choice they considered safer than having the vaccine.

Hard to really get behind the idea that vaccines are all safe, or even a good defense against a serious illness, when 50% of the people who make them would rather risk death than take the anthrax vaccine, which admittedly has been linked with a very high rate of side effects.

The side effects we all know about. And, by themselves are enough reason to promote the right for medical freedom of choice.

But are vaccines actually effective? I am becoming less sure about that as well.

Jenny Allan

Grace Green says :-"There is one very important point I believe you are missing in your reasoned arguments. Infectious diseases are not inflicted by an individual, and therefore any injuries which result can't be blamed on anyone."

Are you kidding Grace? .......or are you just talking about diseases for which a vaccine has not yet been developed?

Some classic examples of 'blame' below:-
South Wales Evening Post 1990s campaign blamed for current measles outbreak

“In California, 2010 started out much like many others for the public health detectives who keep an eye on infectious diseases. But by the end of the year, 10 California babies were dead fromwhooping cough, aka pertussis, a highly contagious disease that’s preventable by a vaccine.”

Yes Dr Wakefield was blamed for those dead babies too, although the REAL cause was vaccine failure, now officially admitted.

Paul Offit on those Pertussis baby deaths in California:
Trine Tsouderos phone in radio show : Tuesday March 22, 2011 11:47
“You would like to think that we could come to a point in this country where we don't need mandates. Where people would educate themselves about vaccines to the point that they realize that the choice not to get them is a bad one. Unfortunately, there are a lot of bad sources of information out there that lead to a lot of bad decisions. So, we're stuck. You could make the argument that any parent of a newborn should get Tdap vaccine. That's the only way those deaths in California from pertussis could have been prevented. Is it your inalienable right to catch and transmit a potentially fatal infection to your child?”

BLAME, BLAME, BLAME!! ......for ANYONE who DARES to express ANY concerns about ANY vaccine, and on this thread more BLAME for anyone who is prepared to accept ANY vaccine for themselves or their children.

I am for INFORMED CHOICE for ALL medications and medical procedures, including vaccines. If that's not 'rational' -what is?


. And, again, children just aren't routinely getting these rash illnesses anymore, no matter what they might be called.


I don't think the rash is the illness. Isn't a rash just a visual cue that the body's immune system is doing what it should, and getting rid of something that shouldn't be there?

If the rashes have disappeared since the introduction of the vaccine, maybe it means that vaccines are interfering with the normal human immune system response to diseases like measles.

And maybe that's why guys like Andrew Wakefield, are finding vaccine strain measles in the intestinal linings of our children.

Grace Green

Bayareamom, Thanks for your comments, and especially that last quote. I think that speaks volumes.

Grace Green

Cia , There is one very important point I believe you are missing in your reasoned arguments. Infectious diseases are not inflicted by an individual, and therefor any injuries which result can't be blamed on anyone. Vaccine injuries on the other hand have been deliberately done by a medical practitioner. This is probably the reason why they are so defensive about admitting they occur, and also why they have cleverly adopted the phrase "preventable diseases". Personally, I think it would be easier to accept that one's child had been unfortunately effected by a virus, rather than harmed by a doctor.


Correction: I did not speak with Dr. Horowitz...it was Dr. Moskowitz. I'll never forget that conversation. This was back in 1993, shortly after our son had his horrific vaccine reaction at four months of age.

I asked Dr. Moskowitz if I was a bad Mom if I decided to no longer vaccinate our son.

He said no in a very sympathetic and empathic manner. I was crying. I was SO terrified I was making the wrong decision, but I knew in my heart we just could not risk our son's health/life any longer by vaccinating him.

Here's a great article by Dr. Moskowitz:

Are the Vaccines Effective?

..."There is widespread agreement that the time period since the common vaccines were introduced has seen a remarkable decline in the corresponding natural infections; but the usual assumption that the decline is attributable to the vaccines remains unproven, and continues to be seriously questioned by eminent authorities in the field. The incidence and severity of whooping cough, for example, had already begun to decline precipitously long before the pertussis vaccine was introduced (1), a fact which led the epidemiologist C. C. Dauer to remark, as far back as 1943,

If the mortality [from pertussis] continues to decline at the same rate during the next 15 years, it will be extremely difficult to show statistically that [pertussis immunization] had any effect in reducing mortality from whooping cough.(2)

Much the same is true not only of diphtheria and tetanus, but also of TB, cholera, typhus, typhoid, and other common scourges of a bygone era, which began to disappear toward the end of the Nineteenth Century, largely in response to improvements in public health and sanitation, but in any case long before antibiotics, vaccines, or any specific medical measures designed to eradicate them.(3)

Reflections such as these led the great microbiologist René Dubos to observe that microbial diseases have their own natural history, independent of drugs and vaccines, in which asymptomatic infection and symbiosis are much more common than overt disease:

It is barely recognized, but nevertheless true, that animals and plants, as well as men, can live peacefully with their most notorious microbial enemies. The world is obsessed by the fact that poliomyelitis can kill and maim several thousand unfortunate victims every year. But more extraordinary is the fact that millions upon millions of young people become infected by polio viruses, yet suffer no harm from the infection. The dramatic episodes of conflict between men and microbes are what strike the mind. What is less readily apprehended is the more common fact that infection can occur without producing disease..."


cia parker

The rabies vaccine is an interesting way to consider these same points. The vaccine is dangerous, has caused a lot of death, cancer, and autoimmune disease in pets, and makes them more fearful and vicious. Dogs were nicer before the rabies vaccine. But rabies is so dangerous, fatal, and capable of being transmitted to any other mammal (maybe not opossums), that I think it's probably good in most cases to give it to dogs and cats once at six months old, once a year later, and after that check titers every three or four years, and repeat if they're below protective level. And even that isn't absolutely true, immunity can exist even without any antibodies being present, but it's the best we can do.

No one will ever be able to make a perfect decision that will always work out for everyone. Yes, I'd like to leave vaccines behind (except maybe tetanus in some instances, polio if it comes back), but then the pendulum will swing, and we'll be back to considering what to do about people damaged by the vaccine-preventable diseases. I don't think it would be as many as they say, but it would be some, and some of them would have been spared had they gotten the vaccine(s). I would prefer to work at teaching the public how to deal with the diseases, but there would still be some killed or damaged by the diseases, even if they did everything right.

cia parker

It used to be true that even kids who hadn't had clinical cases of chickenpox often had achieved subclinical immunity, but I doubt that's true now that most have received the varicella vaccine. Kids just aren't getting chickenpox anymore, a bad thing, which will leave them vulnerable when the vaccines wear off in adulthood, when it can be more dangerous. It's thought that the huge increase of shingles in the U.S. is because there's no longer varicella virus in the environment giving a natural booster effect. In pets there's very little distemper, parvovirus, or rabies now, because of the vaccines: as soon as they started giving them widely, the diseases almost disappeared. But just as with humans, the damage caused by the vaccines in most cases cancels out the benefit, the yearly pet boosters are unnecessary and criminal, and there are better ways of protecting pets. No, I've already second guessed myself, I'd give the basic vaccines to puppies and kittens, but just twice, and not again, except for rabies after checking titers every three or four years.

cia parker

No, ATSC, I don't. Measles is very distinctive, high fever, rash, red eyes, cough. It has been decades since I heard of anyone getting such an illness, and it used to be that ALL kids got it at some point. Have you heard of any children getting a blotchy full-body rash with a high fever, that the doctor diagnosed as something other than measles? There's chickenpox too, which also went from being 100% of children to very rare almost as soon as they started giving the vaccine, different from measles, with crops of pimple-like lesions all over the body. And, again, children just aren't routinely getting these rash illnesses anymore, no matter what they might be called.

I think the vaccines usually work to prevent disease, but that in the case of the childhood diseases this is a bad thing, preventing permanent immunity and training the immune system. And the vaccines often cause horrifying and permanent vaccine damage, and are rarely worth the risk.


Cia Parker says:- "Ultimately I can only advocate for public awareness of the facts as informed sources not beholden to the pharma industry understand them, and then leave the choice up to the individual families."

Agree - and thank you for these rational posts Cia.


In a rational world, there wouldn't be any vaccine injured children.


@Cia Parker:

Actually, I've only posted what Board Certified Neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock has stated regarding vaccines/vaccination. If you want to pick a debate with someone, take it with him! You may actually be able to find a contact address for him over at his website.

So if you truly feel you know more than this Board Certified Neurosurgeon, by all means...take it up with him. I've listened and studied all of his lectures/articles, including those of Dr. Suzanne Humphries, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny and a slew of others who have credentials in the medical field. I have truly looked at both side of this debate and have, after 20 plus years, come smack down on the anti-vaccine side (after truthfully being pro-vaccine for many, many years).

I've also spoken on the phone, years ago, with Dr. Harris Coulter, Dr. Paul Fleiss, and Dr. Horowitz regarding not only vaccines, but pediatric lab testing re PKU. I've interviewed several physicians and nurses who shared with me what information (or not) is provided to them in medical/nursing institutions.

This isn't MY research that I'm posting up here! It is information provided by medical professionals who have the scientific background and/or medical knowledge to back up the information they've provided in their various writings and lectures.



Could it be that the main reason the incidence of measles and pertussis appeared to plummet after vaccines were introduced was because doctors believed the "immunized" couldn't catch them? If symptoms of the disease presented themselves in the vaccinated, it was called something else, and then laboratory testing was introduced to confirm suspected cases which further reduced the numbers. What doctors diagnosed as measles from clinical symptoms alone wasn't necessarily measles, but measles look-alikes, and there are quite a few of those.

The four million cases of measles a year in the U.S. was simply an estimate based on another belief that in the pre-vaccine era everyone caught it - maybe they did, but guessing isn't scientific fact. Re-naming diseases had a big part to play too, as it did with polio. Many fully-vaccinated children and adults had whooping cough, but doctors called it viral asthma, bronchitis or the 100 day cough. From memory, the efficacy of the whole-cell pertussis vaccine was around 35-40%, and immunity waned after seven to ten years - and without the familiar whoop in adults, they were seldom diagnosed with it.

Jenny Allan

Cia Parker says:- "Ultimately I can only advocate for public awareness of the facts as informed sources not beholden to the pharma industry understand them, and then leave the choice up to the individual families."

Agree - and thank you for these rational posts Cia.
Benedetta - As a child I never got mumps, neither did my children. The position with my grandchildren is confused by them all being vaccinated, but two of them reported mumps cases amongst their vaccinated uni 'mates'. I am assuming myself and children got MILD mumps infections, which went unnoticed at the time.

The present position with measles and pertussis is becoming tragic, with very young babies becoming infected, before they are old enough to be vaccinated. As Cia points out, more than 40 years of vaccinations has destroyed an important evolutionary process, which confers a mother's immunity to her child, via the placenta and breast feeding. This protection formerly lasted during the first year of life. Vaccines are just not as effective.

Ed Yazbak

Dear ATSC and Barry,

The following full paper covers most of what the other paper contained:


Predictive value of a self-reported history of varicella infection in determining immunity in adults

Candice N. Holmes,
Karl T. Iglar,
Brenda J. McDowell,
Richard H. Glazier

BTW: If you are interested in Varivax and its issues:




cia parker


Your examples are of the unintended dangers of vaccines as well as of their wearing off or sometimes not working to start with. And all these points are valid. But it is also true that the way the disease rates fell dramatically as soon as the vaccines came into widespread use shows that the vaccine worked to prevent the disease. Another example is Hib meningitis. It became more and more common from the '40s on, possibly enabled by increased use of antibiotics from that time on. By the '80s, I think it was occurring in one in 200 babies, and often caused death or permanent disability. As soon as the Hib vaccine came into use, disease incidence plummeted, till at this time there is only a handful of diagnosed cases a year, and it is no longer a problem. Unfortunately, the vaccine causes peanut allergy and many other problems, including death. But I think our debates must first acknowledge that most vaccines usually work as billed in most people for some years. And then talk about whether the price exacted for this disease protection is worth the cost.


@Cia Parker,

..."Sometimes vaccines fail, especially the flu and pertussis vaccines. But most of the time, in most people, they work and work very well to prevent the targeted disease. The problem is that they do so at an often exorbitant cost. But it is still the case that many children would have been crippled by polio if they had not been vaccinated for it when they were.."

Meaning absolutely no disrespect, but I think you may want to perform a bit more research re your above statement.

For example:

Smoke, Mirrors, and the Disappearance of "Polio"

..."Unbeknownst to most doctors, the polio-vaccine history involves a massive public health service makeover during an era when a live, deadly strain of poliovirus infected the Salk polio vaccines, and paralyzed hundreds of children and their contacts. These were the vaccines that were supposedly responsible for the decline in polio from 1955 to 1961! But there is a more sinister reason for the “decline” in polio during those years; in 1955, a very creative re-definition of poliovirus infections was invented, to “cover” the fact that many cases of ”polio” paralysis had no poliovirus in their systems at all. While this protected the reputation of the Salk vaccine, it muddied the waters of history in a big way.

Even during the peak epidemics, unifactorial poliovirus infection, resulting in long-term paralysis, was a low-incidence disease[2] that was falsely represented as a rampant and violent crippler by Basil O’Connor’s “March Of Dimes” advertising campaigns. At the same time as Basil O’Connor was pulling in 45 million dollars a year to fund the Salk vaccine development, scientists started to realize that other viruses like Coxsackie, echo and enteroviruses, could also cause polio. They also discussed the fact that lead, arsenic, DDT, and other commonly-used neurotoxins, could identically mimic the lesions of polio. During the great epidemics in the United States, the pathology called polio was reversed by alternative medical doctors who attested to great success, using detoxification procedures available at the time – yet they were categorically ignored[3].

Now it is admitted in the medical literature that other viruses can cause polio, yet few people on the street have any idea.

Prior to 1954, the following undoubtedly hid behind the name “poliomyelitis”: Transverse Myelitis, viral or “aseptic” meningitis, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)- (what Franklin Delano Roosevelt had)[4], Chinese Paralytic syndrome, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, epidemic cholera, cholera morbus, spinal meningitis, spinal apoplexy, inhibitory palsy, intermittent fever, famine fever, worm fever, bilious remittent fever, ergotism, post-polio syndrome, acute flaccid paralysis(AFP).

Included under the umbrella term “Acute Flaccid Paralysis” are Poliomyelitis, Transverse Myelitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, enteroviral encephalopathy, traumatic neuritis, Reye’s syndrome etc.

Before you believe that polio has been eradicated, have a look at this graph of AFP and Polio. If you are wondering why there is no data prior to 1996, go to the WHO website for AFP and you will see that there is no data prior to 1996, and note that AFP conitnues to rise in 2011. Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) is just another name for what would have been called polio in 1955, and is used to describe a sudden onset of paralysis. It is the most common sign of acute polio, and used for surveillance during polio outbreaks. AFP is also associated with a number of other pathogenic agents including enteroviruses, echoviruses, and adenoviruses, among others. But in 1955, there was no attempt to detect anything other than polio in cases of AFP. Once the vaccine was mass marketed, the game changed..."

There is a plethora of information out there if you choose to search, Cia, which refutes your above statement. The above is but one example...

cia parker

That's because it's more dangerous to get measles after puberty, regardless of whether or not you've had the vaccine. Vaccine immunity is not permanent, so when vaccine protection wears off and the person gets measles, it's usually years after he had the vaccine, meaning after puberty, and sometimes a more dangerous case for that reason. Another reason to let measles come back, to let kids catch it at the optimal time, between three and ten years old. If women understood how valuable it was to their children's health to breast feed as long as possible, the child would be protected from measles until he was old enough to deal with it himself (if his mother had had natural measles, as we both did).

cia parker

Incidence of pertussis and measles plummeted to close to nothing shortly after the vaccines were introduced. There's no reason to believe that they would have plummeted so drastically at that time coincidental to the vaccines. I'm not advocating the vaccines, both of these vaccines have been devastatingly dangerous. In the nineteenth century, the top killers of infants and children were measles, pertussis, diphtheria, and scarlet fever. All evolved to become less virulent, the incidence of all but measles was falling rapidly before the vaccines were introduced (for all but scarlet fever). With the development of antibiotics, diphtheria and meningitis became treatable, if started soon enough. I think the measles and pertussis vaccines did more harm than good, but it's necessary to look at both diseases and vaccines through the lens of people who remembered how deadly they had been not that long ago, and continued to be in a few cases. From the '40s to the '90s there was close to no pertussis in developed countries, because the old whole-cell vaccine was very effective. Often deadly or disabling, but also very effective at preventing the disease. The new acellular vaccine is still dangerous, while being very ineffective. But looking at the difference in pertussis incidence with and without the whole-cell DPT, you can see how effective it was at preventing pertussis (for whatever that's worth). Measles went from four million cases a year in the U.S. to a fraction of that, and then to virtually none, as soon as the vaccine came into widespread use. Again, for whatever that's worth: getting the natural diseases was very valuable for most people.

cia parker

That would be the retrospective study that Dr. Sears says could absolutely be done, and it's damning how the vaccine industry and government adamantly refuse to do it.

cia parker

Sometimes vaccines fail, especially the flu and pertussis vaccines. But most of the time, in most people, they work and work very well to prevent the targeted disease. The problem is that they do so at an often exorbitant cost. But it is still the case that many children would have been crippled by polio if they had not been vaccinated for it when they were. A few children would have died of pertussis or measles, etc., had they not gotten the vaccines, but most of those vaccinated would have either never gotten the diseases or have gotten a typical case, meaning not very serious: his immune system would have gotten a workout, in most cases for his ultimately improved health.

In the U.S. at this time, since we're ultimately looking at a post-vaccine world, it's important to acknowledge how common severe cases of the VPDs were. And also, of course, look at the many ways vaccine damage can manifest, and, to the best of our ability, gauge how often they have occurred. We have to be willing to look at both sides, and acknowledge the tragedy of lives damaged or cut short by either diseases or vaccines. In my opinion, the lives of most children and their families would be better without vaccines, but with widespread education campaigns on how to handle the diseases when they appear, from natural remedies for typical cases of childhood diseases to advice to rush the patient to the ER if difficulty breathing occurs or if the symptoms of possible meningitis appear. But I acknowledge that some people would be disabled or killed by the diseases if they didn't vax.

Ultimately I can only advocate for public awareness of the facts as informed sources not beholden to the pharma industry understand them, and then leave the choice up to the individual families. Everyone will act according to their personal histories. I let my daughter get the DTaP series (only DT in the fifth one) because of my mother's grief in remembering a neighbor boy who had died of diphtheria decades before. Polio because I had a roommate who had been crippled by polio. I wouldn't do it now if I had it to do over again, because my experience and reading have changed my beliefs. But informing people as to the facts as we understand them is the only way to enable informed consent.


Subclincial with no symptoms or such mild symptoms - is really pretty common. That information coming from my microbiology professor many -many years ago - as we stood watching TB slowly grow in the Universitie's room size incubator. His project coming from his -moon lighting medical lab he owned, subsidized by Merck - or perhaps his professorship was the moonlighting job?
Of course we were talking about me never having the mumps, and he never had one of the measles, and a nurse that worried she had never had chicken poxs.



Having met several unvaccinated adults who have never had measles (or mumps or chickenpox or most other diseases called "vaccine preventable") those are excellent questions. Why do most people imagine that everyone will become sick if they don't have vaccines to protect them; that when they are vaccinated and don't get sick it's the vaccines that are protecting them; and that if they do come down with the illness that they would have had a far worse case if they'd not been vaccinated?

