An edited transcript of Episode 1, part 2

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.

Vaccines are unavoidably unsafe and there shall be no more lawsuits against any vaccine company

BARBARA LOE FISHER: You could still sue a manufacturer if you could show the manufacture could have made a safer vaccine. In 2011, a case went to the Supreme Court. Bruesewitz versus Wyeth. It was a DPT vaccine injury case. And the lawyers representing the pharmaceutical industry, government, and medical trade convinced the Supreme Court that there should be no liability at all for the pharmaceutical industry when it comes to vaccines that are licensed by the FDA as safe and effective. The Supreme Court majority, with two dissents, Justices Sotomayor and Ginsberg dissented. The Supreme Court said “Vaccines are unavoidably unsafe and there shall be no more lawsuits against any vaccine company.”

Legally they’re classified as “unavoidably unsafe

DR. BARK: Legally they’re classified as “unavoidably unsafe.” That’s their legal classification. When I say that, in court in the state cases that I have which are not injury obviously, that’s federal court, the judges always stop me and go, “What? What did you say? Wait, repeat that, repeat that.” I’m like, “They’re legally classified as unavoidably unsafe, your honor.” Then they’re like, “Woah, wait a minute.”

BARBARA LOE FISHER: So, today, if you or you child are injured by vaccine or if your child dies from a vaccine, you cannot hold anyone accountable in a civil court of law, anyone who makes or sells the vaccine, who regulates the vaccine and who makes policy for the vaccine, who votes to mandate for the vaccine, or who gives the vaccine. The only one who’s left with any responsibility for what happens to a child, after that child’s injured by vaccine, is the parent.

My son sustained a permanent brain damage

EDDA WEST: My son sustained a permanent brain damage and so there is a big inner struggle because you see that your child struggles with basic things that most children can easily do. That is learn language, learn how to speak, learn how to tell colors.Comprehend more complex issues. Yeah, you do have guilt, but at the same time if you didn't know in advance that that was a possibility and you blindly simply accepted something innocently that was told to you would be the best thing you could do for your child, you know you can't beat yourself up forever.

What does everybody fear requesting a study?

TY: Over the course of my travels, I was able to interview many parents, including several attorneys who could personally testify that the 2011 Supreme Court decision that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe was no joke, and that what happened to their child was proof. Listen to Congressman Bill Posey from Florida describe how he believes that every member of Congress should co-sponsor studies to make sure that the vaccines we give our children are safe.

BILL POSEY: And I think every member of Congress should be a co-sponsor. There’s no —what does everybody fear requesting a study? I mean why does anybody fear it? You go back through this stuff, and some of my friends here who are doctors, I talk about the issue with them, and they say “You’re nuts. There’s been dozens and dozens of studies.” Then I was like “How many of them have you read? What you know is a big blue-eyed pharmaceutical rep comes in here with your Super Bowl tickets and tells you about these dozens of studies that say this, that are not true.”

Ryan was severely vaccine-injured

LAURA HAYES: So, when I started putting it all together and realized wow, Ryan was severely vaccine-injured, I thought I have to get the word out. I can’t let this happen to othe children. I was one of many and we thought people are going to want to hear this. First thing I did, I wrote to the pediatrician, who we no longer went to, but the pediatrician who vaccinated him. Wrote her a five-page letter about all that had transpired, including not being able to get through to her when our son was nearly was killed by his vaccines. Then I called to follow up to make sure she’d received the letter. And I said, “What makes you so confident that these vaccines that you’re giving day in and day out are safe, that they’re not harming kids?” And she said—and I quote—she had a one sentence answer for me. This was pretty much the end of our phone call. She said, “Because the pharmaceutical reps tell me they’re safe.” The very people who are profiting from these products are the ones claiming their safety. They’re also the ones who are allowed to do their own studies and tell the FDA, “Another safe vaccine. We want you to approve it.” Right around age two I figured out, on my own with no help from my pediatrician, I woke up one morning. It was a Sunday morning. I’ll never forget it. A neon light in my mind. The word autism. I truly believe that was divine intervention. That was the day I had just had my third child three and a half weeks prior to that. I think God wanted me to get through that pregnancy before the bombshell hit that there was something really wrong with our two-year-old. So, he was subsequently diagnosed with autism, which is a term I hate to use because it is what the medical authorities and government entities and pharmaceutical companies have coined to divert the blame from themselves. It’s really encephalopathy that he has. He has brain damage. Catastrophic brain damage from his vaccines. He also has immune system damage. He has been tested. He makes antibodies to his myelin basic protein that covers every nerve sheath in your body. So, you can imagine if your body is attacking that sheath on every nerve cell, your nervous system is not going to work. He has GI issues, he has heavy metal toxicity. He has been greatly harmed by routine childhood vaccinations. I refuse to call them immunizations. Vaccination most certainly does not equal immunization in any sense of the word. He’s now 22. A boy in a man’s body. 6’4” tall, 180 pounds. On a good day, he has the cognitive abilities of a five-year-old.

