Mandatory Vaccinations: A Collectivist Viewpoint Emerges By L. Blaylock, M.D.

[Guest guest]

Excellent and right on-topic answer to those who say we should vaccinate

for the public good. (especially this latest pertussis vaccine push onto

parents, relatives and the elderly, to protect the newborns)

Sheri

" Mandatory Vaccinations: A Collectivist Viewpoint Emerges

By L. Blaylock, M.D.

http://www.thenhf.com/article.php?id=3225

" Students of the history of collectivism will also recognize that

calls for increasing the power of the state over the individual is always

couched in terms of the “public good” and “protecting the public.” That

is, it is a “crisis” that demands collectivist solutions and these

solutions must be accepted without debate or analysis by critics or more

thoughtful and cautionary individuals. The perfect example of this is the

debate over vaccine effectiveness and safety. "

http://www.thenhf.com/article.php?id=3225

Mandatory Vaccinations: A Collectivist Viewpoint

Emerges

By L. Blaylock, M.D.

February 17, 2012

A recent article appearing in the January

issue of the American Medical Association Journal of Ethics, titled

Virtual Mentor, should alert thinking Americans to a dangerous precedence

being set by so-called health “authorities”. Actually, the concept of

compulsion by the state for the “public good,” is not all that new and is

consistent with a collectivist philosophy. So, you may ask--what is

collectivism?

Basically, collectivism

does not recognize the individual as being important to society; in fact,

its philosophers feel that the individual, especially the intellectual,

is an enemy of the “public good.” Collectivism’s most recognized

political expression in modern times is known as socialism (actually

communism--See the Communist Manifesto).

The founders of our

country did not hold this view, rather they reasoned that the individual

must be protected from collectivism at all levels, hence the Constitution

and Bill of Rights. The court system was designed during the founding to

protect the rights of the individual. Within the founders’ philosophical

view, the family is central to the individual’s rights. That is, it is

the father and/or mother who represent the most protective structure for

innocent children and not the state. The state intervenes only in the

most extreme cases of abuse and this is carefully regulated so as to

prevent abuse by the state.

Since the Civil War, we

have witnessed a gradual, yet progressive move toward the collectivist

philosophy, where the state replaces the family and individuals are

sacrificed in the name of the “public good.” This process has

gained rapidly on many fronts, but one of the most disturbing is in the

area of public health.

Reagan warned in

1961--”One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism

on a people has been by way of medicine. It is very easy to disguise a

medical program as a humanitarian project.” Students of the history

of collectivism will also recognize that calls for increasing the power

of the state over the individual is always couched in terms of the

“public good” and “protecting the public.” That is, it is a “crisis” that

demands collectivist solutions and these solutions must be accepted

without debate or analysis by critics or more thoughtful and cautionary

individuals. The perfect example of this is the debate over vaccine

effectiveness and safety.

With that short

introduction to collectivist thinking, let us examine the paper,

Virtual Mentor, written by ne Sheeley and Meyer. They

begin by lamenting the fact that the previous system of recruiting

volunteers for testing experimental vaccines has fallen on hard times.

That is, fewer people are volunteering. They note that the “volunteers”

are fully informed of possible complications caused by the vaccines and

these volunteers have consented to be used in the experiments, in

essence, as human guinea pigs. The former assurance is not true, as

several studies have shown that quite often recognized, serious potential

complications are withheld from the volunteer.

Because of this fall in

volunteers, they tell us-- “But relying on altruism alone to facilitate

clinical trials is potentially unsustainable and ethically contentious.”

So, what is their solution to this problem? Compulsory involvement in

vaccine studies is one alternative solution that is not as outlandish as

it might seem on first consideration.---Mandatory involvement in vaccine

trials is therefore perhaps more akin to military conscription---. In

both conscription and obligatory trial participation, individuals have

little or no choice regarding involvement and face inherent risk over

which they have no control, all for the greater good of society.

(Italics mine).

