Why the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons is strongly opposed to mandatory vaccines

Wednesday, March 13, 2019 by: Tracey Watson

(Natural News) With all the current hysteria about measles and the need for people to be vaccinated it can be easy to label those who choose not to allow their families to receive vaccines as law-breaking, selfish and uninformed conspiracy theorists. This narrative is pushed so strongly by the mainstream media that even those of us who have chosen not to vaccinate because of serious reservations about side effects or for ethical reasons might start to second guess our own decisions.

That is why a statement issued last month by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is so reassuring. These are not conspiracy theorists; this is an organization that represents thousands of mainstream physicians in all specialties across the United States – educated, informed medical professionals who care enough about their patients to take a stand against the World Health Organization and others who have labeled vaccine skeptics as a “global health threat.”

The statement, which was submitted to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions February 26th, warns that the organization “strongly opposes federal interference in medical decisions, including mandated vaccines,” calling such interference “a serious intrusion into individual liberty, autonomy, and parental decisions about child-rearing.”

Too many unknown risks

The AAPS presents several arguments for its strong stance against forced vaccinations. For one thing, it insists that patients have the right to be fully informed of all the benefits and risks associated with any medical procedure, including vaccination, and then, after evaluating the facts, to decide for themselves — and their children — whether the benefits outweigh the risks. (Related: Kids got 11 vaccines in 1986 and 53 in 2017… why? The answer is all about Big Pharma profits.)

They also note that while protecting public health is important, the risks of cancer, death or crippling complications from vaccines cannot be ignored. To properly evaluate these risks far more rigorous scientific studies would be required:

There are no rigorous safety studies of sufficient power to rule out a much higher risk of complications, even one in 10,000, for vaccines. Such studies would require an adequate number of subjects, a long duration (years, not days), an unvaccinated control group (“placebo” must be truly inactive such as saline, not the adjuvant or everything-but-the-intended-antigen), and consideration of all adverse health events (including neurodevelopment disorders).

The AAPS also recognizes that vaccines carry serious risks, and that these risks are acknowledged by both the U.S. Supreme Court and Congress. While the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has paid out over $4 billion to vaccine injury victims, pharmaceutical companies are immune from prosecution, “so the incentive to develop safer products is much diminished. Manufacturers may even refuse to make available a product believed to be safer, such as monovalent measles vaccine in preference to MMR (measles-mumps-rubella). Consumer refusal is the only incentive to do better.”

Another serious issue they point out is that many vaccines that were declared safe in the past have turned out to be truly dangerous and have been pulled from the market – after inflicting serious damage, of course:

The smallpox vaccine is so dangerous that you can’t get it now, despite the weaponization of smallpox. Rabies vaccine is given only after a suspected exposure or to high-risk persons such as veterinarians. The whole-cell pertussis vaccine was withdrawn from the U.S. market, a decade later than from the Japanese market, because of reports of severe permanent brain damage. The acellular vaccine that replaced it is evidently safer, though somewhat less effective.

And the Mumps, Measles and Rubella (MMR) vaccine, still very much in use today, has resulted in many serious, documented complications, with experts warning that the safety studies on this vaccine – both pre- and post-marketing – were totally inadequate.

In addition, vaccines seem to increase the potency of many of the diseases they are supposed to protect against. For example, the AAPS warns:

Measles, when it does occur, is four to five times worse than in pre-vaccination times, according to Lancet Infectious Diseases, because of the changed age distribution: more adults, whose vaccine-based immunity waned, and more infants, who no longer receive passive immunity from their naturally immune mother to protect them during their most vulnerable period.

The fact is, there are serious risks associated with vaccinations. Many people will evaluate these risks and decide that the benefits make the risk worth taking. Others will decide that they are not willing to jeopardize their children’s health by allowing them to receive vaccines. Irrespective, mandatory vaccinations cannot be imposed when those imposing them can offer no guarantees regarding the safety or even the efficiency of these dangerous medical treatments. (Click to Source)

Learn more at Vaccines.news.

Get online and get completely recovered! We are a Biblical Online Recovery Program that is life changing and empowering. We are Teen Challenge Certified Teachers and have integrated the world famous Teen Challenge PSNC curriculum for the most healing fusion of elements for your recovery. VRM is breaking the chains of addiction for a lifetime! Check us out!

 

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons “STRONGLY OPPOSES” Mandatory Vaccines

by Daisy Luther

March 6, 2019

Tensions are high regarding vaccines lately.

Due to a measles outbreak in the United States, frightened people are pushing an agenda to take an important medical decision out of the hands of parents. They’re calling for federally mandated vaccines. They’re calling for the shaming of parents who have chosen not to vaccinate their children.

The hysteria is running high, fueled by fear and memes.

Whether you opt to vaccinate or not to vaccinate, I think we can agree we all want what’s best for our children.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons opposes federally mandated vaccines.

An important letter was presented last week to the Senate subcommittee that is discussing federal laws that force parents to vaccinate their children. The statement below is from The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and they have come out strongly in opposition to the possibility of federally mandated vaccines.

No matter what your opinion is on vaccinating children, please read this.

To:  Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, House Energy and Commerce Committee

Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions

Re: Statement federal vaccine mandates

Feb. 26, 2019

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) strongly opposes federal interference in medical decisions, including mandated vaccines. After being fully informed of the risks and benefits of a medical procedure, patients have the right to reject or accept that procedure. The regulation of medical practice is a state function, not a federal one. Governmental preemption of patients’ or parents’ decisions about accepting drugs or other medical interventions is a serious intrusion into individual liberty, autonomy, and parental decisions about child-rearing.

A public health threat is the rationale for the policy on mandatory vaccines. But how much of a threat is required to justify forcing people to accept government-imposed risks? Regulators may intervene to protect the public against a one-in-one million risk of a threat such as cancer from an involuntary exposure to a toxin, or-one-in 100,000 risk from a voluntary (e.g. occupational) exposure. What is the risk of death, cancer, or crippling complication from a vaccine? There are no rigorous safety studies of sufficient power to rule out a much lower risk of complications, even one in 10,000, for vaccines. Such studies would require an adequate number of subjects, a long duration (years, not days), an unvaccinated control group (“placebo” must be truly inactive such as saline, not the adjuvant or everything-but-the-intended-antigen), and consideration of all adverse health events (including neurodevelopment disorders).

Vaccines are necessarily risky, as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court and by Congress. The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has paid some $4 billion in damages, and high hurdles must be surmounted to collect compensation. The damage may be so devastating that most people would prefer restored function to a multimillion-dollar damage award.

The smallpox vaccine is so dangerous that you can’t get it now, despite the weaponization of smallpox. Rabies vaccine is given only after a suspected exposure or to high-risk persons such as veterinarians. The whole-cell pertussis vaccine was withdrawn from the U.S. market, a decade later than from the Japanese market, because of reports of severe permanent brain damage. The acellular vaccine that replaced it is evidently safer, though somewhat less effective.

The risk: benefit ratio varies with the frequency and severity of disease, vaccine safety, and individual patient factors. These must be evaluated by patient and physician, not imposed by a government agency.

Measles is the much-publicized threat used to push for mandates, and is probably the worst threat among the vaccine-preventable illnesses because it is so highly contagious. There are occasional outbreaks, generally starting with an infected individual coming from somewhere outside the U.S. The majority, but by no means all the people who catch the measles have not been vaccinated. Almost all make a full recovery, with robust, life-long immunity. The last measles death in the U.S. occurred in 2015, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC). Are potential measles complications including death in persons who cannot be vaccinated due to immune deficiency a  justification for revoking the rights of all Americans and establishing a precedent for still greater restrictions on our right to give—or withhold—consent to medical interventions? Clearly not.

Many serious complications have followed MMR vaccination, and are listed in the manufacturers’ package insert, though a causal relationship may not have been proved. According to a 2012 report by the Cochrane Collaboration, “The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate” (cited by the National Vaccine Information Center).

Mandate advocates often assert a need for a 95% immunization rate to achieve herd immunity. However, Mary Holland and Chase Zachary of NYU School of Law argue, in the Oregon Law Review, that because complete herd immunity and measles eradication are unachievable, the better goal is for herd effect and disease control. The best outcome would result, they argue, from informed consent, more open communication, and market-based approaches.

Even disregarding adverse vaccine effects, the results of near-universal vaccination have not been completely positive. Measles, when it does occur, is four to five times worse than in pre-vaccination times, according to Lancet Infectious Diseases, because of the changed age distribution: more adults, whose vaccine-based immunity waned, and more infants, who no longer receive passive immunity from their naturally immune mother to protect them during their most vulnerable period.

Measles is a vexing problem, and more complete, forced vaccination will likely not solve it. Better public health measures—earlier detection, contact tracing, and isolation; a more effective, safer vaccine; or an effective treatment are all needed. Meanwhile, those who choose not to vaccinate now might do so in an outbreak, or they can be isolated. Immunosuppressed patients might choose isolation in any event because vaccinated people can also possibly transmit measles even if not sick themselves.

Issues that Congress must consider:

  • Manufacturers are virtually immune from product liability, so the incentive to develop safer products is much diminished. Manufacturers may even refuse to make available a product believed to be safer, such as monovalent measles vaccine in preference to MMR (measles-mumps-rubella). Consumer refusal is the only incentive to do better.
  • There are enormous conflicts of interest involving lucrative relationships with vaccine purveyors.
  • Research into possible vaccine adverse effects is being quashed, as is dissent by professionals.
  • There are many theoretical mechanisms for adverse effects from vaccines, especially in children with developing brains and immune systems. Note the devastating effects of Zika or rubella virus on developing humans, even though adults may have mild or asymptomatic infections. Many vaccines contain live viruses intended to cause a mild infection. Children’s brains are developing rapidly—any interference with the complex developmental symphony could be ruinous.
  • Vaccines are neither 100% safe nor 100% effective. Nor are they the only available means to control the spread of disease.

AAPS believes that liberty rights are unalienable. Patients and parents have the right to refuse vaccination, although potentially contagious persons can be restricted in their movements (e.g. as with Ebola), as needed to protect others against a clear and present danger. Unvaccinated persons with no exposure to a disease and no evidence of a disease are not a clear or present danger.

AAPS represents thousands of physicians in all specialties nationwide. It was founded in 1943 to protect private medicine and the patient-physician relationship.

Respectfully yours,

Jane M. Orient, M.D., Executive Director

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons

Can we have a respectful conversation about this?

Like I said above, regardless of our opinions on vaccines, we all want to do what is best for our children. Can we share some thoughts in the comments section about the pros or cons of mandatory vaccinations?

Be civil so we can keep the conversation going. Name-calling, rude comments, and blanket generalizations of entire swaths of people will be deleted, no matter which side of the debate you’re on. So let’s have a really good, productive conversation, okay?

PS: And for that guy (you know who you are) who was raging about his First Amendment right to free speech? You don’t have that on my blog. It’s protected by the Communications Decency Act, section 230. This is a privately owned business. I have every right to protect my readers from racist rants, profanity, and inflammatory comments. You are welcome to go elsewhere to comment if you don’t like the way I moderate the conversation here. (Click to Source)

Get online and get completely recovered! We are a Biblical Online Recovery Program that is life changing and empowering. We are Teen Challenge Certified Teachers and have integrated the world famous Teen Challenge PSNC curriculum for the most healing fusion of elements for your recovery. VRM is breaking the chains of addiction for a lifetime! Check us out!

 

 

NY State Senator Passes Away At 47, Complained Of ‘Flu Shot Symptoms’

peralta-flu-shot

José R. Peralta, a former New York State Senator, has passed away at age 47. Peralta is the first Dominican-American to elected to New York’s State Senate.

The circumstances surrounding Peralta’s death are odd, to say the least.

Senator Peralta Complains Of Flu Shot Symptoms

jose peralta flu shot

Peralta complained of a mysterious illness for two weeks prior to his passing. According to an article in the New York Times, Peralta believed the cause of his symptoms to be related to a flu shot he’d recently received.

“It was like pulling teeth to get him to talk about not feeling well,” Mr. Chris Sosa, Peralta’s Director of Communications, said. “He just thought he was having symptoms related to getting the flu shot.”

Peralta began experiencing feeling so disorientation on Wednesday evening. He was immediately taken to Elmhurst Hospital Center in Queens. He passed away at the hospital at 9:23 p.m. An autopsy is being performed.

Medical Examiner Says ‘Septic Shock’ Likely Cause

New York City’s Medical Examiner’s office allegedly told Evelyn Peralta, his wife, that Peralta died of “septic shock,” according to the New York Post.

All they said is that he was septic,’ she said on Friday. ‘And that led to organ failure.’

Without the results of the autopsy, this diagnosis remains informal.

