On June 26th I saw the above article linked to on the main page of CNN's website where the first paragraph begins like this:
(click, "read more" to continue) ---->
On June 26th I saw the above article linked to on the main page of CNN's website where the first paragraph begins like this:
(click, "read more" to continue) ---->
At the same time, health information at odds with big media's message is being censored by Facebook, Amazon, Pinterest, Yahoo, YouTube and more. Yet those lacking first hand knowledge of this censorship, often don't realize how pervasive the censorship has become.
The big tech companies claim they are merely removing things that are not true -- but Sanjay Gupta, Nina Shapiro and others aligned with those who hold the power are not getting censored -- even when they say things that can be shown to be factually incorrect. Here is a good example.
Dr. Nina Shapiro is a graduate of Harvard Medical School, a division head of a surgery center and she's taught medicine in academic settings. With those credentials -- you'd think there might be some pressure on her to make factually supportable public statements right?
Shapiro is also the author of the book, "Hype" which claims to be a doctor's guide to "...medical myths and exaggerated claims...and how to tell what's real and what's not." It is that tagline by Shapiro that makes me think of Brave New World. Let me explain.
Nina Shapiro exemplifies Brave New World.
My first exposure to Nina Shapiro was when I stumbled upon an article of hers featured on Forbes where she argues that the right to have or refuse an abortion IS a valid personal choice, but the right to have or refuse other medical interventions -- with documented risks is not. She thinks having an abortion which can be definitively linked with ending a specific life is acceptable while refusing a vaccine which has only a theoretical possibility of preventing a disease which if not prevented has only a theoretical chance of hurting someone is not acceptable. Here is a screen shot of the headline of her article:
But Nina has a big problem with her facts. The only justification she offers for why our fundamental right to decide what happens to our own body should be violated is this statement:
Could a medical doctor who graduated from Harvard really be THAT ignorant?
Tetanus is not a communicable disease.
The vaccine for Diphtheria is a toxoid --- so there is not even a theoretical basis to suggest that it can prevent the spread of the organism that causes diphtheria.
And the published science on the Pertussis vaccine not only provides ZERO evidence that this vaccine prevents the spread of the disease --- in fact it is well documented that people properly vaccinated for pertussis can have and spread the illness -- and often don't show any symptoms!
I notice a disturbing double standard by some of my scientist and doctor friends when it comes to medical information like this.
When I share information that challenges their perspective (particularly on the subject of vaccines) many look at it only long enough to find a single detail they can point to, to discredit the entire article -- even when the detail might not be central to the evidence being presented. But they take the opposite approach to sources that support what they already believe....like this one I just deconstructed by Nina Shaprio.
But sometimes details really do matter a lot. So I ask you...who is really promoting medical myths and exaggerated claims? (For the record -- here is a screen shot of what Nina wrote:
If you liked this post -- be sure to read my
previous post -- comparing COVID-19 to POLIO
My high school biology teacher once told me about what it was like to live through the polio epidemic of the 1950s. He was a child at the time and recalled classmates, "dropping like flies." He told me it was terrifying coming to school each week and learning that more classmates had fallen ill with polio.
However in recent years, I have struggled to reconcile my teacher's experience with the published science I have read as I looked into the issue of polio a bit more.
For example, look at this passage from page 2341 from my own 17th edition of the Merck Manual:
Here is a cut and pasted copy of the comment I tried to post on Statnews --
on the page with the above article:
This article missed a growing reason why adults are not getting vaccines -- it's CENSORSHIP on vaccine information or any science that challenges the pro-pharma narrative dominating the media. This in turn is fueling vaccine skepticism!
Articles by Helen Branswell exemplify this problem. Branswell has superb credentials, but her writing is PR for pharma thinly disguised as "health reporting."
TIME and the corporate controlled media want us to believe it's everyone's duty to get vaccinated -- especially to protect infants for whom these diseases are more dangerous and who may also be too young to get some vaccines.
On page 37 of the this 2008 article, TIME lamented that only 77% of kinder-gardeners in America were completely up-to-date on their vaccines and even said -- that was the country's highest vaccination rate we had ever had!
