Impfungen Anhang 5
'Post-vaccination syndrome' has for several years now been an increasingly common diagnosis in my daily practice
The PVS can be divided into an acute and a chronic syndrome. The following are the main symptoms of the acute syndrome:
encephalitis and/or meningitis,
frequent and inconsolable crying,
limbs swollen around the point of inoculation,
penetrating and heart-rending shrieking (cri encéphalique)
The chronic symptoms seen are as follows:
Behavioral problems such as fidgeting, aggressiveness, irritation, moodiness, emotional imbalance, confusion, loss of will-power, mental torpidity.
Colds, amber or green phlegm,
Disturbed sleep with periods of waking and crying,
Inflammation of the middle ear,
Lack of concentration,
Lack of coordination,
Lack of vigor,
Loss of eye contact,
Loss of memory,
Rigidity of the back,
[Peter Klein, MD; Hansueli Albonico, MD, Roland Koller, MD, and Daniel Pewsner, MD]
This pamphlet was written by an ad hoc physicians' group. It is the result of a thorough study of the scientific literature, discussions with experts and experience in
everyday medical practice. A complete list of the scientific literature is available from the publisher: Working Group for Differentiated MMR Vaccination, Post Office Box, 3000 Bern 9, Switzerland
Editor's note: The article which follows was written by a group of Swiss physicians as a pamphlet for parents contemplating the pros and cons of the MMR immunization
in particular. Realizing that both the directed audience and prevailing conditions here in the U.S. are somewhat different, the article raises issues which are not often addressed on this continent.
In association with the World Health Organization, a mass immunization program against the childhood diseases measles, mumps and rubella has been underway in Switzerland since 1987. All infants and school children are to complete their immunizations within the next years. The official policy is that every child should be
immunized unless there are strong reasons against it. There is no legal obligation to participate.
We might assume that all important questions regarding the short- and long-term effects of the three vaccines have been answered. However, this is not the case.
The information presently available provides no convincing justification for the routine immunization of children against "MMR."
Measles, mumps and rubella are three quite different childhood diseases. Each of them has its own significance for people, its own course and different possibilities for complications. The same is true for each of the three vaccines. The so-called "MMR Vaccination" is in reality a combination of three quite different vaccines.
Thus, the immunization question that faces parents today is, in reality, threefold:
• Should my child be vaccinated against rubella? If so, when?
• Should my child be vaccinated against mumps? If so, when?
• Should my child be vaccinated against measles? If so, when?
The purpose of this pamphlet is to give parents a better understanding of the immunization process, the risks of the three childhood diseases and the respective vaccines, and the unresolved problems in the MMR immunization program. We wish to encourage parents to become responsible partners in the decision.
We assume the reader has knowledge of the official information about the immunization program.
The MMR immunization program is officially promoted with the following arguments:
• The viruses that cause measles, mumps and rubella, and with them the diseases themselves, can be eradicated by the year 2000.
• It suffices to inoculate all babies and school children once. The protection lasts a lifetime.
• The three childhood diseases, measles, mumps and rubella, are of no value to good health. However, each of the three illnesses can lead to complications that
the inoculation can prevent. The childhood diseases are an unreasonable burden to daily life.
• The vaccines are harmless, and serious complications are extremely rare. There is no need to fear long-term negative consequences for public health. The MMR vaccination is voluntary. However, parents who do not have their children inoculated are portrayed as irresponsible and antisocial.
Note: Since the beginning of the immunization program, the German Department of Heath has already had to revise its views on the following points:
• The eradication of the cause of the illness cannot be achieved with the MMR program. At most, it is only possible to inhibit the occurrence of the known forms
of the three childhood illnesses.
• The length of the protection from the contagion is not lifelong, but unknown.
• There are no reliable complication rates for measles, mumps and rubella in Switzerland. In particular, the rate of measles encephalitis (brain fever) is lower than
that previously given.
The Difference Between Natural Infection and Vaccination
It is true that vaccination can produce an immune reaction in an organism without the presence of a true illness and that this will offer protection from infection by the natural pathogen (cause of the disease). But the effect of the vaccine differs in important points from that of the natural infection.