He must be cared for 24/7/365.

While I’m here interviewing with you, a former tutor of his is taking care of him for two days. It’s not normal to have to hire a babysitter to care for a 22-year-old man. Unfortunately, it’s becoming the norm in our country. He still works with tutors 40 hours a week. We do a special behavioral program that helps him to learn new things and maintain that which we’ve already taught. He’s not able to work. You cannot imagine a four or five-year-old holding down a job. It’s not going to happen. He’s never gone on a date. He never will. He’s not going to get married. He’s not going to have children. He’s been robbed of leading the life that he would have lived had we not vaccinated him. As a mother, it’s painful. If I could have one do-over, one do-over in life: no vaccines for any of my children.

Advertisement

Are you enjoying Episode 1 thus far? Have you learned some great information? Are you excited to see the rest of this show and the next six episodes? Do you think others would enjoy watching it as well? Do you want to support our mission to educate the world on the truth about vaccines? Then help us spread the word by clicking the links below and sharing on Facebook, Twitter, and all the other social media sites. You support makes a huge difference in how many people we reach, and ultimately, how many lives are saved. Thanks in advance, and please click the links below to help us spread the word. Now let’s get back to Episode 1 of “The Truth About Vaccines.”

I was prosecuting the wrong drug dealers

ROBERT KRAKOW: I discovered later that for the decade of the 80s, I was prosecuting the wrong drug dealers. But by the time I learned that, which was in 2002-3, shortly after that we discovered that the drug dealers we should be prosecuting had immunity from liability. Well, what I mean is I discovered, and this is largely a product of personal experience, that one of the greatest threats to the health of our children is, among other things, vaccines. And I say that without saying that all children get hurt by vaccines. Vaccines, it’s arguable, play a very important role in promoting health. What I have seen, based on my personal experience, how vaccines can be damaging and when I had that personal experience, and I fully recognize that the authorities do not agree with me, and we tested that unsuccessfully, but we discovered, when I started pursuing that and trying to promote the interests of my own child, other parents started asking me about how they would bring a vaccine-injured case because their kid was injured. This was primarily the time—this was 2002-3-4, focused on parents of children who had been diagnosed with autism. And I didn’t even know until 2002 that there was something called the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which was sort of an experiment in tort reform that changed the entire civil compensation system, taking it out of the courts and putting it into a special program. And when I discovered it, other parents couldn’t find lawyers, so they started asking me would I handle their cases. And the rest changed my entire law practice, and also essentially my entire life. Because now I focus at least 80 percent of my time on vaccine injury cases. And there are more than I can handle. I’m not suggesting that everyone on the government side or in the court, certainly not in the court, are bad actors. That they’re doing this on some ill will or some desire to hide something that they know about. The system is set up in a way that we cannot get at the truth. That is a much more profound policy problem that’s cultural, that’s societal, that’s political.

Let's start from the position of what we’re for, not against

NICO LAHOOD: We start from the position of what we’re for, not against. We are not against anything. We’re for our kids. And if you can show us that anything is going to benefit our children, we’re all in. And we showed that by believing whatever the medical community, and I’m not against the medical community, said to do about vaccines, and we did it.

As a DA, as a prosecutor, I deal with circumstantial evidence. I look at motives.

