Oral Presentation by Jock Doubleday
"Into the Labyrinth:
Discovering the Truth about Vaccination"

AutismOne
Annual Conference
Chicago, Illinois
May 30, 2004
(with updated links and information as of February 23, 2014)

Cover art, "Minotaur Head," used by permission of the artist
Robbie Wallace Hudson
http://robbiewallacehudson.wordpress.com/

FRIEND ASKED ME RECENTLY if I was nervous to\
speak in front of parents and professionals about
vaccination. I said, "Why would I be nervous to speak
in front of parents and professionals about vaccination?"
He said, "Because you were an English major. All you
did in college was write poetry and analyze stories."
Ah, yes. Stories. Here's a story for you . . .
A Greek hero named Theseus went to slay a deadly
monster living in the center of a labyrinth built by
the king of Crete. The monster, known as the
Minotaur, had been eating youths and maidens
sacrificed to him by the Athenians in return for
peace.

Theseus would have none of this. He sailed to Crete
to slay the Minotaur. There he met the King's
daughter, Ariadne. Ariadne fell in love with Theseus,
though he was the sworn enemy of her father.
To increase her new love's chance of escaping the
labyrinth with his life, Ariadne gave Theseus a long
thread to unravel as he negotiated the maze.
Theseus accepted the gift, entered the labyrinth,
encountered the monster, killed it, followed Ariadne's
thread back out to safety, and all was well. Theseus
ended up marrying Ariadne's sister. But don't feel
sorry for Ariadne. She married the god Dionysus.
n 1978, I went to Oberlin College. Biology was my
first major, then philosophy. After my sophomore
year, disappointed by what I called "the
institutionalization of learning" (large class sizes and
the virtual absence of the teacher-student
relationship), I took five years off and hitchhiked
around the country and undertook my own
education.

I read books. In particular I remember Robert
Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance,
Joseph Chilton Pearce's Crack in the Cosmic Egg,
Loren Eiseley's The Immense Journey, and Lewis
Thomas's The Lives of a Cell.

These books lived on the outer edges of academia
but had profound things to say about our culture and
the world. Written by powerful storytellers, the
books encouraged in me a growing love for story and
inspired me to go back to school at S.U.N.Y.
Purchase to get my degree in literature.
Three years later, in 1990, I came upon Joseph
Pearce's book, Magical Child, which argued that the
natural capacity of children is immense and
kaleidoscopic, but that most children's development
is thwarted by cultural practices. I read Magical Child
again two years later and a third time in 1997.

I remember it was the night before Thanksgiving. I
was in the throes of a very strong visceral reaction to
the story told by Pearce, a story told originally by the
story's characters themselves: hospital insiders and
frightened others. That night I lay in bed unable to
sleep because the images from Pearce's book kept
spinning around in my head. Women and babies are
being treated how by institutional medicine?
I decided to investigate. I didn't want to take
Pearce's story on faith. So over the next year, I
perused medical journals and talked to obstetricians
and perinatal nurses and doulas and midwives and
parents and read key books in the field. And then I
began to write articles on what science had to say
about childbirth.

A friend suggested I start a nonprofit. A year later,
the 501(c)3 California nonprofit corporation Natural
Woman, Natural Man was born.

The focus of the nonprofit was natural childbirth,
though it advocated other back-to-nature practices
as well.

Later, near the turn of the millennium, I
was living in Nevada City, California and writing a
book on natural childbirth -- what I thought of as a
"science-backed ode to nature."

I had been an occasional guest on KVMR (the local
radio station), speaking on breastfeeding and natural
childbirth. I wanted to continue speaking on these
subjects, and the station was all for that. But they
said, "First we want you to talk about vaccination." I
said, "I don't know anything about vaccination. Can I
just do my childbirth talks?" And they said, "We want
something on vaccination."

The first thought that went through my mind, after
spending years researching childbirth, was, "Now I
have to spend years researching vaccines, too?"
But I decided to do some cursory internet research,
and I found some very odd things. As someone who
believed, as most Westerners do, that vaccination
has done great good, I was baffled by evidence to
the contrary. So I bought some books written by
independent researchers. . . .

The great majority of the books had been recently
published. All of the books were heavily documented.
And all of the books drew conclusions based on raw,
unaltered data on disease incidence and mortality
acquired in several different countries over the last
two centuries.

None of the books made any connection between the
practice of vaccination and an improvement in
human health. More fundamentally, none of the
books made any connection between the practice of
vaccination and science.

How could that be? Isn't vaccination scientific?
Any guesses on how many long-term controlled
studies have been performed for all vaccines for all
diseases in all countries in the world since
vaccination was invented in 1796?
Zero studies.
​
We've had  219 years to perform a long-term
controlled study on vaccination, and we have
performed precisely none.

http://www.whale.to/a/lie_tested.html
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/abcnews.html

There is no lack of people to be part of the control
group in such a study. You can find a list of potential
candidates on Dr. Tim O'Shea's web site,
www.thedoctorwithin.com.

These are parents who not only don't vaccinate,
they give out their contact information so you can
call them and ask them how good their unvaccinated
family's health is. There are presently 220 listings,
for a total of over 800 unvaccinated persons.

http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/unvaccinated/Parents-of-Unvaccinated-Children/

And this is just on Dr. O'Shea's web site. You can
imagine how many people live in America alone who
believe in natural immunity, who avoid vaccinations,
and who would be willing to be part of a group that
simply continues doing what it was doing before.
Now, what exactly is this vaunted thing, the longterm
controlled study? In the case of vaccination, a
long-term controlled study is taking two large groups
of people and vaccinating one group and not
vaccinating the other, and then recording disease
incidence over a period of several years. Short-term
studies don't give us any useful information about
vaccine efficacy, for reasons that make themselves
clear with thought.

Now, why is it that we don't have any long term
controlled studies on vaccination?
We live in an age of scientific studies. Governments
and private organizations study anything and
everything under the sun.

Recently, the National Endowment for the
Humanities spent $25,000 to study why people lie,
cheat, and act rudely on Virginia tennis courts.
The National Institute of Neurological and
Communicative Disorders and Stroke spent
$160,000 to study whether or not someone can
"hex" an opponent by drawing an "X" on their chest.
The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism spent over a million dollars to find out if
drunken fish are more aggressive than sober fish.
The National Science Foundation awarded a grant of
$220,971 to researchers to study why women smile
more than men. This study was a follow-up to
another study in 1994 on the meaning of smiles in
general. The NSF awarded another grant to study
the history of the fax machine.

Everything is being studied all the time.
Everything, that is, except vaccination.
Why is it, do you think, that the pharmaceutical
companies, which fund studies, studies, and more
studies, have no interest in funding long-term
studies on vaccination?
I don't know the answer to that question, although
many of the books I've read endeavor to speculate.
If you want to learn about conflict of interest in the
vaccine world, I've got some links for you:

"Profits, Not Science, Motivate Vaccine
Mandates"
http://wellbeingjournal.com/profits-notscience-motivate-vaccine-mandates/

"Conflict of Interest Rampant in Child Drug
Prescriptions"
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/12/06/conflict-of-interestrampant-in-child-drug-prescriptions.aspx

"Follow the Money on Vaccines"
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/09/15/vaccines-part-four.aspx

"Lax Ethics Rules Undercut Science Advice, Say
Groups"
http://www.cspinet.org/new/200303101.html

Now, even though we don't have any long-term
controlled studies on vaccination, amazingly and
thankfully we do have some recourse to discover if
vaccines actually work.

We can look back into human history. Indeed, if you
look at it right, human history can be seen as one
big Petri dish. And it's a Petri dish that's just waiting
for the scientific gaze.

The science of looking back into history at the grand
sweep of disease in populations is called
epidemiology. What does epidemiological data tell us
about vaccination and its effect on the Petri dish of
humanity?

Is vaccination effective or not?

Looking at charts using unaltered government data
on incidence and mortality rates for the great
diseases in the United States, Australia and Great
Britain from 1900 to the present, an interesting
pattern emerges.

Time and again, nature takes care of human beings
without any help from vaccination. Nature lays low
those whose immune systems are functioning at
below-standard levels, and then disease incidence in
the remaining population declines to virtually zero.
Time and again, incidence of disease in human
populations rises, peaks -- then falls, falls, falls
without any intervention from human medicine. . . .
But interestingly, often a vaccine is introduced near
the end of the disease's decline. What happens to
disease incidence after introduction of the vaccine?
The decline keeps going the way it was going, or
sometimes spikes upward for a short time. Either
way, vaccination takes credit for the disease's
decline.

Sometimes, as in the case of scarlet fever and
typhoid fever, no vaccine is introduced before the
disease declines. But vaccination still takes credit for
the decline.

It's a very neat system that unfortunately leaves out
two centuries of international epidemiological data.
For clear graphs of this data, check out
"GRAPHICAL EVIDENCE SHOWS VACCINES DIDN'T
SAVE US"
http://www.vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html

50 Graphs
http://www.healthsentinel.com/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&layout=blog&id=8&Itemid=55

Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective? by Neil
Z. Miller
http://vacbook.com/

I have talked to many doctors about these raw,
unaltered numbers and the charts based on them.
None of them have seen these numbers. None of
them have seen the charts based on them. When I
email them the graphs, they say, "These numbers
must be wrong."

Doctors who willingly admit that we have no longterm
studies on vaccination are absolutely unyielding
on the issue of epidemiology.

And understandably so. They have been taught --
they have had it drilled into them -- that the history
of modern civilization is the history of the triumph of
artificially induced immunity.

So they are put into a corner, and they come out
fighting: "These charts are wrong! The numbers
they're based on must be wrong!" But the numbers
are not wrong. These are the only numbers we have.
They are the government numbers -- raw data from
many different governments.

I am still waiting for a doctor to email me "the right
numbers."

So if we have no evidence from epidemiology that
vaccines work, and we have no evidence from longterm
studies that vaccines work, we are left with no
evidence that vaccines work.

Independent researcher Dr. Viera Scheibner, in her
bold expose Vaccinations: 100 Years of Orthodox
Research Shows that Vaccines Represent a Medical
Assault on the Immune System, sums up the
position of researchers not funded by pharmaceutical
companies. She writes:

"There is no evidence whatsoever that vaccines
of any kind . . . are effective in preventing the
infectious diseases they are supposed to
prevent."

Viera Scheibner Ph.D.
http://www.whale.to/m/scheibner9.html

In fact, we didn't need Viera to tell us that vaccines
are ineffective. The vaccination hoax was exposed
over 80 years ago. In January of 1923, a doctor
named Walter S. Hadwen wrote an article titled,

"The Birth of the Fraud of Vaccination"
http://www.whale.to/v/hadwen1.html

in which he talks about Edward Jenner's circus
artistry in pawning off on an unwitting public his
unsubstantiated claims.

Our story deepens when we discover that Edward
Jenner, inventor of vaccines, and Louis Pasteur,
creator of the germ theory of disease, were the
Barnum & Bailey of medicine.

These men weren't true scientists. They were, quite
unfortunately for us, showmen and hucksters.
They were salesmen.

As early as January 26, 1889, in an issue of Scientific
American Supplement magazine, there was a report
titled "Exposure of M. Pasteur's Methods," by Dr.
Lutaud of France. The report tells how many of
Pasteur's claims, including his claim regarding his
curing of silk worm disease in France, were
fraudulent.

A hundred years later, in 1993, Professor Gerald
Geison, a science historian from Princeton University,
made a thorough study of lab notes that Pasteur
had ordered his family not to make public, and
which were in fact made public only after the death
of Pasteur's grandson in 1975.

Princeton professor Geison compared these notes
with Pasteur's publications and presented his findings
during a congress of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science in Boston.
In his presentation, Geison said that Pasteur
committed scientific misconduct, that he
violated medical, ethical, and scientific rules
and published fraudulent data.

Contrary to what Pasteur claimed, he never tested
his anti-rabies vaccine on animals before he started
experimenting on humans. Further, the vaccine
Pasteur used during his famous "anthrax
experiment" on sheep was -- contrary to his claim --
not his own vaccine. He stole it from a colleague.
According to Geison, money was the primary
motivation for Pasteur's action.

Further, and much to our detriment, Pasteur stole
and misrepresented the ideas of his contemporary,
Antoine Bechamp. Bechamp had a marvelous theory
of disease called the "terrain theory." The terrain
theory says that living creatures, including germs,
are environment specific -- they do well in some
environments and not in others. Bad germs flourish
when the terrain of the body is unhealthy. This
indeed is a tautology. Another tautology is: "Make
the body healthy, and you've made your best
defense against disease."

But as we all know, Pasteur invented his own theory:
the "germ theory of disease," upon which modern
medicine is based. This theory says that if you've got
a germ, you've got a problem.

Pasteur's solution? Heat them up until they explode.
"Denature" them. Kill them at all costs. Pasteur's
theory won out over Bechamp's theory because of
Pasteur's dedication to the marketing of his ideas. In
the Western world today, terrain is ignored and the
germ is all.

