Where Has Common Sense Gone in the Vaccine Debate?

VeritasDolor February 3, 2017 Blog, Featured, Vaccine Debate 3

The Vaccine Debate:

The subject of vaccines is such a hot topic at the moment, and almost everyone has an opinion about it. Many people, who do not have a child or immediate family member injured by vaccines, have already made up their minds.. vaccines are safe, have saved the world, and anyone who questions the safety of them, or decides not to vaccinate, is a dangerous “nutter”. If their beliefs are ever challenged, they immediately shut their ears to anything that person has to say, and often launch into the regurgitated spiel about how, “there is no link between vaccines and autism,” and that, “polio will make a comeback if we stop vaccinating”.

Updated: Feb 12, 2017, a couple corrections, thank you, Zoey O’Toole, for pointing them out!

Appeal To Authority

If only those people, who are certain, anyone questioning vaccine safety are nutters, would take a moment to use some constructive thinking. They should re-examine what they know about vaccines. Where have they gotten the information that all vaccines are both safe and effective? The obvious places, that would most likely come to mind, would be the CDC, newspapers, schools (especially universities), doctors offices, websites, and maybe even major medical journals. These places sound authoritative, and like solid places where one should obtain their vaccine knowledge. It is not until we break away from our “trained” (indoctrinated) thought processes, and bring in common sense thinking, that we can begin to see that the information we know and have been given, may not be accurate.

CDC and Incestuous Relationships

It was Congressman Bill Posey who stated^1,2:

[clickToTweet tweet=”Cong Posey: ‘The incestuous relationship between the public health community and the vaccine makers…'” quote=” ‘The incestuous relationship between the public health community and the vaccine makers and government officials should not be allowed to continue. “]

Congressman Posey followed up, the above quote, with another excellent quotable statement:

…That’s a revolving door that creates a serious conflict of interest and perverts incentives that compromise integrity.

The Congressman was referring to the fact that many of the upper CDC employees, go on to obtain jobs at pharmaceutical companies. An example of this would be Julie Gerberding, the former head of CDC, who reportedly made $250,000 a year³, then went on to make an estimated $2.5 million dollars a year³, plus millions of dollars in Merck Stock.

It may or may not have been a coincidence, that prior to Julie Gerberding’s acquisition of such a prestigious high paying position at Merck, as Executive Vice President for Strategic Communications⁴, CDC was accused of suppression of data, corruption, and fraud. The claim was by “whistle blower”, top CDC scientist, William Thompson.

Mainstream News

The mainstream media, has not only proven itself to be biased in the reporting of the topic of vaccines, but they go so far as to completely black out stories. They censor anyone who dares to raise any questions regarding vaccines, even valid ones. Just earlier this week, Martha Rosenberg, a journalist who had written articles for The Huffington Post, for the past 7 years, was immediately banned from further posting on their website. Her crime? She dared people to think for themselves, regarding the subject of vaccinations. I wrote an article about it here.

Sharyl Attkisson, an investigative journalist, who used to work for CBS, had dared to perform an unbiased interview with the controversial Dr. Andrew Wakefield, a gastroenterologist who was accused of fraud when he showed a link between the MMR vaccine and bowel disease²⁰. She was awarded attacks from journalists, bloggers, and media.

collage of websites bashing Sharyl Attkisson

Ms. Attkisson would refer to many of these attackers as “astroturfers”. Ms. Attkisson has written an article on the subject, which you can read here.

Katie Couric, also did a television segment on the vaccines, choosing the HPV vaccine as her topic. She dared to give parents and their daughters who were harmed by the HPV vaccine, a platform to tell their story.

Katie Couric tweeted:

V interesting debate going on re: Wed’s ep on HPV vaccine controversy! We’re hoping to tell both sides so parents can make informed decision

— Katie Couric (@katiecouric) December 2, 2013

Like Sharyl Attkisson, after her television segment, Ms. Couric faced the most terrible backlash, to the point she reportedly apologized for her own episode.