And so, as a DA, as a prosecutor, I deal with circumstantial evidence. I look at motives, right? And so, all we did that really started a storm in our community and really internationally, was share our testimony and give our opinions. Share our testimony and give our opinion. Our testimony is our journey with our son about how he was developing normally. We have the pictures. Like so many other families, hundreds of thousands of other families share our story. We have pictures. We have video. He’s reaching all his milestones. Then something happened. Something happened. There was some intervening cause that made our son not be normal and not develop the way he was. And so, we have to ask ourselves “What was that?” We didn’t drop him. We didn’t get in a car accident. He wasn’t exposed to any chemicals other than vaccines. And that was the only intervening cause, and it was immediate. It wasn’t like it was months developing, a year, not even a week. It was immediate. It was almost like we were driving down the road, got in a car accident, we walk away but our son doesn’t. It was that type of an event. And so, we shared that journey, and in my opinion and my wife’s opinion, and it wasn’t immediate. It wasn’t like we just automatically thought it was vaccines. We believe that the vaccines caused the tipping point, over the edge, the straw that broke the camel’s back, whichever way you want to say it, that caused our son to be in the situation that he is now.

Lia and Zyter have never been vaccinated. The way they develop is completely different.

DAVI LAHOOD: We have four children. So, we kind of went the same route with our first two. Mya and Michael were vaccinated. And Mya even had some reactions as well, with a skin allergy and hives, breaking out in hives. And then our two youngest ones, Lia and Zyter have never been vaccinated. Completely the way they develop is completely different.

NICO LAHOOD: It’s apples and oranges. I tell people that we became an unintentional study. We have two children that we followed the schedule. And again, we didn’t know any better. We followed the schedule. And our first daughter, tremendous hives afte like four-six month, I don’t remember which round. They thought it was an autoimmune disease. First time parents, we’re freaking out. We had some fool actually tell Davi that she was allergic to her breast milk, which is insane. And she loves breastfeeding our children. And poked her and prodded her, nobody gave us an answer. So, we just kind of went on. We just didn’t know. We didn’t know anything about it. We didn’t even think about vaccines. I mean when it happened immediately after also, but God forbid, anybody blames vaccines. And then to this day, Mya, and we’re in the process of detoxing her, too. Even though she hasn’t been vaccinated since she was 3, and she’s 8 now, she sleeps and scratches in her sleep. She does jujitsu, she sweats. And she has these ringworms around her elbows and her joints. And so, she has skin allergies. So, we feel, and this is our opinion, it’s very frustrating for me. I’m a Type A personality. I trust the Lord, and I defer to him on everything I do. But in my flesh, I’m a very take control type of person. And when people try to tell me that “you son was born this way,” or “there’s no correlation,” or “you’re stupid to have this opinion,” or “how can you go against science?” I’m like “Look, my oath as a prosecutor is to ensure that justice is done.” What does that mean? It means that we get it right. I do that for a living every day. I look at circumstantial evidence. I look at direct evidence. I look at expert evidence.

Well, there’s correlation but not causation.

I deal with science and theories. So, this is—all I’m doing is wearing my lawye hat, either as a defense attorney or as a prosecutor, for our children and for this issue. And so, to me, it just makes complete sense that there’s a correlation. And then people say, “Well, there’s correlation but not causation.” I hear that argument all the time. Well, in my world, correlation means investigation. But in this world, correlation means “Stop your investigation.” That makes no sense to me. And the analogy I told someone the other day, if someone said “Mr. DA, there is murder at 123 Street. We have five suspects because there were only five people in the house.” “Okay, well who caused the murder?” “We don’t know. We have correlation between suspect number one, but no causation between any of them. But don’t consider suspect number one anymore.” That’s insane to me. They’re all suspects still. Until you can show me what the cause is, they’re all suspects. And nobody can tell us why our son is on the spectrum of autism, why he was developing normally, why all of a sudden that after that round of vaccines, that was it. And that’s not a shot against doctors. That’s not a shot against anything. It’s a plug for truth. We obviously want to find out the truth, and we’re amongst hundreds of thousands of other parents. In my common-sense approach, I look at 1 in 15,000 children who were autistic in the 70s when I was born, early 70s, and today as you and I speak, it’s 1 in 43. And with a projection, as you know, in 16 years of being 1 in 2. And people are just going to sit around and be politically correct and not worry about it?

Thank God I have an answer. I didn’t do this to my child.

