At the end of the day, you either have rights to your own body or you don’t.
Hypothetically, let’s explore a world of mandatory vaccines. How would compliance look…?
You send your baby to daycare. Your baby gets their mandated vaccines during their time at daycare. The majority of vaccines are given from birth to two years of age. Baby comes home with several bandaids after their “update” and you aren’t made aware of what was given… why? Because they’re mandatory and your opinion doesn’t matter. Even if you didn’t want them to have the flu shot with the thimerosal, it is not your choice because that is what was available (multidose vials are cheaper) and it was your baby’s shot day.
You send your kids to public/private school and they come home saying they got a shot today. You were never notified nor informed (because they are mandatory, so it doesn’t matter). What shot? Doesn’t matter — mandatory. Flu, HPV, Heplisav-B (with a new adjuvant and myocardial infarction marker), HIV (clinical trials currently), Ebola (created Dec 2019), etc. If it shows up on the schedule, it is mandatory. Maybe it wasn’t tested in this age group, but now it will be because it is on the official schedule. That is how the ACIP approves use… no studies, just data collection after it has been put to market.
In another scenario, a practitioner goes door-to-door for mandatory shots. They can come into your home, because the state says they’re mandatory (you do not have a choice). Homeschool households are brought “up to date” on current govt mandated medicines, despite a risks v. benefit analysis.
Vaccines brought to your workplace, stores, and neighborhoods. Either you get the shots or you are segregated from attending school, work, or public places. Does this not sound a bit familiar?
This. Is. Not. Okay. This is a slippery slope to becoming the object of Big Pharma’s needs. The same people that brought you the opioid epidemic, tobacco science, thalidomide, Vioxx, etc… create vaccines. How can we see the constant lawsuits in the press, yet fully support the same companies on the very products that have never been tested synergistically in our babies and children? How have we given this industry a free ticket to give our children products that have NEVER been subject to rigorous safety testing using an inert placebo for comparision? The “science” is junk.
If the outcome was obvious (e.g., healthier children, longer lifespan), then parents would line up to get their children innoculated. Parents are witnessing the opposite. We ask for the science and what happens? We are vilified, bullied, and harassed… there is your red flag, folks!
The science is never settled, it evolves. This “science” is reductionist and outdated. The safety science is lacking (see World Health Organization conference Dec 2019). Fund the unbiased study comparing vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations. People will volunteer their kids to be part of the unvaccinated cohort (if your problem is “ethics” of not adminstering the biologics).
If compliance has to be mandated and censorship is enforced, perhaps there is a problem with the product.
At the end of the day, who is in charge of your wellbeing? If they were so concerned about health, lawmakers would mandate clean water and good nutrition. Lawmakers would outlaw non-nutritive snack machines in schools. Yet, those things would not increase any big business profit margins, would they? Health doesn’t create lifelong customers for pharmaceutical giants.
STOP NORMALIZING asthma, chronic ear infections, eczema, food/seasonal allergies, and neurocognitive delays. What are we doing to our immune systems that is causing these OVER-REACTIONS in our children?
Vaccines contain adjuvants that are designed to create an immune RESPONSE. Perhaps these doses of adjuvants are creating an OVER response? With any pharmaceutical there is a possibility of overt action…
》too much blood pressure medication = low BP
》too much insulin = low sugar
》too much antibiotic = bye-bye biome balance, hello opportunistic virulent and resistant organisms
》too much immune system suppression = no immune response, risk for illness
What about too much immune system stimulation? What happens when your immune system is on high alert and you eat an allergenic food at the same time? What happens when you’re given this stimulation repeatedly as a newborn with an IMMATURE immune system that still prioritizes Th2 (inflammatory) response over a Th1 (antibody) response?
That sounds like chronic inflammation. Alike… asthma, chronic ear infections, eczema, and food/seasonal allergies. The neurologic disorders may be a byproduct of heavy metal exposure (we see this with Alzheimers and aluminum in brain tissues as well as brain disorders with Cobalt hips). There is potential here, too!
Newborn immune systems lack memory and are tolerant of antigens for a reason. Babies are born sterile. They are still learning boundaries and creating the flora in their bowels that will become a major component of their immune system for their lifetime. If their body created a Th1 response to every foreign substance, they wouldn’t survive in this world… as we live in symbiosis with the microbes on our skin, in our airway, and in our bowels. Newborns must be colonized with these organisms and build up those systems. How does chronic stimulation of the immune system fit into this matrix?
