Thursday, July 30, 2009

Martial Law and the Militarization of Public Health: The Worldwide H1N1 Flu Vaccination Program

by Michel Chossudovsky

"The flu season is upon us. Which type will we worry about this year, and what kind of shots will we be told to take? Remember the swine flu scare of 1976? That was the year the U.S. government told us all that swine flu could turn out to be a killer that could spread across the nation, and Washington decided that every man, woman and child in the nation should get a shot to prevent a nation-wide outbreak, a pandemic." (Mike Wallace, CBS, 60 Minutes, November 4, 1979)

"The federal officials and industry representatives had assembled to discuss a disturbing new study that raised alarming questions about the safety of a host of common childhood vaccines administered to infants and young children. According to a CDC epidemiologist named Tom Verstraeten, who had analyzed the agency's massive database containing the medical records of 100,000 children, a mercury-based preservative in the vaccines -- thimerosal -- appeared to be responsible for a dramatic increase in autism and a host of other neurological disorders among children....

"It's hard to calculate the damage to our country -- and to the international efforts to eradicate epidemic diseases -- if Third World nations come to believe that America's most heralded foreign-aid initiative is poisoning their children. It's not difficult to predict how this scenario will be interpreted by America's enemies abroad." (Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Vaccinations: Deadly Immunity, June 2005)

"Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in twenty-five years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children."( Patti White, School nurse, statement to the House Government Reform Committee, 1999, quoted in Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Vaccinations: Deadly Immunity, June 2005)

"On the basis of ... expert assessments of the evidence, the scientific criteria for an influenza pandemic have been met. I have therefore decided to raise the level of influenza pandemic alert from Phase 5 to Phase 6. The world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic. ... Margaret Chan, Director-General, World Health Organization (WHO), Press Briefing 11 June 2009)

"As many as 2 billion people could become infected over the next two years — nearly one-third of the world population." (World Health Organization as reported by the Western media, July 2009)

"Swine flu could strike up to 40 percent of Americans over the next two years and as many as several hundred thousand could die if a vaccine campaign and other measures aren't successful." (Official Statement of the US Administration, Associated Press, 24 July 2009).

"The U.S. expects to have 160 million doses of swine flu vaccine available sometime in October", (Associated Press, 23 July 2009)

"Vaccine makers could produce 4.9 billion pandemic flu shots per year in the best-case scenario", Margaret Chan, Director-General, World Health Organization (WHO), quoted by Reuters, 21 July 2009)

Wealthier countries such as the U.S. and Britain will pay just under $10 per dose [of the H1N1 flu vaccine]. ... Developing countries will pay a lower price." [circa $400 billion for Big Pharma] (Business Week, July 2009)

War without borders, a great depression, a military adventure in the Middle East, a massive concentration of wealth resulting from the restructuring of the global financial system.

The unfolding economic and social dislocations are far-reaching.

People's lives are destroyed.

The World is at the juncture of the most serious crisis in modern history.

Bankruptcies, mass unemployment, the collapse of social programs, are the untold consequences.

But public opinion must remain ignorant of the causes of the global crisis.

"The worst of the recession is behind us";

"There are growing signs of economic recovery",

"The Middle East War is a 'Just War'", a humanitarian endeavor,

Coalition forces are involved in "peace-keeping," we are "fighting terrorism with democracy"

"We must defend ourselves against terrorist attacks"

Figures on civilian deaths are manipulated. War crimes are concealed.

People are misled on the nature and history of the New World Order.

The real causes and consequences of this Worldwide economic and social collapse remain unheralded. Realities are turned up side down. The "real crisis" must be obfuscated through political lies and media disinformation.

It is in the interest of the political powerbrokers and the dominant financial actors to divert public attention from an understanding of the global crisis.

How best to achieve this goal?

By artificially creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation which serves to weaken and disarm organized dissent directed against the established economic and political order.

The objective is to undermine all forms of opposition and social resistance.

We are dealing with a diabolical project. The public must not only remain in the dark. As the crisis worsens, as people become impoverished, the real causes must be replaced by a set of fictitious relationships.

A crisis based on fake causes is heralded: "the global war on terrorism" is central to misleading the public's understanding of the Middle East War, which is a battle for the control over extensive reserves of oil and natural gas.

The antiwar movement is weakened. People are unable to think. They unequivocally endorse the "war on terrorism" consensus. They accept the political lies. In their inner consciousness, terrorists are threatening their livelihood.

In this framework, the occurrence of "natural disasters", "pandemics", "environmental catastrophes" also plays a useful political role. It distorts the real causes of the crisis. It justifies a global public health emergency on humanitarian grounds.

The Worldwide H1N1 swine flu pandemic: Towards a Global Public Health Emergency?

The Worldwide H1N1 swine flu pandemic serves to mislead public opinion.

The 2009 pandemic, which started in Mexico in April, is timely: it coincides with a deepening economic depression. It takes place at a time of military escalation.

The epidemiological data is fabricated, falsified and manipulated. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), an epidemic of worldwide proportions now looms and threatens the livelihood of millions of people.

A "Catastrophic Emergency" is in the making. The WHO and the US Centre for Disease Control (CDC) are authoritative bodies. Why would they lie? The information released by these organizations, although subject to statistical errors, could not, by any stretch of the imagination, be falsified or manipulated.

People believe that the public health crisis at a global level is real and that government health officials are "working for the public good."

Press reports confirm the US government's intent to implement a mass H1N1 vaccination program in Fall-Winter of 2009. A major contract for 160 million doses has been established with Big Pharma, enough to inoculate more than half the US population. Similar plans are ongoing in other Western countries including France, Canada, the UK.

Volunteers are being recruited to test the swine flu vaccine during the month of August, with a view to implementing a nationwide vaccination program in the Fall.

Manipulating The Data

There is ample evidence, documented in numerous reports, that the WHO's level 6 pandemic alert is based on fabricated evidence and a manipulation of the figures on mortality and morbidity resulting from the N1H1 swine flu.

The data initially used to justify the WHO's Worldwide level 5 alert in April 2009 was extremely scanty. The WHO asserted without evidence that a "global outbreak of the disease is imminent". It distorted Mexico's mortality data pertaining to the swine flu pandemic. According to the WHO Director General Dr. Margaret Chan in her official April 29 statement: "So far, 176 people have been killed in Mexico". From what? Where does she get these numbers? 159 died from influenza out of which only seven deaths, corroborated by lab analysis, resulted from the H1N1 swine flu strain, according to the Mexican Ministry of Health.

Similarly in New York city in April, several hundred children were categorized as having the H1N1 influenza, yet in none of these cases, was the diagnosis corroborated on a laboratory test.

"Dr. Frieden said. Health officials reached their preliminary conclusion after conducting viral tests on nose or throat swabs from the eight students, which allowed them to eliminate other strains of flu."

Tests were conducted on school children in Queen's, but the tests were inconclusive: among theses "hundreds of school children", there were no reports of laboratory analysis leading to a positive identification of the influenza virus. In fact the reports are contradictory: according to the reports, the Atlanta based CDCP is the "only lab in the country that can positively confirm the new swine flu strain — which has been identified as H1N1." (Michel Chossudovsky, Political Lies and Media Disinformation regarding the Swine Flu Pandemic, Global Research, May 2009, last quotation is from the New York Times, April 25, 2009)

Influenza is a common disease. Unless there is a thorough lab examination, the identity if the virus cannot be established.

There are numerous cases of seasonal influenza across America, on an annual basis. "According to the Canadian Medical Association Journal, the flu kills up to 2,500 Canadians and about 36,000 Americans annually. Worldwide, the number of deaths attributed to the flu each year is between 250,000 and 500,000" (Thomas Walkom, The Toronto Star, May 1, 2009).

What the CDCP and the WHO are doing is routinely us re-categorizing a large number of cases of common influenza as H1N1 swine flu.

"The increasing number of cases in many countries with sustained community transmission is making it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for countries to try and confirm them through laboratory testing. Moreover, the counting of individual cases is now no longer essential in such countries for monitoring either the level or nature of the risk posed by the pandemic virus or to guide implementation of the most appropriate response measures. (WHO, Briefing note, 2009)

The WHO admits that at a country level laboratory testing is often absent, while emphasising that lab confirmation it is not required for data collection, with a view to ascertaining the spread of the disease:

A strategy that concentrates on the detection, laboratory confirmation and investigation of all cases, including those with mild illness, is extremely resource-intensive. In some countries, this strategy is absorbing most national laboratory and response capacity, leaving little capacity for the monitoring and investigation of severe cases and other exceptional events. ... For all of these reasons, WHO will no longer issue the global tables showing the numbers of confirmed cases for all countries. However, as part of continued efforts to document the global spread of the H1N1 pandemic, regular updates will be provided describing the situation in the newly affected countries. WHO will continue to request that these countries report the first confirmed cases and, as far as feasible, provide weekly aggregated case numbers and descriptive epidemiology of the early cases. (Ibid)

At a June 2009 WHO press conference, the issue of lab testing was raised:

Marion Falco, CNN Atlanta: My question may be a little basic but if you are not, and so forgive me for that, if you are not requiring testing in the countries that already have well established numbers of cases, then how are you distinguishing between seasonal flu and this particular flu. I mean how are you going to separate the numbers?

Dr Fukuda, WHO, Geneva: It is not that we are recommending not doing any testing at all. In fact when the guidance comes out, what it will suggest is what countries are to do is tailor down their testing so that they are not trying to test everybody but certainly keeping up testing of some people for exactly the kinds of reasons that you bring up. When people get sick with an influenza-like illness it will be important for us to know whether is it caused by the pandemic virus or whether is caused by seasonal viruses. What we are indicating is that if you ratchet down the level of testing we will still be able to figure that out and so we do not need to test everybody for that, but we will continue to recommend some level of testing – at a lower level of people who continue to get sick. See Transcript of WHO Virtual Press Conference, Dr Keiji Fukuda, Assistant Director-General for Health Security and Environment, WHO, Geneva, July 2009, emphasis added).

"Figure that out"? What the foregoing statements by the WHO suggest is that:

1) the WHO is not collecting data on the spread of H1N1 based on systematic lab confirmation.

2) the WHO in fact discourages national health officials to conduct detection and laboratory confirmation, while also pressuring the countries' public health authorities to duly deliver to the WHO on a weekly basis the data on H1N1 cases.

3) The WHO in its reporting only refers to "confirmed cases" It does not distinguish between confirmed and non-confirmed case. It would appear that the "non-confirmed" cases are categorized as confirmed cases and the numbers are then used by the WHO to prove that the disease is spreading. (See WHO tables:

The swine flu has the same symptoms as seasonal influenza: fever, cough and sore throat. What is happening is that the widespread incidence of the common flu is being used to generate the reports delivered to the WHO pertaining to the H1N1 swine flu. Nonetheless, in the tabulated release of country level data, the WHO uses the term: "number of laboratory-confirmed cases", while also admitting that the cases are, in many cases, not confirmed.

Worldwide Pandemic

The WHO establishes trends on the spread of the disease, essentially using unconfirmed data. Based on these extrapolations, the WHO is now claiming, in the absence of laboratory confirmation, that "as many as 2 billion people could become infected over the next two years — nearly one-third of the world population." In turn, in the US, the Atlanta based Centers for Disease Control (CDC) suggests that "swine flu could strike up to 40 percent of Americans over the next two years and as many as several hundred thousand could die if a vaccine campaign and other measures aren't successful." (AP, July 24, 2009).

How did they come up with these numbers?

The CDC estimate has nothing to do with an assessment of the spread of the H1N1 virus. It is based on a mechanical pro-rata extrapolation of trends underlying the 1957 pandemic, which resulted in 70,000 deaths in the US. The presumption here is that the H1N1 flu has the "same transmission path" as the 1957 epidemic.

Creating a Crisis where there is No Crisis

The underlying political intent is to use the WHO level six pandemic to divert public attention from an impending and far-reaching social crisis, which is largely the consequence of a deep-seated global economic depression.

On the basis of ... expert assessments of the evidence, the scientific criteria for an influenza pandemic have been met. I have therefore decided to raise the level of influenza pandemic alert from Phase 5 to Phase 6. The world is now at the start of the 2009 influenza pandemic. ... Calling a pandemic is also a signal to the international community. This is a time where the world's countries, rich or poor, big or small, must come together in the name of global solidarity to make sure that no countries because of poor resources, no countries' people should be left behind without help. ...The World Health Organization has been in contact with donor communities, development partners, resource poor countries, and also drug companies as well as vaccine companies. Margaret Chan, Director-General, World Health Organization (WHO), Press Briefing, 11 June 2009

WHO Director General Margaret Chan

How best to tame the Nation's citizens, to rein in people's resentment in the face of mounting unemployment?

Create a Worldwide pandemic, instil an atmosphere of anxiety and intimidation, which demobilizes meaningful and organized public action against the programmed enrichment of a social minority. The flu pandemic is used to foreclose organized resistance against the government's economic policies in support of the financial elites. It provides both a pretext and a justification to adopt emergency procedures. Under the existing legislation in the US, Martial Law, implying the suspension of constitutional government, could be invoked in the case of "A Catastrophic Emergency" including a the H1N1 swine flu pandemic.

Martial Law

Legislation inherited from the Clinton administration, not to mention the post 9/11 Patriot Acts I and II, allow the military to intervene in judicial and civilian law enforcement activities. In 1996, legislation was passed which allowed the military to intervene in the case of a national emergency. In 1999, Clinton's Defense Authorization Act (DAA) extended those powers (under the 1996 legislation) by creating an "exception" to the Posse Comitatus Act, which permits the military to be involved in civilian affairs "regardless of whether there is an emergency". (See ACLU at )

The issue of a pandemic or public health emergency , however, was not explicitly outlined in the Clinton era legislation.

The Katrina disaster (2005) constitutes a dividing line, a watershed leading de facto to the militarization of emergency relief:

"The disaster that struck New Orleans and the southern Gulf Coast has given rise to the largest military mobilization in modern history on US soil. Nearly 65,000 US military personnel are now deployed in disaster area, transforming the devastated port city into a war zone," (Bill Van Auken,, September 2005).

Hurricanes Katrina (August 2005) and Rita (September 2005) contributed to justifying the role of the Military in natural disasters. They also contributed to shaping the formulation of presidential directives and subsequent legislation. President Bush called for the Military to become the "lead agency" in disaster relief:

".....The other question, of course, I asked, was, is there a circumstance in which the Department of Defense becomes the lead agency. Clearly, in the case of a terrorist attack, that would be the case, but is there a natural disaster which -- of a certain size that would then enable the Defense Department to become the lead agency in coordinating and leading the response effort. That's going to be a very important consideration for Congress to think about. (Press Conference, 25 Sept 2005 )

Militarization of Public Health: The Avian Flu

The 2005 bird flu crisis followed barely a month after Hurricane Rita. It was presented to the US public as an issue of National Security. Following the 2005 outbreak of avian flu, president Bush confirmed that the military would be actively involved in the case of a pandemic, with the authority to detain large numbers of people:

"I am concerned about avian flu. I'm concerned about what an avian flu outbreak could mean for the United States and the world. ... I have thought through the scenarios of what an avian flu outbreak could mean....

The policy decisions for a president in dealing with an avian flu outbreak are difficult. ...

If we had an outbreak somewhere in the United States, do we not then quarantine that part of the country? And how do you, then, enforce a quarantine?

... One option is the use of a military that's able to plan and move. So that's why I put it on the table. I think it's an important debate for Congress to have.

... But Congress needs to take a look at circumstances that may need to vest the capacity of the president to move beyond that debate. And one such catastrophe or one such challenge could be an avian flu outbreak. (White House Press Conference, 4 October, 2005, emphasis added)

On the day following Bush`s October 4, 2005 Press Conference, a major piece of legislation was introduced in the US Senate. The Pandemic Preparedness and Response Act.

While the proposed legislation was never adopted, it nonetheless contributed to building a consensus among key members of the US Senate. The militarization of public health was subsequently embodied in the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007.

"Public Health Emergency" and Martial Law: The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007. H.R. 5122

New legislation is devised. The terms "epidemic", and "public health emergency" are explicitly included in a key piece of legislation, signed into law by President Bush in October 2006.

Lost in the midst of hundreds of pages, Public Law 109-364, better known as the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) includes a specific section on the role of the Military in national emergencies.

Section 1076 of this legislation entitled "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies" allows the President of the United States the deploy the armed forces and the National Guard across the US, to "restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States" in the case of "a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency":


(a) Use of the Armed Forces Authorized-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 333 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`Sec. 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law

`(a) Use of Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies- (1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to--

`(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that--

`(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

`(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

`(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

`(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--

`(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

`(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

`(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

`(b) Notice to Congress- The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.' (See ext of HR5122

These far-reaching provisions allow the Armed Forces to override the authority of civilian federal, state and local governments involved in disaster relief and public health. It also grants the Military a mandate in civilian police functions. Namely the legislation implies the militarization of law enforcement in the case of a national emergency.

"Catastrophic Emergency" and "Continuity of Government,": The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20

Coinciding with the passage of the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, a National Security Presidential Directive was issued in May 2007, (National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20) .

NSPD 51 /HSPD 20 is a combined National Security Directive emanating from the White House and Homeland Security. While it is formulated in relation to the domestic "war on terrorism", it also includes provisions which allow for Martial Law in case of a natural disaster including a flu pandemic.

The thrust and emphasis of NSPD 51, however, is different from that of Section 1076 of HR 5122. It defines the functions of the Department of Homeland Security in the case of a national emergency and its relationship to the White House and the Military. It also provides the President with sweeping powers to declare a national emergency, without Congressional approval.

The directive establishes procedures for "Continuity of Government" (COG) in the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency". The latter is defined in NSPD 51/HSPD 20 (henceforth referred to as NSPD 51), as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."

"Continuity of Government," or "COG," is defined in NSPD 51 as "a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency."

The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter terrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination. (National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20, emphasis added)

This Combined Directive NSPD /51 HSPD 20 grants unprecedented powers to the Presidency and the Department of Homeland Security, overriding the foundations of Constitutional government. NSPD 51 allows the sitting president to declare a �national emergency� without Congressional approval The adoption of NSPD 51 would lead to the de facto closing down of the Legislature and the militarization of justice and law enforcement.

NSPD 51 grants extraordinary Police State powers to the White House and Homeland Security (DHS), in the event of a "Catastrophic Emergency".

A flu pandemic or public health emergency is part of the terms of reference of NSPD 51. "Catastrophic Emergency" is broadly defined in NSPD 51 as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions"

"The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter terrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination. (National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20, emphasis added)

The directive acknowledges the overriding power of the military in the case of a national emergency: The presidential directive "Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect... the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures".

Since their enactment two years ago, neither the John Warner Defense Authorization Act nor NSPD 51 have been the object of media debate or discussion.

NSPD 51 and/or the John Warner H.R.5122 could be invoked at short notice following the declaration of a national health emergency and a nationwide forced vaccination program. The hidden agenda consists in using the threat of a pandemic and/or the plight of a natural disaster as a pretext to establish military rule, under the facade of a "functioning democracy".

Vaccination: From H5N1 to H1N1

A nationwide flu vaccination program has been in the pipeline in the US since 2005.

According to the Wall Street Journal (Oct 1, 2005), the Bush administration had asked Congress for an estimated $6-10 billion "to stockpile vaccines and antiviral medications as part of its plans to prepare the U.S. for a possible flu pandemic." A large part of this budget, namely 3.1 billion was used under the Bush administration to stockpile the antiviral drug oseltamivir (Tamiflu), of which the intellectual property rights belong to Gilead Science Inc, a company headed by Don Rumsfeld prior to becoming Secretary of Defense under the Bush administration.

Consistent with its role as "lead agency", more than half of the money earmarked by the Bush administration for the program was handed over to the Pentagon. In other words, what we are dealing with is a process of militarization of the civilian public health budget. . Part of the money for a public health is controlled by the Department of Defense, under the rules of DoD procurement.

"The US Senate voted [September 3, 2005] yesterday to provide $4 billion for antiviral drugs and other measures to prepare for a feared influenza pandemic, but whether the measure would clear Congress was uncertain.

The Senate attached the measure to a $440 billion defense-spending bill for 2006, according to the Associated Press (AP). But the House included no flu money in its version of the defense bill, and a key senator said he would try to keep the funds out of the House-Senate compromise version. The Senate is expected to vote on the overall bill next week.

Almost $3.1 billion of the money would be used to stockpile the antiviral drug oseltamivir (Tamiflu), and the rest would go for global flu surveillance, development of vaccines, and state and local preparedness, according to a Reuters report. The government currently has enough oseltamivir to treat a few million people, with a goal of acquiring enough to treat 20 million"


The threat of the H5N1 bird flu pandemic in 2005 resulted in multibillion dollar earnings for the pharmaceutical and biotech industry. In this regard, a number of major pharmaceutical companies including GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis, California based Chiron Corp, BioCryst Pharmaceuticals Inc, Novavax and Wave Biotech, Swiss pharmaceutical giant Roche Holding, had already positioned themselves.

In 2005,.a Maryland-based biotechnology company MedImmune which produces "an inhaled flu vaccine" had positioned itself to develop a vaccine against the H5N1 avian flu. Although it had no expertise in the avian flu virus, one of the major actors in the vaccine business, on contract to the Pentagon, was Bioport, a company part owned by the Carlyle Group, closely linked to the Bush Cabinet with Bush Senior on its board of directors.

Vaccination under a Public Health Emergency. Multibillion Financial Bonanza for the BioTech Conglomerates

The 2005 bird flu hoax was in many regards a dress rehearsal. The 2009 H1N1 pandemic is a much larger multibillion dollar operation. A select number of biotech and pharmaceutical companies have been involved in negotiations behind closed doors with the WHO and the US Administration. Key agencies are the Atlanta based Center for Disease Control and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which have close ties to the pharmaceutical industry. The conflicts of interest of these agencies is brought to light in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s detailed study entitled Vaccinations: Deadly Immunity, June 2005:

"The story of how government health agencies colluded with Big Pharma to hide the risks of thimerosal from the public is a chilling case study of institutional arrogance, power and greed. I was drawn into the controversy only reluctantly. As an attorney and environmentalist who has spent years working on issues of mercury toxicity, I frequently met mothers of autistic children who were absolutely convinced that their kids had been injured by vaccines. ... "The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological or immune-system damage," Patti White, a school nurse, told the House Government Reform Committee in 1999. "Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier; however, in twenty-five years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children." Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Vaccinations: Deadly Immunity, June 2005.

The WHO is planning for the production of 4.9 billion dose, enough to inoculate a large share of the World's population. Big Pharma including Baxter, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Sanofi-Aventis and AstraZeneca have signed procurement contracts with some 50 governments. (Reuters, July 16, 2009). For these companies, compulsory vaccination is a highly lucrative undertaking:

"The WHO has refused to release the Minutes of a key meeting of an advisory vaccine group "packed with executives from Baxter, Novartis and Sanofi" that recommended compulsory vaccinations in the USA, Europe and other countries against the artificial H1N1 "swine flu" virus this autumn.

In an email this morning, a WHO spokesperson claimed there are no Minutes of the meeting that took place on July 7th in which guidelines on the need for worldwide vaccinations that WH0 adopted this Monday were formulated and in which Baxter and other Pharma executives participated.

Under the International Health Regulations, WHO guidelines have a binding character on all of WHO's 194 signatory countries in the event of a pandemic emergency of the kind anticipated this autumn when the second more lethal wave of the H1N1 virus "which is bioengineered to resemble the Spanish flu virus" emerges.

In short: WHO has the authority to force everyone in those 194 countries to take a vaccine this fall at gunpoint, impose quarantines and restrict travel." (Jane Burgermeister, WHO moves forward in secrecy to accomplish forced vaccination and population agenda, Global Research, July 2009).

On May 19th, the WHO Director General and senior officials met behind closed doors with the representatives of some 30 pharmaceutical companies.

"In a perfect world the planet's leading pharmaceutical companies could produce 4.9 billion H1N1 swine flu vaccinations over the course of the next year. This is the World Health Organization's latest assessment. WHO Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan met with 30 pharmaceutical companies on Tuesday and briefed reporters on a WHO plan to secure vaccinations for poor countries who lack sufficient infrastructure to fight a possible pandemic. (Digital Journal, 19 May 2009)

According to recent report in Business Week, "Wealthier countries such as the U.S. and Britain will pay just under $10 per dose, the same price for the seasonal flu vaccine. Developing countries will pay a lower price, (Business Week, July 2009). The WHO suggests that the 4.9 billion doses will not suffice and that a second inoculation will be required.

4,9 billion doses at about ten dollars ($10.00) a shot and somewhat less in the developing countries, represents a windfall profit bonanza for Big Pharma of the order of 400 billion dollars in a single year. And the WHO claims that one dose per person may not suffice...

Dangerous Life Threatening Vaccine: Who owns the Patent?

While the production has been entrusted to a select number of companies, it would appear that the intellectual property rights belong to Illinois based pharmaceutical giant Baxter. Baxter is central in the negotiations between the US Administration and the World Health Organization (WHO). Moreover, "a full year before any reported case of the current alleged H1N1" Baxter had filed for a patent for the H1N1 vaccine:

Baxter Vaccine Patent Application US 2009/0060950 A1. (See William Engdahl, Now legal immunity for swine flu vaccine makers, Global Research, July 2009). Their application: states:

“the composition or vaccine comprises more than one antigen... such as influenza A and influenza B in particular selected from of one or more of the human H1N1, H2N2, H3N2, H5N1, H7N7, H1N2, H9N2, H7N2, H7N3, H10N7 subtypes, of the pig flu H1N1, H1N2, H3N1 and H3N2 subtypes, of the dog or horse flu H7N7, H3N8 subtypes or of the avian H5N1, H7N2, H1N7, H7N3, H13N6, H5N9, H11N6, H3N8, H9N2, H5N2, H4N8, H10N7, H2N2, H8N4, H14N5, H6N5, H12N5 subtypes."

The application further states, “Suitable adjuvants can be selected from mineral gels, aluminium hydroxide, surface active substances, lysolecithin, pluronic polyols, polyanions or oil emulsions such as water in oil or oil in water, or a combination thereof. Of course the selection of the adjuvant depends on the intended use. E.g. toxicity may depend on the destined subject organism and can vary from no toxicity to high toxicity."

With no legal liability, could it be that Baxter is preparing to sell hundreds of millions of doses containing highly toxic aluminium hydroxide as adjuvant? (Ibid)

The Los Angeles Times has reassured the US public with an article entitled: What are the odds that H1N1 will kill you? One might also ask, what are the odds that the H1N1 vaccine will kill you?

National Emergency Centers Establishment Act: H.R. 645

There are no indications that the Obama Adminstration is planning in the forseeable future a Public Health Emergency which would require the imposition of martial law. What we have emphasised in this article is the existence of various provisions (legislation and presidential directives) which would allow the President of the United States to instigate Martial Law in the case of a Public Health Emergency. If Martial Law were to be adopted in the context of a Public Health Emergency, what we would be dealing with is the "forced vaccination" of targeted population groups as well as the possible establishment of facilities for the internment of people who have been quarantined.

In this regard, it is worth noting that in January 2009, a piece of legislation entitled the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (HR 645) was introduced in the US Congress.The bill calls for the establishment of six national emergency centers in major regions in the US to be located on existing military installations, which could be used to quarantine people in the case of a public health emergency or forced vaccination program.

The bill goes far beyond previous legislation (including H.R 5122). The stated purpose of the "national emergency centers" is to provide "temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster." In actuality, what we are dealing with are FEMA internment camps. HR 645 states that the camps can be used to "meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security." (Michel Chossudovsky, Preparing for Civil Unrest in America Legislation to Establish Internment Camps on US Military Bases, Global Research, March 2009)

There has been virtually no press coverage of HR 645, which is currently being discussed by several congressional committees. There are no indications that the bill is on its way to being adopted.

These "civilian facilities" on US military bases are to be established in cooperation with the US Military.

Once a person is arrested and interned in a FEMA camp located on a military base, that person would in all likelihood, under a public health emergency, fall under the de facto jurisdiction of the Military: civilian justice and law enforcement including habeas corpus would no longer apply.

HR 645 could be used, were it to be adopted, in the case of public health emergency. It obviously bears a direct relationship to the economic crisis and the likelihood of mass protests across America. It constitutes a further move to militarize civilian law enforcement, repealing the Posse Comitatus Act.

In the words of Rep. Ron Paul:

"...the fusion centers, militarized police, surveillance cameras and a domestic military command is not enough... Even though we know that detention facilities are already in place, they now want to legalize the construction of FEMA camps on military installations using the ever popular excuse that the facilities are for the purposes of a national emergency. With the phony debt-based economy getting worse and worse by the day, the possibility of civil unrest is becoming a greater threat to the establishment. One need only look at Iceland, Greece and other nations for what might happen in the United States next." (Daily Paul, September 2008, emphasis added)

The proposed internment camps should be seen in relation to the broader process of militarization of civilian institutions. The construction of internment camps predates the introduction of HR 645 (Establishment of Emergency Centers) in January 2009.

"Military Civil Support": The Role of US Northern Command in the Case of a Flu Pandemic

US Northern Command has a mandate to support and oversee civilian institutions in the case of a National Emergency.

"In addition to defending the nation, U.S. Northern Command provides defense support of civil authorities in accordance with U.S. laws and as directed by the President or Secretary of Defense. Military assistance is always in support of a lead federal agency, such as the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Military civil support includes domestic disaster relief operations that occur during fires, hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes. Support also includes counter-drug operations and consequence management assistance, such as would occur after a terrorist event employing a weapon of mass destruction.

Generally, an emergency must exceed the management capabilities of local, state and federal agencies before U.S. Northern Command becomes involved. In providing civil support, the command operates through subordinate Joint Task Forces.

(See US Northcom website at ).

The Katrina and Rita hurricane disasters played a key role in shaping the role of US Northern Command in "military civil support" activities. The emergency procedures were closely coordinated by US Northern Command out of the Peterson Air Force Base, together with Homeland Security, which oversees FEMA.

During Hurricane Rita (September 2005), US Northern Command Headquarters was directly in control of the movement of military personnel and hardware in the Gulf of Mexico, in some cases overriding, as in the case of Katrina, the actions of civilian bodies. The entire operation was under the jurisdiction of the military rather than FEMA. (Michel Chossudovsky, US Northern Command and Hurricane Rita, Global Research, September 24, 2005)

Northern Command would, as part of its mandate in the case of a national emergency, oversee a number of civilian functions. In the words of Preident Bush at the height of the Rita hurricane, "the Government and the US military needed broader authority to help handle major domestic crises such as hurricanes." Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff subsequently classified Hurricane Rita as an "incident of national significance," which justified the activation of a so-called "National Response Plan"(NRP). (For further details, consult the complete document at

Within the broader framework of "Disaster Relief", Northern Command has, in the course of the last two years, defined a mandate in the eventuality of a public health emergency or a flu pandemic. The emphasis is on the militarization of public health whereby NORTHCOM would oversee the activities of civilian institutions involved in health related services.

According Brig. Gen. Robert Felderman, deputy director of USNORTHCOM’s Plans, Policy and Strategy Directorate: “USNORTHCOM is the global synchronizer – the global coordinator – for pandemic influenza across the combatant commands”(emphasis added) (See Gail Braymen, USNORTHCOM contributes pandemic flu contingency planning expertise to trilateral workshop, USNORTHCOM, April 14, 2008, See also USNORTHCOM. Pandemic Influenza Chain Training (U) pdf)

“Also, the United States in 1918 had the Spanish influenza. We were the ones who had the largest response to [a pandemic] in more recent history. So I discussed what we did then, what we expect to have happen now and the numbers that we would expect in a pandemic influenza.”

The potential number of fatalities in the United States in a modern pandemic influenza could reach nearly two million, according to Felderman. Not only would the nation’s economy suffer, but the Department of Defense would still have to be ready and able to protect and defend the country and provide support of civil authorities in disaster situations. While virtually every aspect of society would be affected, “the implications for Northern Command will be very significant.”

“[A pandemic would have] a huge economic impact, in addition to the defense-of-our-nation impact,” Felderman said. The United States isn’t alone in preparing for such a potential catastrophe. (Gail Braymen, op cit)

Also of relevance, was the repatriation of combat units from the war theater to assist US Northern Command in the case of a national emergency including a flu pandemic. In the last months of the Bush administration, the Department of Defense ordered the recall of the 3rd Infantry's 1st Brigade Combat Team from Iraq.

The BCT combat unit was attached to US Army North, the Army's component of US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM). The 1st BCT and other combat units would be called upon to perform specific military functions in the case of a national emergency or natural disaster including a public health emergency:

"The Army Times reports that the 3rd Infantry’s 1st Brigade Combat Team is returning from Iraq to defend the Homeland, as "an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks." The BCT unit has been attached to US Army North, the Army's component of US Northern Command (USNORTHCOM). (See Gina Cavallaro, Brigade homeland tours start Oct. 1, Army Times, September 8, 2008, emphasis added).



Because there are many questions about vaccinations, and because there is a strong movement on foot to require every child in the land to receive a complete series of them, this brief overview of the vaccination problem has been prepared.

Harvestime Books

Routine vaccinations are given to many children. Physicians refer to them as the “baby shots."
There are also special vaccinations for people in high risk settings such as travelers about to enplane to a hazardous country. How should we relate to vaccinations for ourselves and our children? Here is some data which may provide help.

Because there are many questions about vaccinations, and because there is a strong
movement on foot to require every child in the land to receive a complete series of them, this brief
overview of the vaccination problem has been prepared. However, the decision whether or not to vaccinate is a personal one. The author is a researcher and not a health practitioner. This is a decision you must make personally. It is hoped that this data will provide you with the basis for additional study on your own. Only In that way can you make an intelligent decision.

Vaccines primarily consist of dead or weakened ("attenuated") germs of the same type of
disease, which are injected into the body in the hope that it will stimulate the organism to produce
protein antibodies to protect it against disease. There is growing pressure from special interest groups to require nationwide vaccination of children. In view of that fact, there is an urgent need to examine the information available on this matter .

"There is a growing suspicion that immunization against relatively harmless childhood
diseases may be responsible for the dramatic increase in autoimmune diseases since mass
inoculations were introduced. These are fearful diseases such as cancer, leukemia, rheumatoid
arthritis, multiple sclerosis, Lou Gehrig's disease, lupus erythematosus, and the Guillain-8arre

“An autoimmune disease can be explained simply as one in which the body's defense
mechanisms cannot distinguish between foreign invaders and ordinary body tissues, with the
consequence that the body begins to destroy itself. Have we traded mumps and measles for cancer
and leukemia?"- Robert Mendelsohn, How to Raise a Healthy ChIld, p. 211.

Let us begin with the "mandatory" vaccinations. These are the ones, which, in most states,
your child is required to take in order to be admitted to public school:


"My name is Wendy Scholl. I reside in the State of Florida with my husband, Gary, and three
daughters, Stacy, Holly, and Jackie. Let me stress that all three of our daughters were born ealthy,
normal babies. I am here to tell of Stacy's reaction to the measles vaccine. Where according to the
medical profession, anything within 7 to 10 days after the vaccine to do with neurological sequelae or seizures or brain damage fits a measles reaction.

"At 16 months old, Stacy received her measles shot. She was a happy, healthy, normal baby,
typical, curious, playful until the 10th day after her shot, when I walked into her room to find her laying in her crib, flat on her stomach, her head twisted to one side. Her eyes were glassy and affixed. She was panting, struggling to breathe. Her small head lay in a pool of blood that hung from
her mouth. It was a terrifying sight, yet at that point I didn't realize that my happy, bouncing baby was never to be the same again."

"When we arrived at the emergency room, Stacy's temperature was 107 degrees. The first 4
days of Stacy's hospital stay she battled for life. She was in a coma and had kidney failure. Her lungs filled with fluid and she had on- going seizures.

"Her diagnosis was 'post-vaccinal encephalitis' and her prognosis was grave. She was
paralyzed on her left side, prone to seizures, had visual problems. However, we were told by doctors we were extremely lucky. I didn't feel lucky."

"We were horrified that this vaccine which was given only to ensure that she would have a
safer childhood, almost killed her. I didn't know that the possibility of this type of reaction even existed. But now, it is our reality. "---Wendy Scholl, testImony given to Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Health and the Environment; 98th Congress, 2nd Session, December 19, 1984; In Vaccine Injury Compensation, p. 110.

Most cases of measles (more rarely called rubeola or English measles) are not serious, when
large numbers of the population have been exposed to the germ. The symptoms generally leave within two weeks. However, one case in 100,000 leads to subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), which produces hardening of the brain and is generally fatal. By 1955, there were .03 deaths per 100,000.

Then, in 1963, a research team headed by J.F. Enders, developed the measles vaccine. Mass inoculations began. According to a November 1969 National Health Federation report, a study conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) disclosed that people who have been vaccinated for measles, have a 14 times greater chance of contracting the disease than those who were not vaccinated. A 1985 study by the U.S. government noted that 80 percent of "non-preventable" cases of measles, occurred in people who had been vaccinated (20th Immunization Conference Proceedings, May 6-9, 1985, p. 21).

"Measles transmission has been clearly documented among vaccinated persons. In some
large outbreaks.”over 95 percent of the cases have a history of vaccination."- Federal Drug
Administration Workshop to Review Warnings, September 18, 1992, p. 27 (reported by Dr. Atklnson of the Centers for Disease Control [CDC]).

"The World Health Organization did a study and found that while, in an unimmunized, measles susceptible group of children, the normal rate of contraction of disease was 2.4 percent; in the control group that had been immunized, the rate of contraction rose to 33.5 percent."-Paavo Alrola, Ph.D., Everywoman's Book, 1979, p. 279.

A survey of pediatricians in New York City reveals that only 3.2 percent of them were actually
reporting measles cases to the health department. A study of medical books reveals that measles vaccine may cause learning disability, retardation, ataxia, aseptic meningitis, seizure disorders, paralysis, and death. Secondary complications associated with the vaccine include encephalitis, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis, multiple sclerosis, toxic epidermal necrolysis, anaphylactic shock, Reye's syndrome, Guillain-Barre syndrome, blood clotting disorders, juvenile-onset diabetes, and possibly Hodgkin's disease and cancer (R.S. Mendelsohn, How to Raise a Healthy Child, p. 215).

“Although one of the reasons for giving measles vaccine is to prevent the known complications
of encephalitis and pneumonia, the vaccine itself may cause encephalitis. Further, one-half of all the
reported cases of measles in the last few years have been in vaccinated individuals."-The Dangers of Immunization, 1987, p. 53.

"Measles in former days was one of the more common childhood diseases. Although it can
cause serious complications, it is a relatively minor illness in the vast majority of cases. Today's
promotional campaigns for the vaccines seldom mention that the measles vaccine itself is known to be associated with serious complications including encephalitis with severe, permanent brain damage and mental retardation."-Dr. Alan Hlnman, Centers for Disease Control, quoted In The Dangers of Immunization, 1987, p. 56.

For some reason, since measles vaccination began in 1963, adolescents and young adults
have more frequently been getting measles. Yet they are at greater risk of pneumonia and liver
abnormalities then children (Infectious Diseases, January 1982, p. 21).

The youngest children receiving the vaccine are especially at risk. For example, 15-month-old
children are at greatest risk (CDG: Measles Mumps, and Rubella, 1991, p. , 1). By 1993, children
under a year constituted more than 25 percent of all measles cases, yet it was quite rare for such
small children to contract measles before the vaccine was discovered in 1963. When asked about this strange situation, CDC officials said it was due to mothers who were themselves vaccinated as

Here is a fact which the experts know: When a child is vaccinated, and does not therefore
contract measles, he develops no natural immunity to the disease. Therefore then immunity cannot be passed on to his children (D.Q. Haney, "Wave of Infant Measles Stems from '60s Vaccinations, " Albuquerque Journal, November 23, 1992, p. 83).

According to the New England Journal of Medicine (October 4, 1990), Vitamin A helps protect
the body of the child against serious complications, stemming from measles.

Strange, new forms of "measles" came into being with the advent of measles vaccinations. Similar results have followed the introduction of other vaccines. These are diseases with a startling
new array of complications. “The syndrome of 'atypical measles'-pneumonia’ petechiae [skin blotching], edema, and severe pain-is not only difficult to diagnose [as being “measles"] but is often over-looked entirely. Likewise, symptoms of atypical mumps- anorexia, vomiting, and erythematous [red] rashes, without any parotid [near the ear] involvement-require extensive serological testing to rule out other concurrent diseases."- W. James, Immunization: the Reality Behind the Myth, 1988, p.34.


Smallpox was the disease that got vaccinations started. Cowpox was a mild disease normally
contracted by cows, and the milkmaids, which worked with them. Edward Jenner found that he could give inoculations of cowpox to people, and this appeared to give them immunity to smallpox. Oddly enough, that which he did was not as dangerous as the later vaccines -which consisted of dead or weakened germs from the same dangerous disease!

Multiple vaccinations against smallpox were common. James Phipps, the eight-year-old boy
initially vaccinated by Jenner in 1796, was later revaccinated. He died at the age of 20. Jenner's own son was also vaccinated more than once, and died at 21. A study published in 1980 overviewed many of these multiple vaccination cases -and showed that re-vaccinated children developed "chromosomal aberrations in their white blood cells." (R.S. Mendelsohn, M.D., Risks of Immunizations, 1988, p. 90).

As sanitation steadily improved, the incidence of small-pox kept lessening. Before England's
first compulsory vaccination law of 1853, the most smallpox for any two successive years was only
2,000. Those were the most severe epidemics (Boston Globe, June 11, 1991, p. 13). In Jenner's own time, he himself admitted that the disease was rare, for, normally, at anyone time there were only a few hundred cases in all England. But, 17 years later, in 1870-1871, more than 23,000 people died from smallpox (E. McBean, The Poisoned Needle, 1974, p. 13).

During that same two-year period, over 124,000 died of smallpox in Germany during the same epidemic. All had been vaccinated (Ibid.)

It is an astonishing fact that 90 percent of all smallpox cases occur after the individual has been
vaccinated. (Ibid.) In order to avoid malpractice suits, smallpox deaths that occur too quickly after
vaccination are sometimes given another name: "pustular eczema. " Medical statisticians frequently try to avoid listing too many instances in which people die of the same disease they were vaccinated against. Instead, a different name is used.

Apparently, this massive vaccine cover-up has been going on since the beginning of the
century!"During the last considerable epidemic at the turn of the century, I was a member of the Health Committee of London Borough Council, and I learned how the credit of vaccination is kept up statistically by diagnosing all the revaccinated cases [of smallpox] as pustular eczema, varIoloid or what not---anything except smallpox."-George Bernard Shaw, quoted in E. McBean, The Poisoned Needle, p. 64.

"In the thirty years ending in 1934, 3,112 people are stated to have died of "chicken-pox, " and
only 579 of smallpox in England and Wales. Yet all the authorities are agreed that chicken-pox is a
nonfatal disease"-M. Beddow Bayly, Case Against Vaccination, London, June 1936, p. 5.

We now have a new disease: monkeypox. An official 1979 report of the World Health
Organization said this new disease afflicting man is clinically indistinguishable from small-pox (World Health Organization, Weekly Epidemiological Record, 1979, 54:12-13). "Immunization against smallpox is more hazardous than the disease itself."-Professor Arie Zuckerman, member of the World Health Organization's advisory panel on viruses.

"For more than fifty years the populations of Australia and New Zealand (with the exception of
the armed forces in time of war) have been practically unvaccinated, and they have been more free
from smallpox than any other community . "The most thoroughly vaccinated countries are Italy, the Philippine Islands, and Mexico. And all of these have been scourged with smallpox epidemics."-L. Loat, The Truth About Vaccination and Immunization, 1951, p. 28.

"Our U.S. Government staged a compulsory vaccination campaign in the Philippines which
brought on the largest smallpox epidemic in the history of that country with 162,503 cases and 71,453 deaths, all vaccinated. That was between 1917 and 1919."-HaroldButtram, M.D., The Dangers of Immunization, 1979, p. 48.

"From West Germany we read of more vaccination casualties. A reader writing to Organic
Consumer Report (June 13, 1968) mentions an article which appeared in Medical World which stated that about 3,000 children each year suffer varying degrees of brain damage as the result of smallpox vaccination. This same writer mentions another medical journal in which Dr. G. Kinel, M.D., reported that in the previous year, smallpox vaccination damaged the hearing of 3,296 children in West Germany and 71 became totally deaf."-W. James, Immunization: Reality Behind the Myth, 1988, p. 18.

Before concluding this section on smallpox, the findings of Dr. Charles A.R. Campbell should be
of interest. Recommended for the Nobel Prize around the turn of the century, Dr. Campbell carried out significant research into typhoid, malaria, and smallpox. He made an important discovery which could help eliminate smallpox. But his discovery was, for the most part, ignored. Dr. Campbell found that smallpox, like malaria, was carried by a blood-sucking insect, and that neither was infectious nor contagious. After careful experimentation, he found that smallpox was caused by the bite of cimex lectularius, a bedbug. These small creatures infested the straw-padded mattresses of that time.

But more: Dr. Campbell went on to learn that the amount of pocking (marking) on the skin, from
smallpox, was directly related to whether or not the person was eating fresh greens.
So smallpox is but one of several "filth diseases:" small-pox and typhus, caused by body lice;
bubonic plague, by lice on rats and rat manure; typhoid and cholera, by contaminated water .
Obviously, the solution to smallpox is a cleaner environment and better nutrition, not
vaccinations of weakened germs.


Here are several interesting statistics to compare: During the Second World War, there were
12 recorded cases of tetanus. Four of them occurred in military personnel vaccinated against the
disease. There have been less than 100 cases of tetanus in the entire nation (U.S.) since 1976. The
majority of those cases were over 50. During that time, no deaths occurred among any tetanus cases under 30 years of age. Tetanus vaccines are not responsible for the success, since they only
immunize for 12 years or less, and most of the vaccines are given to children.

Yet, in contrast, the tetanus vaccine itself results in a variety of serious complications, including recurrent abscesses, high fever, inner ear nerve damage, anaphylactic shock, loss of consciousness, and demyelinating neuropathy (progressive nerve degeneration). (See U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports for additional information on these statistics.) Why then are children vaccinated for tetanus?

Tetanus infection steadily decreased throughout the 20th century because of better attention to
wound hygiene. And that was before the tetanus vaccine was developed. Although 40 percent of the population is not now vaccinated against tetanus, the disease continues to decline. Wounds should be cleansed well, and not allowed to close until healing has occurred beneath the surface of the skin. Careful washing with soap and water, hydrogen peroxide, etc. are said to eliminate the danger of tetanus infection.

According to Issac Golden, Ph.D., in his Vaccination: A Review of Risks and Alternatives
(1991, p. 31), there have been such severe reactions to tetanus shots, that the vaccine has been
heavily diluted causing it to be clinically ineffective in preventing the disease. A New England Journal of Medicine study (November 26, 1981) revealed that tetanus booster vaccinations cause T - lymphocyte blood count ratios to temporarily drop below normal with the greatest decrease coming two weeks after the vaccination.

If you have read articles about AIDS, you will recognize the danger here since it is reduced T - lymphocytes which bring on full-blown AIDS. The NEJM article went on to explain that these altered ratios are similar to those in AIDS patients.


Dennis Hillier was a healthy English boy who excelled in football, running, and other games.
After the first vaccination, he had slightly confused speech, but no one had connected it with the
injection. Two months after his second diphtheria inoculation, he died in October 1942 of a rare form of encephalitis.

In later describing the case, Dr. W. Russell Brain said at a meeting of the Section of Neurology of the Royal Society of Medicine in February 1943: "The patient, a boy of eleven, developed
symptoms after anti-diphtheria innoculation." He then described several other cases of nervous
disorders and poliomyelitis occurring within a few days after vaccination against diphtheria. Then he concluded, "The relation of the infection to the inoculation was at present unsettled."

Cases of diphtheria are rare. In America, only five cases were reported in 1980. From 1900 to
1930, a greater than 90 percent decline in diphtheria cases occurred. Later on, the diphtheria vaccine was developed. Scientists tell us the decline was due to better nutrition and sanitation.

The Bureau of Biologics, working with the FDA, came out with a 1975 report (November 20-21,
1975), which disclosed that diphtheria toxoid "is not as effective an immunizing agent as might be
anticipated." Noting that diphtheria may occur in vaccinated individuals, they said that "the
permanence of immunity induced by the toxoid is open to question."

On the average, 50 percent of the cases occur in those who have been vaccinated (R.S.
Mendelsohn, How to Raise a Healthy Child, p. 223). An interesting sequence of events occurred during World War II: The diphtheria rate throughout Europe was low by the late 1930s. But, after Germany began compulsory diphtheria vaccinations in 1939, 150,000 vaccinated cases of the disease developed within three years. France had refused it, but was forced to give compulsory diphtheria vaccinations after German occupation. By 1943, there were nearly 47,000 cases. But, in nearby Norway, which consistently refused to vaccinate for the disease, there were only 50 cases (E. McBean, Ph.D., Vaccinations Do Not Protect, 1991, p. 8).

In Sweden, diphtheria virtually disappeared without any immunizations."In regard to the decline of diphtheria in Great Britain during 1943 and 1944, we are reminded that the 58 British physicians who signed a memorial in 1938 against compulsory immunizations in Guernsey were able to point to the virtual disappearance of diphtheria in Sweden without any immunization. On the other hand, if we turn to Germany, we find that after Dr. Frick's order for compulsory immunizations, [Germany in 1945 had come to be regarded as the storm center of
diphtheria in Europe.] 40,000 cases suddenly jumped to 250,000 cases.

An article, March 1944, in a publication called Pour la Famille points out the rise in cases of
diphtheria after compulsory immunization. For instance, the increase in Paris was as much as 30
percent. In Hungary where immunizations had been compulsory since 1938 the rise was 35 percent in two years. In the Canton of Geneva, where immunizations have been enforced since 1933, the number of cases trebled from 1941 to 1943."-E.D. Hume, Bechamp or Pasteur? 1963, pp. 217, 218.

"During a 1969 outbreak of diphtheria in Chicago, four of the sixteen victims had been 'fully
immunized against the disease,' according to the Chicago Board of Health. Five others had received
one or more doses of the vaccine, and two of these people had tested at full immunity. In another
report of diphtheria cases, three of which were fatal, one person who died and fourteen out of twentythree carriers had been fully immunized. "-Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., Confessions of a Medical Heretic, 1979, p. 143.


Polio can result in severe paralysis, however, 90 percent of those who are exposed to it, even
during an epidemic, produce no symptoms (M. Burnet and V. White, Natural History of Infectious
Disease, 1972, p. 16). From 1923 to 1953, polio in the U.S. had declined by 47 percent. A similar decline occurred in Europe. Its steep rate of decline continued after the Salk vaccine was produced in 1955, and the Sabin oral vaccine came on the market in 1959. Today polio is almost nonexistent.

Many European countries refused to use the polio vaccines, yet their rate of decline continued at the same pace as in America. Scientific studies have been made of areas in which mass polio vaccinations have occurred. Frequently, the rate of polio infection more than doubled afterward. Studies in half a dozen states are discussed in Allen Hannah, Case Against Vaccinations, 1985, p. 146. For example, during a one-year period from August 30, 1954 to August 30, 1955, Massachusetts had 273 cases before mass inoculations began, and 2,027 cases afterward. That was a 642 percent increase in the polio rate.

Dr. Jonas Salk developed the first polio vaccine in 1955. It used dead polio viruses. In 1976, he
testified before a congressional committee that the live-virus (oral) vaccine (for practical purposes, the only kind used in America since the early 1960s) was "the principle if not sole cause" of all reported polio cases since 1961. The next year Dr. Salk made this statement in Science magazine:
"The live polio virus vaccine has been the predominant cause of domestically arising cases of
paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States since 1972. To avoid the occurrence of such cases, it would be necessary to discontinue the routine use of live polio vaccine. "-Dr. Jonas Salk, Science, April 4, 1977.

In 1955, a new disease began being reported. It was named "paralytic polio. " This new
disease was entirely caused by polio vaccinations. As the "wild" polio continued to lessen, the vaccine-induced type greatly increased. (Polio which has been contracted naturally -that is, not from polio vaccination -is so rare in the last several couple decades that medical experts have given it a special name: "wild polio.”

In an in-depth study of the ten-year period from 1973-1983, the Atlanta-based Centers for
Disease Control (CDC) found that 87 percent of all polio cases were caused by polio vaccine. In 1992, the CDC officially stated that the oral polio vaccine was responsible for nearly all polio cases in the United States. Their conclusions, based on research covring the years 1982 to 1992, bore this significant title: "Epidemiologisty of Polio in the U.S. One Decade after the Last Reported Case of Indigenous Wild Virus Associated Disease” (Stebel, et. al., CDC, February 1992, pp. 568-579).

The report said that every case of polio in the United States (with the exception of imported cases) during those years was caused by the vaccine. The report also noted that five Americans contracted polio during that time while traveling over-seas, and that three of them had previously received polio vaccine.

There is a special and very dangerous problem associated with the oral polio vaccine which you
should be aware of: The vaccine can be injected into a child; then you can touch that child and
contract paralytic polio! The son of a nurse who lives near the present writer had that experience
several years ago. He was in medical school on the West Coast and, one evening, held a baby in his
arms that had received the oral polio vaccine. The baby did not contract paralytic polio, but the young man who briefly held him did. The primary cause is touching a minute amount of the baby's stool. Somehow, some of it must have been on the baby's blanket and the young man touched it. The polio virus passed through his skin. He was crippled for life because of the incident.

"The second anxiety about your unvaccinated child's exposure to others concerns polio. Children who are immunized early in life with the oral, live vaccine may shed the virus in their stool. Exposure of your child to recently vaccinated children is a potential hazard. .Parents should be vocal about their concerns. Ask whether playmates and other children in daycare have recently received the oral polio vaccine."-RandaII Neustaedter, O.M.D., The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 89.

“The only likely means of exposure to polio are travel to a foreign country, and contact with the
feces of a child who has been immunized with the oral vaccine within the previous 6 to 8 weeks."-Op cit., p. 41.

In 1948, Benjamin F. Sandler, a physician at the Oteen Veterans Hospital in North Carolina,
published a book entitled, Diet Prevents Polio. Sandier had done careful research into nutrition and
how the polio virus worked. The book revealed that when a person ate a sizeable amount of food
containing processed sugar, that sugar leached the calcium from their bones, muscles, and nerves.
The polio virus was able to attack the weakened nerves -and crippling polio was the result. Statistics showed that countries with the highest per capita sugar consumption had the most polio cases.

Sandier noted that children eat the most sugar foods (soft drinks, ice cream, candy, etc.) in hot
weather, and it was well known that polio especially strikes in the summer. (Processed sugar, taken into the body, absorbs calcium and other minerals from the body in order to be used. This is because the purified sugar has had the minerals naturally accompanying it removed. This leaching of minerals can result in polio.)

Sandler did not stop with the book; he went on the radio in the spring of 1949 and warned
people throughout North Carolina to not eat sugar foods that summer. The news-papers picked up the story and carried it throughout the state. Alerted to the danger, people feared to eat high-sugar foods that summer. The North Carolina Department of Health later reported that there were 2,498 polio cases in 1948 and only 229 in 1949 (see pages 43 and 146 in the 1951 edition of Dr. Sandler's book).

