seems people often need to experience a bullet to the head before they will
believe bullets can be deadly…and then they rue the day they ignored
warnings about playing with loaded guns.
seems to hold a similar place. People ignore words of caution and roll up
their sleeves to get a flu shot. It seems they think getting a vaccine is
the same as taking a multivitamin, and equally as benign. But when serious
adverse events occur, such as Guillain-Barre paralysis, a seizure disorder
or even a death, a jolt of reality lays bare just how damaging a “simple
vaccine” can be. The stranglehold of fear, perpetrated by those in
white coats and by the medical bureaucrats in Washington DC who take their
marching orders from pharma, is working hard to choke rationally thinking
adults into submission. I get emails almost every day that say something
like, “I bought your DVDs and your books…but I have a question:
Should I get a flu shot?” WHAT?!! My mouth drops. I have to clear
my head and find a way to say, “No, you should not get the flu shot”,
being cautious to keep my tone void of sarcasm. That may seem harsh, but
in very turbulent times. Soft language and hand holding until people “get
it” is becoming increasingly more difficult.
in the business of waking people up to the hazards of vaccines certainly
has its ups and downs. A recent “up” was the public policy debate
held on November 10 at the University of Texas in Austin. Sponsored by the
Libertarian Longhorns, the Texas College Republicans and a few other Texas
health freedom groups, the discussion called, “Are Vaccine Mandates
Good or Bad for Public Health?” was open to the general public. Interest
in this timely topic was reflected by the standing-room only attendance
of the meeting. Speaking in support of vaccination and school mandates was
Tom Betz, MD, MPH, Director of Region 7 for the Texas Department of Health
Services. Several of his health department colleagues joined him in the
audience but chose not to join him on the stage. I had the pleasure of being
teamed with Dawn Richardson, President and Co-founder of PROVE (Parents
Requesting Open Vaccine Education) in Austin, Texas and the Directory of
State Advocacy for the National Vaccine Information Center in Vienna, Virginia.
Our presentation was mostly about opposition to vaccine mandates but we
were able to address our opposition to vaccines in general. Based on the
hundreds of comments we received, the debate (found all on YouTube) was
well received and enlightening for all.
three participants were given the questions to review prior to the debate.
There is so much to say about vaccines that preparation was important to
cover key points, almost as sound bites; only three short minutes were allowed
for each answer. Our very professional moderator, Dr. Donna Campbell, allowed
equal time for each side.
During the personal introductions, Dr. Campbell informed the audience that
the plan was to have two persons on each panel; but that Dr. Betz was the
only person from the Health Department who would agree to participate. Prior
to settling in on the stage, I had learned the reason why. Shaking Dr. Betz’
hand, I thanked him for joining the discussion. He returned the niceties
with a slight shrug, confessing that, “No one else wanted to do it.”
Surprised, I queried, “Why not? This is a great way to tell everyone
your message about vaccines.” My unspoken question was, “Why
didn’t the Health Department want to jump on the opportunity to bury
anti-vaccination ‘pseudo-science’, as you call it, once and
for all, in front of everyone?” He quietly replied, “We’ve
done these types of programs before; they never go well.”
seems pro-vaccine arguments are being soundly defeated, time after time.
And the real vaccine “pseudo-science” is being exposed for the
rhetoric it is: factoids crafted by public health officials from the WHO
and the CDC, and then regurgitated by under-informed medical professionals
to a naïve public. Funny how medical bureaucrats and doctors are considered
the “experts” when it is strangely obvious they don’t
understand – and probably don’t even read – their own
The Austin debate was the next important step in exposing that the “science
of vaccination” isn’t so scientific after all. Vaccination has
been accepted as safe, effective and protective. The shots can be described
as a medical sacred cow, defined as “a medical procedure that is unreasonably
immune to criticism.” Doctors and patients who question vaccines are
ridiculed and marginalized. It is heresy to suggest that the status quo
adverse events are considered “rare,” so when reactions occur,
steps are taken to negate the association to the vaccine. Patients are discredited,
parents are dismissed. Doctors subject very ill persons to thousands of
dollars of inconclusive medical tests, rather than to simply acknowledge
– and rightfully assign causality – to the vaccine. When a person
reacts to penicillin or Paxil or any other drug, it’s it is blamed
on the drug? Not so with vaccines.
to Austin was an upbeat offset to other particularly disturbing news reported
over the last few weeks about the H1N1, swine flu vaccine:
• Several schools have vaccinated children without parental consent.
• The growing list of reported miscarriages.
• A teen athlete who is now crippled.
• Two students and a teacher in China who died hours after getting
• Children having hallucinations, and then committing suicide, after
• The strange and virulent outbreak in the Ukraine, where the WHO
has been deafeningly silent about its findings – but knows that whatever
is the cause, vaccination is the answer.
seem to regard germs the same way we think about terrorism: Random attacks
that can be deadly. All parties who promote vaccination hawk this view,
particularly those pushing both types of flu shots. Tens of millions have
been spent in the US on national advertising campaigns, and even Sesame
Street merchandising, to convince us that flu shots are necessary to keep
us well – and keep us alive. But perhaps we have it backwards. Bugs
can cause random, mostly benign attacks, particularly among the healthy.
But random, “deadly” attacks, with health consequences that
can show up years later? I’d worry more about the vaccines. After
200 years, with our many advances in science and medicine, you would think
that someone could develop a method to protect babies and adults from infectious
disease other than injecting them with animal cells, stray viruses, heavy
metals and toxic chemicals. Why do we call this health and protection? Until
my dying breath I will never understand why people resolutely defend –
and demand – the right to inject themselves and their children with
these risky potients. For those who meet resistance when trying to warn
family and friends of vaccine risks, the only thing to do, really, is to
keep spreading the word. Don’t be discouraged. You never know who
is listening and you never know when the seeds will sprout. Focus on those
who are waking up and gratefully support them. The rest, well sadly, they
may have to find out the hard way what it feels like to get hit by that