Parents who choose not to vaccinate their children

Parents who choose not to vaccinate their children and protect them with vaccine exemption forms are often chastised and stereotyped for putting their own kids at risk. But what is even stranger than this assault on individual freedom and informed choice, is that these concerned parents are attacked for putting vaccinated children at risk.

These attacks are based on the theory of “herd immunity.” This hypothesis was plucked out of an old college textbook. It states that the more people are immune to an infectious agent, the less likely an immune-compromised individual is to come in contact with it. In other words herd immunity serves as a human shield – a type of immunity – for “at-risk” individuals. But remember, it’s only a hypothesis.

When outbreaks arise among children, health officials are quick to state that it’s due to a breakdown in ‘herd immunity.‘ Doctors parrot it too, without even looking at the research. They say it’s happening more often nationwide as states make it easier for parents to opt out of vaccinations.

Like argumentative apes, pro-vaccine parents and their physicians start pounding their chest in favor of such statements. They use them to attack anti-vaccine parents, accusing them of “putting vaccinated kids at risk due to a breakdown in herd immunity.”

This is fuzzy logic. And it’s borderline stupid.

After all, if vaccines truly worked, then why would vaccinated kids be at risk?

…Plus, the spread of infection isn’t limited to coming into contact with another person! You can get sick without ever seeing another individual. Therefore, herd immunity is nothing more than a silly catch-phrase used to scare and bully parents into vaccinating their kids. Don’t fall for it parents, keep using the vaccine exemption forms to legally avoid them.
Parents Should Question Vaccine Safety and Effectiveness by Using Vaccine Exemption

Instead of using an unproven hypothesis to question parents who have opted out, pro-vaccine parents should be questioning the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. With dozens of vaccines being forced on the public, some healthy skepticism could go a long way toward raising a vibrantly healthy child.

My background as a medicinal chemist taught me to rely on proven research. I learned to be less sensitive to emotional arguments and more sensitive to facts supported by reproducibility. This is one of the main principles of the scientific method. It refers to the ability of a test or experiment to be accurately reproduced. As a parent, I have a responsibility to use my training to make decisions for my family. Especially when it comes to potentially dangerous vaccinations.

In my own research, I have uncovered facts that every parent should be aware of. Here are three primary reasons why I have not and will not vaccinate my own children and why I’ve used vaccine exemption forms
for public school and more:

Reason #1: Vaccination Does Not Always Mean “Immunization”

Vaccines are purported to work by triggering the body’s natural immunity. By injecting weak or dead infectious agents through our skin, it’s believed that the body will create the appropriate immune defense. They are even called “immunizations.”

And while this idea is over two hundred years old, it’s not nearly as effective as the pharmaceutical companies, doctors and government agencies want you to believe.

At best, vaccines boost our defenses only temporarily. That’s because your immune system is programmed to recognize and attack invaders that come through the biological “front door.” That would be your nose, mouth and eyes. It doesn’t work properly when we shove infection into our body with a needle.

The World Health Organization (WHO) underscored this fact in their report titled, Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals. They wrote that, “Children under two years of age do not consistently develop immunity following vaccination.” Therefore, vaccines can fly “below the radar” of our immune system.

Not only does this weaken the immune system, it renders many vaccines ineffective.

And history proves this to be the case…

The Polio Vaccine

Polio is the most feared childhood illness. It has caused paralysis and death for much of human history. The world experienced a dramatic increase in polio around 1910. Epidemics became regular events. They were the driving force behind a great race toward the development of a polio vaccine. The vaccine was developed in 1953 and an oral version came soon after.

But the vaccines came too late. Thanks to better hygiene, sanitation and nutrition, the rates of polio infection had already plummeted as documented in my book, Over-The-Counter Natural Cures. And it’s a good thing, because both forms were a total failure. In fact, instead of preventing polio… they actually caused it!

Medical journals around the world have exposed this outcome. The Medical Journal of Australia discovered “the relation of prophylactic inoculations [polio vaccines] to the onset of poliomyelitis [polio]” as far back as 1951.

And the trend has continued…

In a 2007 article, entitled “Nigeria Fights Rare Vaccine-Derived Polio Outbreak,” Reuters showed how the vaccine itself ignited outbreaks of polio in Nigeria, Chad and Angola.

