"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> urbanMamas

Law & Order stirs vaccination pot

I have vaccinated all my three boys more or less on schedule, but it is more inertia than science; when Everett was born, I wasn't in a community that questioned vaccinations (my husband's best man was a pharmaceutical sales rep, for one), and it wasn't until later that I started wondering if filling babies full of toxins was really the best approach. By then, it was almost time for public school, and I didn't want to face filling out forms stating my "religious" refusal for one child, but not another.

But I know lots of you urbanMamas don't vaccinate; parts of Oregon have some of the highest rates of vaccination avoiders in the country. And last night on Law & Order: Special Victims Unit, I felt as if I was seeing one of my friends on trial. After an 11-month-old died from measles -- and her mom, a distracted and turbulent Hillary Duff, buried her in a parking lot, thinking she'd killed her -- it was decided that the real "culprit" was a mom who'd decided not to vaccinate her son. The baby and the little boy had been at the same playground after he'd been infected by an Amish teen with measles. The city of New York put the non-vaccinating mom on trial for murder. Seriously?

Not only were non-vaccinators called out in scathing tones for their lack of medical degrees and their dispassioned uncaring for all others ("I don't make choices for those kids!" said the mom shrilly), but the way the writers portrayed the woman was unforgivable; on the stand, she goes on a rant claiming that the baby would have died anyway, because Hillary Duff's character was a "bad mom" (true, but really) and she was a "good mom" and thus she deserved to get off. She did, much to the disgust of most of the SVU crew, who kvetched about how she'd gotten away with murder. The ending was too complicated and horrifying to describe here.

I was shocked that such an extreme viewpoint, which took the "mommy wars" media invention and ran with it in the ugliest way, was firmly established by a TV show I've often loved as the moral right. Did you watch the show? What did you think? Will you be watching Law & Order again?


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Believe it or not, Law & Order is not the best source of information about vaccination. If you're concerned about your child's health talk to your pediatrician instead of watching TV.

Wow. I didn't watch, but that is pretty extreme to put a non-vaccinator on trial for murder (and if you're going to go that route, why didn't they put the Amish parent on trial too?)

Unfortunately or not, mainstream TV shows are often used as public health message carriers. In fact, in some countries it is done deliberately. I've watched Law and Order here and there and noticed that they really push a conservative agenda, social and political.

They didn't bring up a key reason that people might want to consider vaccinating (and might relate to better than the threat of death); that you are making choices for your child that limit their lifestyle (or life), that they might not make themselves. For instance, traveling or working in developing countries, or in some medical settings.

It's not that hard to selectively vaccinate and spread them out. I was creeped out by the amount of vaccinations that my baby was getting, and asked them to start spacing them out as possible (so we wouldn't have to start new series, etc). Next baby will be on the Sears schedule. I do think it is responsible to vaccinate, but in that biologically unformed system, I hate to have Hep. B injected, just so they can get it done before they're 12 years old.

I think it's very good that there is pressure, questioning the safety of vaccines and their ingredients. There are a lot of public health trends that are are as yet unexplained, and too difficult to correlate in studies because the studies don't cover the lifetime of the vaccinated. However, there are higher known risks with not vaccinating.

I don't even usually watch the show but my roommate roped me into last night-- meaning, he was watching it and I was too lazy to get off the couch. However, once it was abundantly clear that they were moving from "missing child episode" to "we're going to preach about vaccinations episode" I got my lazy ass up. I didn't watch the rest, and am now glad I didn't. I knew it was going to be ridiculous.

The vaccination debate is very important-- who shoots their kids full of stuff without consideration? (well, lot's of people I guess)-- and it has many ideas, views, and pros and cons, and L & O putting in their (very one-sided, badly presented) two cents is just stupid.

Wow, I don't know if it's coincidence or conspiracy, but last week's episode of Private Practice also had a "bad mom" who didn't vaccinate, and her son ended up dying from measles. In a "valiant effort" to save her and her other child from herself, her doctor flew across the room and plunged a needle of vaccine into her son's arm before the mom could stop him. The ignored legal ramifications, stereotypes, etc. were overwhelming.

Both L&O, and PP are terrible, terrible shows - just the kind of mindless drivel I love after a long day of kids and night class. But, as a mom who selectively vaccinates, I feel I need to contact both shows and complain/educate. I encourage others to do the same.

"Unfortunately or not, mainstream TV shows are often used as public health message carriers."

This is so true. Anecdote time, I cannot tell you how many times someone has brought up the Nip/Tuck episode in a circumcision discussion.

this sounds awful. i haven't watched any of the L & O franchise in sometime. SVU deserves a special place in hell, in my view, because they really do end up glorifying the same violence against women that they think they're decrying... I remember the one episode that made me give it up: the woman cop went undercover at a women's prison to try to find a prison guard rapist, and almost gets raped herself for her trouble. It was absolutely too repugnant to watch. And I'm someone who thinks that we *should* be concerned about female inmates, who are so vulnerable, but that show was so smarmily written [and acted] as to be just exploiting them all over again... So, not surprised at all to hear that L &O can't get at the nuances of the vaccination issue.

I also saw the Private Practice episode a month or so ago, and it made me furious. I actually have followed almost all the guidelines for vaccinations (but we waited on the MMR until my son was well past 2). BUT, my husband and I made the vaccination decisions, and the fact that the show's plot line took the decision to vaccinate out of the mother's hands and into the doctor's hands was just plain wrong (and frightening, actually.)

After that episode, I stopped watching the show. Probably should never have watched it to begin with because it's just mindless drama and a waste of time, but the vaccination episode put me over the top.

I'm a fan of L&O, but I do hate it when they get preachy. I guess my response is that there's a valid point to be made with this. If you don't vaccinate, you do put other kids at risk of getting serious diseases. I understand the nuances of vaccinations, and I'm one of those who couldn't fathom giving a Hep B shot in the hospital so I didn't. I try to hold to the belief that it is an individual decision, but it also really isn't a decision that applies just to an individual. I guess I wonder how many people who make the decision not to vaccinate because they determine it's the right thing for their own child factor into the equation that they are also making decisions for other people that may not be the right one for them.

Do you know anyone who's suffered the crippling effects of polio? Well, neither do I, thanks be to God. The numbers simply don't lie: The chances of injury or death from vaccination are infinitesimal compared to the odds of injury or death from the countless diseases that were crushed by the discovery of immunization.

I'm not opposed to individuals being informed about WHY vaccinations are the right thing to do, but this wishy-washy validation of people doing the 100% wrong thing just because they made an "informed" decision is hogwash. I can make an "informed" decision to drive 55 MPH past an elementary school at the afternoon bell because I know there's not a cop around, but that will NEVER make it the right decision. How about if I make an "informed" decision to let my infant play in the cat box and risk toxoplasmosis? Choosing not to vaccinate is not one bit different - it's choosing to play the odds for no good reason other than to elevate the parent's own inflated sense of self-importance simply by being contrarian.

There are also a tiny few instances where a seat belt or child safety seat has contributed to the death of a passenger in an auto accident. Do I go out and blame "Big Safety"? Or do I push for a "gradual" implementation of safety measures - not using a safety carrier for children for the first six months of their lives? How about twenty-four months - just to be sure?

Of course, if my kid isn't buckled in properly, that doesn't present any danger to another child. And that's the point, isn't it? Parents who choose not to vaccinate have the luxury of being irresponsible because so many of the rest of us are keeping their kids safe indirectly.

There are and always have been individuals in our society living with paranoid delusions of some demonic shadow movements trying to enslave us. There have been masses of people who feared the Masons and other secret societies, and there are still those who believe Zionist Jewish banking conspirators pull the strings to start world conflicts. The campaigners against "Big Pharma" are just more of the same - paranoiacs ready to latch on to any half-baked theory to blame for their dissatisfaction with this flawed world we live in and the simple realities of human frailty and mortality.

But you know what has changed human life profoundly for the better in contrast to centuries of suffering and death? Vaccinations.

JM.....I think I love you.

I agree with JM. Thanks for speaking so well. If we all made these "informed" decisions for our children, it wouldn't be very long before all of these diseases that we have vaccinated against are back in full force.

A 4 year old who hasn't been vaccinated might be able to recover fairly easily from the measles. But, a 6 month old infant who is not yet old enough to be vaccinated and is exposed to that 4 year old might not recover. How do you tell that 6 month old's mother that because of someone else's selfish "informed" decision killed her baby?

JM, Hepatitis B is transmitted through direct blood-to-blood contact, unprotected sex and unsterile needles or during childbirth by infected mothers. It is not transmitted casually.


Now, according to you, I (not a Hep B carrier) am under a paranoid delusion when I consider the likely activities of my infant and conclude that unsafe sex and needle-sharing won't be among them. According to you, my decision to skip this vaccination on a newborn baby (who can always get it a few years later) is not informed by facts about the likelihood of his actually contracting Hep B, but rather on my "half-baked" campaign against "Big Pharma."