Katie Couric faces backlash for her HPV tv segment

Journalistic integrity

Journalistic integrity comes into question, when the media portrays only one side or viewpoint, never giving a platform for others to tell their story. It is nothing less than extortion when there is a story to be told, but a journalist faces the choices of not reporting it or persecution. It also, arguably, creates a dangerous situation, where “whoever controls the media, controls the mind”⁸, as the late Jim Morrison (singer from The Doors) once said.

This leads us to the question, why are there such vicious attacks, upon talk show hosts, or journalists, who dare to step out of line, and say anything, other than praise of vaccines?

Perhaps Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has the answer. In an interview with former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura, Kennedy made a shocking (or not so shocking) claim:

I ate breakfast last week with the president of a network news division and he told me that during non-election years, 70% of the advertising revenues for his news division come from pharmaceutical ads. And if you go on TV any night and watch the network news, you’ll see they become just a vehicle for selling pharmaceuticals. He also told me that he would fire a host who brought onto his station a guest who lost him a pharmaceutical account.

It is no surprise that the Pharmaceutical companies have an abundance of money to play with. According to this article on FiercePharma.com, the winner of the top 20 highest-paid biopharma CEOs is Len Schleifer, with a total annual compensation of $41.97 million.

Major Medical Journals

So what about our major medical journals? Surely they are trustworthy sources? Major medical journals, where scientists publish peer reviewed scientific studies, such as BMJ, NEMJ, and Lancet, must be authoritative, and therefore the right place for all of the answers, right? I had already addressed some of this in my last article, here, but will re-post what some former editors of those journals had to say:

Dr. Marcia Angell, of Harvard University, and the former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine wrote in her article published on nybooks.com ^3,4

It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.

In a study entitled “Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals”⁵Richard Smith stated:

That is why Robbie Fox, the great 20th century editor of the Lancet, who was no admirer of peer review, wondered whether anybody would notice if he were to swap the piles marked `publish’ and `reject’. He also joked that the Lancet had a system of throwing a pile of papers down the stairs and publishing those that reached the bottom.

Richard Horton, a former editor in chief of Lancet, another well respected (by the scientific community) medical journal, wrote:

much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”.⁶

With our peer reviewed science under question, what is it that makes our government defer to badly done studies, published in well known scientific journals, and declare the science settled, on the topic of vaccines?

How to Choose the Correct Information

This question brings me back to the common sense aspects, of the topic of vaccines. With so much conflicting information out there, how is one to choose what the right information is? Whether or not we would like to admit it, we have been indoctrinated throughout our lives to believe vaccines are wonderful, and have saved all of our lives. If we revive our common sense thinking, we can then see the red flags, in the dialogue given to us, by the CDC and media.

For instance, badly done studies, of the MMR vaccine, which show no links to Autism, such as this one, have been touted by the media, and our government. Our government uses such studies, to declare all vaccines safe, and to give false credence to the mantra, “the science is settled”. The politicians, then use such studies, to push bills mandating vaccines all across the United States.

Many people blindly accept this mantra, and then mindlessly regurgitate the words “vaccines don’t cause autism”. I would like to point out, that the safety questions regarding vaccines, should not only entail whether or not vaccines cause autism, but whether they are safe in general, and whether or not they contribute to the seeming epidemic of chronic illness, high SIDs rate, and high seizure rates of our children.

If we were to look closer at the mantra, one might question, how a (badly done) study on MMR and Autism would be proof that ALL vaccines are safe for all people. Would it be acceptable to take a study on Tylenol, and make a blanket declaration, that all pain medications are safe, and for all people? Do we then say, “the science is settled!”, and ignore the rest of the much-needed safety questions, such as whether it is safe for all pain medications, to be mixed with others type of medications? Should we never take a closer look at the manufacturer’s processes and the different companies’ safety protocols?

It is also important to note, these vaccines, sometimes given up to 9 at a time, are dispensed with no regard to the possible dangers, or lack of studies, as to whether it is safe to mix brands. Each vaccine brand may, and often do, have their own proprietary ingredients. Regardless, these vaccines are declared safe, and being given together, for children, regardless of ethnicity, background medical history, weight, other medical conditions, gender, age, etc.

