15744035_s

by Meryl Dorey

Just about every government authority in Australia and overseas is trying to describe those who question the wisdom of mass vaccination as being a danger to society. In fact, they are working hard to frame the entire debate as being dangerous – as though just discussing, researching and considering whether or not vaccination is in your or your child’s best interest is somehow spreading deadly diseases in the community.

A US business writer recently responded to a balanced presentation on the HPV vaccine by television journalist Katie Couric by saying, “Merely to ask questions is to validate them.

And an article published on The Conversation website by an industry front-group conducting a public campaign called I Immunise”, claimed that the decision about whether or not one should vaccinate one’s children is an ethical issue – not a matter for scientific debate. The article stated that people who question vaccination are suffering from something called “competitive crunchiness” which basically leads them to reject many of the ‘benefits’ of the modern scientific world and breastfeed, choose organic foods, cloth nappies and reject vaccines.

According to the article:

“I Immunise” does what other Australian campaigns have not: it leads with values rather than facts.”

Perhaps they are rejecting facts because those same facts might show that there is a legitimate area of concern when it comes to vaccination and values don’t even get a look-in when parents are trying to care for their precious children – unless they mean the value we each place on the life, health and happiness of our family?

Where does the real danger lie?

So is it more dangerous to ask questions about medical procedures or to take at face value the information given to us by the medical profession and the government?

Allopathic medicine and government bureaucracies have a long and chequered history of deadly errors, mistakes and outright lies told for the purpose of self-protection, profit and increasing one’s own personal prestige. Trusting them without asking questions would be like buying a used car without checking under the bonnet first, or jumping off a cliff before seeing if there was a deep pool below you. It could be dangerous, possibly expensive and foolhardy in the extreme.

The real danger to the public is not in the dissemination of information – even if that information is wrong. We have to trust that people are intelligent enough to sort the wheat from the chaff. We don’t need to tell people what they can and cannot know – we simply need to give them a broad range of information and let them decide for themselves.

The only people placed at risk by open, transparent and public debate on health issues are those who will lose out – financially and reputation-wise – by the discovery that vaccine and medical ‘science’ may be more guesswork and corruption than fact.

When we see academics, politicians, scientists and government officials telling us that it is dangerous to question them or to listen to those who do – we must see that the real danger lies with believing what they say.

Please note: Blog posts are opinion pieces that represent the views of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the AVN National Committee. The AVN is a forum, support and information organisation and outlet for discussion about the relative benefits and risks of vaccinations in particular – and medical procedures in general. We do not provide medical advice but believe that everyone should have the opportunity and the obligation to do their own research before making decisions for their families. The information we provide (including your personal review of the references we cite) should be taken in conjunction with a range of other data, including that obtained from government, your health care provider and/or other medical source material to assist you in developing the knowledge required to make informed health choices.

26 Comments

  1. Wonderfully written.
    All good news, I say.
    Nobody can belief governments.
    Know that you are tru to yourself.
    Everybody, do your research.
    Read the literature out there.
    Spread the work for your friends, please!

  2. Ignorance might be “bliss” for some but not for me and my family. I am 53 y/o and the best piece of advice I ever received from my negligent father was when I was young and he told me “never believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see” in other words don’t blindly trust anyone or anything! Be responsible parents, we have no excuse today with all the available information, do your research, and if in doubt – don’t! I have been working in the disability field for over 15 years and the amount of parents that have cried on my shoulder telling me that there child was normal, intelligent and reaching all their milestones until they had receive their MMR vaccines has been in the hundreds! It was sad to see so many devastated and suffering with the realisation that their little baby would never be the same again and that they would have to care for them for the rest of their lives (Oh God help me it was terrible to see, the poor people, it brings tears to my eyes!). It was enough to raise alarm and concern with me that when I had my first child I was resolute in that I could not live with myself if I had my child suffer a side effect from being vaccinated. I chose to immunise my child with homeopathy and he is strong, tall and hardly has ever been sick, he actually caught whooping cough from his vaccinated friend who caught it from the vaccinated nurses at the hospital; my boy lightly coughed off and on for 3 days and was over it, the other child who was vaccinated cough and was sick for nearly 3 weeks! I sometimes wonder if it is all the chlorine and fluoride being added to the water that is causing all the people to be stupid – the definition of which is – unintelligent, ignorant, dense, brainless, mindless, foolish, dull-witted, dull, slow witted, witless, slow, dunce-like, simple-minded, empty-headed, vacuous, vapid, half-witted, idiotic, moronic, imbecilic, imbecile, obtuse, doltish. Please people of the world leave those alone who make vital love choices for their families and loved ones and do not persecute those that who make different choices to you!