MICHAEL HUGO: It’s not about greedy lawyers. It’s not about greedy trial lawyers. And it’s not about parents who are looking for a free handout. The most common line that I have ever heard in all of the cases I represented in front of that court—and I tried the first two cases in the vaccine program. I tried the first death case and the first life case. From those cases on to the last case that I ever did, with the exception of one case, the first words out of the parent’s mouth were, “Thank God.” Not, “Thank you.” Not thank you to the judge but “Thank God” And what they were saying was, “Thank God I have an answer. I didn’t do this to my child.” When they come to me, the first session is—I’m getting a little emotional myself. But the first session is heart-wrenching because they come to me and they say, “I need to know that I didn’t do this to my child. If I didn’t vaccinate my kid, my kid would be just like all the other kids in the playground. What did I do wrong?” And they get the answer from the court saying, “The vaccine caused your child’s injury. You didn’t drop your kid. You didn’t rock him on your leg too hard. You didn’t squeeze him too hard when you were hugging him. It had nothing to do—you didn’t put him in the crib the wrong way. Nothing to do with your parenting. It was an outside force that went into your child’s body.” That’s the most important message that any of these mothers and fathers that you see in this hotel right now want to hear is that they didn’t do anything wrong.

TY: That’s so important to remember. If you are the parent of a vaccine-damaged child, you didn’t do anything wrong. You were just trying to protect your child. We learned earlier that vaccine manufacturers cannot be sued if a person is damaged or even killed due to a vaccine. But I’m sure you’ve heard of large settlements being paid to families of vaccine-injured children, right? Like the Hannah Poling case.

The authorities, especially in the courts, have refused to recognize the fact that vaccines can cause a syndrome o a constellation of symptoms that equal autism

ROBERT KRAKOW: The authorities, especially in the courts, have refused to recognize the fact that vaccines can cause a syndrome o a constellation of symptoms that equal autism, despite the fact that there was a very celebrated case where that was in fact conceded by the government.

TY: What was that case? ROBERT KRAKOW: That was the Poling case, a very well-known case where initially the government conceded that vaccines, specifically MMR and other vaccines, five vaccines in one day, caused autism-like symptoms because of an underlying metabolic susceptibility. The government actually conceded that case. The concession was not public. Someone released it, and it was leaked, and it became public and became well-publicized in the winter and spring of 2008.

Her father, a Harvard-trained medical doctor, neurologist, investigates.

TY: Hannah’s father, John, is a Harvard-trained medical doctor, neurologist, and in 2008, he claimed that Hannah’s autistic symptoms were caused by a vaccine reaction after she had received five vaccines: DTaP, HIB, MMR, varicella and polio, at the age of 18 months. Here’s what’s interesting. Hannah had been part of a study of normally-developing children prior to being diagnosed with autism, and had received an advanced brain imaging technology being developed by Harvard University. Her father John was able to present compelling evidence that the vaccine reaction was causative of Hannah’s autism. The vaccine court ruled in favor of Hannah Poling, stating that there was sufficient evidence to conclude that vaccines given to Hannah Poling likely aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disease, causing brain damage with features of autism. The Poling family was awarded $1,507,284. But you may be asking the question, “If you can’t sue vaccine manufacturers, where did the $1.5M come from?” The money came from the Vaccine Injury Trust Fund, also known as the NVICP, National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which is basically a stash of cash collected on every vaccine sold and given to children and adults in the USA. That trust fund is financed by a 75-cent excise tax on each vaccine actively recommended by the CDC. On multivalent vaccines, in other words, those that contain more than one active disease, for example, trivalent vaccines, like the MMR and the DPT, then 75 cents is paid for each valent, or a total of $2.25 for each trivalent vaccine. The Hannah Poling case is only one case, but there are literally thousands where a family has received a monetary award from the trust fund due to the court’s ruling that the child was damaged by the vaccine. In the next segment, Congressman Posey from Florida discusses some congressional hearings on the safety of vaccines, as well as the trust fund.

Vaccines are absolutely 100 percent safe. There is no harm in any vaccine in any person. And anybody who says otherwise is a complete idiot.

Then why has a trust fund paid out over 3 billion dollars to injured people?

BILL POSEY: They had in the Senate a hearing on this, and I watched all of the high-profile defenders of the public good get up there and throw the softball questions to the expert, which was a top Navy medical doctor. And they basically said “Vaccines are absolutely 100 percent safe. There is no harm in any vaccine in any person. And anybody who says otherwise is a complete idiot.” And so, I’m watching this on a monitor and I’m screaming “Ask them about the trust fund. Ask them about the trust fund.” But nobody asked about the trust fund. If these things are 100 percent safe, why has a trust fund paid out over 3 billion dollars to injured people?