This statement is

reminiscent of a statement made by the Fabian socialist and first general

director of UNESCO n Huxley in which he said concerning

implementation of a radical eugenic program--”it will be important for

UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem be examined with the greatest

care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that

much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”

(italics mine)

The extreme left

collectivists bristle at being compared to the National Socialists, so I

will instead examine the source of Hitler’s eugenic thinking, another

“unthinkable” idea made “thinkable” by careful manipulation of American

social opinion makers in the very early 1900s. Keep in mind that all

these eugenic programs eventually resorted to compulsion because the

public could not be convinced to voluntarily accept the deadly

prescription being proposed by the state and self-appointed protectors of

the public good.

The beginning of the

eugenic movement started with suggestions for human betterment through

selective breeding by British biologist Sir Francis Galton in 1882. At

the beginning of the 20th century (1904-1920s) the need for enforcement

of eugenic programs became a matter of “public health.” The eugenic

movement was heavily funded by the Rockefeller foundations and Carnegie

Institutions from its inception and continued even beyond the National

Socialist era.

It is also important to

appreciate that this public health movement was led by some of the most

prominent individuals in society. Harvard educated Davenport was

at center stage in this terrifying public health movement. The elite

proponents of mandatory eugenic policies included Professor Henry Osborn,

director of the American Museum of Natural History, Graham

Bell, wife of railroad magnate E.H. Harriman, the prestigious Cold Spring

Harbor biology laboratory, , secretary of the Department of

Agriculture, Major Leonard Darwin ( Darwin’s son), Winston

Churchill, Theodore Roosevelt and Linus ing, to name a few.

University and college

courses were provided for America’s most prestigious institutions of

learning, such as Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Purdue, University of

Chicago, Northwestern University, New York University and University of

California at Berkley. Soon eugenic courses were being adopted by high

school textbooks and courses. The journal of the American Medical

Association (JAMA) proudly covered the international eugenics meeting in

London and did so in glowing terms.

The goal of the eugenics

proponents was to eventually sterilize 14 million people in the United

States alone and millions more worldwide. Before clearer heads prevailed,

60,000 Americans were coercively sterilized and this is considered a

conservative figure. Support for this monstrous program was based on

pseudoscience and powerful state-supported propaganda, just as we are

witnessing in the present day vaccine mania.

Each generation thinks

it is far more intelligent than previous generations and therefore

comparisons with earlier abuses of science and public policy cannot be

made. Yet, support for forced sterilization and interment camps for the

“unfit” were strongly supported by men considered to be the giants of

biology and medicine as well as influential men of government and private

foundations. Eugenic mania spread across the world among the most

intelligent class. Opponents were labeled “enemies of the public good”

and as individuals unqualified to discuss the problem, just as we hear

today with vaccine safety. Vaccine mandate proponents state that

opponents of their programs are uneducated and unqualified to speak on

the subject, even when they are far greater experts in the field of

vaccine safety and pathophysiology than the proponents.

I have written eight

papers and several chapters on the mechanisms of vaccine-induced

neuropathology and neurological injury and proposed a plausible mechanism

to explain a link to vaccine-induced autism, yet the only person quoted

on this issue in the national media is Offit, who not only profits

handsomely from his own vaccine creation, but admitted in an interview

that he knows nothing about neurology or brain function.

It was assumed by the

eugenics social engineers that all crime, mental subnormality, laziness,

alcoholism, blindness and “antisocial behavior” were hereditary and

therefore controllable by forced sterilization. Laws were passed based on

this phony science and tens of thousands suffered.

Lucien Howe, one of the

most prominent names in ophthalmology, in 1918 took up the cause of

eugenic prevention of blindness and poor vision, just as Offit carries

the vaccine banner. He compiled data showing that $3.8 million was the

national cost of blindness and that mandatory sterilization of the blind

would prevent this nation tragedy. The problem was that over 90% of

blindness had no hereditary link. Despite this, he campaigned tirelessly

to have laws passed for forced sterilization of all blind

individuals.

Howe did not stand

alone, but was given valuable support by the AMA and Carnegie

Institution. He suggested that authorities wait to discover a blind

person and “then go back and get the rest of his family.” By 1921, the

Eugenic Record Office (ERO) and the AMA section on ophthalmology had

drafted a more comprehensive law that targeted all people with imperfect

vision. Doctor Howe insisted that the law include provisions to imprison

the visually impaired. The AMA provided a list of prominent medical

professors to support Howe’s legislative proposals. All of this is

reminiscent of the present vaccine battle.

Sheehy and Meyer makes

the argument that because the public benefits from vaccine trials people

should be made to participate against their will. We must then

ask--Should people be forced to have an experimental surgical procedure

because if successful, it will benefit many? Should they be forced to

take experimental medications?

This principle of

mandatory medical procedures could also apply to experimental brain

surgery, such as the infamous frontal lobotomy. After all, at the time,

it was thought to greatly benefit thousands and was used to treat

sadness, depression, unruly behavior in children and anxiety. Sure, the

effects were irreversible, but so is the neurological damage caused by

vaccine reactions.

The history of medicine

should have taught us that excitement over a treatment or procedure can

often turn to disaster down the road. Thalidomide was considered to be a

very safe tranquilizer--no one knew at the time if given to pregnant

mothers, the child would be born with crippling limb deformities. What if

taking thalidomide had been mandatory at the time--millions would have

been crippled.

We are learning a great

deal about the safety issue associated with vaccines, but much of this

careful research is being ignored. Tomljenovic and Shaw, Strunecka and

others have published a number of very important papers in this field and

I think I have made a compelling case for a mechanism,

immunoexcitotoxicity, to explain the effect of multiple vaccines on brain

development including vaccine-associated seizures.

All of us should be

terrified by the totalitarian nature exercised by the proponents of

mandatory vaccines. Many are openly calling not only for mandatory

vaccinations, but also hiding critical safety data from the public so as

to give the impression of vaccine safety. Programs for mandated eugenics

ended when the public realized the true result of such plans. This

history is now rarely spoken about, yet present vaccine policies are just

as frightening because they hold the potential to irreversibility destroy

the lives of millions of our children.

I would make an open

proposal to those who support mandated vaccines and participation in

vaccine trials. The first participants should be the CEOs of

pharmaceutical vaccine makers, their board members, their families and

then all their employees and their families. All those who have written

or proposed legislation or rules for mandating vaccines should also be

submitted for testing, including Sheehy and Meyers. This, of course

includes all of their families. At the top of the list should be

Offit. I can assure you that if such a policy were instituted we would be

hearing a whole lot less about mandating vaccines.

L. Blaylock, M.D.

Theoretical Neurosciences. LLC

Visiting Professor Biology

Belhaven University

, Mississippi

www.russellblaylockmd.com

www.blaylockwellnesscenter.com

Curriculum Vitae

Name: L. Blaylock, M.D.; CCN

DOB: November 5, 1945

Spouse: Diane Kempff Blaylock

Pre-medical education: Northeast State University, Monroe, Louisiana:

1963-1966 Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana:

1966-1967

Medical Education: Louisiana State University School of Medicine in New

Orleans 1967-1971

Internship: Medical University of South Carolina: ton, South

Carolina Straight surgery intern (Trained with Curtis Arts, M.D. and

Moncrief, M.D, authorities in burn and trauma.)

Residency: Medical University South Carolina: Neurosurgery Residency,

1972-1977. Chief Resident and Teaching fellow 1976-1977. Chief of

Neurology, 1973-1974. Trained with Ludwig G Kempe, M.D

Board Certification: American Association of Neurological Surgeons,

1980. Certified Clinical Nutritionists in 2007.

Private Neurosurgical Practice: May, 1977 through Feb 2001.

Present Profession: President of Advanced Nutritional Concepts and

Theoretical Neurosciences, LLC. Visiting Professor of Biology;

Belhaven University, , Mississippi.

Editorial Appointments: Journal of American Physicians and

Surgeons, Journal of the American Nutriceutical Association, Scientific

Advisory Board of the Life Extension Foundation, Editorial Board of

Fluoride Journal; Editorial board of Surgical Neurology International

Appointments: Clinical Assistant Professor in Neurosurgery at the

University of Mississippi Medical Center, retired in 2001. Visiting

Professor of Biology, Belhaven University-, Mississippi.