“In the history of poliomyelitis, from the time of widespread epidemics in previous decades up
to the present, there is another side of the story which has seldom been told. This is the relationship between polio and dietary sugar. When one considers that sugar in any form was rare or even unknown to the vast majority of people until relatively recent times, and when we realize that the consumption of sugar has risen precipitously since the turn of the century to the present level of 125 pounds per year for every man, woman, and child in America, then we should begin to suspect the harm that is being done to human health."-The Dangers of Immunization, 1988, p. 59.

In spite of the facts, efforts have continually been made to suggest that polio is being "stamped
out" by polio vaccines. But, in a 1983 television interview, Dr. R.S. Mendelsohn said that polio
disappeared in Europe during the 1940s and 1950s without mass vaccination, and that polio hardly
exists in the Third World where only 10 percent of the people have been vaccinated against polio (Phil Donahue Show, January 12, 1983).

During Congressional hearings on bill 10541, these facts were brought out: In 1958, Israel
carried out mass polio immunizations. Immediately, a major ‘type I" polio epidemic occurred. In 1961 Massachusetts had a "type III" polio out-break after an earnest effort to inoculate the population. "There were more paralytic cases in the triple vaccinates than in the unvaccinated."
"In 1957, a spokesman for the North Carolina Health Department made glowing claims for the
efficacy of the Salk vaccine, showing how polio steadily decreased from 1953 to 1957. His figures
were challenged by Dr. Fred Klenner who pointed out that it was not until 1955 that a single person in
the state received a polio vaccine injection. [The polio vaccine was not invented until that year.) Even
then, injections were administered on a very limited basis because of the number of polio cases
resulting from the vaccine. It was not until 1956 'that polio vaccinations assumed “inspiring"
proportions. .The 61 percent drop in polio cases in 1954 was credited to the Salk vaccine, when it
wasn't even in the state' By 1957 polio was on the increase."-W. James, Immunization: Reality Behind
the Myth, 1988, p. 27.
Polio vaccination began in the mid-950s. Since then, there has been such a remarkable upturn
in the number of polio cases that the trend has been to officially report polio cases as "meningitis. "
"In a California Report of Communicable Disease, polio showed a 0 [zero] count, while an
accompanying asterisk explained, 'All such cases are now reported as meningitis.' -Organic Consumer
Report, March 11, 1975.
"It is now seriously suggested that the sIow virus may be the cause of a number of
degenerative diseases Including rheumatoid arthritis, leukemia, diabetes, and multiple sclerosis. It Is
further possible that some of the attenuated [live, but chemically weakened] strains of vaccines that
we advocate may be Implicated with these diseases. Of polio immunization. .Fred Klenner (North
Carolina) has stated, “Many here voice a silent view that the Salk and Sabin vaccines, being made of
monkey kidney tissue, have been directly responsible for the major increase of leukemia in this
country." -Glen C. Dettman, "Immunization, Ascorbate, and Death, " Australian Nurses Journal,
December 1977.
A British researcher, Martin, was the first to point out the connection between polio -and
vaccinations against diphtheria or pertussis. He also noted that the paralysis tended to affect the arm
which had received the injection: "Concerning the subject of 'provocation poliomyelitis,’ Martin (1950)
in London first drew attention to the relation between inoculation against diphtheria or pertussis and an
attack of poliomyelitis when he described fifteen cases that he had seen between 1944 and 1949.
Paralysis came on, as a rule, seven to twenty-one days after injection and affected the left arm, into
which injections are commonly given, four times as often as the right. Interest in this relationship was
greatly stimulated by the observations of McCloskey in Australia and Geffen in London. McCloskey
(1950) investigated 375 cases of poliomyelitis during an epidemic In Victoria In 1949 and found that 31
of the patients had been inoculated against diphtheria or pertussis, alone or in combination, within five
to thirty-two days.
"In London, Geffen (1950) noted that In the 1949 epidemic, 30 out of 182 paralytic patients
under five years of age had been immunized against diphtheria, pertussis, or both within four weeks of
contracting polio. In all these cases the limb last injected was paralyzed. .
“The conclusion drawn from these various reports was greatly strengthened by the statistical analysis
carried out by Hill and Knowelden (1950) which showed an excess of poliomyelitis cases in children
who had been inoculated within the previous twenty-eight days with pertussis vaccine or combinations
of the triple vaccine."-Randolph Society, The Dangers of Immunization, 1987, pp. 44-45.
They then quote Wilson as saying:
" The mode of action of the injected vaccine is open to doubt. The most probable explanation is
that it acts like a fixation abscess and allows viruses circulating in the blood stream to settle down at
the site of injection and thence proceed via the nerve fibres to the spinal cord. The greater the irritating
effect of the vaccine, the more likely this is to happen. "-Op. cit., p. 45.
Mumps is rarely harmful in childhood, and usually disappears within ten days after contracting
it naturally. Life-long immunity is the result. But it is dangerous for males after puberty to contract it.
About 35 percent develop orchitis, or Inflammation of the testes. This can result in sterility. Because
the mumps vaccine gives an immunity which is not lifelong -but gradually disappears, boys who have
received the mumps vaccine can develop mumps later in life, with hazardous complications. Statistics
reveal that mumps after childhood is becoming more frequent, as a result of mumps vaccinations (R.S.
Mendelsohn, M.D., How to Raise a Healthy Child, pp. 29-30, 213-214).
The mumps vaccine can also cause immediate and harmful reactions, including febrile
seizures, rashes, unilateral nerve deafness, and, occasionally, encephalitis.
A recently-developed mumps vaccine is said to produce a higher incidence of encephalitis
("Clinical and Epidemiological Features of Mumps Meningo-encephalitis and Possible Vaccine-Related
Disease, ' Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal, November 1989, pp. 751-754).
“Use of the mumps vaccine, which has been associated with serious side effects, seems
unjustifiable. Administering the vaccine during adolescence may just prolong the problem of waning
immunity and shift the disease and its complications to an even older population."-Randall
Neustaedter, O.M.D., The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 60.
It has been said that children should be inoculated against rubella in order to protect pregnant
women from catching the disease from them. But a study by Dr. Stephen Schoenbaum and colleagues
in 1975-specifically done to find out about that -revealed the surprising fact that adult women contract
rubella from other adults, not from children (S.C. Schoenbaum, et al., "Epidemiology of Congenital
Rubella Syndrome: The Role of Material Parity, " Journal of the American Medical Association, 1975,
Vol. 233, pp. 151-155).
The following was reported in the American Journal of Diseases of Children:
"A 20-month-old white boy was well until ten days after inoculation with the combined mumps -
rubella vaccine. Initial complaints were the inability to stand on the left leg and pain in all extremities.
The weakness progressed to include both legs and ascended to involve all extremities. .Examination
revealed an apprehensive child with a complete flaccid paralysis of all extremities and inability to hold
his head up. The patient had marked soft tissue tenderness of all extremities. Neuralogic evaluation
revealed no muscle stretch reflexes."-J.R. Gunderson, "Guillain-Barre Syndrome: Occurrence
Following Combined Mumps-Rubella Vaccine, " American Journal of Diseases of Childhood, 1973,
Vol. 125, pp. 834-835.
Most people call influenza "the flue. " The flu vaccines vary in type and effects, from year to
year. New strains are constantly being developed in an effort to conquer the latest flu epidemic. Of
course, this also means that last year's flu vaccination can do little to help a person the next year.
"In 1976 more than 500 people who received their flu shots were paralyzed with Guillain-Barre
syndrome. Thirty of them died. During that same year the incidence of Guillain-Barre among fiuvaccinated
U.S. Army personnel was 50 percent greater than among unvaccinated civilians. Dr. John
Seal of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease believes that 'any or all flue vaccines
are capable of causing Guillain-Barre."-N.Z. Miller, Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective?,
1992, p. 44.
Medical records reveal that one of the effects of the swine- influenza vaccine program was
multiple sclerosis and Guillain-Barre syndrome. Commenting on this relationship, Dr. Waisbren
suggested that it may be that the myelin coating on the outside of the nerves may have been damaged
or destroyed by viruses in the swine-flue vaccine:
"Is it possible that antigen in the swine-influenza vaccine evokes in some patients an immune
response to myelin- basic proteins-those that surround the peripheral nerves in patients who
developed Guillain-Barre syndrome, and those around the central nerves in patients who developed a
disorder similar to multiple sclerosis?"-Burton A. Walsbrent M.D., "Swine Influenza Vaccine, " Annals
of Internal Medicine, July 1982, p. 149.
Dr. Robert Couch, Baylor University, Houston, Texas, testified before the U.S. Public Health
Service Immunization Practices Advisory Committee in January 1982. He told them of various elderly
individuals who had a history of chronic disorders. After they received influenza vaccination, some of
their allergies and other problems worsened; some with hypertension had increased blood pressure;
some with diabetes had higher blood sugar; some with gout got worse; some with Parkinson's disease
had increased clumsiness.
“Reports linking immunizations to Reye's syndrome continue to appear,
‘ln an epidemic affecting 22 children in Montreal, five had received vaccines (consisting of
measles, rubella, DPT, and Sabin polio vaccines) within three weeks prior to their hospitalization.
“While the Center for Disease Control had been quick to suggest a relationship between
Reye's syndrome and certain flu outbreaks, they have not, to my knowledge, given equal time to a
consideration of an association between this disease and the flu vaccine itself."-Robert Mendelsohn,
.M.D., San Francisco Chronicle, May 22, 1978.
The other name for German Measles is rubella. When a child contracts it, the result is a mild
disease with few problems. In fact, most of the time few recognize that they have it. The symptoms are
a runny nose, sore throat, very slight fever, and somewhat enlarged, tender lymph nodes on the side
of the neck. Pink, slightly raised spots appear on the skin.
But the situation is entirely different if a pregnant woman develops the disease within the first
trimester (the first three months of pregnancy). Her baby may be born with birth defects such as limb
defects, mental retardation, impaired vision, damaged hearing, or heart malformation.
Obviously, it is dangerous to inoculate a young girl against rubella ! Later, when the immunity
wears off, she has grown up-and then may contract rubella during early pregnancy. The result may be
a defective child. For this reason alone, rubella vaccinations should never be indiscriminately given to
children. Although It is a known fact in medical circles that approximately 25 percent of those
vaccinated against rubella lose that immunity within five years (R.S. Mendelsohn, The Risks of
Immunizations, 1988, p. 4), yet children- including girls -are routinely given their MMR shots -which
includes rubella vaccine.
"Rubella vaccine is unnecessary to administer to boys, rubella illness being of little
consequence for males. But the danger of infection of pregnant women by rubella virus is a very
serious concern. J. Anthony Morris, Ph.D., former Food and Drug Administration executive, pointed
out in the National Health Federation Bulletin in 1977, 'No boy should be given rubella vaccine
because in boys rubella is a relatively minor disease. Rubella vaccination increases the chances that a
pregnant mother can contract the vaccine virus from a son who has been recently vaccinated.' "-The
Dangers of Immunization, 1987, p. 53.
“As much as 26 percent of children receiving rubella vaccination in national testing programs
developed arthralgia and arthritis. Many had to seek medical attention, and some were hospitalized to
test for rheumatic fever and rheumatoid arthritis."-"Science Aftermath, " Science, March 26, 1977.
“It is clear that vaccination of children [for rubella], which has only been done for several years,
is not very successful."-Dr. Plotkln, professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania School of
A study made, during a Casper, Wyoming, German Measles epidemic, revealed that 73
percent of the children developing it were already immunized against it. In an outbreak in Melbourne,
Australia, 80 percent of all army recruits who contracted the disease had received Rubella vaccination
four months earlier (Australian Nurses Journal, May 1978).
Negative side-effects of rubella vaccinations include: arthritis, arthralgia (painful joints), and
polyneuritis (peripheral nerve pain, numbness, or paralysis).
You may know someone with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, which the scientists call Epstein-Barr
Virus. Before 1982, it did not exist in the United States. We are making new diseases all the time!
Researchers now know that the new rubella vaccine (first administered in America in 1979)
produced it. Once a child receives that vaccine, the Epstein-Barr virus can remain in his body for years
and, through casual contact, be transmitted to others (A.B. Allen, M.D., “is RA27/3 a Cause of Chronic
Fatigue?" Medical Hypothesis, Vol. 27, 1988, pp. 217-220; and A.D. Ueberman, M.D., "The Role of
Rubella Virus in the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, " Clinical Ecology, Vol. 7, No.3, pp. 51-54.)
In an article reviewing the statistical evidence of adverse effects of compulsory rubella
vaccination in the State of New Jersey, the following comments were made:
"The HEW [the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare] reported in early 1970 that
as much as 26 percent of children receiving rubella vaccination in national testing programs developed
arthralgia and arthritis. Many had to seek medical attention and some were hospitalized to test for
rheumatic fever and rheumatoid arthritis. In New Jersey this same testing program showed that 17
percent of all children vaccinated developed arthralgia and arthritis. .The HEW report indicated that in
1969 only 87 congenital rubella syndrome cases were reported in the entire U.S.; twelve cases were
reported in New Jersey.
"These statistics hardly justify the crippling of an estimated 340,000 children in the state of New
Jersey as a result of the rubella vaccine.
"Further, writing in the current New England Journal of Medicine, Nobel Prize Winner Dr. John
Enders, of Harvard University, expressed the concern that young girls vaccinated today may be more
likely to get the disease when they grow up and start having children than if they had gotten the
disease naturally in their childhood. Findings indicate that vaccination may establish only partial
resistance that is not as long lasting nor as protective as natural infection."- Science, March 26, 1977,
p. 9.
It is a strange fact that two medical journals have reported that in many hospitals all employees
are required to be vaccinated for rubella,-but physicians (they are the ones who read the medical
journals) refuse to take the rubella vaccine, while the other hospital employees receive them. ("Rubella
Shots for Hospital Employees, " The Doctor's People: A Medical Newsletter for Consumers, August
1991, pp. 1-2). In a second research report, it was noted that 90 percent of the obstetricians and over
two-thirds of the pediatricians refused to take the rubella vaccine ("Rubella Vaccine and Susceptible
Hospital Employees: Poor Physician Participation,” Journal of the American Medical Association,
February 20, 1981). Those physicians are in the two medical specialties which are the most expert in
the dangers of vaccines.
"On August 7, 1989 I had Rubella, Measles, and Varicella Zoster Titre IGG [chicken pox]
vaccines. I am a nursing student. Within three weeks I began feeling weak, tired, and sluggish. This
lead to numbness in both hands and feet. By November I developed Guillain-Barre syndrome and was
hospitalized for two months. I was unable to walk, had difficulty moving my upper extremities, suffered
urinary and abdominal problems, partial facial paralysis, and I lost a substantial amount of weight.
Previously, I was an active healthy woman eager to finish my nursing program. "-Vaccine Reaction
Report, National Vaccine Information Center, November 25, 1991, pp. 23-24.
In the following statement, "herd immunization" is an Australian term for what we would call
"mass immunization:" It is not referring to animal vaccination.
"In October 1972, a seminar on rubella was held at the Department of Pathology, University
Department. Austin Hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Dr. Beverly Allan, a medical virologist, gave
overwhelming evidence against the effectiveness of the vaccine. So stunned was she with her
investigations that it caused her, like a growing number of scientists, to question the whole area
related to herd immunization."-G. Dettman, Ph.D., and A. Kalokerlnos, M.D., "Does Rubella Vaccine
Protect?" Australian Nurses Journal, May 1978.
When parents take their children to see the doctor for a routine checkup, it is standard
procedure for the physician to give them the MMR shots. These are supposed to immunize them
against mumps, measles, and rubella. Medical guidelines recommend that this shot be given at about
15 months of age.
“We would like to enjoy reduction in disease at little or no cost. But this goal is difficult to
achieve because the reason for immunity to pertussis is obscure; hence, we have little knowledge of
the immunizing principle of the bacterium. To accomplish protection we find it necessary to give the
entire bacterium and to allow the host to sort out the effective immunologic response. The cost of
doing this is the inclusion of all components of the bacterium, including the toxic ones."-Vlncent
Fulginiti, M.D., 1984, quoted in H.L. Coulter and B.L. Fisher, A Shot in the Dark, p. 205.
The medical name for whooping cough is "pertussis. " This can be a dangerous disease. The
heavy coughing can so weaken the body that the individual dies from lack of oxygen. In most cases,
the disease is not fatal, but is the most dangerous when Infants under six months of age contract it. No
known antibiotics and cough suppressants seem to lessen the condition.
"Curiously, the United States appears to be the only major Western nation with compulsory
pertussis immunization. It is not mandated in England, France, West Germany, Canada, Austria, Italy,
Switzerland, Portugal, Spain, Denmark, Sweden. Belgium, Finland, Ireland, Norway, or the
Netherlands. In fact, the only part of Europe where pertussis vaccination is universally imposed is the
Soviet Union and the formerly 'iron curtain' countries of Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia.
Mass vaccination in our 'free society' is not voluntary. Since the repeal of the draft in the 19705,
mandatory vaccination remains the only law that requires a citizen to risk his life for his country."-H.L
Coulter and B.L Fisher, A Shot In the Dark, p. 204.
Actually, the number of cases of whooping cough were declining in the years before the
pertussis vaccine was introduced. From 1900 to 1935, the death rate from this disease declined 79
percent in the U.S. (International Mortality Statistics, 1981, pp. 164-165). Due to problems with the
vaccine, since that vaccination began the death rate has risen again.
"Reports in the medical literature of serious adverse consequences -shock and brain damagein
infant recipients of pertussis vaccine extend from the 1930s to the present time."- The Randolph
Society, The Dangers of Immunization, 1987, p. 56.
"The whooping cough vaccine has a high percentage of neurologic complications, including
death. Several physicians I know do not give it at all."-Robert Mendelsohn, "Vaccinations Pose
Hazards, "Idaho Statesman, December 19, 1977.
"One case they described was that of an eight-month-old boy, whose first pertussis shot was
given at seven months. That shot was followed by irritability and drowsiness, which cleared up in
about three days. Three weeks later he was given a second shot and rapidly became irritable,
restless, febrile [feverish], and held his right arm stiffly. About seventy- two hours after the inoculation,
[he] had two severe generalized convulsions and was admitted to another hospital.' ..When he was
seen by his family physician eight months later , , 'he was blind, deaf, spastic and helpless.' .'-1948
research study by Randolph K Byers and Frederick C. Moll of Harvard Medical School, as reported In
H.L. Coulter and B.L. Fisher, A Shot In the Dark, pp. 22-23.
Dr. Vincent A. Fulginiti, chairman of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on
Infectious Diseases wrote a 1976 paper: "Controversies in Current Immunization Practices: One
Physician's Viewpoint. " It was included in a 1982 statement submitted by J. Anthony Morris, Ph.D., to
a U.S. Senate subcommittee:
"To me, it is inconceivable that we can steadfastly recommend and employ pertussis vaccine
without a parallel commitment to resolve the outstanding issues. It is my belief that the National
Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, and CDC should constantly encourage
competent authorities to investigate the unanswered questions and attempt definitive answers."-V.A.
Fulginitf, M.D., quoted In J.A. Morris, Ph.D., statement to U.S. Senate Subcommlttee on Investigations
and General Oversight, Committee on Labor and Human Relations, June 30, 1982.
On those occasions when enough of the public learns about it, it is shocked at what pertussis
inoculations are doing to the children. Storm waves keep arising over the matter, which state health
departments try to quiet with words of peace and safety. But the outcry finally led, in 1986, to a
congressional law (NCVIA, discussed In some detail near the close of the present book).
"The vaccine controversy has reached its emotional and political zenith with the publicity
generated by pertussis vaccine reactions. Public awareness was fueled by television documentaries,
books in the popular press (Coulter & Fisher, A Shot In the Dark, 1985), and many magazine articles.
Children in Great Britain and Sweden no longer receive the pertussis vaccine, Japan has postponed
pertussis immunization until children are two years old, and the United States Congress passed the
National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act [NCVIA] to provide compensation to parents of children injured
by vaccines. "-Randal Neustaedter, O.M.D., The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 43.
The most comprehensive pertussis study was conducted in Los Angeles during 1978-1979 by
UCLA (reported in Pediatrics, 1981, 68:650-660). In a large number of cases, reactions that occurred
within the first 48 hours after pertussis injection were recorded. Serious problems were found to exist
with the pertussis vaccine. Unfortunately, the research only concerned the first 48 hours after
inoculation. Dr. Coulter comments on the many cases of brain damage caused by the vaccine, which
occur more than 48 hours after the injection:
"Severe neurologic sequelae [plural of 'sequela,' an abnormal condition resulting directly or
indirectly from a previous disease or vaccination] may also occur after vaccination in the absence of
an acute reaction. When the baby reacts to a DPT shot with 'a slight fever and fussiness for a few
days,' this may be, and often is, a case of encephalitis which is Quite capable of causing Quite severe
long- term neurologic consequences. .Any researcher who ignores or rejects the possibility that a
vaccination can cause the most serious neurologic disorders in the absence of a marked acute
reaction will have to find grounds for distinguishing post-vaccinal encephalitis from encephalitis due to
other causes."-Randall Neustaedter, O.M.D., The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 46.
Although the study was restricted to only the initial 48 hours after a percussis injection, the
UCLA research still revealed that 50 percent of those receiving the vaccine developed fever, 36
percent had irritability, 35 percent had crying episodes, and 40 percent had localized inflammation.
More significantly, 3 percent had persistent crying, and 31 percent had excessive sleepiness.
Three research studies were made on the relationship that the percussis vaccine had to death.
Each one specifically examined DPT vaccinations, and each found a decided relationship. In Waler's
case-control study, the relative risk of the child having SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) within 3
days after immunization was 7.3 percent! Did you hear that? That is almost one child out of every ten
vacccinated with DPT (the dipththeria-pertussis-typhoid vaccine; a standard vaccination given to
school children).
(The three studies were: Baraff, et al., 1983, reported in Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal,
1983, Vol. 2, pp. 7-11 ; Torch, 1982, reported in Neurology, 1982, Vol. 32, p. A 169; Waler, et al.,
1987, reported in American Journal of Public Health, 1987, Vol. 77, pp. 945-951.)
In a research paper submitted to the Australian government, Drs. Dettman, Kalokerinos, and
Ford have urged that something be done about the pertussis vaccine problem. Among other things,
they noted evidence linking pertussis vaccine with the later appearance of asthma and hayfever ("A
Supportive Submission, " The Dangers of Immunization, Biological Research Institute, Warburton,
Victoria, Australia, 1979, p. 74).
Not only is the pertussis vaccine only about 40-45 percent effective ("Persistence of Pertussis
in an Immunized Population, " November 1989, pp. 686-693), but its immunity is short-lived
(Vaccination Bulletin, February 1987, p. 11). There is a 95 percent chance of infection, only 12 years
after vaccination ("Diphtheria-Pertussis-Tentanus Vaccine, " Pediatrics, February 1979, pp. 256-260).
Edward B. Shaw, a physician teaching in the medical school at the University of California, said
"I doubt that the decrease In pertussis is due to the vaccine, which is a very poor antigen and
an extremely dangerous one-with many serious complications."-E.B. Shaw, M.D., Journal of the
American Medical Association, March 10, 1975, p. 1026.
Here are several additional comments on the pertussis vaccine:
"There is a natural tendency to underreport whooping cough when it occurs in a vaccinated
population, and to over-report it when it appears to be occurring in an unvaccinated population."-H.L
Coulter and B.L Fisher, DPT: A Shot In the Dark.
A new whooping cough vaccine, known as the “acellular pertussis vaccine," was put on the
market in 1981. Also known as "Japanese whooping cough vaccine," Japanese scientists developed it
to be "safer and more effective" than the pertussis vaccines in current use. But the new vaccine has
brought death to some of those receiving it. The first U.S. test was made on Swedish children in 1988;
five of the children died.
"In Japan, the replacement of whole-cell with acellular vaccine resulted in a 60 percent
reduction of 'mild' side effects, particularly febrile seizures. But the rate of severe reactions did not
differ significantly between the acellular and whole-cell vaccine (Noble, et. al., 1987). The Japanese
experience with acellular vaccine has included only children 24 months or older. There are no data
that allow us to predict the rate of severe reactions for infants given the new vaccine."-R. Neustaedter,
The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 80.
"The pertussis vaccine is dangerous in all forms developed thus far. .Infants will continue to be
severely damaged by these pertussis vaccines, and the true extent of undetected, long-term disease
will probably never be discovered. "-Op. clt., p. 81.
In 1987, 66 Japanese victims of the new shots won immense court awards from the
government. The judge said the government was at fault and had victimized the people (report of
Marian Tompson, an investigative reporter, noted in R.S. Mendelsohn, M.D., Risks of Immunizations,
1988, I p.96).
An outstanding book on the whooping cough (percussis) t vaccine has been written! It is
entitled A Shot in the Dark. The subtitle is Why the P in the DPT Vaccination May be Hazardous to
Your Child's Health. Authored by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fisher, it is extremely comprehensive.
Coulter is a medical historian, and Fisher is founding member and vice-president of Dissatisfied
Parents Together, a Virginia-based organization which tries to help parents who have had problemsbefore
or after-vaccinations. (See the section, "For More Information, " for the address.)
DPT is a combination vaccine, composed of diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough), and
typhoid vaccines. It is probably the vaccine most commonly given to small children. The following
account appeared in the distinguished journal, Pediatrics: " A 16-month-old baby girl. .had been
previously healthy and developmentally normal. .In September 1983, 14 days after measles, mumps,
and rubella vaccination, she had subjective fever, cough, conjunctival infection, and a generalized
macular erythematous rash. Two days later, the majority of these symptoms abated, but the
conjuntival infection worsened, her pupils became dilated, and she began walking into objects. .On
admission to the hospital, examination revealed a vigorous toddler who would not reach for objects
and had only minimal light perception. Ophthalmologic examination showed a diffuse chorioretinitis
with perivasular retinal edema, mild papilledema, and a stellate mucular configuration. .Repeat
fundoscopic (eye] examination several days later demonstrated evolution into a 'salt and pepper'
pigmentary pattern distributed radially along the retinal veins. These changes were most consistent
with measles retinopathy ..On follow-up examination 7 months later, her visual acuity had improved;
she was able to ambulate freely but still sat close to the television set and held objects close to her
face. Fundoscopic examination revealed macular scarring."-G.S. Marshall, et al., "Diffuse retinopathy
following measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination, " Pediatrics, 1985, Vol. 76, pp. 989-991.
Measles, normally "caught" the natural way, never causes such problems. But, when
weakened measles viruses are given in injections, the result can be weird (“atypical") types of physical
damage which would never occur if a child caught the disease naturally. We have already viewed the
dangers of measles, diphtheria, and pertussis vaccines. DPT combines them all into one package,
which health department officials in every state routinely require every child to be injected with, in
order to attend public school
Diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus vaccines are gener- ally given in one dose, called the "DPT
vaccine.” Formaldehyde, thimerosal (a form of mercury), and aluminum phosphate -all strong poisonsare
used to "stabilize" the germs in DPT, as well as a number of other vaccines.
Just for a moment, let us discuss this matter of "stabilized" and "attenuated" viruses: If you halfkill
a plant or animal, it is in bad shape. It may become diseased, it may die, it might recover its full
strength. The same applies to the half-killed ("attenuated") viruses in vaccines. The poisonous
chemicals used to "stabilize" them have caused some to become diseased, some dead, and some
recover quite well. -Then the whole mess is pumped into the arm of a small child. And we wonder why
he develops a strange sickness afterward. One child will develop one kind of disease, another a
different kind. It all depends on which direction a majority of the weakened viruses injected into that
particular child happened to go-before and after being injected. It also depended on what other viruses
happened to be in the bovine or monkey pus, which the viruses came from. It also depended on the
child's general health and diet at the time. It also depended on how many vaccines he received at one
time. It also depended on whether this was the first vaccination or the third or fourth in a series.
Another point should be mentioned: After being injected, the fast-flowing bloodstream carries off the
entire collection of chemicals and viruses in the vaccine-and quickly separates the viruses from the
chemicals which kept them in a weakened condition. What happens to the viruses next, now that they
are back in an ideal growth environment? What do the deadly chemicals do? Very likely, the chemicals
weaken the body's immune system, as the foreign viruses set to work to grow and multiply.
A 60-minute documentary, entitled "DPT: Vaccine Roulette," produced by reporter Lea
Thompson, was aired over WRC- TV, Washington D.C., in April 1982. It reviewed a shocking number
of incidents of neurological damage to children following DPT vaccination.
“To health professionals, of course, the dangers of DPT are nothing new. .Almost from the