There’s clearly a potential for harm. No question.

DR. MERCOLA: There’s clearly a potential for harm. No question. No one will deny that. As a parent—typically it’s a parent evaluating this for their child, you need to make the responsible decision to carefully evaluate the evidence and look at the risk. Look at the side effects and see if the benefits warrant or justify that, because you have to balance the scale for your child. Your child is too young. They can’t do it for you. You have to do it for them. If you do that and you carefully evaluate it and you may reach a different conclusion than the public health authorities and your pediatrician is telling you.

MIKE ADAMS: The vaccine industry only tells part of the story. They like to highlight children who are sickened by pandemics, measles, mumps, and so on. And they claim that vaccines are completely safe and effective, implying zero risk. Well, this is a distorted science, or junk science on their part. The truth is that vaccines have risks themselves. And if you look at vaccinating very large populations, you end up with more children having side effects from the vaccines than would have caught the disease that the vaccines claim to prevent. There’s no such thing as a completely safe vaccine. Every medical intervention has risk, and that risk is completely ignored, even denied, by the vaccine industry because they don’t want people to think rationally and scientifically about risk versus possible benefits. It’s interesting, when you look at any kind of a medical intervention, whether it’s drugs, or chemotherapy, or surgery, there’s a risk versus benefit ratio. And an informed person makes a decision to go into that when the risk is low and the reward is high. That makes sense. But when it comes to vaccines, the risk is very, very high of damage and the reward is very, very low. And it’s that equation that the vaccine industry does not want people to think about.

Do the risks outweigh the benefits?

DR. CENTERS: The question is, do the risks outweigh the benefits, and vice versa? And for some children, there is a great risk and a real problem. The real issue is that we don’t know which children those are. And because we don’t know, we are exposing those most vulnerable, most at-risk children to these immunological agents.

TY: Congressman Posey mentioned 3 billion dollars being paid to vaccine-injured people. On the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services website, I found the data report. Through January 1, 2017, there was a total of 3.56 billion dollars in total outlays to families of injured people. We need to evaluate the risks and the benefits of vaccines and then come to our own conclusions.

We’re not talking about either the benefits of vaccination, which are very questionable

DR. WAKEFIELD: The idea that we can’t question vaccines now is derived from the success of what people believe happened with smallpox and polio. So, whenever I get involved in a debate about measles vaccine, or MMR, o thimerosal, people say, “Yeah, but what about smallpox? What about polio?” I say, “We’re not talking about those. We’re talking about something completely different. Can we stay on topic? Can we focus on this and actually deal with the safety issue?” We’re not talking about either the benefits of vaccination, which are very questionable. There’s certainly many, many questions that need to be answered. We’re talking about the safety. They’re two very, very different things. People talk about the benefits when they really should be focusing upon the safety. Just because something may produce a beneficial effect, that does not make it safe.

A child that I am taking care of who is completely normal at age one regress into severe autism over a matter of months.

DR. THOMAS: I was in a group practice with four other pediatricians and around 2004-5, I saw my first case in my own practice. A child that I am taking care of who is completely normal at age one regress into severe autism over a matter of months. So, by age two, this child was non-verbal, no eye contact. Suffering. Some of these kids suffer. They have pain, they have severe abdominal pain and GI stuff. Some of the stuff that Wakefield was charged to look at back in the day. And I'm thinking, I'm reading “there's no link.” We don't know what's causing it, so I'm thinking it's a coincidence. It's clearly nothing to do with vaccines. TY: Because that’s what you were told?