Journal Publications:

Blaylock RL, Ducker TB, Rittenberry MS. Intraventricular

monitoring of craniocerebral trauma. J South Carolina Medical

Association 70: 348-355, 1974. Blaylock, RL. American Medicine: bicentennial celebration. J

South Carolina Medical Association 72: 18-22, 1976. Blaylock RL, Kempe LG. Review and new proposals for immunotherapy

of brain tumors. Neurochirugia 19: 10-21, 1976. Blaylock RL,Kempe LG. Chrondrosarcoma of the cervical spine. J

Neurosurgery 44: 500-503, 1976. Kempe LG, Blaylock RL. Ventriculo-lymphatic shunt. J

Neurosurgery 47: 86-95, 1977. Kempe LG, Blaylock RL. Lateral trigonal intraventricular tumor: a

new operative approach. ACTA Neurochirugia 21: 20-28, 1978. Blaylock RL, Kempe LG. Hydrocephalus associated with subarachnoid

hemorrhage. Neurochirugia 21: 20-28, 1978. Blaylock RL. Building one’s own gallows. Private Practice,

September 1979. Blaylock RL, Kempe LG. Pituitary adenomas: a re-appraisal of their

pathology and treatment. Neurochirugia 20: 68-78, 1977. Blaylock RL. Hydrosyringomyelia of the conus medullaris associated

with a thorasic meningioma. J Neurosurgery 54: 833-835, 1981.

11. Blaylock RL. The medicine business coalition. Private

Practice, pp52-54, 1982.

12. Blaylock R. The unseen effects of drug substitution.

Private Practice, pp 81-85, 1982.

13. Blaylock, M.D. MSG, NutraSweet and the destruction of the

brain. Healthy & Natural, pp78-79, 1996.

14. Blaylock R. Medical Care as an industrial product.

Medical Sentinel 1: 19-22, 1996.

15. Blaylock RL. Running for cover. The herd instinct among

physcians. Medical Sentinel 1: 14-17, 1996.

16. Blaylock RL. Communist use of American POWs as Human Guinea

pigs. Part 1: The Korean experience. Medical Sentinel 2:

93-96, 1997.

17. Blaylock RL. Communist use of American POWs as human guinea

pigs: Part 2: The Vietnam experience, the Soviets and other special

projects. Medical Sentinel 2: 126-131, 1997.

18. Blaylock RL. Managed truth: The great danger to our

Republic. Medical Sentinel 3: 1998.

19. Blaylock RL. Energy producing enzymes and Alzheimer’s

disease. Healthy & Natural, pp 78-79, Vol 125, 1996.

20. Blaylock RL. Neurodegeneration and aging of the central

nervous system: Prevention and treatment by phytochemicals and metabolic

nutrients. Integrative Medicine 1: 117-133, 1998.

21. Blaylock R. An irrestible force. Medical Sentinel 4:

140, 1999.

22. Blaylock RL. New Developments in Phytoprevention and

treatment of cancer. J American Nutraceutical Association

2: 1999

23. Blaylock RL. Phytonutrients and metabolic stimulants as

protection against neurodegeneration and excitotoxicity. J Am

Nutraceutical Association 2000; 2: 30-39.

24. Blaylock RL. A review of conventional cancer prevention and

treatment and the adjunctive use of nutraceutical supplements and

antioxidants: Is their a danger or a significant benefit? J Amer Nutra

Assoc. 2000;3: 17-35.

25. Blaylock RL. New Developments in the prevention and

treatment of Neurodegenerative diseases using nutraceuticals and

metabolic stimulants. JANA 2002; 5: 1-18.

26. Blaylock RL. Food additive excitotoxins and

degenerative brain disorders. Medical Sentinel 1999; 4:

212-214.

27. Blaylock RL. The central role of excitotoxicity in autism

spectrum disorders. JANA 2003; 6: 10-22.

28. Blaylock RL. Interactions of cytokines, excitotoxins, and

reactive nitrogen and oxygen species in autism spectrum disorders.

2003; 6: 21-35.

