Great Article i found on Vaccinations

Get ready to roll up the little ones? sleeves yet again!

by Helen Lobato

Last week the Federal Government announced that every Australian baby will receive the new vaccine against Rotavirus designed to protect infants against the common gastro virus that is responsible for 5-10 child deaths a year.

This latest addition to the childhood immunisation program brings the total number of diseases for which children are to be vaccinated to 14.

The vaccine assault kicks off very early in life. Shortly after birth, your newborn will receive a jab for Hepatitis B.

Now, you may think that there is good reason for this addition to the immunisation sched ule but please think again.

Do some research into who is likely to contract Hepatits B and I can guarantee you will find that it isn?t the sweet, sleepy new born that you hold in your arms.

Hepatitis B is not common in childhood and is not highly contagious. It is primarily an adult disease transmitted through infected body fluids, most frequently infected blood, and is prevalent in high-risk populations such as needle using drug addicts.

Today there are more reports of adverse reactions from this vaccine than there are reported cases of the disease in children. Some 872 serious adverse events have occurred in children under 14 years of age who had been injected with Hepatitis B vaccine. Many of these had life-threatening health problems, were hospitalized, or were disabled following the vaccination.

In contrast, only 279 cases of Hepatitis B disease were reported in children under age 14. 1.

The continued administration of the Hepatitis B vaccine is alarming as it reeks of shocking science and scandalous behaviour that we as a society should not be tolerating. But then the manufacturer Merck, makes almost $1 billion USD a year from this single product.

In the year 2000, the hepatitis B vaccine was added to the childhood schedule beginning shortly after birth. Even more disturbing was the fact that hospitals were to give this vaccination as a conditionality of their hospital funding.

How do we continue to condone such an injustice! These vaccines are being given to young babies who need nothing but mother?s milk for at least six months of their new lives.

As I have previously noted there are now 14 diseases for which children are vaccinated. Starting with Hepatitis B at birth (which is repeated at intervals four times), they are then given vaccines containing Tetanus, Diptheria, Pertussis and, Haemophilus Influenza B, plus the Polio vaccine and Pneumococcal Conjugate. These are also repeated at intervals throughout the child?s early years.

Inoculation with the MMR vaccine, which is a combination of Measles, Mumps and Rubella, begins at the age of twelve months along with Meningococcal C and a vaccine against Chickenpox. Again these are not single shots but are repeated.

Added to this extensive list is Gardasil, the new cervical cancer vaccine for girls, which will soon be promoted for boys. And the latest vaccine to be added to the childhood vaccination schedule is Rotarix or RotaTeq for Rotavirus. Why would you give a vaccine for gastroenteritis when common sense tells you that hygiene and good nutrition will suffice.

Can vaccination really be a good thing for young formative bodies? One wonders how those of us of earlier generations have survived to this point. We were only given the triple antigen and polio, as I recall. But we did survive and so should the young of today, without these supposed cushions, which in reality are nothing but assaults on young developing immune systems.

The triumph over infectious epidemics cannot be attributed to medical science or to doctors or vaccines, but rather to hygienic improvements and vastly improved nutrition. The decline in infectious disease was well on the way before the use and abuse of vaccinations.

"Smallpox was on the way out, indeed epidemics disappeared decades before the WHO decided to conduct the final "eradication" campaign. It is also well-documented that the largest epidemics occurred in the most highly vaccinated populations, while whose who were unvaccinated, did not have the same epidemics. "--Dr. Viera Scheibner 2.

Barbara Loe Fisher Co-founder & President National Vaccine Information Center writes :

"Instead of epidemics of measles and polio, we have epidemics of chronic autoimmune and neurological disease: In the last 20 years rates of asthma and attention-deficit disorder have doubled, diabetes and learning disabilities have tripled, chronic arthritis now affects nearly one in five Americans and autism has increased by 300 percent or more in many states."

As the list of vaccines for children continue to grow we can only begin to imagine the numbers of autoimmune diseases that will spiral right out of control at immense cost to the community.

As to the effectiveness of vaccines Phillip Incao M.D sums it up like this:

Vaccinations are usually effective in preventing an individual from manifesting a particular illness, but they do not improve the overall strength or health of the individual nor of the immune system. Instead, vaccinations modify the reactivity of the immune system, decreasing acute discharging inflammatory reactions and increasing the tendency to chronic allergic and auto-immune reactions. 3.

