Nine Points Left Out By TIME article by Louise Habakus:
1.Edward Jenner’s smallpox discovery and his vaccine experiments were an unequivocal disaster. If you research the history, you will discover that many people died and came down with terrible diseases such as syphilis because the shots were widely contaminated. Then as today, viruses must be grown on animal or human tissue and viral cross-contamination, cross-species transference, mutation and replication are very real issues (i.e., cross-contamination with other viruses living in the tissue that we didn’t know were there) is a very real concern.
2.The article is based on this concept of herd immunity, that is, the belief that a certain very high threshold of the population must be vaccinated or the disease(s) will return. This is assumed but has never been proven. Disease outbreaks occur in schools and other communities where 99%+ of the population has been vaccinated (New England Journal of Medicine, 3/87). Vaccine makers disclose that it is possible to get the disease from the vaccine. While the press and the government like to blame outbreaks on the unvaccinated, It is not possible to precisely prove this as both unvaccinated and vaccinated contract the disease. Disease transmission can occur through breast milk and through “viral shedding” from the nose and mouth of the recently vaccinated.
3.Vaccination is commonly credited with the eradication of terrible diseases. However, if you trace worldwide disease death rate trajectories over the past 100-150 years, you will see dramatic and precipitous declines over the entire period before vaccination was even introduced. Before historical revisionism, these gains were originally attributed to significant improvements in sanitation and hygiene (i.e., we no longer have raw sewage running in the streets).
4.If there is so much controversy about vaccination and if the government is truly very concerned about the consequence if parents are losing confidence and choose to opt out of all vaccination, then why don’t they do the unthinkable? Why don’t they actually conduct an independent, controlled, double-blind, peer-reviewed study on vaccination? The CDC claims that this would be unethical to deliberately withhold vaccination to children and put them at risk. However, we all know that millions of children are not vaccinated (by Time magazine’s own admission, 2-3% of all children) and parents of these children would gladly and gratefully accept the opportunity to participate in this study and to prove that they are indeed responsible and not the societal parasites riding on the good graces of vaccinating parents.
5.At its heart, science is about observation. That government scientists are willing to so readily dismiss the first-hand observations of tens of thousands of parents who swear that they lost their children to autism just days and weeks after inoculations is irresponsible (and I am being kind). I am shocked that Time magazine did not reference Dr. Bernadine Healy’s TV interview on 5/12/08 where she makes a break with her Institute of Medicine (IOM) colleagues and goes on record to say that we must study this further, we must understand what is happening with susceptible groups of children and she chides her colleagues by saying that we must never be afraid of what the truth will show. Dr. Healy is a Harvard-educated physician who did her residency at Johns Hopkins and is former head of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and a current member of the IOM. Her credentials are impeccable.
6.There are unvaccinated populations in this country with significantly lower rates of asthma, diabetes and autism. Former UPI reporter Dan Olmsted investigated the Amish and Chicago’s Homefirst pediatric practice. Details can be found at www.ageofautism.com Why are these studies being ignored? CDC’s Dr. Gerberding claims that there’s something special genetically about the Amish that they don’t get autism. How about the 15,000 Homefirst children who are Muslim, Jewish, Christian and Black?
7.The research studies that the government uses to disprove a link between vaccination and autism are flawed. I urge all parents to read the full studies and the critiques before they are comforted by and choose to parrot the conclusions. All of these government studies are epidemiological. Scientists know that epidemiology is used to identify variables which may be associated with disease incidence in populations; however, epidemiology is never used to prove causation. Only a controlled study can prove or disprove causation.
8.Time ends its article by saying “such a strategy could reveal new avenues of research…” The government will inspire confidence by funding the research that will settle the debate once and for all. Currently, government sponsored research funding by the NIH is $300 million for leukemia which affects 1 in 25,000 and $160 million for muscular dystrophy which affects 1 in 20,000 than the $15 million spent on autism which affects 1 in 150. That kind of dissonance does not communicate a sincere desire to engage in a respectful and forthcoming dialogue with parents. That government and health officials are taking a harder line with parents in the absence of definitive research is shockingly inappropriate; however well-intentioned, it is still an abuse of power.
9.Time chides parents for cherry-picking vaccines. I chide Time on cherry-picking case studies to find the lone non-vaccinating parent whose child contracted HiB. Again, this does not contribute to furthering the dialogue.