Search This Blog

Showing posts with label SIDs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SIDs. Show all posts

Thursday, 17 March 2016

DPT vaccine. Should you allow your baby to have it?

It would appear that it has been acknowledged that the DPT vaccine does cause Autism! At least the package insert of Tripedia, one DPT brand admits that Autism as been reported as an adverse reaction, alongside sudden infant death (SIDs), apnea, seizures up to and including epileptic 'gran mal' attacks, neuropathy and many mores
  • DPT is the vaccine ALL our children are routinely given by our conventional doctors.
  • DPT is the vaccine that our doctors have been telling us for years is safe for our children.
  • DPT is one of the vaccines they want to make mandatory in many USA states, and elsewhere.
  • DPT is one of the vaccines our mainstream media has refused to discuss for 12 year plus.
The fact that autism, sudden infant death, neuropathy, seizures, epilepsy might be bad enough, and a matter of considerable concern for parents who love their young babies.

Yet what is even more alarming is that young parents have not been told, and are not being told even now, about the link between the vaccine, and these dangerous and potentially lethal 'adverse reactions'.

I have seen a copy of the Tripedia package insert on this website - have a look for yourself.
  • If there is a possible link should not the entire conventional medical establishment be concerned?
  • Should there be more good quality research done into any possible link?
  • If there is a possible link should parents be told by their doctors?
  • If there is a possible link should the government not be warning us?
  • If there is a possible link should the drug company not be warning us?
  • If there is a possible link should the mainstream media not investigating, and telling us?
None of this is happening. Instead, as usual, there is silence. Well, it is on the package insert perhaps. But who ever sees the package insert? Doctors and nurses, perhaps, but not the child's parents.

Instead, we have to witness the ever increasing epidemic of autism sweeping the world.

Does the conventional medical establishment know what is causing this autism epidemic? Apparently not. This is the succinct summary given by the NHS Choices website.

          "The exact cause of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is currently unknown. It's a complex condition and may occur as a result of genetic predisposition (a natural tendency), environmental or unknown factors." 

And what treatment does the conventional medical establishment have for autism? NHS Choices is equally succinct about this too.

          "There's no 'cure' for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, a range of specialist educational and behavioural programmes can help children with ASD."

So what should parents of young babies consider when they are asked by their doctor to be allowed to give them the DPT vaccination? Three things....
  1. Conventional medicine is a suspected cause of autism, and our doctors know this.
  2. Conventional medicine says it does not know what causes autism, and fails to mention that one of their vaccines, has been linked with the condition.
  3. Conventional medicine has no treatment for autism if you normal baby should contract the condition.
Instead, conventional medicine tells parents how they can 'live with autism'. In other words, the vaccine can cause autism, the link is denied, the epidemic continues, and parents just have to get on with it!

Does that sound like a good deal? Does that sound like an honest deal? Does that sound like a deal likely to lead to parents making an informed choice?



Thursday, 23 April 2015

Sudden Infant Death. Is it caused by conventional medical drugs?

Sudden Infant Death, or Cot Death as it is more commonly known, is described on the NHS Choices website as "the sudden, unexpected and unexplained death of an apparently well baby". It says that at least 300 babies, usually under the age of 6 months, die "unexpectedly" of this syndrome every year. In most cases, a fit and healthy baby is put to bed by parents, and is found dead some hours later.

So what causes this awful tragedy? This is the conventional medical explanation, as provided by the same website.

     "No-one knows exactly what causes SIDS, but it is thought to be the result of a combination of factors. Experts believe SIDS occurs at a particular stage in a baby’s development, and that it affects babies who are vulnerable to certain environmental stresses. This vulnerability may be due to being born prematurely or to low birthweight, or other reasons not yet identified. Environmental stresses could include tobacco smoke, getting tangled in bedding, a minor illness or having a breathing obstruction. Babies who die of SIDS are thought to have problems in the way they respond to these stresses and how they regulate their heart rate, breathing and temperature".

History of SIDs
Children have always died in their infancy, no doubt for a variety of reasons. There are accounts of this in the  bible, and certainly during the middle ages.  

However, it was not until 1969 that the term 'Sudden Infant Death Syndrome' was coined, and recognised as a distinct disease, and since then, a variety of reasons for cot death have been put forward by the conventional medical establishment - none of them particularly convincing.

So with no medical explanation, it is often the child's parents who have been placed under suspicion, often prosecution, and sometimes convicted and imprisoned on the basis of the 'expert' evidence given by conventional doctors. The case of Sally Clark is probably the best known of these cases, not because she lost two babies to this 'syndrome', but because she was imprisoned, released when the miscarriage of justice was recognised, but committed suicide soon afterwards.

Vaccines and Drugs that may cause SIDs
The tragedy of this SIDs case, which has been repeated too often, is that there is an explanation for the syndrome, although it is an explanation that the conventional medical establishment refuse to admit. As the Sally Clark website says.

          "The only common factor, which may or may not be relevant, is that both deaths followed shortly after vaccination. [There is research into the possibility that these vaccinations can cause death within a few days if infants have certain genetic defects.]

The DPT vaccine, given to babies usually when they are just 2-3 months old, and repeated twice more on a monthly basis, is the only known cause of SIDs, or cot death.

Yet the link between SIDs and the DPT vaccine is not world shattering news. Indeed, our doctors know it, the NHS know it, and the Big Pharma drug companies know it. The link is admitted on the package insert for each DPT vaccine, and this blog also points to more evidence linking the 'syndrome' with the DPT vaccine.

