The CDC is looking for an excuse to "mandate" a 3rd or 4th dose of the MMR vaccine.
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/health/233687.php
College mumps outbreak casts doubt on effectiveness of current 2 shots
By Linda A. Johnson
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Most of the college students who got the mumps in a big outbreak in 2006 had received the recommended two vaccine shots, according to a study that raises questions about whether a new vaccine or another booster shot is needed.
The outbreak was the biggest in the United States since shortly before states began requiring a second shot for youngsters in 1990.
Nearly 6,600 people became sick with the mumps, mostly in eight Midwestern states, and the hardest-hit group was college students ages 18 to 24. Of those in that group who knew whether they had been vaccinated, 84 percent had had two mumps shots, according to the study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and state health departments.
That "two-dose vaccine failure" startled public-health experts, who hadn't expected immunity to wane so soon, if at all.
The mumps virus involved was a relatively new strain in the U.S., not the one targeted by the vaccine, although there's evidence from outbreaks elsewhere that the shots work well against the new strain.
The researchers, reporting in today's issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, note that the virus likely came from travelers or students from the United Kingdom, where mumps shots are voluntary and there was a much larger mumps outbreak of the same strain. Many countries don't vaccinate against mumps, so future cases brought from overseas are likely.
"If there's another outbreak, we would evaluate the potential benefit of a third dose to control the outbreak," said researcher Dr. Jane Seward, deputy director of the CDC's viral diseases division.
Mumps is spread by respiratory secretions and saliva among people in close contact, making college students particularly susceptible.
Mumps causes fever and swollen salivary glands in the cheeks. Before the vaccine, complications such as deafness, viral meningitis and testicle inflammation, which can cause sterility, were common, and there were a couple million U.S. cases a year.
Dr. John Bradley, a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics committee on infectious diseases, said his group is talking about possible changes to the vaccine recommendations schedule with CDC and other health agencies. Now two shots are advised, one at 12 to 15 months and the other at age 4 to 6.
On the Net
• American Academy of Pediatrics: www.aap.org
• CDC: www.cdc.gov/ vaccines/default.htm
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Why Vaccine Choice Should Concern You
Why Vaccine Choice Should Concern You
By Rev. Kathy Rateliff; CCD, CCCE, SM
Author & trainer, Titus 2 Birthing Curriculums http://www.geocities.com/titus2birthing
Every state in America has exemptions written into their immunization policy that allow parents to choose whether to vaccinate their children and themselves. Those exemptions may include medical, religious and/or philosophical reasons for delaying or refusing immunizations. Additionally, the US Supreme Court has provided legal support for those choosing a religious exemption.
Unfortunately, most parents are never told they have an option and, for many of them, it never occurs to them to look at the issue. Many parents are unaware of the possible side effects of immunizations, toxic substances included in the immunizations, contraindications for various immunizations, or what after effects may appear. Additional concerns may include: how the immune system works, what effects immunizations have on the immature immune systems of babies, at what age the immune system is mature and how that maturing occurs, how reliable immunization efficacy and safety studies are, and how decisions about what vaccines to recommend are made.
Every time I hear a parent express remorse for vaccinating because they didn't have all the facts or because their child was one of the unlucky ones to suffer a serious side effect, it makes me mad that more parents aren't being informed about their choice. I do not believe anyone should live in fear - either of vaccine side effects or disease side effects and complications. Part of my motivation on this web site and in much of my writing and workshop presentations is to provide as much information as I can to as many people as I can.
I often talk to parents who are reluctant to immunize, but feel that they have no options. These parents deserve to be told that they have options, what they are, and how to take advantage of those options. One way of accomplishing this task is to provide parents some ideas about how to find out what the law in their state says and how to fulfill the legal requirements of whatever exemption they may choose to use.
Another way of accomplishing this is to help parents who are willing to take the harder road of vaccine refusal and help them learn what rights they have. Many parents are given erroneous information when they decide to take a religious or philosophical exemption. They may be told that they have to fill out an approved form when there is no such form. They may be told they must submit their religious exemption on church letterhead or with their pastor's signature when they law does not require it. They may be told that they can't take the exemption unless they belong to a specific faith group or if they have ever vaccinated this child or any other child in their home. Generally, none of these things are true, although some states may offer pre-printed immunization exemption wavers if asked.
Some parents who have chosen to vaccinate in the past decide after education to refuse some or all of the vaccines or to pick and choose which vaccines their children will get. Many parents believe it's "an all or nothing" deal. Current religious and philosophical immunization exemptions allow parents to choose to refuse some immunizations while accepting others. These exemptions also allow parents to delay immunizations for a time and allow their children's immune system to mature before joining the ranks of the immunized.
Additionally, as pharmaceutical companies work to create more and more vaccines, the number of shots children are likely to receive increases every couple of years. Guidelines on approved vaccines may change to target a different population to increase the number of possible recipients. So, parents may be confronted with decisions for their own health and that of their aging parents. The possible number of immunizations a person could receive over a lifetime may surpass 100, including original doses, boosters, new recommendations, and annual immunizations like the flu shot.
Most parents don't realize how experimental some of these vaccines are. Most parents would not choose to enroll their children in a treatment that is not adequately tested. They assume these vaccines are proven safe and effective. The controversy over side effects and removal of some vaccines from the recommendation list in the last two years proves that parents aren't getting the whole story. Couple that with the ridicule and pressure that many parents get when they decide to either refuse or delay vaccines, and the support they get from most of the medical community is sadly lacking.
So why is there such furor over the right to choose? Surely if the medical community and the government believe that all vaccines are 100% safe and 100% effective in stopping all incidences of a specific disease in the immunized individual, the only person at risk is the person who is not immunized. Right?? Wrong!! The medical community and the government admit that there are side effects to vaccines, although they would have you to believe that these almost never happen. They also admit that some individuals who have been immunized contract the very disease they have been immunized against. In fact, most of the individuals who contract a "vaccine preventable disease" during an outbreak have been immunized.
As a parent, I am aware of the risk I take in not vaccinating my children or myself! I've researched the data, checked out the risks of both the disease and the vaccine, prayed about it, talked it over with my husband and my children, discussed the issue with more than one family doctor, and finally reached a decision I can live with. We have even had a "where the rubber meets the road" experience where our children have contracted a "vaccine preventable disease." We've also had experience with vaccine side effects from the years before we decided not to vaccinate. I have a much easier time living with the way we experienced the disease than with the way we live with the aftermath of vaccine damage!
And, that really is the final issue! If after all is said and done, can I live with the consequences of my decision? Yes, some people die from disease and some die from the vaccines. Some people sustain life-long damage from the disease and many more sustain life-long damage from the vaccine. As a parent, and as a health-care professional, I have to decide if I can live with the decision I have made when I or my child becomes ill with any of the diseases that currently have vaccines.
Each parent should have the same right to choose. Medical professionals should respect a parent's right to choose and not treat them like they have no brain or like they are trying to hurt their child. Each parent should be provided with both sides of the issue and encouraged to do their own research. Each individual who makes an informed choice to refuse should get the same courtesy given to the individual who decides to vaccinate. And, each individual seeking information on how to claim an exemption should be given accurate information instead of rhetoric and, in some cases, outright lies.
If you decide to fully immunize your child according to the recommended schedule, it's important to realize everyone deserves the right to choose. Whatever consequences, good or bad, occur because of your decision are yours. You, and your child, will be the ones to live with the consequences. Neither your doctor, the pharmaceutical companies, the CDC, the policy makers at the FDA or the officials at your state and local health departments will have to live with the outcome of your choice. Therefore, the choice needs to lie with those who will most experience the benefits and risks of whatever choice made.
There is a quote from World War II in Nazi Germany that seems appropriate here.
In Germany, they came first for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists but I didn't speak up because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time nobody was left to speak up. --Martin Niemoeller, Dachau, 1944
The right to choose whether the risks of immunization outweigh benefits must be preserved. Regardless of what choice you make, you have determined which benefits and risks you find most important. Education provides the best and most reliable medium of making choices for you and your family. Make your choice and let others make theirs. Preserve the right to choose by supporting legislation that protects exemptions in all 50 states.
by Kathryn E. Rateliff, CCD, CCM, CCCE, GSM, PE, BFE
Questions and comments can be addressed to her at: Titus2ed@aol.com.
Want to know more about the issue of vaccine choice?
Titus 2 Birthing has a booklet that looks at some of the issues regarding vaccine choice. This booklet includes : vaccine safety, disease frequency in the US, Vaccine Refusal Form, exemption information, religious concerns about vaccines, immunization registry information, vaccinations and premature babies, vaccines and immune suppression, toxic chemical in vaccines as of Sept 2004, the use of aborted fetal tissue as a vaccine medium, vaccination and US government policy in the armed forces and in Homeland Security, the rise of autism and other learning disabilities which may be attributable to vaccine damage, genetically engineered foods containing vaccines, the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons policy on mandatory vaccines, what is informed consent and informed refusal, how vaccines are sold and how vaccine policy is decided and additional resources.
If you are interested in getting a copy of this packet, contact Kathy at Titus2@aol.com and she will be glad to give you all of the details. Please note there is a charge for this booklet.
By Rev. Kathy Rateliff; CCD, CCCE, SM
Author & trainer, Titus 2 Birthing Curriculums http://www.geocities.com/titus2birthing
Every state in America has exemptions written into their immunization policy that allow parents to choose whether to vaccinate their children and themselves. Those exemptions may include medical, religious and/or philosophical reasons for delaying or refusing immunizations. Additionally, the US Supreme Court has provided legal support for those choosing a religious exemption.
Unfortunately, most parents are never told they have an option and, for many of them, it never occurs to them to look at the issue. Many parents are unaware of the possible side effects of immunizations, toxic substances included in the immunizations, contraindications for various immunizations, or what after effects may appear. Additional concerns may include: how the immune system works, what effects immunizations have on the immature immune systems of babies, at what age the immune system is mature and how that maturing occurs, how reliable immunization efficacy and safety studies are, and how decisions about what vaccines to recommend are made.
Every time I hear a parent express remorse for vaccinating because they didn't have all the facts or because their child was one of the unlucky ones to suffer a serious side effect, it makes me mad that more parents aren't being informed about their choice. I do not believe anyone should live in fear - either of vaccine side effects or disease side effects and complications. Part of my motivation on this web site and in much of my writing and workshop presentations is to provide as much information as I can to as many people as I can.
I often talk to parents who are reluctant to immunize, but feel that they have no options. These parents deserve to be told that they have options, what they are, and how to take advantage of those options. One way of accomplishing this task is to provide parents some ideas about how to find out what the law in their state says and how to fulfill the legal requirements of whatever exemption they may choose to use.