29. Blaylock RL. Fluoride neurotoxicity and

excitotoxicity/microglial activation: critical need for more

research. Fluoride; 40: 89-92.

30. Blaylock RL. Chronic microglial activation and

excitotoxicity secondary to excessive immune stimulation: possible

factors in Gulf War Syndrome and autism. J Amer Physic Surg 2004; 9:

2004.

31. Blaylock RL. Excitotoxicity: A possible central mechanism in

fluoride neurotoxicity. Fluoride 2004; 37: 301-314.

32. Strunecka A, Patocka J, Blaylock RL, Chinoy NJ. Fluoride

interactions: From molecules to disease. Current Signal Transduction

Therapy 2007; 2: 190-213.

33. Blaylock RL. The danger of overvaccination with

the present vaccine policy. Health Freedom News 2007; 25:

8-11.

34. Blaylock RL. Immunoexcitotoxicity, Part 1. Alter Ther

Health Med

35. Blaylock RL. Immunoexcitotoxicit, Part 2 Altern

Ther Health Med

36. Blaylock R. Immunoexcitotoxicity, Part 3. Altern Ther

Health Med

37. Blaylock RL, Strunecka A. Immune-glutamertergic

dysfunction as a central mechanism of autism spectrum disorders. Curr

Med Chem 2009; 16: 157-170.

38. Blaylock RL. Vaccines, depression and neurodegeneration

after age 50 years: Another reason to avoid recommended vaccines.

Medical Veritas 2008; 5: 1742-1747.

39. Blaylock RL. The danger of excessive vaccination

during brain development: the case for a link to Autism Spectrum

Disorders (ASD). Medical Veritas 2008; 5: 1727-1741.

40. Blaylock RL. The truth behind the vaccine cover-up.

Medical Veritas 2008; 5: 1714-1726.

41. Blaylock RL. DHA supports development and protects

neurological function. Life Extension Jan 2008: 45-57.

42. Blaylock RL, Strunecka A. Immune-glutamatergic dysfunction

as a central mechanism of autism spectrum disorders. Curr Med Chem

2009;16(2): 157-170.

43. Blaylock RL, Maroon J. Immunoexcitotoxicity as a

central mechanism in chronic traumatic encephalopathy­a unifying

hypothesis. Surg Neurol Int 2011;2:107

44. Blaylock RL. Aluminum induced immunoexcitotoxicity in

neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative disorders. Curr Inorg Chem

2012;2 (in press)

45. Strunecka A, Blaylock RL and Patocka J. Aluminofluoride

complexes: Phosphate analogues and a hidden hazard for living

organinsms. Curr Inorgan Chem 2012;2:8-18.

46. Blaylock RL. Managed Truth: A Danger to Our republic.

Surgi Neurol Int 2011;2:179.

47. Maroon J, Blaylock R, Bost J. TBI and neuroinflammation: a

rationale for treatment: summary text and presentation outline

notes. J Healthcare Sci Humanities 2011;1(4):51-61.

48. Strunecka A, Blaylock RL, Patocka J. Aluminofluoride

complexes: Phosphate analogues and a hidden hazard for living

organisms. Curr Inorg Chem 2012;2:8-18.

49. Strunecka A, Blaylock RL. Insights into the pathogenesis of

autism spectrum disorders from the molecular and cellular level.

Prackticky Lekar 2008;88(2):78-81. (In Czech)

50. Blaylock RL, Maroon J. Natural Plant Products and Extracts

That Reduce Immunoexcitotoxicity Associated Neurodegeneration, and

Promote Repair Within the Central Nervous System. Surg Neurol Int

2011; (in press)

Books and Chapters in Medical Text:

Blaylock RL. Immunoexcitotoxicity in Chronic Traumatic

Encephalopathy. In, Dambinova SA, RL, Wang KKW (eds):

Biomarkers for Traumatic Brain Injury 2012: (in press)

Blaylock RL. Pathophysiology of Head and Cervical Spine Injuries.

In, Irby WB (Ed) Recent Advances in Oral Surgery. Vol II, CV

Mosby, Co St Louis, 1977.

