The truth about vaccinations: Your physician knows more than the University of Google

“A cousin of my mom’s survived Polio and lived the rest of his life with its effects. He was not expected to live past his teens but made it to his 40s. I am grateful that modern science can protect us from Polio and other diseases and I choose to take advantage of modern science to give my kid better odds of not dying from a preventable disease. I had heard a lot of noise from people claiming vaccines caused Autism, but never saw any clear evidence. It just seemed to me like people really wanted to point to something as the cause and they latched onto vaccines.”–Jennifer

I have been getting into a lot of discussions about whether vaccines are safe in the last few days. I’m not sure if it’s because of a post going viral about a (terrible) Italian court ruling last year (In contrast, American courts side with doctors and scientists on vaccine safety) or Jenny McCarthy’s recent hiring as co-host on “The View”, or simply (as a friend suggested to me today) the fact that a new school year is starting soon and parents are having to provide vaccination records to schools.

“(I got my children vaccinated) because the science supports it and I don’t want my kids to die. And civic reasons. It’s so straightforward.”–Britta

Whatever the reason, this week I’ve been in many conversations with individuals staunchly against vaccinations, parents who are very upset at the idea of unvaccinated children putting their own kids at risk, and parents who are confused and worried and want to know how to make the best decision possible for their children’s safety. I’m writing this for the third group of parents.

What’s going on?
There has been a very steep decrease in the rate of vaccinations recently, particularly (but I want to stress not only) within communities of affluent, well-educated parents. [UPDATE: Keep in mind that there’s considerable diversity among anti-vaccine proponents. A conservative religious community here in Texas, opposed to vaccines because “faith should be enough”, is currently experiencing an outbreak of measles].

“It’s that whole natural, BPA-free, hybrid car community that says ‘we’re not going to put chemicals in our children,’” Shapiro told Salon. “It’s that same idea: ‘I’m going to be pure and I want to keep my child pure.’”

California law mandates that all students get vaccinated, but it also makes it easy to get exemptions for personal beliefs. And parents in tony places like Marin County are taking advantage of it in seemingly growing numbers. One public elementary school in Malibu, an affluent beach town just north of Los Angeles, reported that only 58 percent of their students are immunized — well below the recommended 90-plus percent level — according to Shapiro.

And it’s even worse in some of L.A.’s private schools, where as few as 20 percent of kids are vaccinated in some schools. “Yes, that’s right: Parents are willingly paying up to $25,000 a year to schools at which fewer than 1 in 5 kindergartners has been immunized against the pathogens causing such life-threatening illnesses as measles, polio, meningitis and pertussis (more commonly known as whooping cough),” she wrote. –from (Emphasis mine)

This is particularly frustrating when there is overwhelming evidence that vaccinations DO NOT cause autism. As the wonderful blog Science Based Medicine puts it:

“At this point, the evidence is so utterly overwhelming that there is not a whiff of a hint of a whisper of a correlation between vaccines and autism that it has become irritating that antivaccine activists keep pressuring scientists to do the same study over and over again, coming up with the same results over and over again, and then seeing antivaccinationists fail to believe those same results over and over again. Apparently, antivaccine activists think that if the same sorts of studies are done enough times, there will be a positive result implicating vaccines as a risk factor for or contributing cause to autism.”

Why are parents choosing not to vaccinate their children?
I think there are several reasons, but they all may have some connection to misunderstanding of what the scientific evidence on this issue is, or resistance to perceived authority. In Western cultures, we’re accustomed to framing every public issue as two-sided. People who refuse to acknowledge that there’s legitimacy to the other side are “unfair.” I think this viewpoint is really muddling the vaccine safety conversation. When the media presents scientists on one side, and Natural News on the other, it’s creating a false equivalency. The anti-vaxxers have no credible scientific evidence supporting their position, but placing them opposite a scientist makes it seem like there are two legitimate sides to this debate. There aren’t. The simple fact is that there’s overwhelming scientific consensus that the MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism.

“I unapolagetically vaccinate my kid, and it’s not just because that’s what you do, it’s because I really looked at what the science said and made a decision based on facts, evidence, and rational weighing of risk-benefit. I think the problem is that it’s easier to feel off the hook for risking your kids via inaction rather than action. But realistically, the risks of vaccination are so much less than the risks of what could happen if your child does get a vaccine-preventable disease, and you are also protecting those who *can’t* be vaccinated. That’s why I get a flu shot. Not because I am going to die of the flu, but to protect the elderly, infants, and immunocompromised folks I might come into contact with.” –Melissa (emphasis mine)

Do vaccines work?

Yes. Here are some of the diseases prevented with vaccinations:


from “Demographics of Unvaccinated Chidren”, National Network for Immunization Information.

Do vaccines cause autism?

No. As a starting point for you, here’s a roundup of trustworthy scientific resources for you to read on your own (everything is peer-reviewed, or contains links to peer-reviewed articles):

Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism

Vaccine Safety studies (a bunch of studies, with notes about what they mean):

Concerns about vaccine safety (this is really great, and written in layman’s language)

How do we know that scientists and doctors are right?

I’ve been asked about this quite a bit lately. One person asked me “why aren’t we getting peered reviewed research from other points of view?” The reason is quite simple: there isn’t any.

Scientific research works like this:
You start with the specific questions “Does the MMR vaccine cause autism?”, “Does the MMR vaccine increase the risk of inflammatory bowel disease?” and so forth. You then design a study to test that question. It’s not starting from one “side” or the other, trying to seek proof for it. That’s the way politics works, not science. When you get an answer, it’s either “yes” or “no” (actually it tends to be “there is a statistically significant association between this drug and this disease” or “there is NOT a statistically significant association between this drug and this disease.”) Your results are submitted to experts for peer review. These experts then go over your results and methods with a fine-toothed comb, trying to find weaknesses in your approach, or over-interpretation of the results. They evaluate your statistics to make sure that they’re correct. If they decide that it’s acceptable (and this is usually a very hard test to pass), your paper gets published and is considered “peer-reviewed.” But that’s not the end.

Studies are then done by other research groups to both test and build upon your results. While the initial screen by peer reviewers is very stringent, it doesn’t always catch mistakes, and can miss identifying faked data (for example, Andrew Wakefield’s paper got past peer review because the reviewers didn’t catch that his data were fraudulent). However, all scientific research is iterative–that is, it builds upon a foundation created by other research. So if your results are wrong, or faked, it will quickly become obvious to other researchers who try to replicate or use them. Scientific consensus is VERY hard to achieve. So when it happens, pay attention.

Why do I (and others) keep harping on “peer-reviewed” studies? Why do I (and others) refuse to acknowledge the truth of what X blogger says?

Science operates based on the philosophy that the truth is knowable if we design experiments correctly, and we do enough of them to rigorously test our hypotheses. And I hope that you know by now that anyone with a keyboard can make stuff up. Peer review is how we test that someone isn’t making things up. Experts in your field have to agree with your conclusions.

But what about Andrew Wakefield’s research?

“I got my son vaccinated after doing research about it. I had been going through birthing classes that were against it, but the scientist in me questioned what they were saying. I found the info about the falsified info about autism. I still couldn’t believe (and still can’t) that parents would hold chicken pox parties. I’d had chicken pox as a kid, and I know about shingles. It just made sense to me.”–Charity

Andrew Wakefield faked his data for profit. His medical license has been revoked as a consequence. It’s important that people know that the the link between vaccines/autism is based on an outright lie–most of the other authors on the paper have removed their names from it. You can read more about this story here:

What are the consequences of not vaccinating your children?

“We chose to vaccinate Vera on a regular schedule, and to be honest I did not do extensive research. I read enough to know that the studies showing an autism link were bad science and I found a pediatrician I really trusted and talked to her about it. I also really do believe that those of us with healthy kids should vaccinate to protect children who have compromised immune systems.”–Faye

Harm to your child:

Penn and Teller illustrate this beautifully (if profanely: language NSFW)

To put it simply, your child is at risk of contracting a preventable disease.

Image from
Many of us (myself included) don’t remember polio epidemics. This was the treatment. Image from

What happens in the absence of our vaccination program? Read about it here:

Harm to other children:

“Unvaccinated children are concentrated in particular states, increasing the risk of transmitting vaccine-preventable diseases to other unvaccinated children, undervaccinated children and fully vaccinated children.”

One person with whom I was discussing this issue (he has not vaccinated his kids, but does homeschool them) put forth a hypothesis:

“but if you are correct, i guess in the near future the progressive states will have noticeable outbreaks (and not just the ones you read about), ones that touch somebody you know, as more and more hippy parents stop vaccinating their kids. stay clear of the pacific northwest or perish. ahaha. nah, we are growing super strong natural kids for the future here, and not ones reliant on medicines from a lab. we are sprouting wings and soon we shall fly to furthest regions of the universe and beyond”

I agree with that hypothesis. Unlike the rest of his comment, it’s quite scientific. IF vaccines are protective, and IF parents are choosing not to vaccinate, we should be seeing outbreaks of those diseases in states where the rate of non-vaccination is highest.

This is indeed the case. Here are two examples:

Incidents of whooping cough (pertussis) are significantly higher in states that easily allow parents exceptions from the vaccination. In Washington state alone, there was a 1,300% increase in cases.
Have you ever taken care of a child with pertussis? I have. This is what it’s like (warning: video of children in pain):

And cases of measles infection in the United States have already doubled since last year.

That’s just the beginning. This post is already too long, but I urge you to go to the CDC’s website and read about recent outbreaks. They are tied to regions where vaccine rates are low.

Final thoughts

Googling and listening to what people tell you over on parenting message boards, “Natural News”, and similar sites is not the same thing as advice from a trained physician. I really believe that the vast majority of parents who are leery of vaccinating their kids are simply confused because they’ve been given bad information.

“We live in a society, and our actions have consequences for others. It’s our responsibility to protect our children and our neighbors’ children. Plus our ancestors could only have dreamed of something that would protect their children from these horrible diseases.”–Mary

Vaccination is not just to protect your own child. It’s also a moral and civic issue. Remember that we are incredibly privileged in our society to have access to vaccines. In many places around the world, people don’t have easy access to them, and there are even some places where aid workers are killed for trying to administer vaccines. Our privilege confers responsibility as well. By vaccinating your children, you are also protecting other children (and adults) who can’t be vaccinated. Here is a really great explanation of this, and the concept of herd immunity.

“I chose to have my first child vaccinated because I paid some attention in science classes and it works. I paid better attention in history classes and have a sense of the suffering various preventable diseases have caused in the past and I didn’t want that for my child. After my first born spent a week in the hospital with an infection, I feel much more strongly about having my second child vaccinated. In that case, it wasn’t something that could have been vaccinated against, but there is no reason and no excuse for subjecting your child to the risk of that kind of suffering over a preventable disease. It’s irresponsible and cruel.”–Eric

Wakefield, McCarthy, Kennedy and other leaders of the movement are deceiving you. They bear responsibility for the deaths of children. That’s why I keep speaking out on this issue.

I hope that I’ve provided you with a starting point from which to do your own research. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to ask me here, or on twitter, or by email (link at the top of this page), or–even better–ask your physician!

UPDATE: I wrote a tutorial/example of how to critically read a vaccine safety study here. If you wish to do your own research, I suggest that reading the primary, peer-reviewed literature is a vastly better approach than relying on books/Facebook memes/discussion forums. Hopefully the tools you’ll find in that post (and this one) will be helpful.


Edited to remove Lyme disease from list of vaccine preventable illnesses. There’s a vaccine currently in clinical trials, but it’s not fully tested or available yet. Thanks to “justreadingyourblog” for pointing that out to me.

2,204 thoughts on “The truth about vaccinations: Your physician knows more than the University of Google

  1. mubarak December 7, 2015 / 4:56 pm

    haii i have one doubt about vaccination in hiv
    in ELISA method for hiv we r detecting hiv antibodys by using of antigen so if we inject the hiv anti gen in to a host then he can produce anti body aginest the hiv if it is possible
    my emil id

    • Chris December 8, 2015 / 3:26 pm

      There is no vaccination for HIV. The difficulty is that is likes to hide from the immune system, and it is always changing.

    • Scott Nelson December 8, 2015 / 3:36 pm

      That method has been tried. Unfortunately, when T cells respond to HIV, they become infected, and the process of responding actually activates the HIV virus. Additionally, the HIV virus has an extremely high mutation rate, so even if you do respond and make neutralizing antibodies, the virus quickly mutates and resistant forms take over.

      A lot of research is going into finding invariant parts of HIV that human are capable of raising antibodies to-but given the variability of the virus and the variability of humans, its not easy.

      The HIV ELISA does look for antibodies to HIV proteins (typically p24) but the antibodies that are produced do not slow the virus from infecting cells

    • Anonymous October 4, 2016 / 4:26 am

      Stop with the bullshit please. The amount of vaccines a child receives now ya wouldn’t give a horse.

      • foreverh October 7, 2016 / 8:54 am

        You can’t explain any of this to these people. They don’t have a clue about actual science and they quite frankly don’t want to.

        They are convinced that whole foods are the answer to all the world’s ills and their “proof” is that they haven’t died yet. Look at how quick they are to say “If vaccines worked we’d all be cured”.

        They don’t even know that this statement is a clear representation of their ignorance of general science and vaccines. They actually believe this is a valid point.

        Just try to explain MRSA or Mycobacterium and they’ll tell you it was homegrown in a lab by the Gov JUST to scare people or kill them to control population.

        They have convinced themselves their confirmation bias skills are tantamount to “research”, and their vast knowledge of eating as superior to any doctor.

        They quote articles from The Onion, Inquisiter, etc. not knowing these are known satirical and pretend news.

        The only thing that will turn this Titanic of misinformation around and make a dent in their collective psyche, is for this mess to get large enough numbers of these people sick enough to realize they had it wrong. This too will take a long time, because we all know it’s not going to cause some plague overnight. It will be a slow return to the spread of diseases that were at, or near elimination up until now.

        They are simply resigned to the fact that they are “right” because they decided they are.. When faced with real science that explains how they are misinformed, they respond by deeming it false, because they said so. Apparently being “right” is vastly superior and desirable to being informed.

        Right now there aren’t enough of these people to cause destruction. The movement will grow, and when it does? I hope it’s not too late. That’s a horrible way to find out you’re ignorance is not superior to intelligence.

