Vaccination and the Delinquency Disease

Vaccination issues spotlight a vicious cycle of assessing the culprits of disease. You think you’ve got the disease identified and then it morphs and shifts into a more sophisticated, less definable viral scourge. But that spotlight has been shining scrutiny on these issues lately. It’s a disruption surreal at times, suggesting delinquency in parenting, in the institution of medicine and beyond.

The deeper one digs into the issues more questions than answers are discovered. For one, what diseases are most endangering? There are measles, mumps and rubella. How prevalent are they? We hear from media that there’s been a rise in the incidence of childhood disease because of those who’re unvaccinated. We must then ask if that means vaccinated children are catching these illnesses or only those unvaccinated. Reports indicate both. But to solidify their stance on the imperative need for vaccination, sources use CDC statistics. This evokes a sense of the most officious and responsible data input. But if you have the energy to read the CDC’s own data on their website, you’ll note the efficacy of flu vaccines is 0%. Also, the CDC has for years reported deaths caused by flu or other diseases based not on actual deaths but on indirect modeling methods used to estimate. They base their conclusions on computer-generated “cases” that do not actually exist and use inaccurate data. In the final analysis, ”estimations” provide the justification for mandatory vaccination. It is only through a process of exemption we can risk appearing delinquent as parents. And that is, on so many levels, what it amounts to culturally.

The one issue disabling most parents: the social and moral implications of not vaccinating your children. Foundationally, you appear unintelligent, ignorant and/or downright criminal if you persist in your concern with the risks of vaccination. The strong arm of estimations based not on actualities combines with the unnerving judiciousness of the white coat who vows to first do no harm. Such a sheer overwhelm of odds against your own gut feel is daunting to the strongest individual. But the responsibility still rests with the parent. And this fact is what all pharmas and related institutions can manipulate to their advantage either coming or going. It seems hopeless, establishing what disease to fear the most, rubella or delinquency.

Where does a parent establish the guidelines for choices such as these? Who do we trust? When all the institutions upheld as trustworthy, as reliable turn out to be cutting corners on efficiency, on accuracy and on integrity there’s always still the one person to behold in the mirror. We seem to be alone.

But intelligent people in the trenches of medical studies and practice are addressing vaccination risks and the alliance between pharma and medicine. They draw distinct lines between the outcomes of studies put forth as proof of vaccination efficacy and the actual viability of these studies. But we have little way of knowing this with the popular media culture bowing out of solid reporting.

On June 2, 2008, Time did a big front-page splash on the latest vaccine upheaval. On the cover the words “The Truth About Vaccines” hail the grimacing gaze of innocent infancy. A baby dares you to not be convinced. Who could be a better advertiser? Highly dramatized narration of the sophisticated mechanisms and flexible transportation systems of virulent microbes draws the reader in with some flair. Time goes on to tell us that vaccines are “absolutely” necessary based on CDC “statistics.” Turn a few pages and you’ll see who pays for significant chunks of Time space. Merck, for one. You can hear from Pfizer too. They’d like to help you with ED since pharma’s got the skinny on impotence and works feverishly to castrate your right to choose while producing massive quantities of Viagra to compensate. Out of 22 pages of advertisement, 12.25 pages were dedicated to pharma.

Nothing to trust there.

October 28, 2006 the British Medical Journal reports Tom Jefferson, M.D., Ph.D. studied the studies done on influenza viruses and the resulting implications on vaccination. You can read it here:  http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7574/912. Be prepared to use your muscles. This article requires attention but is worthwhile. What’s the sum of it? The studies are fatally flawed. One point made beautifully about the flu vaccine is that the variations (including A and B) are so many that one vaccination cannot begin to cover influenza. The other is that there are flu-like illnesses lumped into the studies but not ever verified as the flu.

What then?

It seems like it’s time to ask what we’re experiencing on the ground here. How many mumps cases have you encountered in your lifetime? Next question: How many people do you know who have an autistic relative? Alzheimer’s? Funny, we have a new epidemic or two. When did they begin? Were they around the same time childhood diseases were declining, a decline that cannot be proven as having begun with mandatory vaccination?

The number one killer of a nation’s health physically, financially and mentally is delinquency, the neglect of diligence in research and true advancement unclouded by greedy distortions. Those distortions can end with the parents who refuse to fall prey to fear. Mumps come. Mumps go. Autism is forever. Alzheimer’s progressively worsens. Is it possible we’re deciding for an incurable disease when we take our vaccinations like good girls and boys hiding away from our own intelligence? Which incurable disease would it be this time?

What risk are we willing to take? That’s the one question to ask. And can we find a way to take back our choice? It’s past time.

jruthkelly