Re: was vaccinations and is now vaccinations vs. homeopathy

[Guest guest]

pam wrote:

>

> I emailed a girlfriend w/ a newborn some info on mercury in

> vaccines/shots in general. She said her pediatician told her they

> stopped putting that in shots/vaccines etc. years ago.

> Does anyone have any supporting/current evidence from a reliable

> source about this?

> Pam

==========================

Well to an extent this is somewhat true. However, it has only been since

the late 90's that this has begun to occur. It is occurring quite slowly

too I might add. There are many vaccines now that are touted as being

thimerosol free but in actuality they aren't. All that has happened is

that they have removed the mercury that was in there, but as they cannot

remove all of it, there is a tad left that the CDC says is totally

harmless. I believe it is something like .3mcg or something. In my

opinion no amount of mercury injected into the human body is harmless. I

don't believe that any vaccination is harmless as it is an invasive

therapy. There are always risks involved with any invasive therapy.

There are much better ways to providing protection for your children via

homeopathy. Here is a long read on vaccinations and using homeopathy

instead.

VACCINATION: RISKS AND ALTERNATIVES

27th Jul 2003

I guess the question of vaccination and immunization doesn't really

occur to us until we have children. Certainly, this was the case for me.

Now that I have four children it is a very serious question, which I

have researched and would like to share with you some of my notes and

thoughts.

We are led to believe by the medical dictorates and the media that

immunization is a safe, scientific procedure, which protects and

safeguards health. However, there is evidence that much immunization is

not safe in the short term; that it offers far less protection than

might be imagined, and that the long-term effects of certain forms of

immunization may constitute a major health hazard.

The argument is that vaccination will provide protection against

infectious disease without the disadvantage of suffering its distressing

symptoms and possible residual effects.

*ACTUAL DISEASE TRENDS*

One of the most common claims made by advocates of routine vaccination

is that the procedure is responsible for eliminating common infectious

diseases from communities that have been well vaccinated. This argument

is not supported by information compiled from official Government

figures obtained directly from the Health Departments of the United

States, Great Britain, and Australia for the following infectious diseases:

Whooping cough, Measles, Poliomyelitis, Tetanus and Diphtheria. If one

where to examine these figures and diagrams, it is quite clear that the

deaths from these diseases were virtually eliminated BEFORE vaccination

programmes were introduced. The downward trend did continue after the

vaccinations were introduced, but the trend was on the down path anyway.

Certainly, it cannot be claimed that vaccination has been responsible

for the elimination of infectious diseases, the credit for which must be

largely attributed to improved sanitation and waste disposal, personal

hygiene and nursing care, and the reduction of severe nutritional

diseases in the countries considered.

*ROUTINE VACCINATION - A SUMMARY OF RISKS*

As one reads the relevant literature on vaccination risks based on

scientific research, it is clear that anyone who says vaccination is a

totally safe and effective procedure is either a fool or a liar - and

probably both. Pharmaceutical lobby groups fall directly into this

category of people.

Dr. Coulter and Dr. Fisher have thoroughly and accurately researched and

documented the risks of the Triple Antigen vaccine. They list fourteen

significant short term side effects of the DPT vaccine, which can also

apply to other vaccines too:

1. Skin reactions

2. Fever

3. Vomiting and diarrhoea

4. Cough, runny nose, ear infection

5. High pitched screaming, persistent crying

6. Collapse or shock-like episodes

7. Excessive sleepiness

8. Seizure disorders - convulsions, Epilepsy

9. Infantile spasms

10. Loss of muscle control

11. Inflammation of the brain

12. Blood disorders - Thrombocytopenia, Hemolytic Anaemia

13. Diabetes and Hypoglycaemia

14. Death and Sudden Death Syndrome (SIDS)

In addition to these short-term side effects, Coulter and Fisher list

three major areas of possible long term damage, including:

1. severe neurological damage

2. brain damage, learning disabilities, and hyperactivity

3. allergy and hypersensitivity

Possibly the most disturbing aspect of their book is the number of

reported case histories where doctors administering vaccines completely

ignored patients' previous reactions to vaccination, in some cases

resulting in death. This further reinforces that ultimately the parents

are responsible for their children's health; ignorance is not inductive

to good parenting.