        • Suki April 28, 2017 / 3:06 pm

          My information came from public health records and studying medical journals before there ever was an Internet, and before the really big cover ups began.

          Before there was Internet, the vaccine industry, and it’s shills, did not have the need to put out articles like this one, because they only had to make sure that information which exposed their intentional misinformation would not reach the public’s eyes and ears. It was, indeed, much easier at that time to keep ordinary citizens in the dark.

          And I would say to anyone commenting here who is not a shill, but thinks that parroting the deliberate falsifications of a multi-trillion dollar industry makes you intellectually superior, have I got news for YOU! And some advice – if you really want to know the truth, try to chuck the brainwashing (I know it isn’t easy for many) and start really digging through the manure to get to the truth.

          • Chris April 28, 2017 / 5:30 pm

            What information and why should we believe anything you say?

            • Suki April 28, 2017 / 6:56 pm

              You don’t have to believe what anyone says. If you want to know the truth for yourself, then you need to put in the work and carefully look for, and examine, all sides. And keep in mind who has the most to gain financially.

              For instance, this is what Dr. Sam Eggertsen publicly stated after taking the time to review all the information on Dr. Wakefield independently:

              “Looking at the evidence I must now agree with my patient that Andrew Wakefield is not a fraud, and if I ever meet Dr. Wakefield I will give him my apology for having said so.”

              Jenny McCarthy’s crime was noticing a distinct, dramatic, horrifying difference in her child immediately after vaccination (it nearly killed him), and having the “uppity nerve” to dare to speak about it! Ironically, she is not even anti-vaccine. She thinks they can be made safer. I disagree with her on that, but you see how intensely the industry goes after someone who simply tells what they have experienced.

              And, you have probably noticed that all doctors who question or speak out against vaccination are labeled as “quacks” on the Internet now. Here is what Dr. Suzanne Humphries said about that:

              “Doctors are really being systematically brainwashed. Not only that, but if doctors do start to see problems… wake up to it; do their own research, and buck the system, they risk being treated the way I was. I was well respected through the entire state of Maine. People were referring their patients to me. My colleagues would come to me with their medical problems… But once I started to argue against the practice of vaccination, I was automatically tossed into the category of a quack…”

              Here is just one example of what I found while researching in a medical journal at exactly the same time period as a mainstream news release appeared in the major media (Parade Magazine in the Sunday edition of all major newspapers) :

              This media release told us that the pneumococcal vaccine, recommended for all seniors, and other “vulnerable” individuals” with health issues putting them at risk, “provides immunity against the 23 types of pneumococcal responsible for about 90 percent of all pneumococcal disease.”

              IN CONTRAST, here is what the article in the NEJM reported, 3 days before the news release:

              In a controlled study of 2,295 “high risk patients” (with one or more of the following: age above 55 years, and the presence of those other high risk health issues), half were given the vaccine, and the other half were given a placebo. The result was that more of the vaccine recipients contracted pneumonia or bronchitis than the placebo group. The experimenters concluded: “We were unable to demonstrate any efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia or bronchitis in this population.” New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 315, No. 21, 1986, p. 1318.

              Major contradiction there, and there is so much more.

              • Chris April 29, 2017 / 12:13 am

                Okay, so you have nothing.

                “Jenny McCarthy’s crime was noticing a distinct, dramatic, horrifying difference in her child immediately after vaccination (it nearly killed him)”

                Except it was closer to more than a year later. The MMR vaccine is given at around fifteen months, her son’s very dangerous seizures happened when when he was about two and a half years old:

                So, no… we really don’t need to believe anything you say. You are just repeating the same lies told by the same liars over and over and over again. Come back when you have some real verifiable evidence in the form of PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers. Until then, you shall be ignored.

                • rosross April 29, 2017 / 12:47 am

                  Oh, you mean ignored as the doctor who first raised the alarm about Thalidomide was ignored? It is hardly a scientific approach but it seems to be a part of the modern scientific approach.

                  • Chris April 29, 2017 / 4:05 pm

                    Dr. Kelsey was not ignored. She was awarded the President’s Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service by President John Kennedy for saving the United States of America from the thalidomide tragedy.

                    • rosross April 30, 2017 / 2:00 am

                      Kelsey did not warn of the effects of Thalidomide, she refused to authorise it for use in the US. A wise and courageous act on her part.

                      And now we are risking the lives and health of babies again by injecting pregnant women with vaccines. How quickly people forget that science-medicine cannot be trusted.

                    • rosross April 30, 2017 / 1:53 am

                      Wikipedia is not accepted as a source by any respectable university in the world. But I see you are prepared to make do with inferior source material.

                • Suki April 29, 2017 / 11:12 am

                  Thanks Chris, for confirming that you ARE a shill, and not just a concerned parent who is willing to investigate.

                  By the way, since you focused on McCarthy and ignored everything else: although Evan’s seizures began around 2 1/2 years, there were other symptoms, leading up to those, which occurred very shortly after the shots. Despite the fact that the saboteurs have planted land mine links all over the place in order to make it look like Jenny is a “lying bimbo” (saw both those terms used), here is what she actually said:

                  In a PBS interview, she describes her experience regarding a vaccine-autism link with her son, Evan. “…He hit pretty much every milestone. It wasn’t until after the MMR [measles, mumps and rubella vaccine] he started showing some regression — meaning not talking as much as he used to. In playgroup, he was more by himself. Kids would steal toys from him, and he didn’t even know they stole the toy. And I would think I just had the most polite little boy in the world who didn’t mind people that stole toys from him. Really, those were the first kind of behaviors that I look back now noticing. Then he started to develop blue circles under his eyes, bloated belly, gas, constipation, eczema..

                  • Chris April 29, 2017 / 11:25 am

                    Yawn. You have nothing, so you resort to name calling.

                    That PBS interview directly counters what she wrote in her book. She changes her story to fit how she decides to exploit her son for publicity.

                • Suki April 29, 2017 / 11:18 am

                  “PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers.” Translation: “The foxes who are guarding their trillion dollar hen houses.”

                  • Chris April 29, 2017 / 11:26 am

                    Again, you are just making stuff up. Sorry, but argument by blatant assertion is stale, old and worthless.

                    • Suki April 29, 2017 / 3:22 pm

                      Actually (and I’ll remind you here that you ignored the medical journal information in favor of going after Jenny McCarthy) Jenny’s statements don’t look bad to me at all. It’s the articles themselves, which are so full of superfluous text, in an obvious effort to just use more and unnecessary words of their own to lead readers off the path of the central subject matter at hand.

                      Very typical of those vested interest land mine links I was referring to.

                    • Chris April 29, 2017 / 4:03 pm

                      What “medical journal information”? You have not provided anything other than your blatant assertions.

                    • Chris April 29, 2017 / 4:11 pm

                      The 1986 one on a bacterial disease for vulnerable adults is not on the present American pediatric schedule.

                    • Chris April 29, 2017 / 11:18 pm

                      Here is an idea… You brought up Jenny McCarthy and her child’s seizures (which were not febrile, but much more dangerous). She claims in one of her many stories it was the MMR vaccine given to her son a year before the seizures.

                      Here is what you need to do: provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that the MMR vaccine that has been used in the USA since 1978 has caused more seizures than measles, mumps and rubella.

                      No excuses, no anecdotes, just real verifiable data.

                    • Suki April 30, 2017 / 12:53 pm

                      “What “medical journal information?” Chris, I think you need to go back to my first comment. It seems you fogged out on everything else in order to focus on Jenny McCarthy.

              • Chris April 29, 2017 / 4:09 pm

                By the way, that article is not about the American MMR, which is what McCarthy was blaming for her son’s seizures he had more than a year later. It also has nothing to do with any other vaccine.

                • Suki April 30, 2017 / 1:16 pm

                  Oh, so now you DID see the info. about the medical journal article? No, it is not specifically about the MMR, but it IS about how information regarding vaccines, which is meant only for ‘insiders’ to see, changes 180 degrees by the time it reaches the public’s eyes and ears. And it was easier to find such info. in the journals before the ‘insiders’ began to realize that there were quite a few of us reading and sharing information that was meant to be kept hidden from the public.

                  However, if one looks hard enough, digs long enough, one can find some admissions, like the following from PubMed:

                  Viral / Immune studies:

                  Abnormal measles-mumps-rubella antibodies and CNS autoimmunity in
                  children with autism.

                  Autoimmunity to the central nervous system (CNS), especially to myelin basic
                  protein (MBP), may play a causal role in autism, a neurodevelopmental
                  disorder. Because many autistic children harbor elevated levels of measles
                  antibodies, we conducted a serological study of measles-mumps-rubella
                  (MMR) and MBP autoantibodies.

                  ….over 90% of MMR antibody-positive autistic sera were also positive for MBP
                  autoantibodies, suggesting a strong association between MMR and CNS
                  autoimmunity in autism. Stemming from this evidence, we suggest that an
                  inappropriate antibody response to MMR, specifically the measles component
                  thereof, might be related to pathogenesis of autism.

                  Serological association of measles virus and human herpes virus-6
                  with brain auto-antibodies in autism.

                  This study is the first to report an association between virus serology and
                  brain autoantibody in autism; it supports the hypothesis that a virus-induced
                  autoimmune response may play a causal role in autism.

                  Hypothesis: conjugate vaccines may predispose children to autism
                  spectrum disorders.

                  Conjugate vaccines fundamentally change the manner in which the immune
                  systems of infants and young children function by deviating their immune
                  responses to the targeted carbohydrate antigens from a state of hypo-
                  responsiveness to a robust B2 B cell mediated response.

                  This period of hypo-responsiveness to carbohydrate antigens coincides with
                  the intense myelination process in infants and young children, and conjugate
                  vaccines may have disrupted evolutionary forces that favored early brain
                  development over the need to protect infants and young children from
                  capsular bacteria.

                  Effects of diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis or tetanus vaccination on
                  allergies and allergy-related respiratory symptoms among children
                  and adolescents in the United States.

                  The odds of having a history of asthma was twice as great among vaccinated
                  subjects than among unvaccinated subjects The odds of having had any
                  allergy-related respiratory symptom in the past 12 months was 63% greater
                  among vaccinated subjects than unvaccinated subjects The associations
                  between vaccination and subsequent allergies and symptoms were greatest
                  among children aged 5 through 10 years.

                  Neurological Complications of Pertussis Immunization

                  Review is made of 107 cases of neurological complications of pertussis
                  inoculation reported in the literature. The early onset of neurological
                  symptoms was characteristic, with changes of consciousness and convulsions
                  as the most striking features. The question of aetiology is considered and
                  contraindications are discussed….as is the grave danger of further
                  inoculations when a previous one has produced any suggestion of a
                  neurological reaction.

                  • Chris April 30, 2017 / 6:22 pm

                    You really are very bad at giving good citations. I can see why, because ‘Neurological Complications of Pertussis Immunization” only brings up this on PubMed:
                    Br Med J. 1958 Jul 5;2(5087):24-7.
                    Neurological complications of pertussis immunization.

                    Wow, 1958 is so current. :-/

                    So how are those allergies and so called “autoimmunity” problems worse than measles, which causes pneumonia in one out of ten cases and encephalitis in one out of a thousand cases? And how are they more dangerous than pertussis, diphtheria and tetanus… the latter two usually kill about one in ten to twenty.

                    • Suki April 30, 2017 / 10:59 pm

                      First of all, one citation was from 1958, the others were from 1998, 2000, and 2002. Also, declaring a study “too old,” is a favorite shill tactic; and never mind the fact that your pseudo-scientists still claim that 200 years ago (that’s a lot further back than 1958), injections of putrid pus scraped from open sores on cows was curing smallpox. A real testimony to the power of smoke and mirrors, and the money used to procure them.

                      “In 1806 a Mr. Kraus was awarded $1000, by the then rulers of New York territory for his scientific discovery which had kept rabies out of New York for over twenty years. His formula is a matter of record and consisted of the ground-up jaw bone of an ass or dog, a piece of colt’s tongue and the green rust off a penny of George the First reign.” from “The Poisoned Needle,” (1957).

                      The recipes for today’s vaccines are not really much different, if you just swap the jaw bone for “fetal calf serum (blood), the colt’s tongue for “chicken protein” or mouse brain cells, and the green rust for aluminum. So much more sophisticated!

                      ““Tetanus vaccine is probably one of the most ridiculous vaccines ever. Your chances of getting Tetanus are about the same as walking outta here and getting hit by a meteor. If you get a cut or puncture wound and you put peroxide on it, your chances of getting tetanus are zero because tetanus organism is anaerobic. It cannot live in oxygen. Tetanus comes from the bowels of animals. As long as you don’t have a sheep or a cow in your house, I don’t think you’re in any danger.” – Dr Russell Blaylock.

                      My brother developed weakness at the injection site after a tetanus shot he received in 2009, and then it spread. He was subsequently diagnosed with ALS. He is, as of 2012, deceased, suffocated to death from Lou Gehrigs Disease.

                      Interestingly, I had come across another article, this one from the BMJ, about several vaccines, plus tetanus shots and gamma globulin shots, causing auto-immune diseases. That’s in addition to the cancers, leukemia, seizures, encephalopathy, paralysis, blindness, asthma, life threatening allergies, and so much more.

                      There ARE effective ways to prevent and treat infectious diseases. Injecting a cocktail of toxic chemicals and noxious biological waste products from animals isn’t it.

                      The real history of vaccines and infections diseases is included in many books throughout that history. But the most recent one that I like is “Dissolving Illusions,” by Dr. Suzanne Humphries.
                      That is, for any readers who are interested in getting past the smoke and mirrors and learning the truth.

                    • Chris May 1, 2017 / 10:01 am

                      “Also, declaring a study “too old,” is a favorite shill tactic;”

                      It is calling out your cherry picking. By definition they are “too old” if it about a vaccine that is no longer used. Especially if that vaccine is smallpox.

                      You are just proving you have nothing but name calling and cherry picking.

                • Suki April 30, 2017 / 5:32 pm

                  “It also has nothing to do with any other vaccine.” You mean you don’t know that the pneumococcal vaccine is a vaccine?

                  • Chris April 30, 2017 / 6:24 pm

                    Do you understand what the word “other” means? It means that one almost thirty year old study has nothing to do with any vaccine on the present American pediatric schedule.

                    Considering your other reply, I see you also do not understand the concept of “relative risk.”