  3. Very well written Stephen.
    For the pro-V’s your story will have no merit or back up science. “It’s only hearsay and anecdotal.”
    For me mate I’m right with you on what you are saying.

  4. I,m from the Netherlands. Had 11 websites about Monsanto, NWO, Codex Alimentarius, Barak Obama, FEMA, vaccine,s (general) and the HPV-vaccine,s Gardasil and Cervarix.
    All my websites are gone ! Just disappeared after I,d asked our gov. some questions about the vaccine,s. Coincidence?
    Maybe my websites were a burden to our Dutch gouverment.

    1. I’m so sorry Annelies. Anyone who thinks that democratic nations don’t behave just like dictatorships, can hear your story and realise how wrong they are. Freedom of communication is a cause worth fighting for. My father didn’t fight for freedom in WW II only to have it snatched away from his children and grandchildren by governments who think that opposition must be stopped. Whether someone agrees with what is said – we all have the right to say what we think and if someone disagrees, we can discuss it or they can ignore it. They certainly have no right to stop us from speaking.

  5. I am a registered nurse and cannot believe that Australians are against vaccinations. Babies have no natural defence against whooping cough, if you chose to to not immunise your child even if they survive it, there is nothing stopping them from passing it to a newborn as has sadly happened before causing death. I came to this website because my hospital had been receiving warnings from the Department of Health on increasing rates of measles and whooping cough causing morbidity and mortality. I wondered who isn’t being vaccinated? Is it a fault of the system? Now I realise it is misinformation. It is fine to say educate yourself. Do. Its important. But use credible data from peer reviewed sources and studies from good sample sizes. Don’t say ‘Oh they are just lying to us’ because really there is strong evidence for vaccination. I have seen many people write on sites like this things like “garlic will prevent the flu” nursed a many with bird flu in ICU and he was Italian, no shortage of garlic there. Protect yourself and your families, ask credible registered health professionals (no homeopathy), listen, ask questions, research through the proper avenues.

    1. Perhaps you need to do some research – not just listen to what you’ve been told, Emily. There are many doctors, specialists, immunologists, neurologists and scientists who question the wisdom of mass vaccination. It isn’t just people from our organisation – it is a wordlwide movement and it is backed by science. Just because someone has told you that this information is not credible doesn’t make it so. Think for yourself; research for yourself; make up your own mind and keep the conversation going. We need to be able to communicate openly and without rancour about such important issues.

      1. I never said my knowledge was based on purely anecdotal sources. You do not spend time at university completing research papers using hearsay. I am also not saying I am incapable of mistakes, I am human. Here is an example of my issues with this site. For interests sake I went to look up the hepatitis B vaccine according to this website. Its information was centered around Dr Jane Orient but did not contain any references. I looked up D Jane Orient and was able to find out her contact details and that she charges $200 an hour and is taking patients but on her organisations website there were 3 stories, not studies, that she appeared to be involved in. On the piece quoted by the AVN http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/01/02/hepatitis-b-vaccine-part-four.aspx there are no references and statements about the data only (no tables of full results etc) and she claims it was an independent review of data. She ends this article with (concerning vaccines) “The evidence is far too poor to warrant overriding the independent judgments of patients, parents, and attending physicians, even if this were ethically or legally acceptable.”
        I therefore do not warrant this to be a credible piece of data. My main point about all of this is, if the Hep B vaccine really is dangerous and evidence exists, then perhaps this website is letting your argument down.I believe we all need to have an openness to ideas and willingness to communicate civilly to those with opposing views. After all as the slogan of this site says ‘Every issue had two sides’

    2. Who decides what is credible Emily? Would it be fair to say that only reports from people with a strong belief in vaccines constitutes “credible” or is there some other definition?