inception of widespread DPT immunization, severe reactions have been reported, beginning with
Byers's and Moll's study of vaccine-associated encephalopathy in 1948. " -Journal of the American
Medical Association, July 2, 1982.
"We have shown that triple antigen injections (DTP) given to scorbutic children [low in Vitamin
C] can result in massive immunological insults which may cause death (as reported In Medical Journal
of Australia, April7, 1973). Obliged to investigate this phenomenon, we were surprised to find the
whole subject of herd [mass] immunization is controversial and not nearly so well authenticated as we
would have our recipients believe.
"It is now seriously suggested that the slow virus may be the cause of a number of
degenerative diseases including rheumatoid arthritis, leukemia, diabetes, and multiple sclerosis. It is
further possible that some of the attenuated [chemically weakened] strains of vaccines that we
advocate may be implicated with these diseases. Of polio immunization ..Fred Klenner (North
Carolina) has stated, 'many here voice a silent view that the Salk and Sabin vaccines, being made of
monkey kidney tissue, have been directly responsible for the major increase of leukemia in this
country."-Glen C. Dettman, "Immunization, Ascorbate, and Death, " Australian Nurses Journal,
December 1977.
The packet insert for the DPT vaccine says that "symptomology related to neurological
disorders" and "excessive screaming" can follow vaccination with DPT.
Dr. John Fox, of the University School of Medicine, issued a warning to the Australian
government that the risk of paralytic complications from injecting certain vaccines is too great. He cited
vaccines containing antigens for measles, polio, whooping cough, and tetanus (Drs. A. Kalokerinos
and G. Dettman, " ‘Mumps' the word, but you have yet another vaccine deficiency, " Australian Nurses
Journal, June , 1981, p. 17).
"(DPT can cause] fever over 103 degrees F ., convulsions ..alterations of consciousness; focal
neurologic signs, screaming episodes. .shock; collapse; thrombocytopenic purpura."-Physlclan's Desk
Reference, 1980, p. 1866.
Edward Brandt, Jr ., M.D. testified before a U.S. Senate Committee on May 3, 1985, and
stated that every year 35,000 children suffer neurological reactions because of the DPT vaccination
(Health Freedom News, May 1985, p. 38).
Under "Side Effects and Adverse Reactions" of DPT is listed:
"1. Severe temperature elevations -105° or higher. 2. Collapse with rapid recovery .3. Collapse
followed by prolonged prostration and shock-Iike state. 4. Screaming episodes. 5. Isolated convulsions
with or without fever. 6. Frank encephalopathy [brain damage] with changes in the level of
consciousness, focal neurological signs, and convulsions with or without permanent neurological
and/or mental deficit.
7. Thrombocytopenic purpura (blood and skin disorder]. The occurrence of sudden infant death
syndrome (SIDS] has been reported following administration of DPT."-Physlcians Desk Reference,
1980, p. 1866.
Reye's syndrome is an often fatal disease, which may be caused by various vaccines:
“Reports linking immunizations to Reye's syndrome continue to appear .
“In an epidemic affecting 22 children in Montreal, five had received vaccines (measles, rubella,
DPT, and Sabin polio vaccines) within three weeks prior to their hospitalization.
“While the Center for Disease Control has been quick to suggest a relationship between Reye's
syndrome and certain flu outbreaks, they have not, to my knowledge, given equal time to a
consideration of an association between this disease and the flue vaccine."-R.S. Mendelsohn, M.D.,
news column In San Francisco Chronicle, May 22, 1978.
Beware of the piercing cry! Think of that cry BEFORE you decide to let your child receive the
injection. Why? Because that cry can be a symptom that the child is suffering slight, partial, or major
brain injury. The result in after years may be only a slight nervous condition, or it may be strong
excitability, slight or greater retardation, partial or complete paralysis.
"The scientists studying the pertussis vaccine have little conclusive evidence of its side effects.
For years, crying spells that develop on the day the shot is given were considered insignificant. Today,
some doctors believe they are evidence of a neurologic reaction to the shot. And the manufacturers of
the vaccine now recommend that children with such reactions do not receive the shot. [Yet that
reaction comes after the shot, not before.]
"A study on DPT effects by researchers at the University of California, the first such study to be
done in the U.S. in 25 years, found that one in 13 vaccinated children suffers persistent, piercing
crying spells the day after receiving a DPT injection. Because the first three shots are given to children
when they are still under one year old, they can not explain the exact nature of their distress.
“However, the crying is usually accompanied by a fever and drowsiness. Some experts
theorize the crying is due to slight damage to the nervous system, but the connection has not been
proven. "-Michael D 'Antonio, "SchooIShots: More Harm than Good?" Family Weekly Magazine,
August 15, 1982.
"Some interesting statistics emerged; however, these figures are very conservative because
doctors don't report reactions, and what does get reported is the result of some special study
commissioned by the government. A recent study at UCLA estimates that as many as one in every 13
children had persistent high-pitched crying after the DPT shot.
" 'This may be indicative of brain damage in the recipient child,' Dr. Bobbie Young said. Later
on he said, 'You know, we start off with healthy infants, and we pop 'em not once, but three or four
times with a vaccine. .The probability of causing damage is the same each time. My greatest fear is
that very few of them escape some kind of neurological damage out of this.' One child in 700 has
convulsions or goes into shock. These reactions sometimes cause learning disabilities or brain
damage. .But these figures represent only the reported effects occurring within 48 hours after the
administration of the vaccine. .
"An even more recent figure on the reaction to the DPT vaccine indicates that 1 in 100 children
react with convulsions or collapse or high-pitched screaming. One out of 3 of these [screaming
babies]-that is, 1 in 300-will remain permanently damaged."-Walene James, Immunizations: the
Reality Behind the Myth, 1988, pp. 13-14.
The standard DPT vaccination schedule for infants is DPT - 1 at 2 months, DPT -2 at 4 months,
DPT -3 at 6 months, DPT - 4 at 15 months, and DPT -5 at 4-6 years. The immunization schedule for
children up to 7 years of age is DPT -1 at first visit, DPT -2 at 2 months later, DPT -3 at 4 months later,
DPT - 4 at 6-12 months after DPT -3, and DPT -5 at 4-6 years of age. Have you already started your
child on his series of five DPT shots?
"Should they [the parents] continue with boosters once they have started? All those other shots
might be wasted. If you have doubts at any point, you can stop giving the vaccines. Remember that
vaccines often cause severe reactions only after the third or fourth shot."-Randell Neustaedter, The
Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 91.
Along with DPT, the MMR vaccine combination is the other major inoculation given to children.
It is composed of weakened viruses of measles, mumps, and rubella. This injection is generally given
as a single shot at 15 months of age or older.
MMR will include all the problems discussed separately above, under measles, mumps, and
rubella. In addition- as with DPT, -because three shots are combined in one, there is added danger of
placing too much load on the child's immunization system at one time.
"Mass immunization of children for mumps, measles, and rubella has resulted in a shift in the
pattern of these diseases. The age distribution has changed significantly since the vaccinations were
introduced in the 1960s. Now these are increasingly becoming diseases of adolescents and young
adults. This is a problem since the diseases them- selves cause more complications in this older
population. Secondly, the vaccines seem to have caused atypical [peculiar] forms of the diseases to
appear ."-Randall Neustaedter, O.M.D., The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 52.
"Despite the history of serious vaccine side effects, which , includes polio caused by the oral
vaccine, deaths and brain damage caused by DPT, and the many problems of live measles and
mumps vaccines, drug companies and the medical profession persist in the development and rush to
market of new vaccines. Few studies and little experience precede licensure of these new products.
Hemophilus, chickenpox, and pneumococcal vaccines are the most recent experiments conducted on
America's children."-R. Neustaedter, The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 73.
The remaining vaccines that we will overview are less frequently administered: pneumonia,
hepatitis B, Hib meningitis, and chickenpox (varicella).
In addition to the "mandatory" vaccinations, there are several other vaccinations which we
should also consider. You might encounter one of them someday.
Also called "hydrophobia,” this disease and the dangers of the vaccine given to stop it, are
discussed in more detail in the section, "How Did Vaccinations Begin?"
“The Indiana State Medical Journal (December 1950) reports the case of a man of 25 who
received the Pasteur rabies treatment and became paralyzed from the waist down and died shortly
thereafter. 'The authors say that no one knows what causes these paralytic reactions. However, it has
been definitely established, they say, that they are not caused by the rabies virus. In other words,
vaccination, not rabies is the danger here. The authors go on to Quote Sellers, another authority, who
believes that 'not hydrophobia but rather rabiophobia is what we have to fear most.' "-Walene James,
Immunizations: The Reality Behind the Myth, 1987, p. 71 (quoting J.I. Rodale, "Rabies: Fact or Fancy?"
Prevention, August 1956, p. 52.
At the worst, a person can receive an especially virulent form of rabies from a rabies shot. (See
the section, "How Did Vaccinations Begin?" for more on that.) At the best, the rabies shot will
accomplish essentially nothing:
"The U.S. Public Health Service Centers for Disease Control [CDC] recently presented findings
that more than justify the warnings of immune system disorder following vaccine injection. In 1983 a
Peace Corps volunteer died in Africa of serologically confirmed rabies after being bitten by a rabid dog.
Prior to being bitten, but after arriving in Africa, this young woman had received the human diploid cell
rabies vaccine (HDCV). Tests done by CDC showed that the vaccine had stimulated her immune
system but only slightly, certainly not enough to protect her from rabies disease. CDC checked over
700 other Peace Corps volunteers who had also received HDCV and found that one-half responded in
an immunologically weak way to the vaccine. "- The Immunization Trio, H.E. Buttram, M.D. and J.C.
Hoffman, Ph.D., 1991, p. 58.
Smallpox was the disease that got vaccinations started. Cowpox was a mild disease normally
contracted by cows, and the milkmaids, which worked with them. Edward Jenner found that he could
give inoculations of cowpox to people, and this appeared to give them immunity to smallpox. Oddly
enough, that which he did was not as dangerous as the later vaccines -which consisted of dead or
weakened germs from the same dangerous disease!
Multiple vaccinations against smallpox were common. James Phipps, the eight-year-old boy
initially vaccinated by Jenner in 1796, was later revaccinated. He died at the age of 20. Jenner's own
son was also vaccinated more than once, and died at 21. A study published in 1980 overviewed many
of these multiple vaccination cases -and showed that re-vaccinated children developed "chromosomal
aberrations in their white blood cells." (R.S. Mendelsohn, M.D., Risks of Immunizations, 1988, p. 90).
As sanitation steadily improved, the incidence of small-pox kept lessening. Before England's
first compulsory vaccination law of 1853, the most smallpox for any two successive years was only
2,000. Those were the most severe epidemics (Boston Globe, June 11, 1991, p. 13). In Jenner's own
time, he himself admitted that the disease was rare, for, normally, at anyone time there were only a few
hundred cases in all England.
But, 17 years later, in 1870-1871, more than 23,000 people died from smallpox (E. McBean,
The Poisoned Needle, 1974, p. 13). During that same two-year period, over 124,000 died of smallpox in
Germany during the same epidemic. All had been vaccinated (Ibid.).
It is an astonishing fact that 90 percent of all smallpox cases occur after the individual has been
vaccinated. (Ibid.) In order to avoid malpractice suits, smallpox deaths that occur too quickly after
vaccination are sometimes given another name: "pustular eczema. "
Medical statisticians frequently try to avoid listing too many instances in which people die of the
same disease they were vaccinated against. Instead, a different name is used.
Apparently, this massive vaccine cover-up has been going on since the beginning of the
"During the last considerable epidemic at the turn of the century, I was a member of the Health
Committee of London Borough Council, and I learned how the credit of vaccination is kept up
statistically by diagnosing all the revaccinated cases [of smallpox] as pustular eczema, varIoloid or what
not -except smallpox."-George Bernard Shaw, quoted in E. McBean, The Poisoned Needle, p. 64.
"In the thirty years ending in 1934, 3,112 people are stated to have died of "chicken-pox, " and
only 579 of smallpox in England and Wales. Yet all the authorities are agreed that chicken-pox is a
nonfatal disease"-M. Beddow Bayly, Case Against Vaccination, London, June 1936, p. 5.
We now have a new disease: monkeypox. An official 1979 report of the World Health
Organization said this new disease afflicting man is clinically indistinguishable from small-pox (World
Health Organization, Weekly Epidemiological Record, 1979, 54:12-13).
"Immunization against smallpox is more hazardous than the disease itself."-Professor Arie
Zuckerman, member of the World Health Organization's advisory panel on viruses.
"For more than fifty years the populations of Australia and New Zealand (with the exception of
the armed forces in time of war) have been practically unvaccinated, and they have been more free
from smallpox than any other community ..
"The most thoroughly vaccinated countries are Italy, the Philippine Islands, and Mexico. And all
of these have been scourged with smallpox epidemics."-L. Loat, The Truth About Vaccination and
Immunization, 1951, p. 28.
."Our U.S. Government staged a compulsory vaccination campaign in the Philippines which
brought on the largest smallpox epidemic in the history of that country with 162,503 cases and 71,453
deaths, all vaccinated. That was between 1917 and 1919."-HaroldButtram, M.D., The Dangers of
Immunization, 1979, p. 48.
"From West Germany we read of more vaccination casualties. A reader writing to Organic
Consumer Report (June 13, 1968) mentions an article which appeared in Medical World which stated
that about 3,000 children each year suffer varying degrees of brain damage as the result of small-pox
vaccination. This same writer mentions another medical journal in which Dr. G. Kinel, M.D., reported
that in the previous year, smallpox vaccination damaged the hearing of 3,296 children in West
Germany and 71 became totally deaf."-W. James, Immunization: Reality Behind the Myth, 1988, p. 18.
Before concluding this section on smallpox, the findings of Dr. Charles A.R. Campbell should be
of interest. Recommended for the Nobel Prize around the turn of the century, Dr. Campbell carried out
significant research into typhoid, malaria, and smallpox. He made an important discovery which could
help eliminate smallpox. But his discovery was, for the most part, ignored. Dr. Campbell found that
smallpox, like malaria, was carried by a blood-sucking insect, and that neither was infectious nor
contagious. After careful experimentation, he found that smallpox was caused by the bite of cimex
lectularius, a bedbug. These small creatures infested the straw-padded mattresses of that time.
But more: Dr. Campbell went on to learn that the amount of pocking (marking) on the skin, from
smallpox, was directly : related to whether or not the person was eating fresh greens.
So smallpox is but one of several "filth diseases:" small-pox and typhus, caused by body lice;
bubonic plague, by lice on rats and rat manure; typhoid and cholera, by contaminated water .
Obviously, the solution to smallpox is a cleaner environment and better nutrition, not
vaccinations of weakened germs.
Several pneumonococcal vaccines are under investigation. In 1977 a pneumococcal vaccine
was licensed which contained 14 types of S pneumonia. This was replaced in 1983 by a vaccine of 23
types. These polysaccharide vaccines have only had limited success, so researchers are now trying to
make a conjugate form, in which the polysaccharide is bonded to a protein carrier. So far, they have
been unsuccessful in producing it. Therefore the 1983 method is still being used. It is predicted that
soon children will begin to be vaccinated for pneumonia.
A controlled study was made of 1,300 healthy Australian children. Some were given the
pneumonia vaccine; others were not. The researchers concluded that the vaccine accomplished
nothing beneficial:
“[Compared with the control group, vaccine recipients experienced] no fewer days of respiratory
illness, no reduction in antibiotic consumption, hospitalization, visits to a physician, or incidence of ear
infections." --Journal of Infectious Diseases study. quoted In R.S. Mendelsohn, M.D., Risks of
Immunizations, 1988, p. 75.
Studies have not shown any appreciable effect in reducing ear infections in children by the
vaccine. Instead of preventing the ear infection, the pneumonia vaccine only altered the types of
microbes in the ear.
So little is known about the pneumonia vaccine, that it has not yet been approved for general
administration to children. Only those "with increased risk of serious pneumonococcal infections" are
now receiving it.
“Approximately 50 percent of vaccines (30 to 40 percent in children) develop swelling and pain
at the injection site. Fever, muscle pain, and severe swelling occur in less than one percent of those
vaccinated. High fevers (over 102 1/2) and severe allergic reactions have been reported."-R.
Neustaedter, The ImmunIzatIon DecIsIon, 1990, pp. 84-85.
Hepatitis B is a serious liver disease which hard drug users had, until it got into the blood banks
-and was given to a wide range of people who were receiving transfusions.
When a vaccine for hepatitis B was developed in the 1970s, many doctors were concerned that
it might be contaminated with an AIDS virus (J.A. Finkbeiner, M.D., Medical World News, January 101
It is of interest that two-thirds of physicians with hepatitis B, have refused to take the vaccine
(R.S. Mendelsohn, M.D., "Drive to Immunize Adults is On,” Herald of Health Newsletter, September-
October, 1985). Yet, in 1991, the CDC began work to mandate inoculation of all infants against
hepatitis B ! In fact, many doctors are already routinely giving multiple doses of it to very young infants
(Boston Globe, June 11, 1991).
The scientific name for this disease is Hemophilus influenzae b (Hib), although it has no
relationship to influenza. It is a bacterial disease which causes upper respiratory and ear infections,
inflamed sinuses, pneumonia, swelling of the throat, and meningitis. And what is meningitis? It is an
inflammation of membranes which cover the brain and spinal cord.
In 1985, a purified polysaccharide form of vaccine for meningitis was released. It was called
PAP. Shortly afterward, a conjugate form of this vaccine (PAP-D or HbOC) was licensed. The
conjugate form is now recommended and mostly given. In the United States, it is the only kind now
Researchers suspect that meningitis is especially caused by other vaccinations which have
been given. So we have here a new vaccine being given to eliminate a serious disease frequently
caused by other vaccines. It is known that central nervous system infections occur more frequently as a
direct result of DPT and measles vaccine (H.L. Coulter, M.D., Assault on the America Child:
Vaccination, sociopathy, and Criminality, 1990.)
Fifty percent of Hib meningitis cases occur in children 6 to 7 months of age-after or about the
time they receive the other vaccinations. The attack rate decreases rapidly with increasing age. Fifty
percent of the cases occur in infants under one year of age. If no vaccines were given to children below
18 months of age, a large number (as many as 75 percent) of the meningitis cases might be avoided.
The original polysaccharide form of the vaccine was not very effective. So the conjugate form is
now used. Here is part of what the conjugate form accomplishes:
"The Hemophilus vaccine is associated with many reactions. Dr. Julie Milstien and colleagues
reviewed 152 spontaneous reports of vaccine reactions submitted to the FDA during the first year of
vaccine availability, 1985-1986 (Milstien, et. al., 1987). Serious reactions included convulsions (with
and without fever), anaphylactoid allergic reactions, serum sickness-Iike reactions (joint pain, rashes,
and edema), and one death within 4 hours of vaccination. In addition to the reported reactions, there
were 63 reports of proven H influenzae type b invasive disease that occurred soon after the
immunization."-Randall Neustaedter, O,M.D., The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 70.
Although the Hib vaccine is often called the "meningitis vaccine," it really provides little
protection against the Hib form of meningitis, -and, aside from Hib, there are also several other causes
of meningitis (pneumococcus, meningococcus germs, and some viruses). In addition, the Hib germs
may also cause upper respiratory infections, ear infections, and sinusitis, -yet the Hib vaccine is no help
in resisting those infections.
In summary, it could be said:
“The vaccine for meningitis has too many unclear aspects. Efficacy is questionable, the
frequency of side effects is unknown, and long-term side effects have not yet been discovered for this
vaccine only recently licensed in 1985. Parents need to decide whether they are willing to risk the
possible side effects of a vaccine which is questionably effective, experimental, and not targeted at the
population of children under 18 months who are most at risk."-Randall Neustaedter, O.M.D., The
Immunization Decision, 1990, pp. 70-71.
Chickenpox is one of the mildest diseases of childhood. Almost all children are infected, and as
a result develop permanent immunity. A chickenpox vaccine was developed in 1973. To date, it is
generally used only with children with cancer and leukemia.
"It is relatively certain that the chickenpox vaccine will soon be added to those routinely
administered to children. The MMRV (measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella) vaccine will replace
MMR."-Op. cit., pp. 75-76.
Such an action would result in great profit to the manufacturers, and would probably result in an
increase of adult chickenpox cases. As with measles and mumps vaccines, chickenpox vaccines-widely
given -would have more likelihood of serious disease and resulting complications. Unusual cases of
varicella-zoster illness may also occur, as they now do after measles and mumps vaccinations.
Varicella-zoster virus can be stored in nerve cells after natural chickenpox infection, and erupt in later
years as herpes zoster ("shingles"). That is a very painful skin eruption which can last for several
weeks. Plotkin says that varicella vaccine has caused zoster in normal children (5. Plotkin, New
EnglandJournalofMedicine, 1988, Vol. 318, pp. 573-575).
What Is the future for us, if chickenpox vaccine becomes another required inoculation?
"Chickenpox, which is relatively mild in childhood, [if given in vaccines to children] might increase in
frequency during adulthood when it is much more severe."-P.A. BruneI', "Where Are We?" PediatrIcs,
1986, Vol. 78 (supplement), pp. 721-722.
“One would not, however, want to vaccinate against varicella routinely in childhood if immunity
wanes and thereby creates a population of varicella-susceptible adults."-A.A. Gershon, "Live
Attenuated Varicella Vaccine, " Annual Review of Medicine, 1987, Vol. 38, pp. 41-50.
"Varicella-zoster virus may be a cause of cancer. This association has never been proven,
though varicella-zoster- infected human cells have transformed mouse cells to cancerous cells in a
laboratory setting."-R. Neustaeder, Immunlzatlon Decision, 1990, p. 78.
There Is more Involved in the vaccination controversy than may appear on the surface.
Although we now have a better understanding of the vaccines, there is a need to obtain a better
understanding of the background which led up to the present controversy, Including aspects
which make It such a crisis today.
Up to the end of the eighteenth century, smallpox was a particularly dreaded disease, not only
because it was often fatal but also because those who recovered were permanently disfigured with
pock marks on their skin. In the seventeenth century, people in Turkey began infecting themselves
deliberately with mild forms of smallpox, in the hope of making themselves immune to severe attack.
They would have themselves scratched with the liquid from blisters of a person who had a mild case.
From this, Some developed a light infection, and others heavy scarring -or death.
In 1718, lady Mary Wortley Montagu learned about this practice when she went to Turkey with
her husband, sent there briefly as the British ambassador. While there, she had her own children
inoculated, and they managed to escape without harm. Since she was known to be some-what
eccentric, no one listened to her when she told fellow Britons back home about it.
Meanwhile, in America a Boston physician, Zabdiel Boylston, inoculated 241 people during a
smallpox epidemic, and a number of them died as a result. Heavily criticized for what he had done, his
idea was also ignored.
Back in Gloucestershire, England, a country doctor, Edward Jenner, decided to try inoculating
the people with cowpox in the hope it would give immunity to smallpox.
In 1796, Jenner inoculated an eight-year-old boy named James Phipps with cowpox, using fluid
from a cowpox blister on a milkmaid's hand. Two months later, Jenner deliberately inoculated young
James with smallpox itself. The boy did not catch the disease. The rest is history.
Jenner called the process vaccination, from vaccina, the Latin name for cowpox. Vaccination
spread rapidly throughout Europe.
Later, Louis Pasteur discovered that he could weaken (or attenuate) germs, either by heating
them or treating them with chemicals. He used this as the basis for vaccines. That began the practice of
injecting live germs into people.
In 1885, Pasteur tried his vaccine for rabies (hydrophobia) on a nine-year-old boy, Joseph
Meister, who had been severely bitten by a rabid dog. The boy survived. The rest is more history.
But there is more to that history than is commonly told. In this book we are discovering a lot of it.
James Phipps, the eight-year-old boy initially vaccinated It by Jenner in 1796, was
revaccinated 20 times and died at the age of twenty. Jenner's own son, who was also vaccinated
several times, died at the age of twenty-one. Both deaths were caused by tuberculosis, a condition that
some researchers have linked to smallpox vaccine.
Joseph Meister was inoculated by Pasteur and survived the dog bite. But, on the same day,
several other people, including the dog's owner, were also bitten-and all continued in good health
thereafter. Other children were not so fortunate. Mathiew Vidau died after being personally treated by
Pasteur. Also, another child, Louise Pelletier, died after receiving the Pasteur treatment. In the National
Review for July 1890, Dr. Charles Bell Taylor gave a list of cases in which patients of Pasteur's had
died while the dogs that had bitten them remained well. In other words, the vaccine had clearly killed
those people, for the dogs were not rabid after all.
A French postman, Pierre Rascol, along with another man was attacked by a dog supposed to
be rabid. Rascol was not actually bitten, for the teeth had not gone through his clothing and he had no
cuts. His companion, however, was severely bitten. What happened to the two men? Rascol was
forced by the postal authorities to undergo the Pasteur treatment, which he did from the 9th to the 14th
of March. Less than a month later, on April 12, severe symptoms developed. The pain was especially
bad where the inoculations had been given. A historian, E.D. Hume, relates what happened next:
“On the 14th of April he died of paralytic hydrophobia, the new disease brought into the world by
Pasteur. What wonder that Professor Michel Peter complained: 'M. Pasteur does not cure hydrophobia:
he gives it!' .'-E.D. Hume, Bechamp or Pasteur? A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology, 1947, pp.
But what happened to Rascol's friend, who actually had been bitten? He refused to go to the
Pasteur Institute for his rabies inoculations, so he remained in excellent health!
Medical journals are replete with such stories. An article in The Archives of Neurology and
Psychiatry (January 1951) told of two patients who became paralyzed after they had been treated by
the Pasteur vaccine for rabies. The Journal of the American Medical Association (January 14, 1956)
detailed a meeting of the French Academy of Medicine in Paris. At that meeting, Korsakoff's psychosis
was discussed. It was noted that individuals who had received Pasteur's rabies vaccinations -could,
twenty years later, be afflicted with Korsakoff's psychosis, a continuing state of delirium. At the same
meeting, lists of patients who had died after receiving the Pasteur rabies treatment were examined and
But discussion is about as far as it ever went, back then. Times have; not changed much since
Each vaccine is composed of three different types of materials:
1 -Viruses. These are either dead or "attenuated." The dead-virus types of vaccines are only
supposed to have killed viruses in them. The attenuated vaccines have live viruses, which have been
weakened by the addition of poisonous chemicals.
It is well-known that dead animals rapidly decompose and are dangerous to human health.
Even the odors coming from them are not healthful. Germs rapidly develop in and around them. What
about a dead animal which had been killed with poisons; would you want to eat it? Would it be wise for
you to do so? Could eating it hurt you? That is what is in dead-virus vaccines.
Sickly animals are not good either. Who would want to eat a cow that was sick? No one. In fact,
if known to be sick, the FDA would not permit it to be butchered and sold to the public. But would you
want to eat a sick cow that is still alive? That would be no better. Yet that is what is in live-virus
It is dangerous to eat an animal killed with poisons -with the poisons used to kill it still in and
around the meat. That is what you get in dead-virus vaccines. But would you want to eat an animal that
was so sick that it no longer could move about? That is what is in live-virus vaccines.
We have been speaking about eating such dead or damaged animals. But it would be far more
dangerous to have part of the dead animal or the living animal injected directly into your blood stream!
Viruses are animals also, although very small ones. It is viruses which are injected into the
bloodstream during a vaccination. As you might already know, viruses are always more dangerous than
Along with the dead viruses, part of the poisons used to kill them are also mingled into the
vaccine. The result can-not be likened to poisoned beef chunks, but rather to beef stew with poison in
the beef and the surrounding broth.
In the case of the weakened viruses, we have tiny animals that are not merely weak, -but are
half dead! An animal that is half-dead is either diseased or soon will be. But there is more: "Attenuated"
viruses are a combination soup. Part of the soup has dead viruses in it; part has nearly-dead viruses;
part has damaged viruses which will soon recover. Some will become very strong and vigorous, and
some will remain sickly, yet will live and reproduce. We are discussing not a single animal, but millions
of animals -for that is what is in the sizeable amount of fluid injected into a person's arm. This is why
there is such a variety of dead, half-dead, and recovering viruses in the mixture.
Now you can see why a person taking a polio vaccine could come down with Polio?! ,Polio
viruses in the vaccine recovered and rapidly multiplied In his body.
Bacteria and viruses multiply very, very rapidly! There is nothing in the world which multiples as
fast-without exceptlon!
But there is also more in that mixture.
2- Other viruses and bacteria. Do not think that only one type of virus is in the vaccine.
Because of the source the medical laboratories extract it from, that mixture contains a surprisingly wide
variety of bacteria and viruses. The lab workers take the serum from the pus of monkeys, cows, pigs,
and other animals. Then they try to "refine" it. But, since they are working with such small creatures,
there is no economical way they can screen out most of the foreign substances and life-forms in that
extracted fluid.
In fact, they do not work directly with a small amount by hand. Before mass-producing the
product for sale to physicians, they must develop a way to mechanically produce large quantities of the
serum in vats. So do not imagine that it has been "checked over" first. Only small samples from the vats
are examined.