Pasteur was not the only snake-oil salesman to come
down the pike. Edward Jenner, whom history has
come for some reason to regard as a "great
scientist," purchased his medical degree from St.
Andrew's College for the equivalent of $75.
After a single experiment with eight-year-old James
Phipps, with no clinical trials or follow-up studies,
Jenner received the equivalent of $150,000 from the
British Government.

"Smallpox Vaccinations at Gunpoint?"
http://proliberty.com/observer/20020408.htm

His Fellowship in the Royal Society was obtained by
what even Dr. Norman Moore, his biographer and
apologist, admits was little else than fraud.
"Vaccine and Serum Evils"
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/shelton3.html

For the story of Pasteur's massive hoax, read Ethel
Douglas Hume's book, Pasteur Exposed: The False
Foundations of Modern Medicine. See also The Curse
of Louis Pasteur: Why Medicine Is Not Healing a
Diseased World, by Nancy Appleton. See also Neil Z.
Miller's book, Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and
Effective?

See also "The Dream and Lie of Louis Pasteur"
http://www.whale.to/a/b/pearson.html

For a Library Journal online review of Geison's book,
The Private Science of Louis Pasteur, see:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0691034427/qi
d=1142542768/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-8732680-
8754236?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

Regarding the fraud of vaccination perpetrated by
Edward Jenner, see Tim O'Shea's article, "Bringing a
Dead Disease Back to Life"
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/smallpox/smallpoxbringing-a-dead-disease-back-to-life/

See also Alfred Russel Wallace's article, "A Summary
of the Proofs That Vaccination Does Not Prevent
Smallpox but Really Increases It"
http://www.whale.to/a/wallace.html

"STOP! Read This Before Vaccinating for Anything"
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/02/09/6-principles-you-should-know-beforemaking-an-informed-swine-flu-vaccine-decision.aspx

Jenner's and Pasteur's hoaxes created a double helix
of hope in the face of the terrifying spread of
disease. They provided exactly what people wanted,
which was confidence in the face of the possibility of
death from disease. Unfortunately, this confidence in
"magic bullet" medicine was, and is, completely
unwarranted.

Now, we have to ask how much money modern
intercessors between ourselves and our health would
make if the terrain theory had won out.
Is it possible to have a healthcare industry
without the germ theory?

I would argue no.

If Bechamp's theory had gained general acceptance,
people in general would understand that their health
is their responsibility. They would understand that
the terrain of the body is influenced by everyday
individual choices. An apple a day, etc. If the terrain
theory had gained credence, doctors and hospitals
would be back in their old functions of caring for
people who occasionally fall out of apple trees and
break their arms.

Unfortunately, Bechamp's theory is known and
followed only by a minority of Westerners.
Bechamp's story simply isn't as exciting as Pasteur's.
Where's the drama in eating an apple a day?
Stephen Jay Gould talks about scientific
misrepresentation in his book Dinosaur in a
Haystack. . . . Gould writes:

"I do not speak of fraud, cover-up, finagling, or any
other manifestation of pathological science (though
such phenomena exist at a frequency that, in all
honesty, we just do not know.) I refer, rather, to the
all too wonderfully human love of a good tale . . ."
So, at bottom, we're talking about our need, as
human beings, for the storification of the world. And
then, yes, there could be fraud, too -- and there is --
but at bottom we have this need for story. And of
course stories can be helpful or harmful.

But let's go back in time before the storytellers
Jenner and Pasteur -- much further back into history
-- to a Greek mathematician named Xeno. Xeno too
was a storyteller, and he told the following story . . .
"An archer is aiming his arrow at a tree. Look, the
archer is letting his arrow loose! Look, the arrow is
flying straight to the tree! Look, it stops before it hits
the tree!"

What?

Well, says Xeno, mathematically speaking, the
distance from the tip of the arrow to the tree can be
divided in half. And then that distance can be divided
in half again, and then that distance can be divided
in half again. And this can go on indefinitely.
Therefore, an arrow released from the bow, forever
halving its distance to the tree, should never reach
the tree. According to "math," everything is infinitely
far from everything else and therefore can never
actually meet.

What we can learn from Xeno and his story about
the arrow and the tree is that a story that is a great
treat for the imagination and that seems to make
perfect sense can be false and is doomed to be found
false as soon as someone does something as simple
as shoot an arrow at a tree.

Like Xeno's fantasy about infinite arrow-flight, the
theory of vaccination holds sway over our
imaginations. The theory of vaccination seems like a
beautiful garden in which we can plant the seeds of
our hopes. The theory says that when a weakened
version of a germ is injected directly into the
bloodstream, it inspires the immune system to
create health-giving antibodies in response. On the
battlefield of the body, hordes of antibodies act as
bouncers for similar germs for years to come. Hey,
we just conquered disease! Culture improves on
nature, and all is well. A beautiful and dramatic
story. And unfortunately, a story as false as Xeno's
tale of arrows flying toward and never reaching their
target.

Let me say here that many of you may be
questioning my sanity, and almost certainly my
motives, in saying that vaccination is nothing more
than a story without any scientific foundation.
Why would I say such a thing? What are my
motives? What do I stand to gain by submitting this
view for public discussion?

As the director of a nonprofit corporation advocating
natural living practices, it makes sense that I would
oppose vaccination, which is clearly an artificial
practice that bypasses the natural method of germ
intrusion by doing an end-run around the mucosal
membranes. Therefore, one might conclude that,
because my salary depends on my opposing this
artificial practice of vaccination, I might oppose
vaccination for financial reasons.

But my salary is as fictional as the stories I read
during college. I don't receive a salary. I don't
receive financial compensation of any kind from the
nonprofit organization that I run. I never have and I
never will. I always felt that it was important not to
receive a salary for my nonprofit work, because I
wanted to be able to answer precisely these charges
of conflict of interest.

Still, I am constantly criticized for "not presenting
both sides" of the issue. "Your presentation is so
unbalanced that we can't even listen to you." I have
been admonished that some diseases must have
been prevented by vaccinations -- otherwise, why
would vaccinations still be around? I have been told
that, if I want to maintain credibility, my
presentation has to be more "balanced."

More balanced? I'm a Libra. I have no problem with
balance. But all of Western culture, from the richest
Bill Gates to the poorest welfare recipient, is
shouting from the rooftops that vaccination is an
absolute good. Where is the balance there? Western
information mass media, including all television, all
newspapers and most other print media, present
vaccination as the savior of mankind. In my giving
an alternate view, I am not even coming close to
balancing the scales.

Even if I wanted to present both sides of the
vaccination argument, I couldn't. There are not two
sides to present. As far as science is concerned,
there is no evidence -- none -- that vaccination does
what it claims to do.

