Dr. Paul Thomas Responds to AAP's Dr. Fernando Stein's Vaccine Safety Article
Katie Wright: Public No Longer Invited to Speak at IACC Autism Meetings

Dachel Interview: Dr. Paul Thomas

Dr. Paul THomas
By Anne Dachel

It is my pleasure to introduce Age of Autism readers to Dr. Paul Thomas from Portland, Oregon.   As I’ve talked with Dr. Thomas and read about him, I can’t help but be hopeful for the future. I have Vaccine Friendly Plansome amazing information in this article, so I invite you all to watch the Skype videos where he explains his views on vaccines safety and what has to change, and to share this with others.

I first heard about Dr. Thomas when I looked into a new medical organization called Physiciansfor Informed Consent, PIC.  Just when it seems that our doctors universally back the CDC’s ever-expanding vaccine schedule for every child in America, suddenly, we have a determined, courageous group of medical providers who say parents have rights over health choices for their children.

On their website their position is clear: “PIC is the first physician organization dedicated to safeguarding informed consent in vaccination.” Doctors, several hundred doctors, are organized in their opposition to medical tyranny.

I was able to interview Paul Thomas about vaccines, their link to autism, and what he’s learned with his Vaccine Friendly Plan.

Q: I asked Dr. Thomas if we’re doing anything to protect children who may be susceptible to a vaccine reaction?

A: “The answer is an absolute resounding yes, [there are vulnerable kids out there]. We now know family histories and certain genetic risk factors that make you less able to deal with toxins, for example. If you have a strong family history of autoimmune issues, you’re going to be more vulnerable to aluminum-containing vaccines,

“Aluminum, the adjuvant in most vaccines, is the largest and most powerful trigger of autoimmunity. There’s an entire book about it called, Vaccines and Autoimmunity, edited by Schoenfeld.   There are hundreds of articles pointing to this issue. That’s just a small piece.

“If you take folks, for example, who have just a real glitch in methelation pathways— Some of the folks who are a little more knowledgeable have heard of the MTHFR enzyme… If you are homozygous, meaning you got the C677 from each of your parents, your enzyme, your MTHFR enzyme doesn’t work very well at all. And that’s the enzyme that takes foliate to methelfoliate…So you have major disruption of your biochemistry if you have that genetic glitch—And that’s one of tens of thousands.

“Here’s the complexity folks: We can’t just say, ‘Vaccine are safe and effective.’ …because that’s lumping tens of thousands of …polymorphisms,… those genetic glitches that make you more vulnerable to the environment.

“I think the misunderstanding when you start hearing GENETICS in the public’s mind, …when I hear that autism’s genetic, I’m thinking, I’m hardwired; it’s hopeless. Oh well, I might as well vaccinate, I’m going …There’s nothing I can do about it.

“Nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is, the genetics they’re finding, ninety-five percent or more, it’s epi-genetics, these things like single type nuclei type polymorphisms that make you vulnerable to toxins, for example.

“So the first chapter in my book, The Vaccine Friendly Plan, is TOXINS, TOXINS, TOXINS, because it’s a lot of toxins. We know that herbicides and pesticides, and plastics, BPA, we know that flame retardants …aluminum in vaccines—these things are extremely toxic. And when you’re pregnant, you have a body burden of toxins, some of which get shunted to your baby—It’s not your fault, moms. I always tell families in pre-natal, us guys are just as toxic, it’s just the world we live in.

“But babies are going to get a toxic hit in the womb. So when you say, oh well, they had genetics at birth, it always could have been toxin related. And it makes absolutely no sense to be injecting vaccines which contain toxins, and they all do, while you’re pregnant. Talk about amplifying the toxicity!

“So it’s TOXINS, TOXINS, TOXINS, and then your baby’s born, and the first thing they do is give your baby a hepatitis B vaccine with a huge dose, 250 mcg. of aluminum, TEN TIMES THE MAXIMUM  TOXIC DOSE, according to the FDA. [The FDA] has had an active policy up since 2000 stating not to exceed 5 micrograms/Kg/day of parenteral aluminum

“So yes, there are children who are more vulnerable. We need to do a better job of identifying them. We’re not currently doing that, except a handful of informed families who get their own genetics screened ahead of time. And then they can come to an informed doctor, and those are few and far between, and say, ‘Hey, am I at greater risk?’

“And those doctors who happen to be aware, might be able to say, ‘You know what, you have this family history, like a family history of autism, a family history of auto-immune issue, a family history …” 


Q: What should we be doing to keep our children safe?

A: “We need to do family histories, and then if you have the ability to do some basic genetic screening, and you have a doctor who can help you interpret that, this too would be important. I really think that the families that have a strong family history of autism, autism spectrum, other neurological issues like severe anxiety, severe bi-polar, schizophrenia, and all the auto-immune conditions—We’re talking type one diabetes, we’re talking Hashimoto's thyroiditis, we’re talking rheumatoid arthritis, the inflammatory bowel disease—the list is fairly long. If you have a lot of that in your family tree, or if you have the autism issues and other neurological things I’ve talked about, you are at higher risk. I would love to see us getting away from the one-size-fits-all.

“And this is also where mandatory vaccine laws are just harmful. I mean you’re literally forcing high-risk kids to take a tremendous risk with—there’s really no need for it.

“I think what we have here is a huge fear: ‘Oh my gosh, these epidemics are going to return, if we stop vaccinating.’ Some of that is based on this whole issue of herd immunity, and there’s this concept out there that if we vaccinate enough people, and then nobody else will get sick. Well, that does possibly apply a little bit to a couple of them. I think measles and chicken pox for example, when you’ve had the vaccine, you usually need boosters, but you get a pretty high rate of immunity. That does cause some protection in the population.

“But for many of them, it’s a whole non-issue. You get no protection from having had hepatitis B or even the pertussis vaccine, whooping cough. People vaccinated can still transmit the disease. It’s way more complicated than just do all these vaccines, and we’re all protected.

“We need to get back to real science-based decisions, and we need informed consent, and we definitely need to find ways of determining who’s at high risk so that we don’t put those poor kids at an even greater risk of having vaccine damage.”

Q: What was your reaction to the news that President-elect Trump has asked Robert Kennedy, Jr. to head a vaccine safety panel?

A: “…I am thrilled.

 “Now that’s odd coming from a board-certified pediatrician—but it shouldn’t be folks. Think about it. We have at the AAP, my Academy, the Academy of Pediatrics, and the CDC, Centers for Disease Control, whose mission is to protect the public from infectious diseases, and in the case of the Academy of Pediatrics, it’s to promote the well-being of children.

“What would be better than to actually put a commission together that’s going to really dig into this? Because we know we have a problem. 

“When I was a child, I knew nobody with autism. When I was in medical school, 1981 to 1985, I saw not one single case of autism. When I was in residency training, from ’85 to ’88, I saw a couple of cases of mild, what we used to call PDD-NOS, Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified. None of these severe, rapid regression into autism, when you had had previously a normal child, let’s say, at age one. And then in the 2000s, this just started exploding.

“So if you’re paying attention CDC, AAP, …you just need to open your eyes and acknowledge, first of all, we have a problem. …I know there’s attempts to say, ‘It’s not a real epidemic.’

Come on.

“When I give talks sometimes I’ll ask a room full of people—Let’s say there’s 200 people, and I’ll say, those of you who are sixty years and older, raise your hands if you grew up and knew someone growing up who had autism.

“Usually not a single hand goes up. I had one talk where one hand went up.

“Then I’ll say, ‘All right, for the rest of you who are under age thirty or forty, how many of you either have a child with autism or know a child with autism, and just about every hand goes up.

“It is not better diagnosis. Sure there’s a little bit of that. …We need to figure out why, and there’s nothing better than putting some minds that are serious about digging into this. We just can’t close our eyes, put our blinders on and say, ‘Vaccines are safe and effective, end of story, we’ve looked at it, we’re done.’

“You see the problem is, the IOM Report that said this has been studied, study it no further, that is the most unscientific approach I’ve ever heard of, especially when you have an ongoing epidemic.

“Many of you may have seen the reports out of California, the kindergarteners last year, compared to the year before, there was a 17 percent increase in autism, just for the kindergarten class.

“This is not going away, it’s getting worse. So no, the science isn’t settled. The time is now to look at it carefully.

“What’s needed is we’ve got to get William Thompson at the CDC to come testify. He said he would, and this group could make that happen.

“There are a group of researchers who are worried about the scientific integrity at the CDC.

“And then it’s time… We have a million cases of autism this past decade, and it is growing at a rapid rate, and that’s the tip of the iceberg. For every autistic kid, there’s five or ten other kids with more subtle neurological issues: learning problems, anxiety, ADD, ADHD, and then all the autoimmune and immune system disruption that goes on.

“We’ve got to look at this. If you don’t like the idea, then you’re not willing to get to the truth, because really it’s just the truth that we’re after.

“We all want safe vaccines, we want a safer way to protect our children. We want healthy children who are not damaged by what we are actually doing.

“In medical school they teach you about iatrogenic disease. If you see something new that’s coming up in your population or in your patient, the first thing you think about is, ‘Did I do something to cause this?’

…Why is it that somehow with vaccines, we just can’t look. It’s like, ‘No, we’re not going to look there; they’re safe.’ Nonsense.

“So this is the best thing that’s ever happened, and I hope this goes forward because once the truth starts coming out, we can start unraveling this disaster that we’ve created.”

Q: What is the different approach to vaccination that you’ve outlined in your book, The Vaccine Friendly Plan?

A: “…There is a schedule, I would call it a selective schedule, that’s in that book, you’re wondering why won’t health officials or other doctors endorse that plan, or try it.

“Here’s the problem: ….a very close friend in medical school today, and they tell me that the vaccine issue is just: They’re safe, don’t listen to the anti-vaxxers out there. And of course, anybody who questions the CDC or questions the science, is categorically labeled ‘anti-vaccine.’

“If you question the CDC schedule, somehow you’re anti-vaccine. That’s the problem.

“And there’s this other issue. Many of you know of Wakefield. Andrew Wakefield [back in 1998] he’d been publishing prolific [science]—an incredibly intelligent man. He’d been publishing on issues of vaccines. He’s a pediatric gastroenterologist from England. He wrote that famous article. He was looking at the gut issues in autistic children and found that there was a much higher prevalence of vaccine strain measles in the lymph nodes of the autistic kids. So he published that literature, and wow, what a firestorm.

“He ended up after almost a decade of going after him, losing his license, and basically unable to practice medicine. …

“So you’ll hear the term ‘Wakefielded.’ Physicians are afraid. They are afraid that if they go up against the vaccine issue, they’re going to be ostracized, or potentially even lose their license.”

Dr. Thomas mentioned Dr. Bob Sears and his book. “He’s under investigation for giving a vaccine exemption. That process that goes between physician and patient has gone under the microscope of the medical board in California. …I can assure you, physicians are scared.

“I am a director on the board for PIC, Physicians for informed consent. One of the issues we hear over and over again, is that physician are scared to be public about their concerns with vaccines.

“So this a real issue. …”

Q: Have you faced any repercussions because of you stand on vaccines?

A: “…It’s interesting. When you’re in medical school, you’re taught about all the safety issues, vaccines are safe and effective, and if you do anything to challenge that, you’re looked upon as anti-vaccine.

“I am not anti-vaccine. I am pro-science, and I’ve studied the science extensively over the last fifteen years.

“…So Bob Sears came out with his book, The Vaccine Book, in about 2008, and he had several plans he had outlined in that book. He was immediately discredited by The Academy of Pediatrics. Both he and I are a member of The Academy of Pediatrics.

“Many people have heard of the term—it’s now a new word probably—‘wakefielded.’ In the medical community, he was ostracized and ultimately lost his license for going up against the vaccine/pharmaceutical industry.

“There’s real fear folks. I’m one of the directors of PIC, Physicians for Informed Consent. We have over 200 members, we’re growing rapidly. There are lots of us who are concerned about vaccine safety with the current schedule. We’re concerned about some of the ingredients in some of the vaccines. But it is very difficult to find physicians willing to be vocal and open about that.

“I welcome the RFK, Jr. commission that Trump is trying to put together to get at the vaccine safety issue and openness in scientific research.

But back to my book, The Vaccine Friendly Plan. This is a pro-vaccine book…It’s science-based.

There are about 300 references, and they’re available on drpaulapproved.com.

“You can go to the reference link, and all the references are there, or at least most of them that I could get a hold of.

“You will find that there is good scientific reason to do a vaccine schedule that’s different than [the one] that the CDC and the AAP are promoting.

“The easy examples are during pregnancy, we’ve never studied long-term outcomes for injecting aluminum into a pregnant mom, or giving flu shots to pregnant moms. We just don’t have the long term data. The package inserts for those vaccines explicitly state that. So we shouldn’t be injecting pregnant moms—that’s a no brainer.

“Another easy example is the hepatitis B. Less than one percent of moms in America have hepatitis B…. Just removing that off the schedule is a no brainer. It’s common sense. A layperson with a sixth grade education understands that, but somehow the CDC and the AAP, and most pediatricians are not able to.

“Let me explain a little bit why that might be. As a pediatrician, I am graded on the quality of the care that I give. …Somebody has to decide what are the criteria by which we determine if this is a good doctor. So what are our quality measures? In pediatrics, invariably, vaccine rates are a quality measure.

“One of the health plans in our town for a few years—I fought it and finally got that one removed—but for a few years, it was, how many of your two year olds were completely vaccinated? In other words, they’d had all twenty—it’s been a while since I counted the total number, but a lot of vaccines. If you’re using common sense, you don’t do the hepatitis B for ninety-nine percent of the babies because they’re at zero risk.

“So my complete vaccination rate, it’s all or none, was less than one percent. So I am one of the ‘worse doctors.’ So doctors are under this kind of pressure. Whether it be from the health plan or whether they’re simply afraid of their medical board coming after their license, they don’t want to speak up, and that’s a sad state of affairs.

“We should have open scientific inquiry, and I’m hopeful that we’re going to head that direction with this new panel that Trump has suggested that RFK head up.

“As to The Vaccine Friendly Plan, we have data showing no new autism in the group that was studied.

“When I opened my new practice, Integrated Pediatrics, in June of 2008, …So we did an informed consent process. Here’s what you’re supposed to do, which is the entire vaccine schedule, according to the CDC, here’s what I would do if it was my kid and why. And you choose.

