The Truth About Vaccines part 1

nutela (61)in #health • 7 years ago (edited)

An edited transcript of Episode 1, part 1

A round of interviews with medical doctors, science experts, legal professionals and parents, to name a few. All around one central topic: are vaccines safe and effective? The answers will enlighten you.

Intro

TY: Welcome to “The Truth About Vaccines.” I’m your host, Ty Bollinger. You may recognize me from documentaries that I’ve produced in the past on the subject of “The Truth About Cancer.” A natural progression was to investigate the truth about vaccines and bring awareness to that topic as well, and that’s exactly what we’ve done. I truly believe that the next seven days are going to change your life, and I look forward to going on this journey with you. So, let’s go ahead and get started.

It's absolutely ridiculous to even talk in terms of pro or anti-vaccine.

Are you pro or anti?

It’s a commonly held belief that people, including doctors, are either pro-vaccine, in other words, they believe that all vaccines are safe and effective for all people all the time, or anti-vaccine, in other words, they are 100 percent against all vaccines all the time. But is this accurate? Are these the only two legitimate positions about vaccines?

DR. MARGULIS: It's absolutely ridiculous to even talk in terms of pro or anti-vaccine. The reason why is that it would be like talking in terms of pro- or anti-antibiotics. So, you can know that it's absolutely wonderful to have access to antibiotics when you need them, when they're being used appropriately, when there's a bacterial infection that an antibiotic can really help beat.

That doesn't mean that you would prescribe an antibiotic for a viral infection. But somebody, a doctor or a parent who didn't want an antibiotic for a viral infection, you would never call that person anti-antibiotic right? So, when people are questioning vaccine safety or vaccine efficacy or vaccine necessity that does not make them anti-vaccine, that makes them pro-science and pro-common sense and pro-public health. The truth is we all care about the same thing. We care about having healthy children and a healthy population. Nobody is anti- or pro-vaccine. We are all pro-kid and pro-health. And questioning certain aspects of our current CDC vaccine schedule is actually really important if we want to make sure that our kids are safe and healthy.

This docu-series will be focused on the scientific integrity of vaccine studies, the safety and efficacy of about a dozen particular vaccines that are in the CDC’s current schedule, and the vitally important topic of vaccine freedom of choice.

TY: I agree with Dr. Margulis. We all care about the same thing. We all want to make sure that our kids are safe and healthy. That’s it. I think we can all agree on that, right? This docu-series will be focused on the scientific integrity of vaccine studies, the safety and efficacy of about a dozen particular vaccines that are in the CDC’s current schedule, and the vitally important topic of vaccine freedom of choice. I don’t want my opinions to get in the way of scientific facts, nor do I want to influence anyone to do anything against their own conscience. My goal is to present the truth so that you, the viewing audience, can make an educated decision for you and your own family.

What is the theory behind vaccines?

I asked Dr. Paul Thomas, a board-certified pediatrician from Portland, Oregon, this very question. What is the theory behind vaccines? Why do they work or what's the theory behind why they work?

DR. THOMAS: Well, before I get into that, I just want to mention, what we've lost in this whole vaccine discussion is that what really keeps us healthy is a strong immune system. Having said that, is it possible to use your immune system and promote some aspect of it so you develop immunity against something that might be causing harm? And I think the theory of vaccination goes way back to small pox, cow pox, Jenner, and all those pioneers. And they were able, at that time, to take a little bit of something that was causing disease or that was similar to it, and get it under the skin and get you body to mount an immune response, so that in the future, when you got exposed to small pox, let's say, your body was ready to go.

So, in a simplistic term, I think that's what we're trying to do with vaccines. We're trying to prime the immune system with the organism that's been killed, or pieces of the organism that's enough for the body to recognize it, and you develop antibodies, so that next time you're exposed your immune system reacts quickly and you don't actually get sick, so you'll have a huge immune response. To some extent, we've been successful, but where we’ve lost—we may have won a battle but we've lost the war, in my opinion, is the collateral damage.

the Academy of Pediatrics, the organization that guards the health of children

TY: We will be looking at the collateral damage, to use Dr. Thomas’s exact words, over the next week. Vaccinations are credited with the reduction and even elimination of several diseases, including whooping cough, diphtheria, tetanus, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, Hepatitis B, smallpox, meningitis, and influenza. If a person develops a positive antibody response following a vaccination, then that vaccination is considered to be successful and that person is believed to be immune to the disease. We will address this topic, antibodies, in the next episode.

DR. THOMAS: I’m a member of the Academy of Pediatrics. We’re supposed to be, the Academy of Pediatrics, the organization that guards the health of children, and when it comes to vaccines, which is what we’re going to be talking about, I feel like the Academy has not been as thorough as perhaps I would like them to be in investigating what’s going on.