Why can't vaccines work? Because the body
recognizes and identifies foreign invaders only when
they pass through the mucosal membranes of your
nose, mouth, eyes, ears, genitalia, esophagus,
larynx, trachea, lungs, stomach, or intestines.
Vaccination bypasses your mucosal membranes.
Thus, the body cannot properly recognize, identify,
and begin to work against foreign invaders.
What about antibodies? Aren't there studies that
show that vaccines increase antibody count? Yes,
such studies exist. But antibody count is not the Holy
Grail scientists once thought it was.

There is no evidence -- none -- that high
antibody count equates with health or leads to
an increased ability to ward off disease.
There was a study done in 1992 in the Department
of Neurology at University of Chicago: "Severe
(grade III) tetanus occurred in three immunized
patients who had high serum levels of anti-tetanus
antibody. The disease was fatal in one patient. One
patient had been hyperimmunized to produce
commercial tetanus immune globulin. (CroneNE,
Reder AT., "Severe tetanus in immunized patients
with high anti-tetanus titers," Neurology. 1992

Apr;42(4):761-4; PMID: 1565228 [PubMed]):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=1565228&dopt=Abstract

So high levels of "tetanus antibodies" gave their
hosts precisely no protection from tetanus.
Sometimes antibodies are present when diseases are
prevented, and sometimes they're not. Alan Phillips,
director of the nonprofit organization Citizens for
Healthcare Freedom, writes:

". . . agamma globulin-anemic children are
incapable of producing antibodies, yet they
recover from infectious diseases almost as
quickly as other children. . . . Natural
immunization is a complex phenomenon involving
many organs and systems; it cannot be fully
replicated by the artificial stimulation of antibody
production" (Epidemics: Opposing Viewpoints, 1999,
pp. 105-106)

http://childbirthsolutions.com/articles/dispellingvaccination-myths-part-i/
http://childbirthsolutions.com/articles/dispellingvaccination-myths-part-ii/

The only scientific argument ever offered by the
medical industry in favor of vaccination is that
vaccines produce antibodies. I'll say that again.
The only scientific argument ever offered by
the medical industry in favor of vaccination is
that vaccines produce antibodies.

But government statistics, medical research studies,
and FDA and CDC reports all show that vaccine induced
antibody production is helpless against
disease.

"Antibodies" are at best mysterious players in the
drama of immunity. I call them freakbodies, myself,
and I even wrote a little poem about them, called
"Ode to Freakbodies." But hey, you don't want any
poets wandering the hallowed halls of science.
Frankly, and I apologize in advance to the Gaiacentrics
out there, I liken the debate on vaccination
to the debate on whether or not the earth is the
center of the solar system.

It is of course possible that the earth IS the center of
the solar system, but there is so much evidence
against it -- an astronomical amount of evidence, in
fact -- that one cannot really justify spending much
time advancing it. If it seems extreme to call
vaccination a hoax, well, it's pretty extreme that the
earth is whipping around the sun at 66,600 miles per
hour.

I won't liken myself to Kepler or Galileo, because the
Galileos in this field, the first ones to expose
vaccination, lived a century ago and are long dead.
They were great scientists and dedicated
researchers, and their names are legion.
And the Church of Modern Medicine ground them
into hamburger meat. If you are sitting in the front
pews of this church, you should read Dr. Raymond
Obomsawin's book, Universal Immunization: Medical
Miracle or Masterful Mirage?

http://www.whale.to/v/obomsawin.html

Researched books on vaccination conclude that
vaccination is not effective. however, their authors
sometimes conclude that vaccination is effective,
because these authors equate antibody count with
health. (Pro-vaccine science only talks about
antibodies, it never talks about health.)
Fortunately, those of us who do research know that
antibodies are not, and have never been, the key
players in immunity.

And in July 2012, the NIH just came out with a study
showing that vaccination theory is incorrect:
"Vaccine Theory Proven Wrong: Study by NIH"
http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2012-07-04/vaccine-theory-proven-wrong-study-by-nih/

Do vaccines work? Science says no. Can vaccines work? Science says no.

Do vaccines harm? Science says yes:
"Vaccinated children have up to 500% more
disease than unvaccinated children"
http://www.infowars.com/vaccinated-children-haveup-to-500-more-disease-than-unvaccinated-children/

"The differences were dramatic, with unvaccinated
children showing far less incidence of common
childhood ailments than vaccinated children . . ."
What?

 * * *

Let's go back in time, for a moment, to the waning
days of the year 2000. Members of the Association of
American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) have just
unanimously voted for an end to all government mandated
childhood vaccines. Why would the AAPS
do such a thing? They would do such a thing
because, in the words of Dr. Jane M. Orient, AAPS
executive director:

"Children face the possibility of death or serious
long-term adverse effects from mandated vaccines."
What? "Death or serious long-term adverse effects"?
You mean vaccines are not only ineffective but
dangerous? I gotta get out of this labyrinth. There's
no oxygen left and my torch just went out.
One of the most serious adverse effects of vaccines
is that they often cause the very diseases they were
meant to prevent.

Measles, for instance, which declined by more than
95 percent before the vaccine was introduced in
1963, is 14 times more likely to be contracted by
vaccinated than by unvaccinated persons. (National
Health Federation report, November 1969)
http://vaccinationcrisis.com/

In one Chicago study, 90% of people vaccinated
against measles got measles. (Gary Null Interview
(December 18, 1997) with Jamie Murphy, author of
the classic work, What Every Parent Should Know
About Childhood Immunization)
http://www.betterdietislam.com/diet/Vaccinations/vaccines3.htm

A study published in 1994 in the Archives of Internal
Medicine evaluated all U.S. and Canadian articles
reporting measles outbreaks in schools and found
that . . . 77% of all measles cases were occurring
among vaccinated individuals. The authors concluded
that "the apparent paradox is that as measles
immunization rates rise to high levels . . .
measles becomes a disease of immunized
persons." (Poland GA, et al. "Failure to reach the
goal of measles elimination: Apparent paradox of
measles infections in immunized persons," Arch
Intern Med 1994 Aug 22; 154(16):1815-1820)
See Sandra Duffy's thoroughly researched and
heavily documented letter to her son's school
district:

http://www.vaclib.org/letters/Letter_Oregon_School_District.htm

In a measles outbreak in 1986 in Corpus Christi,
Texas, 99% of the children affected had been
vaccinated against measles. (TL Gustafson, et al.,
"Measles outbreak in a fully immunized secondary school
population," NEJM, 26 March 1987)
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/316/13/771

The authors of the study cited above write:
"We conclude that outbreaks of measles can
occur in secondary schools, even when more
than 99 percent of the students have been
vaccinated .
 . ."
Notice the "even when" (instead of the more logical
"because") above.