Now you can see why a person who is given a pertussis vaccination, could, instead of getting
whooping cough, could become paralyzed. There were other germs in that vaccine, beside the
pertussis viruses.
But there is still more in that mixture.
3- Poisonous chemicals. In the laboratory, one or several poisonous chemicals were stirred into
the brew of viruses in order to kill or weaken them.
As for the dead viruses, it would be difficult later to fully extract the toxic chemicals, used to kill
the viruses. But, as for the "attenuated" viruses, the poisons have to remain there in order to keep the
viruses half dead!
“Besides introducing foreign proteins. and even live viruses Into the bloodstream, each vaccine
has Its own preservative, neutralizer, and carrying agent, none of which are indigenous to the body. For
Instance, triple antigen DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus) contains the following poisons:
formaldehyde, mercury (thimersol), and aluminum phosphate (Physician's Desk Reference. 1980). The
packet insert accompanying the vaccine (Lederle) lists these poisons: aluminum potassium sulfate, a
mercury derivative (thimersol), and sodium phosphate. The packet insert for the polio vaccine (Lederle)
lists monkey kidney cell culture, lactalbumin hydrolysate, antibiotics, and calf serum. The packet insert
(Merck Sharp & Dohme) for the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine lists chick embryo and
neomycin, which is a mixture of antibiotics. Chick embryo, monkey kidney cells, and calf serum are
foreign proteins; biological substances composed of animal cells, which, because they enter directly
into the bloodstream can become part of our genetic material (World Medicine, September 22, 1971,
pp. 69-72; New Medical Journals Limited, Clareville House, pp. 26-27, Oxendon St., London, J.W.1X4
EL, England. Reprinted in part in The Dangers of Immunization, published by the Humanitarian
Publishing Company, Quakertown, Pennsylvania, 1979, pp. 20-31. These foreign proteins as well as
the other carriers and reaction products of a vaccine are potential allergens and can produce
anaphylactic shock."-W. James, Immunization: Reality behind the Myth?, p. 10.
Next there is the problem of the fast-flowing blood vessels. Blood is pumped rapidly throughout
the body. So, when the whole conglomeration is injected into the body, the viruses are quickly
separated from the poisonous fluid surrounding them. Within a few seconds, both have gone from
veins, through capillaries, into arteries-and have entered the large artery. From there, they pass
through the heart and out into the vena cava. Now, fully separated, the chemicals and viruses enter
various body tissues where they begin working damage.
The chemical poisons weaken the body's immune system, as it begins fighting these strange
substances (such as formaldehyde, which is embalming fluid).
Meanwhile, the viruses have found cells to enter and they are using the cell's DNA and RNA to
multiply themselves. Foreign bacteria and viruses were also in that injection, and they are also setting
up light housekeeping in body cells while they multiply.
The result is that the viruses, when they multiply enough, can attack the body weakened by the
toxic chemicals. The rest of the story is found throughout the book you now have in hand.
Why can there be so many different things -and so much of them in a single shot of vaccine?
First, because we are talking about such small things! viruses, bacteria, and chemicals. Second,
because each of those substances is so extremely toxic in the human body. Third, because-once
placed in the bloodstream-the viruses and bacteria multiply so rapidly. Therefore, it only takes a small
amount of recovering virus to work great harm in the human body. Fourth, they have been placed
directly in the bloodstream where they can quickly go to work multiplying. They have sidestepped the
guardian gates of the stomach and intestines.
The purpose of the vaccination is to get the body to produce antibodies which will provide
immunity for a time against a certain disease. In 1949-1950, the British Medical Council carried out an
extensive investigation to determine the degree to which anti-diphtheria antibodies, produced by
vaccinations, helped the public resist diphtheria. Since the disease was epidemic at the time, the
government had a large number of cases to work with. In their official 1950 report, they disclosed that
the presence of antibodies were of no help of any kind in resisting diphtheria. Some people developed
the disease who had high antibody count, while others with low count were highly resistant. (British
Medical Council Report, #272, May 1950).
Dr. Wenddel Belfield, of San Jose, California, explains the mystery:
“Antibodies are not needed when the primary immunological defense [leukocytes, interferon, T -
cells, etc.) is functioning at maximum capacity ..Antibody production appears to occur only when the
ascorbate level, in the primary defense components are at low levels, thereby permitting some viruses
to survive the primary defenses."-W. Belfield, M.D., quoted In Drs. G. Dettman and A. Kalokerlnos, "A
Supportive Submission," The Dangers of Immunization, 1979.
"It is nonsense to think that you can inject pus. .into a little child and in any way improve its
health. .There is no such thing as immunization, but we sell it under the name 'immunization' ..If we
could by any means build up a natural resistance to disease through these artificial means, I would
applaud it -but we can't do it. The body has its own methods of defense. These depend on the vitality of
the body at the time. If it is vital enough, it will resist all infections; if it isn't vital enough it won't and you
can't change the vitality of the body for the better by introducing poison of any kind into it."-William
Howard Hay, M.D., quoted by Usher Burdick In the House of Representative, 1937; printed In the
Congressional Record, December 21, 1937.
The strange act of introducing weakened disease germs into the body, which we call
"vaccination," can produce abnormal conditions in the body, which, years later, can erupt in something
terrible. In a landmark book, Dr. Richard Moskowitz explained that the unnatural process of vaccination
can put slow-acting viruses into the body. These, he says, can later produce nearly incurable chronic
diseases (R. Moskowitz, "Immunizations: A Dissenting View, " Dissent in Medicine: Nine Doctors Speak
Out, 1985, pp. 133-166).
Vaccines go directly into the body and are "not censored by the liver," according to Dr. William
Albrecht. Aside from the antibiotics and germ-deadening chemicals in them, vaccines are primarily
composed of foreign proteins from animals. Normally, proteins, chemicals, and other substances, which
are eaten, are processed in the liver to protect you. But vaccination sends these foreign substances
directly into the bloodstream.
"If you take water into your system as drink, it goes into your bloodstream directly from the
stomach. But if you take fats, they move into your lymphatic system. When you take other substances
like carbohydrates and proteins, they go into the intestines, and from there are passed through the liver,
as the body's chemical censor, before they go into the blood and the circulation throughout the body.
Most of your vaccination serums are proteins, and are not censored by the liver. Consequently,
vaccinations can be a terrific shock to the system."-William Albrecht, M.D., In Organic Consumer
Report, December 4, 1962.
This is why vaccines do not really give the body immunity -yet that is why they were injected in
the first place. Marian Tompson found that, when immunity to a disease is acquired naturally, the
possibility of reinfection is only 3.2 percent. But when it comes through vaccination, the reinfection rate
is 80 percent (Marian Tompson, "An- other View, " The People's Doctor, Vol. 6, No.12, p. 8).
“Just because you give somebody a vaccine, and perhaps get an antibody reaction, doesn't
mean a thing. The only true antibodies, of course, are those you get naturally. What we're doing (when
we inject vaccines) is interfering with a very delicate mechanism that does its own thing. If nutrition is
correct, it does it in the right way. Now if you insult a person in this way and try to trigger off something
that nature looks after, you're asking for all sorts of trouble, and we don't believe it works."-Dr. Glen
Dettman, interviewed by Jay PatrIck, and quoted In "The Great American Deception," Let's Live,
December 1976, p. 57.
Ordinarily, diseases which enter the body, are filtered through an elaborate network of body
defenses. But vaccines -because they are injected directly into the bloodstream -seem to slip by many
of those defenses. Walene James, in Immunization: The Reality Behind the Myth, says that a vaccine,
placed directly into the blood vessel, is able to gain immediate access to all the major tissues and
organs -and bypass the immune responses that might otherwise have destroyed it (1988, pp. 14-15).
Research by Drs. Kalokerinos and Dettman, discovered that, since the vaccine viruses have
successfully gotten by other immunity factors, when the T -cells encounter them in the blood, they
assume the strange, new viruses must be friendly. So the T -cells adjust for this factor and henceforth
let them live and slowly multiple.
Does all this remind you of AIDS? If you have followed research studies on AIDS and the T -
cells, you will recognize that the similarities are frightening. That point needs discussing.
An ongoing controversy surrounds the AIDS virus. How did it get into humans -when they never
before had it? Well, some believe you need look no farther than the polio vaccine.
Scientists call it SV-40. That is the innocent-sounding code name for an extremely dangerous
virus, which is found in monkeys. In 1955, Dr. Jonas Salk developed a killed -virus polio vaccine. That
means, he found a way to place dead polio viruses in humans. Then, in 1959, Dr. Albert Sabin devised
a way to place weakened polio viruses in people. He called it the "Iive-virus (oral) vaccine against
As soon as the Sabin vaccine came on the market, it was pushed to the front and Salk's vaccine
was set aside. Governments urged that everyone take the oral vaccine. Millions of people swallowed
the weakened polio virus. But they also swallowed something else.
You see, there is far more in a vaccine than merely the weakened virus; there are other foreign
proteins, germs, and viruses which were in the drug company culture vats, in which the specific vaccine
virus grew.
In the case of the Sabin oral polio vaccine, there was also SV-40. This is a powerful and very
dangerous virus, which had never before been placed in human beings. The only way you can get it is
by eating a freshly-killed, uncooked African monkey. When research scientists developed those polio
cultures, which were given to millions in the form of vaccinations, they made a little mistake: Those
cultures were contaminated with SV-40 viruses. Yet, with the techniques then available, the scientists
did not realize it was in the cultures of chopped monkey organs in their laboratories. It was not until the
1980s that they discovered what they had been injecting into people for over 20 years.
This undetected, new virus which passed into the blood- streams of millions of people during the
1960s and 1970s, later became the focus of serious research. The implications were also serious. SV-
40 is a virus which acts as an extremely powerful immunosuppressor; that is, it greatly weakens the
natural immune system. In fact, 1980s researchers-confronted with the new disease, HIV, reexamined
SV-40,-and found it was clinically indistinguishable from fully-matured HIV, which is AIDS.
Because of these facts, there are scientists today who believe that the placing of the SV-40
virus in people, from 1960 onward, laid the foundation for a terrible scourge we now have: Human
Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV), the precursor to full-blown AIDS. SV-40 not only begins the
weakening process of the immune system, which HIV builds upon; but SV-40 appears to act as a
trigger to get HIV started.
First, however, the HIV virus has to enter the body. That requires certain activities which only
certain people care to do. But once in the body, the weakening effect of the SV-40 virus enables HIV to
set to work-without being quickly destroyed by the body's natural defenses.
Does this mean that only polio-vaccinated people can get HIV? Apparently not. Once the SV-40
virus was placed in enough people, it could be transferred, under certain circumstances, to others.
Additional research is being made on the SV-40 virus. But it is a little like examining Pandora's box
after it had been opened.
The SV-40 virus has been found in leukemia, brain tumors, and other human cancers. It has
also been found in people with HIV.
Dr. Hilary Koprowski, a leading polio researcher, in testimony before a congressional
committee, said: "An almost infinite number of monkey viruses can contaminate polio vaccines." (Tom
Curtis, "The Origin of AIDS, " Rolling Stone, March 19, 1992, pp. 58-59.) It should come as no surprise
that a wide variety of viruses can and are found in vaccine cultures. The polio vaccine contains monkey
kidney cell culture and calf serum. MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine is cultured in chick
embryos. There are scores of other vaccines. For example, the foot-and-mouth disease virus vaccine Is
prepared "either of inactivated virus from infected cattle tongue epithelium, or, more recently, of live
virus attenuated by embryonate egg or mouse passage and propagated in tissue culture.” (Stedman's
Medical Dictionary, p. 1680.)
Would you imagine that all those organs are virus-free?
After treatment, they are placed, essentially raw, into the human bloodstream. Keep in mind that
viruses are the smallest living thing known to mankind. Also keep in mind that, back in the 1960s and
1970s, scientists still had no way to recognize minute quantities of many of those viruses. Thus, it
would be easy for a wide range of foreign viruses to get into the human race through "safe
Tests to determine the existence of extremely small amounts of some of these viruses were not
developed until the mid- 1980s.
W.S. Kyle, in the British medical journal, Lancet (March 7, 1992), mentioned two significant
points: First, the oral polio vaccine was used experimentally in the mid-1970s to treat recurrent herpes.
Second, the vaccine could have been contaminated by a number of retroviruses (slow-acting viruses).
HIV is a retrovirus. Such treatment could easily place the SV-40 virus and the HIV virus in the general
population, where it could then be transferred most easily by the two groups in America who, by their
practices, keep their bodies in a continually weakened state: homosexuals and drug pushers.
Prominent AIDS researchers are not ignorant of these facts. In fact, some of them go beyond
the polio vaccine- and implicate other vaccines as causal agencies of AIDS. Dr. Robert Gallo is the
leading AIDS researcher at the National Cancer Institute. He was the co-discoverer of the AIDS virus.
On May 11, 1987, the London Times quoted him as implicating the smallpox vaccine as an AIDS
trigger: "The use of live vaccines, such as that used for smallpox, can activate a dormant infection such
as HIV ." That statement is worth remembering; it was made by the most knowledgeable AIDS
researcher in America.
Although much research has been done on the close similarity of SV-40 to HIV, it appears that
Eva Lee Snead, M.D., was the first to note the connection between SV-40 and vaccinations. Following
extensive research into medical literature on SV-40, she came across the following citation:
"Excretion of SV-40 virus after oral administration of contaminated polio vaccine."-B.L Horvath
and F. Fornosi, Acta Mlcroblologlca Scientarla Hungary, 1964-1965, pp. 271-275.
In common language, that means that researchers found that, after the oral polio vaccine was
given, SV-40 viruses were found in the bowel movements. That could only happen if SV-40 had been in
the oral vaccine (although it was not supposed to be there),-and if the SV-40 was healthy enough to
multiple fast enough to be found in the feces shortly afterward! What a discovery! Yet it was made-and
reported-as early as 1965.
At this juncture, you might wonder why SV-40 was reported as being in the stool of a polio
vaccine recipient back in 1965, yet Western scientists did not find it in the polio vaccine until the 1980s.
The reason Is simple enough: Multiplied millions of the virus were found in human excrement within a
few days after the polio vaccine was received, but the extremely small amounts of the virus in the polio
culture were not discovered until more than 15 years later. Yet that only raises another question: If
scientists knew that large amounts of SV-40 were in the body a few days after the vaccine was taken,-
why then did the Western pharmaceutical industry continue churning out batches of polio vaccines
fterward? "The 1964-1965 article reported that SV-40 was recovered [via the stool] from 10 to 35
children vaccinated orally with polio vaccine.
"Foremost virologists studying AIDS, including Dr. Gallo of the U.S.A. and Montaignard of
France, agree that SV-40 is closely related to the AIDS virus. The SV-40 has been extensively studied
since 1960 and its clinical manifestations in laboratory animals are similar to the so-called AIDS virus. It
has also been linked to tumor growth and birth defects.
"According to sources cited by Dr. Snead, cells from the African green monkey have been used
since 1953 as a growth medium for the polio vaccine. The use of the polio vaccine, contaminated with
this virus, she speculates, is responsible for the current epidemics of childhood cancer, leukemia, birth
defects, and AIDS. These diseases coincidentally increased dramatically after the introduction of the
polio vaccine 30 years ago, she said.
"No one knows how many batches of polio vaccine have been contaminated with SV-40, but
exposed individuals may number into the millions."-H.E. Buttram, M.D., and J.C. Hoffman, Vaccinations
and Immune Malfunction, 1987, p. 64. "Over 30 years ago, I remember reading 'horror' stories of the
slaughter of thousands of monkeys to make Salk vaccine and now I was reading of 'a recently
discovered virus, unwittingly put into hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of doses of early Salk
vaccine.' The unknown virus is, of course, SV-40 and the publication is Science Digest, 1963. Arthur J.
Snider was the author of the article."-W. James, Immunization: the Reality Behind the Myth, 1988, p.
And that turns our attention to smallpox vaccination campaigns. Thanks to the "enlightened
civilizations" of North America and Europe, a massive effort has been underway for years to inoculate
the peoples of other nations with various vaccines. There are seven countries in central Africa which
have the highest AIDS infection rates: Burundi, Malawi, Rwanda, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and
Zaire. As reported in the London Times (May 11, 1987), World Health Organization (WHO) statistics
show those to be the African nations with the greatest number of vaccinated people. According to
WHO, Brazil was the only South American nation included in the smallpox campaign. It has the highest
rate of AIDS patients on that continent.
(Here are several sources on this topic, for your further study: Arthur J. Snider, "Near Disaster
with the Salk Vaccine, " Science Digest, 1963. B.L. Horvath, et al., "Excretion of SV-40 Virus After Oral
Administration of Contaminated Polio Vaccine, " Acta Microbiologica Hungary, 11, pp. 271-275. William
Bennett, Atlantic Monthly, February 1976. E.L. Snead, M.D., "AIDS: Immunization Related Syndrome, "
Health Freedom News, July 1987, p. 1. "Division of Biologics Standards, " Science, March 17, 1972.
Walter S. Kyle, "Simian Retroviruses, Poliovaccine, and Origin of AIDS, " Lancet, March 7, 1992, pp.
600-601. W.C. Douglass, M.D., "WHO Murdered Africa, " Health Freedom News, September 1987, p.
42. Tom Curtis, "Origin of AIDS, " Rolling Stone, March 19, 1992, pp. 54-56.)
There is yet another factor which should be considered, as we note possible links between
vaccines and HIV: the genetic mutation factor.
Because vaccines contain a variety of foreign viruses, when these enter the entire human body
(by being injected directly into the bloodstream), they have the ability to interact with, and become part
of human tissue. Viruses are so small, that they do not compete with human cells-they enter them!
Viruses have the ability to transfer genetic imprints from one host to another. Because they contain
pure genetic material (RNA and DNA), they can transfer it to invaded cells of the new host.
“According to Dr. George Todara, director of Oncogen, a bio-technology company in Seattle,
and Dr. Aaoul Benveniste, a virologist at the National Cancer Institute, RNA retroviruses can approach
a cell's DNA, create their own viral DNA versions of themselves (like a negative of a photograph), and
insert the veral DNA into the cell (Ponte, Lowel', "Jumping Genes": Reader's Digest, April 1987, pp.
132-137). If the viruses are carrying genetic material from other species (culture media for viral
vaccines include monkey kidneys and chick embryos), they will engraft this material as well."-Harold E.
Buttram, M.D., and John Chriss Hoffman, Ph.D., Vaccinations and Immune Malfunctions, 1987, p. 55.
These are very serious matters. The above writers go on to say this:
"The recognition that viral vaccines may be sowing seeds of disease is not new. In 1975, Dr.
Robert W. Simpson, of Rutgers University in New Jersey, raised the question whether immunization
programs against influenza, polio, measles, mumps, and rubella may be seeding humans with RNA to
form 'proviruses,' later manifesting in such diseases as rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, and
cancer (Nelson, Harry, medical writer for The Los Angeles Times, as reported at a science writer's
seminar sponsored by the American Cancer Society In St. Petersburg, Florida, April 1976).
"Such an effect has been documented in at least one instance: In a study of 19 children with
chronic rheumatic disease, rubella virus was isolated from cells of 7 children, but it was found in none
of the controls. The majority of the children had received the live rubella vaccine (Chantler, Janet K.,
and Others, 'Persistent Rubella Virus Infection Associated with Chronic Arthritis In Children,’ New
England Journal of Medicine, October 31, 1985, pp. 939-948.-Op. cit., p.56.
It is well-known that it generally takes several years (usually five) before a person with HIV
comes down with full-blown AIDS. But the New England Journal of Medicine cites an incident in which it
occurred with extreme rapidity. Physicians at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C.,
prepared the report, which was then discussed in the May-June 1987 issue of Infectious Diseases
Capsule & Comment.
A nineteen-year-old army recruit was classified as normal when he took his physical
examination. Two months later he was immunized against adenovirus, measles, rubelia, influenze,
smallpox, and others. Within two or three weeks he came down with full-blown AIDS! The later report
decided he was asymptomatically infected when he entered the service (because of prior contacts with
prostitutes). But he did not have HIV until after the vaccinations-and then that changed into AIDS within
a few weeks.
Biological (or genetic) engineering is a bad word today. It stands for changing and warping cellsinto
something very different. People fear it, and for good reason. Yet vaccinations have been doing It
for years. Joshua Lederberg, of the Department of Genetics at the Stanford University School of
Medicine said this in 1967: "We already practice biological engineering on a rather large scale, by use
of live viruses in mass immunization campaigns." (J. Leder- berg, Science, October 20, 1967, p. 313.)
He also said that "live viruses are. .genetic messages used for the purpose of programming human
cells." (Ibid.) It is possible to produce new diseases within mankind through the use of vaccinations.
One individual, after reading the manuscript for this book, made this comment: "How much
longer will this go on? How much longer will vaccinations be given to little children? How much longer
will parents not be told what is taking place within the bodies of those who are injected with these
viruses? Is civilization going crazy? Not even savages in far-off places methodically kill themselves, so
that eventually no one is left alive!"
(For additional information on genetic changes possible through viruses, read S. Kumar, et. al.,
"Effects of Serial Pas- sage of Autographa Californica Nuclear Polyhedrosis Virus in Cell Culture," Virus
Research, 7 (1987), pp. 335-349. H.E. Buttram, M.D., "Live Vaccines and Genetic Mutation, " Health
Consciousness, April 1990, pp. 44-45. G. Blanck, et. al., "Multiple Insertions and Tandem Repeats of
Origin-Mins Sim- ian Virus 40 DNA in Transformed Rat and Mouse Cells," Journal of Virology, May
1988, pp. 1520-1523.)
Then there is the "virgin soil" problem. By introducing- through vaccinations-so many new
strains of infectious organisms into people, we are placing modern civilization at risk of a variety of
brand new diseases. And that is most dangerous, as two physicians explain:
"There is indirect, circumstantial evidence that immunizations may predispose to the onset of
AIDS in 'virgin soil populations, , that is, in those populations that have not historically been subjected
to the common diseases of Western civilization. When diseases endemic in Europe for many hundreds
of years, such as measles and influenza, were introduced into populations where these diseases were
previously unknown, devastating epidemics often resulted. . in 1983 deaths from AIDS were reported of
seven Haitian immigrants, none of which had a history of the known risk factors for AIDS
(homosexuality, drug abuse, hemophilia, or blood transfusions) (Moskowltz, "Unusual Causes of Death
In Haitians Residing In Miami, " New England Journal of Medicine, 150: 1187, 1983). In 1984, a similar
report appeared concerning eighteen previously healthy Africans who developed AIDS while residing in
Belgium (Clumeck, "Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome In African Patients, " New England Journal
of Medicine, 310:492, 1984). These persons also lacked a history for the risk factors of AIDS. However,
both groups did have two things in common: AIDS appeared or was diagnosed following international
travel, which presumably required multiple vaccines (there is no mention of vaccines in the articles).
Both groups were, relatively speaking, given to 'virgin soil populations.' "-The Immunization Trio, H.E.
Buttram, M.D. andJ.C. Hoffman, Ph.D., 1991, pp. 58-59.
Earlier under the section on DPT vaccinations, we discussed the brain damage which can result
from certain injected vaccines. Learning disorders can also result from inoculations. Drs. P. Landrigan
and J. Witte, in their research study, "Neurologic Disorders Following Live Measles Virus Vaccination"
reported that a variety of learning disorders- from the mild to very serious-can follow childhood
vaccinations (Journal of the American Medical Association, 1459, March 26, 1973). We know that, of
every eight children born in the United States, one of them will grow up with some form of mental
retardation (Better Nutrition, June 1982, p. 32). Are we now learning a key reason for this alarming
Research into the long-term effects of vaccination has revealed that psychotic disorders may be
caused by viral infections. Research studies on this topic include the following: T.J. Crow, "Is
Schizophrenia an Infectious Disease?" Lancet, 1983, p. 17. D. Steinberg, et al., "Influenza Infection
Causing Manic Psychosis, " British Journal of Psychiatry, 1972, pp. 531-535. Halonen, et. al., "Antibody
Levels to HSV-1, Measles, and Rubella Virus in Psychiatric Patients, " British Journal of Psychiatry,
1974, pp. 461-465. H.E. Buttram, M.D., "Live Virus Vaccines and Genetic Mutation, " Health
Consciousness, April 1990, p. 45.
A great mystery surrounds SIDS. This is the abbreviation for sudden infant death syndrome. It is
popularly known as "crib death." What is it? And more important: what causes it?
Parents fear the terrible possibility that –suddenly -their baby may die. As is happening in many
other homes in the nation, they fear that, at any time, they may walk to the crib and find that their infant
is no longer alive.
The most popular medical theory about SIDS is that the central nervous system has somehow
stopped functioning properly, so that the involuntary act of breathing is suppressed. The child stops
breathing and dies.
But only a shadowy mystery lies beyond that. What causes SIDS?
Yet there is information available. Every mother in the land should be made aware of It:
Dr. William Torch, of the University of Nevada School of Medicine at Reno, issued a report that
the DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) shots may be the cause of SIDS. He found that two-thirds of
103 children who died of SIDS had been immunized with OPT vaccine within three weeks before their
deaths! Many died within a day after getting the shot. Torch maintained that this was no mere
coincidence, but I that a causal relationship was involved.
In 1978-1979, during an expansion of the Tennessee Childhood Immunization Program, eight
cases of SIOS were reported immediately following routine DPT immunizations. The U.S. Surgeon
General quietly had the manufacturer recall all unused doses of that batch of vaccine.
In 1983, the UCLA School of Medicine, working with the Los Angeles County Health
Department, reported a study of 145 SIDS deaths. DPT vaccinations were routinely being given, and it
was found that 27 died within 28 days after being immunized; 17 of them within a week after receiving
the shot; 6 within 24 hours after.
It was also noted that breastfeeding is one of the best ways a mother can help her child avoid
SIDS. It is well- known in the medical world that mother's milk contains substances which help protect
the infant against disease, until its own immune system grows stronger.
DPT vaccinations continue to this day throughout the land. Every so often infants suddenly die.
And people wonde, Why?
Although a quantity of case studies, implicating vaccinations, have been collected, yet nothing is
done to stop the vaccination of infants.
"In March 1979, it was suggested that there might be an association between immunization with
diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and pertussis vaccine absorbed (DPT), Wyeth Lot 64201, and the
sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) in Tennessee. An extensive investigation following this report
neither established nor refuted a causal relationship (Hutcheson, "Follow-up on DTP Vaccination and
Sudden Infant Deaths: Tennessee, " Morbidity-Mortality Weekly Report, i 28:135, 1979; Brunier and
others, "Diphtheria-Tetanus Toxoid-Pertussis Vaccination and Sudden Infant Deaths in Tennessee,"
Journal of Pediatrics, 101:419421, 1982). To clarify this issue, the Department of Pediatrics, School of
Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, conducted a study of SIDS in Los Angeles County
(Baraff and others, "Possible Temporal Association Between Diphtheria- Tetanus Toxoid Pertussls
Vaccination and Sudden Infant Death syndrome, " Pediatric Infectious Disease, 2:7-11, January 1983).
Parents of 145 SIDS victims who died in Los Angeles County between January 1, 1979, and August 23,
1980, were contacted and interviewed regarding their child's recent immunization history. Fifty-three
had received a DPT immunization. Of these, 27 had received a DPT immunization within twenty-eight
days of death. Six SIDS deaths occurred within twenty-four hours, and seventeen occurred within one
week of DPT immunization. It was concluded these SIDS deaths 'were significantly more than expected
were there no association between DPT immunization and SIDS.' "-H.E. Buttram, M.D. and J.C.
Hoffman, Ph.D., 1991, p. 54.
It appears that SIDS, so destructive of human life and so terrifying to parents who experience it
in their own home, is totally unnecessary.
"In a study in Queen Alexandra Hospital, Hobart, Tasmania, reported by Dr. Viera Scheibner,
about one half of the babies who succumbed to cot death (SIDS) had recently been vaccinated ("Cot
Death Due to Exposure to Nonspecific Stress: Its Mechanisms and Prevention, " a scientific paper for
the Association for Prevention of Cot Death in Blackheath, New South Wales, 1990). In examining and
discussing the basis for deaths following vaccination, Scheibner pointed out that noxious substances
such as formaldehyde (used as a fixative in some vaccines) can cause serious organ damage. 'The
single most common and preventable cause of death in infants due to stress for noxious substances is
vaccination,' she wrote. Yet, she said, the effect of vaccinating babies has never systematically been
studied, recorded, and analyzed.
"Moreover, Dr. Scheibner declared, parents of infants brain damaged after DPT vaccination are
led to believe that unless the damage occurs within twenty-four hours it was not caused by the shot.
However, the damage often occurs two weeks later."-lbid.
When a person is vaccinated at the time that his body is fighting a disease in that vaccine, he
may suddenly be overwhelmed by an even worse attack of the disease. That is called the "provocation
effect of vaccines. " Sir Graham Wilson, former director of the Public Health laboratory Service
for England and Wales, wrote this in a book published by the Oxford University Press:
"When a vaccine is injected into the tissues during the incubation period of a disease or during
the course of a latent infection, it may bring on an acute attack of the disease. That is to say, the
