Cia
Here are your vaccine preventable diseases (its all lies Cia - all lies) :

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/12/05/my-interview-with-former-cbs-star-reporter-fake-news/

I’ll add a few details. It was routine for doctors all over America to send blood samples from patients they’d diagnosed with Swine Flu, or the “most likely” Swine Flu patients, to labs for testing. And overwhelmingly, those samples were coming back with the result: not Swine Flu, not any kind of flu.

That was the big secret. That’s what the CDC was hiding. That’s why they stopped reporting Swine Flu case numbers. That’s what Attkisson had discovered. That’s why she was shut down.

But it gets even worse.

Because about three weeks after Attkisson’s findings were published on the CBS News website, the CDC, obviously in a panic, decided to double down. If one lie is exposed, tell an even bigger one. A much bigger one.

Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon).

Are your eyeballs popping? They should be.

In the summer of 2009, the CDC secretly stops counting Swine Flu cases in America, because the overwhelming percentage of lab tests from likely Swine Flu patients shows no sign of Swine Flu or any other kind of flu.

There is no Swine Flu epidemic.

Then, the CDC estimates there are 22 MILLION cases of Swine Flu in the US.

So…the premise that the CDC would never lie about important matters like, oh, a vaccine increasing the risk of autism…you can lay that one to rest.

The CDC will lie about anything it wants to. It will boldly go where no person interested in real science will go.

Hans,

Not many would accept that the existence of even one undisclosed vaccine ingredient invalidates the entire vaccine industry. Everyone has known for decades about the problems with even disclosed ingredients like mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, antifreeze, etc., in vaccines. Those who are interested have been aware of the dangers of all foreign protein in vaccines, and of the undisclosed existence of adjuvants like peanut oil in some vaccines. Current practice is terrible, illegal, and reprehensible, and all efforts are rightly made to disclose the fraudulent, dangerous practices.

But at the same time all parents need to at least consider the dangers of the VPDs and how much at risk their children would be if they refused the vaccines because of so many unknowns. Many will reject them all, and that would probably be the best thing to do in the case of most children. But if parents research it and decide that the dangers of tetanus and Hib disease are great enough to warrant taking the risk of the vaccines for them, they should be allowed to do so. My daughter and I both got tetanus boosters in 2005, and had no discernible reaction. I let her get three Hib vaccines as an infant, refusing the fourth after I learned that it increased the risk of diabetes. It wouldn't have been a huge risk if I had refused all of them since she was breast fed, but I didn't have all the information then that I have now. That being said, she didn't appear to react to the ones she got, while she had terrible reactions to the hep-B at birth (the only one she got) and to the DTaP booster at 18 months.

Most people have gotten a lot of vaccines and had no discernible reaction, and I understand and agree that most have damaged their immune systems in ways that they'll probably never know. But I think parents must consider the 20,000 a year who got invasive Hib disease thirty years ago and assess their personal situation to decide what they think the safest course of action would be. If a baby is not breastfed and is in daycare, then it might be a good idea to take the risk of the vaccine. But I don't think that knowing that pharma companies have lied about vaccine ingredients should be a determining factor in their decision: the Hib vaccine stamped out invasive Hib disease almost overnight thirty years ago, even though it did have a number of dangers. It has to be a conscious matter of weighing risks, benefits, and unknowns in an individual situation. And it's always possible for anyone to make a decision he'll later regret.

Hans,

Vaccines can be devastatingly harmful, disable or kill. That is beyond dispute. But if you don't think that any vaccine ever works to prevent disease, why do almost no dogs get rabies anymore? Why do less than 25 children a year get invasive Hib disease now, when thirty years ago, until the vaccine, 10,000 children a year were getting it? With 5% dying and 25% being permanently disabled by the disease, even with antibiotic treatment at a hospital. Why are chickenpox and measles so rare now if not for the vaccines for them (and it would be better for the vast majority if children continued to get them, but they don't)? Vaccines cause antibodies to be produced by a certain technique. Do you not believe that people with these antibodies, albeit artificially produced, usually have protection against the targeted disease?