“I would say ninety-nine percent of the patients, once informed, for example, about the hepatitis B situation, chose to put it off. So that plan is outlined in my book. It’s no Hep B at birth, you’re going to do that closer to the teen years when they’re going to be at risk. …

“In The Vaccine Friendly Plan, you don’t do any vaccines if you have a strong family history of autism or autoimmune. You put off the MMR until age three. We have great data that giving the MMR at age three, just one shot, gives you ninety-nine percent chance of protection down the road. We have that data. We put off the Hep A, we wait on the chicken pox, and you only do one aluminum-containing vaccine at a time. So you still protect against pertussis, which can kill infants,… The Hib and the Prenar that prevent meningitis, against these are small numbers, but we don’t want to leave a child unprotected from meningitis. Those are given as well, but spaced out, so that you have the protection, but it’s a less toxic system.

“We had success with this. We closed the data set in February 2015. We had over a thousand patients who followed this plan, not a single new case of autism. You had to be at least two years and three months old to be in the study, so there was at least a chance that you would have autism have developed. The average age in the group was four years. No new autism.

“The second group unvaccinated, 238 children, not a single case of autism. They were hands down the healthiest kids.

“The third group, we had about 900 kids who were more heavily vaccinated, …and we had fifteen cases of autism or autism spectrum, a rate of one in 60.

“Why won’t people follow this other plan, The Vaccine Friendly Plan?

“All I can say is fear and ignorance. And honestly, we need more data anyway. I’m not saying my plan is perfect. I’m sure it’s not, but it’s certainly a start. We’re going to have to start looking at long term studies to compare unvaccinated, that compare perhaps the vaccine-friendly approach and it compares the CDC approach. If it’s done with informed consent, it should be completely ethical. I have patients beating down the door to my office. We grew from 1,000 to 13,000 patients in the last seven years. We’ve had waiting lists. We closed our practice for two years; we just couldn’t absorb the volume. If you’re a pediatrician, thinking oh, I can’t do that, I’m going to lose all my patients. It’s the opposite.

“Families, as they’re waking up to this issue, want doctors who will honor informed consent and give them reasonable options. You’re going to have to educate yourself, because where I stood when I didn’t know any of this information, I couldn’t possibly recommend anything other than the CDC schedule. I was of that mind that those are the smartest doctors, they must know best. If you really start to think about it, and this was the last straw that broke the camel’s back for me, was back in the early 2000’s, when they moved the hepatitis B from teenagers to newborns, and did it to everyone. It made absolutely no sense. …It was sold to us maybe we’ll develop a population that’s immune to hepatitis B. We know that’s not the case. Infants who get that series today are at a much higher risk for autism. We have that data in the literature. Infants who get this series as an infant have a 24 percent of being immune at age twenty. When do you need protection against hepatitis B? When you’re twenty, right? …

“We have an opportunity to do things better, and I urge you, if you’re listening to this, if you’re a parent, look into this. Don’t just accept what you’re being told to do by a pediatrician, family doctor, or a doctor who is not aware of all the studies. Read The Vaccine Friendly Plan, do your research, and we’re going to make a difference for America.”  

Q: What are your views on the compensation program and the lack of liability on the part of doctors and vaccine makers?


A: “…Here’s my concerns. You just need to know that physicians have no liability for giving vaccines. In fact, there’s movement going on, pressure from the pharmaceutical companies—oh, by the way, they don’t have any liability either. Why? This is a product with known inherent risks, and they’re completely free of liability. Why would they make a safer product or spend the research dollars to make better vaccines? They don’t have any liability, nor do the doctors, and the push across the country is for pharmacists to do vaccines. If we can’t get enough doctors to prescribe them, if we just put ads on TV that scare you to go get this or that vaccine, you can just go to the pharmacy and get it. …And they have no liability either.

“This is unprecedented that you can have a product that has, in many cases, very little efficacy. If you look at the efficacy of the flu shot, go to the CDC website and look up flu shot efficacy, and there’s a table. For the last ten years, it’s around thirty, forty percent, sometimes lower. …

“…The Vaccine Injury Act only compensates people who qualify for certain predetermined known vaccine side effects. So you have to have literally an allergic reaction immediately after getting the vaccine generally to qualify. …

“If vaccines trigger your child to become autistic, good luck. So you’ve got a lifelong damaged child, and it’s not recognized as a side effect of vaccines. Nor are any of the developmental delays, neurological damage…” 

Dr. Thomas then talked about the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, known as VAERS.   

“Ask your pediatrician, or your family practice or your doctor, … ‘How many VAERS reports have you done over the last ten years, or in your career?’ And what’s embarrassing to me personally… It could take weeks, months, or years to develop [a disruption of your autoimmune system], and you can’t now go back and say, you know for sure it was this or that vaccine. …The problem sometimes is the whole schedule. …”

Dr. Thomas said that he doubts that VAERS even catches one percent of the cases of vaccine injury. He said that doctors “don’t even make the connection. Pediatricians, we’re probably the worst. It’s not because we’re bad people …We just were trained to believe that we were doing the best thing we possibly could for kids by giving them these vaccines, and we bought the story that they’re completely safe.  It’s just not so. …It’s very hard to pinpoint it to one vaccine or the other, hence the problem with our current system.

“We’ve got to do research that looks at the whole health of the person. And that’s why I say that when we compare unvaccinated to vaccinated, unvaccinated to selectively vaccinated, selectively vaccinated to fully vaccinated, we’ll start getting answers.

“Until we do that, you cannot say that the research is settled, or that vaccines are safe. We need more data and we’re going to get it folks. The time is now. We’re not turning back, we’re not looking back. Insist on more data, and until you have it, I urge caution when it comes to vaccines. I hope you’ll read The Vaccine Friendly Plan.”

I am very grateful to Dr. Thomas for daring to challenge the sacred dogma “vaccines are safe, vaccines save lives.” He knows that currently we’re putting millions of children at risk.

 Anne Dachel is Media Editor for Age of Autism.

(Technical assistance, John Dachel)


Hans Litten

Eindeker , is this the sacred science that you speak of ?

CDC Scientist: ‘We scheduled meeting to destroy vaccine-autism study documents’

The…co-authors…brought a big garbage can into the meeting room… [and put the documents]…into a huge garbage can. –CDC Senior Scientist Dr. William Thompson



This was not a good analogy:

"Would you chose to get on an airplane, if you knew there was a 50% chance that it was going to crash ?

Would you chose to ride in a car, if you knew there was a 50% chance that the brakes were going to fail ?"

Getting a flu vaccine does not carry a 50% risk of killing you.


Neither does experiencing a plane crash. According to the National Transportation Safety Board, even passengers of the most devastating airplane crashes, survive at a rate of 76 percent.

So the analogy isn't a bad one, if you understand its meaning.

Which is that in both cases, you are accepting the risk of grievous bodily harm. For a potentially dangerous product, that has carries a 50% risk of total failure.


I agree that most people wouldn't die if their wounds bled and/or if they took C. I just saw at immunize.org.nz: Having tetanus does not usually generate immunity to the disease.

That's intriguing. So sometimes it does. Maybe since it's all around us all the time, most people get enough mild exposure constantly to eventually develop immunity. Let me look up the Plotkin and Mortimer references to most people in the Third World having immunity even without the vaccine (except for the 120 or so in the Bangladesh study), and 25% in the US being immune even if had never gotten vaccine. P. 63. Many unvaxxed people in Brazil, China, Ethiopia, India, Israel, Italy, Spain, and the USSR had detectable levels of antibody. Oh dear, there are six studies cited for that, and still two more references to other areas. I don't think I can copy all of them right now. Maybe like other diseases, the very young and the old are most vulnerable, or those under unusual stress. Or having genetic factors which keep them from gaining natural immunity.

I have no problem with people either taking it or refusing it. I reacted to a tetanus booster at 19 with both arms being paralyzed the same day, which I think was the beginning of my MS. I think it was the mercury in it, but it might have been the paralyzing tetanus component, I guess. My father saw a man die of tetanus at his father's doctor's office in their front yard in Reserve, Louisiana in the '30s. (He was also company physician at the Godchaux Sugar Refinery there.) Said it was horrible.


I was talking about meningococcal. I didn't know about the genetic predisposition to infection. Didn't read that on the CDC website where I got the other info.
I am not sure I believe the 1,000/year Hib deaths prior to the vaccine, due to the CDC's track record of rewriting history for the purpose of selling vaccines. If it is true, and if the DPT caused the susceptibility, then perhaps skipping both vaccines would solve the problem.



"I think if no one vaxxed for it, several hundred people a year in the US, maybe more, would get tetanus and some of them would die of it. Not a huge number, but one to consider. "

They probably would if their wounds weren't opened and allowed to bleed, and they weren't treated with Vitamin C, and given enough of it.

"Most people would probably develop immunity from subclinical infections."

It doesn't sound logical to me when.. "tetanus is not an immunizing disease":




Were you talking about meningococcal meningitis in both your comments? I think the fact that the Hib vaccine within a couple of years caused the rate of invasive Hib disease to go from 10,000 cases a year to close to zero shows that it worked. (Though it also causes peanut allergy and diabetes.) I just looked up how many die every year of peanut allergies, it's about a hundred in the US. There used to be a thousand deaths a year from Hib disease. Just factoids to consider.

I made a mistake the other day in the death rate from meningococcal disease. If it's 20% fatal in college-aged kids, with 250 young adults a year getting it, that's only 50 deaths a year in that age group. I just found this at NVIC, interesting about some people having genetic variations which make them susceptible to infections when most people by their age are immune. By two to five years after vaccination, only 58% still have antibodies. But by that time, they'd probably have natural immunity, it's only college freshmen in dorms that they think are at much risk.

" Maternal Antibodies, Natural Immunity Protects Majority

That is because mothers, who have innate immunity, transfer maternal antibodies to their newborns to protect them in the first few months of life until babies can make their own antibodies.13 At any given time up 20 to 40 percent of us are asymptomatically colonizing meningococcal organisms in our nasal passages and throats, which throughout life boosts our innate immunity to invasive bacterial infection.14, 15 By the time American children enter adolescence, the vast majority have asymptomatically developed immunity that protects them, which is how our population maintains naturally acquired herd immunity and why cases of invasive disease are so rare in all age groups.

Genetically Vulnerable At High Risk for Disease

However, a tiny minority of individuals have genetic variations and other unknown biological factors that prevent them from naturally developing protective circulating antibodies.16 These are the individuals, tragically, who are up to 7,000 times more likely to get severe invasive meningococcal disease at some point in their lives.17 Clearly, there must be greater attention paid to developing screening techniques to identify those high-risk individuals and help them avoid a potentially fatal or crippling meningococcal infection.

Environmental High Risk Factors

In addition to genetic factors that place some people at higher risk, there are other biological and environmental factors that make people more susceptible. These include smoking or living in a home where people smoke; a recent respiratory infection; crowded living conditions, such as in military and prisons settings; alcohol use; and an underlying chronic illness, especially immune deficiencies such as lupus or HIV/AIDS.18, 19

Constant, Close Personal Contact Required

It is not easy to develop invasive meningococcal disease.20 You have to be susceptible and have regular close personal contact, such as sharing a toothbrush with or kissing person, who is colonizing meningococcal organisms.

Know Symptoms, Get Immediate Medical Care

Symptoms of meningococcal disease include fever; severe headache; painful, stiff neck; nausea and vomiting; inability to look at bright lights; mental confusion and irritability; extreme fatigue/sleepiness; convulsions and unconsciousness.

In babies, signs of “irritability” can include persistent crying or high pitched screaming with arching of the back, which are symptoms of encephalitis or brain inflammation that can be caused by a bacterial or viral infection or a vaccine reaction.21 These are danger signs and it is very important to seek immediate medical attention and treatment to help prevent permanent injury or death.

Vaccine Has Only 4 Strains

In 2000, the CDC recommended that all college freshmen get a dose of meningococcal vaccine containing four strains (A, C, W-35, Y)22 and, in 2005, that policy was expanded to include all 11 year olds.23 There is one problem: the vaccine does not contain strain B, which is the strain associated with more than 50 percent of meningococcal cases and deaths,24 especially in children under five years old.25

Vaccine Effectiveness Does Not Last, Need Booster

There is another problem: The vaccine has been found to be, at best, only about 58 percent effective within two to five years after adolescents have gotten the shot.26, 27 So, in 2011, when public health officials realized that one dose of meningococcal vaccine did not last, they said that all 16 year olds should get a booster dose.



Dear Mr Litten, let’s start from the beginning….the Italian paper you quote has been widely discredited as fairly meaningless & bad science but let’s go through this one step at a time.
• As you say the paper looks at 44 samples of 30 different types of vaccine, the paper was published in 2016, so let’s be generous and say the experimental work was conducted in 2015-16. Table 1 gives the expiry dates of the samples & guess what Hans 28 of the 44 samples expired before 2015 in fact an amazing 19 samples expired in 2010 or earlier, that’s the first reason for not taking this seriously
• Where’s a control sample???? There is none, like using double distilled water or even saline put through the procedure to check for contamination from laboratory procedures giving the so called contaminant material rather than the vaccine, the reason for this is below
• The authors describe a procedure where a 20ul sample of vaccine is placed on a 0.25um cellulose membrane and, after drying down, the membrane is scanned in their electron microscope, so simple what could possibly go wrong???? (Hint a control blank sample would be helpful) In the absence of such a control this method absolutely relies that the cellulose membrane is “clean” & does not contribute any material that could give false readings. Only trouble is that cellulose membranes do contain significant amounts of trace metals: http://journals.co.za/docserver/fulltext/waters/1/1/2261.pdf?expires=1487009914&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=B4D2903FDC15A808B7AFB21A802908F4 Have a look at the second page, the authors list the following elements as being found in a variety of cellulose membranes from different manufacturers: Zn, Cd, Cu, Pb, Fe, Mn, Co, Ni, Cr, Ag, Sn, do you understand the problem Hans, the authors claim the vaccines contribute to all these spurious “signals” but the very background material they are looking at has significant levels of these metals, where’s the control???
• On the other non-metallic stuff they found, well yes you are drying down vaccine material, you would expect to see things, vaccines are not homeopathy
I could go on but there seems little point, this paper is very poor science and certainly doesn’t warrant your ridiculous statement In a remarkable new study with potentially immediate and earth-shattering effects on the vaccine industry and the regulatory agencies that oversee their safety, oh no I don’t think so dear Mr Litten
The next comment you make is even more silly, this myth of a stealth sterilization program using hCG laced tetanus toxoid vaccine given to women of child bearing age. “The vaccine was not given to men or boys, despite the fact they are presumably equally liable to step on rusty nails as women No Mr Litten it was given to prevent neo-natal tetanus in both the mothers and new born infants, a considerable source of potential in under developed countries, it has precisely nothing to do with risks from stepping on rusty nails!!! At the end of 2014 the World Federation of the Catholic Medical Associations issued a statement including these 2 key points:
4 The validity of the vaccine assays performed in the 5 laboratories in Kenya is questionable for 2 reasons: the assays were valid for human serum and not vaccine, and the substance they detected (which is not hCG) varied by a factor of 4000 times between laboratories.
5. Even if the substance assayed was hCG, the levels were so minute that there is no way this could produce antibody levels with a contraceptive effect. (6)

This myth is a dead parrot Mr Litten, but it is an obscene myth if it discourages poor women in 3rd world countries getting tetanus vaccination to prevent neonatal deaths from tetanus.