TY: That really sums up the reason that we produced this docu-series. We need more investigation. We need more discussion. We need more honest debate. But the two diametrically opposing positions of those who are pro-vaccine and those who are anti-vaccine have resulted in a climate where civil discussion rarely takes place, where there’s much name-calling and pejoratives. This has created a climate that is not conducive to true debate or discussion.

Nobel Laureates are suddenly being called quacks and idiots and crazies because they’re questioning the safety of vaccines.

DR. PALEVSKY: In today’s climate, you have the “Get your kid vaccinated now.” Then you have a growing climate of “Don’t vaccinate your kid.” Now neither standpoint allows for owning a decision and understanding why you make that decision.

DR. BARK: The moment you question the safety of vaccines you are a “quack,” the moment you bring up any issue with safety. You could be pro-vaccine but if you bring up one safety issue you’re automatically a quack. We have Nobel Laureates who’ve brought this out. These are Nobel Laureates and suddenly they’re being called quacks and idiots and crazies because they’re questioning the safety of vaccines.

SAYER JI: I think it’s one of the most disturbing facts of our time that you can’t even speak to the basic facts like vaccine inserts that state that all of these potential harms are possible and have been observed previously. You can’t even speak to them without being called an “anti-vaxxer,” whatever that’s supposed to mean.

History repeats itself

TY: If we look back in history, we’ll see people like the Italian astronomer and physicist, Galileo. He was convicted in 1633 for publishing his evidence that supported the Copernican theory that the earth actually revolves around the sun. Galileo was called a heretic for his anti-scientific, heliocentric, in other words, sun-centric views and was sentenced to house arrest, where he remained for the rest of his life. Now we later learned that Galileo’s scientific theories were correct and that the orthodox scientific community of his day was wrong. Over the next seven days, we are going to present expert testimony, scientific studies, and medical data in as concise and understandable manner as possible so that you can make wise decisions based upon informed choice. A big part of making wise medical decisions is the concept of informed consent.

DR. MARGULIS: The idea behind informed consent is that whenever you do a medical procedure you have to talk to the patient about the benefits of the procedure, the possible complications with the procedure and the other options that you may have. So, with vaccinations, you have to talk about what are the positives of vaccinating you child, what are the potential negatives of vaccinating your child, and what are the alternatives? And one of the alternatives always has to be not vaccinating or spacing out the vaccines. The problem is that doctors are incredibly busy, they have less than 15 minutes in the office with a family. They hand them a piece of paper that comes from the CDC. That's not informed consent. That's not really saying to them, “Okay, look at this is really the pluses and minuses.” And the problem is that most doctors in America haven't actually taken the time to do the fundamental research that they need to do to figure out what the true risks and benefits are of any given vaccine. So, in this country we don't really have informed consent when it comes to vaccines.

The Vaccine Friendly Plan

DR. THOMAS: There's a term I remember vividly being taught in medical school and that's iatrogenic. So, iatrogenic is caused by what we do. If you take a medicine that I prescribed and it makes you ill, or causes you harm, that's iatrogenic. And I think we've lost our way in looking at vaccines and looking at what are the iatrogenic effects? What harm is being done by our vaccine program? So, you know, I wrote this book, The Vaccine Friendly Plan, and—

TY: Just so people know, you're not anti-vaccine?

DR. THOMAS: Absolutely not. The dilemma I was in in 2008 after I had those four cases of children who regressed into severe autism, and I'd already learned about toxicity, I'd read studies on thimerosal and aluminum toxicity. There's books on this topic. I could no longer ethically keep doing vaccines “business as usual” with the CDC schedule. And the things that concerned me the most were that Hepatitis B dose for newborns. Back then they weren't pushing vaccines on pregnant women, that's happened since. And the sheer number of vaccines that were being given, for example, at the two month visit we were giving six different vaccines, three of which had too much aluminum. So, you're multiplying huge toxins, adding on top, adding on top, and it was just clearly not a scientifically justifiable approach when you understand toxicity.

NEIL MILLER: If you're going to give parents informed consent before they take these vaccines, don't just tell them that the vaccine was responsible for lowering the incidence of cases of measles. Tell them that there are studies that if you take this—showing that if you take this measles vaccine you're statistically significantly more likely to be hospitalized after receiving that vaccine. Okay? You're more likely to have epileptic seizures. You're more likely to have allergies as a result of that vaccine. Okay? That’s well documented. You’re more likely to develop cancers and heart disease in later life if you've taken that vaccine, because it has suppressed you from being able to develop those protective effects that you gain when you are exposed to that disease naturally as a child. So, if you want informed consent, you have to have all of that information, access to all of that information, so that then you can make an informed decision. And then you have to be free to accept or reject vaccines.

TY: According to the CDC, there is no federal requirement for informed consent relating to immunization. For state and local regulations, check with your state or local health department. So, this is a 10th Amendment issue, since the 10th Amendment states that all powers not specifically given to the federal government are the responsibility of the states.

