The vaccine debate is escalating. A while back, the New York Times Online published a review of a new book, VACCINE: The Controversial Story of Medicine’s Greatest Lifesaver, by Arthur Allen. Here is a portion of David Oshinsky’s review:
Allen is sympathetic to parental fears regarding the dangers of various vaccines, though he remains skeptical that scientific studies of these dangers, no matter how rigorous, will open many minds. At this point, he writes, much of the ‘antivaccinist’ leadership is composed of countercultural types who view life through the prism of conspiracy theory: the government lies, the drug companies are evil, the medical profession is corrupt; trust the Internet instead….To a large extent, says Allen, this antivaccination impulse is fueled by an ignorance of the past. Vaccines have done their job so well that most parents today are blissfully unaware of the diseases their children are being inoculated against.
The end result is a culture that has become increasingly risk-averse regarding vaccination because people have greater trouble grasping the reward. The problem appears to be growing. As more children go unvaccinated in the United States, there has been a rise in vaccine-preventable diseases. Meanwhile, fewer pharmaceutical companies are now producing vaccines, citing the high cost of testing, diminishing markets and a fear of litigation. For Allen, a reversal of these trends will require something long overdue: a frank national discussion about the risks and benefits of vaccination. His splendid book is a smart place to begin.
Oshinsky, David. A book review of VACCINE: The Controversial Story of Medicine’s Greatest Lifesave in New York Times Online. February 4, 2007.
Allen’s book is one in a recent series that gives tribute to the “wonder of vaccines.” The author and the reviewer promote their pro-vaccine views by disparaging intelligent adults and dedicated physicians who have researched the problems associated with vaccines and consider mass vaccination to be the casualty-causing loss-leader of the pharmaceutical industry. The drug companies count vaccine injuries as few, at least in part, because safety is concluded through large epidemiological studies. The larger one makes the denominator, the easier it is to discount the size of the numerator. For example, 231 injured in a study that involved 679,900 persons makes the percentage of those injured appear small.
But vaccine injuries are frequent despite claims that occurrences are rare. Fears of developing autism have been dismissed by mainstream medicine which prefers to attribute the increased incidence, currently at 1 in 150 children, to a “better diagnosis.”
Another area of research is investigating an association between genetics and autism spectrum disorders.
The number of children with illnesses such as allergies, asthma, diabetes, ADD-ADHD and cancer has exploded over the last 10 years. Instead of suspecting the more than one hundred vaccine antigens that are injected into children before they enter kindergarten, mind-controlling drugs designed for adults have been given expanded approval for treatment of children.
Healthcare providers continue to view vaccination in the same way as described by the catchy title of Mr. Allan’s book: Medicine’s greatest lifesaver. This accolade is attributed to the reduction of childhood infectious diseases such as chickenpox, mumps and three-day measles. But can a negative truly be proven? The assumption by conventional medicine is that all children will be exposed and when exposed, all unvaccinated children will get sick. This assumption is faulty.
If a vaccinated child does not contract chickenpox, is it due to the protection of the vaccine? Or was it because the child was never exposed to the virus? What if an unvaccinated child is exposed but does not become sick? Is that a testament to the health of the child’s immune system? Not every child in a classroom exposed to influenza comes down with the flu.
Studies comparing the health of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations of children are greatly needed. In 2005, investigative reporter Dan Olmsted discovered that the rate of autism among the Amish communities was nearly non-existent. He later discovered another large unvaccinated group, thousands of children cared for by Homefirst Health Services in the greater metropolitan are around Chicago. According to Homefirst doctors, none of these children has autism.
Examining the health histories of these children could be a telling exercise. Discovering that unvaccinated children have not contracted “vaccine-preventable diseases” would deliver a serious blow to the national vaccination program. An even more provocative study would be to examine what health problems — if any — exist among unvaccinated children.
In June, 2007, the first large scale study showing the health differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated boys was released by Generation Rescue. Interviews were successfully completed in 11,817 households and data on 17,674 children was gathered. The study concluded that vaccinated boys had a 155% greater chance of having a neurological disorder like ADHD or autism than unvaccinated boys. For less than $200,000, a small non-profit was able to complete a study that the CDC, with an $8 billion a year budget, has been unable or unwilling to do.
If vaccines were safe, manufacturers would not need federal legislation to protect them from liability. If vaccines were effective, no one would question the value of their use. If vaccines were good for us, state mandates would not be necessary to enforce them. A growing number of adults are investigating vaccines and discovering their contents. Vaccines are grown on monkey kidneys, chicken embryos and contain bovine (cow) serum. Vaccines contain particles of viruses, bits of bacteria and measurable amounts of aluminum, gelatin, polysorbate 80, MSG and other chemicals. A responsible adult who concludes this combination of pathogens and chemicals can be harmful is not a “countercultural type who views life through a prism of conspiracy theory” as Oshinsky reports from Allen’s book. Understanding that autoimmune reactions can be the consequence of injecting animal cells and foreign chemicals into the body does not require a medical degree or PhD.
The health risks of vaccination are well documented but rarely discussed. Instead of calling them names, parents and physicians who challenge the spoon-fed dogma should be commended.