To add to my last comment about inability to determine meningitis vaccine efficacy -
Further compounding the problem is that meningoccal disease tends to be cyclical, so one can't assume efficacy if rates drop after a vaccination campaign.


I've read in one of the meningitis vaccine inserts (or maybe it was a CDC publication about it?) that meningitis is so rare that it is impossible to test for efficacy. They admit to not knowing if these vaccines work to prevent the disease. The other big question is how the vaccines, those singly or in combination with all the others, interfere with immune system function and alter the microbiome short and long term.



The vaccine causes measurable antibodies to tetanus to be produced. Many people produce antibodies to tetanus even if they've never been vaccinated. I just looked it up in Plotkin and Mortmer's Vaccines, second edition, p. 63. " Specifically up to 80% of people in India and up to 95% of Ethiopian refugees had levels of antitoxin suggestive of protection." " This information suggests that in at least some areas of the developing world, asymptomatic colonization - presumably of the intestine - or infection with C. tetani occurs, leading to the production of antitoxin. In the developed world, this phenomenon has not been adequately studied. Serosurveys in the US have found 25% or more of reportedly unimmunized individuals to have circulating antitoxin."

Aviva Jill Romm in Vaccinations, p. 73, says: " Broadscale use of tetanus vaccine among American soldiers in 1941 led to significant declines in wartime cases of tetanus as compared with rates from WWI. WWI rates were 700 cases per 520,000 wounded; WWII rates were 12 cases per 2.73 million wounded. The British military showed a similar decline in cases. In both countries, however, rates were thought to be declining significantly long before the introduction of vaccines, because of improved hygiene and wound care. "

Randall Neustaedter says in The Vaccine Guide, p. 257: " There is no question that a series of tetanus toxoid injections is highly effective at preventing tetanus (Edsall 1959). This has been documented in several large studies during WWII, and with studies in large groups of horses. The fact that nearly all recent tetanus cases in the US occurred in individuals who had not received the recommended schedule of vaccinations provides further evidence that active immunization is extremely effective."

The Bangladesh study from the early 1980s was interesting both because it showed how effective vitamin C was in curing tetanus and because that hospital had a huge number of both child and adult patients with tetanus all during the time of the study. http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/hemila/CT/Jahan_1984_bm.pdf

There was both a group of 55 adults 13-30 years of age and one of 62 children 1-12 with tetanus. All were treated with conventional hospital treatment for tetanus. The groups were divided in half: half got 1,000 mg vitamin C treatment, and half didn't. Of the 31 children treated with C, all recovered. Of those who weren't, 8 out of 31 recovered, 23 died. Of the adults, who should have been given higher doses of C, 17 out of 27 of those who got C recovered, ten died. Only 9 out of 28 in the group which did not get C recovered. So it certainly makes you wonder why C isn't standard treatment for tetanus. (The Cochrane Collaboration wrote about this, but said that due to the small number of test subjects, the results should be viewed with caution. So nobody should jump to the conclusion that it might be good to spend pennies a dose for vitamin C treatment for patients in danger of dying of tetanus.)

About half of tetanus cases are caused by minor wounds or even by an injury the patient was unaware of. HIllary Butler said in one of her books that tetanus can be caused by pricks from rose thorns, if the rose bush had had animal manure with tetanus spores in it used as fertilizer. So I don't think you can rely on good wound care to always prevent tetanus, though it would prevent most cases.

I think if no one vaxxed for it, several hundred people a year in the US, maybe more, would get tetanus and some of them would die of it. Not a huge number, but one to consider. Most people would probably develop immunity from subclinical infections. Good wound care is very important, but some inapparent infections would result in tetanus. But it's back to its being the parents' decision. I personally think it's probably a good idea to get the tetanus series after the age of two, and then a booster at 40.

Jeannette Bishop

@John Stone,

Though the rate of meningitis is low enough that it might be hard to establish efficacy right out the gate (meningitis, not sure which type if it matters, is listed as a risk of flu mist ...and this is still speculation) for a new vaccine without some unusual level of help?

I think I'm speculating (out of my ken definitely) mainly because the cancellation of nasal flu vaccine for "poor efficacy" reasons clouded my mind a little too much.



I've also thought about the fact that most adults have achieved immunity to local strains of meningitis through subclinical exposure, and wondered if those vaccinated for meningitis are able to achieve this immunity once the vaccine wears off. I've also thought that that might mean that mothers can't protect their babies from meningitis with placental immunity for the first six months if they don't have natural immunity.

I think it makes meningitis and measles similar. The pay-offs of getting the natural diseases are significant, but they depend of not getting the vaccines, which in some cases save lives. Most babies won't get clinical meningitis, but a few will. So the vaccine is only beneficial in a few cases, but how do you determine whether your baby would be better off getting or not getting the meningitis vaccines? I think you have to just give the parents the info and then let them decide.

Hans Litten

In the 1990’s the UN’s World Health Organization launched a campaign to vaccinate millions of women in Nicaragua, Mexico and the Philippines between the ages of 15 and 45, allegedly against Tentanus, a sickness arising from such things as stepping on a rusty nail. The vaccine was not given to men or boys, despite the fact they are presumably equally liable to step on rusty nails as women.

Because of that curious anomaly, Comite Pro Vida de Mexico, a Roman Catholic lay organization became suspicious and had vaccine samples tested. The tests revealed that the Tetanus vaccine being spread by the WHO only to women of child-bearing age contained human Chorionic Gonadotrophin or hCG, a natural hormone which when combined with a tetanus toxoid carrier stimulated antibodies rendering a woman incapable of maintaining a pregnancy. None of the women vaccinated were told.

It later came out that the Rockefeller Foundation along with the Rockefeller’s Population Council, the World Bank (home to CGIAR), and the United States’ National Institutes of Health had been involved in a 20-year-long project begun in 1972 to develop the concealed abortion vaccine with a tetanus carrier for WHO. In addition, the Government of Norway, the host to the Svalbard Doomsday Seed Vault, donated $41 million to develop the special abortive Tetanus vaccine. 12


Hans Litten


Dirty Filthy Rotten vaccines .

Read it Eindeker , Cia , Jenny .

In a remarkable new study with potentially immediate and earth-shattering effects on the vaccine industry and the regulatory agencies that oversee their safety, researchers at the National Council of Research of Italy and the International Clean Water Institute, USA have found extensive and inexplicable widespread contamination of vaccines with particles that, according to the authors of the study, clearly should not be present.

The study, published in the International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination, examined 30 vaccines (44 samples in total), and found particulate matter, in aggregates and clusters. The composition of those clusters, the researchers say, are consistent with “burnt waste”. They also found red blood cells of unknown origin, and extensive metal contamination, including lead, chromium and tungsten.

John Stone


Usually they seem to like it the cloudier the better.

Jeannette Bishop

@Someone...a tangential speculation regarding flu mist discontinuation this year, also seen to modify the microbiome of the nasal passages...


... was that vaccine suddenly so ineffective (which suggests to my cynical mind they publish less doctored, or maybe just typically doctored, numbers this year) because authorities possibly didn't want potential interference clouding results with the new meningitis B vaccines (at least for the time being)?


Interesting questions. Another I have is - the CDC says that 65-85% of adults have immunity to meningococcal strains that they develop along the way and that most adolescents who are exposed do not get sick but develop natural immunity (that they retain throughout adulthood).

So how does vaccination of babies, teens and young adults, affect the development of natural immunity that historically happens without the vaccine?


While we're on the topic of meningitis, which is truly a frightening disease, it should be mentioned that roughly one third of us are carriers of Neisseria meningitidis at any given time. It is in our very noses and throats as part of our normal flora. The question I would like answered by "scientists" is this:
If someone is an asymptomatic carrier of N. meningitidis, what does receiving a meningitis vaccine do to his/her pre-existing N. mengitidis nasal bacteria? Does the vaccine worsen it, or make the person more likely to go from being an asymptomatic carrier to a shedder of N. meningitidis?

As previously stated by someone else, both smoking and drinking alcohol are risk factors for contracting meningitis, which are two activities known to proliferate on college campuses. Another question I would love to know the "scientific" answer to is this: If you are a carrier of N. meningitidis, will the bacteria in your very own nose suddenly become virulent, and attack you and be more likely to give you meningitis (if you smoke or drink), than someone else who is a carrier of the same pathogen, but an active shedder of the disease?

During the Princeton University meningitis outbreak, it was very interesting (and very sad) to me that two non-Princeton students contracted and died from meningitis after being exposed to Princeton students who had likely been vaccinated twice against Men B with the then-experimental, non-FDA approved Bexsero vaccine. Did those students go from asymptomatic carriers of Men B to Men B shedders due to their receipt of Bexsero?

Here is an interesting writeup about the ineffectiveness of the Men B vaccine during an actual outbreak of Men B.



"It's hard to bear in mind that 250 (college kids) isn't very many out of the many millions a year who DON'T get it (meningococcal disease), even though we're constantly exposed to the germs. "

Of course vulnerability to disease is something that should have been looked at a very long time ago. What is the difference between the few who succumb to germs that are commonplace and the many millions who don't? And why is it necessary for many millions to receive vaccines that are in themselves dangerous when the germs would pose no risk to them at all?

At least some risk factors for meningitis are known: alcoholism, autoimmune disorders, HIV/AIDS, cancer or diabetes, immunosuppressive drugs, intravenous drug abuse, smoking marijuana, removal of the spleen. What if college students had learned early on during their school years how to keep themselves healthy, avoid risky behaviours, to be their own person and not to give in to peer pressure?

I fail to see how the tetanus vaccine could possibly work when tetanus itself is not an immunising disease. Care of puncture wounds is most important because tetanus is an anaerobic bacteria that can't survive in the presence of oxygen. The advice I've given my children is to make any deep cuts or puncture wounds bleed.

There's also the standard treatment for these diseases to consider. For instance, mainstream doctors suppress fevers, which are actually beneficial, and don't consider the benefits of Vitamin C, and yet it has saved lives.

NZ Farmer Beats Swine Flu With Vitamin C:

Thanks Jenny.


We're trying to make people aware of the discrepancies between what the medical party line is and reality. That's all we can do. It's certainly frightening when you realize that the vaccine industry is a mega-monopoly enabled by every institution in society, including schools, legislators, and the mainstream media. And certainly heartening that so many people are pushing back. This whole Pizzagate thing is like all the denial and cover-ups in the vaccine arena, and extremely scary. Who's paying ALL these people to say that there's OBVIOUSLY nothing to it? Really? So what's THEIR explanation of the huge amount of evidence? Why in the world would they want to enable child sex trafficking? You drew my attention to the Ben Swann angle. He's the courageous journalist who has reported on vaccine damage in several reports. Also on the Pizzagate story, and his story on CBS was censored and deleted nearly everywhere, although it was professionally done and factually reported. I guess everyone has noticed that only two weeks in office and Trump has promoted the busting of sex crime operations in several states, California, Texas, and Illinois? 480 arrests made in Ca and many children being kept imprisoned as sex slaves now freed and in foster care. And is the MSM reporting on this? Not much, and it's huge. I just saw linked on American Buddhist dot net this new DHS video about know the " signs" of sex trafficking. All sorts of suggestive symbolism, starting with pizza signs next to a gate behind the black teen looking very sad.


Does this herald blows to the power of the MSM etc.? Is it really that crazy to posit large-scale sex trafficking conducted by rich elites? Remember the Rotherham sex trafficking of over a thousand young girls? Widely scoffed at before it proved to be true? Really that crazy to posit rich industries heading massive exaggerated and coercive campaigns to sell their products, vaccines?


"Most people realize in all other fields, like buying a car, for instance, that the vendor is usually going to say only good things about the product he's selling, and not say the bad things."

Very important point, Cia. The answer is because health care professionals are licensed public servants, sworn to act only in their patient's best interest. It is illegal and unethical for them to sell, push or provide a product or treatment that they know (or should know) is harmful, especially for profit. They are supposed to be trusted advisors that are above corruption. People are told all the time to "ask your doctor..."


Correction: In my last quote "ovation" was supposed to have quotation marks followed by ...




I agree with you that the buck stops with the parents. Most people realize in all other fields, like buying a car, for instance, that the vendor is usually going to say only good things about the product he's selling, and not say the bad things. Why do they forget this in the area of vaccines and other drugs? I think it's inappropriately extended religious belief.

I agree that the vaccine pushers exaggerate the dangers of the diseases in order to push the vaccines. Pertussis was an extremely severe illness, very often deadly, in the nineteenth century. VERY often, it killed tens of thousands of children a year in the US and UK. Now it doesn't, even when tens of thousands get it, as they do now. Both because of improved living conditions and nutrition and because the pathogen, like that for measles and scarlet fever, has evolved to be much less dangerous. Now pertussis is simply not dangerous except for a tiny percentage (0.5% or less) of the youngest newborns, and for some of those with chronic disease. I had it when my eight-month old baby had it, despite three DTaPs, and it was scary, very uncomfortable to cough ten times per breath, my chest would tingle from lack of oxygen, and it lasted a long time, over a month in her and over two months in me. But it wasn't dangerous and we both recovered. And that's the way it usually is. In Sweden they didn't give the DPT for seventeen years, from 1979 to 1997. Vaccine writer (pro-vax) Arthur Allen wrote that 60% of Swedish children in those years got it, but there was less than one death a year from it. The vaccine doesn't work on babies, whose immune system hasn't developed enough to react appropriately to it. It is dangerous, causing asthma, allergies, seizure disorders, SIDS, and autism (the booster at 18 months erased my daughter's only words and she was diagnosed with autism two months later). I think if parents were not led to believe that the vaccine is mandatory, that it's a no-brainer to get it to prevent pertussis (which results in no permanent immunity in anyone, even when they later get pertussis, and not having placental immunity to give babies or protection from breastfeeding), then a lot wouldn't get it, most people would get pertussis and get permanent immunity, and as a society we would teach parents to shelter infants at home rather than possibly expose them to pertussis.

