FW: VACCINES: A SECOND OPINION (pt. 10)

December 20, 2001

(approx. pp. 143- 166)

Activists Speak Out on Vaccine Dangers

Barbra Loe Fisher is cofounder and president of the National Vaccine

Information Center (NVIC), in Vienna, Virginia, a nonprofit, grass roots

organization run by parents who are dedicated to preventing vaccine injuries

and deaths through public education. For over a decade, Fisher has been a

consumer activist, advocating the right of individuals to make informed,

independent vaccination decisions for themselves and their children. She

shares her concerns about a number of issues, as do some of her colleagues

engaged in the fight against government-mandated vaccines.

The Pertussis Vaccine

If there is one vaccine that has been the most problematic and

caused the most controversy, it is the pertussis vaccine. After studying

the issue in depth, Fisher had no choice but to question its effectiveness.

“In 1985,” she says, “our organization made a presentation at the Centers

for Disease Control. We questioned the health departments of eight states

as to the vaccination status of children who had come down with the whooping

cough in 1984, and discovered that more than 60 percent had been fully

vaccinated. So, there is a real question of efficacy with the pertussis

vaccine.” As to why the public is being kept in the dark about this

situation, she speculates, “I think they are afraid to tell the truth

because people will ask questions, and perhaps choose not to vaccinate.”

Fisher and Coulter wrote DPT: A Shot in the Dark, which

examines the dangers of the pertussis vaccine. Says Fisher: “During the 2-

1/2 years of research that went into the writing of that book, I interviewed

literally hundreds of parents across this country. I listened to them tell

the same story again and again of how they took their healthy, beautiful

babies into the doctor's office for a routine DPT vaccination and then

watched their baby scream and twitch and lapse into shock and die. Often

those deaths were written off as sudden infant death syndrome. They still

are. Other babies are being left with learning disabilities or

hyperactivity. My son was. Some children withdraw into autism, or become

mentally retarded and racked with uncontrollable convulsions.

“I wanted this book to be a voice for those parents and children. I kept

hoping that once the book came out and people knew the truth that something

good would happen. I believed that the health officials at the CDC and the

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), who are in charge of our country’s

vaccination system, would change their policies and conduct studies to

identify high-risk children and screen them out of the program. I believed

they would conduct studies to determine whether vaccines were causing

long-term damage to our children’s immune and neurological systems, and I

thought they would institute policy changes so that fewer children would be

vaccine-damaged. It was the greatest disappointment of my life that this

did not happen.”

Fisher points out that at one time, the medical literature was

filled with studies documenting the ability of the pertussis vaccine to

cause brain damage and death, both in lab animals and humans. “There were

detailed descriptions of what was known as classic pertussis vaccine

reaction. But by the end of the 1980s, you couldn't find one scientific

article examining vaccine side effects. And by the early 1990s, health

officials at the CDC and AAP were denying that the pertussis vaccine had any

permanent side effects whatsoever. They were telling doctors and parents

alike that babies exhibiting symptoms of classic pertussis vaccine reaction

were destined to die or to be brain damaged, and ignoring the fact that a

vaccine had been given on that day.

“It is absolutely unbelievable when you take a step back and look at

what they have done. They say the vaccine is not to blame when 60 years of

medical research says otherwise. In my opinion, this is nothing more than a

deliberate coverup by health officials who are practicing bad science and

bad medicine. Children are being killed or brain-damaged every day in this

country because doctors and Ph.D.’s in charge of the disease control system

in this country can't bite the bullet and admit that they have problems with

vaccines. They can't tell the truth and they are refusing to take action to

solve those problems.”

What has to be done now? Many would agree with Fisher when she says

“there needs to be a thorough investigation into whether mass vaccinations

is the way to go in terms of disease prevention.” As Fisher reminds us,

science is still just assuming that mass vaccination is an unquestionably

good thing for society. “No one is examining the down side, the possibility

that, in the long-term, vaccinations can result in catastrophes down the

road...This is a major public health concern because, by law, every child

born must be vaccinated. Yet no one is looking into it.”

Fisher speculates on the reason for this indifference: “I sat in on

the National Vaccine Advisory Committee for four years. During that time, I

constantly asked, ‘Please show me proof that your recommendation that

children be vaccinatedon one day--with DPT, OPV, MMR, is safe and

effective.’ They just kept saying, ‘Oh we’ve got it,’ but they never showed

me the proof. They don't have to because no one is holding them

responsible. Who oversees these people? Congress believes that if they

have an M.D. or a Ph.D written after their name, they must be right. So no

one is holding them accountable.”

Problems with Temporary Immunity and Benefits of Childhood Disease

Vaccines provide only temporary immunity, whereas when you get the

natural disease you have permanent immunity most of the time. Barbara Loe

Fisher notes, “That is one of the reasons why they have to keep giving

booster doses. With DPT and OPV, you need up to five doses. They told us

that with the measles vaccine, one dose was needed for life. Then we started

seeing more and more measles in vaccinated children. Now they are asking

for a second dose. As these vaccines only result in temporary immunity,

they are going to be recommending more and more doses.”

Fisher goes on to stress that “when these diseases were endemic in

the population, people who would get them would become permanently immune.

As vaccines only cause temporary immunity, you are going to see more and

more problems with vaccine failure. Already, measles has mutated into a

more serious form of the illness. When babies are no longer protected by

their mothers’ antibodies because their mothers have only been vaccinated,

and have no permanent antibodies to give to these babies, these little

babies are going to get a more severe form of measles. There are many

things that are happening that they didn't anticipate because they didn't do

the long-term scientific studies to begin with.”

Scientist and activist Vera Scheibner writes, “Black et al. (1984)

summarized data on the problem of ineffectiveness of re-vaccination

published by several authors, who demonstrated that antibody titer in

re-immunized children may fall after several months to very low levels, and

that children vaccinated twice may still experience clinically recognizable

measles, although in a much milder form. Black et al. concluded that ‘This

state in which a child is immunologically sensitized, but not immune to

infection, we shall call ‘inadequate immunity.’

“This observation highlighted another looming problem, namely, that

generations of children with this inadequate immunity would grow into adults

with no placental immunity to pass on to their children, who would then

contract measles at an age when babies are normally protected by maternal

antibody.

“This was indeed confirmed by another study [Lennon and Black

(1986)] which demonstrated that ‘haemagglutinin-inhibiting and neutralizing

antibody titers are lower in women young enough to have been immunized by

vaccination than in older women.’

“Perhaps the most unfortunate thing about the idea of eliminating

infectious diseases by vaccination is that indeed there is no need to do so.