And according to The Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, the polio vaccine program launched by Bill Gates paralyzed 47,500 children in 2011 alone. And those injured by the vaccine died at twice the rate of those infected by “wild” polio!

Whooping Cough

The same scenario was repeated in the case of the whooping cough (pertussis) vaccine. Between 1900 and 1935, mortality rates due to whooping cough dropped by 79 percent in the United States. Yet, the vaccine (DTP and DTaP) wasn’t introduced until 1940.

Today, those who have been “immunized” are the most susceptible to whooping cough.

Researchers with the CDC publicly stated in 2002 that, “the number of infants dying from whooping cough is rising, despite record high vaccination levels.” In 2009, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution recognized the trend too. In the article titled, “Whooping Cough Vaccine not as Powerful as Thought,” the publication highlighted a recent cluster of 18 whooping cough-infected students. Seventeen of those students – 95% of those infected – had been immunized with five doses of DTaP vaccine.

Measles, Mumps, Rubella

The measles vaccine is no different. In 1957, the MMR shot became widely used in an effort to eradicate measles, mumps, and rubella. The The CDC insisted that it would eliminate mumps in the United States by the year 2010.

But rather than preventing mumps and measles, the vaccine has actually caused widespread epidemics. Outbreaks have become the norm. And those who have suffered the most were “vaccinated.”

Between 1983 and 1990, there was a 423% increase in measles cases among vaccinated individuals. Then in 2006, the largest mumps outbreak in twenty years occurred. Among those infected, 63% were “immunized,” as shown by Neil Miller in Vaccines: Are They Safe and Effective? Others found similar results.

In The Journal of Infectious Diseases, scientists from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine wrote, “Vaccine failure accounted for a sustained mumps outbreak in a highly vaccinated population.”

In his book, How to Raise a Healthy Child In Spite of Your Doctor, the late Dr. Robert Mendlesohn, MD showed that vaccinated individuals are 14 times more likely to contract mumps than unvaccinated.

These stunning vaccine failures led the Iowa Department of Public Health to conclude that, “…Our most important public health tool against this disease—2 doses of MMR vaccine—is not providing the necessary levels of protection to control mumps in the U.S. population.”

Even the Mayo Clinic – a bastion of mainstream medicine – states that, “vaccine failure has become increasingly apparent.”

Flu Vaccine Failure

The flu vaccine has proven just as worthless…

In 2007, the CDC reported that it had “no or low effectiveness” against influenza or influenza-like illnesses. The data showed that the flu vaccine protected no more than 14% of those who received it. And this wasn’t some fluke. The vaccine is rarely any more effective than that.

Even The New York Times reports that, “The influenza vaccine, which has been strongly recommended for people over 65 for more than four decades, is losing its reputation as an effective way to ward off the virus.”

Doctors who do their homework understand that vaccines are ineffective. Dr. Ira Goodman MD, FACS, ABHIM, a surgeon from Loyola Medical School is one of them. Through email correspondence, he told me he is against vaccines simply because “they don’t work!”

The failure of vaccines has finally gone mainstream. But instead of admitting that they don’t offer protection, health officials and the pharmaceutical companies are pushing for MORE vaccines as the solution. When you consider the number of outright toxins contained in these experimental concoctions, the implications are chilling.

Reason #2 Vaccines Expose Kids to Toxins

According to fact sheets put out by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), vaccines are brimming with toxins. These include dozens of chemicals, heavy metals and allergens. They also include numerous objectionable ingredients, such as monkey kidney cells and aborted fetal tissue.

Formaldehyde is just one of many chemicals found in vaccines. And according to the FDA, “Excessive exposure to formaldehyde may cause cancer.” Another ingredient in the cocktail is a chemical known as 2-phenoxyethanol. This comes with an FDA warning which states that, “It can depress the central nervous system and may cause vomiting and diarrhea, which can lead to dehydration in infants.”

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg…

In addition to mercury and aluminum, many vaccines are also spiked with antibiotics like neomycin, polymyxin B, streptomycin and gentamicin. These drugs aren’t even approved for uninfected children!

Despite this emerging toxic threat, Parenting Magazine and Dr. Paul Offit stated that, “In theory, healthy infants could safely get up to 100,000 vaccines at once.” Are you kidding me? He won’t be testing that theory on my children. I wonder if he’s willing to stab himself that many times to prove it?

I queried numerous physicians via email and phone to find out if they shared Dr. Offit’s ideas. They didn’t. Dr. Suzanne Humphries, MD was adamant that, “Vaccines put children at risk for a form of kidney disease called nephrotic syndrome. This can be caused by a common ingredient – Bovine Serum Albumin. Doctors just give children steroids to suppress the symptoms, never knowing what the cause was.”

Autism

If parents need further proof of toxicity, they can read vaccine package inserts. The insert for the DPT vaccine from Sanofi Pasteur warns that, “A review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) found evidence for a causal relation between tetanus toxoid and both brachial neuritis and Guillain-Barré syndrome [pain and loss of nerve and motor function].” Makers of the Tripedia vaccine for DTaP state that certain outcomes are so frequent that they had to list them. These reactions include:

• Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)
• Anaphylactic reaction
• Cellulitis (a bacterial skin infection)
• Autism
• Convulsion/Seizures
• Brain dysfunction
• Low muscle tone and strength
• Nerve damage
• Hyperventilation/apnea

These are some damn good reasons to use vaccine exemption forms.

Vaccine supporters will insist that the benefits outweigh these toxicity risks. But that would only be true if vaccination was the only road to immunization.

Reason #3 Kids Can Build Immunity Naturally

We are all at risk from various “biological nasties.” Invisible threats are everywhere…A single gram of feces can contain more than 10 million viruses, 1 million bacteria, 1,000 parasite cysts and 100 parasite eggs.

The goal is to minimize risk by increasing our immunity, naturally. In Over-The-Counter Natural Cures, I showed how innate and adaptive immunity act as our God-given protection from biological nasties.

But, you have to support these Gatekeepers of health with proper nutrition, hygiene, sanitation and natural medicine like andrographis. Just as hand washing saved millions from infant mortality in a hospital setting, healthy habits minimize exposure and boost our natural defenses. The science supporting this won the Nobel Prize in 2011!

Bruce Beutler and Jules Hoffmann discovered that we are hard-wired with special receptors that recognize foreign invaders and activate our immune response. Ralph Steinman then found that special cells of the immune system possess the unique capacity to activate the immune response, which clears biological nasties from the body. And all of this occurs without vaccination!

[RELATED: Nature's Immune Booster is Potent Antibiotic. See the facts here.]

Decline in Disease Not Caused by Vaccination

Further research has shown that the historical decline in infectious diseases – that parents are now vaccinating against – were not the result of inoculation, like doctors blindly and wrongly assert. Instead, the decline began years before the vaccines were introduced thanks to improved habits of hygiene, sanitation and nutrition that raised our natural immunity.

Differences among immunity reflect the importance of healthy habits…Ever wonder why two people (even in the same household) can be exposed to the same virus while one of them is laid up in bed for a week and the other doesn’t feel the slightest effect?

And why is it that while nearly 50 million people died from the Spanish flu in 1918… the case fatality rate was from two to five percent? That means that 95 to 98 percent of those who contracted the flu recovered fully. And that says nothing of the hundreds of millions of people who came into contact with the virus, but never became ill at all.

The difference is our individual immune system.

And the bottom line is that your habits have a great deal of control over it, as shown in Nobel winning science. Work with it to acquire protection.

There are no Silver Bullets Against Infection, but You Have Options

There is no silver bullet, though.

Despite our best efforts at nutrition, hygiene and sanitation, the immune system can still fail. Fortunately, in many cases, emergency medicine can help.

With all this science and technology at our fingertips, I’m not willing to risk my children’s health on the antiquated vaccine theory… nor the toxic brew they contain.

That doesn’t make me a religious “nut job” or conspiracy theorist. It simply means that I am an informed and caring parent with healthy kids who don’t need to rely on risky medicines or “herd immunity.” And since herd immunity is nothing more than an antiquated theory – and not something that is actually protecting kids form infections – pro-vaccine parents shouldn’t give a shit about my non-vaccinated kids or my use of vaccine exemption forms.