                    • Suki April 30, 2017 / 11:12 pm

                      Oh, thanks for the new definition of “other,” and for ignoring (I’m sure, deliberately) the fact that the example was meant to show how the vaccination promoters and their media minions LIE to the public about how their vaccines perform (or not).

                      So, carry on. I shared information for those who really want to know the truth, and how to start researching, how to recognize links, and postings, of deliberate misinformation, and the financial reasons behind it.

                      I’ve done that, and so I’m through responding to your word manipulations, and dashes around the mulberry bush.

                  • rosross May 2, 2017 / 1:18 am

                    It is a law of physics that the greater the force the greater the resistance and the more the pro-vax-max brigade seek to force their views and vaccines on others, the greater will be the resistance.

                    On average human beings are not stupid and when they find out that the vax companies have been given carte blanche with no fear or threat of being held accountable, it makes people suspicious. As it should.

                    Science without ethics, morals, integrity or common sense is behind the max-vax movement and we can only hope that the return to common sense does not require enormous levels of human misery, suffering and death.

                    There is a limit to how long the science-medical industry can hide the damage done by vaccines. The truth will always come out eventually.

          • rosross April 28, 2017 / 9:33 pm

            Well said but the brainwashed and fanatical do not want truth because it demands they question their beliefs and as with any religion, and this form of science, scientism has become a religion, should the god of science-medicine be questioned and found at fault, then the security of their system is severely challenged and that creates a level of irrational panic.

            To hold science-medicine accountable for vaccines in objective ways, where integrity and truth are the major factors, is just too terrifying for the acolytes.

            But the numbers grow in those who are intelligent, informed, aware and sensible and let us hope that inroads can be made before a tragedy of such terrible proportions is created by vaccines, that the deniers can no longer deny.

            • Chris April 29, 2017 / 11:25 pm

              Oh, deer… that is very weird coming from someone who thinks homeopathy is real. I love the mangling of vocabulary and metaphor. Deer Roslyn, go back into your 18th century cave, and leave the science talk to the modern adults.

              If you want to come dine at the grown up table, then prove Andre Saine’s contention that homeopathy works better for rabies than the modern vaccine, which was introduced in the 1960s. Just provide the PubMed indexed animal studies by non-homeopaths that uber-diluted remedies worked better for rabies than the modern vaccine. Otherwise, go back to doing macrame or whatever you do when you are not trolling on science blogs.

              • rosross April 30, 2017 / 1:52 am

                I think you mean dear. Thanks for that ad hominem, abuse the person not the post, approach. It reflects on you, not me.

                • foreverh April 30, 2017 / 1:47 pm

                  Your entire rant was ad hominem.. You name call all science, name call all scientific opinions, and then propose that only those that cherry pick already debunked anecdotal papers are the “truly educated”.. You are a hypocrite and a liar.. You have nothing of value to say

                  • rosross April 30, 2017 / 8:54 pm

                    Gosh, you did get upset.

                    I do not dismiss all scientific opinions, I simply make the point that science is a system of enquiry, run by humans and flawed as any system run by humans is flawed.

                    I fully appreciate where the scientific system has skills, in the material and mechanical and think that making machines and bits of equipment is often a very useful skills area, but, it is where science tries to apply its mechanical and material belief system to the natural world that we have problems and never more so than in science and in this particular, in regard to vaccines.

                    Many scientists and doctors act with integrity but they are also brainwashed and trapped by the power that profit-driven pharmaceutical companies have over them.

                    They are additionally compromised by the modern agenda-driven nature of society, i.e. we believe in vaccines so they must be okay, as opposed to, let’s keep questioning vaccines so we can be very, very, very, very sure that injecting babies and small children with disease, toxins, animal, human and bird material, dozens of times in the first five years of life, beginning within hours of birth, does not do great harm to them.

                    More so now we have learned the brain and immune system are physically connected. Something not known when vaccine theory and methodology were invented.

                    You may think the safety of children is of no value – I do not.

              • rosross May 2, 2017 / 2:14 am

                When vaccine theory and methodology was invented science-medicine did not know the brain and immune system were physically connected and more importantly, they did not think it could be.
                They were utterly, completely, desperately wrong.

                When Andrew Wakefield’s results were mocked, science medicine did not know what it now knows about the gut-brain connection.

                And you talk about an 18th century cave?

                The most basic form of testing a drug – comparing those getting the drug with a placebo group who don’t – has never been done on the MMR vaccine.
                There are no long term studies to investigate the effects of getting multiple vaccinations.

                One reason the original research suggesting a link between gut bacteria and the brain was dismissed was because at the time no such connection was thought possible. The microbiome is now known to be extensively connected with brain development, the immune system and inflammation.

                Wakefield’s results have since been replicated more than two dozen times.


              • rosross May 2, 2017 / 2:16 am

                Those who have closed their minds on the issue of vaccines are a disgrace to science and to medicine.

                Quote: Instead of discussing these issues, Vaxxed coverage has been all about how outrageous it was to give the film, directed by Dr Wakefield, who was struck off here by the GMC in 2010, a chance to be seen in cinemas. (Incidentally, the other two doctors who faced charges with him were both cleared, one on appeal.) But no one mentioned that his retracted study has since been replicated 28 times internationally, including at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, North Carolina.


      • foreverh October 8, 2016 / 10:12 am

        Many people have died from eating apples.. Just a plain old soil grown organic apple.. Now mind you they choked, were allergic, etc.. But we’ll just say they died. There’s no need to get semantic, because that’s plenty good enough for you and those who keep this kind of focus.

        Based on your logic we should ONLY focus on that small number, and not concern ourselves with why, how, or look at any of the reasons, again because death and injury in ANY number are unacceptable. This is paramount. We should NEVER allow any form of challenges to exist.

        Accordingly this logic means that all fruits and vegetables must be eliminated and all flowers must be destroyed because people die every day due to allergies, poisoning (due to poisonous plants), and choking.

        I can prove this with countless medical reports, and peer reviewed papers. I can absolutely defend my position because it is uncontestably true. Nothing I have said to this point is inaccurate.

        I’m willing to bet you find me snarky and the info irrelevant. I’m willing to concede that the idea of vaccines is different because it is, in some cases “man-made” (quotes used because the material is natural in nature). The concept however is identical.

        If you believe that anything that causes injury or death must be eliminated? Then it is hypocritical and lacking integrity to cherry pick which things are unacceptable. Ignoring this kind of fact, in favor of your belief (natural occurring material causing death is “acceptable” vs. Vaccine material has to be “unacceptable”) is equally damning.

        Arguing that vegetation is necessary for life, and that vaccines are a choice and not necessary, is a belief not based in fact. Without vaccines? Death is assured. People WILL get and die from preventable diseases. That’s a fact. Your denial lives in 2 places: The diseases will just pass through with no damage (you somehow believe none of them are deadly), and all vaccines are, are toxins designed to kill the population.

        You’re not “fighting the good fight”. You’re not some savior of biblical times come to save us from the satanic snake and telling us not to eat the apple.

        You’re the snake, you’re the evil saying “Stop protecting yourself.. It’s really poison.. Stop helping people.. It’s all a lie”

        Choke on this: If your beliefs cause enough people to choose to stop protecting themselves and people start dying of the diseases you were so sure we’re a myth? Can you live with being responsible for the imminent destruction and chaos you will have caused? Will you be strong enough when your neighbors come calling for you to be held accountable and ask for your head on a platter?

        No… You know the answer is no.. And your beliefs are so ingrained that you think what I’m saying is ludicrous and nonsensical. You dismissed me two sentences in.. Sound familiar?

  2. Scott December 11, 2015 / 3:33 am

    You are part of the collective fear programming. There are so many to live a healthy life of which few western medicine doctors know. There is not even nutrition curriculum at medical schools.
    Western medicine is archaic and vaccinating your child is feeding them poison.
    Your research is only based on studies?
    Have you read dr. Mercola, dr. Schulze, listened to other brilliant minds on vaccines? Or do you only listen to people that have letters after their names md, Ph.D. Etc..
    I have countless stories about the horros of vaccines, heavy metal poisoning etc. perhaps you think male circumcision is a must as well?

    • Scott Nelson December 11, 2015 / 9:52 am

      So Scott, since you don’t believe in modern chemistry, biology ect…. I trust that you think that sewage is perfectly safe to drink and eat and that diseases are caused by disfavor by the gods. The people you mention have degrees after their name (as do I)(that’s the Dr. part) but have thoroughly sold themselves out and have based their beliefs on the almighty dollar or pound. Ask them for some peer reviewed and replicated studies of their beliefs-they’ll be very hard to come by.

      As for people living perfectly healthy lives without modern medicine, that’s true-they tend to be quite healthy until they die of a bacterial infection, vaccine preventable disease or trauma-three things that modern medicine is quite adept at treating. Before modern medicine, you were quite lucky to make to 15, giving a lifespan at birth of ~20-30 yrs, although if you made it past 15 yrs you might live quite a while. Those numbers didn’t budge much until the introduction of vaccines and sewage control (mid-1800’s)

      • Chris December 11, 2015 / 7:39 pm

        Because I looked for a “Dr. Schulze”, I now have popup ads for that idiot “HerbDoc” popping up on my screen. Le sigh.

      • Scott December 15, 2015 / 11:37 pm

        Yes western medicine can and does serve us. But Modern Western Medicine is based on a narrow “scientific” model, and arrogantly ignores and rejects therapies and entire medical systems that don’t fit this model.
        Instead of treating the underlying causes or imbalances, Doctors often merely manage symptoms.
        One of the biggest issues is that doctors see the human body as a machine with separate parts that can be treated independently rather than as an integrated whole. In addition the mind and body are also seen as separate independent entities and emotions are often ignored.
        Have you read anything about the mind body connection?
        How do you eat? Do you follow a typical American diet of non-organic genetically modified food?

        The damage caused by vaccines can no longer be ignored, nor can it be dismissed as a necessary evil. By 2010, the U.S. Court of Claims had awarded nearly $2 billion dollars to vaccine victims for their catastrophic vaccine injuries. Currently, this number is believed to now be $3 billion dollars.

        Did you know that most of these crap vaccines are made in China? Do you have any idea how toxic this crap is?

        Some vaccine ingredients (listed by Dr. Mercola) include the following (however, more ingredients as listed by the vaccine manufacturer’s themselves) may be found at

        aluminum hydroxide

        aluminum phosphate

        ammonium sulfate

        amphotericin B

        animal tissues: pig blood, horse blood, sheep blood, rabbit brain, dog kidney, monkey kidney, chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg, calf (bovine) serum, fetal bovine serum, casein, porcine (pig pancreas), hydrolyzed gelatin





        human diploid cells (originating from human aborted fetal tissue)

        monosodium glutamate (MSG)


        neomycin sulfate

        phenol red indicator

        phenoxyethanol (antifreeze)•

        potassium diphosphate

        potassium monophosphate

        polymyxin B

        polysorbate 20

        polysorbate 80

        MRC5 proteins (from human cells)



        thimerosal (ethyl mercury)

        tributyl phosphate (a plasticizer)

        Please explore more..

        “There is no such thing as a safe vaccine.”

        Movie: Silent Epidemic; The Untold Story of Vaccines by Gary Null

        (50 Vaccine Facts):

        Peer-Reviewed Papers on Dangers of Vaccines:

        • Scott Nelson December 16, 2015 / 8:13 am

          Scott-First, let me advise you to take a course in chemistry. “Dr.” Mercola like to throw about big words to scare people, if you know what they mean, they lose all their power. Aluminum salts are almost certainly higher in freshly grown, organic produce than anything else-they are the common components of dirt. Various phosphate salts are routinely used buffers in your body, by your body. There has been EXTENSIVE explanation of this throughout the comments of this article.

          There is absolutely NO evidence that transgenic crops are any danger to anyone, and in many cases have fewer pesticide residues on them than traditional crops, owing to the fact that the crops do not require pesticides to protect the crop-because they protect themselves. Organic crops may also have considerable pesticides residues on them-they are just organically acquired, and they can be very potent-such as rotenone.

          As to the allegation that western medicine doesn’t use other modalities, that is just pure crap. If you have hypertension, your doctor will almost certainly advise you to reduce your stress level, lose weight, exercise, and eat more vegetables-before they start drugs. Ditto for hypercholestemia, unless your genetic make up is such that these things won’t help. There is an entire branch of medicine called behavioral medicine.

          Medicine is actively investigating meditation as we speak, and in fact the Dali Lama (along with numerous other people who practice meditation) has been in a fMRI machine several times so that scientists can investigate the effect of meditation on the mind and body. There are many investigations going one investigating the interaction of the various organ systems in the body, I’d be glad to point you to entire journals such as Pyschooncology and Pyschoneuroendocrinology. Do you know what they alternative medicine that works? MEDICINE

          • Anonymous June 2, 2016 / 2:40 pm

            That’s cute, you think you’re going to change his mind using intellectual arguments and science and such… 😠

        • Chris December 16, 2015 / 9:58 am

          “The damage caused by vaccines can no longer be ignored, nor can it be dismissed as a necessary evil. By 2010, the U.S. Court of Claims had awarded nearly $2 billion dollars to vaccine victims for their catastrophic vaccine injuries. Currently, this number is believed to now be $3 billion dollars.”

          Here is a little math problem for you: go to the first table of the latest NVICP statistics. Look at the last row labeled “Grand Totat.” Find the number for the total vaccines given during the set time period (2,532,428,541 vaccines). Then run your finger over the compensated claim column, and get that number (2068 paid claims). Now take the first number and divide it by the second number. What is the result, and what does it mean?

          “Did you know that most of these crap vaccines are made in China? Do you have any idea how toxic this crap is?”

          But I thought you liked things that were not “Western.” Are you now moving that arbitrary line between the “Western” and “Eastern” part of this globe? So what happened to all those people who were working in the vaccine manufacturing plants in North Carolina and New York state? Or is that just another made scare tactic?

          • Dan June 2, 2016 / 6:24 pm

            “made in china”

            So he’s saying that… vaccines are a Chinese remedy? What’s the problem then? I thought anti-vaxxers love Chinese remedies! Or is it just the unproven ones they love?

            • Chris June 2, 2016 / 7:54 pm


    • Chris December 11, 2015 / 11:46 am

      “Western medicine is archaic and vaccinating your child is feeding them poison.”