As pointed out by the group of Swiss doctors opposing the U.S.-inspired

policy of mass vaccination against measles, mumps and rubella in

Switzerland, ‘We have lost the common sense and the wisdom that used to

prevail in the approach to childhood diseases. Too often, instead of

reinforcing the organism’s defenses, fever and symptoms are relentlessly

suppressed. This is not always without consequences…’” (484, 485, 486)

Scheibner adds, “Many practitioners know that cancer patients have a

particularly small number of infectious diseases of childhood to report in

their medical history. Ronne (1985) found evidence of a relationship

between lack of rash in measles and increased incidence of degenerative and

auto-immune diseases. It is also well known that measles is an important

developmental milestone in the life and maturing process in children. Why

would anyone want to stop or delay the maturation processes of children and

of their immune systems?” (487, 488)

Continuing along the same lines, Scheibner notes, “Mumps is a common

childhood disease which is benign in the vast majority of cases. It is

desirable that mumps be contracted in early childhood because, when

contracted in adulthood, the disease may cause meningitis and/or damage to

the testes, ovaries, auditory nerves or pancreas. However, and equally

importantly, women are less likely to contract ovarian cancer if they have

had mumps during childhood (West 1966).” (489,490)

Lastly, Scheibner states, “There is no need to artificially immunize

our children and ourselves. The body has proper, natural mechanisms to

create immunity to diseases. The diseases themselves are the priming and

challenging mechanisms of the maturation process leading to the competence

of the immune system. It has been demonstrated, time and again, that

infectious diseases of childhood are beneficial for children to catch. They

function to even out differences in rates of development of different body

systems and so perform a sort of balancing act in a fast-growing organism.

They also represent important milestones in the overall development of

children. The general inflammatory process is important in the dynamics of

maturation of the immune response to diseases. I feel embarrassed to hear

and read of orthodox medicine’s futile efforts to stop children from getting

childhood diseases--it is a sign of ignorance and a naïve approach. The

fanaticism fed by ignorance, irrational fear of illness and greed are the

moving forces behind the ritual of vaccination. Vaccine injections represent

an enormous and unjustified insult to a young child.” (491)

Vaccine Experimentation on Vulnerable Populations

Informed consent law requires that anyone who is to receive

treatment with an experimental drug or medical device must be fully informed

about the device or drug, its risks and benefits, and the reasons for the

study. It is a tenet of ethics that people being experimented on must be

made aware of the fact that they are participating in research, and they

must give their consent freely before becoming part of a study. The

hallmark document concerning research ethics in the United States is the

Belmont Report. It addresses the use of vulnerable populations, and says

that children, prisoners, and people whose capacity to consent is lowered by

virtue of poverty or diminished mental capacity must have extra protection.

Inhabitants of Third World countries are particularly at risk for

being unwitting subjects. According to Meryl Dorey, although most

developing nations have regulations for informed consent, the laws in

general are not as stringent, and so it is easier to find human subjects in

developing nations. (492) “Pharmaceutical companies know that the thing to

do is to go to Africa, Haiti, or South America--some place like that,” Dorey

says, “to choose subjects, do tests, and release the results.” Then, she

says, the researchers can get their innovations approved for use in

developed countries where people have the money to spend on them.

This does not mean that everyone in America is safe. Fisher

expresses her concern for those people in this country who have vaccines

tested on them. “The populations most vulnerable to vaccine experimentation

are senior citizens, infants, and minority populations. I am really

disturbed about minority populations in the inner cities, with regard to

mass vaccination. Those who vaccinate go in there and just line the

children up. They don't take medical histories, and they don't find out if

there have been previous reactions. They just pretend these biological

vaccines, which are inherently toxic in many instances, are like aspirin.

“They simply don't know to what extent this mass vaccination

campaign may be causing problems in these children. But they do know that

there are higher incidences of learning disabilities, hyperactivity, and

seizure disorders in the inner cities....”

Fisher’s concern for minority groups is supported by Curtis Cost, who states

that the information gap in the black and Latino community prompted him to

write his book Vaccines are Dangerous: A Warning to the Black Community.

(493) Cost speaks of hospitals routinely inoculating newborns with the

hepatitis B vaccine on the day they are born, without parental consent.

“Reactions may prompt everything from 18-hour sleeping episodes to

high-pitched screaming. Parents on public assistance are extremely

vulnerable. Welfare authorities tell them they must vaccinate their

children to remain on welfare. These individuals do not have lawyers to run

to, and they don't have time to fight this order....Therefore, they are

extremely vulnerable. The legal aspect of all of this is something that we

need to address because it points to a very fundamental question: How much

authority should our government have when it comes to telling us what to put

into our bodies?”

Soldiers are another group of subjects used for the testing of

vaccines. During the Gulf War, for example, 690,000 GI’s were inoculated

with botulism and anthrax vaccines, in addition to being given the PB

anti-nerve-gas tablets that have been shown to cause troublesome

aftereffects. Thousands of these servicemen and women now suffer from Gulf

War syndrome, and the vaccines they received are suspect. Dr. Black comments

on the practice of using soldiers in vaccine experimentation: “One of the

statements in the Congressional hearing was that there are no studies of the

long-term effects of vaccines. No one knows what will happen to these

soldiers. This was a gross violation of human rights...” (494)

Dr. Coulter explains the rationale behind vaccine experimentation on

a mass scale. “If you give the vaccine to several million people,” he says,

“you pick up all sorts of reactions which you never find if you test it on

10 thousand. And this is generally recognized by the authorities. They say

we have to do post-introduction surveillance of the population, meaning that

you give it to the population, and you see what happens. That’s the way

they really test vaccines for safety. They test it on a population of

vaccinated individuals.”

The EZ Measles Medical Fiasco

In the mid-1980s researchers from the CDC and s Hopkins

University started vaccinating babies as young as 4 months old with the

experimental high-titer Edmonston-Zagreb (EZ) measles vaccine. Targets were

more than 1500 black and Hispanic babies in Los Angeles and thousands of

babies in several Third World countries. The experiment was halted in 1991,

after results of several studies showed that female babies receiving the

high-potency vaccine had a 95-percent increased mortality rate compared to

those injected with the standard measles vaccine. (495, 496) Furthermore,

children who developed a rash after receiving the EZ vaccine had an almost

fourfold higher mortality rate in the 5-7 years following vaccination

compared to those who did not develop a rash. (497)

The EZ vaccine was also shown to increase morbidity, (495) to induce

short- and long-term immune suppression, (498, 499) and to interfere with

normal growth. Children who had the highest antibody response to the

vaccine developed the most profound immune suppression, and the alteration

of the immune system was still present when children were evaluated three to

five years after vaccination. (500)

Worth Coolie Prost of Arlington, Virginia, is a biomedical research

consultant and medical ethicist who terms what happened with the EZ measles

vaccine a “silent tragedy.” (501) She reminds us that human experimentation

has been performed on vulnerable populations throughout history, with

informed consent standards being repeatedly ignored, despite laws designed

to prevent this from happening. Usually, Prost explains, the measles

vaccine is not given before a child is 15 months old, since up until that

time antibodies from the mother provide natural protection against the usual

childhood diseases. At about 15 months, maternal antibodies in the

bloodstream decline and the child’s own immune system matures enough to

respond to infectious agents that it encounters either through the

environment or through vaccines.

In the 1980s, the World Health Organization declared measles a

life-threatening illness in Third World countries. To lower infant

mortality rates, they recommended that the high-titer EZ measles vaccine be

used on infants younger than 15 months old. Theoretically, a high enough

concentration of viral particles would overwhelm the maternal antibodies,

making it an effective treatment for younger babies.

Prost argues against this presumption, saying that vaccines given

too early have no effect. Furthermore, she says, “not only does it not

work, there are impelling medical arguments that vaccines given too early

compromise the child’s capacity to respond to vaccines given later. [if you]

give a baby a vaccine at nine months that he’s not supposed to have until

he’s twice that old, [and then]...give it again at 18 months, he’s going to

be worse off than if you just waited until he was 18 months old in the first

place.”

