Vaccine
Rationale... Is It Rational?
The
purported rationale for vaccination, which
is virtually forced routinely on children,
is to prevent infectious "diseases."
However, if we delve into history, concepts,
definitions, and alternatives, this rationale
becomes highly questionable at best. A major
question is the definition of "a disease.""
In
the mid-19th century, tiny life forms we call
bacteria and fungi (yeast) were being discovered.
Wine had been made for millennia, but what
was doing it was not understood. Similarly,
it was found that bacteria were associated
with disease. Louis Pasteur is credited with
this discovery, and, with the help of the
French Academy of Science and some friends
in high places, he gospelized and institutionalized
the notion that specific bacteria cause specific
diseases. It became known as the germ theory
of disease.
Pasteur's contemporary Antoine Béchamp
had a different slant. A brilliant scientist
the likes of Galileo, Béchamp also
conflicted with vested interest, earning him
historical obscurity. Holding three degrees,
three professorships, and earning several
honors and awards, Béchamp was one
of the great scientists in history—of
the caliber of a Lavoisier. It was he who
first demonstrated "the germs of the
air," not Louis Pasteur (he was also
first to identify blood as a tissue, not a
liquid).
Béchamp
said that it does appear as though bacteria
cause disease, as Pasteur, who plagiarized
his work, insisted. But the whole truth, Béchamp
said, is that the bacteria are opportunists,
not the prime movers. In other words, disease
'causes' bacteria, or more precisely, for
germs to take hold, the body's "terrain"
(inner environment) must be unbalanced. The
mere presence of the germ is not enough. Pasteur
admitted this on his deathbed, but it was
too late—for science and the sickened
world that would result.
Béchamp
also said that it isn't the primary purpose
of these organisms to produce diseases, but
to recycle the body upon death and return
it to the earth.This was a profound insight.
The
'condition' of which Béchamp spoke
is the crux of the whole matter. He referred
to the inner body as a "terrain."
He was speaking about health in terms of ecology—as
in an environment (knowlege of immune function
had not yet developed). Common, specific terrain
imbalances, such as toxicity, eventually appear
as diseases.
Béchamp
saw bacterial proliferation as a symptom, not the cause, of disease.
This makes all the difference, because the approach based upon
the germ-theory half-truth targets symptoms, neglecting underlying
conditions. This crucial subtlety also underlies the concept of
what 'a disease' is, and thus conventional medicine's approach
and methods. For more on this, click here.
The
Big Lie
Béchamp's work led him to conclude
that the doctrine of specific diseases was
flawed. Briefly, there is no such thing as
a specific disease—this is a conventional
construct designed to maximize profit in the
system, not wellness. There are specific disease
conditions, or imbalances that lead to what
are called diseases. Diseases are more accurately
called symptom pictures, or symptomologies.
By mis-defining
"disease," the profit-motivated system can make it look
like its methods are effective, or there's a so-called cure, and
at the same time perpetuate illness for future profit by ignoring
inner ecology, or terrain imbalance (and often worsening it).
Quite the setup.
This
impacts vaccination in the following way:
what they're vaccinating you against is a
symptomology, not the cause of what's called
the disease. Even if the vaccine works to
prevent the appearance of the targeted symptoms
(and they sometimes do), it is most likely
to seriously weaken the body against other
acute and chronic symptomologies. This
puts the lie to the statement that the benefits
outweigh the risk.
Research
in this area—that is, the connection of vaccination to non-targeted
symptoms—has been stymied by money/power control. This is
especially so with regard to long-term and chronic effects, as
opposed to immediate reactions/damage. The latter is what's implied
in "the benefits outweigh the risk." In other
words, the biggest part of that story has been omitted.
However,
a lot of evidence exists in the medical literature, and the research
venue is opening up. Much of that evidence, however, is simply
being ignored. And people's lives are being devastated by a Frankensteinian
assault on wellness backed up by oppressive, anti-American rules
and laws that make vaccination routine, indiscriminate, and virtually
mandatory. There is no bigger insult to freedom, and not many
greater threats to health.
The
Other Big Lie
We are told that the "immune system"
is the "first line of defense" in
the body. Again, this is clever language.
First of all, there's no such thing anatomically
as an immune system. There is immune function
in a number of body systems. One of these
is the lymphatic system, which produces specific
immunity.
Specific
immunity means that resistance is directed
toward a specific germ (or toxin), and that
the molecule or cell that is designed for
the purpose has no other application. Specific
immunity has two divisions called cell-mediated
immunity; and humoral, or antibody-mediated
immunity (the most 'famous' one, which vaccines
target).
We
are told that specific function is the 'first
line of defense.' However, this is not logical,
because the specific division has to 'learn'
a germ first to be optimally effective. It
is, in fact, a backup system, so that by the
time it has to kick in, the horse is out of
the barn and we get sick anyway.
