THE VACCINATION DEBATE
ARTICLES
|
"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
Further
Reading:
·
Viruses
|