There is also evidence that other conventional pharmaceutical drugs are linked with SIDs. 

Methadone, an opiate drug, used as a painkiller, and an anti-addiction medication by conventional medicine, is also linked to SIDs.

Indeed, it is suspected that any conventional medical drugs that seeks to influence sleep, or fluid control, including antihistamines and alcohol can have a marked effect on crib death rates.

Tuesday, 14 January 2014

Child Protection and Medical 'Experts'


In essence it concerned parents who have lost, or are in danger of losing their children, arising from ‘expert’ medical evidence provided to local authority social services (the lead agency in child protection work) and the family courts. The infants and young children featured had one thing in common - all were found to have multiple broken bones which could not be explained by their parents.

Cause for concern, on the face of it, and no-one (least of all myself, as I have worked in child protection for many years) will take exception to safeguarding children from serious physical harm.

The medical authorities referred the cases to the social services, and child protection procedures were initiated. The parents did not know how the injuries occurred, and did not admit liability. Care proceeding were taken, and largely on the basis of medical evidence, many parents are losing their children, and living under the threat of any newborn child being removed in a similar fashion.

The ‘expert’ medical evidence stated in these cases that the injuries had no medical cause, and therefore, could only have been done through the abuse and mistreatment by the parents. Unfortunately, this ‘expert’ medical advice was not correct. The programme outlined that most of these children had extremely low levels of Vitamin D, and that this could, and should have been put on the agenda when considering whether the children had been abused. So who was at fault here.
  • The social services who acted mainly on the information given to them by medical ‘experts’? 
  • The family courts who acted mainly on the information given to them by medical ‘experts’?
  • The medical ‘experts’?
Even the BBC, loyal supporters of the Conventional Medical Establishment, almost brought themselves to admit that the medical evidence was wrong, and that they should have been aware of the consequences of serious Vitamin D deficiency - one of which is rickets (a disease now apparently in the process to returning to this country).

There is certainly a similar reluctance to challenge the Conventional Medical Establishment within local authority social services departments, and within the family court. Indeed, there is a reluctance throughout society to challenge conventional medical expertise!

There is, however, no such diffidence within the Conventional Medical Establishment to claiming not only expertise, but an expertise bordering on infallibility! So if a child is found to have multiple broken bones, and the ‘expert’ medics can provide no explanation for them, the parents are blamed. There can be no other explanation as doctors know, and can explain everything, about health matters.

The word of conventional doctors seems to have become the unquestioned, unchallenged ‘law’ of the land.

Has this happened before? Do you remember ‘shaken baby syndrome’, for which several mothers were imprisoned on the almost sole basis of the evidence of conventional medical ‘experts’. And that these mothers were eventually released when the medical evidence was found to be deeply flawed.

And do you recall the issues raised by many unexplained cot deaths (otherwise known as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, or SIDs)? 

The only difference with ‘shaken baby syndrome’ and SIDs is that there are medical explanations, but the explanations were not given by the conventional medical ‘experts’ involved presumably because it did not suit them to do so. In other words, SIDs has been found to be caused by the very medicine they prescribe for us!



So should these conventional medical ‘experts’ have known about the link between broken bones and Vitamin D deficiency? Should these parents have lost their babies? As the BBC Panorama programme indicated, the link between Vitamin D deficiency and Rickets has been known for over 100 years. So what this knowledge does, yet again, is to raise a vital question. 

To what extent can we trust the Conventional Medical Establishment to tell us the truth? How honest are our doctors about the dangers their drugs and vaccines cause us? And just how far will conventional medical ‘experts’ go to prevent us from knowing about the harm their medical system is doing to our health.

This is just another reason for all of us, but particularly the mainstream media, the social services, and the courts, to begin to question seriously the safety, effectiveness, and indeed the honesty of the Conventional Medical Establishment.


Tuesday, 21 May 2013

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDs), Co-Sleeping, and the DPT vaccine

Listen to BBC News today (21st May 2013) and you might be fooled into believing that SIDs, or 'Sudden Infant Death Syndrome', commonly know as Cot Death, was caused by parents who shared a bed with their babies! (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-22594587). How does this cause death? Do they lie on the baby, and stop it breathing? If so, why is SIDs medicalised with the label 'syndrome'? What is a 'syndrome' anyway?

The article does question the validity of the findings, but it does not discuss any other cause of SIDs. So a more pertinent question for the BBC might be - why?

The answer is, of course, that the only known cause of SIDs, or cot death, is a vaccine - the DPT vaccine - given to babies when they are just 2-3 months old, and repeated twice in monthly intervals.

The link between SIDs and the DPT vaccine is not world shattering news. Our doctors know it, the NHS know it, the Big Pharma drug companies know it, and the BBC and the rest of the mainstream media know it too. The link is admitted on the package insert for each DPT vaccine.

But whilst the Media, and the BBC in particular, will provide you with a diet of medical nonsense about 'co-sleeping' they will never share with you the known, and accepted dangers of the DPT vaccination.

'Co-sleeping' is a diversion. It is a distraction. It is nonsense.

The conventional medical establishment knows the primary, and probably the only cause of SIDs. Sudden Death Syndrome is not a syndrome, it is not a disease; it is death caused by medicine, it is a drug-induced-death. 

If you want to keep your baby safe, it is probably much better to refuse the DPT vaccine and to share a bed with your child; although as the BBC article suggests, it is probably best not to do this either.