      Is medicine from Japan okay? They were the ones who came up with colonoscopies, statins, the DTaP and varicella vaccines. Or is the arbitrary line of what is “Eastern” versus “Western” somewhere else on this round planet?

      Also, please tell us which poison in any vaccine on the American pediatric schedule is more dangerous than tetanospasmin.

      “Have you read dr. Mercola, dr. Schulze, listened to other brilliant minds on vaccines? Or do you only listen to people that have letters after their names md, Ph.D. Etc..”

      A word of advice, Scott, do not trust “doctors” who have a tiny picture of a shopping cart on their webpage. They don’t care about your health, just how much you pay for the stuff they sell. Or have you already bought a tanning system from Mercola and a colon cleanse kit from Schulze?

      Also Mercola does have a “DO” after his name. He did graduate as a osteopathic doctor (which in the USA is equivalent to an MD). Schulze, on the other hand, “trained” with naturopaths so he is “Not a Doctor.” And depending on his genetic heart disorder*, he can live for for a long time, but even with the herbs, special foods, supplements, etc… it could literally break at any time.

      parent of someone who has one variant, a type that sometimes diagnosed in people from age two to sixty only after “sudden cardiac death.” Our kid’s was found due to a heart murmur at the appointment for a tetanus booster. He did get surgery after a few years, especially the one year where there were a few 911 calls to our house.

    • rosross December 12, 2015 / 7:26 pm

      It is the modern pastime to spread the propaganda that modern medicine has saved us.

      Crunching numbers to come up with the fantasy that the human organism did not live as long in the past as now, falls into the realm of lies, damned lies and statistics.

      Where I lived in Africa the average longevity was 42. Did everyone die at 42? Nope. Plenty lived into their eighties and nineties. The figure of 42 comes from crunching the numbers for child and infant mortality and the impact of malaria and HIV/Aids….. all of them much greater because of poor nutrition, sanitation and hygiene.

      Engineers, not doctors were responsible for improvements in health and longevity – and farmers – better nutrition, sanitation and hygiene, where applied, saw infant/maternal mortality figures plummet, along with the disappearance of epidemics and a major decline in mortality from disease.

      Where modern medicine made a difference was in accidents/trauma/crisis, but if you take out those stats, not wanting to prejudice the final picture, then modern medicine has played very little part in improved health and longevity.

      Research done on Egyptian and South American mummies showed that many people lived to very, very ripe old ages and one presumes they did so because they had good nutrition, sanitation and hygiene. They probably also had good forms of holistic medicine and the Egyptians were talented surgeons as well.

      The irony and tragedy is that we now have higher and rising levels of chronic and serious disease, more so in children, in this over-medicalised, and over vaccinated age.

      We have children and young people experiencing cancer, the biggest killer being brain cancer, in ways never seen before along with heart disease and strokes.

      We have epidemics in children of Diabetes, Autism, Asthma, Coeliac Disease, Behavioural and Learning Difficulties, Auto-immune Disease, Allergies.

      Whatever part Allopathic or modern medicine is playing it is not diminishing disease and it is not making or keeping people healthier.

      What is most criminal is that it is the third and heading for second, biggest killer after heart disease and cancer, and yet points the finger at other medical systems like Homeopathy, Nutritional and Herbal medicine and Acupuncture which heal and cure without the kill and injure rate of Allopathy.

      • shay simmons December 12, 2015 / 8:30 pm

        Are you badly-educated that you’ve never heard of averages?

      • shay simmons December 12, 2015 / 8:31 pm

        It has been pointed out to you before that cancer is not the leading killer of children. Short-term memory issues, or merely a commitment to superstition so deeply ingrained that you feel you must lie for it?

      • shay simmons December 12, 2015 / 8:32 pm

        Oh…neither are heart disease, strokes, or “allopathic” medicine?

      • Trish March 2, 2016 / 4:58 pm

        I agree with you, people refused to see the fact that if these vaccination really work then why aren’t we all cured by now. Also how is it that you put people at risk by not having vaccine’s.
        if the vaccine people are having work then you are protect from it right. Just saying seems to me the worlds getting sicker not better at all.

        • foreverh March 2, 2016 / 10:57 pm

          This is what belief produces over fact. “Gee I don’t know how this works but I think it should work this way.. Since it doesn’t? It MUST be wrong”.

          Just because you don’t know how immunity works? Doesn’t mean it isn’t working. We’ve never lived longer nor enjoyed better health. It is the very fact that we’re better that is causing doubt about vaccines. When history is forgotten it is doomed to be repeated.

        • Chris March 3, 2016 / 11:26 am

          If you are confused by a concept you could try taking some biology and English courses at your local community college. I did that a few years ago, and I really appreciated learning things I skipped in high school — like biology.

        • rosross October 4, 2016 / 11:45 pm

          The world is sicker. The levels of serious and chronic disease are astronomical and worse in children than in adults. The young and old are particularly vulnerable and every vaccine carries a toxic dose of Aluminium which is detrimental to brain function, hence no doubt why Dementia and Alzheimers are at epidemic levels in the aged and Autism and Behavioural and Learning Difficulties at epidemic levels in the young. And no doubt why Brain Cancer is now the biggest Cancer killer of children and young people.

          People do not live longer than they have ever done where nutrition, hygiene and sanitation are good and most survive childhood, but the science/medical industry crunches the numbers to pretend that they do.

          And don’t even bother with the ‘but if you are vaccinated you are protected logic’ because the irrational brain function of the max-vaxxers makes it impossible for them to be logical.

          • Chris October 5, 2016 / 7:50 pm

            Why should we believe anything you say. Now take this corker: “And no doubt why Brain Cancer is now the biggest Cancer killer of children and young people.”

            The reason that the brain cancers has moved to #1 from #2 is because more kids with blood cancers are surviving. There has been no change in the rate of either cancer, it is now instead of leukemia being 100% fatal, it is now more than 90% survivable.

            • Shay October 5, 2016 / 10:31 pm

              Actually brain cancer is not the biggest killer of children, and ros has had this pointed out multiple times with citations. She is either intrinsically dishonest or believes we all have really short memories.

            • rosross October 8, 2016 / 10:39 pm

              Brain Cancer and Spinal Tumours as the currently biggest Cancer killer of children and Young people is new and since they are dying, how can it have anything to do with survival stats in general?

              And apart from your squirming and wriggling to avoid the key point, you are wrong –

              Brain Cancer Kills More Children Than Any Other Disease –

              Quote: Brain cancer survival rates are low and have hardly changed for 30 years….


              • Chris October 8, 2016 / 11:41 pm

                I believe that you did not understand that page, because it repeated what I said: leukemia is not causing as many deaths as brain cancer. The point is that leukemia treatments have improved, which is why its graphic says 9 out of 10 survive leukemia.

                Also that page has a specific agenda: to get you to donate to their specific cause. The reason that cancer is the the disease that causes most deaths in Australian children is that vaccines prevent the things that used to kill them in much greater numbers. But that logic is lost on you. And the biggest killer of Aussie kids are accidents:

                Here is another news report:

                It says: “All pediatric cancer death rates have been dropping since the mid-1970s, according to the report released today (Sept. 16) from the National Center for Health Statistics. The report details changes in cancer death rates among children and teens ages 1 to 19, from 1999 to 2014.”


                In 1999, six out of 20 cancer deaths among children were due to leukemia, and about five in 20 were due to brain cancer, according to the numbers in the report. By 2014, those numbers had reversed.

                “Major therapeutic advances” in the treatment of cancers, particularly leukemia, has likely resulted in the increases in survivorship, the researchers wrote in their report.

                Overall, the cancer death rate for children and teens dropped 20 percent over the 15 years included in the study. Among females, the overall cancer death rate dropped 22 percent. Among males, it dropped 18 percent.

                • rosross October 8, 2016 / 11:47 pm

                  The point you sought to make did not address the point I made. I realise that the point you sought to make sort of appeared in that article but the point I was making with which you cannot cope, seemingly, is that Brain Cancer is now the biggest Cancer killer in children and young people, and by the look of this post, now the biggest killer, and that logic, common sense and integrity dictate that studies should be done into the prevalence of Brain Cancer in the Fully, Partially and Non-vaccinated.

                  The fact that ‘survival’ rates for other Cancers have improved, or appear to have improved, although number-crunching would not factor in the massive increase in Cancer in general, is irrelevant in face of my point, that Brain Cancer is now the biggest killer of children and young people.

                  If I had been talking about survival rates, your point would have made some sense, but I was not and so your point makes no sense or is nonsense.

                  As you can see, Brain Cancer survival rates are poor and have not changed in decades, so your point is still pointless.

                  What should concern science/medicine, and it certainly concerns parents, is why there is so much more Cancer in children and general and Brain Cancer in particular.

                  Survival rates are just medico-waffle to distract those easily distracted from the salient point – why is there so much Cancer and so much Brain Cancer in our kids.

                • rosross October 8, 2016 / 11:53 pm

                  You still avoid the point. In light of the new knowledge of a physical link between the brain and immune system, should not vaccine theory and methodology be re-assessed since it interferes with the immune system, and now, we know, it must also affect the brain?

                • rosross October 8, 2016 / 11:55 pm

                  I forget whether you did science or medicine but you certainly got top marks in patronising insults.

                  The irony is that you did not or could not understand the point I made because it challenged your belief system and your response is to accuse others of not understanding material.

                  Pot, kettle, black but needs must I suppose when denial replace logic and common sense.

                  • foreverh October 11, 2016 / 6:53 pm

                    Yoy literally are the only one playing “belief”. You summarily deny any form of science and your excuse is because it isn’t “all knowing” or “all perfect”, and then you follow it I’m up by saying that anyone of the science based mind is incapable of logical thought..

                    Are you really this dumb? Or do you just want everyone to believe you are? You are clearly the one with the belief system that spends their time in complete denial.. You are entitled to your opinion but you seem to have the idea that you are also entitled to your own set of facts.. And that you will never be entitled to..

                    Stop making up your own facts and quoting KNOWN debunked, fraudulent, medically disbarred and general quackery..

                    Get a clue

                    • rosross October 11, 2016 / 9:44 pm

                      I do not summarily deny any form of science. I have frequently stated that in the realms of its belief system, materialist reductionist mechanics, modern Science can be very useful.

                      But it is not an arbiter for all things and certainly becomes dangerous when the belief system is applied to the natural world, of which humans are a part.

                      If you bothered to follow links, I know, messy, real research and an open mind, you would find facts to substantiate my position.

                      But I do understand that may not be possible.

      • Gale June 30, 2016 / 9:21 am

        Well said!

    • G3 February 22, 2016 / 1:38 am

      Scott you are an idiot. I hate non vaccers. Keep your crazy hollywood ideas and walking disease spreading children at home. The rest of the intelligent people in the world that are innoculating their children deserve to walk around without being infected by diseases you people spread.

  3. shay simmons December 11, 2015 / 8:36 am

    the rigorous scientific approach

    Ah yes, “we don’t know how it works but it does!” is a rigorous scientific approach.

    • rosross December 12, 2015 / 7:14 pm

      We don’t know how it works but it does —— like gravity!

      Yep, that kind of rigorous scientific approach. You observe, you gather data empirically, you make use of what you learn but you don’t actually understand how it works. Same for Homeopathy.

      Quote: We know more about what’s inside an atom than we do about why a ball comes back down when we throw it in the air. For all science knows, it’s because of ghosts.

      • shay simmons December 12, 2015 / 7:17 pm

        There are many questions for science still to answer — but those answers can’t violate the basic laws of mathematics, chemistry, biology and physics.

        You’re like the people who were rushing around at this time last year insisting that the Ebola virus was airborne.

        • rosross December 12, 2015 / 7:29 pm

          And if the answer to how gravity works did violate the basic laws…. no, let’s be correct …. did violet what science currently believes are the basic laws of mathematics, chemistry, biology and physics – what then?

          I had not realised it was a scientific criteria that no advance could be made unless it validated the currently held beliefs in regard to ‘basic laws.’ How is that rigorous science?

          • rosross December 12, 2015 / 7:30 pm

            Violate not violet – wish this had an edit function – but hey, violet can work as well.

          • shay simmons December 12, 2015 / 8:29 pm

            It doesn’t.

        • rosross December 12, 2015 / 8:33 pm

          To be correct, you need to say, the ‘basic laws’ as understood at this point in time of mathematics, chemistry, biology and physics.

          There were plenty of things which ‘violated’ and by that you mean challenged, the ‘basic laws’ as understood at the time in the past.

          Who says what a ‘basic law’ is beyond a current belief?

          Quantum mechanics upset, or violated, quite a lot of what was considered to be ‘basic law’ and science managed to get over the shock and horror of that, even if Einstein never quite managed it before he died.

          It is ridiculous to even talk about basic laws when so much is unknown.

          Basic laws are in essence meaningless since unless you fully understand absolutely everything about this world, there are no ‘basic laws’ to be determined. There are in fact no laws.

          If it is discovered that this world, as a great physicist, astronomer and mathematician, James Jeans, described it – is a ‘great thought.’ then all the basic material laws become as nothing in any absolute sense.

          If all is thought, mental, and that determines the material world, then all basic laws pertaining to materiality can change.

          Quote: What we perceive as our physical material world, is really not physical or material at all, in fact, it is far from it. This has been proven time and time again by multiple Nobel Prize (among many other scientists around the world) winning physicists, one of them being Niels Bohr, a Danish Physicist who made significant contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum theory.

          “If quantum mechanics hasn’t profoundly shocked you, you haven’t understood it yet. Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” – Niels Bohr

          It is amusing that science can accept that ‘everything is energy’ and yet reject Homeopathy because it claims to work on the material, through an energy level.

          Double standards, methinks.

          The irony is I have far greater trust in Science than any of you and am the true sceptic. I question everything, including what science says, but I also know that as a system it is designed to grow, change, develop and evolve, albeit more slowly given the Luddites who currently ‘staff’ it, but it will get there and I am sure many, many, many things will be violated.

          It was ever thus and it is required.

          • shay simmons December 12, 2015 / 8:34 pm

            “If all is thought, mental, and that determines the material world, then all basic laws pertaining to materiality can change.” To bad for you it doesn’t determine the material world.

            • rosross December 12, 2015 / 8:54 pm

              Yeah, thought that might be a bit too complex for you.