DR. THOMAS: That's what I'm reading almost daily. We have what we call “throwaway journals” for pediatricians. So, there's an infectious disease journal. I mean if you look at all the ads in it, it clearly comes from—it's supported by pharma. But it's very well-written, I mean it looks good, it's glossy and it comes across your desk weekly. And you read, pretty much almost every copy of that will have something that's elevating vaccines and putting down any possible connection. Putting down Wakefield as a fraud. They would just repeat that. So, you read that over and over again. I'm reminded of weapons of mass destruction and off we went to war. I mean you hear it enough times, you start thinking it must be so. But anyway, next year, I get another case. My practice, a kid in my practice who was doing great, perfectly normal at one, becomes severely autistic. I was seeing at that time about 100 babies a year. Maybe slightly more. 100 to 150 babies a year would join my practice at that time. So, that's an autism rate of 1 in 100, 1 in 150, which is about what it's been reported to be back then. I should remind you or tell you, when I was in medical school in 1985, I saw not one case of autism. So, I'm at a regional center, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, and I didn't see a single case. In my residency training in California, again, at major centers, I had one case that I recall of what we called PDD-NOS, pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified That's sort of another code for autism spectrum, that's the term we used back then. One case in all those years. So, it is true that the autism rate has just skyrocketed, I mean absolutely skyrocketed. You'll hear people say, “Well we're just better at diagnosing it.” Right? Oh, come on. These cases that I'm telling you about, so to get back to them, you can't miss them. They weren't missed, they didn't exist. You cannot miss a kid who's got no eye contact and is flapping perhaps and not talking, when they were talking before. This was something new, this was something different. Fast forward a couple more years, I had had four cases. So, in November of 2007, I walked into a room and there was a little fellow, I know his name, he's still my patient. He'd been normal at one when I'd seen him, he'd seen my nurse practitioner at 18 months and was doing great. And he was—we're behind the window, he had his back to the window in a stroller and he was just doing this. I went up to him and I said—called him by name, trying to get his attention. I can usually get kids to interact. Nothing, he was gone. And he ended up being my fourth case in four years of normal one-year-olds who were completely, severely autistic by age two. And that was the last straw for me. I had already been doing my own research about toxins and I knew all about the thimerosal and how huge—the dose we were giving of thimerosal, of mercury, was so far exceeding the safe limits that it was criminal. And I'd also been starting to become aware of the amount of aluminum that we were injecting.

Any red flags, should be interpreted beyond doubt that there is a problem with that vaccine, until proven otherwise.

DR. WAKEFIELD: If you are going to institute a public health measure across the board, for all healthy children in the country o in the world, then you’ve got to make absolutely certain that it is as safe as it possibly can be. And any red flags, any red flags, should be interpreted beyond doubt that there is a problem with that vaccine, until proven otherwise.

TY: Any red flag with vaccines should be considered a problem, and we should apply the brakes until it’s proven safe, not vice versa. And remember, the entire purpose of this documentary is to facilitate discussion about vaccines and to overcome the idea that we cannot even ask questions about vaccines. A sentence in the DHHS Register, Volume 39, number 107, from June 1, 1984, was in reference to the final rules for polio vaccination campaigns in the United States after three decades of controversy. And I quote: “Any possible doubts, whether or not well-founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to ensure the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation’s public health objectives.” Why are well-founded doubts not allowed to be discussed? We are here to explore uncomfortable topics in order to protect our children and humanity. Dr. Wakefield just mentioned smallpox and polio, so I want to address the history of both of those vaccines. We’ll cover smallpox in this episode, and then we’ll get to polio in the next episode. Edward Jenner was born in 1749 in Berkley, Gloucestershire. He was orphaned at age five and went to live with his older brother. During his early school years, Edward developed a strong interest in science and nature that continued throughout his life.

---

Snip. Too long for Steem.

fc::raw::pack_size(trx) <= (get_dynamic_global_properties().maximum_block_size - 256):

End of part 2.

---

Thank you for your attention. Let's make this world a better place together.

Love, peace and prosperity.

@Nutela

---

Previous posts about vaccines:

• The Truth About Vaccines Video Docu-series - Episode 1
• transcript of Ep. 1 part 1
• transcript of Ep. 1 part 2
• transcript of Ep. 1 part 3
• The Truth About Vaccines Video Docu-series - Episode 6
• transcript of Ep. 6 part 1
• transcript of Ep. 6 part 2
• The Truth About Vaccines Video Docu-series - Episode 7
• transcript of Ep. 7 part 1
• transcript of Ep. 7 part 2

Other people writing about vaccines

• Vaccinations : An Unvaccinated 16 Year Old's Perspective!
• CDC Knew Her Son Was At Higher Risk; but now Austin Figueroa is #4920 Name on the Bus! (VaxXed Stories From The Road)
• How the Measles Vaccination Program has Destroyed Herd Immunity
• https://steemit.com/vaccines/@synesthesia/i-ll-take-my-natural-immunity-any-day-over-vaccines-2017724t204130100z