Dachel Wake Up: Egypt and Autism
London Film Premiere June 25th: Man Made Epidemic

JB Handley Talks Vax Safety on Medium.com

JbPORTLAND, Oregon — First, a disclaimer: I’m not a doctor, and the final decision about vaccinating your child should take place between you and your healthcare provider. I’m not giving you medical advice; I’m stating my opinion.

I am a dad. And, I write this without benefitting in anyway from what is said here. I have no book to peddle, no profits to protect, and there’s no doubt that writing this will result in some amount of hate directed in my general direction for challenging a popular narrative that vaccines are only safe and effective and should be administered the same way to all children without consideration for the unique biology of each and every child. So be it.

About the title

How could this be the only vaccine guide you’ll ever need? Like the old adage about teaching someone to fish, I believe my words will help you to do two things that can put you in control of the vaccine decision for your child and family:

  1. Do your own research. Understand the risks and benefits of everything you are putting into your child.

Every single person is different. There is no part of medicine where “one size fits all” is a good idea.

If you understand the harm vaccines can cause in some children and the benefits they provide, you won’t be intimidated by any pressure or judgment being placed on you by others.

2. Find a healthcare provider who doesn’t believe “one size fits all” when it comes to vaccines

The relationship between you and a doctor when it comes to vaccines is critical. There is a lot of shame and intimidation used in the healthcare profession to goad parents into vaccinating. This is wrong on so many levels, and there are also many healthcare providers who don’t believe one size fits all, who do believe every child is different, and who work with parents to provide the best plan for each child. Find that doctor. (And if someone shames you or tries to coerce you, run away fast!) They exist in every region of the country — network with parents until you find one. They might be a naturopath, a D.O., or a chiropractor, just find one!


That was easy, right? Do those two things (your own research, find a great healthcare provider) and you will be in great shape.

So you know, I did neither of those things when I had young kids in the early 2000s. I did no research. I went with the local pediatrician everyone else seemed to use. I regret those choices deeply, which is why I’m writing this to you right now*.

(*like tens of thousands of other American parents, I watched my son decline into Autism after following the vaccine schedule perfectly.)

I’m going to do 2 more things with this post to hopefully get you on your way to a better understanding of vaccines:

  1. I’ll share with you ten truths about vaccinations that most people — and especially new parents — don’t typically know
  2. I will go through every vaccine currently recommended for American children by the CDC and give you my opinion on their risk vs. benefit

Ten truths about vaccines most people don’t know

Read more at Medium.com


cia parker


I understand that Dr. Wakefield found live measles vaccine-strain measles in the guts of many of the children with autistic enterocolitis. Very few of the non-disabled children who had also gotten the vaccine had it. So, again, I'd say that it's a terrible idea to get the measles vaccine. Most children who get the MMR don't get the bowel disease or autism, but many do. Many children get the autistic enterocolitis as a vaccine reaction unrelated to the measles virus, such as my daughter, who has never had the measles vaccine. All of these things are true, and parents must consider all of them.

But it's still true that very few people now get classic measles, and it's because the vaccine has prevented it. Was the measles virus in the gut of the affected children inadequately weakened, or was it more from a weakness in their immune system? I don't know. I said no to the MMR even back in 2001 when it was urged on us. But saying no to it did not keep her from getting both autism and bowel disease caused by other vaccines.

cia parker

I said: "I think it was a big mistake to try to eliminate measles, but the vaccine has made measles a very rare disease in the US now, because as big a mistake as it was, the measles vaccine sure got rid of measles."

I think both things are true: it was a BAD thing to get rid of measles with the vaccine, because measles is very rarely dangerous, and can be handled wisely to minimize complications, and it provides many benefits. I wasn't trying to promote or defend the vaccine (the way I'm willing to defend the tetanus and polio vaccines). But it's true that as soon as they started giving the measles vaccine, incidence plummeted, until within a decade or so, measles had gone from 99% of kids getting it, to much much less than one percent getting it. Not a good thing, but true. The measles vaccine doesn't prevent measles with 100% effectiveness, but it's still very effective. It causes a lot of disability, it was a terrible idea, I would never recommend it for anyone, but as far as working, it works very well to prevent measles.


"the measles vaccine sure got rid of measles."

That's an interesting statement. When we were kids, we all got the measles and got over it and it left the great majority of us healthier than it found us, and with life long immunity that we could pass on to our babies. We apparently don't see that kind of measles infection here anymore.

But how many people around the world, at this moment in time, suffer a chronic debilitating intestinal vaccine strain measles infection that has destroyed their lives and the lives of their loved ones?

