Doctors Need To Be Educated and Held Accountable

The VAERS database is replete with thousands of reports of vaccine injuries. Here is one about Gardasil, the new HPV (cervical cancer) vaccine filed on June 27, 2007 by a parent who is a pediatrician (MD, FAAP). Her first-hand account of the reaction that happened to her 11-year-old daughter speaks volumes:

“Within minutes of receiving the HPV vaccination and a DTaP booster yesterday afternoon, my daughter complained of numbness extending down her right arm (HPV vaccination site) to her finger tips. She then noted tingling in her other hand and both of her feet. She was sitting in the waiting area at this time. I noted that her lips looked pale. I had her put her head in her lap. After a minute or so, she sat back up and her lips were redder. She remained a bit woozy for the following hour or so. Pain and discomfort in her right arm continued over the next several hours. I treated her with 400mg Advil when we got home about 2 hours after the vaccine. She continued to complain of pain and stiffness in her right arm throughout the evening last night. Today her right arm is better and her left arm (DTaP site) is more painful. As a pediatrician myself (MD, FAAP), I was very concerned when I saw the incidence of syncope being reported with the HPV vaccine. I spoke with a friend who has her PhD in child psychology. She does not think ‘adolescence’ is an appropriate excuse for this adverse reaction. I won't be giving my daughter the remaining doses until more has been studied regarding this reaction.”

COMMENT: Here’s a physician-parent (not sure if this was a mom or a dad) who didn’t even read the package insert about giving Gardasil to her daughter at the same time as another vaccine. The insert clearly states, “Results from clinical studies indicate that Gardasil may be administered concomitantly (at a separate injection site) with hepatitis B vaccine (recombinant). Co-administration [and safety] of injecting Gardasil with other vaccines has not been studied.”

So, ignorance, or perhaps laziness, prevailed and the parent allowed her daughter to be an experiment. Doctors have an illusion that vaccines are “safe, protective and cause no harm.” This doctor risked her daughter’s health: It appears the daughter’s immune system aborted the onset of what could have become full-blown Guillian-Barre syndrome with long-term paralysis. This doctor was willing to risk his daughter’s life by giving this vaccine. By mid-July, 2007, the number of reported reactions from Gardasil had risen to 2,207, including five deaths as a result of this vaccine.

This parent-pediatrician states “I won’t give the remaining doses to her daughter." I wonder if s/he will continue to vaccinate other children? I wonder what s/he will tell other moms who come to her office requesting Gardasil for their pre-teen daughters? I wonder if this scary episode will prompt this parent-pediatrician to do his homework and investigate other vaccine reactions children are no doubt having that are being dismissed as “normal”?

Doctors need to be held accountable for acts of commission – giving a drug (vaccine) that causes a reaction – and for acts of omission – refusing to learn about the dangers of vaccines. Let's make this a new rallying point for parents of vaccine-injured children. The drug companies are not to blame. They make products to sell. It is the responsibility of the physician to learn to use their products (drugs) safely – or decide whether to use them at all. Pediatricians and other vaccinators are under-educated, uninformed and blindly follow the recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics, parroting the five-color glossy information distributed by eager drug company sales persons.

Here’s a suggestion: Buy my DVD, “Vaccines: The Risk, Benefits, Choices” for your pediatrician. Then they won’t have an excuse that they don’t have time to do the research. If he or she refuses to review it, that should speak volumes.

Home Schoolers Beware: Vaccinators Are After Your Kids

Parents choose to home school their children for many reasons. One reason is to avoid vaccinations required by school systems prior to attendance. The push to vaccinate home schooled children started several years ago; it appears that legal papers are now being prepared to force parents to shoot up their children, even if they are not attending public schools.

The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics published a new article pushing law makers to vaccinate all children. Look what's being planned:

"To protect public health, states require that parents have their children immunized before they are permitted to attend public or private school. But for home schooled children, the rules vary. With the spectacular growth in the number of home schooled students, it is becoming more difficult to reach these youth to ensure that they are immunized at all.

These children are frequently unvaccinated, leaving them open to infection with diseases that are all but stamped out in the United States with immunization requirements. States should encourage parents to get their home schooled students vaccinated through enacting the same laws as those used for public school students.

This could be done by enforcing current laws through neglect petitions or by requiring that children be immunized before participating in school sponsored programs. As most states require some filing to allow parents to home school their children, it would be easy to enact laws requiring that home schooled children be immunized or exempted before completing registration."

COMMENT: The wild-eyed vaccinators will stop at nothing to inoculate every child across the country with their concoctions in the name of "health." In June, 2007, Generation Rescue published the results of a survey that showed unvaccinated boys are healthier than vaccinated boys. The study compelled the CDC to complete a nationwide health survey of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated children. It has been suggested that home schooled children be the source of subjects for that study. To date, the CDC has refused to undertake this study. Why? In my opinion, government officials are afraid of what they will find. Many home schooled children are unvaccinated.

The new article suggests that petitions should be filed against parents who do not vaccinate their children, charging them with "medical neglect." This means the State could seize your children because you have not vaccinated them and have chosen to educate them at home. Those who want to vaccinate their home schooled children are free to do so. Those who want to refuse should have the same right.