Other researchers have shown that children who received the pertussis

vaccine were 5.43 times more likely to develop asthma in later years,

over twice as likely to have ear infections, and significantly more

likely to spend longer periods in hospital than those who had not

received the vaccine. Thus, clear evidence is emerging of a long term

weakening of the immune system due to vaccination.

Dr. Gallo, the US expert who first identified the AIDS virus,

raised the possibility between the spread of AIDS in Central Africa and

the World Health Organization's (WHO) Smallpox vaccination campaign (see

HERE for more information). WHO figures show that the greatest spread of

the HIV infection coincides with the areas receiving the most intense

vaccination programmes. This may also explain why the disease in Africa

is more evenly spread between males and females than in the West.

Dr. Archie Kalokerinos and Glenn Dettman, Ph.D. undertook one of the

most important pieces of research regarding vaccination programmes, in

their work with aboriginal children in Australia. Aboriginal infant

death rates had reached an unprecedented level of up to 500 out of every

1,000 babies. The death rates had increased dramatically during the

early 1970's. The areas Minister of Interior called in Dr. Kalokerinos

who began to investigate. He discovered that herd immunity, without

prior examination, was resulting in babies dying due to being

vaccininated when they were severely nutritionally undernourished or had

a cold or infection.

Summaries of the long-term side effects are as follows:

1. Severe neurological damage

2. Brain damage

3. Allergy and hypersensitivity

4. General damage to the immune system

5. Slow viruses

6. Genetic abnormalities - " Jumping Gene " phenomenon

7. Viral transference

8. Trigger mechanism for immune system diseases

9. Dynamic (miasmic) changes

I have personally seen a number of parents who brought their children to

me with similar problems (ADD, Autism, Autistic symptoms, cognitive

difficulties, etc.), reporting a " sudden change " just after vaccination.

All these children tested positive on the VEGA bio-dermal screening for

" vaccination stress. "

*HOW EFFECTIVE ARE VACCINATIONS?*

It would be nice to think that vaccinations were 100% effective, but the

research shows otherwise. Studies measuring " secondary attack rates " -

the percentage of other family members infected as a result of definite

exposure to a family member with Whooping Cough showed that the efficacy

of the vaccine ranged between 59.6 to 80.5%.

Professor of Glasgow University, UK, head of Community Medicine,

states that in 1974/5, and 1978/9, outbreaks in the UK, and in 1974 in

the outbreaks in the USA and Canada, the proportion of children

developing whooping cough who had been fully vaccinated was between 30

and 50 per cent. Dr. goes on to conclude that the risks of

vaccination to new born babies are as great as those of actually

catching the disease itself.

In 1993, Japanese health authorities discontinued the use of the MMR

vaccine. One reason was that the vaccine was causing Mumps in

recipients. Initially, side effects from the vaccine were predicated as

1 in 100-200,000, but in practice, however, reactions were found to be

frequent as 1 in 300.

and others examined an outbreak of Measles and found that the

MMR vaccine was not only ineffective, but increased the severity of the

disease. " Symptoms were equally common among immunised and non-immunised

subjects. However, significantly more immunised boys than non-immunised

boys reported fever, rash, joint symptoms and headache.

*SUMMARY OF PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH ROUTINE VACCINATION*

There are three basic flaws in the theory and practice of vaccination:

1. The primary cause of disease is not antigenic since not all

unvaccinated or previously unexposed people become infected when

similarly exposed to an identical antigen. The disease initially results

from a sensitivity, which causes inability to cope with invading

antigens. This raises the question regarding why some people have

natural immunity while others do not. Many other factors are involved in

immunity, including genetic characteristics, placental transfer,

breastfeeding, as well as individual health, nutritional status, and

emotional response to stress.

2. Injections of antigens do not necessarily produce the same results in

all individuals, and exceptions can be fatal. At best, these injections

increase toxins in the body, which may cause some of the many side

effects associated with vaccination. These side effects are aggravated

by the relatively massive doses of antigen administered compared to

natural exposure, plus chemicals such as Aluminium Phosphate and

Thimersol used in the vaccines, as well as the fact that the injected

material enters the bloodstream almost directly, bypassing the outer or

primary immunological defences. In addition, the protection given by

injected antigens is usually temporary, whereas natural exposure to

infectious diseases virus generally produces permanent immunity.

3. Repeated injections of antigens tend to both sensitise the recipient

to the disease and destroy the vitality of the immune system on a number

of levels. This has been scientifically established, as noted in

references to various medical practitioners and researchers in previous

sections. Natural Therapists believe that damage also occurs on the

inner, dynamic level from which an individual derives their entire

physical and emotional health.

*PREVENTION IS BETTER THAN CURE!*

The best position that advocates of routine vaccination can take is that

the program offers some protection and that the known side effects (and

yet to be demonstrated side effects) are worth the risk. Since this is

obviously not an optimum position, the question: " Is there a genuine

alternative available? " must be asked. And the answer is a definite YES.

As parents, the best protection you can give your child involves:

1. Ensuring adequate ongoing nutrition for yourselves and your children,

including a balanced diet, no more than a moderate alcohol intake, and

no smoking.

2. Breastfeeding, where possible, to around nine to twelve months

providing an emotionally stable home environment for your children

3. Ensuring safe and effective treatment if an infectious disease is

contracted [Dr Shepherd wrote that, during local outbreaks of disease,

conventional practitioners would complain that she always had the " easy "

cases; her reply was that her method of treatment - Homoeopathy - made

her cases appear easy].

4. Constitutional treatment that will elevate general vitality and

immune competence.

If desired, parents may support the above measures with Homoeopathic

medicines as preventatives against these infectious diseases.

*THE ALTERNATIVES TO ROUTINE VACCINATION*

Vaccines are more toxic than homoeopathic medicines: This point is

generally accepted; in fact, many doctors criticize homoeopathic

substances because they do not contain any molecules of the original

substance used. They say that " nothing " is there, so " nothing " cannot be

toxic. Vaccines, however, contain a number of toxic substances. For

example, the triple antigen vaccine contains molecules of diseased

material modified with formaldehyde together with an adjuvant (usually

aluminium phosphate) and a preservative (usually thimersol, a

mercury-based chemical).

The vaccine efficacy of 75-95% may be compared to the single measure of

effectiveness of the homoeopathic method derived from the 1994 analysis,

being 89%, as confirmed by the latest ten-year survey (1997). This

figure not only gives a general indication of efficacy, but (more

importantly) supports the historical experience with the homoeopathic

method over the last 200 years.

Homoeopathy rapidly gained popular acceptance when it proved successful

in treating the infectious diseases sweeping through Europe, such as:

1. In 1813, Hahnemann achieved a success rate of 100% in treating 183

Typhus patients; at that time Typhus was considered incurable.

2. Scarlet Fever was effectively both treated and prevented by Hahnemann

using the remedy, Belladonna.

3. During the European Cholera epidemics of the mid-1800's, the death

rate was between 54% and 90%, while the rate amongst persons who

received Homoeopathic treatment was between 5% and 16%.

4. During the 1918-1920 Influenza (Spanish Flu) epidemic in the United

States, the mortality rate was around 30%; the mortality rate among

individuals treated Homoeopathically was less than 1%.

*A SPECIFIC HOMEOPATHIC PROGRAM*

We will now examine the programs developed by the Issac Golden over the

last ten years, who wrote the excellent and comprehensive book

" Vaccination? A Review Of Risks and Alternatives. " As stressed

previously, no program, orthodox or alternative, can be guaranteed 100%

effective, but it is essential that we establish a reliable guide to the

relative effectiveness of vaccination and homoeoprophylaxis.

It must be emphasised that the methodology of disease prevention and the

remedies used in the kit are not new, having been used for nearly 200

years. However, Issac Golden, following extensive research in the

Homoeopathic literature, and subsequent personal clinical experience

developed the particular programs.

*BASIC PROGRAM FOR PROTECTION FROM BIRTH (1993)*

AGE GIVEN REMEDY

1 month Pertussin(200)

2 months Pertussin*

4 months Lathyrus Sativus(200)

5 months Lathyrus Sativus

6 months Haemophilis (M)

7 months Haemophilis* Sativus*

9 months Diphtherinum(200)

10 months Diptherinum*

11 months Tetanus Toxin(200)

12 months Tetanus Toxin*

13 months Pertussin*

14 months Morbillinum(200)

15 months Morbillinum*

16 months Lathyrus Sativus*

17 months Haemophilis*

19 months Parotidinum(200)