Did the measles vaccine get rid of the measles or did it just introduce a different, more virulent, more destructive and dangerous, form?

cia parker

Since no one has ever said that vaccines are 100% effective, you can't say that it shows that all vaccines are worthless if the diseases still ever occur at all. And not everyone has gotten the vaccines, and not everyone has gotten boosters, in addition to the vaccine failures. I think it was a big mistake to try to eliminate measles, but the vaccine has made measles a very rare disease in the US now, because as big a mistake as it was, the measles vaccine sure got rid of measles. I don't think it's a good idea to try to say that all vaccines are so bad that no one should ever get them. If we have a diphtheria outbreak in poor areas of the US, or if polio comes back, I think it's 100% certain that most people will go out and get the vaccines for them, and I probably would too.

cia parker


I didn't see the top comments until now. I doubt we'll ever get another vaccine either. No flu shots for us. But I'm not planning on going to a yellow fever zone either. It's not accurate to say that well-nourished people who've never gotten a vaccine will do fine with disease. Taking your own food and water to a yellow fever zone would do no good: it's transmitted by mosquitoes: dengue, yellow fever, malaria, and now zika (doubtless many more too). Most of those who worked on the Panama Canal in the nineteenth century died of yellow fever, also those who went as military personnel. Even the well-nourished Americans. Most of them got and died of yellow fever. They had to give up on the canal at that time because the death toll among the workers was almost universal. The book The American Plague, about the yellow fever outbreak in Memphis, Tennessee in 1878, describes many nuns, priests, and doctors who nursed the sick: most of them caught yellow fever and died of it. The bubonic plague killed a third of the people in Europe, even the well-nourished ones. Ebola has killed many well-nourished Europeans: I read about a Danish boy in The Hot Zone: intelligent, tall, athletic, well-brought up, but he went into the fateful elephant cave with his parents and sister, apparently caught Ebola from bat guano, and died horribly.

We're lucky to live here and now: contagious disease poses a minimal threat to us, even if we don't get any vaccines. There are way too many vaccines given routinely now: we all agree on that. It's very important that we educate people so they can get just the DT (or the T if it's available), but know to ask and turn down anything with P in it. But the diseases can be horrible and they can kill. It's a mistake to think that being well-nourished is everything. There have been deaths from yellow fever here in the US even in the last ten years, in those just returned from a tropical country with endemic yellow fever. Even with the best of treatment in the most modern hospital, many people still die of these diseases. Everyone should absolutely have the freedom to make their own decisions on this, but it could be a wise decision in some cases to get a vaccine. They are a tool: an unpredictable tool, but in some cases they could save your life. Or take it. You just have to assess the odds as best you can.

Cynthia Cournoyer

DTap for children and Tdap for adults. You MIGHT be able to get the DT or the Td which includes diphtheria. But since the pertussis vaccine has been recommended for adults, they just give the Tdap for emergencies. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/tetanus.html (go to vaccination schedule and use).

I don't believe you can even get a "tetanus" shot alone. See table: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf

It doesn't include a listing for "tetanus" only, just with diphtheria attached. And look at the ingredients.

Yes, I would never take a vaccine. I don't think my immune system could handle it. In all the statistics quoted by Cia, I must ask: How many of these people were also subjected to UNICEF, Bill Gates, etc. etc., upon coming down with yellow fever? What was their immune system like? Was it also in an area of clean water and plenty of healthy food? If not, the statistics do not apply to me or most anyone else in this country. If I were to go to a place where there was yellow fever, I would most likely bring all my own food and water.

Weighing the severity of a disease against the severity of a vaccine reaction starts with a premise that I believe is false. In order to begin weighing that question, you must first decide that a vaccine will work and that it won't cause damage. The problem is, since people have gotten the disease in spite of vaccinating (vaccine failure), and while people who don't get vaccinated have been spared the disease, we are not dealing in exact science. So I would state the problem this way: When taking a vaccine your are taking TWO risks. 1) that you might suffer vaccine damage and 2) that you might get the disease anyway. If remaining unvaccinated you are taking just one risk: 1) that you might get the disease. However, as in the Amish example and my speculation that much of Africa is victim to Bill Gates, you are not starting with an unassaulted immune system when you weigh statistics on Yellow Fever.


Cia, I appreciate what you are saying about weighing the risks and benefits of vaccines and diseases and that, "It seems to me to be making anti-vaccinism into a religion parallel to the vaccine religion, to recommend absolute purity (completely unvaxxed) no matter how many are dying or being disabled by the diseases."

There are people who believe that diseases are so dangerous that the right to make medical decisions should be removed. And yes, for many people the motivation is purely financial, but I do believe that for others this combines with humanitarian zeal and faith in vaccine dogma.

On the other side, there are many whose terrible experiences with vaccines, often combined with extensive reading and knowledge, have resulted in the conclusion that all vaccines are bad for everyone.

I'm somewhere in the middle. I believe that our current program is way overboard, corrupted by pharma profits and govt CYA, unwilling to acknowlege and deal with adverse reactions, causing serious chronic immune and nervous system disorders in many children as well as an increasing number of adults today. But I don't believe that all vaccines are bad for everyone. I grew up in the 1960's when a few vaccines were given for a few serious communicable diseases, and everyone I knew did fine. In the course of my life I've seen various diseases disappear when vaccines were introduced, and I don't think that was just a coincidence - just like I don't think it's a coincidence that autism has increased in tandem with the growth in our vaccine program, and that parents have witnessed vaccine reactions followed by regression into autism. I like the "U" principle that Julie Obradovic wrote about. And yes, vaccines are not 100% effective, so outbreaks shouldn't be blamed on the unvaccinated. And there are benefits to coming down with some diseases.