Taking measles as an example, coughing people transmit the virus in droplets to the mucous membranes in the air passages of healthy people. The typical measles symptoms such as high fevers and skin rash are an expression of an intense struggle between the organism and the viruses. The overcoming of the natural illness through the child's own powers of resistance helps his or her immune system to mature and increases resistance against other childhood and adult diseases.
In contrast, the vaccination is a planned infection - living viruses are injected under the skin. These viruses are derived from the natural measles virus and are modified and weakened (attenuated) in the laboratory through a sequence of dozens of animal and human cell cultures and additional substances. The injection bypasses the normal resistance barriers such as the mucous membranes and lymph nodes. The injected virus cannot stimulate the immune system to the same extent as the natural virus does.
It is a fact that the antibody concentration in the blood after vaccination is less than after a natural disease. Also, 5 - 10% of those inoculated do not react at all, or react insufficiently. Experiments with vaccines given through the nasal mucous membranes have been unsuccessful so far.
The goal of the MMR program is to replace all natural measles, mumps and rubella viruses with those developed in the laboratory. Scientists point out that the risks of manipulating living viruses are difficult to estimate. In addition, continuous tests of the quality of the vaccine using countless animal and human experiments are necessary.
How Dangerous are Measles, Mumps and Rubella?
The classic childhood diseases have been around for centuries. For generations, people have accepted them as being something normal. Parents, teachers and observant doctors have always noticed that through childhood illnesses, children can take important developmental steps, and that after overcoming an illness they are often healthier than before. Psychological disorders, such as bedwetting or stuttering, often stop suddenly after a childhood illness. Psychologists point to the significance of these "illness breaks" for the harmonious development of the soul- not only for the child, but also for the entire family. On the other hand, though, the childhood illnesses bring with them the possibility of complications.
Measles is a common childhood illness with a high fever. It causes major changes, comparable to "molting," to take place in nearly all organs of the body. The organism thus has the opportunity to get rid of wastes and renew itself. This perhaps explains the observed fact that genetically-related diseases such as eczema, asthma, and respiratory illnesses in particular, but also certain kidney diseases (nephritic syndrome), sometimes improve or heal after a case of measles.
However, complications can arise through this far-reaching illness. If the patient does not fully overcome the disease, it can extend to the ears, to the lungs, or to the brain, thus causing a middle ear infection, pneumonia, or the feared encephalitis (brain fever) which can cause lasting damage or death.
Mumps is a harmless childhood illness with fever and a painful swelling of the parotid glands. Neuritis could occur, but rarely results in a loss of hearing. Other complications, such as meningitis, can pose a threat when the illness occurs after puberty. Sterility after a mumps infection of the testes cannot be proven scientifically.
The WHO's recommendation for Europe does not include inoculation against mumps.
Rubella is a harmless childhood disease with fever, swelling of the lymph nodes and a rash. It is dangerous only when a woman becomes ill with it during pregnancy.
Then the embryo can be severely damaged (rubella, embryopathy).
The best protection against rubella illness during pregnancy is having had rubella as a child.
Until recently, only girls who did not have any antibodies at puberty were inoculated. Rubella antibodies can be detected through a blood test.
The incidence of complications from childhood illnesses depend; primarily upon the age and health status of the child, and upon the nature of the treatment. It can be observed that medication that suppresses the symptoms, for example, a medication that strongly reduces fever, inhibits the body's resistance. With measles, it also appears important that the rash completely break out. In earlier times, the danger of an "inward turn" of the measles rash (i.e., failure to fully break out) was well known. Modern observations confirm that children who have the measles without a real rash more often become ill with chronic pains and cancer in later life. Finally, the patient needs sufficient rest and protection from over stimulation.
Today, the way to treat childhood illness has been largely forgotten. An intensive combating of the symptoms has replaced the supporting of the child's natural powers of resistance.
What about Measles Encephalitis?
When considering medical procedures, such as inoculations, the main thing is always to carefully weigh the possible advantage against possible damage. However, in Switzerland there is no mandatory reporting of complications of childhood illnesses, and mandatory reporting of inoculation complications has only recently been introduced. Thus, we can only work with estimates. We can use the example of measles encephalitis to show that the uncertainty of these estimates is great.
Encephalitis can occur after measles or after a measles vaccination. In the scientific literature, the estimates of the rate of measles encephalitis after the illness vary between 1 in 1000 to 1 in 11,600 cases. The occurrence of encephalitis after inoculation is estimated to be from 1 in 17,500 to 1 in 1,000,000 cases. For Switzerland, the example was given of approximately 70 cases of measles encephalitis (from the illness) per year. With approximately 50% of the children inoculated against measles, there have been only rare cases of encephalitis in the past years.
Such different results exist because encephalitis is not a clearly defined complication. Thus some researchers count the passing confusion that commonly occurs in normal cases of measles as encephalitis.
Medical Concerns about the MMR Eradication Program
All of the symptoms of measles, mumps and rubella can occur, usually in a very attenuated form, after inoculation with the combined MMR vaccine. It is also possible for
the complications associated with the illnesses themselves to occur after inoculation. Finally, on occasion complications that do not result from the natural illnesses occur
as a result of the vaccination. In individual cases it is difficult to prove the relationship of the illness to the inoculation. For that reason, there are widely varying statements concerning the rates of short-term inoculation complications. The rate of complications presented depends upon whether the pharmaceutical firm producing the vaccine is making the statement, or an organization representing parents of children injured as a result of vaccination. This is a reflection of the fact that these rates are related to personal and economic interests.
Consequences for the Immune System
Perhaps more important than the short-term inoculation reactions and complications are the long-term consequences for the human immune system. As presented above, the vaccines affect the development of the child's immune system differently than the natural illness. When the MMR immunization program began, there was no scientific clarification of the connection between naturally overcome childhood illnesses and resistance to chronic degenerative illnesses, illnesses related to immune system deficiency and cancer. For example, nothing out of the enormous research concerning AIDS answers the question of the connection between immunization and immune system weakness.
Shifts in Ecological Balance
The MMR immunization program can be seen as a widespread public health experiment on the total Swiss population whose long-term result is largely unknown.
For several centuries an ecological balance existed between the viruses of the childhood illnesses and human beings. The measles virus, as well as the mumps and rubella viruses, spread throughout our area; children usually became infected in the early years and acquired life-long immunity. Constant contact with the viruses continually renewed this resistance. Babies received an effective immunity from their mothers during the critical first months.
If, for instance, measles was introduced into an area where it normally did not occur, and, therefore, the population had no immunity against it, the illness caused enormous damage. In the last century, such measles epidemics ravaged a large part of the population of the Faroe islands (off the coast of Denmark). Another example in modern times
is in Gambia (Africa). Several years ago after an intensive immunization program, the World Health Organization declared that measles was eradicated in that area.
The illness reappeared a few years later, but with much larger number of serious complications and deaths than before.
It is possible to shift the ecological balance much more rapidly by mass immunization than by individual inoculation. We know today that the effects of such forced interventions are difficult to estimate.
In spite of that, in recent years in countries with a close-to-l00% inoculation rate (as a result of mandatory inoculation), for example, in the USA or East Germany, it has been possible to verify the following disquieting effects:
• Effective immunization does not take place in a portion of the vaccinated population.
• This portion, depending upon the vaccine and the quality of the inoculation, represents about 5-10%.
Widespread vaccination has led to an increased occurrence of measles, mumps and rubella during puberty and adulthood because children now can only rarely infect one another. Contracting the illness in puberty or adulthood often results in a more difficult recovery and more complications. People who have not or cannot be vaccinated through the routine immunization program, are becoming increasingly endangered as individuals. We must, therefore, determine if such people need to be vaccinated during puberty.
The immune resistance to measles of babies born to vaccinated mothers is less than that of babies born to mothers with a naturally obtained immunity.
The vaccines do not give lifelong protection. The inferior immune reaction to the vaccine, along with decreased opportunities for natural renewal of the immunity, leads to
a recurrence of the illnesses in spite of vaccination. In the USA, for example, measles and its complications have become rare today due to mandatory (see footnote above) vaccinations. Nevertheless, every year there are small measles epidemics, increasingly often among adults, at least half of whom have been properly vaccinated. During such outbreaks in the USA and in East Germany, massive programs for contagious disease control are put into effect that always include re-inoculation.
In the case of rubella, because of the early age of vaccination, the possibility exists that during the critical time of pregnancy, there will be insufficient immunity to prevent infection. There have even been cases of rubella embryopathy in spite of correctly administered inoculations.
