For decades, vaccines have been hailed by many as a saving grace provided by pharmaceutical companies to aid in the elimination of disease. In the same time, many parents have questioned the need, safety, and efficacy of the vaccines. While this debate has had its hot issues, and each side has been cold toward the other, the general public consensus was rather lukewarm. However, there has been more attention drawn to vaccines in the past two years than most people remember in their lifetimes, and the heat has certainly been turned up. How did we get here?
When parents of newborns and young children go to the pediatrician, they are most commonly inundated with information for their trusted doctor on the need for numerous vaccines. Often several at once for their young, developing infant or toddler. These parents are often led to believe that if they’ll just give their child this vaccine, their child will not have to worry about contracting a horrible disease that often ends in death. If they don’t, they may be putting their precious child in harm’s way, deliberately. Is this accurate? Does a vaccine offer the level of protection from a deadly disease that parents and the public are led to believe? Does not accepting it lead to a life of certain disease and death? Do parents have a choice? Is this discussion this simple?
What is a vaccine?
To have a clear discussion, it is important for everyone to have the same understanding of the words used. In terms of vaccines, however, that has been complicated. The word immunization had been used interchangeably. Reading below, it becomes clear as to why immunization is a misnomer.
In the 1700’s the term vaccine was derived from the Latin word for cow when Dr. Edward Jenner of England discovered that exposure to cowpox would confer a level of immunity to people during a smallpox epidemic. From that time, the term vaccination has come to refer to injections for all diseases. However, we no longer say that they confer a level of immunity as once thought. In fact, the definition of vaccine and vaccination have changed more than once in the last several years.
Merriam Webster had defined vaccine as:
a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease (emphasis added).
More recently, Merriam Webster’s site states the definition as:
a preparation that is administered (as by injection) to stimulate the body's immune response against a specific infectious agent or disease (emphasis added).
The definition was also adjusted to include the mRNA technology used in the COVID shots:
a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein) (emphasis added).
There is also a new category to include immunotherapy:
a preparation or immunotherapy that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against noninfectious substances, agents, or diseases
Finally, we have what the CDC defines vaccination to be:
The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.
Door Wide Open for Endless Possibilities Without the Responsibilities
Not only is the very definition of vaccine confusing, but the responsibility to be sure they are “safe and effective,” as the marketing indicates, is also misleading. In the early to mid-1980’s, there had been a surge in complaints relating to vaccine-induced injuries that nearly drove vaccine manufacturers to discontinue producing the products. However, the U.S. government stepped in with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 to remove the burden from the vaccine manufacturers to ensure their products are safe and effective. Since then, the number of vaccines introduced in the marketplace and injected into children has increased from 7 in 1985 to over 30 for children under the age of 2 in 2022 according to the CDC schedule.
So, Who Is Responsible for Vaccine Safety?
Not only did the 1986 Act protect vaccine manufacturers from liability, but it also established the responsibility of the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Under Section D of the Act’s text, it states:
Allows any person to commence a civil action against the Secretary where the Secretary allegedly has failed to perform a duty under this Act. Provides for judicial review of the Secretary's regulatory actions in a court of appeals of the United States.
Requires the Secretary to conduct studies on pertussis, rubella, and radiculoneuritis vaccines and publish the results of such studies.
Directs the Secretary to study the risks to children associated with each vaccine listed in the Vaccine Injury Table and establish guidelines respecting the administration of such vaccines. Directs the Secretary to periodically review and revise such guidelines.
Directs the Secretary to review the warnings, use instructions, and precautionary information presently used by manufacturers of vaccines listed in the Vaccine Injury Table. Directs the Secretary to require manufacturers to revise and reissue any warning, instruction, or information found inadequate.
Grants the Secretary recall authority with respect to any licensed virus, serum, toxin, antitoxin, vaccine, blood, blood component or derivative, allergenic product, or other licensed product which presents a danger to public health. Establishes civil penalties for recall violations.
But Are They Really?
In October of 2017, Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) issued a letter to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. You can read the initial letter, the response from HHS, and follow-ups, including a follow-up due to lack of response. The biggest concern brought forth by ICAN, is that the HHS isn’t following up on the safety of vaccines.
Attorney Aaron Siri represents ICAN, and has been the initiator of many FOIA requests, and has won lawsuits against the FDA and CDC. He will be giving an update on the cases June 26th in Wisconsin.
This lack of transparency, follow-up, and research isn’t limited to the U.S. In December of 2019, the World Health Organization met to discuss vaccines. Many of the doctors and researchers present indicated concerns regarding the lack of data and research they had assumed was in hand.
The conflict of interest is easy to see when you search the revolving door of large pharmaceutical companies and heads of the FDA and CDC. Most recently and notable, is Scott Gotlieb, the former FDA commissioner who is currently on the board of Pfizer. The numerous conflicts of interest have been outlined in several instances.
What Could Possibly Go Wrong? Vaccines Neither Safe Nor Effective
Vaccine injuries aren’t new. In fact, many would argue they aren’t rare either. There are several reporting systems in the United States. Most referenced, is the CDC monitored Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). This system has been assessed and shown to have a less than 1% reporting of adverse reactions to vaccines according to a Harvard study. For more information on vaccine injuries, read this article.
Many have questioned long-term safety data and how vaccines affect health for months, years, and even decades after vaccination. Dr. Paul Thomas, a pediatrician from Oregon, conducted a study in his practice of children who were fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, and unvaccinated. The rate of other health conditions in the vaccinated population is undeniably higher.
Not only have general health and immediate reactions been questioned, but are the vaccines even protecting from the illness they claim to prevent? A phenomenon known as Antibody-dependant Enhancement (ADE) has been recognized in vaccines for RSV, in which children died, and HIV. In the case of RSV, in the 1960’s over 80% of the children who had received the shot were hospitalized with severe respiratory disease. Two of those children died before the vaccine was pulled.
In March of 2020, Anthony Fauci stated that sometimes vaccines “can make people worse.”
In recent years, it has been noted in Africa, more cases of polio are now caused by the vaccine than the wild virus.
What happens When Something Does Go Wrong?
In the 1986 Act, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVIC) was developed. Since 1989, 8,790 cases have been compensated for a total of $4,780,727,772.60 in total financial outlay. According to the Health Resources & Services Administration:
Since 1988, over 24,909 petitions have been filed with the VICP. Over that 30-year time period, 20,931 petitions have been adjudicated, with 8,862 of those determined to be compensable, while 12,069 were dismissed. Total compensation paid over the life of the program is approximately $4.7 billion.
When compared to the number of injuries reported to VAERS, this reflects a fraction of the injuries reported.
In recent months, more and more people are speaking out for the vaccine injured, however many of them are silenced and dismissed by the medical community without support.
Silencing Those With Differing Opinions and Insights
While the discussion has been more out in the open than it has been before, it has also become more contentious for the general public as well as doctors, news media, elected policy makers, and even between family and friends. Social media companies have become involved in silencing opposing views and restricting open dialogue.
It’s not just the average person on social media that is noticing the pushback on information, but doctors as well. Many have lost social media accounts, YouTube channels and had their credentials brought into question, suspended, or revoked. The White House has issued numerous warnings against what they have dubbed the Disinformation Dozen.
Many question who it is that determines what is disinformation or misinformation. Many of these scientists and doctors that have been accused of spreading misinformation or disinformation have done thorough scientific research and many have been peer-reviewed and published. Due to their findings in violation of what media and government agencies are saying, their studies have been revoked.
Days after Doctor Paul published his study, his medical license was suspended, and his approved, peer-reviewed publication was revoked. He is now in a legal fight over the issue.