Post preface: I was vaccinated. I vaccinated my children. I’m not anti-government, or ‘anti-science’, or beholden to any set of religious beliefs. I’m simply a curious person who began to examine an idea that I had never stopped to consider: that any of the facts I had been taught throughout my life on vaccination could possibly be false.
I’m surprised to discover that I think many vaccine ideas may indeed be false, and the wildly emotional and angry response of non-scientists defending a complex mass of poorly understood ideas only pushes me further into the camp of the science-educated voices speaking out against vaccines as they are now.
The mainstream press is closed to neutral, critical debate of facts and information, which suggests its subservience to its pharmaceutical advertising revenues. I would ask anyone to be open to considering: Who determined that original vaccine science was an immutable law and not simply an idea on a trajectory of understanding like all other science? Does a more advanced understanding of disease, immunology, microbiology, bacteria and viruses not necessitate a rethinking of our vaccine ingredients, vaccine schedule, and vaccines themselves? What is the nature of the many diseases and viruses we’re “fighting”? Can conditions change over decades to alter what might have been a beneficial product? Can science and nature evolve, and things deemed necessary for survival one year become hazardous later one?
Voices within the global scientific community express concern that market forces of pharmaceutical manufacturers are directing scientific thought, research and published results to a greater degree than ever before: can vaccination — a hugely profitable industry — be immune to such a force? Can the free market take over an idea and use its power within the media to silence dissenting opinion on it? Is modern science in a position where new viruses can be quickly identified, tracked and slowed, with limited loss of life? if so, what is the necessity of vaccines as they are used today?
Might there be more effective methods of controlling outbreaks of deadly (as in an Ebola virus, for an example, not a measles type, which rarely takes lives) virus than mass vaccine as we know it? Bacteria mutate, we are simply biological and bacterial organisms — maybe fighting our own infants’ immune systems as we have done with this old-style vaccination is no longer the most efficient and effective method of keeping ourselves healthy.
I’m dismayed that these questions and more aren’t being asked by the media, instead of the attacks it has been waging against anyone questioning vaccine orthodoxy over the past year or so. Vaccines are owned, produced and sold by global pharmaceutical manufacturers who are acting much like the governments of Iran or China in muzzling public discourse about this critical topic.
My high-school son is taking an online summer-school class necessary for graduation. The course has a few cyber-teachers who grade, and respond to, written assignments. Today, responding to an assignment about search engines and advertising, the teacher noted that, “…I used to think that Google was a benevolent corporation…” until s/he realized it wasn’t.
The divide between those of us who understand that vaccine manufacturers are profit-making machines responsible for massive harm, and those who think that vaccines are protecting the world from dangerous, killer pathogens, is demonstrated in that idiot’s nonsensical phrase: benevolent corporations.
The notion of vaccinations was originally good. And maybe, if vaccines were made simpler and safer, and if they weren’t injected into infants; and if vaccine manufacturers accepted legal responsibility for their safety; and if vaccine trials and research were transparent and without industry conflict-of-interest; and if government and medicine weren’t palms-out for pharmaceutical industry dollars; and if vaccines were studied and researched based on current understanding of modern immunology; and if the mainstream press, which needs pharmaceutical advertising dollars, published open analysis of vaccination…then they would still make some sense to me.
The tragedy is that vaccines are NONE of those things.
I once believed the myths I was fed about them: We need infants vaccinated. We will all die if we’re not vaccinated. Herd immunity is an immutable law of science. Vaccination saved the planet. However, the truths are these: the majority of illnesses they purportedly eradicate don’t kill; diseases run a natural course and disappear; many are particular to certain population groups or geographies or age groups; but all are unnecessary for hundreds of millions of infants. Vaccine orthodoxy was created before medicine even had the barest understanding about the human immune system or how it functions! Bombarding infants with vaccines is nothing short of madness. Hepatitis B shots for babies? And why?
It’s an unsafe practice. What was once believed to be safe is not. And that shouldn’t be a contentious issue, but it is. Like lead, and DDT, and smoking, and flame retardants, and deep tanning, and a host of things of the modern world whose myths were debunked.
The actual science emerging through vaccine critics (most of whom are scientists and have actually sorted through the literature) now doesn’t bear out much of vaccine orthodoxy. We now know that loads of what we were fed as proof of the research and efficacy of vaccines was a corrupted sham, and the rest is outdated science. And we know that pharmaceutical corporations bought governmental support for their products — no surprise, since we live now in a corporate oligarchy — in order to keep a massive moneymaking machine operating globally.
I’m not providing links to the educated researchers who have, and who continue to, take apart the myths of vaccines, the myths of their safety, and the real science behind past epidemics and the nature of future epidemics. If you’re interested they’re everywhere and you’ll find them. Films, published research papers, books, blogs.
If you’re not interested, then it’s likely that you think in terms of benevolent corporations. You think that corporate science has an interest in protecting your kids, and that government cares about you, and that the FDA wouldn’t release products if they were harmful. You think that somehow vaccine science has developed along with modern science. You think that a pharmaceutical company’s bottom line is magically separate from its product development. That banks make our money work for us, and that cars are safe when they’re put on the road. You think scientists are neutral allies in making the world a better place, that your doctor reads current literature, and that your anti-depressant makes you happier.
But I don’t live in a fairy-tale world. There’s no doubt that our regular and sustained exposure to dangerous cocktails of chemical toxins is responsible for the lightening-fast and unprecedented rise of childhood cancers, and for childhood mental illness and developmental issues. Denying that multiple injections of modern vaccines are the cause of massive damage to babies is like denying that the planet is round.
So it’s unsurprising that those who question vaccine orthodoxy are treated like Galileo when he challenged Church orthodoxy. Pharmaceutical corporations are the new Church [doubt it? How many pharmaceuticals are you and your family members on, and do you know what effects those drugs have on your body systems…?], and governments and the media are beholden to them.
The state of California passed a repressive vaccine law this week, and the state’s governor was quoted as saying, “The science is clear.” Ridiculous, of course, because the real science as understood by people without pharmaceutical industry ties is clear that current vaccines as they are used are dangerous and harmful, and that the only people benefiting from them are those making money from them. [The group that forced this law through included individuals with clear pharmaceutical industry conflicts.]
I’m curious about the psychology of the people who attack those of us challenging the vaccine narrative. Why are they unable to take a critical look at vaccines? What is behind the need to believe in something that you don’t actually understand or haven’t analyzed?
I posit that the people who would call me “anti-science” or an “anti-vaxxer” or worse, are emotionally invested in the notion that nebulous systems protect us from a dangerous and uncontrollable world. That without protections like vaccines — which enjoy a fairy-tale narrative — we’re all at risk of being struck dead by the marauding pathogens of the world at any moment, like a scene from a horror film.
Beneath the misplaced trust in vaccines lies our fear that we can’t control our natural world, and our fear of death, plain and simple. Vaccines guarantee that my child will stay healthy and alive. Vaccines are my family’s armour against a wild, predatory world. And if only it were so!
Sadly and ironically, our compulsions to control our planet and be safe have only created new ways for us to be sick and die. We and our children were going to die a hundred years ago; and we and our children will die today. While it’s true we lead longer lives in the developed nations, statistics don’t necessarily demonstrate that we are “safer” and healthier. In fact, quite the opposite! The compulsion to control our world is our continuing folly.
Humans are bacterial, biological, mutating beings in a bacterial, biological, mutating world. We’ll never be safe in a controlled environment, as much as we labour to be (to the planet’s detriment). The notion that vaccines keep us safe is part lie and part collective delusion.
Pharmaceutical producers knew our fear of death, took the vaccine ball and ran with it. They added more and more vaccines, with more and more adjuncts, and more and more preservatives (lengthening any product’s shelf life adds to its profitability, whether it’s vaccines in your baby’s body or Dorito chips at the 7-Eleven) without controlled, blind studies, or transparent research.
So instead of getting briefly ill from measles or chicken pox, babies and toddlers are now suffering developmental delay, chronic illness, and death from vaccines. They are likely candidates in the skyrocketing childhood cancer rates. A fine trade-off if your child doesn’t fall ill days after a vaccine, and a trade-off that gives you the freedom and ease to vilify unlucky parents and children.
And don’t forget: If your child doesn’t fall ill within days of a vaccine, but instead is diagnosed three years later with leukemia or brain cancer, no conventional doctor will suggest that you connect those dots. “Hmmm,” your white-coated expert will murmur while pursing his/her lips pensively. “You know, we just can’t know why these things happen…”, and you’ll walk away comforted in knowing there are no answers to life’s mysteries but thankful for the miracle of modern science to treat your child’s cancer with immune-system-killing chemo and radiation. All hail conventional medicine.
Vaccines as they are today — not as they were originally conceived — are about greed, fear, and denial, not about protecting anybody’s precious baby from anything at all.
Post Script: After updating my own post I found this interview (see below) with Robert Kennedy Jr, which includes much information I had already come across over the past several months. News to me was specific details of American journalists being harassed and fired over stories critical of the vaccine industry. It confirmed the howling vacuum of critical, open-debate press coverage on what is a white-hot topic. The interview:
This is thoughtful, comprehensive blog with well-researched facts on vaccines:
And researcher Sayer Ji writes and speaks widely on vaccines on his site and elsewhere: