Most people are unaware that there is a controversy about vaccination. They are unaware that there is another point of view about the benefits of vaccination. They are unaware of the risks associated with this medical procedure. Where risk of injury or death is acknowledged, it is believed to be rare and inconsequential compared to the perceived benefits to individuals and society.
With growing evidence that vaccinations may actually be causing chronic health problems and the attendant realization that the right to informed consent is being denied, a growing number of parents and concerned individuals are demanding that questions about safety and appropriateness be addressed.
What are the perceived issues?
On the one hand, there is a vaccination policy whose goal is 100% compliance and whose proponents believe that vaccination is modern medicine’s greatest achievement. Today every child born is expected to be “inoculated” with some 30 vaccines by the age of 18 months and by the age of five years old, have up to 38 shots.
On the other hand, there are concerned parents and professionals who believe there are some flaws with both the theory and the application of our vaccine policy, who claim that vaccines are dangerous, and who may not want to comply with the above stated goal.
In the middle of this schism, a growing number of people are getting wind that a debate about vaccines is brewing. Many of these people would prefer NOT to know there are issues about vaccination, because the questions and issues that are being raised threaten the belief system that our conventional health care system is predicated upon.
While it may seem like The Vaccine Controversy is news, the issues surrounding this debate have actually been contested for decades. Whereas the proponents of mass vaccination might have you think there is a conspiracy of quacks and unfit parents trying to thwart medical progress, the truth of the matter is that the mounting evidence of malfeasance is undeniable as the conspiracy of silence about this conflict is brought to light.
At issue, of course, is whether vaccines are safe. As the incidence of autoimmune diseases in our children rise to epidemic levels, concerned people see a credible correlation to vaccine history and want the independently researched scientific data that verifies both safety and efficacy of these medical products and procedures. Vaccine proponents, while they admit there are some risks, keep assuring us that vaccines are safe and vaccination saves lives. Those who question, they say, forget or are unaware of how devastating diseases were before the advent of vaccines.
Given that vaccines were conceived and are produced within the paradigm of Modern Medicine’s scientific method, our faith in the policy of mass vaccination is nothing less than steadfast and confident. With killer epidemics of infectious disease a thing of the past, WHY NOT credit mass vaccination? Indeed, this assertion is taken at face value even in the Informed Consent Movement, even though statistics show that better nutrition and improved hygiene are as much contributing factors to the eradication of killer epidemics as mass vaccination is purported to be.
The fact is, the stellar role that mass vaccination is believed to play in public health DOES NOT preclude a possible secondary role in ALSO being a cause of chronic, debilitating and, in many ways, painful immunologic and neurological disorders. Proponents of mandatory vaccination say absolutely not. Parents of chronically ill children, a growing number of medical professionals, and other reasonable people are beginning to wonder. Hence, the Vaccine Controversy . . .
Many people would prefer not to go down this road. It was easier when you only had to deal with the fear of getting an infectious disease. Vaccination put that fear out of your mind. With Informed Consent, and knowing that the risks of vaccination are actually higher and more diverse than you previously thought, it seems we now have two fears to contend with. What to do?
To begin with, what is needed is proper perspective. There are several serious issues in this debate that MUST BE RESOLVED, vaccine safety being one, however
The FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE in The Vaccine Controversy is not about vaccine safety!
The fundamental issue in The Vaccine Controversy has to do with the government’s power to deny individual rights. Simply stated, because vaccines are mandated by law individuals are not free to make choices about vaccination for themselves or their family members.
Because vaccines are mandated, The Vaccine Controversy is about the Right to Informed Consent.
Vaccination is a medical procedure that carries an inherent risk of injury or death. Vaccination is the only medical procedure & medical product that is forced upon us by law.
Because there are risks of injury or death with vaccines, parents deserve to be given truthful and unbiased information about both the diseases and the vaccines.
Informed Consent means having the right to choose or decline a medical procedure that carries a risk for serious injury, disability or death.
Because vaccines are mandated, The Vaccine Controversy is about the Right to Choose.
Individuals have the right to choose the type of preventive health care they want to use, including choosing whether to use one, ten or no vaccines. See the Patient’s Bill of Rights for more information.
What is the justification for mandated mass vaccination?
A common belief that the majority of people have shared since the advent of vaccines is that vaccination improves public health and that mass vaccination protects everyone’s health. The presumed logic is that high vaccination rates are necessary in order to prevent the return of terrible diseases. In order to protect the public, the public must be vaccinated.
It is not clear whether vaccination became mandatory because the public cannot be trusted to always fulfill their obligations to society, so laws were created to enforce compliance, or whether because vaccination is a medical procedure that carries risk of injury or death, it must be mandated. If the rationale that mass vaccination protects everyone’s health was true, rational people would likely be willing to take the risk of injury or death from vaccination, and people everywhere would suppose that forcing this medical procedure upon entire populations is noble, even though not ethical. In fact, this is what we have believed and why we have been so willing to sanction this violation of civil rights.
However, the variables have changed, and so, too, the outcome. We now have a new, more insidious epidemic occurring, the consequences of which are not yet fully understood or realized. The rising epidemic of autoimmune diseases and neurological dysfunction in our children begs, now more than ever, the question “is vaccination somehow to blame; is vaccination a contributing factor?” Yet, even as the credible empirical and scientific data coming in suggests that it could be, our regulatory agencies and the pharmaceutical companies that profit from vaccination continue to assure us that injecting a plethora of diseases and toxic chemicals into the bodies of our young children does not adversely affect their immune systems and “not to worry.” In fact, they implore us to ignore what we see, what we read and hear about, and they remind us of our obligation to society. Because, you see,
The rationale for mandated mass vaccination is based on the notion that the risk of injury or death from vaccine is relative to the risk of injury or death without vaccine.
In other words, the perceived benefit of saving millions of lives from the scourge of epidemics by mass vaccination outweighs the purportedly rare incidence of death by vaccine. Thus, “the end justifies the means.”
This, as we learn from studying history, is a dangerous precedent for government intrusion and leads to unbridled, unchecked and unlawful power. Yet the majority of people think that mandating this risky medical procedure is appropriate. Why? Because “vaccination is about the public health”, meaning that individual choice is no longer relevant.
If it were true that vaccination protects the public health and improves immunity, one might be willing to play the vaccine game of roulette in order to gain such a benefit. However, the science simply does not support this hypothesis any longer. The truth is that the justification for compulsory injection of toxic chemicals and foreign proteins is based on a flawed but pervasive belief that vaccination safely stimulates an immune response — yet the most advanced science in immunity proves that the human immune system cannot be tricked, suppressed, or controlled into accepting or tolerating any foreign DNA or proteins – whether by infection, injection or transplantation – without immunologic consequences. Vaccine technology is based on a two hundred year old theory and advanced science simply does not support this hypothesis any longer.
With an epidemic of autoimmune diseases literally crippling our next generation of adults, there is no question that vaccination is about public health. Perhaps it is time to expand our myopic view that high vaccination rates and low incidence of infectious disease alone constitutes public health. The fact is, our beliefs about vaccination are founded on precepts that are no longer valid — the variables have changed, and so too the outcome.