• Promotion via Misinformation and Fearmongering- School children are indoctrinated to believe that vaccines are a monumental scientific achievement and an indispensable tool to prevent harm from infectious disease. Doctors licensed by the state get a similar education, emphasizing the need to give vaccines on schedule, and downplaying the risks that they present. Government officials and state-licensed doctors provide wrong and misleading information, on an ongoing basis, through major media outlets which denounce and do not give adequate exposure to vaccine critics.
• Lack of Legal Liability - Congress has removed legal liability for doctors, drug companies, and those ordering vaccines. There is good reason to believe that this action was responsible for the explosion in the vaccine schedule following its passage.
• Development of Vaccine Schedules - The CDC has created schedules for every citizen, for which vaccines to take and at what ages. This can be viewed as an exercise in central planning and, as we have seen with full-blown Communism, central planning can never work to achieve its stated objectives.
• Creation of Vaccine Monopolies - Governments have granted licenses to pharmaceutical companies to allow them to sell vaccines on their schedules. In some cases, they have an exclusive monopoly for a type of vaccine and in other cases there may be a small number of other companies’ products available. Governments have also granted patents on these products, so that other firms cannot sell a similar product and, thus, they are able to charge monopoly prices for these products. When combined with mandates, government promotion of vaccines, and lack of liability, these measures have made it highly lucrative for drug companies to expand the vaccine schedules rapidly.

If we go through the above list, we see that governments have played a key role in all of the major causes of the vaccine problems that confront us. Taken collectively, we might refer to these initiatives as the “Government Vaccine Program” and say that the root cause of our vaccine problems is the existence and operation of the Government Vaccine Program. The solution? Abolish the Government Vaccine Programs, in their entirety, so that we have a complete separation of vaccines and state. Now some readers might ask if this is really necessary. Maybe we can resolve these problems via reform instead. Maybe the vaccine schedule can be scaled back, the disclosure of vaccine risks increased, etc. But those who have been paying close attention must admit that the Government Vaccine Programs are highly resistant to reform. Their defenders deny problems, they increase their bloated schedules, they threaten dissidents with punishment, etc. They persist and ramp up despite knowing that they are causing massive harm. In short, our governments have effectively declared war on their people. Of course we vaccine dissidents have no interest in fighting a war. We want to live our lives, raise our families, and contribute to society. But we have been confronted with a stark choice: allow the Government Vaccine Program to continue and to destroy our civilization or dismantle the Government Vaccine Program.

While the primary objective of this article is to lay out what our long-term objectives should be, I will speak briefly here about the main way we will progress toward the point where the Government Vaccine Program can be demolished. In a nutshell, we need to continue the work that we are doing to destroy the vaccine “brand”. Vaccines have the acceptance that they have today because most people have positive associations with them in their mental imagery and thoughts. Through endless repetition, people have come to believe that vaccines are safe, effective, necessary, that they save lives, and so forth. By countering these lies and persuading a critical mass to believe otherwise, the vaccine brand will be destroyed and then the whole apparatus of fraud and coersion (the Government Vaccine Program) can be deep-sixed.

Still, we need to think very carefully about how things should work in the absence of Government Vaccine Programs.In the sections ahead, I will address how things could work in such a world and address some potential objections to what I have set out.

In a world without Government Vaccine Programs, and certainly in the near-term aftermath of them, many parents and others will still demand some form of protection against harm arising from infectious disease. However, instead of there being a monopoly, one size fits all solution to this concern, there will be a variety of approaches and products made available through a competitive marketplace. Some may prefer to rely primarily on nutrition and herbs to protect themselves. They could do so on their own or rely upon trusted organizations, such as the Weston A. Price Foundation, for help in developing appropriate protocols. Some might prefer  homeoprophylaxis, the homeopathic counterpart to medical vaccines, to provide protection against certain infectious agents. Others might still want to use medical vaccines, but going forward these products will need to pass a market test in order for them to be made available, rather than simply stamped Safe and Necessary by rogue government committees. They will need to be certified by competing private firms, rather than licensed via a monopoly government agency. People relying upon such firms will look to organizations that have developed a reputation for integrity and for providing sound assessments. Also, such medical vaccines will need to be safe enough that they can be insured and offered at an affordable price. It is unclear if or how many vaccines will be able to survive the market test. If it turns out that none do, then that is the market’s way of telling people that they should look elsewhere for protection from harm from infectious disease. Of course, an open and competitive market is a dynamic one and there may be many other approaches developed that we can hardly even imagine today, even through use of electronic instruments. While it is impossible to predict precisely what the market will look like, we can say for sure, that it will be much more diverse, satisfactory, and economical than the current monopoly Government Vaccine Program.

While the abolition of Government Vaccine Programs will drastically reduce harm going forward, and the financial costs that go along with that, it will not undo the harm already done and will not address the issue of families who did not received satisfactory financial compensation.  Two steps will need to be implemented here. First, all doctors and other healers who are working to help those who have been harmed will need the freedom to do their work. They will need to have the latitude to try unconventional measures, without the threat of having their licenses revoked. And healers who are finding success will also need to be given the freedom to advertise their successes, without incurring the wrath of the FDA or other such bodies. Still, despite their best efforts, it is possible that some will never fully recover. For them, a reparation program will need to be established to buy structured settlement annuities to take care of the vaccine injured for the rest of their lives. No longer will parents need to lobby governments on an ongoing basis, to get funding to make sure that their children will be taken care of.

I am sure that readers will think of potential objections to what I have set forward here, so I will address a couple of them that I am sure will come up:

1. That all sounds good, but it will never happen. Here I will say that none of us know the future. When a critical mass of people come to realize the truth about vaccines, which I think WILL eventually happen, there is going to be a lot of outrage and disillusionment and people who might scoff at such a proposal today, will be a lot more receptive at that time, IF we are able to clearly articulate and promote our vision. Surely, the (slavery) abolitionists were told that slavery had been around for thousands of years and that it could not be eliminated. However, they recognized that slavery was immoral and uneconomical, they were persistent, and they were ultimately successful. One could say the same thing about the early efforts of women seeking equality before the law. I am sure that a lot of people said that things have always been that way and it will never happen … until it did.
2. Can we really rely upon competing private firms to certify vaccines (or other alternative products)? Will they really appear on the scene? The first thing to realize here is that the system of competitive private firms providing certification ALREADY works in many different contexts. For example, there are firms certifying kosher food, certifying the skills of auto mechanics, certifying electrical appliances (Underwriters Laboratories). When services like these are provided by competing firms, it opens the door to improvements in the way that these evaluations are done and to reductions in the costs for providing such services. This is in stark contrast with the way government monopoly agencies operate and the great resistance such bureaucracies have to innovation. It is also crucial to realize that such firms live or die based on their reputation and their track record. They have a strong incentive to get things right, so as to not lose business to other firms. Will such firms come to market after the FDA monopoly on vaccine review has been taken away? We have every reason to believe so. Whenever there is a true consumer demand for a good or service, a firm will find a way to offer it. Even in today’s environment, we see that savvy people look to the Cochrane Collaboration to provide unbiased, informed evaluations of drugs and vaccines. This is precisely the type of institution that SHOULD be making these determinations, not corrupt government agencies which pay no price if they lie to us or make horrific mistakes.
   
   David Weiner has a longstanding interest in health matters and liberty. His writing focuses on the intersection of these topics, on how our health systems and our societies in general would be far better off if we had genuine health freedom.