Religious belief vaccine exemptions

BARBARA LOE FISHER: Whatever was not defined in the Constitution as a matter for the federal government defaults to the states. Public health laws are state laws. Vaccine laws are state laws. Now, the federal government has to protect the borders, so they can make laws about people coming into the country who have infectious diseases or who are not vaccinated. But, in our country, it’s the states. That’s why you have different vaccine laws in different states. Different states have different exemptions. Right now, 50 states have medical vaccine exemptions. 47 states have a religious belief vaccine exemptions. And 16 states have medical, religious belief, and a third exemption that’s worded as either a conscientious belief, philosophical belief, or personal belief exemption.

TY: Vaccine laws are statutory. In other words, they are created by a particular state, not the federal government. In my investigations, one topic that initially interested me the most was the amount of vaccine education that a typical medical doctor, especially a pediatrician, receives when he or she is in medical school. Here’s what the experts had to say.

DR. PALEVSKY: Vaccines were not very much discussed in medical school other than, this is what vaccines do, they save lives, they protect people from disease, and this the schedule you need to use in your pediatric clinics to give to kids. I started medical school 1983, and it wasn’t until 1998 that a mother came over to me and said, “Dr. Larry, did you know that there’s mercury in vaccines?” I said, “No.” Instead of just pushing it aside and saying, “Oh, it’s just such a small amount, it doesn’t matter,” I actually started looking to see what else is in vaccines. I realized that there’s a great amount of material in vaccines that impairs many cell structures and cell functions.

You're not going to go trying to disprove a well-proven theory or practice while in medical school

DR. HUMPHRIES: I really didn't think about vaccines very much throughout my career because, I don't know if you know this, but medical doctors really aren't taught anything about what's in vaccines or the contents or the problems that can happen after vaccination. We’re basically given a sheet of paper during a pediatric rotation and told this is the schedule and to keep up with it. So, the thinking there is, oh, I just got to make sure that everybody's got the ones that they need and which ones they need, not really critically thinking about it at all. I used to think it was just me because I was an adult internist, but when you look at people like Dr. Larry Pavelvsky and Dr. Toni Bark, who actually specialized in pediatrics and you hear the same thing from them then you realize that medical schools are not providing this information and there's no incentive to go—and look there's not a lot of time during residency, so unless something's really a problem you're not going to go trying to disprove a well-proven theory or practice. Nobody does it.

DR. THOMAS: I've got a daughter in medical school and a really good friend in medical school, and I've asked them, because they're already being taught vaccines are safe and effective, and they're the best thing you can do to further the health of the population. They're already being taught this, and I was never taught when I was in medical school 30 years ago, what was in a vaccine. We were only taught that they’re wonderful and do them. Most doctors trained today have no idea what's in the vaccines.

The number of vaccines keeps growing

DR. TENPENNY: When I went to medical school, I graduated in 1985. At that period of time when I went on to practice there were only three vaccines that were used in children. There was DPT, MMR, and Polio. It wasn’t until 1991 when there was the big ramp up of the vaccines schedule starting with the hepatitis B vaccine at birth. And then they added the HIB and then chickenpox and Prevnar. Now we have 46 doses of 16 vaccines that are given to children by the time they’re five years of age. So, I would say that when I was in the medical school there wasn’t much to talk about. There was only the three vaccines. But then we had this big ramp up. So, anybody who’s graduated from medical school and gone through a residency program from 1991 forward, which has been 25 years, the only thing that they’re told is here’s the schedule and here’s how you give it. And you really need to deal with those parents who are doing this whole thing called “vaccine hesitancy” now.

TY: Dr. Tenpenny just mentioned a term that you may have heard before, vaccine hesitancy. We’ll get to that in a moment. But first, I want to address the apparent lack of vaccine education that most doctors receive while in medical school. Perhaps things have changed since Dr. Pavelvsky and Dr. Tenpenny and Dr. Humphries attended medical school. I wanted to get an idea of the current courses that a medical school student would take while they’re at a school like, say Harvard. The first year includes the following 13 total courses:

Introduction to The Profession
The Molecular and Cellular Basis of Medicine
The Human Body
Human Genetics
Patient-Doctor 1
Introduction to Social Medicine and Global Health
Clinical Epidemiology and Population Health
Introduction to Healthcare Policy
Scholarship in Medicine
Physician and Community
Integrated Human Physiology
Immunology, Microbiology, and Pathology
Medical Ethics and Professionalism

It appears that whatever is taught about vaccines and vaccination in Harvard’s five-year curriculum is done with one course: Immunology, Microbiology, and Pathology. If you search through the curriculum of dozens of other medical schools in the United States, you will find that there’s not much variation from Harvard. Apparently, vaccines and vaccination are simply not featured prominently. Now let’s go back to what Dr. Tenpenny said earlier. She mentioned a term, “vaccine hesitancy.” What exactly is this? According to the World Health Organization, “Vaccine hesitancy refers to the delay in acceptance or refusal of vaccines despite availability of vaccination services.” Let’s listen to Dr. Tenpenny once more to get the full context of her statement.

