Wednesday, July 13, 2011


I've been putting this off for a long time! Partly because I haven't been sure where I stand and partly because I haven't wanted to vocalise it. I am very aware that I am in a minority and that the majority has some angry and damning people in it. I'm not sure where to start so I'll just launch into it.

The most aggressive argument I hear from those who believe in vaccination is about herd immunisation. The idea that the more people who are vaccinated the harder that it is for the disease to spread through the community. Seems logical in theory. There are two things that just don't work with this argument. One is that immunity from vaccination is not a given. Many people find that they still get the disease after being vaccinated or discover that that they have not created antibodies to a disease that they have been vaccinated against. Recently someone mentioned that you don't always create antibodies towards a disease, but that doesn't mean that you're not immune to it. I'm not sure how this works and haven't looked into it. Something I might do one day, but right now if you want to know more you might have to look into it yourself.

If you do become immune to a disease through vaccination even vaccine manufacturers will now tell you that that immunity will probably only last you between 2-12 years for tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough (pertussis) and for measles, mumps, rubella, haemophilus influenzae type b (HIb), polio and hepatitis b they either don't know or "it appears to result in long-term immunity" according to the Immunisation Advisory Centre. It would be interesting to know how many adults who were vaccinated as children still have immunity to these diseases. I don't hear of too many adults going to get booster shots for any of these diseases, unless they're traveling to countries where these diseases are more prevalent or they get a tetanus booster when they go to Accident & Emergency with a severe cut. In terms of pertussis this is notable as it's not a dangerous disease for an adult but could easily be passed onto a baby under 6 months for whom it could be more dangerous.

There is also evidence (see the research that this blog links to) that either the vaccines aren't working or immunity is waning for disease that 'appear[s] to result in long-term immunity'. This quote from the above mentioned blog mentions a number of issues I have already touched on. "The measure of immunity used in science (antibody titres) is not always predictive of whether a person will develop an illness or not. The shift in the age group who are sick with mumps suggests waning immunity, with 19-24 year olds now most likely to contract mumps. The cause for this waning immunity is not well understood, with the possibility that a reduction in circulation of the virus could result in a reduction in the natural ‘boosting’ effect when there is already immunity to mumps virus."

So as someone else eloquently put it on a forum I was reading, "In regard to herd immunity I usually say that the idea of herd immunity is a myth designed to get us all to police each other. It is a myth as many vaccines only last for 5-10 years (whooping cough for example) and how many adults and teens do you know who get regular booster shots? When was their last booster shot? So the rates of vaccination across the community are way lower than reported, and I don't see why it has to be my 4 month old who is responsible for that. It really is ridiculous that the burden of "community safety" is put upon our smallest and most vulnerable. Herd immunity really to me is a piece of propaganda designed to make good parents feel guilty and to get the community to police its dissidents."

Hear, hear. I agree with this parent completely. So onto what I find more horrifying from the article is that the population most likely to get mumps is now 19-23 yr olds. This is also the age where mumps are more dangerous in terms of becoming testicular mumps in men and causing sterility. "Orchitis (testicle inflammation) affects 1 in 5 adult males" IMAC. My emphasis added. Also from the IMAC site is that most reported cases of mumps in NZ are for 5-9 yr olds. Again my emphasis. Doesn't mention whether these cases are in vaccinated or unvaccinated children.

Here's a direct quote from Dr Russell Blaylock in December 2009 found on this blog.

"That vaccine-induced herd immunity is mostly myth can be proven quite simply. When I was in medical school, we were taught that all of the childhood vaccines lasted a lifetime. This thinking existed for over 70 years. It was not until relatively recently that it was discovered that most of these vaccines lost their effectiveness 2 to 10 years after being given. What this means is that at least half the population, that is the baby boomers, have had no vaccine-induced immunity against any of these diseases for which they had been vaccinated very early in life. In essence, at least 50% or more of the population was unprotected for decades.

If we listen to present-day wisdom, we are all at risk of resurgent massive epidemics should the vaccination rate fall below 95%. Yet, we have all lived for at least 30 to 40 years with 50% or less of the population having vaccine protection. That is, herd immunity has not existed in this country for many decades and no resurgent epidemics have occurred. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations."