Vaccination continues for many reasons. One powerful reason is that we have been brainwashed to believe in the powerful assumption that vaccines protect us from the diseases of which we are afraid. Then there is the coercion that is applied to parents in that they comply with vaccination or they will miss out on childcare and certain parenting allowances. We are not informed that we do have a choice in this matter and that you are free to register as conscientious objectors and still receive these benefits. Another really significant reason for the continuance of this policy is that doctors are paid bonuses by governments each time they vaccinate your child. Our governments do not approve of our mainstream media discussing the issue of vaccination for it fears that parents will not vaccinate if they hear the other side of the vaccination issue. The media itself stays right away from the issue as the pharmaceutical companies are the largest buyers of advertising space. The practice of vaccination results in record profits for pharmaceutical companies as it vaccinates first and then sells the medicines to drug the autism sufferers and relieve the symptoms of countless auto immune diseases.

There are currently 200 vaccines in the pipeline ranging from a vaccine to prevent periodontal disease to a shot in the arm for peanut allergy. The vaccination cartel is way out of control!

References

1. http://www.naturodoc.com/library/bio-war/HepB.htm

2. THE VACCINATION HOAX

3. articles

also there is
visainfo.org.au

Thankyou Eli, what a great site - so much very relevant information

this has become such an interesting topic. I was quite naive when i had my first child and really didnt know that there was a choice not to immunise and then automatically followed suit with baby number 2. I now find myself 10 years older and trying very hard to conceive baby number 3. I now have already decided after all the data i have recently read and also from personal experience that i would not immunise baby number 3. amazing how my stance has done a complete 360. I am concerned though what do you not get from the government if you chose to not immunise and also i noted when both of my kids went to school they needed to have an immunisation school certifacate. why?
Does this mean they can't go to school in Victoria without their immunisations?If so thats cool too-home schooling is fine by me(no bullies here). The other reasons i feel so strongly is because you cannot poosibly immunise against everything known to man. Logic must intervene somewhere(probably where profits stepped in). Myself and my daughter both had scarlet fever about two years ago. Who in this day and age gets scarlet fever. Yet we were quarantined and recovered well. And my first born regardless of having all his immunisations was affected by measles twice while he was a toddler and preschooler. So what is the point? A friend of ours had their son immunised with the chicken pox vaccine and he still got chicken pox a year later. I also have grave fears now for the amounts of heavy metals and toxins that these vaccines contain and yet years ago i did this voluntarily!

You jsut get a Conscientious Objection form and you still get teh Immu Payment.

It annoys me because I have to make a dr's appointment just to get it signed.

That's a good article - doesn't go too over the top, but nice clear facts.

I also find it funny that some people are so ill informed. I had one friend worried that her children couldn't play with mine, I had other mothers in the playgroup literally pick up their kids from the floor when I mentioned I didn't vacc.
Stupid BIL and SIL didn't want to bring their kids over. Pathetic. BTW my kids have never caught any illness, so it's not like they were pox ridden with shaven heads and snotty noses...

I just laugh and say - well you can't be too confident in your childs immunisation - apparently your children can't catch anything....

I actually had a folder with all the info I researched on Vacc that I would whip out as soon as anyone hassled me. First I would ask what research they had done on the matter and oh wow - none of them had.

The hygiene issue isn't an issue nowadays, but the fact remains, when hands are washed, disease doesn't spread. It took a while for them to associate hygiene with epidemics back then.

Being exceptionally clean is no good either. You body does not get the chance to build up immunity to everyday viruses and pathogens.

ETA - what research have you done Shannon?

:

---

Hmmmm, such an emotive topic isn't it? To me, I can understand on a personal level why people choose not to vaccinate, but believe that the whole society benefits from the process.

---

Yes, Shannon, I agree. You are absolutely right. The push for all children to be immunised is a classif public health policy, in that it caters to the overall health needs of society, as opposed to looking at the health needs of the individual.

:

---

Absolute baloney to say that diseases such as measles and mumps can be eradicated with proper hygiene! LOL, that's funny. Small pox was going to wipe itself out hehehe.

---

This is an often misunderstood facet of the anti-immunusation argument.

No one argues that good hygeiene will eradicate any vaccine-preventable disease. What we do know, however, is that there is a clear correlation between the mortality rate of infants and children with vaccine preventable diseases, and community standards of hygeiene and health. In other words, good hygeiene prevents the spread of vaccine-preventable diseases, as well as preventing the spread of general diseases such as gastroenteritis and influenza. The result is children who are generally healthier, as they spend less time with fevers, vomiting or diahrroea in their lives. We also have better standards of nutrition - we eat more fresh food, we have sufficient food for our children, etc. The result is children who are healthier. As a result, their bodies are much more able to deal with a vaccine-preventable disease such as measles or smallpox.

In examining the immunisation issue, we have to consider what gives the greater benefit, the use of childhood immunisation programs, or allowing children to catch these diseases themselves. A century and a half ago, these diseases killed many, many children, and it made sense to push for immunisation for all children to protect children from these diseases. However, even before the immuniation programs were introduced, there was a marked decrease in the number of deaths from vaccine-preventable diseases. This correlated with improving community hygeine and nutrition standards, and improved access to health care.

Notwithstanding that, if we assume immunisation is universally safe, you could still mount an argument for universal immunisation for all children. But this is not the case. There are still children, every year, who have massive allergic reactions to immunisations. Other major immunisation reactions are increasing as well, and while researchers have not been able to causatively link autism and immunisation, there is enougyh anecdotal evidence now that the latest research into immunuisation accepts that the link exists and is calling for more research to try and identify the cause.

Given the facts, and that in both cases (whether to immunise, or not) there are risks, it is essential that each parent look at the research - from both sides - and make an informed decision.

:

---

My mum is a clean freak and trust me when I say that hygeine wasn't an issue in our house. Didn't stop me from getting the diseases though, that's because handwashing and hygeine cannot stop viruses from spreading (especially airborne ones).

---

How old are you Shannon? The main components of the immunisation schedule have been in place for quite some time. Were you immunised, or did your parents choose not to? Either way, the fact that you caught these diseases - and have survived without any ill effects, and no doubt have a strong immunity to them - is living proof that there is a case for not immunising.

:

---

And although I can say that I had mumps and measles and there's nothing wrong with me, there were hundreds of children who died from measles. Hundreds and thousands who went deaf, or were rendered infertile through these diseases. Now days we have a handful of cases of measles every year instead of a handful of children dying from it.

---

I agree. But these diseases are not prevalent in babies and infants any more. Most parents in Australia keep their babies at home, or have them cared for by trusted relatives. There is also not the degree of social contact for young babies and infants that there was decades ago. These diseases spread around schools and day-care centers., now, in older children. There is no reason why the schedule could not be examined now, in the light of new epidemiological research, and adjusted. Mumps is a benign disease - unless you are a male, in which case you have a slight chance of developing an orchiditis which could render you infertile. So why vaccinate girls for it? Vaccinate boys. And wait until they are 4 or 5, so that they are old enough that their immune systems only need one dose to develop an immunity.

:

---

I can understand how the small number of people who choose not to vaccinate can feel comfortable in not doing so, that their children probably won't get sick from the diseases, and that's because the majority of people do vaccinate. If not for the majority pulling their weight on this one, choosing not to vaccinate would result in the diseases being much more prevalent and children getting sick and dying.

---

While most of your post was well though out Shannon, this last paragraph was just a thinly disguised way of saying that parents who choose not to immunise are responsible for other children getting sick. Your deliberately inflammatory language (not "pulling my weight"? Really?) I actually find offensive. I think, given this, that this thread should be monitored by the mod team, and I have reported it accordingly. But to address your concerns, if any of my children were ill with one of these diseases, I would have no hesitation in isolating them. The cold, hard facts are, in my job as a children's nurse, in the last six months, I have seen two child care centers shut down for a fortnight because of pertussis (whooping cough) outbreaks. And in both cases, the children who caught the initial infection and proceeded to pass it in to the others - were fully immunisaed against it.

If you have researched the information and made an informed decision to immunise your children, then I applaud you, and uphold your right to do so. I expect, in return, that you will uphold my right, based on the evidence at hand, not to. But I would urge you to do your own research, Shannon, because immunisation is not the silver bullet that many, including you, seem to believe.

Okay, I think that everyone should try really hard to stick to the facts on this one and keep to the topic and refrain from making personal comments - however thinly veiled.

Thanks for that article Catrionalee, very informative.

My primary reasons for not vaccing (and I bring it up as it hasn't been mentioned), is that I don't believe mealses, mumps, rubella or chicken pox are life threating to my children.
Immunosuppressed children etc, yes, but mine are not. These are all treatble diseased, Rubella is very, very, mild and only a danger to pregnant women.
If and when my children get sick they are cared for at home until they are not contagious. This is also one of the main reasons I am a SAHM (as much as possible). I don't want the pressure of taking 2 weeks off work with an employer on my back.
Every single child I know who has contracted anything major (since I started investigating this a few years ago) have ALL being "immunised". So why bother risking injecting children with crap cultured off monkey kidneys?

Anyway, that's my thing - I think people are frightened by what I consider 'normal' childhood illness, many we have contracted ourselves.

Given the facts, and that in both cases (whether to immunise, or not) there are risks, it is essential that each parent look at the research - from both sides - and make an informed decision.


I think that is the main point, great response Michael