Well, I beg to differ.

Zinemama, don't play like that.

I'm not laying down the law on every possible vaccination, and by making it about Hep B exclusively, you're just building a strawman - attempting to take me down by attacking an argument that isn't at the core of the discussion.

What do you want, for me to specifically address each and every vaccine? And maybe I should break out each component of each vaccine - not just MMR but separately for each of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella? How about not just for DipTet, but for Diptheria and Tetanus separately?

You're right - Hep B is not contagious under normal circumstances. I myself didn't get it until I travelled abroad to a couple undeveloped countries (and no, I didn't engage in any risky behaviors as you described). But trying to use this fact as a cornerstone of some blanket refutation of my argument is either poor form or just poorly thought-out.

"The campaigners against "Big Pharma" are just more of the same - paranoiacs ready to latch on to any half-baked theory to blame for their dissatisfaction with this flawed world we live in and the simple realities of human frailty and mortality."

I was with you until there, JM. I am pro-vax, but if you honestly believe that pharmaceutical corporations are more concerned with you and your child's well-being over the almighty dollar, you are a naive fool. They are lobbyists that serve stockholders.

I wasn't aware that there's a law against advancing humanity and making money at the same time, You so crazy. What a crazy idea!

I'm not in any way championing the pharmaceutical companies. Heck, Pfizer bought out my hometown pharma company for the formulas and gutted the city's economy by shutting most operations down.

The point is that casting pharmaceutical companies as mustache-twirling villains using vaccines to turn us into sheep distracts from the core question: Are vaccines effective tools in combatting deadly, contagious diseases? If the answer is yes, then, well, what do you know? I'm actually willing to pay for that, and for my children. And who am I to say that pharmaceuticals companies shouldn't, well, get paid for protecting me from virulent contagions?

JM, it's not about Hep B exclusively. It's your contention that parents who research vaccines (and not on scary anti-vaccine websites, but using books written by MDs and material provided by the CDC), are somehow deluded and paranoid when, based on that research, they opt out of certain vaccines or choose to space them out.

You said of such parents that we are "choosing to play the odds for no good reason other than to elevate [our] own inflated sense of self-importance simply by being contrarian."

Well, that's downright demeaning. I don't make these decisions for my children lightly and certainly not to elevate my own self-importance.

That's what I objected to in your post.

Yay JM! I am frankly sick of other Portland parents who make us feel as if we're bad parent for "injecting my child with poisons" -- my husband and I have actually been told that's what we've been doing by vaccinating.

Are you aware that Dr. Sears is running on the good name of his father and he makes quite a fortune for his book as well as for having people come to his clinic to get vaccines separately. He is taking advantage of our fear based society for his monetary gain. Please don't let the fact that he is an MD provide you with a security blanket that this is the correct thing to do. If you opt not to vaccinate, don't do it simply based on his book. Do your research as well as being aware of all the horrible diseases that we are risking have return to harm our loved ones.

wow, ladies. lets step back a moment. the post asks "Did you watch the show? What did you think? Will you be watching Law & Order again?" The vaccination argument is like beating a dead horse. There have been plenty of other posts, anti/pro vaccine, that have let you guys rip each others hair out. reread those posts and save us all some time, instead of reposting the same ol' stuff.
i did not watch the show and don't plan to in the future.

Jodi, I haven't read Dr. Sear's book, which came out quite recently, I believe. (My kids are older). Personally, I found Dr. Stephanie Cave's book very informative and unbiased. I liked the way she breaks down each VPD, and assesses the risks and benefits of the vaccines for each. (She is ultimately in favor of vaccines, by the way). I also relied on the CDC's Pink Book. I would never make a decision like this based on a single source. I don't know anyone who would.

Provaccine, I hope you realize that those comments are not representative of people like me. This is a complex issue and I don't hold people who arrive at a different decision in contempt. It's too bad you have run into people who are just plain rude.

Honestly? If that happened to me, I'd want someone to be held responsible. Really, if I took my infant to the park and he got a fatal illness that someone could have avoided by vaccine, I'd want them to be held responsible. How is it different than a drunk driver killing a child? I'm not pleased with myself that I feel that way, but I'm being honest.

I can honestly say, JM, that I have never come across a person less educated on the topic of vaccine safety, let alone vaccine effectiveness.

"But you know what has changed human life profoundly for the better in contrast to centuries of suffering and death? Vaccinations." I think you're forgetting about the most important advancement in human health to date: the flushing toilet.

Please, please inform yourself.

Kathleen, they wouldn't have been able to tie the Amish family directly to the death of the infant because he didn't come in direct contact. It would be up to the mother who didn't vac to go after him if she wanted, but she wouldn't have a case because she didn't take all measures to avoid being infected. Not to defend the show, but just to answer your question!

I have never like Law and Order SVU. I really like the other ones and will watch them again. As for the vaccination question: I think vaccines certainly have their place and I have vaccinated my daughter. I think vaccines should be spread out more because I agree that too many at one time might be harmful and overwhelming to a small body. As for the children who aren't vaccinated only time will tell how they do and how they will affect those that are vaccinated.

It's funny, Jenni, you call JM uneducated, yet you offer no actual information yourself, nor do you provide any sources. Here's one:


You don't believe any of this, of course, because it's all lies made to scare us, right? The CDC is just a tool of the military-industrial complex, right?

The possibility of injury from vaccine is there. But if not getting vaccinated is like playing Russian roulette with one bullet in one six-chambered revolver, getting vaccinated is like playing Russian roulette with one bullet in an armory of weapons.

Someone can be totally, completely educated about every horrible, heartbreaking possibility resulting from a vaccination, but it's about the ODDS. The ODDS don't lie.

So, I did not see the episode of SVU, but as a fairly frequent watcher of the show in times past, I think that I can imagine how it went.

Unfortunately, TV, even prime time TV, is the primary source of medical information, even just information on current issues, for most people. Wrong to perhaps display an opinion so aggressive, but in the end, probably truly for the overall good. Compare to the situations on daytime soaps which dare to portray gay/lesbian relationships...Most of us here probably laud these decisions...as it seems to make these things mainstream and more "acceptable" to those who perhaps don't know such a couple personally....

So...on to my thoughts on some of the other issues expressed on this thread...primarily because I can speak with at least a bit of experience. I am a US trained infectious diseases specialist (and I have mentioned that before here in discussions of vax...) who now works in the drug regulatory agency ..and actually works with licensing of some vax. So I must speak to the scepticism of both sides of this fence....

I honestly think that the CDC/FDA and the ECDC/EMEA (European equivalents) and the drug companies have the primary goal to promote the health and welfare of society. I think that this is borne out from the governmental side by the fact that most decisions made by the CDC/FDA are the same as those made bu the authorities in Europe (decisions made separately mind you...actually very little collaboration). Don't get me wrong, there are differences...and sometimes those differences may be important. For instance, in Europe, vax against chickpox is not recommented...but hey, my children have been vaxed against meningitis and tick born encephalitis which was not done in the US. Drug companies do have to answer to their shareholders...but the physicians, scientists, and epidemiologists who work for them are good people...most all of the people I know have all considered and perhaps have chosed to work for the industry...and actually, I feel good about that...I want them to have smart people with integrity working for them....

Now just on to vaccines....be prepared. More and more will be on the way. This issue will only grow larger and larger. With the introduction of certain vaccines, we "force" the microbiological world to evolve (just like the use of antibiotics forces resistance)....vaccines are being developed which offer more "expanded" coverage..given our pressure and perhaps factors unrelated to vax, bacteria which before were not prevalent now are and are causing disease...We now have a vaccine against cancer..the human papilloma virus...I am sure more will come....And of course, I think no one would argue that a vax against HIV would likely be worthy of a Nobel Prize...

Furthermore, more infectious diseases are emerging...4 new ones in 10yr since I graduated from medical school (SARS, monkey pox, avian flu, and now swine flu)...all the result of our "encroachment" on each others and animals territories. Also the emergence of previous lesser prevalent diseases given climate change...amoebic encephalitis which was diagnosed in roughly 15 persons last year in the south and dengue/malaria which will reach the south US in time....

Not to be a fear monger, just telling it like it is. Vaccinations are an important part of our society...I will concur that the toilet was a remarkable invention against infectious diseases...but (and I apologize as I had said it before...) it was the reason that smallpox was eradicated nor the reason that polio almost is....

Sorry..what a shame to typo the last sentence of my comment....the toilet was NOT the reason diseases have been eradicated...vax are!

The Problem With Dr Bob's Alternative Vaccine Schedule
Paul A. Offit, MDa,b and Charlotte A. Moser, BSa

This article just goes to show . . .in medicine never take the word of just one MD. That is the difficult part of the lay public learning how to handle "scientific research". Certainly there are very intelligent people out there that can make appropriate choices, however the vast majority of the population may not make smart choices and put the rest of society at risk. I am not a fan of L&O making these points, but somehow society needs to know the risks of not vacinating. Unfortunately, my own father and his brother had polio as his mother did not vaccinate him or his brother even though the vaccine was on the market already.