Such side effects of the immunization program can be eliminated only when the three viruses are, in fact, totally eradicated worldwide. Present experience shows that this decisive goal of the program is quite unrealistic in practice.
Is the MMR Vaccination Voluntary?
In Switzerland there is no legal necessity for MMR vaccination. However, in many respects parents, children, teachers and doctors face strong pressure to comply with the immunization program:
The official information is one-sided and evokes both an unnecessary fear of childhood illnesses and an uncritical trust in the usefulness and safety of the vaccine.
Vaccination is elevated to the level of a moral necessity. "Who Loves Them Well, Will Vaccinate Them Well," is the title of the French language pamphlet for parents.
With the rise of routine immunizations, anyone who is not or cannot be vaccinated is increasingly in danger of possible illness in adulthood.
Parents and doctors who refuse the routine MMR vaccination must fear being held responsible for the anticipated negative effects of the immunization program.
Although we can speak of a legally voluntary program, in reality the immunization program is becoming increasingly mandatory. This is a principal part of the eradication strategy inherent in the program.
You Be the One to Decide!
In summary, we must ask ourselves why we should change the current relatively favorable balance of the childhood illnesses measles, mumps and rubella in Switzerland through a mass immunization program. Serious complications are at present rare. At the level of immunization reached today by the "voluntary" program (50% of all Swiss children), the natural viruses are still present and enable a continued renewal of immune resistance after either the illness itself or the vaccination. Thus, the vaccinations can remain effective. At the same time there are increased reports from countries with a high immunization rate concerning unforeseen problems, such as epidemics, the necessity for re-inoculation and so forth. The goal of the program, namely the eradication of the three illnesses, has shown itself to be unreachable. Thus we must question whether the usefulness of mass MMR immunization outweighs the long-term dangers to public health. (In third world countries, the possible usefulness of measles vaccination must be judged in a fundamentally different manner.)
Then, why not maintain the present practice of individual vaccinations?
Why not, as has been done until now, individually address the question of vaccination for each of the three very different childhood diseases? (Each of the vaccines is available individually and in two-part combinations.) The general guideline might be that if there is no compelling reason to immunize an individual, then that person will not, as a rule, be vaccinated. A legitimate reason for immunization might certainly be the views of the parents on childhood diseases. A refusal of immunization for personal reasons deserves the same respect.
The situation of unvaccinated children who have not had the childhood illnesses before puberty deserves particular mention. We should seriously reconsider the respective inoculations, particularly the rubella inoculation for girls. Due to the uncertain level of immunity, it is recommended that girls vaccinated against rubella as small children have a blood test (antibody count) toward the end of junior high school (around age 14).
There are no compelling arguments for measles, mumps and rubella vaccinations that would make the parents' participation in the decision unnecessary. Further, it is not possible to scientifically decide the question of immunization against these three diseases once and for all. In individual cases, however, there are certainly objective or factual considerations to aid in the decision. A personal conversation with the doctor is most important. Fear, propaganda and mass immunization do not provide the basis for a reasonable use of the vaccines. Only complete and balanced information for parents and doctors can do so. This pamphlet is intended to be a step in that direction.
[Hansueli Albonico, MD, Roland Koller, MD, and Daniel Pewsner, MD Michelle Goldstein]
Die Entscheidung darüber, ob Sie sich bzw. Ihr Kind impfen lassen, liegt ganz allein bei Ihnen, aber es ist eine Entscheidung, die Sie sich nicht leicht machen sollten, und
die nicht unter Zwang und Druck durch andere erfolgen sollte. Wenn die Impfung erst einmal durchgeführt wurde, können die etwaigen Nebenwirkungen nur schwer,
wenn überhaupt, rückgängig gemacht werden. Zu diesen gehören tödliche Folgen,
plötzlicher Säuglingstod, Autoimmunkrankheiten, chronisch-entzündliche Darmkrankheiten, Allergien, Asthma, ADHS, Autismus, Guillian-Barré-Syndrom und andere neurologische Schädigungen.
Ihr Arzt wird höchstwahrscheinlich das Auftreten dieser Krankheitszustände NICHT mit der Impfung in Verbindung bringen, ungeachtet dessen, ob sie unmittelbar nach Impfungen, nach einigen Tagen oder Monate
später auftreten. Sie allein werden die Verantwortung für die Behandlung dieser lebenslangen Krankheiten zu tragen haben. Die Entscheidung für eine Impfung sollte UNBEDINGT erst nach gründlicher Information
erfolgen, damit Sie klar erkennen, ob das im Fall Ihrer Familie der richtige Weg ist.
ZEHN GRÜNDE GEGEN IMPFUNGEN:
1. Weder die Unbedenklichkeit noch die Wirksamkeit von Impfstoffen (Vakzinen) sind je erwiesen worden.
Vakzinstudien, die von pharmazeutischen Firmen finanziert werden, vergleichen „Nebenwirkungen” der Vakzine untereinander. Richtige wissenschaftliche, doppelblinde Placebostudien zum Nachweis der Unbedenklichkeit
von Vakzinen sind nie durchgeführt worden. Die Wirksamkeit kann nicht bestimmt werden, ohne dass die Versuchspersonen sich nach der Impfung wissentlich dem entsprechenden Krankheitsbild aussetzen würden.
Es wird nur die Bildung von Antikörpern gemessen.
Siehe hierzu “How Pharmaceutical Companies Hide the Dangers of Vaccines from Parents“.
2. Vakzine erfüllen nicht die ihnen zugeschriebene Funktion. Sie erzeugen zwar vielleicht einen vorübergehenden Anstieg von Antikörpern gegen eine bestimmte Krankheit, aber das ist nicht mit einer Immunität gegen diese
Krankheit gleichzusetzen. Mit all ihren Toxinen und ihrer unnatürlichen Methode, eine Krankheit direkt in den Blutstrom einzubringen, schwächen Vakzine vielmehr die Zellimmunität, die für das Immunsystem der
entscheidendere Faktor ist. Der Neurologe Russell Blaylock hat sich zu diesem Thema in Wort und Schrift ausführlich geäußert.
Wenn irgendwo eine Krankheitsepidemie ausbricht, wird ihr Auftreten oft den ungeimpften Kindern zugeschrieben. Wann immer man jedoch diese Ausbrüche näher untersucht, geht aus den Daten hervor, dass die Mehrheit
der Erkrankten gegen die Krankheit geimpft war.
Krankheitsdiagramme zeigen, dass die betreffenden Krankheiten vor der Einführung von Impfungen größtenteils ausgerottet waren.
Was in den meisten Fällen die Krankheit nachweislich zurückgehen lässt, sind sauberes Wasser und verbesserte sanitäre Zustände.
3. Der allererste Impfstoff war ein katastrophaler Fehlschlag.
Die Unbedenklichkeit und Wirksamkeit von Vakzinen ist ein künstlich erzeugter Mythos, fest verankert in der Psyche der Amerikaner und untermauert durch das Gesundheitssystem. Die Geschichte der Pockenimpfstoffe
zeigt auf, dass der erste Impfstoff zu einem Anstieg der Krankheit führte und zusätzliche schwere Gesundheitsschäden verursachte, darunter Syphilis und Todesfälle. Wiederholt trafen sich Ärztegruppen, um das Impfproblem
zu diskutieren; sie kamen zu dem Schluss, solange Impfstoffe profitabel blieben, sei es unmöglich, sie aus dem Verkehr zu ziehen, trotz aller Nachweise ihrer Schädlichkeit.
Daran hat sich seither nichts geändert. Der Polio-Impfstoff war ebenfalls mit ernsten gesundheitlichen Folgen verbunden, einschließlich Krebs und AIDS. Statistiken wurden manipuliert in dem Versuch, die Wirksamkeit dieses Impfstoffs zu beweisen. Mit jedem neuen Impfstoff sind neue Gesundheitsschäden und künstlich erzeugte Krankheiten aufgetreten. Siehe hierzu Small Pox Vaccine: Origins of Vaccine Madness.
4. Impfstoffe sind für Pharmafirmen und für die Gesundheitsbranche äußerst profitabel. Es sind starke finanzielle Anreize, die zur Fortführung der Vakzinanwendung führen, nicht die Wirksamkeit. Sie können den Informationsbroschüren von Pharmafirmen über Impfstoffe nicht trauen, da es sich um profitorientierte Unternehmen handelt. Ihr Ziel ist NICHT der Gesundheitsschutz, sondern der Verkauf von Impfstoffen.