I think we need to give people the facts to the greatest extent possible, and then let them make a decision whether or not to get the vaxxes. It would be possible to say that you think the interests of the herd are better served by no one's getting any vaxxes, and I think that would be true for the vast majority. But you have to then say that you don't think a thousand children a year dying from Hib disease, 2,500 permanently disabled by it, are enough to justify anyone's getting the vax. And that gets into the realm of a personal belief system which people have different opinions on. And the parents of concrete children have the right to get or refuse any vaccine. They will have to carry the burden if the child reacts to a vaccine with autism, SIDS, etc., but also if they refuse a vaccine and the child dies or is mentally or physically disabled from Hib meningitis. Both outcomes are possible.

Re: scarlet fever vaccine, my limited understanding is there was at least one that was tried without good results.

John Stone | December 01, 2016 at 10:39 AM

Yes John , my favourite vaccine , the scarlett fever vaccine . Because they were unable to make one !
But yes I'm sure the immunologists are still claiming SF disappeared because of vaccines (scoundrels) -

Hans Litten: When and where was the scarlet fever vaccine ever widely used? It was a major killer in the 19th century until the sanitation revolution, but the mortality rate fell precipitously by the early 20th century, long before antibiotics existed. Nothing was eradicated by medicine. It is now a largely forgotten disease, yet "Even today, the organism [Streptococcus pyogenes] innocently colonizes 15-20 percent of school children and remains ever present." Dissolving Illusions, pp. 47-48 and 192-193.

For Cia

http://www.naturalblaze.com/2016/11/vaccines-autoimmunity-doctors-reveal-turn-immune-system-against-us.html

No one would accuse Yehuda Shoenfeld of being a quack. The Israeli clinician has spent more than three decades studying the human immune system and is at the pinnacle of his profession. You might say he is more foundation than fringe in his specialty; he wrote the textbooks. The Mosaic of Autoimmunity, Autoantibodies, Diagnostic Criteria in Autoimmune Diseases, Infection and Autoimmunity, Cancer and Autoimmunity – the list is 25 titles long and some of them are cornerstones of clinical practice. Hardly surprising that Shoenfeld has been called the “Godfather of Autoimmunology” – the study of the immune system turned on itself in a wide array of diseases from type 1 diabetes to ulcerative colitis and multiple sclerosis.
But something strange is happening in the world of immunology lately and a small evidence of it is that the Godfather of Autoimmunology is pointing to vaccines – specifically, some of their ingredients including the toxic metal aluminum – as a significant contributor to the growing global epidemic of autoimmune diseases. The bigger evidence is a huge body of research that’s poured in in the past 15 years, and particularly in the past five years. Take for example, a recent article published in the journal Pharmacological Research in which Shoenfeld and colleagues issue unprecedented guidelines naming four categories of people who are most at risk for vaccine-induced autoimmunity.

Rtp,

Incidence of Hib meningitis was NOT going down before the vaccine. Antibiotic treatment for it was usually effective, but not always: even with treatment, 5% died and 25% were permanently damaged by it. The highest rate was in 1982. The first vaccine, one dose at 18 months, I think, was introduced in 1985. The three-dose series was introduced in 1988, but not widely given until 1990. For several years they didn't give it to infants, so those most at risk of serious disease, those between six and twelve months, didn't get it. And incidence of Hib meningitis plummeted to close to zero in just a couple of years.

I'm not saying parents should get the vaccine. I'm saying they might want to get it after learning the pros and cons.

Linda, I read the one in 200 babies in a parenting magazine when Cecily was a baby. I see that a study by Sells says that it was one in 350 children under five. It's possible the magazine was wrong, or it's possible that it was that high in babies between six months and two years old, the age with the higest incidence, and lower in those between two and five, averaging out at one in 350. There are figures here for the total number in the country which it would be easy to calculate using the total number of children in that year, I think it was 1984, with the highest number of cases ever.

These are some of the sources of the information which I have read and believe to be accurate. From The Solution: Homeoprophylaxis: The Vaccine Alternative, p. 80: "Haemophilus influenzae type b is a bacterium that is believed to be responsible for a variety of invasive syndromes particularly severe in infants. (NB: invasive means that the germs get from the respiratory passages where most people usually carry them to systems designed to be sterile, like the bloodstream and the brain.) It is a bacterium that normally resides in the mucous membranes but can become a risk in infants and young children. Breast feeding and passive immunity from the mother protect the infant in the early months. It is not known how these normal bacteria become pathogenic and develop into invasive disease.

Epiglottitis begins with swelling between the base of the tongue and the epiglottis with a very high fever. The swelling of the epiglottis results in a dry croaking voice, difficulty breathing, and blockage of the airways resulting in suffocation.

