I found this article on hsionline.com. I highly recommend this site,you can find a lot of information on health related issues there. There you can also find a doctor that practices alternative, natural or complementary medicine in your state!
If you’ve got Gardasil outrage fatigue, prepare to have your outrage fully revived!
“OMG! Did you hear what’s happening in California?”
My friend Sarah sent that question attached to a very disturbing article.
What’s happening in California is so obviously, GLARINGLY wrong that it’s hard to imagine how such a completely ludicrous idea ever got off the ground in the first place.
A few days ago, the California Senate passed a bill (already passed in the CA Assembly) to slightly reword the state Family Code.
This minor change is actually ENORMOUS because it allows children as young as 12 to consent to vaccinations that prevent sexually transmitted diseases without their parents’ approval. In fact, their parents don’t even have to be informed when the vaccines are given!
Now it’s up to Governor Brown. If he signs it, it’s law — done.
The article includes an appeal to contact Gov. Brown and urge him not to sign the bill.
That’s a great idea, if you’re a California parent. But the article missed one very important point: California is NOT the only state where this is happening.
In fact, millions of U.S. parents will probably be shocked to learn that this very law is already on the books in 10 states and the District of Columbia.
Welcome to the Big Pharma States of America where pediatricians and possibly even school medical personnel can give your kids a Gardasil vaccine without you even knowing.
Surprising end run
Rick Perry was a dangerously loose cannon when he attempted to make the Gardasil HPV vaccine mandatory in Texas. But abolishing parental consent is even worse in this one key way: If the vaccine is mandatory, at least parents have the chance to opt out.
When parental consent is removed, any mainstream medical do-gooder, who’s convinced by the CDC that he’s on a mission to save lives, can try to persuade your child to get a Gardasil vaccine. You? You’re just a parent. You can’t be trusted with this sort of decision, so you’re simply taken out of the loop.
Here’s how easily that can happen…
While the new California bill was being debated, a California teen named Courtney testified before a legislative committee.
Courtney said that during a checkup at age 15, the doctor asked to speak to her alone and her mother consented. The doctor then tried to convince Courtney to get a Gardasil vaccine, adding that her mother didn’t have to know.
When Courtney declined the shot, the doctor tried a harder sell on Courtney’s mother, telling her that without the vaccine, if Courtney were ever raped she could develop a potentially fatal cervical cancer.
Imagine how many thousands of young teens would have simply accepted the vaccine, potentially exposing themselves to dangerous side effects they might never be aware of.
Meanwhile, without parental consent, the state is picking up the tab for the expensive Gardasil shots, so Merck is potentially raking in millions of our state tax dollars.
I say “our” literally, because Maryland, the state I live in, is one of the 10 states that gives medical professionals the right to vaccinate with Gardasil without parental consent. Here are the other nine: Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, North Carolina, South Carolina, and South Dakota.
Parents in these states should be up in arms! Taxpayers should be storming the statehouses!
You think Rick Perry’s Gardasil scheme was bad? That was nothing. He didn’t succeed. But a few hundred state legislators DID succeed when they very quietly gave Merck access to your kids while cutting you out of the loop — except, of course, for the part where they freely spend your tax dollars.
Parents in D.C. and the states listed above need to talk about this outrage with their pediatricians, school administrators, and — most importantly — their kids. Every child needs to know that if a parent is not present and a vaccine is offered, they should do exactly the same thing they’ve been told to do when offered a recreational drug: Just say “NO!”
“A Parent’s Horrid Nightmare: Coming Soon to YOUR State?” Dr. Joseph Mercola, 9/16/11, mercola.com
“CA Parental Rights Victorious – Temporarily – CA AB 499 In Suspense File” Camille Giglio, Pipeline News, 8/22/11,
The website Green Med Info has assembled 44 articles which together list 60 diseases or adverse unintended consequences associated with hepatitis B vaccination.
Among the problems the vaccination may cause are:
Autoimmune inflammatory polyneuropathy
Anaphylactic shock and death in infants
According to one of the studies linked on Green Med Info:
“Evidence … suggests that hepatitis B vaccine is positively associated with adverse health outcomes in the general population of US children.”
Green Med Info
Annals of Epidemiology January 2001;11(1):13-21
Dr. Mercola’s Comments:
There is no vaccine that gets me more upset than hepatitis B. There are two primary reasons for this. It is given to virtually every newborn in the hospital and many times without parents’ consent shortly after the child is born. If the parent chooses not to have their 12-hour-old newborn vaccinated in the newborn nursery, it takes enormous effort on the parent’s part to make sure this vaccine is not given without their informed consent before the baby leaves the hospital.
Secondly this vaccine given on the day of birth is the least justifiable of any vaccine that I can think of. A child can ONLY get the disease from IV drug abuse, sexual activity with an infected partner, a blood transfusion using contaminated blood, OR from the mother.
There are few or no detectable antibodies in the blood of most children within 7-10 years after they are vaccinated so booster shots will probably be recommended by government officials in the future for children entering adolesence.
Obviously the only real threat during infancy is if a child is born to an infected mother. So why not screen ALL pregnant women for the disease and only give the vaccine to those infants whose mothers actually test positive for hepatitis B? That policy would be a lot less expensive, as well as a lot safer for the majority of babies born in the United States.
Also what about the side effects associated with adverse health outcomes in the general population of US children? How about one linked to serious autoimmune disorders, autism, Bell’s palsy, multiple sclerosis, anaphylactic shock and death? Just one vaccination, hepatitis B, has been linked to all of the above and more, yet continues to be part of the standard government-recommended childhood vaccination schedule, with the first dose given at 12 hours of age in the newborn nursery of most hospitals.
An Unusually High Number of Adverse Reactions
Routine use of the hepatitis B vaccine for all newborns began in 1991, and according to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), operated jointly by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), there were 36,788 officially reported adverse reactions to hepatitis B vaccines between 1992 and 2005. Of these, 14,800 were serious enough to cause hospitalization, life-threatening health events or permanent disabilities.
Further, 781 people were reported to have DIED following hepatitis B vaccination — and this is likely an underestimate because only a fraction of the serious health problems, including deaths, following vaccination are ever acknowledged. This serious underreporting is due to an unwillingness of many doctors and vaccine providers to report vaccine-related injuries and deaths and also due to a lack of public awareness about how to recognize signs and symptoms of vaccine reactions.
For instance, when babies die after hep B vaccinations, most of the time their deaths are automatically attributed to SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) without investigation into whether the vaccine caused the baby’s sudden death.
Common reactions to the vaccine include fatigue, muscle weakness, fever, headache, irritability, and joint pain. But there have been reports of disabling neurological and immunological disorders that have developed following hepatitis B vaccinations as well, including:
Multiple sclerosis (MS)
Guillain Barre syndrome
Idiopathic Thrombocytopenia purpura
Convulsions and brain disorders such as encephalitis (brain swelling) and brain demyelination
Visual and hearing impairments, including optic neuritis
Autism spectrum disorders
A study published September 2009 in Annals of Epidemiology also found that giving hepatitis B vaccine to infant boys more than tripled their risk for an autism spectrum disorder. This was doubly concerning because an earlier study by the same researcher group, using a different database, found the same results.
There are more reports of serious adverse reactions in children than there are cases of childhood hepatitis B reported in the United States! From 1990 to 2002, there were a total of just 13,829 cases of acute hepatitis B reported among children aged 19 and younger, and as the CDC stated:
“The incidence among adolescents aged 15-19 years was consistently higher than the incidence among younger age groups.”
Which begs the question, why are babies being vaccinated for this disease?
Why is the Hepatitis B Vaccine Recommended?
Hepatitis B is a viral infection that affects your liver, and spreads the same way as AIDS — through direct contact with the body fluids (particularly blood and semen) of an infected person. There are two primary circumstances in which your baby would be at significant risk for contracting hepatitis B and both are quite rare in the U.S.:
If you are pregnant and are a carrier for the hepatitis B virus, your baby could be at risk for being infected during childbirth. However, you can easily find out if you are hepatitis B positive by getting tested while pregnant.
Your infant could be at risk for hepatitis B infection by receiving a blood transfusion using hepatitis B infected blood. In America, all blood products are required to receive proper screening for hepatitis B virus and other pathogens prior to use. There is no way to achieve 100 percent safety with blood transfusions, however.
Universal hepatitis B vaccination might be a good idea IF the vaccines were completely safe and gave lifelong immunity — but as the CDC states, it’s currently not known how long immunity lasts when children are vaccinated at birth:
“Among vaccinated cohorts who initiated Hepatitis B vaccination at birth, long-term follow-up studies are ongoing to determine the duration of vaccine-induced immunity.”
So why are babies vaccinated at birth, if it’s known the mother does not have hepatitis B?
The CDC states:
” … because errors or delays in documenting, testing, and reporting maternal HBsAg status can and do occur, administering the first dose of Hepatitis B vaccine soon after birth to all infants acts as a safety net, reducing the risk for perinatal infection when maternal HBsAg status is either unknown or incorrectly documented at delivery.
Also, initiating the Hepatitis B vaccine series at birth has been shown to increase a child’s likelihood of completing the vaccine series on schedule.”
In other words, if you’re pregnant and have tested negative for hepatitis B, it’s advised that you vaccinate your baby anyway, just in case the test was wrong — and because the CDC believes you’re more likely to adhere to their dictated schedule if you start early, just hours after birth.
It is important to be tested for hepatitis B if you’re pregnant, as it’s possible to have a chronic infection with no symptoms and not know it. However, if you use the CDC’s logic that you can’t trust the test results anyway, this obviously important preventive step would be rendered pointless!
But again, most babies are at very low risk of hepatitis B in the first place, so the question to ask is does the vaccine’s benefit outweigh its risks? It’s worth noting as well that, as adults, most people infected with hepatitis B don’t require hospital care and the majority recover without complications and are left with natural, lifelong immunity.
It’s Your Right to Ask Questions About Vaccinations
You have every right to not only ask questions about vaccine safety, but also to decide which vaccinations you would like to receive or decline for yourself and your children. In the case of the hepatitis B vaccine, if you’re giving birth in a hospital you can let your nurses, obstetrician and pediatrician know whether or not you consent to having your baby vaccinated.
It’s your choice.
There are reports that some newborns are being vaccinated in the newborn nursery against the parents’ wishes, however, so if you decide to opt out of the vaccine it is a good idea to keep your newborn with you at all times, or have a family member stay with the baby, while in the hospital.
But please remember that it’s up to you to get informed about every medical procedure being given to your baby, and vaccinations are no exception. I encourage you to ask these eight questions, developed by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), if you are considering getting yourself or your child vaccinated:
Am I or my child sick right now?
Have I or my child had a bad reaction to a vaccination before?
Do I or my child have a personal or family history of vaccine reactions, neurological disorders, severe allergies or immune system problems?
Do I know the disease and vaccine risks for myself or my child?
Do I have full information about the vaccine’s side effects?
Do I know how to identify and report a vaccine reaction?
Do I know I need to keep a written record, including the vaccine manufacturer’s name and lot number, for all vaccinations?
Do I know I have the right to make an informed choice?
As NVIC states:
“If you answered yes to questions 1, 2, and 3, or no to questions 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 and do not understand the significance of your answer, you may want to review information on NVIC’s website with links to other websites and resources so you can better answer these questions designed to educate consumers about the importance of making fully informed vaccine decisions.”
Further, I highly recommend all parents consider the following steps before consenting to vaccinations, including hepatitis B:
Educate yourself about vaccination, including reading the vaccine manufacturer product inserts for vaccines that your doctor is recommending and reviewing vaccine information on this website and websites like NVIC.org.
Help educate your family, and your community by circulating this newsletter among your friends, neighbors, doctors, lawyers, teachers, school principles, nurses, local newspaper, TV and radio stations. Send a copy of this newsletter with a personal note to your elected representatives.
The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) provides information for consumers about vaccines and diseases and works to protect vaccine choices. Register today for the NVIC Advocacy Portal, an online interactive database and communication system that will help YOU protect vaccine exemptions in YOUR state.
Report vaccine reactions to the federal government (VAERS) and to the NVIC Vaccine Reaction Registry by visiting the NVIC website. This reporting is EXTREMELY important and necessary if we are to accelerate change.
If you are pregnant, get tested for hepatitis B disease. If you are infected, your baby may be at higher risk for becoming infected with hepatitis B and is a candidate for vaccination, so you should explore all sides of the issue with your physician.
