Dear parents, you are being lied to.

Standard of care.

In light of recent outbreaks of measles and other vaccine preventable illnesses, and the refusal of anti-vaccination advocates to acknowledge the problem, I thought it was past time for this post.

Dear parents,

You are being lied to. The people who claim to be acting in the best interests of your children are putting their health and even lives at risk.

They say that measles isn’t a deadly disease.
But it is.

They say that chickenpox isn’t that big of a deal.
But it can be.

They say that the flu isn’t dangerous.
But it is.

They say that whooping cough isn’t so bad for kids to get.
But it is.

They say that vaccines aren’t that effective at preventing disease.
But 3 million children’s lives are saved every year by vaccination, and 2 million die every year from vaccine-preventable illnesses.

They say that “natural infection” is better than vaccination.
But they’re wrong.

They say that vaccines haven’t been rigorously tested for safety.
But vaccines are subjected to a higher level of scrutiny than any other medicine. For example, this study tested the safety and effectiveness of the pneumococcal vaccine in more than 37,868 children.

They will say that doctors won’t admit there are any side effects to vaccines.
But the side effects are well known, and except in very rare cases quite mild.

They say that the MMR vaccine causes autism.
It doesn’t. (The question of whether vaccines cause autism has been investigated in study after study, and they all show overwhelming evidence that they don’t.)

They say that thimerosal in vaccines causes autism.
It doesn’t, and it hasn’t been in most vaccines since 2001 anyway.

They say that the aluminum in vaccines (an adjuvant, or component of the vaccine designed to enhance the body’s immune response) is harmful to children.
But children consume more aluminum in natural breast milk than they do in vaccines, and far higher levels of aluminum are needed to cause harm.

They say that the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (and/or the “vaccine court”) proves that vaccines are harmful.
It doesn’t.

They say that the normal vaccine schedule is too difficult for a child’s immune system to cope with.
It isn’t.

They say that if other people’s children are vaccinated, there’s no need for their children to get vaccinated.

This is one of the most despicable arguments I’ve ever heard. First of all, vaccines aren’t always 100% effective, so it is possible for a vaccinated child to still become infected if exposed to a disease. Worse, there are some people who can’t receive vaccinations, because they are immune deficient, or because they are allergic to some component. Those people depend upon herd immunity to protect them. People who choose not to vaccinate their children against infectious diseases are putting not only their own children at risk, but also other people’s children.

They say that ‘natural’, ‘alternative’ remedies are better than science-based medicine.
They aren’t.

The truth is that vaccines are one of our greatest public health achievements, and one of the most important things you can do to protect your child.

I can predict exactly the sort of response I will be getting from the anti-vaccine activists. Because they can’t argue effectively against the overwhelming scientific evidence about vaccines, they will say that I work for Big Pharma. (I don’t and never have). They will say that I’m not a scientist (I am), and that I’m an “Agent 666” (I don’t know what that is, but I’m pretty sure that I’m not one).

None of these things are true, but they are the reflexive response by the anti-vaccine activists because they have no facts to back up their position. On some level, deep down, they must understand this, and are afraid of the implications, so they attack the messenger.

Why are they lying to you? Some are doing it for profit, trying to sell their alternative remedies by making you afraid of science-based medicine. I’m sure that many others within the anti-vaccine movement have genuinely good intentions, and do honestly believe that vaccines are harmful. But as a certain astrophysicist recently said “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it”. In the case of vaccine truthers, this is not a good thing. Good intentions will not prevent microbes from infecting and harming people, and the message that vaccines are dangerous is having dire consequences. There are outbreaks of vaccine-preventable illnesses now throughout the United States because of unvaccinated children.

In only one respect is my message the same as the anti-vaccine activists: Educate yourself. But while they mean “Read all these websites that support our position”, I suggest you should learn what the scientific community says. Learn how the immune system works. Go read about the history of disease before vaccines, and talk to older people who grew up when polio, measles, and other diseases couldn’t be prevented. Go read about how vaccines are developed, and how they work. Read about Andrew Wakefield, and how his paper that claimed a link between the MMR vaccine and autism has been withdrawn, and his medical license has been revoked. Read the numerous, huge studies that have explicitly examined whether autism is caused by the vaccine…and found nothing. (While you’re at it, read about the ongoing research to determine what IS the cause—or causes —of autism, which is not helped by people continuing to insist that vaccines cause it).

That may seem like a lot of work, and scientific papers can seem intimidating to read. But reading scientific articles is a skill that can be mastered. Here’s a great resource for evaluating medical information on the internet, and I wrote a guide for non-scientists on how to read and understand the scientific literature. You owe it to your children, and to yourself, to thoroughly investigate the issue. Don’t rely on what some stranger on the internet says (not even me!). Read the scientific studies that I linked to in this post for yourself, and talk to your pediatricians. Despite what the anti-vaccine community is telling you, you don’t need to be afraid of the vaccines. You should instead be afraid of what happens without them.


Edited to add: This video is an outstanding summary of many of these issues. I encourage you to watch it.

“Humans try to make sense of the world by seeing patterns. When they see a disease or condition that tends to appear around the time a child is a year or so old, as autism does, and that is also the age that kids get particular shots, they want to put those things together. Parents watch kids more carefully after they get shots. Sometimes they pick up on symptoms then. Just because two things happen at the same time doesn’t mean that one caused the other. This is why we need careful scientific studies.”

Note: For people coming via a direct link, please also feel free to participate in a follow-up discussion

1/13/15: Edited to update broken hyperlinks. If you find any additional broken links, please don’t hesitate to let me know. –JR

4/19/16: Edited again to update more broken hyperlinks. If you find more, keep letting us know and we’ll keep fixing them. –CM

5,955 thoughts on “Dear parents, you are being lied to.

  1. Amy Lopez June 1, 2014 / 3:42 pm

    1.I was immunized against chickenpox, yet contracted it twice. Now I have shingles. So how did the immunization help me?
    2. My daughter got immunized, now she has asperger’s syndrome. BTW no autism anywhere else in the family. doctors kept telling me she was fine. Met a friend of my youngest daughter who’s son is autistic, the first thing she said to me was where was my daughter on the spectrum? I didn’t know what she was talking about. I guess parents are not as educated as doctors right?
    3.My aunt died from the supposedly safe fen-phen. She had chest pains and the doctor upped her dose. she then had a heart attack. But drugs given by doctors are safe…….BS.
    4. My advice is go to your nearest bookseller and pick up a book called Evidence of Harm. Read it cover to cover and then come tell me immunizations are safe.
    5. remember the flu vaccine? check to see how many women miscarried. my BIL’s wife now has a paralyzed father because they were pushing this “safe” vaccine.

    • confusedbylogic June 1, 2014 / 4:13 pm

      Amy Lopez,
      My advice is to go write an accepted dissertation in immunology, then read it cover to cover and tell us what you think?

      All of your points are based on the presumption that things are all one way or the other.
      Doctors missed my child’s diagnosis, so doctors are stupid.
      I got an immunization, but got the illness anyway, so they are not protective.

      What is the balance of the information that is out there? Is it that
      A) 50% of the data indicates vaccines cause autism, or it is that
      B) 95+% of it proves, beyond any reasonable doubt, that such claims of vaccines causing autism is an outright lie?

      If it is B and you are pretending, and telling others to pretend, that “it could go either way,” then you are perpetuating a myth as dangerous to our society as “smoking is good for you – and the people around you.”

    • Chris June 1, 2014 / 4:16 pm

      “1.I was immunized against chickenpox, yet contracted it twice.”

      How old are you? The vaccine was only introduced in the USA in 1995, and the second vaccination for it was implemented a few years later. My twenty year old daughter caught chicken pox as a baby a year before the vaccine was available.

      “4. My advice is go to your nearest bookseller and pick up a book called Evidence of Harm”

      Um, yeah. So a travel writer was hired by the guys who started SafeMinds to write the book in order to bolster their lawsuits. Not terribly convincing. Especially since it is all about the “evil” thimerosal, which was removed from American pediatric vaccines over ten years ago. Even half of the influenza vaccines approved for children are thimerosal free, as are most of the DTaP vaccines.

      “remember the flu vaccine? check to see how many women miscarried. ”

      You have that backwards. In 2009 more women actually miscarried and died due to actually getting influenza:

  2. Tree June 1, 2014 / 3:58 pm

    Vaccinations are for pussies. And by the way, if scientists really want to be helpful, come up with a vaccine to prevent American children from becoming fat, lazy assholes.

    • Chris June 1, 2014 / 4:22 pm

      Perhaps they should work on better science/medical education for their parents. Scientist/doctors have been telling parents to not feed kids junk, and to make sure they pull away from the boob tube/computer games… but they parents don’t.

      Why don’t you show us how good your scientific education is by backing up this misogynistic statement with some actual verifiable documentation: “Vaccinations are for pussies.”

        • Chris June 1, 2014 / 6:24 pm

          This reminded back in the days of there being only one phone company when there was no “caller id”, and we’d get the crank calls. Also we only had one phone, which was in the living room. So late one night the phone rang, I stumbled to the living room to hear some nut say in a raspy voice: “I want your pussy!” To which I replied: “Why do you want my cat?” click!

          Or thought I replied, since I was half asleep. I may have just said “You woke me up this stupidity?” click!

  3. James Lewis June 1, 2014 / 4:40 pm

    DR.Raff . This article and the resulting conversation has been very interesting. I went to “collage” ((ITT-Tech so I’m almost certain it does not count as a collage or even a learning institution )) With a young man suffering with autism. I talked to his father who accompanied him to school on a regular basis. He was extremely antivax and got a lot of his information from so called “Autism support groups” that after reading their literature seem to be almost militant in nature. Over time I came to understand why the father was this way though. It has to be tough watching your child suffer with autism, the physical, mental and social effects are heartbreaking. Searching for some kind of concrete answer as to why this is happening, but getting no such answer. Feeling powerless to help your child or any other for that matter. The anti-vaccine movement seems to prey upon this feeling. First it gives you the plausible sounding enemy that conventional science could not provide. Once you have an enemy you can focus all the pent up anger and frustration on that enemy. Then it asks for money to support the “Cause” and asks you to be it’s mouth piece. Recruit more for the army, so to speak. I truly feel for the parents of the autistic. I being a caregiver in my own right can understand that helpless feeling as you watch a loved one struggle through life, I just hope more will realize that by encouraging the refusal of vaccines you are sentencing other parents to your torment.

    • gewisn June 1, 2014 / 4:49 pm

      James Lewis,

      You, sir, won the internet.

  4. Thomar June 1, 2014 / 6:05 pm

    Jennifer, THANK YOU. 100% agree with your position in the face of overwhelming evidence in support. But please, check for the overuse of the word ‘that.’

  5. Michaela Dimoff June 1, 2014 / 7:59 pm

    Reblogged this on The Michaela Chronicles and commented:
    This incredibly well researched and reliably sourced article puts my frustration about parents refusing to vaccinate their children.

  6. Anonymous June 1, 2014 / 8:23 pm

    All I can say is since I’ve been vaccinated at the age of 18 I’ve found myself sick every 6 months for the past 16 years. Scientific proof is only so reliable. Before I was 18 I never had a single vaccination and I can only recall being sick twice and having the chickenpox. In 18 years…. In 14 years I’ve been sick beyond belief I have allergies now spring and fall I’m miserable. I now get bronchitis 2 times a year… So for your scientific proof I call B.S. everyone is different no scientific study is going to make me believe that these vaccinations are a good thing.. This topic can go either way I do believe there may possibly be benefits to these shots but as for my health I can tell you it has ruined my immune system. As for being able to infect others I can call B.S. on that also, if your telling me that for the first 18 years of my life I risked infecting others that were vaccinated then how good are the vaccinations? No matter what anyone posts on the site everyone will have a retort for it and that’s fine.. This is just my own experience for not being vaccinated to being vaccinated and the effects of it…

    • gewisn June 1, 2014 / 9:48 pm


    • Colin June 1, 2014 / 9:56 pm

      Scientific proof is only so reliable.

      It is vastly more reliable than anecdotal evidence with a sample size of one, which is what you’re using as a justification for disregarding scientific reasoning that conflicts with your preconceptions.

      This is just my own experience for not being vaccinated to being vaccinated and the effects of it…

      You haven’t described “the effects of it.” You’ve described a perceived correlation, not any sort of causation.

    • gewisn June 1, 2014 / 9:59 pm

      (if I sent an empty reply, I apologize)

      “no scientific study is going to make me believe that these vaccinations are a good thing..”
      So what would convince you? What sort of evidence would you prefer?

      “I can tell you it (vaccination) has ruined my immune system.”
      Please explain.
      How did you become convinced that
      A) your immune system has been ruined and
      B) that vaccination is what ruined it?
      What was the thought process that led you to that conclusion?
      What other conclusions did you consider?
      What evidence convinced you that those other conclusions were less likely?

      “As for being able to infect others I can call B.S. on that also, if your telling me that for the first 18 years of my life I risked infecting others that were vaccinated then how good are the vaccinations?”
      Actually, they were mostly concerned that you were risking infecting others who were UNvaccinated. You know, babies that couldn’t yet get all the vaccines, and people with immune disorders, and like that. But no one has ever claimed that vaccines are 100% effective or that all vaccines provide lifelong protection – so there is, indeed, some risk that unvaccinated people (as you were) pass infections on to vaccinated individuals. But, as I said, that is not the primary concern.

  7. Portia Leigh June 1, 2014 / 8:33 pm

    Okay so I’m banking on the fact that you are an ethical journalist and wouldn’t write anything without heavily researching it first, I am the same way; however, when it comes to vaccines, what do you think about Gaurdasil, which is used for hpv, and is only actually effective in 4 of the 240+ strains, which in most cases clear up on their own within 6 months? There is so much research showing how this drug has led to the deaths of women across the US. It started being given to women ages 14 and up for free several years ago, and the few doctors who originally supported it have come out saying how horrible it is. The company is definitely not giving it to us for free, they are making money off the government subsidy. I don’t know enough about autism to say refute your statements, but big pharma is a HUGE problem; when you consider drugs like Vioxx (not a vaccine) by Merck & CO., one of the largest pharma companies in the world, who drew up a list of doctors who disagreed with the benefits of the drug with an employee saying “We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live,” it’s very hard to think anything these companies say can be true.

    • Anonymous June 1, 2014 / 9:32 pm

      Genital warts are most commonly caused by two types of HPV (type 6 and 11). These never go away. HPV type 16 and 18 are the strongest linking risk factor for Cervical Cancer. These four strains of HPV have reason to be immunized against. It is currently unnecessary to immunize against the other strains because they do “clear up” in a safe manner. These 4 strains (6, 11, 16, & 18) do not.

      • Portia Leigh June 1, 2014 / 9:48 pm

        Thank you:) I love to learn, unfortunately its impossible to remember all the statistics…. I feel that when it comes to the science of vaccines and pharmaceuticals its silly to be so emotionally invested in one standpoint or another, considering that many of these ‘drugs’ have not been around long enough to get a clear comparison of the effects they can have over a persons life span, I wish I were a scientist because I love learning about these things, but I find it so unfortunate that people are fighting throughout the comments of this post (as is the case with most articles of controversy) and are calling eachother “mongrols” and such… There is always more research to be done, and if you’re a scientist then having an open mind and the willingness to change your standpoint as new research becomes available is integral to growth…

        • Anonymous June 1, 2014 / 11:35 pm

          I was immunized along with my eight other siblings in 1950 to 1960. along with my extended family, cousins about 50, none of us have ever experienced any autism. I have worked in health care for 38 years and received numerous immunizations and have never had an adverse effect. That said I do agree BIG pharm does pass drugs through without enough study prodded by big money. When drugs put on the market and serious side effects in numbers are noted the drug is taken off the market, THIS causes questions about who is looking out for us the regular people??? Money talks and we are left wondering ISTHIS DRUG SAFE????

        • gewisn June 1, 2014 / 10:12 pm

          Portia Leigh,
          I’m honestly and sincerely curious.
          I promise not to ridicule your answers or accuse you of being less intelligent than me or than anyone else. I hope you will consider answering.

          What were your thoughts on Gardisil before this item (and other articles regarding Dr Harper)?
          What did you feel was the main point of that CBS article?
          What were your conclusions about Gardisil after the article?
          And what sort of information would you most like, now that you have seen that report?

          • Portia Leigh June 1, 2014 / 10:35 pm

            This article has no baring on my views I’ve been researching the drug since 2011 and sincerely regret having blindly taken it, I personally feel it changed my body because I’ve had chronic candida overgrowth and I had never had a yeast infection prior– I would never tell anyone else not to take it because of my experience, all of our bodies are different, I personally don’t trust most press outlets because everyone has an agenda, that’s just the world we live in today… I just looked up doctor Harper really quick and posted the article in case anyone wanted to research her standpoint further… I definitely don’t trust Merck & co. The maker of gardasil because of all of the things I’ve read about them, (they’ve been around for hundreds of years during the time when “ketchup” was prescribed as medicine, theyve change their name slightly) I feel like the film ‘the Gardner’ sums up how pharma companies go about getting drugs on the market pretty well… I think it’s weird that Gardasil is given to women across the board regardless of their bodily constitutions, a few years of research doesn’t seem like its enough to find out long term effects no matter how large the sample group is…

            • gewisn June 1, 2014 / 10:50 pm

              Portia Leigh,
              Thank you.

              What sort of information would you like now?
              What the things about that infomations that are most important to you?
              The authors? The funding? The peer review? How easily the original information is accessed by people like you trying to make informed healthcare decisions? The length of time the study took place? The variety of people who participated in the testing?

          • Tania Velasquez June 2, 2014 / 12:07 pm

            This conversation between the two of you has been one of the smartest, sincere, and most grounded discussions I’ve read on any comment boards. Thank you both for your ego-free intelligence 🙂

      • anna June 2, 2014 / 9:11 pm

        This is true…coming from someone who studied cervical cancer for years…HPV 16&18 cause 90-99% of cervical cancer alone…genital warts are more an eyesore (although can cause very severe disfigurement/pain in some) than dangerous…but it’s a tough virus to clear when the right strain hits…I would agree it is much more serious for females than men, even with reg. pap smear screening and abnormal cells caught early, the treatment (conization/leep) of the cervix can cause preterm labor and prolapsed uterus later in life…still thinking of not vaccinating your daughter?

      • Anonymous June 3, 2014 / 2:18 am

        I’m sorry, but it’s not a matter of clearing up. There are many HPV types that cause cervical cancer. There are at least 15 types occurring on a noteworthy frequency, but 16 and 18 are by far the most common types (making up 70% of HPV associated cervical cancer), and thats why vaccines contain their strains. Same goes for HPV 6 and 11, they are simply the most common.

      • tobiakazmer June 3, 2014 / 8:52 am

        So you believe that we should prevent with a vaccine what’s preventable with monogamy and sexual education? Genital warts are a sexually transmitted disease, not and airborne toxicity.
        I personally know a girl who got the HPV vaccine and developed cervical cancer within 6 months.
        I’ll let those results speak for themselves.

        • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 9:13 am

          I can’t hear what you are saying. Are you saying the girl was sexually active at age 14 and contracted HPV then, causing cervical cancer? Are you saying she had inborn error in her genome predisposing her to cervical cancer? Are you saying that all people should be perfectly monogamous, and upon the death of a spouse, join a convent/preisthood? Or are you trying to demonstrate causation with an n=1?

        • Chris June 3, 2014 / 9:35 am

          I applaud and congratulate you on being totally faithful in your monogamous relationship. I hope you can keep it up with a very long marriage like me (over thirty years).

          But I have a few questions, because long monogamous marriages are not terribly common. My mother-in-law’s first husband died when her children were both less than ten years old, so she remarried three years later. Why was that bad?

          Also, can you guarantee that my daughter will marry a man who does not HPV, even though she might be a virgin? Plus, can you also guarantee that my daughter will not be a victim of rape? And do you know what your teenage daughter is doing every hour of every day?

          Some of my thoughts came because of this Washington Post article, Bodies of 800 babies, long-dead, found in septic tank at former Irish home for unwed mothers, I read this morning. It was horribly sad, and one thing that was sad was this quote (emphasis added):

          “When daughters became pregnant, they were ostracized completely,” Corless said. “Families would be afraid of neighbors finding out, because to get pregnant out of marriage was the worst thing on Earth. It was the worst crime a woman could commit, even though a lot of the time it had been because of a rape.”

          • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 9:56 am

            Yes Chris, very sad & completely true… society has been messing with womens minds for generations now, to make them inferrior… Another fact is that scientists have found a new lead into women carrying the genes of the men they slept with for many years afterwards which can also be passed on to their children and have adverse effects on their personalities and wellbeing…

            I think sexual education forced down the throats of 5 year olds doesn’t quite explain to them these effects, along with other problems, however they should be taught every gruesome detail from the age of the earliest sexual activity (12 i think)… then maybe they wouldn’t go out of their home, thinking “freedom from mummy telling them what to do” Yet being so naive as to what and how they should do it.

        • moladood June 3, 2014 / 10:12 am

          So in the instance of rape leading to an HPV infection and cervical cancer, what do you propose?

    • cathy June 2, 2014 / 6:16 am

      Vioxx was one of the most effective drugs an old lady like me has to treat arthritis. I would have gladly stayed on it, as nothing now is as effective. However, it was withdrawn because of the link to cardiac issues in a few, but notable number of the population. The company lost billions, but the system of checks and balances worked. As a professional health care worker, I see the results of responsible pharmacy every day.

      • Ellot June 22, 2014 / 11:07 am

        I could be wrong but the number of deaths was supposedlly 50,000 !!!! That’s deaths not the number of injured, which of course was many more thousands. Effectiveness is nothing if it’s not safe. The company only lost billions because they HID data which indicated cardiac problems. Overall the company more than likely still made money. To say the system worked is quite a statement considering the number of deaths and injuries. Vioxx is the poster child for what’s wrong with the pharmaceutical industry. As a health care professional you should know better.

    • Anonymous June 2, 2014 / 9:58 pm

      Not all HPV strain cause cervical cancer. Strains 16 and 18 cause most cases of cervical cancer. Guardasil immunizes against those two and a couple of other runner-ups. The point is to prevent cancer deaths, not cosmetic genital warts.

    • Brian June 3, 2014 / 6:53 pm

      Wow…Very frustrating!!
      -It’s impossible to convince people who don’t believe in science to believe in science.
      – It’s impossible to convince the math illiterate that lotteries and gambling are actually a tax on those bad at math.
      – It’s impossible to convince the high school drop-out that maybe homeschooling isn’t the best choice for their kids
      – Some people try to get nutrients from eating the sun instead of food
      -Some also think they are smarter than the experts who are highly educated and believe there is an active conspiracy against the uneducated by academia and corporations.
      They instead turn to the internet where people sell them sham theories to take advantage of them even more. I too believe there are some things science can’t explain – but this one is really a no brainer – and — It’s fine — It’s their choice to make – The problem is when parents uninformed decisions based on junk science impact those who I love — I have a serious problem…My kids are immunized. Why? Because I’ve read the statistics and literally millions of children are alive today in North America due to immunization (not to mention the rest of the world). Do parents have the right to hand the “Darwin award baton” off to their children? What’s going to happen when the offspring of one of these “too-cool-for-school” folks who don’t believe in immunization – e.g. Bring their kids on a yoga retreat in India and come back with an undetected case of polio, measles etc. and unknowingly pass it off to some poor kid with Leukemia or HIV that couldn’t be immunized. (FYI this is hypothetical I have no proof this ever occurred)
      – Is it their fault?
      – Is there no guilt?
      – Can they be sued by the parents of the impacted child?
      Probably not, those incapable of comprehending their actions are not typically culpable.
      What I can say is this:
      I’m glad I live in Ontario, Canada where, when it’s really important to the “greater good”, we protect people from those making uninformed choices and take real action against those who “choose” not to vaccinate. We do this in order to protect those who cannot be immunized for serious medical reasons. In Ontario if you choose not to vaccinate your kids – They can be excluded from school. This is the penalty paid by your children for you not being a “team player” and not buying into the widely proven “herd immunity” theory.
      Of course, Ontarians are not completely heartless. We want to give all children the opportunity to be more educated than their parents. To accommodate this if you happen to be a religious fundamentalist or anti-vax zealot you can sign a sworn affidavit stating you have “Sincerely held convictions based on religion or conscience” notarized by a public notary, judge or lawyer. Even if you sign this affidavit you do so with the understanding that – “I understand that section 12 of the Act provides that the Medical Officer of Health may order that the above named pupil be excluded from school if there is an outbreak or immediate risk of an outbreak of a designated disease” — Here’s the form – It’s the real deal –

      Click to access 4897-64E.pdf

      This is a touchy subject on freedoms. I personally believe when your decisions impact other people it is responsibility of government to legislate against the damage you may potentially inflict on your fellow citizens. — We have done that in Ontario – This is what happens when medical professionals & government instead of big drug companies and insurance run the system – It is no conspiracy – It’s common sense!
      If your district, state, province, fiefdom, parish etc. does not provide your children with similar legislated protection. I encourage everyone to site Ontario as an example and get their provincial or state legislatures to get the ball rolling – It’s more important to protect your kids than the freedoms of the uninformed to make “choices”.

      • Yes. Your comments on who is the victim, the selfish parent or the innocent child, are valid. A couple of years ago I got a phone call from the father of a young man. His son contracted polio when he was nineteen and on a church sponsored mission to a polio endemic country. About a month before the father called me, his son learned that his parents never had him vaccinated against polio as a child. The father was asking me to validate his earlier decision to not have his child vaccinated. I sympathized with the family’s distress, but I would not let the father off the hook. His earlier decision was selfish and stupid.

      • Susan September 22, 2014 / 5:22 am

        That sounds about right to me. All one has to do is look at the reports on how many people died of said diseases 100 or 50 years ago and how many people die of those diseases today to realize that vaccines have saved lives. You hear the horror stories of someone getting an illness like the measles or polio and dying of it because they weren’t vaccinated. You’d think people would realize but sadly there will always be people who only think of themselves and do not look at the big picture.

    • Sarah Hoffmann June 19, 2014 / 10:47 pm

      But the vaccination goes against the two strains (16, 18) which are most dangerous for cervical cancer and it has proven cross reactivity (most of the 240+ strains do not cause cancer). If the vaccination would habe been available a while ago I would not have lost my grand mum. Of course the companies are making money, would not you have you have spent up tp 2 billion in developing that vaccine? The only study which was linking autism to vaccination was a research misconduct one and it was retracted in 2010. All other studies investigating this topic did not show and lil between autism and vaccination. Here you go:…/ympd/JPEDSDeStefano.pdf and the faked, retracted The Lancet Story from 1998:

    • Brenda June 29, 2014 / 11:54 am

      Portia, I can see that you don’t find it necessary to read every important fact in an article. Her name is Dr. Jennifer Raff, she is a Scientist, she has a Doctorate in Science, she is a Doctor of Science. I thought that I should explain it in several ways just in case you weren’t reading all of this.