My children were deliberately exposed to chickenpox but never caught it, so what was protecting them? Perhaps they had subclinical symptoms that passed by unnoticed:

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Dec 14 2002

Most children with a negative or unknown varicella history are immune
"Of the (10 year old) children with negative or unknown varicella histories, 63% had antibodies against the virus. "

Pediatr Infect Dis J 2001;20:1087-1088.
(I note that the article has almost vanished from the internet, there's no abstract on Pub Med (PMID: 11247626) and the study is not listed on Google Scholar. How typical for important information to be hidden from public view!)


To add to what Barry said,
Or does it mean that the measles (or other) vaccine not only did not provide immunity, but impaired the person's ability to fight that and other diseases that the person encountered, leading to a worse case upon exposure than if no vaccine had been taken, while at the same time causing autoimmunity?


I also think that the basic theory of vaccines is correct: most of them (excepting the flu and pertussis vaccines) usually work to provide immunity for a limited, unknown length of time to the targeted disease.


With all due respect, what are you basing those assumptions on?

As an example, say a person gets vaccinated against measles, and doesn't appear to contract measles for a period of 10 years.

Does this mean that the vaccine worked for 10 years? Or does it mean the measles vaccine did nothing whatsoever, and the person simply didn't encounter measles over that 10 year period ? Or does it mean that the measles vaccine did nothing whatsoever, and when the person did encounter measles, their own immune system took care of it?


..."I also think that the basic theory of vaccines is correct..."

Based on what?

When I just read the above, I immediately thought about the time I was asking our then allopathic pediatrician in Palo Alto, just 'what' made vaccines work.

His statement was thus: "Well, they 'trick' the body's immune system to create antibodies so then your body will know what to fight if you should come up against any of these dreadful diseases."

Words to that effect...

Here are a few words from Dr. Russell Blaylock re vaccines:

..."Basically, vaccines contain either killed viruses or bacteria, germ components, toxic extracts or live organisms that have been made less virulent--a process called attenuation. To stimulate an enhanced immune reaction against these organisms, manufacturers added powerful immune-stimulating substances such as squalene, aluminum, lipopolysacchride, etc. These are called immune adjuvants.

The process of vaccination usually required repeated injections of the vaccine over a set period of time. The combination of adjuvants plus the intended organism triggers an immune response by the body, similar to that occurring with natural infections, except for one major difference. Almost none of these diseases enter the body by injection. Most enter by way of the mucous membranes of the nose, mouth, pulmonary passages or GI tract. For example, polio is known to enter via the GI tract. The membranes lining these passages contain a different immune system than activated by direct injection. This system is called the IgA immune system.

It is the first line of defense and helps reduce the need for intense activation of the body’s immune system. Often, the IgA system can completely head off an attack. The point being that injecting organisms to induce immunity is abnormal.

Because more and more reports are appearing citing vaccine failure, their manufacturers’ answer is to make the vaccines more potent. They do this by making the immune adjuvants more powerful or adding more of them. The problem with this approach is that in the very young, the nutritionally deficient and the aged, over-stimulating the immune system can have an opposite effect--it can paralyze the immune system..."


What Happens to the Brain With Vaccination?

"It seems the brain is always neglected when pharmacologists consider side effects of various drugs. The same is true for vaccinations. For a long time no one considered the effect of repeated vaccinations on the brain.

This was based on a mistaken conclusion that the brain was protected from immune activation by its special protective gateway called the blood-brain barrier. More recent studies have shown that immune cells can enter the brain directly, and more importantly, the brain’s own special immune system can be activated by vaccination.

You see, the brain has a special immune system that operates through a unique type of cell called a microglia.

These tiny cells are scattered throughout the brain, lying dormant waiting to be activated. In fact, they are activated by many stimuli and are quite easy to activate. For our discussion, activation of the body’s immune system by vaccination is a most important stimuli for activation of brain microglia.

Numerous studies have shown that when the body’s immune system is activated, the brain’s immune cells are likewise activated. This occurs by several pathways, not important to this discussion. The more powerfully the body’s immune system is stimulated the more intense is the brain’s reaction. Prolonged activation of the body’s immune system likewise produces prolonged activation of the brain’s immune system.

Therein lies the danger of our present vaccine policy."


cia parker

I also think that the basic theory of vaccines is correct: most of them (excepting the flu and pertussis vaccines) usually work to provide immunity for a limited, unknown length of time to the targeted disease. I think it's important to recognize this, since it's the reason so many accept getting the vaccines. Most of the VPDs can be devastating or fatal, and the facts about how common they are and how often deadly or disabling in a given area at a given time should certainly be information available to everyone, as well as what is known about how effective the vaccines are (and in most cases it's very effective). I think it's important to acknowledge that, but then go on to look at whether the disease is still common, or would be if no one vaxed, to what degree well-nourished people might still be in danger of disability or death if they got the disease, and, of course, what is known about how many and how serious reactions to the vaccine are.

Most people are unaware of how UNdangerous (with some exceptions)measles, mumps, chickenpox, rubella (in everyone but fetuses), and whooping cough (in everyone but the youngest newborns), hep-A, rotavirus, and flu are. How rare meningitis is, how it can be prevented with breast feeding and keeping babies at home, how most adults have immunity to the most common kinds of meningitis through subclinical immunity.

But it's important to acknowledge the present or past dangers of the diseases in order to communicate with those not yet affected by vaccine damage.


..."Screaming vaccine injury out of one side of our mouths, and "judicious vaccinating" out of the other, is not a sincere form of advocacy."

THANK you.

To any and all who may feel I may have been unduly harsh with my comment below:

NO ONE has true informed consent when that same consent is based on LIES/untold truths. Sure, there are many people who clamor for the next vaccine for their kid or themselves because they've been conditioned/indoctrinated into this false belief system that vaccines are good for them...that they'll save them from these dreaded diseases and death.

True informed consent does not yet exist re the vaccine issue because quite frankly, real research, true scientific research, has never, ever been performed on ANY of these vaccines, just as David Burd has pointed out (and many others here as well).

UNLESS/UNTIL that type research is performed on vaccines, providing unsuspecting parents, whose feelings toward vaccination has been propagated and fueled by the big pharma industry, will be continually duped and misled in the false belief that they've been provided informed consent (in the form if a VIS) when they are asked to sign that document prior to vaccination.

You cannot have truth based on untruth. You cannot have true/valid informed consent based on a bunch of lies.

Calling a spade a spade here: This entire vaccine program is based on nothing more than propaganda. There is not one single shred of scientific proof these vaccines actually promote health. It's quite the contrary, according to a plethora of research that has been artfully and selectively kept from the masses.


So again when the claim is made that people should have 'choice' when it comes to this issue or any other issue for that matter, in a truly democratic society, that CHOICE should be based on FACTUAL INFORMATION, not some information contrived out of a propaganda campaign designed to DECEIVE you into the FALSE BELIEF that this choice is based on something valid.

Because it isn't.

Further, EVEN if these vaccines were proven save and effective - 100% - for ALL, the use of them should STILL be A CHOICE and not a mandate. That's something my lovely husband said to me the other day. He's absolutely correct.

NOTHING, no medical procedure, nothing, nothing, nothing should be forced on anyone in a truly free and democratic society. This mantra of 'for the good of the whole' is nothing short of fascism. That line of BS has been used in non-democratic societies - fascist societies - in our past and is still being used today to deceive the masses.

History will always repeat itself until the masses awaken. This is my greatest fear today; not enough have awakened to realize just how far and wide they've been deceived.

cia parker

I think informed vaccine choice is the key issue, but it requires that all people considering a vaccine for themselves or their children have been presented with all the necessary facts now known, and very few people or doctors are aware of them. No one should ever be permitted the illusion of believing that any vaccine he gets for his child is certainly safe. I personally support giving the DT series to children over two years of age, but I do so very tentatively, recognizing that the vaccine can be disabling or fatal, while the disease is and probably would be rare even if no one vaxed for it. I give my opinion, but recognize that intelligent, well-informed people might very well decide not to take the risk of the tetanus vaccine, and, provided they have read and considered the most important pros and cons, I would respectfully accept their decision. I don't think any other vaccine should even be considered for any child (or adult) in the U.S. at this time. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the reasons for considering or rejecting any vaccine. But I know that very few people have internalized the reality that vaccine damage might very well happen to them or their child. Yes, some of us have genetic factors which predispose us to reacting, but no one is immune, and blithely consenting to whatever vaccines the doctor recommends is the height of irresponsibility and is diametrically opposed to appropriate love and concern for themselves or their child. And that's what very few people have understood or accepted.


Dr. Yazbak,

My son was born perfectly healthy. And yet he was disabled by vaccines, that were delivered in what we thought was the safety of a doctors office, before he was even two…. while my wife was likely holding him down.

My son's story is just one of millions, but my anger over that crime isn't really the issue here.

The issue is that this madness must be stopped, completely. And those responsible need to be punished for their actions, so this horrible period in history is NEVER repeated.

if advocacy is the first of that process, then it has to real advocacy.

Screaming vaccine injury out of one side of our mouths, and "judicious vaccinating" out of the other, is not a sincere form of advocacy.

david m burd

I'm repeating what has been published a number of times here on AoA, BUT it's worth repeating as relevant to "the science" from Pharma/CDC asserting their Studies show vaccines' safety:

ALL vaccine studies done here in the U.S. by Pharma/CDC NEVER use a true placebo when they monitor (for just a few weeks) adverse reactions. Instead their (phony) placebos are either: (1) the exact same concoction injected into babies but only leaving out the antigens; or (2) a different vaccine (such as one Flu concoction to another Flu concoction).

NEVER is a true saline solution used as an honest placebo. Thus, adverse reactions are inevitably about the same; and thus the vaccine is blessed. THIS technique is about as dishonest as it gets. I will go further, and say their "science" is criminal.

Ed Yazbak

Dear All,

I have two vaccine-injured grandsons - so believe me, we are all on the same side.

I am most grateful to those of you who took the time to support my position. Thank you again.


I don't know what vaccine tragedy has rendered you so angry but it must have been terrible. I am so sorry!

I absolutely and totally respect your right to believe that all vaccines are bad. You should respect our right to believe otherwise.

Please consider helping the efforts to keep vaccine exemptions.

I wish you the best.



Dr. Yazbak if you read all his stuff - agrees with you BayareaMom.
But the greater population wants what they want and believes just like they believed in eating carbs and getting rid of all fats - and if they did eat fats - it better be that man made margarine stuff cause it was made out of veggie oil - don't you know All that worked out well didn't it. - To be fair to the masses - so did I.

But it is what it is - and Dr Yazbek's article gets to that point..

By the way my SIL in Mississippi - just posted that a child had died this week from the flu in the state of Mississippi Highest vaccinatied bunch in the nation and she is very concerned. After all her grandbaby was in the hospital because of low oxygen levels from a viral infection just a month ago.

Lot of rotten stuff is going on because we can't get America to wake up.

And in between the 26 years of one mean doctor to the next - there was plenty of in- betweens.

For instants the ER doctor in 1999 - when my son had a grand mal seizure and the peds had been messing with my mind - telling me there were no incidences of seizure activity and the school teachers' complaints were ignored just as mine were ignored.

After I arrive at the ER; crying mad, scared, frustrated - he listens to me, as I tell him he had a vaccine injury, he had seizure disorder up untill he was four years old he was on seizure medicine. His EEG came back okay but ever since it has been incident after incident.

So he calms me down, I go out to repark the car, I come back and he says to me, "I see you are from south eastern Kentucky from the way you pronouce your soft "I's" .

"Yes," I said - "that is the only difference between north and south Kentucky."

He then says," Eastern Kentukcy, they use posionous snakes in their church worship services don't they?"

I said, "I did not know." or some other stunned response.


We are fighting this story book fairy tale that unicorn vaccines came into modern medicine, just like the low fat diet - it will come - and Dr. Yazbec and Dan Olmstead is bringing it on.


..."I don't believe there's a safe version of anything that can do this to children. And if you're going convince me that 'some' vaccines are safe and effective, then you're going to have to produce some rock solid science to explain how you could possibly know that."

Completely agree.

Wasn't there someone, at some point in time, that reportedly stated at one time you cannot serve two Masters?

To ME, when the statement is made that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe and/or the statement is made that vaccines are safe and effective, YOU'RE NOT BEING COMPLETELY TRUTHFUL. You're either lying, or you're not. Which is it? Because anything less than the whole, complete truth...IS A LIE.

I always think about that most especially when it comes to the vaccine issue. (Caveat: I am not stating the following to convert anyone here over to my anti-vaccine side.)

To ME, if you're going to come out with a statement which states that you do not believe ALL vaccines can be harmful, you need to back that up with solid, hard core science. To-date, there have been a plethora of studies, well documented here by several, which definitely shows vaccines can, and have and will continue to cause damage and death in some (perhaps in many more than is readily acknowledged because of suppression of the info.).