Meningococcal meningitis is extremely serious, often fatal, limbs are often amputated to save the patient's life. I readily grant all of that. But it is rare. There are about 3,000 cases a year in the US, most in babies between six months and two years (they're protected before six months by placental immunity from their mother, nearly all adults have achieved subclinical immunity to it). Breastfeeding extends the protection for as long as it is continued. It is fatal in 10% of cases, even if they receive rapid hospital treatment with antibiotics and life support. Before the vaccine for college kids, there were 250 teen and college-age cases a year, and in that group, it's 20% fatal. The vaccine is often dangerous. If I were to see photos of all 250 young people who died of it every year, I think I would be clamoring for my daughter to get the vaccine. I don't know what the right way of viewing the issue is. It's hard to bear in mind that 250 isn't very many out of the many millions a year who DON'T get it, even though we're constantly exposed to the germs. I have read stories about some of those who got it and died or were disabled by it, and were strong and apparently very healthy before they got it.

No one should deny this or minimize it. The disease is extremely dangerous, and there is a vaccine which is effective against the strains which it covers (far from all of them). The vaccine is also dangerous. The disease isn't common. But I wouldn't want to tell parents or young adults what decision they should make. Many people would tend to give too much importance to the photos of real kids who got it and died of it, unable to conceptualize the large numbers (without humanizing photos) of those who didn't. I guess you'd have to also publicize photos of young people who were disabled or killed by the vaccine as a counterweight. Voices for Vaccines is the car salesman, though, and parents must be given more complete information than what it gives.

I would just try to tell parents what we know now, pro and con. Knowing the figures, they'd have to decide for themselves. It is rare, but it is a possibility, and it is very bad when it occurs, and frequently disables when it doesn't kill. I wouldn't get it for my daughter or myself, I think the vaccine is more likely to hurt us than help us, but I understand the risks involved and have decided that I'd rather not get the vaccine.

I agree with you that good nutrition and healthy living practices go far in improving health and resistance to disease. But I think that contagious (and infective diseases like tetanus) are still going to occur in many, even if they do everything to safeguard their health. And it's also true that it's beneficial to go through the milder illnesses to improve immune function. I think, again, that it is a difficult decision in many cases. And I don't know much about immunocompromised children or adults. I think they are in a different category, but may be more severely affected than healthy people by either the vaccines or the diseases. I'd have to say they should consult with both allopathic and alternative practitioners and then research the issues in books and on the Internet to decide what to do.

I think it's an interesting question where the blame lies when harm results from parents taking what turns out to be advice which wasn't good for them in their individual situation. In many cases the blame rests squarely with the parents, but in others, when the parents are uneducated or too accepting of authority, it's easy to see that they have been indoctrinated into acceptance of medical and industry indoctrination. On the other hand, they may be too apt to not think critically and to believe extreme views. I think it's too extreme to say that no vaccine should ever be given, that they're all much more dangerous than they are protective. They ARE certainly often very dangerous, and parents must research each individual vaccine and disease.

I think if there were no mandates, then it would ultimately work out in a beneficial, non-coercive way. Once there were tens of thousands of children who had not gotten the MMR (or hep-B), and there will be once parents see enough autistic children and hear about the dangers of the vaccine, or who waited till three, or whatever, then we would have data to look at outcomes, including in very long-term studies, how much less lifetime risk of cancer (etc.) there was in those who never got the MMR.


I do not see Dan's "perch" in the right margin, so I will put this here. Meryl Streep Saturday night at a fundraiser for the Human Rights Campaign:

“If you think people got mad when they thought the government was coming after their guns, wait until they come and try to take away our happiness,” Streep said to a two-minute long standing ovation.

“We have the right to live our lives, with God or without, as we choose,” Streep said. “There is a prohibition against the establishment of a state religion in our constitution, and we have the right to choose with whom we live, whom we love, AND WHO AND WHAT GETS TO INTERFERE WITH OUR BODIES. As Americans, men, women, people, gay, straight, LGBTG. All of us have the human right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”



s regards moderation of comments, I think some of the ad hominem insults and misinformation on this thread amounts to abuse of both myself and Cia. The following was aimed at me:-

"There is simply no justification for ever injecting a person with stainless steel particles, only one of a long list of contaminants. Doesn't matter what the disease is or how bad the epidemic."
( So better to die from a disease than receive a contaminated vaccine? - NOT my choice-better to campaign to 'clean up' the vaccines- make the manufacturers accountable).

"Jenny apparently doesn't like anyone pointing out the now abundant science that shows that successive yearly flu vaccines, with or without mercury, result in less immunity to contagious illness."

Sorry-I've NEVER heard of this so called 'abundant science' about flu jabs affecting immunity to contagious diseases. What diseases? Where are the links? Where is the proof?"

No, Jenny, the stainless steel example was not aimed at you. It was "aimed" at everyone in this discussion. That is my opinion, which you don't like and want to suppress. As for the science of flu vaccines, you earlier told *me* that you don't need to be lectured by me on the science. So why are you asking now? Normally I would be more than happy to share, but not in this instance. You have stated that you know everything there is to know on the subject and you don't want any information from me.

John Stone


Barry's analogy is not accurate in this case. It is more a case of the relatively unlikely event of getting the disease which you don't have in the first place and which mostly is not very dangerous (though unpleasant) against the unquantified risks of having a product which is not properly safety tested every year, with the public being manipulated and in some cases being forced to have it against their will by an industry and their surrogates in government, who pretend mortality is much higher than it is. It is a distortion of public policy for commercial ends. I understand that people feel "safer" by having it but I think this is mostly based on propaganda rather than informed consent. I don't like it partly because people are being misled.

Jenny Allan

I'm very pleased to hear AoA's policy is still pro safe effective vaccines and informed choice, and also to uphold parental rights to chose or not choose vaccines for their own children. I was beginning to wonder if Dan Olmstead's untimely death, had precipitated a change of stance, to one hellbent on banning all vaccines and damn the consequences. Like Cia, I have concerns about vaccine safety, efficacy and particularly accountability, and campaign to improve things. I date back to the days of diptheria and typhoid outbreaks, and narrowly avoided being bitten by a rabid dog in Thailand some years ago; ( it sunk its teeth into a German tourist further up the queue). Banning all vaccines, including a citizen's right to choose them, having weighed up the possible risks against the benefits, amounts to 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater'.

ATSC -I hope you don't mind my repeating this paragraph from your excellent and thoughtful comment:-
"I think that if parents decide not to vaccinate because of something an anti-vaxxer said and the child dies from what is called a vpd, blame will be put on the "antivaxxers". instead of where it rightfully belongs on parents who do what other people tell them to do instead of taking the subject seriously, doing their own research, considering risk factors that might apply to their family, and most important of all, standing by their decision."

Totally agree ATSC -and thank goodness for sensible moderate comments.



This was not a good analogy:

"Would you chose to get on an airplane, if you knew there was a 50% chance that it was going to crash ?

Would you chose to ride in a car, if you knew there was a 50% chance that the brakes were going to fail ?"

Getting a flu vaccine does not carry a 50% risk of killing you. It's more like being offered a new drug to treat a serious illness, and being told there's only a 50% chance that it will work. A lot of people would take it anyway. Like Dorit saying that the flu vaccine a few years ago was not very effective, but was better than nothing.


Thank you, Jenny, I agree with you. I clicked on your link to the vaccine bullies article, and it was what I had thought. I don't know why people can't express their thoughts with civility.



I have recognized in many comments that many families these days depend on both partners working full-time. It is also true that most women just don't want to nurse their baby for many months or years, and I doubt if intensive education would change that. And I don't know for how many it is true, but it was agonizingly painful for me for the first nine weeks. My mother begged me to give up and bottle feed the way she had done me and my brother. Then the pain suddenly stopped and from then on it was easy, and I could read while I nursed, which made it wonderful. But not many women would have continued something so painful for that long. I asked a lactation consultant, nurses at the doctor's office, and the leader of La Leche League, but none was able to help.

I had a friend who had inverted nipples, and she said she couldn't nurse her son for that reason. My sister-in-law was extremely enthusiastic about the idea, but when her son was born with a strep infection and in intensive care for a couple of weeks, she said she tried but wasn't able to nurse him. She later didn't even try for her other two children. She was wealthy and stayed at home, she didn't have to work, but for some reason didn't nurse any of her three children.

Some women love the role of stay-at-home mother. I did. When I was a child, I didn't know any women who worked: all of them stayed home with their children. It seems strange that now it seems so impossible for women to stay at home and live on one salary, even for a few years. I believe that most women if they were really committed to the idea could find a way to stay home with their baby. If it was a crummy job with no maternity leave, they could quit and find another one when the child started kindergarten. A lot of women live on welfare and stay home with their children.

But it's also true that many women don't really like having babies and don't want to give up their life as a working adult and a life outside the home. A woman at the play group I took C to told me that she really didn't like taking care of an infant. Whom she had never nursed. A guy in my department's wife had a baby: he was thrilled, a devoted dad, and wanted to have another one, but she didn't like taking care of a baby and didn't want to have another one. When I got Time magazine I used to read about Joel Stein's life: he loved having a son, and wanted another one, but his wife didn't like taking care of a baby and didn't want another one. I don't understand it, I would have loved to have a husband eager to have another baby and delighted to support all of us as we created a snug and nurturing home.

After a rocky start, nursing became very easy, C absolutely loved it and I got to read for long periods of time. At first I thought I'd wean her by nine months or a year, but when that age came, she still loved it so much that I didn't see how I could take it away from her. I had thought it was weird to nurse a toddler when I saw women at La Leche League doing it, but ultimately I thought well, it's satisfying and healthy for both of us, so who cares?

My Iranian friend put her baby in daycare at the age of six weeks old. She had a good job at a lab and was an assistant professor. It was really expensive, like $800 a month, but she loved it and thought it was very enriching for her daughter, who got all the shots and never reacted to anything, turned out to be a wonderful person, extremely healthy and sociable, and academically very gifted, in med school now.

I think our society is what it is. I don't think breastfeeding rates are going to go up much, and I think most people are going to continue putting their babies in daycare, even though they could find a better alternative if they thought it was important. Most people think the world is great the way it is, people have babies, vaccinate them with everything, put them in daycare, and the kids turn out great. Except for the ones whose children turn out vaccine-damaged. And then their friends whose lives continue to be great despite vaccines and daycare will drop them as being depressing and bad luck to hang around.

We'll have to see what alternatives we can provide at the outskirts of society for those worried enough about the vaccines to refuse some or all of them.



" I went to WhyIimmunize.org, and guess what? It was really Dorit Reiss' blog Voices for Vaccines. She's branching out. "

Clicking on www.whyichoose.org/promote.html in the Campaign Kit Supplement also takes you to Voices for Vaccines.

Do you have any idea why Maurice Hilleman's name appears on their list of Scientific Advisory Board members? He died in 2005.


"If they have made a well-researched choice informed by their love for their child, then they can find solace even if the worst occurs and the child is disabled, even killed, by a vaccine, or killed or disabled by a vaccine-preventable disease."

I agree with this so long as the parents are fully-informed before making a decision that they are comfortable with. No one should be forced into compliance through the use of fear tactics like these examples from the Preteen Campaign Kit -Vaccine Indoctrination Activities:

"Whooping cough is the common name for pertussis ­ a disease that can make you cough so hard it breaks your ribs! It could also make you vomit (“throw up”) and have a hard time drinking, swallowing food or breathing. You can be sick for weeks or even months."

"Anyone can catch this serious disease (meningococcal). Some people who catch this disease lose their limbs arms, fingers, and legs may be cut off (amputated). Others may become deaf, have brain damage, and some even die."

Risk factors for these diseases and their complications are not discussed and treatments such as Vitamin C and homeopathic remedies for pertussis are not mentioned. It is simply, "Get these vaccines or you will suffer horribly, lose limbs, become brain-damaged or die!" which is, of course, nonsense, but highly effective propaganda.

I think that if parents decide not to vaccinate because of something an anti-vaxxer said and the child dies from what is called a vpd, blame will be put on the "antivaxxers". instead of where it rightfully belongs on parents who do what other people tell them to do instead of taking the subject seriously, doing their own research, considering risk factors that might apply to their family, and most important of all, standing by their decision.

Breastfeeding, nutrition, adequate sleep, exercise, sunlight, hygienic practices such as hand-washing etc all play important roles in achieving and maintaining good health. This is another side of the coin, and if people neglect their own health and the health of their children, and decide not to vaccinate simply because they read something somewhere, I don't think they have the right to turn around and blame someone else if their child gets sick. Parents should take responsibility for the choices they make on behalf of their children, after all no one but their family will have to live with the consequences - like those of us raising vaccine-injured children. Unfortunately, we were scared by the propaganda and did what our doctors told us to do.

Jenny Allan

s regards moderation of comments, I think some of the ad hominem insults and misinformation on this thread amounts to abuse of both myself and Cia. The following was aimed at me:-

"There is simply no justification for ever injecting a person with stainless steel particles, only one of a long list of contaminants. Doesn't matter what the disease is or how bad the epidemic."
( So better to die from a disease than receive a contaminated vaccine? - NOT my choice-better to campaign to 'clean up' the vaccines- make the manufacturers accountable).

"Jenny apparently doesn't like anyone pointing out the now abundant science that shows that successive yearly flu vaccines, with or without mercury, result in less immunity to contagious illness."

Sorry-I've NEVER heard of this so called 'abundant science' about flu jabs affecting immunity to contagious diseases. What diseases? Where are the links? Where is the proof?

"She can believe what she wants and she is free to get a yearly vaccine while it's legal for her to do so, but she shouldn't get upset when people here point out the science"

What a load of cobblers! Since when was flu vaccine illegal -and sorry- still no links to this so called 'science'.

"That would be unfair to readers who don't know. We have a responsibility to put the truth out so that people aren't misinformed by our discussions."

Ah yes -the Earth is round the sky is blue......... and SOME AoA commenters regard their opinions as more equal than others.

As they say in certain circles 'The science is in.".......................EXCEPT.................It isn't!

John Stone


Dan was frequently disturbed by comments but you can't really stop them coming. There has certainly been no change of policy.

Aimee Doyle


" I think one problem is women's liberation, that many women now (meaning last fifty years) think it is their right to work full-time at a demanding, well-paid job, and society needs to enable it. Theoretically one could pump breast milk and make it work, but it would be very hard and not many women would do it."

This is not a matter of entitlement. I just want to point out that many families NEED two incomes simply to keep going. I know moms who would have loved to stay home with their kids, but simply could not afford to do so. Wages have been flat for several decades. There is also no mandated maternity leave in the United States so that a mother and baby could more easily fall into a breastfeeding rhythm. I personally know moms who have tried to breastfeed - and their employers made it difficult or impossible for them to pump at work.

And in fact, it's the minority of women with kids who work at "well-paid jobs."