My most common response to the herd immunity argument and my irresponsibility is that I wouldn't expect another parent to do something to their child that they believed was detrimental to them for the sake of my children and I would expect the same in return. My responsibility is firstly to my children and then to 'doing no harm' and doing good where I can in society. I also believe that 'herd immunity' is a myth for the same reason someone has mentioned already. Wow look at the world's population! We have done a pretty good job at surviving these life threatening childhood diseases!!! I make sure my children have the strongest immune systems that they can, through extended breastfeeding (they have a bit of my immunity for 2-3 years!), a really good diet, (low in sugar, bad fats and preservatives/additives etc), a high quality supplement on top of that when they're over 2 and not breastfeeding so much or at all, fish oils, probiotics. When they get sick I keep them home (we live frugally on one income in order to provide this for our children when they're young) use homeopathy, herbal remedies and vitamins (not cheap). We very rarely visit the doctor. My children get sick and they get better quickly. My 1 year old has had 1 dose of pamol so far. The only drug in his system ever. Dare I say it but when it comes to natural selection my children will survive. It is not acceptable for anyone to die these days. Well anyone young. So we are taught to fear death and these diseases and not to trust our bodies and our children's bodies ability to heal. Sometimes I wonder whether people vaccinate their children thinking that they now don't have to worry about being conscious of keeping them healthy.

As I've eluded to another reason I don't vaccinate my children is all the unknowns about vaccines. There is very little thorough research on the safety of vaccines. It simply hasn't been done! An example of this is the chemical aluminum. "No one has actually studied vaccine amounts of aluminum in healthy human infants to make sure it is safe." Sears, R.W. (2007). The Vaccine Book. I was just flabbergasted to read this information on aluminum. I'll try to sum it up for you:

Aluminum: There is some interesting past research on IV (straight into the vein) aluminum in premature babies. Injected aluminum bypasses the protective mechanism of the GI (gastrointestinal) tract and it circulates and is deposited in human tissues. "...if premature babies get more than 10 micrograms of aluminum per day in their IV solution, it may accumulate in their bones and brain at toxic levels." (Sears, R.W. 2007). "...toxicity is difficult to detect just by observing symptoms." In a 1997 study in The New England Journal of Medicine premature babies were split into 2 group - those with aluminum in their IV drip and those without. Hundreds of babies were studied. One group received an average of 50 micrograms per day and the other group about 10 micrograms per day over about 10 days. This study concluded that aluminum impaired the neurologic and mental development of the premature babies who received more than 10 micrograms of IV aluminum per day. No one knows how long it takes to absorb into the bloodstream from the muscle and then excretion into the urine and out of the body when it's injected into the skin and muscles of infants.

I had a look at the vaccines injected into a 6 week old according to the New Zealand Vaccination Schedule (it's actually called Immunisation Schedule, but I can't bring myself to use that word as it is not descriptive of what it is. It hopes to create immunity, but may not, therefore it is a vaccination schedule not a guaranteed 'immunisation' schedule). I digress. So at 6 weeks a baby receives 2 injections. One is the INFANIX -hexa of Diphtheria, Tetanus, Whooping cough (DTaP), Polio, Hepatitis B (Hep B) and Haemophilus influenzae type b (HIB). The other is Prevenar of Pneumococcal (Pc). Using Dr Bob Sears, The Vaccine Book, written in 2007 I added up the amount of aluminum that a baby of 6 weeks would get. He didn't have the INFANIX -hexa vaccine as so I just added up the aluminun in DTaP, HIB and Polio combo vaccine from Pentacel (330 micrograms) with the Hep B vaccine (250 microgram) and the Pc (125 micrograms) which comes to a grand total of 705 micrograms of aluminum injected into the skin/muscle of a 6 week old in one go! The same 6 week old will get that amount again 6 weeks later. Hmmm is the kidney function of a 6 week old that much better than a premature baby? How quickly does the blood stream absorb this amount from the muscle? How much ends up accumulating in tissues, including the brain of this baby in it's first 3 months of life? Nobody knows the answer to these questions because nobody has studied it!

Other ingredients in vaccines also concern me. These include human and animal tissue, mercury (now only found in flu vaccines and some tetanus vaccines), formaldehyde, MSG, 2-Phenoxyethanol and more.

The human and animal tissue present in MMR, Chickenpox, Polio, Flu, DTaP, Tetanus and diphtheria, Tdap are Human blood proteins, human lung cells, human fetal lung cells, human cell lines, cow serum, cow heart-muscle extract, cow tissue extract, monkey kidney cells, guinea pig embryo cells, chicken embryos, chicken kidney cells, chicken eggs.