20 months Parotidinum*

22 months Diphtherinum*

24 months Tetanus Toxin*

26 months Lathyrus

28 months Haemophilis*

32 months Pertussin*

41 months Tetanus Toxin*

46 months Haemophilis*

50 months Diphtherinum*

54 months Morbillinum*

56 months Lathyrus Sativus*

60 months Tetanus Toxin*

----------------------------------------------------------------

* Triple doses to be used

Note: The disease-remedy relationship (including possible substitutions)

is as follows:

DISEASE NOSODE SUBSTITUTE REMEDY

-------------------------------------------------------------

Whooping Cough Pertussin Cuprum Met. Diphtheria Diphtherinum Gelsemium

Measles Morbillinum Pulsatilla Poliomyelitis Lathyrus Sativus Lathyrus

Sativus Tetanus Tetanus Toxin Hypericum Mumps Parotidinum Rhus Tox

Rubella(German Measles) Rubella Pulsatilla Hib Haemophilis Arsenicum Album.

-------------------------------------------------------------

A supplementary program has also been developed, which may be used in

conjunction with or instead of the basic program.

The reason for using both programs is that, although successful use of

the remedies in the basic program has been established, no system of

protection can be guarantied 100% effective. In the event of definite

exposure to a source of infection, parents may wish to give their child

additional protection at that time. These two programs comprise the

third Homoeopathic Kit, which was first released in 1993.

Supplementary Program for Protection When Exposed to Infection

DISEASE ADMINISTRATION OF REMEDY

-----------------------------------------------------------------

* Whooping Cough- Pertussin (200c) twice weekly for 3 weeks after

contact with carrier.

* Tetanus- Three doses of Ledum Palustre (30c) daily for 3 days after

breakage of skin.

* Diphtheria - One dose of Diphtherium (200c) weekly for 4-6 weeks

during an outbreak of Diphtheria.

* Measles- Morbillinum (200c) weekly during an outbreak, for 3 weeks.

* Mumps- Parotidinum(200c) weekly during an epidemic or after contact

with carrier.

* Rubella - As natural immunity is the most certain, it is better to

allow (German Measles) healthy children to acquire this mild disease. If

protection is required, the Rubella Nosode (200c) or Pulsatilla (30c)

may be used twice weekly for two weeks.

* Haemophilia - Haemophilis (1M) every 2 weeks during an outbreak (Hib).

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Most of the Homoeopathic medicines listed above are called 'nosodes'.

These are potentised preparations of diseased substances; for example,

the nosode Pertussin is the potentised expectoration from a patient with

Whooping Cough. However, it is not essential to use Nosodes.

As discussed previously, when a person acquires immunity through natural

exposure to a virus, the actual quantity of virus is minute, yet the

change is effected on a dynamic level, and subsequently on the physical

level. In Homoeopathy, the effect is similar in that changes initially

occur on a dynamic level. The Homoeopathic remedy, Pertussin, is the

virus potentised to a purely dynamic and non-material degree. Unlike

vaccines, therefore, Homoeopathic preparations copy the processes of

Nature, with similar results in practice. Further, it must be stressed

that vaccination is not a type of Homoeopathic (as has been suggested by

some).

We are using medicines of energy, not crude substances like those used

in vaccines. The remedies are selected using the Law of Similars. The

ignorance of such attacks is made more obvious considering that

Homoeopathic medicine is first derided because 'nothing is there', and

then criticised as being 'toxic'. Logical and scientific criticism indeed!

If the reader really wants to get to grips with this complex subject, I

will give a few of the references that I have used for this brief

newsletter. There are many further details and studies that I recommend

the parent or practitioner who truly wants to get to grips with vaccine

alternatives to read:

1. Issac Golden - Vaccination? A Review of Risks and Alternatives (5th

edition)

2. Leon Chaitow - Vaccination and Immunization: Dangers, Delusions and

Alternatives

Dr. J Georgiou, Ph.D.,D.Sc (A.M).,N.D.

drgeorge@...

--

Peace, love and light,

Don Quai

" Spirit sleeps in the mineral, breathes in the vegetable, dreams in the animal

and wakes in man. "

[Guest guest]

Thanks Don for this info (and the b-day wish)

Pam

----------

[Guest guest]

pam wrote:

>

> Thanks Don for this info (and the b-day wish)

> Pam

> ----------

;-)

--

Peace, love and light,

Don Quai

" Spirit sleeps in the mineral, breathes in the vegetable, dreams in the animal

and wakes in man. "