Sorry if I'm meandering and repeating myself, but the point I am getting to is that a the rights of individuals to make medical choices needs to be respected on all sides, not only respect for choices that are the same as whatever choices each of us would make. It is not so simple to weigh the risks of vaccines and diseases. The risks of diseases do matter, though often exagerated by today's vaccine promoters.

No need to state your point again, Laura, as I understood it the first time. But sorry that I didn't notice your appreciative words for J.B.'s article. I'm oversensitive because often I see really good vaccine-critical articles being dissed for not being anti-vaccine enough.


"One more time, my point is that it should never be stated that vaccination decisions are "between you and your healthcare provider". "

I agree, Laura. The phraseology implies guardianship. It's a power grab.
I think, too, that we ought to stop calling allopaths healthcare providers and instead call them what they are: pharmaceutical drug providers.


Cia Parker;
Yes, I should have said -- I thought I said - they do have just the tetanus shot -or rather the Diphtheria and tetanus shot without the pertussis.

But they won't tell ya that.
You looked it up for me -- thanks but getting it out of them: That is another matter.

Knowing they have just a DT with out the P Here is a Personal Example:

In 1987 : My son finally received a doctor's note to finish up his s childhood vaccines with just the DT and he did great. No Problem.

Just before that I was lied to. Earlier in 1987 I had a discussion, or rather a -- I am not sure it was a discussion, more like an order. I asked then to this ped with his hurried demeanor, and his hand on the door knob on his way out; if the DPT could be divided. He lied and said it was all or nothing. Then ; after -- and only After the vaccine reaction, after the damage had occurred -- did and done - then suddenly he informed me that there was indeed a DT with out the P.

Does that make him a liar? I think it does.

Yeah, I was lied tooooooooo..

Now; That that is getting into the what Laura Hayes is talking about. So, now I am all confused if J.B. Handley was right to say that??
At last; how do we talk to our health care - doctors when they will out right lie to you.

That is hardly the end to my experience though. They lied to my daughter; - back four or five years ago.
Just the tetanus shot she said- and we get the bill back - that says it was really the DTaP. I am so experienced with vaccine reactions though -- I already read her health signs to know she had indeed received the whole DTaP.

Do they call it a DTaP that they get in high school? I promise you it is called the tetanus shot which is a lie. My daughter had that too. Seeeeeee, I should be getting good at reading the signs. Her brother; my son six years behind her - did not. .

She is at home now, bright and sweet as the morning sun, raising tons of zinnas and caring for the chickens and is very well. Every day she eats yogurt with all the berries I that I raise, Blueberries, blackberries, and raspberries for antioxidants. I cook with few carbs and no gluten, Yet, I feel in my heart and bones her health is fragile.

These doctors for the most part know, they just don't care , or perhaps they do, but they have worked so hard and sacrificed so much of that medical degree that they are willing -- many - not all - to sell out their patients - probably their own mother.

But J.B. Handley and Twyla knows all of this. I have seen J.B. Handley in action; not letting them by with lies and taking the hard, hot heat from them. The end game; Have a discussion with your doctor - and read and know enough to keep up your end of the discussion.

Good luck to all the young ones out there. Old ones too - they come for us all now , don't they.

Laura Hayes


You wrote: "But I think it's a shame when there is a litmus test where an article with lots of very important useful information is judged solely on not being completely and totally against all vaccines for everyone. "

Perhaps go back and read my very first comment to JB, which includes compliments and a thank you to JB for a good article.

One more time, my point is that it should never be stated that vaccination decisions are "between you and your healthcare provider". That is wrong. In the case of a child, vaccination decisions, indeed all medical decisions, reside solely with the parents...and we all need to be fighting to make sure it stays that way.

cia parker

This is from Randall Neustaedter's The Vaccine Guide:

In the yellow fever epidemic in the Mississippi valley in 1878, the overall fatality rate was 16% (Coulter 1982). Homeopathically treated cases had mortality of 5.6% in New Orleans and 7.7% throughout the South (American Institute of Homeopathy 1880).

The vaccine is very effective at preventing yellow fever: in one study of 60,000 people it was 95% effective at inducing antibodies (Smith et al, 1938). Between 1938 and 1942 in Colombia, only one case of yellow fever occurred in a population where 127,000 vaccinations were given annually (Bugher & Gast-Galvis 1944). A recent study in Brazil showed that only 75% of vaccinated children in Brazil developed adequate antibodies (Guerra et al 1997).

Most vaccine reactions involve encephalitis, especially in children, mainly infants, and older people. Before 1956 there were 15 cases of encephalitis reported in medical literature (Stuart 1956). Vaccinating everyone in Senegal in 1965 resulted in 248 cases of vaccine encephalitis, 90% of the cases were in children under 12. 67% had convulsions, 34% had coma, and 23 cases died (Collomb 1966). Between 1965 and 1991 six cases of vaccine encephalitis were reported. Then between 1996 and 2001, five people between 56 and 79 (four from US, one Australian), and two Brazilians 5 and 22 years old got sick after the vaccine. Six of the seven died (CDC 2001).