incubation period is shortened, or a latent infection that might have given rise to no manifest illness is
converted into a clinical attack. The two diseases in which this so-called provocation effect has been
most studied are typhoid fever and poliomyelitis, but evidence exists to show that it may be operative in
other diseases."-Sir Graham Wilson, M.D., Hazards of Immunization, 1967.
Quite obviously, that fact opens up a whole new avenue of suffering, permanent damage, and
premature death for innocent people.
Vaccinations can not only have immediate effects on those who receive them; they can also
have long-term effects. These are physical problems which develop years later. "Most of the
degenerative diseases are going to be shown to be due to X-rays, drugs, and polluted food, additives.
preservatives and immunizations. "-Robert Mendelsohn, M.D., Interview, Public Scrutiny, March 1981,
p. 22.
"It Is dangerously misleading, and, indeed, the exact opposite of the truth to claim that a vaccine
makes us 'immune' or protects us against an acute disease, if in fact it only drives the disease deeper
into the interior and causes us to harbor it chronically, with the result that our responses to it become
progressively weaker, and show less and less tendency to heal or resolve themselves spontaneously."-
1Richard Moskowitz, M.D., The Case Against Immunizations, reprinted from Journal of the
American Institute of Homeopathy, March 1983, p. 13.
The problem here is due to changes within tissues and organs-which can take place due to
RNA and DNA modification caused by the substances in the injected vaccines. The special offenders
are the foreign viruses in those vaccines.
Dr. Wendell Winters, a virologist at UCLA, said this at a 1976 meeting of the American Cancer
"Immunization may cause changes in the slow viruses, changes in the DNA mechanism, as
being studied by Dr. Robert Hutchinson at the University of Tennessee in Nashville."-W.D. Winters,
M.D., quoted in R.S. Mendelsohn, M.D., Interview, The Herbalist New Health, July 1981, p. 60.
As mentioned earlier, because they are injected directly into the bloodstream and so bypass the
body's natural immunity defenses, vaccines are able to trick the body into accepting them as natural
substances which should not be destroyed. The virus is placed directly into the blood and thus
permitted to multiply and invade blood cells and tissues.
Live viruses, injected into the body, are able to live in latent form for years in the human body.
Then, decades later, they can begin reproducing and causing changes in body tissues and organs.
They do this by attaching their own genetic material as an extra particle (called an "episome") to the
host cell's' genome, which is the half-set of chromosomes and their genes, found in every body cell.
Then the virus replicates itself as the host genome replicates (in order to make a new cell). While the
host cell continues most of its normal functions, additional coding is added by the virus.
One gland which is particularly affected is the thymus gland, whose secretion, thymosin, is
necessary for the maturation and function of T-lymphocytes throughout the body. Abnormalities in the
function of the thymus gland result in a variety of immuno-deficiency, autoimmune, and neoplastic
diseases. It is known that patients with leukemias, cancers, and rheumatoid arthritis have impaired
thymus-dependent immune systems.
Interestingly enough, the thymus gland degenerates more rapidly in Americans than in people in
India, where few vaccinations are given.
"Spontaneous cancer development in old age may also be related to declining thymus function
and immune responses in old age, at least in those instances in which the cancer cells contain foreign
antigens."-Drs. Kalokerinos and Dettman, "A Supportive Submission," The Dangers of Immunization,
Biological Research Institute, Warburton, Australia, 1979, p. 49.
."Although the body generally will not make antibodies against its own tissues, it appears that
slight modification of antigenic character of tissues may cause it to appear foreign to the immune
system, and thus a fair target for antibody production."-Peterson and Good, Postgraduate Medicine,
Special Issue: Connective Tissue Diseases, May 1962, p. 422.
Elsewhere in this book we have noted a number of important factors in maintaining good health,
such as: cleanliness, proper sanitation, adequate ventilation, outdoor exercise, and a wholesome diet
focused on fresh greens, of vegetables, and fruits. (Some authorities also recommend alfalfa tablets
and garlic as helpful preventatives of childhood disease.)
"The major contributing factor toward improved health is over the past 200 years has been
improved nutrition [and sanitation]. Nearly 90% of the total decline in the death rate in children between
1860 and 1965 due to whooping cough, scarlet fever, diphtheria and measles occurred before the
introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization against diphtheria."-Dr. Powles, quoted in The
Dangers of immunization, 1987, p. 51.
If your child comes down with whooping cough, diphtheria, mumps, measles, etc., he is far less
likely to have a severe bout with the disease if he has been on such a good dietary and lifestyle regime.
However, nutritionists tells us that a key factor, in shortening how long the child has the disease,
is related to the amount of Vitamin C the child is getting.
According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, 90 children with whooping cough
were treated daily with 500 mg. of Vitamin C for one week. The children were well again in 15 to 20
days, depending on whether they received intravenous or oral doses of the vitamin. But children treated
with vaccine averaged 34 days duration. (Very likely, the vaccine helped them not one bit, and, if a third
group, given no special treatment, had been tested also, it probably would have recovered as quickly-or
quicker-than the vaccine group.)
The well-known writer, Adelle Davis, used much higher potencies of Vitamin C, and gave them
orally. She found that children, thus helped, only had the sickness for one day, with no nausea, no
vomiting, and no irritability. She gave 1,000 mg. of Vitamin C every hour for the entire day. (Fifty 500-
mg. tablets of Vitamin C were dissolved in a cup of boiling water. One-fourth cup of fruit juice such as
pineapple. apricot, or orange was then added. Each teaspoon of the resultant solution contained 500
mg. of Vitamin C.) Later she discovered that, when calcium and pantothenic acid (a B vitamin) were
included, smaller amounts of Vitamin C could be given.
Polio requires special care, and you are referred to other books on the subject. However, it is
known that potassium iodide, calcium, and magnesium are important in successfully treating polio. (As
you may recall. in the polio vaccine section of the present book, it was highly-refined sugar products
which stripped the body of calcium, so that polio germs could attack the nerves.) One physiologist
recommended that, as soon as polio occurs, the patient should be placed in a warm bathtub, with only
his head out of water-and kept there for hours at a time. That helped the leukocytes fight the polio
virus. High-Ievel Vitamin C dosages were also recommended.
As mentioned earlier, one result of vaccination can be long-term changes in various body
structures. Because organs are weakened by the viruses and other foreign proteins, chronic and
degenerative diseases later develop. In 1976, Dr. Robert Simpson of Rutgers University said this to a
group of science writers at a seminar of the American Cancer Society:
“Immunization programs against flu, measles, mumps, polio and so forth, may actually be
seeding humans with RNA to form latent proviruses in cells throughout the body. These latent
proviruses could be molecules in search of diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis,
systemic lupus erythematosus, Parkinson's disease, and perhaps cancer ."-R. Simpson, M.D., quoted
In Richard Moskowitz, M.D., "The Case Against Immunizations, reprinted from the Journal of the
American Institute of Homeopathy, March 1983, p. 10.
Vitamin C consistently is noted in the medical literature. Not only is it needed to ward off
infection from vaccines, In but it is also children lacking in Vitamin C in their meals- which tend to be
the most damaged by the vaccines.
In order to understand this better, we will turn our attention to the work of Glen C. Dettman,
Ph.D., and Archie Kalokerinos, M.D., two Australian researchers. In the 1970s, they led out in Australia
in a full-fledged campaign to stop government vaccinations.
Until their efforts ceased, they virtually eliminated extremely high infant mortality among the
native tribes of northern Australia. Kalokerinos, a medical doctor, had worked among those tribes for a
number of years and he found that many deaths were the result of nutritional/immunization
interactions. By this is meant the dangerous combination of vaccinating a child who was already on a
poor diet, low fruits, greens, and other sources of important nutrients. When vaccinated, such a child
would enter an “immune paralysis" reaction, in which his immune system had become so burdened
down in an effort to throw off the dangerous substances in the vaccine, -that he lost all resistance to
simple, common infections. Soon he died.
Dr. Kalokerinos found that many of these infants were suffering from scurvy with acute Vitamin
C deficiency. Immunizations of such infants, often with colds at the time, brought on death..
After instituting a program of improved nutrition, with regular Vitamin C supplementation for
native children, the mortality was virtually wiped out. For two years, not a single infant died. This,
obviously, was a startling change in the situation.
Kalokerinos later wrote a book about his experiences. In it, he described how he came to a
realization of the underlying cause of the problem:
"Returning from the United States in August 1971, I threw myself for a few weeks into a problem
that had been presented to me shortly before. Ralph Hunt, a grazier in the Collarenebri district, and
been appointed Minister of the Interior. As such he was responsible for the administration of the
Northern Territory and partly responsible for the health of its Aborigines. A tour of the area horrified him.
The infant death rate had doubled in 1970, gone even higher in the first six months of 1971, and looked
as if it would reach, in some areas, 500 per 1,000. Authorities in the Territory claimed that the problem
had no quick solution. .
"It happened to be a beautiful night as I drove back to the hotel in which I was staying. People
who know Sydney will know Rose Bay and the loveliness of the waterfront. I compared it with the
desert around Alice Springs where I would be in less than twenty-four hours. I thought of Ralph Hunt
and how he had tried to help. .Then suddenly it clicked . 'We have stepped up the immunization
campaigns,' Ralph had said. Myll had known for years that they could be dangerous, but had I
underestimated this? Of course I had. There was no need to go to Alice Springs. I knew. A health team
would sweep into an area, line up all the Aboriginal babies and infants and immunize them. There
would be no examination, no taking of case histories, no checking on dietary deficiencies. Most infants
would have colds. No wonder they died. Some would die within hours from acute vitamin C deficiency
precipitated by the immunization. Others would die later from 'pneumonia,' 'gastroenteritis,' or
'malnutrition.' If some babies and infants survived, they would be lined up again In a month for another
immunization. If some managed to survive even this, they would be lined up again. Then there would
be booster shots, shots for measles, polio, and even T.B. Little wonder they died. The wonder is that
any survived.
"The excitement of this realization is difficult to describe. On one hand, I was enthralled by the
simplicity of it all, the 'beautiful' way by which the pattern fitted everything I had been doing. On the
other hand, I almost shook with horror at the thought of what had been, and still was going on. We were
actually killing infants through lack of understanding. .
"I have no doubt that some so-called 'cot deaths' are in fact acute vitamin C deficiencies, and
these can occur even if the diet is adequate. .and their response to vaccines against these infections is
not always good. First, there is an increased utilization of vitamin C, and this, particularly when
associated with dietary deficiency or failure of intestinal absorption, may precipitate a deficiency. This
deficiency lowers immunity, and the immunizing agent adds to this temporary lowering. An infection
such as pneumonia or gastroenteritis is likely. .thus an infant may die a few days or a few weeks after
being immunized."-Archie Kalokerlnos, M.D., Every Second Child, 1974.
Obviously, the children of the aborigines of Australia- living as they did under the most primitive
conditions out in the desert-were far more fragile than regular children. In their case, death rather
quickly followed vaccination.
"When our observations first forced us to examine the possibility of immunization being a health
hazard, under certain conditions at least, it seemed rather absurd and very puzzling to us. However, the
facts were before us here in closed Australian Aboriginal populations where children and adults were
found suffering all too often with severe and even fatal immunological accidents. As scientists we found
ourselves taking a second look at the history of microbiology in order to better understand what we
were seeing with our own eyes as a consequence of mass Immunizations of Aboriginal populations."-
Glen Dettman, Ph.D., and Arclvides Kalokerinos, M.D., "Second Thoughts About Disease: A
Controversy and Bechamp Revisited, " Journal of International Academy of Preventive Medicine, July
With other children, we have found that, Instead of a quick death, an extended life-but with
serious infections, paralysis, brain damage, or some other problem, may result.
Yet, as we consider the Australian tribes people, we learn why earlier good nutrition and Vitamin
C in their diets-are so urgently needed by children or adults who receive vaccination. The stronger their
bodies are, the more likely they will be able to resist the deadly substances in the vaccine! Yet, in the
process of trying to overcome the vaccine, their built-up immunities, Vitamin C levels, etc., are greatly
over- taxed.
How much better it is to not take the vaccine in the first place!
"Dr. Viera Scheibner, of the Australian Association for Prevention of Cot Death, who also
studied cot death (SIDS) infants, reported in 1990 that a detoxifier is necessary to relieve symptoms of
stress caused by noxious substances, such as vaccines. The most effective, common, and natural
detoxifier, she said, is vitamin C."-H.E. Buttram, M.D., and J.C. Hoffman, Ph.D., The Immunization Trio,
1987, pp. 30-31.
Vaccines can also introduce allergies into the system. An allergy is a reaction of the body
against a foreign pro- tein, and vaccines are primarily composed of foreign proteins. They have been
called "potential allergens,” because they introduce undigested proteins into the bloodstream. People
afflicted with allergies will recognize the truth of this, since well-known allergens, such as goldenrod,
are simply non-split proteins, which have gotten into the bloodstream. Normally, the digestive tract
splits proteins in the diet into their building blocks: amino acids. But, when a complete, non-split protein
is absorbed into the blood, it can produce allergenic reactions.
"The fact that human infants are born with an undeveloped immune system magnifies their
vulnerability to vaccinations. Nature, however, compensates by providing a rich source of antibodies
from the mother's breast-colostrum. (Hanson, "The Mammary Gland as an Immunologic Organ,”
Immunology Today,3[6):168-172, 1982). If the mother continues nursing her infant for some months,
the infant is provided with an ideal form of sustenance until its digestive system is matured to the point
that it can begin to digest and utilize other sources of food. If, on the other hand, this pattern is broken
and the infant is started on commercial formula feedings (which contain foods that are much more
difficult to digest and assimilate than the mother's breast milk), the immune system of the infant is
stressed and often sensitized by these foods. A life-long pattern of food allergy and food sensitivity may
be initiated."-The Immunization Trio, H.E. Buttram, M.D. and J.C. Hoffman, Ph.D., 1991, p. 62.
That which we have read so far may appear grim. But It becomes a crisis -when the
vaccination decision is suddenly thrust upon your home or the home of a loved one. Here Is
Information that will be needed when that time comes.
In 1982, an hour-long television documentary, “DPT: Vaccine Roulette,” was shown to the
public. The documentary showed children who had been permanently brain damaged following
DPT vaccinations. Their little bodies were twisted, contorted. Anguished parents were standing
"Many children have suffered horrible and permanent side effects from this vaccine. "-Lea
Thompson, Investigative reporter, TV show, Today, April 20, 1982.
But, during the television documentary, officials were also interviewed who gave the
standard statements urging the importance of continued vaccination:
"The benefits of the vaccine, in my view, far outweigh the risks."-Edward Mortlmer, M.D., of
the American Academy of Pediatrics, Ibid.
“Much more is to be gained by immunizing the children with the current vaccines with its
limitations, than by allowing our children to be exposed to contracting Pertussis."- John Robblns,
Food and Drug Administration, Bureau of Biologics, Ibid.
But, elsewhere on that same documentary, Dr. Robbins made this remarkable statement:
"I think if you as a parent brought your child to a doctor for a DPT shot and the doctor said to
you initially, 'Well, I have to tell you that some children who get this vaccine get brain damaged,'
there's no question as to what your reaction would be. As a responsible parent you would say, 'I
wish not to take this vaccine.' "-Ibid.
Sir Granham S. Wilson, M.D., knew a lot about the subject of vaccination, since he formerly
had been director of the British Public Health Laboratory Services. He said this: "The risks attendant
on the use of vaccines and sera [plural of serum] are not as well recognized as they should be.
Indeed, our knowledge of them is still too small and the incomplete knowledge we have is not
widely disseminated..The late Dr. J. Hutchinson of the [U.K.] Ministry of Health collected records of
fatal immunological accidents during the war years and was kind enough to show them to us. We
were surprised to learn of the large number of persons in the civil and military populations that died
apparently as the result of attempted Immunization against some disease or other. Yet only a few of
these are referred to in the medical journals.
"When one considers that Dr. Hutchinson's records covered only four or five years and were
limited to Great Britain, and that in other countries in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, and Australia,
probably much the same proportion of accidents were occurring-and further that such accidents
have been going on for sixty or seventy years, -one realizes that a very small proportion can ever
have been described in the medical literature of the world. "-Sir S.G. Graham, M.D., quoted in The
Hazards of Immunizations, 1967.
An Australian news magazine (The Age, April 12, 1975) interviewed Dr. Ronald Penny,
associate professor of medicine at St. Vincent's Hospital in Sydney. In the Interview, Penny stated
that a number of children were regularly harmed or killed by vaccinations, and that they were most
likely to be children who had deficiencies in their immune systems.
According to Dr. Penny, measles, rubella, and polio inoculations were the most dangerous
because they involved "live" viruses. He explained that weakened viruses are in the vaccines, but,
placed in a person with a weak immune system, they are as dangerous as a vigorous set of germs
placed In a healthy person.
According to Sir Graham Wilson, former director of Public Health Laboratory Services of
England, all it takes to get a disease in a vaccine-is to get yourself run down enough before you
receive the vaccination:
"When a vaccine is injected into the tissues during the incubation period of a disease or
during the course of a latent infection, It may bring on an acute attack of the disease. That is to say,
the Incubation period is shortened, or a latent infection that might have given rise to no manifest
illness is converted into a clinical attack. The two diseases in which this so-called provocation effect
has been most studied are typhoid fever and poliomyelitis, but evidence exists to show that it may
be operative in other diseases such as tuberculosis and rickettsial infections. Numerous factors
such as exposure to cold and wet, excessive fatigue, over-indulgence of various sorts and certain
chemo-therapeutic agents, are credited with playing a similar role by lowering the resistance of the
host to the causative bacterium or virus in question. Certain vaccines appear to have a similar
effect, though probably more specific."-Sir Graham Wilson, M.D., The Hazards of Health, 1967.
The result, according to Sir Wilson, is a "provocation disease,"-a disease you contracted
from the vaccine injected to prevent you from getting it!
In a letter to the British Medical Journal, Rosemary Fox, secretary of Parents of Vaccine
Damaged Children, said this:
“Two years ago, we started to collect details from parents of serious reactions, suffered by
their children to immunizations of all kinds. In 65 percent of the cases referred to by us, reactions
followed 'triple' vaccinations (tetanus- diphtheria-pertussis). The children in this group total 182 to
date; all are severely brain damaged, some are also paralyzed, and 5 have died during the past 18
months. Approximately 605 of reactions (major convulsions, intense screaming, collapse, etc.)
occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 80 percent within 3 days, and all within 12 days. ' During
the period 1969-1974, when 64 deaths resulted from whooping cough, 56 cases of severe brain
damage followed vaccination.
"These cases have been referred to the DHSS [British Department of Health and Social
Services] over the past two years. As the figures steadily increased and we discovered that there
were doubts about the safety of whooping cough vaccines, we asked the DHSS if current vaccines
were available. .The department insists, however, that the incidence of severe reactions to
whooping cough vaccines is low and states that there are no plans to study our cases at present."-
Rosemary Fox, Ietter to the British Medical Journal, dated February 21, 1976.
The plan under consideration, at the present time is for the federal government to fund the
cost of giving wide- spectrum vaccinations to every child in the nation. Those injections will, of
course, be given on a mandatory basis.
At the 1982 Forum of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the adoption of the
following resolution was urged by a concerned member:
"The MP [will] make available in clear, concise language information which a reasonable
parent would want to know about the benefits and risks of routine immunizations, the risks of
vaccine preventable diseases and the management of common adverse reactions to
immunizations."- Resolution presented to American Academy 'of Pediatrics, 1982 Forum.
After careful deliberation, the resolution was rejected. Therefore, parents continue to not be
told, of the risks of vaccination.
“Margaret Ann, the only daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Donald W. Goading, of Woisey, Essex,
England, was pronounced a perfect baby by the doctor when she was born. This beautiful and
healthy infant was vaccinated at the age of 4 months. The first two injections didn't take so a third
was given, after which inflammation of the brain developed within 5 days. She was taken to the
hospital where she remained for many weeks. At the age of 13 months she was blind and could not
learn to walk. She also developed digestive disturbances and convulsions. "-E. McBean, The
Poisoned Needle, p. 78.
The fact stands out-loud and clear -that immunizations are doing nothing to reduce disease.
According to Volume 2 of World Health Statistics Annual, 1973-1974, there has been a steady
decline of infectious diseases "in most developing' countries regardless of the percentage of
immunizations administered in these countries. It appears that generally improved conditions of
sanitation are largely responsible for preventing 'infectious' diseases."
The biologist, Rene Dubos, said the improvement was due to better sanitation and public
water supplies. Other scientists have said it was due to improved personal hygiene, better food
distribution, and the eating of fresh fruit, and vegetables. (cf., among others, W.J. McCormick, M.D.,
"the Changing Incidence and Mortality of Infectious Disease in Relation to Changed Trends in
Nutrition," Medical Record, September 1947.) Johnathan Miller, M.D., believes the reduced death
rate is due to better nutrition, and improved ventilation and drainage. (Interview on Dick Cavett
show, February 4, 1981).
Yet, In spite of these facts, that which appears to be a massive cover-up of facts continues.
"Why then does the vaccination fetish persist? We must find the answer in economics -in the
billion-dollar serum industry."-Cash Asher, Bacteria, Inc., 1949, p. 42.
Any business which controls such large sums of money, is in a position to influence
legislation-in order to protect its sales. Dr. Miltion Silverman, a University of California
pharmacologist, said the pharmaceutical industry "is now grossing sales in the tens of billions of
dollars a year." (Quoted in television documentary,”Pesticides and Pills, " on Public Television, in
the fall of 1981.)
In Australia, Glen Dettman, Ph.D., and Archie Kalokerinos, M.D., had seen all too well the
terrible results accruing year after year from vaccinations. So they teamed up and began a
nationwide campaign to stop vaccinations. They appeared on television and radio talk shows, wrote
articles, gave interviews, and wrote a book. They said this:
“Even the World Health Organization has conceded that the best vaccine against common
Infectious diseases is an adequate diet. Despite this, they made it perfectly clear to us that they still
intended to promote mass immunization campaigns. Do we take this as an admission that we
cannot or do not wish to provide an adequate diet? More likely it would seem, there is no profit in
the constituents of an adequate diet for the pharmaceutical companies."-A. Kalokerlnos and G.
Dettman, "A Supportive Submission, " The Dangers of Immunization, Biological Research Institute,
Australia, 1979, p. 68.
"Remaining unimmunized for childhood diseases is a risk no child should face. .Health
experts warn that unless more young children are immunized, widespread epidemics could take
place again."-Virginia State Department of Health folder.
"Expanded immunization -using newly improved vaccines- ..will prevent the six main
immunizatable diseases from killing an estimated 5 million children a year and disabling 5 million
more."-James Grant, executive director of UNICEF, In Shift In the wind, 18, May 1984, p. 7.
“Any person who dies within 15 minutes to a day after taking the vaccine could be suffering
from a personal sensitivity, an allergy of the vaccine which is unrelated to the 'dead' viruses therein,
most researchers concede. "-Official statement regarding a swine flue vaccine, quoted In Let's Live,
December 1976, p. 58.
The British Medical Journal mentioned that multiple sclerosis can be caused by one or the
other of seven different vaccines!
“German authors have described the apparent provocation of multiple sclerosis by.
.vaccination against smallpox, typhoid, tetanus, polio, and tuberculosis and after injections of antidiphtheria
serum. Zintchenko (1965) reported 12 patients in whom multiple sclerosis first became
evident after a course of anti-rabies vaccinations."-British Medical Journal, October 22, 1967.
Actually, mass vaccine programs are medically unethical: "Current mass vaccine programs
represent two major departures from the ethics and traditions of medical practice: (a) The programs
diverge from the time-honored tradition that all treatments should be individualized, particularly
when dealing with substances which carry the potential for adverse side effects. (b) Vaccines have
been made compulsory."- : Harold E. Buttram, M.D., and John C. Hoffman, Vaccinations and
Immune Malfunction, 1987, p. 45.
Yet mass vaccinations are also crucial to the ongoing success, not of conquering disease,
but getting people inoculated. Without the coercion aspect, vaccinations would disappear.
"The principle of compulsory mass medication is an established and excepted fact in
American society today. Its cornerstone rests upon the compulsory mass vaccination programs,
which are being enforced, with ever greater stringency throughout the country. The enforcement of
these programs is taking place in a number of areas in our society, but its primary impact is on our
children, who are required to take their quota of vaccines before acceptance and admission into
school, the attendance of which is mandated. "-Ibid.
"One wonders why the vaccine-damaged children issue is soft-peddled -if it isn't an issue,
why have we in Australia, an Association for the Prevention of Vaccine-Damaged Children, and In
the U.K., the Association of Parents of Vaccine-Damaged Children?"-Editorial, Australasian Nurses
Journal, June 1978.
"The best vaccine against common infectious diseases is an adequate diet."-Statement by
the World Health Organization, quoted In H.E. Buttram, M.D., and J.C. Hoffman, Ph.D., The
Immunization Trio, p. 10.
"The children, kicking and screaming, were taken away from the parents and given smallpox
vaccinations."- .'Opposing Compulsory Immunizations, " Health Freedom News, April 1985, p. 21.
"No shots, no school. Students who can't prove they have been immunized against
contagious childhood diseases shouldn't expect to start school Monday."-Usa Hogberg, "No Shots,
No School, " Virginia Beach Beacon, August 28, 1983.
"My name is Ann Andrex. I am from Mount Rainier, Maryland, and I am not associated with
any of the groups here. I am a parent of a two-year-old and expecting another child soon. My twoyear-
old has received all legally required vaccinations to attend nursery school, but I feel It Is wrong
to force parents to have children vaccinated to attend school. There are too many unknowns about
the threats from the effects of the vaccination compared to the threat of contracting and suffering
through the various diseases, especially in the case of pertussis, and it is also wrong to legally mandate
vaccinations when there are no legally mandated programs of keeping track of the vaccination
effects by private as well as public M.D.s
"There should be freely available information on the disease and on the vaccinations so
parents can make informed decisions. Instead of current scientific studies and statistics, today's
parents have legal requirements based on no documented information upon which to base their
personal decisions about their children's future health and health risks, and I just wanted -maybe it
is out of place here, but I wanted to say that."-Ann Andrex, Open Meeting on Pertussis and
Pertussis Vaccines, Rockvllle, MD, April 26, 1983.
Citizens In a given state can unite their efforts to fight compulsory vaccinations. In
Wisconsin, they did just that. The people formed Citizens for Free Choice in immunization, and
worked until, In 1980, they clarified the Wisconsin State statute that discusses exemptions from
mandated vaccination. They had included into it a statement that persons who have a decided
conviction against a vaccination procedure can choose not to receive It, and can also keep their
children from receiving it. These modified provisions were signed Into Wisconsin law on May 71
1980 (1979 Wisconsin Assembly Bill 767), and now can be found in the Wisconsin State Statute
(Section 140.05[16]). .
"Since God placed the welfare of the children in the hands of the parents or guardians, it is
only they who should have the right to make the final decision, since it is they who must assume full
responsibility for the consequences."-Gerald E. Poesnecker, N.D., D.C., "No Shots, No School?"
For You, Naturally, January 1983.
"Even in those states (requiring mandatory immunizations), you may be able to persuade
your pediatrician to eliminate the pertussis component from the DPT vaccine. This immunization is
the subject of so much controversy that many doctors are becoming nervous about giving it, fearing
malpractice suits. They should be nervous, because in a Chicago case a child damaged by the
pertussis inoculation received a $5.5 million settlement award. "-Robert Mendelsohn, How to Raise
a Healthy Child, p. 210.
In 1962 a compulsory immunization bill was before Congress, which, if enacted, would have
required vaccination of every person in America.
"It is hard to convince the public that something is good. . Consequently, the best way to
push forward a new program is to decide on what you think the best decision is and not to question
It thereafter, and further, not to raise questions before the public or expose the public to open
discussion of the issues. "-Paul Meier, M.D., speaking on a panel before a Congressional hearing
on Intensive Immunization Programs, 1962.
But the compulsory immunization bill was defeated by the efforts of such groups as the
National Health Federation, the Christian Scientists, the Natural Hygienists, and others. So the