              • shay simmons December 12, 2015 / 8:57 pm

                No — woo is woo. Not hard to recognize. No wonder you are completely unable to answer any of the questions you’ve been asked about immunology, homeopathy, and biology.

  4. rosross October 4, 2016 / 11:50 pm

    We await those rigorous scientific sorts who are now demanding a rewriting of the textbooks regarding vaccine theory and methodology, in the same way that they are saying textbooks on neurological disease will have to be rewritten, in light of the new understanding that the brain and immune system are physically connected.

    Those not so clever scientists and doctors did not believe such a connection existed, nay, they believed it impossible, unlike their wiser holistic medical colleagues, and dammit, they were wrong.

    Since the toxic mix of disease, chemicals, including that neurological horror Aluminium, along with animal, human and bird material was invented in the age of ignorance when this physical link between brain and immune system was not known, or even guessed, one presumes there will be a lot of textbook rewriting going on.

    Perhaps soon we shall understand why our children are brain damage with Autism and other neurological conditions, why the aged are reeling with Dementia and Alzheimer’s and why Brain Cancer is now the biggest Cancer killer of children and young people.

    I am sure all those max-vaxxers will be pushing for this crucial research and if not, why not?

    • Chris October 5, 2016 / 7:55 pm

      I recognize the words being written in English, but the way they are arranged make no sense. Because scientists in one area of study clarify some of understanding one tiny part about immunity, it does not re-write the entire scope of immunology.

      • rosross October 8, 2016 / 10:35 pm

        I understand you cannot afford to see the sense but when a discovery is made, something anyone of moderate intelligence would have suspected anyway, about a physical connection between brain and immune system, which, according to the experts requires a re-writing of textbooks on neurological disease, logic dictates that an experimental system, which is what vaccination is, which targets, deceives and interferes with immune function and which was developed when the scientists were ignorant of the brain/immune system connection, should also be requiring a rewriting of the textbooks.

        It may not require a rewriting of the entire scope of immunology but it certainly requires a substantial reworking of how interfering in the body’s immune system may impact the brain.

        I remain bemused at the lack of logic and common sense in the position of so many who tout Science.

      • rosross October 8, 2016 / 10:43 pm

        p.s. finding a physical connection between the Brain and the Immune System is hardly a ‘tiny part’ of anything. It is uber major and any neurological disease, particularly those more common in the vax-max age should be studied in regard to vaccination rates as a matter of urgency. Killing our children to prove a point seems cruel and senseless.

        Surely it would be easy enough to establish and set everyone’s minds at rest. Study the incidence of Brain Cancer in Fully, Partially and Non-vaccinated children and young people.

        Why would anyone oppose such vital research?

        • Chris October 8, 2016 / 11:24 pm

          Your brilliance is underwhelming. Obviously your grasp of actual scientific concepts comes in homoepathic doses. Here, this might help:

          • rosross October 8, 2016 / 11:42 pm

            It is a given that when people resort to name-calling, ad hominem attacks, they are frustrated because they know they are in a corner. Thanks for admitting that.

            Homeopathic medicine could certainly help you with your level of denial.

            In the age of max-vax which began about forty years ago, Brain Cancer has become the biggest killer of children and young people.
            Since science/medicine has now discovered, something holistic medicine always took as a given, but which Allopathic medicine denied was possible, that the brain and immune system are physically connected and since vaccine theory and methodology was invented in the age of ignorance regarding this connection, surely everyone should be demanding not just a rewriting of textbooks in regard to neurological disease, but studies comparing the incidence of Brain Cancer in the Fully, Partially and non-vaccinated young?
            And if not, why not? How can science/medicine know what these toxins and disease and trickery and animal, human and bird material do to the Brain when they have never studied any possible effects because they believed there could be none?
            Why would not every parent demand such research????????
            Quote: In a stunning discovery that overturns decades of textbook teaching, researchers have determined that the brain is directly connected to the immune system by vessels previously thought not to exist.

            Missing link found between brain, immune system; major disease implications
            In a stunning discovery that overturns decades of textbook teaching, researchers have determined that the brain is directly connected to the immune system by vessels…


            • Chris October 8, 2016 / 11:47 pm

              You get your information from headlines in a flashy magazine article? A very short one, that was very skimpy on data. By the way, we already know that diseases can cause harm to the brain.

              (by the way, I did not include an ad hominem attack… I did not say you were wrong because you like homeopathy, I just said that you were wrong as a statement of fact)

              • rosross October 8, 2016 / 11:47 pm

                Sarcasm is ad hominem.

                • Chris October 8, 2016 / 11:59 pm

                  Nope. The words mean “to the man.” It means to disregard someone because of what they are, not by what they say. An example is “Joe is just a baker, therefore what he said is wrong.”

                  Though a fact would be “Roslyn believes in homeopathy, therefore she believes in nonsense because homeopathy claims diluting something makes it stronger — which is just bonkers.”

                  • rosross October 9, 2016 / 12:13 am

                    Ad hominem means, beyond the literal translation which I know, to attack the individual instead of the argument or the position. And when you insult and slight that is what you do.

                    Your denial levels are high on many counts aren’t they? I wonder why.

                  • rosross October 9, 2016 / 12:25 am

                    You don’t have the correct definition of ad hominem, hence your error.

                    Oxford Dictionary definition:

                    ad hominem
                    ADVERB & ADJECTIVE

                    1(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.
                    [as adjective] ‘an ad hominem response’

                • Chris October 9, 2016 / 12:04 am

                  Because they added to their understanding does not mean they replaced all the other things known about immunity. They found an additional fact, it has nothing with protecting children from measles, mumps, pertussis, diptheria, tetanus, polio, Hib and other things that can literally destroy their brains.

                  Really, work on your reading and logic skills. You start by actually opening your mind up to the complexity of the world, and that there is no one simple answer to everything.

                  • rosross October 9, 2016 / 12:11 am

                    I never said it would replace all the other things known, although rewriting the textbooks is pretty strong language for science-medicine.

                    I said, it demanded a rethink of vaccine theory and methodology since that process targets and interferes with the immune system and by extension, as we now know, the brain.

                    Your second para is desperation. Your final is even more desperation.

                    Deal with the issue. If you have any credibility you know as well as I do that if the new knowledge is rewriting textbooks for neurological disease then it needs to be rewriting them for vaccines.

                    And seriously, I am old enough to have had to have had those childhood diseases and all my friends, siblings, parents, grandparents, even my children and their peers and no destroyed brains. In fact, no Brain Cancer although today I know of more than one poor child dead, dying or diseased with it.

                    I never said there was a simple answer – that is your position. Here vaccinate people to provide a simple answer etc.

                    Would you support studying the incidence of Brain Cancer in the Fully, Partially and non-Vaccinated young? And if not, why not?

                  • rosross October 10, 2016 / 6:13 pm

                    Quote: Add one more item to the growing stack of published medical literature linking vaccines to the current explosion of autoimmune diseases from skin afflictions to neurological disorders. A paper published online this month in the journal Pharmacological Research is an international team of immunologists’ roundup of current findings on vaccine-induced disease — and their conclusions are in sharp contrast to public health’s “safe and effective” mantra that denies any such connection.
                    “Vaccines and autoimmunity are linked fields,” state the authors led by Luísa Eça Guimarães of the Zabludowicz Center for Autoimmune Diseases in Tel-Hashomer, Israel. Just as natural infections can sometimes induce autoimmune disease, so can vaccination induce autoimmunity that “may be severe and fatal.”

                    …Future studies must be “better designed,” the paper concludes. Having true placebos rather than comparing one adjuvanted vaccine to another would be a start. And studies should follow recipients for many years rather than the usual month or two and large epidemiological studies of vaccines’ impact on autoimmune disease should be undertaken, the researchers add.

                    Many parents and even many doctors may be surprised that such studies have never actually been done already, particularly for immune system diseases that are inexplicably soaring.

                    But even more disturbing than these admissions from top immunologists is the paper’s unintended revelation of just how little is known about how vaccines impact the immune system. It turns out the top doctors don’t have a clue who is really in danger of vaccine injury or why. The study of ASIA and these adjuvant effects is just beginning to bring parts of the whole vaccine/autoimmunity phenomenon into focus. And what is most clear is not at all reassuring.


                    • Chris October 11, 2016 / 1:18 pm

                      Ms. England is not a qualified medical researcher, nor is she reputable. She is actually quite a despicable person who tries to blame vaccines for shaken baby syndrome, as she tries to protect child abusers.

                      That “Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute” is an antivaccine group pushing their own unscientific agenda. It was founded by Claire Dwoskin, who also has the Dwoskin Family Foundation that funds the research specifically to support their claim that vaccines are dangerous. As it turns out that “research” is pretty worthless:

                    • rosross October 11, 2016 / 9:51 pm

                      Just remind me, you reject CMSRI because you say it has a vested agenda and you post in support a link to Harpocrates Speaks? I am beginning to wonder if vaccines really do create brain damage in general.

                    • rosross October 11, 2016 / 9:55 pm

                      The key words here are ‘not been properly studied.’ One would have thought before approaching a baby with a syringe full of toxins, everything should have been properly studied. Clearly not, as those who question vaccine theory and practice so often point out.

                      What is most astonishing is the cavalier attitude within science/medicine to vaccination experiments with babies and small children, where, as is so often stated, concerns are not addressed, in the name of cost, and potential harm is not properly studied.

                      Quote: Summing up: Rigorous and replicable studies (in different animal species) have shown evidence of EtHg, and of Al toxicities. More research attention has been given to EtHg and findings have showed a solid link with neurotoxic effects in humans; however, the potential synergic effect of both toxic agents has not been properly studied. Therefore, early life exposure to both EtHg and Al deserves due consideration.


                    • rosross October 11, 2016 / 10:57 pm

                      So, the Dwoskin Family Foundation, which we both know would be monitored by Government regulators is not okay but the Gates Foundation is, even when Bill Gates has conflicts of interest regarding vaccines.

                      Is there a place for selectivity in rigorous scientific and academic approaches? There must be.

                    • Chris October 11, 2016 / 10:42 pm

                      “you reject CMSRI because you say it has a vested agenda …”

                      No, I said ” As it turns out that “research” is pretty worthless:”

                      As it turns out they do shoddy work to bend the data to the requirements of their paymaster, Claire Dwoskin. As noted when one of their pet papers was retracted:

                      Part of the mucked up methodology was forcing mice to swim, which causes all mice a great deal of stress. They tortured the mice and blamed the vaccine. Seriously, work on your reading comprehension.

                    • rosross October 11, 2016 / 10:54 pm

                      If the research is ‘pretty worthless’ then that is your opinion and since anything which questions vaccines has to be pretty worthless your view doesn’t count for much.

                      Just reading through the bio’s of the scientific advisory body for CMSRI and they seem largely well credentialed even by your selective standards.


                      And seriously, if someone tried to dismiss all of conventional science/medical research because of distortions, there would not be much left.

                      Given the abject failure of science-medicine even in a field founded on its beliefs, Allopathic medicine, you are on pretty flimsy ground pointing the finger at others.

                      Do you know how many Allopathic studies and drugs are retracted? Lots and lots and lots. So, your point would be?

                      And your benchmark is conventional science/medicine???

                      The interval between launch date and reports of adverse drug reactions has shortened over the past few decades, perhaps because of better reporting of suspected adverse reactions or stricter regulation. In addition, increasing numbers of individuals may have been exposed to the withdrawn products in recent years, leading to quicker detection of adverse reactions. However, withdrawal of products following reports of suspected adverse reactions, sufficiently serious to warrant withdrawal, has not improved consistently over the last 60 years. In addition, harmful drugs are less likely to be withdrawn in African countries. Greater co-ordination among drug regulatory authorities and increased transparency in the reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions would help improve decision-making processes.


                      Would you not call dangerous drugs on the market mucked up methodology?

                      And no doubt, as needs must, you are unaware that many, perhaps most adverse vaccine reactions are not reported, as much as anything because doctors are in denial, and so there is no hard data available?

                    • rosross October 11, 2016 / 11:07 pm

                      I would laugh if it were not so tragic::

                      You link to an article which contains the following –

                      We asked him what his research means for the HPV vaccine safety. He emphasized that they were working with an animal model, which does not mean the results necessarily are applicable to humans:

                      And yet animals are used for most vaccine testing! I have to say science/medicine demonstrates its idiocy when it thinks it can transfer results from ‘specially bred animals manifesting disease’ to humans who develop disease.

                      Then again, no power, no profits, no profession if animals can’t be tortured in the name of science. Who cares if it works? Thalidomide was tested on rabbits and the one breed manifesting deformity was dismissed as an anomaly. No doubt lots of inconvenient anomalies get dismissed regarding vaccines.

                      Quote: Animals are used to understand basic biology, as “models” for studying human biology and disease, and as test subjects for the development and testing of drugs, vaccines, and other biologicals (i.e. antibodies, hormones, ingredients in vaccines, etc.)

                      Drug and vaccine development
                      Millions of animals and taxpayer dollars are used in the production and testing of biologicals, such as vaccines and antibodies. For example, a complete batch test for a therapeutic protein can involve 12,000 mice and cost $2.4 million; 2007 estimates for the cost of drug development and to bring it to market range from $800 million to $1.7 billion. Potential drugs are often required to be tested in at least two animal species in preclinical trials before moving on to human clinical trials.11 Yet “only around 5% of drugs that show potential in animal studies ever get licensed for human use.”12 Potency tests of such products as vaccines are still based routinely on the principle of protection, i.e., survival or death after exposure, which was first introduced in the 1890s. Many of these tests are exceptionally cruel, involving high levels of pain and distress for a range of species from rodents to nonhuman primates (including chimpanzees). According to 1998 USDA statistics, more than 60 percent of the animals reported to experience unrelieved pain were used for vaccine testing.


                    • Chris October 12, 2016 / 12:10 am

                      “Dwoskin Family Foundation, which we both know would be monitored by Government regulators..”

                      The government of the United States of America does not dictate how private organizations spend their money as long as they abide by federal tax law, which just regulates reporting and accounting… not what they care about. There would be no regulations that would go counter to the US Constitution’s first amendment pertaining to free speech.

                      You have now starting to go off on to conspiracy theories. We always “love” it when someone who does not live in this country tells us what our government does (by the way, unlike Australia, public schools do not make kids go to a religion class for real scripture lessons, ). Do you wear a tin hat? And it would have to be actual tin (a moderately expensive semi-precious metal), and definitely not the dreaded aluminum!