A recent study has shown that measles-vaccinated
persons appear to be three times more likely to
develop Crohn's disease and two-and-a-half times
more likely to develop ulcerative colitis. Since the
measles vaccine was introduced in 1968, Crohn's
disease in children has increased rapidly, with a
300% increase in Scotland. (Thompson, N.P,
Montgomery, S.M.., Pounder, R.E., Wakefield, A.J.,
"Is Measles Vaccination a risk factor for inflammatory
bowel disease?" The Lancet 345 (1996):1071-1073)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7715338&dopt=Abstract

Further, rather than preventing measles, the
measles vaccine may simply be suppressing it, only
to have it manifest as other forms of disease. (Jamie
Murphy, What Every Parent Should Know About
Childhood Immunization, 1993, p. 114)
Associated with the measles vaccine are
encephalopathy, aseptic meningitis, cranial nerve
palsy, learning disabilities, hyperkinesis, and severe
mental retardation. . . . " (Gary Null Interview (April
7, 1995) with Jamie Murphy, author of What Every
Parent Should Know About Childhood Immunization)
A recent study found that women vaccinated with
the measles vaccine pass on far less immunity to
their offspring than women who are not vaccinated.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/503025.stm


Before the vaccine was introduced, it was extremely
rare for an infant to contract measles. Now more
than 25 percent of all measles cases are babies
under a year of age. (Daniel Q. Haney, "Wave of
Infant Measles Stems From '60's Vaccinations,"
Albuquerque Journal (November 23, 1992), p. B3)
See also Ohsaki M, et al., "Reduced passive measles
immunity in infants of mothers who have not been
exposed to measles outbreaks" Scand J Infect Dis
1999;31(1):17-9. Abstract at:

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Scandals/Sept_6_02/reduced_passive_measles_immunity.htm

Sandy Mintz writes:

"Compounding the problem is the fact that the
population most vulnerable to measles, infants, is
least protected. Vaccinating too early can cause
vaccine failure more often and/or later booster shots
to be ineffective. The Catch-22 is that in the past,
most mothers passed on naturally acquired measles
antibodies transplacentally to their offspring who
were protected until 6-9 months. With the advent of
vaccines, a higher percentage of mothers will be
seronegative (have no antibodies) and will not pass
those antibodies on to their children, at precisely the
time that the vaccines are not effective, and yet the
infant is most vulnerable. On the other hand, those
who would ordinarily be better off receiving maternal
antibodies might find themselves in the untenable
position of having those very antibodies interfere
with vaccine efficacy, with the end-result that neither
the vaccine nor the antibodies were protective."
(Wilkins, J and Wehrle, PF, "Additional evidence
against measles vaccine administration to infants
less than 12 months of age: altered immune
response following active/passive immunization," J

Pediatr 94:6 (June 1979):865-869)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/448525?dopt=Abstract

(Narod, S (letter) "Measles vaccination in Haiti," New
Engl J Med 314:9 (Feb 27 1986):581-582)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3945300?dopt=Abstract

See also
"Reasonable People Can Disagree: The rationale for
allowing philosophical exemptions to vaccinations"
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/dailynews/may2001/reaspeopdis.htm

Authors of a study published recently in the Journal
of Pediatrics conclude that: "infants whose
mothers are born since measles vaccine
licensure in 1963 are significantly more
susceptible to measles than are infants of older
mothers . . ." ("Increased susceptibility to measles
in infants in the United States," Journal of Pediatrics
1999 (Nov); 104 (5): e59)

In the above study, it was found that infants whose
mothers were born after 1963 (the majority of whom
had been vaccinated) had a measles incidence rate
of 33%, compared with an incidence rate of 12% for
infants of older mothers, all of whom had not been
vaccinated for measles.

This discrepancy makes sense, because vaccinated
mothers transfer fewer naturally produced measles
antibodies to their newborns, so their babies are
more susceptible to measles.

In the case of whooping cough, the majority of
doctor-reported vaccine-related deaths are due to
the whooping cough vaccine -- the "p" in DpT. In
fact, the number of pertussis vaccine-related deaths
dwarfs the number of deaths from pertussis itself.
It is not known exactly how many deaths have
occurred from the pertussis vaccine, because doctors
underreport vaccine adverse events. Normally I don't
trust the FDA to tie its own shoes, and certainly not
to give candy to babies (see
http://www.sweetpoison.com/), but if even the FDA
admits that doctors report only 10% of adverse
reactions, we can speculate that the chances of
dying from the pertussis vaccine are at the very least
100 times greater than the chances of dying from
pertussis itself.

If death isn't enough, another serious adverse effect
of vaccines is chronic disease. Vaccines, it turns out,
have a causal relation to the growing epidemic of
allergies, asthma, attention deficit disorders and
hyperactivity, and -- you guessed it -- autism.
Dr. F. Edward Yazbak writes:

"Autism, as an entity, was unknown before the early
1940s . . . A steep increase in its prevalence was
noted in the United States starting in the late 70s
and in the United Kingdom after 1988 following the
extensive use of the MMR vaccine in both countries.
"A new clinical picture also started to emerge around
the same period.

"While earlier, symptoms of autism were noticed
shortly after birth . . . lately many of the affected
children are healthy and developmentally normal in
the first 12 to 15 months of life.

"Sometime between 15 and 18 months of age, they
suddenly stop acquiring new skills and then start
regressing, losing speech and social dexterity. At the
same time, neurological, immune and gastrointestinal
symptoms appear: some children develop
seizures, some have recurrent infections and are
prescribed repeated courses of antibiotics and some
start with peculiar eating habits and severe diarrhea
. . .
"Most affected children today are not simply
"autistic", a psychiatric behavioral description. They
suffer from a multi-system medical syndrome, called
Regressive Autism. They do not require psychiatric
care and medication only; they need medical
treatment, dietary intervention and the close
attention of a multidisciplinary team of therapists. . .
.
"As far as many parents are concerned, the timing of
the behavioral, speech and cognitive changes
appeared to follow the first dose of MMR.
"Some parents have also reported that their children,
after improving on special diets, supplements and
behavioral therapy, regressed a second time around
the age of 5 years shortly after receiving their MMR
booster. Such double-hit situation (challengerechallenge)
has been accepted in courts and by a
committee of the Institute of Medicine . . . as proof
of causation."

http://www.mombu.com/medicine/cancer/tregressive-autism-and-mmr-vaccination-viruschemotherapy-autism-obesity-12722100-new.html

The vaccine "authorities," however, do not know
what causes autism but are "certain" that the
administration of the MMR vaccine is not responsible
for Regressive Autism and are "convinced" that any
temporal association between the two is "simply a
coincidence."

http://www.mombu.com/medicine/cancer/tregressive-autism-and-mmr-vaccination-viruschemotherapy-autism-obesity-12722100-new.html

Bernard Rimland, Founder of the Autism Society of
America and Founder/President of the Autism
Research Institute (ARI) in San Diego, writes that,
even though the MMR vaccine does not contain the
mercury derivative thimerosal suspected of being a
main cause of autism, thimerosal-containing
vaccines are still suspect.

"The fact that the number of cases of regressive
autism still continued to rise rapidly in the 90's, after
MMR vaccination rates had been consistently high for
several years, seems to support this theory."
Again, however, "The vaccine authorities have . . .
ruled out such a connection. . . ."

http://www.mombu.com/medicine/cancer/tregressive-autism-and-mmr-vaccination-viruschemotherapy-autism-obesity-12722100-new.html

Now, guess what the CDC -- our main vaccine
"authority" -- left out of its November 2003 study
published in Pediatrics, a study which looked at
thimerosal-containing vaccines? They left out the
fact that the relative risk for autism is 2.48 times
higher for children who receive 62.5 micrograms or
more of mercury from thimerosal-containing
vaccines by 3 months of age. See Kelly Patricia
O'Meara's article, "CDC Study Raises Level of
Suspicion"
www.safeminds.org/research/library/20031223.pdf

In other words, it left out the fact that if you give a
baby many shots at once, the mercury in those shots
can cause autism.
That seems like a pretty important fact for the
"authorities" to leave out of a report on thimerosal
containing vaccines.

Now guess who was specifically responsible for
dropping this information from the study? A man
named Thomas Verstraeten, who submitted the
study for publication and who at the time of
submission was an employee of GlaxoSmithKline, a
pharmaceutical company and vaccine manufacturer.
Now, this is a strange story to be telling, right? I
mean, one would think that the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention would want to control and
prevent disease. But clearly there are other forces at
work. We find this not-so-reassuring quote on the
CDC's web site:

"The weight of currently available scientific evidence
does not support the hypothesis that vaccines cause
autism. We recognize there is considerable public
interest in this issue, and therefore support
additional research regarding this hypothesis. CDC is
committed to maintaining the safest, most effective
vaccine supply in history."

(As of June 1, 2012, the above quote has been
changed to the following: "Monitoring health
problems after vaccination is essential to ensure the
United States continues to have the safest, most
effective vaccine supply in history.")
http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/mmr_autism.htm

As opposed to what other vaccine supply? You mean
the vaccine supply that didn't work and wasn't safe
before? But the new vaccines actually are going to
work and be safe?

* * *

UPDATE (February 23, 2014):
Dr. Brian Hooker, PhD, informs us that the data on
over 400,000 infants born between 1991 and 1997,
data analyzed by CDC epidemiologist Thomas
Verstraeten, MD, "proves unequivocally that in 2000,
CDC officials were informed internally of the very
high risk of autism, non-organic sleep disorder and
speech disorder associated with Thimerosal
exposure."

"CDC forced to release documents showing they
knew vaccine preservative causes autism"
http://therefusers.com/refusers-newsroom/cdcforced-to-release-documents-showing-they-knewvaccine-preservative-causes-autism/#.UworRoVebiM

Although the FDA gave vaccine manufactuerers a
two-year deadline to remove the mercury-based
preservative from vaccines after the neurotoxin was
banned in 1999, it still remains to this day in 60% of
flu vaccines.

"CDC forced to release documents showing they
knew vaccine preservative causes autism"
February 23, 2014
http://therefusers.com/refusers-newsroom/cdcforced-to-release-documents-showing-they-knewvaccine-preservative-causes-autism/#.UworRoVebiM

* * *

Institutional medicine doesn't lend itself to straight
talk, so if you go to medical institutions for medicine,
timorously approach the jabberwock and uffishly
shun or shake the vorpal sword, you are met with a
barrage of doublespeak and zerothink, which are the
children of the exclusive worship of Mammon. Greed
in, garbage out.

Fortunately, it turns out that our story doesn't
ultimately end with the CDC. Yes, the CDC and
Jenner and Pasteur and the pharmaceutical
companies all combine to form the Minotaur at the
center of the maze, and we have to pay a brief visit
to them.

But once the Minotaur is seen for what it is, once the
darksome veil falls and the coins cascade to the
floor, the way out of the maze is to go galumphing
back to our own simple lives. That's where our story
ends, in our own houses.

Once we've negotiated the heady maze of
information on vaccines and "killed the Minotaur," we
turn back to the simple life. And what is the simple
life? It is life as it should be. It is our bodies in our
own hands.

It's not the CDC's responsibility to prevent my
disease or yours. It never has been and it never will
be. My health is my responsibility, not the
responsibility of some far-off government agency
that doesn't know the first thing about me.
This doesn't mean I don't seek the help of experts.
In times of serious trouble like autism, the help of
experts is precisely what I seek. But the government
is not expert. Independent researchers are experts.
As families have begun to recognize that the CDC
does not have reliable sources of information at its
base, that it is an agency mired in conflict of interest
and creaking under the tulgey weight of Orwellian
baggage, they have begun to turn to alternative
information sources.

I am often asked for advice on vaccination. Because
I am not a health professional, but merely a guy who
has done a lot of research, I cannot legally give
medical advice. All I can do as a layperson is present
the evidence that I have found and say what I would
do in a similar situation.

So if you asked me whether or not I would vaccinate
my children for any reason, I would answer, "If I had
children, I would not vaccinate them under any
circumstance whatsoever. Disease exists.
Vaccination is not the answer."

But let's say your child has been vaccinated. And
let's say your child has had serious adverse effects
from the vaccine. Let's say further that your child
has been diagnosed with autism. What's your first
move?

I don't know the answer to that question. Curative
track records are emerging rapidly, springing up like
wildflowers after a forest fire. It's a new frontier, and
I don't pretend to be on the front lines. There are,
however, many pioneers at this conference who have
some solid things to say on this subject, and you
may have heard some of them. If you pinned me
down for my thoughts on the matter, though, I
would say the following:

"If my child became autistic following administration
of a vaccine, I would look seriously into the following
options:

A gluten-free, casein-free diet, specifically the
Feingold diet.
http://www.feingold.org/autism.php
http://www.magneticclay.com/testimonials.php

Homeopathy. Amy Lansky's book, Impossible Cure:
The Promise of Homeopathy, is inspiring.
http://www.renresearch.com/autism.html

Jaquelyn McCandless's new book, Children with
Starving Brains: A Medical Treatment Guide for
Autism Spectrum Disorder, is full of cutting-edge
information on autism treatment.
http://www.generationrescue.org/resources/recommended-reading-2/

Don't expect help from organizations like Autism
Speaks, which pretend to care about autistic children
but deny the vaccine-autism link. These
organizations, which concentrate on "behavioral
treatment" (that is, training children like dogs to be
more compliant to their parents' wishes), care
nothing about autism remedies. Where would their
salaries come from if children were cured?
Home birth obstetrician Mayer Eisenstein scolds
Autism Speaks on April 2, 2013:

"Shame on you, Geraldine Dawson . . . Chief Science
Officer for the autism advocacy group Autism
Speaks. Do not donate even one penny to Autism
Speaks. They want to perpetuate the myth that
vaccines have nothing to do with autism!" - Home
birth obstetrician Mayer Eisenstein, MD, JD, MPH
Autism Speaks Does Not Speak For Me!!!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVns2ytdZDE

For those interested in preventing autism, that too is
within reach. Fortunately, although vaccines are
"mandated," no vaccine is mandatory. You and your
children can always avoid receiving any vaccine,
even when you are traveling to another country, by
claiming any of three exemptions: religious, medical,
or philosophical. Some states do not allow one or
more of these, but all states allow some exemption.
State and federal governments give their citizens an
out, not because citizens' health is at issue, or
because governments want their citizens to have
freedom of choice, or because governments in any
way care about you and yours, but because
governments simply don't want to be sued for
vaccine adverse events.

What is the answer to 99 out of 100 questions?
Money.

The much-touted success of vaccination is a story. It
is an epic of man's triumph over nature, a narrative
that chronologues the victories of grand-scale
vaccination programs, a step-by-step account of the
rise and fall of dread diseases like polio, whooping
cough, diphtheria, smallpox, and measles. The story
of vaccination is Biblical in its grandeur. Moses-like,
its heroes part the Red Sea of disease, caducei held
high, bright sterilized needles shining in the light of a
raiseful sun. In the history of medicine, there is
simply nothing like it.

Vaccination is the greatest medical story ever told.
And it is, without any doubt whatsoever, a fabulous
fiction, a story born of a few individuals' desire for
both fame and financial gain. The story of
vaccination is the greatest medical story ever sold to
a penny-unwise, super-credulous public.

But here's the good news. If a poet, a dreamer, can
enter the maze of information and disinformation on
vaccination and grab the dogma by the tail, anybody
can.

The information is out there. Honest researchers
writing for honest purposes have left us a thin but
strong Ariadne's thread both into and out of the
maze. All we have to do is hold the torches of our
intellects before us, find the thread, and put one foot
in front of the other. And any of us can sail back
from the island of institutional medicine and land
safely on the mainland of common sense.
And the first thing we do on the mainland is buy
Jamie Murphy's book, What Every Parent Should
Know about Childhood Immunization. This is a lucid,
humble, questioning book that in my opinion makes
Murphy the Job of the scientific age, but a Job who
has alchemically transmuted his anger into gold.
Next we get our hands on Tim O'Shea's The Sanctity
of Human Blood: Vaccination Is Not Immunization --
truly a wild ride in institutional medicine's Show Me
The Money Rodeo. The book is now in its eighth
edition.

And no mainland library is complete without Neil Z.
Miller's excellent books. And the list goes on. . . .
One last dip into the toxic world of vaccines.
There are many crimes against newborns routinely
committed in the modern-day hospital (and I use the
word "crime" in its full meaning). But one of the
main institutional assaults is by needle. In U.S.
hospitals, newborns are required to receive the hep
B vaccination before discharge. This vaccine can
cause hepatitis B and may result in serious
debilitating side effects and even death.

Now, aside from the fact that no vaccine has ever
been shown to work, there is another problem with
mandatory infant hep B vaccination. Hepatitis B is a
blood-borne disease found largely in populations of
IV drug users and the sexually adventurous. By
these criteria, the hep B vaccine has no business in
the bloodstreams of newborn babies.
How pharmaceutical companies have been able to
keep key epidemiological vaccination data out of
medical school textbooks for four decades I don't
know. But they did it.

Now, neither you nor I can get to the pharmaceutical
companies. They're protected. They have protected
themselves with the National Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program.

This program turns the U.S. government into a
shield between the pharmaceutical companies and
the people they injure. The arrows of parents' grief
fly like rain toward their targets, but they can never
reach them. Not because space is infinitely divisible,
but because pharmaceutical companies are
monstrously powerful -- powerful enough to convince
a nation that individuals who are vaccine damaged,
and whose children are vaccine damaged, should pay
first in grief and second in tax dollars.

* * *

SOURCES

VACCINE BOOKS
(in order of importance)
Jamie Murphy, What Every Parent Should Know
about Childhood Immunization
Tim O'Shea, The Sanctity of Human Blood:
Vaccination Is Not Immunization
Neil Z. Miller, Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and
Effective?

Robert Mendelsohn, How to Raise A Healthy Child in
Spite of Your Doctor

Walene James, Immunization: The Reality Behind
the Myth

Ed Koren, Childhood Vaccination: Questions All
Parents Should Ask

Randall Neustaedter, The Vaccine Guide: Risks and
Benefits for Children and Adults

Raymond Obomsawin, Universal Immunization:
Medical Miracle or Masterful Mirage?

Ethel Douglas Hume, Pasteur Exposed: The False
Foundations of Modern Medicine

Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fisher, A Shot in
the Dark: Why the P in DPT Vaccination May Be
Hazardous to Your Child's Health

Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization:
Dangers, Delusions and Alternatives

Harris L. Coulter, Vaccination, Social Violence and
Criminality: The Medical Assault on the American
Brain

Viera Scheibner, Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox
Research Shows that Vaccines Represent a Medical
Assault on the Immune System

Neil Z. Miller, Vaccines, Autism, and Childhood
Disorders

Neil Z. Miller, Immunizations: The People Speak!
Catherine J.M. Diodati, Immunization: History,
Ethics, Law and Health

Epidemics: Opposing Viewpoints (Opposing
Viewpoints Series, Unnumbered) by William Dudley,
Ed., Mary E. Williams, Ed., Greenhaven Press
(January 1999)

ANIMAL VACCINES
http://www.healthy.net/library/articles/ivn/animals.h
tm
http://www.canine-health-concern.org.uk/
http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/petvacc.htm
http://essentials4all.org/NATURAL_IMMUNITY.html
http://www.ahvma.org/

ANTHRAX VACCINE
http://www.gulfwarvets.com/anthrax.htm
http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/2007_07_01_ar
chive.html