You cannot PROVE ALL vaccines are safe WHEN THE RESEARCH IS NOT THERE TO BACK THIS UP. Unless, of course, you want to go with the Big Pharma backed research which purports to show same, at which point I will then say you're relying on absolutely false, unproven data.

Show me the science!!! PLEASE!!! Show me where it says indisputably that ANY toxic ingredient, no matter how small the so-called trace amount, WILL NOT HARM MY CHILD OR ME.

In order to do that, you've have to first understand MY immune system and every other human being/animal PRIOR to injecting any of us with any of these known neurotoxins and demonstrate no harm will come.

They can't do that; it's never been done. The FACT is that we are ALL playing Russian Roulette when any of these vaccines are given to any one of us. THAT'S a fact.

Anything else claimed is absolute rubbish...


Barry; Dr. Yazbek wrote a good article and he has worked hard on this issue. Suffered because of this issue. He does not think they are safe, that is why he is writing and looking at stats. He has done some amazing work and I admire him so ver much. So he is not going to try to show the science theyare safe cause he does not believe they are safe. . We are up against the masses still; even if vaccine injuried the masses seem to be clueless. It is fate - they say.

I do understand the anger though Barry. I had two doctors talk to me like a low life ignorant dog. I have never been talk to like that as an adult, by an adult - ever. Th first doctor managed to ruin my life - but worse ruined my child's life. The other doctor talk to me again like a dog just this past winter - but this time I held fast. Those two doctor talks were 26 years apart. Yes spanned 26 years apart. I get what you are saying but you displacing your anger.

Jenny Allen; I love you - I really do - agree with you 95 percent of the time - but Jenny -we are too young to remember the iron lung stuff when most of us on this website have held our catitonic babies in our arms and thought they were dead, or our hearts broke when our little five year old boys sobbed quietly as they tried to peddle a tricycle while their sister peddled a two wheeler around in the yard. It is just not stomach problems but body movements that vaccines can do damage also. Damage to motor part of the brain - as my Father found out from his annual flu shots Be careful out there Jenny. By the way I do remember iron lung and a shorter leg and measles and all that.

Dr. Yazbek this was a great article. I was looking for it to appear on my facebook like all the other articles do on Age of Autism - I wanted to share it with my SIL that lives in Ol'e Miss but it never showed up????


Your stance is anti-vaccine - ALL vaccines. I beg to differ.

Which is fine by me, because I'm not trying to change your opinion. It seems like you're the one who's trying to change mine.

I don't believe there's a safe version of anything that can do this to children. And if you're going convince me that 'some' vaccines are safe and effective, then you're going to have to produce some rock solid science to explain how you could possibly know that.

Art of Autism

Here's the thing, Dr. Yazbak is for Choice. The battle for parents who've had their life overturned by vaccine-damage is a separate fight. I'd wholeheartedly agree, no vaccine withstands rigorous scientific scrutiny i.e. net benefit. But that's my Opinion based considerably searching begun on AoA. Dr. Yazbak's position - above all - is CHOICE. Even this reasonable middle ground is unavailable in this polarizing media environment. To the degree Dr. Yazbak succeeds in establishing a middle road is the degree to which any other advances can be made. Dr. Yazbak is considered a fully-crazed anti-vaxxer in Offit's head quarters merely for advocating Choice. He suffers the slings and arrows. Pharma's CDC does NOT want him to succeed, in any way, and at ANY cost! Otherwise, you end up with "rational discussions" and that's a very scary road to reduced billions in profit. THAT is why it's absolutely critical we help Dr. Yazbak pave the middle ground.


Dr Yazbak,

Thank you so much for your reply.

His parents were in one of the states at risk of losing their exemption,( fortunately the bill is dropped for now)
and said they would be willing to travel anywhere in the country to protect him and find a doctor who would be willing to give them a medical exemption, but they weren't sure if anyone would/could. As doctor who acknowledges the possibility of vaccine injury, I thought you would at least know if it was even possible. That is great news for them.

You are right; risks and benefits do change with the situation.

Thank you so much for speaking up for our rights as parents to choose. Please keep talking and writing. We need people like you in our corner so badly. Thank you again.

Jenny Allan

"You just typed me a 6 paragraph lecture… and then you tell me not to impose my views on you????"

Absolutely Barry. Anyone hellbent on 'imposing their views' on others, should not expect to receive no disageement or criticism of that stance. Your stance is anti-vaccine - ALL vaccines. I beg to differ. My post was explanatory of my own views, and not meant to sound like a 'lecture'. As both myself and Dr Yasbak explained, we respect the views of others, including those who choose not to vaccinate at all. Please try to respect our views too.

Just as a footnote:
In response to Dr Yazbak's comment about a child being bitten by a raccoon. I assume he is talking about the danger of rabies. This illness is almost 100% fatal and is endemic within feral and wild animals in many countries. In the UK a species of bat carries a fatal form of rabies, with a few human fatalities.

I sincerely hope Barry and those other anti-vaccine proponents on this thread and others, NEVER have to face the dilemma of their child being bitten by a rabid dog or other animal. The choice here is certain horrific death, or the possibility of survival via a vaccine. NO don't answer that Barry & co. I'm just asking you to THINK about it!!


You are welcome to disagree with my views, but please don't campaign to impose your totally anti-vaccine stance on me or anyone else. Dr Yazbak is a fervent supporter of our cause for vaccine safety and choice, and more than anyone else, has campaigned vigorously for safer, better child vaccine schedules.


You just typed me a 6 paragraph lecture… and then you tell me not to impose my views on you????

Just to be clear, if you really feel the need to stick a label on me, then the right one is pro-child safety.

I'm not interested in condescending history lessons, from people who think that they're older, and wiser than I am.

When I tell people that vaccines ravaged my son's health, it often gets dismissed as anecdotal…. because I have no PROOF.

I view 'vaccine safety' as an oxymoron. And if you want to convince me of the value of vaccines, then you'll need to produce some scientific PROOF, which shows that any vaccine is safe and effective.

Ed Yazbak

Thank you for your comments.

To those who wrote kind words, I so much appreciate your help and support.

To those who were critical, I respect your right to disagree.

To ALL: Keep up the good work and help those fighting for indiividual rights.


We do not need a vaccine reaction to justify a medical exemption and this boy already has ample reasons to merit such an exemption.

Medical exemptions are intended to PREVENT a vaccine injury in susceptible individuals.

Having said that, imagine that the same careful doctor who wrote that exemption is called from an ER and told that your friend's son had been bitten on the face by a raccoon that ran away into the woods. In this case of course, the doctor and parents will be examining a totally different set of vaccine risks and benefits.