Jenny Allan

@Cia Parker "Why do so many of you speak to me so insultingly and attempt to censor my thought? Is this a new religious war of Catholics against Protestants? I am concerned about people dying of vaccine-preventable diseases, and you should be too. Since the vaccines are often so damaging, it is sometimes a difficult choice to make, but no one should forget that contagious diseases can be terrifying, painful, and deadly."
I am going to quote Dan Olmstead again, since his words have been driven down, obliterated by subsequent posts, which have become ever more extreme:-

“If you believe, say, that the main task is to get mercury out of the flu shot; or that promoting a more selective schedule could significantly reduce morbidity and mortality; or that preserving choice is the heart of the matter – well, you risk being run out of Autism Town if that doesn't happen to be their agenda du jour.
It’s their way or the highway, preferably underneath a Mack truck"

It has not escaped my notice the same bunch of protagonists pushed the same anti all vaccines agenda on the comment thread of Dan's 'The bullies within' article. I am sure Dan would have intervened on this thread to disallow some of these comments, which Brian Deer would be proud of. I am not sure whether Deer or some of his Science Blogs etc cronies coined the term 'rabid anti-vaxxers' to describe AoA editors and commentors but- think about it. With 'friends' like these who needs enemies?


White Rose,

I think there are several vaccines most implicated in causing autism: the hep-B vaccine, MMR, flu, and DTaP vaccines. Although I"ve also read of the Hib and varicella vaccines causing autism. I think the extremely large number of vaccines routinely given now is also a major cause in the explosion of autism we see now.

Until the Hib vaccine's introduction in 1990 as a series for infants, the autism rate in the US was three per 10,000 children. I never knew or heard of autism growing up, because it was extremely rare (and caused by the DPT when it occurred). That suggests that those receiving few vaccines would have a greatly reduced risk of severe vaccine reaction.

I believe that parents who chose to give the DT series after the age of two (no pertussis) would incur very little risk of the child's reacting adversely. Little, not none. Those children who were not breastfed and in daycare would be at risk for Hib and pneumococcal disease, which have a fairly high rate of death and disability caused by them. They were not uncommon in the years right before the vaccines were introduced. Parents must study the issues involved carefully, but NO, I don't think it would be unreasonable to get these babies the Hib and/or Prevnar series after the age of four months old. And, if polio came back here, I think it would be reasonable to get the polio series. If rubella came back, it would be reasonable for girls to choose to get the vaccine before pregnancy, but the ultimate decision has to be theirs. As adults, I wouldn't give the rubella vaccine to children who still have a chance to get the mild disease naturally. It would also be reasonable to refuse the vaccines, but if your child is going to be in daycare, you'd better have a plan for protecting him. Although, again, the vaccines are required for children in daycare.

Why do so many of you speak to me so insultingly and attempt to censor my thought? Is this a new religious war of Catholics against Protestants? I am concerned about people dying of vaccine-preventable diseases, and you should be too. Since the vaccines are often so damaging, it is sometimes a difficult choice to make, but no one should forget that contagious diseases can be terrifying, painful, and deadly. Daniel Defoe's Journal of the Plague Year was not made up and planted in the antique books sections of libraries all over the world by Merck.

I believe that most children would be healthier without any vaccines. Is that not enough to establish my bona fides? But I'm not going to try to hide or deny the immense human suffering caused by contagious disease just because vaccines have proven so destructive to my family as well as millions more. Parents must make the decision much more carefully than they usually do, and should refuse to just take the entire schedule without question. They must look for information on both sides, certainly consider what their lives would be like if they caused autism in any of their children by one or more vaccines. Or asthma and allergies, etc. And then choose. If they have made a well-researched choice informed by their love for their child, then they can find solace even if the worst occurs and the child is disabled, even killed, by a vaccine, or killed or disabled by a vaccine-preventable disease. The only sin here would be to refuse to look at the truth, even if it's a child who suffered horribly and died from a VPD.



These are some of the sources from which I got my information. To me it seems undeniable that peanut oil in vaccines and other drugs has caused the modern, never-before-seen peanut allergy epidemic. Parents must read this information before consenting to any vaccines. That's all I can say. I think that Hib disease is the VPD which presents the greatest risk to babies in developed countries. I also think that the vaccine is effective, that it has wiped out Hib disease wherever it is used, but that it also has caused sometimes-fatal peanut allergy in one in fifty children. Very difficult decision to make. Breast feeding, no daycare, and homeopathic nosodes would be a better way to go than the vaccine, but not everyone can take that path.





From the ddrblog article: "Peanut Allergy
During the late 1940’s and throughout the fifties, peanut oil in penicillin was not suspect. It was used not only in this wonder drug, but in streptomycin, broad-spectrum antibiotics, injected epinephrine for asthma, in anesthetics and vaccines. Unknown to consumers, peanut oil was a popular ingredient in vitamins, skin cream and even infant formulas!
Prior to 1941, the literature shows no report of peanut allergies in adults or children. A survey of people showed self-reported peanut allergies in .3% of those born 1944-47, .4% of those born 1948-57, and .6% between 1959-67. In 2008, over 1% of people born 1944-67, reported allergies to nuts, including peanuts.
Articles published in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s show a growing awareness of peanut allergy, but the first formal study of peanut allergy in children was not launched until 1973, and then on only 114 kids. Doctors watched the mysterious rise in peanut allergies, but few asked “why?” By the early 1990’s tens of thousands of peanut allergic kindergartners entered school, not only in the U.S., but in Canada, the United Kingdom and in Australia. This allergy acceleration was concurrent with an unprecedented push of political, social, legal and economic reforms to alter and accelerate the vaccination schedule in these countries.
The Vaccine Connection
In 1964, pharmaceutical giant Merck announced a new vaccine ingredient promising to extend immunity: Adjuvant 65-4, containing up to 65% peanut oil as well as aluminum stearate. An adjuvant (from the Latin “adjuvare,” to enhance) is a vaccine additive that stimulates the immune system, upping the body’s production of antibodies to a pathogen. Adjuvants reduce production costs as the vaccine maker needs less of the expensvie antigen; they also increase a vaccine’s efficacy. They can also be dangerous; the more effective a vaccine, the greater the risk of allergies and other adverse effects.
The inventor of Adjuvant 65-4, Maurice Hilleman and his colleagues at Merck knew that allergic sensitization to the peanut oil in the adjuvant was a distinct possibility, but considered toxicity and allergenicity inevitable outcomes of vaccination. It was simply difficult to balance potency and safety.
The public clearly did not know what was being injected into their children, called by immunologist Charles Janeway, “the immunologist’s dirty little secret.” The peanut allergy epidemic in children was precipitated by vaccines. Lawsuits ensued, especially related to the DPT vaccine. By 1985, over 200 lawsuits were pending against four vaccine manufacturers. This litigious environment caused many pharmaceutical companies to abandon the lucrative vaccine market, causing a vaccine shortage. A solution: combination or conjugate vaccines.
Vaccines were combined for convenience. With speed and efficiency the U.S. Pediatric vaccination schedule took off, helped by President Clinton’s Childhood Immunization Initiative in the mid-nineties. By 1998, childhood vaccination rates were at an all time high. So was the incidence of peanut allergy in children. Between 1997 and 2002, the peanut-allergic pediatric population in the U.S. grew by and average of 58,000 children a year, and doubled between 2002 and 2008. By 2008, more than one million children under 18 and another two million adults were allergic to peanuts in the United States alone.
According to Heather Fraser, “vaccination was the elephant in the middle of the room. Researchers glanced at it, knew it was there, but were reluctant to get too close.” The possibility that hundreds of thousands of children have been sensitized to peanuts by ingredients in one or more routine pediatric vaccinations is just too much to conceive. But it is too obvious to deny. The real clue is the sudden rise in peanut allergy following the escalation of the pediatric vaccine schedule."


Apologies I seem to have screwed up the formatting with a post, please delete my previous one and use this which should be OK now
Dear Cia et al can we get some basic terminology correct, you, and others seem to use the terms “adjuvant” and “excipient” interchangeably: excipients are used in many medicines that are preserved as freeze dried “cakes” to help them re-dissolve quickly when the saline solution is added at the point of use to reconstitute the vaccine: the purpose of an excipient is to form this cake, they are inert. Adjuvant is added to some vaccines to help the immune response to the antigen that it is complexed with, and as by definition these have very limited solubility they will be little use as excipients, especially an oil based adjuvant.

Now in the example that you give of peanut oil being formulated with penicillin in the early days it is acting neither as an excipient, nor an adjuvant, but the peanut oil it was a method of slow release of the penicillin in order that the penicillin half life is extended by slowing its excretion. So this observation has precisely nothing, to do with vaccine adjuvants, and yes, Merck did do some experimental studies in man with flu vaccine and their experimental peanut oil adjuvant 65 but it was never licensed for human use, and as Fraser states in her book Merck dropped its further development.
Finally this old chestnut “it's about peanut oils being used in vaccines starting some 50? years ago, and I would bet are still today in proprietary "excipients" that don't list proprietary ingredients.”
Cia, & others who perpetuate this “non-disclosed” ingredient myth, you do realise don’t you that a full disclosure of all manufacturing ingredients has to be made as part of the licensing procedure, whether this information is commercially sensitive or not. These disclosures are made under terms of a confidentiality agreement with the licensing authorities such as the FDA or EMA or Japanese authorities etc. Full manufacturing records with all components have to be submitted for the pilot licensing batches, so there are no “hidden” or non-disclosed ingredients. In addition the manufacturing plants are liable to inspection at any time, without notice, so how many people do you think would have to involved in these mythical conspiracies to hide some “hidden” ingredient??

In Fraser’s book the only similarity she can show between the peanut protein (and remember AD 65 was an oil adjuvant) and the Haemophilus influenzae protein is a similar wide range of molecular weights, (20 to 63.4 kDa for peanut and 39 to 98 kDa for the outer membrane protein of Hi) but MW has little to determining antigenic specificity or cross reactivity.
Finally Cia there’s an article here https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/03/as-peanut-allergies-rise-trying-to-determine-a-cause/ that you might find interesting as to modern theories regarding the causes of peanut allergy, it certainly has nothing to do with a non-existent adjuvant in a vaccine!
But….I do agree with you that HiB vaccine is highly effective at preventing a devastating childhood disease: “A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of PRP-OMP vaccine was performed among Navajo infants vaccinated at 2 and 4 months of age. Vaccine efficacy was evaluated for 3,486 infants who completed the primary two-dose regimen. Fourteen cases of invasive Hib disease occurred in the placebo group compared with one case in the vaccine group, an efficacy of 93% (95% CI = 45%-99%) (M. Santosham, personal communication). Among infants who received only one dose of vaccine or placebo, eight cases of Hib disease occurred in the placebo group, compared with none in the vaccine group (p=0.008).

White Rose


"Horrible that so many are trying to shut down the discussions and leave only one option"

presumably you are referring to the news blackout , massive international state censorship forever repeating the fake mantra "safe & effective" , that continually denies the vaccine injured any fair hearing (led by the scoundrels at the BBC , which is not beholden to any Pharma advertising revenue).

Or are you referring to Senator Pan and his sb277 draconian Nazi law .

"Close to no children are dying these days of Hib disease, while 1,000 a year were dying of it before the vaccine series for infants was introduced in 1990."

Yes totally agree now up to 50M children worldwide have been left vaccine maimed into the falsely named condition AUTISM .Lives ruined , families torn asunder by the VACCINE LIE

Shame on you CIA


I was looking at your links. Very impressive, they've got all their bases covered for a really complete middle school indoctrination effort, with lots of fun activities built in. Awesome rap. I went to WhyIimmunize.org, and guess what? It was really Dorit Reiss' blog Voices for Vaccines. She's branching out.

david m burd

Eindeker, As to your wondering about peanut allergies, you can further search (below) Doctor Buttram and Heather Fraser when you have the time; it's about peanut oils being used in vaccines starting some 50? years ago, and I would bet are still today in proprietary "excipients" that don't list proprietary ingredients. You take the time if you want. However you might consider that deadly peanut allergies were non-existent until the Age of Modern Vaccines. Think about it. Here's the reference paragraph you might pursue:

"As part of his researched testimony, Doctor Buttram chronicled the use of peanut oil in vaccines, which proves rather interesting. After penicillin was invented (1945) researchers found that the kidneys excreted it within 3 hours thereby rendering it ineffective. In order to prolong penicillin’s action it was mixed with 4 to 4.8 percent beeswax and peanut oil. As a result, penicillin was slowly released as the body metabolized the oil. To further extend penicillin’s effects, penicillin with aluminum monostearate was added to make a solution suspended in peanut oil that kept blood levels of penicillin up to 24 to 26 hours. In 1964 Merck produced the adjuvant 65-4 that contained up to 65 percent peanut oil plus Arlasel A, aluminum stearate, and other ingredients with 13-fold higher levels of antibodies than previous vaccines. During the 1970s and 1980s peanut oil became a common practice and ingredient in vaccines. Coincidentally, peanut allergies began rising exponentially in children as more vaccines were administered. Heather Fraser in her 2010 book, The History of the Peanut Allergy Epidemic, documents this."


I totally agree. There ARE many sides to this debate. Horrible that so many are trying to shut down the discussions and leave only one option. I really don't know what the best course would be for an entire country. No mandates, that's for sure, and way fewer vaccines given, but beyond that, I don't know. You posted really interesting links.


Have you read Heather Fraser's The Peanut Allergy Epidemic? There's no question that the adjuvant introduced by Merck in 1964 had peanut oil in it. What was it, Adjuvant 54? I can't remember. It was never licensed in the US because the arlacel in it caused cancer in lab mice, but at that time Hilleman, the famous vaccine developer, was enthusiastic at the use of vegetable oils as adjuvants in vaccines and other medications rather than the mineral oil which had caused a lot of serious problems up until that time. He thought vegetable oils would be safer, though he knew it was very likely to cause an allergy, but thought that the benefits outweighed the risks. It was licensed to be used in the UK and other countries, and many adjuvants patented in the US had on their patent applications that they contained peanut oil. A law was passed in the early '70s saying that vaccines didn't have to report all the ingredients in their secret formulas, and peanut were considered a "known safe" ingredient.

Peanut allergies never existed anywhere in the world until the US in 1970 when a child got a vaccine and then dropped dead when he ate peanut ice cream. And then they increased, although never that many until 1990, when the Hib series for infants was introduced. And then within three years peanut allergy incidence in the US tripled. Everywhere the Hib vaccine was introduced, it was the same, from zero peanut allergies to one, then two percent of vaccinated children. Fraser provides the official sources and the statistics for many countries. She says it's also true that the peanut protein closely resembles the Hib bacteria, enabling cross-reactivity, so that the immune system is sensitized by the vaccine to react to substances resembling the Hib pathogen, such as peanuts.