Not only did the experiment prove ineffective, it had disastrous

consequences. Says Prost: “In 1987, four large ‘studies’and I use

quotation marks because in Third World countries research we sponsor often

falls far short of [our usual] standards--using the very-high-titer EZ

measles vaccine were sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the

United States Agency for International Development (USAID), s Hopkins

University, and their Department of International Health. These studies

used concentrations of the EZ vaccine in doses 10 to 500 times the standard

in babies as young as four months old. Studies were done in Haiti, Senegal,

Mexico, and Guinea-Bissau.”

Prost refers to this incident as a huge, silent disaster for Third

World countries and inner city USA. Had the experiment not been

stoppedlargely through the efforts of one person--consequences would have

been far worse, as deaths were not clearly associated with the vaccine. She

elaborates:

“It is very unlikely that any of those deaths would ever have been

linked to the vaccine, since deaths were delayed. They didn’t begin until

six months after vaccination and they continued up until four years after

vaccination. Additionally, the deaths were not from measles. Babies died of

infections, diarrhea, malnutrition, and all the other things that Third

World babies usually die of, because what the vaccine did in some babies,

particularly girls, was cause a broad immunosuppression....It’s important to

point out that, at least in Haiti, the study was done on a population that

included a number of HIV-positive infants. So there were children given

this very-high-dose vaccine who were already known to be immunocompromised.”

In the beginning, Prost notes, results of the experiment were

glowing, but once the data were analyzed this presumption changed.

“The study was deemed a success, and by October 1989 WHO was recommending

the high-titer EZ vaccine to Third World children as young as six months.

They were posting a contract for 250 million doses. By January of 1990, just

three months later, the directors of one of the two African sites notified

WHO and CDC of a possible link between increased mortality in the babies who

were given the high-titer vaccine versus babies who got the regular vaccine.

In April of that year, Dr. Goran, director of the Senegal site, re-analyzed

his data and found the same thing. He alerted WHO to the problem and was

essentially ignored.

“In January of 1991, there was an international meeting of the

vaccine team. Dr. Goran’s mortality data was presented in full. Going into

the meeting, he had believed that once the rest of the team saw the figures

they would say, ‘Oh my God, yes, he’s right, the vaccine is causing deaths.’

But he was astounded to see his data set aside. The studies were to

continue.”

Prost goes on to say that, at that point, Goran decided that the

only ethical thing to do was to publish his data independently. “When

you’re in medical research and you’re part of a study team, publishing

something independently is like being part of an orchestra and suddenly

deciding to stand up and do a solo. It’s very unusual. But given that the

vaccine was causing increased mortality, and that the team was not

responding to the data, Goran thought that that was his only ethical choice.

“Dr. Goran’s article appeared in The Lancet, one of the

gold-standard medical journals, in October 1991. By that time, the s

Hopkins team that had been doing this research in Haiti had gone back and

collected mortality data, and thought that Dr. Goran might be right. WHO

called for an independent analysis of mortality to be presented at a meeting

in June 1992.”

By this time, EZ measles vaccine studies were already taking place

in the U.S.

“Fifteen hundred mostly black and Hispanic six- to nine-month-old,

inner city Los Angeles babies were enrolled in a study that used the

high-titer vaccine. Parents were not told that the vaccine was

experimental, only that their children were in a study comparing two

different kinds and schedules of measles vaccine to see which one worked

better. The parents did sign something, but the paper left off a little key

fact about this being, number one, an experimental vaccine and, number two,

associated with increased mortality.

“In October 1991, the Los Angeles program was halted, and in June

1992, Dr. Goran’s position was vindicated as it became clear that the EZ

measles vaccine was significantly associated with increased mortality. The

vaccine was withdrawn internationally. By then, the vaccine had been used

in about two dozen countries, from Bangladesh to Zanzibar, in ‘studies’

involving at least 15,000 children. Not all of them received the high-titer

EZ, but many certainly did. Nobody knows how many of those children died.”

Prost feels strongly that had it not been for the actions of one

man, Dr. Goran, we may have had a tragic and unnecessary loss of life of

almost unparalleled proportions. And the press never reported the enormity

of the incident. She asks people to look back at the Tuskeegee study, which

went on for 40 years, and reminds us that it was not the Public Health

Service (PHS) or the CDC that exposed that to the public in 1972, but rather

the press. “A journalist, Heller, began a series of articles after a

social worker, employed by the PHS in California, had been writing to the

PHS and the CDC for years with no results. He questioned the ethics of

denying a diagnosis and treatment of syphilis to people in the interests of

science. Finally, the material was turned over to a reporter who covered it,

causing an immediate end to the experiment. That went on for 40 years, and

it only stopped because the press covered it.”

Prost contrasts that to the situation with the EZ measles vaccine.

“The press hardly covered this issue,” she says. “A reporter had an article

that ran...in the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, and the

Philadelphia Inquirer in which CDC director Dr. Sacher [now Surgeon

General] said that he was shocked to discover that parents in the LA study

hadn’t been told the vaccine was experimental and that they were very, very

sorry and would never do that again. They ignored the fact that the vaccine

had caused deaths in Third World countries. That was stated, but in such a

way that it was glossed over; [it was] sort of an afterthought, a given, if

you will. CDC and Kaiser maintained that there was only one death, and it

was unrelated to the vaccine.”

While some international media and U.S. progressive media have

covered the experimental measles vaccine story, our mainstream media have

not. Says Prost: “We should be very alarmed about this for two reasons in

particular, the first being that if the mainstream press hadn’t touched

Tuskeegee we never would have known about it. And secondly, we should be

alarmed because precisely the same government agencies, research

institutions, and very often even the same researchers are...doing AIDS

vaccine research in Third World countries and in the United States. The

same folks who did the EZ measles vaccine--this non-story--are doing HIV

vaccine research. There’s been no accountability, no disclosure...Why

should we expect different behavior now? And if the press doesn’t cover it,

how will we know when things go wrong?”

What the Future May Hold

According to Barbara Loe Fisher, if we’re concerned about our health

and our freedoms, we should be worrying about the future. “I truly believe

that unless the public wakes up to what is happening, and starts standing up

for their right to be fully informed about vaccines, and their right to make

informed independent vaccine decisions, the day will come when we won't have

that right. We will be forcibly vaccinated by law without exception. We

will have to take all the vaccines that the government tells us to take to

keep America disease-free. In fact, right now they are trying to introduce

a tracking system in order to know who is and is not vaccinated.

Eventually, we will not be able to get a job, fly on an airplane, get health

insurance, or file our income tax unless we show a card proving that we have

been vaccinated.” (502)

Fisher feels that unless coercive forces are reckoned with now, the

dangers will become even worse. “People do not understand that there is an

international vaccination infrastructure that is being set up. The World

Health Organization, the World Bank, the CDC, and government health agencies

in countries around the world are a part of this. Among the things that

they are trying to do is develop a supervaccine that they call the “Holy

Grail.” This was announced at a symposium in Washington...The vaccine will

contain raw DNA from 40 different types of bacteria and viruses that will be

inserted directly into human cells. It will be squirted into the newborn’s

mouth, literally at the moment of birth. Once ingested, the super-vaccine

will remain in the body indefinitely, and booster doses will be released at

timed intervals throughout a person’s life. They don't talk about what will

happen if the baby has a reaction to the initial dose.”

Curtis Cost adds that vaccine ingredients are even being added to

food.