Cellulitis is a rapidly progrssing, potentially life-threatening skin infection which usually involves the face, head, or neck.

Meningitis is inflammation of the cerebral and spinal meninges: the membrane that covers the brain and spinal cord. This inflammation can be the result of either viral or bacterial infection, or systemic reaction to another illness such as Haemophilus. The condition is classified as a medical emergency due to the proximity of the brain and possibility for brain damage. If meningitis is suspected, give the indicated homeopathic remedies on the way to the hospital.

Symptoms: headache, neck stiffness, arching of the back, with a high fever, confusion, or altered consciousness, and possibly seizures. Inability to tolerate light or loud noises. Nausea, vomiting, and tiredness. If the condition is bacterial, there may be a fine blotching of the skin. The condition may become septic, with rapid heart rate and breathing. Seek professional help if child makes high-pitched cries and moans, child has a stiff neck or is arching his back, fever goes over 103, throat and airways become constricted, or skin lesions are becoming infected. "

Dr. Randall Neustaedter, The Vaccine Guide, p. 185 et seq.: "Mortality from Hib meningitis is 3 to 8% (Sell, 1987). Sensorineural (permanent) hearing loss occurs in about 10% of meningitis cases (Dodge 1984), though this is more common with pneumococcal (Prevnar) meningitis. Appropriate treatment of Hib meningitis includes the use of a cephalosporin (or other) antibiotic, administered intravenously.

The estimated incidence of Hib meningitis was about 12,000 cases a year before the licensing of the Hib vaccine, plus an additional 7,500 cases of invasive disease (lungs, heart, etc.) Before the Hib vaccine, about 1 in 350 children younger than five years of age developed Hib meningitis (Sell 1987). In 1995, five years after the vaccine became available for infants, the total reported incidence of invasive disease was 1,300 cases (Bisgard 1998). This 98% reduction in Hib invasive disease has been attributed to the vaccine campaign. ..

This new vaccine (he was writing in 2002), relatively untested and questionably effective, presents a difficult decision for parents. Meningitis is not a mild childhood disease. Haemophilus meningitis was not uncommon prior to widespread use of the vaccine. ..Parents should weigh the likelihood of exposure against their feelings about the known adverse effects of Hib vaccine, including the ability of the vaccine to suppress immune system function and cause an increased susceptibility to Hib disease. A parent's philosophy about immune system competence, unknown effects of vaccines, and the politics of vaccine campaign promotion will always enter into the decision process when a new vaccine is marketed for a serious disease."

Aviva Jill Romm, Vaccinations: A Thoughtful Parent's Guide, p. 81: "In 1984 at least 20,000 cases of invasive disease occurred in the US, with approximately 12,000 of these resulting in meningitis (the others in cellulitis, epiglottitis, etc.). These rates are the highest ever recorded. it is important to note that the disease has increased at least fourfold since 1946. Approximately 85% of all cases of invasive Hib occur in children under five years old, its being very unusual in infants under six months old, especially those that are breast fed. ..In the absence of prompt and effective medical treatment, the disease has a high mortality rate of up to 5%, as well as a high rate of seizures and other complications of the nervous system, up to 30%. Neurological complications include hearing loss, language delay or problems, learning disabilities, retardation, seizure disorders, and vision problems. Other complications include pneumonia, pericarditis, abscesses, septic arthritis, cellulitis, bacteremia, and epiglottitis."

Dr. Paul Thomas, The Vaccine Friendly Plan, p. 125: "Physicians my age and older remember too well the hospitals full of children with meningitis, the airway emergencies with epiglottitis and the miracle that the Hib vaccine was when it was introduced in 1985. We saw this disease virtually disappear in a few short years. The unknown is whether these serious illnesses would return if we stopped this vaccine. I suspect they would, as the bacteria are alive and well in the noses of adults and older children today. ..

Postvaccine follow-up studies have shown a 71% decrease in Hib disease in under-five year olds from 1989 to 1991, and an 82% decrease in Hib meningits between 1985 and 1991.This vaccine alone is believed to have prevented more than ten thousand cases of meningitis. In 2011 in the US, there were only 14 cases of serious Hib diseases a year, and feweer than 250 non-type B or unknown types of Hib invasive disease respectively.