                      And worse, you have become a very boring troll. I am done feeding you, I put out enough information for the lurkers to show how you have no actual factual argument (“monitored by Government regulators”… really?):

                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Though the threads are swollen
                      Keep them comments trollin’,

                      Move ’em on
                      (Head em’ up!)
                      Head em’ up
                      (Move ’em on!)
                      Move ’em on
                      (Head em’ up!)
                      Cut ’em out
                      (Paste ’em in!)
                      Paste’em in
                      (Cut em’ out!)
                      Cut ’em out
                      Paste ’em in,
                      Keep trollin’, trollin’, trollin’
                      Though they’re disaprovin’
                      Keep them comments trollin”,
                      Don’t try to understand ’em
                      Just rope, laugh, and ignore ’em
                      Soon we’ll be discussin’ bright without ’em

                    • rosross October 12, 2016 / 1:33 am

                      No, the US Govt. does not dictate how money is spent but they do monitor those areas of medicine where processes might be considered questionable. Perhaps you are unaware of that check and balance.

                      I have no idea what religion or schools have to do with this and for what it is worth, kids do not have to go to religious instruction. Mine never did and most kids I know in the public system do not either.

                      It may well vary from State to State, but, as a plus, and religious instruction is optional and parents may request their child does not attend, at least our teachers are not sacked when businesses close down as happens in your system. We have universal quality education provided by Government an hopefully one day Americans will have the same. They need it.

                      And I take your lengthy diatribe as a sin that you are aggravated because I raised salient points you cannot counter.

                      Denial is a dangerous game and our children deserve better.

                    • Chris October 12, 2016 / 10:05 am

                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
                      Though the threads are swollen
                      Keep them comments trollin’,

                    • rosross October 12, 2016 / 7:16 pm

                      You do realise this just makes you look truly silly?

                    • Scott Nelson October 12, 2016 / 10:34 am

                      Rosross- Please document the explosion in autoimmune disease, also please document that this is not due to improved diagnostics. For example, Multiple sclerosis was extremely hard to diagnose prior to the advent of MRI with contrast.

                      I’ve had an interest in autoimmune disease for 30 years, I’ve yet to see anything in the medical or scientific literature documenting a broad-based increase in autoimmune disease. I have seen an increase in Guillain-Barré syndrome in response to Zika virus-but you cana’t blame that on a vaccine-one doesn’t exist yet for Zika-it in response to the DISEASE

                    • rosross October 12, 2016 / 7:15 pm

                      If you follow the link I am sure you can find the information you require.

                      Don’t you think the ‘diagnosis’ ploy is a little sloppy for the supposedly rigorous scientific system?

                      Perhaps you need to read more widely and remove the convenient and subjective belief that it is all about improved diagnostics. Spend time around kids with Autism, Behavioural and Learning Difficulties, Auto-Immune Disease and then come back and explain to me how doctors and parents missed all that for centuries.

                      In days of old doctors actually were empiricists and their note-taking was detailed and admirable and they could actually diagnose which doctors today cannot. Running generic tests for generic humans who don’t exist and number-crunching the data is not diagnosis – it is number-crunching.

                      We have rates of Diabetes in kids today unknown in generations past – that is reality, not improved diagnosis.

                      Quote: According to a new study the prevalence and incidence of autoimmune diseases, such as lupus, celiac disease, and type 1 diabetes, is on the rise and researchers at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention are unsure why.

                      Between 2001 and 2009, the incidence of type 1 diabetes increased by 23%, according to The American Diabetes Association. Finland also showed a similar increase. Type 1 diabetes occurs when the body’s own immune system destroys the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas, while Type 2 diabetes, the most common form of diabetes, occurs when the body does not produce enough insulin or cannot use the insulin adequately.


                      Perhaps you overlooked it because the substantial rise in auto-immune diseases is blamed, for the moment anyway, on diet. No-one who wants to keep their job is going to even consider vaccines.


                      You can dismiss the use of the term ‘explosion’ as mildly hyperbolic, but, and it is astonishing you missed it, there is no doubt there is an increase in auto-immune diseases, and it is referred to as an epidemic.

                      Quote: Conclusions
                      Considering the prevalence of autoimmune
                      disorders in America, both
                      the scientific community and the public must recognize the urgency of the autoimmune epidemic.

                      Click to access 11s_final-6-8.pdf

                      Of course, vaccines may not be the culprit but that can be easily resolved by comprehensive studies of the health of Fully, Partially and Non-Vaccinated children.

                      As a scientist you should be the first to call for that. Shouldn’t you?

                    • Scott Nelson October 18, 2016 / 3:52 pm

                      Rosross-First of all-we have an epidemic of obesity in first and second world countries. Obesity is highly correlated with type 2 diabetes. There is an old saying in American medicine “When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras”, or in other words rule out obvious causes before looking for exotic causes. Obvious causes of obesity are decreased levels of activity and in crease in the availability of high amounts of cheap calories. Witness the amount of time you spend in front of the computer.

                      Second, if you want to examine the effects of vaccination on rates of type II diabetes-have fun. You will have to age and socio-economic match large numbers (5000-10,000/ group) of children at birth, randomly assign them to the various treatment groups- 1 group for each vaccine you wish test, and one group for EACH combination of vaccines, so if there were 10 vaccines typically given you would have 10!+1 groups to work with-well exceeding the number of live births in the world. Then you have to get informed consent from each of the participants, RANDOMLY assign them to the various treatment groups, and then track them longitudinally (that’s over many years), tracking fasting blood sugar levels, activity levels, height, weight ect… and keep track of all this data-securely. Then have an army of statisticians pour through this data to try and winnow out any effects. Before you start this you will have to file an application with the IRB (institutional review board) or equivalent in each country to make sure the study complies with all applicable laws, customs, and ethics in each of the participating countries. You will also have to detail how you will accumulate the data, store the data, the disposition of the data at the end of the study, and write and get funded the multi-billion dollar grant to fund the work-all to chase your belief that vaccines are bad because you don’t understand jack about biology or chemistry.

                    • rosross October 19, 2016 / 2:05 am

                      Health is not singular and poor health will be sourced in many factors. I take a basic position, question everything. However, some things, like vaccines are considered too sacred or too vulnerable, to question. Sadly.

                    • shay simmons October 19, 2016 / 10:15 am

                      ” However, some things, like vaccines are considered too sacred or too vulnerable, to question.” Vaccines (and other medical procedures) are questioned constantly. Your problem, ros, is that you don’t like the answers and so you refuse to accept them.

                    • foreverh October 19, 2016 / 11:56 pm

                      You don’t “question” anything. You are a cynic not a skeptic.

                      Skeptics are driven by curiosity, and they make it clear that health care providers have to earn their trust — but it can be earned.

                      Cynics are not driven by curiosity but by an ugly mix of ignorance and arrogance. After dumpster diving on the Internet for pseudo-science, anti-vaxxers have decided that their contempt for public health guidelines and their distrust of modern medicine somehow makes them more “informed.”

                      First, there is no amount of expensive scientific research that will assure anti-vaxxers about the safety, efficacy and necessity of vaccines. Where genuine skeptics ask questions in order to learn, cynics ask questions in order to scorn. Presenting legitimate peer-reviewed scientific data to anti-vaxxers does not persuade them because they already reached a verdict based on their fears and contempt.

                      These are NOT desirable traits

                    • rosross October 20, 2016 / 12:09 am

                      I suggest you look up definitions for cynic and sceptic. I am in fact immensely curious and a true sceptic in that I don’t just believe what I am told but make sure I have enough information, across a broad spectrum, to make up my own mind. And that applies to all issues.

                      I also take a holistic view of health and the case for Allopathic intervention has to be rock solid for me to consider it. Generally it is not.

                      Vaccines do not create health. A robust immune system – the terrain, not the pathogen – is the key to good health.

                      I have tested my beliefs over many decades living in Third World countries without the ‘benefit’ of vaccines, medications or maybe medicine.

                      I have in my time, prepared scientific and medical material for public consumption and feel more than able to wade through the data to make sense of it.

                      I have also enough objectivity and scepticism to question how modern science and medicine function and it is troubling. Who would trust such a system, certainly not me.

                      So look, this is circular and I respect your beliefs and don’t care if you call me cynic or sceptic, I merely take the position that science medicine cannot be trusted at this point in time, if indeed it ever could and the history is littered with tragic mistakes, and so all medical treatments must be optional. The move toward medical fascism is indeed troubling for cynic or sceptic.

                      Being gullible and easily brainwashed are not desirable traits either but seem to be increasingly common. Perhaps vaccines do impair brain function as some studies indicate.

                    • foreverh October 21, 2016 / 9:46 am

                      Since you love thinking you can make up definitions of words as much as you love seeking out known false information, and conspiracy theories involving any science you decided to disagree with:

                      Simple Definition of cynic
                      a person who has negative opinions about other people and about the things people do; especially : a person who believes that people are selfish and are only interested in helping themselves.

                      This accurately describes your nature. You behave as though you are a part of an elitist knowledge that only few are privileged to realize and accept.

                      What never seems to occur to you is that that the group to which you have aligned yourself with has made up “facts”. The self appointed “authorities” within this group have proven again and again that they have no foundation for their “facts”, and have been unable to produce any evidence of their theories being correct.

                      Even when faced with this truth that there is NO truth, the response is “Well I have decided it IS true and the new proof that it isn’t, is simply lying.” That’s called Cognitive Dissonance and is dangerous in this sense, because it compromises the health of the person who chooses the consequences of the practice of this thought.

                      It is precisely vaccines that have created a sense of immortality in those that refuse to believe they are of any benefit. I don’t know what you believe vaccines are capable of? But they are neither a cure nor a treatment for any disease to which they are designed for.

                      They’re sole purpose is to introduce a strain to the immune system so that it may learn to produce a fighter cell system all by itself. It doesn’t always work perfectly because some people’s immune system will not be able to create that fighter cell. Vaccines don’t possess the ability to manipulate that system response.

                      Now, so much of the world has been inoculated, that the diseases for which the vaccines are given have become ghost stories. Enter YOUR group of deniers. You have collectively decided that the ghost stories of diseases are a lie made up by vaccine companies JUST to make money?

                      It’s sad, pathetic, and just plain ridiculous that you would rather let the diseases take their toll and cause massive preventable deaths.

                      I am acutely aware that your train of thought says it won’t happen and it’s not even a thing. That makes you wilfully ignorant, not researched.

                    • shay simmons October 18, 2016 / 10:42 pm

                      “Don’t you think the ‘diagnosis’ ploy is a little sloppy for the supposedly rigorous scientific system?” Don’t you think that’s a disingenuous comment from someone who keeps harping on the fact that there are some things science hasn’t yet discovered?

                    • rosross October 19, 2016 / 2:03 am

                      I don’t see your point. More diagnosis is a convenience more than a reality, to stifle questioning. Obviously given the obsession Allopathic medicine has with ‘labels’ and the flux in the system of diagnostics, there are undoubtedly more diagnoses, but with one in 10,000 diagnosed with Autism for instance in 1983, now down to one in 67 or less, and dramatically so in the US military, one could easily argue that better diagnosis is more ploy than reality because they are huge changes in a short time.

                    • shay simmons October 19, 2016 / 10:16 am

                      ” More diagnosis is a convenience more than a reality, to stifle questioning. ” How? In order to get a diagnosis one must ask questions.

                    • rosross October 20, 2016 / 12:02 am

                      Number-crunching is useful and ‘more and better diagnosis’ a useful crunch factor to avoid objective analysis.

                    • shay simmons October 20, 2016 / 9:44 am

                      “Number-crunching is useful and ‘more and better diagnosis’ a useful crunch factor to avoid objective analysis.” What a non-answer. Diagnosis of a patient is all about asking questions.

                    • rosross October 21, 2016 / 1:07 am

                      The excuse of more and better diagnosis is the number-crunching aspect.

                      And since most doctor consults barely last 8 minutes, then we both understand why diagnosis is so poor these days.

                      In the old days of medicine doctors could diagnose and they used empiricism as part of the process. Now they use generic tests for generic humans who don’t exist and number-crunched data which, as doctors themselves are beginning to say, particularly in the realms of meta-analysis is next to useless.

                      Meta-analysis is the distorted ‘art form’ of number crunching, particularly in the realms of Allopathic medicine because the human body is not a machine or piece of man-made equipment which can be reduced to the purely material.

                    • shay simmons October 21, 2016 / 10:52 am

                      “The excuse of more and better diagnosis is the number-crunching aspect.” In what universe can that sentence be parsed?

                    • shay simmons October 19, 2016 / 10:18 am

                      “one in 10,000 diagnosed with Autism for instance in 1983, now down to one in 67 or less, and dramatically so in the US military,”

                      If I read this correctly you are saying that the incidence of autism in the US military is more than in the general population?

                    • rosross October 20, 2016 / 12:01 am

                      The data indicates higher levels of Autism in the US military, probably the most heavily vaccinated group on the planet and certainly the most experimentally vaccinated.

                    • shay simmons October 20, 2016 / 9:45 am

                      “The data indicates higher levels of Autism in the US military.” Produce the data.

                    • rosross October 21, 2016 / 1:05 am

                      You can find it if you are interested. Easy to do.

                    • shay simmons October 21, 2016 / 10:54 am

                      “You can find it if you are interested. Easy to do.” Then find it and produce it. Otherwise, you’re just making an argument by assertion.

                    • rosross October 12, 2016 / 7:28 pm

                      Are you seriously saying you missed the Diabetes epidemic in kids? Which really is an explosion.

                      Or were you being disingenuous ‘protecting’ your position with the qualification of ‘broad-based increase’? I mean, a number of epidemics of auto-immune disease but that doesn’t count because you have not seen anything documenting a broad based increase? Seriously?

                      Quote: Type 2 diabetes has been described as a new epidemic in the American pediatric population that has been coincident with the overall 33% increase in diabetes incidence and prevalence seen during the past decade. In 1992, it was rare for most pediatric centers to have patients with type 2 diabetes. By 1994, type 2 diabetes accounted for up to 16% of new cases of pediatric diabetes in urban areas, and by 1999, it accounted for 8–45% of new cases depending on geographic location.