Today, ten years later, whooping cough, measles and mumps outbreaks are in the news and "anti-vaxxers" are being blamed.
But a large body of published science shows that extremely high rates of vaccine coverage do not prevent circulation of these diseases in the community. They may keep vaccinated individuals from showing symptoms -- but vaccinated people can still be silent carriers, making seemingly healthy vaccinated people a bigger threat to infants than their not vaccinated counterparts (since someone who has not recently been vaccinated and becomes infected with Pertussis is more likely to appear to have a cold or cough and thus can be avoided.)
Also at odds with the media's narrative is the fact that vaccination rates in children have actually soared from 77% to about 94% since TIME published their article:
Though the report emphasizes the fact that there was a very tiny increase in exemptions, the report actually puts the overall rate of vaccinated kinder-gardeners at about 94% now. Here's another screen shot:
The idea that people refusing vaccines are putting babies too young to be vaccinated at risk hides another unintended public-health consequence of vaccines; infants may actually be more vulnerable to measles now, than they were in the pre-vaccine era.
Before routine measles vaccination, most mothers had measles in childhood. Studies suggest that babies of mothers who had the actual disease (as opposed to only the vaccine) pass on more protective antibodies to their infants:
Did you hear about the recent measles outbreak in Samoa that killed 6 -- most of whom were babies too young to be vaccinated? The deaths were blamed on falling vaccination rates in Samoa, but it's likely they were due at least in part to vaccinated mothers having less immunity to pass on to their infants.
The media discourages us from seeing something an important fact: High vaccination rates are not preventing circulation of these diseases.
If you have read a lot of the published science on this subject however, this will not surprise you because...
The pharma-promoting media, in conjunction with our "conflict-of-interest-compromised" regulatory agencies, spin what is happening to support vaccine sales and passage of laws that take away the fundamental right to informed consent for medical procedures -- a direct violation of the Nuremberg Code.
Meanwhile plenty of published science shows whooping cough and mumps are frequently spread in fully vaccinated populations.
Here is a small sampling:
And can you think of any population more highly vaccinated than the military? And yet Mumps spread through a navy ship earlier this year. (Though they tried to deny it was mumps by calling it, "Mumps-like.")
Though the measles vaccine appears to be more effective than mumps or pertussis -- many fully vaccinated against measles have gotten and spread it too...and the vaccine's effectiveness in an individual has been shown to wane with each passing year.
Meanwhile, growing numbers of parents are coming forward alleging serious adverse events following their child's vaccinations--reactions which left some children brain-damaged, disabled or dead.
I found this short video of these parents of triplets very moving. Why does our media never tell these family's story? Yet if a child is hospitalized after a case of Chickenpox -- that story makes headlines across the country.
America has an epidemic of chronic diseases plaguing fully vaccinated children (allergy, asthma, autoimmune disease, seizures, autism, and psychiatric disorders). A growing body of science suggests various mechanisms by which vaccines are likely contributing to many of these chronic conditions.
Vaccines are one the fastest growing, most profitable sectors of the pharmaceutical industry -- an industry that has been repeatedly shown to engage in scientific misconduct intended to hide the true harms of their products or overstate benefits.
Do your own critical thinking.
Especially pay attention to the very bottom words on the image above...
I saw. But this enabled me to appreciate this bigger picture before I was, "educated" to not find it problematic: How companies create biased science and then use it to shape public health policy.
(Note -- this article was originally published on my Compassionate Souls website shortly after my first book came out (about 2001). Neil Miller republished it with permission in his booklet on the Chickenpox vaccine, and 4 years ago I posted it to this blog. I am bringing it to the front of my blog now, because this issue is timely again.)
When I was a child, chickenpox was universally understood to be a generally benign disease in otherwise healthy children. Every spring, chickenpox would wash through the younger grades at my elementary school, and initiate a new group of kids. Most of us remember the disease for its horrendous itching and the occasional scar, but I don't remember any of us fearing it. I grew up accepting Chickenpox as a fact of life, and a normal passage of childhood -- like skinning your knees.
According to the Merck Manual, Chickenpox is a highly contagious infection caused by the
Which one are we being told to fear more?
