Search This Blog

Tuesday 29 March 2011

Vaccination. Arguments for and against.

More and more, patient choice is coming under attack by the conventional health lobby. 
  • Get vaccinated, or don't go to school. 
  • Get rid of personal choice based on ethical or religious grounds. 
  • Vaccinate your dog, or it cannot enter a kennel. 
And so the drug enforcement regime of conventional medicine goes on. But what are the arguments for and against vaccination? 

This list of arguments is taken from a new book, 'Vaccine Epidemic; how corporate greed, biased science, and coercive government threaten our human rights, our health and our children'.

The Pro-Vaccine Camp

  1. Government officials are best qualified to make vaccination decisions.  Only government can ensure that a sufficiently high percentage of people vaccinate to preserve societal heard immunity.
  2. Vaccines are overwhelmingly safe and effective, and the benefits vastly outweigh the risks.  Adverse events are vanishingly rare.
  3. Science proves the benefit of vaccines beyond a reasonable doubt.  The science is in – vaccines are not responsible for any increase in common childhood health problems, including autism.  They’re safe and effective.
  4. Vaccine refusers are dangerous and selfish.  People who elect not to vaccinate are parasites.  They are selfish, irrational, and threaten others with deadly disease.
  5. Only “false prophets” suggest that vaccines may cause disorders like autism.  Quack healthcare practitioners concoct unfounded treatments for autism and prey on vulnerable parents desperate for help.  People should disdain and shun them.
  6. Vaccine exemptions should be abolished.  Dr. Offit and other suggest that states should abolish philosophical and religious exemptions.  l abuse them and put other at risk.  Because vaccines have been proven safe and effective, people have a social responsibility to vaccinate.

 The Pro-Choice Camp

  1. Vaccination choice is a human right.  Because vaccination poses a risk to life, liberty, and security of person, only an individual or gardian may decide how, when and whether to vaccinate.
  2. Society as a whole benefits from the cumulative impact of free and informed individual healthcare choices.  The theory of herd immunity is not an adequate rationale for state compulsion to vaccinate.
  3. Vaccine safety science is flawed and incomplete.  The IOM as well as informed scientists, doctors and officials have repeatedly acknowledged that fundamental questions about vaccine safety remain unanswered.
  4. The US vaccine program is rife with conflicts of interest.  Vaccines are big business and all of their promoters – pharma, government, medicine, and science – get their cut.  The vaccine program does not put children’s safety first.
  5. Biomedical interventions are valid.  Considerable science and anecdotal evidence support biomedical interventions’ for ASDs and other chronic conditions.  The interventions include diet, vitamin and mineral supplementation, chelation, and GI treatment.  Individuals are entitled to the practitioners and remedies of their choosing.
  6. Vaccination exemption rights must expand, not contract.  Individuals have the right to free and informed consent for all medical interventions, including vaccination. In practice, not just in theory, individuals must have the right to make their own decisions.

So, who do you back? Your own personal choice and preference. Or those who want to choose for us, and make fortunes doing so?

Are vaccines really dangerous? Well, look at the amounts of money drug companies have to pay out in compensation in the USA!

Difficult one, eh?

Conventional Medicine now the leading cause of death?

It has been estimated that 28,000 die, and there are almost 700,000 emergencies, arising from pharmaceutical drug poisoning in the USA.

These statistics were released recently by the American College of Emergency Physicians. The article says that conventional medicine is the 2nd largest cause of injury-related deaths in the USA. But the situation is actually worse than this.

This feature states that the American Health System is the leading cause of death and injury in the USA. It uses similar figures, but the analysis of the horrific scale of iatrogenic (doctor-induced) disease. It asks whether American medicine is working, and calls for 'complete and total reform'.

Actually, the conventional medical system cannot be reformed, it cannot be safe - for two reasons. First, the whole premise on which conventional medicine drugs are based makes them unsafe - inherently unsafe. The second is that Big Pharma companies seem to show little or no interest in admitting that it is causing such dreadful carnage, leave alone reforming itself.

The details of the carnage are even more revealing. When you examine the details of how people are killed by the medical system, the full enormity of the problem, and the enormous financial costs it generates, strikes home.

If there was ever evidence needed for a 'safe medicine' blog, these three web pages provides it. The solution is not reform, even if it is 'complete and total'. It is abandonment, an admission that conventional medicine, based on Big Pharma drugs is not sustainable. We need homeopathy, and other CAM medical therapies to come to the rescue.

Tuesday 15 March 2011

Osteoporosis drugs cause fractures

Yes, I know they are drugs that are supposed to prevent fractures - but new research suggests they cause them! 

So Conventional Medicine and Big Pharma strike again! 

The research was conducted at the St Michael's hospital in Toronto, Canada, and published in the Journal of American Medical Association, 2011; 305: 783-9. 

Thanks to What Doctors Don't Tell You for knowledge of this research.

Tuesday 8 March 2011

The Nightingale Collaboration

Florence Nightingale was a user of homeopathy. She was a patient of James Manby Gully, who she called a 'genius'. She worked with homeopathic nurses in the Crimea. And she advised her sister to see a homeopath for an illness that ConMed had made worse, and asked her mother to try homeopathy for her father's eye condition. She wrote this of homeopathy, in her 'Notes on Nursing', published in 1859.
          Homeopathy has introduced one essential amelioration in the practice of physic by amateur females for its rules are excellent, its physicking comparatively harmless–the “globule” is the one grain of folly which appears to be necessary to make any good thing acceptable. Let then women, if they will give medicine, give homeopathic medicine. It won't do any harm”
For further information on her connection with homeopathy, see
and also Dana Ullman's Book. "The Homeopathic Revolution: why famous people and cultural heroes choose homeopathy".

Strange, then, that the Nightingale Collaboration should select her name to attack homeopathy!

The opponents of homeopathy are often not very bright! It becomes very clear, when you read what homeopathy denialists say and do, that they know little about homeopathy, or its history. In their attempts to support ConMed, they wallow in their own ignorance. And long may they do so!