Do people like JM seriously think that this world was a cesspool of disease before vaccines came along? That every disease that we currently vaccinate for was a rampant epidemic? I'm not implying that no vaccine has had any improvement on our mortality rate, but I get really frustrated with the fearmongering from people who would have us believe that, for example, we would all know a few children crippled from polio if it weren't for the polio vaccine. The truth is, polio had greatly declined the year before the vaccine was made. Epidemics are cycles - waves that come and go. We still see these waves in things like SARS and the swine flu. These illnesses do not take over the whole world for lack of vaccines; they come and they go in occasional waves. Certainly, some vaccines have had some benefits for society, but the attitude that anyone who doesn't give their child every vaccination is by default a horrible, careless parent is absolutely ridiculous and uneducated.

For more information, a great resource book is Vaccinations: A Thoughtful Parent's Guide by Aviva Jill Romm.

Oh, and as a response to the odds thing, the odds are overwhelming that a child with vaccinations will develop more allergies and other autoimmune problems than a child who is not vaccinated. THOSE are the odds that made me choose not to vaccinate my children yet, though my daughter's 105 degree fever after her last vaccination certainly got the ball rolling in my quest for more information. Now that my older daughter is three, I plan to start vaccinating her again, one vaccine at a time. That is my personal decision, and I think every parent should have the right to look at the information that is out there, like I did, and make the decision that they feel is best for their child. We are the parents, and our children's health is our responsibility. God forbid that we just take a line from either side of the debate and go with it, without taking any personal responsibility for the choices that we must make.

As for L&O I think their motto is "ripped from the headlines" , taking issues that are relevant to our society and creating an episode. Maybe you can email and ask them to make a counterpoint episode that comes froma different perspective.


If the CDC is your authority on this matter, God help you.

Time to lay off the coffee, JM. Sheesh. Chill out.

I'm still curious about a non-vax response to the idea that this story could really happen. I'm not intending to put anyone on the spot or to ask them to defend their decision. I understand the reasons people don't vax, and I try to be open-minded about it. Personally, I'm weary of the name-calling debate over it because no one is saying anything new or particularly influencing that we haven't already heard. I'm just really curious about how a non-vax advocate answers the possibility that this could occur. It's really not a scenario I had considered before. Have you?

mom22, I don't suppose that I can adequately answer the question you have asked, but instead of using an example as recently incendiary as the measles, consider influenza. A vaccine exists and the suggestions with regard to who can be vaccinated and when are changing in favor of being more inclusive (definitely not talking about the N1H1 business we're learning about lately).

So let's say that a friend of yours had an opportunity to have the flu vaccine, but declined. Imagine that members of her family began to develop flu-like symptoms shortly after having spent a nice afternoon with your family. No one becomes terribly ill, just the usual aches and snot and discomfort. Perhaps some of the members of your family become ill. One of your family members becomes particularly sick and is diagnosed with pneumonia. Is that your friend's fault? Was no one else in your community a possible source? I don't think it's necessary to imagine fatalities in order to discuss this subject.

Do you personally bear any responsibility for the health of your family? For providing adequate nutrition? For recognizing signs of illness (I do believe that fever with a rash present is pretty universally regarded as something that warrants the attention of a Dr.)? I'm certainly not implying that a healthy diet, adequate rest and hydration are a kind of panacea guaranteed to cure all ills, but aside from treating symptoms, what other advice would you receive from a doctor? And how much personal responsibility do we have for ourselves and our own care?

Microbes exist and we have very little control over them, propagating the illusion that we do is not helpful and renders people helpless in relatively benign circumstances, let alone in the face of more serious health issues.

Having the measles is not a death sentence. It used to be a common childhood illness that wasn't any more frightening than having the chicken pox was when I was a child. Women who had measles in their childhood carried lifelong immunity. That immunity was available to their infants via breast milk. That immunity got the equivalent of booster shots when those infants grew and acquired measles. Mostly a non-sequitur at this point, since that cycle has been broken. And not to say that having the measles was a lovely risk free experience, I can't think of much that is.

For us, vaccination is medically contraindicated. Even if it wasn't it is highly unlikely that I would vaccinate my son at this point. There will be some risk/benefit consideration due as he approaches adolescence with regard to the possible complications of mumps in an older boy, but that is some way off.

I find it interesting that the vaccine manufacturers carry zero liability for their product. I find it interesting that it can be pretty clearly shown that improvements in diet and hygiene have had at least as significant an impact on VPDs as vaccines themselves. I find it really disheartening that the concept of herd immunity is something people take for grated as a truism.

Jenni 7,
I think there's really know way to know how prevalent the diseases controlled by vaccines would have become, but there are experts who speculate based on their expertise. One way to look at it is to see how many people are affected some vaccine-able diseases in countries that have the disease and don't vaccinate (developing countries). For the people in those countries, I'll bet they wish they had access to the vaccines. Also we do know that public health has improved in the last 75 years in developed countries, and there are numbers for things like smallpox and polio that we know are nearly eradicated, but did exist before.

It should be tossed out that the physician who first published these studies linking MMR to autism has been found to be wrong by several large scale clinical trials. And that he, in fact, was found to be fraudulent and charged with professional misconduct by the UK's General Medical Council.


Just wanted to add, in terms of knowing where the source of whatever germ is, the neither the whole cell, nor the acellular pertussis vaccines prevent transmission, for example. So just because the ignorant hippies down the street didn't vaccinate their kid, doesn't mean they're the source; someone you know may well have a subclinical infection particularly since it is not known exactly how effective the vaccine is, or for how long. Live virus vaccines (e.g. MMR) can shed.

JM, thanks for putting it so well. I agree with you, but couldn't find those words to express how I felt.

"Choosing not to vaccinate is not one bit different - it's choosing to play the odds for no good reason other than to elevate the parent's own inflated sense of self-importance simply by being contrarian."

My old friend didn't vaccinate her children, not out of research, but simply to be "anti-establishment". It's unbelivably scary when children's health is linked to parental dissidence.


just curious about your statement, " I find it really disheartening that the concept of herd immunity is something people take for grated as a truism."

what is the evidence against it?

Thanks for the thoughtful discussion. I just wanted to gently remind everyone of our cardinal rule to be respectful, please try to temper personal attacks or snide remarks (http://urbanmamas.typepad.com/urbanmamas/2007/03/urbanmamas_poli.html).

I watch L&O and probably will not boycott it as I see it as entertainment. There's a formula to the show especially with the cops messing up making the DA's job harder (e.g., supressing evidence, etc.). They're original case is usually messed up, and they usually need to figure out a way find new evidence or find the need to go after someone else for the crime. It is sad that people use the information on TV shows as fact and cannot separate entertainment from reality.

Thank you for posting that hau. It has gotten stressful lately checking the comments. Like walking in to the middle of a fight or something.

Rebecca, not everyone who skips or delays vaccinations does so because of fears about autism. (I'm not saying you said this, but it's a common perception that autism is the only factor people consider). Other ingredients, like aluminum and formaldehyde (for example) concern some parents, as does the age at which vaccines are given, the number of them given at once to an immature immune system, and the risk of reaction to a particular shot vs. the risks of the disease itself. There are a lot of factors to consider.

And Eve, if it's really true that your friend didn't vaccinate her kids solely to be anti-establishment, that's very sad. That is not the norm among the delayed/selective or non-vaccinators I know.

Sorry, I meant to say, other ingredients besides thimerisol (the preservative never conclusively associated with autism but nevertheless removed from most vaccines anyway)are of concern to parents.

Hi Rebecca,

What I meant is that herd immunity is something of a myth. It can not be determined exactly how effective any given vaccine is in any given person, or how long it will or will not last. In the case of something like Hib, there are issues such as serotype replacement (sure, you're vaccinated against the B-type of Haemophilus Influenzae, but by eradicating that particular colony of organisms, you have left a blank to be filled by others).

The idea of herd immunity is like the absolute value of a number, according to proponents--it is a thing that exists, that can be obtained, that truly is an absolute. That simply isn't possible because of the myriad variables involved in human biological reality.

Wow, JM, thank you, (although I might have said it a bit more gently :) ). I get so tired of getting the big eyed stare from all of the "informed" Portland mothers when I say that I vaccinated on schedule.

Personally, the best scholarly, peer-reviewed, MEDICAL article (not Jenny McCarthy, blogger, or some other C-list celebrity)I read postulating one (not THE one, just one) of the possible contributors for the genetic links for autism was advancing paternal age. Let's face it, people have kids a lot later now than they used to. More children live past the age of 1-2 (when most autism symptoms begin to manifest themselves) now than 100 years ago. But that doesn't nearly make the headlines that vaccines and Big Pharma conspiracies do. We wouldn't want to tell people to start having kids younger, right? I tend to side with most medical experts on the theory that autism is a genetic disorder with a myriad of causes. I don't believe there is any one smoking gun for such a complex disorder with an incredible range of manifestations.

