Let's have a Conversation: Health & Vaccine Safety

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...

Have you heard about the newly published study: "Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12- year old U.S. children"   in the Journal of Translational Sciences?  You can see the study here in PDF format:  http://oatext.com/pdf/JTS-3-186.pdf   or here:  http://oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U.S.-children.php This is exciting! I hope many more vaccinated vs. unvaccinated studies follow in its footsteps. Celeste McGovern sums the findings up nicely in her article on the website for the Children's Medical Safety Research Institute: We’re assured vaccines are “safe and effective” even though public health officials acknowledge they sometimes have serious side-effects including death and despite the troubling fact that no long-term study of their effects on overall health has ever been conducted. Remarkably, not a single published study has ever compared va...

I recently read this article titled: Defending a parent's right to withhold vaccines when they want to  in Philly Voice. I was pleasantly surprised to find the writer (Amy Wright Glenn) was pro-vaccine--especially since mainstream media likes to portray the debate as being strictly black and white. Considering myself a nuance of gray too, I really enjoyed the openness, sincerity, and understanding she brought to the topic of informed consent and vaccine mandates. Here's an excerpt from the article: All who are pro-vaccine support the existence of medical exemptions, because some children cannot be safely vaccinated. But not all who are pro-vaccine support mandatory vaccination laws that remove religious or philosophical exemptions. Award-winning pediatrician Paul Thomas, M.D., co-author of The Vaccine-Friendly Plan and father of 10 vaccinated children, argues: “It’s up to the parents—not the government or any doctor—to ultimately decide what will work best for their child...

"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...