As I mentioned in the introduction, this vaccine was introduced during my training in the late 1980s, and we saw an immediate significant drop in the numbers of children with meningitis and serious Hib infections like epiglottitis and sepsis. A child with suspected epiglottitis who was often drooling and unable to swallow would be rushed to the OR,, where X-rays were taken and the airway stablilized by intubation (a breathing tube placed down your trachea to protect your airway). Once a weekly occurrence, epiglottitis is a condition basically unfamiliar to younger doctors who have trained since the vaccine was introduced. Had you walked the floors of Valley Med Center or Fresno Children's HOspital before then, you would have seen several young children with severe meningitis, many of whom would not be neurologically normal if they survived the infection. These are infections of the past, a testament to a successful vaccine."

Plotkin and Mortimer, Vaccines, second edition, p. 337 et seq., "Before the widespread use of effective vaccines in young infants, invasive Hib disease was the leading cause of bacterial meningitis in the US and most parts of the world...Over the past 50 years, the advent of many effective antibiotics for Hib focused attention on treatment rather than prevention of disease. The appreciation that the morbidity and mortality of disease could never be completely eliminated by treatment, even with antibiotics, gave further impetus to the development of Hib vaccines."

Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted, Vaccines 2.0, p. 150 et seq.: "Virginia pediatrician Elizabeth Mumper, who is a supporter of the vaccine, vividly recalls seeing previously healthy infants before the vaccine became available whose spinal fluid was filled with pus. ..Since it targets only one microbe, it appears to work well enough."

Dr. Robert Sears, The Vaccine Book, p. 5, "A severe case presents with symptoms of meningitis, pneumonia, or epiglottitis immediately apparent to a physician. Hospitalization with aggressive antibiotic treatment and possible respiratory support in an ICU will ensure. Most children respond gradually and do recover fully but may spend many days or weeks in the hospital. Complications of Hib meningitis such as hearing loss, learning problems, or nerve injury, occur in about 25% of survivors. The fatality rate is 5% and typically occurs only if the disease is so overwhelming right away that treatment isn't adequate or the disease isn't suspected soon enough, causing a delay in testing and treatment. Fortunately such cases are uncommon. Hib blood, bone, and lung infections, though less serious, are still potentially fatal.

Is Hib common? No, but it used to be. Before the vaccine came into use in the mid-1980s, there were about 20,000 cases of serious Hib infections each year in the US. Now we have only about 25 cases each year in young children. "

I believe that each of these authors, some with personal experience treating Hib infections in the '80s, is telling the truth about it to the best of his or her ability. HIb meningiits is a dangerous disease and it was not uncommon in the years right before the vaccine was introduced (it wasn't widely given as a series until 1990). The vaccine for it is usually effective in preventing it, and was viewed as a miracle when it suddenly and dramatically wiped out Hib meningitis in a couple of years. The vaccine has dangers, such as an increase in diabetes and peanut allergy, as well as other possible reactions. The best way to protect a child under two is by breastfeeding and keeping him or her out of daycare. If he is not breastfed until two, he does stand a small chance of getting Hib meningitis, since the germs continue to be carried by most people. Even with antibiotic treatment, 5% of children with it die, and 25% are permanently damaged by the disease. Refusing other vaccines like the DTaP and MMR might reduce his chances of getting HIb meningitis, but at this time that's just a good theory: it has not been studied in practice. The homeopathic nosode would probably work to prevent it, but I don't have specific information on that. If a mother cannot or does not want to breastfeed for that long, I think she has a difficult decision to make, with dangers on both sides of the issue to get or refuse the vax.

I do not believe that vaccine manufacturers made up the numbers of those getting, dying, and being disabled by the disease before the vaccine, and I don't believe that they're making up the disappearance of the disease post-vaccine. The vaccine does pose dangers, but so does the disease, and everyone must think carefully about them.

I've reviewed the literature for ten years, most importantly the Military Surgeon Generals' Reports of the 1918-1920 citing a great number of novel, very toxic pus-generated vaccines mandated for ALL the millions military personnel (total reached 4.7 million by November, 1918, the majority ushered into duty during 1918. When so many troops became quickly terminally ill, the panic spread to the American public who also insisted on getting tens of millions of the new deadly vaccines. Contrary to perceived propaganda, the vast majority of 1918-19 deaths came from "toxemias" and "septicemias" (.i.e. blood poisoning) in both military and civilian groups - CAUSED by extremely toxic vaccines. By the way, this explains the great "puzzle" of always healthiest age group of 18-28 years old dying from "flu" - the only time in history (BECAUSE of the great percentage of that age injected with the vaccines).
ciaparker (and All) note: this may be a duplicate, sorry)

The H1N1 variant you cited was concocted about 15 years ago from dug-up remains in Alaska, and in fact meant nothing - except yet another fear-mongering medical myth - and falsely reinforcing the myth of a lethal Spanish Flu in 1918-19. Just like today, the CDC just makes it up as they go along, and by far the majority of 2009 H1N1 fatalities ascribed to flu were logically caused by a CDC-generated insane panic coercing two additional of the whipped-up H1N1 doses in October and November of flu vaccines having a full 25 micrograms of ethymercury, ON TOP OF THE EARLIER July, August, September doses already injected.

The Great Spanish Flu was caused by vaccines -- it's that simple, and that evident.

The Spanish Flu was neither Spanish nor the flu.

It affected primarily healthy young adults particular soldiers.

And its defining symptoms were consistent with those of a cytokine storm.

In short, it was caused by the vaccines they gave to soldiers. Because there was a mass surplus if them at the end of the war they handed them out to everybody stupid enough to believe their propaganda about soldiers returning with horrible diseases.

Well they did have such diseases but mostly because of their vaccine program.

Jenny,

You are mistaken. I recognize that breastfed babies and children are much less likely than those who are not to get serious disease (less likely, not totally safe), those who eat healthy organic food are also less likely. But look at all the people out there. Most couples both work full-time: they don't have much time or money, they can't afford organic, and don't have time to cook much. They eat out a lot, and eat fast food a lot. They put their children in daycare. They don't breastfeed them more than a month or two at most. So what are we going to do? We can't tell them, well, just quit your job, stay home with your baby, give him only organic fruits, vegetables, oils, and meats when he's weaned.

Children in daycare are at much higher risk than those kept at home of getting many of the VPDs. I was lucky. I didn't have to work outside the home and was able to breastfeed my baby until self-weaning (five and a half!) I got organic food and cooked a lot of homemade nutritious food. She was not in daycare. She caught pertussis at a La Leche League meeting at the Newman Center when she was eight months old: there were probably twenty babies and toddlers there, so there you go, daycare-like situation for two hours, and she gets pertussis. I caught strep throat at a play group when she was four, she didn't get it.

So what are we going to recommend? I'd like to see large trials of homeopathic nosodes to see how well they work. That would be my first choice. But in the meantime, would we want to go back to a thousand babies a year dying of Hib meningitis if no one vaxxed for it? Parent's choice, always, but many parents would want to protect their children from Hib and pneumococcal meningitis with vaccines. One in 200 babies used to get a clinical case of Hib meningitis. At this time one in forty gets autism, but it would be less than that if no one got the hep-B vaccine or the MMR for their children, less still if they didn't get the pertussis vaccine or the flu vaccine. So what if we were looking at one in 200 gets a serious case of Hib meningitis, and one in 400 gets autism from the reduced number of shots? Which should you prefer, which way should you go?

Hans,

Yes, I know that many neurological and autoimmune conditions are caused by vaccines. The facts must be given to parents and they must be allowed to choose. But before the Hib vaccine, just thirty years ago, a thousand babies a year in the US died from Hib meningitis. 5,000 babies a year were permanently damaged by the disease. Now it's close to zero on both counts because of the Hib vaccine. That's a lot of deaths and a lot of disability. You have to tell parents about the one in fifty with peanut allergy now, caused by the Hib vaccine. And a lot of other information too, there have been many adverse reactions to the vaccine. But what if the parent says he'd rather take the chance of asthma etc. and reduce or eliminate the risk of Hib meningitis? It is his or her right to do so, and the vaccine would probably reduce or eliminate the risk.

Cynthia,

Yes, I'm aware that giving the pertussis vaccine depresses immune function. That's why they used to suspend DPT vaccination during polio outbreaks, as it was well known that children who had gotten the DPT in the previous month were much more likely to get a crippling case of polio. The pertussis vaccine also caused the rate of Hib meningitis to quadruple between 1940 and 1967, again, because it depressed immune function. But if your town is experiencing an outbreak of polio and a number of people have been crippled by it, it makes sense to get the polio vaccine. And it makes sense to not get the pertussis vaccine at that time (or even better, ever). How does this make it a bad idea to get the polio vaccine during an outbreak? I would not recommend getting it now, not unless polio came back, there's no use borrowing trouble, but if it came back here and now I would seriously consider getting it for myself and my daughter.