Stand up for your informed consent rights. If you are opposed to the hepatitis B vaccine for your baby at birth, you can amend the “consent for medical treatment” forms you sign upon entering the hospital before giving birth by writing on the form that you do not give consent for your baby’s hepatitis B vaccination in the newborn nursery.
Vaccine exemptions: Although hepatitis B vaccines may be “mandated” for your child to attend school, each state offers different legal exemptions (medical, religious, and philosophical). Research your state’s specific vaccine requirements and find out what kind of exemption to vaccination you are allowed to exercise in your state.
I read this article today. This just makes me feel better about not vaccinating my children. What other proof do we need to see that these vaccinations are dangerous.
Flu Vaccine Linked to Seizures in Kids Under Five
The rate of convulsions caused by high fever among children in Australia given a seasonal flu shot has been ten times higher than normal. Up to one in 100 children given the injection, made by CSL and marketed in some countries by Pfizer, suffered febrile convulsions in the following hours and days.
It is not known what is causing the problem. Adults given the vaccine do not appear to have been affected.
The Telegraph reports:
“In Australia, which is in its winter, stopped vaccinating all children under five when the increased rate of convulsions was found.”
The Telegraph July 31, 2010
Regular Flu Vaccine Actually INCREASES Risk of Swine Flu
In September 2009, news stories reported that researchers in Canada had found an increased risk of pandemic H1N1 (pH1N1) influenza in people who had previously been vaccinated against seasonal influenza.
In a school outbreak of pH1N1 in spring 2009, people with cough and fever were found to have received prior seasonal flu vaccination more often than those without.
Several public health agencies in Canada therefore undertook four additional studies during the summer of 2009 to investigate further. Taken together, the four studies included approximately 2,700 people with and without pH1N1.
The first of the studies found the seasonal vaccine to be associated with an increased risk of approximately 68 percent for pH1N1 disease.
The further 3 studies similarly found between 1.4 and 1.5 times increased likelihood of pH1N1 illness in people who had received the seasonal vaccine compared to those who had not.
WHO Finally Admits They Screwed up on Swine Flu
In related news, the World Health Organization (WHO) has admitted that it made mistakes in its response to H1N1 swine flu.
WHO influenza expert Keiji Fukuda conceded that the six-phase system for declaring a pandemic was confusing, and resulted in widespread panic about an illness which proved to be even less deadly than the similarly overhyped bird flu.
Critics have pointed out WHO’s links to the pharmaceutical industry. Many drug companies made huge profits when governments bought enormous stockpiles of H1N1 vaccine, much of which has gone unused.
Physorg April 6, 2010
Reuters April 12, 2010
PLoS Medicine April 6, 2010
Dr. Mercola’s Comments:
You may remember back in the spring of 2009, just when the swine flu hysteria was building, that a Canadian study revealed people who had received a regular, seasonal flu shot were twice as likely to catch swine flu.
Then again, you may not have heard this before, as it wasn’t exactly shouted from the rooftops, and the United States pretty much ignored the findings and continued to recommend that vaccinations for both seasonal and H1N1 flu go ahead as previously planned.
This, of course, occurred despite the fact that administering two types of flu shots in a single season had never been done before.
In certain Canadian provinces however, the study was compelling enough for them to suspend seasonal flu shots for anyone under 65, and further studies were recommended to find out what was really going on.
Well, several epidemiologic investigations were conducted over the summer of 2009, and the results are now in.
Seasonal flu shot DID increase the risk of catching swine flu.
Four Additional Studies All Confirm the Initial Findings
The four studies, which were conducted by public health agencies in Canada, involved about 2,700 people in all, and each one had the same result: if you got the seasonal flu shot, you were more likely to get the swine flu. The researchers wrote in PLoS Medicine:
“ … Estimates from all four studies (which included about 1,200 laboratory-confirmed pH1N1 cases and 1,500 controls) showed that prior recipients of the 2008–09 TIV [seasonal flu shot] had approximately 1.4–2.5 times increased chances of developing pH1N1 illness that needed medical attention during the spring–summer of 2009 compared to people who had not received the TIV.”