“They’re taking things like potatoes and bananas and combining them

genetically with hepatitis B, for example, and E. coli. The logic they give

is that in so-called developing nations, such as in Africa and Latin

America, people are very poor. They can’t afford vaccines. So, when they

eat bananas they will get vaccinated. . . .

“They don’t know the long-term results. In fact, they even state

that they fear some terrible side effects if people eat too much of this.

There are excellent articles on this in Science magazine (503) and The

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (504)

“Science is playing around with genetics, the foundation for all

life on our planet. They don’t know what new diseases they’re going to

bring to the human race through genetic engineering. They don’t know how

the human race may be altered.” Indeed, cost feels that all aspects of

genetic engineering should be taken extremely seriously. “Once our genetic

structure is messed with, the results will be irreversible. Not only will it

affect the individual who receives these genetically engineered drugs, it

will also potentially affect their future generations.” (505)

Fisher concurs, and urges everyone to stop being complacent, to

start becoming informed about vaccines and diseases, and to act.

Specifically, she states, “you are going to have to work to amend your

state’s laws. If you would like to be better informed and to help get the

truth out, please join our grass roots vaccine safety movement.”

Pet Vaccines

Dr. Loops, a veterinarian of 19 years, has most recently

confined his practice to veterinary homeopathy, specializing in cancer and

behavioral problems. Dr. Loops warns against our present policy of

over-vaccinating our pets, which he associates with the rise in diseases

being seen in animals today.

“I think that what we [are now observing] with our pets that are

dear to us, is what we are going to see with the vaccination problem with

people in coming generations. Think about how often we vaccinate in a given

animal’s lifetime, giving yearly boosters. Animals will get four or five

initial shots when they’re puppies and then get a vaccination every year

after that for 12 or 15 years. It’s a really good study situation for how

much damage a vaccination can do. The weaknesses that these vaccines can

cause are then transmitted to future generations.

“What we’re observing now after 30 or 40 years of vaccinating our

dogs and cats is a tremendous rise of diseases associated with the immune

system--auto-immune diseases, chronic allergy problems, irritable bowel

syndrome, and a continuing rise in cancer. We even have one tumor that’s

produced directly from a vaccination given to cats, which is a devastating

problem. It’s been named evactonoma, and it grows at the injection site

from feline leukemia and rabies vaccinations....It’s been estimated that

between 3 and 7 per thousand cats are getting this problem, which is a

terminal problem even with various kinds of treatment.” (506)

Loops talks about the time factor in the symptoms he sees. “A lot

of these problems--skin diseases in puppies, for instance--will start two

weeks to a month after vaccination. We will also see connections with

vaccinations versus homeopathic treatments. My practice is 100-percent

homeopathic. You may see a situation where you’re getting an excellent

response to a homeopathic remedy for a skin condition. The dog will be

better than they’ve been for several years. Then the owner will take the

pet to another doctor for a vaccination. What we see is a tremendous

exacerbation of this underlying skin problem. It can come back with such a

vengeance that it can take months to get it under control.”

Economic, Political, and Legal Issues

According to Dr. Coulter, the ones who profit most from vaccinations

are pediatricians. “They have the well baby visits, and this constitutes a

very large bulk of their practice; maybe half to two thirds of their

practice consists of giving vaccinations. They would be the ones to

exercise the most political antagonism to any changes in the vaccination

laws.” (507)

In their now classic work, A Shot in the Dark, Coulter and Fisher

write of the vaccine power structure: " Although vaccines have been credited

with saving millions of lives, the bottom line is that they are big

business. The research and administration of vaccines employs tens of

thousands of people in drug companies, private research laboratories,

universities, state health departments, public health clinics, the FDA, the

CDC, hospitals, and doctors’ offices. States obtain federal immunization

grants to implement mass vaccination programs and to hire additional

personnel in their health departments. And the fact that [a sizeable

list of] childhood vaccines are legally required for admission to school

assures drug manufacturers a stable, ready-made market. Will the vaccines

now being tested...be added to the present list of vaccines now required for

our children to enter school? Will adults eventually be required to show

proof of vaccination...before being able to enter a hospital, obtain health

or life insurance, or hold a job? If even half the vaccines being developed

today are used by the general public tomorrow, drug manufacturers will

realize profits of many millions of dollars. And just as we are told to

give our children the pertussis vaccine today 'for the greater good of

society,' we may be told to give them the herpes vaccine tomorrow 'for the

greater good of society.’ But what guarantee do we have that adequate tests

for safety and toxicity will be developed and [that reports of] adverse

reactions will not be suppressed with other vaccines as has been done with

the pertussis vaccine?”

Coulter and Fisher go on by contrasting American and European

practices: " Gordon said, 'If the Centers for Disease Control has its

way, Americans and their children are going to become human pincushions.'

Polio, diphtheria, and tetanus vaccines are the only ones used universally

in Western Europe. In America, all children are routinely injected with

four doses of DPT vaccines (containing 12 antigens), one dose of MMR vaccine

(three antigens), and four doses of oral polio vaccine (12 antigens), for a

total of 27 antigens by the time they are 18 months old. And we are racing

to develop more vaccines for everything from croup to tooth decay. " (508)

Cournoyer has noted that vaccines are the only products in

the country that are legally mandated to be used by every person born. (509,

510) Fisher examines the problem and paints an ominous picture of things to

come:

“As consumers, we can bring very little economic pressure on the

system to have that product improved or removed, because all of us are

required by law to use it. It’s a dream for the pharmaceutical industry

involved in making vaccines, because there’s no way anybody can say no. It’s

a stable, ready-made market, and the enactment of the compensation law in

1986 has removed almost all liability for drug companies....

“What concerns us most is that there is an electronic monitoring

system being put in place by state public health departments with federal

funding--they’re trying to get it in every child born and monitor his or her

vaccination status. It will be linked to the birth record and Social

Security number. A person will not be able to move from state to state

without being tracked, because the tracking systems will be linked together.

This monitoring system also includes entitlement programs being linked to

your vaccination status. It started out with ‘No shots, no school.’

They’ve now graduated to no shots, no welfare; no shots, no food stamps; no

shots, no Woman, Infant, and Child benefits. In other words, a pregnant

woman who is poor will get no federal assistance unless she can show that

all of her children have been vaccinated with all the recommended vaccines.

There is a state legislator in Oregon who has introduced a bill that will

take away parents’ rights to file a state tax exemption for their children

unless they can show that the kids have had all the government-recommended

vaccines. So what I’m saying is that an Orwellian infrastructure is being

set up that is not only tied to education -- ‘No shots, no school’-- but to

economic penalties.

“When speaking in public, I often make the prediction that soon you

will have to carry a health care card with your vaccination status on it,

among other information, and you will not be able to get into a hotel, you

will not be able to get into a nursing home, you will not be able to get a

job, unless you can show you’ve been vaccinated with all the

government-recommended vaccines.

“I think Americans have got to wake up and realize that, in the name

of disease control, their rights are being taken away every day. People

must go to their state legislatures and change mandatory vaccination laws to

allow them to make informed, independent decisions about vaccination. Then

we will have the ability to put economic pressure on the drug companies and

on the health agencies to do a better job with vaccine safety and efficacy.