Another way of accomplishing this is to help parents who are willing to take the harder road of vaccine refusal and help them learn what rights they have. Many parents are given erroneous information when they decide to take a religious or philosophical exemption. They may be told that they have to fill out an approved form when there is no such form. They may be told they must submit their religious exemption on church letterhead or with their pastor's signature when they law does not require it. They may be told that they can't take the exemption unless they belong to a specific faith group or if they have ever vaccinated this child or any other child in their home. Generally, none of these things are true, although some states may offer pre-printed immunization exemption wavers if asked.
Some parents who have chosen to vaccinate in the past decide after education to refuse some or all of the vaccines or to pick and choose which vaccines their children will get. Many parents believe it's "an all or nothing" deal. Current religious and philosophical immunization exemptions allow parents to choose to refuse some immunizations while accepting others. These exemptions also allow parents to delay immunizations for a time and allow their children's immune system to mature before joining the ranks of the immunized.
Additionally, as pharmaceutical companies work to create more and more vaccines, the number of shots children are likely to receive increases every couple of years. Guidelines on approved vaccines may change to target a different population to increase the number of possible recipients. So, parents may be confronted with decisions for their own health and that of their aging parents. The possible number of immunizations a person could receive over a lifetime may surpass 100, including original doses, boosters, new recommendations, and annual immunizations like the flu shot.
Most parents don't realize how experimental some of these vaccines are. Most parents would not choose to enroll their children in a treatment that is not adequately tested. They assume these vaccines are proven safe and effective. The controversy over side effects and removal of some vaccines from the recommendation list in the last two years proves that parents aren't getting the whole story. Couple that with the ridicule and pressure that many parents get when they decide to either refuse or delay vaccines, and the support they get from most of the medical community is sadly lacking.
So why is there such furor over the right to choose? Surely if the medical community and the government believe that all vaccines are 100% safe and 100% effective in stopping all incidences of a specific disease in the immunized individual, the only person at risk is the person who is not immunized. Right?? Wrong!! The medical community and the government admit that there are side effects to vaccines, although they would have you to believe that these almost never happen. They also admit that some individuals who have been immunized contract the very disease they have been immunized against. In fact, most of the individuals who contract a "vaccine preventable disease" during an outbreak have been immunized.
As a parent, I am aware of the risk I take in not vaccinating my children or myself! I've researched the data, checked out the risks of both the disease and the vaccine, prayed about it, talked it over with my husband and my children, discussed the issue with more than one family doctor, and finally reached a decision I can live with. We have even had a "where the rubber meets the road" experience where our children have contracted a "vaccine preventable disease." We've also had experience with vaccine side effects from the years before we decided not to vaccinate. I have a much easier time living with the way we experienced the disease than with the way we live with the aftermath of vaccine damage!
And, that really is the final issue! If after all is said and done, can I live with the consequences of my decision? Yes, some people die from disease and some die from the vaccines. Some people sustain life-long damage from the disease and many more sustain life-long damage from the vaccine. As a parent, and as a health-care professional, I have to decide if I can live with the decision I have made when I or my child becomes ill with any of the diseases that currently have vaccines.
Each parent should have the same right to choose. Medical professionals should respect a parent's right to choose and not treat them like they have no brain or like they are trying to hurt their child. Each parent should be provided with both sides of the issue and encouraged to do their own research. Each individual who makes an informed choice to refuse should get the same courtesy given to the individual who decides to vaccinate. And, each individual seeking information on how to claim an exemption should be given accurate information instead of rhetoric and, in some cases, outright lies.
If you decide to fully immunize your child according to the recommended schedule, it's important to realize everyone deserves the right to choose. Whatever consequences, good or bad, occur because of your decision are yours. You, and your child, will be the ones to live with the consequences. Neither your doctor, the pharmaceutical companies, the CDC, the policy makers at the FDA or the officials at your state and local health departments will have to live with the outcome of your choice. Therefore, the choice needs to lie with those who will most experience the benefits and risks of whatever choice made.
There is a quote from World War II in Nazi Germany that seems appropriate here.
In Germany, they came first for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists but I didn't speak up because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time nobody was left to speak up. --Martin Niemoeller, Dachau, 1944
The right to choose whether the risks of immunization outweigh benefits must be preserved. Regardless of what choice you make, you have determined which benefits and risks you find most important. Education provides the best and most reliable medium of making choices for you and your family. Make your choice and let others make theirs. Preserve the right to choose by supporting legislation that protects exemptions in all 50 states.
by Kathryn E. Rateliff, CCD, CCM, CCCE, GSM, PE, BFE
Questions and comments can be addressed to her at: Titus2ed@aol.com.
Want to know more about the issue of vaccine choice?
Titus 2 Birthing has a booklet that looks at some of the issues regarding vaccine choice. This booklet includes : vaccine safety, disease frequency in the US, Vaccine Refusal Form, exemption information, religious concerns about vaccines, immunization registry information, vaccinations and premature babies, vaccines and immune suppression, toxic chemical in vaccines as of Sept 2004, the use of aborted fetal tissue as a vaccine medium, vaccination and US government policy in the armed forces and in Homeland Security, the rise of autism and other learning disabilities which may be attributable to vaccine damage, genetically engineered foods containing vaccines, the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons policy on mandatory vaccines, what is informed consent and informed refusal, how vaccines are sold and how vaccine policy is decided and additional resources.
If you are interested in getting a copy of this packet, contact Kathy at Titus2@aol.com and she will be glad to give you all of the details. Please note there is a charge for this booklet.
Baby Bottle Toxin
When are they going to stop using all these damned chemicals? IT MAKES ME SICK!
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24143555/
U.S. questions plastic baby bottle safety
Preliminary report finds possible link to hormonal problems
The Associated Press
updated 9:39 a.m. ET, Thurs., April. 17, 2008
WASHINGTON - A chemical used to make baby bottles and other shatterproof plastic containers could be linked to a range of hormonal problems, a preliminary government report has found.
The report was greeted by some environmental groups as confirmation of their concerns, while chemical makers latched on to the report’s preliminary nature and its authors’ warning against drawing overly worrisome conclusions.
The federal National Toxicology Program said Tuesday that experiments on rats found precancerous tumors, urinary tract problems and early puberty when the animals were fed or injected with low doses of the plastics chemical bisphenol A.
While such animal studies only provide “limited evidence” of bisphenol’s developmental risks, the group’s draft report stresses the possible effects on humans “cannot be dismissed.” The group is made up of scientists from the Centers for Disease Control, the Food and Drug Administration and the Institutes of Health.
Exposure to the chemical
More than 90 percent of Americans are exposed to trace amounts of bisphenol, according to the CDC. The chemical leaches out of water bottles, the lining of cans and other items made with it.
The American Chemistry Council, which represents manufacturers, said the report “affirms that there are no serious or high level concerns for adverse effects of bisphenol on human reproduction and development.” Among the manufacturers of bisphenol are Dow Chemical Co. and BASF Group.
The group said it supports additional research to determine whether adverse effects seen in animals “are of any significance to human health.”
Environmentalists, meanwhile, hailed the report as the first step toward reassessing a chemical they believe could contribute to cancer and other health problems.
“We’re hoping this decision will force FDA to recognize the toxicity of this chemical and make manufacturers set a safety standard that’s protective of the most vulnerable populations,” said Dr. Anila Jacobs of the Environmental Working Group.
The toxicology group’s findings echo those of researchers assembled by the National Institutes of Health, who last August called for more research on bisphenol in humans.
The FDA in November said there is “no reason at this time to ban or otherwise restrict its use.” The agency on Tuesday did not immediately have any comment about the new report.
Turning to glass alternatives
But growing concern about the chemical has pushed many consumers toward glass alternatives, and triggered investigations by state and federal lawmakers.
Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., called on FDA Tuesday to reconsider the safety of bisphenol, saying the toxicology report’s findings “fly in the face of the FDA’s determination.”
Dingell, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, issued letters to seven companies that make baby formulations earlier this year, questioning whether they use bisphenol in the lining of their cans and bottles.
The companies included Hain Celestial Group, Nestle USA and Abbott Laboratories.
A spokeswoman for the International Formula Council, which represents baby food makers, said Tuesday “the overwhelming scientific evidence supports the safety” of bisphenol, adding that no foreign governments have restricted or banned its use.
The National Toxicology Program will take public comments on its initial report through May. A final version will be issued this summer.
Earlier this month state lawmakers in New Jersey introduced a bill that would ban the sale of all products containing bisphenol.
Canada’s health agency is also examining the health risks of bisphenol is expected to issue its findings in coming days.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24143555/
U.S. questions plastic baby bottle safety
Preliminary report finds possible link to hormonal problems
The Associated Press
updated 9:39 a.m. ET, Thurs., April. 17, 2008
WASHINGTON - A chemical used to make baby bottles and other shatterproof plastic containers could be linked to a range of hormonal problems, a preliminary government report has found.
The report was greeted by some environmental groups as confirmation of their concerns, while chemical makers latched on to the report’s preliminary nature and its authors’ warning against drawing overly worrisome conclusions.
The federal National Toxicology Program said Tuesday that experiments on rats found precancerous tumors, urinary tract problems and early puberty when the animals were fed or injected with low doses of the plastics chemical bisphenol A.
While such animal studies only provide “limited evidence” of bisphenol’s developmental risks, the group’s draft report stresses the possible effects on humans “cannot be dismissed.” The group is made up of scientists from the Centers for Disease Control, the Food and Drug Administration and the Institutes of Health.
Exposure to the chemical
More than 90 percent of Americans are exposed to trace amounts of bisphenol, according to the CDC. The chemical leaches out of water bottles, the lining of cans and other items made with it.
The American Chemistry Council, which represents manufacturers, said the report “affirms that there are no serious or high level concerns for adverse effects of bisphenol on human reproduction and development.” Among the manufacturers of bisphenol are Dow Chemical Co. and BASF Group.
The group said it supports additional research to determine whether adverse effects seen in animals “are of any significance to human health.”
Environmentalists, meanwhile, hailed the report as the first step toward reassessing a chemical they believe could contribute to cancer and other health problems.
“We’re hoping this decision will force FDA to recognize the toxicity of this chemical and make manufacturers set a safety standard that’s protective of the most vulnerable populations,” said Dr. Anila Jacobs of the Environmental Working Group.
The toxicology group’s findings echo those of researchers assembled by the National Institutes of Health, who last August called for more research on bisphenol in humans.
The FDA in November said there is “no reason at this time to ban or otherwise restrict its use.” The agency on Tuesday did not immediately have any comment about the new report.