  8. kelly June 1, 2014 / 10:12 pm

    We stopped vaccinating our kids when our oldest’s reactions were too large. Fast forward a few years later and we have since found out they have a rare genetic disorder. We are NOT anti-vaccination. We would like to vaccinate but cannot find ANY doctor that is willing to actually sit down and talk to us. Keep in mind that that since our kids have 2 pediatricians, 9 specialists and 1 GP that is a lot of doctors that deal with them. We have even emailed and talked to public health nurses. When we try to ask any questions regarding their diagnoses and if the vaccines are safe we get the pat answer “all scientific studies blah blah blah….vaccines are completely safe …” etc. No one is willing to look at their health history and have a heart to heart discussion with us. When we try and say, “but they have these diagnosis and a rare disorder so is it still safe for them, in particular?” the doctors say “I have to go see my other patients now” and walk out of the room. The fact is, vaccines do have side effects. There are actually a lot listed on the full prescribing information. So when you hear from doctors a pat answer “all scientific studies say they are safe” and you have actually read this prescribing info that there are side effects you wonder why doctors are saying this. Then you hear stories that kids have died from vaccines (hpv shots) and you really question and doubt. And then you find out your child has a rare disorder so you want to know if this changes anything. But NO doctor will discuss it with you. And that just makes it feel like they are hiding something from you. If they don’t know the answer, then admit you don’t know. But why won’t any doctor sit down and actually discuss vaccines with parents who are truly desiring to have these questions answered?? Perhaps parents who have had to deal with bad reactions (such as us) and are wanting to vaccinate but are hesitant or those on the fence would feel more comfortable to do so if doctors would be up front and honest. Be willing to discuss the facts and concerns without having an air of ego, disgust and dismissal that you won’t just accept the pat answer and get the shot already. Doctors and the public need to realize that many parents such as myself that haven’t fully vaccinated their children are not “anti-vaxxers” but simply scared. Worried about genetics and past bad reactions. And horribly frustrated that doctors won’t give up their ego and pat answers to have a respectful, open and honest conversation about the risks of vaccines to their specific child. Because every time a doctor walks away from me when I bring up the subject that I WANT to vaccinate but want to discuss the potential risks vs genetics first, that makes me more and more suspicious that they are hiding something….

    • Anonymous June 1, 2014 / 10:24 pm

      Kelly, I’m not sure where you live or what pediatric hospital your specialists are based, but most pediatricians and pediatrics specialists should more then willing to discuss your child’s problems and vaccines they can or can’t recieve. As a pediatrician, I’m always more then willing to discuss any and all questions about children’s care, not just vaccines.

      • Michael June 13, 2014 / 9:04 am

        Studies to become a doctor has unfortunately been degraded overtime, in some countries medicine studies have become mere anatomy studies what drugs to administer when studies have been left for big pharma conducted during conference meetings. The change happened suspiciously close to timing when they deregulated clinical tests for new drugs. yes nowadays clinical test in the states can be conducted by private corporations if they don’t like the outcome they can keep it secret.
        Regarding vaccines, I myself have taken almost all possible vaccines out there due to my job. Many in my generation have done the same, no one thought twice about it. Now when you read about it in news and people life stories there are alot of people dying from cancer, I don’t know if there is a correlation but I also know that so called science which is based on statistics might get it wrong from time to time
        If we consider vaccines often those are in activated proteins injected by passing the immune system straight to our bodies, does it have consequences yes! immunity is one of them be there might be others as well.

        What really cause me to be careful about vaccines was the so called pandemic of swine flu. the pandemic was announced by WHO staffed with former big Pharma directors. Countries played along ordered huge amount of vaccines for their population, people willingly took them and the result is that more people suffers now from narcolepsy than from the Swine-flu a direct cause that they took the vaccines. Normally the big pharma would get there asses sued but in this case they sign a contract with most countries that the countries themselves have to take the risk which they signed off to the individual. Lives are ruined. 10 passed away due to swine flu, most of them were old or had serious disease already the 200 that got narcolepsy were young healthy individuals. Since they signed away their rights when taking the vaccines they don’t get much help. They would most likely be better of with swine flu in the end, at least then insurance would have covered them.

        And that good folks is what started this wave of anti vax movement. it is the cynicism and loss in confidence, and confidence has the nature that it take long time to build up but it disappears over night.

        As for conspiracy theories goes, try this one: Who have gotten their bails outs? Banks got them through TARP, Military industrial complex got them through War in IRAQ, Afghanistan, Libya, etc. Big Pharma got it through Swine flu.

        In summary we haven’t vaccinated our kid by recommendation by our doctor, The doctor said there is no need, those diseases like polio etc are extinct in my part of the world so there is no need to take it unless you are going to where you risk contracting it. This applies to a lot of vaccines.

        Funny fact. Measles got extinct in europe at the same time as the US despite that it was only US that introduces measles vaccines. However both countries invested a lot in sewage system and water infrastructure.

        • jb0nez95 June 13, 2014 / 11:12 am

          Your facts are so wrong I don’t even know where to start.
          Far far more than 10 people died during the swine flu epistemic. And connecting the vaccine to narcolepsy? There’s a first for me…

          • Chris June 13, 2014 / 11:18 am

            The narcolepsy did happen in Scandinavia. It is not a vaccine used in the USA, and it only happened to some with a certain genetic profile.

        • jb0nez95 June 13, 2014 / 11:22 am

          36,000 people a year die from the normal fku and hundreds of thousands are hospitalized. Considering the 1918 flu pandemic killed 18: MILLION people (more than the Holocaust, and roughly about the amount Stalin killed), it soothe be obvious why countries were aggressive about vaccinating for an aggressive form of fku.
          The rest of your post is just nonsense, straw man arguments, mistaking correlation for causality. Like I said not even going to bother.

        • Oh, Michael. The “big pharma” claim is really not a very good argument. Is it a sin to make a profit? If it is, then never go to a grocery store, or a restaurant, or buy clothing at a retail store, or buy a television, or buy a cell phone, or … wait a minute. You are obviously reading this blog. So you must be using some sort of electronic device. Some company manufactured it and put a price on it. So your purchase of it contributed to the sin of profit. Shame on you.

        • Anonymous July 5, 2014 / 9:05 pm

          Michael, I find it interesting that you commented on what it takes to get a doctorate when, as evidenced by your post, you have likely never taken a single semester of English Compisition/Grammar, Biology, Immunology, or Research. Perhaps you shouldn’t be the spokesperson for med school demands. Also, nobody appreciates people who just make stuff up!

    • Rosa Jo June 1, 2014 / 11:41 pm

      that’s because doctors receive very little education on vaccines; they merely administer. perhaps talk to an immunologist, if that’s a possibility.

    • Shira June 2, 2014 / 1:50 am

      Hi Kelly,
      Thanks for sharing your story. Unfortunately, it IS hard to get a doc to sit and talk with you, but not because they are hiding anything. Try to keep in mind that doctors are in an unfair system right now, where they are paid per patient they see and per procedure they perform. So, it’s not that they are hiding anything, not even that they are greedy. Just that they have massive debt and massive malpractice insurance payments and other things, and work in a system which really limits their ability to operate with anything but efficiency in mind. THAT’s the thing that needs to change. Doctors are not the enemy, but they are being treated pretty badly. And that means patients, in turn, don’t get the care THEY deserve. You can find out a lot about this on the web, but here’s one example.

    • Andreia Santos June 2, 2014 / 9:16 am

      I agree, my LO was vaccinated because i researched the safety of the vaccines he received and how to best care for him during that time… In my trying to research, i was belittled by doctors, ignored by everyone else (and no available immunologists in my island one told me (although i doubt its true). The only people willing to give me the time of day were those against (including through the internet)… I felt that everyone is standing their ground and arguing their side but nobody was keeping an open mind… what if!!!! What if some of these illnesses were eradicated through cleaner living rather than vaccines? What if vaccines effect a child who is prone to autism (as it’s never detected until after their first jabs anyway)? what if, its some form of mind control by some other species running our planet? What if the rises of cancers, dementia, lupus and other conditions are due to vaccines forcing our immune systems to fight so early in life? What if this is the governments way to ensure we don’t all live too long, now that natural selection hardly exists? (anyone notice that my all what if’s are against jabs?) That’s right, we are attacked for having what if’s… when we are being asked to shut up and accept it…. How do they add up how many children survived (BECAUSE) of being vaccinated? They say these vaccines were thoroughly tested, did they test the effects on the body “long term and short term?” And when they tested it on near 38,000 children, were parents aware their children were being used like lab rodents?

      Luckily my LO has been vaccinated because this report, claiming that vaccines are the publics biggest health achievements and that natural medicaments are worst for people… is one of the biggest bullshit statements i’ve ever heard….

      It’s a fact, that a lot of the pharmaceuticals medications are recreated through old remedies created by regular people, when money got involved, the peoples right to use those ailments was in some ways revoked.

      Its a fact that although scientists have come a long way, and have achieved a great deal of knowledge in how our bodies function, what it needs and how to preserve it… THERE IS A LOT TO LEARN STILL….

      SO…. Let me make this simple, based on the available information pro and against vaccines, and based on the knowledge of how to look for and treat your child for worst and best case scenario after vaccines… i chose to vaccinate my child, just in case it did help children who couldn’t be vaccinated. But i am not fooled that vaccines are the best thing or a miracle cure (it’s not even 100% effective, and has side effects just like any other lab created drug or home made)… In my opinion, yes children should be vaccinated, but parents should have the right to choose, all the good and bad information and every possible side effect and ways to treat it (rather than just asking people to take them to ER for a fever), all that should be given to the parents 1 week (latest) before vaccines are due… Then people arent left with lingering questions and basing their decisions on the opinions of non-professionals.

      i.e. whoever wrote this report is not working in the field, i can assure you all that.

      • moladood June 2, 2014 / 10:18 am

        Not everything should be right to choose. Sometimes people are just too stupid. Like drinking and driving, you should not get the right to choose.

        • Ruth de los Santos June 2, 2014 / 1:20 pm

          Not everyone should get to choose …. is this really what you just said? I’m hoping I misunderstood you.

          • moladood June 2, 2014 / 2:15 pm

            That is what I said. In the context of drinking and driving, you should not get to choose. People think that they should have the right to choose on everything even when it can endanger others. There are many instances when you shouldn’t get the right to choose such as drinking and driving.

            The basis for herd immunity is that every one is vaccinated and hence we can protect people who cannot get the vaccine for legitimate reasons (like compromised immune systems). Why should a right to choose not to vaccinate be more important than endangering society as a whole? If you want the right to choose, you may have to sacrifice other societal benefits.

            Back to the drinking and driving example, if you want the right to choose, you may lose the privileged of driving or even face jail time. Bottom line is a person who decides to drink and drive is endangering others.

        • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 3:39 pm

          Did you really just type those words? Congrats on the most ignorant comment I’ve read all day!

          • moladood June 2, 2014 / 4:43 pm

            As the saying goes, takes one to know one. Your posts are by far some of the worst, illogical and ignorant anti-vaxx comments I have read.

            Soon you will be spreading the haarp and chemtrail conspiracies. You are caught up in denial so I actually feel bad for you.

            • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 9:19 am

              Seriously Moladood… you’re talking shite!!! Are you forgetting FREEWILL??? Let me give you an example, when you buy painkillers you get a leaflet in the packet offering more advice than we all bother to read sometimes, it lists ingredients, side effects (common & uncommon), it lists exactly what it’s for, could be for and may be good for, also lists who it’s not good for and what to do in case of etc etc. For someone who doesn’t like drugs “like myself” we read up on all these ingredients/effects etc… I was highly disappointed that i was offered a leaflet for my son’s vaccines on his vaccination day, plus i had to look it up online, and when i did, the sob story of why you should vaccinate is their major concern… I HAD ALREADY VACCINATED HIM!!!! It was only the fact that i have a close friend (a doctor) who did provide me with all the information prior to vaccines, but that itself makes me angry, why aren’t they providing us with the information we all search for in pro and against propaganda sites????

              Any dumb and ignorant person would assume that it’s just eggs, dairy etc children are allergic to, lets not forget that as diet standards drop to prepacked un-fresh and frozen goods, then there are lots of new allergies coming to light… What if they are allergic to something in the vaccine? Huh? They only name the main components, i assume even they don’t know what they all are. Look at the new craze they are trying to force down parents throats, do NOT give them sugar, GRRR the amount of childrens yogurts and other things that contain artificial sweeteners (including Aspartame) is ridiculous, Calpol is almost unavailable unless its sugar free…. EXCUSE ME, But as far as im concerned we are still living as free human beings, amongst human rights and free will… And it should be MY choice (until my son is old enough to choose for himself) Whether he gets given a spoonful of sugar or artificial sweeteners… So don’t go giving me that bullshit that VACCINES are safe just because they said this and that (and the same for the anti people) ALL I WANT is to be provided with all the information, written, and by someone in that profession, rather than listen to pro and against publicity, self proclaimed scientists, fake stories and reports etc etc…. It is their duty to provide us with the whole truth, so that we trust them enough to allow our children to be vaccinated (trust is very much taken for granted). Why is this so difficult, what dumbass actually thinks that simply saying “You Have To Do It” is enough for a new mother to go ahead with it, especially when friends, mothers, grandmothers and other people they know advise them against it.

              Just like people have the choice to go in public when they have the flu, parents should have the choice to say yes or no to everything that is offered to their child, so as long as it doesn’t put them at risk of bad treatment, health and nutrition… Herd immunisation will never happen for a simple reason, not everybody CAN be vaccinated and those that are may still contract the virus/disease, therefore it cannot be eradicated EVER…

              There is not enough proof to determine whether polio was eradicated through vaccines because there has always been the groups of people that weren’t vaccinated.

              Scientists, only test the here and now effects, they do not cover every function, cell, organ on every vaccinated child against those that weren’t, on short time and on long term effects… they work on percentages, but percentages can be worked the same way for anything when comparing richer areas and poorer areas, because it is the poorer areas that have a higher percentage of unvaccinated children.

              Obviously the wool is blocking your eye view Moladood…

              • Chris June 3, 2014 / 9:57 am

                “Are you forgetting FREEWILL??? ”

                That depends. “Free will” can be limited if it means endangering others. You don’t have “free will” to ignore traffic law. The city I live in now no longer allows smoking inside restaurants, and other food service places (before that happened, I remember when smokers would wave their lit cigarettes around the food at the college cafeteria, yuck!). Also you may not be able to visit someone who is getting treatment at a hospital.

                Actually no one has said you don’t have a right to not vaccinate, at least in all but two states. But if you do not vaccinate your child, you would probably go through a few more hoops to enroll your child in a public school (like actually having proof of a conversation from a health care provider, not just being given a pamphlet). Also if there is an outbreak you would be required to keep your child at home. Sometimes for a chicken pox outbreak that would be about six to eight weeks.

                Also, there are plenty of private school that don’t care if your is vaccinated. We find out about them when they have to temporarily close due to an outbreak. Then there is the option to homeschool.

                By the way, by not vaccinating you are giving pathogens free will to infect your body. Vaccinating does help reduce the pathogens infectious free will.

              • moladood June 3, 2014 / 10:08 am

                You lost me with all your CAPS and PUNCTUATION?!?!? Using it does not make you smarter, nor does it make your points any better.

                Freewill is great and all but someone should not always have freewill. In my example, when you put other people in harms way such as drunk driving, we as a society need to look at the greater good.

                I skimmed through your rant and thought I would touch upon one point.

                “Herd immunisation will never happen for a simple reason, not everybody CAN be vaccinated and those that are may still contract the virus/disease, therefore it cannot be eradicated EVER…”

                Please provide some support for this statement. Herd immunity doesn’t mean what you think it does. Herd immunity is precisely set out to to protect people who cannot be vaccinated because it limits the potential exposure. So for the small % of people who cannot be vaccinated or for those where the vaccine is not effective, they are protected by the vast majority of people that are immune. The question is not whether it will happen, it has already happened. Not just in vaccinated populations but in populations with natural immunity.

                Before vaccinations of chicken pox, ever know someone that didn’t get the chicken pox into adulthood? The likely reality is that initially they were lucky not to get exposed when it was going around but after the initial herd built natural immunity (having had the virus), it became nearly impossible to actually get the virus because the herd (people they interacted with daily) could not give it to them because they were all immune.

                I fail to see why people argue against herd immunity as if it is some made up thing by the vaccine companies. It is simple and logical. It is true even without vaccinations and whether you believe in it or not. You likely believe in natural immunity, why is it so hard to grasp that if 99% of people are immune (natural or otherwise), it makes it statistically improbably of getting the disease? Take the extreme example, if every person on the planet is immune except for 1 person, how can that 1 person get the disease? Isn’t that sufficient to prove that herd immunity does exist in populations with high %’s of immunity?

              • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 10:54 am

                Andreia, what if someone you trust sat down with you in a comfortable atmosphere and taught you the science of immunology and how vaccines are designed to work? If that information demonstrated that what you said is not accurate, would you consider changing your mind?

              • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 12:58 pm

                Gewisn, i don’t need my mind changing as i have gone through the process of vaccinating my child… I’ve gone a bit off topic really because i got angry… But my point in everything i have said is that i do not trust web published research by self proclaimed scientists, either pro or against vaccines. I spent 1 year “before my childs vaccines were due” doing my own research and asking the only professional doctor i trusted, yes i think vaccines are perfectly safe, they were for us!!! I just personally feel there isn’t enough people taking the time to sit down (as you say) and properly explain all about it… They tell parents that it’s the right thing to do but they don’t tell you the details of the vaccines themselves. Yes i’d love the information, all of it, from a true professional that can answer the most difficult questions that activists seem to flaunter over, do you know where i can get that information.

                Sorry Chris, i agree with you there… I was replying to Moladood who thinks we should not have a choice at all, vaccines should be compulsory so that stupid people don’t have a choice to say no… I was offering him a different opinion and thoughts of a different possibility. I am still for vaccinations but i am against the lack of compassion and understanding to people who doubt the vaccines… instead of everyone attacking each other, why don’t they just provide proof

                Moladood, DID I GIVE YOU THE IMPRESSION THAT I WAS ACTING SMART? Please, English is my second language and i can understand, spell and write better than a huge percentage of people whose first language is English. Please don’t skim through my rant, i was offering you a different point of view, so that you are not so harsh towards anyone who does not give you the approval you seek on your views. Firstly chicken pox in adulthood is much more dangerous than in childhood, hence why a lot of parents try to get it out of the way now by taking their children near other children with chicken pox.
                You say (( I fail to see why people argue against herd immunity as if it is some made up thing by the vaccine companies )) If i implied this, then i apologise, i do not think that at all, and feel insulted that you are categorising me into a group of Anti-vax… Remember we are all human, we all make mistakes, the blogger posted ((The truth is that vaccines are one of our greatest public health achievements))
                Come on, really? Is this the kind of report that will influence those who doubt the vaccines to go and vaccinate? Or is this just someone belittling parents who are too scared to inject unknown chemicals and chemicals (they heard terrible things about) into their children. I think it’s reports like this and those against vaccines which spread more confusion onto parents… And as i’ve been trying to point out from my very first comment, there should be a good amount of information given to parents when their children are born, information that covers every area of their doubts… This isn’t being done so, and when a parent asks a professional, as i did when i first visited one, we are told not to be absurd to worry about something like that, they MUST be vaccinated to protect children who cannot. (That is not enough information for “stupid” people like me, who didn’t give a toss about vaccinations until we had our first child.

                P.s. So your reason for why a child should be vaccinated is because it will protect those that cannot… (this is the reason i chose to go for it)…. what i want though, is the reason on why vaccinating is the best thing for MY child, those that can’t be vaccinated can still contract the disease…. i.e. if you have a school with 50% children that are vaccinated & 50% of children that can’t be vaccinated… you say that, they would be better protected? Why and How, please explain?

                • moladood June 3, 2014 / 1:38 pm

                  My example was to show instances where freewill is not always a right people should have such as drinking and driving.

                  I am all for protecting those who cannot get vaccinated, I think we agree on that, I do not suggest it is mandatory for everyone regardless of situation.

                  My issue is most people are not doctors. They buy into the fear spread on the internet about chemicals, toxins and other nonsense. The people who make this, test this and do this for a living that study research as a full time job are vaccinating their children, that must count for something.

                  Stupid, unqualified people are causing rates of vaccination to decline and kids are now getting sick, they need to live with that.

              • David G June 3, 2014 / 8:37 pm

                Andreia Santos said: “There is not enough proof to determine whether polio was eradicated through vaccines because there has always been the groups of people that weren’t vaccinated.”

                As the child of a parent who was one of the few survivors of polio, I find this statement offensive. What point are you trying to make? That the public should not have been given the polio vaccine. That the vaccine was ineffective? That polio was actually eradicated not because of the vaccine but through some other means, such as magical thinking? I can’t imagine any explanation that would be validated by any rigorous peer reviewed scientific study.

              • Anonymous June 4, 2014 / 2:44 am

                No David, did not mean that at all… I was just questioning whether it is actually eradicated…. Please read furtherdown the replies and maybe you will have an understanding of the direction i was going on.

                Moladood, i never apologised for for my rudeness, it was bad moment and i should have kept away from social media, sorry.

                • moladood June 4, 2014 / 8:16 am

                  No apology needed. Everyone is passionate about this as it is a big issue and hopefully comments and content of this post will help people become more informed on the current data science can offer us.

              • Andreia – Did you actually intend to write, There is not enough proof to determine whether polio was eradicated through vaccines because there has always been the groups of people that weren’t vaccinated.”? I contracted polio in 1953, two years before the Salk vaccine. More children died that year of polio than of any other communicable disease. In 1952 there were nearly 60,000 cases of polio in the U.S. From the late 1940s to the early 1950s, polio outbreaks in the United States increased in frequency and size, and the severity of polio was increasing. Parents were frightened to let their children go outside, especially in the summer when the virus seemed to peak. Travel and commerce between affected cities were sometimes restricted. Public health officials imposed quarantines on homes and towns where polio cases were diagnosed. In 1955 the Salk vaccine was approved for use. People lined up for blocks to get vaccinated. People saw polio every day. They knew how devastating polio can be. By the middle 1960s, after the Salk and Sabin vaccines were introduced, the number of polio cases dropped to about 1,000 and continued to drop to zero in the U.S.. Don’t let anyone try to confuse you by saying that polio is caused bad hygiene or not enough vitamins or (you fill in the blank), or polio cases dropped because of (you fill in the blank). Poliomyelitis is caused by a virus! The talking heads on Youtube who try to say that vaccines are not needed or cause more damage than good are just plain wrong. It is doubtful if they ever watched a child die of polio, or smallpox, or other vaccine preventable diseases. I’ve witnessed too much of this.

                • jb0nez95 June 19, 2014 / 2:00 pm

                  It’s so sad that we’re going to need to see a comeback of polio, whooping cough, and other devastating communicable diseases before these people realize that vaccination is a Good Idea

                  Maybe once their child is crippled for life or in an iron lung then sense will enter their thick skills.

                • jb0nez95 June 19, 2014 / 2:03 pm

                  There’s a reason these particular diseases were targeted by vaccine makers, and too many people alive today have never seen those reasons themselves, so they “don’t exist” or “the vaccine is worse.”

                  They will reap what they sow!

            • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 9:43 am

              And lets not forget that only know has it come to light the effects of canned foods (as the consumption is becoming larger) the effects are showing now, Dementia is linked to metal in the brain…
              And then there’s plastic… everything is wrapped in plastic or metal, Margarine has plastic, and margarine mixed with oil is extremely unhealthy unlike full fat butter…. Chocolate in the US has plastic so that it travels well.

              Lets not forget that over the last “however many years” scientists have been changing what they at first thought was absolutely safe, because new evidence, new research and new people stepped in.

              Lets not forget that it is the pharmaceuticals enforcing people to stick with artificial drugs instead of allowing people to use natural versions:
              Cannabis Oil – regenerates white blood cells, capable of defending cancer and many other conditions, can also be used for cars, home, materials etc etc etc (can’t be bothered to list it all, go look it up)
              better than cannabis oil is marihuana honey… widely unavailable now 😦 even bees are now allowed this natural source.
              Mould – (= natural antibiotic) with a vast expansion of GM grown fruit and veg, and picky eaters who turn their nose up at everything, we are slowly looking a battle with ourselves.
              Sea water – capable of disinfecting many skin/external diseases, is also good to swim in when pestered by a cold/flu… followed by a hot soup/spicy meal to sweat it all out and rest.
              The 3 G’s that should be used every week, month and quarter (garlic, ginger, ginkgo)
              Nuts – Once called fattening but highly needed in diets, along with avocado, anona and fresh papayas…
              Bay Oil (from inedible fruit not leaf) also very good for kidneys, fevers, headaches… although only drops are evr needed

              • Chris June 3, 2014 / 10:10 am

                What does food have to do with vaccines?

                Though you have made several claims about cannabis oil, mould, sea water, garlic, ginger, ginkgo, nuts and bay oil. If it was not all off topic I would ask you for citations.

                (by the way I have a bay laurel tree in my back yard, it does produce berries, but they are not at all oily… and I really just use the leaves)

              • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 11:00 am

                How do you avoid the poisons of the chemtrails sprayed by the illuminati used by the freemasons to depopulate the planet and hidden by fake clouds that are really just holograms provided to fool us into believing we are not living inside a hollow earth?

              • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 12:11 pm

                Chris, i mention food because that is the very source of the methods scientists use, they create artificial versions of natural ailments we once used… but obviously far more advanced now… I also mention this because the blogger of this page refers to natural remedies not being any better, whereas the only reason natural remedies aren’t used by medical professionals is because they cannot control quantities and usage, plus the knowledge is long dying.

                Where i am from they long cooked these berries in this man made type of wheel machinery, then squeeze out juices, tightening each time, opening, stirring and tightening again for another squeeze, then the long process of spooning out the oil from the juice into bottles (2 litre bottles can take up to a week to make) and also takes a lot of berries, so government has now protected trees and banned making Bay oil unless you grow your own 100 or so trees in your back garden. P.s. I too only use leaves, love them.

                You are right though, going off on one here, was just angry and should remain in topic hehehe

              • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 12:17 pm

                Notnearlyanonymous – Is that meant to be sarcasm? If you’re serious & if that were true then your only option would be to make your own compost, grow and raise everything you eat & drink, instal solar panels on your roof, have natural water coming to your house and still filtrating and disinfecting it to ensure it’s safe, isolate yourself from the rest of the population… then you would live and die like the rest of us!!! My point, there’s no need worrying about that, the point is to ensure you not only have life but you also live .

                • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 12:27 pm

                  I somtimes have trouble tracking who is replying to whom on here.
                  I don’t think I wrote the comment to which you were replying.

                  – Notnearlyanonymous.

          • hiltonshead June 3, 2014 / 9:04 am

            I have been reading your posts. I would like to ask you one thing. First, let me say that I have no education in science or medicine and that this question is not intended to be antagonistic. But, you mentioned your use of “common sense” and so along those lines, I ask the following. There was a time when illnesses like polio, measles, mumps, rubella, etc. infected and afflicted many unfortunate people. Then, the medical community produced the innovation of vaccines, the public began immunizing their children, and the numbers for instances of illnesses such as these almost disappeared. Recently, the anti-vaccination movement has been gaining momentum and we are experiencing a resurgence of outbreaks of these illnesses. What is your “common sense” explanation for this pattern? Once again, I am just curious and I am not trying to engage you in an argument. Also, I have not read all of these posts in their entirety so, if this has already been addressed, then I apologize. Thank you.

            • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 1:10 pm

              So in your opinion all children should be immunised? I agree too, even those that are let off for egg allergies and other illnesses… with a growing number of allergies and intolerances, it wont be long before the percentages of unvaccinated children outweigh those that are, then who will be at risk?

              I also stand the opinion that forcing a young body to work their white blood cells so hard, may not be scientifically the best solution for that body in the long term… however, it is the best solution for the body to survive the immunisation, hence why done so early… We weren’t programmed to attack our immune systems when they are at their strongest & i’d love a real professional to explain the science behind these facts, as this would provide me with peace of mind.

              • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 1:43 pm

                The immune system of a baby has to work pretty hard from birth. The uterus is a reasonably sterile environment (very recent studies show some bacteria present in the placenta), when the baby is born, the immune system is still pretty naive, it has the whole fricking world to deal with. I’m talking viruses, bacteria, yeasts, protists and multicellular organisms. The mother is able to transfer some protection from her blood stream to the baby’s-but that only lasts 4-6 weeks and then they are on their own.

                I’d like you to think back, say 5000 years, -that’s an eye blink in evolutionary terms. What was the world like then? Was a baby born in a sterile environment and fed pasteurized food or were they born in some grassland or cave or primitive hut? Dr. Raff is better to address the exact environment then, but I’m quite sure that since germ theory is an 1870’s discovery that there wasn’t much sterilization going on, and the food certainly weren’t pasteurized. The kid had to get up and running and deal with all the pathogens around it within the first month or two of life. There were no antibiotics, no life support-it was do or die-and many did die. This is what our immune system is used to dealing with, we live in a far cleaner world than what we evolved in. Why do we immunize so much in the first years of life? Its so that the children will make it through the first years. Immunizations give the immune system a chance to develop tools to fight things that can kill the baby-largely without placing the babies life at risk. We have dramatically lowered childhood mortality by these interventions. That’s why we immunize so much.

              • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 3:09 pm

                My point made, the two replies i received here is the best method to encourage people who are too scared, in some cases “stupid” and too uninformed to have their children vaccinated… please remember that.

                If i were to choose my child being vaccinated through the information received over the internet, the belittling methods of some angry people and through some friends and family members, then i would have probably stayed clear of it… However, i was lucky and went the right way about it. I think that personally every parent should be spoken to and given the right information during the last few months of pregnancy when they are visiting the health professionals, or in the early days of birth. They should be fully informed, so that when question arises by somewhat another person or information material, then they are better equipped to answer that question for themselves and still continue to protect their child.

                If people really want to help, then the way to do it is to spread the information in polite and understandable ways, or not comment at all, because shall you feed into anti-vax propagandas then you are feeding further questions to the mothers (and fathers) that are still wondering which side is telling the truth. Provide detailed explanations, real & approved links, historical facts (that can be shown in paper) etc.

                Another way we could all help is by asking the health professionals to make this available, or to encourage new research into the vaccines so that maybe they find a safer version that can be used in all the children.

                • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 4:50 pm

                  Thank you, Andreia. I think that’s helpful advice.

                  I’m sure by now that it’s no surprise that I have another question for you.
                  Okay, I’ll admit it’s the same question in another form.

                  What sort of advice or information do you think would be helpful to have in the doctors’ waiting rooms?
                  Statistics on outbreaks due to low vaccination rates?
                  Pictures of sick kids in the ICU of US hospitals due to catching vaccine-preventable illnesses?
                  Celebrities urging people to get their kids and themselves vaccinated?
                  Photos of the doctors in that clinic telling waiting patients that “We know many of you have questions about all sorts of preventitive healthcare measures, and you want to know which ones are right for your family.
                  We also know that there’s a lot of people out there ready to sell you their favorite magic cure or the latest fad.
                  We would rather answer your questions now than have to watch you or your kids suffer through the effects, disabilities, and treatments of illnesses we could prevent with the right information.
                  So we’re asking you to help us, to help you.
                  Please let your nurse and your medical provider know if you want to talk about weight management, vaccines, nutrition, birth control, exercise, or elder care, or anything at all regarding helping you achieve the best possible health and wellness for your entire family.
                  Ask us. We want to help.”

              • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 5:20 pm

                Yes Gewisn, that is the most basic information and it’s not available… But adding to that:
                There should be pamphlets to take home
                * Of question & answers (i.e Is the mercury levels harmful to my child, followed by professional replies) etc.
                * An informational guide of side effects & how to best act in the chance child suffers side effect “by listing best act for each side effect,whether rare or common” (currently just asks you to take them to the doctor if you think it’s serious).
                * Extra information on the causes of fever if left ignored, the dangers of diarrhea and of course dehydration (i met a lot of ignorant parents, this information is vital even if this information is more widely based than just towards vaccines)
                * Obviously the statistics (as you mention) but also latest news and developments in that area, what they hope to develop next (i.e. chicken embryo-less versions for egg allergy sufferers)
                * The history of Vaccinations itself & the diseases.
                * Information on the diseases, how it’s spread etc.

                That sort of thing is what i wanted…

                And the internet, as much as social media is great, it just takes one nut, one fake report, and people start reading into things they don’t fully understand. With the population trying to turn a healthy corner and avoid all sorts of chemicals in foods, water, ground, air etc… Someone just has to mention lab equipment is washed with bleach and they assume they are vaccinated with enough bleach to brain wash them 😀 “this last part was a joke”

                • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 6:00 pm

                  Thank you, Andreia Santos.
                  I really appreciate the time, effort, detail, and especially the sense of humor in your reply. You’ve given me a lot to think about.
                  Not everyone will want that level of detail, so the trick is how to provide the basics of the information and then have more info on each area available for those who want it. I’m beginning to think the presentation needs to be interactive enough to be inviting to people, and permit them to pull up the level of detail they want on a subject. I wonder if a system couldn’t be devised to use some sort of touchscreen (gotta’ worry about the infectious disease control then) that permits patients and families to begin to get info, but then also send additional info they want to their home email or even to their Cable/Internet provider account, and also flags the provider as to what info the patient was looking for – in order to begin a conversation about what was learned in the waiting room.

                  I’m just brainstorming here, but I think this idea has some potential.
                  Interactive medical information system at the doctor’s office, that you can continue utilizing at home. This sounds like the kind of thing Kaiser might do as a research project, figure out what parts of it work to improve patient-care and health, and then expand the program to many of their locations.

                  This could produce the continuous, on-going conversations about health and wellness between providers and patients that provider organizations have been saying they want for decades. This might actually get the focus off acute illness and on to wellness.

                  Nahhhh, nobody would want that!

                • jb0nez95 June 3, 2014 / 6:16 pm

                  All programs that administer vaccines under the federal Vaccines for Children program (which is almost anyone giving children vaccines–100s of millions of vaccines a year) MUST hand out a CDC “Vaccine Information Statement” or VIS for EACH vaccine at EACH visit, which lists most everything that you ask for. Most parents just toss them.

                  They are also available online:

                  They list the known adverse reactions, the risks from moderate to severe, who should and shouldn’t get it, what it protects against, etc etc.

                  The mercury thing is a non-issue and has been for a long time. I believe only one formulation of one multi-dose flu vaccine still has thimerosal – and I could be wrong on that. Thimerosal from vaccines has been shown through numerous very well run studies with sample sizes in the tens of thousands to not cause harm anyway — it’s a red herring, and much money has been wasted on it instead of looking for the true causes of autism. Again – mercury. Non-issue. At this point the science is so strong it’s wasting my time to even type this.

              • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 6:12 pm

                You’re right that not everybody wants that level of information, but it’s exactly those that need it that choose to ignore it Gewisn.

                I understand the costs from offering so much material to so many mothers every day, but why not have midwives go through it with parents on a pre natal visit and then if they want to look further into it, they get given a pack… If they are reassured enough, then they don’t need it… If they’re against it, then some of their fears can be expressed and midwife can refer them to doctor (or immuniologist in some countries) to be taught and shown that their fears can be eradicated unlike the diseases unless they vaccinate… hehehehe see what i did there 😀

                Where i live there’s a new system… we all pay circa £55 to visit doctor here and then pay to see nurse for vaccines… had i known that if you were to leave your child unvaccinated for a month, that then the health workers come visit you and try to help fears, and offer vaccines for free given there and then… i would have opted for cheaper and more informed version… Also another possibility… home vaccines, FREE 😀

              • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 6:24 pm

                Thanks jb0nez95, i’ll look at that and see if it’s worth sending a line to our authorities to provide the same paperwork here.

    • R- June 2, 2014 / 11:31 am

      We have had familial reactions, as a result my children are not vaccinated. I have had similar experiences with healthcare professionals. They are not willing to discuss individual circumstances. It is a travesty that most do not believe happens.

    • Caleb June 4, 2014 / 4:01 pm

      Herd Immunity is here for you! Be grateful for the parents that CAN get their kids vaccinated, and encourage others to have their kids vaccinated. Who knows, your kid could avoid serious illness because another parent vaccinated their kids.

  9. A. M June 1, 2014 / 11:35 pm

    One of the main issues I have with this topic is that not all vaccines are the same. They don’t all have the same compounds and they don’t all have the same cost benefit analysis. For example, even under the best scenario whooping cough is increadibly stressful to endure. It lasts a long time and is something that few people would opt to endure let alone their children. The vaccine is by all accounts effective and the amount of metals included is fairly small.

    Influenza on the otherhand can be sever but in most cases it’s not. It doesn’t last for anywhere near the same amount of time and is in most instances just uncomfortable. The virus mutates quite quickly and there is a reasonable chance the vaccine you got will not protect you against all the strains you have to fight. It’s also (generally) coupled with considerably higher amounts of metals, some of those can be heavy metals depending on the manufacturer.

    Some vaccines have been well tested, others not so much.

    Now the cost benefit for whooping cough is different to that of influenza, however vaccines are discussed as a whole. Not on an individual basis which I think confuses the issue more than it probably should be.

    I choose to vaccinate my children with certain vaccines, and not others.

    As the author pointed out, it’s a good idea to read scientific papers yourself and make a decision.

    • Dayna June 2, 2014 / 1:24 am

      WHO tracks influenza outbreaks across the world. They then predict which type of influenza strain or strains will be the most prominent and with a high mortality rate, and then pharmaceutical companies will create a vaccine based on that information. The flu vaccine is and was never intended to protect against all strains of the influenza virus.
      The metals that are inside vaccines are trace metals, and are ones that are readily absorbed on a daily basis by simply consuming a variety of foodstuffs in different food groups. To shout, “all metals are bad” is a misconception.
      Mercury has not been included in the MMR vaccine for many years now. Not because it causes autism, but to appease the general public in hopes more people will vaccinate so preventable diseases do not cause unnecessary deaths.

      • Parents of vaccine injured children June 2, 2014 / 9:22 am

        To appease the general public! Really? It’s always good to read other opinions.

        • Rehsab Thgir June 2, 2014 / 11:55 am

          You just demonstrated you have no knowledge of the history behind the MMR vaccine. Well done.

      • Chris June 2, 2014 / 12:11 pm

        “Mercury has not been included in the MMR vaccine for many years now.”

        Just for your information: the MMR has never contained thimerosal, even when it was introduced in the USA in 1971.

      • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 3:40 pm

        Educate yourself better

        • Scott Nelson June 2, 2014 / 3:44 pm

          Wendy, If you would like us to educate ourselves better, would you mind telling us what your education is? Me, I’ve got a Ph.D. in biochemistry, extensive experience in Immunology, Molecular biology and Protein Chemistry, 20 years of bench experience. What would you suggest I do to augment my education?

          • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 3:53 pm

            I don’t hold your education against you Scott, do you think I am somehow impressed by it, formal education only gets you so far in the intelligence department? If I were to list out my four degrees and numerous professional accolades here would you be impressed? Somehow I doubt it….

            • Scott Nelson June 2, 2014 / 3:57 pm

              Try me. Are those degrees in the sciences?

            • jb0nez95 June 3, 2014 / 12:35 am

              BWAHAHAHA your four degrees?
              I doubt you have a high school degree.

          • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:03 pm

            Very much so Scott, but then again, I don’t give as much credit to your education as you do. I don’t think it makes you more intelligent, and in my opinion, your pro-vaccination comments here just reiterate that opinion. By suggesting that vaccinations somehow revolutionized human health and are in any way responsible for the decline or eradication of disease shows an inferior education…

            • Scott Nelson June 2, 2014 / 4:18 pm

              Interesting-formal education doesn’t hold much for you, yet you are on the internet, therefore using electric power-using products of formal education-and if you don’t think the electrical engineers, programmers, civil engineers who built the infrastructure you are using have any formal training-I’d like to see you do it.

              I trust also you don’t care for a guy named Pasteur and that whole germ theory thing-or the fact that he developed a VACCINE for rabies. Have you seen anybody die from that lately? I don’t think so-its because we vaccinate our animals for it. You might want to check out India they have 25,000-30,000 deaths/year there (

              I asked for what would be considered good training haven’t heard it-yet. You stated you have 4 degrees and numerous honors-what are they?

  10. mfaridd June 2, 2014 / 2:41 am

    Reblogged this on A Thinking Blog and commented:
    I have came across this issue as being one of the topics I was asked to write about on an IELTS exam. I didn’t know it was that real at the time…

  11. Jenny18 June 2, 2014 / 4:09 am

    Thank you for this article, i have to admit, that I am still very young, but i really hope that your article will open many eyes. I am so thankful for people like you, who care for others and try to educate people. I never thought that vaccine could be harmful, but if i had thought that, after reading your article, i would have been concinved of the opposite! It is so shocking what kind of deseases we are now again exposed to!

    • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 10:02 am

      Jenny18, you are young, this article is bogus, if you use this drivel to make an “educated” decision when it comes to inoculating your children, well you have not been educated at all. There were no facts written into this article, please, research outside of opinion.

      • Colin June 2, 2014 / 10:44 am

        Please click the blue words; they are “hyperlinks” that will take you to a great deal of supplemental information, including research papers.

        • Rehsab Thgir June 2, 2014 / 11:43 am

          Go easy. It’s Wendy’s first time on the internet.

      • jb0nez95 June 2, 2014 / 3:19 pm

        Every blue link goes to a scientific article backing up the statement. This article is fact, not opinion. Try reading the links, “educate” yourself, then come back and comment. Until then *your* opinion on the article is “bogus.”

        • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 3:43 pm

          OOOHHHHHHHH RIIIIGHHHHT, gotcha, thanks, but here’s the thing “really smart people” I follow the money, it’s very telling when attempting to regard a “new study” as scientifically sound….then I use this thing, it’s called common sense…but I don’t want to go into too much detail because common sense gets lost on a lot of people…hey, go get your kids shot up okay? And while you’re at it I’ll attempt to be more smarter lmao

          • Scott Nelson June 2, 2014 / 3:50 pm

            You know Wendy, the bad thing about common sense is that IT DOESN’T ALWAYS WORK! Galileo figured that out 500 years ago.
            That computer you’re using utilizes many things that are counter-intuitive, like light being a wave and a particle, particles tunneling through barriers, and the fact that everything you think of as solid is actually mostly empty space. Try some chemistry, biology, and physics and see how the world empirically works.

          • jb0nez95 June 2, 2014 / 4:14 pm

            Just read the science. Facts trump your “common sense.” And please work on your use of the English language while you’re at it.

          • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:29 pm

            My use of the English Language…well you nailed one master on the head…science, yes, oh glorious science, let me praise all the good and forget all the bad….

            • moladood June 2, 2014 / 5:48 pm

              Wendy, you are now responding to yourself. Go home, you’re drunk.

          • Chris June 2, 2014 / 4:35 pm

            “I follow the money, it’s very telling when attempting to regard a “new study” as scientifically sound….then I use this thing, it’s called common sense.”

            Good, then you’ll be able to get me that economic data that not preventing diseases is more cost effective than treating them. Obviously your common sense must dictate that the Forty-three (15%) who were hospitalized saved a whole bunch of cash by skipping that pesky MMR vaccine.

          • Colin June 2, 2014 / 4:46 pm

            When you say that you “follow the money,” do you mean that you studied the flow of payments in and around scientific research? Or do you mean that you read what someone else wrote telling you that there is corruption in that research? Or do you mean that you assume there is such corruption, but haven’t actually attempted to study the flow of payments yourself?

            These aren’t rhetorical questions, I’m honestly curious.

  12. Lucy June 2, 2014 / 4:29 am

    The biggest tragedy is that everyone who is pro-vaccine thinks it’s an easy decision to make deciding not to vaccinate your children. The fact of the matter is it’s taken a really long time to come to the decision not to vaccinate, and it’s been through long hours of research and weighing up BOTH SIDES to reach the agonising and often terrifying decision. I still doubt my decision some days, but mostly i’m happy that i took the time to RESEARCH all the arguments/stats and realise that trusting nature and my children’s immune system is a safer bet than trusting money-making pharmaceuticals that care nothing for my children.
    The parents that trust their doctors wholeheartedly without question are the ones being lied to.
    It’s the easiest thing in the world to put yourself and your children’s lives into the hands of a doctor and let them get all the vaccinations available. It’s the hardest decision in the world to trust your instincts as a parent and question anything that may cause harm to your children.

    • sandy June 2, 2014 / 9:18 am

      Just be sure to let those in your life know you and your children aren’t protected, so they can make their own informed decision. The biggest tragedy, actually, is the harm done to the immune compromised or very young because someone else only thought not vaccinating affected them.

      • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 3:46 pm

        You do realize that vaccinating creates a compromised immune system, right Sandy? And that vaccinated individuals are the biggest threat to those with “compromised immunity” because they are given live virus? Maybe, you should get your kids a t-shirt that says…just vaccinate, shedding disease, so that those truly vulnerable to the disease (which healthy people AREN’T) can protect themselves….

          • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:27 pm

            You forgot to mention a few things here Scotty…wanna add to your list?

            • Scott Nelson June 2, 2014 / 4:44 pm

              Certainly. Lets add HIV, high corticosteroid levels, chronic Hepatitis B, cancer, Adenosine Deaminase deficiency.

              And I’m still waiting for your degrees and qualifications.

        • moladood June 2, 2014 / 4:39 pm

          Wow Wendy, they have really lied to you.

          I assume when you refer to shedding, that is the study regarding apes and whooping cough acellular vaccine. You do realize that the only way for a vaccinated person to shed the disease is if they come into contact with the FULL virus (an infected person) after vaccination. So, let me be clear as to the results:

          vaccinated person – if exposed to virus will not get symptoms and are able to transmit

          unvaccinated person – if exposed to virus will get symptoms and are able to transmit

          I don’t know about you but all things being equal, I would prefer my child not to get the symptoms – that is the only difference.

          What I find really funny is that anti-vaxx crowd will use scientific studies to support their stance (even when they took it out of context) but won’t trust anything scientific that doesn’t support their belief.

        • Colin June 2, 2014 / 4:48 pm

          I share Dr. Nelson’s curiosity; how exactly does vaccinating create “a compromised immune system”?

        • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 5:33 pm

          Any parents that exposes their recently vaccinated child to children that haven’t been vaccinated is an incompetent moron… Some mothers were unable to vaccinate their older child because they had a newborn baby in the house, and from what i know, one mother is on the mission to get that changed because her older child died from a preventable disease…. Wendy, please explain to me why are you so against vaccines?

          • Layla June 4, 2014 / 4:54 pm

            Can you please explain this more? I mean this sincerely. I am reading to understand vaccinations more and I definitely don’t want to be an incompetent moron. I have a 2 year old that has had some vaccinations and a 3 month old that hasn’t been vaccinated yet. Are you saying I should vaccinate the infant before I continue with my sons vaccinations? I haven’t heard this before and want to be sure I don’t endanger one or the other. Thanks!

            • Andreia Santos June 4, 2014 / 6:04 pm

              Actually, you best ask your health worker… There was a recent report (I can’t find now) about a woman who is fighting because she wasn’t allowed to vaccinate older child because she had just given birth to another baby (if i were able to find this, then i could tell you which country they have this rule in) anyway her older child died by contracting one of those preventable diseases. I don’t know exact details (in all honesty) and wouldn’t want to influence your decision, although you could always inform yourself for peace of mind. I was actually being sarcastic towards Wendy, who thinks that children are being vaccinated and then walking around infecting other children, if that were true then parents would be morons, right, hehehehe

    • Anonymous June 2, 2014 / 9:29 am

      Thank you. I agree. I am just tired of the other side staing such nasty things. They have been wrong before on many “scientific facts” the less chemicals in the body the better.

      • Colin June 2, 2014 / 9:34 am

        This is the kind of magical thinking that drives pseudoscientific quackery. Your body needs, and in fact is made up of, chemicals. Moreover, adding addition “chemicals” is obviously beneficial in many circumstances, such as eating food or taking antibiotics.

        Life is more complicated than “the less chemicals in the body the better.”

        • gewisn June 2, 2014 / 10:56 pm

          not to mention the chemicals that make up a bajillion virus particles or bacteria that are inside you when you are infected by any of the illnesses that can be prevented by vaccination.

          BTW, 1 bajillion = 4.73 gazillion
          Just in case you were wondering

      • moladood June 2, 2014 / 10:24 am

        If there were no chemicals in your body, you would die. You are made up of molecules like carbon, hydrogen & oxygen that join to form chemical compounds. An overload in many compounds required for life can impact your life. Water is needed to live but you can’t breathe it. If you drink too much, you can also die. It is a delicate balance of chemicals that allow us to live.

      • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:32 pm

        Science, interesting stuff, people believe that science is fool proof, as is evidenced here, but people have short memories, or blinders on, or just don’t care about all the times science has been used to the detriment of humanity…they just close their eyes and pretend it never happens…

        • moladood June 2, 2014 / 6:00 pm

          Actually that is the opposite of what science believes. Science constantly uses new data to disprove or confirm something we already know. It is an evolving, collective body of knowledge given the best tools we have to measure at any given point.

          If you believe science has been a detriment to society, please go live in a cave until your late 20’s (life expectancy). Oh and stop using the internet which again was created by scientists. Science isn’t a fad, it is a way that the world can combine and share knowledge about what we discover. And it isn’t wrong because you believe it to be.

    • Parents of vaccine injured children June 2, 2014 / 9:42 am

      Lucy, don’t doubt your decision. You reached it, as we did the same, with good reason. Sadly, we were late deciding and our family now suffers. I blame our doctor for not giving us the full information on the damage that vaccines are able to cause. Nothing else in our family could have have caused our children to deteriorate as they did. We injected them chemicals. The oranges and vegetables etc were organic. We are healthy people, but our children now are not. Also, the doctor remains in her clinic during the week, but I have had to sell my assets in order to pay for my childrens’ medical treatment. The doctor is seen waterskiing on the weekends, but we stay at home hiding our children from the neighbors. Our life now sucks. Our doctor lives it up, but our family does not. We used to. We reckon vaccines caused it.

      Comments elsewhere in this blog criticize my stance. That is their right, and I stand by my stance.

      • Colin June 2, 2014 / 10:46 am

        It seems to be important to you to blame someone for your family’s misfortune. Is it possible that’s why you “reckon vaccines caused in,” in the absence of any scientific evidence supporting your belief?

      • Anonymous June 2, 2014 / 2:53 pm

        If your child has been ligitimately injured by vaccines (and by the tone of your post, I’m not entirely convinced), then have you filed a claim with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program ( It’s put in place to cover such issues without requiring you to pay for legal counsel…

      • Anonymous June 16, 2014 / 1:45 pm

        Parents of vaccine injured children, I stand behind you 100% and for anyone to say you are being fed wrong info , is plainly put, full of crapola! They won’t want to hear personal experiences here, they just want to tell you how wrong you are and how good vaccines are. Medical Doctor’s won’t tell you about Samuel Hannahman though they full well know of Classical Homeopathy. Hannahman was the creator of Homeopathy in the 1800’s and he was a Medical Doctor, so it’s been practiced for a long time. Why do Doctor’s hate this practice? Because it works, reverses chronic disease and remedies are very cheap. They make NO money with that route. Doctor’s poisoned me over two years ago with Cipro IV’d through me. Took me 14 months to figure out it was the Cipro and had to request Medical records to see they gave me this, didn’t tell me the side effects and I am on a list where 1000’s and 1000’s have been destroyed by this drug and who are much worse off than I am. It’s funny that one here piped in and said I wasn’t poisoned, I had an allergic reaction to the drug. Really? My symptoms didn’t present until after the fact and allergic reactions don’t last over 2 years. What I am doing to get my health back is switching to eating for my blood type and under care of a Classical Homeopath. It ROCKS! Just because oranges are good fruit, doesn’t mean it’s right for everyone to eat, that’s on a no no list for me I can’t even eat wheat or dairy, another tumy bloater and if diabetics would lose wheat and grains, they would lose weight and balance out the blood sugar. But do Doctor’s tell you this? No, they say, “eat what you want and just take a shot.” Totally ludicrious. This list is a sham filled with Pharma Shills, Doctor’s and other trolls. Do what your spirt tells you and know those vaccines did harm your kids and here they tell you nothing but lies. Leave before they brainwash you with more of their flat out lies.

        • Colin June 16, 2014 / 4:09 pm

          But do Doctor’s tell you this? No, they say, “eat what you want and just take a shot.”