5. Alle Impfstoffe enthalten eine Anzahl von toxischen Giftstoffen und Chemikalien, die mit schweren neurologischen Schäden verbunden sind, unter anderem Aluminium, Thimerosal (Methylquecksilber), Antibiotika, Mononatriumglutamat (MNG) und Formaldehyd (und andere).
Weitere Beispiele für gefährliche Bestandteile von Impfstoffen sind Frostschutzmittel, Blei, Kadmium, Glyzerin, Azeton und Hefeproteine.
6. Jede Studie, die ungeimpfte und geimpfte Kinder vergleicht, kommt zu dem Schluss, dass ungeimpfte Kinder bei Weitem gesünder sind.
Ungeimpfte Kinder leiden im Vergleich zu geimpften im Allgemeinen nicht an Erkrankungen der oberen Atemwege, Ohrinfektionen, Autismus, ADHS, Asthma, Allergien, Autoimmunkrankheiten und anderen derartigen Erkrankungen (siehe Sally Fallon Morell: The Nourishing Tradition’s Book of Baby and Child Care, 2013.)
7. Impfstoffe verursachen eine Vielzahl von „chronischen, unheilbaren und lebensbedrohlichen Krankheiten“, darunter Autismus, Asthma, ADHS, Autoimmunkrankheiten, Guillain-Barré-Syndrom, Lebensmittelallergien und Hirnschäden.
8. Die einzige Methode, um echte lebenslange Immunität gegen eine Krankheit zu erzeugen, besteht darin, dass man sich auf natürliche Weise der Krankheit aussetzt, wodurch der Körper richtige Antikörper und eine richtige Immunität auf mehreren Ebenen entwickelt.
9. Impfstoffe können bei Säuglingen, Kindern und Erwachsenen zum Tode führen. Es gibt starke Anzeichen für einen Zusammenhang von Impfstoffen und plötzlichem Säuglingstod (SIDS).
Mehr als hundert vorher gesunde junge Frauen sind infolge von Impfungen gegen HPV (humanes Papillomavirus) gestorben.
Vom Grippeimpfstoff ist bekannt, dass er die meisten Kosten zum Ausgleich für schwere Gesundheitsschäden bis hin zu Todesfällen verursacht hat.
Die Langzeitwirkungen von Impfstoffen sind nicht bekannt. Impfen ist ein Experiment mit der Gesundheit, bei dem niemand die Langzeitauswirkungen kennt.
In den USA erhalten Kinder weit mehr Impfstoffe in jüngerem Alter als in anderen Ländern. Die Todesraten im Säuglingsalter bei amerikanischen Kindern gehören zu den höchsten der Welt, besonders im Vergleich zu Ländern, in denen Kinder weniger geimpft werden und wo man das Impfalter wohlweislich heraufgesetzt hat.
10. Wenn Sie oder einer Ihrer Angehörigen unter einem Impfschaden leiden, übernehmen die Pharmafirmen und Ärzte keine medizinische/ärztliche Haftung.
1986 wurde in den USA das Nationale Gesetz zu Impfschäden bei Kindern (National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act) eingeführt, durch das eine direkte Schadenersatzklage gegen Pharmafirmen oder Angehörige von Gesundheits-
berufen aufgrund von Impfschäden unmöglich gemacht wurde.
Sie sind auf sich selbst gestellt, wenn Sie versuchen, im Fall von Impfschäden Ihre Gesundheit wiederherzustellen. Sie tragen die Kosten und das Leid allein.
Das System ist so konstruiert, dass der Einzelne für Impfschäden keine Ansprüche geltend machen kann. Die Öffentlichkeit kommt für diesen Entschädigungsfonds in Form von Impfsteuern auf.
[Farokh Master Peter Klein, MD; Hansueli Albonico, MD, Roland Koller, MD, and Daniel Pewsner, MD Michelle Goldstein Christian Wessling]
Missouri Physician Investigates Immunizations
As a family physician I am often asked, "Doctor, should I have my child vaccinated?" This question became more frequent after Missouri's 1992 immunization law removed the parents' freedom of choice to exempt their child from vaccination. Children could only be exempted for "medical contraindications" or "religious belief." Following this,
the Department of Health promptly followed by unilaterally adding a rule which limited religious exemption to members of specific organized religions.