      This “peer-review” nonsense is killing science. Sure IT, engineering etc are great but the theoretical sciences probably haven’t been this sick for 600 years. It is nothing more than a group of people heavily invested in an institution deciding upon the validity of papers that either support or criticise that institution. An absolute disaster or a system. We would be better off if we just chose papers by pulling them out of a hat.

      Oh and by the way, the pertussis vaccine purports to prevent the b pertussis toxoid not the bacteria itself. It cannot – even assuming it works as claimed – prevent its transmission.

      1. Thanks for replying.
        To me an credible source is using the scholarly definitions like;
        -Written by someone (or a group) who is qualified (eg. immunology specialist)
        -Has a comprehensive reference list
        -Uses studies with large sample sizes to draw their conclusions
        -Has the paper critiqued (peer reviewed) by another qualified person (or persons) in their field
        -Recent (In the last 10 years) or an older study which has been re-reviewed and released again
        -Have no clear monetary interest in the outcome.
        The Cochrane Review is great for comparing studies. I am not sure why you mentioned IT and engineering and medicine is not a theoretical science.
        Bordetella pertussiss is the bacteria, once it colonizes a lung it releases the pertussis toxin which disrupts the immune systems normal function and causes phagocytes (1st line defence) to not respond normally to the bacteria and prevent lymphocytes from returning to the lymph nodes where the bacteria is filtered. So the toxin unable the sufferer to develop pertussis. The vaccines also contain a section of the cell wall of the bacteria itself though. So the body has something to recognise as foreign and to provoke a immune response to, but it cannot infect the patient as it is missing the rest of the bacteria.
        So i believe it would have an effect on the transmission of whooping cough. The thing that concerns me is that the vaccine, and naturally acquired immunity for whooping cough, have been found to be limited in the duration of their effectiveness (varying data from 12 -20 years) so if you chose to immunise you would need a booster later in life which is new news to me and I am sure for others.

      2. “Written by someone (or a group) who is qualified (eg. immunology specialist)”
        But what if you believe the entire field was misguided? Should I care what an expert on eugenics or Lysenkoism has to tell me?

        “-Has a comprehensive reference list”
        What if your paper is saying something completely novel? You might still have references for some aspects of your paper but by definition they couldn’t be particularly critical.

        “-Uses studies with large sample sizes to draw their conclusions”
        Hang on. Are you saying that *only* statistical evaluations can be used as evidence?

        “-Has the paper critiqued (peer reviewed) by another qualified person (or persons) in their field”
        And this is the biggie. Peer-review is not just worthless, it is worse than worthless. It is one person whose entire income and reputation is dependent on the continuing belief in X reviewing a paper on the validity of X. What possible purpose could it serve other than to help ensure that the orthodox view remains?

        “-Recent (In the last 10 years) or an older study which has been re-reviewed and released again”

        So we can safely ignore people telling us about the wonders of the smallpox or polio vaccines then?

        “-Have no clear monetary interest in the outcome.”

        Well that would rule out every pro-vax study then.

        “I am not sure why you mentioned IT and engineering and medicine is not a theoretical science.”

        Sorry, that was sloppy on my part. For those who have read much of my rantings they will know that the epistemic differentiation is between fields of knowledge whereby those who practise it are in a position to know the counterfactual and those where the counterfactual is unknown or ambiguous.

        “The vaccines also contain a section of the cell wall of the bacteria itself though. So the body has something to recognise as foreign and to provoke a immune response to, but it cannot infect the patient as it is missing the rest of the bacteria.”

        It’s hard to know whether your sloppy wording is simply a mistake or a function of the fact that you are grasping at straws. If the pertussis vaccine is designed/able to prevent the bacteria then why include the toxin component as well? Just to make it more dangerous?

        And if the body can amount an effective immune response to mere components of a bacteria (and I assume the same is true of viruses (although I suspect that this is all made up)) then why would we ever concern ourselves about “mutations” of pathogens rendering the previous vaccine ineffective?

        “The thing that concerns me is that the vaccine, and naturally acquired immunity for whooping cough, have been found to be limited in the duration of their effectiveness (varying data from 12 -20 years) so if you chose to immunise you would need a booster later in life which is new news to me and I am sure for others.”

        The thing that concerns me is how so many people can fall for the unfalsifiable nonsense that vaccines prevent disease.

        Oh by the way. You’re one of only two people that have ever attempted to answer the pertussis thing. Irrespective of whether I find your answer convincing I truly appreciate the effort.

        From your other post:

        “I looked up D Jane Orient and was able to find out her contact details and that she charges $200 an hour”

        Isn’t that basically the same rate any GP would get paid? I never go there but my understanding is that the minimum consult is around $60 and this might only last a few minutes. Of course they have overheads etc but regardless, why would earning $200 an hour negate anything Dr Orient has to say?

      3. If I neglect to address something due the the length of your response I apologise.
        The problem I have with your critique is that I that from what you have said it would appear you have no insight or experience with scientific writing and you are getting aggressive with ME this. Those points were some that were actually taken from my university handbook about writing credible reports. Reports without references are seen as opinion pieces only. Older studies on small pox and polio etc are constantly re-reviewed. If a study has shown to shed light on a subject that information will not just go away, but it allows old incorrect information (Such as the first study that the MMR vaccine causing Austism in Britain) being discredited. If you chose not to read reports and evidence that is your business, there is alot more to say but this is a comments section, not a place for essays.

        I also said earlier-

        “The vaccines also contain a section of the cell wall of the bacteria itself though. So the body has something to recognise as foreign and to provoke a immune response to, but it cannot infect the patient as it is missing the rest of the bacteria.”
        You replied-
        “It’s hard to know whether your sloppy wording is simply a mistake or a function of the fact that you are grasping at straws. If the pertussis vaccine is designed/able to prevent the bacteria then why include the toxin component as well? Just to make it more dangerous?”

        If you researched this you would see that the toxin attacks the immune system within moments, preventing the phagocyotes in the blood stream from binding to foreign cells and allowing the pertussis bacteria to colonise. If they did NOT include the toxin component, the person given the incomplete vaccine would still have a weakened immune system, even if they are immune to pertussis. I think you should hesitate before calling someone else’s comments ‘sloppy’. I look at your comments and see many errors, points that don’t seem to make sense and things I don’t agree with and I don’t call you sloppy or grasping at straws. I was under the impression this was a civil place of discussion, yet you applaud me for attempting to respond? I see why people don’t.

        Also my point about Jane Orient ”
        I looked up Dr Jane Orient and was able to find out her contact details and that she charges $200 an hour and is taking patients but on her organisations website there were 3 stories, not studies, that she appeared to be involved in. On the piece quoted by the AVN http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/01/02/hepatitis-b-vaccine-part-four.aspx there are no references and statements about the data only (no tables of full results etc) and she claims it was an independent review of data. She ends this article with (concerning vaccines) “The evidence is far too poor to warrant overriding the independent judgments of patients, parents, and attending physicians, even if this were ethically or legally acceptable.”

        Was that was ALL I found out about her. For someone made such an important statement quoted by the AVN and who they hold in high esteem, she does not participate in anti-vaccine research and does not put her name to anything anti-vaccine and high profile anymore. She is on the board of a doctors association which says very little about vaccines and her statement used by the AVN (talking about potential dangers of vaccines) ends with the evidence is far too poor to change vaccinations unless the individual decides too.