          I have never in my life heard a doctor say anything remotely similar to that. Every doctor I’ve ever seen has encouraged me to eat healthy foods and pay attention to my own health.

          Hannahman was the creator of Homeopathy in the 1800′s and he was a Medical Doctor, so it’s been practiced for a long time.

          Bleeding was practiced for a long time too, just like homeopathy. And just like homeopathy, it was ineffectual. Magic cures like homeopathy, reiki, and sorcerous spells don’t do anything but (possibly) provoke a placebo response. More importantly, though, they cost money. They’re a way for practitioners to get rich without having to jump through any of the hoops that real healers have to deal with; since homeopathy doesn’t do anything, for example, homeopaths don’t have to learn or worry about drug interactions like real doctors.

          Real doctors and con men both accuse each other of being in it for the money. There’s an objective difference: real doctors study what works. They perform and follow research to actually test whether their treatments have an effect and are safer than the status quo. Homeopaths don’t care–their work fails every rigorous, objective test of efficacy, but they push it anyway. That’s because from their perspective it’s not about whether the treatment works, but whether it feels like it works. As long as patients feel like homeopathy is helping them, they’ll keep paying for it, and that’s what the alternative medicine industry is ultimately about.

          • Patrick McDonald June 16, 2014 / 4:19 pm

            Take two teaspoons of nothing and call me in the morning.

          • jb0nez95 June 17, 2014 / 1:35 am

            Awesome past Colin.
            Homeopathy is a thoroughly debunked crock of poo. It’s based on ridiculous ideas that costs basic concepts of chemistry, physics, and biology. If water had “memory” of what it was in contact with once, then by homeopathic principles we’re all dosing ourselves with feces every time we drink a cup of water.

            And the huge difference as Colin said between real doctors and quack SCAM (supplements, complimentary, and alternative medicine) doctors is that doctors change their practice in response to science and research. Quacks don’t.

        • moladood June 17, 2014 / 7:10 am

          “They make NO money with that route.”

          Right! They do it out of the kindness of their heart. Make no mistake, holistic and homoeopathic is an entire industry that is less regulated. Think of Big Pharma except with no rules.

    • Chris June 2, 2014 / 9:56 am

      Please thank your responsible neighbors who vaccinate for providing the community immunity that is protecting your children from diseases.

      “trusting money-making pharmaceuticals that care nothing for my children.”

      Having had a child taken to the hospital for seizures due to a now vaccine preventable disease over twenty years ago, I can tell you that treatment is not cheap. If you want to see “money-making” you should check out the our bills from the ambulance, emergency room treatment and follow-up care. Along with the neurodevelopmental treatment that ran for several years later all because he could not do something as “simple as talking” when he was three years old.

      I would really love to see the economic analysis that shows treating diseases is cheaper than preventing them. That is the “both sides” argument I have yet to see any real numbers showing diseases are cheaper than the vaccines to counter this paper: Economic Evaluation of the Routine Childhood Immunization Program in the United States, 2009.

      And because of our experience, I would love to see the “both sides” argument that shows the vaccines cause more seizures than the diseases. But I am particular about th quality of studies, they have to be PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers.

      • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:26 pm

        poster child Chris, we don’t live with a “prevention” health care system in this nation, our doctors are not educated to PREVENT disease, they are educated to MASK SYMPTOMS and TREAT DISEASE…so do you think you could be any more hypocritical? Tell me I’m wrong, please, I’m begging you

        • Chris June 2, 2014 / 5:01 pm

          So where are your PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers to support your claim that medical doctors do not prevent disease? I can’t tell if you are wrong or not unless you provide some actual scientific and economic data to support your claims.

          In another comment you wrote: “I choose not to be so naïve, I make evidence based decisions.” So where is your evidence? I have not seen you post anything other than arguments by assertion like “You mean the fake food like shit we eat?” and “It shows improvement in infrastructure.”

          (by the way, if we take your sentence about the food you eat literally, you might want to try getting a better cookbook, or at least let the manure thoroughly compost before putting it in your veggie garden)

        • moladood June 2, 2014 / 5:52 pm

          It is clear to anyone with half a brain that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Why continue this embarrassment? You have no intention to change your belief system and until you are open to adult dialog, I suggest you go spread your conspiracy and misinformation elsewhere.

          Hmm, on second thought, each post you make may help show how delusional and uneducated anti-vaxxers are. Please, ignore my comments above and post away.

        • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 1:05 am

          “our doctors are not educated to PREVENT disease”

          How should they be educated?
          What subjects in the current curriculum would you leave out and which would you put in?

          How would you go about evaluating whether that new curriculum should be evaluated?
          This last question is of real interest to me, since I suspect there is much too little evaluation of how changes to physicians’ education affects later practice.

        • Inthe Morning (@noagendavideo) June 3, 2014 / 5:05 am

          Cause and effect. For instance, if we wanted health & wellness and to eradicate preventable disease in the 3rd world, maybe we should start with clean water and nutrition instead of assuming we can just skip that step and vaccines will do all the heavy lifting.

          • Chris June 3, 2014 / 1:27 pm

            Oh, excellent idea, for water borne pathogens like cholera and typhoid. Now what about airborne pathogens like measles? Please read Measles vaccine coverage and factors related to uncompleted vaccination among 18-month-old and 36-month-old children in Kyoto, Japan, especially where it says:

            According to an infectious disease surveillance (2000), total measles cases were estimated to be from 180,000 to 210,000, and total deaths were estimated to be 88 [11,12]. Measles cases are most frequently observed among non-immunized children, particularly between 12 to 24 months.

            Please tell us what caused the failing nutrition and lack of clean water in Japan at the turn of this century that caused all of those cases of measles. Make sure you provide verifiable documentation that all of children were malnourished and drinking bad water.

        • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 10:53 am

          So Wendy, I suppose the anti-hypertensives, HMG-CoA inhibitors, the advice to lose weight and exercise, stop smoking, that doctors give is all in an effort to prevent what? They say its to reduce heart disease and cancer. Could you tell me what they are really trying to do?
          Yes, to a certain extent doctors do palliate against the ravages of aging. Do you know why they do that? Its because people are living long to get old! Every person on this planet will eventually age and die-doctors try to make that process as long and painless as possible. I’m quite happy to morphine and oxycodone when I have a kidney stone, happy to see analgesics given to those with arthritis. Yes, it just covers the pain, but it does extend and improve the quality of life-and is sometimes therapeutic.

        • Andreia Santos June 3, 2014 / 5:50 pm

          Actually i think you were mistaken Wendy, Doctors are educated to prevent disease and mask symptoms… They cannot fully TREAT disease, as it’s impossible to clear every diseased cell in your body unless, like chemo, you also destroy white blood cells.

          Doctors prescribe you meds to prevent oncoming illnesses and they prescribe you meds to make you feel better when the symptoms are too painful to handle, they also prescribe you meds to reduce inflammation/swelling etc But at no point should you be fooled that they treat it, they only clear it.

    • Scott Nelson June 2, 2014 / 12:06 pm

      Lucy, in your research, how much statistics, biochemistry, immunology, and cell biology did you read and understand? How much epidemiology and population biology understanding went into your decision making process?

    • Miriam June 2, 2014 / 2:52 pm

      If you are ‘trusting nature’ and your child’s immune system, consider this: in the 1730’s, an epidemic of diphtheria raged through the New England colonies, killing as many as half of the children who lived there (REF: Caulfield, Yale J. Biol and Med 1939); that’s nature. There have been only six cases of diphtheria in the US since 2000 (REF: WHO website); that is the result of an effective vaccination program. In the 1950’s, polio crippled more than 35,000 people every year in the US alone (REF:; that’s nature. There have been no cases of polio in the US since 1979, thanks to an effective vaccine. I can pull up statistics for other diseases, but they would all show the same trend: vaccines reduce the occurrence of disease and save millions of lives.

      Vaccines work by introducing HARMLESS versions of viruses or bacteria into a person’s body, then the person’s own immune system produces a natural response. Part of this response is a ‘memory’ so when the person is exposed to the real (harmful) viruses or bacteria, the immune system can respond very quickly and strongly to fight back, and the person will not get sick.

      I’m a microbiologist and college professor, and teach my students how vaccines work (in more technical detail) in class.

    • Dear Lucy – Decisions about raising a child are often difficult, and it is commendable that you did research on your vaccine decision. Unfortunately, the balance of “both sides” is not even close. Those of us who have been around long enough know that vaccines save lives. The vast majority of medical experts, the scientific community, and scholars of recent history know this. There will always be a vocal fringe element that believes everything is a conspiracy or that “trusting nature and my children’s immune system is safer.” Before vaccines we had no option other than to trust nature and a child’s immune system. Did you know that in 1953, two years before the Salk polio vaccine, trusting nature and a child’s immune system didn’t do a very good job? That year more children died of polio in the U.S. than of any other communicable disease. So much for a child’s immune system. In all honesty, when it comes to health issues, the good ‘ol day were not that good!

  13. Parents of vacicne injured children June 2, 2014 / 5:37 am

    It would be lovely to live in a dream-world like you Jennifer.
    Sadly, we have children who are maimed by vaccine ingredients.

    • sandy June 2, 2014 / 9:22 am

      Then your children had a legitimate reaction and are the ones who need to be protected by others able to get the vaccine. Not vaccinating is a lifestyle, and some don’t have a choice. When people simply choose not to be vaccinated, they can kill other children. If a person has a life-threatening reaction to a vaccine, then they shouldn’t get it. They should be protected by those who can, though.
      Btw, “science” isn’t a dream world.

      • Parents of vaccine injured children June 2, 2014 / 9:24 am

        “When people simply choose not to be vaccinated, they can kill other children”. How?

        • Parents of vaccine injured children June 2, 2014 / 9:57 am

          “When people simply choose not to be vaccinated, they can kill other children” – that is such a foolish statement, akin to calling my wife and I killers of children. I strongly object and suggest that you look elsewhere for killers. We are healthy people, not killers. Are you charging us with murder? I suggest you get your facts right, then apologize. Just because you want to inject pharmaceuticals into children does not make us killers.

          • gewisn June 2, 2014 / 11:10 pm

            What sort of information might change your mind?
            What might convince you?
            Where would such information come from?
            Who would provide you that information?
            Can you imagine becoming convinced that you were wrong? Is that possible?

            Just what is it that might convince you that your anti-vax behavior runs the risk of maiming or killing children you will never meet?

        • Chris June 2, 2014 / 10:11 am

          By actually getting pertussis, measles, mumps, Hib and other diseases that are still circulating in the USA and infecting children too young to be vaccinated, or those who have immune deficiencies, those who are going through cancer treatment, etc.

          A couple of cases:

          Julieanna Metcalf

          … and several babies in a medical office waiting room, one requiring hospital care: “Five patients required urgent outpatient care, and an infant aged 10 months (too young to be vaccinated) was hospitalized for 72 hours and received intravenous hydration for diarrhea.”

          Also, I had a kid who required hospital care due to seizures from a now vaccine preventable disease over twenty years ago. So could you please provide the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers showing vaccines on the present American pediatric schedule can cause more seizures than the actual diseases? Thanks.

      • Parents of vaccine injured children June 2, 2014 / 9:28 am

        Btw, “science” isn’t a dream world. Sorry, science is a dream world, involved with all sorts of statistical foolishness and mirrors. You are not oblivious to that are you?

        • Anonymous June 2, 2014 / 10:05 am

          LOL seeing as how science has led to most likely every aspect of your life including the food you eat, clothes you wear, medicine you take, treatments you are using for your children, etc., the “dream world” of science seems to be extremely realistic. But I guess you are oblivious to that seeing as how your children obviously had a negative reaction to the vaccine (and since all of your children apparently suffered, I’m betting it’s genetically-related). With that being said, it may or may not be the doctor’s fault for failing to realize that the vaccine would harm your children, however, your situation is not a direct correlation to vaccines harming children. For example, your neighbor’s children who most likely have been vaccinated are fine, aren’t they? I have been vaccinated many many times and I am fine, aren’t I? Yes. Therefore your unfortunate life story is by no means a “conclusive effort” to ascertaining that vaccines cause illness.

          Maybe you should try to get over your unfortunate life experience and check out the “dream world” of science a little more. Maybe you’ll find that the root cause is genetic or maybe that your children have genes destined for illness regardless of being vaccinated or not.

          Yes, maybe then the world will no longer be so “oblivious.”

          • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 3:59 pm

            You mean the fake food like shit we eat? Because that’s not really food, you know? KUDOS to science!! For introducing more cancer and disease causing substances into our diets than nature EVER did….WOW, go drink another diet pepsi

            • Jake June 4, 2014 / 12:52 pm

              No Wendy in terms of food that science has helped produce I was referring to the agricultural breakthroughs which have occurred in the last century or two. The ones which have allowed our crops to produce more food, avoid crop loss via organic fertilizers, enhance nutritional supply via advanced genetics (which significantly help third-world regions where the majority of crops consumed do not contain essential nutrients needed for a healthy individual), etc.

              Wendy, I suggest you separate the capitalist perspective of manufacturing poor quality foods from the agricultural achievements of science. The enlightenment you’ll receive will be substantial. What scientific issue would you like to belittle next?

              BTW I am the anonymous replier above to whom you replied to.

      • Rehsab Thgir June 2, 2014 / 11:53 am

        There are, on rare occasion, reactions to vaccines. But what are the symptoms in this case, and when, precisely, did they occur? Can we corroborate the reported evidence should it ever appear?

        Right now, we just have the assertions of an anti-vaxer with little to no understanding of immunology.

    • mike vlachos June 2, 2014 / 1:02 pm

      If that is your only point, then it’s invalid. All drugs come with possible negative side-effects. All pools come with the potential for drowning. All cars come with the potential for a fatal accident (accidental death is by far the largest cause of child death in the US by the way). Play grounds have risks of broken bones, or bee stings.

      If your only reason to not get a vaccination is that a very low number of people suffer and adverse effect (and by this I mean a proven causal link) then I expect you keep you children in a bubble somewhere, do not let them outside to play, do not smoke, or have flammable substances in the home they may cause a fire or any of the hundreds of other activities that have a risk of harm to children.

  14. Wendy June 2, 2014 / 10:11 am

    This “article” can’t be for real, and if it is for real, it was obviously written by a very delusional young woman, with a lot of opinions and NO FACTS. Nothing wrong with an opinion, but spewing an opinion as if it were fact? C’mon Jennifer Raff, that is unethical, but not surprising. To all who read this “article” and swallowed the drivel in one gulp, well, I have no words for you, other that you parents, YOU are being lied to, and if you think it is so impossible for that to happen, well keep drinking the Kool-Aid! Jennifer Raff made a fresh pitcher of it with her attempt at some kind of journalistic ability here. Me? I prefer the TRUTH, I hate Kool-Aid, and I would never, not ever, allow my children to be injected with a vaccination by an ignorant sick-care provider, who in fact and most likely DOES NOT know anything beyond the compensation he receives from pharmaceuticals, about the poisons being injected into perfectly healthy children. And the argument that 50-60 years ago you were vaccinated and didn’t get autism, I have read these arguments in this thread, do you realize that the CDC recommends that your child be inoculated over forty times prior to entering school, that’s 5 years old….Oh and arguing that whooping cough, mumps, or measles are deadly is asinine, stop reading this drivel RIGHT THERE, all credibility is LOST with such simple little lies….Jennifer, someday you will be wise, and I hope when you are, you will regret making this pitcher of Kool-Aid….oh your poor kiddos 😦

      • Chris June 2, 2014 / 10:35 am

        So she listed the mortality rates. It shows improvements in medical care. What does that have to do with incidence? Also, the strep bacteria that causes Scarlet Fever is still around and is easily treated with antibiotics.

        By the way, did Rina Marie ever write a thank you note to her responsible neighbors who protect her family with community immunity by vaccinating? Her argument basically boiled down to “no deaths” and “diseases are no longer with us”, completely neglecting good hospital care and living in a highly vaccinated community.

        For the record her blog is not a “PubMed indexed study by a reputable qualified researcher.”

        • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:05 pm

          It shows improvement in infrastructure Chris….

          • Chris June 2, 2014 / 4:42 pm

            Can you please explain in more detail? Take for instance the incidence of measles. The following is USA census data showing the reported incidence of measles for most of the 20th century. Can you please tell my exactly what improvement in infrastructure caused the 90% drop in measles cases in the USA between 1960 and 1970? Please do not mention mortality, any other decade nor any other country. Thank you.

            Year…. Rate per 100000 of measles
            1912 . . . 310.0
            1920 . . . 480.5
            1925 . . . 194.3
            1930 . . . 340.8
            1935 . . . 584.6
            1940 . . . 220.7
            1945 . . . 110.2
            1950 . . . 210.1
            1955 . . . 337.9
            1960 . . . 245.4
            1965 . . . 135.1
            1970 . . . . 23.2
            1975 . . . . 11.3
            1980 . . . . . 5.9
            1985 . . . . . 1.2
            1990 . . . . .11.2
            1991 . . . . . .3.8
            1992 . . . . . .0.9
            1993 . . . . . .0.1
            1994 . . . . . .0.4
            1995 . . . . . .0.1
            1996 . . . . . .0.2
            1997 . . . . . . 0.1

          • Brian June 2, 2014 / 11:14 pm

            Interesting graphs but the source of the data is unclear. Also interesting is the USA didn’t really have accurate reporting of diseases until the late 1940’s so I’m not 100% sure where this data originated from.
            You can also check it the Canadian data –

            Some would say it comes down to infrastructure improvementa- then why the dramatic decreases in reported incidents in where countries people are still pooping in a ditch. To me the data from the Anti-vax side simple doesn’t add up.

            Although I appreciate their passion I just don’t understand how Dr. Jim Carey (a phenomenal actor without a Medical or University Degree) and Dr. Jen McCarthy (1994 Playboy Playmate of the year, no University or medical degree) have any merit.

            What I’d really like to see is a graph showing the declining market for infant and children’s coffins since the introduction of vaccines. GET YOUR KIDS VACCINATED — you don’t have to listen to the drug companies- but please listen to the compassionate and highly educated members of the medical communities — your national health service and the World Health Organization they cannot all be wrong — Bill Gates is giving away a large chunk of his vast fortune to vaccinate Africa — If you have any doubts compare the mountain of data for vaccination against the anthill of data against it. — them go with your head — save the hemp oil and the Kale for your morning shake.

      • FacePalmingDarwin June 2, 2014 / 12:43 pm

        If you look at this graph, it shows that the mortality rates of the diseases drastically decrease after the introduction of a vaccine for the disease. So therefore if you do not vaccinate, the mortality rates will increase back to levels they were before vaccinations. These diseases are no longer associated with death the way they used to be because of vaccines.The graph does nothing to support your argument Wendy, it only proves you wrong.

    • Chris June 2, 2014 / 10:21 am

      Did you click on the words that are in blue text? Those are hyperlinks to studies and other sites with more information.

      “Oh and arguing that whooping cough, mumps, or measles are deadly is asinine, stop reading this drivel RIGHT THERE, all credibility is LOST with such simple little lies”

      Yay! Someone who can answer my question with real scientific evidence! I have been asking, and asking and asking, and no one will provide me the actual PubMed indexed papers by qualified reputable researchers that the vaccines on the American pediatric schedule cause more harm than the diseases. So please do tell us how pertussis is not dangerous for babies and measles doesn’t kill. I really want to know.

      Some reading that you really need to debunk: Historical Comparisons of Morbidity and Mortality for Vaccine-Preventable Diseases in the United States and The Clinical Significance of Measles: A Review.

    • Max Riethmuller June 2, 2014 / 10:34 am

      Dr Raff backs up every one of her claims with a link to a study or relevant research (the underlined words in blue – hint: click them).

    • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 3:37 pm

      Did I give the impression that I care what any of you think personally? Oh, well, I don’t. Here’s the thing, we DO have a fundamental right to PARENT and care for our children as individuals….that means you have a right to feed your children pretend food, starting with baby formula, without anyone telling you that you can’t. You have a right to choose the care provider if you work, you have a right to choose schooling for your children, and you have a right to choose HEALTH CARE over SICK CARE. My kids are healthier than yours, because we choose health, even if it means going against the “grain”. When it comes to taking care of my kids I do the best I can for them, and I think LONG TERM, because the choices I make today when it comes to medicines and medical practices WILL affect my children for the rest of their lives, and that matters to me. I have a right to choose what my children consume because what we put into our bodies MATTERS in the overall picture of health, the same goes with vaccinations, I have a right to choose not to poison my children with the ridiculous mega doses of toxins starting within hours of birth. Just as you have a choice, whether you know it or not, to have your children vaccinated. What I don’t appreciate and what I can’t understand is the complete lack of knowledge by the masses when it comes to disease, especially the ones you people line up to vaccinate your children against, it is sad to me, it’s sad that without sick people the drug makers would be out of business, it’s sad to me that vaccinations earn drug makers BILLION and BILLIONS of dollars in profit annually, all the while leading the herd to believe it’s for the good of humanity, and it’s not, and that’s all.

      • Anonymous June 2, 2014 / 4:09 pm

        Wendy – I think the problem with your view is not your right to parent as you see fit – it’s your attitude of lumping all vaccines in one big giant “evil” bundle. Drug company’s spend billions of dollars researching, designing, creating, test and risking their lives (ask any chemist that ever worked for a drug company the danger the exposed themselves to daily) to create the safest possible medicine for the masses. They did all of this long before they have ever made a single penny on that drugs. And they make a lot of very good medicine (doesn’t always work for everyone – there will NEVER be that guarantee) for a lot of people to keep them healthy or comfortable. Like Asthma medicine so a kid can enjoy to play outside or allergy medicine that saves someones life after a bee sting or ant bite or being exposed to peanuts. Not to mention the various varieties of antibiotics and pain medicine (have you ever seen a cancer patient dying and see first hand how pain medicine is the only relief? I have!!). So big pharmacy is not the EVIL monster under the bed. Instead of turning up your nose at all vaccines and spewing hatred to the “big & evil” pharmacy company – maybe you should expel some energy to see how people are dying all over the world because they do not have easy access to these medicines you take for granted. You are very fortunate to live in a country where they “force” these vaccines on the masses so it’s very likely that your unvaccinated loved ones will every suffer. But even in the unlikely event that your loved ones contract one of these aliments – I’m sure you’ll be able to find a doctor that will happily inject your loved one with “poison” that is necessary to radicate the disease. Just be sure to tell this sweet one that you so dearly love that there suffering likely could have been prevented if you hadn’t been so determined to parent the way you wanted and not how society “demanded”.

        • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:20 pm

          I choose not to be so naïve, I make evidence based decisions, that’s why I do not vaccinate my children, and quite frankly that’s why unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children, overall and by far. I’ll take my strong, cognitive, healthy children and be thankful that they are not plagued by chronic illness, allergies, autism of any spectrum, that they have never had an antibiotic and that they have never been seriously ill. I will also thank my parents for not vaccinating me.

          • David G June 2, 2014 / 9:21 pm

            Wendy, just to cite one example that has personal meaning to me, my mother had polio in the early 1950s. She was one of the very few to survive this devastating disease. The subsequent discovery of the polio vaccine saved millions of lives. If you would seriously advocate for banishment of all vaccines, including those for diseases such as polio (or diptheria, etc.), there is absolutely nothing relevant to discuss with you.

          • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 1:09 am

            “unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children, overall and by far.”

            That is a testable claim.
            How would you define “healthier” in this context? What dependent variables would you measure to demonstrate “healthier?”
            Would you prefer to test this before and after vaccination in the US, or in a region without vaccination now, and then test again after vaccination is offered to that area, or test you equivalent areas of the globe where one has vaccination and one does not?

          • Andreia Santos June 4, 2014 / 6:38 pm

            Wendy, my child is vaccinated, he is healthier, stronger, fitter, faster, smarter and wittier than most children i’ve met, plus he isn’t allergic to anything, so based on that fact (if i was basing it in the same way you are) i’d say vaccines actually improves brain, body and health. I personally don’t care if you’re pro or against vaccines, what i do wonder is, why? What is it about vaccines that scares you so much?
            Do you not buy pre made foods (such as bread, pasta, sauces)
            Do you not allow them to drink pre packed juice
            Do you use cling film, plastic bags, metal spoons, knifes etc

            It’s seems that it’s so easy for you to ignore the basic poisons in everyday life because it suits your needs, but you are also prepared to ignore the dangers amongst unvaccinated children. What would you do if your child became very ill? would you care for your child at home,or would you take them to a professional (the hypocrisy confuses me)

            Seriously love, go see professionals and ask them, ask them every little detail you have against vaccines and listen to their answers, then doubt every answer and question again your doubts. Or better, study this field properly not just from links and web pages, go and study this and understand it inside out.

            You can’t mix all that’s wrong with this world and put your childrens (and others) health at risk. I see a lot of your points, i agree with some of them, but not vaccines, you need to protect your children, because then when there are outbreaks you wont need to worry about keeping them away, and the older they are, the worst the effects.

      • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 12:08 am

        How would you know if you are wrong?
        What sort of evidence or information would make you change your mind?

        Or is it that information is irrelevant to your decisions about how you decide what is safe for your children?

      • jb0nez95 June 3, 2014 / 2:48 am

        Please just stop posting, are an embarrassment.

      • Verucalise June 4, 2014 / 7:48 am

        How about you move to Knox County, Ohio, meet up with some of these affected families… and then tell us how healthy your children really are.

        Unless I see you intentionally exposing your child to a vaccination-preventable disease without any consequences, I will ignore your blatant and utter stupidity. Your children are not super-human healthy. They are not biologically superior to all others. I’ve seen children with the worst diets the most healthy, and the children with the best diets the most sick. Immune systems are funny; some trump others, and you cannot contain environmental contaminations from interfering with genetic predispositions. In the end, we are all human. Children are especially prone to infections or injury, and one day, you will find this out. One of your children will become ill or severely hurt themselves, and the same medical community you are fighting against you will be begging from.

        For your children’s sake, I hope that day doesn’t come. If it does, though, please let us know, when your child is suffering… how you feel as a mother who had a choice. And chose wrong.

    • jb0nez95 June 2, 2014 / 4:23 pm

      Wow…just…wow. It saddens me that there are such ignorant people in this world. It is apparent you are severely under-educated; I’m surprised you managed to get on the internet. It’s obvious you don’t possess even the most basic critical thinking skills, much less any true education in biology, physiology, or chemistry that would allow you to evaluate this article and the linked *science* and make such ridiculous statements.
      Please go finish high school, maybe even college, learn how the scientific method works…then you’ll be qualified to comment. All you’re posting now is meaningless drivel.

      • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:38 pm

        You know what’s funny, I would consider you, after reading your comments, to be quite ignorant, and presumptuous, not to mention overly arrogant and assuming. Let me guess, you have a coveted college education, and said “education” has given you some authority to deduce who here has not received such a superior education as yourself…very well little man, I’ll make my own assumption, that my IQ is upwards of 20 points higher than yours in any given subject. You keep dreaming about being “smart” because an education without intelligence is nothing more than DEBT, and I have a feeling you owe…

        • moladood June 2, 2014 / 6:04 pm

          Why are all your comments about education? What value are you bringing to the conversation? You have a belief that it is bad. What evidence besides, “I have 4 degrees” or “you’re education doesn’t matter to me” do you have to support any claim to your statements?

        • jb0nez95 June 3, 2014 / 12:45 am

          “my IQ is 20 points higher than yours in any given subject” you say? Sweetheart, do you even know how the IQ test works, what it measures, and what the significance of the numbers are? And BTW my IQ is 3 standard deviations (do you know what a SD is?) above norm, 99th percentile. As performed by a psychologist, with the actual WAIS-R, not some silly online IQ test. If you want to go there.

    • A curious individual June 2, 2014 / 7:31 pm

      Well I can certainly say that reading all these comments has been a real “eye opener” and thank you Wendy for helping me to see the opposed side to vaccines! I have always seen 2 sides to the vaccination process and I do not believe that vaccinations should be condemned or praised by and few instances! I believe that the most logical way to look at something is to way up both arguments but to always go with the side that has the most facts backing it up after all facts are not speculation. But I also think it is important to weigh up the positive and negative impacts of everything in life and when the positives outweigh the negatives to go with that option! Vaccines have saved so many lives and have helped us to develop in to the nation we are today! They are especially useful in developing countries where treating a disease or infection is not possible due to the lack of money but preventing it is doable! I think it is sad that peoplecan condem something so fantastic through a lack of knowledge and through a generalisation of some suvere cases that can not be denied to have occurred but sometimes need to be scaled to show the bigger picture. If I were to take a picture of a grain of dust and blow it up it would look very large but to show the true size of it something must be placed next to it to put it in context. I am not or will not ever deny science has failed in the past and still will in the future but if you compare it to what it has done the achievement is massive and without it the world today would be very similar to how it was 1000’s of years ago. While science should not be taken lightly or as a defornate fact straight away it should never be condemned simply for being science! P.S I oppologise for any spelling mistakes or grammatically incorrect scentences!

    • lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 3:56 pm

      Wendy, this is a fabulous article that helps demonstrate your point about changes in infrastructure and, overall, changes in sanitation and such.

      The graphs are particularly interesting with regard to how they demonstrate that many of these diseases were already on their way “out” when the vaccines were introduced.

      I think this is where I have issues with the pro-vaccine folks…I just want information that isn’t skewed by the government and all of the organizations taking money from the government or drug companies. I want cold, hard facts so I can make an informed, responsible choice. And, those who argue that just getting a vaccine is automatically responsible don’t understand the meaning of the word. Part of being responsible is thinking about consequences like this and asking difficult questions. I hate the way anti-vax people are just dismissed as ridiculous and naive. The science regarding vaccines is hardly settled and there is not a consensus as more and more research is done.

      I think about the drug-resistant superbugs our medical community is faced with and I can’t help but wonder if the diseases for which we inoculate are “smart” enough to become vaccine resistant. I don’t think such is a stretch of the imagination. I also think it’s intellectually disingenuous to not mention where these outbreaks are beginning…people are entering our country with the disease. We freely allow people to come into our country, regardless of whether they are carriers of disease, yet many here want to require parents vaccinate their children? I’m sorry, but my 2 year old has never been sick with more than a cold. I haven’t been sick in 8+ years, and neither has my husband. Do you know why? We get good rest, drink filtered water, and we eat a healthy diet. The problem with our society is we’ve become too reliant on drugs…hence the superbugs.

        • Chris June 9, 2014 / 5:21 pm

          Those graphs are terrible. The vertical axis just says “Decreases.” The one on measles does clarify that it is the decreases of deaths, but that has nothing to do with rate of incidence.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 9:03 pm

            Oh, Chris. I found something I understand…the law.

            I’m curious how this “compensation” program works and how much of our tax dollars go to help fund this. I’m also curious to know what types of limits are placed on people eligible to file claims…like gag orders? I’m also curious if people are eligible to sue the vaccine makers directly…the fact that we have this program indicates, to me, at least, they aren’t. What I would bet is going on here is that vaccine makers are given indemnity from being held liable in tort, which is interesting. I think this is probably a conflict of interest, here, between the government (keepers of the NCBI, CDC, etc.) and vaccine makers.


            I read back through the article I posted and, while I see the point you’re making, I still think there’s important information to be taken from the article. Namely, that death rates were rapidly falling with regard to these diseases. The author even explains, in addition to the graphs which display something else, that incidence and severity of diseases was decreasing.

            • jb0nez95 June 10, 2014 / 12:21 am

              “Oh, Chris. I found something I understand…the law.

              I’m curious how this “compensation” program works and how much of our tax dollars go to help fund this. I’m also curious to know what types of limits are placed on people eligible to file claims…like gag orders?”

              I don’t think you really read the article. The “Vaccine Court” is well explained in it. Follow some of the hyperlinks.
              It’s not paid for by tax dollars, it’s paid for by each pharma company chipping money in. That’s because vaccines are not a highly profitable venture, and all it would take is a few lawsuits with uneducated juries to wipe a vaccine off the market, putting tens of millions at risk. So it’s a way to encourage pharma companies to make vaccines.

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 9:16 pm

            Tax dollars do not support that NVICP, it is funded through a surcharge on the vaccines.

            It was created because vaccine makers were leaving the market and there were shortages of vaccines. Which tends to cause children to suffer and die from things like pertussis.

            If you look at the pdf that is linked there, and realize that with about four million children born each year in the USA, that over the twenty-six years that the program has existed billions of vaccines have been given. And less than 3600 claims have been compensated. What do you think the ratio of 3600 to the billions of vaccine doses would be? Would it be a high or a low number?

            And since I had a kid that suffered from a now vaccine preventable disease I want to know two things:

            What compensation program exists for those of us have kids harmed by the actual diseases?

            What causes more harm: the diseases or the vaccines? That requires real data, and not opinion.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 9:28 pm


            The “surcharge” is called an excise tax, and it’s .75 a vaccine. If the government is not the entity administering the vaccine, it’s not a “surcharge”…it’s a tax…which the people who receive vaccines are required to pay. So, please, do not tell me we are not taxed because this is pretty clear that we are. What’s pretty terrible is the idea the government can practically force us to vaccinate (should we want to go to public school) and then tax us on that…but, par for the course, I’m afraid.

            What’s curious is why the government is even involved? If there was a concern with protecting vaccine makers, why not pursue tort reform, in general?

            And, this isn’t meant to be disrespectful, but you’re not exactly “bias-free” with regard to this debate, either. It’s hard to trust your information simply because of your feelings on the issue.

            See why it’s tough? You say “facts” but I gave you a website you shrugged off. That website linked to over 100 doctors who have issues with vaccines and don’t deem them safe. Remember earlier when I said there wasn’t, necessarily, a consensus about vaccines? This is what I mean…just because 50 scientists believe vaccines are dangerous doesn’t mean they’re quacks. Maybe they are onto something new…that’s how science works.

            • gewisn June 9, 2014 / 10:14 pm

              If I may interject in the current argument…

              “just because 50 scientists believe vaccines are dangerous doesn’t mean they’re quacks. Maybe they are onto something new…”

              1) Physicians are not necessarily scientists.
              Medical school here in the US does not concentrate on critical thinking or careful evaluation of the basic bench sciences on which clinical science is based and then clinical decisions are made. There are scientists who enter med school and there are physicians who become fantastic scientists – but that is not guaranteed, or even considered necessary. There sare so many thousands (perhaps millions) of pieces of information to get through in four years that most med schools I know of don’t put much effort into teaching critical thinking or evaluation of the research literature. Also, since the licensing exams have not focused on these cognitive skills, schools are loath to spend more time on this skill and remove time from some aspect that is tested.
              I know physicians who state evolution is, “Silly. It just doesn’t make any sense,” yet do all the right things for patients at the right times. I don’t understand it, but it happens.
              1A) If there are some physicians who disagree with the principles of immunology does not mean that this is serious criticism of the science of immunology. It might mean that, but it does not necessarily mean that.
              1B) According to this (, there are 878,194 physicians actively licensed in the US as of 2012. If you had 100 physicians with a particular view, this represents 0.01% of the group. If that means 99.99% agree with the opposing viewpoint, that is an astounding consensus of professionals who agree with an extemely well researched theory that is “proven” beyond all but the most unreasonable doubt.

              2) Just because a group (of scientists or physicians) disagrees doesn’t mean they are onto something new.
              If they have new information, or even a novel but useful way to look at the current information, that leads to more valid and/or reliable predictions – THEN they are on to something new. When something is as well established as the principles of immunization, then the bar is much higher for being “on to something new.” A vague suspicion that something might have been missed because there are statistical outliers among 0.1% of the studies, or a perennial naysayer’s complaint that “I ain’t buyin’ it,” is not something the majority of scientists are going to waste resources on unless there is something much more substantive to the claims.

              I really suspect your contention is that you are not convinced that
              A) vaccines do as much good as the medical community would like you to believe and
              B) we understand much about the possible serious side effects of vaccines.

              If I am close, would you provide a bit more explanation of what sort of information, from whom, you would find convincing – in either direction?

              I now return you to your regularly scheduled argument.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 10:26 pm

            Honestly, my contention is the information parents have when making decisions about vaccinations for their children. I was reading in another post people blaming anti-vacciners for the recent outbreaks…ignoring the fact that, in one case, the outbreak was started (for the first time) by someone who was vaccinated and in another instance, the disease was brought into this country by travelers and was spread to an even number of people with and without the vaccines. This is crazy.

            I vaccinated my son and I will vaccinate my daughter when she arrives. My concern is the attitude pro-vaccine folks have for people who have questions and doubts about the efficacy and safety of injecting all sorts of toxins into a little human. I do believe that diet is a big factor that our “healthcare” industry ignores and I believe we are more readily willing to diagnose people, children especially, with crazy diseases for the purposes of medicating them (I am mostly referencing ADHD/ADD…I believe the disorder is real, but I’m not sure we accurately diagnose it). I have concerns about the chemicals we pump into our children because the FDA has deemed such “safe”…you get the idea.

            I think there is still a great deal to learn about the safety and efficacy of vaccines. While they are great and do a great deal of good, I’m not sure we really know what the effects of such are…kind of like GMOs or injecting our meat with varying growth hormones. I simply don’t want my child to be a guinea pig.

            The recommendation was given to read the Lies book…I’ve been reading reviews, and the reviews are leading me away from it because it seems to overlook the very issue I’m most distrustful of…how involved the government is and how much power it has over the research that is done. Consider how “diet” and research concerning such is changing. Remember when it was a deadly sin to eat red meat and real butter to combat weight issues? We’re finding out that this isn’t as true as we thought…and the science was once “settled” on these issues.

            And, thank you for returning me…I wouldn’t want to miss a second of it!

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 10:45 pm

            “The recommendation was given to read the Lies book…I’ve been reading reviews, and the reviews are leading me away from it because it seems to overlook the very issue I’m most distrustful of…how involved the government is and how much power it has over the research that is done.”

            Read the book. Amazon reviews can be very stupid, especially if the book affects their income or beliefs. The main point of the book is about “who are the stakeholders.”

            “ignoring the fact that, in one case, the outbreak was started (for the first time) by someone who was vaccinated and in another instance, the disease was brought into this country by travelers and was spread to an even number of people with and without the vaccines”

            Which outbreak? Details are needed. Because this year’s outbreak of measles were caused by unvaxed Americans picking it up elsewhere, and then spreading it around. Most who caught measles were not vaccinated or had unknown vaccine status. See this update. Yes, I know it is from the CDC, but until you tell us whose data is more reliable it is what will be used.

        • Chris June 9, 2014 / 9:54 pm

          “What’s curious is why the government is even involved? If there was a concern with protecting vaccine makers, why not pursue tort reform, in general?”

          Because people make demands, and corporations don’t have to comply. Sometimes people want to make whatever they want plus make claims without any regard to their actions. Just like the manufacturers of a Elixir Sulfanilamide did in the 1930s. Parents weren’t pleased that even though the syrup killed their kids, what the company did was not illegal. So some laws were made.

          It is not like you would be happy if someone decided to come into your yard and started to dump their garbage. Who would you call first, your lawyer or the police?

          “And, this isn’t meant to be disrespectful, but you’re not exactly “bias-free” with regard to this debate, either. It’s hard to trust your information simply because of your feelings on the issue.”

          I have never claimed to be, which is why I want facts not opinions. If you showed me that a vaccine caused more harm than the disease I would be swayed. John Salamone provided that data to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Policy, and the OPV was replaced by the IPV.

          “See why it’s tough? You say “facts” but I gave you a website you shrugged off. That website linked to over 100 doctors who have issues with vaccines and don’t deem them safe.”

          A hundred doctors is still a drop in the bucket compared to the medical professionals and scientists who are part of the global consensus that show vaccines are a good idea.

          “Remember earlier when I said there wasn’t, necessarily, a consensus about vaccines? This is what I mean…just because 50 scientists believe vaccines are dangerous doesn’t mean they’re quacks. Maybe they are onto something new…that’s how science works”

          So what? That is just your opinion, which has nothing to do with the facts… or how science works. Tomorrow, go the the library and get the book I suggested.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 10:03 pm

            Torts isn’t about what’s illegal and what’s not…it’s about harm and causation. If a vaccine has caused harm and said harm is linked back to the vaccine, it doesn’t matter if the company did something “legal.” Harm was still caused by them. Take simple battery…offensive touching is not, necessarily, a crime, but you may be sued for such. Vaccine companies work the same way…if they caused harm as a result of their vaccine, why shield them from tort liability?

            If someone dumped their garbage into my yard, I have no need to call a lawyer because I am one. Calling the police would likely not do me any good because I’m not sure what crime they’d be committing. But, that’s an aside.

            I am in the same position as you. But you discount 100 doctors as being meaningless but what if the evidence suggests that the consensus is wrong?

            I looked into the book…on Amazon. The reviews were interesting…I particularly found the reviews, calling out the author for her skewed opinion, interesting.

      • jb0nez95 June 9, 2014 / 4:04 pm

        “The science regarding vaccines is hardly settled and there is not a consensus as more and more research is done.”

        I’m sorry but, coming from a Registered Nurse, I can tell you assuredly that there is no dispute in the medical or scientific community about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. Much more is known about them by experts in the field than you seem to be aware of. Or perhaps you know better than the experts?

        Try clicking the blue words that link to actual scientific articles. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

        • lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 4:15 pm

          That’s the thing about “science”…it’s never “settled” because it’s science and things change as research changes and advances. Not to be cliche but, at one time, it was settled the earth was flat and the sun went around the earth. As we become smarter and we research and QUESTION more, we learn more. I really don’t believe anything in the scientific community can be classified as “settled.” If you choose to disagree, that’s your business and your right.

          The article I posted was written by a doctor and his list of sources include references to other scholarly, medical journals.

          Facts are such, but if we don’t look at all the information, it’s not really factual, is it. You can argue that vaccines save lives, but it’s intellectually dishonest to assert that many of the diseases “eradicated” by vaccines were not in decline prior to the use of the vaccine. If you do not choose to acknowledge such, I guess I would be grateful I have much more intelligent nurses taking care of me, as well as the rest of my family, when we visit our varying doctors.

          • jb0nez95 June 9, 2014 / 9:42 pm

            Yes that’s the wonderful thing about science – it is constantly changing as new research is being done. Science is not a static body of knowledge, it is a dynamic method to approach the nature of observable reality. That’s a LOT more than can be said for homeopathy/chiropractic/acupuncture, that ignore all evidence and don’t change their practices even slightly when new evidence comes in.
            So no of course nothing is ever known for certain – it’s all probabilities. But the probability that vaccines lower mortality and morbidity has been proven to about 99.99999%. SURE maybe everyone is wrong and it’s just random chance.

            As far as vaccine preventable diseases declining before the vaccine was introduced – that makes perfect sense to me and doesn’t do anything to discount the effectiveness of vaccines. Germ theory had only recently been discovered, so physicians, surgeons, and nurses started doing this wacky thing called “washing their hands” between patients, and modern sanitation was not even truly in effect until less than a century ago! Modern sanitation is probably the greatest public health intervention ever.
            Add to that that during the polio epidemic, those prone to getting the disease and DYING from the disease would be the first ones to, well, DIE (that goes for all diseases actually) then of course after an epidemic there would be lower rates. Guess what – after 20 million people died of the Spanish Flu in 1918, flu rates dropped. No vaccines needed. This is not an acceptable solution to those of us in the medical field. We’re more interested in saving lives.

            Smallpox, a brutal, deadly disease has been eradicated with vaccines. I dare you to claim otherwise, to try and claim that it was going to die off on its own. That would make you look like a total and complete buffoon.

      • gewisn June 9, 2014 / 4:14 pm

        Just so we know what you mean by consensus…

        What would you consider a consensus?

        What group(s) of professionals would have to achieve what percentage of agreement for you to consider it a consensus about vaccines?

        – would it be immunologist physicians, laboratory virologists working off NIH research grants, virologists at CDC or another country’s counterpart, researchers for World Health Organization? If not any of those, who would it be?

        Just so we can compare, what are some scientific fields (inside or outside of medicine) for which you feel there is consensus?
        Gravity? Geology? Botany? Cardiology? Oncology? Cosmology? Time? Others?

        • lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 4:24 pm

          I guess this is the point I’m making…science isn’t supposed to be about consensus…it’s about fact. I am not sure I care that 500 scientists believe vaccines are perfect. If one discovers vaccines are dangerous, do we keep going with the consensus? That doesn’t seem logical.

          I do believe there is more evidence to suggest that vaccines are not the miracle we claim they are as evidenced by the article I shared.

          • gewisn June 9, 2014 / 4:30 pm

            Okay, so consensus and “settled” science was never your point. Now I understand better. Thank you.

            I think you alluded to wanting honest info from experts who are not paid by – well, I’ll let you explain before I put words in your mouth.

            Who is the group that is not being paid by someone from whom you would like to new research or review of existing research?

          • jb0nez95 June 9, 2014 / 9:44 pm

            “I guess this is the point I’m making…science isn’t supposed to be about consensus…”
            You apparently know nothing about the scientific method. It is ALL about consensus, and independent reproduction of study results that either prove or disprove a hypothesis, eventually leading to a “theory” — a well accepted, strongly supported premise. Like the theory of gravity. Or germ theory.
            PLEASE go educate yourself on the scientific method….wikipedia has a nice article on it.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 9:56 pm

            Science is based upon evidence, not agreement (which is a synonym of consensus). A group of scientists could come to a wonderful agreement, but if there’s not evidence to back up said agreement, it’s meaningless. Scientific consensus simply indicates general agreement, but consensus ceases to be important if the evidence is not there to give said consensus any meaning.

            I admit that I do not have a science background, but I understand upon what science is based. Had you not cherry-quoted me for the purpose of attempting to make me look stupid, my next statement was that science is based upon facts…or evidence rather than opinion.

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 10:07 pm

            “Science is based upon evidence, not agreement (which is a synonym of consensus).”

            Really, go read this book: Lies, Damned Lies, and Science.

        • lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 4:47 pm

          I could not respond to your other post…

          Honest information…what DOES that even mean in our society? This question is my overall issue. Many people cite the CDC as a source, but I am distrustful of government run organizations for their many conflicts of interest. I am aware that making money for research doesn’t necessarily mean there will be a conflict, but I am leery that there are a great many more conflicts in the scientific community. For example, it’s been demonstrated that scientists have cooked the books with regard to global warming…is it such a stretch that it could happen with vaccine research? And, with regard to changes, I am seeing so many changes with regard to diet…what was considered “settled” is no more. How do you explain this?

          • gewisn June 9, 2014 / 5:28 pm

            How do I explain it?
            Science is a process that allows humanity to learn more every day.
            But that does not mean that we know nothing.
            We know what we know at any given time, and some things are understood with more depth and more certainty than others.
            The typical problems that arises at this point in the discussion is the fallacy of all-or-none. Science deniers use this fallacy to state that if we don’t know anything with 100% unchanging certainty, then we don’t know anything and, therefore, any hairbrained idea is as valid as any well-understood scientific theory.
            To be fair, I do NOT believe you are attempting to employ this fallacy yourself. But some of your statements could lead people to think that is what is going on, so I wanted to get it on the table and let us both dismiss all-or-none as a fallacy we won’t be employing.

            So let’s get down to what you are saying.
            Are you claiming that vaccines can’t work in the way intended, by intitating the immune system to create antibodies before the body has to encounter the live, active virus before it has any immunity? Again, I don’t think you are, but let’s get your response on the record as well.

            Are you claiming that the illnesses prevented are not serious and, therefore, there is no need to employ vaccines to lessen their incidence and their severity?

            Are you claiming some vaccines don’t work as well to prevent the intended illnesses as some others?
            Of course that’s true.

            Are you claiming the science is so corrupt that you can’t trust any of it?
            Again, I don’t think you are claiming that or you wouldn’t be pointing to other science resources to support your point. (BTW, that would be another all-or-none fallacy.)

            What I’ve done so far is set up “straw man” arguments, but not to in any attempt to invalidate your point. I do that only to clear the table of propositions that others might think you are claiming – but I don’t believe you are – so we can move on.

            So what is your point, with a little more explanation, please?

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 5:36 pm

            “Many people cite the CDC as a source, but I am distrustful of government run organizations for their many conflicts of interest.”

            So what about the NHS? Or the researchers in Japan, or Finland, or Canada, or elsewhere? Who would you trust?

            You posted an article from a political site. Why should we trust those particular persons? The author and at least one of his citations (Jane Orient) are part of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons. This is a group that has published some very strange papers,

            So seriously, what caused the rate of measles incidence to drop 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970? (see my comment on June 2, 2014 at 4:42 pm). What was that change in infrastructure? Explain in your own words and provide PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers to support your answer.

            Do not mention deaths, do not mention any other decade, nor any other country, plus do not link to a website from the AAPS or any other political organization. And definitely do not link to anything that includes graphs made by Neil Z. Miller, a journalist associated with an anti-vaccine organization.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 5:53 pm


            Can’t respond to your post, either.

            I’m sorry the article is from a “political” source. It doesn’t mean the point of view isn’t interesting or discussion worthy. If you choose not to discuss it or entertain the information therein, that’s your issue. You don’t have to trust what I posted…just like I don’t have to trust the CDC or any other government funded entity. But, this illustrates my point and the problem…where does one find information that’s unbiased about this topic? If you question, you’re crazy…and I vaccinated my children. Like I said, I believe in information and I like having as much as possible.

            I’m not aware of vaccines in Japan, so I can’t speak intelligently about the topic. I also don’t know where to find accurate information about such (my ENTIRE point). From a cursory search, it would seem that Japan has a different vaccination schedule than the US, so I’m curious why they employ something different. A quick google search indicates they banned the MMR vaccine? Interesting.

            Regarding your “task” for research, why don’t you provide me with information to prove your point? I never suggest vaccines don’t have a purpose. I suggest that science changes and I have concerns about the “consensus” people try to tell me there is.

            • jb0nez95 June 10, 2014 / 12:14 am

              Japan banned the MMR one-shot combo vaccine. They still vaccinate against Measles, Mumps, and Rubella, but they’re individual shots. This is a very important distinction you left out!

              The MMR combo shot IS known to cause seizures in about 2-3 out of 100,000 children who receive it. It’s one of the well known adverse reactions to it. Yes, vaccines do have adverse reactions. We don’t deny that.

              However, 5 in 1000 children with Measles die.

              You do the math 🙂

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 6:12 pm

            If you cannot respond to questions, then do not make claims. If you make a claim (like about infrastructure), then you must provide the verifiable scientific data to support that claim.

            “It doesn’t mean the point of view isn’t interesting or discussion worthy.”

            Only in regards to how he misused science. Which is apparently the standard for the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons. Like saying the incidence was reduced before vaccination, but using plots for deaths. There is a big difference between the two. Basically you cannot say something declined, yet post the evidence for some other thing. It is like saying you gathered a box of oranges, but bring in a stinking box of horse manure!

            As far as Japan goes, see my comment posted on June 3, 2014 at 1:27 pm. So why did measles return to their islands and kill almost ninety people (mostly kids) in one year less than fifteen years ago? What happened to their infrastructure?

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 6:34 pm


            Thank you for proving my point. The only opinions that matter are those that align with the sources and information “you” deem credible.

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 7:47 pm

            “Thank you for proving my point. The only opinions that matter are those that align with the sources and information “you” deem credible.”

            And not just me, but almost every other person who values the science, and actually understands it. If you don’t like the way I define verifiable data, then tell us what your criteria for for verifiable data.

            And why do you think it is okay dokay to make a claim that X happened, but just provide the graphs showing Y? Do you not know the different definitions of “incidence” and “deaths”? How is that “honest information”?

            The reason I limit the evidence to PubMed because at least it is open, and there has been a process to get it published that attempts to keep the data honest. There are problems. Wakefield was able to publish a paper where he fraudulently changed data. Neil Z. Miller has published papers where he and the other author cherry picked the data, and totally screwed up the statistics (plus they failed to declare their conflicts of interests and source of funding). But that can be discussed in the open.

            You made a claim above, let me cut and paste it so that you will remember: “Wendy, this is a fabulous article that helps demonstrate your point about changes in infrastructure and, overall, changes in sanitation and such.”

            Since she used the word “infrastructure” as a way to explain the decrease in measles incidence in the USA between 1960 and 1970, I assumed the article you posted would have that answer. It did not. The measles section clearly did not explain the decline of incidence, but included a graph of the decline in deaths. That is not honest.

            So, again, provide real honest reasons why the incidence of measles dropped 90% in the USA between 1960 and 1970. No more excuses.

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 7:58 pm

            “The only opinions that matter are those that align with the sources and information “you” deem credible.”

            Let me clarify. I am not interested in “opinions.” I only care about the verifiable data and evidence. Just like all of the others on this page who care about the science.

            This is one reason I don’t want to see an opinion article from a political site. I want to see the studies, with actual data that supports their claims.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 8:38 pm


            Don’t address me as if I’m an uneducated neanderthal simply because I think an article is helpful in illustrating some of the issues I take with the pro-vaccine crowd pushing their beliefs upon me, like yourself.