In the Nuremburg Trials which followed the Holocaust, the court drafted what is known as the Nuremburg Code -- rules requiring the voluntary, informed consent of an individual before they are given a medical procedure or are part of a medical experiment. "Informed consent" has been embraced by the global medical community, and most people consider it a basic human right.
So why would well-meaning people push policies that take away our informed consent?
The Cardiovascular Health Study, a project of the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute concluded that all males over the age of 65 exposed to the Western-style diet probably have cardiovascular disease and should be treated as such. Cardiovascular disease costs the US about 1 billion dollars a day in healthcare costs and lost productivity. It's the number one cause of death in our country. Because blocked arteries contribute to many premature deaths, some heart doctors propose that as a public health measure, we put statins in the public water supply -- forcing everyone to be exposed to their risks. Though this might prevent some deaths, it would also deprive everyone of the choice to refuse this medical intervention -- which like ALL medical interventions may have unintended consequences for some. Plenty of people on statins have discontinued them, because of the side effects -- even though not taking them might increase their risk of death.
With most health care we do not have a one-size-fits-all approach. Antibiotics can be life saving. They can also ruin people's health. Differing lifestyles, family histories, and even different times, can make the risk-benefit of any medical intervention unique to each. We also have different values. Joan Rivers died after accepting the small risk of death from elective plastic surgery. She valued looking younger more than avoiding this risk. Some with terminal illnesses, agree to be in medical trials and endure horrific, experimental treatments, for a long-shot at living a little longer. But not all of us would make such choices.
But what happens when the financial incentives for certain medical interventions become enormous....AND then corrupt the science seeking to really understand the risk/benefit of those interventions? Doctors and public health officials can be misled too!
Antidepressants are one case in point. Aggressive "education" of doctors made these drugs blockbusters for pharma while side-effects were downplayed. They were widely recommended for pediatric populations before we had data showing safety in this group. Evidence now suggests antidepressant benefits were actually far more modest than advertised -- and they increased suicides in young people. The book Anatomy of an Epidemic carefully deconstructs the long tr ail of biased science, "bought" researchers and "captured" regulatory agencies that fueled record drug company profits, while sacrificing untold numbers of citizens who fell prey to pharma's scheme. That book is a must read for anyone who cares about public health -- because too many pubic servants are acting like pharma's interests are OUR interests and can be trusted. (Note: after writing this post, I was watching this video --and 10 min in learned about how a medical doctor/Pam Popper's business partner, nearly lost his medical license for appearing on the Oprah show and voicing his opinion that psychological problems were NOT caused by chemical imbalances and no one should take antidepresants.)
So given that history, it should concern everyone, that bills that will increase pharma profits by eliminating informed consent for ALL the recommended vaccines (and there are a lot of them with a lot more in the pipeline) are right now flooding state legislatures. What most people don't know, is that we already had creeping financial incentives from insurance companies that reward doctors who have practices with a high compliance among their patients getting every single vaccine that is recommended.
Could it get any worse?
What if Congress passed a law that, gave drug companies complete immunity if their products injured or maimed citizens? Of course to make such a crazy thing more palatable to the public, they would have to include in such a law something that says Health and Human Services would have the task of overseeing the safety on these products and that they would be charged with filing a report every two years discussing what they were doing to assure that these products were being made as safely as possible...
Imagine if a car manufacturer could NOT be sued if someone died because their car brakes were poorly designed or data on crash tests had been fudged to make a car appear safer than it really was....How safe do you think our automobiles would be?
In fact, in 1986, Congress passed the National Vaccine Injury Act, which gave complete immunity to pharmaceutical companies when vaccines injured or killed children. And HHS was tasked with overseeing vaccine safety -- but we now know HHS did not do their job...NOT ONE TIME in over thirty years!
But, as a result of the 1986 law, vaccine companies were incentivized to rush to market with as many new, poorly tested vaccines as possible. None of these vaccines got tested to see if they might harm the immune system, trigger allergies or autoimmune diseases, or cause cancer...not only that, much of the short term safety testing that was done didn't even use a TRUE CONTROL. In fact overall, I have tell you that the "science" they are using to tell us these new vaccines are safe is pretty terrible, HHS has not been doing their job, you can't sue if vaccines hurt your child and oh -- more and more are being mandated for school entry. As a result vaccines are poised to be pharma's best cash cow yet -- and that's saying a lot for an industry that is one of the most powerful in the world (and also has an egregious record of fraud and misconduct.)
It's no surprise given these facts, that growing numbers of parents -- who either witnessed a vaccine reaction in one of their children or heard about someone being tragically harmed by a vaccine, are doing their own research and choosing to NOT do one or more of the recommended vaccines because the risk/benefit of THAT vaccine does not make sense for THEIR child.
Following introduction of the chickenpox vaccine, I met parents who told me that after getting this vaccine for their child, she came down with SHINGLES -- a disease far worse than chickenpox, which was unheard of in children before the chicken pox vaccine was introduced. But soon Chicken pox joined the others as a required vaccine in most states.
Perhaps the worst of all vaccines -- in terms of the risk/benefit for children in wealthy countries is the HPV vaccine. If you have access to the PAP test, you can prevent almost all cervical cancer -- making this vaccine pretty unnecessary. However the HPV vaccine uses a powerful new adjuvant that some science suggests is quite dangerous for some children. An entire meticulously researched book well-referenced to the scientific literature deconstructs the egregious conflicts of interest that paved the way for this vaccine to become recommended -- and even mandated in 3 states. Check out The HPV Vaccine on Trial if you would like to see for yourself what the science really says and how many whistle-blowers have been attacked for trying raise awareness about the shoddy science and terrible safety testing that supposedly showed this vaccine was safe and effective. When a member of the once highly esteemed Cochrane Collaboration failed to fall in-line with pressure to ignore half the published science on the HPV vaccine it led to his firing and then mass resignations of the Cochrane board in protest. And even if you don't have kids this issue could impact you. It appears the CDC is about to recommend this vaccine now for people in the 20s, 30s and 40s. And I know adults who have been forced to get vaccines as conditions of holding on to their jobs.
But it gets even worse. Pharma shills (and those caught in their cult-like mind control) have become impatient with states who still allow parents to refuse a vaccine they don't want for their child. (including in some states the HPV vaccine which has not only harmed many kids, but is for a disease that is not spread by casual contact -- so it cannot be argued that someone eschewing that vaccine poses a threat in a public setting...yet they are claiming that as justification for forcing our young people to get it.
Next week the federal government will be having hearings to consider new federal mandates that will override state laws that do allow parents the right of informed consent on behalf of their child. This would be a travesty of justice -- and I believe would materially harm many children.
Please contact your elected representatives and let them know how much you care about maintaining medical freedom. This page has more information.
I am a microbiologist and I have looked at a lot of the science, and I can tell you that the risk/benefit ratio of every single vaccine varies a lot from one to another...and it varies from one child to another as well. Chickenpox and Diphtheria are not equally dangerous diseases and Hepatitis B does not pose an equal threat to all populations. Parents are not stupid, and when they actually look at the facts and discover that the reasons to vaccinate do not apply equally to all vaccines -- AND that some children really do die or become disabled from vaccines (far more than our media admits too -- that's why the government gave vaccine manufacturers immunity.) THAT is what is undermining our vaccine program -- it's the half truths and the coercion -- not the parent's doing their job and trying hard to make the best decision for their child. No one cares more about the well-being of any individual child, nor appreciates that child's unique family history and environment than that child's parents. That is why parents, not doctors and not the state, must be allowed the basic human right of informed consent and the right to refuse any medical intervention after considering the risks and benefits for their child.
The death rate from infectious disease in America, declined sharply BEFORE vaccines were in widespread use -- and as vaccines for specific illnesses were being introduced the death rate between those we vaccinated for and those we did not (like scarlet fever, TB, Typhoid, Typhus, Malaria) mostly declined at similar rates suggesting that other public health measures (like sanitation) were more responsible for declining death rates than vaccines. So we take away informed consent for vaccines, it will be much easier to take away informed consent for other medical interventions where a stronger argument of saving more lives can probably be made (like putting statins in the drinking water.)
Informed consent is a basic human right. Taking it away on top of giving drug companies immunity if their products injure is a very very bad idea.
One of the things that has been very helpful to me I learned from my years of involvement with Montessori schools. Integral to the philosophy is something Montessori refers to as the, "Prepared Environment." The idea is to thoughtfully set up the physical space in a way that is visually appealing and invites one to engage in activities beneficial to well-being. This facilitates desired behaviors while discouraging that which might be destructive. Or as engineers, architects and planners like to say, "Structure determines function."
Get ready --- the deluge has already begun. We are being bombarded with media reports about yet another dangerous disease -- West Nile Virus. No doubt this helps to sell lots of bug repellent, and enable applications of toxic chemicals to our environment, while priming the populace to accept yet another vaccine once it becomes available (google it -- and you'll see it's in development now.)
Do news reports like this make you fearful (as they do me)? Then this post is for you. The first thing I did after I read a recent news report about the scary West Nile Virus, was to visit this CDC Page:
I originally wrote this post two years ago. I have just added a bit of video from the entertainment at last year's (2017) Summerfest --- It's a really funny musical skit featuring Miyoko Shinner (Founder of Miyoko's Kitchen) Dr. Michael Greger of NutritionFacts.org and Dr. Ted Barnett (Rochester Lifestyle Medicine). This year, (2018) The big news is that Vegetarian Summerfest will henceforth be called Vegan Summerfest. Enjoy!
Highlights of the 2016 NAVS Vegetarian Summerfest
If you've never been there -- words and pictures simply fall far short of capturing the magic, the love, and the soul-affirming feeling of connection, hope and healing that is the essence of the North American Vegetarian Society's Summerfest Conference. Scroll down to see lots of pictures from this year's conference -- and notice what a vibrant looking bunch of humans are there! I've been to many other conferences -- and although they may share similar speakers, offer equivalent educational opportunities, provide tantalizing food and fun social gatherings, nothing I have yet experienced comes close to creating what the majority of the 600 plus attendees who pilgrimage to this event each year experience: Summerfest quite spectacularly and reliably renews people by immersing them
Of all the new products I sampled at the HUGE Asheville VeganFest...one in particular stood out as something I needed to tell everyone about. It's a delicious new product called "Hempe." The sample I tasted was air fried with very little oil, and used no additional seasonings and was AMAZING!
Even better --- now my soy-allergic friends have yet another terrific vegan protein to enjoy -- that is entirely free of soy products!
I bought this package here at the festival (it has "FARB PAID" on it because I had them hold it for me in their coolers a bit before I was ready to trek it back to my
When I was in grade school in the 1960s-70s I never heard of anyone with a peanut allergy. I knew of exactly one case of someone with asthma. Her diagnosis stood out in my mind for two reasons: First because she didn't have to run laps in gym class, (which I envied at the time) and second because her disease, "Asthma" was so rare. I virtually never heard of any other cases for at least ten more years. (Full disclosure to give some perspective here -- as a child, I read our Family Medical Reference Book for fun.) Allergy, Asthma, Autism and ADHD, are referred to by many as the, "Four A's." There is much overlap in the populations afflicted with each of these.
In 1941 Allergist Warren Vaughan wrote what appears to be the very first book to explain to the public what an allergy was. It was titled, Strange Malady. That book also documents milk, egg, strawberry and wheat as the most significant allergies at that time. There was no mention of peanuts as a trigger for allergies...
It’s no secret that gluten-free foods are one of the fastest growing sectors in the food industry. Yet many mainstream health and nutrition sources still discourage adoption of a gluten free diet for anyone without a laboratory confirmed diagnosis of Celiac Disease (CD). Some widely touted studies have suggested that “gluten sensitivity” may not exist, and suggest that FODMAPS, not gluten are causing the GI symptoms that people assumed were from gluten.
There are other studies that suggest many who are harmed from gluten have no obvious GI symptoms and may be negative for CD by every known test. Sometimes they present only with anemia, or osteoporosis which many doctors still don't know can be caused from consuming gluten.
Every currently used medical test to identify those who might be harmed by gluten, has many