I don't know, would it be better to vaccinate everyone in an affected area or give everyone homeoopathic prophylaxis and treatment? The main remedies are bryonia, crotalus horridus, eupatorium perfoliatum, and phosphorus. It's impressive that only one case of yellow fever occurred in Colombia at a time when everyone was vaxxed every year, but I don't know how many vaccine injuries there were from it.

Everyone in a yellow fever area should know these facts and then make their own decision. But should we just turn our backs and let tens of thousands of people die horribly of yellow fever because we don't think any vaccine should ever be used under any circumstances?

cia parker

I disagree that you should not use the danger of the disease as a factor in making the vaccine decision. Obviously I mean a disease that is a real threat where the individual lives or will travel. If you were in Africa right now in the area with a yellow fever epidemic, I think you need protection of some sort. Homeopathic protection would be ideal, but I'd take vaccine protection over risking having my kidneys and liver dissolved by yellow fever.

I think most of the vaccines shouldn't even be considered. In the US at this time, I think the tetanus vaccine (dT) is the only one worth considering (unless you have hep-b at the time your baby is born). We need to actively give schoolchildren measles, mumps, and rubella at the end of a school year to give them permanent immunity. If polio and/or diphtheria came back, but not unless they did, I think those vaccines would be worth considering. If you've got a 50% chance of catching a dangerous disease, and a 20% chance of dying if you got it, most people would rather take the vaccine and worry about the possible adverse reactions when they happened.

cia parker


I just looked:


and in 2016 you can get a dT booster (or DT for children under seven), without the pertussis component which is the most dangerous part. I think parents should seriously consider giving the DT series, later dT boosters, for children over the age of two. It's less reactive than the plain T anyway. I would NOT recommend that anyone get the pertussis vaccine in the DTaP.

Tim Lundeen

For a insider's perspective on the medical system, read Dr Suzanne Humphries' autobiography: https://www.amazon.com/Rising-Dead-Suzanne-Humphries-M-D/dp/0692648186/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1466792085&sr=8-2&keywords=suzanne+humphries -- highly recommended, I had a hard time putting it down.

If your choice is to treat your chronic illness with pharmaceutical drugs or surgery, and you eagerly anticipate an ever-increasing list of "side effects" that will be treated with more drugs and more surgery, then our medical system is simply superb. Good luck with that :-)


But Laura, the whole point of this article is to encourage you to make your own decisions, walk away from a doctor who bullies you, understand that vaccines have real risks, understand how much our vaccine program has grown and that it is a corrupted program. The article fosters skepticism - and many of us wish we had had that skepticism when we were vaccinating our kids, with blind faith in the CDC.

I get that some people think that nobody should ever get any vaccines and nobody should ever see a doctor except for in some kind of rare serious situation. But I think it's a shame when there is a litmus test where an article with lots of very important useful information is judged solely on not being completely and totally against all vaccines for everyone.

Laura Hayes


The rhetoric we use is of critical importance.

A growing number of people don't want to use a "healthcare" provider of any sort, save for a life-or-death emergency.

And an even larger number of people don't want to even discuss vaccines with their doctors. They have already made their wise decision to forego them and they don't care a bit that their "healthcare" provider might want them or their children to have one, some, or all of them.

Stating that vaccine decisions should be made "by you and your healthcare provider" implies that one must use a healthcare provider and that the healthcare provider gets a say in one's vaccination decisions. Both implications are wrong, and therefore, should not be stated.

"You and your doctor/Talk to your doctor" is also the rhetoric used by Big Pharma in every drug commercial, another big reason not to be using it. It aids and abets their propaganda, i.e., that we are dependent on doctors for our health...which in this day and age could not be further from the truth due to the high level of iatrogenic harm that is inflicted on patients each and every day.

Ricky Barnes

It should be noted that a vaccine only needs to meet the criteria of producing an antibody, in order to be approved. The antibody is not from the "wild" virus or bacteria, but an atypically manipulated one. This is why the package insert will always have a variation of this statement "correlation to immunity has not been established". Because having that atypically manipulated antibody response is not the same thing as immunity. In essence, each vaccine is experimental. "Effective" only means it produces an antibody response, not immunity. Thanks for taking a look at my film 50centsmovie.com. And thanks to Mr JB!! PS: to read the real history of vaccine effectiveness, please read Dissolving Illusions (co-authored by Dr. Suzanne Humphries.


David Burd; They have long - long - long stop giving just the tetanus toxoid,. Instead. it is every time some form of the DPT.

My husband was coming out of factory one day and they were sitting in the cafeteria waiting for him like some ol'e fat spider waiting for a fly. They said they were giving free tetanus shots - but it was a DPT (sure enough DPT - not some form of it) since there had been an outbreak of whooping cough back in the 80s.

I know it is a DPT vaccine cause I was told after I ripped my hand open when a horse jerked up it's head while I was holding it for the ferrier to trim it's feet. The hook on the choke chain hooked under my skin of my hand and just about skinned me!

They really wanted to give me a tetanus shot, but were very nice - I have to admit after hearing my story. Nicer than the pediatricians when I bucked them.