Blaylock RL. Concomitant Injuries: Diagnosis and Treatment. In,

Irby WB ( Ed), Trauma And Concomitant Problems: Evaluation and

Treatment. CV Mosby, Co St Louis, 1979

Blaylock RL. Facial Pain: Differential Diagnosis and Treatment.

In, Irby WB ( Ed) Recent Advances in Oral Surgery, Vol III, CV

Mosby, Co, St Louis, 1979.

Blaylock RL. Multiple Sclerosis: A Patient Care Book. Pritchert

& Hull Assoc, 1988

Blaylock, RL. Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills. Health Press,

Inc Sante Fe, NM, 1994.

Blaylock RL. Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills (updated edition

in softback) Health Press, Santa Fe, 1997.

Blaylock RL. Health and Nutrition Secrets That Can Save Your Life.

Health Press, 2003.

Blaylock RL. Natural Strategies for Cancer Patients. Kensington

Press, 2003.

Strunecka A, Blaylock RL. Cellular and Molecular Mechanism of Autism

Spectrum Disorders. Bentham Publishing 2010 (ebook)

Blaylock RL. Wrote forward to Never Be Fat Again, by

Francis

Blaylock RL- Wrote Forward to- Treating Epilepsy Naturally by

A. Murphey

Blaylock RL. Wrote Forward to –Natural Vet’s Guide to Preventing

and Treating Cancer in Dogs. By Messonnier

Blaylock RL- wrote forward to – Vaccine Safety by Neil Z.

, 2009

Blaylock RL. Wrote forward to Stop Alzheimer’s Now by Bruce Fife.

, Piccadilly Press, 2011

Blaylock RL­Chapter in Knockout by Suzanne Somers, Crown

Publisher, NY 2009

Blaylock RL. Chapter in Breakthrough by Suzanne Somers, Crown

Publishers, NY, 2008;

Professional Memberships:

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

American Nutraceutical Association

American College of Nutrition

Life Extension Foundation

National Health Federation

International and American Association of Clinical Nutritionists

Lecturer for Foundation for Anti-aging and Regeneration Fellowships.

Module VII.

Showing 2 comments

_Siegel

One of the several elephants in this crowded room is that the reported

cases of serious adverse vaccine reactions are only the tip of the

iceberg. The most powerful tool we have to fully evaluate vaccine risk is

VAERS, and it is dysfunctional - while the reported cases are indicative

of the nature of vaccine damage, they do not reflect its pervasiveness,

for it is egregiously unused, with estimates of the number of actual

serious reactions reported as low as 1%. The simple fact that we don't

know should be a most worrisome aspect, for any parent.

Truly, there is no way the vaccine industry can supply potential

vaccinees accurate risk information, for either clinical trial or

post-licensure use - even if they were to make even a half-hearted

attempt to do so, which they do not. Moreover, even if they knew the true

probability of vaccine damage, it is not their privilege to determine

what level of risk is acceptable in declaring vaccines safe; that

responsibility and authority belongs to the parent.

Like Reply 2 weeks ago

1 Like

bonan1 Collapse

They inject you and feed you the TOXINS. Then mother and father pass on

the toxic chemicals through the female egg and sperm. Now the fetus is

soaking in a stew of chemicals, including mercury, gasoline byproducts

and pesticides. The Environmental Working Group did a tests of 10 samples

of the Placenta Cord-blood taken by the American Red Cross. They found an

average of 287 contaminants in the blood, including mercury, fire

retardants, pesticides and the Teflon chemical PFOA.

Now get this “Of the 287 chemicals we detected in umbilical cord-blood,

we know that 180 cause cancer in humans or animals, 217 are toxic to the

brain and nervous system, and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal

development in animal tests,” the report said. Blood tests did not show

how the chemicals got into the mothers’ bodies.

This does not include vaccines that are loaded with huge amounts of

Toxins like Formaldehyde, Aluminum, Polysorbate 80, Mercury, Lead. Never

have the cummulative effects of all vaccine ingredients have been tested

and they keep on adding more vaccines to the CDC vaccine schedule.

It is all about we the parents and consumers having the freedom and the

knowledge to choose.

Wakeupgethealthy.com