organizations, determined to sell vaccines in large quantities, focused on getting one state after another
to mandate immunization.
At the present time, all states have some type of compulsory immunization law requiring
children to be immunized against certain childhood diseases: diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus,
measles, mumps, rubella, and polio. Failure to comply with the law can prevent your child from
attending school, and expose you to possible criminal penalties.
In recent years, there has been a trend toward greater strictness in the enforcement of
childhood vaccination programs by schools. Legislatures in all fifty states have passed laws
requiring vaccinations for admission to schools, although most states have provided exemptions.
For example, a tougher new vaccination law went into effect in Virginia in 1983, which
required private schools and day care centers to also comply, and mandated that records be
checked for exact dates of immunizations. Each school principal was told he would be fined
$10,000 if he admitted even one student without vaccination papers.
More and more colleges are requiring new students to be fully vaccinated before entrance.
In 1991, the federal government was considering adding a vaccination requirement for anyone
applying for welfare or food stamps (New York Times, March 17, 1991).
But the battle is being fought the most vigorously at the elementary school level. Physicians,
schools, and local and state health departments tell parents that state laws and school regulations
absolutely require that the children be vaccinated, in order to attend school. In the process, these
authorities convey the distinct impression that vaccination is mandatory and there are no
exceptions. Why the battle? Parents recognize their children are young and lack the robust strength
of a 20-year-old. They also may have heard something about the fact that live disease viruses are
in those vaccines, so they try to avoid the vaccinations. Yet their concerns are met with threats of
court hearings and the loss of their children.
But is it true that vaccinations are mandatory "with no exceptions"? In reality, each state
provides waivers permitting parents to object to mandated vaccines for one or more of the following
reasons: medical, religious, personal, parental objection, etc.
"Legal requirements concerning immunization vary from state to state. All fifty states have
compulsory vaccination laws, though the specific requirements differ. This means that parents who
decide not to give the vaccines to their children will need to seek a legal exemption. All fifty states
also have a medical exemption. "-Randal/ Neustaedter, The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 20.
All fifty states have a medical exemption. All states, except West Virginia and Mississippi
have legal exemptions from vaccination on the basis of the parents' religious beliefs. Twenty-two
states have the option of personal or philosophical belief exemptions-more on that below.
Children cannot be refused admission to public schools if their parents have a legal
exemption. (Private schools are able to set their own requirements for admission. Daycare centers,
preschools, nursery schools and private elementary schools can refuse admission to any child for
any reason they choose. Yet, although they do not need to, most of them go along with the
recommendations of their state health department.)
"Refusal to admit a child on the basis of 'inadequate' immunization could create a legal
liability for a private school in a state where religious or philosophical exemptions exist. That is,
parents could take a school to court. "-Randal/ Neustaedter, The Immunization Decision, 1990, p.
Where should parents begin, when confronted with such a situation? The first thing to be
done is to read the law. Specifically, what is the wording of the compulsory vaccination law In your
state? (For information on how to get that data, see "Sources of Information, " later in this chapter.) ,
Most states have medical and religious exemptions; some also have personal conviction
(belief) exemptions.
1 -For the medical exemption, you must provide medical reasons why you or your child
should not be vaccinated. The child can be exempted if the parents can obtain a written statement
or certificate of waiver from a physician licensed in that state, stating that the vaccine would be
harmful to the child's health. But doctors generally fear to cooperate, lest they get in trouble with
their state licensing boards. So such statements are not often issued.
In this letter, it is generally necessary to state the reason for the requested waiver and the
length of time it should extend. Many laws limit all such letters to a school year and they must be
renewed each fall.
There are two medical reasons which, on medical grounds, are the most valid: (1) “The fear
of allergic reaction in a sensitive child," and (2) “to prevent possible damage to a weakened immune
system." Both of these can occur in a child who has been immunized, and since no one but the
physician and parent will be held responsible for such consequences, it is their responsibility to
protect the child. .
Some states require that the letter be signed by an M.D. or D.O., but, If courteously and
properly written, some allow an exemption letter from a chiropractor.
So although medical exemptions are valid, when written to fit each state law, they usually
must be renewed yearly. That latter point is a major weakness to medical exemptions, even when
they can be obtained.
2- The religious exemption Is generally better than a medical one. But often it is not satisfied
by your merely stating that you are religious, or have personal religious beliefs. You must show
evidence that you have membership in a church, which does not believe In vaccinations. There are
not many such churches around. (The only recognized denomination which is legally opposed to
vaccination, is the Christian Science Church. Many years ago, they took the matter to court and
obtained a legal ruling of exemption. Other denominations could have done the same, but they did
not do so.)
In some states, the parent or guardian need only sign a notarized affidavit stating that
immunizations conflict with the parent's (or child's) religious beliefs, in order to qualify for the
religious exemption. While, in other states, an official letter from a church authority is required
before exemption. In still others, it is only necessary to submit a notarized letter that the individual
adheres to religious tenets which hold vaccination to be against God's laws.
"Recent legal precedents have established that religious, belief may be personal, and
parents need not be associated with a religious institution opposed to vaccination."-Randall
Neustaedter, The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 20.
3 -A third exemption is exemption due to personal conviction (or personal belief). You are
personally convinced that you or your loved one should not be vaccinated. This, obviously, Is a
much better exemption, and one which is easier for the court to accept. If your state has the
personal belief exemption, simply write on a piece of paper that immunizations are contrary to your
Twenty-two states have liberal exemptions based on "conscience, parental objection,
personal beliefs, philosophical, or other objections. " These states are Arizona, California, Colorado,
Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North
Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.
However, it is possible that, when you read this, changes might have been made and, more or less,
states have those exemptions.
According to Carol Horowitz, there is yet another category: that of conscientious objector
status. In a 1983 magazine article she said, "It is possible for parents to file as conscientious
objectors with the state health department, although this choice is not advertised" or widely known.
She says that several people she knows who are conscientious objectors state that it is their "God
given right to refuse to immunize my child." Any lesser statement, she says, is legally unacceptable.
You cannot, for example, say that you have read 15 articles in newspapers and 8 articles in medical
journals, or that you have seen some documentary on television. It must be a personal, solid
conviction, not an acquaintance with hearsay. (Carol Horowitz, "Immunizations and Informed
Consent, " Mothering, Winter 1983, p. 38.)
The general pattern is for county or state authorities to place heavy pressure on the parents
to comply with the vaccination code as soon as possible. They are threatened with court action and
the loss of their children. The parents are thrown into a panic. But the authorities are in their own
state of panic. They must get the recalcitrant family to yield right away, lest others follow their
example. Across the nation, there are to be found vaccine-damaged children, and it is only by
strong-arm, police-state tactics that the states can maintain their "compulsory vaccination laws."
“Other parents may be anxious about the effects of vaccines on their child, but they are [still]
concerned that if enough people avoid the shot then the diseases will begin to reappear. The
vaccines may have bad side effects, yet if I avoid them for my child then the vaccine campaign will
not work for the general population. But this is a sacrificial philosophy. Risk the side effects in my
child for the good of the whole society. The stakes of this game may be exceedingly high if the
vaccines are capable of causing a covert encephalitis syndrome. If that is true, then we are trading
one disease for another. This sacrifice is hardly worth the cost."-R. Neustaedter, The Immunization
Decision, 1990, pp. 87-88.
It is claimed that the parents are "neglecting their children" by not vaccinating them. Yet
there is a sizeable amount of evidence of vaccine-caused damage, -indicating they would be
neglecting their responsibility to permit their children to be inoculated.
Another argument is that communities must require that c all children be vaccinated "In
order to protect the other children." Well, the "other children" are the ones who have been
vaccinated; are they not already "immunized"-fully protected-against those particular diseases? If
the vaccines offered true Immunity, only the unvaccinated would become ill.
"If vaccination does what its advocates claim for it, the person who is vaccinated ought to be
safe no matter whether anybody else is vaccinated or not."-Clarence Darrow, quoted In W. James,
Immunization: the Reality Behind the Myth, 1987, p. 151.
"The State Health Commissioner presented overwhelming evidence that a voluntary
immunization program would not be successful or worthwhile to maintain, and therefore he could
not support our position [to relax the mandatory restriction in the state vaccination law]. When I read
that letter I couldn't help thinking, 'What an admission! So the program can't stand on its own
'merits'; it has to be forced.' "-W. James, Immunization: the Reality Behind the Myth, 1987, p. 15.2.
One angry medical professional wrote this: "The so-called compulsory vaccination laws are
a complete travesty of the American Constitution and of God's law of free will. Surprisingly, the
Land of the Free is one of the few civilized countries that inflicts this dictatorial rule on it people.
Countries like England, Ireland, West Germany, Austria, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Spain
did away with it long ago.
"I use the prefix 'so-called' in front of these laws because, while they are entitled
'compulsory,' they all have exclusions of which you can take advantage if you so desire. These
exclusions were placed there not for your benefit but, like so much small-print in contracts, to
protect the establishment. If a law were truly mandatory and without exclusions, the framers of that
law and the executors thereof could be legally held responsible for all adverse consequences that
might stem from its implementation. Since it is a well-known fact that all vaccines are potentially
dangerous, no doctor drug firm, or health official will ever accept this responsibility. Therefore, all
laws have waivers or exclusions, and should your child be injured or killed by a vaccine, the officials
will look at you with that bland smile they wear so well, and say, 'Well, you should have exempted
him if you thought there would be any trouble.' Of course, they never tell you about these waivers
ahead of time, for this does not fit in with their emphatic 'No Shots, No School' dogma.
"Nowhere, and at no time, in our great country has the governmental right to give you or
yours a 'shot' against your own will. If someone should attempt to do so, you have a prIma facie
[immediately obvious] case of 'attempted assault with a deadly weapon,' and I would let them know
this if they try .
"Those in the establishment who would force their opinions and views down our throats (or
rather, stick them into our arms) have two major weapons to use against you: your ignorance of
your rights and their use of intimidation. Once you become informed on this matter you will be able
to with-stand this intimidation through the realization that these 'servants of society' are but 'paper
tigers' who stand on very shaky legal ground.
"With the Increasing proliferation of vaccines and strong efforts toward compulsory
immunization on the one hand, and the possibility of a generation of immune-deficient, weakened
Americans on the other, it behooves everyone In charge of children to investigate thoroughly the
claims and counterclaims made concerning the immunization procedures.
"Since God placed the welfare of the children in the hands of the parents or guardians, it is
only they who should have the right to make the final decision, since it Is they who must assume full
responsibility for the consequences."-Gerald E. Poesnecker, D.C., "No Shots, No School?" For You
Naturally, January 1983, pp. 1-3. .
Because of this obsession to force all children to be vaccinated, even In "free states" (the
nine states listed earlier which have more liberal exemptions), attempts will be made to override or
Ignore the state statutes permitting those more enlightened exemptions. In Arizona, for example,
parents were told "no shots, no school, " and efforts were made to intimidate them Into having their
children vaccinated. Yet the exemption procedures were there -for those determined enough to use
"By definition, the enforcement of vaccine programs is a police action by the state. Police
powers are necessary in certain areas of modern society, but are they appropriate with the vaccine
programs?"-H.E. Buttram, M.D., and J.C. Hoffman, Ph.D., The Immunization Trio, 1987, p. 79.
But the pressure generally succeeds, as one public official said:
“A spokeswoman for the health department said. .one-half of one percent of the children
eligible for vaccinations are granted exemptions on medical or religious grounds each year ."-
Virginia State county health department official quoted in Immunization: the Reality Behind the
Myth, 1987, p. 143.
A special method used with remarkable frequency in scattered locations to whip up
business, frighten the public, fight anti-vaccination groups, and get more vaccinations is “the
epidemic” When the public becomes apathetic or suspicious of vaccines, announcements are sent
out that an epidemic is in progress.
In Placitas, New Mexico, not enough people were being vaccinated, so the local newspaper
was told that a dangerous whooping cough (pertussis) epidemic was in progress. Headlines blared
out the frightening message. But only three cases of whooping cough were discovered in the entire
area -and all of them in children who had been vaccinated for whooping cough.
When one way does not work, it is time to try another. When television programs in the mid-
1980s focused, for a change, on the dangers of pertussus vaccinations and said that it was they
which were responsible for cases of whooping cough, the Maryland Health Department countered
with, the argument that the epidemic of pertussis was caused by the television shows. (R.S.
Mendelsohn, Risks of Immunizations, 1987, p. 34).
"Many of the vaccines have significant side effects. These can be separated into two
groups: (a) immediate reactions, and (b) delayed reactions and permanent disabilities. Immediate
reactions include fevers, allergic reactions and convulsions. With some vaccines, these can be
quite severe.
Delayed and permanent reactions include epilepsy, mental retardation, learning disabilities,
and paralysis."-R. Neustaedter, O.M.D., The Immunization Decision, 1990, p. 8.
When faced with required vaccination for your child, there are several alternatives. Here are
three primary ones:
1 -You can go ahead and have your child vaccinated. Thousands of others have done this,
you can also. Vaccinations are somewhat like Russian roulette: The parents never know if it will be
their child which will be stricken down by the germs in the vaccine. Perhaps nothing will happen.
2- You can move out of the state to one with more liberal exemption laws. This is a
possibility rarely mentioned in books of this nature. Everyone is very concerned about winning the
war against vaccination laws. But there is also the possibility that your own family might lose the
war-and either your child will be forced to have the vaccination any way, or it might be taken from
you and placed in a foster home. Prayer is needed, not only mere determination.
If you do decide to flee, you might do well to pack and then leave in the night. An alternative
is to have the mother leave with the children and go to another state. Most laws of this nature are
not enforced on the same day that notification of the violation is served. Two or three days are
generally given for compliance.
Keep in mind that, if one parent-or both parents -Ieaves with the children, the local
authorities will try to find out where they are and then contact that state to go after them. Therefore,
it would be best to have learned in advance which states are the safest to move to. Those will
be the ones with the most relaxed regulations on the vaccination. In this way, the family can do
some advance planning in case of trouble, which is always better than last-minute decisions. (See
"Sources of Information" for a list of some states with more liberal vaccination exemptions. But,
remember, the list might have changed by the time you have to make a decision, so get current
In one instance, the mother refused to let the children be taken from their home school and
placed in public school. But the father was wavering, unwilling to face the battle. So she left with
them during the day while he was at work, merely telling him that she had gone with the children.
When the judge learned of it, he ordered the man jailed until the children were returned to that state
and placed in the public school. Then, by someone's wise decision, the media was given the story.
They spread it everywhere. In this instance, it produced such a public outcry, that the judge
released the man. He then wound up his affairs, left the state, and rejoined the mother and childrenwho
were in a state with liberal home school provisions.
3 -You can try to get a waiver, on the basis of an exemption stated in the state vaccination
law. This will be easier to do if you are in one of the 22 states (listed above) with more liberal
exemption laws.
If you decide to go this route, quickly obtain more information. You need to know your state
law, and you would do well to contact one or more of the following sources.
1 -For further information on vaccine regulations in your state, you can call one or more of
the following: your State or Country Health Department; your State Board of Education; your local
school district Superintendent of Schools office. Request a copy of your state's Immunization Laws.
It will contain, in print, the requirements and exemptions.
2 -Still another source is the reference section of your local public library. Look in the State
Statute Revised Law Book, under "Public Health Law" or "Communicable Disease" sections. You
should there find the list of immunization requirements, followed by the exemptions: usually one or
two provisions will be Ilsted -elther on religious or medical grounds.
3- You may call or write your state legislature representative and ask for a copy of the
immunization law in your state. Making this available is part of his job, and he will usually send it
4 -If you wish to know about vaccine regulations in another state, you can obtain this
information by contacting its State Department of Health or State Department of Education. [1] If
you do not already know it, from a map learn the capital city of that state. [2] Call the operator for
the area code of that city. [3] During office hours in that state, dial 1-area code-555-1212 and ask
for the phone number of the State Department of Health, or the State Department of Education. [4]
Dial the number and ask the entering switchboard to be transferred to the department which can
give you the state vaccination and immunization requirements. [5] When you are transferred to that
office, ask for a written copy of the state compulsory immunization law and its exemptions. Give a
name and address for it to be sent to. An alternate source of information would be one or more of
the next three listings (items 5, 6, and 7).
5 -A valuable source of information about legalities concerning vaccinations is the American
Natural Hygiene Society, Inc., 12816 Race Track Road, Tampa, Florida 33625. This society has
available abstracts of state laws from most of the fifty states concerning immunization law
exemptions. They try to keep the information up to date.
6- Another source is Dissatisfied Parents Together (DPT), 128 Branch Road, Vienna,
Virginia 22180; 703-938-DPT3. It was started by concerned lay people and professionals. They
promote information about vaccines, assist parents in their legal battles to avoid immunization or
obtain compensation from vaccine injuries or death, and urge legislation for safer vaccinations.
Members receive an ongoing newsletter. This organization was prominent in the battle to get the
NCVIA enacted by Congress (discussed later in this chapter). (Also see the next paragraph.)
7 -If your doctor or local authorities are unrelenting in their efforts to vaccinate your child
against your will, you are invited to contact the National Vaccine Information Center(NVIC), 512 W.
Maple Avenue, Apt. 206, Vienna, Virginia 22180. (703-938-DPT3; FAX 938-0342).
8 -For Information on financial compensation, due to death or injury to a child from a
mandated vaccine, see "The Compensation System and How It Works, " published by The National
Vaccine Information Center .
9- Another source is The Dangers of Compulsory Immunizations: How to Avoid Them, by
Thomas Finn, an attorney residing in Florida. His book is available from Family Fitness Press, Box
1658, New Port Richey, Florida 33552.
10 -A helpful source is the booklet, How to Avoid Un-wanted Immunizations of All Kinds,
published by Humanitarian Publishing Company, Rural Route 3. Clymer Road, Quakertown,
Pennsylvania 18951.
11 -For additional information on immunizations, and how to obtain attorneys in your area,
etc., contact National Health Federation, P .0. Box 688, Monrovia, California 901016 (818-357-
2181). ,
12 -If you are being asked to have your child given the standard DPT (diphtheria, pertussis,
typhoid) vaccination, you will find a wealth of additional information on the dangers of pertussis
vaccines in the book, A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fisher. If uncertain
where to obtain a copy, you can order it from the publisher of the book you now have in hand.
Many facts and principles are given in this chapter. Here are several more:
In all your contacts with authorities (school, public health, legal, etc.) remain calm,
courteous, and humbly respectful toward their position. You are only asking of them that which duty
binds them to give you. Nothing is gained by unnecessarily antagonizing them. If they are
overstepping the law, then you must diplomatically bring the true facts to their attention. Do this
without belittling them. What you want is a waiver; so help them help you get it, with as little
embarrassment on their part as possible.
In theory, the State must provide you with the possibility of exemption waivers, in order to
protect itself from responsibility for what might happen if your child's injured as a result of a
mandatory vaccination. If a State allows no exceptions, then it must take full responsibility for
forcing the citizens to do a certain action which might result in injury. If waivers are placed in the
law, the responsibility is placed back on the parent: why did he not sign one?
Thus, all “compulsory" vaccination laws are, in fact, voluntary. The problem is that the
officials do not want you to know that.
While all immunization laws have exceptions, which you can use, it is important that you
know the wording of the law-since it differs from state to state.
Many health officials wish to exert as much control as possible, while assuming as little
responsibility as possible. Therefore, if you place them in a position in which they must either give
you the waiver or, themselves, assume more responsibility, you will usually get your waiver.
When working with school officials and attorneys, it is important that you use the right, legal
terminology. The correct terminology (some of it given in this chapter) has worked before and
should again. Many of these principles are stated in this book, but, if in doubt, contact item 5, 6, or 7
in the section, "Sources of Information, " just above. (Important: also read the next section: "When
the School Requires Immunization.)
It is Important that you state your written objections so they comply with your state's
exemption provisions. According to Grace Girdwain (a researcher into the subject), They must then
accept your request; if they do not, they are breaking their own law." Therefore it is essential that
you know your particular state law, word for word, before you submit your written objection.
Most state and county officials like an easy-going, un-stressful job. When you send in your
written statement of objections, you disturb them and make their life less pleasant for a time. There
are only two ways to solve the problem: either coerce you into submission, or give you what you
want. In order to successfully obtain an early waiver, you want to make the giving of that waiver the
easiest path for them.
Because it so frequently succeeds with parents, they will first try to intimidate you. In
response, you politely, calmly, but with certainty tell them that you understand your rights under the
law and will not accept evasions of those rights. Once they discover that you are adamant and
acquainted with the state law, it is likely that your waiver will be rapidly forthcoming.
But success cannot easily be guaranteed: There seems to be a hidden power behind the
throne. The county is answerable to the state. The state receives federal funds. Major industries
with big money contribute heavily to federal and state election campaigns. Then people like you
come along and threaten the high volume of vaccine sales. It is recognized that if you succeed in
avoiding a vaccination, others may try also.
What can you do when your local school requires immunization? Here are several things to
keep in mind.
You can do one of two things: Let your child be immunized, or do not let him be immunized.
That will be your choice. Make it thoughtfully and carefully. It will be totally your decision.
Because the second of these decisions is the most complicated, we will consider that one
Although waivers and exemptions are written into all immunization laws, most public health
officials and physicians prefer not to discuss their existence -even when questioned. So, to start
with, they do not want you to know that such a waiver exists.
If you hesitate or refuse vaccination, you will then face strong intimidation. They are likely to
threaten to keep your child out of school, take him from you, or send you to jail. But, according to a
research study by Grace Girdwain, of Burbank, Illinois, the officials cannot legally do any of those
things if you will take the following five steps:
"1. You must send a letter to the school to inform the education officials of your stand. A
phone call is not legal. It can be a note from your doctor, minister, or a notarized letter from you
stating your sincere objections to the immunization. If you do not do this and fail to have your child
immunized, it could be construed as negligence on your part and in some states there is a
possibility of legal action against you.
"2. If the school should refuse to honor your letter, request that they give you a statement in
writing outlining their reasons for refusal. If they won't, their refusal is legally invalid, and your letter
stands; they must enroll your child. If they do (they rarely will), they take the risk of incriminating
themselves, especially if they are acting contrary (as is common) to what is specified in the law
concerning your rights for exemption. Remember they are on tenuous ground, not you. They are
your servants, not you theirs.
"If worst comes to worst and you have a very knowledgeable official who writes you a
refusal and states accurately the lawful reasons for his refusal, he will also be required to tell you
what the accepted exemptions are. Then you can go about meeting them, using the information
available here and elsewhere.
"3. Child neglect is the one legal point you want to avoid at all costs. No legal parent or
guardian can be charged with neglect unless he shows complete lack of concern or action to be
more informed. Stripped of legal jargon, this simply means that if you can show that you have
investigated the situation, have come to a specific decision concerning immunizations, and have
informed the authorities of the same, no neglect charge can be brought. Neglect can be brought
only when it can be shown that you have failed to have your children immunized, not out of respect
for their medical or spiritual integrity, but only because you were too concerned with other matters.
" 4. At times there may be a question of whether you have given or withdrawn 'legal
consent.' Legal consent is dependent upon being properly informed on both the advantages and the
risks in any choice or decision you make. In other words, if a physician were to tell you that
vaccination is perfectly safe and effective to obtain your consent, such consent would not be legal
because he lied and you have not been properly informed. "Conversely, it could be argued that
nonconsent is not legal if you are not fully informed about the risks and advantages of
immunizations. Toward this end, the information in Parts I and II of this book should be sufficient to
make your consent or nonconsent fully legal.
"5. What I do if everyone refuses to give me a waiver? "This would be an extremely rare
circumstance, but should it happen, you are not left without resources. Here is where we pull out
one of our big guns. Send notarized letters by certified mail to the vaccine laboratory which makes
the shot (ask your doctor for the address), the doctor who is to administer the shot, your school
principal, the school board, and your local health department. In these letters make it clear that,
since they have refused to give you a duly requested waiver, you can no longer be held responsible
for what may happen to your child, if they force these shots upon him. You then state that you will
allow immunization if each will present you with a written signed guarantee of safety and
effectiveness of the vaccine and that they will consent to assume full responsibility for any and all
adverse reactions that your child may develop from the required shots.
"Of course none will give you such a guarantee. They cannot do so because all vaccines are
considered potentially highly toxic. We have yet to hear of an instance of further harassment of
parents after such letters have been sent.
"That's about all that is needed to obtain the necessary exemptions for your children."-Grace
Girdwain, "How to Legally Avoid Unwanted Immunizations of All Kinds," reprinted In Harold E.
Buttram, M.D., and John C. Hoffman, Ph.D., The Immunization Trio, 1991, pp. 108-109.
Keep in mind that many states only require mandatory vaccination of children in public
schools-not private or parochial schools. Carefully read your state's vaccination law. The principle of
a private school may tell you that your child must be vaccinated, when, in fact, the state does not
require it of children in private schools.
Some individuals are able to move to a different state, and may wish to learn which states
are the least strict in their vaccination requirements. (See the section, "Sources of Information, " for
where to write to obtain those facts.)
What if you are taken to court? You may be brought before the judge, -or, what is also likely,
you may be asked to appear before a “kangaroo" court of school and health department officials.
(This other “court" will be convened to see how determined you are, how much you know, and how
likely they can browbeat you into submission.)
A variety of information relating to this probability is given elsewhere in this chapter. Here is
more. Among other things, during the hearing, explain in a humble but firm matter the following:
1 -No vaccine carries any guarantee of protection from the laboratory that produced it, or the
doctor who administered it. Therefore, if a person refuses a given vaccination, the responsibility
would totally rest on the public health department requiring it.
2- The U.S. military allows no-nonsense "immunization waivers." So other U.S. citizens
should be able to receive them also.
3 -There is no federal law on immunizations. They do not dare to enact one. Their attorneys
