My Assumptions About Va<<ines

  

I was raised with western medicine and when I traveled to a 3rd world country and began having my own children, these were my assumptions about va<<ines:

I thought va<<ines were like pharmaceuticals and were under the same kind of safety regulations while they are actually classified as a “public health measure” and not as a pharmaceutical drug.

I assumed that short and long term safety studies were done before releasing any vaccine onto the market.

I assumed regulatory agencies were third party, eliminating any potential for conflict of interest.

I thought it was the pediatrician’s job, not the parent’s job, to investigate what health conditions or family medical history might be a contraindication for a child to receive a particular va<<ine. I assumed this was the sort of thing a physician would check with the parent (& the child’s medical file) about before administering.

I thought the side effects and adverse reaction warnings for va<<ines included minor symptoms like low fever, itchy/red entry site, and muscle soreness, and did not include things like death, SIDS, life-threatening conditions, hospitalization, encephalitis, seizures, permanent health conditions, autoimmune diseases, etc. I thought that regulatory agencies wouldn’t release a va<<ine to the market and recommend them if such risks existed.

I assumed the hippocratic oath not only applied to doctors but also to pharmaceutical regulators and va<<ine regulators.

I assumed physicians were educated about the va<<ines they recommend and administer, as opposed to just administering what they’re told to (and when) according to the CDC schedule..

I assumed that the elimination of disease epidemics was due to introduction of va<<inations rather than predominately from improved sanitation and hygiene, clean water, etc.

I assumed that the elimination of disease epidemics meant certain diseases were no longer being contracted, not that they had been renamed, like polio, for instance, which now goes under the names: Guillain-Barre syndrome, Reye’s syndrome, Bell’s Palsy, Transverse Myelitis, Aseptic Meningitis, Acute Flaccid Paralysis, Spinal Apoplexy, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Cholera, Multiple Sclerosis, and Inhibitory Palsy.

I thought pediatricians recommended va<<ines because they knew them to be beneficial and not also because they receive financial incentives for high va<<ination rates among patients (i.e. conflict of interest).

I assumed that if any industry had unsafe products on the market, they would be sued and would no longer be able to keep the product on the market. (The National Childhood Va<<ine Injury Act of 1986 shields the vaccine industry from liability.)

I assumed our country would not recommend a va<<ine that is known (and labeled) as having “side effects that were unavoidable” – side effects that include things like death, encephalitis, autoimmune disease, etc.

I assumed that if evidence regarding fraudulent and illegal activity – particularly as it applies to product safety (e.g. va<<ines) – is made public, it would be subpoenaed and presented to a judge.

I assumed that if a va<<ine was found to be dangerous it would be remade, not renamed and sold to another country.

In order to prove efficacy, I assumed safety studies would be conducted rather than testing it on human "guinea pigs."

The United States is thought to be a leader among other countries in medical technology and advancements, so naturally I assumed that medical schools made it a priority to be as current as absolutely possible in order to stay ahead of other countries – NOT that there is an estimated 17 years of lag time before PubMed studies make their way into medical school curriculum. And I assumed va<<ine education was among the topics given a substantial amount of time and detail for med students.

I assumed the physicians who recommend va<<ines and the nurses who administer them are well-versed in all potential adverse reactions so that they are able to identify symptoms that are correlated with va<<ines so that they could report the incidences to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

I assumed any serious, potentially life-threatening side effects would be extremely rare, when in fact over 4 billion dollars in compensation has been paid out since 1990, and between 2006 and 2009 alone, Harvard reported 35,570 adverse reactions in 376,452 recipients (that is nearly a 10% adverse reaction rate). If 1 in 10 isn’t alarming enough, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services themselves admit that “fewer than 1% of adverse events are reported” (to VAERS) and FDA Commissioner, David A. Kessler, stated in a U.S. Congressional Report that it is estimated that VAERS data represents only a fraction of the number of serious adverse reactions actually occur. If 1 in 10 adverse reactions were serious enough to win compensation, and that only represents 1% of va<<ine reactions by the HHS’ own admission, then the risk is obscenely greater than I could have ever imagined and its availability/recommendation to the public is no less than a horrific crime.

I assumed that if medical professionals begin to suspect (based on the evidence they’re seeing with their patients) that something isn’t adding up, they can bring their concerns forward and even be praised for seeking thorough testing for the safety of our children (and adults) without their practices and their very lives being threatened.

I assumed everybody had their kids (& themselves) va<<inated, not realizing the vast number of medical professionals, and people in the know, who don't receive certain shots or allow their children to receive va<<ines.

***Even if a handful of these assumptions are correct and just 1 or 2 are incorrect, is it worth investigating further?