But back to my hand; The doctor said that they might have to order just a tetanus shot, but he would for me. I still refused and he gave me a great big antibiotic shot in the hip before I left. .

Same for my son when he was working around a cattle trailer and almost smashed his finger off, a few years later
We are working around cattle and horses.

Twyla is right - I know that Twyla -- No one has worked harder and been a straight talker as J.B. Handley.

david m burd


More on tetanus: Most of the child vaccines (DTaP), per the CDC Excipient List, have "traces" of Thimerosal and Aluminum adjuvants, formaldehyde, and other toxic compounds such as Polysorbates. Here on AoA several years back, "traces" of Thimerosal mean equal or less than .3 micrograms per injection which is still hundreds of billions of mercury atoms.

As to "First Aid" for adults and older children, a Tetanus Toxoid shot is generally given AND this toxoid shot contains 25 micrograms of Thimerosal.

Right out of a Three Stooges episode a couple years ago I badly lacerated my hand scaring a squirrel away from my sunflowers, and bled a whole lot while getting to the nearby hospital's Emergency Room with a clean T-shirt wrapped around my hand getting soaked in blood. Right away the first nurse said "OK, let's give you a tetanus shot" and I said emphatically "NO." She was puzzled but went away. After a PA stitched me up, he said "OK, let's give you a tetanus shot" and again I emphatically said NO. He asked why and I told him about all the shot's excipients - including mercury - . He politely listened and we said goodbye as I thanked him for his good needlework on my hand.

Just so everybody knows, most First Aid for tetanus usually includes a toxoid shot having 25 micrograms of ethylmercury Thimerosal. And, in my case, my hand lacerations that bled profusely were from a broken clean drinking glass, and NOT punctures, with basically zero chance of tetanus exposure. But the medical mindset was to still give me a useless tetanus toxoid shot - and of course I would have been charged another $100 dollars on my First Aid bill.


I'm sure J.B. believes that parents should make vaccine decisions. I think "you and your healthcare provider" is just short-hand for, "you in consultation with your health care provider".

And yes, when it comes to vaccines many doctors are fountains of propaganda, but their are some sincere thoughtful knowledgeable doctors willing to engage in a meaningful conversation.


I wonder Carol at a lot of things too. I wonder at the unconcern I suppose - more than anything else. I wonder if the doctor would really have done the same if it had been is very own kid?


Well since we are talking about tetanus; Back in the 1930s my Mother jumped off of the family horse - bare footed (since they only received shoes once a year and went every where bare footed to preserve them ) right onto a nail sticking out of a plank, in the barn. IT went all the way through her foot coming out at the top. She pulled it out.

Her Mother doctored it but there was no antibiotics, no tetanus vaccine.

On the other hand about that time; some famous cowboy movie star barely nicks his leg on a nail in his barn and gets tetanus.

We have no understanding at all about immunity, or microbes for that matter. This gut microbiome stuff linked to depression has surprised everyone. .
Now we are seeing the effects of immune dysfunction.


I had a close encounter with Mr. Handley's pediatrician in 2001 or 2002. I asked him about MMR and autism expecting him to say that the connection between vaccines and autism had been debunked. Instead he said it could be hepB or Hib, but it wasn't MMR because autism sometimes manifests before that shot is given. That gave me something to think about. (And after research I found out that it's MMR too.)

Since my daughter had already been lavishly vaccinated in another country, I thought I had some breathing space, but he ended up summarily kicking me out of his practice. In fact he told me he wanted to redo all of the vaccines my daughter had already gotten. That left me speechless.

For this dude autism is just an unpleasant side effect of vaccinating. You wonder how some people sleep at night.

cia parker

I would leave it up to the parents' choice. After reading about the many thousands of children killed or crippled by polio just in New York City in 1916 in Dan's recent series, how many parents would choose to take their chances with polio rather than the vaccine if polio came back here and killed or crippled thousands of children even across the entire country? If diphtheria came back here as it did in the former Soviet Union, and killed thousands, or even hundreds, what do you think parents would choose? At its height, tetanus never killed more than about 500 Americans a year, but the tetanus vaccine doesn't seem to cause nearly that number of cases of death or disability which are easily perceived. My father saw a man die horribly of tetanus when he was brought in to his father, who was a doctor. Many people would prefer the security of the vaccine, which is relatively safe and very effective, as are the vaccines for polio and diphtheria. No, they're not 100% effective, but would you rather take a 10% chance of ineffectiveness or just take your chances with polio, diphtheria, or tetanus? It seems to me to be making anti-vaccinism into a religion parallel to the vaccine religion to recommend absolute purity (completely unvaxxed) no matter how many are dying or being disabled by the diseases. I'm with J.B.: I would never recommend that anyone get the vaccines on his first list. But I think Americans today are sort of spoiled by not having gone through an epidemic of serious disease which killed or crippled thousands of children a year. OK, autism, but since it scarcely existed before the vaccine epidemic, but is very common now, it would seem to indicate that if you just got a few of the safer vaccines (not pertussis, not MMR), you're unlikely to have the extremely serious and common reactions so widespread now. Not guaranteed, but unlikely. I think respecting informed parental choice is the only way to go.