The only thing that they’re told is “Here’s the schedule and here’s how you give it.

DR. TENPENNY: The only thing that they’re told is “Here’s the schedule and here’s how you give it. And you really need to deal with those parents who are doing this whole thing called vaccine hesitancy now.” Which is being published in all of the medical literature saying that “All of these crazy people, why wouldn’t they want vaccines?” They’re actually even combing information off of Facebook of the arguments that people get into and try to come up with arguments to convince more and more people why they should be vaccinated.

Integrative pediatrics

DR. THOMAS: In an attempt to have a safe vaccine approach, I did something in 2008 when I started integrative pediatrics that is pretty much unheard of for a pediatrician to do, and that is to one by one give parents the real facts about the vaccine, the benefits of the vaccine, the risks, and the alternatives. So, informed consent. And I truly believe this is what doctors should do. We need to get back to doing that if we're doing something to a healthy person. You got a healthy child in front of you, and you're saying, “Well we're going to do this thing to you, this vaccine, and it's a good idea.” And all they're being told is it's safe and effective to do it. And “Oh, by the way, if you don't do it, you're going to leave my practice.” That's what's happening today. That should be illegal. I mean if you have a doctor that's telling you to leave you practice if you don’t do what I say, that's called paternalism. And we were taught in medical school that is the worst way to practice medicine. Yet, the Academy of Pediatrics is now saying that’s okay. Today, pediatricians are being trained on how to—I would just use the word coerce their patients into doing all the vaccines.

TY: Why do pediatricians need to convince and coerce patients to vaccinate? Shouldn’t parents be presented with the facts and then be able to make up their own mind? Did you know that the American Association of Pediatricians actually has an entire page dedicated to teaching physicians how to persuade vaccine-hesitant parents? Some parents just want to spread out vaccines. But in the video entitled, Are There Too Many Vaccines, in order to convince the mother, who’s really an actor, that there’s no need to spread out the vaccines and that there’s no benefit, the doctor, who is also an actor, refers to a study of over 1,000 children where “Researchers found no evidence that getting all the vaccines on time during infancy is associated with any developmental delays.” This study to which she was referring was published in the journal Pediatrics in June 2010. Sure enough, here’s a conclusion, and I quote,

“Timely vaccination during infancy has no adverse effect on neuropsychological outcomes 7-10 years later. These data may reassure parents who are concerned that children receive too many vaccines too soon.”

That’s the actual conclusion. Now the children studied were born between 1993 and 1997. So, let’s take a look at the actual vaccine schedule back then. In 1995, prior to 18 months, a typical baby would receive 3 doses of Hepatitis B, DPT, HIB, and polio vaccines, as well as the MMR, a total of 13 doses. However, according to the CDC schedule in 2016, by the age of 18 months a typical child would receive 3 doses of Hepatitis B, 3 doses of rotavirus, 4 doses of DTaP, 4 doses of HIB, 4 doses of pneumococcal, 3 doses of polio vaccine, influenza, the MMR, varicella, and 2 doses of Hepatitis A, for a total of 26 doses. That’s exactly double the doses that were studied in the original study. How can the AAP take a study that concluded that 13 doses had no effect on neuropsychological development and then apply that same study to 26 doses, and then come to the same conclusion without further studies? Let me ask you a question. Is it possible that some vaccines work and some don’t? Is it possible that some vaccines cause severe side effects and some don’t?

Looking at vaccines on a vaccine by vaccine basis

DR. MARGULIS: We have to look at vaccines on a vaccine by vaccine basis. So, saying that you have concerns about the Hepatitis B vaccine, about the infant series of the Hepatitis B vaccine, which is not based on science doesn't mean that you want to throw the baby out with the bathwater and you want to do no vaccines ever for any children. That's not what this is about. But what ends up happening is that a parent who says, like I did, a parent who says “I want more information. I don't think I need the hepatitis B vaccine. I'm hepatitis B negative. My husband is too. We've been in a monogamous relationship for three years. There's no chance that my child will get exposed to this disease,” is then told, “Well you're an anti-vaccine fanatic, how dare you question our science?” And then is vilified and ridiculed and then that parent ends up turning away from all vaccines because they've been sort of ostracized by mainstream medicine.

Aluminum in vaccines

DR. HUMPHRIES: Another problem that I see when people talk about vaccines is that it's very convenient to paint all vaccines with the same brush and we can't do that because the fact of the matter is there are different kinds of vaccines. Some of them have live viruses, some of them have killed viruses. Some of them have killed bacteria, some have pieces of bacteria, pieces of virus, and so we have to distinguish are we talking about a live virus, like the influenza vaccine? We talked about pertussis, whooping cough, but we didn’t talk about the vaccine but that’s another killed vaccine, a subunit vaccine and it has particles of either some of the toxins or some of the pieces of the external bacteria. So, those vaccines don't stimulate immunity on their own, you have to add aluminum to them. Whereas influenza vaccine, you don't have to add aluminum to the influenza vaccine but most of the other killed vaccines you do need to add aluminum. When you do that, what happens is you're stimulating that more of an antibody response than a cell mediated response. And so, those are the people that are going to be more prone to allergies later and who won't have—that's why you need, with your newborn baby at two months, four months, six months, and one year and then again when you're four years old. And now we're told that every time a woman is pregnant she needs to get a pertussis vaccine. Well that's why, because immunity is really short-lived after those particular vaccines.