                      If contemplating the role vaccines might play in humans is just too traumatic you might want to break yourself in gently and look at some of the research into animals regarding vaccines and auto-immune disease.

                      Vets, owners, breeders, farmers, have been concerned for some time and the reality is that more people are obsessed with animals than they are with children, so it might be animals which lead the way to objective study into health damage from vaccines.

                      And sure, animals are not human, but hey, we all know most vaccine and drug testing for that matter is done on animals to assess ‘safety’ for humans, so the animal research must surely count.



                      Recent Posts
                      Why AAFCO Guidelines Are Useless For Raw Dog Food
                      Herbs For Your Dog’s Skin Problems
                      Everyday Foods To Get Rid Of Dog Worms
                      Which Vaccines Does Your Dog Need?
                      Capturing Your Dog’s Personality Through Photos
                      MSG In Dog Food Can Cause Brain Damage
                      The Purdue Vaccination Studies and Auto-antibodies
                      Vaccine Articles and News / By Catherine O’Driscoll
                      A team at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine conducted several studies (1,2) to determine if vaccines can cause changes in the immune system of dogs that might lead to life-threatening immune-mediated diseases. They obviously conducted this research because concern already existed. It was sponsored by the Haywood Foundation which itself was looking for evidence that such changes in the human immune system might also be vaccine induced. It found the evidence.

                      The vaccinated, but not the non-vaccinated, dogs in the Purdue studies developed autoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including fibronectin, laminin, DNA, albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and collagen.

                      This means that the vaccinated dogs — ”but not the non-vaccinated dogs”– were attacking their own fibronectin, which is involved in tissue repair, cell multiplication and growth, and differentiation between tissues and organs in a living organism.


                    • Scott Nelson October 17, 2016 / 9:02 pm

                      Try a course in pathophysiology or physiology. Type II diabetes, pediatric or adult, is NOT an autoimmune disease. Type II disease is insulin insensitivity at the cellular level, usually associated with chronic, excessive ingestion of calories also known as obesity. The exact cellular dysfunction is still being worked out-but it is not due immune dysfunction. The body makes insulin but cells do not respond normally to it. Also, in larger individuals, there may be an inability to secrete adequate amounts of insulin because the patient is so large-but the patients make insulin just fine. I the old days this was usually called “adult-onset diabetes” or diabetes insidious, because glucose levels in the urine were relatively low. Yes, doctors used to taste the urine of their patients to make the diagnosis.

                      Type I diabetes is an autoimmune immune disease, resulting from the immune system attacking the beta cells of the Islets of Langerhans in the pancreas, resulting in their destruction and hence an inability of the body to secrete insulin and thus take up glucose that has been ingested. This was also known as diabetes mellitus in the old days, because the urine would taste sweet due to glucose spillover from the bloodstream.

                      Try again

                    • rosross October 17, 2016 / 9:56 pm

                      Perhaps my reading spectrum is broader than yours. Try again.

                      Diabetes II is in the process of being redefined as an auto-immune disease.

                      Quote: Co-first author Daniel Winer, now an endocrine pathologist at the University Health Network of the University of Toronto in Ontario, Canada, started working on the study as a postdoctoral scholar at Stanford University School of Medicine in California, USA. He told the press that:

                      “We are in the process of redefining one of the most common diseases in America as an autoimmune disease, rather than a purely metabolic disease.”



                    • Scott Nelson October 17, 2016 / 9:05 pm

                      Damn autocorrect-the Type II form of diabetes used to be called diabetes insipidous because the urine didn’t last sweet.

                    • rosross October 17, 2016 / 9:58 pm

                      Let’s be realists, there is how the human body works, how science-medicine can prove how the body seems to work and how science-medicine believes the body works. Theories in the main and as often wrong as right.

                      Science-medicine believed there was no physical link between the rain and immune system. Wrong. This belief was held when vaccine theory and methodology was invented. Logic suggests that if textbooks on neurological disease are being rewritten in light of the new knowledge, then so should textbooks on vaccine theory and methodology.

                    • Scott Nelson October 18, 2016 / 10:28 am

                      Rosross-what you are arguing is nihilism-that if we don’t know everything, we know nothing.

                      Science re-writes the textbooks all the time-talk to a cosmologist about how their world has changed in the last 20 years. All it takes is the one thing you lack-firm, repeatable, verifiable evidence. Somebody saying “If this is true, then when I do this, this should happen. I did it and I didn’t get the expected result”. Then somebody else does it and says-“Yes, you’re right we’ve got something wrong here” or “I did what you did and got the expected result-I think you might have screwed something up” . It happens ALL THE TIME in science.

                      You, on the other hand are arguing that if we ever got one thing wrong, we should give up trying, because we aren’t perfect. That is the recipe for a total standstill. If you ever got one thing wrong a test-drop out of school (perhaps you did, based on your arguments). Stop learning. Stop trying. You most certainly would not have the computer you are writing on, the internet, chemistry, waste treatment, the germ theory (do you think Koch never got anything wrong?)

                      Vaccines are one thing where we have a lot of knowledge and experience, we are quite confident in the fundamentals, although we do not know everything, that’s what research is all about-trying, failing, try again, until you get it right.

                    • rosross October 19, 2016 / 2:20 am

                      No, I am not arguing as you claim. That is your projection.

                      The only point I would make is that good science should be open-minded, curious, and not limited to narrow belief systems like materialist reductionism as modern science is today.

                      The, ‘you are working on a computer’ line is childish. Modern science is great with equipment, man-made stuff and mechanics but the human body is not equipment, not pure mechanics and not man-made like a computer or washing machine.

                      Germ theory is questionable. Even Pasteur finally admitted before he died, it was the terrain, not the pathogen. Germ theory is a mechanical mindset which has actually led Allopathic medicine off course.

                      Many of our greatest scientists, and sure, products of their age, were also astrologers and alchemists and some even utilised Homeopathy, and yet their scientific abilities were not compromised by belonging to such a ‘broad church.’ In fact, it probably made them better scientists.

                      Modern science is trapped in a materialist reductionist belief system which is excellent for machines and man-made equipment etc., but not so great for the natural world, logically, of which the human organism is a part.

                      The human body is not a machine and no matter how many numbers are crunched, how finely the chemical make-up is understood etc. etc. that approach is never going to contribute to effective cure – and effective cure is not medication for life or having body parts regularly removed – and neither is it going to create safe medicine which is why vaccines do harm a significant number, which is known, and possibly do harm not yet known to more. It is also why iatrogenic (Allopathic) is one of the top killers, most of it from prescribed medication.

                      The scientific system now has so much power it must be questioned. It dictates modern medicine. It controls modern medicine and that means profit is paramount and everything else is secondary.

                      Common sense dictates that at the point the vaccine manufacturers pressured the US Government to protect them from being liable, that something was very, very wrong.

                      What other produce could be manufactured and protected in that way? And if vaccines are generally safe as claimed, why is the protection needed?

                      And you say science is about trying, failing, trying, questioning and at its best it is, when it is allowed to be.

                      Former editors of both The Lancet and The New England Journal of Medicine have both said much research simply cannot be trusted, and other research has said most is just pain wrong, so why would anyone trust the scientific system of enquiry, particularly in the realm of medicine.

                      More troubling is that vaccine theory and methodology was invented when science believed there was no connection between the immune system and the brain. They were completely wrong and it is now said neurological textbooks will have to be rewritten.

                      Well, if neurological textbook have to be rewritten then why not vaccine theory and methodology?

                      I sincerely hope my doubts are unfounded, but, as countries move to force more and more vaccines on children in particular and now pregnant women – a cavalier approach which seems insane given the horrors of Thalidomide, do we never learn – and will push more forced vaccines on the public in general, anyone of conscience should be demanding we are very, very sure about what we are doing.

                      That certainty could be brought closer by studying the health of Fully, Partially and Unvaccinated children comprehensively. It can be done. It should have been done. It has never been done.

                      And vaccine testing needs to be called to account. It is utterly dishonest to use an Aluminium adjuvant in what is called a placebo but which patently is not.

                    • shay simmons October 19, 2016 / 10:13 am

                      “The only point I would make is that good science should be open-minded, curious, and not limited to narrow belief systems like materialist reductionism as modern science is today.”

                      How about limited to narrow belief systems like what is replicable and provable?

                    • rosross October 20, 2016 / 12:17 am

                      The issue is not about being replicable and provable but the fact that the demand is the replication and provability fit into materialist reductionist beliefs. Many things cannot be replicated and as we both know, as research is showing, often studies are not replicated and not proven and yet drugs are released onto the market.

                      Clearly science-medicine as pharmaceuticals does not meet your criteria and no doubt that is why it is a major killer.

                      And if drugs are released without research which replicates and proves then no doubt so are vaccines.

                      So, your system doesn’t work and what you demand of others is not something which exists in Allopathy anyway.

                    • shay simmons October 20, 2016 / 9:43 am

                      “The issue is not about being replicable and provable but the fact that the demand is the replication and provability fit into materialist reductionist beliefs.” If it can’t be proven or replicated, it’s useless.

                    • shay simmons October 21, 2016 / 10:51 am

                      From your article, ros – “A massive effort to test the validity of 100 psychology experiments finds that more than 50 percent of the studies fail to replicate.”

                      So, no…it does not say anything at all about “allopathic” medicine.

                    • Scott Nelson October 19, 2016 / 10:59 am

                      Rosross-You’re right-science is trapped by that which is verifiable and repeatable. If it doesn’t fulfill those two criteria, its not science. Crystals, prayer, homeopathic medicines have all been scientifically tested and shown to have no effect greater than placebo or sham. Therefore science says they don’t work, and miles of word salads will not change that.

                      You can believe what you want, but you are not entitled to your facts. If you think science doesn’t apply to humans, drink some Arsenic, bathe in polluted waters, consume Amanita phallodies, walk off a cliff and prove to me that physical laws don’t apply to you. My money is on you not having the courage of your convictions. Otherwise all you are blowing is that which comes out of the south end of a north bound cow.

                    • rosross October 19, 2016 / 11:59 pm

                      You run off on tangents. No-one says the physical laws as currently understood scientifically don’t apply – of course they do.

                      But the point is, science understands a tiny part of this universe and its laws, albeit more than it might have done a century ago, but still, very, very little and there are laws and realities and facts that science is incapable of understanding at this point in its history.

                      Or do you seriously believe that in 2016 Science knows absolutely, irrevocably, all possible laws at work in this universe and all there is to know

                      I doubt it. Ergo, my position makes sense and yours is irrational.

                      I repeat for the last time, Science and its beliefs are great for mechanics and material and man-made, but not for the natural world because while you can reduce a piece of equipment like a washing machine to the mechanical and purely material, you cannot do that with a human being, or any creature for that matter, let alone our ecology and this planet.

                      I have no idea what crystals and prayer are doing here since they have no relevance to Homeopathy. But then you seem to get things mixed up.

                      Take care. The world is much more complex and interesting than your narrow scientific beliefs would allow you to contemplate.

                    • Scott Nelson October 20, 2016 / 4:13 pm

                      Rosross-So you are stating that humans are separate from the rest of the world. By what criteria are humans different and which laws of biology, chemistry and physics don’t pertain Homo sapiens? At which point in evolution did H. sapiens become independent of these laws? I’m sure the world would like to know the dividing line between H. sapiens and our nearest ancestors, which made them independent of whatever laws and theories you say don’t apply. You put forth a hypothesis-show us the data by which you reached these conclusions and your rationale.

                    • rosross October 21, 2016 / 1:04 am

                      You misread and misquote.

                      I said humans cannot be treated like machines – they are not man-made and purely mechanical.

                      We can know just about everything involved with creating a washing machine or computer but our knowledge of the natural world, including the human body, while greater than it was, remains minimal.

                      There are no biological laws, simply levels of knowledge and understanding. If there were biological laws one presumes that the kill and injure rate of Allopathic pharmaceutical medicine would not be so high and neither would anyone be injured by vaccines. If there were biological laws then every human subjected to the same treatment would react the same. They do not.

                      I did not put forward the hypothesis you cite. That is your projection and your inaccuracy given either poor reading or poor comprehension.

                      The currently understood ‘laws’ regarding biology, chemistry and physics, barely touch the surface of this world and our understanding of it – but you know that.

                    • Jennifer Raff October 18, 2016 / 2:03 pm

                      This is the only one of your recent comments that I found in the mod queue, and it looks like it got caught because it had multiple links. Are you missing others?

                    • rosross October 19, 2016 / 2:05 am

                      Thanks. There were a couple but it is fine. At the end of the day not that important and glad you don’t censor. Good on you.

                    • rosross October 12, 2016 / 7:31 pm

                      I did try to answer your question but I see there is now moderation, read censorship, in place on the thread and I suspect my replies will be deleted. Hopefully not, but it seems to be a norm on the subject of vaccines, which is odd when we are constantly being told the are fine and there is nothing to hide. Goodness me, where did that scientific and academic integrity go?

                    • Colin October 16, 2016 / 10:47 pm

                      Relax. No one is censoring you. If your comments aren’t getting through, are you putting multiple links in them? That can trip the spam filter.

                    • shay simmons October 16, 2016 / 10:50 pm

                      ” No one is censoring you.” You’re raining on her little speaking-troof-to-power parade, there,Colin.

                    • Jennifer Raff October 16, 2016 / 11:51 pm

                      Sorry if comments have been getting caught in the spam filters. I’ve been traveling and not monitoring closely.

                    • rosross October 17, 2016 / 9:52 pm

                      No links. And I don’t usually look at the thread but did and it showed them as moderated which is new and generally does involve censorship in this day and age of vetting what is considered suitable to be said. But trust me, I am very relaxed and really not fussed because I believe censorship always backfires. But thanks anyway.

                    • Jennifer Raff October 18, 2016 / 1:59 pm

                      There’s no censorship on this blog, unless a comment contains a personal insult or threat. If you scroll through the comments on here, you’ll see it’s obvious that I don’t censor people. If you’re missing some comments, it’s because they’re caught in moderation and I didn’t happen to see them to approve. I’ll check my mod queue again.

                    • rosross October 19, 2016 / 2:06 am

                      Thanks for your response. I am sure in the scheme of things not that important. More important that you don’t censor through moderation as many do on this issue.

          • rosross October 9, 2016 / 12:07 am

            This is an interesting diagram of some of the knowledge currently accepted within immunology. It is hardly the last word on the complexity of the immune system and since science, until recently believed there was no connection between the Brain and the Immune System, nay, that none was possible no doubt, and now it knows it was completely, totally, utterly wrong, why on earth would anyone accept that there are any absolutes in any field of knowledge?

            It doesn’t take much brain-power to draw up pretty coloured boxes linked with lines.

            True, pure, rigorous science requires curiosity and an open mind, and if wise, understanding that knowledge is only ever partial and always incomplete, since modern medicine for all of its bells and whistles and smoke and mirrors is not creating better health but instead presides over an age when serious and chronic disease levels are higher than ever before in general and more so in children.

            Your simplistic, materialist reductionist, mechanistic diagram is, seemingly, of little use when it comes to robust health in people and active cure, and so is pretty worthless except to make those who enjoy diagrams, content.

            Allopathic medicine will remain one of the top killers and will never be a force for robust health as long as it erroneously believes that it knows it all and that the body can be treated like a machine or piece of equipment. The proof is in the pudding and when it comes to health and disease the only proof which matters is firstly, robust enduring health and second, cure – not medication for life or having body parts regularly removed as a system of removing or repressing symptom, but real, lasting cure and robust health.

            Fewer diagrams and dictates and modern medicine might improve its kill, injure and cure rates.

  5. Scott Nelson October 18, 2016 / 10:32 am

    Oh, I read your article-not a scientific report bu a blurb to the lay public-that was published in 2011. I haven’t heard much more about it-and that study was done in engineered mice, which are not a bad model, but talk to any researcher about how many models didn’t pan out when crossing species-it goes with the trying and getting something wrong.

  6. kdr February 8, 2017 / 5:20 pm

    I suppose my question is, if vaccines (in whole or part) don’t cause autism, why does the federal claims court in DC, after years long litigation, pay out millions a year to families for vaccine-induced autism. and PS they’re doing it with YOUR tax money!

    • shay simmons February 22, 2017 / 8:57 am

      Oh, and no award has ever been granted by the VICP for vaccine-induced autism.

  7. Morgan February 15, 2017 / 3:24 pm

    You left out a lot. You didn’t list All the studies that show a link between vaccines and autism, the fact that the studies you show were done with only one vaccine MMR and one ingredient Thimerisol. How many vaccines are there now? How many doses? 75 , how many ingredients about 40
    Get educated people

    • shay simmons February 15, 2017 / 4:56 pm

      The MMR is a live vaccine — it does not now, nor did it ever contain thimerosal, which is a preservative.

      Get educated, yourself.

  8. rosross February 15, 2017 / 5:50 pm

    In regard to the Polio epidemic and those who suffered from it, the following facts are worth noting:

    Polio has long been with us and to a large if not total extent, the Polio epidemic of the Fifties was created by Allopathic medical practices and these connections were recognised and discussed at the time:

    a. the practice of removing tonsils and adenoids, because science-medicine could not work out what they might do, common practice from the early part of the 20th century when antibiotics made surgery safer, and carried out on countless millions of children, and recognised to predispose to severe paralytic Polio, and

    b. the recognition that the Diptheria vaccination predisposed children to severe paralytic Polio, with paralysis often beginning at the injection site. Warnings were given at the time but doctors and the powers that be decided the vaccination industry was more important than the lives and futures of some children.

    In addition when Salk’s live vaccine was introduced, Polio was again in decline and the vaccine reinvigorated it and killed and injured many more.

    Even more troubling was and is the connection between the Polio vaccine and Cancer, something even Salk and Sabin recognised and admitted.

    So, for everyone who suffered during the Fifties Polio epidemic, we now have millions with Cancer. Is it worth it? Many would say it is not.

    Claims of Polio being eradicated, although Wild Polio may well have died out, as diseases often do, are also nonsense with other forms of paralytic disease, particularly those following Polio vaccination, have been given different names.

    The core issue is not whether vaccines trigger or cause Autism, but the fact that vaccines have not been properly tested, ever. Placebos used in vaccine studies also contain the Adjuvant, Aluminium, which means no placebos are used and the effects of Aluminium, a known neurotoxin, cannot be established.

    More concerning is the fact that vaccination theory and methodology were invented in an age when science-medicine wrongly believed there was no connection between the brain and immune system. There is, a strong lymphatic connection, and that means vaccines impact brain function.

    This has never been studied because you cannot study something you do not know, or believe exists. Calls for textbooks to be rewritten in light of this new knowledge, would, one presumes, include vaccine textbooks. If not, why not?

    The two most vulnerable groups are the young and the old and the former has epidemics of Autism and Behavioural and Learning Difficulties and Brain Cancer and the latter, epidemics of Alzheimer’s (where Aluminium is a recognised factor) and Dementia.

    Anyone who is not questioning vaccines is deluded or irresponsible.

    • shay simmons February 15, 2017 / 8:24 pm

      Citations needed for all of your claims — but I won’t hold my breath, since you’ve never been able to provide any.

      • rosross February 15, 2017 / 9:40 pm

        Citations given to you in the past and ignored. And easy enough to find for those who are interested in the truth.

      • rosross February 15, 2017 / 9:44 pm

        since you have had citations in the past and ignored them, I doubt you would bother now, but I shall post some information for others.

      • rosross February 15, 2017 / 9:59 pm

        Anyone interested in wading through research into the Cancer risk from the Polio vaccine can find material themselves, and Salk’s words warning of it in discussion with Sabin.

        Something to begin with from the days when the media would still publish material questioning vaccines:

        • shay simmons February 16, 2017 / 8:52 am

          As you have been told before, ros — this occurred in the 1960s. Since that time, no one has ever been diagnosed with a case of cancer caused by the SV40 virus.

          Why do lying antivaxxers always lie?

  9. rosross February 15, 2017 / 9:45 pm

    Usage of chemicals in vaccines have also been linked with polio. Dr. Geffen in London reported 30 children who had been vaccinated with diphtheria and whooping cough vaccines and went on to develop polio within 4 weeks of vaccination.

    ‘’The paralysis affecting, in particular, the limb of injection.’

    (Bradford Hill, A., Knoweldon, J. 1950. “Inoculation and Poliomyelitis”. BMJ, July 1st, pp 1-6.).

    By 1950, the UK Department of Health advised that vaccines were NOT used in areas where there was polio, because of the risk of them triggering polio.

    It was reported that of 112 cases of paralysis admitted to the Park Hospital, London, during 1947-1949, 14 were paralyzed in the limb which had received one or more of a course of immunizing injections within the previous two months. In the majority of cases, the interval between the last injection and the onset of paralysis was between 9 and 14 days. Again, combined whooping cough, diphtheria and tetanus injections were involved. This outbreak of polio followed an intensive immunization campaign during that time, 1947-49. Following these findings, the Ministry of Health recommended that diphtheria and triple vaccines should not be used in areas where polio was naturally present. From that time onwards, the incidence of paralytic polio decreased rapidly in Britain, even prior to the advent of Salk vaccination…” (Reported in the July 29th edition of the BMJ, 1950).

    One man, Kevin, told of his experience after he contracted polio from the vaccine in the 1950’s, in an article he entitled ‘Suffer the Little Children’. He said

    “I’ve always blamed the injections I had at school in the year that I ended up in an iron lung in Ballarat’s Base Hospital. So did my parents. Now I know this to be true and it’s all there in the British medical journal The Lancet.

    Recently I stumbled on critical research published in The Lancet in April 1950 linking polio with whooping cough and diphtheria immunisation. In the weeks leading up to my personal D-Day in September 1951, I was immunised at Lexton State School in central Victoria against whooping cough and diphtheria as well as smallpox. And that was in the days when you were given a ”live” virus.

    In my case there was a problem with the first diphtheria shot and I was given a second injection, presumably for certainty. Some three weeks later, during the second round of diphtheria injections, the syringe and needle came apart and vaccine squirted into my face. Again I was given a second dose. I could hardly move my right arm the next day. When I contracted polio a few weeks later, it seemed no coincidence that the paralysis most severely affected my arms, my right one in particular. My left arm was (and still is) partly paralysed, my right arm totally.

    The revelatory research, as it happens, was done by Dr Bertram McCloskey, the Victorian Health Department’s polio officer, who actually treated me in Ballarat. His report in The Lancet makes disturbing reading, even today. McCloskey reports that 375 cases of polio were notified in Victoria between January and August 1949, and of the 340 cases investigated, 211 of these had ”a history of previous immunisation against whooping cough and/or diphtheria”. This showed, he wrote, that there was ”considerable evidence that a correlation between inoculation and poliomyelitis infection existed in this epidemic”.

    He said the more recent the injection, the more likely was its association with the onset of polio. ”The data revealed that the last injection before the onset of symptoms was that usually associated with the location of paralysis.” In 17 cases of children under the age of three, he found there was considerable evidence to confirm that the paralysis was more severe in the last inoculated limbs of these children. I was 10 at the time, but that was certainly true in my case.

    Another doctor, Dennis Geffen, came to similar conclusions in London. It staggers me that, despite these findings, the Health Department and Victorian government of the day still allowed the school immunisation scheme to go ahead during the polio epidemic.”

    To read the whole of Kevin’s article go to:

    • shay simmons February 16, 2017 / 8:55 am

      Do you bother to read these cites of yours, ros? 60 years ago. Oh, and as an example of logical fallacy, Dr McCloskey’s post hoc ergo propter hoc is right up there.

    • shay simmons February 16, 2017 / 8:56 am

      65 year old article, ros. Why is it that you can’t come up with anything more recent? Oh, that’s right; hundreds of thousands of research and medical professionals are hiding the truth.

  10. rosross February 15, 2017 / 9:50 pm

    Lymphatics connect the brain and immune system and tonsils and adenoids are a part of the lymphatic system.

    The data, for those hysterical about the site, can be traced to those sites the pro-vax-max brigade consider acceptable. Take the time to do it.

    Quote: Tonsillectomies are ancient and, as the ear nose and throat doctor said, very common. “For much of the twentieth century,” says this book,”tonsillectomy (generally with adenoidectomy) was the most common surgical procedure in the United States.” They are still very common. In 2006, half a million were done just in America.

    What do tonsils do? Tonsils, like other parts of the lymphatic system, contain large numbers of lymphocytes. Lymphocytes are usually called a type of white blood cell, but that is misleading because relatively few are in the blood. Almost all your lymphocytes are in your lymphatic system, which is why they’re called lymphocytes. As recently as the 1950s, their function was unknown. In 1953, for example, this ignorance was called “a disgraceful gap in medical knowledge”. Failure to understand what lymphocytes do made it unclear what tonsils do. It is dangerous, to say the least, to cut off part of the body whose function you don’t know. In spite of this, tonsillectomies were extremely popular from the 1920s through the 1940s. Tens of millions were done.

    Around 1900, America started to have frequent polio epidemics. Starting in 1916, they happened every summer, which came to be called “polio season”. Over the years, they got worse. In 1951, thousands of children died, and tens of thousands were crippled. The level of fear can be seen from a booklet called Polio Pointers for 1951. Along with practical advice (“keep [your children] away from new people”), it tried to reassure: “Remember — at least half of polio patients get well without any crippling.” As both tonsillectomies and polio increased, a horrifying correlation emerged: Children who’d had a tonsillectomy were more likely to get a certain type of polio (infection of the bulbar region of the brain stem) than children who had not had a tonsillectomy. This became common knowledge. Polio Pointers said “don’t have mouth or throat operations during a polio outbreak.”

    In 1954, the American Journal of Public Health ran an editorial summarizing the link between tonsillectomy and polio. The main evidence was that within a group of children with polio, the ones with bulbar polio were about three times more likely to have had their tonsils removed than the ones with spinal polio (infection of the spinal cord). This resembles some of the first evidence connecting smoking and lung cancer: Hospital patients with lung cancer were much more likely to be heavy smokers than hospital patients with other diseases.

    Although Polio Pointers implied that tonsillectomies were unsafe only “during a polio outbreak,” this was false. The data implied they were always unsafe: “This higher proportion of bulbar cases in tonsillectomized persons occurs at all ages regardless of the time elapsed since operation,” said the editorial. A 1957 paper about the tonsillectomy/polio association cited 19 studies that had observed it. “The association is generally regarded as an underlying causal relationship,” said the paper, meaning that the usual explanation was that tonsillectomy increased risk of bulbar polio. The paper found more evidence for this explanation.

    Researchers considered other explanations for the polio/tonsillectomy association (for example, are tonsillectomies more common among rich children? among sickly children? ) but failed to find supporting evidence. The tonsillectomy/polio connection is probably why tonsillectomies became less popular starting in the 1950s. They declined from extremely common (the most common of any operation) to very common (the most common operation done on children).

    By 1960, the tonsillectomy/polio association was firmly established, but its explanation was a mystery. If it reflected cause and effect, why would tonsils protect against infection? Around this time, work by James Gowans and others started to answer this question by figuring out that lymphocytes are the main cells of our immune system. They detect bacteria and viruses and make antibodies against them. T cells, B cells, and natural killer (NK) cells — all lymphocytes. In one experiment, Gowans and his co-workers drained the lymphocytes from rats. The rats lost the ability to make antibodies. When the researchers put the lymphocytes back into the rats, they regained the ability to make antibodies. That’s just an example. Our understanding of what lymphocytes do comes from thousands of experiments.

  11. rosross February 15, 2017 / 9:54 pm

    Quote: In 1980, public health researchers working in West Africa detected a startling trend among children diagnosed with paralytic polio. Some of the children had become paralyzed in a limb that had recently been the site of an inoculation against a common paediatric illness, such as diphtheria and whooping cough. Studies emerging from India seemed to corroborate a similar association between diagnosis of polio and recent immunisation.

    • Chris February 16, 2017 / 1:18 pm

      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Though the threads are swollen
      Keep them comments trollin’,

      Move ’em on
      (Head em’ up!)
      Head em’ up
      (Move ’em on!)
      Move ’em on
      (Head em’ up!)
      Cut ’em out
      (Paste ’em in!)
      Paste’em in
      (Cut em’ out!)
      Cut ’em out
      Paste ’em in,
      Keep trollin’, trollin’, trollin’
      Though they’re disaprovin’
      Keep them comments trollin”,
      Don’t try to understand ’em
      Just rope, laugh, and ignore ’em
      Soon we’ll be discussin’ bright without ’em

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s