Linda sent an article about an epidemic of yellow fever in Africa going on now, the highest mortality in decades. There's another example. I'd love to see a study done of the effectiveness of homeopathic crotalus horridus in prevention and treatment of it, but, faute de mieux, I can totally understand people wanting the yellow fever vaccine. Yes, the vaccine itself is dangerous and has caused many deaths, but I read An American Plague last month, about the yellow fever epidemic in Memphis, Tennessee in about 1875, and it was horrifying. Entire families dying in extreme agony in their boarded-up houses, many nuns and priests dying as they cared for the sick. The efforts of Walter Reed to figure out the cause and develop the vaccine: one of the researchers, Jesse Lazier, letting an infected mosquito bite him on purpose, and getting yellow fever, from which he agonized for several days and died. It's actually similar to Ebola in its liquefying of the organs in the most serious cases.

How many would take their chances with yellow fever rather than take the vaccine if they lived in the affected area?

Laura Hayes

Hi Bob :)

Well-informed or not, all medical decisions, including vaccination decisions, belong SOLELY to the parents.

Parents informing themselves is their job and up to them. We already know that there are some parents, if not many, who will never take the time to inform themselves, be it about vaccines, food, prescription drugs, pesticides, cancer treatments if cancer occurs, fluoridated water, flame retardant furniture and clothing, toxic cleaners, the list is endless.

Nonetheless, medical decisions regarding one's children, for better or worse, belong to the parents.

Having said that, it is a HUGE problem when those in positions of power and trust ABUSE their positions and their power, disseminating incorrect and fraudulent information, approving (and mandating in the case of vaccines) that which is harmful and/or improperly studied, attacking those who speak truth, and maligning those who have suffered at their hands and as a result of their decisions. We are seeing that in spades with medical "professionals", the media, government regulators, CEOs, elected officials, and others who choose to act unethically, immorally, lazily and with complacency, apathy, and disregard...and seemingly without any degree of humanity.

And you and I are not nit-picking with one another, we are openly and respectfully discussing the issue :) I hope you know I hold you in the highest regard, having never met you, but based on your near-daily comments. You are one of my favorite contributors to AoA, Bob!

Bob Moffit

@ Laura Hayes

"I do take exception, however, with the 2 times you state that vaccine decisions should be made by "you and your healthcare provider." Wrong. Vaccine decisions should be made by none other than the parents."

I really do not want to nit-pick .. especially to you .. but .. I would agree with your "exception" .. had you stated "vaccine decisions should be made by none other than .. "well-informed".. parents. No?

After all .. wouldn't you agree it would be "wrong" had JB recommended parents who are not "well informed" .. to make ANY decisions regarding their child's health?

@ Cia

"Vaccines are not safe, we'd all agree on that. The question is whether an individual child is more likely to be at greater risk from the vaccine or from the disease in question."

If .. as you say .. "we all agree that vaccines are not safe" .. the question whether or not an individual child is more likely to be at "greater risk from the vaccine or from the disease in question" .. in my humble opinion .. becomes mute.

My friend .. in other words .. since we .. and .. a majority of the Supreme Court agree .. that vaccines are 'unavoidably unsafe" .. why in God's name .. should/would .. ANYONE recommend a parent subject their child to what we and the Supreme Court recognize .. which is .. there is NO SUCH THING AS A SAFE "ONE SIZE FITS ALL VACCINE".

Maybe it's just me .. but .. having a child DIE from ANY vaccine preventable disease is no less a tragedy than having a child suffer a "life-long" .. "life-threatening" .. adverse reaction of an "unavoidably unsafe" vaccine.

Hey .. please don't take offense .. non intended .. it's probably just me ..

david m burd

Cia, You say: "Tetanus is an ever-present danger in the soil which has ever had animal manure in it, it can occur in healthy children and can rapidly lead to death. " I think you are wrong.

Dan Olmsted did his original UPI series on the Amish documenting autism was non-existent in their virtually unvaccinated children.

Equally so, tetanus seems to have no deadly effects in Amish children, and they are constantly exposed to the so-called tetanus pathogen and grow up with farm animals of every type, and no doubt go through many cuts and scratches and punctures during their childhood,

My point being that tetanus and diphtheria (and polio I venture to say) are very, very rarely deadly in well-nourished communities such as the Amish. Yet, I'd bet they all would test to have been exposed, and sailed right on in good health.

So, good nutrition and such as Vitamin C therapy (and other therapies if serious illness actually manifests) are the right way to go. NEVER fear-mongered vaccines that all have their inherent dangers AND contaminants (that JB never brought up).


"Ditto what Cynthia Cournoyer said!"

I'm on board! Ditto for me, too.

Laura Hayes

What Cynthia Cournoyer wrote bears repeating...again...and again...AND AGAIN!

"The bottom line, the severity of a disease does not by itself, make a vaccine any more safe or effective. If the treatment, cure or prevention holds to be toxic and outright dangerous, one must not use the danger of a disease to make their decision whether or not to use a flawed medical practice."