The researchers stopped short of saying that a causal relationship had been established, saying instead that there could have been unidentified factors within the groups studied that accounted for the increase. They’ve recommended further studies to determine if the shot really was responsible, for instance, if the seasonal vaccine modified people’s immune systems in such a way that made them less able to fight off H1N1.
This latter explanation makes perfect sense.
Why Getting a Vaccine for One Disease Could Make You More Likely to Catch Another
Remember that ALL vaccines are immune suppressing, meaning they lower your immune functions. The chemicals and adjuvants in the vaccines depress your immune system; the virus present depress immune function, and the foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues depress immunity — that is the trade-off you are risking.
The traditionally held belief is that it is acceptable to exchange a small overall immune depression for immunity to one disease. However, this trade is not at all in your favor when you consider the fact that you’re trading a TOTAL immune system depression, which is your main defense against ALL known disease — including millions of pathogens — for a temporary immunity against just one disease, which in most cases is a non issue for you and your family..
This may explain why people who had recently been vaccinated with the seasonal flu shot were therefore more likely to fall ill with swine flu. There are other theories circulating as well. According to Deseret News:
“One hypothesis suggests seasonal flu vaccine preoccupies the cells that would otherwise produce antibodies against H1N1.
But, according to Dr. Rubinstein, the research shows that people who received the seasonal shot during the 2007-08 flu season remained vulnerable to swine flu well into 2009, an interval that should provide most immune systems ample restoration time.”
CBC News Canada published another theory:
“Theoretically, antibodies created by the immune system after exposure to bacteria or a virus can facilitate the entry of another strain of the virus or disease. The effect has been seen for other viral vaccinations but never for influenza, said Dr. Donald Low, chief microbiologist at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto.”
Whatever the mechanism may turn out to be, waiting for science to figure it out seems foolish given the heightened risk. Nonetheless, the World Health Organization, who has admitted many times over that they made major mistakes in their handling of the H1N1 pandemic, has gone ahead and recommended that H1N1 be included in upcoming seasonal flu vaccinations.
So please keep this article handy to share with your friends and loved ones who are ready to get their “H1N1-enhanced” flu shot come October or November.
A Brief Reminder of How to Prevent the Flu Naturally
If you’re feeling skittish about going through flu season flu-shot-free, you should know that there are far safer, not to mention more effective, ways to prevent the flu.
Most people do not realize that vitamin D, unlike flu shots, is a proven method to keep yourself from catching an infectious disease.
According to the Irish Independent, R Edgar Hope Simpson was one of the first to discover the link between a deficiency in solar radiation and seasonal influenza. Then, in 2006, the journal Epidemiology and Infection published Dr. John Cannell’s paper Epidemic Influenza and Vitamin D, which presents the hypothesis that influenza is merely a symptom of vitamin D deficiency.
He followed this up with another study published in the Virology Journal in 2008.
His findings were again confirmed by another recent study — the largest and most nationally representative of its kind to date — that involved about 19,000 Americans.
It found that people with the lowest blood vitamin D levels reported having significantly more recent colds or cases of the flu. In conclusion, lead author Dr. Adit Ginde stated:
“The findings of our study support an important role for vitamin D in prevention of common respiratory infections, such as colds and the flu. Individuals with common lung diseases, such as asthma or emphysema, may be particularly susceptible to respiratory infections from vitamin D deficiency.”
Add to this the fact that vitamin D has been shown to have a dramatic impact on nearly all chronic diseases, and you begin to see why optimizing your vitamin D levels may indeed be crucial for avoiding the flu in the first place, and/or avoiding serious and potentially deadly complications from the flu.
While you can use vitamin D acutely to treat the infection by using 20,000-50,000 units a day for three days, it is FAR better to have your levels optimized BEFORE you are exposed to the flu. If you have been taking relatively larger doses of vitamin D (5,000 units a day or more) then there is very little likelihood that this high dose for three days would work and it is not suggested to try it.
Only use that dose if you have not been on regular doses of oral vitamin D or had healthy sun exposure.
Optimizing your vitamin D levels is one of the absolute best strategies for avoiding infections of ALL kinds, and vitamin D deficiency is likely the TRUE culprit behind the seasonality of the flu — not the flu virus itself.
It makes much more sense to get your levels optimized than risk taking a shot that may increase your chances of coming down with another virus.