“I think our society has become obsessed with fear of infectious

disease. We have become deathly afraid of viruses and bacteria which, in

some cases, have been on this earth longer than humans. Instead of trying

to find natural ways to enhance the functioning of our immune systems and

come to an accommodation with microorganisms, we have blindly trusted public

health officials who, like generals in a war, are determined to exterminate

without evaluating the number of human casualties it will take. This

climate of fear is the breeding ground for the draconian measures being

employed by...public health officials. It’s very dangerous. If we don’t

act now, the public health infrastructure is going to get more power to

intrude in our lives, intrude in our health care choices. It all comes down

to whether or not we, as individuals, are going to fight for the right to

make informed health care choices, including vaccination choices, for

ourselves and our children, and whether we are going to hold the drug

companies and government health officials accountable for the injuries,

deaths, and chronic illnesses caused by vaccines they produce, sell, and

promote for mass use.” (511)

The need to rethink what we’re doing in this area is now so obvious

that none other a mainstream source than Money Magazine has questioned the

economic motives behind the use of vaccines. In its November 11, 1996,

issue, Money reported that a safer DPT vaccination available in other

countries has not been used in the U.S. for no other reason than the cost.

In addition, the article documented how medical experts paid by vaccine

manufacturers regularly help dictate government decisions that put

children’s health at risk while increasing corporate profits. Money also

noted the fact that the oral polio vaccine has been the sole cause of polio

over the past 17 years. (512)

One interesting financial aspect of vaccines overlooked by Money

involves the federal ACT Compensation Program. An excise tax of $23.50 was

tacked onto the price of pediatric vaccines in 1988 to fund this

compensation program. What this means is that consumers are footing the

bill for any injuries or deaths that may result from medical procedures that

they are required by law to undergo. (513, 514, 515)

Alan elaborates: “Vaccination costs us much more than just

the lives of our children. The U.S. federal government’s National Vaccine

Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) has paid out over $724.4 million to

parents of vaccine injured and killed children, in taxpayer dollars. The

NVICP has received over 5000 petitions since 1988, including over 700 for

vaccine-related deaths, and there are still some 2000 total death and injury

cases pending that may take years to resolve. Meanwhile, pharmaceutical

companies have a captive market: Vaccines are legally mandated in all 50

states (though legally avoidable in most), yet these same companies are

immune from accountability for the consequence of their products.

Furthermore, they have been allowed to use gag orders as a leverage tool in

vaccine damage legal settlements to prevent disclosure of information to the

public about vaccination dangers. Such arrangements are clearly unethical;

they force a nonconsenting American public to pay for vaccine manufacturers’

liabilities, while attempting to ensure that this same public will remain

ignorant of the dangers of their products.” (516, 517)

Neustaedter concurs:

“Profit has always been the goal of vaccine manufacturers. When

lawsuits leveled at drug companies began wiping out profits gleaned from the

pertussis vaccine, the manufacturers simply stopped production of the

vaccine. The United States government stepped in to pay these

vaccine-damage claims. Only then did the drug companies agree to resume

vaccine production. The formula was simple--no profits, no vaccine.

“Now that drug companies are protected from legal action, the race

to invent and distribute new vaccines has again switched into high gear.

Vaccines for hepatitis, haemophilus, and chickenpox have all been pushed

into the recommended schedule for children. This zealous rush to bring new

vaccines to market, heedless of the damage inflicted in the name of

prevention, could have far-reaching consequences. We may be setting the

stage for...widespread immune system failure and auto-immune disease.” (518)

Yet the race toward new vaccines continues. And in recent years

it’s taken on a scary dimension, as reported in the August 1994 issue of

NVIC News and the September 2, 1994, issue of Science, which tell of a

search for “The Holy Grail”:

" At a scientific symposium held in Washington, D.C....vaccine

researchers announced they are leading a worldwide effort to raise $300 to

$500 million to develop a 'supervaccine' that they refer to as `the Holy

Grail' to wipe out all infectious disease from the earth. This genetically

engineered supervaccine, which will contain raw DNA from 30 to 40 different

kinds of bacteria and viruses that will be inserted directly into the cells

of the human who receives it, can be squirted into a newborn's mouth at the

moment of birth. Once ingested, the supervaccine will remain in the body

indefinitely and booster doses will be released at timed intervals

throughout a person's life, although the researchers did not discuss what

happens if a baby has a reaction to the initial dose and how future doses

can be stopped from being released in the body if the first reaction does

not kill the child. There was also no discussion about the potential of the

vaccine to cause negative genetic changes at the cellular level in humans.

" The money needed to bring the supervaccine to the world within the

next five to ten years, an effort which is part of the Children's Vaccine

Initiative, will be funded by a group of financiers including the U.S.

government, United Nation's Children's Fund, the Rockefeller Foundation, the

World Bank, World Health Organization, major drug companies, and private

foundations, as well as governments from around the world being solicited

for donations. Among the diseases targeted for inclusion in the supervaccine

are AIDS, pneumonia, dengue fever, diarrheal disease, diphtheria, hepatitis,

malaria, measles, meningitis, encephalitis, polio, schistosomiasis, tetanus,

tuberculosis, typhoid fever, and pertussis. " (519, 520)

Whereas the specter of a mandatory supervaccine is reason enough for

concern, such fears are compounded when one considers the relatively tiny

number of people involved in making decisions affecting the public’s health.

As Coulter and Fisher write, " The production of new medical knowledge is

controlled by a system of interlocking directorates of the kind that were

banned from the production of goods and services by the antitrust laws.

Members of one policymaking committee sit on other similar committees. High

government health officials retire and take equally high positions in the

drug industry. Physicians on the editorial boards of medical journals are

vaccine policymakers who can effectively suppress scientific reports that

run counter to prevailing vaccine policy. And many are getting research

grants from the federal government, vaccine manufacturers, or both.

" Gordon stated in an interview that the interlocking

directorate is, in fact, worldwide. `It is a very closed circle. The

international health authorities are controlling it as well. It means that

something like one hundred people are pretty well controlling what goes on

in the entire world of vaccines. They are all in cahoots with each other

and with the pharmaceutical companies.' " (521)

Right to Refuse Vaccination

A question frequently asked of advocates on the front lines of the

freedom-from-vaccines movement concerns legal rights of refusal. According

to Barbara Loe Fisher, whose book The Consumer’s Guide to Childhood Vaccines

provides information on this topic, “it is common for hospital and clinic or

emergency room staff to ask you about your child’s vaccination status. You

don’t have to provide them with written proof. A verbal answer is

satisfactory. However, if you are being questioned closely and feel that

you are being pressured into vaccinating your sick child without your

consent, you should understand that you have the right to refuse to give

permission to have your sick child vaccinated if you believe vaccination at

the time will endanger your child’s health or life. You may choose to

reassure medical personnel that you will consult a private pediatrician for

further guidance about vaccination.” (522)

Parents should know that despite the fact that the CDC and AAP

guidelines indicate as many as 10 different vaccines can be administered on

a single day to children a year old, state laws do not require that legally

mandated vaccines be administered all at once. And Fisher points out that

parents may have the right to decide at what age children are vaccinated and

how many vaccines they receive on a given day. (523)

One special precaution, Fisher notes, involves pregnant women.