TY: Dr. Humphries just articulated other issues that arise when vaccines are painted with a broad brush. Some vaccines need additives, or adjuvants, to create the immune response, and there are different types of immune responses. In other words, antibody versus cell-mediated. The polio and the injected flu vaccines, and the DTaP, are composed of inactivated, killed virus, while the MMR, measles, mumps and rubella, is composed of a live virus. It’s important to remember that there are various types of vaccines, and all of them are different with different ingredients, different risks, different side effects, different benefits. But let’s get back to our focus on the current CDC vaccine schedule, which is one of the things that most every doctor is taught while in medical school. When I was a baby in 1968, I think I got about three or four vaccines in total, and I was considered to be “fully vaccinated.” But in order to be considered “fully vaccinated” today, it’s much different.

69 doses of 16 vaccines

BARBARA LOE FISHER: What we have now is 69 doses of 16 vaccines that the federal government is saying all the children should use from day of birth to age 18. Back when my children were receiving vaccines in the late 70s and 80s, it was 23 doses of 7 vaccines. So, we’ve had a tripling of the numbers of doses of vaccines that children are now getting. And in that time period, as this dramatic escalation of the child vaccination schedule has occurred, what have we seen? Have we seen children be healthier? Just the opposite.

We have an epidemic of chronic disease and disability.

One child in six in America, now learning disabled. One in nine with asthma. One in 50 with autism. One in 400 developing diabetes. Millions more with inflammatory bowel disorders. Rheumatoid arthritis. Epilepsy. Epilepsy is on the rise. We have children—30 percent now of young adults have been diagnosed as having a mental illness, anxiety disorder, bipolar, schizophrenia. This is the worst public health report card in the history of this country. And it has coincided perfectly with the tripling of the numbers of vaccines.

Pediatricians are actually like foot soldiers to the CDC

SAYER JI: Pediatricians are actually like foot soldiers to the CDC, which is like a military organization. They literally wear uniforms. It’s a top down command situation. If a pediatrician does not abide by the standards of vaccination and promulgate them, then they themselves become legally liable for being sued. Even if they’re open and they’re like, “Oh well she doesn’t want to vaccinate according to the schedule,” and then someone actually gets injured or gets an infection, then they themselves could be legally liable. Whereas they are completely expunged of all liability if they follow without any thought the vaccine schedule.

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.: When I was a kid I got smallpox vaccine and I got polio vaccine and that was it. My kids received 69 doses of 16 vaccines.

DR. LEVATIN: A typical two-month-old baby will be getting as many as nine vaccines at once. It may not be nine injections, but it’s nine vaccines.

TY: At once?

DR. LEVATIN: At once. They can be getting a Hepatitis B, Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus, Polio, Haemophilus influenza B, Pneumococcal, Rotavirus, and I might be missing one.

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.: I’m pro-vaccine. I had all six of my kids vaccinated. I think that vaccines have saved millions of lives, and I just accepted that they were safe. That’s what the science said. I started looking at the science, and I started calling people within the agencies. I called Paul Offit, who was a big defender of vaccines, and I called Kathleen Shraten (?) at CDC and other people within the agencies, and I started questioning them. And their answers—they gave me the answers that they gave to the public, but I was informed about the science. And when I started drilling down with them on the science, it was clear that not only that the science they were citing me was bogus, but that they knew that it was weak, and they were unwilling to defend it in front of informed criticism. And that shocked me because these were not—I was used to environmental agencies becoming captured, but a public health agency that is charged with protecting the health of ou children, to lie about science and to manipulate science, which is what they were doing, just seemed criminal.

Parents who decided to delay or forego some vaccines were parents who made over $70,000 a year and had the most education