Turning to glass alternatives
But growing concern about the chemical has pushed many consumers toward glass alternatives, and triggered investigations by state and federal lawmakers.
Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., called on FDA Tuesday to reconsider the safety of bisphenol, saying the toxicology report’s findings “fly in the face of the FDA’s determination.”
Dingell, who chairs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, issued letters to seven companies that make baby formulations earlier this year, questioning whether they use bisphenol in the lining of their cans and bottles.
The companies included Hain Celestial Group, Nestle USA and Abbott Laboratories.
A spokeswoman for the International Formula Council, which represents baby food makers, said Tuesday “the overwhelming scientific evidence supports the safety” of bisphenol, adding that no foreign governments have restricted or banned its use.
The National Toxicology Program will take public comments on its initial report through May. A final version will be issued this summer.
Earlier this month state lawmakers in New Jersey introduced a bill that would ban the sale of all products containing bisphenol.
Canada’s health agency is also examining the health risks of bisphenol is expected to issue its findings in coming days.
10 YUMMY SUPER FOODS :)
Ten Super Foods to Use in Your Recipes and Menus
Avocados are a clean, healthy source of healthy fatty acids - They are rich in cholesterol-lowering phytosterols and high in the powerful anti-oxidant glutathione - Avocados are healthy anti-cancer food - Use it in place of butter, mash it with bananas for young children, and use it in lots of avocado-based dressings and dips
Blueberries/Blackberries are packed with tannins, anthocyanidins, flavonoids, polyphenols, and proanthcyanidins that have been linked to prevention and reversal of age-related mental decline - They also have powerful anti-cancer effects -Use frozen organic berries in the winter when fresh ones are not available
Cantaloupes are another vitamin powerhouse - With only 56 calories a cup, one gets a huge amount of vitamin C and beta-carotene as well as folate, potassium, fiber, thiamin, niacin, pantothenic acid, and vitamin B6
Carrots/Beets are colorful root crops that add beauty and flavor to dishes -Shredded raw in salads, cooked, or in soups, they are high in fiber and antioxidants compounds such as cartonoids abd betacyanin, a powerful cancer protective agent found to inhibit cell mutations
Flax Seeds are rich in lignans and omega-3 fatty acids, and scientific studies have confirmed that flax seeds have a positive influence on everything from cholesterol levels and constipation to cancer and heart disease - Use ground flax seed in oatmeal, or add them to whipped frozen bananas, stewed apples, and cinnamon and nut balls - Keep in mind that the scientifically documented benefits from flax seeds come from raw, ground flax seed, not flax seed oil
Green Lettuce is exceptionally low in calories, but contains an abundance of phytonutrients, plant proteins, vitamins, minerals, and fiber - Eat salad with lettuce every day
Kale is a fantastic high-nutrient green vegetable to add to soups and to serve chopped
Sesame Seeds are one of the most mineral-rich foods in the world and a potent source of calcium, magnesium, copper, iron, manganese, zinc, vitamins, and fiber - They are also rich in anti-cancer lignans that are uniquely found in sesame seeds alone - Grind some unhulled sesame seeds into a powder to sprinkle on salads and vegetable - Toast lightly and mix with eggplant, chickpeas, scallions, and garlic for a healthy and delicious dip
Strawberries are high in folic acid, flavonoids, iron, and vitamin C -They provide a good source of dietary fiber and potassium yet contain only 60 calories per cup- Use strawberries and frozen strawberries frequently - Try a fruit smoothie by blending together a banana, orange juice, and frozen strawberries
Tomatoes have been a hot topic in recent years because their consumption has been linked to dramatic reduction in the incidence of common cancers -One of the tomatoes' heavily investigated anti-cancer phytochemicals is lycopene, which has been shown to be protective against cancer, including prostate cancer, breast cancer, endometrial cancer, lung cancer, and colorectal cancers
Nearly All Americans Contaminated By Sunscreen
http://www.naturalnews.com/022990.html
(NaturalNews) The Center for Disease Control (CDC) released a new study showing that nearly all Americans are contaminated with oxybenzone, a widely-used sunscreen ingredient. This chemical so far has been linked to allergies, hormone disruption, and cell damage, as well as low birth weight in baby girls whose mothers are exposed during pregnancy. Oxybenzone is also a penetration enhancer, a chemical that helps other chemicals penetrate the skin. So where has the FDA been on this?
Apparently in the back pocket of the sunscreen industry. The Food and Drug Administration, again, has failed in its duty to protect the public from toxic chemicals like oxybenzone. Caving to the industry lobbyists, the agency has delayed final sunscreen safety standards for nearly 30 years. FDA issued a new draft of the standards last October under pressure from Environmental Working Group (EWG), but continues to delay finalizing them because of pressure from the industry.
In their online cosmetic safety database, EWG identifies nearly 600 sunscreens sold in the U.S. that contain oxybenzone, including leading brand names like Hawaiian Tropic, Coppertone, and Banana Boat, and many facial moisturizers as well. On top of that, they also show many of these so-called sunscreens offer inadequate protection from the sun. In fact, they found that sunlight also causes oxybenzone to form free radical chemicals that may be linked to cell damage, which is the exact opposite reason many women mistakenly use the sunscreen - to protect them from damaging free radicals which lead to premature aging!
And interestingly, as sunscreen sales have risen, so has the rate of skin cancers. Go figure. We've been pressured to believe that the sun is our enemy and we need to slather ..s of sunscreen to protect ourselves, when in actuality we need sunlight for our bodies to manufacture vitamin D. For those of us who are either fair skinned or just plain vain and worry about age spots and wrinkles, limiting our unprotected sun exposure to 20 minutes a day is adequate for our daily dose of vitamin D. For more fun in the sun, overexposure can be avoided by using a natural or organic sunscreen with a reflective barrier like zinc, instead of chemical sunscreens. Even a small amount of shea butter rubbed into the skin daily offers a bit of natural UV protection. Whatever you do, don't wait for the FDA to help you in your choice. Based on their history in this category, it could be another 30 years before safety standards are improved.
References:
1. Environmental Health Perspectives: Concentrations of the Sunscreen Agent, Benzophenone-3, in Residents of the United States: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003–2004
http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2008/1126...
2. Environmental Working Group: Comments from EWG on the U.S. FDA's Proposed Amendment of Final Monograph for Sunscreens
http://www.ewg.org/node/25705
3. Environmental Working Group: Americans Carry 'Body Burden' of Toxic Sunscreen Chemical
http://www.ewg.org/node/26212
About the author
Ellen Holder is co-founder of Caren, an online store for natural, organic and synthetic chemical free skin care products. http://www.carenonline.com
(NaturalNews) The Center for Disease Control (CDC) released a new study showing that nearly all Americans are contaminated with oxybenzone, a widely-used sunscreen ingredient. This chemical so far has been linked to allergies, hormone disruption, and cell damage, as well as low birth weight in baby girls whose mothers are exposed during pregnancy. Oxybenzone is also a penetration enhancer, a chemical that helps other chemicals penetrate the skin. So where has the FDA been on this?
Apparently in the back pocket of the sunscreen industry. The Food and Drug Administration, again, has failed in its duty to protect the public from toxic chemicals like oxybenzone. Caving to the industry lobbyists, the agency has delayed final sunscreen safety standards for nearly 30 years. FDA issued a new draft of the standards last October under pressure from Environmental Working Group (EWG), but continues to delay finalizing them because of pressure from the industry.
In their online cosmetic safety database, EWG identifies nearly 600 sunscreens sold in the U.S. that contain oxybenzone, including leading brand names like Hawaiian Tropic, Coppertone, and Banana Boat, and many facial moisturizers as well. On top of that, they also show many of these so-called sunscreens offer inadequate protection from the sun. In fact, they found that sunlight also causes oxybenzone to form free radical chemicals that may be linked to cell damage, which is the exact opposite reason many women mistakenly use the sunscreen - to protect them from damaging free radicals which lead to premature aging!
And interestingly, as sunscreen sales have risen, so has the rate of skin cancers. Go figure. We've been pressured to believe that the sun is our enemy and we need to slather ..s of sunscreen to protect ourselves, when in actuality we need sunlight for our bodies to manufacture vitamin D. For those of us who are either fair skinned or just plain vain and worry about age spots and wrinkles, limiting our unprotected sun exposure to 20 minutes a day is adequate for our daily dose of vitamin D. For more fun in the sun, overexposure can be avoided by using a natural or organic sunscreen with a reflective barrier like zinc, instead of chemical sunscreens. Even a small amount of shea butter rubbed into the skin daily offers a bit of natural UV protection. Whatever you do, don't wait for the FDA to help you in your choice. Based on their history in this category, it could be another 30 years before safety standards are improved.
References:
1. Environmental Health Perspectives: Concentrations of the Sunscreen Agent, Benzophenone-3, in Residents of the United States: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2003–2004
http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2008/1126...
2. Environmental Working Group: Comments from EWG on the U.S. FDA's Proposed Amendment of Final Monograph for Sunscreens
http://www.ewg.org/node/25705
3. Environmental Working Group: Americans Carry 'Body Burden' of Toxic Sunscreen Chemical
http://www.ewg.org/node/26212
About the author
Ellen Holder is co-founder of Caren, an online store for natural, organic and synthetic chemical free skin care products. http://www.carenonline.com
Marketing Poison To Children
I am outraged that these people have the nerve to try and market vaccines to "tweens" Only in America could people create such a stupid marketing term for children, then use it to sell everything from cancer causing "fast food" to cancer and injury inducing vaccines.
I would say more but this sickens me, and when I 1st saw it on several email list the other day I actually thought it was a hoax, I mean I know big pharma and the government is evil but I never thought they would stoop quite this low. What angers / sickens me the most is the fact I actually gave these monster credit for being "human".
*****
http://cdlhn.com/create_frameset.cfm?id=66&CFID=1499001&CFTOKEN=55461110
Tweens are defined as young people, usually aged 9-12, those IN BETWEEN childhood and teenhood.
In Marketing Vaccines to Tweens, Susan Kirby, of Kirby Marketing Solutions, discusses social marketing and disease prevention that’s specifically directed at “tweens”, and how to empower them to get the immunizations they need.
The presentation features:
# The “4 Ps of Marketing” and the Social Marketing Model
# Tween demographics, facts, and trends
# Behavioral objectives aimed at creating a successful vaccination campaign
# What motivates and inspires your target audience to action
# Barriers to address that might prevent action
# Developing and communicating the message
# How to adapt effective existing campaigns
Dr. Kirby is president of Kirby Marketing Solutions, and has more than 25 years of senior-level experience in public health project management, marketing, and communication campaign development, including six years as Director of the Marketing Research Resource Center at the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
I would say more but this sickens me, and when I 1st saw it on several email list the other day I actually thought it was a hoax, I mean I know big pharma and the government is evil but I never thought they would stoop quite this low. What angers / sickens me the most is the fact I actually gave these monster credit for being "human".
*****
http://cdlhn.com/create_frameset.cfm?id=66&CFID=1499001&CFTOKEN=55461110
Tweens are defined as young people, usually aged 9-12, those IN BETWEEN childhood and teenhood.
In Marketing Vaccines to Tweens, Susan Kirby, of Kirby Marketing Solutions, discusses social marketing and disease prevention that’s specifically directed at “tweens”, and how to empower them to get the immunizations they need.
The presentation features:
# The “4 Ps of Marketing” and the Social Marketing Model
# Tween demographics, facts, and trends
# Behavioral objectives aimed at creating a successful vaccination campaign
# What motivates and inspires your target audience to action
# Barriers to address that might prevent action
# Developing and communicating the message
# How to adapt effective existing campaigns
Dr. Kirby is president of Kirby Marketing Solutions, and has more than 25 years of senior-level experience in public health project management, marketing, and communication campaign development, including six years as Director of the Marketing Research Resource Center at the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Sometimes the vaccine has a good memory and sometimes it doesn't---WTF???
I love how the vaccine for mumps has been shown not to work, yet they are still making excuses for people to take it. I think these idiots think we are all stupid too to notice so they just make it up as they go along.
Below is one of the worst excuses I have seen so far pushing the mumps vaccine and I am posting it partly as a joke because of how stupidly written it is, I mean you would think if they wanted to convince people they would come up with something better than "Sometimes the vaccine has a good memory and sometimes it doesn't" I mean really, WTF???
*****
http://media.www.easternprogress.com/media/storage/paper419/news/2008/04/17/News/Vaccinated.College.Students.May.Not.Be.Immune.To.Mumps-3329813.shtml
Vaccinated college students may not be immune to mumps
By: Kristen Miller
Posted: 4/17/08
You might remember getting that physical examination before you could start middle school. You might have images of a white-shirted nurse with unpleasantly cold hands, or still be able to taste the tongue depressor shoving your mouth open as you said "aah."
But when you think back to the medical tests you had to take before advancing to middle school, you might not think about getting your MMR shot-because once you have been vaccinated for measles, mumps and rubella, you never have to think about them again.
However, after a mumps outbreak struck a college campus in Iowa and spread to other midwestern states, people might have a good reason to start thinking again.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that, of the 6,600 people who came down with the virus, the majority of infected were college students, according to the Associated Press. Further, 84 percent of college students who developed mumps received the two required mumps shots when they were younger, according to the article.
Dr. Pradeep Bose of Health Services said the shot is required twice, once at 15 months of age and one more dose before middle school.
Mumps is a virus that mainly affects the ovaries and testicles and may lead to infertility, Bose said. The virus can display symptoms such as swollen salivary glands, abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting.
So why would a vaccine designed to stave off such a serious virus simply stop working by college?
Bose said it doesn't necessarily mean the vaccine was bad. The immune system might respond to the vaccination - which introduces manageable amounts of the virus into the body - very quickly and then wear off, he said.
When the immunity fades and the body doesn't recognize the virus, it's called a wild virus, Bose said.
Memory is important when it comes to the immune system fighting off a virus. Sometimes the vaccine has a good memory and sometimes it doesn't, Bose said. It all depends on the virus and vaccine.
Also, Bose said, the mumps virus is not some random sickness that strikes out of nowhere.
"The mumps virus is not dead; It's there," he said. Even though you may not see many cases of it, people still get the virus.
The mumps outbreak in 2006 started on an Iowa campus, according to the Associated Press article, and was a new viral strain that wasn't targeted by the original vaccine. Bose said Eastern is prepared to deal with an outbreak on campus if it happens.
Right now, Health Services offers MMR shots. But it isn't a requirement in Kentucky that college students get the shots before coming to school unless they are going into programs such as nursing or physical therapy where students have to be in close contact with people on a daily basis.
Bose said right now there are faculty members working to make it a requirement for college students to get the two shots before coming to school.
"I would recommend that strongly," Bose said.
One reason the virus may have spread quickly on the Iowa campus - and why college students are more susceptible to the virus-is because of the way college students live, Bose said.
"Lifestyle makes them at high risk," Bose said. College students live in close proximity to each other in dorms and are likely to share items such as drinking glasses, make-up and cigarettes.
But Bose said if the majority of college students are vaccinated, it creates "herd immunity" and the virus won't be as widespread.
Right now Dr. Bose doesn't know when - or if - there will be a requirement for students to get the vaccine for mumps before college. He is working with other faculty to get the proposal approved by the "higher up."
"It goes through a winding process," Bose said.
The MMR vaccine is offered in health services for $45.
Below is one of the worst excuses I have seen so far pushing the mumps vaccine and I am posting it partly as a joke because of how stupidly written it is, I mean you would think if they wanted to convince people they would come up with something better than "Sometimes the vaccine has a good memory and sometimes it doesn't" I mean really, WTF???
*****
http://media.www.easternprogress.com/media/storage/paper419/news/2008/04/17/News/Vaccinated.College.Students.May.Not.Be.Immune.To.Mumps-3329813.shtml
Vaccinated college students may not be immune to mumps
By: Kristen Miller
Posted: 4/17/08
You might remember getting that physical examination before you could start middle school. You might have images of a white-shirted nurse with unpleasantly cold hands, or still be able to taste the tongue depressor shoving your mouth open as you said "aah."
But when you think back to the medical tests you had to take before advancing to middle school, you might not think about getting your MMR shot-because once you have been vaccinated for measles, mumps and rubella, you never have to think about them again.
However, after a mumps outbreak struck a college campus in Iowa and spread to other midwestern states, people might have a good reason to start thinking again.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that, of the 6,600 people who came down with the virus, the majority of infected were college students, according to the Associated Press. Further, 84 percent of college students who developed mumps received the two required mumps shots when they were younger, according to the article.
Dr. Pradeep Bose of Health Services said the shot is required twice, once at 15 months of age and one more dose before middle school.
Mumps is a virus that mainly affects the ovaries and testicles and may lead to infertility, Bose said. The virus can display symptoms such as swollen salivary glands, abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting.
So why would a vaccine designed to stave off such a serious virus simply stop working by college?
Bose said it doesn't necessarily mean the vaccine was bad. The immune system might respond to the vaccination - which introduces manageable amounts of the virus into the body - very quickly and then wear off, he said.
When the immunity fades and the body doesn't recognize the virus, it's called a wild virus, Bose said.
Memory is important when it comes to the immune system fighting off a virus. Sometimes the vaccine has a good memory and sometimes it doesn't, Bose said. It all depends on the virus and vaccine.
Also, Bose said, the mumps virus is not some random sickness that strikes out of nowhere.
"The mumps virus is not dead; It's there," he said. Even though you may not see many cases of it, people still get the virus.
The mumps outbreak in 2006 started on an Iowa campus, according to the Associated Press article, and was a new viral strain that wasn't targeted by the original vaccine. Bose said Eastern is prepared to deal with an outbreak on campus if it happens.
Right now, Health Services offers MMR shots. But it isn't a requirement in Kentucky that college students get the shots before coming to school unless they are going into programs such as nursing or physical therapy where students have to be in close contact with people on a daily basis.
Bose said right now there are faculty members working to make it a requirement for college students to get the two shots before coming to school.
"I would recommend that strongly," Bose said.
One reason the virus may have spread quickly on the Iowa campus - and why college students are more susceptible to the virus-is because of the way college students live, Bose said.
"Lifestyle makes them at high risk," Bose said. College students live in close proximity to each other in dorms and are likely to share items such as drinking glasses, make-up and cigarettes.
But Bose said if the majority of college students are vaccinated, it creates "herd immunity" and the virus won't be as widespread.
Right now Dr. Bose doesn't know when - or if - there will be a requirement for students to get the vaccine for mumps before college. He is working with other faculty to get the proposal approved by the "higher up."
"It goes through a winding process," Bose said.
The MMR vaccine is offered in health services for $45.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Early Life Infections Improve the Function of the Immune System
http://www.chiro.org/Immunity/
Early Life Infections Improve the Function of the Immune System
by Daniel J. Murphy, DC, FACO
Vice President of the ICA
A 1998 article published in the journal THORAX titled:
Early Childhood Infection and Atopic Disorder [ 1 ] notes:
1) Atopic diseases (asthma, hay fever, and eczema in this study) are rapidly rising in westernized communities.
2) The mechanism for this increase in atopic diseases is reduced exposure to microbes.
3) Atopic diseases were significantly statistically linked to immunization with the Pertussis vaccine and to treatment with oral antibiotics in the first two years of life.
4) The authors conclude that exposure to certain infections repress atopic disorders.
A 1999 article published in the journal THE LANCET titled Atopy in Children of Families with an Anthroposophic Lifestyle notes [ 2 ]
1) The increased prevalence of atopic disorders in children may be associated with changes in childhood infections as related to vaccination programs and antibiotics that alter intestinal microflora.
2) Children who use antibiotics restrictively and have few vaccinations have lower levels of atopic diseases.
Another 1999 article published in the journal CLINICAL EXPERIMENTAL ALLERGY titled Antibiotic use in early childhood and the development of asthma notes [ 3 ]
1) Antibiotic use is significantly associated with a history of asthma.
2) If antibiotics are used in the first year of life there is a 305 percent increased risk of developing asthma when compared with children who had never used antibiotics.
3) If antibiotics are used only after the first year of life there is a 64 percent increased risk of asthma when compared with children who had never used antibiotics.
4) The greater the number of courses of antibiotics given to children, the greater the risk that they will develop asthma.
5) “Early childhood infection may have a protective role against the subsequent development of asthma.”
6) The treatment of infant infections with antibiotics could play a role in the development of childhood asthma.
7) Antibiotics increase the risk of asthma by “reducing the intensity and duration of acquired bacterial infections.”
8) There is a “temporal association between the increasing prevalence of asthma and the increasing use of antibiotics throughout the developed world.”
A 2000 article published in the journal ALLERGY titled The immunology of fetuses and infants: What drives the allergic march? notes [ 4 ]
1) Atopy refers to allergic conditions which include hay fever, asthma, and eczema, and are associated with the production of IgE antibodies to common environmental allergens.
2) The risk of atopic disease early in life is particularly high in Western industrialized countries.
3) The critical period that influences the development of atopy is the first years of life.
4) “A decline in certain childhood infections or a lack of exposure to infectious agents during the first years of life could have caused the recent epidemic of atopic disease and asthma.”