In this created situation where vaccinations were no longer voluntary in Missouri (20 states voluntary). Parents choosing not to vaccinate found themselves outside the law.
Fortunately, a group of concerned citizens made its voice known at the Legislature. As a result, the Department of Health retracted its restrictive rule. Since April 1994 Missouri parents can now claim exemption by simply stating that vaccination violates their religious beliefs. Throughout of all this I was troubled by many questions which made me research the issue further. What I learned during this process made me ponder the future of health care, the decisions my wife and myself will make as parents
of three young children and, most of all, my role as a physician and healer.
Firmly believing in the ancient maxim of medical ethics: "First do no harm," I discovered that in 1986 Congress was alarmed enough about serious reactions to common childhood vaccines to enact the National Childhood Vaccination Injury Act, establishing the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. This federal program has thus far paid over $400 million to vaccine-injured children and their families. The federal government receives about 1,000 reports of vaccine-associated injuries or deaths every month!
Other countries do not share the same enthusiasm for vaccines as our U. S. health authorities. The governments of Sweden, Great Britain, and Taiwan have withdrawn DPT (diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus) from general usage because of concerns about its safety; Japan restricts its use to children over 2 years of age. Another well-recognized concern
is that measles immunization has altered the epidemiological pattern; since the artificial immunity acquired through vaccination is inferior to the lifelong 100% immunity conferred by having gone through the illness. More cases are now seen in older children and young adults as well as infants who are no longer protected by their mothers' antibodies. In both these groups, complication rates are much higher than they were when measles was a naturally occurring illness. Nationwide, about half the cases of whooping cough and measles have occurred in vaccinated individuals. I also found the efficacy of commonly used childhood vaccines is far less than the public realizes.
Of the 120 cases of pertussis (whooping cough), which occurred in Missouri in 1992, 48% of the victims were fully vaccinated. It concerns me that public debate does not
give the whole picture. We are told the drop in death rates from polio, lockjaw, measles and other dreaded epidemics is due to immunization programs when, in fact, most
of this drop had already occurred prior to their implementation, mainly as a result of improved sanitation and other factors. A rosy, optimistic picture is painted of humanity, soon, forever-freed from these "old scourges." But even the WHO has conceded its "war on measles" is not about to be won. Even the term "vaccine-preventable illnesses"
is a misnomer because it ignores the high percentage of illnesses occurring in vaccinated persons. This is not to imply vaccines should not be given. Vaccines occupy an important place in our nation's health care system. But should vaccines be forced on people against their will?
The concept of publicly enforced vaccination campaigns stems from a time when smallpox epidemics were threatening and at times wiping out large populations.
Things have changed since then. In 1994, what are the real threats to the health of our children - measles or poor dietary habits, whooping cough or lack of exercise and childhood obesity, chicken pox or domestic violence? Government child advocacy, which focuses on the 2% of Missouri children not immunized by first grade, aims to
restrict the parent's rights to determine their children's medical treatment and does little to improve the more serious threats to the children health.
"Should children be vaccinated?" My answer is, "Let the physician advise, but let the parents make the ultimate decision. Let us have true informed consent, after considering the risks and the benefits as we do for other medical procedures." We now have a schizophrenic situation where federal law requires parents to sign that they understand these risks and benefits before any vaccination may be given, yet state law makes it "unlawful" for any child not to he vaccinated. More vaccines are on the horizon, some already
in use, though not yet required by law.
Two new vaccines were recently licensed - one for hepatitis A, the other for varicella (chickenpox) which latter, as we all know, is very rarely a serious health threat.
Quite likely we will soon see pressure to include them in routine vaccination schedules. There is a motion at the Federal level to soon require states to track each child's immunizations from birth in a government computer. using the child's social security number. This represents an Orwellian vision of "Big Brother" invading children's
private medical records.
Democracy assumes that individuals are competent to make their own decisions, including those regarding health care. It is totalitarian to assume that citizens are incompetent and the government must make their decisions for them. Behind the zeal to "get every child vaccinated," there is a worrisome trend away from basic democratic values.
The physician Benjamin Rush, signer of the Declaration of Independence, once warned: "Unless we put Medical Freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize itself into an undercover dictatorship." Time has come to think about this once again.