VAX TIME RELIGION

When our firstborn, Kevin, was nine months old, he got a cold which led to an ear infection, for which the doctor prescribed amoxycillin. I mentioned this to my mother and added that my wife, Ellen, and I weren’t going to administer this medication.

My mother knew that we were living on one income and thus, on a budget. Concerned, she said, “I’ll give you the money for the antibiotic.”

I thanked Mom but told her that our decision wasn’t about money. Amoxycillin was generic and inexpensive. I said that Ellen and I didn’t think antibiotics were appropriate for a minor, likely viral, condition and that amoxycillin would damage Kevin's gut biota, which Ellen was seeding daily with beneficial bacteria and growth factors by breastfeeding him. We kept an eye on Kevin, but trusted his immune system and believed that minor challenges would strengthen his long-term health and immunity.

The difference between my Mom’s medical compliance and Ellen and my low-intervention approach revealed a sort of generational shift. I say “sort of” because many of our post-1990 parental peers still administered antibiotics for ear infections and authorized ear tube installation, etc. Ellen and I thought/think that it’s often better to decline medical treatment. When each of our two daughters were subsequently born, we avoided meds and vaxxes. They were breastfed, fed well thereafter and active. All three kids remained healthy. Young bodies are especially vital.

—

When Kevin was born, we didn’t oppose vaccination. We hadn’t thought about it. Vaxxing was—and still is—widely seen as something that responsible parents must do to protect their children. To decline vaccines was/is widely seen as confrontational, reckless and retrograde.

New parents can be overwhelmed by the birth and caretaking process and naively deferential to doctors. Thus, Ellen and I let hospital staff vaxx Kevin in the hospital and at his "well baby" check-ups. After his 18-month shot, Kevin stopped walking for a few days. Though he soon returned to normal, I’ve met a series of parents of other vaccinated children who’ve witnessed post-vaxx damage that didn’t go away.

Following that experience, and aided by some reading she did, especially in Mothering magazine, Ellen and I decided not to expose our kids to the additional shots on the CDC schedule.

—

According to MD Suzanne Humphries’ book, Dissolving Illusions (2015), most vaxxes are designed to prevent very low-prevalence infections, which generally don’t pose serious threats. Additionally, some say that, after injecting, 20-40% of vaccinees don’t develop a protective response.

Moreover, contrary to the popular belief that vaccine effects last throughout vaccinees’ lives, various types of vaxxes wear off within a few years. For example, before he went to college and again before grad school, Kevin had to “catch up” on shots not taken during his elementary school years while under a religious exemption or, instead, prove immunity to the underlying illnesses. Although he had received the MMR vaccine as an infant and toddler and opted to get the MMR vaccine for college when he became 18, his grad school blood titer was negative for immunity to measles, mumps and rubella. Thus, kids who vaxx end up getting some of the diseases against which they’re ostensibly shielded. Unsurprisingly, because most of the shots are for non-lethal infections, the sick survive.

Similarly, when a sixth-grade classmate of our younger daughter got pertussis, the perturbed school nurse telephoned Ellen because her records showed that our unsick daughter had received a vaccine religious exemption. In response, Ellen calmly asked if the afflicted student had been vaccinated against pertussis. Not perceiving her illogical self-own, the nurse answered, “Of course she was!”

—

Popular affinity for modern medicine is based more on indoctrination and conformity than on informed, thoughtful risk/reward analysis. Vaxxes are a contemporary, quasi-religious rite. Vaxxers believe fervently in the shots, even though they haven’t read any of “The Science” they claim to be “following.” Most American adults see the injections as magic bullets and technological sacraments that enable their offspring, and them, to survive a barrage of imaginarily perilous viral assaults. Per St. Thomas Aquinas, “To he who believes, no explanation is necessary.”

While many hail vaccines as medical miracles that have saved countless millions of American lives, children would be fine without the ritualistic jabs. As Dr. Humphries repeatedly observes and illustrates with multiple graphs, infectious disease incidence dropped sharply and life spans increased dramatically decades before vaccines or antibiotics were invented and administered. Vital people who live with decent nutrition, sanitation, clean water and sunlight easily fight off airborne diseases.

Humphries describes in detail how squalid and hazardous American and European cities were in the 1800s and early 1900s. These settings had open sewers and animal excrement filled the streets. Adults and children worked long hours in dimly lit sweatshops, factories and mines. Their air was polluted by wood—and, later, coal— smoke generated to provide heat and to fuel industry. People lacked sufficient calories, protein and vitamins and their limited food was often spoiled. These wretched environments weakened them and left them vulnerable to illness.

Near the beginning of the 20th Century, conditions began to get better. As they did, peoples’ health improved and life expectancy increased sharply.

Nonetheless, well-propagandized vaxx supporters wrongly credit vaccines for lengthening life spans. They incorrectly assume that abundant, study-derived data support vaccine efficacy. As set forth in the book Turtles All the Way Down, Pharma avoids random controlled trials in which they give saline placebos to some injectees to compare the post-vaxx health outcomes of the injected to those of the unjabbed.

In defending vaccines, generally, most point to the most praised inoculations, those against poliovirus, which has been around for millennia. Dr. Humphries observes that reverence for the polio vaxx is misplaced. Firstly, when polio was seen as widespread, much disability from a variety of other causes was misattributed to polio. Secondly, purported polio incidence was temporally linked to inorganic arsenic and DDT exposure, which cause neuromuscular harm to both insects and humans. When these substances were widely used, polio diagnoses spiked. When these pesticides were banned, polio rates dropped sharply. In nations where these substances are still used, polio persists.

—

Aside from inefficacy, people know or think little about how vaccines might damage health.

Parents of children who have exhibited injuries shortly after vaxxing, including neurological symptoms resembling autism, have told me that their pediatricians dismiss a vaxx link and attribute these injuries to a series of other causes. Further, the Vaccine Awareness Monitoring System (VAERS) and V-Safe rely on self-reporting and are user-unfriendly. As many parents don’t know how to report vaccine injuries, many injuries go unreported. Thus, most assume that the shots are safe.

Many insist that studies have proven that there’s no link between vaxxes and autism. But with so many children vaxxed, one wonders how big the unvaxxed control groups in these studies were. Pharma is powerful enough to suppress evidence contrary to their interests. And the CDC, NIH, and the FDA have a revolving door with pharmaceutical companies.

In the meanwhile, the number of shots continues to grow. The CDC Schedule, which most states adopt by reference, now includes 72 vaxxes, including 16 in the first year. Most of these shots are for very low-incidence and low-lethality diseases: diphtheria, measles, whooping cough, RSV, varicella, rotavirus, as well as for conduct-driven infections like Hep-B and HPV. Vaccines contain not only the viral “payload” but a variety of adjuvants and preservatives, including neurotoxic aluminum and mercury, which present their own dangers. Injecting a cumulative brew of these substances into small, developing bodies seems risky and without commensurate reward.

—

The Covid vaccines were extremely overrated. They certainly failed, as had been promised, to “stop infection and spread” with/of a wildly overhyped virus. Despite becoming sick—often multiple times—legions of Covid injectors have asserted that their shots kept them out of the hospital. I took no Covid shots and never went to the hospital. I’ve facetiously attributed my No-vid to the rabbit’s foot I keep in my pocket. I’ve invited vaxx backers to prove me wrong.

The Covid shots provide a good example of the games that biostatistician shills play in overrating both a given disease’s threat and the efficacy of the attendant “vaccines.” Covid was widely oversold as a universal threat, even though it was always obvious that those healthy and under 80 faced almost no risk of dying from infection. Covid shot researchers misleadingly redefined many who were vaccinated as having been “unvaccinated.” Additionally, those who cited Covid injections’ efficacy studies publicized relative risk reduction instead of absolute risk reduction because doing so made the shots appear far more helpful than they really are. In other posts, I’ve discussed such chicanery in more detail.

Anecdotally, every Covid-injected person I know has gotten sick multiple times. No Covid shot decliner I know has been hospitalized. Multiple Covid injectors whom I know have died, officially from non-vaxx causes; though the timing of their deaths raised questions. And those who died within six weeks of their first shot were defined as “unvaccinated.”

The core, media and government-suppressed truth of the past five years is that even without treatment, over 99.98% of uninjected, normal weight people under 70 survive Coronavirus infections; with basic, inexpensive outpatient treatment, even more do. Under 50, there was functionally zero risk.

Given how much they exaggerated health risks to young people during Coronamania and how poorly the Covid shots performed in relation to the public health apparatus’s Covid vaxx hype, neither politicians, bureaucrats, Pharma nor media deserve to be believed about disease risk or vaxx efficacy or safety, generally.

—

The rabbit’s foot effect also seems true of non-Covid vaxxes: reasonably healthy people don’t need shots in order to survive these illnesses.

Widespread refusal to vaccinate healthy children wouldn’t cause infectious disease deaths. As I told my own adult children about the Covid shots, their immune systems protect them far better than injections do. And their parents are infinitely more concerned and better educated about their health than are Biden, Fauci or mentally unwell late night talk show hosts who presented giant dancing vaxx needles or fantasized about the unvaxxed on ventilators.

If vaccination mandates ended in the United States, vaxx injuries would decrease. Even Pharma recognizes that vaccines seriously injure thousands of American children each year. Perhaps without so many early life shots, there would be less autism. Maternal anti-depressants’ or seizure meds’ effects on autism or other drugs, such as pitocin, used during delivery also deserve a closer look. Until I was in my twenties, I hadn’t encountered an autistic child. Since then, we’ve all seen many. Something far worse than infectious diseases is profoundly damaging children. We need to find out what it is and make it stop.

Those who believe strongly in vaxxes are free to subject their own kids to many dozens of injections. But their pro-injection zeal and their arrogant mandates are misplaced. If injection backers believe their kids are protected by their own shots, they shouldn’t care if other kids are injected or not. Yet, many jab proselytizers won’t be satisfied until they convert everyone to their secular Pharma religion.

—

Can the ever-growing vaxx tide be reversed? Unlike makers of any other product, vaxx makers are shielded from lawsuits. Some wish that a new political administration will ask Congress to rescind vaxx makers’ immunity from lawsuits. If vaxx makers faced civil liability for vaxx injuries, they might lose the incentive to market products whose risks exceed their benefits.

Or maybe administrative reform will ensue. One wonders if RFK’s “anti-vaxxer” label will preclude the Senate from confirming him to head HHS. If confirmed, perhaps he’ll lessen the number of shots in the CDC schedule and/or recommend that parents can choose which vaccines their children get and which they skip. Or maybe he’ll close the revolving door between the FDA, CDC, NIH and Pharma and end various corrupt practices, such as bureaucrats accepting patent royalties. Or expose medical journals’ biases. And conduct or fund some studies regarding vaxx effects.

These—and other—changes may be too much to expect, given decades of med/vaxx propaganda and Pharma’s campaign finance clout. Maybe the best we can do is to say “No,” one family at a time, to the overmedicalization of our children.