A
first-time encounter with a germ elicits a
moderate response which then 'records' that
germ in the cells in case it shows up again.
The second response, known as 'anamnestic,'
is much more vigorous, and will nip it in
the bud—which is why if you've had measles,
you don't get it again. Does it make sense
that our first line of defense would leave
us life-threateningly susceptible?
The
first line of defense in immunity is non-specific,
because it responds to everything and is our
elegant janitorial service (and recycling
department) that keeps the house clean. With
regard to germs, however, the first line of
defense, as noted above, is the more general
condition of the body's inner ecology, or
terrain. The vaccine pretends to mimick a
natural infection that has been met with specific
response.
Because
critical misconceptions that underlie conventional medicine
are not mere mistakes, but are contrivances, I 'affectionately'
call it 'conmedicine' for short. Under
the Elite umbrella, however, many industries conspire to compromise
health. If you think there's no malfeasance here, check out
this story about carcinogens
in baby products.
The
assault on babies is further documented in Excitotoxins:
The Taste That Kills by Russel Blaylock, MD. He tells how
Gerber was at one time putting MSG in 'Gerber Graduates' baby
food under guise of "hydrolized protein." Remember
when MSG was banned? Too bad we can't send ol' Jim Traficant
over there to give a few folks some kicked nuts. We could call
that Pulverized Scrotein, and use it as a dairy substitute in
the boardroom coffee.
Vaccine
Safety?
When I say, "No vaccine has ever been proven safe
and effective," sometimes the response is that I'm mistaken,
because safety studies have been done. Then the medical literature
is quoted. While it is true that studies have been done, the quality
of those studies is in serious question.
One
tactic used in "science" is to publish
an article with a desired conclusion, and
then refer to it endlessly in the literature.
By the time further analysis shows it to be
junk, it makes no practical difference, because
the article and its references have become
entrenched as "what is known." Here
is an
example of what constitutes "vaccine research"
(lies in bold).
In December
2002, the FDA approved GlaxoSmithKline's Pediarix®
for diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough, hepatitis
B, and polio...claiming "there were no vaccine-related
serious adverse events...after any vaccine
dose." But upon reading the study we learn:
"Two subjects withdrew from the study because
of serious adverse events that were determined
by the safety monitor to be unrelated to vaccination.
One subject...was diagnosed with a seizure
disorder 14 days after the first immunization.
Another subject...neuroblastoma detected 6
weeks after the first immunization. Six others
[were]...hospitalized for brochiolitis/pneumonia
(4), meningitis (1) and apnea (1) but this
was also determined to be unrelated to
vaccination." Pediarix® contains formaldehyde,
glutaraldehyde, 2-Phenoxyethanol (antifreeze),
Thimerosal (mercury), monkey cells, neomycin,
polymyxin B, polysorbate 80, and yeast protein.
Sylvia
H. Yeh, MD. et al. Safety and immunogenicity
of a pentavalent diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis,
hepatitis B and polio combination vaccine
in infants. Ped Inf. Dis. J. 2001;20:973-980.
Based on
this "research" the FDA deems Pediarix safe.
What do you think?
The truth is, with enough
money, you can buy any set of conclusions you want. Who
has the most money for this? This fact has come much more to light
due to the abuses of science by the W. Bush administration.
Statistical
Gymnastics—Gold Medal for Conmedicine
What
is not told is that infectious epidemics run
a natural course. They arrive, peak, and burn
out—all by themselves, with
no help from Dr. Frankenstein. Vaccines are
generally introduced shortly after the peak
in statistics, which makes it look like the
vaccine is working. In
her milestone book, Immunization: The
Reality Behind the Myth, Walene James
tells the story of polio. I love this one.
During
the rise of the big polio epidemic in the
U.S., doctors were being payed ($25) for every
polio diagnosis they reported. It was known,
however that polio would resolve itself in
30 days in 50% of cases. So, while the "disease"
was on the rise, the rule was the person had
to have the symptoms for a week. Once it peaked,
however, and the vax was introduced, the period
of presentation was increased to more than
30 days. So if you had it and it went away,
you never had it.
Another
trick used in the polio scam was to include
a "cousin" disease in the diagnosis,
called aseptic meningitis. Calling this polio
naturally boosted incidence. After vax intro,
aseptic meningitis was removed, causing a
decline in incidence. You have to hand it
to them.
In
the book is also the story of a doctor who
told the people of his town that if they wanted
to avoid polio in the coming summer to keep
sugar away from the kids. Incidence dropped
dramatically in that area.
Best
way to get rid of a disease - stop reporting
it.
Chickenpox Party:
Developing Natural Varicella Immunity
By
Brian Wimer, Jacquelyn L. Emm and Deren Bader.
Mothering magazine, Issue 112, Jan/Feb
2004.