This new article should be a rallying cry for home schoolers to join forces and rebel to defend their rights.

Iraq vs. Special Needs Children

Danielle is a young mother. Two of her four kids, all under 7, have autism. The third likely has Asperger syndrome, a form of high-functioning autism. And the fourth, a 3-month-old baby, needs stomach surgery. Danielle, who out of embarrassment asked that only her middle name be used, isn't working because she takes care of her kids by day, takes nursing classes at night, struggling for the skills she needs to support her family on something better than minimum wage. "If I can just make it 15 months," Danielle says of her registered nursing course, "then I'm OK."

As if that weren't stress enough, here's the topper: The entire family is homeless.

COMMENT: Virginia can't find the money to put a family with four special needs children in a home and off the street. We can't give healthcare to this family. We can't even feed them. Yet, we can spend hundreds of billions of dollars to "rebuild and secure" Iraq.

I'm speechless on both counts. Will our country every get back to helping others? Are these our new priorities, destroy a country in the name of "fighting terrorism" and at the same time, letting special needs children sleep on the streets, homeless? Sadly, the Great Republic is fading away....

Who are the Real Charlatans?

According to an article in the TimesOnline, from the UK, there have been 150 cases of measles over the past three months documented in a city outside of London. Ten have been admitted to hospital with pneumonia with high fever, the hacking cough, the sore eyes, and a blotchy rash. You really should read the entire article...be prepared to scream.

It's author, Dr. Michael Fitzpatrick, a GP in Hackney, East London, went on to say,

"Anti-MMR campaigners are critical of the many MMR safety studies: yet there are no studies whatever of the safety or efficacy of the program of separate vaccinations (though it is certain that the inevitable delays in giving the vaccines will leave children vulnerable to these infections)....The rise in measles is a combination of extreme skepticism towards established sources of authority in science and medicine and anxiety about environmental threats to our well being has led many to put their faith in self-proclaimed mavericks and alternative healers and charlatans...The choice to refuse MMR to avoid an entirely speculative risk of autism results in children being exposed to the real risks of measles."

COMMENT: Wow. Where to begin?

First: Let's ask about the 6 percent (10 children) who were admitted to the hospital. Did they have underlying conditions that made them more susceptible to a severe case of measles? Obviously, the other 94 percent had the infection and recovered uneventfully. Did any of the ten who were hospitalized have an adverse outcome? And since measles is a viral illness, other than hydration and possibly oxygen, what other truly helpful agents were given? Antibiotics would not treat a viral pneumonia.

No one wants their child to become ill or be admitted to the hospital. However, ask this question to any parent who observed first hand their child develop autism after the MMR: Would you have preferred a few weeks of infirmity and "inconsolable misery"-- even if it included a hospital stay -- to months and years of daily, untreatable illness?

Second: The "established authority of medicine" is exactly why parents have chosen to challenge and distrust it. Medical authorities have refused to listen to the eye-witness accounts of parents. They won't even acknowledge that autism may be the result of the MMR in at least some children.

Instead, pompous, "we know best" physicians declare the connection between the MMR and autism "impossible and unproven." Their insolent assertions are based on large epidemiological studies, similar to the ones used by the tobacco industry to "prove" that there was no connection between cigarettes and lung cancer.

Third: I should be accustomed to the insulting arrogance of conventional, dogma-loving practitioners, but it continues to nauseate me. Name calling was something we were told to stop when we were in kindergarten. Does the act of wearing a white lab jacket and dangling a stethoscope around one's neck make one a "self-proclaimed" expert and more correct than any other "self-proclaimed expert" who prefers plain clothes to a white coat? Why do we allow Established Medicine to claim to have the only answer? Why is a challenger of the drug-funded status quo a "charlatan"?

Fourth: (I'll stop here but I could go on and on) Do parents who have seen the MMR damage their children consider the risk "speculative"? Do those who are 40+ years of age and remember having measles during their childhood recall it to be a "disasterous event"? Even this small outbreak of 150 children demonstrates that 94 percent recover uneventfully. Is the "speculative risk" worth the risk of a life-time disaster?

I encourage everyone to read the book, "Bodily Matters," by Nadja Dubach. It is a history of the anti-vaccination movement from 1853 -- the date the first Compulsory Vaccination Law was passed in the U.K. -- to 1907, when "conscience objection" was allowed to stop the revolt against politically motivated vaccination. Conventional "wisdom" and its dominance has been challenged and resisted from its first embrace of vaccination. Vaccination was considered then --as now -- scientific experimentation. Doctors were able to carry out their "delighted torment" on patients in the 1800s by keeping the public both ignorant and in awe of their scientific expertise. The Internet had pulled back the curtain and the "awe" has mostly stopped.

Threatened physicians are left with name calling as a defense.

Who are the "real charlatans" ? Those that harm people for a living, using psychiatric drugs, vaccines and unproven chemotheraputics calling it "Science," or those who work to heal the body using whole foods, nutrients and agents that eliminate known poisons, such as mercury and lead, from the body?