Cynthia, I have said dozens of times that I am against mandates, and demand parental choice. But I disagree with the proposition that no one should ever get any vaccine ever. Everyone must research it for himself and make the choice that seems best to him. There is no 100% correct choice in this. I think the chickenpox vaccine was a terrible idea. But at the same time, fifty children and fifty adults a year used to die of chickenpox. It's a point to consider. Personally, I wouldn't take the vaccine because of that, but some people probably would. it used to be that 450 children a year died of measles, out of four million cases. I would say that's not enough deaths to base your decision on, considering how relatively mild it is for most and how beneficial. But some people probably would want their children to get the vaccine based on that number of deaths. I hope that homeopathic nosodes work out to be as effective as they may prove to be. But at this time, I don't have much information on most of them. I think it's very important to remember that we're talking about deaths either way, death from diseases if you don't vaccinate and death or disability from vaccines if you do. It's not like everyone would be so healthy that no one ever died of communicable disease in a post-vaccine world. For my family I"d say that I'm willing to take the risk of the VPDs and not the risk of the vaccines (from personal experience). But I can't and wouldn't want to speak for everyone.

Cia - your information is deceptively incomplete. When you "argue" your point, you always seem to talk as if

1. you believe that every person carries the same risk for meningitis or other diseases as the next person and that
2. vaccines are the only easy and/or plausible and/or effective way to mitigate disease risk and reduce the severity of symptoms and that
3. all vaccine adverse risks have already been discovered and defined and that there isn't any undefined science out there any more when it comes to risk from vaccines vs risk of the disease.

Which is why your arguments lack the credibility that they could have. They are so incomplete as to be circular in logic. Any fully informed consent will not only list the true risks of vaccines and diseases (an accomplishment that still lies far in the future) but will also inform consumers of the role of proper nutrition in mitigating not just disease, but vaccine reactions, because it is extremely likely that the same people at risk for exhibiting the most serious symptoms or death from vaccines are the same folks who may also exhibit more serious symptoms from the diseases themselves. When you go on and on about how diseases have ruined people's lives, you never seem to mention general societal trends going on in nutrition at the time statistics were or are at their worst.

For instance, grains (as a cheap, profitable food substitute for unattainable meats, vegetables, grass fed dairy and fruit) and sugar crept into diets of modern man, and indeed probably helped relieve some starvation. But the tradeoff was a dearth in nutrients and a resulting deleterious effect on the ability of the immune system to cope with illness from ANY source, leading to more death and disease and the rise of vaccines. There was not enough knowledge of nutrition, nutrient dense foods, fat soluble vitamins, or methods to communicate it to the public masses, and not enough compassion for industry to want to spread the word about non-patentable solutions to disease. What little knowledge of nutritional options there was would have been up against the commercialization and marketing of allopathic medicine to the masses during the late 19th and early 20th centuries - heavily backed by the industrialists. Industrialists had a choice: market vaccines to 100% of the population (a huge target market) or make medicines to help the sick (a much smaller market in the beginning, but promising with patent laws profit potential under control). Turns out they ended up with both markets: that first target market having now affected and grown the second market into a much larger one that is still growing today, given that over 50% of children now have a chronic illness diagnosis.

BUT we now know how important chemical free living, combined with nutrient dense vegetables, grain free (or anti-nutrient reduced grains) diets incorporating grass fed healthy meats and healthy fats are for health and the immune system. The science is in and is huge and growing and immediately available. It is a viable option to vaccines. So you CANNOT compare death and disability rates from 75 or 100 years ago, or even 25 years ago to support your hypothetical fear about what would happen today if vaccines were discontinued, given the comprehensive nutritional and probiotic knowledge and scientifically backed alternative solutions we have now which were not available back then. The game has changed.

If you continue to ignore the evolution of food and nutritional science in your arguments and you run the risk of becoming irrelevant.

Posted by: ciaparker | November 28, 2016 at 09:56 PM

We are in the middle of a diabetes pandemic (you allude to it yourself HIB)
Cancer pandemic
Autism pandemic
Obesity pandemic
Alzheimers \ dementia pandemic
MS is rife
ALS
SIDs
ME
and so on .