            I understand the english language so, yes, I know the difference between “incidence” and “death” as a result of disease.

            You keep ordering me to explain this decade long occurrence…why don’t you provide me with the evidence that you believe is so worthy so I may read it? If you wish to educate people about vaccines, you’re doing a crappy job providing them with resources. You have an issue with the article I provided because I find it interesting to note the decreases occurring prior to the vaccine being introduced. You have attacked my article, yet you order me to do research for you?

            I am not a science background, which is why I stated: “I just want information that isn’t skewed by the government and all of the organizations taking money from the government or drug companies. I want cold, hard facts so I can make an informed, responsible choice. And, those who argue that just getting a vaccine is automatically responsible don’t understand the meaning of the word. Part of being responsible is thinking about consequences like this and asking difficult questions. I hate the way anti-vax people are just dismissed as ridiculous and naive.”

            I’m a very open-minded person and I’m open to information…not receiving orders. I don’t have a science background, which is why I seek out information from others and become increasingly frustrated in dealing with people, like yourself.

            In the future, if you wish to help guide people through the process of learning more about vaccines, it would be wise to share your expertise rather than be somewhat of a jerk.

            • jb0nez95 June 10, 2014 / 12:18 am

              “I want cold, hard facts so I can make an informed, responsible choice.”

              All the facts you could need and more are in the original blog post.

              It’s possible to be so open minded your brain falls out 😉

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 8:51 pm

            “I am not a science background, which is why I stated: “I just want information that isn’t skewed by the government and all of the organizations taking money from the government or drug companies. I want cold, hard facts so I can make an informed, responsible choice. “….

            Then why did you think an article was useful when the author skewed the information by using a graph of “deaths” to show a decrease of incidence? If you knew the definitions of the words, you would have realized it was not “helpful in illustrating some of the issues.” The source had a definite bias, and misrepresented the data.

            Okay, you are not a science person. That is not a bad thing, but you can learn how to evaluate scientific evidence. There is a very short readable book on how to look at science claims: Lies, Damned Lies, and Science: How to Sort Through the Noise Around Global Warming, the Latest Health Claims, and Other Scientific Controversies by Sherry Seethaler

            Here are some cold hard facts from scientists in Australia: Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies.

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 9:06 pm

            “What say you about this?”

            It is a random website, and one editor, Brian Shilhavy, has no medical credentials: “Brian earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in Bible/Greek from Moody Bible Institute in Chicago, and his Master of Arts degree in linguistics from Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago. He is currently the CEO of Tropical Traditions, Inc.”

            Also, the opinion of three doctors, none of them of with the appropriate immunology or infectious disease credential, does not counter the thousands of medical professionals and researchers around this globe. Especially since one specializes in selling stuff. One wee bit of advice: do not read articles by doctors who have a store on their website.

            Seriously, get to you local library and check out Lies, Damned Lies, and Science: How to Sort Through the Noise Around Global Warming, the Latest Health Claims, and Other Scientific Controversies by Sherry Seethaler

          • jb0nez95 June 9, 2014 / 9:47 pm

            So vaccines are all just a conspiracy by the CDC?

            When it comes time to believe someone, are you going to believe doctorates in immunology who’ve spent their life doing research or a random blogger? I suspect you’re an Art Bell listener…

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 10:08 pm

            Not a conspiracy in the tin-foil hat way, but I do have some concerns about the veracity of a multi-billion dollar industry influencing itself throughout the varying ways the government is involved.

            I’m not sure why anyone would be shocked that anyone else isn’t exactly trusting of the government. They don’t do much correctly.

            • jb0nez95 June 10, 2014 / 12:29 am

              “A multi billion dollar industry” WHERE in the world do you get that from? Vaccines are low to no profit margin. Plus through the Vaccines For Children program (VFC) tens millions of vaccines are given each year to uninsured children. This program buys the vaccines for literally pennies on the dollar.

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 10:33 pm

            “I’m not sure why anyone would be shocked that anyone else isn’t exactly trusting of the government. They don’t do much correctly”

            Who is “they” exactly? What makes up your government? Are they some kind of super entity that not is not subject to questioning or even the opinions of folks like you?

            Or are they people who are hired by folks you elect to office? Or do you just not vote?

            Do you grow all your own food because you do not trust the FDA and USDA? Do you refuse to get on an airliner because you do not trust the FAA? Do you stay off the freeways and out out of national parks because they are run by the federal government? Do you stay out of city and state parks? Do you walk everywhere so htat you do not have to deal with roadways with government regulated traffic laws? Do you just barter for all of your needs because you cannot trust the Dept. of Treasury? Do you make sure everything you barter for is from your own state so it is not tainted by the touch of the FTC? Well at least we know you don’t care about the FCC and NSA because you are on a computer accessing the Internet.

            As an employee of the FDA did Dr. Frances Kelsey do the bidding of Big Pharma and approve thalidomide in the early 1960? For the answer read Protecting America’s Health: The FDA, Business, and One Hundred Years of Regulation by Philip J. Hilts (it also includes what happened with Elixir Sulfanilamide).

            But seriously, who do you trust? Whose data do you trust? Tell us about that honest researcher who would never steer us wrong.

          • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 10:55 pm

            “They” as in many government-run departments, organizations, etc.

            And, yes…in theory, they aren’t a super entity, but in reality the opinion of “folks like me” don’t really matter as evidenced by the way Congress behaves, and our Executive Branch, for that matter (not just this president…pick one). So, no…I don’t have a great deal of trust in our government. When my husband was in Afghanistan on a deployment, we always were amused by his assignment…to fight government corruption. As if that’s not ridiculous.

            I don’t grow all my own food, yet, but I’m working toward it. At the close of the next 10 years, I hope to raise my own chickens, grass-fed beef, and have a garden large enough to provide for a family of 10-12 (I don’t have that many children…just planning to help those around me). I don’t fly often, but I do believe one of the most ridiculous organizations (and useless) is the TSA. I always love the “muh roads” argument. We had roads before the federal government took over. We also survived without income tax. CIty and State parks are different than federally operated ones (see Separation of Powers). As an aside, this is very fun. The Department of Treasury is one of the worst criminals. The Fed should be audited, but Ron Paul is a joke, so I digress.

            I don’t care about the NSA. Every once and a while, I change my backdrop to a picture of the middle finger…just for the NSA. And, you bring that up…I think that’s a fine example of our government’s handy work…spying on our own citizens without warrant. Oh well…par for the course.

            My apologies for cynicism. I am willing to admit government funded research can be trustworthy, but I also think it’s important to be aware of the clear conflicts existing all throughout varying programs. And, I don’t trust many with regard to information about health, especially our government.. Prior to going to law school, I read the healthcare bill…scary, scary.

            Nice chatting with you. I’ll work on my open mind.

          • Chris June 9, 2014 / 11:38 pm

            “When my husband was in Afghanistan on a deployment, we always were amused by his assignment…to fight government corruption. As if that’s not ridiculous.”

            You do realize as while an active or reserve military personnel your husband was also part of “the government.”

            I am an Army brat. My brother retired from the Army after twenty years. Both my father and my brother were very happy that their government paid health insurance as retired military personnel is now completely free. But ObamaCare is bad.

            I have a kid who is disabled from a now vaccine preventable disease, but not enough to qualify for the state’s Department of Developmental Disabilities. He does not have a job, but he will be getting an associates degree from the local community college after seven years. Later this year we will have to find a way to pay for some kind of health insurance for him after his twenty-sixth birthday, which even under ObamaCare may not be cheap.

            Personally I am just grateful that the ACA rules allowed him to get the open heart surgery he need a couple of years ago. But the road ahead will be interesting. And unlike my brother and father, that healthcare will not be free. All because my kid caught a particular virus.

            While I am very glad you do vaccinate, you really need to come up with better arguments than the “government” is bad.

          • Anonymous June 9, 2014 / 11:45 pm

            I never mad the argument “government is bad.”. I’m a little better than that. I laid out some basic reasons for distrust. Your faith in obamacare tells me a great deal, and we’ll leave it at that.

            Yes…I’m aware he was government at the time of his deployment…maybe that’s why he didn’t stay in.

            Just my thoughts about corruption in government. If you don’t see it, I can’t help you.

          • Chris June 10, 2014 / 12:07 am

            “Just my thoughts about corruption in government. If you don’t see it, I can’t help you.”

            Just your “thoughts.” Which are worthless without data.

            And the reason I “can’t see it” is because you provide no evidence.

          • Chris June 10, 2014 / 12:36 am

            jb0nez95: “Japan banned the MMR one-shot combo vaccine. They still vaccinate against Measles, Mumps, and Rubella, but they’re individual shots. This is a very important distinction you left out!”

            Read the article I posted, there is even a more subtle distinction. They only stopped the MMR, but still offered an MR (measles rubella) and separate mumps (most likely still the Urabe strain, which was cheaper but did cause menigitis issues… a strain never used in the USA). What they did do was make it only voluntary.

            This dropped the measles acceptance to less than 90%, which caused massive outbreaks of measles. Plus (this is just a guess) I suspect they had only required one dose not two MMR vaccines. Measles is very infectious, and even if all of the population has had two vaccines… one out of a hundred can be infected. That means if someone with measles goes into a fully vaccinated school with four thousand students, you might get forty cases of measles.

            The other result of their reactive bit about the MMR, they ended up with more cases of partial deafness:
            Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2009 Mar;28(3):173-5. doi: 10.1097/INF.0b013e31818a8ca8.
            An office-based prospective study of deafness in mumps.

        • Lrb112908 June 9, 2014 / 5:42 pm


          I can’t respond, again, to your most recent post, but to answer your question, I invite you to go back and reread my original post to Wendy. I never make a claim that vaccines don’t have a purpose, but information to parents who question is hardly available from sources that are not skewed.

          I realize science is a process and we will never know anything with 100% certainty…I also don’t suggest that vaccines aren’t important and can’t be very helpful in preventing disease. I was vaccinated and so was my son. I guess my issue as a person who questions everything is the way anti-vacciners are treated by those who believe the science surrounding vaccines is “settled” rather than just what we know right now based on information we have right now.

          This is why I shared the article I did…I think it’s important to note other changes in our society, rather than just giving the credit to vaccines, with regard to overall health and disease eradication

          The article I shared was merely another viewpoint of this complex issue…an issue that people don’t dare disagree with. The people who are pro-vaccine are absolutely ruthless to people who question them, as evidenced by other’s behavior. This is also why I believe it’s impossible to get accurate, unbiased information.

          No need to go into other detail about my opinions. They really aren’t important. The only opinions that matter are those who have the right to have such…people in the “medical” field. I hope I remember that the next time a lay person bothers me with their definition of the law.

          • jb0nez95 June 10, 2014 / 12:11 am

            “I can’t respond, again, to your most recent post, but to answer your question, I invite you to go back and reread my original post to Wendy. I never make a claim that vaccines don’t have a purpose, but information to parents who question is hardly available from sources that are not skewed.

            I realize science is a process and we will never know anything with 100% certainty…I also don’t suggest that vaccines aren’t important and can’t be very helpful in preventing disease. I was vaccinated and so was my son. I guess my issue as a person who questions everything is the way anti-vacciners are treated by those who believe the science surrounding vaccines is “settled” rather than just what we know right now based on information we have right now.

            This is why I shared the article I did…I think it’s important to note other changes in our society, rather than just giving the credit to vaccines, with regard to overall health and disease eradication”

            Fair enough. I think the hostility against the anti-vaxers is pure frustration. They believe in their cause with the shell of a religious fervor, that logic, evidence, and science cannot penetrate. And these are people’s lives at stake! If it were just opinion about the best Android phone that would be one thing…but this is about saving lives.

            The article you shared is VERY biased however, and not in anyway representative of good science. To the layman it looks & reads well, but to the trained eye…well, let’s just say that it’s what a layperson would write if they were writing a law (based off your insinuation that you’re an attorney).

          • Chris June 10, 2014 / 12:19 am

            “The article you shared is VERY biased however, and not in anyway representative of good science. To the layman it looks & reads well, but to the trained eye…well, let’s just say that it’s what a layperson would write if they were writing a law (based off your insinuation that you’re an attorney).”

            A lawyer would have recognized the substitution of variables in the article. You cannot claim X caused something, but just post a graph of Y to prove it.

          • Anonymous June 10, 2014 / 6:54 am


            I did notice the graphs were bout death rates. I think that’s interesting to note that the death rates were in decline long before vaccines entered the picture. He discussed incidence rate in other areas of the article.

            I’m sorry you find the article biased…I think the same can be true about government sources.

            • Max Riethmuller June 10, 2014 / 7:13 am

              Death rates were in decline due to improved treatment for the symptoms of measles, but it wasn’t a cure. Just as many people were getting measles and suffering severe side effects. But due to improved treatments hospitals were able to prevent the deaths that might normally accompany measles. Then after the intro of vaccines the disease itself largely disappeared meaning the untreatable symptoms of measles were no longer causing havoc in thousands of people.

            • jb0nez95 June 10, 2014 / 1:12 pm

              “I’m sorry you find the article biased…I think the same can be true about government sources.”

              If you trust a political blogger over scientists at the CDC, then just go search Pubmed. It’s an index of journal articles — NOTHING explicitly to do with the government, studies mostly done by various universities and research organizations. Sure some studies are funded by government. Many aren’t. Most articles disclose who funded them so feel free to ignore those.

              So go search what is considered the best index of peer reviewed journals.

              I know what the results are (I’ve done it) I think it would be a good exercise for you.

              Hell, use Google Scholar even.

              But for the non-scientist, reading articles can be difficult, and it can be even more difficult to know which ones are in reputable journals and which one are scammy types that print anything; it can be difficult to interpret the study methodology to determine if the scientists really controlled various variables.

              There is a reason people spend 20+ years in school getting PhDs in the topics of biology, immunology, physiology. That’s how long it takes to become an expert. It’s rather arrogant to come along as a lay person and think you know better than them.

              There are some links in this original blog post on tips for reading a scientific paper. Sounds like you haven’t really read the links yet.

              • moladood June 11, 2014 / 7:52 am

                It seems that most people are accepting of a bloggers opinion about vaccinations over someone who is an expert and has studied it for 20 years. There was one ‘rebuttal’ blog posted many times in the comments here and if you look at the bio, it is ‘photographer’. How is that sufficient to believe a word she says on biology or immunization? There were too many holes in her statements and many points where she simply misunderstood the entire study she referenced.

                If blows my mind how people can even think that these quacks are a credible source. You would not hire a photographer to build a sky scraper or a bridge yet somehow will believe the misinformation of some stranger with no experience with the health of their children.

          • Chris June 10, 2014 / 9:24 am

            “I think that’s interesting to note that the death rates were in decline long before vaccines entered the picture.”

            Due to improved medical care. Very expensive medical care that someone has to pay for. The same number of people got measles each year, but because of things like antibiotics for secondary bacterial infections and ventilators for measles pneumonia… not as many died.

            There are several PubMed indexed papers that detail how much measles outbreaks cost the families and the public health departments. Since the latter is paid by the taxpayers, those who claim diseases should be treated instead of prevented are playing fast and loose with other people’s money!

            Again claiming a drop if incidence but presenting graphs on deaths is like claiming you have a box of oranges when you are holding a box of horse poop. It is not honest, though it is a very common lie used by anti-science groups.

          • lrb112908 June 10, 2014 / 1:48 pm

            The author of the article is not a “political blogger” unless PubMed isn’t where I should be looking for information about him? Many of his articles, papers, or whatever are found there, as well.

            I’m not arrogant because I have questions about pumping my 6+ month year old child full of toxins to help him build immunity. Sorry. The only arrogance I see is yours. You think you know everything and you have all the answers, and that’s fantastic. I still have concerns, which is perfectly fine, too. If it’s such an issue that people pose questions about a topic, where there clearly is absolutely no middle ground (it seems), don’t worry about answering them and more and more people will shy away from vaccination. Treating people who are leery of vaccines as if they are stupid is, well, stupid.

            • jb0nez95 June 10, 2014 / 8:12 pm

              “don’t worry about answering them and more and more people will shy away from vaccination. Treating people who are leery of vaccines as if they are stupid is, well, stupid.”

              When their children start becoming crippled from polio they will come running back to vaccines and wishing they hadn’t been so stupid.

              You are right about one thing. When it comes to people’s lives, there is no middle ground.

          • Chris June 10, 2014 / 2:24 pm

            “The author of the article is not a “political blogger” unless PubMed isn’t where I should be looking for information about him?”

            I did not say the author was a political blogger, I said the website was a political site. It is called “The Capitalism Magazine” and the articles are mostly on libertarian viewpoints, not science. The author, Dr. Miguel Faria, is a member of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons which is not a medical organization, but a political one.

            The website, the author and the AAPS all have a political agenda, which is often at odds with the science. Oh, I see jb0nez95 is the one who called the author a “political blogger.” Well, the site and the author are using their political views to skew the science.

            By the way, you kept going on about “honest information”, yet you are still defending the article and author for conflating “incidence” and “deaths.” Again, how is that “honest information” when they do a bait and switch by making a claim but posting the wrong data?

  15. Saga June 2, 2014 / 10:49 am

    Would you explain please, Jennifer Raff, how you have access to a medical library? Or do you pay $35+ per article online? Or are your statements based on abstracts alone? Or what?

    In my experience something like 90 percent of primary-source articles in respectable journals are paywalled. The few that are available free to the public are such a small selection that they are an inadequate set for researching anything. Abstracts do not reveal enough information to evaluate methodology or conflicts of interest. Only “the one percent” could realistically pay the cost to review the literature on any biomedical topic. There are medical libraries in some major cities, but many require a university affiliation, and the majority of the population are beyond a practical driving distance to do any meaningful research.

    So this leaves me wondering about your advice “inform yourself”. Have you failed to notice any of the above facts? Or maybe you mean for people to accept n-generation (tertiary at best) interpretations and summaries? Or maybe you don’t really mean for people to be informed, but are just hoping they’ll be reassured without any real information? Will you clarify this?

    • Scott Nelson June 2, 2014 / 10:55 am

      Had you bothered to read Dr. Raff’s CV, you would see that she works at a University. They typically pay a flat fee so that researchers can access articles. If you need to access articles, contact a librarian, they can request the articles from the Universities, for little or no charge-but it will take a couple of days.

    • Jake June 2, 2014 / 11:47 am

      Exactly what Scott said. If you had such so-called “experience” you would know that this is typical of most university researchers and even many industry practices. Geez, such experience goes a long way doesn’t it Saga?

    • Brittany June 2, 2014 / 3:12 pm

      Most doctors and researchers have access to these types of articles free of charge.

  16. faynwatson June 2, 2014 / 11:47 am

    Reblogged this on Fay N Watson's Blog and commented:
    This wonderful post by Jennifer Raff needs to be read and shared by any parent who is considering NOT VACCINATING their children.

  17. crestwind24 June 2, 2014 / 1:36 pm

    THANK YOU!!! Great summary, citations, links, and passion!!!!

  18. Anonymous June 2, 2014 / 2:15 pm

    you say “alternative” medicine, which I am interpreting as “natural” medicine.. the funny thing is that your vaccines, prescription pills and big pharm is actually the “alternative” medicine, not natural medicine. Humans 4,000 plus years ago weren’t lining up at the local hospital taking there children there to be vaccinated. they use the “original” method of medicine, the medicines nature produces, not some substances put together, made into pill or shot form, claiming to cure whatever illness or disease you have, but leaves you with more side effects and symptoms than you had before.

    • Chris June 2, 2014 / 2:29 pm

      “Humans 4,000 plus years ago weren’t lining up at the local hospital…”

      So how many kids did they have in order for one or two to attain adulthood?

    • Anonymous June 2, 2014 / 3:39 pm

      So what was the life expectancy all those years ago or even 50 or 80 years ago?? I’m not saying that medicine is the answer to everything and we don’t need to be a pill popping society but when you just do a simple look at the numbers you can come to a reasonable conclusion (without being a bio chemist) that some vaccines are VERY good for society as a whole. That’s doesn’t mean it’s good for everyone all the time. Like a car wreck or some other terrible accident – people always have and always will be hurt or even die way before their time. Nothing and no one (DR, Scientist, etc) will every been perfect but they do try very hard to help, prevent & cure as much as they can. People didn’t drive cars or fly in planes all those years ago and car wrecks (especially when you factor in DUI) kill a lot of people (many are very innocent of the act that caused the wreck) but no one is starting a country-wide anti-driving campaign.

    • Wendy June 2, 2014 / 4:09 pm


      • Chris June 2, 2014 / 5:52 pm

        Are you celebrating the days of high child mortality?

        • cleverlyconfused June 3, 2014 / 12:31 am

          Nope, not celebrating them.
          She is just praying for their return.

          • Chris June 3, 2014 / 1:11 am

            Hallelujah for the resurrection! Let all the little kids die fevered painful deaths so that they can live again… and then what happens?

            Oh, wait, I know: then the Earth will learn the difference between fantasy and reality.

            Okay, this got all convoluted. The folks who died (quite frequently) four thousand years ago are not returning. Only an idiot would invoke the “naturalist fallacy” combined the “argument from antiquity” in thinking life was better in almost pre-ancient times.

  19. June 2, 2014 / 2:16 pm

    My partner and I stumbled over here coming from a
    different page and thought I might as well check things out.
    I like what I see so now i am following you. Look forward to
    checking out your web page repeatedly.

  20. Me June 2, 2014 / 6:46 pm

    Well the titel of the article is correct, parents you are being lied too……….. again, if you believe the writer who is lying to you again and she has a vested interest in you taking their drugs and vaccines, she makes a living off it along with the perks that go along with it. All the latest outbreaks of measles, whooping cough etc. have occurred in mainly vaccinated people, the unvaccinated didn’t get sick? Did I miss something here Doc? Seems like you have a problem when the unvaccinated aren’t involved in these outbreaks don’t you think? And YES autism has been linked to vaccines, both mercury and aluminium have been proven to affect certain individuals, that’s why the vaccine makers/government have been awarding huge settlements to parents, but that’s being kept quiet in the mainstream media, as usual. So in essence your article id full of lies and BS, but I guess you have to tow the party line, ethics hasn’t come into the equation with you and many other doctors.

    • Colin June 2, 2014 / 6:56 pm

      There are many differences between the article above and your comment. The most striking to me (setting aside spelling, grammar, and tone) is the absolute lack of evidence or reliable data in your comment.

      As an aside, is your theory that anthropologists studying ancient human DNA get a cut of all vaccine profits, or simply that scientists who disagree with you must be corporate shills?

    • Chris June 2, 2014 / 7:18 pm

      Me: “All the latest outbreaks of measles, whooping cough etc. have occurred in mainly vaccinated people, the unvaccinated didn’t get sick? Did I miss something here Doc?”

      Yes, the actual data. First the latest <a href=" statistics show:

      Most of the 288 measles cases reported this year have been in persons who were unvaccinated (200 [69%]) or who had an unknown vaccination status (58 [20%]); 30 (10%) were in persons who were vaccinated. Among the 195 U.S. residents who had measles and were unvaccinated, 165 (85%) declined vaccination because of religious, philosophical, or personal objections, 11 (6%) were missed opportunities for vaccination, and10 (5%) were too young to receive vaccination (Figure).

      To help with the vocabulary and math: “mainly” implies more than half were vaccinated in your statement. But the numbers show show 69% were not vaccinated. The number “69” is more than 50% (which means “half”). So your statement is incorrect, and yes, the unvaccinated did get sick, and in greater numbers.

      Now pertussis is more complicated, because the vaccine is not as effective as the MMR is for measles, and immunity will wear off (even if you get the actual disease) after five to twenty years: Duration of immunity against pertussis after natural infection or vaccination..

      While the raw numbers may show more vaccinated with pertussis get it than the unvaxed, you have to match the numerator with the denominator of the fractions. The ratios you need to look at are:

      Vaccinated who got sick / total number of vaccinated persons

      Unvaccinated who got sick / total number of unvaccinated persons

      This is the relative risk. And this has been examined, and the studies show there is a higher risk for someone who is not vaccinated to get pertussis. This study, Parental refusal of pertussis vaccination is associated with an increased risk of pertussis infection in children, concludes that “Vaccine refusers had a 23-fold increased risk for pertussis when compared with vaccine acceptors, and 11% of pertussis cases in the entire study population were attributed to vaccine refusal.”

      Here are a couple of other studies showing similar results:

      Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Dec 15;168(12):1389-96. Epub 2008 Oct 15.
      Geographic clustering of nonmedical exemptions to school immunization requirements and associations with geographic clustering of pertussis.

      JAMA. 2000 Dec 27;284(24):3145-50.
      Individual and community risks of measles and pertussis associated with personal exemptions to immunization.

    • moladood June 2, 2014 / 8:41 pm

      I really enjoy posts like yours. Mainly because they are baseless and not supported with any facts. It really helps people doing the research to see through the anti vaxx propaganda.

      Your argument seems to support the fact that if anyone gets paid for their profession then they must be corrupt and only out to make money or somehow unethical. If you really actually read the post, you would realize that the real message is encouraging people that want to learn to actually read and do the research and understand the science themselves.

  21. rosannebowman1 June 2, 2014 / 8:57 pm

    Although I am not a scientist, I am puzzled. How do people who have been vaccinated get vaccine preventable illnesses from people who aren’t vaccinated? Isn’t the point of a vaccine to protect you against the disease if you come into contact with it? How do people who don’t vaccinate even come into the equation if you’ve gotten your vaccines? It shouldn’t have any bearing at all if it they work. Btw, I’m not anti-vaccine necessarily but I think it is completely possible for some children to have serious, adverse reactions to vaccines. After all, everyone is different and some systems are more sensitive to things than others. I also think it is ridiculous the number of vaccines/doses they give tiny babies. That can’t be good for anyone. I made my doctor spread the vaccines out and that was 15 years ago before all this became popular. It just seemed like common sense to me.

    • Max Riethmuller June 2, 2014 / 10:04 pm

      Vaccines aren’t 100% effective, some people don’t end up with immunity even after receiving a vaccine. However if the vast majority of people are vaccinated then enough people are immune that the disease goes into decline and therefore those who aren’t immune are protected.

      If large numbers of people cease vaccinating then there is a larger pool for the disease to circulate in. In some cases people can be carriers of a disease even if infected, but often those diseases are only highly infectious in their active state. So the higher the number of people who are vaccinated, the less likely that those few for whom vaccines don’t work will catch the disease.

      • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 11:19 am

        Max, you are describing Herd Immunity. It is but a theory that growing numbers of people are not buying into. Many people have never bought into it.

        You also state ” In some cases people can be carriers of a disease even if infected ” – That’s just stating the obvious isn’t it?

        You describe your understanding of the matter at hand very clearly.

        • Chris June 3, 2014 / 11:35 am

          “It is but a theory that growing numbers of people are not buying into. Many people have never bought into it.”

          Who are these people? And why should we value their opinions?

          In other words: citation needed.

          • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:10 pm

            Chris, you need to venture out into the real world. All opinions are valuable, would you not agree?

            • Chris June 3, 2014 / 1:14 pm

              Perhaps. But while you are entitled to your own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts.

              So who are those people who doubt the validity of community immunity?

        • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 11:57 am

          Parent of….,

          What is it, exactly, that makes you think herd immunity is not real?

          Would you agree that:
          A) If every member of a group (all the interbreeding members of a species) has immunity to an infectious agent (esp one which is only passed on by members of that same speicies), then the group, the herd, has immunity and any one member of the group has zero chance of becoming infected?

          B) If 99.9% of the herd has immunity, then even the 0.1% of the herd without immunity has a tremedously small chance of becoming infected, because the chance of encountering an infected individual is so small.

          C) If 98% of the herd has immunity, then the rest without immunity still have a much lower chance of becoming infected than when only 10% of the herd has immunity?

          That’s all herd immunity is. It’s no more mystical than that.
          If you agree that A, B, and C are all true, then you agree that herd immunity exists.

          Now if you are questioning whether immunizations can produce herd immunity, that is a slightly different question.

          Please let us know what are your questions about herd immunity, and we can try and find someone you would trust to provide information that could answer your questions.

          • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:12 pm

            There is no proof that herd immunity works. It is not a scientific fact. “Herd Immunity” is a theory.

            • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 12:24 pm

              Do you agree with A and B and C? If not, why not. What about the logic presented bothers you? What questions do you have?

              • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:28 pm

                Gewisn, you state “Do you agree with A and B and C? If not, why not. What about the logic presented bothers you? What questions do you have?”

                Your grammar makes no sense. I have no questions of you.

                • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 12:33 pm

                  Do you not understand standard English. Geswin writes in a clear and coherent style, presenting a logical argument. What words don’t you understand-interbreeding, herd, immunity, the % sign or the abbreviation for especially (esp)?

                  • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:37 pm

                    Scott Nelson, Geswin wrote gibberish. I understand all the words you mention, and some more. What’s your beef?

                    • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 12:41 pm

                      If I made myself unclear,
                      I hope you will permit me to try again.

                      You are right, it is probably better to take one at a time:

                      Would you agree that:
                      If every member of a group (all the interbreeding members of a species) has immunity to an infectious agent, like a virus or bacterium (especially one which is only passed on by members of that same speicies), then the group has immunity and any one member of the group has zero chance of becoming infected?

                    • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:47 pm

                      Gewisn, no.

                    • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 1:26 pm

                      When you have time to get back to us, could you help me understand why you don’t agree with the statement…
                      “If every member of a group (all the interbreeding members of a species) has immunity to an infectious agent, like a virus or bacterium (especially one which is only passed on by members of that same speicies), then the group has immunity and any one member of the group has zero chance of becoming infected”

                      I really am trying to understand.
                      I’m happy to do my best to understand what you are saying and to try to make myself understandable.

                    • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 12:41 pm

                      I’m trying to understand why that which seems abundantly clear to me is gibberish to you. Does anybody else here have a problem understanding Geswin?

                    • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:49 pm

                      Scott Nelson, it was not English.
                      Sure the spelling was English, but context was not. It was not sensible English. It made no sense. Obviously you were able to read it. I was not.

          • moladood June 3, 2014 / 1:19 pm

            What I find interesting is that the same people will completely understand when their household all gets sick that they can’t get it again or that when one person in their house is sick, they are likely to get it. How do they not see the logic when applied to a larger population or ‘bigger house’, it is baffling.

            • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 1:59 pm

              That is why you see me trying to ask similar questions to almost everyone.
              You and I find a certain type of information convincing. Obviously, not everyone finds that same kind of information convincing – or we wouldn’t be in here talking about it.
              To me, and I suspect for you as well, when there is an enormous over-abundance of scientific information indicating one answer is much more likely to be true than another, then we accept that likelihood as very, very probably true. When I stand at sea level and drop an apple from a height of 6 feet, in a vacuum, the probability that it will fall toward the ground (and not in some other direction) is so high that we accept it as essentially equal to 100%. When I hear people say, “I need facts, not probabilities,” I cringe because the “fact” is that the chance the apple will fall downward is a probability very near 100% – but not 100%.

              To some, if there is ever anyone who can propose another option, no matter how silly, then the question about which way the appele will fall is “open to debate” and any answer is “just a matter of opinion.” I’ve taken an obviously extreme example, but this False Equivalency (if there are two possibilities, then the chance of either one being true is exactly 50%) is how many people think. And so do you and I, but probably on different issues. How many times have you said, or at least thought, “I’ll bet their both about the same,” or “six of one and half a dozen of the other” about things that could actually have discrete answers calculated if we had the energy, time, information, and desire. But lots of times choosing Jif over Peter Pan peanut butter just doesn’t matter.

              I personally suspect that the number of people who utilize the False Equivalency (or the False Dichotomy, when there are more than two reasonable answers) has grown dramatically, from politicians to advertisers to all the news outlets who love to have one talking head yell at the other talking head. When all the politicians say they are working for the “common man” or the “middle class,” they try to portray that this means he is working for you and not someone else. When, in fact, he is working for the next election, and for contributors, and not for any large group of voters. However, when he portrays that he is working for me, and I think that’s good because that means he’s not working for someone else, I’ve been taken in by the same fallacy.

              Mammalian brains try to use these short cuts to understand the world, and it can be very difficult to get past them. They feel true, in part because if they didn’t feel comfortable, they would not be so easily utilized to make fast decisions in the wild, where most animals have never been able to understand discrete probabilities and life/death decisions have to be made before the frontal lobe can even engage.

              I’m trying to understand what sort of information people find convincing, and if there are commonalities about that among people who are in simliar places on the continuum.

              I think the biggest challenge for science education and science literacy is going to be how to utilize specialized communication techniques to help young students to learn how/when to put aside the short-cuts and understand the nature of the acutal probabilities – even if all the information is not yet known.

          • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:13 pm

            Equating “Herd Immunity” to “Gravity” is wrong. They are polars when it comes down to fact.

            • confusedbylogic June 3, 2014 / 12:25 pm

              How about herd immunity among northern arctic white bears? Do you believe in that?
              They are polars, too.

              • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:30 pm


            • jb0nez95 June 3, 2014 / 1:53 pm

              ‘Equating “Herd Immunity” to “Gravity” is wrong. They are polars when it comes down to fact.’
              Both are scientific theories. You do not understand the scientific use of the word theory as compared to hypothesis or as compared to “theory” in common parlance.
              As such you have demonstrated your are not adequately educated to make statements questioning the well-accepted theory of herd immunity. Or germ theory. That’s “just” a theory too…

        • moladood June 3, 2014 / 12:03 pm

          Herd immunity is not a theory but really a statistical probability. By saying you don’t believe in it is like saying you don’t believe in the odds of getting a royal flush in poker.

          I am not sure why anti-vaxxers hate on herd immunity. They often preach about natural immunity. Note that herd immunity also applies to support natural immunity as well. It is not the enemy here in the debate. Lets take an example.

          If there are 30 kids in a class and 29 have had the chicken pox so they have natural immunity to getting it again. The 1 child that does not have it will likely not get it while in that class because the herd offers protection because the 29 kids can’t get it and give it to him. Herd immunity does not state that it is impossible to get, it just states the more a population is immune, the less overall transfers and exposures there are.

          Even someone with elementary school education can understand that. If you think that vaccines are unsafe that is one thing but to really lack the comprehension skills around simple logic is astounding.

          • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:18 pm

            Moladood says Herd Immunity is a probability. Therefore it is not a fact. It is a theory.
            It is not a fact that coins turns heads 50/50. It not even science. It is a probability, but with vaccines when there are so many chemicals involved, one cannot forget the unforeseen side-effects, many witnessed years down the track. Probability of damage is great. Probability of immunity is unknown.

            • Inigo Montoya June 3, 2014 / 12:28 pm

              You keep using that word.
              I do not think it means what you think it means.

              • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:34 pm

                Inigo Montoya … it’s a funny word isn’t it. What do you think it means?

            • Colin June 3, 2014 / 12:38 pm

              It is absolutely a fact that the probability of a coin landing heads-side-up is 0.5. If you feel compelled to deny that fact, it is a signal that you are reasoning to defend your ideology rather than to understand the underlying facts.

              • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:45 pm

                Colin, probability Colin. Not Science.
                Colin, provide me Science, not probability.

                • moladood June 3, 2014 / 1:28 pm

                  Says the person who shows a complete lack of understanding science.

              • Colin June 3, 2014 / 1:02 pm

                You are working very, very hard to avoid the science in this case. I know that it will be difficult for you to step away from your ideology here, but look what it’s done to you–you’re twisting yourself into knots to find a way to ignore even reviewing the mathematics and research. You haven’t been able to find any data supporting the conclusion you want to be true, so instead you just deny the inconvenient information over and over and over again, even though you clearly don’t understand it well enough to make an educated decision.

                The arguments you make here will make it even harder for you to change your mind, because you won’t want to act inconsistently with your public statements (even your anonymous statements). But I hope you will nevertheless take time to reflect on the fact that the more someone understands about science and medicine, the less likely they are to be an anti-vaxer. There is a reason that the best-informed and most experienced experts fall on one side of the question, while the anti-vax camp is stuffed with ignorance and rhetorical arguments

            • moladood June 3, 2014 / 1:15 pm

              You should really learn the difference between a theory and a fact. You should also learn some grammar, it might help people take your comments seriously.

              There are many scientific principles based on probability. Take for example brownian motion which of course you know is the random movement of particles suspended in a fluid or gas, probability plays a big role.

              I take it you didn’t study much math or science at even the most basic level. I am surprised you are able to access the internet and read/write.

          • Penny June 5, 2014 / 9:07 am

            As my experience from working as a healthcare provider in a rural area has shown me, sometimes you need to tone the scientific tone down when discussing relevant issues with non-healthcare involved people. The amount of miscommunication that can arise from the use of medical lingo (as well as subconscious dislike and fear of being talked around of) is astounding.

            Herd immunity, as I would describe it to my medicine-naive family or patients, is big-sounding talk for a very simple thing. If everyone in your town can’t get a disease (because they have been immunised with a vaccine) they can’t pass it on to you either (if for any reason you are still in danger of getting it, as in if the vaccine doesn’t work for you -it doesn’t for some people- or if you are still a baby). The disease finds it very hard to find new people to spread on to, so it slowly clears away until no one has it anymore.

            Now if people stop getting their vaccines, because they haven’t seen this disease in a long time (and hey, it can’t be as bad as the older people describe, can it?) then your town becomes easier prey for the disease again. And while you might have been a little safe not vaccinating (or you know, just legitimately not having the vaccine work on you or being a newborn baby not old enough for vaccines yet), the more people that stop vaccinating, the more dangerous it becomes for a random traveller to bring the disease back into your town and having it passed down to you too. Long story short, the more people you convince not to use vaccines, the more dangerous it becomes for your unvaccinated children and everyone’s newborn babies. The end.

            So, herd immunity is just a quick way of describing the above scenario. Replace the words town with state/family/neighborhood and disease with measles/varicella/whatever and there you have it. Personally, I don’t really think it’s something that needs to be proved, as it’s more of a descriptive term than anything else, but people here have already provided lots of links. I just thought I’d pitch in with a more clear description.

            • Patrick McDonald June 7, 2014 / 12:34 am

              What then, are we to do with the Batallions of the uninformed? There are no isolated islands to put them on. If they provide centres of infectable people, they risk the lives of those whose immunity, like my own, is below par. Do I let them kill me? The response of the antivaxxers is encouraged.

        • jb0nez95 June 3, 2014 / 12:58 pm

          “Theory” in the scientific sense is not used as it is in common parlance. A scientific theory is a hypothesis that has withstood rigorous independent testing and is generally accepted as true. GRAVITY is a theory.
          So, the “theory” of herd immunity is indeed a theory–so what?. Just like germ theory, i.e., the idea that bacteria and viruses cause illnesses.
          If you don’t know the usage of the word theory in the scientific sense, then I don’t think you’re qualified to be commenting on its validity. And you’re factually incorrect about there being any dispute about it, it’s a very well accepted theory.

        • Max Riethmuller June 4, 2014 / 9:51 pm

          Way to take my sentence out of context.

          Herd immunity is just a theory? Yep, like Evolution is ‘just a theory’. But I suppose you don’t believe in Evolution either?

          • Chris June 4, 2014 / 10:53 pm

            I suspect that “Parent” is not a fan of the latest Cosmos series on FOX.

            I am still waiting to see the list alluded to with this comment: “It is but a theory that growing numbers of people are not buying into. Many people have never bought into it.”

            Are they like the “scientists” who don’t believe in evolution and/or anthropomorphic climate change who are actually engineers? Something that causes me much embarrassment because I used to be an engineer*. Le sigh.

            * a structural engineer, don’t get me started on the absolute incompetence of the 911 Truthers who are architects and engineers that do not know how heat changes the structural integrity of steel!

    • gewisn June 3, 2014 / 12:55 am

      ” I also think it is ridiculous the number of vaccines/doses they give tiny babies. That can’t be good for anyone.”

      What if there was clear evidence that bunching them, as is done now, significantly reduces the chances of getting the preventable diseases from the the risk of contracting the diseases when the vaccines are spread out?
      Would you change your advice to other parents?

    • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 11:08 am

      Margarine IS plastic, isn’t it?

    • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 11:10 am

      Rosanne, you were, and still are correct. It is common sense. Scientists who suggest otherwise are typically paid to wield their mirrors and smokescreens.

      • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 11:34 am

        Oh, good. We have here an authority.
        Please list out for us the names of the scientists you know to be corrupt.

        Or is it that anyone who disagrees with you must be corrupt because, well, how could you possibly be wrong?

        • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:08 pm

          Do you own research. An A4 page would overspill with names of corrupt scientists. Are you saying you don’t know of any? Am I wrong?

          • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 12:21 pm

            By “do your own research” do you mean…
            A) get an education in the relevant fields, be accepted into a graduate program so that you learn how to design, execute, and report scientifically valid testing results, and then get those published in a peer-reviewed journal and then accept the questions and criticisms from others in the field to learn more and produce even better research the next time?
            Or do you mean…
            B) read internet advertisements for magical cures and “natural” treatments that have never been tested for either effectiveness or safety.

            “Are you saying you don’t know of any?”
            I’m saying that if I make a statement about the plethora of them, I’m ready to name at least a few: Dr Mercola, Dr Oz, Dr Amen.
            Do you know how many are in a plethora?

            “Am I wrong?”
            Yes. I’m glad you asked.
            Now perhaps we can have a conversation.

            • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:26 pm

              Notnearlyanonymous, to answer your three questions;
              you seem to be in a vortex unable to comprehend the original posting.

              • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 12:34 pm

                So then you are answering that you don’t know how many are in a plethora.
                Good, now we’re beginning to understand each other.

                What do you mean by “do your own research?”
                You’ve agreed that it did not mean getting an education in related fields.
                What did that research consist of for you? What was your “research?”

                • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:43 pm

                  Notnearlyanonymous … you asked the original question and I have no idea how you reached your first conclusion in your current comment. You seem to jump to conclusions.

                  “What was your “research?”” you ask? I told you to go seek yourself rather than ask me for something that anyone discussing this subject should already know. Perhaps you need 24 hours off this site to go and do your own research before overstaying here and exposing your lack of knowledge.

                  • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 12:49 pm

                    I have been asking what you mean by the term “research”, so that I can answer just what my research has revealed.

                    I’m trying to identify what concepts we have in common, so that a conversation might be possible.

                    • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 1:00 pm

                      Notnearlyanonymous, you are now very polite. But I am now finished for the night as I have my vaccine-damaged children to care for in about 3 hours when they will wake, then I go to work leaving my wife to handle the daytime dramas with them. Our life is a misery now and having found this site with so many people hell-bent on arguing the benefits of vaccination has been a real eye-opener for me.

                    • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 1:05 pm

                      So, still no idea what you mean by your “research.”

                      Honestly, I do hope you and your children and your wife have a good day tomorrow.

                    • moladood June 3, 2014 / 1:40 pm

                      I hope your children read about how you call them “damaged”.

      • Colin June 3, 2014 / 12:06 pm

        How much are they paid? How often? By the word, or by the article, or per autistic child? I suspect you don’t have answers, because rather than reporting facts you’re making them up to defend your preconceptions against inconvenient scientific data.

        • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:20 pm

          Colin, what inconvenient scientific data? Are you talking about the scientific data which supports the theory of Herd Immunity? It’s just a theory. Why do you infer it is actually scientific fact when it is certainly not. It is but a theory.

          • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 12:28 pm

            Ummm, I posted a link to the mathematical basis of herd immunity. Kindly refute the logic or the math-blanket statements of “It doesn’t work” don’t cut it. You have to know why it doesn’t work, what errors in logic were made-then you can say it doesn’t work.

            • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:32 pm

              Scott Nelson, Science does not prove itself by probables. Facts please, not probable. That’s not science.

              • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 12:37 pm

                So Sorry, here I am doing science for 25 years, calculating the probabilities that I am right or wrong, estimating the distribution of my answers, and now I learn that I should have been doing facts! All of science is based on probablities-some things are more probable than others. According to quantum mechanics, there is a distinct, but extremely low probability that I could fall through the floor right now-but that that probability is vanishingly low.

                • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:53 pm

                  Scott, when it comes to vaccinating your child based on probabilities and not science, that’s where I now draw the line. Stand well clear of my family wielding your needles when you come brandishing probabilities and possible outcomes. Been there and done that. Will you pay my child-care bills? The medical establishment are certainly not. Prick.

                  • Scott Nelson June 3, 2014 / 12:59 pm

                    Parents of vaccine injured children. I hate to tell you this, but in this life, there are no facts, only probabilities. There is a probability that you will be hit by a meteor when you step outside your house, there is a probability that you will be hit by a meteor inside your house. Your entire life is the summation of a series of probabilities.

                    A good way to know if someone is really a scientist is that there measurements are always couched in uncertainty. Its this +/- this, they are never absolutely certain that they are right.

                  • Notnearlyanonymous June 3, 2014 / 12:59 pm

                    When you slowly realize that ALL science is reported as probabilities (like when you read p<0.05 means "the probability of this test result being due purely to chance is less than 5%" or a Relative Risk value or a Confidence Interval), you will understand the error involved in your statements.

                    ALL science is reported as probabilities. ALL.
                    This is why some have asked for your understanding of some of the terms.

                    When the science is summarized in 5th graders text books, they skip over that concept.


              • Colin June 3, 2014 / 1:08 pm

                It’s not my blog, but Dr. Raff is incommunicado at the moment so I’ll presume to step in. Please refrain from any gratuitous insults, no matter how well-justified you may think they are. It’s one of the host’s rules.

          • Inigo Montoya June 3, 2014 / 12:29 pm

            Now I am sure it does not mean what you think it means.

            • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:35 pm

              Inigo Montoya – Why?

          • Colin June 3, 2014 / 12:43 pm

            How did you arrive at that conclusion? Did you examine the data yourself? What research have you reviewed?

            • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:55 pm

              Colin, 20 years of my life.

              • Colin June 3, 2014 / 1:06 pm

                That’s obviously not research. You don’t seem to understand the concepts you’re fighting here; your answers to Geswin are beyond bizarre. Nothing anyone has to say here will persuade you, because your conclusions are not based on a rational review of evidence. I’m glad we had this conversation nevertheless, as it illustrates the depth of ignorance at the heart of the anti-vax movement.

  22. Penny Black June 2, 2014 / 11:50 pm

    I have nothing against science per se…but BIG “BAD” PHARMA has corrupted science to such a degree blindly supported by the philistine instrumentalism of our capitalist states. I know longer even feel able to consult a general practitioner or other physician as their knowledge and expertise is so corrupted by the pharmaceutical industry…..and well as for the media……

  23. dapperdanman June 3, 2014 / 6:09 am

    The first link after “They say that the MMR vaccine causes autism.” does not work: Session timed out. (The link contains a session ID, so I expect that is indeed the problem)
    Do you have a DOI available for that?

  24. karunacreator June 3, 2014 / 7:51 am

    wow…I have not read all the comments, and has anyone addressed the reality that at best immunization can only be highly correlated with decrease in incidence of a disease. There is no causal relationship between vaccine and decrease of incidence. It is the shortfall of these heavy handed science arguments. A stronger correlation would likely be socioeconomic status….or access to healthcare. I’m so glad that some scientist/researcher in their laboratory has shown that their vaccine stops this disease, and that proves nothing in the reality of disease incidence in the real world outside the ivory pharmaceutically supported walls of academia!

    • Max Riethmuller June 3, 2014 / 8:09 am

      “has anyone addressed the reality that at best immunization can only be highly correlated with decrease in incidence of a disease.”

      Are you serious?? There have been thousands upon thousands of studies that prove vaccines confer immunity. The “highly correlated” match of reduced disease in relation to vaccine introduction is just the icing on the cake.

    • drscottnelson2014 June 3, 2014 / 8:11 am

      Actually, it’s much more than highly correlative. Work dating back to Edward Jenner shows a causative relationship, and this is required for almost all vaccines (the influenza virus mutates so rapidly that causative studies cannot be done). There is a list of the studies done for Gardasil about mid April in this thread.

    • moladood June 3, 2014 / 8:53 am

      You are joking, right? Even if it only correlated with drastic reduction in incidence, it is still better than what anti-vaxxers use for data. There is a lot of data and studies that support vaccines prevent diseases. Do your home work. If you can support your statements, I would be happy to read any evidence you have.

    • Tony Goodfellow June 3, 2014 / 11:21 pm

      You are not only wrong but I fear that you are willfully ignorant judging by your ability to use words like “ivory” and “walls of academia!” If you got here you must know how to use an internet search engine…eg. Smallpox.

      The level of obscurantism and sophistry found within these comments is staggering. Without the scientific method we are left with appeals to nature, gods and anecdotal evidence in short the dark ages.

      Ibn al-Haythaman Islamic scholar understood this 1,000 years ago “…The seeker after the truth is not one who studies the writings of the ancients and, following his natural disposition, puts his trust in them, but rather the one who suspects his faith in them and questions what he gathers from them, the one who submits to argument and demonstration, and not to the sayings of a human being whose nature is fraught with all kinds of imperfection and deficiency.”

      • cleverlyconfused June 4, 2014 / 12:01 am

        I think I hear a Caps button being locked…

  25. Tory June 3, 2014 / 8:58 am

    Italian Courts have particular arrangements to attenuate the time frame it manifests itself – anywhere between 10-30 years or so.
    Apart from offering law solicitors in middleton glasgow services to their clients.
    It’s happening now It happened in Manhattan, it’s happening in Cape Cod and it’s likely happening in your town, those who were solicitors in middleton glasgow harmed.
    Not many of these cases, a dog owner who fails to warn such a person would
    hold out to the right reporters with relevant information.

  26. David Vickers June 3, 2014 / 10:26 am

    Dear Jennifer,

    I have to admit, I never used to question vaccination. The consensus was strong: scientists, physicians, and government organisations were behind it. Vaccine makers hyped it. All of my nation’s provinces have some derivation of federally-recommended vaccine programmes with no obvious ill effect. I’d classed those who did not get vaccinated as irresponsible know-nothings.

    Unfortunately, public concerns of vaccine safety and effectiveness (in general) tend to be met with sanctimonious dismissal. Scientists and Physicians know best.

    I find that we (as healthcare workers) are guilty of telling “half truths” of what we know about vaccination. “Pro-vaccination” messages tend equate vaccination and immunisation (even though one does not necessarily lead to the other); we omit the fact that infection with influenza, Measles, or Pertussis is—itself—an immunising event. Most-importantly, it’s not mentioned that being infected does not necessarily equal disease, let alone severe disease.

    I’ve done my own research; I’ve started talking with my immunologist colleagues. The deeper I’ve gotten into the topic, the more I’m realising that the middle ground on this topic has been completely decimated.

    Vaccination is like climate change, gun control, or abortion—wildly polarized, with many vested interests. Both “pro-” and “anti-vaccinators” hoard-up selective evidence to prove themselves “right”. There’s enough conflicting evidence to keep both sides happy.

    There is always contradictory evidence available—no matter the topic, but especially when it’s polarised. And unfortunately, even people in the “scientific community”—people with PhDs—are some of the most susceptible to what I call confirmation bias: the phenomenon (that I mentioned above) of hoarding-up selective evidence to prove themselves right.

    Not all “pro-vaccinators” do their homework. Not all “anti-vaccinators” are loonies—they include epidemiologists, immunologists, and physicians. And just like antibiotics, vaccination (even with its successes) lacks wisdom in its application. I continue to respect science greatly, however I’ve also come to learn that some scientists can be hasty in judgment, narrow in understanding, and more loyal to their ideology or source of income than to the “truth”.

    Here, for what they’re worth are some (recent) conclusions I’ve drawn after my recent immersion in this contentious topic:

    • Medical history books, almost uniformly praise the virtues of vaccination. One is left with the impression that during the early 20th century plagues were rampant and they killed people by the thousands and that, because of vaccines, this is no longer the case. It generally permeates society as an established fact. One example I’ve come across states that:

    “It is difficult to underestimate the contribution of immunization to our well-being. It has been estimated that, were it not for childhood vaccinations against diphtheria, pertussis, measles, mumps, smallpox, and rubella, as well as protection afforded by vaccines against tetanus, cholera, yellow fever, polio, influenza, hepatitis B, bacterial pneumonia, and rabies, childhood death rates would probably hover in the range of 20 to 50%. Indeed, in countries where vaccination is not practiced, the death rates among infants and young children remain at that level.” (Sherman, Twelve diseases that changed our world, 2007, pg 66.)

    • However, in Canada (for example), the number of deaths from diseases like Measles and Whooping Cough were exponentially declining, decades before the introduction of their respective vaccines (, Table B35-50). By the time vaccination was introduced for Pertussis (1943) and for Measles (1963), death rates from these infections had decreased by approximately 73% and 95%, respectively.

