THE VACCINATION DEBATE
"Theories of science must be judged on the basis of facts and reasoning, and not by the authority of dogma."
Thomas Huxley 1860
Germs (bacteria and viruses) are everywhere, they are in the air we breathe, in the food we eat, in the water we drink and on everything we touch. We are constantly exposed to germs, yet for most of the time we remain perfectly well. If germs are the cause of disease, then why is it that we are not sick all the time?
If germs are the cause of disease, then why is it that millions of people can carry within them the germs of influenza, tuberculosis, tetanus, staphylococcus infections and many other diseases and yet remain perfectly well?
In Europe during the latter part of the 19th century, virtually all city dwellers were infected with the tuberculosis germs, yet only a tiny proportion succumbed to the disease.
The New England Journal of Medicine reports that over 25 million Americans are infected with the herpes virus, yet only a minority of these develop the genital sores associated with herpes.
During the polio epidemics of the 1950's, millions of people carried the polio virus, but again, only a fraction (less than 1%) developed the disease.
If germs are the cause of disease, then how is it that in many diseases supposedly caused by a specific germ, that germ is not present?
Sir William Osler, one of the most renowned physicians of his time claimed that the diphtheria germ was absent in 28 to 40% of diphtheria cases. According to Green's Medical Diagnosis, the tuberculosis germ is often absent in the early stages of tuberculosis.
Medical researchers have noted that many cases of AIDS have occurred in people with no trace of the AIDS virus. Now if you can develop the disease without the germ, then how can the germ be the cause?
Professor Rene Dubos, the most renowned microbiologist of his time and referred to by the Scientific American as one of the most influential ecological thinkers of the 20th century rejected the germ theory and went so far as to say "Viruses and bacteria are not the sole cause of infectious disease, there is something else."
Immunity, from the medical viewpoint, is a state in which the body's immune system is capable of recognising and destroying specific disease causing germs. So for example, if the body has immunity against measles, then supposedly, should the body come into contact with a measles germ, the immune system will take immediate action to destroy the measles germ thus preventing measles. Sounds fine in theory but it doesn't work in practise.
Many studies have shown that measles, rubella, diphtheria and other infections can still occur in fully immune individuals. One such study appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association (May 1990) under the title "Mild Measles and Secondary Vaccine Failure during a Sustained Outbreak in a Highly Vaccinated Population".
The article states: "Serological surveys have consistently demonstrated high rates of post-vaccination seroconversion, with long-term persistence of antibody titers…data from recent measles outbreaks show little or no evidence of waning immunity and apparent high rates of vaccine efficacy. The recent occurrence of large, sustained out-breaks in highly vaccinated school populations however, was unexpected."
In other words these measles out-breaks occurred amongst students who were shown to have total immunity against measles.
In reality, high antibody levels (immunity) do not guarantee protection against disease for, as Australian Doctor and Vaccine Researcher Archie Kalokerinos points out, "Antibody levels are used to measure the degree of protection against a particular disease, and the authorities always say that means protection, but it doesn't. You can have tons of antibodies and no protection, or you can have no antibodies and tons of protection."
Vaccination is based upon the premise that immunity is your only protection against infectious disease, and that without it, should you be exposed to a specific disease causing germ then you can succumb to the disease and even die! So for example, if you are exposed to the polio virus and have no immunity against polio, then you can develop this disease and die. Or if you don't die you can develop paralysis or other horrible complications.
Well the truth is that for the majority of persons who have no immunity against supposedly disease causing germs, they will not succumb to the disease.
During the polio epidemics of the 1950's, the Medical Journal of Australia (Feb 9,1952.P170) published an article which stated "When a virus infection is initiated in the body of a person with no pre-existing immunity, it is only on the rarest occasions that the virus finds it possible to sweep through and produce serious damage in all or most of the cells that are theoretically susceptible to its actions."
In fact a couple of years earlier The British Medical Council published a study (May 1950 Report No 272) which showed there was no relationship between antibody levels (immunity) and the incidence of diphtheria.
It was found that many diphtheria patients had high levels of antibodies (immunity), whereas many of the doctors, nurses and friends who were in constant contact with the diphtheria patients had low antibody levels (no immunity) and yet remained perfectly well.
The Council reported "Some of the results obtained were so unusual, and unexpected, so contradictory, and indeed paradoxical, that the inquiry as originally envisaged and put into effect, had to be brought to a close."
Vaccination is based upon the premise that with immunity, you are protected, without it, you are unprotected. This is not the case.
It is indeed a fact that for most children who develop measles, chicken pox, rubella or any of the other common childhood infections, they will never experience these same infections again. However, I do not accept the belief or the assumption, that this is because such infections confer life-long immunity against having them again.
Measles, chicken pox, rubella and the other childhood infections represent an acute crisis of toxic elimination.
In order for the body to mount an acute crisis there must be a large reserve of vitality which most children possess.
Unfortunately, by the time most children grow to adulthood, this reserve of vitality has been greatly diminished, due largely to poor eating habits, drugs, vaccines, chemical poisons in food and water, atmospheric pollutants and the depressing effects of fear, worry and other negative emotions.
By adulthood, few adults have sufficient vitality left to mount an acute crisis such as measles or chicken pox.
Although adults can still experience a crisis of elimination, it is more often in the form of a cold or flu which generally does not involve fever and can last anywhere from a few days to a few weeks.
For those adults who are diagnosed with measles, whooping cough, chicken pox etc., it will often be found that their fever is two to three degrees below what a child's fever would be if experiencing the same infection. This is due to the adults lower vitality state.
For those children whose vitality remains strong and where there is no history of drug suppression, then there is no physiological reason why such children cannot experience measles, chicken pox or any of the other childhood infections on more than one occasion should their toxicity level exceed their body's toxic threshold.
Indeed, Herbert Shelton, the most renowned Natural Hygienist of the 20th century has confirmed from his own clinical experiences, cases of chicken pox, measles etc, occurring in the same child on two, three or even more occasions.
The ability of our immune system to take defensive action against antigens (foreign substances) is dependent not only on immunological memory, but more so, on the strength of our body's inherent vitality. A simple analogy will make this clear.
Take a football team, put them through a gruelling 4 hour workout so they finish it 5 minutes prior to the start of their game.
Now when they take the field, they will still be able to recognise their opponents, they will still know that their roles are to defend and attack them, but their ability to perform this role will be greatly impaired because of their energy depletion from the 4 hour workout.
Because of their energy depletion they will more than likely be overwhelmed by their opponents.
Now much the same applies with our immune system and how well it performs its role. When our vitality is strong, then our immune system works with maximum efficiency, but if our vitality is weak, then our immune system will be less capable of defensive action even though it possesses immunological memory for the antigens it encounters.
The key to strengthening our immune system lies not in creating immunological memory against specific antigens, for at all times, the body can recognise any antigen (foreign substance) through its innate intelligence. The key to strengthening our immune system lies in raising our vitality.
"The body has its own methods of defence. These depend on the vitality of the body at the time. If it is vital enough, it will resist all infections; if it isn't vital enough, it won't, and you can't change the vitality of the body for the better by introducing poison of any kind into it."
Dr William Howard Hay (1937)
Heard about the new cough vaccine? Yep! Guaranteed 100% safe and effective. Take this vaccine and the next time you get something caught in your throat, then instead of coughing it up, you get to choke to bloody death!
Sound pretty stupid? Well no more stupid than taking a vaccine to prevent measles, chicken pox and the others. Why? Because measles, chicken pox and the others serve the same purpose as a cough - to remove foreign and offensive materials from the system in order to preserve physiological health.
Think about it……
Each year, the World Health Organisation, sponsored by the American Drug Trust, goes into third world countries and vaccinates millions of malnourished children in an attempt to protect them from measles, polio, whooping cough and other infections. To those who would endorse these campaigns, I pose a question.
The purpose of vaccination is to stimulate the body's immune system to create antibodies which supposedly fight off germs.
Now in order for the body to create antibodies, it needs protein, for this is what antibodies are made up of.
So my question is - how can the body of a malnourished child create antibodies? Malnourished children are protein deficient; they don't have the protein to create the antibodies. They suffer from a condition known as kwashiorkor which means protein deficiency.
To believe that vaccinating a malnourished child will stimulate their immune system to produce antibodies is to believe that you can build a brick house without the bricks!
"…. and malnutrition is considered to be an added indication for immunising children."
British Medical Journal, 22/9/90, p593
If the role of our immune system is to fight off germs, then the obvious question is - why do we carry germs in the first place?
Why doesn't our immune system fight off all germs so that we remain germ free?
If our immune system is designed to protect us from polio, tetanus, diphtheria and other supposedly disease causing germs, then why is it that for most people who carry these germs, their immune systems take no defensive action (meaning that no antibodies are produced) and yet they remain perfectly well?
There is only one logical answer to these questions - our immune system is not designed to fight off germs, for in reality, germs are not our enemies but our friends.
Their real purpose is to feed on the waste matter within our bodies and thus assist in the important task of keeping our system clean.
The true relationship between man and germ is not one of open warfare but one of peaceful co-existence, a relationship that Biology refers to as symbiosis.
"..when germs are found within a sick body, it is not that they entered from outside and caused the disease. It is because they developed from the decaying cells within the body and have an important part to play in helping to handle the waste and destruction bought about by serums, drugs and other poisons forced upon the body from without."
Eleanor McBean "The Poisoned Needle"
So what is the true role of our immune system?
Our immune system is made up of millions of white blood cells and antibodies which are designed to bind, engulf and ultimately destroy foreign proteins, bacterial excretions and other harmful substances.
In other words, the true role of our immune system is not to fight off germs, but to rid the body of foreign harmful material and thus assist in the important task of preserving physiological health.
Many parenting groups are appealing to medical authorities to make safe vaccines. As I personally believe that vaccines don't work, I can't help asking - what's the point?
Putting that question aside, I would like to explain why I believe it is a physiological impossibility to make safe vaccines.
Vaccines, by their very nature, must always contain foreign material in order to evoke an immune response.
The presence of any foreign material in the body is always potentially harmful, for if the body is unable to remove or eliminate it, then it's retention within the body will not only impair normal functioning and deplete vitality, but it will cause a gradual degeneration in surrounding tissue and thus earlier onset of chronic disease.
Vaccines can never be made safe for the simple reason that the very materials they are made up from are always of a poisonous nature, and therefore harmful to human health.
Trying to make a safe vaccine is like trying to make arsenic safe to drink!
In the words of Dr James R. Shannon, former Director of the National Institute of Health, USA
"the only safe vaccine is one that is never used."
The term infectious disease implies that we catch another person's disease, so for example, we catch somebody's cold. In reality, we do not catch somebody's cold, we develop a cold due to our inner toxicity level.
When a child develops measles, chicken pox, whooping cough or any of the other childhood infections, it is not because it contracted a germ from outside itself, for at all times children are exposed to the germs associated with these infections.
The development of these infections occurs when the child's toxicity level reaches an unsafe level, for it is then that the body must take emergency action to reduce the toxic load.
Now I do not argue that the germs associated with these infections can be passed on from child to child, but whether the child develops the disease is determined not by the virulence of the germ but by the inner conditions of the child's body.
So for example, if a child is in a state of physiological health and becomes infected with the measles germ that child will not develop measles.
Now when measles does develop in a child, it's still not because of the germ, but because of that child's inner toxicity level, remembering that measles, like all the other childhood infections, represents an acute crisis of toxic elimination.
With regards to other so-called infectious diseases like AIDS, hepatitis, herpes, leprosy, tuberculosis, etc, the development of these diseases is determined not by the presence of the germ or the virus, but by the inner conditions of the body.
This explains why, of the millions of people who carry the germs or viruses associated with these diseases, only a small fraction of them go on to develop the diseases.
The term infectious disease is a misnomer for it implies that disease can be passed from person to person, when in reality, disease does not come from without, but comes from within.
"We may diagnose these symptoms as mumps, measles, catarrh, cancer, smallpox etc, as we similarly name the various products of the soil as wheat, corn, oats, many kinds of grasses, weeds, trees etc; but regardless of the arbitrary names of the symptoms at the surface, they all come from and centre in one cause"
G Clements 'The Unity and Simplicity of Disease'
Firstly, they have you believe that there are all these germs out there that can kill you. Or if they don't kill you, they can cause horrible complications and long term suffering.
Secondly, they have you believe that no matter how healthy you are, if you contract one of these germs then you can easily develop the disease and die. In other words, they have you believe that health is no protection.
Thirdly, they have you believe that your only means of protection, your only chances of survival, is through their drugs and vaccines that you have to buy. (Your taxes are paying for them)
The most effective marketing strategy on the planet is to convince the consumer that if he doesn't buy the product he'll die!
The liver is the body's largest detoxifying organ and one of its major functions is the breakdown of nitrogenous wastes and other toxic substances. How well the liver performs this function is primarily dependent upon the strength of inherent vitality and the body's toxic load.
In alcoholics, injecting drug users, malnourished and toxic individuals, and persons with liver dysfunction, the toxicity level of the liver can often exceed its normal detoxifying capacity, thus leading to liver toxicity. This condition is potentially harmful, for if left unchecked, it can ultimately lead to liver destruction, cirrhosis and even cancer.
When liver toxicity develops, then as long as sufficient vitality exists, the body will attempt remedial action in the form of liver inflammation, a condition that medical authorities refer to as Hepatitis. ( 'Hep' meaning liver, and 'itis' meaning inflammation).
The purpose of inflammation is to reduce the liver's toxicity level and to carry out healing and repair. What I am therefore saying is that Hepatitis is not the disease, but in fact, the cure.
"The inflammatory reaction is fundamental for the survival of the organism. It is necessary for the maintenance of homeostasis in the face of injury and without it the organism cannot survive."
Ronald Raven, Foundation of Medicine
Copyright © 2002 Ian Sinclair All rights reserved. Disclaimer