In the '40s, cottonseed oil was used to adjuvant several drugs, including penicillin. And then a lot of people developed cotton seed allergies for the first time, many of them dying of them. When they figured out what was happening, they took the cottonseed oil out of drugs, and the allergies and deaths completely stopped.

There's no doubt that the Hib vaccine causes peanut allergy at a rate of one in fifty in the US now. Beyond that, it's up to the parent to consider. Hib disease can be very serious when it occurs in babies, and it wasn't uncommon before the vaccine. Peanut allergy is frightening, and/but it only kills a small number of children a year. Diabetes caused by the vaccine is another consideration, but I don't know how often it occurs. Women who don't breastfeed their baby for at least a year have a very difficult decision to make.


Thank you. Instead of teaching natural immunity - human lactation - they are indoctrinating about vaccination. Modern public schools, especially in California, are nothing more than brainwashing processing plants. People really need to homeschool now. AND if SB18 passes, the state will determine what constitutes adequate education. You can bet that homeschooling will be in trouble, especially if it isn't teaching about vaccines - according to the state's standards. Because according to Pan, a child who isn't vaccinated or knowledgeable about vaccination, is being mistreated.


Linda, Cia, Hans, Jenny...

Your discussion here shows that there are many sides to the debate. It's a pity that most children and young adults don't get to hear more than one side.

Unfortunately, while schools should be teaching children how to think and not what to think, the CDC is using teachers and the school system to indoctrinate them through their Vaccine Week programme: the Vaccine Catechism (see the Jeopardy activity) , rap songs, and by the use of peer pressure to make them conform. Presumably, neither teachers nor children can opt out of this programme, the lessons or the I choose/I immunize photo shoot. There's no room for discussion.

Vaccination has become worse than a religion because at least at the Catholic schools I attended, we could ask our teachers questions and even respectfully disagree with them. And no one forced us to take communion.

Preteen Vaccine Week

Campaign Kit Supplement - activities

Vaccine Rap Targeting Preteens:



It would be good to teach breastfeeding from kindergarten on. I think one problem is women's liberation, that many women now (meaning last fifty years) think it is their right to work full-time at a demanding, well-paid job, and society needs to enable it. Theoretically one could pump breast milk and make it work, but it would be very hard and not many women would do it. And it depends on most women being willing to do what's best for their baby rather than carrying on life as usual. I'm not sure that most women would be willing to do it, even if they knew how valuable breastfeeding was. But it would be very good to try it. And the shills have pointed out to me examples of breast fed babies dying from VPDs like Hib meningitis. It's miraculous but not fool-proof (although of course vaccines aren't either).

The other thing is that while vaccines cause most immune deficiency and most autoimmune disease, so falling vaccine rates would reduce both, there are still going to be some healthy, well-fed children who die of measles or meningitis. From my standpoint, I'd be glad to give up vaccines (we both got a tetanus booster eleven years ago that should be good for another thirty years), and take our chances. I'm not going to get the pneumonia, flu, Tdap, or shingles vaccines, but recognize that I might die from one of these diseases which might be prevented by the vaccines. But there are so many variables, so many unknowns, that I think it's good to inform people of both sides and then let them make their choice. I'm willing to take our chances, but don't want to try to make other people take theirs.


"Also, of course, the one in fifty with peanut allergy caused by the vaccine." Cia this is another myth there has never been a peanut oil based adjuvant licensed for use it vaccines. Experimental ones may have been tried in animal work, but it was precisely because of worries that it might trigger allergy if it was used that it was never licensed. Give one credible source for your statement please.

John & Jenny please read the one page link I gave "I guess one doesn't know what proportion of UK testing labs were involved: you would think it would not hard for the to aggregate all otheir results.
The results were from five primary care influenza sentinel swabbing surveillance schemes from England (two schemes), Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
The results were quite clear, across all age ranges of those patients having a swab confirmed flu infection only 14% were vaccinated, whereas in a similar number of matched controls who did not have the flu 27% had been vaccinated clearly showing the effect of vaccination
Mr Litten until you provide actual source references for what you claim: "90% flu vaccines contain thiomerosal" or the supposed document from Nuffield Health re "product (super poison) Themiserol " did they misspell it as well??? or No vaccines = No Autism (disproven by personal testimonies many times it's not worth discussing these with you any more and I do have to laugh at your latest little jibe regarding "someone" paying me, if only it was true!!!


I didn't say to tell pregnant women about breastfeeding. I said start teaching breastfeeding in kindergarten and to continue teaching breastfeeding (human lactation) in biology and health classes all the way through school, so that by the time children are mothers and fathers, they aren't hearing it for the first time. They can teach it by that point and they would understand exactly what they need to do. They would be well prepared to be parents.

The reason why that doesn't happen is that children so empowered would not be vulnerable to Pharma once they reach adulthood, not only with regard to feeding their infants, but in dealing with the health care system and being able to minimize their children's contact with it.

It requires a cultural shift, which requires that our culture get a good scrubbing to clean it of hypocrisy and dirty tactics embedded for more than half a century, aimed at mothers and fathers, to get them to buy formula. It's an ingrained error, a thorn that needs to come out.

Of course, public health doesn't look to mothers to make their children healthy, even though mothers were endowed with the tools necessary to do just that. No, health comes through a needle and regular pediatric visits where children are not only injected with poison, but also exposed to all the neighborhood pathogens.

Re doctors and breastfeeding, it has been my experience that their education is extremely limited with regard to human lactation, and while they may give lip service to breastfeeding, their breastfeeding promotion/protection is usually half-hearted and a lot of babies whose mothers set out to breastfeed end up on formula.


Hans Litten,

Close to no children are dying these days of Hib disease, while 1,000 a year were dying of it before the vaccine series for infants was introduced in 1990. The vaccine has Hib sugar and tetanus toxoid complex, also at least one brand has 225 mcg of aluminum. I'm sure that a child who got the three or four shots in the series would have gotten a fair amount of aluminum. The next question is whether it's better to have a thousand babies a year die of Hib disease or have millions of children who never got the vaccine and didn't get any aluminum from it. Every parent must think about this question. Also, of course, the one in fifty with peanut allergy caused by the vaccine. Now go look at children on the playground at any school. Something like 95% of them have gotten all doses of all vaccines. So again, is it better to write off the thousand children who would die every year without the vaccine so as not to have to worry about what the aluminum might have done to those who got the aluminum-containing version? I think the 10% of children in special ed now is an appalling figure, largely caused by vaccines.

But I think it's hilarious that you think it's so obvious that it's MUCH better to let children die than EVER give them the vaccine that would have saved their lives. You're MUCH too nervous about aluminum to EVER let anyone get a vaccine containing aluminum, no matter HOW many lives were lost by your squeamishness. I kind of doubt that you'll be able to work out a comedy routine, though, you'd lose most of your audience when you asked them if they wouldn't rather see their child die than ever get any vaccine for him.



I certainly support all the measures you suggested, and they would make a world of difference to children's health. Absolutely, every pregnant woman should be given the information on the miracles of breastfeeding, and they really are miraculous.

It's unfortunate that not all pregnant women don't commit whole-heartedly to breastfeeding until self-weaning. Extremely unfortunate that so many millions of small children are in daycare. Tragic that so many women can't take off a few years to raise their babies. But it's been decades now that every parenting magazine has articles nearly every month on how wonderful breastfeeding is, and I think all doctors recommend it these days. So why are so few women still nursing their baby at three months old? Do they not care that they're making it much more likely that their child get a serious disease?

I agree that we need to work in all of these areas to make a healthier society for our children. But there are just too many unknowns for me to say that no child should ever get the Hib vaccine. it wasn't a serious problem until the DPT was started in 1948, and then it quadrupled in incidence by 1968, because the DPT suppressed immune function for at least a month after the shot. So one question is what would happen to rates of Hib disease if most people stopped getting the pertussis vaccine. Maybe they would drop to pre-'48 levels even with no Hib vaccine. It still wasn't a huge problem because antibiotics worked very well to treat Hib disease until the '80s, when they were no longer that effective and rates of invasive Hib disease soared, until one in 200 babies was getting a serious case before two years old, with 1,000 deaths a year. And then the Hib vaccine lowered incidence and deaths to close to zero. It also created the sometimes fatal peanut allergy epidemic and increased diabetes rates in children. However, it saved many babies from dying or being disabled by Hib disease.

I would HATE to be a young working woman grappling with this decision. I would urge her to beg her partner to support her while she stayed home with the baby and nursed him. Urge her to ask her mother to come live with them and take care of the baby. It's just a very difficult decision and there is no perfect answer. I would certainly make the young mother read fifty VAERS cases on Hib disease, look at the large number over many years of babies killed by the vaccine. Also true accounts of babies killed by the disease.

I'm going to have to stop there. It's overwhelming. Most people at this point are going to go by their basic worldview to make the decision. I think next we need to get information on how many young women would be willing to nurse the baby for at least a year, and/or look for alternatives to daycare. How many absolutely have to work full-time, and how many absolutely WANT to work full-time. I'd say that young women who are NOT going to nurse the baby for at least a year and who are going to leave him in daycare, one thing, all daycares require these shots, so it would be out of her hands. Maybe it would be a good idea to have some daycares require the vaccines and others which didn't. Parents would have to be aware when they left their baby at the latter that he will be exposed to pertussis, meningitis, and flu, and then decide how they felt about that. And we should certainly promote the use of homeopathic nosodes for the diseases the parents wanted protection against.

Jenny Allan

"I guess one doesn't know what proportion of UK testing labs were involved: you would think it would not hard for the to aggregate all otheir results."

.........and that's just one of the problems John. In the UK the official medical advice is NOT to contact a doctor in suspected flu cases, unless there are other concerns. Most of these surveys just rely on GP reported cases and those with complications, which land them in hospital. Flu in the vaccinated and unvaccinated will inevitably be under reported. Free NHS vaccinations are only available to children, OAPs and persons with co-morbidities in the UK, which will skew any collected data, since elderly persons with co-morbidities are those most likely to have complications. I'm afraid I have little time for purely statistical analyses without a clinical input. In the Cochrane paper linked by Hans Litten, 1% of vaccinated persons got flu; 4% of unvaccinated persons got flu. With large numbers involved this is actually quite significant. Again I don't know exactly how they collected the data.

On the bright side, if Eindeker is correct about mercury being removed from all UK flu vaccines, then that is surely a victory for common sense. I would like to think the campaigning on AoA columns helped to influence the decision. There have been quite a few small but significant reported concerns about vaccines and all power to Dr Thomas and his colleagues for 'informed consent'. Having a US President 'on board' is huge, and your reported BMJ article gives me hope. These persons all claim to be pro-vaccine, but a full safety investigation and audit of ALL vaccines is long overdue.

david m burd

John and Eindeker, and All, From the reference Eindeker supplied the author wrote:

"There is strong evidence that pregnant women have a much higher risk of serious illness as a result of flu, compared with the general population. The risks are highest in the last three months of pregnancy. US studies of the H1N1 (‘Swine Flu’) pandemic in 2009 found that pregnant women were four times as likely to develop serious illness and up to five times as likely to be admitted to hospital, compared with the general population."

However, what is MOST LIKELY is the rushed-into-production H1N1 flu vaccine that was fear-mongered into the great majority of pregnant mothers-to-be in the U.S. also contained 25 micrograms of Hg, on top of the "regular: flu shot ALSO having 25 micrograms of Hg (ethlymercury), and it would odds on there would be additional toxic contaminants. But, naturally for an ardent vaccine advocate writing the above article, he/she would blame the basically harmless flu virus, instead of the incredible toxicity of the vaccines, following the lie by the CDC that Thimerosal in vaccines is totally harmless.

By the way, in early 2010 the CDC ordered about 60 million unused H1N1 vaccine doses to be shipped back and destroyed as "toxic waste" - you can't make it up what these CDC criminals do.

Hans Litten

"But I don't think that because vaccines have aluminum, formaldehyde, ethylene glycol, foreign proteins, antibiotics, etc., that that makes them always too dangerous to give anyone."

Have you thought about a career in stand-up comedy ?


"Being adamant about completely forbidding vaccines means that you're accepting responsibility for those killed by the diseases."

Nonsense. The FDA does not approve many drugs because they are deemed not safe enough (or at least they used to operate that way). That doesn't mean that for some those drugs would not be effective. They even close down factories and raid clinics when unsafe drugs are being used. Not with contaminated vaccines.

You want informed consent? Ok. What would informed consent look like for Hib? It would start in the first years of school being taught the importance of human milk and long-term (years) breastfeeding and that lesson would continue and increase in complexity of content all the way up through high school and college. Every educated citizen should know and be able to name, as a matter of common cultural knowledge, ALL the known immune factors present in human milk, and the nature of human lactation, how it works, how it doesn't work, and how it protects our species from specific pathogenic invasion, like Hib. That would be a start - and then breastfeeding would be (once again) the normal way to feed an infant and synthetic pharmaceutical laboratory derived inferior formula AND vaccines would become largely both unnecessary and too dangerous to consider. AND public health policy should aggressively seek to institute paid maternity leave and policies which support and make long-term breastfeeding possible.



But it would be wrong to be paternalistic and take the freedom of choice from these young parents. I had a friend who, when I said the information is readily available in books on vaccines and on the Internet, all you have to do is type in Deaths caused by the hep-B vaccine, or whatever, and you get millions of hits and moving stories about those killed by either the vaccine or the disease. She said yes, but what about the poor illiterate people on welfare who didn't have a computer. I said they could go to the public library. She said what if they don't have the bus fare to get to the library. What if they are illiterate and don't know how to use the computer. She said they had to believe their Medicaid physicians, who were too busy saving children's lives 24/7/365 that they didn't have even five minutes to spend learning about the dangers of vaccines.

At that point I'd have to say Survival of the fittest. Those who are completely incompetent in gathering new crucially important information and deciding what to do with it are on their own. All young parents now know about the vaccine debate, and honestly I think all but about five in the country are able to find and use computers. Those who are completely incompetent to learn basic facts about vaccines and contagious disease are also going to be the ones whose children die when they get measles or pertussis and don't recognize that they have pneumonia and can't breathe. But what can you do? You can't take everyone's children away from them and have them be raised in state-operated institutions. Or maybe Pan would support that.



I still don't agree. I completely believe that all vaccines have ingredients which are dangerous for between a few and many, possibly all. I do not agree that this means that none should ever be given to anyone. Most of the children in schools have gotten all the recommended vaccines, and most appear to be unaffected by them. OK, half have allergies etc., but they're alive and functioning. And many are alive but not functioning very well. I total recognize all of that.