“When pregnant women are admitted to a hospital to have a baby, many times

while in active labor, the hospital will require that the mother or father

sign a paper agreeing to have the baby treated by medical personnel while in

the hospital. Signing this paper may also constitute your consent to having

your newborn vaccinated with hepatitis B vaccine shortly after birth. Many

parents have reported that their newborns are being vaccinated without their

knowledge and, when they ask why, they are told they signed a consent form

prior to admission agreeing to medical treatment the hospital determined was

necessary. Read any consent form you sign carefully. If you do not want

your newborn vaccinated shortly after birth, you have the right to sign it

after writing in an exception, such as, ‘I do not consent to have my child

given any vaccinations prior to discharge from the hospital.’ Bring this to

the attention of the person admitting you and the nursery supervisor and ask

to have it printed on the outside of your chart. Some parents take the

extra precaution of not leaving the newborn alone with hospital personnel

without being able to observe the baby.” (524)

In the unfortunate case of an adverse vaccine reaction resulting in

medical bills totaling more than $1000 or injuries lasting longer than six

months, parents qualify for benefits under the National Childhood Vaccine

Injury Act of 1986 (PL 99-660). Statistics up to 1997 indicate that

approximately 1000 vaccine victims have been compensated with payments

totaling nearly $750 million. (525)

Vaccination as Population Control

Over the past few decades, the U.N.’s World Health Organization has

been investing substantial resources in the development of anti-fertility

vaccines. This effort has also been supported by the World Bank, the

Rockefeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the U.S. National Institutes of

Health, the all India Institute of Medical Sciences, and the governments of

the United Kingdom, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Germany, among others. By

1993, over $350,000 million had been invested in such research. (526)

Contraceptive vaccines are designed to induce an immune response

that will interfere with conception. Although the working principle is the

same one underlying other vaccines--the stimulation of the immune system to

respond to a certain antigen--the target is very different--the body’s own

molecules rather than foreign viruses and bacteria. The aim is to evoke an

immune response against specific proteins found on the surface of either the

sperm or the egg (before or after fertilization), or against the female

hormone HCG (human chorionic gonadotropin). This hormone is secreted by the

early embryo and has a pivotal role in maintaining pregnancy.

The anti-HCG vaccine is the most pursued of the contraceptive

vaccines. Since HCG is a naturally occurring hormone, the immune system

recognizes it as " self " and tolerates it. However, if we bind HCG to a

foreign molecule, or carrier, we can trick the immune system into believing

that the whole complex is extraneous, and we can therefore elicit an immune

response, i.e., an attack, against the molecule-carrier complex.

Anti-HCG vaccines use tetanus-toxoid as a carrier, thus inducing an

antibody response directed against both the toxoid and the HCG. The idea is

that when a woman becomes pregnant and starts producing the hormone, her

immune system will attack and disrupt the hormone, and the pregnancy will be

interrupted. Basically, then, these vaccines are reprogramming the immune

system into doing what it is designed to avoid, attacking its own self. The

consequences of such a strategy can be numerous; first and foremost among

them is the development of auto-immune diseases.

A lot of molecules in our body share common motifs. HCG, for

example, belongs to a family of hormones that includes LH, FSH, and TSH,

which regulate the activity of sex and thyroid hormones. All hormones of

this family have a similar structure, and an antibody response directed

toward one of them could interfere with the activity of the others, a

phenomenon known as cross-reactivity. It is no coincidence that since the

introduction of vaccines, conditions of uncertain origin, such as allergies,

asthma, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, multiple sclerosis, AIDS,

Alzheimer’s disease, autism, and ADD, have started appearing or started

being diagnosed at alarming rates. But this is not surprising--how can we

expect that the manipulation of a fundamental, complex, and delicate system

of self-protection such as the immune system will be without consequence?

We can’t. And we also have to keep in mind that over two thirds of

individuals affected by auto-immune diseases are women, who are more

susceptible to such disorders. Vaccine trials conducted at the Karolinska

Hospital of Stockholm, Sweden, had to be suspended after the first seven

volunteers enrolled in an anti-fertility vaccine trial developed severe

reactions after the injection. (527) In other women, cross-reactivity

against pancreatic cells was observed. (527) And these are just

short-term effects. Long-term effects are more preoccupying.

Another issue that deserves consideration is that reversibility

cannot be guaranteed. Women might never be able to sustain a pregnancy

after vaccination. What this also may mean is that they might never be able

to stop unwanted cross-reactivity against other of their body’s components.

Also, if a woman receives the vaccine without knowing she is pregnant, she

might have a miscarriage. While this event might not seem of particular

relevance in small-scale experimentation, it might have profound

consequences if the vaccine is used in larger trials, like those conducted

in the developing countries.

The design of such vaccines raises ethical questions concerning the

legitimacy of large-scale manipulation of human systems. Furthermore, the

risk exists that these vaccines might be used for demographic control in

uninformed populations. Such an event would constitute a criminal act. In

fact, it’s already happened. That’s right--criminal acts, conducted under

the auspices of the World Health Organization and the other august bodies

with which it works--have already been perpetrated against uninformed women

in several developing countries.

The Hidden Agenda of an Anti-Tetanus Campaign.

In 1993, mass vaccination campaigns against neonatal tetanus were

initiated in Mexico, Nicaragua, and the Philippines. Targets were women of

reproductive age (12 through 45 years old). Vaccination protocol required

women to receive three injections during a three-month period and two more

injections within a year’s time. Putting aside questions about the validity

of the method used to control neonatal tetanus--the disease results from

delivery practices performed in disregard of basic hygiene rules; therefore

education and implementation of sanitary practices would accomplish what

vaccination so far hasn’t, the extinction of a disease practically unknown

to the developed countries--and questions about the efficacy of such a

method--several articles in the literature report cases of neonatal tetanus

occurring in children of vaccinated mothers--what struck some observers the

most about this campaign was the need for such a high number of injections

in such a short time. Immunity to tetanus generally lasts from 5 to 10

years, and only after this time is a new injection generally recommended.

Something wasn’t right.

In 1994, a Mexican organization affiliated with Human Life

International became suspicious, started analyzing some of the anti-tetanus

vials, and discovered that they contained not only tetanus, but also human

chorionic gonadotropin. Proof of HCG-‘contaminated’ vaccines also arrived

from the Philippines, where over 3.4 million women had been vaccinated

during the campaign. (528) None of the women knew anything about being used

in anti-fertility experimentation.

According to a report written in June 1995 by Human Life

International, the WHO and the Philippine Department of Health (DOH)

immediately denied that the tetanus vaccine vials were tainted with HCG.

Four new vials of vaccine were analyzed, and all of them tested positive for

the hormone. (528) In response, WHO and the Philippine DOH stated that the

HCG was indeed present in the vials, but in such small amounts that no

immune response could have been induced. Analysis of the level of anti-HCG

antibody in vaccinated women proved them wrong again. Twenty-six of 30

vaccinated women had high levels of anti-HCG antibody. The WHO and the DHO

had no answers in reply.

Soon after this incident, it became known that none of the vaccines

used had ever been tested or approved by the Philippine Bureau of Food and

Drugs, as required by law. The Philippine bureau attempted to justify the

mishap by explaining that the three companies distributing the vaccine, the

Canadian Connaught Laboratories Ltd. and Interdex, and the Australian CSL

Laboratories, " did not apply for registration. " (528, 529) It bears

mentioning that Connaught Laboratories is the same company that in the

mid-80s was found to knowingly distribute AIDS-contaminated blood products.