All of it documented to be caused by vaccination , and I see you already know that .
Vaccination is a complete fraud . A gigantic lie . And completely indefensible .
A technology that is being used for malice and nothing to do with healthcare ,

At this time, there are about 25 hospitalizations a year for Hib meningitis, with about five deaths, or less. So what made the incidence drop from 20,000 thirty years ago to 25 now? I think it's obvious that it's been the use of the vaccine.

*************

Or, just more fabricated statistics.

From the same people who would have us believe that there is no autism epidemic. Kids like ours were always there. The perception of an epidemic is really nothing more than a recently evolved, laser-like ability of doctors to spot them.

In my experience, people who lie about one thing.... usually lie about everything.

I disagree that there are no vaccine-preventable diseases. There are a number of VPDs: all of them have killed at least some, and many of them have killed many. The question in very case is whether you believe your child is more at risk from the vaccine or the disease. I agree that in most cases he is more at risk from the vaccine, but you can only know that in hindsight. I am against the Hib meningitis vaccine: it has caused a lot of death and vaccine injury, almost single-handedly created the peanut allergy epidemic. It would be better for prevention to NOT get the pertussis vaccine, to breast feed until at least two years of age and to keep the child out of daycare. But a lot of kids have already gotten or will get the pertussis vaccine, and not many babies are breast fed for that long, and many have to go to daycare for one reason or another. So it's necessary to at least look at how dangerous Hib meningitis had become by the time the vaccine was introduced in the late '80s.

In 1987, there were 20,000 serious cases of Hib meningitis in the US every year. It had, and has, about a 5% fatality rate, and in about 25% of the cases there is permanent damage, such as hearing problems, learning disability, or nerve injury. The pathogen can also cause blood, bone, and lung infections which can be deadly. Antibiotics, if started early enough in the infection, can usually treat it, but not always. At this time, there are about 25 hospitalizations a year for Hib meningitis, with about five deaths, or less. So what made the incidence drop from 20,000 thirty years ago to 25 now? I think it's obvious that it's been the use of the vaccine. Although the vaccine IS dangerous, it has also prevented a lot of infant deaths from Hib meningitis. So it MUST be left up to the parent to decide whether or not he/she wants the vaccine for his/her child. I would refuse it, but actually I DID let Cecily get three Hibs. I said no to the fourth when I read that it could cause diabetes. Knowing what I know now, I would have said no to all of them. But she did not have an obvious reaction to it, and does not have peanut allergy. Also did not get Hib meningitis.

In the UK, Dr. Halvorsen says there were 1,000 children under five who used to get invasive Hib meningitis every year. Of these, 900 made a complete recovery, but 35 died, and 70 were permanently disabled by it. The chance of a child under five getting a serious case of the disease (nearly everyone gets at least a subclinical case and permanent immunity by five) was one in 3500, the risk of dying of it one in 100,000, and of being disabled by it one in 50,000 a year. The risk was greatest between six and twelve months (the young infant being protected by placental immunity). Invasive cases had about half of them as bacterial meningitis, treatable by antibiotics: about 3% die. One -tenth of cases appear as epiglottitis, and 3-4% die if not treated quickly. Cellulitis occurs in 9% of Hib infections in young children. Blood poisoning in 7%: rare, but the most severe form, with one in seven dying. Pneumonia, bone and joint disorders occur in the other cases.

Half of those who died were already immunocompromised, as is also the case with deaths from pertussis or measles. The other half were healthy. Dr. Halvorsen reports that the vaccine did give some immunity to the disease, but not for as long as it was originally thought that it would. He says that while one study showed a 14% increase of diabetes in those who got the vaccine, it was possible it was just from chance. He said that there was an association with asthma, allergies, and Guillain-Barre syndrome.

So the bottom line is that it is, for most parents, a difficult decision. I think the vaccine usually works to prevent Hib meningitis in the critical first two years of life, as is seen in the steep decrease of clinical cases before and after the vaccine. Hib meningitis was causing a severe case inn one in 200 babies in the years right before the vaccine. The vaccine is very dangerous. I think it's important to recognize that many people have been severely affected, even killed by the disease, and then give everyone the information we have on both the vaccine and the alternatives, such as the homeopathic nosode. I don't have any information on how effective the nosode is. I don't think many people would believe that no one ever really suffered from Hib meningitis, so there's no need to even consider the vaccine for protection against it. I think extended breast feeding is the best solution, for those who can do it.