DR. MARGULIS: There was a study published in Pediatrics that showed that parents who decided to delay or forego some vaccines were parents who made over $70,000 a year and had the most education. So why is it that the best educated parents who have the highest socioeconomic income are choosing to delay some vaccines? It's not because something is wrong with those parents, it's because something is wrong with the current CDC vaccine schedule. I'll tell you an industry-kept secret, which is that a lot of doctors in America are choosing not to vaccinate their children on the current CDC schedule. Almost every doctor I've interviewed has chosen an alternative schedule for their children that is based on better health and better science. It's a really well-kept secret that the people working at the CDC are also alternating the vaccine schedule for their own children. And how do I know that? I know that because I've talked to them. So, I had someone who's an active very, very vocal spokesperson for the current vaccine schedule who confided in me that that person did not do the hepatitis B vaccine, because when that person looked at all of the data that person realized that it wasn't a good idea. So here we have public health officials screaming from the rooftops that parents must do this vaccine schedule exactly as it is put out by the CDC, while themselves in their own families are choosing not to follow it. Whenever I have a doctor who I talk to who says “I alternate the schedule,” I say “Would you share that, can I use your name?” and they say “I don't want to lose my job,” or “I don't want people to know,” or “I'm choosing not to do these vaccines, because I know they're not effective or I know they're not necessary but you can't let anybody know.” And I'm a journalist and I'm bound to journalistic ethics and I could never reveal who those people are, but I can tell you that I have spoken to them myself and they have told me the truth, and the truth is that they are alternating the schedule in their own families for their own children.

TY: Why would CDC employees not follow their own vaccine schedule? Why would pediatricians not follow their own vaccine recommendations to their own patients? In medical schools across the globe, physicians are taught that the current CDC schedule has been proven to be safe and effective.

BARBARA LOE FISHER: In 2013, the Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, issued a report that said that the current federally recommended child vaccine schedule of 49 doses of 14 vaccines, given between day of birth and age 6, has not been adequately studied for safety. And one of the issues was that the vaccines may have been studied separately, but they have not been studied in the combined schedule, including giving 8-10 vaccines on one day. So, that is something the Institute of Medicine has acknowledged. The federal government disagrees, but I think everybody needs to understand, that child vaccine schedule has not been adequately studied for safety. Fewer than 40 studies have actually studied the schedule. That’s not enough studies to prove that that schedule is safe or effective.

Synergistic effects

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.: Plus, there haven’t been any studies looking at the synergistic effects of the ingredients. So, if you have one metal, what does it do to the body? If you have one metal and another metal, what does that do to the body? If you have one metal, one metal, and antibiotics, what does that do to the body? And it’s already been shown that metal detoxification in the presence of antibiotics is diminished, versus metal detoxification without antibiotics. You have metal, metal, antibiotic, then you have a microorganism. What is the synergistic effect of that? So, none of those amplified studies, or the look at the amplification of one ingredient’s effect on another have ever been done.

NEIL MILLER: The studies in this book, Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies, this book, there’s 400 studies in here. And these are studies—most of these studies are recent studies. These are all studies that are showing problems with vaccines. Because I got tired of hearing medical doctors saying “There are no studies that show that vaccines are a problem, that vaccines are unsafe.” What are you talking about? That is an outright lie. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of studies published in peer-review journals, documenting safety and efficacy problems associated with vaccines.

The consensus around vaccines is just like tobacco science

DEL BIGTREE: The consensus around vaccines is just like tobacco science. You know? Would we have fought for tobacco science? There was a time when every doctor was saying “Smoking cigarettes is good for you, or at least it’s not bad for you.” That existed, and the industry was just paying for tons and tons of science to be done that supported that issue. That’s what’s happening in vaccines. DR.

THOMAS: Back in the 50s, doctors were promoting this brand. “Smoke Camel” o whatever. Doctors will tell you, “It's good and it will relax you. It will help you.” The tobacco companies back then knew, they had their own data, they knew that tobacco is a carcinogen, that there were problems. And once we did the huge studies, followed millions of people over years, decades. Everybody today knows. Everybody knows tobacco is a leading killer. We need to do those same sorts of studies for vaccines. TY: We do need to do more studies on vaccines and more testing. While the CDC recommends polio, Hepatitis B, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, rotavirus, Haemophilus influenza type B, and pneumococcal vaccines for 2-, 4- and 6-month-old infants, this combination of 8 vaccines administered during a single physician visit was never tested for safety in clinical trials. In addition, the CDC report entitled Mixed Exposures Research Agenda that states exactly the opposite and concluded that mixed exposures to chemicals, including pharmaceuticals and stress factors, may produce unexpected deleterious health effects. In the executive summary, we read this, and this is a quote, “Exposures to mixed stressors can produce health consequences that are additive, synergistic, antagonistic, or can potentiate the response expected from individual component exposures.” Did you know that since the late 1980s, vaccine manufacturers cannot be sued?

the Vaccine Injury Act

TONY MUHAMMAD: The vaccine makers have been protected by Congress under the Vaccine Injury Act. The anger and the rage that whites in my audiences that’ve attended, blacks and Latino mothers. They say, “Wait a minute. We can’t sue them?” I mean even those that I have met that are pro-vaccine, when you let them know that the vaccine makers cannot be so sued, even they say “Wait a minute. I'm against what you’re here for, but I ain’t for that. You’re telling me that I can’t sue the vaccine makers if it's proven that vaccine injured my child?” I say “No, they’re indemnified. You can’t touch them.”

One of the first red flags that scares me the most about vaccines is that they remove any potential for litigation against any damage from vaccines.