But I don't think it's fair to say that vaccines have to be completely safe for everyone or none should ever be given. We don't hold any other pharmaceutical drug or medical intervention to that standard. Most people recognize that they may have a serious infection and decide to take an antibiotic for it, EVEN knowing that they may prove to be intolerant of or allergic to the antibiotic, and may unexpectedly die if they take it.

I'm just asking that parents be aware of enough facts about the vaccines and the diseases that they can make an informed choice. There is no perfect choice which will result in health and happiness for all. Get any vaccine and yes, it may kill or disable you. Get them all and your chances are much higher of death etc. from the vaccines. Don't get them, and a certain number are going to die or be disabled by the diseases. The factors are different for every vaccine, every disease, and no one can ever be sure he has made the right choice. But that's life.

But I don't think that because vaccines have aluminum, formaldehyde, ethylene glycol, foreign proteins, antibiotics, etc., that that makes them always too dangerous to give anyone. We should work to improve them. There should be no mandates, ever. But we should also recognize that we don't see many dangerous cases of contagious disease these days because nearly everyone has gotten the vaccines for them. We'd have to see what the picture would be if few, none, or even half stopped getting the vaccines. As a society, we'd be healthier with no vaccines. On an individual level, that wouldn't be the case for many. Being adamant about completely forbidding vaccines means that you're accepting responsibility for those killed by the diseases.

Hans Litten



Cia and All,
My other problem with "letting the parents choose" is that I know full well that young parents, who have every right to become parents, have also most likely just emerged from 12 or more years of government school indoctrination where they were taught not to question authority, to follow experts and that vaccines were handed down with the tablets and are necessary for human life to exist on this planet. They go straight from that brainwashing to a medical system that reinforces the lies.

IF the health care system all of a sudden started telling the truth, there would be no vaccination program, so that isn't going to happen. It would more likely be a message that the above described folks would not be able to internalize and utilize the way they would if they had another 10 or 20 years of life experience ( and some not even then).

There are people with varying levels of ability to research on their own and to absorb information and then there is all the propaganda. I don't think it is fair to expect a lot of people to be able to choose for themselves, when we know that the products are so dangerous. Health professionals are licensed precisely because they are supposed to be able to, with their in depth understanding of medical science, guide patients to the right decision and health care for them. Our health care system has broken down and those who are LICENSED to function as patient advocates are now patient predators and carpetbaggers. That is at the root of the problem. I don't think people with a low IQ , and there are many, many of them, should be taken advantage of (and it's not just those with lesser intellectual ability) because they aren't able to sort it out. Everyone, of all levels of intelligence, knowledge and maturity deserves to live in this society without being preyed upon. That's what regulatory agencies are supposed to be there for. To make sure that dangerous products are not on the market.

Look, it has been known for at least 30 years that hydrogenated oils are deadly. These laboratory made oils are banned in restaurants in many of our large cities. Food labels are marked with the amount of trans fat on them in order to warn/inform the public. Yet, supermarkets still use these poisons in cheap (and sometimes expensive) processed foods. Restaurants across this country still use them. The number of deaths and disability from these poisonous oils is unknown but is certainly astronomical. Known to block coronary arteries, these oils are dished up without a peep from our regulatory agencies while heart disease is the #1 cause of death.

Telling people should not substitute for appropriate regulation of criminal industries, because there will always be people who don't understand and who get hurt. That is not acceptable.

John Stone


The link Eindeker sent is taking me a while to fathom but I see only 1,155 cases of A or B type flu identified in a population of 64m. When it comes to the over 65s I see only 63 cases, and more of them had had the vaccine than not despite the obsession of elderly people with getting their flu jab. Also they are saying that in the rather remote possibility of someone over 65 getting A or B type flu the vaccine was less than 30% effective. Again, it looks like the labs got more than twice many cases that were not A or B type than were (in the case of the over 65s nearly 5 times as many).

I guess one doesn't know what proportion of UK testing labs were involved: you would think it would not hard for the to aggregate all otheir results.


You are completely missing my point. Besides the pro and vs re vaccination, there is the fact of contamination. As I said earlier, stainless steel and other wayward particles and poisonous substances found in human vaccines should end the discussion right there. Just on that one factor, it should be (and would be with any other product) - GAME OVER.



Serological tests on army recruits in 1960 showed that 99% of them had antibodies to measles from having had natural infections. Please cite the study which shows that 99% of unvaccinated American children have serological evidence of antibodies to measles today. Please show the figures on babies who suffer every year at this time from congenital rubella syndrome. Please show a recent interview of parents recounting their children's experience with having measles, since you believe that measles is just as common now as it ever was.

If you cannot show a particle of scientific evidence to support your contention that measles, mumps, rubella, polio, are JUST as common as they ever were in American children, vaxxed or not, I would suggest that perhaps you might consider how little stock most people are going to put in your unbased pronouncements. Continue making them if you choose, but very few are going to believe you. But I would suggest that you have no right to tell me that if I cannot share in your beliefs, that I have no right to say anything. That's what the online shills say.


And I as well try to present the facts so that parents may make an informed choice. I have shown how much the meningitis vaccines have reduced the numbers of children hospitalized for or dying from the diseases. I'm not recommending that parents get the vaccines and fully recognize how dangerous the vaccines are. A certain number would have died of measles every year had it not been for the vaccine. Again, I'm against the vaccine, but would let parents choose. I'm never going to be the parent whose child dies of a vaccine-preventable disease, it's not my place to make the decision for them. Think how bad you would feel if a parent were to say, I had an appointment to get the Hib vaccine for my baby, but cancelled it after reading what you said about it. And a month later the baby caught a type of Hib disease and died of it. On the one hand, the baby will never get autism from a vaccine. On the other hand, the baby is now dead. Both are possibilities.

The Cochrane Foundation I don't find trustworthy. I sent you something last year in which the CC said that having your teeth cleaned at the dentist does nothing at all to prevent periodontal disease. Nothing. Ever. You're wasting your money. Do I believe it? Probably there's something to it, but I guess I just don't believe that it does no good at all, and I have an appointment to get mine cleaned next week. Don't they ALWAYS say that the results must be interpreted with caution as the study subjects used were not statistically significant? I would never get a flu vaccine, never have. And I know that few here believe anything the CDC says, but I think a lot of what it says is true but must be interpreted with caution. This is what it says on how it determines that the flu vaccine saves a certain number of lives.


Jenny Allan

"Cochran collaboration says the flu vaccine efficacy is no better than 0.5% .
Which means the flu vaccine does not work at all ."
Thank you Hans, but please provide a link to the above, which appears to be a generalised opinion rather than a hard and fast fact.

I don't always agree with Eindeker, but at least he backs up his assertions with links, which we can peruse ourselves and make up our own minds about the 'evidence'. I have no reason to disagree with the UK Government's data, which puts flu vaccine efficacy 2015 at around 50%, admittedly less for my age group, but my past bouts of flu have probably left me with some generic flu virus immunity.

Just for the record, I signed a petition against administering nasal flu vaccine to schoolchildren in the UK. In the US it's acknowledged this spreads the flu rather than prevents it.

Hans Litten

Posted by: Jenny Allan | February 10, 2017 at 07:20 AM

Cochran collaboration says the flu vaccine efficacy is no better than 0.5% .
Which means the flu vaccine does not work at all .
So what is it ?

Jenny Allan

"And what proven facts are those ?"
YOU tell ME Barry

Hans Litten


Unfortunately, there are many more vaccine lies than this, but I tried to focus on the ones that are less commonly discussed. Many people simply argue vaccines and autism, herd immunity, and not much else. I have no interest in getting into a fight with anyone over issues that can’t be informed by science.

Jeannette Bishop

Thank you, as always, Anne, and thank you, Dr. Thomas. The way youTube is working (or not working) with my computer lately, the transcripts are especially helpful.

I want to also recommend J.B. Handley's recent podcast interview of Dr. Thomas. I hope his observations/experience within his practice of differing health outcomes will be published shortly.


Jenny Allan,
No one is dictating to you or anyone else.
You know, now that I think of it, whenever anyone expresses an anti-vaccine position, you take offense like you are being personally insulted. No one is insulting you. We just disagree. That's all.


I get the drift, but don't dictate to me about 'science'. I well understand the differences between 'opinions' 'hypotheses' and proven facts.


And what proven facts are those ?

Jenny Allan

@ Linda 1 "I don't see anyone being disrespectful. I do see people not compromising...........................Doesn't matter what the disease is or how bad the epidemic.............Jenny apparently doesn't like anyone pointing out the now abundant science that shows that successive yearly flu vaccines, with or without mercury, result in less immunity to contagious illness. She can believe what she wants and she is free to get a yearly vaccine while it's legal for her to do so, but she shouldn't get upset when people here point out the science. That would be unfair to readers who don't know. We have a responsibility to put the truth out so that people aren't misinformed by our discussions."

I get the drift, but don't dictate to me about 'science'. I well understand the differences between 'opinions' 'hypotheses' and proven facts.


Since I've answered your question will you please provide me with any evidence that removal of thiomersal from vaccines has had any effect at all on autism or ASD rates?


People can say anything they want Eindeker, that doesn't mean it's true.

Any chance you can provide proof that the mercury has actually been removed from vaccines?


"Studies have shown that women who have been vaccinated against flu are less likely to give birth prematurely, and less likely to have a low-birthweight baby (see the results of a Canadian study ). Other studies have shown that women who have the flu vaccine while pregnant are less likely to experience stillbirth (see the results of an Australian study ). http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/flu-vaccine-pregnancy"

I smell tobacco smoke/science. Could it be because there is an increased rate of fetal death?

"Fetal deaths after 20 weeks' gestation have not declined in recent years, and starting in 2011, there were more fetal deaths than infant deaths in the United States, according to data from 2011 to 2013 published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a National Vital Statistics Report.

"Much of the public concern surrounding reproductive loss has focused on infant mortality, due in part to a lesser knowledge of the incidence, etiology, and prevention strategies for fetal mortality," the authors write, calling for more research on the occurrence and causes of fetal death.

There were 23,595 fetal deaths in 2013, for a rate of 5.96 per 1000 live births plus fetal deaths, which is close to the 2012 rate of 6.05. (Induced terminations were not included.) Overall, this puts the rate of fetal deaths for 2011 to 2013 higher than the rate of infant mortality for the first time, although the rates were "essentially the same," study authors Marian F. MacDorman, PhD, and Elizabeth C.W. Gregory, MPH, from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Division of Vital Statistics, write.

The rate was highest in non-Hispanic black women, with a rate of 10.53 deaths vs 4.88 for non-Hispanic white women. Although much of the disparity is still unexplained, part of the difference is a result of the higher rate of preterm delivery in black women because of previously documented factors including differences in prenatal health and access to quality healthcare, according to the researchers."



I don't see anyone being disrespectful. I do see people not compromising. Some, like myself, see vaccination as poisoning, as a breech of the duty to first, do no harm. I am convinced that the whole thing is barbaric and harmful in the vast majority of uses. Would there be rare cases where the benefits may outweigh the risks? Possibly. But we can't even know the risks because we have inadequate, dishonest, science. Which leaves, for instance, babies born to hepatitis B mothers, at risk not only of the disease, but of fraudulent science and medical malpractice which has become the standard of care.

There is simply no justification for ever injecting a person with stainless steel particles, only one of a long list of contaminants. Doesn't matter what the disease is or how bad the epidemic.

Jenny apparently doesn't like anyone pointing out the now abundant science that shows that successive yearly flu vaccines, with or without mercury, result in less immunity to contagious illness. She can believe what she wants and she is free to get a yearly vaccine while it's legal for her to do so, but she shouldn't get upset when people here point out the science. That would be unfair to readers who don't know. We have a responsibility to put the truth out so that people aren't misinformed by our discussions.

Cait from Canada

I would like to speak up on behalf of Cia and Jenny. It's fine to disagree, but surely we can do so while remaining civil and without making offensive or ad hominem remarks. On this thread, for example, Hans Litten "accused" Cia of being pro-vaccine, which is obviously not the case, and told her she was talking nonsense, which is quite rude and also clearly not the case.

Cia is firmly on the side of informed consent. She never presents a diktat – something that so many do on the issue of vaccination, whether pro or con. She simply shares information and encourages others to make their own decisions based on their own circumstances and family history.

Jenny cited an article by Dan Olmsted, and he also posted a number of comments, on the theme of intolerance and bullying. I hope the AoA administrators will help to ensure that the spirit of respect for different viewpoints will continue to prevail on this site.



I don't think Jenny is being unreasonable to ask that people express their opinions politely and to respect that many have different, well-researched opinions. I certainly agree that vaccines have a lot of problematic ingredients. But I think it's reasonable to say, for example, that you are afraid enough of meningitis for your baby that you look at the statistics on how mortality, disability, and hospitalization rates for Hib and pneumococcal meningitis have plunged to very low since the vaccines were introduced, and decide that you want that protection for your child. Since most children get the shots and don't seem to react obviously, you might decide that the ingredients are safe enough for your child even though they are not 100% safe. I let Cecily get three Hib shots at 2, 4, and 6 months (and a half, I staggered it so she never got more than one shot per visit, four DTaPs, three polios, and three Hibs. And the one hep-B shot without permission), much good it did us), but if I could do it over again, I wouldn't let her get any shots at all. Live and learn. But most people don't have the experience we did, and without the vaccines, there would be a certain number damaged or killed by the diseases. Some would die who would not have died if they had gotten the vaccines. But certainly, yes, I believe that half of children now are being severely damaged by vaccines who would not have died from any of the VPDs. But that still doesn't speak to each individual case.

Personally, yes, I say 450 children dying of measles a year in 1960 out of four million cases is not enough for me to get the vaccine for my daughter, since it's a very beneficial disease to go through naturally. And I don't think 200 children a year dying of pneumococcal meningitis is enough to get the shot. Or even 1,000 a year from Hib meningitis. I don't know what they say the death rate from flu is these days, but whatever it is, I would still choose to take our chances with the flu rather than the vaccine. But surely it has to be left up to each family to research it and try to reach a decision, but those who disagree with their decisions should express their disagreement calmly and respectfully. No one is trying to hurt children or ourselves.

You've seen the extremely insulting comments made here to me in the last few months. Jenny is right: we don't deserve this treatment.

david m burd

If I may offer an "analogy" when it comes to the dangers of injected vaccines into infants, children, adults (or ANY injection, for that matter).

Even the tiniest bite or sting by a myriad of insects, injecting their microdrops of venom, can kill, or paralyse, or permanently damage any one of us.

Yet we somehow condone the myriad of toxins inherent to vaccines, and with unknown contaminants, INJECTED into babies just born, and into their mothers while in the womb. Pro-vaccine advocates should think about this.