Thank you, Cathy, for this really excellent article. I admire your patience!

I have great respect for every one of you who commented, and for you, Cathy, for the stamina and resolve you consistently show. But after so long a road, I want to say thanks to Barry, whoever you are. That's it in a nutshell. Some people ("think they are just too good to be told anything") won't "get it" until it happens to them. It's really sad that many of us who have been walking this path for a long time have daily reminders that even the closest relatives of the autistic child, parent, and grandparent -- and I mean siblings of the parent, siblings and other adult children of the grandparent -- fall into the "too good to be told anything" category. Yes, good luck with your vaccines. And I will look forward to your Youtube link, Laura!

But if we're not prepared to offer answers for serious cases of VPDs in the post-vaccine world, then we lose credibility and supporters, and once there were an epidemic in which even a few people died of the VPD, there would be a backlash and increased support for vaccines.

*****************

There is no such thing as a vaccine preventable disease. In fact I would argue that the belief in this lie, is exactly what brought each and every one of us into this mess!

We will never be taken serious by anyone. Until we, the parents of vaccine injured children, are prepared to accept that fundamental truth.

We've all spent months years answering the trolls,and it gets to the point when you realise your not talking to humans but computerised answers.Various links can be found at ease on how to answer back to us vaccine dissenter's, ssssshame on us-ho,honest.

Though the brainwashing is to be admired the ones in power have it down to a fine art. I am just glad that we haven't had teLIEvision in the house now for 12 plus years. This was mainly due to our fears of what our Autistic son would pick up-and to date his worst behaviours come from pre-school cartoons etc,never mind what goes on in mainstream TV.Horse to water Cathy thanks for sharing.

MMR RIP

I might add good luck with your adult mandates (they've floated a couple and passed one in California already anyway, and there are non-legislated ways of coercing/tricking into agreeing to vaccination that we also hear about)...

Hundreds of vaccines in the works...

http://www.phrma.org/press-release/medicines-in-development-for-vaccines

Millions of adults whose childhood vaccines can be argued to have worn off (if they get essentially 99.9999% compliance, kind of like they have in China, in children, and still have outbreaks, kind of like they do in China, then it will only be natural for them to blame and target adults for boosters, kind of like they are blaming 1-3% of children now)....

An industry used to mandated markets with no liability for injury from most of their vaccines (I expect they'll either change the NVICP to cover all adult vaccines or try to shoehorn more onto infants and children so injured adults can't sue either)...

With government agencies that will disease propagandize at least once, lately twice, every year and market vaccines with taxpayer funds and manipulated statistics without hesitation (Simpsonwood transcript, Dr. William Thompson's documentation)...

With easy-to-question-with-even-just-a-little-scrutiny mandates like hepatitis B for infants with significant risks and no theoretical benefit for most and like flu vaccines for all which appear in research to actually increase risk for other infections and new pandemic flu strains in coming years (there's no reason to think they won't try to mandate every new vaccine for someone)...

She may want to keep her right to choose for herself and her children instead of throwing it away to get others to sacrifice their health for those who think they are "the greater good" and for a false sense of SAFETY for most (hopefully soon to be few) of the rest of us.

Greyone, and All,

Cynthia Cournoyer's book, "What About Immunizations? Exposing the Vaccine Philosophy", does an EXCELLENT job of explaining that when each person does what is best for herself and her family, THAT is how excellent community and public health is achieved, not to mention individual health. Her book is a great one to share with people who are new to questioning the vaccine lies.

A paradigm change for public health measures is needed, shifting from "the greater good" to what's good for each and every human being: clean air, clean food, clean water; identifying, minimizing, and eliminating toxins.

I have a lot of trouble accepting the argument that all children must be vaccinated in the interest of the "greater good.” It seems ethically insupportable to expect some children to "take it in the chin” for the supposed good of the rest of us. Yet that is the concept underlying the vaccine injury compensation program. Do we really want to be the sort of nation that sacrifices any number of children for the "greater good?” This is similar to what goes on in the post-apocalyptic nation of Panem in the dystopian world of The Hunger Games. The sacrifice of 25 children each year for the “greater good.” But that was fiction... right?