        1. I have had RN’s report to me as the Manager of Community Services with St Vincent’s health and aging division and let me tell you, most are not so fun to deal with, they all think they are like doctors and you cannot tell them anything as they know it all. Yes some of them are smart and recall all they have been taught but again I say is all they have been taught right? Do people really think that there is no corruption in medicine??? No hidden agenda’s? No immoral or ethical inconsistencies? Are you seriously telling me that you believe all that you have been told? Do you believe in little fairy’s with wings too, what about santa claus, little green men from outer space. Wherever there is big money to be made there is corruption, that is a fact! Time to snap out of the hypnotic trance you have been spell-blinded by and know this “these big corporations are like big religions” they only want to deceive you and take your money, they have no interest in helping you at all, I know I am in the industry, I see all the hypocrisy. Do you think for one moment that if they discovered a cure for cancer which was say for example eating some herb in the garden, they would approve it and tell you? Don’t be bloody stupid, if they cannot make money out of it they will not test it, approve it, tell you, in fact they will do everything they can do discredit you and destroy any credibility you might have. People are so naive and easily manipulated, God help us all.

      4. I’ll leave your first paragraph as it was just gibberish.

        “If you researched this you would see that the toxin attacks the immune system within moments, preventing the phagocyotes in the blood stream from binding to foreign cells and allowing the pertussis bacteria to colonise.”

        So you can’t have the bacteria without the toxin. But you can’t have the toxin without the bacteria.

        Kif, we have a conundrum.

        “If they did NOT include the toxin component, the person given the incomplete vaccine would still have a weakened immune system, even if they are immune to pertussis.”

        Weakened against what? The toxin?

        Again, the only way to make sense of what you write is if you think that the toxin can exist in the absence of the bacteria.

        “I think you should hesitate before calling someone else’s comments ‘sloppy’.”

        I couldn’t work out what you meant by “missing the rest of the bacteria”. And I still can’t.

        “I look at your comments and see many errors, points that don’t seem to make sense and things I don’t agree with and I don’t call you sloppy or grasping at straws.”

        Do you want a hug? Meryl and Greg and others put up with the most outrageous abuse because of their position with politicians, journalists and other assorted intellectual marshmallows lining up to take pot shots at them and you want to have a sook because something you wrote on this issue was described as sloppy?

        “I was under the impression this was a civil place of discussion, yet you applaud me for attempting to respond?”

        Are you even upset that I applauded you? You made a good faith attempt to answer a question but it wasn’t actually a very good one and you obviously recognise that now. So now you are just frantically searching for excuses not to listen to us through some trumped up righteous indignation.

        And your point about Dr Orient was even more incoherent than your first paragraph about all reports being right unless they are wrong or some such.

    3. According to Barbara Loe Fisherv, Co-Founder & President, National Vaccine Information Center

      “Of all the vaccines which have been routinely used by children in the past century, the brain damaging effects of the pertussis (whooping cough) portion of DPT vaccine is among the most well documented in the scientific literature.

      Created in 1912, the crude pertussis vaccine basically consisted of B. pertussis bacteria killed with heat, preserved with formaldehyde, and injected into children. In the early 1940’s, aluminum was added as an adjuvant and later the mercury preservative, thimerosal, was added when pertussis was combined with diphtheria and tetanus vaccines to create DPT. Pertussis vaccine was never studied in large clinical trials before being given to children in the first half of the 20th century or after it was combined into DPT and recommended for mass use by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1947.”

      Children who are particularly high-risk for brain injury or death after getting a pertussis-containing vaccine (DTaP or Tdap) include those who have suffered previous vaccine reactions, such as:

      High fever
      High pitched screaming or persistent crying
      Convulsions (with or without fever)
      Collapse/shock (also known as hypo-tonic/hypo-responsive episodes)
      Brain Inflammation and encephalopathy
      Most of the adverse effects are believed to occur from the effects of the pertussis toxin itself, which is one of the most lethal toxins in nature. It’s a well-known neurotoxin that is so reliable for inducing brain inflammation and brain damage that it’s used to deliberately induce experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) in lab animals. The toxin is implicated in brain inflammation caused both by the disease (whooping cough) itself, and complications from pertussis-containing vaccines.