Birgit Calhoun

Great article! I have read most of what you said. I also have read the rules that allow exceptions from vaccines.

I would like to know if there is a survey of parents regarding the following: How many children percentage-wise became autistic because of the following: they got vaccinated with a monovalent vaccine, they became autistic because they got a Thimerosal-containing trivalent vaccine, they became autistic with an MMR vaccine? And one more: Is there knowledge of how many children got autism after receiving all kinds of vaccines all in one day containing MMR and other live viruses as well as all kinds of Thimerosal-containing and other vaccines?

Cynthia Cournoyer

cia parker:
Why are there ANY cases of those diseases in an almost 100% vaccinated country? It begs the question as to whether or not vaccines actually work.

With a total rejection of "sanctioned" studies on unvaccinated children, we are left to rely on our own observations. Unvaccinated children are overwhelmingly more healthy and tend not to get those diseases. Ask the growing population of parents choosing not to vaccinate subsequent children after vaccine damage in an older sibling.

The bottom line, the severity of a disease does not by itself, make a vaccine any more safe or effective. If the treatment, cure or prevention holds to be toxic and outright dangerous, one must not use the danger of a disease to make their decision whether or not to use a flawed medical practice.

Delaying and choosing which vaccines to use or not is like delaying or choosing which toxic, dangerous effect we wish to bestow upon our children. Once you decide which vaccine is dangerous, keep in mind, ALL vaccines have three things in common: 1) a similar history 2) a similar record of side effects, damage and death 3) documented failures, where the disease is found in the already-vaccinated.

cia parker

Vaccines are not safe, we'd all agree on that. The question is whether an individual child is more likely to be at greater risk from the vaccine or from the disease in question. We'd have to see what happened if large numbers of kids were no longer vaccinated. If we were to see a large increase in children dying of diphtheria, tetanus, or being crippled by polio, most parents would probably think that it was worth taking the risk of the vaccines: I think the vaccines for these diseases are usually effective, though often dangerous. It would have to be left to the parents to do the research and make their choice. At this time, with close to 100% of the population having gotten the vaccines for these diseases, it's impossible to tell what might happen if very few vaxxed.

Laura Hayes

Ditto what Cynthia Cournoyer said!

For those wanting an EXCELLENT book recommendation, read Cynthia's book!

"What About Immunizations? Exposing the Vaccine Philosophy" by Cynthia Cournoyer

If only someone had recommended her book to me prior to my having three children in the early 1990s, my children would have been spared the serious vaccine injuries they endured, one whose injuries were catastrophic and which continue to manifest in heartbreaking ways today, as her first edition was published in the 1980s. She has updated her book a number of times and it is a must-read, must-share, must-donate a copy to your local library book!

Cynthia Cournoyer

After stating all the reasons why vaccines are dangerous and parents should be careful, I find a disconnect when simultaneously acknowledging an alternative schedule or a "friendly" way to vaccinate.

If the vaccine industry and its overseers are disingenuous or corrupt, what were they in 1962? 1983? The industry that gave us today's disaster should not be given any benefit of the doubt that to delay their mess, or pick and choose between each of their messes are somehow progress toward health.

cia parker

About the four vaccines which J.B. thought should be researched carefully, the rest having been rejected: DTaP, injected polio, Hib, and Prevnar. The last two are for types of meningitis, and have proven to be very dangerous vaccines, with a fairly high rate of death and disability caused by them. Hib meningitis had become not uncommon by the '80s when the series was introduced in 1988, but the rate had quadrupled between 1940 and 1968 because of the introduction of the DPT in 1948, and its depression of immune function permitted a vast increase in invasive cases: subclinical cases and permanent immunity by adulthood have always been the norm, the germs being universally present in the environment, with most people carrying the germs in their nasal passages most of the time without ever having symptoms of disease caused by them. Breastfeeding and keeping the child at home until he is two, or with a caregiver who cares for only a few children in her home, would provide better protection from meningitis. Homeopathic prophylaxis for all the VPDs is available, safe, and effective. Treatment with high-dose IV vitamin C is also recommended if the disease occurs despite precautions. Meningitis is certainly very dangerous, but the vaccines are too. And the Hib vaccine is now causing peanut allergy in one in fifty American children (Heather Fraser, The Peanut Allergy Epidemic), and sometimes fatal peanut allergy is a much more present danger to a baby than meningitis of any kind.

Pertussis is only dangerous to infants in the first three or four months of life: it can be dangerous to young babies, one in 200 newborns with pertussis dies, but it would be better to keep them at home and treat with vitamin C if the disease occurs (see Suzanne Humphries online protocol). Breastfeeding does not provide protection from pertussis, but it does for many other diseases. There is an average of nine deaths a year in the US from pertussis, usually in newborns, to keep the very small mortality in perspective. The vaccine is both very ineffective and very dangerous: it erased the only words of my baby when she got the booster at 18 months, and she was diagnosed with autism two months later: she's still very low verbal and extremely delayed developmentally. The vaccine also causes asthma in one in nine American children now, and allergies, seizure disorders, and SIDS.