IAN CLARK: One of the first red flags that scares me the most about vaccines is that they remove any potential for litigation against any damage from vaccines. What that tells you is that they don’t have the science set up properly. The original vaccinations, the toxins, o whatever they wanted to call them, to try to put a tiny little bit of a disease into you so that that would get your immune system to become aware of that and used to that, and then therefore fight it off and be stronger, that principle is actually a fairly sound principle. But, when it came to making money, and getting everyone to get vaccinated for all manner of things, when it wasn’t required, it became a money scheme. As children, we were injected with all manner of poisons. I remember, when I was a kid, I couldn’t figure out, one day my eye drooped. I remember my eye drooping. Directly related to a vaccination. My eye drooped permanently. Vaccinations are irresponsible the way that they’re done. If they were responsible, if they made absolutely sure that there was no possibility of a negative side effect, and that if they didn’t do their due diligence properly then they could be litigated against. Fair’s fair. They don’t do those things. There are so many red flags around vaccinations.

MICHAEL HUGO: You have the vaccine manufacturers pretending that they were having production problems and going to Congress and saying, “We need to upgrade our plant, our physical plant to make more of this.” “But we’re not going to spend the money because we’re getting sued. And if we’re going to get sued—if we’re going to spend the money to make a product to get sued, it doesn’t make sense for us business-wise. We’re dropping out of the vaccine business.” All of the vaccine manufacturers went to Congress and told them, “We’re dropping out of the business unless you do something to make it so that we can stay in the business.” Which is where the vaccine compensation program and the vaccine act, the vaccine court, the things that you’ve heard so many things around this area over the past few days. That’s where the whole idea came from. It came from the manufacturers who could no longer defend themselves. And Congress saying, “We need to protect the vaccine supply.”

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.: I think the choice at that time was not an irrational choice by congress given the alternatives that they were presented and the alternative was that I think the calculus was based upon the idea that, at that point, there was so much litigation against the vaccine companies that the pharmaceutical industry was considering abandoning vaccines altogether. And I think the vaccine companies went to Congress and said “We're going to stop making vaccines and that's going to be a national security problem, because if there is a bioterrorism attack or if there is an epidemic, there's going to be no factories that are up and running that can create new vaccines that can respond to those national emergencies. And so, if you want us to continue to make vaccines you're going to have to give us immunity from litigation,” and that's what happened.

What business do you know is allowed to practice and offer its service without liability insurance?

DR. PALEVSKY: If you’re a surgeon, you can’t go into the OR without liability insurance. What business do you know is allowed to practice and offer its service without liability insurance?

BARBARA LOE FISHER: And what product that carries a risk of injury or death, what other product is mandated to be used by every single person born in this country multiple times, and there’s no liability for anybody?

The vaccine industry has absolute legal immunity

MIKE ADAMS: The vaccine industry has absolute legal immunity. In other words, they push all the risks of their toxic interventions onto the individuals, the families, the moms and dads. They take no risk whatsoever. And you know why? Because they have legal immunity and it means they have no reason to have quality control. They could put—if they wanted to, they could put Radioactive cesium-137 into a vaccine and inject people with it and cause you cancer and they would have absolute no liability whatsoever. They can put anything in a vaccine. And to some extent, they do. They put known neurotoxins in the vaccines. It’s criminal what they do to our fellow human beings.

BARBARA LOE FISHER: The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act that our organization worked on to try to get safety provisions in that law, says that your doctor is supposed to keep a permanent record of every vaccine and lot number given. Your doctor is supposed to write down in a child’s permanent medical record if there is a health problem that occurs, that’s serious, hospitalization and injury, and report it to the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. TY: With no responsibility and legal immunity basically, the companies that manufacture vaccines have no reason to have quality control. They literally can put whatever they want into vaccines. Barbara Loe Fisher’s nonprofit organization, The National Vaccine Information Center, NVIC, worked with Congress to pass the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. This law included a centralized vaccine reaction reporting system, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, VAERS, which is jointly operated by the federal Food and Drug Administration, the FDA, and Centers for Disease Control, the CDC. Let’s have a listen to a few experts discuss the topic of adverse reactions to vaccines.

Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System

DR. THOMAS: In the United States, we have the VAERS, Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System, and this is the system that doctors or patients, anybody, can report a possible vaccine reaction to. The reason it doesn't work is this,