“As a member of the Assembly for eight years and then as senator, he fought tirelessly to make a difference for others, and he will always be remembered for his service to Queens and to all New Yorkers,” Mr. Cuomo said in a press statement.

“Jose Peralta was a proud son of Queens and the Dominican Republic. He worked his way up from the grassroots, with heart and tenacity,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said on Twitter.

Peralta recently lost his State Senate seat to Jessica Ramos. Peralta’s loss is said to have been a result of his aligning with Republicans via the Independent Democratic Conference. He served in the seat since 2010.

The above article can be found in it’s original format HERE.

VRM LOGO

Health Authorities Seize All MMR Vaccines Amid Epidemic Of Child Deaths

Children died minutes after receiving MMR vaccination

By: Daniel Newton  |@NeonNettle on 10th July 2018 @ 4.00pm
vaccine-28jsjs

Children died minutes after receiving MMR vaccination

Samoan health authorities have seized control of all children’s MMR vaccines after an epidemic of side effects resulted in the deaths of two toddlers. Prime Minister Tuilaepa Lupesoliai Sailele Malielegaoi has launched a full inquiry into the deaths, which has now put the vaccine safety into question once again.The tragic deaths of two children, both aged 1, who died minutes after receiving MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccination at Safotu Hospital, in Savaii, has sent the shockwaves throughout the country and the health community.
vac-mmr-3

According to nzherald.co.nz: The youngsters have been identified as Lannacallystah Samuelu, daughter of Marietta and Samuelu Tuisuesue, and Lameko Si’u, son of Punipuao and Timua Si’u.News of the deaths began to spread over the weekend after family members posted photos of the dead children – one wrapped in the arms of his distraught mother – on Facebook. The public was officially informed by authorities yesterday, when Samoa’s Ministry of Health chief, Dr Leausa Toleafoa Take Naseri, announced that all MMR vaccines in the country were to be seized after the deaths.The nurses who administered the vaccinations have been stood down for their own safety and were being supported, he told local media. ‘He’s finished’Families of the youngsters told TV1 Samoa they had made formal complaints with local police and were calling for investigations into their children’s deaths.

The mother of one child told the station she asked that her son not get the vaccination after learning about the death of the little girl, which ha It is alleged the nurse insisted that the vaccination go ahead and was given without consent.

Speaking to TV1 Samoa, a distraught Punipuao Si’u described the events immediately after her son was given the shot.”We walked out. It hadn’t been a minute since we’d sat down on the chair outside the hospital when I saw his head fall and his eyes close.”I ran back into the hospital. I cried and watched as they worked on my son. I asked: ‘How is my baby?'”I came outside. I walked back in and asked: ‘How is my baby?’ And the doctor/ nurse said: ‘He’s finished’.

“They didn’t say anything to break it to me gently or calm my heart, they just said: ‘He’s finished’.”
vac-39jsjs

In a statement, Malielegaoi described the incidents as “devastating” and said he was not taking this lightly.” There are already processes that will determine if negligence is a factor,” he said. “And if so, rest assured those processes will be implemented to the letter – to ensure that such a tragedy will not be repeated and those responsible will be made to answer.” Malielegaoi revealed that one of his own grandsons was affected a number of years ago “under similar circumstances.”

He said his grandson survived after proper treatment but that: “He will never be the same, as he has lost the ability to speak. ”What about MMR in New Zealand? Meanwhile, New Zealand’s Ministry of Health has contacted health authorities in Samoa to ask whether any help is required of them in regards to the investigation.Dr Stewart Jessamine told the Herald the MoH did not know where Samoa sourced its MMR vaccine from, but confirmed it was not supplied from New Zealand.

“New Zealand currently uses a brand of MMR vaccine called Priorix. It’s made mostly in France and Belgium and tested there before it’s sent to New Zealand.

“It’s monitored along the way to make sure it’s kept at a constant safe temperature until it’s administered to patients.” Jessamine stressed that the MMR vaccine in New Zealand had an excellent safety profile and had been used without significant problem for several decades. University of Auckland vaccinologist Dr Helen Petousis-Harris said one death, let alone two, was extremely rare, and there had never been a death associated with the MMR vaccine in New Zealand. She said although investigations were still continuing into what went wrong, there were two reasons that could have been factors in the deaths. “One is that there’s been an error where the vaccine is prepared for the injection incorrectly and ultimately results in the wrong substance being injected.” Or there’s been some sort of contamination due to the vaccine having been reconstituted and left at a room temperature for a really long period of time. ” Petousis-Harris acknowledged that there could now be fears from parents about the safety of vaccines and immunisations. But she said it was important for people to understand that the vaccine programme was a very safe one in New Zealand. “The last thing you want is for people to be fearful of something that we know is actually incredibly safe.”But right now, we have to try and understand what happened and then work out what can be done to ensure it doesn’t happen again.”It’s exceptionally rare at the global level and will be taken extremely seriously.” (Click to Source)

CLICK HERE for the finest faith based personalized and compassionate addiction recovery program – right from the comfort of your home.

 

 

As Flu Deaths Soar, Big Pharma Pushes Their Answer: ‘Death By Lethal Injection’ – Has The 2018 Flu Been Genetically Manipulated?

Witches Brew Of Chemicals Found In Government-Issued Flu Shots

By Stefan Stanford – All News Pipeline – Live Free Or Die

In this January 8th story over at the Santa Barbara Independent they report the flu had just killed 8 people in Santa Barbara, what the ‘public health czar‘ for Santa Barbara County was calling “unprecedented numbers“. Also warning that the number of patients testing positive for flu at local hospitals there was “off the charts“, Steve Quayle had left an interesting SQ note while linking to that story: “Whenever you see the word unprecedented its a heads up to consider intentional, manipulated virus – note the ages”.

As the SBI story noted, each of those who passed away was over the age of 65 yet, despite the announced fact that this years flu shot has largely been ineffective, as this new SQAlert also noted, doctors are still suggesting that the young and the elderly take their flu shots, despite even heavy medical industry doubts over its effectiveness.

Why would doctors recommend that their patients get the flu shot this year despite its ineffectiveness, with 7 of the 8 flu death victims in Santa Barbara having gotten the flu vaccine themselves? The full SQ Alert is republished below.