    • In England, death rates from Measles decreased by 95% prior to the introduction of the vaccine in 1968 (

    • A 2009 study (Heffernan & Keeling, Implications of Vaccination and Waning Immunity, Proceedings of the Royal Society, 2009; 276) demonstrates that there are both the intended and unintended effects of Measles vaccination. In particular, they show that when you consider moderate waning immunity times (i.e. 40–80 years) and high levels of vaccination (greater than 70%) large-scale outbreaks will still occur. Additionally, they demonstrate that, after a long disease-free period, the introduction of infection will lead to large epidemics.

    • Repeated, annual Influenza vaccination has found to leave participants at an *increased* risk of contracting influenza (Ohmit et al, Clin Infect Dis. 2013 56(10):1363-9. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit060; Janjua et al., Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2010; 51(9): 1017-1027). This has substantial implications especially since current practice is to vaccinate every year.

    • A common recommendation to prevent the transmission of pertussis to infants has been to “cocoon”, or vaccinate people who have contact with infants. However, current acelluar vaccines fail to prevent colonisation and transmission of the pertussis bacteria (please refer to a recently published article in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

    • Chris June 3, 2014 / 11:32 am

      ” we omit the fact that infection with influenza, Measles, or Pertussis is—itself—an immunising event”

      Not necessarily with either influenza or pertussis. Influenza viruses often change, and even immunity from pertussis can be temporary (just like it is temporary with tetanus and diphtheria):
      Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005 May;24(5 Suppl):S58-61.
      Duration of immunity against pertussis after natural infection or vaccination.

      “Most-importantly, it’s not mentioned that being infected does not necessarily equal disease, let alone severe disease.”

      Citation needed.

      “By the time vaccination was introduced for Pertussis (1943) and for Measles (1963), death rates from these infections had decreased by approximately 73% and 95%, respectively.”

      “• In England, death rates from Measles decreased by 95% prior to the introduction of the vaccine in 1968”

      So what? That has nothing to do with the severity of the diseases, but with the improvements of medical care. One thing that helped increase survival was the invention of antibiotics, which helped both pertussis and for secondary bacterial pneumonia that can occur with measles, because that virus literally reduces the immune system. Another thing is the invention of artificial ventilation to keep oxygen in the patient, things like iron lungs and the tubes they put down babies throats when they have pertussis and/or epiglottitis (like from Hib).

      Death is not the only complication from many of those diseases. Some like measles, Hib, mumps, polio, etc can cause permanent disability.

      Two questions:

      Why is treating an infection with antibiotics and respiratory support better than vaccinating?

      Isn’t an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure?

      “Measles vaccination. In particular, they show that when you consider moderate waning immunity times (i.e. 40–80 years) and high levels of vaccination (greater than 70%) large-scale outbreaks will still occur.”

      That is why it is recommended that measles vaccination levels should be over 90%, preferably 95%, because 70 is not a high level of vaccination. It is because measles is very infectious.

      “Clin Infect Dis. 2013 56(10):1363-9. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit060;” is titled “Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness in the Community and the Household.” It is a one year study of a bit over a thousand people (328 households). It is too small and too short to come to the conclusions you stated, especially since circulating influenza viruses change each year. Even the authors state it needs more study. You might try reading this editorial comment: Influenza Vaccine: Glass Half Full or Half Empty? (the link was posted on the paper you cited).

      “However, current acelluar vaccines fail to prevent colonisation and transmission of the pertussis bacteria”

      …. in baboons! The best commentary on that study I found is Making sense out of the baboon pertussis study. Though the “This Week in Microbiology” podcast on it was interesting. I am out of links but you can find it at MicrobeWorld with “TWiM #70: A paroxysmal cough.”

      Immunology is difficult. It is complicated because we vaccinate against both bacterial and viral diseases, which are completely different kind of pathogens. And there are differences between virus species that are as vast as they are to bacteria. A polio virus is not like a measles virus, and neither are like influenza viruses. And a pertussis bacteria is not like an Hib bacteria. You can’t say “because influenza vaccines are imperfect so are measles vaccines.”

      Just like you cannot use declines in mortality rates as a gauge of vaccine effectiveness. You need to use infection rates.

      Some additional papers for you to read (many are free online);

      Pediatrics. 2014 Mar 3.
      Economic Evaluation of the Routine Childhood Immunization Program in the United States, 2009.

      J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1;189 Suppl 1:S210-5.
      Measles hospitalizations, United States, 1985-2002.

      J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1;189 Suppl 1:S69-77.
      Acute measles mortality in the United States, 1987-2002.

      Pediatrics. 2009 Jun;123(6):1446-51.
      Parental refusal of pertussis vaccination is associated with an increased risk of pertussis infection in children.

      Am J Epidemiol. 2008 Dec 15;168(12):1389-96. Epub 2008 Oct 15.
      Geographic clustering of nonmedical exemptions to school immunization requirements and associations with geographic clustering of pertussis.

      Pediatrics. 2010 Apr;125(4):747-55.
      Measles outbreak in a highly vaccinated population, San Diego, 2008: role of the intentionally undervaccinated.

      BMC Public Health. 2005 Jun 4;5:59.
      Measles vaccine coverage and factors related to uncompleted vaccination among 18-month-old and 36-month-old children in Kyoto, Japan.

      JAMA. 2000 Dec 27;284(24):3145-50.
      Individual and community risks of measles and pertussis associated with personal exemptions to immunization.

      • Parents of vaccine injured children June 3, 2014 / 12:04 pm

        Wow Chris, I could stay up all night responding to you. But I won’t be.

        • Chris June 3, 2014 / 1:30 pm

          I see. I am sorry you will not answer my questions. Is it because you don’t want to or you cannot?

          Though, when you do, please try to include some verifiable scientific and statistically sound evidence. Because as a parent of a child who suffered from a now vaccine injured child who also has a genetic heart condition, I have incentive to counter vaccine misinformation.

        • pdw September 22, 2014 / 1:00 pm

          because he’s right?

  27. kyle June 3, 2014 / 1:02 pm

    I can give you a fact chris has no life if he did he wouldnt go on the way he does its personal and personal is not good be open minded mate like myself

    • Chris June 3, 2014 / 1:35 pm


      Why do you think insults are a valid substitute for actual evidence?

      I am perfectly willing to change my mind if you provide something that is more substantial than arguments by blatant assertion and insults. I have been asking for PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that vaccines cause more harm than the diseases, and yet none have been posted. Why is that?

      • kyle June 3, 2014 / 2:10 pm

        You are the one insulting others for them posting what they believe just let people have there say without complaining about grammer. Im not anti vax i am not pro vax i am open and always learning. You talk about your child because that is your personal experiance people have personal experiances also which go against yours so no need to go on the way you do thinking your better because you know a couple of things people might not have facts like you are asking they are living with children that as their parents just no if it was caused by an injection or not.I do believe you know a lot and you speak factual but quite frankly some of your comments are nasty and not needed for you to get your point. I apoligise for my grammer in advance as i havnt got time to perfect

        • Chris June 3, 2014 / 2:23 pm

          “I do believe you know a lot and you speak factual but quite frankly some of your comments are nasty and not needed for you to get your point.”

          Please point out which of my comments are nasty. I do try to stay polite, but sometimes it is hard when comments say things like “Congrats on the most ignorant comment”, “poster child Chris”, “you need to venture out into the real world”, and “this article is bogus.” Why do you not chastise the persons who wrote those phrases?

          Why are my questions more offensive? Why is it so terrible to ask for citations? Why is it terrible to provide actual citations to support my statements?

          By the way, I searched this page for the use of the word “grammar” and this is the first time I have used it. I have asked people to use paragraphs because it makes it easier to read. So if I offended you by doing that, I apologize.

    • Tony Goodfellow June 3, 2014 / 11:38 pm

      No argument = attack the messenger = fail

      “be open minded mate like myself” = agree with what I say
      “personal is not good” = Straw man because Chris has provided evidence
      “insulting others for them posting what they believe” = identity is bound to the antivax position, it may hurt their feeling if you refute it with evidence.

      Kyle if you cannot be convinced through evidence then you by definition have a closed mind unlike Chris who is asking for substantive arguments.

    • Colin June 3, 2014 / 3:01 pm

      Comments are wonky today; please see my reply below.

    • moladood June 3, 2014 / 4:03 pm

      Its too bad there are little facts in that post. Opinion piece at best.

  28. Colin June 3, 2014 / 2:54 pm

    My favorite link! FYI, not many of those “facts” are actually facts; the author of that piece is ironically (as well as shamelessly) lying to you.

    I wrote a rebuttal to a few specific misrepresentations here. The short version is that Megan, the author of that piece, is making up stories to enhance her credibility. She also deleted comments pointing that out, despite having (and claiming to abide by) a comment policy that permits open discussions. I like that little fact because it puts her in sharp contrast with Dr. Raff, who actually permits open conversations in her comments. Between those two women, one is an expert and not afraid of the facts; the other is a liar who needs to control a conversation to prevent those facts from coming out.

    If you’re interested in more detail, another blogger wrote a more in-depth and personal analysis of this piece here.

    Yes, you are being lied to. Yes, it is anti-vaxers who are lying. Specifically, Megan is lying to you. She can do it because it won’t make a difference–her anti-vax audience isn’t interested in what the facts are, only in what they want the facts to be. She’s so confident that she can get away with lying to you that she’s republishing her piece without correcting any of the dishonest statements she made. Why should she? Her goal is not to disseminate honest information–it’s to get clicks and make fans of people who also don’t particularly care what the facts are.

      • kyle June 3, 2014 / 3:05 pm

        a better one if you worked on written English. Little things like grammar, spelling, punctuation and rhetoric would greatly improve your employment prospects.
        Have you considered some basic writing, math and science classes at your local community college? Trust me, they are more than willing to work with all of your learning issues, since I have seen them bring out great improvements in my very learning disabled son.
        These are just some of the examples i have not got time to go through them all as i say surely you dont need to act the way you do with the knoledge you have and bringing your child into it is low

        • Colin June 3, 2014 / 3:08 pm

          I’m already employed, but I’m always interested in improving my written communication skills. Are there any specific errors you wanted to point out?

  29. kyle June 3, 2014 / 2:58 pm

    “Are you forgetting FREEWILL??? What was the need for caps ?

    “Oh and arguing that whooping cough, mumps, or measles are deadly is asinine, stop reading this drivel RIGHT THERE, all credibility is LOST with such simple little lies” caps again dricel thats your opinion i could go on bit havnt got time

    Again, dear brave Anonymous, we don’t care about yours or anyone else’s “beliefs”, we want actual verifiable evidence. You complained colleges “don’t teach you to use your own brain”, yet we have yet to see you use yours.
    Do try to use the brain your particular deity bestowed upon you, and try to figure out reality from fantasy

    • Chris June 3, 2014 / 6:00 pm

      I did not type the first two sentences. I very seldom ever use all caps. You obviously are mixing me up with someone else. If you insist it was me, then list the URL of the page and the date/time stamp.

      And seriously, how is the third one worse then the accusation that I don’t have a life?

  30. kyle June 3, 2014 / 3:02 pm

    a better one if you worked on written English. Little things like grammar, spelling, punctuation and rhetoric would greatly improve your employment prospects.
    Have you considered some basic writing, math and science classes at your local community college? Trust me, they are more than willing to work with all of your learning issues, since I have seen them bring out great improvements in my very learning disabled son.
    These are just some of the examples i have not got time to go through them all as i say surely you dont need to act the way you do with the knoledge you have and bringing your child into it is low.

    • Chris June 3, 2014 / 6:19 pm

      And you think that is nasty? Please, you need to get thicker skin.

      Kyle/Charlie, I was sincere in suggesting you work on your English skills. You would definitely get more respect when you express your thoughts more clearly. It is not “nasty” to provide constructive comments.

      Because, if you think it is too time consuming to write out a clear sentence with proper grammar, punctuation and rhetoric, a bit of practice in an writing class would make it go much quicker.

      And so please tell me why that sentence is worse than the stuff said by Wendy? She wrote at least one of the sentences you claim is me being nasty. Seriously, if you think my comments are nasty, yet let others get a free pass when they use insults, then don’t read blog comments.

      • kyle June 4, 2014 / 2:55 am

        You asked were you wrote grammer that is what i showed you i stuck to the comments between you and charlie because it was the one i found which had what you asked for. You asked were you said grammer i showed you fact and when i said you have no life its things like give me the url and time that prove the point i think you will find on this occation i have proved you wrong you did mention grammer
        Kyle/charlie yet again you are wrong i simply took a quote which you asked for and i apoligise for getting that one quote wrong between you and wendy i can admit when i am wrong.

        • Chris June 4, 2014 / 10:19 am

          So what? You have a strange definition of “nasty” behavior. The bottom line is that you are very difficult to understand. When I asked you to use paragraphs to make your comments clearer you responded with:

          “Who is your God? The God called Satan who tells you to toss in your little dribble about no paragraphs. That in itself was a useless statement.. That’s the thing, in colleges today, they don’t teach you to use your own brain, everything you do is done for you by a computer, calculators, etc.. If you can’t make heads or tails out of something written without paragraphs, then question yourself on how well the brain works.”

          The person who wrote that should not call others nasty because they commented about that person’s writing skills. This makes me wonder about your level of education. It is obvious you have never been on a college campus. That is why I suggested you enroll in your local community college, where they are willing to help just about everyone.

          Of course, I can’t force you to take that advice. You are the one who has to make the decision about improving your skills. Though you should really stop using insults as a form of discussion.

          • Patrick McDonald June 7, 2014 / 12:44 am

            Spellcheckers are available. If your ideas cannot be expressed coherently, perhaps you need to rethink them.

          • Chris June 7, 2014 / 12:31 pm

            I have a spellchecker, thank you. It lets me notice things like “Englsih.”

            By the way, I don’t go after every typo or grammatical fluff, I just think Kyle/Charlie would do better if he learned to express himself more clearly. His wall of text is very hard to decipher.

  31. Sharif Malik June 4, 2014 / 12:55 am

    Debunking her MMR statement:

    Vaccine Court Awards Millions to Two Children With Autism:

    Breaking: Courts discreetly confirm MMR vaccine causes autism:

    Debunking her Thimerasol statement:

    Thimerosal Linked To Autism: New Clinical Findings:

    Neurodevelopmental disorders after thimerosal-containing vaccines: a brief communication.:

    Study Proves Link Between Thimerosal and Autism Neurotoxicity:

    Mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired oxidative-reduction activity, degeneration, and death in human neuronal and fetal cells induced by low-level exposure to thimerosal and other metal compounds:

    Study “Disproving” Mercury-Autism Link Published in Journal with Financial Ties to Vaccine Manufacturers:

    • Chris June 4, 2014 / 10:28 am

      Those debunk nothing. They are just random news articles, web sites of dubious info and an article by a guy who was stripped of his medical license for lots of reasons (like using chemical castration on children).

      Next time stick to PubMed indexed studies by qualified reputable researchers.

  32. Reidun Granberg June 4, 2014 / 4:32 am

    Thank you for a very interesting article!

  33. Anonymous June 4, 2014 / 11:20 am

    Dear Jennifer! Courage! I am 40, mother of 3 healthy children. I got measles, when I was 21 (I wasn’t vaccinated) and faced death! It took me 3 years of my live to recover. My husband and I of course vaccinate our children! We live in Germany and know many people who don’t vaccinate their children! They believe Measles are good for their children… for example and beleive Vaccines are harmfull… I have given up discussing with this kind of people! They deny and deny facts… Theirfore I send you strength!

    • Patrick McDonald June 7, 2014 / 12:41 am

      Congratulations to you! If these centres of infaection were not so dangerous to the rest of us, I’d ignore them. But they are very dangerous to some of us.

  34. sarah June 4, 2014 / 12:36 pm

    I was wondering if someone could help me understand a bit more about imunisation i have recently had a child and have had both sides of you should you shouldnt.
    At the end of the day i know its up to me but was wondering if someone could explain how some people are saying they cause autism i cant seem to get an honest answer all i get of my nurse is if its good enough for the queens children its good enough for me and that doesnt help me understand were these acusations come from thanks. I do have an interest in science however am no were near able to understand what is posted on the internet as it is very contradicting.

    • Chris June 4, 2014 / 1:10 pm

      There is only one side, the science side. You can start by reading Dr. Raff’s article at the top of this page, and watch the YouTube video at the end of the article. There is no real evidence that vaccines cause autism.

      Since you mention a “queen”, I am going to make an assumption that you live in the UK. You might try checking out the pages at the NHS vaccine information site, though it has a pop-up menu which is very annoying (the blue box on the left that says “All about vaccinations”).

      You can start with their Vaccine Myth page:

      And their vaccine safety page:

    • Scott Nelson June 4, 2014 / 1:24 pm

      I’ll be glad to try and help. Briefly, A British doctor named Andrew Wakefield published a paper in Lancet in 1998 claiming that he saw a correlation between the MMR vaccine and Autism. This caused a lot of research, with the basic finding that he had made up the data to monetary gain. For this fraudulent behaviour, he lost his liscense to practice medicine in Britain. The claim has been investigated in 100,000’s of children, with the result that there was no difference between those who received the vaccine and those who did not. If you go to the article above all these comments, you’ll see this passage:
      “They say that the MMR vaccine causes autism.
      It doesn’t. (The question of whether vaccines cause autism has been investigated in study after study, and they all show overwhelming evidence that they don’t.)

      If you click on any of the blue words in that passage, it will take you to an article refuting the claim. In fact, you’ll find that if skip about 3 words down the blue highlighted words, it will take you to a different article, describing similar results. Millions of US dollars, and a fair number of British pounds have been spent investigating this claim, it has been investigated in a number of countries around the world- they all come to the same conclusion-vaccination does not cause Autism.

      I’ll agree that there is a bunch of information on the internet, a lot of it bad, about vaccines. Dr. Raff has done one of the best jobs so far to compile and refute these accusations.

      If you have further questions, please feel free to post them here, we’ll do what we can to try and answer them.

    • jb0nez95 June 4, 2014 / 2:35 pm

      As a Registered Nurse, very familiar with Evidence Based Practices and recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control regarding vaccines (as I administer them and must keep up to date on the science, adverse reactions, etc.) I can tell you unequivocally what *every* good study has shown:
      The people claiming so are A) Not scientists and B) Not educated healthcare professionals.
      Who are you going to trust about this – the people who’ve dedicated decades of their lives to researching and understanding this topic, or a few random internet cranks with no credentials and no good research (or even the ability to discern good research from bad). Don’t leave your child’s health in the hands of Joe Sixpack posting on the internet. Read the studies linked in this article yourself. Print them out and bring them to your GP and see what he says.

      • sarah June 4, 2014 / 3:32 pm

        I have read the article above and watched the video i found the article very helpfull and also your links thank you

        I didnt realise their were links on the article as i was on my phone i used the laptop and the links answered most my questions thank you. There was even a link to help you understand it in more my language i have just a couple if questions if you could help is that parents that claim to have a child that regressed after mmr is this just parents looking to lash out and dr wakefield has give them this?
        Is there a reason for regretion ?
        And last i promice
        Why are they combined for example (DTaP/IPV/Hib why is there so much packed into one injection and not in seperate is this for cost efffectivness?

        I stated earlier i have went to a registered nurse in which i got the answer “if its good enough for the queens children its good enough for me ” that did not help me i also recieved advice from my gp in which he said there is nothing that he knows of yet again didnt give me the detail i wanted and i did not like the comment about my child i am seeking advice for my sons health i call going in blind and accepting whatever is giving to be not caring and wasnt dr wakefield a very reputable scientist before his false allegations its people with your comments that make seeking nurses advice very intimadating to someone not 100% on the matter

        • jb0nez95 June 5, 2014 / 1:19 am

          You got AWFUL responses to your legitimate questions to the nurse and GP, and that nurse should be ashamed! It is our duty to advocate for and respect our patients! “If it’s good enough for the queen’s children…” That’s horrible nursing, and I’m sorry you were treated that way. I NEVER treat my patients that way.

          I don’t know if you saw my earlier post about the “Vaccine Information Statements” or VISs put out by the CDC. EVERY vaccine I give to EVERY child at EVERY visit (even for boosters of the same vaccine) I give them the accompanying VIS and make sure they understand it and answer any questions about it. You should check them out

          I apologize if I seemed intimidating, I’m certainly not that way with my patients, I was making a forceful statement here about how everything about vaccines is based in the best science known to man.
          Wakefield had a competing vaccine he intended to introduce. He used children at his child’s birthday party for “sample” for his “studies”. His studies have been thoroughly discredited, his license has been revoked, the paper has been revoked..but the damage has been done. As I said in my other post he has the blood of thousands of dead children and responsible for tens to hundreds of thousands more sickened.

          Regarding why so much packed in one vaccine – simply so your child only gets poked once instead of 3 to 4 times basically! It probably is cheaper to do them separately to be honest, it’s done for convenience of parents (and the one giving the shot to the screaming, squirming child).

          What people don’t realize is yes there are foreign proteins, “antigens,” in vaccines — that’s the point — but there are foreign proteins in the air we breathe, the food we eat, anything we touch. In ONE day your child is exposed to 10,000+ foreign proteins, which his capable immune system deals with as a threat or not. The few that are in a vaccine are nothing compared to what you get exposed to by, well, just living. Except that the diseases that the full organism cause have the potential to kill or maim your child, and the vaccine has a much, much, much lower risk of doing the same.

          I commend you for clicking on the links and reading the articles to further educate yourself 🙂

        • jb0nez95 June 5, 2014 / 1:28 am

          ” i have just a couple if questions if you could help is that parents that claim to have a child that regressed after mmr is this just parents looking to lash out and dr wakefield has give them this?”

          MMR is given at 12 months of age or later, per CDC recommendations. So usually between 12 and 24 months.

          This is also the time frame autism symptoms appear. People correlate the two, thinking there is cause and effect, but science has shown there is not.
          There are many unvaccinated children with autism.
          Dr. Wakefield led the entire autism research community in the wrong direction with a scam story designed to scare the public so that he could introduce his own “safe” MMR vaccine. He’s done horrible damage as a result. Instead of looking for the real reason for autism, people have now spent over a decade focusing on vaccines. All the research in that decade+ has shown NO link. It’s time to let that one go and let the limited funds go towards finding the real cause and effective treatments.

          The anti-vaxers are often conspiracy theorists, so rather than “lash out” at Wakefield they actually embrace his ideas….to the detriment of society.

          • Patrick McDonald June 7, 2014 / 12:37 am

            Why isn’t Wakefield in a maximum security prison for life?? His crimes against humanity certainly merit such an action.

  35. sarah June 4, 2014 / 3:08 pm

    I have read the article above and watched the video i found the article very helpfull and also your links thank you

    I didnt realise their were links on the article as i was on my phone i used the laptop and the links answered most my questions thank you. There was even a link to help you understand it in more my language i have just a couple if questions if you could help is that parents that claim to have a child that regressed after mmr is this just parents looking to lash out and dr wakefield has give them this?
    Is there a reason for regretion ?
    And last i promice
    Why are they combined for example (DTaP/IPV/Hib why is there so much packed into one injection and not in seperate is this for cost efffectivness?

    I stated earlier i have went to a registered nurse in which i got the answer “if its good enough for the queens children its good enough for me ” that did not help me i also recieved advice from my gp in which he said there is nothing that he knows of yet again didnt give me the detail i wanted and i did not like the comment about my child i am seeking advice for my sons health i call going in blind and accepting whatever is giving to be not caring and wasnt dr wakefield a very reputable scientist before his false allegations its people with your comments that make seeking nurses advice very intimadating to someone not 100% on the matter.

    • Scott Nelson June 4, 2014 / 3:44 pm

      Sarah, the regression that some parent see is an unfortunate coincidence. Many of the symptoms of autism start around the same time the MMR is given-and people tend to be more attentive after significant events, and so see the symptoms. In all likelihood the symptoms were there before hand, but we all tend to see what we want to see, and ignore things that discomfort us, so we ignore that my child doesn’t play much with other kids, or doesn’t speak as much as other kids the same age. You pretty much nailed it when you said “… this just parents looking to lash out and dr wakefield has give them this?”

      The reason they pack so many different vaccines is not so much for cost effectiveness, but rather coverage. If you can give 5 vaccinations in 1 shot, 1 office visit, you have a much greater likelihood of getting the child all the vaccines they need-because you don’t need to get the child into the office 5 times. Nobody likes taking time out of their day to go to the doctor, and if you can save 4 office visits, so much the better. It really doesn’t tax the child’s immune system to get all 5 at once, here’s a link to a paper describing what the child’s immune system is really capable of:

      If you have more questions, feel free to post, its a pleasure answering questions from someone trying to figure out this problem

    • Chris June 4, 2014 / 4:05 pm

      ” wasnt dr wakefield a very reputable scientist before his false allegations”

      Not really. He spent time training to do surgery, and he has never had the medical qualifications to work directly with patients. I heard somewhere he was trying to find something to make himself standout, and somehow latched on to an idea about measles causing a Crohns. This caught the eye of lawyers who were preparing a lawsuit on the newly introduced to the UK MMR vaccine (the vaccine has been used in the USA since 1971). And the rest is history.

      There is a book called Science Tales by a talented cartoonist, where he explains the Wakefield story. Part of that is online:

      By the way, you should call your health care clinic and ask if there is someone willing and who has the time to talk to you about vaccines. Obviously the nurse you talked to was either too busy, or just not very well trained in dealing with worried patients. Good luck, and I hope you find someone much nicer than that nurse next time.

      • sarah June 4, 2014 / 5:10 pm

        Thank you for your links and your facts i think its a real shame that people like me (people with no real knowledge of science) feel the need to ask these questions but i cant believe there are people out there willing to cloud peoples judgement on imunisation for pure profit or for a name. It makes what should be a very easy decision questionable to the unknown.

        • gewisn June 4, 2014 / 5:51 pm

          No, Sarah, thank YOU for asking.

          Wakefield continues to make a good living by talking his same line of bull to adoring crowds, despite faking the evidence, having been proven to improperly sign-up children for his fake study, and having been stripped of his medical license. Millions of healthcare dollars and research dollars were wasted chasing his fakery, and kids continue to be endangered because a few people think he was a crusader of some ridiculous sort.

          Make no mistake, that @#$%^&*, Wakefield knowingly faked numbers to try and get you to endanger your children for the sake of his own ego and his own wallet – and he’s still doing exactly that!

      • Anonymous June 5, 2014 / 12:43 am

        You left out the part where Wakefield was working on his own competing MMR vaccine he intended to introduce to market after he’d discredited the current vaccine as “causing autism.”
        He was a crook and a fraud and thousands have died, with potentially many more. Wakefield has the blood of children on his hands.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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