Ty. I'm a pediatrician. I should be seeing all these vaccine reactions, right? And you ask any pediatrician. How many vaccine reactions have you seen? “I haven't seen any. I mean a little bit of redness where the shot’s given. Some fever. We expect that. But no, I haven't seen any reactions.” How can that be? Well, either there are no reactions, or we don't know what to look for. I think it's the latter. Here's the thing. Kids will have seizures after vaccines and we'll say, “Oh that's normal,” because you can have febrile seizures and that's a normal thing. We're taught that febrile seizures are normal. And are they? I don't know. Let's look at the unvaccinated and the vaccinated. Let's follow them and see. Do the unvaccinated have febrile seizures as well? SIDS. I'm trained to think that's just normal. We don't know what causes it, but it's normal. Let's look at the unvaccinated and vaccinated and see if they both have the same amount of SIDS. Neurological problems, autism, which you remember is the tip of the iceberg. What about all the ADD, the ADHD, the autism spectrum, the anxiety and the depression that we're seeing? We're not even talking about all the auto-immune stuff we’re starting to see at higher levels, diabetes type 1, and we're seeing way more allergies and eczema, hearing more and more about people with peanut allergies that have to carry EpiPens around. Would that still be in that unvaccinated arm? Would they have all those same levels of these disorders, these chronic diseases that we’re seeing in kids? I'd love to see this study be done. That's what we need to do.

There is a government-industry collaboration to promote vaccination

ROBERT KRAKOW: I think there is a government-industry collaboration to promote vaccination. We know that government sees itself primarily as the promoters of the vaccine program. They’re supposed to also warn us about the risk. By the way, they’re supposed to, under the law, the legislation of the vaccine act, publicize the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. We know from a recent report from the government accountability office that the people who are pushing the vaccines did not want to publicize it because they thought that conflicted. That’s not me saying that. That’s Congress. Congress commissioned the report. They said that. So, they intentionally did not publicize the vaccine program. By the way, it’s my statutory obligation, as a lawyer who does this, to promote the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. So, we can consider this interview as promoting the statutory purpose of the vaccine act. Everyone in our country, especially the doctors who don’t know how to recognize vaccine injury, should know that there’s a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, should be familia with the types of injuries that occur, and be receptive to it, and report it to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System so that we can monitor what’s going on. That’s not happening.

VAERS is not 1/10th of the injury

DR. BARK: What we see on VAERS is not 1/10th of the injury, which is what the government says. The government says “It’s probably 1/10th.” Right? It’s probably 1/1000th. I say that because I didn’t know to report to VAERS. I ran a pediatric emergency room. I trained in pediatrics.

TY: And you didn’t know you were supposed to report vaccine injuries?

DR. BARK: No. No. We had, in our year when I was a medical student, a resident and running the ER, we certainly saw kids, and I would moonlight at other hospitals even, that came in who had stopped breathing or had seizures after they’d been in the vaccine clinic. Nobody reported that. Nobody went and said “This has to be reported.”

TY: Didn’t even know.

DR. BARK: No. It was kind of like we knew that happened, okay. But they didn’t get reported. So, think how many don’t get reported.

DR. PALEVSKY: Doctors are not taught what a vaccine adverse reaction looks like. In fact, when a parent calls the doctor and says, “My child was vaccinated, I can’t wake them up, he’ll only wake up to feed. He’s sleeping for two days.” The parent is told “That’s normal.” When the parent raises the question, “Could this have been from a vaccine?” meanwhile the kid has never done that before. The doctor almost unanimously says, “No. It’s just a coincidence.” That kid suffered brain damage. Sleeping fo two days as an infant, not waking up, other than to feed. That kid was brain damaged, had brain inflammation. Not waking up for two days, other than to feed is a neurological event. That’s not normal. That’s from the injection of material into the brain.

ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR.: 1989 is the year that this epidemic of childhood illnesses began. Autism, ASD, ADD, ADHD, speech delay, language delay, ticks, something called misery disorder which I'd never heard of before. Texas Tourette’s syndrome, and other family of grave neurological injuries that became epidemic that year. SIDS, narcolepsy, seizure disorders, and of course food allergies and asthma and all of those things began at 1989. On all of those illnesses there is science today, there is science out there that indicates that those illnesses are being caused by thimerosal or adjuvants like aluminum or squalene o some other vaccine association.

Cognitive development of children

DR. PALEVSKY: Something is happening to the brains of our children. Something is interfering with the normal neuro-sequencing of brain development. Because when babies are born, their brain is not developed. When babies are born, they have more nerve cells than their brains need. It’s through life experience, that the tracks are laid down to create the proper sequencing of muscular development, speech development, cognitive development, and emotional development. Something is interfering with the proper sequence of those steps. Something is getting in the way of the brain developing properly. No one is asking the question, “Why?” Why are so many kids having an interference of the proper sequencing of brain development? Why as of January 2016, are we seeing one out of every 20 children under the age of five with a seizure disorder?

I believe that it’s clear that the vaccines were the beginning of my downward spiral of my health

SAYER JI: I believe that it’s clear that the vaccines were the beginning of my downward spiral of my health, which became sort of a lifelong issue as far as bronchial asthma, as well as other health issues that emerged. So, it was a very personal journey for me in advocacy. Because I wanted to see, is the literature supporting the view that there are this many adverse effects that could occur? And it turned out, after spending 10 years looking at the research, I’ve got all of it on my website, there’s actually over 200 adverse health effects that have been documented caused by vaccines in the schedule today.

Snip. This post would have otherwise too long for Steem.