Hans Litten

Posted by: Eindeker | February 09, 2017 at 09:47 AM

What is the money like ? How much are they paying you ?
What is your actual job title ? Misinformation specialist ?


Jenny, no one is villifying or judging you. Some people hold a different view. Please stop crying foul. It may be uncomfortable to be the odd man out, but people have a right to opine. It is you who are trying to silence other's opinions.

Hans Litten

Posted by: Eindeker | February 09, 2017 at 09:47 AM

No vaccines = No Autism

Jenny Allan

The late great Dan Olmstead wrote an AoA article called 'The Bullies within', published by Age of Autism on December 06, 2014 at 05:45 AM:-
From above:-
“If you believe, say, that the main task is to get mercury out of the flu shot; or that promoting a more selective schedule could significantly reduce morbidity and mortality; or that preserving choice is the heart of the matter – well, you risk being run out of Autism Town if that doesn't happen to be their agenda du jour.
It’s their way or the highway, preferably underneath a Mack truck -- a Mack truck that backs over you (and your little dog, too) several times.
I know people who have been slapped down hard by our own side because they said they might consider even one vaccine for their child out of the 16 now recommended by the CDC. One? Heresy! Or because they said that thimerosal in the flu shot is an outrage, but they are not taking a position on vaccines in general – or, God forbid, that they even support them. Smite them with thy staves, ye righteous ones!”

You can read the comment thread yourselves, which includes my flu jab controversy and a few jabs (metaphorical) at Dan. I have no problem with persons expressing their personal opinions, but surely it is out of order to judge, condemn and vilify anyone who happens to have different views.

Please Please AoA Editors and administrators. Don't allow Dan's moderate legacy to be lost.


John here's the reasons for flu vaccination in pregnancy given in the UK: Studies have shown that women who have been vaccinated against flu are less likely to give birth prematurely, and less likely to have a low-birthweight baby (see the results of a Canadian study ). Other studies have shown that women who have the flu vaccine while pregnant are less likely to experience stillbirth (see the results of an Australian study ). http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/flu-vaccine-pregnancy
But to answer your question given the choice yes (if I was a pregnant woman...) I'd opt for a single dose vaccine without thiomersal, but given no choice and just the thiomersal multi dose version yes I'd opt for that rather than no vaccine http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2010/09/13/peds.2010-0309.full.pdf
Since I've answered your question will you please provide me with any evidence that removal of thiomersal from vaccines has had any effect at all on autism or ASD rates?

Hans Litten

Posted by: Eindeker | February 09, 2017 at 07:07 AM CIA


This article, “New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro and Nano-contamination” published on January 23, 2017, in the peer-reviewed journal, the International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination absolutely blew me away.
A team of scientists in Italy decided to examine batches of vaccines, looking for contaminants not listed as ingredients. 44 types of vaccines manufactured in Italy and France were analyzed using an Environmental Electron Scanning Microscope. This method was chosen because the matter can be separated into either organic debris (called aggregates) or inorganic debris (called clusters). The identified particles were counted three times by three different operators, with an error rate of less than 10%. They found inorganic contaminants in every single one.

The presence of micro- and nanosized particulate matter, composed of inorganic chemicals, metals and combination elements whose presence is inexplicable.
The particles are foreign bodies, and can produce a chronic inflammatory reaction because the particles cannot be degraded. The tiny nanoparticles can enter the cell nuclei and interact with cellular DNA.
The inorganic particles are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means they are biopersistent. They can induce immediate effects or the effects may be delayed for a long time after administration.
Indentifying Aluminum and NaCl is obvious because they are commonly used in vaccines and they are declared components, but the other materials are not supposed to be in vaccines or in any other injectable drug.

In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd. They have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like form randomly, for example, when waste is burnt. In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable, let alone in vaccines given to infants.

Hans Litten

Posted by: Eindeker | February 09, 2017 at 07:07 AM

Total nonsense .Poppycock
90% of all flu vaccines contain the safe form of mercury (try not to laugh everyone) .

I have a document in my possession where Nuffield Health UK asked me to sign a waiver that it was ok to inject me with the product (super poison) Themiserol . This was their flu vaccine program .

John Stone


So, would you advise US citizens - including pregnant women - to go ahead with the mercury version?


Sorry to disappoint you Mr Litten, It has the safe kind of mercury in it too, but as I live in the UK, no vaccines used here contain mercury, as I provided the info for John.

Hans Litten

Posted by: Eindeker | February 08, 2017 at 05:34 PM

Yes I totally agree with you , the flu vaccine is brilliant , which is why I recommend you never skip it .
Make sure you get it every year please .
I heard the efficacy (the word you were searching for) is 95% , its amazing .
The flu vaccine is the scientific marvel of our times .
Go for it Eindeker . It has the safe kind of mercury in it too .

david m burd


What surely must be obvious to all is the Criminal Insanity of America's pediatricians injecting its babies and children with mercury-laden flu vaccines!

IF adults are ignorant enough to take such toxic shots it simply means they have been brainwashed by decades of codswallop CDC advertising.

But, then our nationwide health bills will inevitably cost us all, along with the god-awful destiny of the mercury's destruction of our senior citizens' minds, with our complicity - if WE don't stop it.

And, as this Forum started with Dr. Thomas and child vaccines, it's up to Dr. Thomas to tell us what his practice is on this flu vaccine topic.


It looks to me as though there were genetic factors which make some people store vaccine mercury for life while most people excrete most of it relatively quickly. The same glitches which Dr. Thomas describes with regard to aluminum in vaccines may apply to mercury as well. My elderly neighbor turned 89 today and is as sharp as a tack even though she gets mercury-containing flu vaccines every year and has done so probably since 1980. Everyone in my family, on the other hand, stores it and develops severe health problems caused by the mercury. I personally wouldn't want to take the chance and see by experience which group I fell into. It's hard to understand why so many say, Well, I got forty shots, and look how great I am! That PROVES that vaccines never do any harm, except for that hapless anonymous one in a million case, without considering that most of us can eat peanut butter every day without ill effects, but one in fifty these days of universal Hib vaccine may die if they breathe in an atom of peanut dust. Does anyone know what genetic factors separate those who react to the Hib vaccine with peanut allergy from those who don't?


No John flu vaccine in the UK was over 50% efficiency in the 2015-16 season


Would you chose to get on an airplane, if you knew there was a 50% chance that it was going to crash ?

Would you chose to ride in a car, if you knew there was a 50% chance that the brakes were going to fail ?


I'm with you Cia. I too got attacked and vilified on these columns after admitting to receiving an annual flu jab. At my age flu is dangerous. The jab may not be very effective but it HAS kept the flu away from me for more than a decade

No one's attacking either one of you, they're just disagreeing with you. It happens to all of us sometimes.

As for the flu, I haven't had the flu in over a decade either. Where we differ however, is that I've never had a flu shot.

I wonder what kept it away from me?



I noticed thirty-odd years ago that people had stopped saying they had a cold and called it "the flu" but, I'm sure you know, that flu can't be distinguished from a cold without laboratory testing of a throat swab.

What influence do you think that changing the perception of "the flu" in the public's mind might have had on the acceptance and uptake of the flu vaccine? I can honestly say that although our family members have had the odd cold from time to time, that only one member has ever had the flu, and that was in Japan in the 1970s. What do you think is protecting those of us who've never been vaccinated and seldom if ever get flu?

Jeannette Bishop

Regarding flu shot efficacy/risks:


According to Dr. Bark...

"In any winter, seven percent of the population are diagnosed with " flu." [This] means a flu-like symptom, upper respiratory symptom with coughing, sneezing, fever. It does not mean influenza.

"Out of that seven percent-only seven percent of those people actually have influenza. So it's a small percentage. There's all these other things going around that can knock you on your back and make you sick. . . ."

So, out of 100 people, 0.49 will be diagnosed with flu that is actually flu. Then 50% effective means what? Something like instead of 0.49 diagnosed, 0.245 of 100 vaccinated people (or is it even less in actuality?) and you've maybe knocked an approximate 1 in 200 chance of getting the flu down to 1 in 400? Or maybe you've cut half a case of flu (out of 100 people) into a quarter case?

What about the apparent increased risk (up to 4 times I think) of some respiratory illnesses (maybe illnesses in general) in the vaccinated, and the increased susceptibility to worse cases of pandemic (new) flu strains in the coming years...never mind risk of debilitating autoimmune outcomes, etc.?

And the research that found a significant healthy user bias in those who got the vaccine, also saw the mortality gap (between vaccinated and unvaccinated during the summer) narrow during and after flu season (including the springtime months)...doesn't that suggest that the flu shot needs to be independently retrospectively evaluated for its own mortality risk in carefully matched groups compared to the unvaccinated?

And with no research looking at all-health outcomes between those who vaccinate against flu with those who do not (for multiple years ideally) ...we really only know the flu shot engenders titers in some people (not whether it provides a benefit to any person). This is pretty much all we know about the benefit/risk equation of any vaccine.

Jenny Allan

"If she had had the vaccine for the last 20 years most of it would have contained mercury probably, and this year I don't know." (John Stone)

Just to clear up any confusion and supposition about my flu jabs. I have been offered a free annual flu jab for the last 10 years under a UK Senior Citizens' NHS health initiative. Before that, I was getting a very bad dose of the flu roughly every 5 years, the last one affected my heart, thankfully only temporarily. I was aware the jab might have contained some mercury, but didn't care. I still have my own teeth, including a large amount of very unsightly mercury amalgam, since I date back to the days when molars were filled automatically by dentists as soon as they appeared. It's a moot point whether or not the Hg affected my brain or intelligence, but at my age it hardly matters. I am unlikely to become a demented burden on the state as explained in an earlier response on another AoA thread. This was informed consent and my own body.

I am delighted mercury amalgams have been phased out of child fillings and would be even more delighted to know it was phased out of adult flu jabs, but like John I don't trust those persons in charge of the NHS to report with honesty or accuracy. I am vehemently opposed to Thiomersal being administered to children and pregnant women in vaccines, and will continue to campaign against its use in the third world.


"flu vaccine in the UK was over 50% efficiency in the 2015-16 season, "

How do you prove a negative, Eindecker? Does the crystal ball indicate who would have gotten sick?


I should have said that another reason I wouldn't ever get the flu vaccine is because it paralyzed my father in 1999 for the last three and a half years of his life. It was the mercury, and the mercury also caused Alzheimer's in my mother. I'm struggling to chelate the vaccine mercury out that caused my MS. I've been doing the Andy Cutler chelation protocol for the last four years, ALA and DMSA. When I took ascorbyl palmitate to chelate it from my brain it caused months of severe mercury attacks just like some of my MS attacks: nausea, vertigo, dizziness, vomiting, ataxis (lack of balance when walking). Last year I took homeopathic Mer Detox and it set off months of more mercury attacks, starting three hours after I sprayed the remedy under my tongue. Then I got remedies from a homeopath in India, same thing, starting the day I first took his remedies. Last month I consulted with another alternative practitioner, and took Pecta (something, can't remember) with citrus pectin which was supposed to chelate circulating mercury but not pull out any more. Three weeks later I had several mercury attacks, the last of them severe, more dizziness, vertigo, lack of balance. I stopped taking it and haven't had another attack since the attacks a week and a half ago. It DID pull out more vaccine mercury from storage, I don't know if from the bones or organs. I don't think it can pass the blood-brain barrier. There's no doubt that vaccine mercury has caused all or almost all of the MS, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and a lot of the paralysis which have affected so many hundreds of thousands. Now, what's the chance they're going to admit it?

I would always rather just go to bed with the flu. I didn't take anything for it a year and a half ago, as I was just too sick to go get my remedies out, but theoretically I'd take lots of vitamin C and Sambucol (elderberry). Not homeopathy except in case of great need, it's better to just let your body fight it out when possible, but there are remedies available to treat all symptoms.

John Stone

Goodness Eindeker, that was a bit quick of the mark. Anyone would think you were being paid to monitor me on behalf of the JCVI! So, you have a year in which you are relatively lucky with the match but there only about 7,500 cases here which is about 1 person in 8,500. Another problem is that the children who are given nasal vaccine represent a hazard to the immune compromised.

Sir Liam Donaldson used to tell us 12,000 people or more were dying in the UK from flu every year, and here we only have 7,500 cases.

david m burd

John (Stone),

"codswallop" !! - A great English derogative. Our comparative American term would be "bullish**".

As to the UK eliminating EtHg in its flu jabs after 2011, I thought my Oxford University ref would suffice. BUT!, I shall pursue your always valid skepticism as to possible current mercury content, as one can never trust the Vaccine Cabal - either here in the U.S. or in the UK.


"Parents must research the issues very carefully and consider alternatives to vaccination "

I agree with you on this, Cia. The choice is not restricted to vaccination or disease and death, there's avoiding disease by building strong immune systems through healthy living practices and keeping young babies away from crowds. Also, if people are sick they should stay at home and keep right away from babies.

I think we have to ask why some people get sick when the vast majority exposed to exactly the same germs don't, and why well cared for, unvaccinated children are far healthier in body and mind than their fully-vaccinated peers. This is one of the reasons, I'm sure, that a study of vaccinated vs totally-unvaccinated children will never be allowed.


"it is just a load of codswallop" No John flu vaccine in the UK was over 50% efficiency in the 2015-16 season, https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/530756/Influenza_vaccine_effectiveness_in_primary_care_in_children.pdf and having had the real McCoy in 2015 50% sounds a really good deal to me


Just FYI John:
Thiomersal is a mercury compound used to prevent the growth of dangerous bacteria and fungus. It is not found in any of the childhood or adult vaccines routinely used in the UK. However it is still widely used outside of Europe and the USA in cheaper multi-dose vaccines, because it is an important preservative. It was also present in the Swine Flu (H1N1) vaccine Pandemrix, used in 2009, 2010 and 2011 in the UK. Thiomersal is not used in any of the annual flu vaccines currently in use in the UK. http://vk.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vaccine-ingredients#thiomersal

John Stone


But since the statistics do not support the vaccine preventing flu in more that about 1 in 100 goes the probability is that Jenny - if she had had the vaccine say for the last 20 years has missed about 1/5th of a dose of flu, so I go back to saying she probably would not have got it anyway. In fact some research from Canada suggests that having the vaccine lowers your resistance to non-strain viruses in subsequent seasons (and most seasons it is not the vaccine strain that proliferates). If she had had the vaccine for the last 20 years most of it would have contained mercury probably, and this year I don't know.

This season a relative couldn't get an important blood test done because the surgery was booked up with flu vaccination for a week - it is just a load of codswallop.

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.)