Educate before you vaccinate.
About the Author

Shane "The People's Chemist" Ellison holds master's degree in organic chemistry and is the author of Over-The-Counter Natural Cures (SourceBooks). He's been quoted by USA Today, Shape, Woman's World, US News and World Report, as well as Women's Health and appeared on Fox and NBC as a medicine and health expert. Start living young by signing up for his FREE Natural Cures Watchdog below.

How Artificial Sweeteners Confuse Your Body into Storing Fat and Inducing Diabetes

By Dr. Mercola

    As noted in the featured video, there are currently five different artificial sweeteners on the market. The one you're most likely to encounter is aspartame, which also tends to be the worst of the bunch.

    Aspartame and other artificial sweeteners are primarily promoted to diabetics and those concerned about their weight. This despite the fact that artificial sweeteners have repeatedly been shown to produce the exact opposite effects:

        Research shows that aspartame worsens insulin sensitivity to a greater degree than sugar
        Artificial sweeteners have also been found to promote weight gain, in more ways than one

    Over time, artificial sweeteners have also crept into a wide variety of products not directly targeting diabetics and dieters.

    Artificial sweeteners are added to about 6,000 different beverages, snacks, and food products, making label-reading an ever pressing necessity. Disturbingly, food industry groups are now trying to hide the presence of artificial sweeteners in certain foods...

Like GMOs, Industry Wants to Hide Artificial Sweeteners in Foods

    Last year, the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) filed a petition with the FDA requesting the agency amend the standard of identity for milk and 17 other dairy products, in order to allow for the addition of artificial sweeteners without having to indicate their use on the label.

    The IDFA claims the proposed amendments would "promote more healthful eating practices and reduce childhood obesity by providing for lower-calorie flavored milk products" since many children are more inclined to drink flavored milk products than unflavored milk.

    Not only is IDFA behind the push to put aspartame in milk,  but they are also one of four trade organizations suing Vermont1 in an effort to overturn the state's GMO labeling law, which was passed in May.

    It would seem that, far from being concerned about providing Americans with high quality dairy, the IDFA is wholly invested in deceiving the American public for the benefit of the chemical technology industry. Why else would they be so insistent on hiding ingredients that are suspected of harmful effects?

Artificial Sweeteners Cause Metabolic Confusion

    One of the reasons why artificial sweeteners do not help you lose weight relates to the fact that your body is not fooled by sweet taste without accompanying calories.2,3

    When you eat something sweet, your brain releases dopamine, which activates your brain's reward center. The appetite-regulating hormone leptin is also released, which eventually informs your brain that you are "full" once a certain amount of calories have been ingested.

    However, when you consume something that tastes sweet but doesn't contain any calories, your brain's pleasure pathway still gets activated by the sweet taste, but there's nothing to deactivate it, since the calories never arrive. 

    Artificial sweeteners basically trick your body into thinking that it's going to receive sugar (calories), but when the sugar doesn't come, your body continues to signal that it needs more, which results in carb cravings.

    Besides worsening insulin sensitivity and promoting weight gain, aspartame and other artificial sweeteners also promote other health problems associated with excessive sugar consumption, including:

        Cardiovascular disease and stroke4,5,6
        Alzheimer's disease. While poor diet is a major driver of Alzheimer's in general (the primary culprits being sugar/fructose and grains, especially gluten), the key mechanism of harm here appears to be methanol toxicity—a much-ignored problem associated with aspartame in particular.

        In a previous interview, toxicology expert Dr. Woodrow Monte (author of the book While Science Sleeps: A Sweetener Kills7), explains the links between aspartame and methanol toxicity and the formation of toxic formaldehyde.

Research Overwhelmingly Refutes 'Diet' Claims of Artificial Sweeteners

    Contrary to industry claims, research over the last 30 years—including several large scale prospective cohort studies—have shown that artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite, increase cravings for carbs, and produce a variety of metabolic dysfunctions that promote fat storage and weight gain—often to the researchers' great surprise.

    Below is sampling of some of the studies published through the years, clearly refuting the beverage industry's claims that diet soda aids weight loss. The 2010 review in the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine8 is particularly noteworthy.