(528, 530)

According to WHO, the tetanus vaccine is being used in over 140

countries. The organization has declared that " tetanus toxoid does not have

a contraceptive effect or contain any hormone. " We now know that they have

been lying. Recently, evidence of covert birth-control vaccination has also

emerged from the African countries, where vaccination programs requiring

five tetanus shots have been enrolling women aged 15-45. (528, 531)

Congressional investigation has been called for by Human Life

International, which points out the major role the U.S. has played in

funding practically every agency involved in the anti-fertility business.

Holistic Health and Freedom of Choice

According to Barbara Loe Fisher, “the alternative health care

movement in this country is going to play a vital role in the vaccine safety

movement.(532) Those who are looking into chiropractic, osteopathic

medicine, naturopathic, homeopathic, vitamin therapy, etc., are looking for

ways to boost the immune system through more natural means in order to be

able to naturally deal with viruses and bacteria that they come in contact

with. This is a very important movement.”

Dr. Black agrees, and sees vaccinations as only a shortcut for those

people in our society who have not taken full responsibility for their

health. “It’s a way of saying, don’t look at the more natural holistic way

of helping the body. Medicine believes disease is the enemy. Natural health

care believes disease is actually an ally. Medicine fights disease.

Natural health care works with it. The parent who believes in natural

health care, who believes in feeding the child wholesome foods, having a

good emotional and spiritual tone in the home, building strength in every

other possible way, simply says this, ‘Disease will come. Let me prepare my

child with a good body. Then my child will become immunized.’

“Medicine believes symptoms are evil. Natural health care believes

symptoms are the body’s efforts to rid itself of disease. In medicine, if

you attenuate the virus, and therefore reduce the symptoms, you’ve done a

good thing because you have fewer symptoms, but natural health care says

that if you attenuate the virus and attenuate the symptoms, you likewise

attenuate the body’s response to clear itself of disease. You only have a

partial response, and therefore a partial clearing....There is no way in the

world that we can overrule nature’s law that says, if you want a benefit,

you must do all that it takes to get it. I don’t think we can produce

shortcuts to full immunity other than being exposed to the disease.” (533)

Curtis Cost adds, “We know through...studies that the incidences of

various diseases have been declining steadily prior to the advent of various

vaccines. We see declines up to 90 percent, and these declines result from

improvements in sanitation and nutrition. The medical establishment knows

full well that if you want to control disease, the primary thing you need to

focus on is sanitation--a good sewage system, the removal of trash from the

streets, good water processing plants. If the environment is clean, the

risk of disease is less. If people have more access to fresh fruits and

vegetables, their immune systems will become stronger.

“My point is that parents do not need to be terrified into believing

that the only way to protect themselves and their children from disease is

through vaccines. We know that if parents breastfeed their babies, the risk

of death and disease is dramatically reduced because the breast milk

contains all the natural nutrients that the mother will naturally give to

her child as she breastfeeds. We know that diet has a tremendous effect on

disease. If you are not eating a proper diet your risk of getting various

diseases is much greater. So we need to focus on taking control of our

health...to focus on eating more organically grown fresh fruits and

vegetables, on drinking pure water, and on exercising. These actions build

up the immune system.” (534)

Dr. Philip Incao is a general practitioner whose experience has led

him to question current vaccination practices. He writes (Internet

document, www.garynull.com): <http://www.garynull.com): /> “A critical

point which is never mentioned by those advocating mandatory vaccination of

children is that children’s health has declined significantly since 1960

when vaccines began to be widely used. According to the National Health

Interview Survey conducted annually by the National Center for Health

Statistics since 1957, a shocking 31 percent of U.S. children today have a

chronic health problem, 18 percent of children require special health care

or related services, and 6.7 percent of children have a significant

disability due to a chronic physical or mental condition. Respiratory

allergies, asthma, and learning disabilities are the most common of these.

“Three controlled studies comparing vaccinated to unvaccinated

children in England, and New Zealand have shown that the vaccinated children

have significantly more asthma, ear infections, hospitalizations, and

inflammatory bowel disease than their unvaccinated cohorts. Since

vaccinations have a lasting effect on the immune system, and since it is

known that many vaccines shift the balance of the immune system away from

its acutely-reacting " Th1 " side and toward its chronically-reacting " Th2 "

side, it is a very plausible scenario that vaccines are contributing greatly

to the large-scale and unprecedented increase in chronic conditions such as

allergies, asthma, diabetes, and a wide range of neurological dysfunctions

including learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, seizures, and

autism in U.S. children today.

Dr. Incao concludes by summarizing observations drawn from 27 years

of experience as a general practitioner of medicine. Twenty-three of those

years were in a rural farming community in upstate New York where, he

reports, as many as 50 percent of his pediatric patients were unvaccinated

due to their parents’ conscientious personal choice.

“For 23 years I had the opportunity to observe my young patients

grow from infancy to young adulthood and to appraise their overall health

and vitality. It was out of this experience that my present views took

shape. I observed that my unvaccinated children were healthier, hardier, and

more robust than their vaccinated peers. Allergies, asthma, and pallor, and

behavioral and attentional disturbances, were clearly more common in my

young patients who were vaccinated.

“My unvaccinated patients, on the other hand, did not suffer from

infectious diseases with any greater frequency or severity than their

vaccinated peers: Their immune systems generally handled these challenges

very well. "

Finally, no one is saying not to vaccinate; the point is that

individuals need the freedom to choose. They should not be forced in one

direction or another. Barbara Loe Fisher stresses this: “Our organization

does not tell a parent what to do. (535) I want to make that clear. We are

an information clearinghouse and we believe in education. We believe that

parents should take the responsibility for making their own decision. In

this society, we ought to have the right to make the right decisions without

being bullied and harassed and threatened into vaccinating if we do not

believe that it is in the best interest of our child.”

Similarly, Cost encourages people to research the subject of

vaccines rather than trust blindly in the dictates of the medical

establishment:

“The subject of vaccinations is not a religion. It should not be

based on your belief system, but on an objective analysis and facts. There

are more than enough studies out there for people to read and to come to

sound conclusions one way or the other. There are also many books on the

subject. I encourage people to delve into them.” (536)

Alan reminds us that we are kept in the dark about our

freedom to choose.

“Most states currently allow for medical and religious exemptions. You are

not told this when you go to a pediatrician or when you enter a university.

You are simply told that you have to vaccinate. But that is not usually

true. Probably 15 to 20 states have a philosophical or personal exemption

option that you don’t even have to tie to your religion.

“I don’t advocate that people do or do not vaccinate. I say that

there’s a lot of information that people should investigate before they make

a decision one way or the other. We’re so steeped in what I would now call

the myth of vaccination that it seems nonsensical and counterintuitive to

even raise the question. In fact, the first time that I raised the question

with a pediatrician I got yelled at. While I think that was unprofessional

of the pediatrician, it does demonstrate the degree to which assumptions

about vaccinations are held.” (537)

Black states, “As a parent, there might be times I choose to

immunize my child. Maybe I would find scientific evidence to back its

validity in a case where a disease is so fraught with risk that I dare not

expose my child. Maybe then I would choose [to vaccinate]. But I would do

so having thoroughly thought about it....What I believe we cannot tolerate

as a free nation is to have government bureaucrats come in and say--based

upon false statistics--if you don’t immunize your child, you will suffer

penalty of law. That, to me, is a gross injustice that simply has to be

changed.” (538)

APPENDIX: Scientific Peer-Reviewed Studies

The following are abstracts of articles on vaccine problems that

appeared in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

[Note: This text is complete. It requires going to the Endnotes, which I

will send shortly, having at last completed the numbering! C.]