As far as the entertainment angle goes, didn't that stupid show Eli Stone have an episode where he was winning some big settlement proving that vaccines caused autism? Honestly, I'm glad attention is being brought to the issues through television-it gets the discussion going.

Finally, even though I don't believe vaccines cause autism, I don't feel that autism is the worst thing that could happen to my child. I'd rather her be autistic than to lose her to a secondary infection stemming from measles or polio. I guess what it comes down to, for both sides, is "What if I failed to do something that could have protected my child?" For some of us, the greater threat is infectious disease. For others, its autism. All of us are trying to be good parents and protect our children.


herd immunity is not a myth. perhaps another word to use would be model. and furthermore a model which when applied has consistently produced the predicted results.

for example, rates of measles have increased in the UK and the increases in outbreaks here in the US in correlation with a decrease in vaccinations secondary to the Wakefield scare and other concerns about additives. we have successfully decreased rates of H. influenzae pneumonia in the elderly because we have vaccinated the young.

furthermore, this theory is used by public health officials as a tool to contain outbreaks, as happened with meningitis in new zealand. it will be used as well if H1N1 2009 becomes the deadly pandemic it may have the potential to do (the pandemic of 1918 began similar to this one, with a flurry of activity in the spring before its deadly deluge in the following autumn).

your comments regarding our ability to predict the response in an individual is true, but we are not talking of individuals, this is population concept.
population based models are constructed to account for the "myriad of variables" in individuals.

Vaccinated people can still be carriers of the viruses they are vaccinated against!
I will never watch SVU again. This last episode made me sick.
What about the mother of the dead little girl? Her daughter has measles, therefore a high fever and an evident rush all over the body but insted of taking her to a hospital or doctor what she does? She spank her and go back to sleep! Measles is a disease ralrely fatal for kids or babies IF properly treated (and this is a fact even if somebody is trying to make us believe is the most dangerous illness ever). But instead of prosecuting this careless mother they decide is more "appropriate" to prosecute a mother who choose not to have her own son vaccinated and take good care of him during his illness. Ridiculous! I wonder who the producer of this episode is...a pharmaceutical industry?

But Rebecca, it's a model generally based on immunization in infants/children. It doesn't account for waning immunity in adults (although I am aware that there are more and more efforts made to encourage vaccination and booster shots in adults), which was once addressed by the circulation of VPDs that acted on their own as a kind of "booster" for adults who had already acquired immunity. So it becomes a self limiting concept. A good example of a failure of herd immunity would be the mumps epidemics in the US and the UK, while another consideration would be that in the case of smallpox, quarantine is also required, vaccination isn't sufficient.

I think that this is a difficult concept all the way around, and even as an ID MD (not a vaccinologist) there is much I do not know about vaccines.

However, what I do know is that we have come a long way in the field of infectious diseases, preventing large amounts of morality and morbidity with the use of vaccines. Herd immunity is a model which works, but I am sure that it has its shortcomings, as you mention with mumps, smallpox. Another good example would be that of pertussis which has run a bit rampant in Oregon in the past few years. We use other tools, such as vax boosters later in life, quarantine, etc to contain spread of disease.

But all in all, quotes on this thread like "...if the CDC is your authority, God help you" and "herd immmunity is somthing of a myth" are really not called for, in fact, disrespectful to the medical/ public health community. I know these people, as I worked in the Acute and Communicable Diseases Division of Oregon Health Services, and these are some of the brightest people I know. In fact, it was the department in Oregon that was responsible for discovering the source of some very large nationwide outbreaks, salmonella in almonds a couple of years back to name 1. And many of my former colleagues work at the CDC, and I personally think they do a damn good job!

Fine if you don't want to vaccinate your own children, just say a word of thanks to all the parents who vaccinated theirs and the CDC/OR public health department...they are the reason disease rates are low and outbreaks are contained...and your children are as safe as they are!

Rebecca, I certainly didn't mean to belittle anyone with my statement about herd immunity, and I apologize if that felt like a personal attack to you. I simply don't accept/agree/what have you that the answer is that simple. I feel that it becomes a circular argument.

I also have strong feelings about personal freedom when it comes to medical intervention. My father is an MD, my brother is a medical professional of a different stripe, and I myself have training to provide limited medical care. I do not disregard the tremendous services that medical and scientific professionals provide. I grew up in a living room littered with editions of JAMA and similar publications, however, when it comes to the health of my family, I do not take anything for granted. Not those who do vaccinate, neither those who do not. Least of all those who would place my child into a "for the common good" category on either side of any argument.

Please, if you will, have some fil mjolk for me (I miss that stuff!), and let's be grateful to have strong, healthy children--in spite of or because of whatever it may be.

Wow! We've got some smart mamas on this board! Rebecca and Laurie (and others), I appreciate your thoughtful, intelligent discussion of this (even if I didn't fully understand all of it!) This is what I like to see on UM. Respectful conversation; agree to disagree. It's definitely possible to get your opinion heard without judgment and name calling.

Thanks ladies.

A timely article in this week's edition of the New England Journal of Medicine..


And a nice reminder of the benefits of vaccination!


An important study...vaccine preventable diseases are still around today...and unvaccinated persons are vulnerable!


I was disgusted by the episode. So much propaganda on the TV these days. I never watch Law and Order but it happened to be on and it sparked my curiosity. I was shocked at how the episode ran saying that you are an irresponsible parent if you don't vaccinate. I can't believe anyone loves their children more than I do and I made an informed decision not to pollute my beloved childrens bodies. I am distraught that I did not learn about the dangers of vaccinations and the side effects/problems in the future before I gave my children most of their innoculations. I implore all of you to research and not blindly listen to your doctor who gets alot of kick backs from the drug companies. If you don't think that part is true you need to wake up. I worked in a doctors office for several years and saw it first hand. The bribes and the pressure were non stop. we have been brainwashed to think this is normal and natural. All pro vaccine people I am 100 % sure are spouting back what they have been told, not hard raw research

and I also think JM needs to get of their almighty high horse and read. Obviously they only read VC andrews and crap, being informed and doing your own research is the right thing to do, just sitting back and doing what you are told like a good little sheep is why this world is going down the tubes. I bet they believe everything they read in the tabloids as well. Good little sheeple JM, government loves submissive obedient slaves like you

Assertions such as "the benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risks" or that "the risks of vaccines are infinitesimal" are based on extremely skewed and faulty statistics. The FDA has estimated that only ten percent of vaccine adverse reactions are ever reported by doctors! Which means that the actual risks of vaccines are FAR GREATER than the "statistics" seem to indicate.

The FDA is hardly a loony fringe group of anti-medical-establishment fanatics. Quite the contrary - their bias would naturally be IN FAVOR of the medical establishment. Other studies have estimated the side effects of vaccines to be far greater than even the FDA estimate. Please remember and consider this whenever you hear about how "safe" vaccines are.

What do folks say about the statistics like this: TWO of my uncles died in childhood from diseases that we vaccinate against today. What is an acceptable level of risk? I don't know the answer, but how many children used to die before we had vaccines to protect them?
One uncle died before his 3rd birthday of diptheria (yes, diptheria), and the other (my father's older brother) got polio as an early teen.

Everyone loves their kids, make your chioce but don't call me a puppet or uncaring or any of the other names so casually thrown around when I have had actual deaths in my family from preventable diseases.

To Josh and others: Just a reminder that adverse event reporting after vaccination does not have to be done by the medical community. Anyone is free to report adverse events: the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System through the FDA and the CDC can be accessed by everyone.

Working in pharmacovigilance at the present time, I can say first hand that it is hard to collect this data.. privacy issues make it almost impossible to prospectively follow subjects who receive vaccines and monitor them closely. This would be ideal but completely impractical. The foundation of pharmacovigilance therefore is to rely on the medical profession AND the patients to report. Any lack of data that the regulatory agencies is not entirely their fault...patients have rights but also responsbilities. We can better the system if we choose to collaborate with them....

I'm an adult man with AS, also an SVU fan. Dramatically, "Selfish" wasn't one of their better episodes, but I thought it was OK. The episode didn't get into any particular controversy about vaccines. One of the points raised explicitly is that, if people DO choose not to vaccinate their children, they should limit how much time the child spends in public places

"How do you tell that 6 month old's mother that because of someone else's selfish "informed" decision killed her baby?"
Why didn't she keep her baby at home? Your baby is more likely to catch and die from regular flu, hantavirus, plague, SIDS ...
than to catch and die measles.

regarding "Your baby is more likely to catch and die from..."

Come again?