    It provides a historical summary of artificial sweeteners in general, along with epidemiological and experimental evidence showing that artificial sweeteners tends to promote weight gain. It also illustrates that as usage of artificial sweeteners has risen, so has obesity rates.
    obesity trends

full report

Stronger Gardasil Vax Ok'd - More Girls Suffer, Die?

 by Norma Erickson
SaneVax.org

Malfeasance is when a public official violates the public trust by performing an act that is wrongful, legally unjustified, or contrary to law. Nonfeasance is the failure to act where there is a duty to act. Misfeasance is conduct that is lawful but inappropriate. Perhaps, when it comes to the recent approval of Gardasil 9 all of these apply.

10 December 2014: The FDA approved the use of a reportedly “new and improved” version of Gardasil, which will be marketed as Gardasil 9. According to the FDA approval letter, this action was taken without consultation with VRBPAC (the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee) which is responsible for reviewing and evaluating data concerning the safety, effectiveness, and appropriate use of vaccines and related biological products.

The FDA approval letter, signed by Marion Gruber, Director of Office of Vaccines Research and Review CBER,  states the reason for bypassing the advice of VRBPAC writing:

    ”We did not refer your application to the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee because our review of information submitted in your BLA, including the clinical study design and trial results, did not raise concerns or controversial issues which would have benefited from an advisory committee discussion.”

So, the Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) committee took it upon themselves to decide there were ”no concerns or controversial issues” regarding the approval of Gardasil 9?

This division of CBER decided there would be no benefit from ”an advisory committee discussion”?

According to their own mission statement, the FDA is ”responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy and security of human and veterinary drugs, biological products, medical devices, our nation’s food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.”

The FDA, and all committees associated with the FDA, are public officials and therefore obliged to act in the public’s best interest particularly when it comes to health and safety issues.

Is bypassing advisory committee discussions regarding Gardasil 9’s potential safety and efficacy acting in the public’s best interest, or is it malfeasance, nonfeasance and/or misfeasance?
Gardasil 9 Facts: More than DOUBLE the amount of Toxic Aluminum!

CBER decided there was no need for VRBPAC to review or evaluate any data concerning the safety, effectiveness, and appropriate use of Merck’s proposed Gardasil 9 vaccine before making a decision to approve the nine-valent HPV vaccine. This move is particularly disturbing when one considers the worldwide controversy surrounding Gardasil’s safety, effectiveness and appropriate use.


- See fyll report at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/stronger-more-toxic-gardasil-vaccine-approved-by-fda-will-more-girls-suffer-and-die/#sthash.rqS7IFHD.dpuf

Your sense of smell predict your risk of DEATH

GET a whiff of this: Losing your sense of smell predicts impending death better than heart failure, lung disease, and cancer, suggests a new study from the University of Chicago.

Researchers tested the smelling capabilities of 3,000 adults over age 57 and followed up 5 years later to see who was still alive. Those who had failed the test—about 4 percent of the population—were four times as likely to have died as people who could smell normally.
Not being able to smell was found to be a bigger risk factor for mortality than any known leading cause of death.

Here's the really bad news: Men are 30 to 40 percent more likely to lose their sniffing powers than women, says study author Jayant Pinto, M.D.

So how in the world does your sense of smell predict your risk of death? Pinto says he and the other researchers aren't sure yet, but they have a couple guesses.
Losing your ability to smell could be a sign that your body is no longer equipped to repair and regenerate cells, a normal part of the aging process that may ultimately lead to death, Pinto says. That's because the olfactory system—the body parts that enable you to take a whiff—depends on cell turnover more than any other sense.

Another possibility: The nerve responsible for smell is the only one directly connected to your brain that is also exposed to the environment, Pinto says. So if you encounter lots of pollutants, toxins, and germs over the course of your life, that could fatally damage your sense of smell—and the rest of your body.

Diminished smell is a normal part of getting older, just like hearing loss, Pinto says. Researchers don't know if the association between your nose and death holds true in younger people, but plan to study that next.

The classic sign that your sniffer is slipping is if everyone around you can sense an odor, like burning toast or rotting garbage, and you can't. If that regularly happens to you, don't freak out—but make an appointment with your doctor for a checkup, Pinto says.