That would be "Judicious Vaccination"



Jenny Allan

"Our children were disabled by vaccines, and you're disgusted by us because we disagree with doctors who STILL want to give them to children??"

No Barry. Like Dr Yazbak, I am a grandparent of a child I believe was damaged by MMR vaccine. As an underweight premature baby, he also got the full dose of mercury preservative in the then version of the Diptheria, Tetanus and Pertussis vaccine. Thankfully, the mercury was removed in most child vaccines in the Western World, but this poison is still present in trace amounts in many vaccines, and in full amounts in syringe Flu vaccines administered to pregnant mums.

We don't have mandatory vaccines in the UK, and thankfully no Hep B newborn jabs, but there's a huge propaganda 'push' for for a raft of new child vaccines to be introduced. The totally unnecessary and potentially harmful HPV vaccines, were licenced for girls in the UK, without a single murmer of dissent. In the UK, vaccine dissent is rigorously suppressed. Post Wakefield, doctors, journalists and politicians are terrified of expressing any vaccine concerns in the UK, but there is evidence, doctors and politicians are quietly getting monovalent vaccines for their OWN children instead of MMR vaccine. (Remember the fuss about former Prime Minister Tony Blair's son Leo? We have still not been told about his measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations.)

I don't need any lectures about the damage vaccines can do to children, but I belong to a post war generation which also saw at first hand the deaths and damages caused by some diseases. My husband as a child survived diptheria, rife before vaccines, and one of my brothers in law survived polio, albeit following years in an iron lung. He was severely disabled. TB was endemic in those days. Children were tested for antibodies before receiving the vaccine. That was more sensible than 'blanket' vaccinations.

I campaign relentlessly, mostly 'under the radar' against those vaccines I consider either harmful or unnecessary, and for parental choice in the matter of child vaccines, but like Dr Yazbak, I am certainly not anti-vaccine or perhaps to put it another way, not 'anti-immunisation'. In some cases, where the diseases are mild, I consider immunisation is best conferred by getting the diseases in childhood. Mumps, for instance, is presently causing havoc amongst young adults in our UK colleges and universities. This is due to the mumps MMR component 'wearing off'. For once, Dr Wakefield cannot be blamed for this vaccine failure. I consider rubella vaccine to be unnecessary for boys, and it should only be administered to girls pre-puberty without pre-acquired immunity.

You are welcome to disagree with my views, but please don't campaign to impose your totally anti-vaccine stance on me or anyone else. Dr Yazbak is a fervent supporter of our cause for vaccine safety and choice, and more than anyone else, has campaigned vigorously for safer, better child vaccine schedules.


The trouble with stats it only tells trends and we are suppose to figure out the whys.

For instant - Mississippi has fewer doctors and high infant death rates.

Does doctors usually stay in the states they are raised and trained in?

I don't know, but to me that seems to be probable.
And if there are less capable youths to step forward to be trained as doctors - well?

I have family down in Mississippi and they are affected by vaccine injuries.

Anyway; I see that low rates of doctors in 10 states listed in Dr. Yazbak's link does not include West Virginia which also will not allow a child out of vaccination unless by a medical - exemption.

How goes it in West Virginia? what is their infant death rates, and doctor per population? Of course West Virginia is a bit closer to the east coast and Mass. which is one of the states listed that has a lot of doctors.

Any research on that?

Exemption doesn't mean unvaccinated

I do not believe that Mississippi has the most vaccinated children- I believe this is a conflation of the lowest exemption rate- which one would intuitively assume means it has the highest vaccination rate- but that is not true. In the same way the OR and WA, with the two high exemption rates, do not have the lowest vaccination rates.
In the CDC NIS 431x314 Mississippi is only 11th best, WA is 22 Best, and OR is 39 best- but- the range is only 8%, and the margin of error for the report 3.8% or so plus or minus. The other Medical Exemption only state is WV, which is 43rd in child vaccination.
Exemptions are required to avoid even a single, final dose of one of the required series. So it is possible to have a high exemption rate and high vaccination rates when parents are using exemptions to selectively vaccinate, getting most vaccine but avoiding ones their child reacted to previously or ones for mild infections, like Chicken Pox, or ones that cannot be caught in school, like Hepatitis B.
Here are slides from 2012 comparing vaccination rates to infant mortality rates from the same data, United Health Foundation https://www.scribd.com/doc/85704894/United-Health-Foundation-Top-15-States-by-Infant-Mortality-Top-15-States-By-Vaccination-Rates


I am disgusted by the criticisms aimed at you, for your well expressed moderate views and perspectives. Such intolerance does not help our vaccine damaged children, and insults the efforts of thousands of US citizens, presently fighting proposed legislation aimed at removing parental rights and choices.


Our children were disabled by vaccines, and you're disgusted by us because we disagree with doctors who STILL want to give them to children??

The definition of judicious is " .. having, showing, or done with good judgment or sense".

If we're going to sit here and argue that vaccines were poisonous enough to do this to our children, then we look pretty ridiculous when we present "giving less of them", as a solution that invokes good judgement.


I'm sure that Dr. Yazbak endorses careful, selective vaccination done with fully informed consent and respect for each child's individual needs. His many articles make clear his position as a thoughtful, caring physician.

I learned a lot from this article. I didn't know that Mississippi had fewer doctors than other states. If Californians aren't careful, they too will find themselves in this same boat. Doctors are not going to live in a state where they have no choice over what drugs their children are given.

Jenny Allan

Dr Yazbak says:-

"What I mean by pro-judicious vaccination is just what the name implies eg among other things returning to monovalent measles, mumps and rubella vaccines for those parents who prefer them."

Absolutely!! This is surely about parental and personal CHOICE. Those persons who vilify anyone who 'chooses' a vaccine - ANY vaccine, for themselves or their children, are justifying the rantings of Deer, Gorski, Carey and Offit + a well subsidised army of trolls, who refer to everyone expressing any vaccine concerns at all, as 'anti-vaxxers'.

I am disgusted by the criticisms aimed at you, for your well expressed moderate views and perspectives. Such intolerance does not help our vaccine damaged children, and insults the efforts of thousands of US citizens, presently fighting proposed legislation aimed at removing parental rights and choices.

Laura Hayes

Dr. Yazbak,

My comment was not meant to be a personal affront. I simply won't share information that includes the following:

"Pediatricians and other Primary Care Physicians and Allied Professionals should continue to encourage parents to vaccinate their children."

As David M Burd stated, this stance of yours is perplexing.


Dear Ed:

It has been a journey of many years and surprises, my very good friend.

Thank you for your pro bono time, advice, and expertise in educating me in how to attempt to recover vaccine injured children.

I admire your selflessness. The medical profession has much to learn from individuals like you.

Ed Yazbak

Mr Burd

I never said negligible risk. I have spent 25 years proving and arguing those risks and they were certainly not negligible


What I mean by pro-judicious vaccination is just what the name implies eg among other things returning to monovalent measles, mumps and rubella vaccines for those parents who prefer them.

BTW: I respect your right to think otherwise

Right now, you should consider supporting the parents who need help instead of losing your time criticizing me.



Now that un -brainwashed people know how poisonous and dangerous vaccines are, I feel that doctors should NOT be recommending them. What happened to "do no harm"???
There's a book called "The Medical Mafia"by Guylaine Lanctot and her medical license was taken away from her after she wrote it which sort of proves her point. I think some doctors are scared to put their patients' health first if it means not going along with the medical mafia.


Dr Yazbak,
I am deeply greatful for your courage in pointing out the need to respect parents right to choose with regard to vaccines.
Re medical exemptions; it seems that for the most part, they will only come after a proven injury has occurred.

For example, I know of a case; Mom has autoimmune disease, unvaccinated child has celiacs, and abnormally Low HG A levels( so a type of immunodeficiency.) If something went wrong after vaccination, everyone would say "well the child had autoimmune problems anyway".

But am I right that unless the child went ahead, had the vaccine and was severely damaged by the vaccines,( at which point it would be too late), there would be no medical grounds for an exemption?
Would be very grateful to hear your opinion.
Thank you.

david m burd

Thank you Dr. Yazbak for answering,

However, you have now said "Over 95% of US parents wish to vaccinate their children"! (as apparent justification for your opinion)

BUT, this 95% you quote is because parents have been dogmatically trained to believe in the efficacy of vaccine, and, that vaccinations apparently pose negligible risk.

But, NEGLIGIBLE RISK from vaccines is a total damn lie.

Thank you for your participation, I have always admired your wonderful work, and I am totally perplexed by the current stance you have taken.


... even doctors who are pro-judicious vaccination do support parents' free choice.


Wow , that's pretty big of you guys.

Can you explain exactly what you mean by " pro-judicious vaccination" ?

Ed Yazbak

Sorry about that Ms Hayes. You evidently don't know me.

Dear ASDfatherPA, I know how you feel and I feel for you.
I am a double ASDgrampyMA



Ed Yazbak

Dear Mr. Burd,

Like you, I am of course not a great fan of the current pediatric vaccination schedule and I never thought that administering a vaccine to a newborn who does not need it, was a good idea.

In fact I have written several papers on the subject.

Over 95% of US parents wish to vaccinate their children and of course their doctors should support them and carefully explain to them the risks and benefits of any vaccine - as we did at length before VICP - when we were personally liable for vaccine injuries.

Mississippi's health issues (before and beyond age 1) are not due to the state's high vaccination rates.

They are due to the fact that sadly Mississippi also has the lowest doctor /poulation ratio of the Nation and few funds dedicated to "Health".


I sincerely hope that the present State Health Officer will be able to achieve her goals and not just worry about vaccination rates and exemptions.

The reason why I am writing this "In Perspective" series is to show legislators and organizations attemting to ban philosophic exemptions that even doctors who are pro-judicious vaccination do support parents' free choice.

The reason why I wrote "this perspective" was because I really could not believe my eyes when I read the articles I cited.


Jeannette Bishop

Thank you, Dr. Yazbak. The geographical observations as well as the observation of high immunization with less ideal health outcomes are important and should be considered IMO by anyone considering themselves a health professional.


I agree with Laura that David Burd raises a good point. Why did Dr. Yazbak say that?

Laura Hayes

To David M Burd,

Thank you for your comment. It is because of the very line you cite that I won't be sharing this article.

david m burd

Dr. Yazbak,

Toward the end of your article you say: "Pediatricians and other Primary Care Physicians and Allied Professionals should continue to encourage parents to vaccinate their children."

You seem to be endorsing vaccinations be given per the current Schedule with its onslaught beginning day of birth with the (insane) HepB shot, then 8 more vaccine doses at 2 months, 4 months, 6 months, on and on!

You CAN"T BE SERIOUS! Especially in light of Mississippi, as U.S. pediatric health compares horribly to the rest of the world.


The sad thing is that when these highly vaccinated Mississipians get sick from all these drugs, they have less ability to get treatment and certainly have a low chance of getting state of the art care. A well to do child with vaccine induced type 1 diabetes is in a better position to manage the disease than a child born into poverty. The same with asthma and ADHD and other horrendous vaccine induced outcomes, including, of course, autism.

Betty Bona

When I grew up in Arkansas 50 years ago, there was a saying that was commonly repeated whenever state by state performance statistics came out: "Thank Goodness for Mississippi!". No matter how badly Arkansas performed, Mississippi was almost always worse. I can't understand why any state with generally respectable performance in these state by state comparisons would follow the lead of Mississippi.

Bob Moffitt

How difficult would it be for the CDC to conduct a vigorous .. retro-spective study of Mississippi children .. to ascertain Mississippi's rate of "diagnosed and treated" chronic autoimmune disorders .. such as .. autism, asthma, allergies (peanuts?), infant strokes, seizures, juvenile type 1 diabetes .. on and on?

At the same time .. the CDC conducts the same .. retrospective study of any State having the least vaccinated children .. for comparision in "diagnosed and treated" chronic autoimmune disorders?

Surely the CDC would want "statistical evidence" to demonstrate how much healthier the vaccinated children of Mississippi are compared to those children living in less vaccinated states?

As to Mississippi's dismal infant mortality rate .. didn't they get the "back to sleep" memo .. warning parents to place their infants on their back while sleeping .. as opposed to earlier memo warning parents to place their sleeping infants on their stomachs?

As I understand it .. the "back to sleep" memo has greatly reduced SIDS .. or .. has the reduction only occurred in states other than Mississippi.

Has Mississippi's infant mortality rate decreased since that memo was issued? Inquiring minds want to know.

By the way .. what was Mississippi's rate of autism in the last count by CDC .. 1 in 68 (1 in 49 boys) which applies to children born somewhere around 2000?

I think Mississippi's highly vaccinated children population provides a great opportunity to show how "healthier" they are than other states .. such as .. how does Mississippi's dismal infant mortality rate compare with our military force families?

Theresa 66

It would seem possible, with all the statistics available, we could determine if vaccinated infants are more ( or less ) likely to die. I wonder if we could compare all the states vaccine rate with IMR?

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.)