Not Just a Bad Batch, But a Bad Idea

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

 

 
 

On March 25,
GlaxoSmithKline’s Rotarix vaccine – used for a diarrhea-causing virus
called rotavirus – was recalled because it was found to be contaminated
with a supposedly "harmless" pig virus. The virus, called
porcine circovirus type 1, is not known to cause disease in humans
or animals – unlike porcine circovirus type 2, which causes a wasting
syndrome marked by diarrhea in young piglets. As a precaution, the
FDA ordered the vaccine destroyed. The company was quick to point
out that children are exposed to the virus anyway from eating pork.

"PCV-1
does not multiply in humans and is not known to cause illness in
humans. It is found in everyday meat products and is frequently
eaten with no resulting disease or illness," said the company.

However, there
is a huge difference between eating something and having it injected
directly into your body. By itself, the high acidity of the stomach
destroys most viruses – unless you foolishly disable this defense
mechanism by taking acid-blocking drugs. And since when do two-month
old infants eat pork chops?

This was a
tough break for GSK because only this past November, they had to
recall some of the swine flu vaccine they sent to Canada because
of "serious allergic reactions." The 170,000 dose batch
in question had mostly been already administered – the majority of
it.

Rotavirus is
a diarrheal illness affecting babies and children that is rampant
in the Third World – particularly Africa. Even before the vaccine
became available, there were only several dozen reported deaths
from rotavirus each year in the USA. Compare that to 36,000 purported
deaths in the USA from seasonal flu every year.

"Every
child in the world will have at least one rotavirus infection before
age five," according to the CDC and WHO. Therefore, it seems
that recovery is quite spontaneous in most children. So, is this
vaccine really necessary in countries like the USA and Canada? In
the developed world, which has modern sanitation, ample nutrition,
etc., how grave is the risk from rotavirus? It’s a fair question
because injecting pig material into a child is hardly risk-free.

It goes to
show how much faith and trust is involved in taking a vaccine – any
vaccine. About one million American children received the tainted
rotavirus vaccine. Worldwide, 30 million children received it. They’re
saying it was just a harmless pig virus. Of course. No worries.
But then again, the air was fit to breathe at Ground Zero after
9-11, according to authorities.

But when was
the last time you reviewed the list of government-mandated vaccines
for children? If you are anywhere close to my age (60) you may be
shocked at how long the list has become. Here it is:

Hepatitis-B
vaccine: 3 doses
Hib vaccine: 4 doses
Polio vaccine: 4 doses
DPT (3 vaccines) 6 doses
Pneumococcal vaccine: 4 doses
Rotavirus vaccine: 3 doses
Hepatitis A vaccine: 2 doses
Influenza vaccine: 2 doses, and then annually for life
MMR (3 vaccines): 2 doses
Varicella vaccine: 2 doses
Meningococcal vaccine: 1 dose, age 11
HPV vaccine (girls only): 3 doses, starting age 11

Makes your
head spin, doesn’t it? I wonder if they have a vaccine for that.

You’ve probably
heard the clamor about the mercury-laced preservative thimerosal,
which is still being used in flu vaccine. I won’t go into it here,
but the issue of vaccine safety goes far beyond thimerosal. In fact,
I can’t possibly discuss all the safety issues involved with vaccines –
it would take a book. However, I want to point out that no double-blind,
controlled studies of vaccines are ever done. They refuse to do
it, claiming it would be "unethical."

Dr. Amy Tuteur,
a Harvard-trained OB/GYN, has the nerve to compare hypothetical
controlled studies of vaccines with hypothetical controlled studies
of car seats using real babies. But, that’s ridiculous! The risks
to the unrestrained child are obvious, self-evident, and dictated
by the laws of physics, which are immutable. The effectiveness of
the car seat can be determined using dummies, as in crash tests
for cars. The only thing you need the baby for is to determine whether
he or she can unfasten the restraints, which can be tested in a
non-moving vehicle.

With a new
vaccine, there are a lot of unknowns. You do not know which group
is at greater risk – the vaccinated or the unvaccinated – and to say
otherwise is to presume the outcome that you’re testing for. And
the risk to the unvaccinated child is simply the risk of being alive,
which every child faces. Being exposed to microbes is a "usual"
risk in life – it is part and parcel of life. In contrast, the "unusual"
risk is being borne entirely by those children getting the new vaccine.
To say that denying any child the rotovirus vaccine would be "unethical"
is rank hubris. Some countries don’t vaccinate for rotovirus as
it is. And what belies their sanctimonious bluster is that they
refuse to do any kind of comparative testing of vaccines. Forget
the double-blindedness. It’s not as though there is no value in
doing an open comparison.

For instance,
only 20 percent of Americans chose to take the swine flu vaccine,
which means that it would have been very easy to do a large comparative
study of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. It would not have involved
denying anyone a swine flu shot who wanted one. Of course, they
would have had to "control" for everything else as diligently
as possible, but that would be as feasible with vaccines as it with
drugs and supplements. The same rules would apply. And to those
who say that without placebo controls, it’s meaningless, I say poppycock.
If there is a placebo effect at all, it accrues to those getting
the vaccine. There’s no placebo effect from doing nothing. So, their
dog in the fight would, if anything, be bolstered from it, not hampered.
And what if, despite that advantage to the vaccinated, the unvaccinated
fared as well or better? I sense that’s what they’re really afraid
of. They claim that over 10,000 Americans died from the swine flu,
but they never revealed what percentage of them were vaccinated.
Don’t you think that is an important piece of data we could all
use? Talk about withholding evidence. Vaccination is seeming more
and more like another example of "crony science" like
Evolution and Global Warming.

Now that national
health care is upon us, I fear that it will be harder than ever
to get children exempted from scheduled vaccinations. And I am sure
that no amount of vaccine failures and fiascos, including the recent
swine flu fiasco, in which doctors were ordered to diagnose swine
flu automatically to prop up the numbers, will alter the course
towards more and more vaccines.

I had only
one child, a son, who is now a robust, healthy 36-year-old man,
and his mother and I never subjected him to any vaccinations –
NADA! – and he never developed any diseases for which others
are vaccinated. There were absolutely no bad repercussions from
that decision, and I would do it again just that way if given the
chance. I realize that readers of this forum probably differ widely
in their opinions about vaccinations. But everyone here (unless
you are a spy) should be able to agree that the government has no
right – under any circumstances – to inject anything into
anyone’s body, or their children’s bodies, against their will.

Ralph
Cinque [send him mail]
has worked as a chiropractor, nutritionist, and health spa operator.
He offers a free
weekly health newsletter
.

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare
  • LRC Blog

  • LRC Podcasts