With the state of California’s flu epidemic running 300% above the 5-year average according to this story from Breitbart and not just packing emergency rooms to beyond capacity but bringing widespread medical shortages, even some ANP readers have mentioned in the comment section that they or friends or family members had fallen ill to the flu or some other mysterious illnesses recently.

pharma_deadly_poisons.jpg

In this story we’ll take a look at the deadly flu striking America as well some alternative health remedies that some people are using to help themselves and their loved ones fight this winter onset of illness. We’ll also take a look at some signs that this outbreak of the flu may have been genetically modified though at the moment we’re not in the position to prove so.

As we hear in the 2nd video below featuring Jon Rappoport along with Infowars as is also shared in this Rappoport story, big pharma and the vaccine industry pumped $3.2 billion dollars into TV ads for drugs during the 11 months preceding his story. As he mentions, that kind of money not only buys them influence, but it buys them control.

So why would any mainstream media companies do a proper investigation into ‘big pharma’ and their deadly poisons, including vaccines such as the flu shot? In the graphic at this link at the bottom of this story we see the witches brew of chemicals they’re injecting into our bodies when we get vaccinations, including latex rubber, aluminum and formaldehyde. From Rappoport’s story:

If a major network suddenly decided to set its hounds loose and investigate the overall devastating effects of medical drugs on the public, there would be hell to pay at the network. Drug companies wouldn’t stand for it. 

Robert F Kennedy, Jr., whose film, Trace Amounts, about toxic mercury in vaccines, was getting no media coverage, made this comment:

“I talked to Roger Ailes [then CEO of FOX News], who I have known since I was 17 years old, he’s very sympathetic with this issue and saw the film Trace Amounts. I said to him, ‘I just want to go on one of your shows. Nobody will allow me to talk about this or debate me.’ He said to me, ‘I can’t allow you on any of them. I’d have to fire any of my hosts that allowed you on my station.’ Because he said, ‘My news division gets up to 70% of advertising revenuesduring non-election years from the pharmaceutical companies’.”

That’s called control.

flu_across_America.png

According to this 2017 story over at the website Health Impact News titled “Government Vaccine Injury Report Continues to Prove Flu Vaccines are Destroying Lives”, the federal government’s Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV) had determined that at least 275 people had been injured with at least 4 deaths from the flu shot in 2017.

Yet with this massive outbreak of flu cases across the US, as our videographer tells us in the 1st video below, we might want to avoid the massive propaganda push to get the flu shot now, especially with it being largely ineffective.

As we see in the map above taken from this Weather Channel story, with widespread flu having now struck 46 states across America, the ‘vaccine propaganda machine’ has been kicked into overdrive. Not only striking the US but the UK as well, where deaths have soared 77% within one week according to this new story from the Daily Mail, might this version of the flu have been GMO’d?

With it now exactly 100 years since the Spanish flu of 1918 killed more than 100 million people after infecting nearly 500 million people in Europe and throughout the world as reported in this new story over at the Daily Wobble, it’s long been warned that globalists intent upon depopulating the planet might manipulate such a deadly disease to do so.

In this 2003 story over at AHC Media titled “Raising the ghost of 1918: Could flu be the ultimate bioweapon?” they report that in an age of exploding genetic engineering as we’ve previously reported upon on ANP, the opportunity to weaponize such a disease as the 1918 flu to wipe out a large part of humanity is growing, and please keep in mind, the excerpt below came from a 15-year old story.:

Could the Spanish influenza strain of 1918 — the unholy grail of infectious diseases — be resurrected as the ultimate bioweapon? 

“It would not be easy; but with advances in this technology, it gets easier every day,” warns Mohammed Madjid, MD, lead author of a provocative new paper about the possibilities of using the flu virus as a weapon of bioterrorism.

death_of_America_by_lethal_injection.jpg

According to this December 29th story over at Natural Blaze, FDA-approved medical drugs kill 106,000 Americans per year. As their story points out, that’s a MILLION deaths per decade! Death by lethal injection?

And as was previously mentioned above, why would medical doctors still be insisting that their elderly and very young patients get the flu shot when they know that it is ineffective? Great points brought up by David S. in the SQAlert below.

 READERS OBSERVATIONS CONCERNING THE FLU DEATHS IN SANTA BARBARA- NOTE THE AGES KILLING OFF THE YOUNG AND THE AGED – I CONCUR WITH DAVID’S ASSESSMENT 

Steve, 

I found the article that you posted this morning on the eight flu deaths in Santa Barbara county the past two weeks astounding. Seven of the eight victims had the flu vaccine yet died! Seems to me that not only doesn’t the vaccine work, but could the vaccine have contributed to their death? What a convenient trace free way to cull the elderly population. Then the “public health czar” (whatever the hell that is), a Ms. Dean says the following: “Even so, Dean said people should still get flu shots, particularly those younger than 5, older than 65, pregnant, or otherwise dealing with compromised health. “If your choice is between life and death or a trip to intensive care, why would you pass up that kind of protection, particularly if you’re already vulnerable?” she asked.” 

Steve, what kind of protection is she talking about, the kind that killed seven out of eight who got the shot? I was no math major but if I lived in SB I would take my chances not getting the shot in Santa Barbara. I rarely see a story that so blatantly smells of a cover up like this one. Even in an age of daily coverups!! This lady should be fired immediately for being an idiot, but then again she’s in CA and works for the government…enough said. 

God bless. 

David S..

natures_antibiotics.png

In the final video below, our videographer shares with us numerous natural remedies which she uses to help her own family get through cold and flu season including essential oils, elderberry, garlic, honey and many other natural treatments for the whole family. If you’ve got a personal favorite remedy to treat the flu, please let us know in the comment section below.

As the story excerpt below from the Herbal Academy reports, many may not even know that they likely have natural ingredient alternatives to help fight the flu or the cold right now in their own kitchens. From the Herbal Academy:

Home Remedies for Colds and Flu Shopping List

Garlic – anti-viral, antibiotic, and antiseptic. 
Onion – great for coughs and raw onion keeps the respiratory tract open. 
Ginger – antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory. In addition to treating cold/flu, ginger is excellent for nausea and vomiting. 
Sage – carminative, antiseptic, and astringent – the mouth and throat plant. Used for sore throats and cough. Also used for sinus congestion. Sage should not be used when pregnant or breast feeding.
Thyme – antimicrobial, antibacterial, antiviral, expectorant, and astringent. Thyme is great for respiratory infections and coughs. It is also good for the stomach and relieves gas.
Cayenne powder – stimulant, anti-microbial, analgesic, carminative, diaphoretic, and expectorant. Cayenne can help prevent a cold or flu as well as shorten the duration of a cold or flu. It brings heat to the body, which can help dispel coldness.
Honey – raw, local honey should ideally be purchased either at a farmer’s market or at Whole Foods or Trader Joes. Honey is antibacterial, antimicrobial, and antiseptic. Do not give honey to children under 1 year old.
Lemon – high in vitamin C, lemon may help decrease the strength of the cold and flu virus in the body and reduce phlegm. Many folks use lemons to build resistance to cold and flu, and speed up healing. (Click to Source)

what_is_in_a_vaccine.jpg

How flu shot manufacturing forces influenza to mutate

Egg-based production causes virus to target bird cells, making vaccine less effective

Date:October 30, 2017

Source: Scripps Research

Institute Summary: The common practice of growing influenza vaccine components in chicken eggs disrupts the major antibody target site on the virus surface, rendering the flu vaccine less effective in humans.

171030134625_1_540x360

According to a new study from scientists at The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI), the common practice of growing influenza vaccine components in chicken eggs disrupts the major antibody target site on the virus surface, rendering the flu vaccine less effective in humans.

“Now we can explain — at an atomic level — why egg-based vaccine production is causing problems,” said TSRI Research Associate Nicholas Wu, Ph.D., first author of the study, published recently in the journal PLOS Pathogens.

For more than 70 years, manufacturers have made the flu vaccine by injecting influenza into chicken eggs, allowing the virus to replicate inside the eggs and then purifying the fluid from the eggs to get enough of the virus to use in vaccines.

The subtype of influenza in this study, called H3N2, is one of several subtypes shown to mutate when grown in chicken eggs, and the researchers say the new findings further support the case for alternative approaches to growing the virus.

“Any influenza viruses produced in eggs have to adapt to growing in that environment and hence generate mutations to grow better,” explained study senior author Ian Wilson, D.Phil., Hansen Professor of Structural Biology at TSRI.

The new study shows exactly why egg-based manufacturing is a problem for the H3N2 subtype. As H3N2 influenza has become more prevalent, scientists formulating the seasonal flu vaccine have sought to include this virus and teach the human immune system to fight it. Despite this effort, recent flu vaccines have proven only 33 percent effective against H3N2 viruses.

Wu used a high-resolution imaging technique called X-ray crystallography to show that — when grown in eggs — the H3N2 subtype mutates a key protein to better attach to receptors in bird cells. Specifically, there was a mutation called L194P on the virus’s hemagglutinin glycoprotein (HA). This mutation disrupts the region on the protein that is commonly recognized by our immune system.

This means a vaccine containing the mutated version of the protein will not be able to trigger an effective immune response. This leaves the body without protection against circulating strains of H3N2.

In fact, Wu’s analysis shows that the current strain of H3N2 used in vaccines already contains this specific mutation L194P on HA. “Vaccine producers need to look at this mutation,” cautioned Wu.

The researchers say further studies are needed to investigate replacing the egg-based system. “Other methods are now being used and explored for production of vaccines in mammalian cells using cell-based methods and recombinant HA protein vaccines,” said Wilson.

“There’s a huge need for flu vaccine research,” added Wu. (Click to Source)

Story Source:

Materials provided by Scripps Research InstituteNote: Content may be edited for style and length.


Journal Reference:

  1. Nicholas C. Wu, Seth J. Zost, Andrew J. Thompson, David Oyen, Corwin M. Nycholat, Ryan McBride, James C. Paulson, Scott E. Hensley, Ian A. Wilson. A structural explanation for the low effectiveness of the seasonal influenza H3N2 vaccinePLOS Pathogens, 2017; 13 (10): e1006682 DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006682

Government Knew About Dangerous MMR Vaccine Strain, Used It On Children Anyway

dangerous-mmr-shot-deaths-1

By Brandon TurbevilleNatural Blaze

Because mass media and technology are geared to shift from one topic to the next with no real depth or understanding of the subject matter, the vast majority of people, even those who are generally more intelligent, simply cannot remember important events that took place only a year ago. For that reason, it is occasionally important to revisit recent occurrences in order to refresh the collective memory.

Nearly ten years later, many will simply not remember that the UK government, which today nauseatingly pushes vaccines and vaccine propaganda, allowed a dangerous MMR shot (more dangerous than regular MMR shots) to be sold on the market for two years in the UK, putting millions of children at risk in addition to the already toxic and deadly nature of the vaccine at play.

As the Telegraph reported in its article “Vaccine Officials Knew About MMR Risks,” published in March, 2007,

Government officials were made aware of some problems with a version of the MMR vaccine in other countries but still introduced it in Britain in the late 1980s, newly released documents show.

The MMR vaccine with the Urabe strain of mumps was first used in Britain in October 1988. It was blamed for the deaths of several children after being withdrawn by the Department of Health in September 1992.

Previously confidential documents released under the Freedom of Information Act show how officials gradually learned of the dangers of the Urabe strain MMR which caused encephalitis-type conditions, including meningitis. Involving swelling of the brain or of the lining of the brain or spinal chord, they can lead to brain damage, deafness or even death.

The papers show that many months before the Urabe MMR vaccine was introduced in the UK, officials were made aware of problems in America, Sweden and Canada.

The first warning came when an unnamed official at a meeting of the Government’s Joint Committee of Vaccination and Immunisation in May 1987 “expressed his reservations concerning reported adverse reactions to MMR in the USA”.

The second came in a letter from the Central Microbiological Laboratory in Sweden in September that year, where authorities reported “52 cases of febrile convulsions probably associated with MMR vaccination”.

Then, a Government working party on the introduction of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, learned of “a report of cases of mumps encephalitis” in Canada at a meeting in Feb 1988.

The documents show that the statistical risk from Urabe MMR was considered to be low. The UK went ahead with its nationwide MMR programme in October 1988 in which 85 per cent of the triple-vaccinations contained Urabe.

The minutes of another meeting of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, in May 1990, show that there was “especial concern” about “reports from Japan of a high level of meningoencephalitis associated with the administration of MMR”.

Yet the government waited another two years before ending its use of the Urabe MMR vaccine. That decision to stop using the Urabe vaccine, however, only came after the manufacturer informed the government that they were going to stop making it.

The Telegraph continued by writing,

The minutes were obtained by the FOIA Centre, a specialist research company, on behalf of one of the parents of a child in a group bringing litigation at the High Court. The Government insists it acted swiftly as soon as it became aware of the dangers of Urabe MMR in September 1992.

Sir Liam Donaldson, the chief medical officer, told one of the parents in a letter: “As soon as the Department of Health had clear evidence that there was a risk with Urabe-containing MMR and that there was no such associated risk with a different strain of mumps virus (the Jeryl Lynn strain) used in an alternative MMR vaccine, the department moved quickly to discontinue use.”

The Telegraph cont.,

Prof Kent Woods, chief executive officer of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, confirmed that the UK authorities had been aware of “sporadic cases” in Canada. However, the risk of meningoencephalitis from Urabe MMR was lower than the risk of the same condition resulting from “wild-type mumps virus”, he said.

Urabe MMR was withdrawn “following reports of generally mild transient meningitis caused by the mumps vaccine virus in some children who recently received the Urabe mumps vaccine containing products”.

Yet, in typical fashion, the government admitted no wrongdoing, instead doubling down on its collectivist view that the “benefits outweigh the risks” and that you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. Too bad if you’re the egg.

The Telegraph wrote,

A Government spokesman said: “The UK investigated the evidence and acted promptly when this problem with Urabe strain of mumps vaccine was identified.

“On the basis of information obtained in studies, the UK was in a position to make an informed decision on whether to continue using the Urabe vaccine, as there was an alternative vaccine strain, called Jeryl Lynn, which did not appear to have the same risk.”

You can’t handle the truth about vaccines (Ad)

The spokesman added: “In 1992 the Committee on Safety of Medicine considered all of the evidence and concluded that the benefits of vaccinating with Urabe mumps strain vaccines still outweighed the risks.”

Although having taken place in 2007, it is important to revisit incidents such as these in order to show how much things change while they remain exactly the same. (Click to Source)

U.S. healthcare workers do NOT have health freedom: 69 employees FIRED for refusing flu vaccination

woman-doctor-flu-shot-syringe

(Natural News) Health freedom? What health freedom?

According to BMJ.com, a total of 69 staff members at Essentia Health have been fired for refusing to get the flu vaccination. As for hundreds of other Essentia workers, getting the flu shot was the only real option that they had, considering the fact that they were warned that they would lose their jobs if they failed to be vaccinated before a November 20 deadline.

Essentia Health operates 15 hospitals and 75 clinics in the states of Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota and Idaho, and employs roughly 14,000 people.

There are multiple issues with this that need to be addressed. First and foremost, even though companies have the final say over the standards employees must meet in order to continue working there, Essentia Health could have perhaps been more understanding and accommodating to those who refused to get the flu vaccines because of legitimate medical concerns. Strongly recommending that employees get the vaccine instead of threatening to fire them if they don’t, for example, may have been a better approach. The United States was founded on the principles of self-governance and individual liberty, and all companies, regardless of whether or not they are in the medical industry, should respect that.

Second, it’s important to note that flu vaccinations may not be as safe and as effective as most people think they are. At the very least, there is a vigorous and ongoing debate in this country over the safety of flu vaccines, and Essentia Health should have taken that into account as well before threatening to fire employees who refused to get vaccinated.

A few months ago, Natural News founder Mike Adams reported on a groundbreaking study conducted by the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, which found that women who receive the flu vaccine end up developing a weaker immune system in subsequent years. The studies lead researcher, Lisa Christian, Ph.D., concluded, “Growing evidence shows that those who received a flu shot in the prior year have lower antibody responses in the current year.”

Mike Adams went on to provide further commentary on the Ohio State University study, arguing that there is a substantial amount of evidence that suggests that flu vaccines actually make people less safe rather than more safe, even though much of the country believes otherwise. “Far from offering bulletproof protection, flu shots actually make people more vulnerable to influenza infections, which of course contributes to more people catching the flu and then falsely thinking they need more flu shots for ‘more protection,’” he explained. (Related: Here are four rational and legitimate reasons to avoid getting the flu shot and what you can do instead to protect your health.)

Never one to leave Natural News readers without the facts, the Health Ranger listed off some significant and eye-opening statistics regarding just how unsafe flu vaccinations can be, including the fact that those who got the flu shot in 2008 had a 250 percent increase in influenza infections in subsequent years, and the fact that mercury-laced flu vaccines resulted in a 4,259 percent increase in fetal deaths throughout the 2009 flu season. As a result of the flu vaccine’s ability to weaken the immune system, Adams also noted that “people who get flu shots will be the first to die in an actual global pandemic.”

Even though Essentia Health may legally be allowed to fire employees for not complying with the company’s medical standards and vaccine requirements, it doesn’t make it right, especially when one considers the fact that there is a substantial amount of evidence that suggests that the flu vaccine isn’t very safe in the first place. (Click to Source)

Have Failed Vaccination Programs Caused the U.S. to Lead All Industrialized Nations in Infant Mortality Rates?

vaccines-life-expectancy-rates

Natural vs. Artificial Herd Immunity: What Have Failed Vaccination Programs Taught Us?

by James Lyons-Weiler, PhD
Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge

Herd immunity is a concept by which an infectious agent can no longer spread across a population because a sufficiently large percentage of individuals have immunity, either from a history of exposure to the wild-type of the infectious agent, or due to acquired immunity from vaccination with a vaccine designed to protect against the wild-type.

From an individual perspective, herd immunity can afford protection to one who is not immune.

This type of immunity exists within populations to varying degrees depending on the number of individuals who are immune to the infectious agent.

Other factors that influence the spread of pathogens include attributes of the infectious agent, attributes of the vaccine, the route, mode and rate of transmission of the infectious agent, the lethality of the infectious agent, and the diversity of types of the specific pathogen for which immunity is sought.

Regardless of whether immunity is achieved via a vaccine, or via natural infection, the total percentage of individuals who are immune can have an effect of slowing down the rate of spread of infection via natural transmission.

Herd immunity is sought, in part, due to concern over individuals who are immunocompromised because they are more likely to contract a circulating pathogen in a population in which the infectious agent is relatively free to spread. It is generally thought that there is an inverse relationship between the percentage of a population that is immune, and the chance that a person who is not immune will come into contact with an individual who can transmit the virus.

Either through natural immunity or through vaccination, sufficient herd immunity can, in principle, bring the rate of transmission of an infectious agent to zero, with immune individuals collectively acting as a barrier to the spread of the infectious agent, until it “burns out.”

Unless there is a natural reservoir, herd immunity can be a factor that can contribute to the eradication of infectious agents.

In most mainstream descriptions of herd immunity, the contribution of natural immunity is diminished, or not even mentioned, as the individuals are counted as part of the percentage that have been infected.

However, the statistic of interest to epidemiologists tracking the spread of infectious disease is the number of new transmissions, so any individual who has recovered from a previous infection, and who is now immune, most typically does not represent a source of potential new infections.

Individuals who have natural immunity, whether via natural infection, or passive immunity in babies who acquire their mothers’ antibodies, all contribute to a reduction in the rate of occurrence of new transmissions.

Some viruses and bacteria however, are inherently capable of re-infecting, either because they rapidly evolve (such as the cold virus, or the influenza virus), or there are many types (such as HPV), or because they result in a poor or non-specific immune response.

The determination of the benefit of widespread vaccination for any vaccine must consider not only the ability to protect those at risk, but also the downstream costs due to vaccine injuries.

Vaccines: Efficacy and Injury

Efficacy of specific vaccines vary, and thus a difference exists between the rate of vaccination and the rate of immunization.

This difference is one of the reasons why there can be no one fixed rule for percentage of vaccination rate required to achieve sufficient herd immunity.

Other factors include:

  • the incidence of the disease at a given time
  • variation among vaccines in terms of the period of immunity (the period for which a vaccine confers protection against the wild-type)
  • the nature in which vaccination is conducted.

When only an identifiable segment of the population is at risk of acquiring an infection, such as is the case for Hepatitis B, targeted vaccination can be an effective means of control.

The determination of the benefit of widespread vaccination for any vaccine must consider not only the ability to protect those at risk, but also the downstream costs due to vaccine injuries. The calculations used to bring a Hepatitis B full-population (mass vaccination) program forward did not include any explicit determination or estimation of the cost of Hepatitis B vaccination beyond the cost of the vaccine units themselves.

Vaccine injury is a poorly-studied factor that can directly impede the ability of vaccines to contribute to herd immunity.

Obviously, a vaccine that imparts a higher risk of injury than is relayed to the public, either due to weak, poor, or fraudulent vaccine safety science, will cause a manifestation and realization of that risk, which then will be shared across news media outlets (1980s-late 1990s) and, with mainstream media afraid of losing advertising revenue from direct-to-consumer marketing, via social media outlets (late 1990s-present).

For example, widespread vaccine injury reports by thousands of parents including immediate (same or next day) symptoms such as seizures, screaming, head-banging, loss of verbal communication, etc. have contributed to vaccine hesitancy.

This will reduce vaccine uptake, thereby limiting the ability of that vaccine to contribute to herd immunity.

Such has been the case now for many vaccines currently on the CDC vaccination schedule. The cause of the inability of the vaccine to contribute to herd immunity in these cases results from clearly misleading information on the safety of the product, magnifying distrust.

Some vaccines come with warnings that those receiving the vaccine should not go near infants who have not been vaccinated against that infectious agent. This is the case of vaccines against the Bordetella pertussis bacterium, which causes whooping cough (a treatable respiratory disease).

Pertussis is also an interesting infectious agent with respect to the concept of herd immunity. According to the CDC, individuals should be vaccinated two weeks prior to being near a newborn. Consider then this quote from the CDC:

More than 95 percent of U.S. children receive three or more doses of pertussis vaccines, while less than 1 percent are completely unvaccinated. Because of this, we usually find that most pertussis occurs among vaccinated people. This does not mean that the vaccine doesn’t work, it just means that most people are vaccinated but protection wears off.

And yet the herd immunity threshold score (the target percentage) allegedly required to acquire herd immunity is between 88% and 93%. The difficulties in expecting herd immunity with vaccination against B. pertussis were known back in the 1990s (Fine, 1993):

The cyclical pattern of pertussis provides a classic example of mass action dynamics…. Consideration of age-dependent transmission has suggested a slightly lower estimate, 88 percent, assuming no waning of immunity….

Given that these herd immunity estimates are higher than most estimates of the protective efficacy of a complete course of pertussis vaccine… and that there is evidence of waning vaccine-derived protection… it appears that eradication of this infection is not currently possible by childhood vaccination alone.

Vaccination of those most at risk of being infected is considered to be the most efficient use of herd immunity. These strategies are sometimes called “bubble” or “ring” (around an outbreak) and cocoon (around an individual) vaccination.

The CDC recommends cocoon vaccination for infants for pertussis, leading to new vaccination of individuals who will be near the infant shortly after birth with the DTaP/TDap vaccine.

This recommendation persists in spite of the findings of epidemiologists who reported in 2012 that to prevent one infant death, one million parents would have to be vaccinated.

Fear tactics—such as the Glaxo Smith Kline ad featuring a new grandmother, supposedly not recently vaccinated with TDap, turning into a wolf—are used to aggressively promote the cocooning strategy.

Nicola Klein, a pediatrician and vaccine researcher who led a recent Pediatrics study on vaccinations for whooping cough stated,

“I haven’t seen any studies that show a strong protective effect form the cocooning strategy.”

Vaccine Failure

11-29-CrowdedStreet_Featured_Image-800x417

The vaccination paradigm holds that a specific percentage of vaccinated in a population will bring about herd immunity fails at 95 percent in part because people who are vaccinated lose their immunity.

With acellular pertussis, the immunity is lost fairly quickly; one study in 2005 found that adolescents who were schedule-compliant for pertussis vaccination only had 73% effectiveness within one year of the final booster, and that the effectiveness rate dropped to 34% within two to four years.

Compared to natural immunity, which lasts four to 20 years, the pertussis immunization program cannot be expected to contribute to herd immunity as well as vaccine proponents would have us believe.

Dr. James Cherry, in a commentary accompanying the Acosta et al. study, found the results, which he calls “vaccine failure”, “disappointing” and pointed out that case-control studies tend to inflate efficacy.

He attributes the failure of the TDap and DTaP vaccination program to five factors:

  • waning immune responses
  • a change in the typical immune response in vaccine recipients
  • insufficient antigenicity of the vaccine due to missing proteins that would cause longer immunity as in the natural infection
  • improper formulation of the antigens that are in the vaccines
  • a stronger response of the original vaccine components than to new epitopes in the later vaccine

Vaccines other than the TDap/DTaP have been developed with high efficacy.

Why have these not been brought forward?

Combined vaccines have caused gridlock on improvement in terms of both safety and efficacy, and this gridlock has lead ACIP and CDC to adopt unsafe strategies. Unfortunately, the failure of the proposed ten-year booster TDap program resulted in calls for vaccination with TDap during pregnancy—each pregnancy.

For a vaccine to be administered to pregnant women without adequate safety data is, in my view, nothing short of medical malpractice.

Pertussis vaccination during pregnancy was actually put into policy with zero safety data. The use of TDap during pregnancy was recommended by the CDC in 2013—before, even as they admitted, sufficient safety testing was available.

The subsequent and few vaccine safety studies conducted for TDap during pregnancy focused primarily on maternal outcomes, and have not properly accounted for fetal deaths (e.g., excluding cases of spontaneous abortions).

Maternal immune activation is especially problematic for brain development.

In a review of one study in its recommendation, the CDC reported that fever was observed in 2.4%–6.5% of recipients of a TDap booster (indicating increased risk of neurodevelopmental issues, per maternal immune activation), and while those rates were similar to controls, they noted that,

Safety data on use of Td during multiple pregnancies have not been published,”

and yet they still recommend TDap in each and every pregnancy.

The use of an absence of evidence as evidence of absence belies an approval bias that reaches outside the realm of science.

And herein we see the same logical fallacy that CDC has been using since 2004 to have vaccines approved.

The use of an absence of evidence as evidence of absence belies an approval bias that reaches outside the realm of science.

In a study earlier this year, Perry et al reported that 3% of women who received TDap during a pregnancy were not likely to accept another TDap during subsequent pregnancies due to responses to the first dose.

However, they also noted that maternal reactions following receipt of TDap are common: two-thirds of the study population had noteworthy negative reactions.

ACIP Wants Three Doses of MMR? What For? 19% Efficacy?

In their anti-trust case against Merck, two whistleblowers have asserted that the actual efficacy of the MMR vaccine against the wild-type mumps virus may be as low as 10%.

ACIP recently recommended a third dose of MMR to help stem the growing number of mumps outbreaks across the country.

For over a decade, mumps outbreaks worldwide have involved—almost exclusively—vaccinated individuals.

In an article reviewing the Merck fraud case, Dr. Paul Offit, MD is quoted as “believing” that all young people should be required to get a third MMR dose before entering college.

This “belief”, like ACIP’s “belief” that TDap would be safe during pregnancy, is not science-based.

Based on Merck “science,” MMR is claimed to have a two-dose “efficacy” of 80-85% (“efficacy” is in quotes because this is for the vaccine strain, not the wild type).

If the whistleblowers’ allegations are correct, under a naïve model in which repeated vaccination increases immunity in the previously vaccinated at the same rate as the unvaccinated (a dubious but best-case scenario), my calculations tell me that the expected population-wide efficacy of MMR against wild-type mumps after three doses is 14.5%.

To achieve the reported immunity (85%), individuals would have to receive a stunning 14 doses of MMR.

If the single-dose efficacy is 68%, four doses are needed to achieve 85% overall efficacy. 

Note that even this falls short of Merck’s goal of 95% efficacy to achieve herd immunity.

Clearly, if TDap/DtaP is a failed vaccine, MMR is an absolute blunder.

Theory vs. Reality

So, what have we learned about herd immunity from admitted failures such as the TDap/DTaP vaccination program and ongoing mumps outbreaks within vaccinated populations?

A meta-analysis in 2015 estimated that assuming 85% efficacy, in every additional year after the last dose of DTaP, the odds of infection increased by 1.33 times and that only 10% of children vaccinated with DTaP would be immune to pertussis 8.5 years after the last dose.

Reviewing last year’s Harvard mumps outbreak and the current outbreak at Syracuse University, nearly all the students diagnosed with mumps had been “properly vaccinated” against mumps with the MMR.

Given that the only solution offered to us from the CDC is more boosters, I would say that we have not moved or improved in artificial immunization—at least against B. pertussis or mumps—in decades.

There are calls for lifelong adult boosters against pertussis to “increase herd protection” as if that is still (or ever was) a viable concept when considering pertussis.

U.S. Leads all Industrialized Nations in Infant Deaths

Crying little baby boy receive vaccine in office

The US leads all industrialized nations in the rates of deaths of infants on the first day of life.

Starting in 2011, there were more fetal deaths than infant deaths in the United States (National Vital Statistics Report, CDC), and the rate of maternal death during pregnancy is skyrocketing, beyond all western countries.

One study in the Lancet reported a rate of 26 deaths per 100,000 pregnancies in the US.

We have also learned that the vaccine industry, including the CDC, will continue to allow society to expend time, energy and resources on demonstrably failed vaccine programs, ambivalent to the risks of adverse events associated with each and every vaccine, and that they will desperately try to move the goal post of performance, or ditch their vaccination efforts onto another unsuspecting segment of the population without sufficient safety testing. (Click to Source)

An final end to drug & alcohol recovery is as close as this website: VictoryRetreatMontana.com

BOMBSHELL: UNICEF just finished vaccinating 355,000 children to halt a polio outbreak caused by vaccinating children in the first place

black-boy-receiving-vaccine-e1494401780331

(Natural News) UNICEF, the World Health Organization (WHO), and partner organizations have been hard at work administering the polio vaccine to over 355,000 young Syrian children. This urgent immunization program has been undertaken in response to an outbreak of “vaccine-derived polio” in parts of Syria wracked by violence. While these healthcare workers certainly demonstrate compassion and bravery, especially considering the environment they are being forced to work in, it defies logic that inflicting more vaccines on Syrian children is the best response to an outbreak that was caused by vaccines in the first place.

The Rotary Organization explains that the response to such outbreaks is to immediately launch “supplementary immunization activities and field investigations” in both the affected and neighboring countries.

Rotary has pledged $1.2 billion to the polio vaccination effort.

A UNICEF press release notes:

To vaccinate every child in need, UNICEF ran an outreach campaign and provided the vaccines and essential cold chain equipment. WHO has trained more than 1,000 field volunteers, transported the vaccines to the conflict-affected area, and funded the implementation of the campaign.

“As of 18 August 2017, 33 children under the age of five have been paralyzed,” said Elizabeth Hoff, the representative for WHO in Syria. “The detection of the circulating vaccine derived polio virus type 2 (cVDPV2) cases demonstrates that disease surveillance systems are functional in Syria. Our priority now is to achieve the highest possible polio immunization coverage to stop the circulation of virus.” [Emphasis added]

So, with 33 children already paralyzed as a result of the use of polio vaccines, the response of the international health community is to rush to vaccinate as many more children as possible? How is that logical? (Click to Site)