Synergistic Toxicity

Even environmental history is ignored, history such as whether there could be lead in the baby or child’s drinking water. This article on SafeMinds.org discusses the impact of synergistic toxicity. They define synergistic toxicity as “the effect that when exposed to two toxins, the toxicity level is far greater than the additive toxicity levels of the two toxins.”

Below is a chart SafeMinds.org uses to show this effect:

Zero Liability

Aside from the glaring issues regarding declaring all vaccines safe, we must also remember that there is zero liability¹⁸ given to these manufacturers. We must then question why our politicians, our CDC, and our scientists, could callously declare all vaccines as safe, without consideration for whether all pharmaceutical companies run their factories properly, and with the proper safety protocols. After all, many pharmaceutical companies are based in countries such as China²¹, and the quality of safety in such factories has been under fire many times. There have even been several incidences, where pharmaceutical companies in China, have been accused of falsifying data. There was even a large scale vaccine scandal, in China, where millions of improperly stored vaccines, were sold around the country.^16,17 A multitude of reports surfaced, describing illegal vaccine trades, and how questionable vaccines were being bought by pharmacists, and distributed.¹⁶

Important Concerns:

There are many theories, and concerns various scientists have raised. Important theories that should be looked into properly. For instance,
some scientists, such as Dr.Theresa Deisher, who has a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cellular Physiology from Stanford University¹⁵, have addressed concerns about the use of human aborted fetal cells in our vaccines. She stated:

It is possible that these contaminating fragments could be incorporated into a child’s genome and disrupt normal gene function, leading to autistic phenotypes.¹⁵

Other scientists are still concerned with the contamination of the polio vaccines, with the Simian virus 40 (SV40), a virus found in the monkey kidney cells that the polio-virus was grown in, to create the vaccines¹⁶. This virus was injected into millions of Americans, through the polio vaccine drives, during the 1950s and 1960s. Many scientists believe this is the cause, of many cancers found in humans.

Some scientists worry over moral and ethical issues, such as whether Chicken Pox vaccines take away natural immunity boosters for the generation of people who had chicken pox the natural way¹³. The theory is that this lack of exposure, throughout a person’s life, to the wild chicken pox, takes away a natural booster, which is thought to keep the dormant Chicken Pox virus in check. This lack of “boosters”, is thought to be the cause of epidemics of Shingles in our elderly.

Another theory that should not be taken lightly, is a belief that we are causing an unbalance in nature, creating super-bugs, and mutated strains of viruses, that could possibly end with terrible consequences for the human population²².

No matter whether your belief is that vaccines are the cause of autism, or not, scientists should be alarmed by the growing number of children, diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum Disorder scale. Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at MIT believes that half of all children will be autistic by the year 2025.¹⁷

Repercussions

All of the above, are serious concerns that should be properly looked into, without the interference or influence from the vaccine companies, who profit in the billions, on selling their products. With the inability to have open reporting, and mainstream free speech forums, and without the influence of conflict of interest parties, such as the pharmaceutical companies, on our politicians, doctors, and scientists, we can never believe or have faith in the vaccination programs. We cut off voices of scientists, journalists, and doctors who dare to question the safety of vaccines, for fear of being “Wakefielded” ( A term being used to refer to the stripping of medical license and attack on Dr. Andrew Wakefield). Thus, we can also never guarantee our children are being given safe vaccines, or that scientists will do the non-pharma influenced studies needed, and find true answers, as to whether vaccinations are really safe and effective. We will also, never have answers as to what is causing this epidemic of chronically ill children, allergies, asthma, and SIDs, and we will never address all of the important concerns that should be addressed.

As dramatic as it sounds…if there is even a remote possibility these scientists are right, vaccines may actually be a detriment to the human population! It is possible, that vaccines, are in fact causing deaths, autoimmune diseases and genetic changes in our children, and ultimately irreversible damage to the human race. With such serious concerns for the health and well-being of our future generations, it is about time we stop allowing pharmaceutical money to control the narrative in the vaccine safety and efficacy debate, and bring back common sense thinking to lead us.