know what the consequences would be.
4- My rights have been infringed upon by officials attempting to use force against my will.
In addition, you may wish to bring in some of the data contained in the next several sections,
immediately below. A helpful tip: write brief phrases of points you might wish to make on one or
more 3x5-inch cards. Hold them unobtrusively in your hand, and refer to them when needed.
Beforehand, practice speaking the points, referring from time to time to the notes.
In 1986, Congress enacted a special law. Entitled, The National Childhood Vaccine Injury
Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-660) (NCVIA), it was passed to officially recognize the reality of vaccinecaused
injuries and deaths. .
"Shortly after [the television documentary] 'DPT: Vaccine Roulette" was first shown in
Washington, D.C., in April, 1982, a group of parents in the area banded together and formed the
national organization known as Dissatisfied Parents Together (DPT). This nonprofit, educational,
and charitable foundation operates the National Vaccine Information Center and has distributed
information to thousands of parents across the nation, as well as having collected data on many
hundreds of cases of vaccine damage. .
"Dissatisfied Parents Together was instrumental in educating Congress and the public about
the need for a no-fault compensation system alternative to a lawsuit, which resulted in passage of
the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-660; 42 USC 300aa 1 et seq.).
The vaccine injury compensation and safety legislation was supported by more than fifty major
health organizations and drug companies. "-H.L. Coulter and B.L Fisher, A Shot in the Dark, p. 213,
The reason the law was enacted was because parents were happy that it provided a means
of financial payment to those families damaged by vaccinations, and it provided protection to the
drug companies against those receiving those payments. (In order to receive the payments, they
could not additionally sue the physicians, hospitals, drug firms, etc.) However, provision was made
for those who wished to sue, rather than receive the compensation:
"During the five years it took to pass the bill, DPT participated in negotiations with the
American Academy of Pediatrics, vaccine manufacturers, and legislative staffs to create the first nofault
compensation bill of its kind in America. During that time, the vaccine manufacturers and the
American Medical Association pressed for passage of an exclusive remedy compensation bill that
would have cut off all vaccine injury lawsuits in the courts. The exclusive remedy bill was also
supported by HHS [the Department of Health and Human Services] and the Justice Department,
but the bill that was passed preserved the parents' right to choose between the compensation
system and accessing the court system to sue negligent doctors and manufacturers."-H.L. Coulter
and B.L. Fisher, A Shot in the Dark, p. 214.
"The United States Government was compelled to step in and rescue drug companies from
the ruinous lawsuits brought against them by dismayed and angry parents of children damaged by
the pertussis vaccine. Financial investments of drug companies and the vaccine industry dictate the
direction of research on immunization policy. Their interests lie in promotion of vaccines, not
investigation of side effects. "-R. Neustaedter, The Immunization Decision, 1990, p.73.
All aspects of the law will prove most helpful if, after the vaccination is given, your child is
damaged. We hope you will never need to use it! However, its safety provisions can provide some
assistance in your efforts to avoid "mandatory" vaccinations. It specifies that, the physician is
required by law to notify each vaccinee of all the dangers, prior to injecting the vaccine.
This is an important law, yet your state and county officials will never introduce it in their
conversations with you,- and many would prefer to believe it does not exist.
Therefore it is your responsibility to know about this law. You may need that information
This law has two main aspects: safety provisions, and a no-fault federal compensation
program. (For further information on this second aspect, see "The Compensation System and How
It Works, " listed in this book under: the section, "Sources of Information').
The safety reform portion of NCVIA is as follows:
1 -The NCVIA requires that doctors provide parents with information about childhood
diseases and vaccines prior to vaccination. This information must include vaccine risks; that is, the
possible dangers that could result from taking each vaccine the physician offers you.
This, of course, is a very important proviso. Yet very few doctors inform parents about
vaccine risks, even though vaccine manufacturers place written warning information in every
package of vaccine they sell. So the information is there, in hand, when the box is opened. '
“’According to the CDC (Centers for Disease Control, the federal 'agency in Atlanta which
oversees such matters), physicians are required to first inform their patients of the risks involved
before they consent to vaccines.' If they do not do so, it is prima facie evidence of deceit or
negligence on the part of the physician. This regulation by the federal government would also seem
to assume that the patient has the right to refuse if he feels that the risks are too great. If that is so,
is not the federal government on record as supporting voluntary immunization and, by obvious
implication, against state-enforced, compulsory immunization?"-H.E. Buttram, M.D., and J.C.
Hoffman, Ph.D., The Immunization Trio, 1991, p. 110. [The Initial quotation Is from the writings of
Grace Glrdwalh.)
2 -The NCVIA requires that all doctors, who administer vaccines, report vaccine reactions to
federal health officials. Barbara Loe Fisher, executive vice president of the National Vaccine
Information Center (NVIC), said this:
“The will and intent of Congress in enacting the National Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 is being
subverted. This subversion is resulting in an appalling underreporting of vaccine reactions and
deaths by both private and public physicians ..[There is also] a lack of record keeping and/or
willingness on the part of physicians to divulge the manufacturer's name and lot number when a
reaction occurs. "-Barbara L. Fisher, National Vaccine Information Center [See "Sources of
Information" for the NVIC address).
"According to NVIC, doctors often justify their refusal to report vaccine reactions by merely
claiming the shot had nothing to do with the child's injury or death. Some pediatricians may actually
believe this, because they quote vaccine policymakers in the AAP and CDC who tell them that the
vaccine is completely safe. However the fear of being sued for failing to warn parents of the
potential dangers and contraindications may also be a consideration. "-Neil Z. Miller, Vaccinations:
Are They Really Safe and Effective?, 1992, p.59.
"Doctors and pediatricians are not the only instruments of the Medical-Industrial Complex
who are likely to deny the existence of vaccine reactions and cover up the truth. The medically
trained coroners are also members of this elite group. .Rarely is the vaccination ever listed as the
cause of death. Instead, they use impressive terms to falsify the death certificate: cardiac arrest,
possible myocarditis; bronchial bilateral pneumonia; septicemia due to septic tonsillitis; lymphatic
leukemia; streptococcal cellulitis; tubercular meningitis; infantile paralysis; and sudden infant death
syndrome, to name a few."-Op. cit., p. 61.
3- The NCVIA requires doctors to record vaccine reactions in an individual's permanent
The problem here is similar to that discussed under the second requirement, above. Just as
vaccine reactions are not being reported, so they are not being properly recorded. The reason for
both is the same: to avoid the possibility of a malpractice lawsuit-by eliminating the evidence in advance.
4 -The NCVIA requires doctors to keep a record of the date that each vaccine was given,
the manufacturer's name and lot number, where the vaccine was administered, and the
professional title (M.D., R.N., etc.) of the person administering the vaccine. .
This requirement is closely related to those preceding it. Obviously, such regulations, as the
above four-which can be so time-consuming to doctors, hospitals, and public officials,-indicate that
vaccines can be dangerous!
5 -The NCVIA mandates that the federal government begin urging manufacturers to improve
existing vaccines, and develop new, safer vaccines.
As a result of the passage of NCVIA,-the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
started the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC). The NVAC was assigned the task of
getting the universities and vaccine manufacturers to "develop and disseminate vaccine information
materials for distribution by health care providers."
This information was to include negative reactions, contraindications, etc. That information
was also to tell the general public that a federal no-fault compensation program was now available
for those who are injured or die from a mandated vaccine. (No, you have never heard of this
before.) It is obvious that, according to NCVIA, Congress wanted the public to be told about the
dangers of vaccines, and to be told about the available financial compensation when vaccines
injured those receiving them under mandatory vaccination laws.
But that was as far as it went. The entire matter essentially went nowhere. It is a national
law, but no teeth have ever been set in action to require getting the information out to the public.
Barbara Loe Fisher, who chairs the subcommittee on adverse reactions for the National Vaccine
Advisory Committee gives her comment:
"Even though Congress gave NVAC a dual mission: ‘to achieve optimal prevention of
human infectious disease through immunization' and 'to achieve optimal prevention against adverse
reactions to vaccines,' I had observed that the majority of NVAC time was spent discussing how to
promote vaccination. The equally important goal of identifying ways to prevent vaccine reactions
appears to be a subject that causes discomfort among many committee members, is viewed as an
obstacle to promoting vaccination, and is generally given little time or in depth treatment (in a
September 16, 1990, letter written by Barbara Loe Fisher to Donald A. Henderson, chairman of the
National Vaccine Advisory Committee, p. 1).
"Not only is there a lack of concern about the subject of vaccine reactions on the part of
some committee members, but there is a deliberate attempt to deny the reality of vaccine reactions,
deaths, and injuries ..[Committee members need] to spend more time trying to find ways to solve
problems associated with preventing vaccine reactions rather than trying to find ways to reword
subcommittee reports to deny the existence of children who were injured or killed during a vaccine
reaction. ' '-Barbara Loe Fisher., letter dated September 16, 1990, to Donald A. Henderson,
chairman of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee, pp. 1-2.
As usual, the underlying problem is that there are powerful organizations in America that do
not want people to know that there is anything wrong with vaccines. If the public learned that, it
might stop mass vaccinations.
"HHS was to satisfy this legal requirement by no later than December 22, 1988. However,
by March 4, 1991, this matter was still unsettled, and notice was provided to Louis w. Sullivan,
M.D., secretary of HHS, of the intent to bring a lawsuit against Sullivan and the Department for
failure to perform an 'act or duty' as required by law. This notice was submitted by NVIC on behalf
of several parents of vaccination-aged children (NVIC Mini News, Vienna, VA., March 1991, p. 1).
"Because HHS has failed to publish the required information, high risk children who should
not receive one or more of the vaccines may suffer from avoidable brain damage, permanent
disabilities, and even death. And parents whose children were injured or died from one or more of
the vaccines during the past few years may still be unaware of their right to seek compensation.
"It should be noted that vaccine guidelines were eventually submitted by the advisory
committee (after the December 22, 1988, deadline) but were rejected by NVIC on the grounds that
they 'failed to meet even minimal standards of scientific rigor, candor, and fairness. ' Vaccine risks
were systematically understated or ignored. For example, the proposed guidelines stated that 'a few
people will have a serious problem,' but they do not mention that a 'serious problem' could be
permanent brain damage or death. The guidelines also reveal a selective use of scientific data,
down- play the true rates of adverse reactions, and give inconsistent, incomplete, inaccurate, and
potentially dangerous information regarding contraindications."-Neil z. Miller, Vaccinations: Are
They Really Safe and Effective?, 1992, p. 62.
But how can It be otherwise, when such powerful lobbies and pressure groups are so
influential in Washington, D.C. ? For example, James Cherry and Edward Mortimer, two prominent
physicians who were "impartial" advisors to the Department of Health and Human Services (the
federal agency responsible for developing and promoting vaccine safety guidelines), were found to
have been paid $800,000 by pertussis vaccine manufacturers for expert witness and consulting
fees and research grants (National Vaccine Information Center press release, dated May 9, 1991).
In America, medical schools are subsidized by the foundations and grants of the multi-billion
dollar drug industry. That same industry spends an average of $6,000 a year on every physician in
America -to get him to prescribe their drugs.
In England, in order to drum up more business, the National Health Service pays a 'bonus'
to doctors with documented vaccination rates greater than specified percentages (Richard
Moskowitz, M.D., "Vaccination: A Sacrament of Modern Medicine, " speech in Manchester, England,
September 1991).
America now spends many times more money on medical care than does England, Canada,
or Japan. In fact, our total medical bill is now around $400 billion a year and growing at a rate close
to 15 percent annually. Medical care is a terrific success story in the United States:
More than two-thirds of all Americans suffer from chronic illness; 132 million workdays lost to
illness at a cost to industry of $25 billion a year; 36 million suffering from arthritis, 250,000 of these
are children; 12 million Americans have diabetes; 43.5 million have heart or blood vessel disease;
550,000 die each year of a heart attack; 525,600 new cases of cancer diagnosed yearly; 420,000
die of cancer each year. On and on It goes.
The compensation portion of NCVIA is as follows:
1 -The NCVIA would provide this financial compensation as an alternative to suing vaccine
manufacturers and physicians, when children or adults are injured or die because of reactions to
mandated vaccines.
2 -The NCVIA would provide for awards up to $250, 000 per case, if the individual dies, or to
compensate for pain and suffering if the child survived but was brain damaged. Awards were also to
be given for permanent injuries involving learning disabilities, seizure disorders, mental retardation,
and paralysis. .
In official physician's reports, vaccine-caused injury and death to children are often
attributed to some cause other than the vaccine. In addition, the public is not widely told about this
federal compensation law, lest they start fearing to have their children vaccinatedor overwhelm it
with claims. Yet, in spite of these drawbacks, it is highly significant that, by July 1992 (less than four
years from the time that the NCVIA was enacted), more than $249 million had been awarded for
vaccine-caused injuries or death. Thousands of cases are still pending ("On Vaccination Safety, "
Washington Post, November 2, 1992; for further documentation, see U.S. Claims Court records.).
At the rate it is going, the number of claims may eventually bankrupt the U.S. Treasury. But that will
be no problem, as long as vaccine sales continue. Nothing must stand in the way of "protecting the
In connection with these filings for clalms, the Food and Drug Administration released a mid-
1992 report, which said that more than 17,000 injuries and 350 deaths from vaccines had occurred
in the 20-month period from November 31 1990 to July 31, 1992 ("On Vaccination Safety,"
Washington Post, November 2, 1992). If you know someone who believes that vaccinations hardly
ever hurt anyone, read them this paragraph.
It is also of interest that many of the awards given for pertussis (whooping cough vaccine)
deaths were complicated by the fact that physicians had initially recorded them as "sudden infant
death syndrome" (NVIC Mini News, Nov. ember 1990, p. 2).
The intriguing question is who pays for these awards? The answer is the general public.
Congress voted a special tax on all mandated vaccines sold after October 1) 1988. In some
cases, this tax is several dollars per injection. (DPT [diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus] and MMR
[mumps, measles, and rubella] have the heaviest tax; apparently they cause the most death and
damage. Remember that fact; it is based on detailed federal statistics -which you and I do not have
access to.) This tax is passed on to consumers who are, in effect, paying vaccine insurance to pay
for the damage which may be received from the vaccine.
In ancient times, people sacrificed their children to Molech; now they are required to offer
them to vaccines.
What about traveling to other countries? Can you go around the world without vaccinations?
The World Health Organization (WHO) based in Geneva, Switzerland, grants American visitors and
tourists the right to refuse shots when traveling internationally. You simply declare exemption under
Clause 83 of the International Sanitary Code, issued by WHO and adopted by all its members.
Exceptions built into Clause 83: (1) If you come from an infected area, vaccinations are
necessary OR you might be quarantined (detained in one place) for up to 14 days from the time you
left the infected area IF the health department of the nation you arrive in thinks it necessary .If you
come from an area where there has been an epidemic, you will probably be put under surveillance.
This means that, together with the local health department, you must keep watch for suspicious
signs or symptoms. You will probably be required to report periodically to the local health officer for
a period up to 14 days, from the time of your departure from the infected area. If symptoms occur,
you must immediately turn yourself in and submit to quarantine or isolation. (2) If an area you wish
to enter is infected, you may be detained until the public health official permits you to continue on.
In actual practice, all this is quite remote. Even if it did happen, it would not matter whether
you had taken your shots before leaving your home nation; you would be quarantined for 14 days
along with those who had refused the vaccines.
Every year thousands travel abroad without taking vaccinations, and with little or no
inconvenience. They simply sign a waiver before they start their overseas travel.
When you receive your passport, ' request a copy of Foreign Rules and Regulations, Part
71, Title 42, on immunizations. That is the sheet that spells out your right to not be inoculated in
your travels. Keep a copy in the bottom of your suitcase.
Can a person in the U.S. Armed Forces obtain a waiver so he will not have to take an
inoculation? Yes, all branches of the Service provide "immunization waivers." If they did not, they
could be sued for millions of dollars if a reaction occurred from their immunizations. Because
waivers are available, the person accepting vaccination thereby takes responsibility for what
happens thereafter.
The procedure goes this way: When a person first enlists, he must state his objection to the
vaccinations and tell whether it is "religious conscience" or medical reasons, such as allergies or a
low tolerance to medications of any kind. But, if that person does not initially sign that written
vaccination waiver statement, he cannot thereafter be exempted from receiving inoculations.
Henceforth, the military, has the right to do what it wants to with that person.
The underlying point is that a person did not give up basic rights when he enlisted. Even
though he may be in the Service, no one has the right to immunize him against his will.
"Parents often need booster doses of vaccine education.
They should keep in mind three points of information: (1 ) Vaccines have immediate,
sometimes drastic side effects. (2) Vaccines have unknown long-term side effects which may
include post-encephalitis brain damage. (3) Vaccine efficacy may decrease as adults when the
diseases are more serious."-R. Neustaedter, The Immunization Decision, 1990, p.89.
When enough people set to work to accomplish a good work, they can succeed. The public
needs to be educated and the laws changed. Frankly, in this work woman are frequently much
more influential then men. They are the mothers of America. They are the ones who bear and raise
the children. Nothing is more ferocious than a mother protecting her young". Working together
toward a common goal unites people and, in the process, gets a lot of publicity in the newspapers
and on local and statewide television.
There are individuals out there who actually set to work to change state vaccination lawsand
make them more liberal. Here is one example:
“lt was now time [for our group] to contact legislators and formally open an area chapter of
the National Health Federation. On January 4, 1982, I mailed letters to the five House of Delegates
and the three state senators of our district requesting that Section D of Article 3, Chapter 2 of the
Code of Virginia (the compulsory Immunization law) be amended to include an exemption based
upon personal beliefs. I cited the unconstitutionality of the present law. Three delegates replied
saying they would investigate the matter, and our senator from this area, Joe Canada, said he
would send my letter to legislative services to have a bill drafted. '"
’On May 13, 1982, the Tidewater chapter of the National, Health Federation had its first
meeting. Our first project was getting a petition signed which requested that the Compulsory
Immunization Laws of Virginia be amended to provide for an exemption based upon personal
conviction. The petition mentioned that there were 19 states that already had this exemption. An
accompanying sheet listed, with references, some of the diseases and disabilities that have been
linked to immunizations and pointed out that there are natural and harmless ways of preventing and
treating so-called dread diseases for which vaccines are given."-Walene James, Immunization: the
Reality Behind the Myth, 1988, p. 149.
Well, in this book we have discussed a serious problem. It does not affect everyone who
receives a vaccine. But it affects a significant percentage of them. Many of the viruses injected into
people during vaccinations are "attenuated"; that means they are sick live viruses. Because these
organisms are so small, hundreds of millions are pumped into an arm with a single squeeze on the
syringe. Would you like to place millions of sick germs in the bloodstream of someone you loved?
What should you do about this to protect others? What should you do to protect your own
family? Personal decisions must be made. An abundance of data has been given to you in this
book. It is our prayer that your decision will be a wise one.
Since neither the author and researcher of this book, nor the publisher, is an attorney at law,
they cannot attest to the ultimate legal status of any of the data and suggestions made in this book,
in reference to vaccines, vaccinations, or vaccination laws.
The information given was factual, to the best of their knowledge. The methods of obtaining
waivers have been successfully used by others, but that does not prove they will always be
successful, nor in all states.
We therefore recommend that, if in doubt, before any action is taken-that you consult a
reputable attorney in your own state and carefully consider his recommendations.
Nothing in this book is to be construed as suggesting that anyone should, or should not,
receive immunizations of various kinds. This is the sole decision of each individual. Our objective Is
to present to those who desire them, their legal rights as American citizens regarding this matter.
Here is the vaccination scene in the early 1990s: An enormous amount of money is still
being given to the drug companies for vaccines. The May 1993 Kansas vaccination campaign well
illustrates the present situation:
The Kansas State plan is called "Operation Immunize. " The goal is to vaccinate every child
in the state within the next two years. Carried on by the Kansas State Department of Health and
Environment, four statewide vaccination drives are to be carried out, of which the first was
completed in May 1993. All over the state were to be seen posters with a cartoon bumble bee and
the words "Bee wise, immunize." Thousands of volunteers are distributing the ad sheets at 200
shopping malls, trailer parks, etc., across the state. In one weekend, 18,000 vaccinations were
Perhaps the most significant item about the campaign was the disclosure of what the
vaccines cost:
"The price [for one child] of a full battery of shots for all nine childhood diseases is $125 at
public health centers, and more than $200 at private clinics."-National Public Radio, May 5, 1993.
Because the state government estimated that 55,000 Kansas children had not yet had their
shots, it spent $750,000 on a computerized tracking system-in order to know who has been
vaccinated and who has not. The cost in vaccines to the state: 55,000 children times $125 per set
of shots totals $6,875,000.
"Kansas State is spending nearly $7 million on vaccines and personnel for 'Operation
Immunize.' A little more than half comes from the state legislature. And the rest is pro- vided by
grants from the Federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "-lbid.
The Kansas campaign is being watched closely, and the federal government is considering
doing something similar- on a nationwide scale.
Here is the federal government's "full plan":
Nationally, it is estimated that only 63 percent of 2-year- olds have had their immunizationsand
the rate is as low as 10 percent in some areas of the country. Yet the American Academy of
Pediatrics is urging the public-and Congress-that every child in the land should receive 14 to 15
immunizations by the age of 2, as protection against 9 diseases.
In the spring of 1993, the full vaccination plan was urged by President Clinton. It failed to win
support from Congress, but it is believed that it can be enacted later-within three to five years at the
most. The ful11993 program would cost $1.1 billion annually, and would provide free vaccines for
all children under 2 by 1995. About $300 million would be given to the states to lengthen clinic
hours.. hire additional nurses, and arrange for vans to bring the vaccines out to neighborhoods.
Intensive media campaigns would be paid for, and, when the program was fully implemented within
two years, a national database would be kept on every child in the nation, to insure that he or she
had received all the shots-and right on schedule.
According to U.S. News and World Report, at the present time it costs $244 for a complete
set of shots:
"A full round of immunizations, including newly recommended vaccines for hepatitis B and
bacterial meningitis, costs $244 from a private physician, up from $23 ten years ago."-U.S. News
and World Report, May 10, 1993.
Did you note that last part? The profit-making shots, which brought in $23 per child ten
years ago,-now bring in nearly $250 per child No 'wonder that lobbyists for the pharmaceutical
industry are so busy in Washington, D.C., and at every state capital in the nation! And they are
having remarkable success, although they will not be satisfied until every child In the land is
required to be vaccinated.
In Apri11993, a new combination, meningitis/DTP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis)
vaccine, was licensed by the Food and Drug Administration. That will reduce the number of needle
sticks the child must receive for those four diseases from eight to four. The stated objective is to reduce
the number of shots each child must receive, by giving him a few "supershots." We earlier
noted the danger of supershots. So much is injected at one time, that the risk is greatly, magnified.
According to the latest reports, Merck's chickenpox vaccine will be added in 1994. By 1995 or 1996,
a vaccine for ear infections will be added to the list of "baby shots."
The big question is how soon will childhood vaccinations become mandatory on a national
level. Only two things are needed: (1) a national computer monitoring center and (2) federal funds
to subsidize the vaccines, as well as a portion of the personnel costs. Both of those preliminary
steps are now being urged. Once enacted, the third step will be passage of a mandatory law.
As we near press. time, the following report has came to our attention. Although it may not
take effect this year, the trend is obvious -and It is one you should know about.
Clinton Administration has announced plans to implement a one billion dollar program
to immunize all United States children. Under Clinton's proposal, children would be required to
receive vaccinations at the time of birth or shortly thereafter, but no later than age two. An important
feature of the proposal is the creation of a nationwide tracking system that would require all children
to be registered at birth in a centralized computer databank.
The plans were drafted for the Clinton Administration by Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and
Senator Don Riegle (D-MI) and were introduced as S. 732 and S. 733 on April 1. Drafters of the
bills worked closely with the Children's Defense Fund in formulating this proposal. The House
version of the bill, HR 1640, was introduced by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA).
Kennedy spokesman, Dr. Keith Powell, told the National Center for Home Education that the
primary goal of the bill was to create a "registry with the capacity to do tracking and surveillance."
Powell indicated that a religious or philosophical exemption from mandatory vaccinations would not
be included in the bill. In response to the question about enforcement mechanisms against parents
who do not immunize. Powell stated that the law would be designed so that "if a child does not
show up and get a vaccination, bells and whistles will go off."
A similar measure was recently introduced in the House of Representatives. On February
17, 1993, Virginia Congresswoman Leslie Byrne submitted her bill under the guise of an
"immunization entitlement program." Like the pro- posed Kennedy/Clinton plan, Byrne's H.R. 940
would create a "national immunization registry system" under the direction of the Center for Disease
Control.. The bill states that the purpose of the system is "to provide. for national surveillance of
childhood immunization status through age six." The Byrne bill would require that the Secretary for
the Center for Disease Control must develop a "registry to cover the entire Nation," with "the
capacity .to link and process all birth certificate records through a central registry." The Secretary
would also be required to develop "projects to assess techniques for tracking children in mobile
populations across geographic areas." Section 9 (D) of the bill, which calls for a "registry which
requires the participation of private providers of immunization services" seems to indicate that
private doctors will be required by law to report to the national registry families who have not
vaccinated their children.
Republican Senators Danforth (R-MO), Kassebaum (R- KS), Durenberger (R-MN) and
Hatch (R-UT) have announced similar plans to introduce an immunization bill into the Senate.
Speaking for the four Senators, Danforth announced that the' Republican plan would be similar to
the Kennedy/Reigle proposals in that it would emphasize the tracking and surveillance of families
through a central registry, but would reject the Democrats' call for universal purchase of vaccines by
the United States Government.
The Clinton, Byrne, and Danforth proposals dramatically escalate federal involvement in
immunizations. The new proposals would require immunizations as a matter of federal law and
would effectively provide an enforcement mechanism which would require parents to vaccinate
homes schooled and privately schooled children, extending vaccine enforcement beyond students
in the public schools who are already required in many states to be immunized. By using birth
certificates and social security numbers -now required for all children age 1 and up for IRS tax
return purposes -to track children through a centralized computer registry system, parents who
chose not to vaccinate their children could be tracked down by government officials for criminal
The tracking and registration of children is part of President Clinton's broader plan to record
and track all personal health information through computer-linked databases, and such tracking
might include, according to the Clinton Administration, use of the “smart card” a universal identity
card, which has imbedded in it a powerful computer complete with memory chip and
microprocessor. Ira Magaziner, a Clinton administration official, in charge of organizing health care'
policy, asserted that the president wants to ..create an integrated system with a card that everyone
will get at birth.":-Douglas W. Philips, Director of Government Affairs, National Center for Home
Education, May 1993.