From 1987
to 1997, the reported national incidence of
chickenpox decreased 58%. (2) In fact, doctors
are no longer required to report chickenpox
cases to local and state health departments—which
just might have some influence on optimistically
low chickenpox statistics. 'The decrease from
1987 to 1997 corresponded with decreases in
the number of states reporting to NNDSS and
the completeness of reporting,' admits the
CDC. Areas reporting dropped from 46 states
and DC in 1972 to 20 states in 1997. What
declined was the reporting, not the incidence
of chickenpox. Today, the CDC actively watches
only three US sites for varicella: West Philadelphia
, PA; Travis County, TX; and Antelope Valley
, LA, CA (3) Two years after vaccine licensure,
in the 14 states that maintained continuous
reporting of varicella, the incidence remained
completely unchanged, at 107.0 cases per 100,000
population. (4)
See the rest (including the references) here.
Dangers
of Vaccines
With the enactment of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act
of 1986, the US government (and medicine), acknowledged (only
a century late) that, at least, immediate reaction/damage does
occur. VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, was
established in 1991 and was designed to compensate families of
damaged kids. There are at least two big problems with this setup.
1) The money for it comes,
not from drug companies, but from the people's
pockets, and the drug companies are off the
liability hook (even when they cook up especially
nasty batches called "Hot Lots."
2) Many adverse
events go unreported because they're unrecognized,
and all long-term effects never even enter
the picture.
The
long-term effects of vaccines are chronic
disturbance of immune function, the nervous
system, and organs. Here is a short list of
symptomologies: allergies, asthma, developmental
disorders, ADD/ADHD, cancer, MS, cerebral
palsy, diabetes, epilepsy/seizures, stuttering,
and eating disorders. One of the worst ballooning
epidemics is autism. Although autism and other
maladies may have various causes, the common
denominator is toxicity.
The
major factor underlying the adverse effects
of vaccines is toxic brain encephalitis, or
brain inflammation, which can lead to many
symptoms. Another important factor is that
a vaccine can push a baby with a marginal
supply of vitamin C into a condition called
subclinical scurvy. This also leads to many
metabolic disturbances, mostly associated
with short-term reactions, including death.
Most
toxicity study is bogus, because virtually NEVER is the potential
synergy of the numerous poisons simultaneously passing into, through,
and lodging in, biosystems taken into account. The allowed
amount of 'this poison' is safe. This amount of 'that poison'
is safe, and so on disintegratedly, ad infinitum, or a bit more
accurately, ad the 80,000 or so virtually unregulated chemicals
now infused into our inner and outer environments. Not to mention
the ever growing background of radioactive environmental poisoning
bestowed upon us by the insane people promoting the nuclear power
and weapons industry. Nor, apparently, is the completely unpredictable
and greatly varying ability of human babies to eliminate toxins
taken into account.
So
if you begin to understand the Elite and the malfeasance of the
Elite-driven medical system, you can understand the push for vaccination
with this potentiation of profitable research and treatment: The
CDC recommends that "healthy" children get injected
with at least 45 vaccines by the age of six months. And by the
time of entering school at 4-6 years of age, at least 74 vaccines!
The irony is that whether the child is healthy or
not, he has no need for vaccine.
To
this enormous biological insult, is frequently
added the sickening encore of flu
vaccine.
Unjustified
fear of childhood 'diseases' is used as a
tactic to force compliance. And of course,
people aren't being told there's a much better
way to ward off, or minimize the effects of,
childhood disease. First, it is highly unlikely
that one of these infectious symptomologies,
such as diphtheria or pertussis will take
hold in a truly healthy child. Secondly, if
it does, it will not be damaging or life-threatening,
and will even strengthen the child, as challenges
tend to do.
If
the child is unhealthy, vaccines will not
help anyway (keep in mind what was said about
merely preventing the appearance of targeted
symptoms, while increasing susceptibility
to others).
Let's
look briefly at how to address childhood disease,
or any disease, rationally and effectively.
As noted above, it's mainly a question of
inner ecology, or terrain balance. Think of
seeds being unable to germinate on asphalt,
or trying to grow palm trees in Alaska (although
this may become less far fetched if humanity
continues on its headlong destruction of planetary
ecology with global warming).
The
best way to prevent childhood disease is for healthy mothers to
breastfeed their infants (of course, our toxic way of life has
thrown a monkey wrench into this holy act, because toxified
milk is downloaded to the infant. Unfortunately, there's more
knowledge required to get a driver's license than to have a baby.
Anyone can do it, no matter how ill-informed about health. And
even very unhealthy women can conceive. It's the lack of knowledge
about health, instilled in large part by the influence of flawed
medical philosophy on our culture, that results in the threat
to newborns of unhealthy mothers.