      Yep that’s what I would like to see my child go through, NOT!

      1. When the pertussis vaccine was first made in 1912 as you said, it was made from the whole cell of the bacteria and contained much more side effects. That version of the vaccine is no longer in use in Australia and was replaced in the 90’s with a acellular version of the vaccine. Meaning it contains a part of the cell wall (and part of the toxin) and not the infectious component. SInce then adverse incidents have dramatically decreased. Redness (10% of cases) and fever (20%) can occur as with all vaccines. Febrile convulsions although rare can still occur, As can Hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes (HHE), defined as an episode of pallor, limpness and unresponsiveness in the moments post vaccination (In Australia during 2009, 3.2 cases of HHE were reported per 100 000 doses)
        Thimerosal is not used in the pertussis vaccines used in Australia. However traces of formaldehyde are as are as it inactivate the toxin you mentioned thereby preventing the other side effects you mentioned.
        Why I am personally for this vaccination is according to this website Since 2008 however, “Australia’s reported cases of whooping cough have been increasing exponentially with nearly 40,000 cases in 2011” Pertussis can cause death, especially for infants who in 55% of cases reported in Australia got it from an unprotected adult. I personally believe the risk of my having a fever is worth potentially saving someones, or my own, life. Everyone has their own decision to make.

      2. Emily, don’t you think that the info about 40,000 cases in Australia in 2011 simply proves how ineffective the vaccine is?

        The fact is that, despite the protestations of the skeptics, more people are receiving more vaccines than ever and yet here we are with massive increases in rates of pertussis.

        Now, I have my own views about the validity of this data but regardless, what we are seeing is an increase in reported cases at the same time as an increase in vaccination rates. Shouldn’t that tell us that – at least this particular vaccine – is completely useless?

      3. Emily, my point exactly, when you said – When the pertussis vaccine was first made in 1912 as you said, it was made from the whole cell of the bacteria and contained much more side effects. That version of the vaccine is no longer in use in Australia and was replaced in the 90′s with a acellular version of the vaccine. Meaning it contains a part of the cell wall (and part of the toxin) and not the infectious component. SInce then adverse incidents have dramatically decreased.

        Emily it goes to show that you confirm at least this “was” the case but they changed it right? My point exactly, they got it wrong then what makes you think they got it right now? Are we to the point where people think that we are perfect and science has all the answers and now don’t make mistakes? Please realise that I am all for science, however, I am also a skeptic which is wise. I am not that easily convinced as I have learnt that not all that glistens is gold, there is a lot of fools gold to sieve through! What I am saying is that there is enough evidence out there with families whose child has experienced an adverse reaction to these “safe” (so called) vaccines (and these beautiful people are intelligent, smart, love their children and know them better than anyone). Not to mention that there are scientists and doctors many of whom are also anti-vaccine who I know for a fact will oblige by giving your child a vaccine if you request it, however, do not vaccinate their own children! That information should ring alarms bells right there, there is no such thing as infallible science, they change their minds ALL THE TIME! I don’t know about others but I DO NOT TRUST (believe in, rely on, have faith in) DOCTORS OR SCIENTISTS (who accidentally kill people all the time Oops sorry just misdiagnosed you that’s all, sorry to have killed, maimed you) I cannot believe that people today have “faith” in this science stuff, really, it boggles my mind, it is like science has become a religion to people and trust in it so unquestionably and totally are convinced and believe all that they are told! The main point here is open your ears people and listen the alarm bells are ringing, just like they have before and will do so again with other things like GMO foods! Stop and listen to reason and question the science, do not by blind faith believe in everything that you are told. Look at who is to gain or who it is that has lot at stake to lose (if they decided that vaccines were harmful that is, governments, huge companies, doctors they would all collapse in a heap)! Do not think that for one minute that if they knew that vaccines were harmful that they would let you know, no way, it would go crazy, and would they care NOPE they DO NOT, specially not for your children like you do. It’s like most people have been hypnotized and under some sort of spell, snap out of it folks, someone click their fingers out there near you so you can WAKE UP and HEAR THE ALARM BELLS?

    4. Emily, forgive me but you have been trained and indoctrinated by universities who are funded by big companies who have an agenda. Just because you are a nurse does not mean that what you were taught was the truth! I know you probably really care (the pathway to hell is pathed with good intentions!) but like I have stated earlier “if it were to be proven that vaccines were harmful and causing all sorts of sickness and death the whole system of governments, pharmaceutical companies and doctors would collapse into a heap”. You see they cannot admit it even if it were true, and if vaccines were harmless then why in the good ole USA have a vaccine court that have paid out billions of dollars in compensation to vaccine damaged children? Answer me that…Answer me that. You see “they know!” But they refuse to admit it to the people! Why? Because of MONEY yep the greed just keeps growing. Why do Governments pay out big money (but not enough)for people with disabilities? To keep their mouths closed? Why is the rate of sickness, disease, Autism and the like increasing if all these scientists are so smart? What is the rate of Autism now is it 1:50 or 1:80 something like that, why why why? Specially that the vaccine schedule is ever increasing with more and more vaccines being injected into children. Why do you think that chemicals and synthetics are good to inject in a child? Why why why? For goodness sake people, all you have to do is think for yourselves USE COMMON SENSE!

  6. I have some very sad news, our dear friends who we tried so hard to get to research vaccines before they vaccinated their only son refused to listen to us, they treated us like we were conspiracy theorists and that we were overly cautious have just lost their precious boy after he received his 4 year old MMR vaccine. Shortly after receiving it he was rushed to the hospital with what they said was fluid on the brain and he slipped into a coma. Two weeks later (which was two days ago) he died, I just came back from the funeral today. The doctors said he had Mitochondrial disease (which is one of the known adverse reaction to vaccines), not funny is how this little beautiful boy was always hospitalized after receiving his vaccines, once after receiving a vaccine he woke up blind but it went away, and I guess this was the last straw. Oh God the sadness today, the parents are besides themselves inconsolable the mum passed out with grief and the whole family are just devastated! My wife and I are grieving terribly and know that we did all we could do to inform them, we are also so very angry that this could have been avoided, the doctors just pumped I don’t know how many extra vaccines on top of the MMR into him and now he is dead! Oh God please help them, the family is devastated by this tragedy! Poor little fella he was so very cute and gorgeous, the doctors said that if he survived after coming out of a coma he would more than likely be severely brain damaged, I guess there is small comfort in knowing they didn’t, like many other families, have to endure a lifetime of torment and suffering caring for a severely disabled child, although they will suffer the rest of their lives remembering their beloved son. In memory and celebration of the joy that this little boy brought into the lives of those that knew him…..

    1. Correction, children are born with Mitochondrial disease with makes them more of a risk to an adverse reaction to a vaccine. There is some speculation that it could be as high as 50% of children are born with this and that people are asking why are not children tested for Mitochondria before ever being vaccinated as the risk of an adverse reaction is extremely high. This is neglect from the medical institutes anyway as far as I am concerned.

      1. Hi Stephen,

        From my reading, it is not known whether children are born with mitochondrial disease or of environmental factors such as vaccination and pharmaceutical drugs can damage the mitochondria and lead to the disorder. But there is no doubt that damaged mitochondria can certainly make one more susceptible to being injured by vaccines and by those injuries causing ASDs and other neurological conditions.

        1. Hi, thank you for clarifying that, it was a bit of an emotional time when I wrote it.

  7. I find it very interesting that so many people are voting against people who are informed about the adverse effects of vaccinations….makes me believe in trolls!

Comments are closed.