Already it has been discovered that between 1955-1963 some of the monkey kidney cells used in the injected polio vaccine contained the SV-40 virus, which is known to cause brain tumors, bone cancer, lymphoma and mesothelioma cancer in animals. The genetically identical virus has been found in human tumors today. They now test for this disease, but how many other diseases are or could go undetected in the production of vaccines? So far they don't know how to screen for mad cow disease. We didn't know it existed until the 1980's and cow serum had been used in vaccines for decades before that. Was anyone injected with it? Who knows. It is my concern and those of others too that virus' may go undetected in future vaccine batches.

Formaldehyde is used to preserve the frogs, cats etc that you may have dissected in biology class. Some say that you would have inhaled more of it in this class than you'd ever get in a vaccine. However it's my opinion that injection of chemicals like this is a whole different story. Our bodies are used to dealing with pollutants (in more recent years, so we're probably still not 'used' to dealing with them) and pathogens that enter through the nose, mouth, ears etc - naturally occurring 'holes' in our bodies. Our immune systems are set up to fight these dangers as they enter the body. When injected into skin and muscle, then very quickly the blood stream our bodies first defenses don't get a chance to protect us from the damage they might do when they reach the blood stream. Most of our immune system is in our gut. The other argument is that these chemicals are in such miniscule amounts that they 'probably' wouldn't harm us. Although our bodies have to cope with a lot these days, they are still very fine tuned organisms. Tipping the balance of any, even naturally occurring chemicals in our bodies could cause problems.

My final thoughts on vaccines are this. Our population seems to be surviving pretty well. We didn't all die out when there were no vaccines around to prevent these childhood diseases. As my aunty commented recently, "oh yes I had the measles when I was little, everyone did." And yes some people died from it. What I'd like to know and may never find out is, who were these people? What was their level of health before contracting the disease? Did they have underlying conditions? Were they fully and well nourished? What was their socio-economical status (which may had influenced their level of nourishment and living conditions)?

No one is allowed to die these days, especially not when they're young. It's considered a tragedy and there is no way I'd want it to be my child, no one would. The strongest, fittest, healthiest would have survived. Perhaps in some cases some of the strongest, fittest and healthiest did succumb to these diseases and who knows why, but I'd bet that most of the time it was the under or malnourished, those who lived in damp, unhygienic conditions and those who already had underlying condition or immune disorders.

My response to childhood diseases is to do what I can to arm my children with the strongest immune systems and the best of health so that when they contract these diseases and in some cases I hope they do Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Chicken Pox (might be incubating that one in our house right now!), they will get sick and get well again with no permanent damage. Of course I will be there to give them the support they need. It is well known that the use of cod liver oil supports someone through the measles. As the measles virus uses up vitamin A from the body, cod liver oil replaces this so the body can still function well enough to overcome the disease and suffer less through it. Grandma knew what was good for us! Or maybe we need to go back to Great Grandma. I also heard a story of a doctor who was successfully treating many malnourished children with severe cases of measles with IV Vitamin C. He went on leave and instructed his stand in to do the same. The stand in doctor didn't believe this to be the right way to treat measles and didn't follow his instructions. In the time the doctor was on leave 2 children died from measles. Not sure of the accuracy of this story but have heard of the use of IV Vitamin C before. These diseases have been around for so long we (medical establishment and anyone who has investigated them) know what we are dealing with when they pop up. There is so much we don't know about vaccines.

The 'pop up' rate in the western world is low these days, probably due to vaccines and in some cases this can be a problem. It is thought that without the wild strains of these diseases floating around the community, no one (including those who have been vaccinated) are being immune 'boosted' by them. When immunity wanes (in those who have been vaccinated, possibly even those who get the disease if they are not exposed to it again for a very long time) which it does after approximately 10 years for most people and most vaccines then we have an adult population at greater risk. Not only are they at greater risk of catching the disease if it was to arise (until we fix the problem of under and malnourishment in many parts of the world these diseases will continue to kill these populations and spread around the world) they are also approximately 20% more likely to be hospitalised.

Many vaccine proponents argue that those of us who chose not to vaccinate do so in a climate of low levels of the diseases and because we weren't around to see rows and rows of sick and in some cases dying people we don't understand what we're risking. This might be so. I make my decision based on when and where we live. If there was a major disaster and we were suddenly without a sewage system and clean water it might be a problem. Again, survival of the fittest might come back into play. Until then I will continue to arm my children with strong bodies and minds in order to be the 'fittest'.

At the end of the day vaccination in New Zealand is a choice. At this stage (and I can't envision it changing, but won't rule it out) I choose not to vaccinate myself or my children. When they are old enough I will help them to understand the issue and they can make a decision for themselves. Until then we will look after ourselves without the use of vaccination and all the short and long term, known and unknown risks they pose.

No comments: