Millions of people are being asked to take the H1N1 vaccine, but there is no way to screen out individuals for whom that vaccine will be reactive and could potentially cause permanent brain damage, immune system dysfunction, or even end in their death.
In the 25 years there has been a dramatic rise in the numbers of children who are suffering chronic brain and immune system dysfunction. One child in six in the U.S. is learning disabled. One in nine has asthma. One in 100 is diagnosed autistic.
Are vaccines worth the risk?
It’s too bad the producers of “Anatomy of a Pandemic,” a series aired on PBS in the middle of December, didn’t take the opportunity to do the autopsy this so-called pandemic deserves.
Although the health officials who interviewed for this PBS special – Dr. Ann Schuchat and Mike Osterholm from the CDC, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases – alluded to the failure of H1N1 to pan out into the death and devastation they expected, they never really addressed why or how world leaders decided so prematurely to declare it a mass killer.
They also never explained why it was so important to jump the gun and do away with clinical trials that other new drugs must go through before they are introduced into a mass market.
Instead, these officials seized the moment to lay the foundation for a new vaccine in the pipeline, push for more people to line up for a vaccine for a flu that is one of the mildest on record, and to chastise anyone who dares to question the safety of these vaccines.
Taking Advice from Comedians?
The new vaccine they promoted is a universal flu vaccine that Schuchat referred to as “the Holy Grail of influenza vaccines.” The lessons learned from the pandemic-that-wasn’t, they said, were in the area of communications and planning. To that end, they stressed that they still think it’s important to get the H1N1 vaccine -- even if you think you’ve already had this flu.
This advice makes no sense whatsoever, since if you’ve already had the flu you’ve already developed the antibodies against the virus, so getting vaccinated would be completely pointless. Ironically, the area they really need to study, according to Osterholm, is why society is “beginning to shun” science-based programs, like vaccines.
Were they more perceptive, they may have realized that the ridiculousness of their recommendations is likely a major reason for this trend… Quite frankly, more people are simply beginning to see the truth, and are not falling for the nonsensical hype any longer.
Osterholm didn’t mention by name Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), who voiced her concerns about one-size-fits-all vaccination policies the day before his segment was filmed.
But he did refer to “an anti-science movement” that dares to question “a whole lot of public health activities and other science-based programs.”
“The revolutionaries who do this,” he said, “get their information from Internet sites that post anything, no matter how far-fetched it is. We see people taking their advice from comedians as opposed to doctors today and doing that with great seriousness,” Osterholm said.
This is a typical response from someone who doesn’t have a leg to stand on -- research that finds fault with vaccines is referred to as unscientific hogwash, while cherry picked, shoddy studies that find no safety issues are hailed as the gold standard of true science. And those who insist on safety before ill-conceived profit are called “revolutionaries”…
Fortunately, people are starting to see through this kind of manipulative nonsense that is designed to intimidate the public and ultimately increase revenues to the drug companies.
Show Us the Science and Give Us a Choice
The theme of NVIC’s international vaccine conference in October was “Show Us the Science and Give Us a Choice.” The entire conference represented what many people, not just Barbara Loe Fisher, feel about vaccines.
Show us the science and give us a choice as to whether we want to get a certain vaccine, and whether we want to risk any possible adverse reactions that might be connected with it. That’s all we want, really, when we ask questions about vaccines, or any medical procedure, isn’t it? And truly, isn’t that your right?
Choice is an important constitutional concept for U.S. citizens in particular. And it is choice that the majority of people are thinking of when they ask questions about vaccines.
We’re Not All from the Same Cookie Cutter
Although she’s not a physician, Barbara Loe Fisher for nearly three decades has led the movement for information and choice when it comes to vaccines. She is an author and activist who worked with Congress to develop the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.
A respected advocate for choice, she also has worked to assist those who have suffered from vaccine reactions, and is recognized by the media as the go-to person for “the rest of the story” on balanced, science-based evidence with vaccines.
It is important to note that neither Barbara, the NVIC, nor I advise for or against vaccines. Our main objective is to protect your right to exercise your human right to informed consent to medical interventions that carry a risk of injury or death for yourself or your children, including vaccination.
To that end, Barbara is a fierce advocate of recognizing that human beings are diverse and unique – that we’re not all cut out with the same cookie cutter. And to that end, she is not alone. Scientists know that different bodies respond to different stimuli and substances in different ways, including vaccines.
For example, in 2001, the Institute of Medicine published an entire book on the issue of how male and female bodies react differently, from behavior and cognition to metabolism and response to chemicals and infectious organisms. So if scientists and doctors from the Institute of Medicine recognize that one size doesn’t fit all, why don’t health professionals who are pushing vaccines do the same?
That’s all Barbara was trying to say in her segment of “Anatomy of a Pandemic.”
The Science is Evident and VERY Clear
It’s true that we have a national pandemic going on right now. The science is evident: we have a pandemic of autism, ADHD, juvenile diabetes, learning disabilities and asthma in the US.
We have mothers who take their healthy children to be vaccinated and the next day, or even a few hours later – or sometimes immediately – their children start exhibiting physical and mental problems that weren’t there before they were vaccinated.
And even if health officials like those at the CDC are unwilling to even briefly entertain the possibility of a connection to a vaccine, there are physicians and researchers who do believe vaccines are to blame.
One researcher in particular, Dr. J. Bart Classen, president and Chief Executive Officer of Classen Immunotherapies, spent years independently studying safer uses of vaccines in his private research stage biopharmaceutical company.
His work shows that common vaccines are one of the most important causes of diabetes in children and in highly immunized adults. And although the CDC adamantly denies that Classen’s work is on target, he has colleagues who believe as he does, and who also question a cookie-cutter vaccination policy.
A Challenge to the CDC and PBS
Recently the New York Times reported that an investigation shows that the CDC has done a poor job in screening medical experts for financial conflicts before they served on advisory panels. Some of these experts are the very ones who help make vaccine decisions.
Then, on December 21, Reuters reported that the CDC’s former head, Dr. Julie Gerberding, had accepted a job with vaccine giant Merck, as president of Merck’s vaccine division.
And on December 15, in Moscow, a noted British epidemiologist, Dr. Tom Jefferson, spoke publicly about his concern that World Health Organization (WHO) officials and pharmaceutical companies were too cozy when it came to the swine flu and pandemic predictions.
Accusing them of “creating a scare” to “cash in” on selling a remedy, Jefferson said WHO expert committees have "people with extensive ties to the industry or decision-makers who have explicitly kept on producing apocalyptic forecasts year in, year out."
Knowing this, it seems that Barbara Loe Fisher’s request to study the science behind the new H1N1 vaccines is more than reasonable. It is important to show with complete transparency and without question, that there was no undue influence by pharmaceuticals on decision-makers.
And, I would like to challenge the CDC to explain a little more thoroughly how it makes its vaccine decisions, and to show us the science behind all of them, including the H1N1.