ANTIBODIES AND VACCINES
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/antibody.html
http://vaclib.org/intro/qanda3.htm
http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2012-07-
04/vaccine-theory-proven-wrong-study-by-nih/

ARMY VACCINES
http://www.milvacs.org
http://www.gulfwarvets.com/winds.htm
http://www.all-natural.com/gwi-1.html

ASTHMA AND VACCINES
ttp://www.whale.to/vaccines/asthma.html
http://www.whale.to/v/asthma3.html

AUTISM AND VACCINES
http://www.generationrescue.org/
http://www.naturalnews.com/035513_Andrew_Wakefield_vaccines_autism.html
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/24/new-evidence-refutes-fraud-findings-in-drwakefield-case.aspx
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/autismVaccines/Autism-and-Vaccines/
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/mercury/Autismand-Mercury/

CHILD ABUSE (shaken baby syndrome) AND
VACCINES
http://www.falseallegation.org
http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/contents.html

CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND VACCINES
http://wellbeingjournal.com/profits-not-sciencemotivate-vaccine-mandates/
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/12/06/conflict-of-interest-rampant-in-child-drugprescriptions.aspx
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/09/15/vaccines-part-four.aspx
http://www.cspinet.org/new/200303101.html

DIABETES AND VACCINES
ttp://www.naturalnews.com/023902.html
http://www.whale.to/v/coulter.html
http://www.nvic.org/vaccines-anddiseases/Diabetes/juvenilediabetes.aspx

DIPHTHERIA (DPT) VACCINE
http://www.whale.to/a/diphtheria5.html
http://www.whale.to/v/asthma3.html

DPT VACCINE LINKED TO PARALYTIC POLIO
http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/online/vaccine/polio
.html

EXEMPTIONS / WAIVERS FOR VACCINES
http://www.vaclib.org/exemption.htm
http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/state-vaccinerequirements.aspx
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/exemptions.htm
http://www.gval.com/exempt.htm

FLU VACCINE
http://www.naturalnews.com/flu_vaccine.html
http://www.healthy.net/library/articles/ivn/flu.htm
http://www.naturalnews.com/037323_flu_vaccines_j
unk_science_toxicity.html

FORCED VACCINATION
http://www.infowars.com/forced-vaccinationsquarantine-camps-health-care-interrogations-andmandatory-decontaminations/

HEPATITIS B (HEP B) VACCINE
http://www.naturalnews.com/hepatitis_B.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/032579_hepatitis_B_vaccines.html
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/June2001/HepBVaxReactOutnumbCases.htm

HOMEOPATHY AND VACCINES
http://www.naturalnews.com/031865_homeopathy_vaccines.html
http://www.tinussmits.com/english/
http://www.impossiblecure.com

IMMUNE SYSTEM AND VACCINES (autoimmune
disorders)
http://www.healthy.net/library/articles/neustaedter/immune.htm

PARENTS OF UNVACCINATED CHILDREN (list and
contact information)
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/unvaccinated/Parents-of-Unvaccinated-Children/

OLIO VACCINE
http://thinktwice.com/s_polio.htm
http://www.infowars.com/bill-gates-and-47500-cases-of-paralysis/
www.sparks-of-light.org/Polio%201%20LR.pdf

RUBELLA VACCINE
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/rubella.html
http://thinktwice.com/s_rubell.htm

SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) AND
VACCINES
http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/coulter/sids.html
http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/coulter/vaccdeb.html
http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/newsl/kalo.html
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/sids.html

TETANUS VACCINE
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=1565228&dopt=Abstract
http://www.whale.to/v/asthma3.html

TUBERCULOSIS VACCINE
http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20030723.htm
http://www.whale.to/m/point1.html

NVACCINATED CHILDREN
http://www.naturalnews.com/036220_vaccinated_ch
ildren_disease_allergies.html
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/unvaccinated/Parents-of-Unvaccinated-Children/
http://www.healthy.net/library/articles/moskowitz/unvaccinated.htm

VACCINE ARTICLES
http://www.curezone.com/art/1.asp?C0=735
http://www.healingwell.com/library/health/thompson2.asp
http://www.healthy.net/clinic/familyhealthcenter/children/vaccination/articles.asp
http://www.wellbeingjournal.com/profitsvaccines.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2003/jul/12/vaccine_procedure.htm

VACCINE CHALLENGE (Viera Scheibner's)
http://vaccinationnews.com/DailyNews/October2001/VaccinationChallenge.htm

VACCINE CRITICS
http://www.whale.to/m/critics.html

VACCINE HOAX
http://www.whale.to/a/hoax.html

ACCINE INEFFICACY
http://www.vaclib.org/sites/debate/index.html
http://www.thinktwice.com/
http://www.whale.to/vaccines.html
http://www.nvic.org/
http://vaccineinfo.net/
http://www.foundationforhealthchoice.com/
http://www.avn.org.au/
http://www.vaclib.org/
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/chapters/
http://www.whale.to/v/obomsawin.html
http://www.know-vaccines.org/
http://www.vaccineeducation.org/
http://www.informedparent.co.uk/
http://www.vaccinationnews.com/
http://www.healthsentinel.com/

VACCINE INGREDIENTS
http://www.vaclib.org/basic/vacingredient.htm

VACCINE LINKS
http://www.vaclib.org/links/vaxlinks.htm
http://wolfcreekranch1.tripod.com/human_vaccines.html

VACCINE PACKAGE INSERTS (pdf files)
http://www.vaclib.org/chapter/inserts.htm

VACCINE SITES (government)
http://www.fda.gov/cber/vaers/vaers.htm

ACCINE QUOTES
http://www.whale.to/a/hoax.html

VACCINE BOOK SITES (general)
http://thinkchoice.com/
http://www.korenpublications.com/kp/category/books-vaccination
http://www.noamalgam.com/vaccinations.html

VACCINE BOOK SITES (vaccine-autism connection)
http://www.generationrescue.org/resources/recommended-reading-2/
http://astore.amazon.com/autisreseains-20

VACCINE BOOK REVIEWS
http://products.mercola.com/callous-disregard/

VACCINATION SCIENCE
http://www.vaclib.org/sites/debate/about.html
http://www.rifeenergymedicine.com/VACCINES.html

VACCINE VIDEOTAPES
http://www.vaclib.org/basic/products.htm

VACCINOSIS AND HOMEOPATHY
http://www.naturalnews.com/031865_homeopathy_
vaccines.html
ttp://www.tinussmits.com/english/
http://www.impossiblecure.com

WAIVERS / EXEMPTIONS FOR VACCINES
http://www.vaclib.org/exemption.htm
http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/state-vaccinerequirements.aspx
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/exemptions.htm
http://www.gval.com/exempt.htm