This
article is not intended to teach health, but
one of the most important factors is a full
complement of pro-life bacteria (probiotics)
in the intestinal tract and throughout the
body, which mother passes to baby. These
bacteria underlie a robust digestive system,
which, together with a strong immune-globulin
presence in mucosal tissue (linings of lungs
and GI tract) make up the 'first line of defense;'
and all this supports our inner, non-specific
balancing processes.
Vaccination
is NONSENSE. - End
Archive
of Editorial Letters
Page
Top
Just
Say NO to the Flu Vaccine
During
October and November, numerous reports usually
say we're about to have a nasty flu epidemic.
There will be reports of possible school closings,
restricted air travel, and many. All of these
messages are fed to the mass media to scare
you into believing you need to get a flu shot.
Every
year, flu vaccine manufacturers earn a hefty
profit on the some 80-100 million vaccines
they manufacture. The entire industry has
become a cash cow for vaccine manufacturers
such as Chiron. The average cost per dose
is $10—$15. This means Chiron could stand
to add 1.5 billion dollars to their bottom
line every year by scaring the public into
mass inoculations.
Moreover,
the CDC and various government health facilities
help to perpetuate the farce on the American
public, mainly because they are populated
with people in the pharmas' pockets.
This
year, Chiron already reported in a CNN story
on September 29, 2004 that they have concerns
about the safety of their vaccine because
some batches were contaminated. This could
be good or bad news depending on one's perspective.
Since pharmas police themselves, I worry about
contamination not caught--not that an "uncontaminated"
vaccine isn't still poisonous enough.
The
good news is, Chiron lost up to 4 million doses for the 2004 season,
meaning that many escaped the toxic blast. The irony was, they
said they'd give what's left to those most at risk, such as infants
and the elderly—who also happen to be the most susceptible
to the harmful effects of vaccines.
There
are many reasons to not get a flu shot. For
one, let's check out the ingredients, taken
from the inserts that come with the vaccines.
Among others, they contain two extremely dangerous
chemicals: formaldehyde and mercury. Formaldehyde
(embalming fluid) is a known carcinogen, and
mercury is a known brain and neurological
poison. Mercury has been, or is being, removed
from most vaccines, but not the pediatric
flu vaccine, of all things.
These
chemicals can cause a strong damaging reaction
and may lead to the development of autoimmune
disorders such as Guillain-Barre syndrome,
a disease that resembles Multiple Sclerosis.
The
second reason to avoid flu vaccine is because it will not necessarily
protect you from the flu (even if it did, the health price is
too high). Every year the CDC recommends flu vaccine manufacturers
put in 3 viral strains they guess might be the most common infections
for the flu season. However, there are thousands of flu virus
possibilities every winter. Taking a flu vaccine is basically
a crap shoot. Also, officials frighten people with flu-death statistics,
but never tell you how many of those got the vaccine.
Health
officials at the CDC stated they had made a mistake in determining
the viral ingredients for the 2003-2004 vaccine, and it would
offer no protection for the flu virus that most people were contracting.
However, they still pushed people to get a flu shot. This made
no sense (except financially)!
The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
says babies under 2 who get the flu are more
likely to be hospitalized for flu complications
than older children. Last year's flu season
hit children hard; 152 died, most of them
under 5 years old. How many dead got the vaccine?
They never say.
And the final reason you don’t want a flu
shot is probably the most important reason.
If people pay attention to simple health principles,
such as internal cleansing and good nutirtion,
they won't be susceptible to flu or be levelled
by it if they get it. Not only that, but the
flu symptoms themselves are the body's way
of cleaning itself out. All that guck coming
out is good to get rid of, and most susceptibility
is due to being clogged up.
We
have a dynamic immune function with white
blood cells that can attack and fight off
the flu virus, so either you don’t get the
flu or you fight it off. If you do get the
flu, immune function becomes stronger and
you are the benefactor. Various studies have
shown that when we fight off infections using
our natural immunity, we are better protected
from other life-threatening scenarios such
as cancer.
In
order to keep immunity strong, we need the
friendly/symbiotic bacteria in our digestive
tract and mucous membranes. This crucial
internal population is assaulted constantly
in our society—for example, by chlorinated
municipal water supplies, medications, and
emotional stress. Thus, much better than vaccines
is a probiotic regimen and high-quality diet,
periodic internal cleansing, proper sleep,
and good exercise, along with lots of pure
water—up to a gallon a day.
There is still
another side to this story. Spin. Most of the people who are said
to have died from the flu actually contracted the flu secondarily
to another symptomology they were battling. The flu was acting
in an opportunistic way, and was not the sole reason for their
death. Statistics can be misleading!
NEW
(11/20/06) Dr. Sherri Tenpenny's article "Another
Flu Vaccine Push Coming Soon"
If
you would like further information on vaccines
in general, the flu vaccine, and why you might
want to SAY NO! you can visit the following
links:
Gemini
Press 
4
Or
Send S-mail: