Let's have a Conversation: Health & Vaccine Safety

When I first started looking into vaccination, I was trying to convince myself that vaccines were indeed safe and effective--and that all those people who had "adverse reactions" were "coincidence." To my great and humbling surprise, I did not find this to be true. As I dove deeper into my research, I came across several resources that I found particularly helpful. Now, I would like to share them with you. Organizations/Groups: National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) : This organization has been around since 1982! "The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is dedicated to the prevention of vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and to defending the informed consent ethic in medicine." Their website has an abundance of useful information in an easy-to-navigate format: http://www.nvic.org/ They even have an advocacy portal to keep you connected to important issues in your state (just register and get involved)! Pennsylva...

The Guardian published an article this past October (2016), which reports that " Nurses and midwives who ignore scientific evidence by promoting anti-vaccination to patients and the public [will be] cracked down on in a tough new position statement from their industry regulator. " The article goes on to urge the public to report any nurse or midwife who promotes anti-vaccination literature (even on social media) so they can face prosecution for their "offence." This is troubling news for Australian nurses and midwives. What is labeled "anti-vaccination," more often than not, is discussion about vaccine safety. Since there is science to support both sides of this discussion (a lot of it), it does not make sense to censor one side over the other, and to do so is irresponsible and dangerous .  I will never understand why a more comprehensive and unbiased approach to vaccine science and studies, and health in general, is so seldom considered in ...

If our goal is health, then the risks and limitations of vaccines must be considered in earnest. The argument is not truly “pro” vs. “anti” vaccine as many like to project. The “argument,” or more appropriately, the discussion, is vaccine safety, known risks, and ways to improve, which should include a more personalized approach to health. The science is not settled—there are studies that implicate vaccines as a cause of autism , and there are studies that do not. In such cases, the call for more studies on the subject is warranted—and to say otherwise is truly anti-science. Are you aware that the United States had a Eugenics program up until just after World War II? The precedent for their Eugenics stance was Compulsory Vaccinations . “They believed vaccination protected individuals and the public from disease and eugenical sterilization protected society from ‘racial degeneracy’” (Humphries, 153). U.S. eugenics poster advocating for the removal of genetic "defectives...

The Immunity Education Group (non-profit) recently posted a video on how to recognize harmful vaccine reactions. It is well-worth the two and a half minute watch here: Thanks to the Immunity Education Group for this video:  http://immunityeducationgroup.org/ I think it is important to note that just because some of these reactions are considered "normal" does not equate to causing no harm. There are numerous stories of children who have suffered a range of vaccine reactions from mild to death. These cases should not be ignored in the name of the "common good." My stance will always be: where there is risk, there must be choice . Period. The federal court stated in 09-152 Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC (02/22/11) - Supreme Court, that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe." With this remark they essentially determined that, yes, vaccines are unsafe--we can't help it, but they can't be improved upon, so it's ok. I find that unacceptable. If there is gre...

Origin of Vaccination, c. 1800 I recently posted about the "Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12- year old U.S. children." I learned of this study at the exact time I was re-reading a few chapters from Suzanne Humphries' book:  Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History . The chapters (6 and 7) go into the history of the Smallpox vaccine and its resistance in Leicester, England in the 1860s-1880s. To summarize: at this time, there was a great push for vaccines in England. The "1867 Vaccination Act [had] consolidated existing laws regarding vaccination and instituted a fine for parents who did not present their children for vaccination within three months of birth" (Humphries, 114). Even with this push for mass vaccination, a smallpox epidemic hit England in the early 1870s. This caused a great loss of faith in vaccinations: "It must strike the reflective observer as rather singular t...

"Recently, the state of Pennsylvania introduced SB217, a bill that would eliminate parental and child rights to refuse vaccination. Natural Blaze reports: SB 217 amends P.L.30, No.14 known as the Public School Code of 1949 as follows: Section 1303. Immunization Required; Penalty.–* (e) Notwithstanding any rule or regulation to the contrary, a strong moral or ethical conviction similar to a religious belief may not qualify as an exemption from the immunization requirements of this section. Should the bill pass, it will take effect within just 60 days. Four senators, Democrat Daylin Leach, Democrat Lawrence D Farnese, Democrat Sharif Street and Republican Bob Mensch, joined forces to introduce the bill, which would strip Pennsylvanians of their right to say no to a vaccine that they believe will harm their child. The bill echoes the sentiments of California’s SB277." -Vicki Batts, Natural News This bill is twofold for me. First, I truly believe vaccines should be consider...