It does not make sense. Vaccines are given in several doses to “create antibodies” though we know that more are added because they are ineffective in doing that in the first 2-3 doses… probably due to lack of the Th1 response, eh? So, now we give these tiny bodies several doses of adjuvant along with a fragment of a genetic component or microbe without considering what complexes are made between those simultaneous IM exposures, nor do we even study them.
The ACIP, advisory council for immunization practices, does not perform nor require adequate studies! They STATE that fact in these meetings.
So, if you still think that the voice of several thousand concerned mothers and fathers is horsebalogna, your cognitive dissonance is strong. We don’t do this to create drama. We do this to create safer practices for future generations. Mothers and fathers should not have to prove that these practices are harmful. Robust scientific evidence (not industry jargon) should prove interventions to be SAFE before subjecting our most vulnerable populations to them. Concerns should be addressed with valid studies (again, not industry jargon).
Pharmaceutical studies are done on adult populations and medications are recalled for adverse events… I think it is time for a recall, but “biologics” are not considered ‘medications’ for that exact reason…
Are we trading short-term infection for long-term disease?
Are we damaging immune systems by overstimulating them in their development?
When do we start paying attention to the parents that witness their children’s struggle to breathe, eat, and feel well? A normal child should not battle painful skin, constant stomach disturbances, nor frequent episodes of intense ear infections. This was not our (parents born before 1995) reality of childhood and must be questioned.
Months ago, when I said “I just want him to slow down and be a kid while his brother does school,” it didn’t sit right with me.
I didn’t want to stifle his interests, but school was a chore for us growing up and homeschool started to feel like a chore also. I mean, learning isn’t fun right?
WRONG. Compulsory education isn’t fun. Spontaneous learning is a blast! Why should we “force” our children to learn in a way that our culture is pressuring when it fails time and again? Is it really valuable information if the individual does not value it?
We know that public school fails us, but why? Newsflash (if you haven’t been around small children lately)!! Children aren’t designed to sit still in a chair for 5+ hours each day, stay quiet, write what we say, and absorb what they are told. That’s not how it works. We can cater to most of their needs… So, why not the most valuable asset a human holds?! The capacity to learn should be cherished, grown, and modeled.
In the United States, we put children in classrooms and pressure them to regurgitate information that a group of people say is valuable. What about living life? Isn’t that valuable, too? Shouldn’t we promote the curiosities of our children and help them explore this world and create a love for life and learning instead of a hatred of school?
In school, we give clear expectations and require children to meet those expectations. In life, there are no expectations… it requires of us to be creative and problem-solve without being told what to do and when to do it. If we want to grow a generation of “innovators” then it is time to ALLOW them to be innovative by nurturing their curiosities, growing their love for learning, and valuing their capacity to do so. Learning should be modeled as a lifelong process, for that is where innovation is found.
It didn’t sit right with me when I said I wanted my second-born to “still be a kid.” because I was stripping that right away from my 5-year-old… who is still a kid.
I did not devote years of my life to health, science, healing, and wellness to be attacked, ridiculed, judged, and labeled.
I did not spend thousands of hours studying health sciences to graduate at the top of my class THREE TIMES to be discredited for my experiences and knowledge about these topics.
I did not dedicate countless hours of my time reading government websites, pharmaceutical documents, peer-reviewed studies, and systematic reviews to be ignored, silenced, rejected, and censored.
I did not want this, but my conscience will not let me ignore my experiences.
I was once indoctrinated. I was taught the vaccine schedule and what infections were covered in those vaccines. I was briefly shown herd immunity. I was informed that “vaccines [were] safe and effective.” I had no reason to question otherwise, and if others did so, they lacked the capacity to understand “the science.” That is what I was, and many others are, indoctrinated to believe.
I was not taught about vaccine efficacy rates or failure. Vaccines were not a focus in immunology, though some processes signaled theories of their supposed actions. Vaccine-targeted bacteria and viruses were not thoroughly explored in microbiology alike other microbes. Vaccines were not covered in pharmacology, where adverse events were always attached to studied drugs. Vaccines did not come with adverse events. There was no mention of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), and I was not familiar with this passive avenue of compiling population data through post-marketing surveillance as clinical trials are of short duration (some only FOUR days… e.g., Hep B vaccine).