Plague: the last big plague epidemic in this country was in Los Angeles in 1925, according to the CDC. Since then, there have been about 10 to 15 cases reported each year, mostly in rural areas. Thanks to the same modern medicine that gave us antibiotics, patients who catch plague (typically from an infected animal, like a flea) don't die. They recover fully.

Hantavirus? From 1993 (when it was identified) to 2007, there were a whopping 465 cases of hantavirus in the entire country, from people who breathed air contaminated with rodent hair, droppings or saliva. That's not 465 a year; it's 465 over 14 years. None of them were babies; their ages ranged from 10 to 83 years. About a third of the patients died.

Flu: About 50-100 children die of the "normal" seasonal flu every year (of about 36,000 deaths from seasonal flu overall, mostly among the elderly). About 5 to 20 percent of the U.S. population get the seasonal flu every year.

And finally - a baby can catch SIDS? That's contagious now?

Until the measles vaccine was developed in 1963, there were about three to four million cases in the U.S. every year, and an average of 450 deaths. Every year. And those were typically kids. Because measles is so very, very contagious, more than half of people had had measles by age six and 90 percent by the time they were 15 years old. Due to vaccinations, measles is no longer considered endemic in the United States - our outbreaks are typically imported by travel. So if we didn't have roads or airplanes or boats, we might not have to worry about vaccinating people against it. Worldwide, 242,000 children died of measles in 2006.

Vaccination efforts have been met with some controversy since their inception, on ethical, political, medical safety, religious, and other grounds. In rare cases, vaccinations can injure people and they may receive compensation for those injuries. Early success and compulsion brought widespread acceptance, and mass vaccination campaigns were undertaken which are credited with greatly reducing the incidence of many diseases in numerous geographic regions.

Childhood Vaccinations Hoax - Not Effective and at Worst, Harmful
by Heidi Stevenson, citizen journalist

(NaturalNews) It's taken as an article of faith that vaccinations have improved our lifespan. We take our children to the doctor for their injections without question. We think of ourselves as bad parents if we don't. It's simply one of those things that we don't question, as if it's obvious. It's gone so far now that, as has been so well documented on NaturalNews, parents are threatened with prison, and their children are forced to get vaccinations at gunpoint (http://www.NaturalNews.com/021572.html) . Medical tyranny in Texas turns teenage girls into HPV vaccination profit centers.

The reality, as documented by the American Medical Association's own journal (JAMA) in the January 1999 issue, is that there is no connection between death from infectious diseases and vaccinations; that's right, "none".

First, let's look at the dates for when vaccinations were first introduced in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control:

* Measles (one of the Ms of the MMR vaccination): 1963

* Mumps (the other M of the MMR vaccination): 1967

* Chickenpox: 1995

* Diphtheria (the D of the DPT vaccination): First licensed in 1921, but not widely used until the 1930's

* Pertussis (whooping cough, the P of the DPT vaccination): First developed in the 1930's, widely used by the mid-1940's

* Tetanus (the T of the DPT vaccination): First used as a childhood vaccine in the 1940's.

* Rubella (German measles, the R of the MMR vaccination): 1969

There are several others, of course, but they are either too recent to take into account or not truly associated with childhood illnesses, such as smallpox and polio, which are more appropriately considered epidemic diseases.

The JAMA Study

The number of deaths from nine different infectious diseases, in some cases, groups of diseases, were tallied. They are:

* Pneumonia and influenza

* Tuberculosis

* Diphtheria

* Pertussis

* Measles

* Typhoid fever

* Dysentery

* Syphilis


All but AIDS were chosen because they were the most common cause of death by infectious diseases in the first half of the 20th century, with the exception of polio, for which data are not available for all years covered by the study.

Graphs showing numbers of deaths by age, by infectious disease deaths as a whole, by specific infectious diseases, and by all disease causes are shown plotted by time, from 1900 through 1996.

Results of the JAMA Study

With the exception of 1918, when the influenza epidemic struck, the rate of deaths from infectious diseases show a fairly smooth rate of decrease from 1900 through 1980, at which point a slight rate of increase develops. This link shows the associated JAMA graph: (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/conten...) .

Deaths graphed by groups of diseases show some variations, but interestingly, the most significant improvements are in typhus and dysentery (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/conten...) . Both of these diseases show almost no deaths after 1960. Interestingly, there is no vaccination for dysentery and most people are not vaccinated for typhus.

Tuberculosis rates show a curve similar to the overall infectious disease rate. The death rate from pneumonia and influenza from 1970 through 1996 shows a general increase, in spite of the ongoing vaccinations for influenza and the introduction of pneumonia vaccines in 1977 and 1983.

Diphtheria shows its greatest decrease of deaths prior to 1920. There was a spike in diphtheria deaths during the early 1920's, shortly after the vaccination was introduced, and then the rate of decrease continued as before the vaccination's introduction. Whooping cough (pertussis) and measles showed the same general trend of decrease during the 20th century.

Finally, take a look at the chart for death rates from all disease causes (http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/conten...) . From 1900 through the 1920's, the infectious disease rate goes down at an impressive pace. This is a time during which there were no vaccinations against childhood diseases. The rate of decrease of deaths from 1940 through 1960 continues at about the same pace. Then, it starts to level out, in spite of the fact that the vast majority of children are vaccinated during this time.

Now, take a look at the same graph showing the death rates from all causes. This should make you nervous. The rate of death from all disease decreases slightly from 1900 through 1920. However, after this, when vaccinations start to be introduced, the death rate from noninfectious causes starts to increase. It isn't a huge amount, but it's definitely there. Most significantly, the increase in death rate from noninfectious causes starts when vaccinations are introduced.

What Can Explain the Reduction in Infectious Disease Rates?

Since it's obvious from the AMA's own documentation that vaccinations have little or no effect on the outcome of infectious disease deaths, then there must be other issues at play. If one looks at the history of the 20th century in the U.S. then it isn't too difficult to see what has changed. This was the era of improved overall hygiene and adequate food.

It was when clean and abundant water became the norm. It was when systems to clean wastes from public water supplies became standard. It was when septic and sewer systems to separate people from disease-producing wastes were introduced. It was a time of relative plenty, when people grew larger because of adequate food. In other words, it was a time of relative wealth and public works for good water and sewage treatment.

This is the most likely reason behind the decrease in infectious diseases, not the medical system's vaunted vaccinations.

Why Are We Vaccinating Against Childhood Diseases?

This is the multi-billion dollar question. Parents usually have their children vaccinated because the idea of not doing it simply doesn't occur. We have been thoroughly indoctrinated with the concept of "deadly" childhood diseases. Yet, there is no documentation showing that death rates from these diseases have been improved by vaccinations. As the data from the AMA itself shows, there is every reason to believe that these vaccinations are not effective, that we need to look to other reasons for the decrease in these disease deaths.

Even more significantly, the AMA's own data shows a possible link between an increase in death coinciding with vaccinations. Whether this is a cause-and-effect link is not proven at this time. However, with the AMA's record of not looking into the effects of vaccinations - of not even requiring that after-effects be reported - it's clear that the allopathic (standard) medical system is not going to sort this out. That leaves us with no option but to assume the worst - that childhood vaccinations not only do little or no good, but they may be doing great harm.

The question, of course, is "Why?" As with any corporate-controlled business (and make no mistake, the medical industry is big business) the answer always goes back to the same thing: money. Filthy lucre. There are millions and billions of dollars, pounds, euros, and other currencies to be made by both the pharmaceutical firms and the doctors themselves.

The Bottom Line

For the medical industry, the bottom line is the bottom line. For each of us and for our children, the bottom line is completely different. It's the quality of our lives. In the end, the only ones who must live with the results of vaccinations are the children and adults whose bodies have been pierced by the needles injecting them.


This article focused on the most common childhood vaccines, the ones noted for childhood diseases and also the ones that have existed for the greatest amount of time. However, readers may find the following information about when vaccines have been introduced to be of interest:

* Anthrax: November 20, 2002

* Hepatitis A: HAVRIXR vaccine in 1995, VAQTAR vaccine in 1996

* Hepatitis B: First in 1982; in 1986 a recombinant DNA vaccine issued; in 1989 a second recombinant DNA vaccine issued

* Hib (Haemophilus influenzae type b, not a true influenza virus, but a bacterium): First licensed in 1985, but a "new improved" form licensed in 1987

* HPV (Human papillomavirus): June 8, 2006

* Influenza: First introduced in 1945; ongoing updates developed year after year in attempt to keep up with viral changes

* Meningococcus: First in 1974 against one of five major subtypes; others introduced 1981 and 2005 for original subtype and three others; no vaccine exists for fifth subtype (B), which is the cause of 65% of meningitis cases under age 2

* Pneumonia: 1977 for 14 types of bacterial pneumonia; 1983 "improved" vaccine for 23 types of bacteria; a specific vaccine aimed at children under age 2 developed in 2000

* Polio: Jonas Salk killed virus vaccine in 1955; live vaccine in 1961; "enhanced formulation" introduced in 1988. Note that the death rate from polio had already decreased dramatically, to a tiny fraction of where it had been at the beginning of the century, before the vaccine's introduction.

* Rotavirus: February 2006

* Zoster (shingles): May 26, 2006

To see how the medical establishment presents nonsense studies falsely "proving" that their treatments and drugs are useful or harmless, read Dissecting a Thimerosal Study (http://www.NaturalNews.com/022237.html).

NaturalNews's Mike Adams has been pointing out problems with vaccines. A recent must-read is his exposé, HPV Vaccine Hoax Exposed: FDA Documents Reveal HPV "Not Associated with Cervical Cancer" (http://www.NaturalNews.com/022404.html).

About the author
* Heidi Stevenson, BSc, DIHom, FBIH
* Fellow, British Institute of Homeopathy
* Gaia Health (http://www.gaia-health.com)
* The author is a homeopath who became concerned with medically-induced harm as a result of her own experiences and those of family members. She says that allopathic medicine is the arena that best describes the motto, "Buyer beware."
* Heidi Stevenson provides information about medically-induced disease and disability, along with incisive well-researched articles on major issues in the modern world, so members of the public can protect themselves.
She can be reached through her website: www.gaia-health.com

Historical Data Shows Vaccines are Not what Saved Us

by Richard Stossel, citizen journalist

(NaturalNews) With all of the hype surrounding the H1N1 swine flu virus lately, everyone is very concerned with the safety and effectiveness of vaccines, and rightly so. This is a very important question that we must all ask ourselves and find out what the truth is. As the debate rages on an even more important question has rarely been asked. Do vaccines even protect you from the viruses and illnesses that they claim to?

If you only get your news and information from mainstream news and educational sources, then the question about whether vaccines are effective is never even raised. This lack of discussion gives the perception that they are so effective that only a crazy or ignorant person would even think otherwise. Of course that is the perception that they are trying to get across to you, but that is far from the truth.

In fact if you take a look at some of the historical facts on the effectiveness of vaccines you will begin to see that not only did they too often not protect people from the very diseases that they claimed to but they actually caused outbreaks of those same diseases they were hyped to prevent.

From vaccinationdebate.com website

Take a look at some of the historical data below showing various vaccination programs and the outbreak of that very disease either immediately to several years later.

In 1871-2, England, with 98% of the population aged between 2 and 50 vaccinated against smallpox, it experienced its worst ever smallpox outbreak with 45,000 deaths. During the same period in Germany, with a vaccination rate of 96%, there were over 125,000 deaths from smallpox. (The Hadwen Documents)

- In Germany, compulsory mass vaccination against diphtheria commenced in 1940 and by 1945 diphtheria cases were up from 40,000 to 250,000. (Don`t Get Stuck, Hannah Allen)

- In the USA in 1960, two virologists discovered that both polio vaccines were contaminated with the SV 40 virus which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell tissue cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. (Med Jnl of Australia 17/3/1973 p555)

- In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organisation after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate. (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990)

- In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children. (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)

- In the 1970`s a tuberculosis vaccine trial in India involving 260,000 people revealed that more cases of TB occurred in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. (The Lancet 12/1/80 p73)

- In 1977, Dr Jonas Salk, who developed the first polio vaccine, testified along with other scientists that mass inoculation against polio was the cause of most polio cases throughout the USA since 1961. (Science 4/4/77 "Abstracts" )

- In 1978, a survey of 30 States in the US revealed that more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. (The People`s Doctor, Dr R Mendelsohn)

- In 1979, Sweden abandoned the whooping cough vaccine due to its ineffectiveness. Out of 5,140 cases in 1978, it was found that 84% had been vaccinated three times! (BMJ 283:696-697, 1981)

-The February 1981 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 90% of obstetricians and 66% of pediatricians refused to take the rubella vaccine.

- In the USA, the cost of a single DPT shot had risen from 11 cents in 1982 to $11.40 in 1987. The manufacturers of the vaccine were putting aside $8 per shot to cover legal costs and damages they were paying out to parents of brain damaged children and children who died after vaccination. (The Vine, Issue 7, January 1994, Nambour, Qld)

- In Oman between 1988 and 1989, a polio outbreak occurred amongst thousands of fully vaccinated children. The region with the highest attack rate had the highest vaccine coverage. The region with the lowest attack rate had the lowest vaccine coverage. (The Lancet, 21/9/91)

- In 1990, a UK survey involving 598 doctors revealed that over 50% of them refused to have the Hepatitis B vaccine despite belonging to the high risk group urged to be vaccinated. (British Med Jnl, 27/1/1990)
- In 1990, the Journal of the American Medical Association had an article on measles which stated, "Although more than 95% of school-aged children in the US are vaccinated against measles, large measles outbreaks continue to occur in schools and most cases in this setting occur among previously vaccinated children." (JAMA, 21/11/90)

- In the USA, from July 1990 to November 1993, the US Food and Drug Administration counted a total of 54,072 adverse reactions following vaccination. The FDA admitted that this number represented only 10% of the real total, because most doctors were refusing to report vaccine injuries. In other words, adverse reactions for this period exceeded half a million! (National Vaccine Information Centre, March 2, 1994)
- In the New England Journal of Medicine July 1994 issue a study found that over 80% of children under 5 years of age who had contracted whooping cough had been fully vaccinated.

- On November 2nd, 2000, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) announced that its members voted at their 57th annual meeting in St Louis to pass a resolution calling for an end to mandatory childhood vaccines. The resolution passed without a single "no" vote. (Report by Michael Devitt)

From NaturalNews website

Scientific evidence links vaccinations to chronic fatigue, autoimmune disorders, aids, learning disabilities, and other health problems.
Viera Scheibner notes that the annual death rate in Europe prior to 1940 from diphtheria was "negligible (less than 300 deaths per million)." After this date, when mass vaccinations against the disease were begun, "unprecedented" diphtheria epidemics followed in "fully vaccinated subjects." Mass vaccinations against tetanus and whooping cough also began in many countries in the 1940s, and were followed by outbreaks of the "so-called provocation poliomyelitis.
- Conscious Health: A Complete Guide to Wellness Through Natural Means by Ron Garner

Childhood vaccinations may also be one element that contributes to allergy, in a way that is similar to the mechanisms of the hygiene hypothesis. The vaccinations that prevent childhood illnesses may actually be making children more vulnerable to allergic disorders, by changing the natural function of their immune systems. Specifically, the vaccinations appear to make kids` immune systems too Th-2 skewed, with a relative deficit of Th-1 activity.
- Healing the New Childhood Epidemics: Autism, ADHD, Asthma, and Allergies: The Groundbreaking Program for the 4-A Disorders by Kenneth Bock

While the dangers of vaccinations are greatly understated by most health authorities, the advertised benefits are greatly exaggerated. For instance, incidence of the four leading childhood killer diseases - diphtheria, pertussis, scarlet fever, and measles - had already declined 90 to 97 percent before the introduction of vaccines, due to improved sanitation and hygiene.35
- The Natural Way to Heal: 65 Ways to Create Superior Health by Walter Last

Homeopathic remedies may also help reduce the side effects of vaccinations. Dr. Kotsanis makes the following recommendations regarding vaccinations: Before vaccinations, give L-glutamine (500 mg), vitamin C (500 mg), and vitamin B6 (50 mg) daily for six weeks. Give probiotics (two times per day) and aloe vera juice (2 oz in divided doses, 2-3 times daily) for three months before and after vaccinations. Make sure the child gets plenty of pure water daily.
- Alternative Medicine the Definitive Guide, Second Edition by Larry Trivieri, Jr.

Immune systems are even harmed by vaccinations because even though they may protect the body from one strain of infectious disease, they weaken the immune system against future strains. Fortunately, there are many products to help boost immune system function. But remember: Even with the help of these products, proper immune system function requires greatly reducing exposure to synthetic chemicals and non-natural substances, as well as following the 3 principles of health discussed in the first half of this chapter.
- Natural Health Solutions by Mike Adams

After you were born, during your preschool years, you got every little cold or virus that came along, but your immune system was getting some heavy-duty instruction on things to defend against. Vaccinations, too, "schooled" your immune system. So as the years passed, illnesses and immunizations helped your body`s immune system begin to develop memories of what was body-friendly and what was body-menacing.
- The Vitamin D Cure by James Dowd and Diane Stafford

So what are some of the true reasons why disease decreased and disappeared in the last century? From his book `Health and Healing` Dr Andrew Weil said it best with the following statement;

"Scientific medicine has taken credit it does not deserve for some advances in health. Most people believe that victory over the infectious diseases of the last century came with the invention of immunizations. In fact, cholera, typhoid, tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough, etc, were in decline before vaccines for them became available - the result of better methods of sanitation, sewage disposal, and distribution of food and water."

Of course each person must weigh all of the evidence and data and then decide what is best for themselves and their families. This information is provided to help the reader make an informed and educated decision on this subject and to come out from under the ideas that we have been led to believe that vaccination automatically equals 100% immunity to disease.

Health and Healing, Dr.Andrew Weil

About the author
Richard is a network engineer and longtime practitioner of Chinese martial arts, medicine and chi-gung for over twenty six years. Having learned many Chinese health and healing arts from old world gung-fu and healing masters and practitioners, he has helped many people to overcome their health issues and achieve their fitness goals. Through diligent study and experience he has taken this knowledge even further over the years including reading scores of books on Chinese medicine, health, chi theory, science, physics, nutrition, supplements, meditation, martial arts, and many other subjects. Utilizing the web, health and fitness videos, newsletters, articles, teachings and lectures, Rich is passionate about spreading the true knowledge of health, healing, fitness and spiritual truths. I'm proud to be writing articles for NaturalNews.com You can read many articles, hear audio interviews, and learn more about the highly praised Chinese Health and Fitness video by visiting www.chinesehealthandfitness.com

Vaccines Exposed: A Hidden Crime Against Our Children

by Rami Nagel, citizen journalist

(NaturalNews) "The greatest lie ever told is that vaccines are safe and effective," said Dr. Len Horowitz. I am a father, and in the course, I have spent a reasonable amount of time researching vaccines in order to determine the most sensible cause of action for my daughter.

According to the US government's own Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in 1998 there were 88 vaccine related infant deaths, in 1999 there where 73 infant deaths, and in 2000, 73 infant deaths. This trend of between 70-90 reported infant deaths continues yearly through 2007.

In 1993, FDA commissioner David Kessler reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association that, according to one study, "Only about 1% of serious events are reported to the FDA."

Based on this report, and other studies regarding the reporting of "serious events," one comes up with an estimated figure that 1-2% of all serious adverse vaccine reports are actually recorded. When you combine the VAERS data together with the adverse events reporting studies, there is only one dreadful conclusion. In the United States each year, anywhere from an estimated 3,900 to 7,800 infants are poisoned to death, as a direct result, of being vaccinated.

If this figure is too startling or shocking for you to swallow, consider an ultra-conservative figure that states that 10% of adverse vaccine events are reported. Even with that figure, we can be sure that about 780 infants are poisoned to death every year.

When one child is murdered by a violent person, as a culture, we put forth the maximum amount of anger, hatred, and punishment towards such a sick person. We all know in our hearts, that children need to be honored, cherished and protected from harm. We are united as a culture in the belief that hurting children is bad, and wrong.

However, when there is documented evidence that proves, beyond any doubt, that hundreds, and likely thousands of infants, are murdered every year by vaccines in this country, we consider it to be good public policy. With the recent vaccine events in Maryland, one can conclude that since a certain percentage of children will die, and a higher percentage will become permanently disabled, that Maryland's state vaccine policy is a policy of state sponsored child debilitation.

I want you to really take a moment here to pause and reflect on this experience that is so painful and vast; that many of us do not want to take the leap of faith to realize the gravity of what I am, as well as many others, are saying about vaccines. We have a national policy that supports the murder of completely innocent infants. The cost is particularly high to the parents who are shocked when they find their newborns poisoned to death. Part of a way our government has decided to mitigate this harm is through a system of compensation for vaccine injured children. The burden of proof to receive compensation for this program is extremely high. Very few parents who apply for an "award" qualify for the money. In the past 18 years, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid out $782,638,751.16 for 908 "awards."

Look At Vaccines Moralistically

As a culture, we accept, tolerate, advocate, and make laws that promote the unlawful murder of thousands of infants because we have a belief system, and a public policy, that allows these children to be the "necessary" sacrifices of what is believed to be an unassailable system of vaccinations. The purpose of murdering perhaps several thousand infants per year is because we think that the good of the vaccine policy helps other children live and thus supposedly outweighs the known harm caused.

Now, I am going to bring up a critical example to show you the error of the current vaccine paradigm that allows for children to be harmed. Imagine that one of these children was your own. Or, imagine that one of these individuals was your mother, your sister or brother, or a saint. Are you telling me that one of the greatest examples of the cruelties of humanity, sacrificing helpless infants, is justifiable to supposedly save others? Is it really good public policy to crucify some children to supposedly prevent diseases in others?

If it was your child, would you volunteer your child to be the sacrificial lamb of our public policy?

Do not volunteer your child anymore and allow them to be the next lamb of our hideous public policy, do not vaccinate your child!

The truth is, every child's and every infant's life is valuable. Each being is precious, full of life and warmth, each infant is god-like. Every person on this planet counts and deserves the chance to live a healthy life. Since we have a public policy that allows for innocent children to be harmed, and at times murdered, then this policy must stop immediately.

We know for sure that at least 70 or more children are murdered yearly, and more likely several thousand children are murdered every year. When any individual or government sponsors vaccines; this is the equivalent to sponsoring the crime of murder. This is an outrage!

This first argument against vaccinations has come to you allowing the broad assumption that vaccines work, and that the losses of human life are thus justifiable because many more lives are supposed to be saved by vaccine public policy.

Yet the belief that vaccines work, flies in the face of any reasonable scientific inquiry because there has never even been one. Expert vaccine researcher Dr. Philip Incao MD testified that, "Incredible as it sounds, such a common-sense controlled study comparing vaccinated to non-vaccinated children has never been done in America for any vaccination."

In simple English, we have no real, double blind scientific studies that show that any vaccination works as it is intended to work. In case you are wondering, normal vaccines are approved for use with only short-term studies, many times the studies are 30 days or less. It is hardly scientific to study the effects of vaccines for such a short term, when vaccines are designed to work for several years at a time. Thus, the long term effects, and the long term effectiveness of vaccines, have never been proven; let alone reasonably studied by the people who unconditionally believe in their good.

Because "Safety testing of many vaccines is limited and the data are unavailable for independent scrutiny"; in the year 2000, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons passed a resolution calling for a moratorium on vaccine mandates. With such limited evidence, they stated that mandatory vaccination "is equivalent to human experimentation." Unethical human experimentation was banned by the Nuremberg Code after the horrors of World War II were exposed (Nazi experiments on their prisoners).

Not only do vaccines not work, they actually cause diseases. According to the same US government Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, there were approximately 1400 serious events from vaccinations for people of all ages, per year, from 1991-1996. Serious events include: permanent disability, hospitalization, and life threatening illnesses. And we can know for sure, due to the low reporting of serious vaccine events, that the actual number of diseases caused by vaccinations is 10 - 100 times this number, meaning vaccines cause 14,000 - 140,000 serious events (diseases) per year. In some cases, such as with the Hepatitis B vaccine given to infants and children, the vaccine causes more harm and injury that the disease of Hepatitis B in infants and children.

Published studies from reputable journals have linked vaccines to causing AIDS, autism, cancer, diabetes, hearing/vision loss, hepatitis B, mumps, measles, polio and rubella.

At this point you might be wondering how it is that vaccines can cause so much destruction.

Why Vaccines Cause Diseases

Our body is equipped with an immune system. The immune system I am referring to is not just helper cells and anti-bodies, we have several lines of defense against infection and illness. We have saliva that is full of germs, and we have skin to protect our organs. We have a liver and kidneys to cleanse our blood and excrete toxic waste. We have our lungs to take in fuel, and excrete the waste of cellular metabolism.

In order to make a vaccine, one needs to render the virus, or germ, ineffective and find a way to introduce it into the body. In order to make many batches of this virus for injection, the virus needs food to grow off of. To grow a vaccine virus, the virus is cultured on a variety of nutrient rich substances; like monkey kidney cells, aborted human fetuses, calf serum, guinea pig embryonic tissue, fetal tissue, and other foul things. Once you have this large batch of "disease," and you can imagine how sick and putrid this mix is, you need to remove all the impurities and isolate the virus (or germ) that you want to inject into someone. Now isolating just the virus from this milieu is impossible. Yet we try anyway, we bleach and cleanse the serum and get mostly the virus, plus many contaminants. Now, when the body gets injected with this virus, it will immediately seek to repel it, especially since it is rare for a disease to be introduced into the body directly through the blood stream. Vaccine creators had to find ways to keep the altered virus or germ from being immediately repelled from the body, and this is one purpose of adjuvants, vaccine additives.

Every vaccine contains MSG as one such additive; other vaccine additives include, thimerosal which is mercury, antibiotics, anti-freeze and other poisonous and acidic compounds.

Now imagine your helpless infant. They hardly have an immune system as their bodies' lines of defenses. Their organs are still growing and forming. It is our public policy to inject infants soon after birth, directly with a syringe full of foreign substances. The injection dosage is not carefully measured to be specific to the exact body weight of the infant, and the dose has never been independently screened to be free of contaminants. Immediately after the injection, the body goes into life saving procedures. If you have a healthy and robust child, you will be lucky to get away with a cold or flu-like symptoms, as your child's body tries to excrete all of the impurities just injected through its organs of purification: such as the kidney's, the liver, and the skin. If you have a less robust child, their body's defense mechanisms can fail one after the next, especially after repeated injections. When the body's internal purifiers fail, the blood-brain barrier becomes compromised; that is why a known side effect to vaccines is a high-pitched screaming. The screaming is the nervous system of an infant being damaged and breached as it was never meant to be. Many children are autistic because of vaccinations as the toxic poisons in the vaccines get lodged into places that can alter and affect the nervous system; including brain and spinal column development.

Dr. Albert Sabien, developer of the oral polio vaccine, has changed his vaccine position widely. In a 1995 lecture, he said, "Official data have shown that the large-scale vaccinations undertaken in the US have failed to obtain any significant improvement of the diseases against which they were supposed to provide protection."

With this in mind, we have before us one of the most horrific, disturbing, and incompressible crimes ever committed. Each and every day, thousands of parents along with local and state governments, schools, doctors and politicians, allow this crime, and even promote this crime, as it continues to go unnoticed by the masses.

Let me add one final note to this article. You may have heard of these supposedly great humanitarian organizations going into the third world and providing community service by vaccinating poor children against diseases. Given your new awareness about the lack of evidence of vaccine efficacy, you might wonder what these organizations are really doing? This is what the World Health Organization asked themselves in an internal review, after noticing that an AIDS epidemic seemed to follow where they were vaccinating.

Vaccines in the Third World

On May 11, 1987, The London Times, one of the world's most respected newspapers, published an explosive article entitled 'Smallpox Vaccine Triggered AIDS Virus'. The story suggested the smallpox eradication vaccine program sponsored by the World Health Organization was responsible for unleashing AIDS in Africa. Almost 100 million Africans living in central Africa were inoculated by the WHO
(www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cf...) .

In Dr. Campbell Douglas's 1987 report titled 'W.H.O Murdered Africa' he writes that, "There is no question mark after the title of this article because the title is not a question. It's a declarative statement." (www.biblebelievers.org.au/who.htm)

Wangari Maathai, the first African woman to win Nobel Peace Prize claims, what is a common belief in some parts of Africa, that, "In fact it (the HIV virus) is created by a scientist for biological warfare."

Kihura Nkuba spoke about Polio vaccine genocide in Uganda. "At the main hospital in Mbarara during that month of 1977 more than 600 children had died following polio vaccination. 600 children! So even some of the timid medical practitioners who were initially afraid to come out, started coming out giving information and saying 'Oh, we knew this oral polio vaccine was trouble because as soon as the child receives it, they get a temperature and their health goes downhill and there is nothing that you could do.'" (www.whale.to/a/nkuba.htm)

You need to know why you have been led so far from the path of truth. You need to know that when you see media reports that promote the good of vaccines and their effectiveness, such as news or television reports, that these reports are completely fake and fabricated.

This leads me to the conclusion that some of the most powerful forces are at play, since they can easily and freely put manipulative and false material into the public's eye.

Healthy children come from healthy parents who eat whole and unrefined organic foods, who avoid processed foods like pasteurized milk, processed sugar, cheap vegetable oils, infant formulas, and processed flour products that are so prevalent in our food supply.

If you want your child to be healthy and disease free, do not give them a polluted body. Do not violate the purity of your child's blood.

Loving our children means not giving them vaccinations and it means that we need to inform other parents as well that vaccines are indeed shown and proven to be deadly.

Spread the word and do your part in ending this heinous crime.

"The greatest lie ever told is that vaccines are safe and effective," and now you know why.

May you and your children experience peace and happiness beyond vaccines.

Learn more about vaccines and their harms from this free, well referenced resource that includes many detailed and specific vaccine links as well as references to many points made in this article. (www.healingourchildren.net/vaccine_...)

About the author
Ramiel Nagel is the internationally published author of Cure Tooth Decay and Healing Our Children In "Cure Tooth Decay" Nagel, reveals how your teeth can heal naturally because they were never designed to decay in the first place! Now there is a natural way to take control of your dental health by changing the food that you eat. Receive 19 free lessons on how to stop cavities
"Healing Our Children" explains the true causes of disease conditions of pregnancy and childhood so that you can avoid and prevent them. It provides essential natural health programs so that mothers and their new babies can optimize their health during the times of preconception, pregnancy, lactation and early childhood. Receive a free chapter of Healing Our Children
Free health information is also available on the topics of:
A Program for preconception health based on indigenous wisdom.
The cause of disease and the end of suffering of humanity.

Vaccinations news, articles and information:


A new study confirms the safety of one of the HPV vaccines, by the way. http://life.nationalpost.com/2012/10/01/hpv-vaccine-found-to-be-safe-in-u-s-study-of-190000-women/

What if you didn't get the flu vaccine and gave my grandma the flu, which killed her? Would you expect me to hold you responsible for her death? No vaccine protects against the virus 100%.....none. They offer a lot of protection, but not complete. Which is why this episode was ridiculous. People get measles, pertussis, flu, etc even when they have been vaccinated. In addition, there are many viruses that can kill infants that are not yet formulated into vaccines. The episode was ridiculous.

Kinda in the middle of the whole vaccine thing (see both sides), but I will say, L&O, Sport Utility Vehicle almost always pulls both medical information and legal precedent out of their collective bottoms. My two faves:

Olivia (with full on pompous, self righteous blather) lecturing a very stupid teen mommy in a prego pact with her firends, "don't you know the risks and birth defects of teen pregnancy??? Like DYSLEXIA???"

Okay, everyone knows a baby born to a teen mommy in not getting the greatest start in the world in about 90 catrillion ways--and there are many birth defects (with some evidence of certain forms of palsy) being very much linked.

That said, A) dyslexia isn't one of them (most evidence indicates it's congenital). B) Dyslexia isn't a birth defect---your mind just works differently. And yes, I'm mildly dyslexic, my daughter more so and it most assuredly runs in my family. Given that there are captains of industry, world leaders and geniuses with it, it's hardly anything to be ashamed of or guard against.

My favorite legal ridiculous plot:

Liv is undercover in prison to catch herself a prison guard sex abuser/rapist. She gets slightly fresh with the guard capitan, so he decides he'll "teach her" by forcing her to perform oral sex on him. She's only saved by Finn in the nick of time (revealing the show's rather paternalistic bent, as well).

The show claims that an undercover police officer wouldn't be able to get a conviction against a corrections officer, because he claimed he was just "subduing a prisoner" (yeah, with his fly unzipped and her handcuffed). But they're ultimately able to get a conviction, because a former inmate is able to identify him by a scar on his body.

Yes, so an ex-con is more credible than an honored detective and he totally couldn't have claimed it was consensual. It's a silly show and one I no longer watch

Something new from Australia about the stunning efficacy of their national HPV vaccination campaign:

Vaccines are not "toxins." I am sorry you have been misinformed, but I support holding ignorant people responsible for the harm they cause, unwittingly or not. There are enough credible sources on the internet to convince any reasonable person that vaccines are largely safe, extremely effective, and nothing short of a medical wonder. If you want the freedom to keep your children unvaccinated, then you assume responsibility for the consequences of that decision.

It's like those religious loons who believe visiting doctors demonstrates a lack of faith in the healing power of Jesus Christ. You are entitled to your fringe science-phobic beliefs right up until the point a child dies, then we put you in jail.

I just watched the show and I have to say it was incredibly irritating. I turned the channel and I'm tempted to throw out the show all together. It really got under my skin the way the portrayed that mom and the way that mom acting. As soon as her trial started I changed the channel.

They just rebroadcast this episode last evening (4/6/15) in our market.

The new episode airing Wed. 4/8, "A DEADLY EPIDEMIC" ought to be 'interesting.' http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/care-of-immunocompromised-patient.jpg

How can you ignore this??? From Johns Hopkins...

Vaccinated children and adults CAN SPREAD the disease for which they were inoculated for WEEKS.

http://www.morganverkamp.com/august-27-2014-press-release-statement-of-william-w-thompson-ph-d-regarding-the-2004-article-examining-the-possibility-of-a-relationship-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism/ The CDC whistleblower was investigated by Florida Congressman Bill Posey after he was approach by Brian Hooker, former CDC employee and aquantance of Dr. William Thompson. Dr. Thompson says he didn't know the confersation that he had with Brain Hooker was being recorded when he told him that he "I can't believe what we did, but we did. It's all there.." The CDC whistleblower now has immunity from The Obama Administration & is to speak b/f Congress soon.

#SB277 Here the voices & see the faces of many, many parents of Vaccine Induced Autistics here! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsLuR3X6cpg … Twitter Search #HearThisWell #ParentsDoTheWork #VaccineInjury

The comments to this entry are closed.