By Shane Smith

Oklahomans Deserve the Full Story Surrounding Vaccine Safety and Effectiveness

There are serious questions that are currently being ignored regarding the safety and effectiveness of these pharmaceutical products, and serious doubts as to whether they are helping any of us at all.

By Shane Smith

A poll recently conducted by the Oklahoma Alliance for Healthy Families, and funded by D.C.-based non-profit ‘Bio,’ is being hailed by the group as proof that Oklahomans believe vaccines to be “safe and effective,”

and that the majority oppose the philosophical and religious exemptions currently enjoyed by citizens of this state. This sounds suspiciously like a preamble to the introduction of new legislation that would eliminate those exemptions, but let’s ignore that for now.

Does the poll (only 1,000 Oklahomans were polled) accurately reflect how Oklahomans truly feel about vaccines, had they received the full set of facts regarding their safety? Or does it represent a viewpoint that has heard only one side of the debate, and one set of facts? Were another poll conducted among a group of people who did have a more firm grasp of the arguments from both sides, would the results be the same this time around? I doubt it.

I wonder, how would Oklahomans respond once they learned of the over $4 billion that has been paid out in settlements for vaccine injuries since 1986? Or that a Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare study found that less than 1% of vaccine injuries are ever even reported?

How would they respond if they knew that vaccine manufacturers are shielded from lawsuits stemming from vaccine injuries?

How many have heard of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act of 1986 (NVICA), which granted vaccine manufacturers blanket legal immunity from injury lawsuits, and created the vaccine court that doles out millions every year to victims of vaccine injury? How about the unbelievable fact that the Department of Health and Human Services has not once submitted a vaccine safety report, even though it is required to do so every two years as stipulated by the NVICA?

How would they respond if they knew that, despite all the claims to the contrary, many children have regressed into autism shortly after receiving a barrage of vaccines, and that even the vaccine court has compensated cases of “vaccine-induced brain damage” that resulted in autism? They should read, “Unanswered Questions from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: A Review of Compensated Cases of Vaccine-Induced Brain Injury,” published in 2011 in the Pace Environmental Law Review.

How many have heard of Hannah Poling, who, at age 18 months, immediately regressed into autism after receiving nine vaccines at once? Her family was awarded $1.5 million for her life care, plus over $500,000 each year thereafter. This was the largest settlement at the time from the vaccine court.

How many have read the Slate magazine investigation into the Gardasil trials that seemed designed to downplay serious, long-term autoimmune injury stemming from the vaccine? Entitled, “What the Gardasil Trials May Have Missed,” it’s something every parent should read before considering the HPV vaccine for their child. And if the curious reader wants to know more about the havoc wrought by Gardasil worldwide, read the book, The HPV Vaccine on Trial: Justice for a Generation Betrayed.

How many know that the polio vaccines administered to 98 million Americans between 1955 and 1963 were contaminated with simian virus 40, or SV40, due to the fact that the virus used in the vaccine was cultured on monkey kidneys. SV40 has been thought to be a culprit in the fast-spreading cancer, mesothelioma. Curious readers should look up the article, “The Virus and the Vaccine,” published in the February 2000 issue of The Atlantic, for the full story.

How would Oklahomans respond if they knew that many of the vaccines given to their children have been shown to be not only ineffective, but actually increase their susceptibility to future infections, such as the pertussis component of the dTaP vaccine? They should read the recently published paper, “The 112-year Odyssey of Pertussis and Pertussis Vaccines-Mistakes Made and Implications for the Future,” in the Journal of Pediatric Infectious Diseases.

How many have heard of Peter Aaby’s discovery of high mortality rates among those vaccinated with the DTP vaccine in Guinea-Bissau? Read his article, “Evidence of Increase in Mortality After the Introduction of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis Vaccine to Children Aged 6-35? Months in Guinea-Bissau: A Time for Reflection?”

How many know that many pediatric vaccines contain a large amount of the potent neurotoxin aluminum? An infant following the CDC-recommended vaccine schedule is inundated with aluminum, beginning on day 1 with the hepatitis B vaccine, containing 250 mcg of the neurotoxin. At the two-month doctor’s visit, the infant receives multiple vaccines containing a total of 1,225 mcg of aluminum.

Besides all this, why are we only supposed to fear diseases for which a vaccine exists? We no longer fear scarlet fever, a far bigger killer than smallpox, polio, measles, and others. And yet that disease disappeared without the aid of any vaccine. We should be more curious as to the why that happened.

Mortality rates for the most feared infectious diseases declined by at least 90% by 1940 in the United States, before the arrival of almost all vaccines and antibiotics. What accounts for that decline? Curious readers should look up the article, “Annual summary of vital statistics: trends in the health of Americans during the 20th century,” published in the journal, Pediatrics, in the year 2000, for more information.

The sanitation movement, an episode in history that we are never taught in school, had an enormous impact on public health, and is to be thanked for the very low rates of infectious disease as compared to a century ago. The push for chlorination of public water supplies, toilets, sanitary standards for cities, food safety, all this played a primary role in defeating infectious disease. Why do we allow vaccines to take the credit? Curious reader should find a copy of Suzanne Humphries’ excellent account of the true cause of the decline of infectious disease in her book, Dissolving Illusions.

A vaccine is nothing more than a pharmaceutical product that has been produced, marketed and sold by the same fallible companies that have been convicted in court of pushing dangerous drugs onto the public in the past. Merck’s heart attack-inducing pain medication Vioxx killed more Americans than the Vietnam war, a risk that Merck knew of beforehand, and yet concealed from the public. Was anyone ever punished for that criminal scandal? The CEO during the fallout now teaches business at Harvard. This is the same company that manufactures the MMR and Gardasil vaccines, and invests heavily in politicians throughout the country.

Vaccine safety isn’t the cut-and-dry issue that it is being portrayed as. There are serious questions that are currently being ignored regarding the safety and effectiveness of these pharmaceutical products, and serious doubts as to whether they are helping any of us at all. If they are truly safe and effective, why not restore liability to their manufacturers? Why not study long-term health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated populations? Why the push to force an enormous vaccine schedule on school age children, and smear anyone who so much as raises an eyebrow?

If the pro-vaccine, pro-mandate crowd is so certain of the safety and effectiveness of the product that they believe should be forced upon the public, why the repeated refusals to openly debate the their merits?

How would a truly informed public respond to the recent poll?

I think we know the answer.

Shane Smith is a pro-liberty writer based in Norman, Oklahoma. He blogs at: RepublicReborn.com, and can be reached at: digitalsunset86