As a foundation, colleges require you to learn concepts without challenging the information. As you dive deeper into the sciences, you find that challenging theory is vital to the fluid nature of science. We still discover new things about the evolving biome/virome and what humans have done to help or hinder the health of populations (e.g., the implications of antibiotic overuse, tobacco science, and the low-fat/high sugar “heart health” diet in light of the obesity crisis… just to name a few). We see changes in human health and must consider contributing factors to find solutions. Current research in epigenetics, the gut-brain connection, and functional medicine are challenging long-held theories surrounding health and wellness.
I have made up for gaps in school. I have explored the evidence-based practice, how to read scientific studies, how to check for bias, and have challenged mainstream ideas in the classroom with success. I have pulled the studies from databases and notice a trend. Glowing reports of vaccine efficacy always contain a bias as they are usually funded by vaccine manufacturers and government agencies that promote them. Those researchers that challenge the data and ask the hard questions rarely have a government funding source, are never tied to the pharmaceutical companies that produce vaccines, and declare no conflicts of interest. Funny how that works, eh?
That being said, we all have biases that need worked through. Our experiences, including formal education, can create these biases. We can be taught to hold certain entities in high regard, but we must be careful not to be blinded to their failures or misrepresentation of data. We must hold them accountable.
I do not think that there is a conspiracy surrounding the childhood vaccination program. I do not believe vaccine manufacturers intended to injure children. At the same time, we have got to recognize that vaccine manufacturers are the same companies that create other pharmaceuticals. If you know anything about FDA regulation and drug testing, you know that there is a price, harm still occurs after the screening of new drugs, and there are regular recalls. You know that medical journals are filled with shady science promoting new medications that are funded by the companies producing those drugs. The clinical trials involved in the manufacturing of vaccines are lesser than those demanded of the FDA for prescribed medications. Fact-Check this; clinical trials are included in manufacturing inserts for vaccines that are required by law.
My take on these issues is that an unintentional loophole was created with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that freed manufacturers from liability and guaranteed a market for vaccines that are recommended for the U. S. Vaccine Schedule. When your vaccine is approved for the schedule, you have secured revenue. The fiscal incentive for more vaccines is high in a developed country.
In 1983, there were seven total vaccine doses. In 2019, there are over 70 throughout childhood, with 22 doses concentrated in the first 12-15 months of life in the U.S. We also have an embarrassing infant (0-12 month) mortality rate as compared to other developed AND developing nations (we rank in the 50s)!
According to the most recent data, the 4th leading cause of death in the first year is Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). SIDS is unexplained death that is not the result of congenital anomalies, maternal/pregnancy complications, or gestation-related causes. If we remove congenital, maternal, pregnancy, gestation from the death table, SIDS will rank #1! Sadly, we spend next to nothing on SIDS research as compared to vaccine spending. On top of that, spending on SIDS research was slashed by almost half from 2017 to 2018! Governments are the largest funding source for R&D, and the largest investment category worldwide is Vaccine Research and Development. The CDC claims vaccines aren’t the cause of SIDS; however, SIDS has no explained cause so that statement is a fallacy. Why would the CDC go against their own vaccine recommendations? They wouldn’t. That is why all their supporting SIDS studies contain glaring conflicts of interest (as they are generated internally), not to mention: outdated.
Where your money goes, there lie your interests. Infant mortality in the U.S. is not the result of infectious diseases, yet that is where the money is spent. We have “no idea” why infants suddenly die, yet we aren’t interested in finding out why? Every year, roughly 2,500 babies born in the U.S. die before age one for unknown causes when you remove strangulation/suffocation from the data. Scientific processes allow people to find out the cause of death for a mummy buried over 4,000 years ago, but we cannot do the same for a baby that dies today. Let that sink in.
I do not think there is a conspiracy, but I do believe that these health agencies feel they have gone too far to turn back. They have sold us to their dogma of “vaccines are safe and effective” that is slathered all over government websites. If the childhood vaccine program fails, several people lose trust in government programs that seek to do some good. The challenge is identifying when data is misrepresented due to strong biases. It takes a level of commitment and discomfort (cognitive dissonance) when you seek education and put your biases aside. There is a lot on the line when you challenge the science of vaccines, but without conflict there cannot be progress. We have conflict because we demand progress. Never stop demanding progress.