Polio is not present in the US at this time, and I don't think the danger of possible polio is worth the risk of the vaccine at this time. If polio came back and were affecting a lot of children in a large area of the US, the choice would be to get the vaccine series (it's probably the least dangerous of the vaccines, which does not mean it hasn't caused a number of deaths and disabilities) or to give the homeopathic remedy lathyrus sativus both for prevention and treatment. I don't know at this time which I would choose if polio came back here.

I think it might be worth getting the DT series after the age of two: Hilary Butler says that the combined DT is less reactive than the T by itself. Diphtheria used to be a horrifying disease, closing off the child's breathing passages so that he asphyxiated. It came back in the former USSR twenty-five years ago, sickening tens of thousands and killing thousands. I wouldn't recommend it on its own unless diphtheria came back here, but it might be worth getting the combined DT since it's less reactive.

Tetanus is an ever-present danger in the soil which has ever had animal manure in it, it can occur in healthy children and can rapidly lead to death. It has a fairly high mortality even with the best of treatment, though IV vitamin C greatly improves the recovery rate. Good cleansing of wounds is essential, but about half of cases of tetanus occur with very slight wounds which the person may not even be aware of, like a splinter.

I completely agree that the other vaccines should be rejected from the get-go.

Laura Hayes

In the event we have some new AoA readers who are just beginning down the path of questioning all CDC, FDA, and medical advice, thought I'd share some pertinent articles I have written:

"BEWARE of Standard of Care" by Laura Hayes

"10 Reasons Why Doctors Should Not Hesitate to Sign Medical Exemptions for Vaccinations When That is the Only Option Available for Patients/Parents" by Laura Hayes


Laura Hayes's Rally Speech Opposing SB277 on 4-8-15


"Disney, Measles, and the Fantasyland of Vaccine Perfection" by Laura Hayes


"I Have Decided to Vaccinate My Child Because..." by Laura Hayes (Don't be deceived by the title! Written just before the CDC Whistleblower's admissions, so those are not included.)


"The Baby Food is Organic...the Shots are Not" by Laura Hayes


cia parker

I agree, Laura. Parents should certainly do a lot of research on each vaccine and each vaccine-preventable disease before permitting any of them. A doctor can be a resource they use, but they must be aware that the doctor will only give them the pharma-sponsored party line. It would be preferable to do the research independently, using the many excellent books on the issue (my favorite is Randall Neustaedter's The Vaccine Guide, with a new edition coming out in October), also Birch and Whatcott's The Solution, on homeopathic prophylaxis, and websites. Parents should certainly be aware that some of the VPDs used to be extremely dangerous, but most of them, like pertussis and measles, evolved to become relatively mild, both because of better nutrition in the developed world and because the diseases themselves mutated to become less virulent. Some have always been mild in children, like chickenpox, mumps, rubella, and hep-A. Some would probably again be dangerous if they came back in the US, like diphtheria, polio, and tetanus. Some are dangerous because vaccines depress immune function, greatly increasing the rate of dangerous cases of meningitis and other VPDs in the month after vaccination, but if parents stopped giving the DTaP, there would again be a very low rate of invasive meningitis. Hep-B is only a danger for babies born to mothers positive for hep-B core antigen, a tiny number, and otherwise the vaccine is many times more disabling for the baby than the disease, often causing vaccine encephalitis, brain damage and autism (see Judy Converse's When Your Doctor is Wrong: the Hep-B Vaccine and Autism: the same thing happened to my baby as to Judy's, vaccine given without permission, horrific reaction, and autism). Breastfeeding and staying out of large daycares also prevent meningitis.

The final decision must be made by the parents before seeing a doctor, and the decision to reject the hep-B vaccination at birth must be firmly conveyed to every member of the hospital staff before, during, and after the birth.

Great article, as always, J.B., you don't know how many times I've linked your Autism not really on the Rise? As you say, the parents must do the research themselves, but really, I wouldn't advise them to defer to the doctor's opinion at all. He's not the one who will spend the rest of his life dealing with an autistic child and regretting his decision to permit whichever vaccine caused it (usually, though not always, hep-B, MMR, flu, and DTaP) every day for the rest of his life. There are better ways to prevent the dangerous diseases, the mild ones like measles are irreplaceable for the healthy development of the child's immune system, and there are treatments available for all of them: antibiotics for some of them, herbal (see Aviva Jill Romm's Vaccination for ways to treat mild cases of the childhood diseases), and homeopathic.


Thank you for this excellent summary!

Laura Hayes

Good article, J.B.

I do take exception, however, with the 2 times you state that vaccine decisions should be made by "you and your healthcare provider." Wrong. Vaccine decisions should be made by none other than the parents.

If parents want to consult with one or more healthcare providers regarding vaccination decisions, that is their CHOICE. It most certainly should not be phrased as a should or a must.

Today, there exist but a very few "healthcare" providers. Most are what I now call "deathfare" providers.

The rhetoric we use to change the current dire situation is critically important. We must arrive at a paradigm where the parents are the sole decision makers regarding the care and upbringing of their children, not the government, and not in forced conjunction with willfully ignorant and/or corrupt "healthcare" providers.

Some great information summarized in your article, J.B. Thank you.

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.)