This article discusses more than 150 infant deaths following DPT

vaccination. Half of this total occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 75

percent within 72 hours, and 90 percent within 1 week. Half were sudden,

resembling SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome). Half were associated with

symptoms such as apnea, shock, seizures, dyspnea, irritability, lethargy,

apathy, coma, and paralysis. (539)

Results of this study showed a SIDS-associated fatality rate in the

period of 0-3 days following DPT vaccine administration to be 7.3 times

greater than that during the period starting 30 days after immunization.

(540)

This study reports on the cases of six patients who experienced

severe pneumococcal disease following exposure to pneumococcal vaccine

(Pneumovax). (541)

Results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled study found that

the oral rhesus rotavirus vaccine was 29 percent ineffective in preventing

diarrhea in young infants and led to significantly more side effects

relative to controls. (542)

This study reports on the cases of a 19-month-old and 10-month-old

girl who developed Guillain-Barre Syndrome within a week of exposure to live

measles-rubella vaccine and live measles vaccine, respectively. (543)

This article reports on the cases of five patients who developed

corneal allograft rejection following immunization (one patient from

tetanus, four from influenza vaccines). (544)

This study examined the reporting mechanisms in place to monitor

adverse vaccine effects and found that, in general, the public sector did a

better reporting job compared to the private sector. However, noting a

significant underreporting and the nonspecific nature of most adverse event

reports, the authors argue their findings point to the unreliability of the

nation’s system for monitoring adverse vaccine event incidence. (545)

Results of this study found that the administration of live,

attenuated influenza virus vaccine via nasal spray exacerbated respiratory

symptoms in middle-aged patients with chronic lung disease. The same

vaccinations were well-tolerated by healthy subjects in the same age range.

(546)

This article reports on the case of a 48-year-old man who

experienced symptoms of myasthenia gravis one month following general

anesthesia and a second dose of hepatitis B plasma vaccine. (547)

This article reports on two cases of acute posterior multifocal

placoid pigment epitheliopathy following immunization with a recombinant

hepatitis B virus vaccine. (548)

This article reports on two female patients who developed diffuse

myelitis shortly after exposure to live rubella vaccine and never completely

recovered with respect to full motor function. (549)

Results of this study involving 404 cases of Reye’s syndrome

indicated that 15 of 269 children with the condition had received live virus

vaccines within a month of onset. These findings, coupled with seasonal

distribution and clustering of incubation periods, point to a possible role

of live virus vaccines as a causal agent. (550)

This article reports on the case of a newly vaccinated infant who

virally transmitted polio to its father. (551)

Results of this study found a strong association between immediate

allergic reactions (including anaphylaxis) to vaccines and the presence of

specific IgE to gelatin in children. (552)

This review article notes that 50 percent of leukemic children

experience mild to moderate adverse effects following exposure to live

attenuated varicella vaccine. (553)

This article reports on the case of a healthy 30-year-old female

physician who developed a localized case of herpes zoster 3 years after

being immunized with two doses of live attenuated varicella vaccine. (554)

This review article notes that rashes occurring during the initial

six weeks following live, attenuated varicella virus vaccine are caused by

the vaccine, as are breakthrough infections with wild-type VZV. (555)

A Danish survey of 309 cases of drug-induced thrombocytopenia found

that the drugs taken most frequently in connection with this were valproic

acid and measles-mumps-rubella vaccine. (556)

Results of this study found that 10 of 75 adolescents exposed to

revaccination with live measles vaccine 11-14 years following original

immunization with killed measles vaccine experienced local pain with

swelling at the site of injection. Three of them reported severe and

disturbing systemic complaints. (557)

This article examines the effects of the National Childhood Vaccine

Injury Act and concludes that it is likely more vaccine-injured children

will receive compensation than previously would have under state law, but

that the compensation level per child will be lower. (558)

Results of this study demonstrated that neonatal immunization with

HiB conjugate vaccines does not provide earlier protection against invasive

HiB disease. It was also shown that DT administration did not enhance

subsequent antibody responses to HiB conjugate vaccines. (559)

This article reports on the case of a male infant with a congenital

immunodeficiency who suffered from fatal disseminated measles following

exposure to a live attenuated measles vaccine. (560)

This article notes the cases of two patients with immune

thrombocytopenia who suffered from relapses of their condition following

exposure to pneumococcal and influenza vaccines. (561)

This article discusses the September 1993 report released from the

Institute of Medicine on Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines:

Evidence Bearing on Causality. This report found evidence pointing to a

causal association between diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and Guillain-Barre

syndrome and brachial neuritis, between measles vaccine and anaphylaxis,

between oral polio vaccine and Guillain-Barre syndrome, and between

unconjugated HiB vaccine and susceptibility to HiB disease. Evidence was

also established pointing to causal associations between diphtheria and

tetanus toxoids and anaphylaxis, between measles vaccine and death from

measles vaccine-strain viral infection, between measles-mumps-rubella

vaccine and thrombocytopenia and anaphylaxis, between oral polio vaccine and

poliomyelitis and death from polio vaccine-strain viral infection, and

between hepatitis B vaccine and anaphylaxis. (562)

This article reports on two cases of patients who experienced

neurological symptoms and evidence of central-nervous-system demyelination 6

weeks following exposure to recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. (563)

This article notes that during the years 1976-1977, there were 26

reported cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in England and Wales, 6 of which

were associated with vaccines. (564)

This article summarizes a report by the Advisory Committee on

Immunization Practices on the case of a person with AIDS who experienced

progressive measles pneumonitis following exposure to measles vaccine. (565)

This article reports on the cases of three children who experienced

adverse reactions within 30 minutes of receiving live attenuated measles

vaccine (Rimevax). Reactions involved fever, rash, and vomiting. Two of

the children also suffered from cyanosis. (566)

Results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study found the

hepatitis B vaccine (Heptavax- to be ineffective among a group of dialysis

patients. (567)

This article reports on the case of an immunodeficient child who

developed chronic progressive poliomyelitis following exposure to a live

oral poliovirus vaccine. (568)

This review article notes that the Cendehill vaccine used against

rubella has been shown to produce severe defects in the children of pregnant

women not protected against rubella. (569)

This article reports on the case of an adolescent girl without

humoral immunity to measles virus despite having received two inoculations

of live, attenuated vaccine, who suffered an exaggerated atypical rubeola

illness after being exposed to the wild virus. (570)

This article reports on the cases of 5 out of 52 children with acute

lymphocytic leukemia in which a varicella-like illness occurred after

exposure to live varicella vaccine. (571)

This article argues that “the advantages of new vaccines and

immunization programs should no longer be measured exclusively in terms of

the number of lives saved but should take into account direct and indirect

cost savings and overall benefit to individual and societal health and

well-being.” The authors concede that most cases of varicella and hepatitis

A infections are self-limiting with no significant after-effects, and thus

immunization is less likely to save lives than merely improve quality of

life. (572)

This article reports on 9 cases of patients who experienced

pneumonia of atypical measles following rubella infection after being

immunized with killed measles virus vaccine. (573)

This article reports on the case of a patient who experienced acute

transverse myelitis following exposure to recombinant hepatitis B vaccine.

(574)

December 20, 2001