|
KNOW ... The Vaccine
Controversy
Most people are
unaware that there is a controversy about vaccination. They are unaware
that there is another point of view about the benefits of vaccination.
They are unaware of the risks associated with this medical procedure.
Where risk of injury or death is acknowledged, it is believed to be
rare and inconsequential compared to the perceived benefits to
individuals and society.
With growing
evidence that vaccinations may actually be causing chronic health
problems and the attendant realization that the right to informed
consent is being denied, a growing number of parents and concerned
individuals are demanding that questions about safety and
appropriateness be addressed.
What are the
perceived issues?
On the one hand,
there is a vaccination policy whose goal is 100% compliance and whose
proponents believe that vaccination is modern medicine's greatest
achievement. Today every child born is expected to be
"inoculated" with some 30 vaccines by the age of 18 months
and by the age of five years old, have up to 38 shots.
On the other
hand, there are concerned parents and professionals who believe there
are some flaws with both the theory and the application of our vaccine
policy, who claim that vaccines are dangerous, and who may not want to
comply with the above stated goal.
In the middle of
this schism, a growing number of people are getting wind that a debate
about vaccines is brewing. Many of these people would prefer NOT to
know there are issues about vaccination, because the questions and
issues that are being raised threaten the belief system that our
conventional health care system is predicated upon.
While it may seem
like The Vaccine Controversy is news, the issues surrounding this
debate have actually been contested for decades. Whereas the proponents
of mass vaccination might have you think there is a conspiracy of
quacks and unfit parents trying to thwart medical progress, the truth
of the matter is that the mounting evidence of malfeasance is
undeniable as the conspiracy of silence about this conflict is brought
to light.
At issue, of
course, is whether vaccines are safe. As the incidence of autoimmune
diseases in our children rise to epidemic levels, concerned people see
a credible correlation to vaccine history and want the independently
researched scientific data that verifies both safety and efficacy of
these medical products and procedures. Vaccine proponents, while they
admit there are some risks, keep assuring us that vaccines are safe and
vaccination saves lives. Those who question, they say, forget or are
unaware of how devastating diseases were before the advent of vaccines.
Given that
vaccines were conceived and are produced within the paradigm of Modern
Medicine's scientific method, our faith in the policy of mass
vaccination is nothing less than steadfast and confident. With killer
epidemics of infectious disease a thing of the past, WHY NOT credit
mass vaccination? Indeed, this assertion is taken at face value even in
the Informed Consent Movement, even though statistics show that better
nutrition and improved hygiene are as much contributing factors to the
eradication of killer epidemics as mass vaccination is purported to be.
The fact is, the
stellar role that mass vaccination is believed to play in public health
DOES NOT preclude a possible secondary role in ALSO being a cause of
chronic, debilitating and, in many ways, painful immunologic and
neurological disorders. Proponents of mandatory vaccination say
absolutely not. Parents of chronically ill children, a growing number
of medical professionals, and other reasonable people are beginning to
wonder. Hence, the Vaccine Controversy . . .
Many people would
prefer not to go down this road. It was easier when you only had to
deal with the fear of getting an infectious disease. Vaccination put
that fear out of your mind. With Informed Consent, and knowing that the
risks of vaccination are actually higher and more diverse than you
previously thought, it seems we now have two fears to contend with.
What to do?
To begin with,
what is needed is proper perspective. There are several serious issues
in this debate that MUST BE RESOLVED, vaccine safety being one, however
The FUNDAMENTAL
ISSUE in The Vaccine Controversy is not about vaccine safety!
The fundamental
issue in The Vaccine Controversy has to do with the government's power
to deny individual rights. Simply stated, because vaccines are mandated
by law individuals are not free to make choices about vaccination for
themselves or their family members.
Because vaccines are
mandated, The Vaccine Controversy is about the Right to Informed
Consent
Vaccination is a medical procedure that
carries an inherent risk of injury or death. Vaccination is the only
medical procedure & medical product that is forced upon us by law.
Because there are risks of injury or death
with vaccines, parents deserve to be given truthful and unbiased
information about both the diseases and the vaccines.
Informed Consent means having the right to
choose or decline a medical procedure that carries a risk for serious
injury, disability or death.
(link to "Informed Consent"
definition)
Because vaccines are
mandated, The Vaccine Controversy is about the Right to Choose
Individuals have the right to choose the
type of preventive health care they want to use, including choosing
whether to use one, ten or no vaccines.
(link to the New Legislation)
What is the justification
for mandated mass vaccination?
A common belief that the majority of people
have shared since the advent of vaccines is that vaccination improves
public health and that mass vaccination protects everyone's health. The
presumed logic is that high vaccination rates are necessary in order to
prevent the return of terrible diseases. In order to protect the
public, the public must be vaccinated.
It is not clear
whether vaccination became mandatory because the public cannot be
trusted to always fulfill their obligations to society, so laws were
created to enforce compliance, or whether because vaccination is a
medical procedure that carries risk of injury or death, it must be
mandated. If the rationale that mass vaccination protects everyone's
health was true, rational people would likely be willing to take the
risk of injury or death from vaccination, and people everywhere would
suppose that forcing this medical procedure upon entire populations is
noble, even though not ethical. In fact, this is what we have believed
and why we have been so willing to sanction this violation of civil
rights.
However,
the variables have changed, and so, too, the outcome. We now have a new,
more insidious epidemic occurring, the consequences of which are not
yet fully understood or realized. The rising epidemic of autoimmune diseases and
neurological dysfunction in our children begs, now more than ever, the
question "is vaccination somehow to blame; is vaccination a
contributing factor?" Yet, even as the credible empirical and
scientific data coming in suggests that it could be, our regulatory
agencies and the pharmaceutical companies that profit from vaccination
continue to assure us that injecting a plethora of diseases and toxic
chemicals into the bodies of our young children does not adversely
affect their immune systems and "not to worry." In fact, they
implore us to ignore what we see, what we read and hear about, and they
remind us of our obligation to society. Because, you see,
The rationale for mandated
mass vaccination is based on the notion that the risk
of injury or death from vaccine is relative to the risk of injury or
death without vaccine.
In other words, the perceived benefit of
saving millions of lives from the scourge of epidemics by mass
vaccination outweighs the purportedly rare incidence of death by
vaccine. Thus, "the end justifies the means".
This, as we learn
from studying history, is a dangerous precedent for government
intrusion and leads to unbridled, unchecked and unlawful power. Yet the
majority of people think that mandating this risky medical procedure is
appropriate. Why? Because "vaccination is about the public
health", meaning that individual choice is no longer relevant.
If it were
true that vaccination protects the public health and improves immunity,
one might be willing to play the vaccine game of roulette in order to
gain such a benefit. However, the science simply does not support this
hypothesis any longer. With an epidemic of autoimmune diseases
literally crippling our next generation of adults, there is no question
that vaccination is about public health. Perhaps it is time to expand
our myopic view that high vaccination rates and low incidence of
infectious disease alone constitutes public health. The fact is, our
beliefs about vaccination are founded on precepts that are no longer
valid -- the variables have changed, and so too the outcome.
|