5) Recovery from natural measles infection reduces the incidence of atopy and allergic responses to house-dust mites to half that seen in vaccinated children.
6) Bacterial infections are modulators of the atopic march.
7) The use of antibiotics during the first two years of life increases the risk of asthma.
Another 2000 article published in the journal THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE titled Siblings, Day-Care Attendance, and the Risk of Asthma and Wheezing during Childhood notes [ 5 ]
1) Young children with older siblings and those who attend day care are at increased risk for infections, which in turn may protect against the development of allergic diseases, including asthma.
2) Exposure of young children to older children at home or to other children at day care protects against the development of asthma and frequent wheezing later in childhood.
3) The incidence and the prevalence of asthma among children have increased dramatically in the past three decades, making it the most common chronic disease of childhood in the United States, and a decrease in infections during early childhood may be responsible.
4) “The incidence of asthma among children who had two or more older siblings or who attended day care during the first six months of life was significantly lower than that among children who had one sibling or no siblings and who did not attend day care.”
5) Bacterial or viral infections occurring during infancy may provide important signals to the newborn’s maturing immune system.
This article generated an editorial titled Day Care, Siblings, and Asthma — Please, Sneeze on My Child , that included the following comments: [ 6 ]
1) “Parents generally agree that children who attend day care or who have older siblings have more frequent infections. They may be surprised to learn, however, that this tendency may protect their younger children from asthma.”
2) “A common factor underlying the increased prevalence of asthma and atopic disease may be a reduction in early exposure to microbes, with a lasting influence on immune development.”
3) An important signal for normal postnatal immune system maturation is exposure to microbes. Deprivation of these signals in infants may allow a change that increases the risk of eventual asthma and atopic disease.
A 2001 article published in the journal ALLERGY titled The causes of the increasing prevalence of allergy: Is atopy a microbial deprivation disorder? [ 7 ]
1) “The atopic diseases, i.e., primarily, bronchial asthma, atopic dermatitis, and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, were rare a few decades ago, but constitute today an increasingly severe public health problem.”
2) “The increase in the prevalence of the allergic diseases, especially in those born after 1960, is almost explosive, and there are now epidemics of allergic diseases in many countries.”
3) “The prevalence of asthma in children and young adults has tripled and quadrupled in many industrialized countries during the last two decades.”
4) Allergic sensitization may occur in utero. [Important, as noted below.]
5) Allergic sensitization that occurs early in childhood tends to persist throughout life.
6) The very first months of life are of crucial importance in allergy development.
7) “The more children in the family, the more infections they encounter” and this may help to prevent allergy.
8) Viral infections protect against allergic disease.
9) “If the assumption that early viral or bacterial infections protect against the development of allergic diseases is correct, vaccination should lead to an increase of allergic disorders.”
10) Atopy is correlated to MMR vaccination (measles, mumps, rubella) and with the administration of antibiotics.
11) There is a significant relationship between treatment with antibiotics during the first two years of life and later development of allergy.
12) “Multiple courses of antibiotic treatment are associated with higher allergy prevalence, and the finding that treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics appears to be more likely associated with allergy development than is ordinary penicillin.”
13) “Microbial agents do indeed play a protective role in the development of allergic disease.”
14) Childhood infections lower allergy prevalence, especially bacterial infections.
15) “From an evolutionary perspective [INNATE], it is perhaps not unexpected that the immune system, which over millions of years has adapted to a heavy microbial load, may react in an ‘inadequate’ way upon a sudden, radical decrease of this load, caused by vaccinations, antibiotics, and especially improved hygienic conditions.”
16) “A change in the ‘microbial load’ seems to be the most probable cause of the increase in the allergic diseases.”
A 2002 article published in the journal ALLERGY titled The rise of atopy and links to infection notes [ 8 ]
1) This article explores the evidence that “exposure to certain antibiotics and public health immunizations in early life” are the cause of atopic disorders.
2) This article also explores the evidence that “certain microbial exposures [infections] can inhibit experimental allergy.”
3) “Certain natural infections promote immune regulatory processes that can restrain atopy.”
4) 45 percent of children in some countries may be suffering from atopic disorders.
5) “Antibiotic receipt in early life is associated with more subsequent atopy and asthma.”
6) Antibiotics given early life (<24 months of age) for any clinical indication “predicted substantially more subsequent atopic disorder.”
7) 80 percent of children who subsequently display atopic disorder received antibiotics at two months.
8) There is a “direct promotion of atopy by antibiotic receipt.”
9) Certain immunizations may also increase subsequent atopy, including pertussis in the DPT vaccine and the measles/mumps/rubella (MMR) vaccine.
10) The limited microbial exposure caused by hygiene, antibiotics, and vaccinations may also explain the rising of inflammatory disorders, such as insulin dependent diabetes, in developed countries.
11) Microbial exposure “may play a key role in allowing the immune system to develop protective responses.”
Another 2002 article published in the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE titled Environmental exposure to endotoxin and its relation to asthma in school-age children notes [ 9 ]
1) “Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood and accounts for substantial morbidity and health care costs.”
2) One can have exposure to microbes or to nonviable parts of microbes and not become infected.
3) “Environmental exposure to microbial products may have a crucial role during the maturation of a child ‘s immune response.”
4) Exposure to microbial products is “associated with a significant decrease in the risk of hay-fever, atopic sensitization, atopic asthma, and atopic wheeze in childhood.”
5) “The innate immune system responds [favorably, for ones entire life] to a high microbial burden.”
6) Exposure to microbial products strongly affects the development of atopy and childhood asthma.
This article generated an editorial titled Eat Dirt—The Hygiene Hypothesis and Allergic Diseases , that included the following comments: [ 10 ]
1) There is an epidemic of both autoimmune diseases and allergic diseases.
2) “One theory proposed to explain this increase in the prevalence of autoimmune and allergic diseases is that it results from a decrease in the prevalence of childhood infection.”
Another 2002 article published in the same issue of the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE titled Mechanisms of Disease: The effect of infections on susceptibility to autoimmune and allergic diseases notes [ 11 ]
1) Infectious agents can suppress allergic (asthma, rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis) and autoimmune (multiple sclerosis, insulin-dependent type 1 diabetes, and Crohn’s disease) disorders.
2) The incidence of these disorders began to increase in the 1950s [coincidentally with the availability of antibiotics and vaccinations] and continues today.
3) There has been a significant decrease in the incidence of many infectious diseases in developed countries as a result of antibiotics, vaccination, and improved hygiene.
4) Early childhood infections change immune system maturation.
5) The administration of antibiotics to children increases the risk of asthma and allergy.
6) Decreased exposure of women to viruses before pregnancy may subsequently reduce the degree of protection against these viruses afforded to their newborns.
7) “Vaccination strategies should be examined in the context of the hygiene hypothesis.”
8) Vaccinations may prevent ‘protective’ infections and thus have an unfavorable effect.
9) “In addition to the problem of antibiotic resistance, unnecessary treatment with antibiotics could reduce the degree of physiological immunostimulation afforded by commensal bacteria.”
10) “There is a certain irony in the fact that we must now search for new ways to reproduce the infectious diseases against which we have been fighting with great success over the past three decades.”
11) These mechanisms might extend to other immune disorders, like non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas [cancer], which is also increasing in developed countries.
Another 2002 article published in the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE titled The Importance of Prenatal Exposures on the Development of Allergic Disease notes [ 12 ]
1) A decreased exposure to infection may play an important role in the etiology of allergic disease, but there is little data on the impact of change in microbial exposure during pregnancy on the child’s risk of developing allergic disease.
2) Exposure to antibiotics in utero is associated with an increased risk of asthma, eczema and hay fever in a dose-related manner.
3) Exposure to antibiotics in utero is a important risk factor in the development of allergic disease.
4) Because the immune system develops in utero, exposure to antibiotics during pregnancy is associated with an increased incidence of allergic diseases.
5) “This effect did not appear to depend on the type of antibiotic prescribed or the trimester the antibiotics were prescribed.”
A 2005 article published in the BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL titled Day care in infancy and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia notes [ 13 ]
1) Reduced exposure to infection in the first few months of life increases the risk of developing acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
2) Several other investigators have reported reduced risks of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children with many infections.
3) Reduced infections in the first year of life provides “inadequate priming of the naïve immune system” and “may precipitate a highly dysregulated immune response.”
4) “Similar associations have been reported for type 1 diabetes and allergies in children.”
5) “Some degree of early exposure to infection seems to be important for child health.”
PUBLISHED RESPONSES THAT FOLLOWED THIS ARTICLE INCLUDE:
“Striking the right balance between protecting our children from damaging or life threatening infections whilst exposing them to a ‘sufficient dose’ of milder infections to prime their immune systems, has far-reaching social and behavioural connotations.”
— Roger C Parslow, Senior Research Fellow, Paediatric Epidemiology Group, University of Leeds
[This was my favorite response, by a chiropractor, Dr. Richard Lanigan]
“Gilham et al’s findings should not come as a surprise, however they have stopped short of questioning the possible benefits to the immune system of what were once called ‘normal childhood infections’ and now, are extremely rare.”
“Prevention of infectious diseases is seen universally as beneficial to the health of society. However few have considered the possibility that natural selection and these diseases, played a role in the development of the immune system to fight more deadly diseases.”
Dr. Lanigan then cites references to support the following points:
1) Children who take fewer antibiotics and a lower rate of immunization also have a lower prevalence of asthma, eczema and hay fever than the controls.
2) Children who contract measles are less likely to develop asthma, a disease that was rare thirty years ago and now kills 2000 people per year in the UK.
3) DPT vaccination increases the risk of allergy.
4) There is a specific inverse relationship between contracting measles and atopic diseases.
5) Children who did not have the DPT or polio immunization did not suffer from asthma or other allergic illnesses while 23 - 30 percent of the control group did.
6) Children who suffered infections in the first year of life are less likely to develop insulin dependent diabetes.
7) Immunized children have twice the incidence of type-1 diabetes.
—Richard Lanigan, Chiropractor
“The study by Gilham et al. confirms the hypothesis that reduced exposure to infection early in life has effects on the maturing immune system that increase the risk of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) and possibly other malignancies.”
“The immunological basis of this increased risk is uncertain but it could be the result of the inadequate development of immune surveillance mechanisms that detect cancer-specific antigenic determinants.”
“Gilham et al. postulate that the inadequate priming of the immune system due to a lack of exposure to infection permits subsequent infections by unknown exogenous agents, probably viruses, to cause immune dysregulation leading to acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.”
— John M.Grange
Centre for Infectious Diseases
and International Health,
University College London.
— Bernd Krone
Klaus F. Kölmel
Departments of Virology and Dermatology, University of Göttingen, Germany
“Before 1920, acute leukemia among children was a rare event. A significant peak-age incidence (2-5 years) appeared after 1940. Since then, the incidence rate of childhood leukemia has been more or less remarkably stable. This means that some leukemogenic factor must have been introduced in children’s lives some time around 1940.”
“It is a highly striking coincidence that at the same year the introduction of immunization against diphtheria was began on a national scale.”
— Petar I. Ivanovski, pediatrician
University Childrens Hospital, Belgrade
“I wonder if our friends at the CDC, NIH, WHO etc. have considered adding leukemia in addition to diabetes, Guillian-Barre’, Autism, SIDS, Arthritis, Thrombocytopenia, Encephalitis, Death, SBS, Distressed Breathing, Thimerosal Accumulation in Brain (TAB), delayed speech, tics, seizures, hallucinations, dizziness, Hemorrhagic Vasculomyelinopathy etc. etc. etc. to ‘highly coincidental’ adverse reactions from the long list of mass immunizations.”
“Do you think parents would be informed during their child’s well visit of any of the above?”
“In particular, MMR advice from WHO is to jab unless the child is in serious risk of dying. And the only reason given not to jab in this instance is that the death may “incorrectly” be attributed to the MMR. And we wonder why most all serious adverse vaccine reactions are attributed to ‘coincidence’. As clearly seen in this WHO advice—take great lengths to disclaim any adverse vaccine reaction.”
— L. Travis Haws, Dentist
Lakewood CO 80228
“I draw attention to a letter entitled ‘Immunization and Childhood Leukaemia’ in which it was shown that Leukaemia in children in Brisbane Children’s Hospital from 1958 to 1964 showed a significant statistical association with immunization against diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough.”
In view of Dr Ivanovski’s observations that the incidence of childhood leukaemia increased with the introduction of DPT vaccination it is virtually certain that, if investigated, they will find the group with Leukaemia also shows a statistically significant increase in immunization with DPT vaccine.
— Michael Innis, Director Medisets International
KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE INCLUDE:
1) A number of studies going back nearly two decades propose that a deficit of exposure to infectious agents in infancy delays immune system development and is consequently responsible for the childhood peak of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia at age 2-5 years.
2) Sending infants to day care increases the incidences of infections, which plays an important role in immune system development, and reduces the incidence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
3) In this study, infants in day care without older siblings had a 39 percent reduction in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
4) Infants in day care with older siblings had a 62 percent reduction in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
5) “The greatest reduction in risk of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia was seen in children who attended formal day care during the first three months of life.” [Very Important: this indicates that the first 3 months of life are a critical time for infants to actually get infections so that their immune system develops appropriately and strongly, which reduces the incidences of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and other diseases]
6) Not being infected (“immunological isolation”) in infancy increases the risk of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
7) Nine other case-control studies of childhood leukaemia suggest a reduction in risk of around 30-40 percent for day care attendance and increased infections.
8) Not being infected (“immunological isolation”) in the first year of life provides “inadequate priming of the naïve immune system” and “may precipitate a highly dysregulated immune response.”
9) Increased infections in the first few months of life reduce chances of developing acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
10) “The most plausible interpretation is that this protection comes from exposure to common infections.” [This means that exposure to common infections is a good thing in terms of immune system development and reduced incidence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.]
11) Exposure to common childhood infections also reduces incidence of type-1 diabetes and allergies.
12) “Some degree of early exposure to infection seems to be important for child health.” [Very Important]
KEY POINTS IN THE RESPONSES TO THIS ARTICLE INCLUDE:
1) The prevention of infectious diseases [with antibiotics and vaccinations] impairs the development of the immune system so that it is less capable of fighting more deadly diseases, including cancer.
2) Antibiotics and vaccination of children (especially DPT) increase asthma, eczema, hay fever, allergies, atopic disorders, insulin dependent diabetes.
3) Immunized children have twice the incidence of type-1 diabetes.
4) Mass immunizations have been linked to leukemia, diabetes, Guillian-Barre’, Autism, SIDS, Arthritis, Thrombocytopenia, Encephalitis, Death, SBS, Distressed Breathing, Thimerosal Accumulation in Brain, delayed speech, tics, seizures, hallucinations, dizziness, Hemorrhagic Vasculomyelinopathy etc. etc. etc.
5) There is a significant statistical association with immunization against diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough and acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
SUMMARY POINTS FROM DAN MURPHY, D.C.
These articles, published in the world’s finest medical journals by many individuals from multiple continents, have several common points of agreement:
1) A person’s immune system begins to develop and mature in utero.
2) The first years, and especially the first few months, of a persons life are also critical times in the lifelong development and maturation of the immune system.
3) The most important factor directing the proper development and maturation of the immune system so that it will best serve a person for life is exposure to bacteria and actually being infected with a variety of bacteria and viruses.
4) Antibiotics, beginning in utero, and certain vaccinations against common childhood diseases received in the first few years of life deprive the developing and maturing immune system of the stimulus required for optimal lifelong function.
5) The consequences of the microbial depravation are increased incidences of allergies, hay fever, eczema, asthma, multiple sclerosis, type-I diabetes, and leukemia.
Dan Murphy graduated magna cum laude from Western States Chiropractic College in 1978, and has more than 20 years of practice experience. He received Diplomat status in Chiropractic Orthopedics in 1986. Since 1982, Dr. Murphy has served part-time as undergraduate faculty at Life Chiropractic College West, currently teaching classes to seniors in the management of spinal disorders.
Dr. Murphy is on the post-graduate faculty of several chiropractic colleges. His post-graduate continuing education classes include “Whiplash and Spinal Trauma” and “Pain Neurology.” Dr. Murphy is the coordinator of a year-long certification program in “Chiropractic Spinal Trauma,” now (2000) in its twelfth year of being offered. This year, the program is being offered through the International Chiropractors Association of California. He has taught more than 700 post-graduate continuing education seminars.
Dr. Murphy is a contributing author to the book Motor Vehicle Collision Injuries, published by Aspen, 1996; and to the book Pediatric Chiropractic, published by Williams & Wilkins, 1998. He writes a quarterly column in the Journal of Clinical Chiropractic.
In 1987, 1991 and 1995 Dr. Murphy received the Post-graduate Educator of the Year award, given by the International Chiropractic Association. In 1997, he received The Carl S. Cleveland, Jr., Educator of the Year award, given by the International Chiropractic Association of California.
REFERENCES:
1) Farooqi IS, Hopkin JM
Early Childhood Infection and Atopic Disorder
Thorax, 1998;53:927-932
2) Alm JS, Swartz J, Lilja G, Scheynius A, Pershagen G
Atopy in Children of Families with an Anthroposophic Lifestyle
The Lancet, Vol. 353, May 1, 1999, 1485-88
3) Wickens K, Pearce N, Crane J, Beasley R
Antibiotic use in early childhood and the development of asthma
Clin Exp Allergy 1999 Jun;29(6):766-71
4) Wahn U
The immunology of fetuses and infants: What drives the allergic march?
Allergy 55 (7), 591-599 (2000)
5) Ball TM, Castro-Rodriguez JA, Griffith KA, Holberg CJ, Martinez FD, Wright AL
Siblings, Day-Care Attendance, and the Risk of Asthma and Wheezing during Childhood
New England Journal of Medicine, Aug. 24, 2000, Vol. 343, No. 8, 538-43.
6) Christiansen SC
Day Care, Siblings, and Asthma — Please, Sneeze on My Child
The New England Journal of Medicine, August 24, 2000, Vol. 343, No. 8.
7) Strannegard O, Strannegard I-L
The causes of the increasing prevalence of allergy: is atopy a microbial deprivation disorder?
” Allergy 56 (2), 2001, 91-102.
8) Hopkin JM
The rise of atopy and links to infection
Allergy, Volume 57, August 2002, Issue s72.
9) Braun-Fahrlander C, Riedler J, Herz U, Eder W, Waser M, Grize L, Maisch S, Carr D, Gerlach F, Bufe A, Lauener RP, Schierl R, Renz H, Nowak D, Von Mutius E
Environmental exposure to endotoxin and its relation to asthma in school-age children
The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol.347, No.12, September 19, 2002, 869-877
10) Weiss S
Eat Dirt—The Hygiene Hypothesis and Allergic Diseases
New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, No. 12, September 19, 2002, 930-931.
11) Bach JF
Mechanisms of Disease: The effect of infections on susceptibility to autoimmune and allergic diseases
New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, No. 12, September 19, 2002, 911-920
12) McKeever TM, Lewis SA, Smith C, Hubbard R
The importance of prenatal exposures on the development of allergic disease: a birth cohort study using the West Midlands General Practice Database
American Journal Of Respiratory And Critical Care Medicine Vol. 166, pp. 827-832, 2002.
13) Gilham C, Peto J, Simpson J, Roman E, Eden TOB, Greaves MF, Alexander FE
Day care in infancy and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: findings from UK case-control study
British Medical Journal, June 4, 2005.
Early Life Infections Improve the Function of the Immune System
by Daniel J. Murphy, DC, FACO
Vice President of the ICA
A 1998 article published in the journal THORAX titled:
Early Childhood Infection and Atopic Disorder [ 1 ] notes:
1) Atopic diseases (asthma, hay fever, and eczema in this study) are rapidly rising in westernized communities.
2) The mechanism for this increase in atopic diseases is reduced exposure to microbes.
3) Atopic diseases were significantly statistically linked to immunization with the Pertussis vaccine and to treatment with oral antibiotics in the first two years of life.
4) The authors conclude that exposure to certain infections repress atopic disorders.
A 1999 article published in the journal THE LANCET titled Atopy in Children of Families with an Anthroposophic Lifestyle notes [ 2 ]
1) The increased prevalence of atopic disorders in children may be associated with changes in childhood infections as related to vaccination programs and antibiotics that alter intestinal microflora.
2) Children who use antibiotics restrictively and have few vaccinations have lower levels of atopic diseases.
Another 1999 article published in the journal CLINICAL EXPERIMENTAL ALLERGY titled Antibiotic use in early childhood and the development of asthma notes [ 3 ]
1) Antibiotic use is significantly associated with a history of asthma.
2) If antibiotics are used in the first year of life there is a 305 percent increased risk of developing asthma when compared with children who had never used antibiotics.
3) If antibiotics are used only after the first year of life there is a 64 percent increased risk of asthma when compared with children who had never used antibiotics.
4) The greater the number of courses of antibiotics given to children, the greater the risk that they will develop asthma.
5) “Early childhood infection may have a protective role against the subsequent development of asthma.”
6) The treatment of infant infections with antibiotics could play a role in the development of childhood asthma.
7) Antibiotics increase the risk of asthma by “reducing the intensity and duration of acquired bacterial infections.”
8) There is a “temporal association between the increasing prevalence of asthma and the increasing use of antibiotics throughout the developed world.”
A 2000 article published in the journal ALLERGY titled The immunology of fetuses and infants: What drives the allergic march? notes [ 4 ]
1) Atopy refers to allergic conditions which include hay fever, asthma, and eczema, and are associated with the production of IgE antibodies to common environmental allergens.
2) The risk of atopic disease early in life is particularly high in Western industrialized countries.
3) The critical period that influences the development of atopy is the first years of life.
4) “A decline in certain childhood infections or a lack of exposure to infectious agents during the first years of life could have caused the recent epidemic of atopic disease and asthma.”
5) Recovery from natural measles infection reduces the incidence of atopy and allergic responses to house-dust mites to half that seen in vaccinated children.
6) Bacterial infections are modulators of the atopic march.
7) The use of antibiotics during the first two years of life increases the risk of asthma.
Another 2000 article published in the journal THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE titled Siblings, Day-Care Attendance, and the Risk of Asthma and Wheezing during Childhood notes [ 5 ]
1) Young children with older siblings and those who attend day care are at increased risk for infections, which in turn may protect against the development of allergic diseases, including asthma.
2) Exposure of young children to older children at home or to other children at day care protects against the development of asthma and frequent wheezing later in childhood.
3) The incidence and the prevalence of asthma among children have increased dramatically in the past three decades, making it the most common chronic disease of childhood in the United States, and a decrease in infections during early childhood may be responsible.
4) “The incidence of asthma among children who had two or more older siblings or who attended day care during the first six months of life was significantly lower than that among children who had one sibling or no siblings and who did not attend day care.”
5) Bacterial or viral infections occurring during infancy may provide important signals to the newborn’s maturing immune system.
This article generated an editorial titled Day Care, Siblings, and Asthma — Please, Sneeze on My Child , that included the following comments: [ 6 ]
1) “Parents generally agree that children who attend day care or who have older siblings have more frequent infections. They may be surprised to learn, however, that this tendency may protect their younger children from asthma.”
2) “A common factor underlying the increased prevalence of asthma and atopic disease may be a reduction in early exposure to microbes, with a lasting influence on immune development.”
3) An important signal for normal postnatal immune system maturation is exposure to microbes. Deprivation of these signals in infants may allow a change that increases the risk of eventual asthma and atopic disease.
A 2001 article published in the journal ALLERGY titled The causes of the increasing prevalence of allergy: Is atopy a microbial deprivation disorder? [ 7 ]
1) “The atopic diseases, i.e., primarily, bronchial asthma, atopic dermatitis, and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, were rare a few decades ago, but constitute today an increasingly severe public health problem.”
2) “The increase in the prevalence of the allergic diseases, especially in those born after 1960, is almost explosive, and there are now epidemics of allergic diseases in many countries.”
3) “The prevalence of asthma in children and young adults has tripled and quadrupled in many industrialized countries during the last two decades.”
4) Allergic sensitization may occur in utero. [Important, as noted below.]
5) Allergic sensitization that occurs early in childhood tends to persist throughout life.
6) The very first months of life are of crucial importance in allergy development.
7) “The more children in the family, the more infections they encounter” and this may help to prevent allergy.
8) Viral infections protect against allergic disease.
9) “If the assumption that early viral or bacterial infections protect against the development of allergic diseases is correct, vaccination should lead to an increase of allergic disorders.”
10) Atopy is correlated to MMR vaccination (measles, mumps, rubella) and with the administration of antibiotics.
11) There is a significant relationship between treatment with antibiotics during the first two years of life and later development of allergy.
12) “Multiple courses of antibiotic treatment are associated with higher allergy prevalence, and the finding that treatment with broad-spectrum antibiotics appears to be more likely associated with allergy development than is ordinary penicillin.”
13) “Microbial agents do indeed play a protective role in the development of allergic disease.”
14) Childhood infections lower allergy prevalence, especially bacterial infections.
15) “From an evolutionary perspective [INNATE], it is perhaps not unexpected that the immune system, which over millions of years has adapted to a heavy microbial load, may react in an ‘inadequate’ way upon a sudden, radical decrease of this load, caused by vaccinations, antibiotics, and especially improved hygienic conditions.”
16) “A change in the ‘microbial load’ seems to be the most probable cause of the increase in the allergic diseases.”
A 2002 article published in the journal ALLERGY titled The rise of atopy and links to infection notes [ 8 ]
1) This article explores the evidence that “exposure to certain antibiotics and public health immunizations in early life” are the cause of atopic disorders.
2) This article also explores the evidence that “certain microbial exposures [infections] can inhibit experimental allergy.”
3) “Certain natural infections promote immune regulatory processes that can restrain atopy.”
4) 45 percent of children in some countries may be suffering from atopic disorders.
5) “Antibiotic receipt in early life is associated with more subsequent atopy and asthma.”
6) Antibiotics given early life (<24 months of age) for any clinical indication “predicted substantially more subsequent atopic disorder.”
7) 80 percent of children who subsequently display atopic disorder received antibiotics at two months.
8) There is a “direct promotion of atopy by antibiotic receipt.”
9) Certain immunizations may also increase subsequent atopy, including pertussis in the DPT vaccine and the measles/mumps/rubella (MMR) vaccine.
10) The limited microbial exposure caused by hygiene, antibiotics, and vaccinations may also explain the rising of inflammatory disorders, such as insulin dependent diabetes, in developed countries.
11) Microbial exposure “may play a key role in allowing the immune system to develop protective responses.”
Another 2002 article published in the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE titled Environmental exposure to endotoxin and its relation to asthma in school-age children notes [ 9 ]
1) “Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood and accounts for substantial morbidity and health care costs.”
2) One can have exposure to microbes or to nonviable parts of microbes and not become infected.
3) “Environmental exposure to microbial products may have a crucial role during the maturation of a child ‘s immune response.”
4) Exposure to microbial products is “associated with a significant decrease in the risk of hay-fever, atopic sensitization, atopic asthma, and atopic wheeze in childhood.”
5) “The innate immune system responds [favorably, for ones entire life] to a high microbial burden.”
6) Exposure to microbial products strongly affects the development of atopy and childhood asthma.
This article generated an editorial titled Eat Dirt—The Hygiene Hypothesis and Allergic Diseases , that included the following comments: [ 10 ]
1) There is an epidemic of both autoimmune diseases and allergic diseases.
2) “One theory proposed to explain this increase in the prevalence of autoimmune and allergic diseases is that it results from a decrease in the prevalence of childhood infection.”
Another 2002 article published in the same issue of the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE titled Mechanisms of Disease: The effect of infections on susceptibility to autoimmune and allergic diseases notes [ 11 ]
1) Infectious agents can suppress allergic (asthma, rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis) and autoimmune (multiple sclerosis, insulin-dependent type 1 diabetes, and Crohn’s disease) disorders.
2) The incidence of these disorders began to increase in the 1950s [coincidentally with the availability of antibiotics and vaccinations] and continues today.
3) There has been a significant decrease in the incidence of many infectious diseases in developed countries as a result of antibiotics, vaccination, and improved hygiene.
4) Early childhood infections change immune system maturation.
5) The administration of antibiotics to children increases the risk of asthma and allergy.
6) Decreased exposure of women to viruses before pregnancy may subsequently reduce the degree of protection against these viruses afforded to their newborns.
7) “Vaccination strategies should be examined in the context of the hygiene hypothesis.”
8) Vaccinations may prevent ‘protective’ infections and thus have an unfavorable effect.
9) “In addition to the problem of antibiotic resistance, unnecessary treatment with antibiotics could reduce the degree of physiological immunostimulation afforded by commensal bacteria.”
10) “There is a certain irony in the fact that we must now search for new ways to reproduce the infectious diseases against which we have been fighting with great success over the past three decades.”
11) These mechanisms might extend to other immune disorders, like non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas [cancer], which is also increasing in developed countries.
Another 2002 article published in the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE titled The Importance of Prenatal Exposures on the Development of Allergic Disease notes [ 12 ]
1) A decreased exposure to infection may play an important role in the etiology of allergic disease, but there is little data on the impact of change in microbial exposure during pregnancy on the child’s risk of developing allergic disease.
2) Exposure to antibiotics in utero is associated with an increased risk of asthma, eczema and hay fever in a dose-related manner.
3) Exposure to antibiotics in utero is a important risk factor in the development of allergic disease.
4) Because the immune system develops in utero, exposure to antibiotics during pregnancy is associated with an increased incidence of allergic diseases.
5) “This effect did not appear to depend on the type of antibiotic prescribed or the trimester the antibiotics were prescribed.”
A 2005 article published in the BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL titled Day care in infancy and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia notes [ 13 ]
1) Reduced exposure to infection in the first few months of life increases the risk of developing acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
2) Several other investigators have reported reduced risks of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children with many infections.
3) Reduced infections in the first year of life provides “inadequate priming of the naïve immune system” and “may precipitate a highly dysregulated immune response.”
4) “Similar associations have been reported for type 1 diabetes and allergies in children.”
5) “Some degree of early exposure to infection seems to be important for child health.”
PUBLISHED RESPONSES THAT FOLLOWED THIS ARTICLE INCLUDE:
“Striking the right balance between protecting our children from damaging or life threatening infections whilst exposing them to a ‘sufficient dose’ of milder infections to prime their immune systems, has far-reaching social and behavioural connotations.”
— Roger C Parslow, Senior Research Fellow, Paediatric Epidemiology Group, University of Leeds
[This was my favorite response, by a chiropractor, Dr. Richard Lanigan]
“Gilham et al’s findings should not come as a surprise, however they have stopped short of questioning the possible benefits to the immune system of what were once called ‘normal childhood infections’ and now, are extremely rare.”
“Prevention of infectious diseases is seen universally as beneficial to the health of society. However few have considered the possibility that natural selection and these diseases, played a role in the development of the immune system to fight more deadly diseases.”
Dr. Lanigan then cites references to support the following points:
1) Children who take fewer antibiotics and a lower rate of immunization also have a lower prevalence of asthma, eczema and hay fever than the controls.
2) Children who contract measles are less likely to develop asthma, a disease that was rare thirty years ago and now kills 2000 people per year in the UK.
3) DPT vaccination increases the risk of allergy.
4) There is a specific inverse relationship between contracting measles and atopic diseases.
5) Children who did not have the DPT or polio immunization did not suffer from asthma or other allergic illnesses while 23 - 30 percent of the control group did.
6) Children who suffered infections in the first year of life are less likely to develop insulin dependent diabetes.
7) Immunized children have twice the incidence of type-1 diabetes.
—Richard Lanigan, Chiropractor
“The study by Gilham et al. confirms the hypothesis that reduced exposure to infection early in life has effects on the maturing immune system that increase the risk of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) and possibly other malignancies.”
“The immunological basis of this increased risk is uncertain but it could be the result of the inadequate development of immune surveillance mechanisms that detect cancer-specific antigenic determinants.”
“Gilham et al. postulate that the inadequate priming of the immune system due to a lack of exposure to infection permits subsequent infections by unknown exogenous agents, probably viruses, to cause immune dysregulation leading to acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.”
— John M.Grange
Centre for Infectious Diseases
and International Health,
University College London.
— Bernd Krone
Klaus F. Kölmel
Departments of Virology and Dermatology, University of Göttingen, Germany
“Before 1920, acute leukemia among children was a rare event. A significant peak-age incidence (2-5 years) appeared after 1940. Since then, the incidence rate of childhood leukemia has been more or less remarkably stable. This means that some leukemogenic factor must have been introduced in children’s lives some time around 1940.”
“It is a highly striking coincidence that at the same year the introduction of immunization against diphtheria was began on a national scale.”
— Petar I. Ivanovski, pediatrician
University Childrens Hospital, Belgrade
“I wonder if our friends at the CDC, NIH, WHO etc. have considered adding leukemia in addition to diabetes, Guillian-Barre’, Autism, SIDS, Arthritis, Thrombocytopenia, Encephalitis, Death, SBS, Distressed Breathing, Thimerosal Accumulation in Brain (TAB), delayed speech, tics, seizures, hallucinations, dizziness, Hemorrhagic Vasculomyelinopathy etc. etc. etc. to ‘highly coincidental’ adverse reactions from the long list of mass immunizations.”
“Do you think parents would be informed during their child’s well visit of any of the above?”
“In particular, MMR advice from WHO is to jab unless the child is in serious risk of dying. And the only reason given not to jab in this instance is that the death may “incorrectly” be attributed to the MMR. And we wonder why most all serious adverse vaccine reactions are attributed to ‘coincidence’. As clearly seen in this WHO advice—take great lengths to disclaim any adverse vaccine reaction.”
— L. Travis Haws, Dentist
Lakewood CO 80228
“I draw attention to a letter entitled ‘Immunization and Childhood Leukaemia’ in which it was shown that Leukaemia in children in Brisbane Children’s Hospital from 1958 to 1964 showed a significant statistical association with immunization against diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough.”
In view of Dr Ivanovski’s observations that the incidence of childhood leukaemia increased with the introduction of DPT vaccination it is virtually certain that, if investigated, they will find the group with Leukaemia also shows a statistically significant increase in immunization with DPT vaccine.
— Michael Innis, Director Medisets International
KEY POINTS FROM THIS ARTICLE INCLUDE:
1) A number of studies going back nearly two decades propose that a deficit of exposure to infectious agents in infancy delays immune system development and is consequently responsible for the childhood peak of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia at age 2-5 years.
2) Sending infants to day care increases the incidences of infections, which plays an important role in immune system development, and reduces the incidence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
3) In this study, infants in day care without older siblings had a 39 percent reduction in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
4) Infants in day care with older siblings had a 62 percent reduction in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
5) “The greatest reduction in risk of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia was seen in children who attended formal day care during the first three months of life.” [Very Important: this indicates that the first 3 months of life are a critical time for infants to actually get infections so that their immune system develops appropriately and strongly, which reduces the incidences of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and other diseases]
6) Not being infected (“immunological isolation”) in infancy increases the risk of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
7) Nine other case-control studies of childhood leukaemia suggest a reduction in risk of around 30-40 percent for day care attendance and increased infections.
8) Not being infected (“immunological isolation”) in the first year of life provides “inadequate priming of the naïve immune system” and “may precipitate a highly dysregulated immune response.”
9) Increased infections in the first few months of life reduce chances of developing acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
10) “The most plausible interpretation is that this protection comes from exposure to common infections.” [This means that exposure to common infections is a good thing in terms of immune system development and reduced incidence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.]
11) Exposure to common childhood infections also reduces incidence of type-1 diabetes and allergies.
12) “Some degree of early exposure to infection seems to be important for child health.” [Very Important]
KEY POINTS IN THE RESPONSES TO THIS ARTICLE INCLUDE:
1) The prevention of infectious diseases [with antibiotics and vaccinations] impairs the development of the immune system so that it is less capable of fighting more deadly diseases, including cancer.
2) Antibiotics and vaccination of children (especially DPT) increase asthma, eczema, hay fever, allergies, atopic disorders, insulin dependent diabetes.
3) Immunized children have twice the incidence of type-1 diabetes.
4) Mass immunizations have been linked to leukemia, diabetes, Guillian-Barre’, Autism, SIDS, Arthritis, Thrombocytopenia, Encephalitis, Death, SBS, Distressed Breathing, Thimerosal Accumulation in Brain, delayed speech, tics, seizures, hallucinations, dizziness, Hemorrhagic Vasculomyelinopathy etc. etc. etc.
5) There is a significant statistical association with immunization against diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough and acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.
SUMMARY POINTS FROM DAN MURPHY, D.C.
These articles, published in the world’s finest medical journals by many individuals from multiple continents, have several common points of agreement:
1) A person’s immune system begins to develop and mature in utero.
2) The first years, and especially the first few months, of a persons life are also critical times in the lifelong development and maturation of the immune system.
3) The most important factor directing the proper development and maturation of the immune system so that it will best serve a person for life is exposure to bacteria and actually being infected with a variety of bacteria and viruses.
4) Antibiotics, beginning in utero, and certain vaccinations against common childhood diseases received in the first few years of life deprive the developing and maturing immune system of the stimulus required for optimal lifelong function.
5) The consequences of the microbial depravation are increased incidences of allergies, hay fever, eczema, asthma, multiple sclerosis, type-I diabetes, and leukemia.
Dan Murphy graduated magna cum laude from Western States Chiropractic College in 1978, and has more than 20 years of practice experience. He received Diplomat status in Chiropractic Orthopedics in 1986. Since 1982, Dr. Murphy has served part-time as undergraduate faculty at Life Chiropractic College West, currently teaching classes to seniors in the management of spinal disorders.
Dr. Murphy is on the post-graduate faculty of several chiropractic colleges. His post-graduate continuing education classes include “Whiplash and Spinal Trauma” and “Pain Neurology.” Dr. Murphy is the coordinator of a year-long certification program in “Chiropractic Spinal Trauma,” now (2000) in its twelfth year of being offered. This year, the program is being offered through the International Chiropractors Association of California. He has taught more than 700 post-graduate continuing education seminars.
Dr. Murphy is a contributing author to the book Motor Vehicle Collision Injuries, published by Aspen, 1996; and to the book Pediatric Chiropractic, published by Williams & Wilkins, 1998. He writes a quarterly column in the Journal of Clinical Chiropractic.
In 1987, 1991 and 1995 Dr. Murphy received the Post-graduate Educator of the Year award, given by the International Chiropractic Association. In 1997, he received The Carl S. Cleveland, Jr., Educator of the Year award, given by the International Chiropractic Association of California.
REFERENCES:
1) Farooqi IS, Hopkin JM
Early Childhood Infection and Atopic Disorder
Thorax, 1998;53:927-932
2) Alm JS, Swartz J, Lilja G, Scheynius A, Pershagen G
Atopy in Children of Families with an Anthroposophic Lifestyle
The Lancet, Vol. 353, May 1, 1999, 1485-88
3) Wickens K, Pearce N, Crane J, Beasley R
Antibiotic use in early childhood and the development of asthma
Clin Exp Allergy 1999 Jun;29(6):766-71
4) Wahn U
The immunology of fetuses and infants: What drives the allergic march?
Allergy 55 (7), 591-599 (2000)
5) Ball TM, Castro-Rodriguez JA, Griffith KA, Holberg CJ, Martinez FD, Wright AL
Siblings, Day-Care Attendance, and the Risk of Asthma and Wheezing during Childhood
New England Journal of Medicine, Aug. 24, 2000, Vol. 343, No. 8, 538-43.
6) Christiansen SC
Day Care, Siblings, and Asthma — Please, Sneeze on My Child
The New England Journal of Medicine, August 24, 2000, Vol. 343, No. 8.
7) Strannegard O, Strannegard I-L
The causes of the increasing prevalence of allergy: is atopy a microbial deprivation disorder?
” Allergy 56 (2), 2001, 91-102.
8) Hopkin JM
The rise of atopy and links to infection
Allergy, Volume 57, August 2002, Issue s72.
9) Braun-Fahrlander C, Riedler J, Herz U, Eder W, Waser M, Grize L, Maisch S, Carr D, Gerlach F, Bufe A, Lauener RP, Schierl R, Renz H, Nowak D, Von Mutius E
Environmental exposure to endotoxin and its relation to asthma in school-age children
The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol.347, No.12, September 19, 2002, 869-877
10) Weiss S
Eat Dirt—The Hygiene Hypothesis and Allergic Diseases
New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, No. 12, September 19, 2002, 930-931.
11) Bach JF
Mechanisms of Disease: The effect of infections on susceptibility to autoimmune and allergic diseases
New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, No. 12, September 19, 2002, 911-920
12) McKeever TM, Lewis SA, Smith C, Hubbard R
The importance of prenatal exposures on the development of allergic disease: a birth cohort study using the West Midlands General Practice Database
American Journal Of Respiratory And Critical Care Medicine Vol. 166, pp. 827-832, 2002.
13) Gilham C, Peto J, Simpson J, Roman E, Eden TOB, Greaves MF, Alexander FE
Day care in infancy and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: findings from UK case-control study
British Medical Journal, June 4, 2005.
Vaccines - Injections Of Death!
Vaccines - Injections Of Death!
By Alan R. Yurko
A Look At Their History
Vaccines are credited as the greatest medical wonder of the 20th century, having allegedly eradicated certain diseases from the planet and declined morbidity en masse. (1)(2)(3) The 21st century has further embraced this lie and we see that there are now vaccines being developed and in existence for a rotunda of maladies varying from HIV/AIDS to varicella - zoster (chicken pox). There are even vaccines being developed for cocaine and alcohol abuse as well as acne and hair loss, among many others.
The concept of vaccination is novel and embraces a noble intention, which is why so many are easily deceived. For centuries, we have tried to find ways of inducing immunity in order to escape the consequences of disease. In Greek history, Thucydides (c. 460-400 B.C.) noted that during a plague, some people escaped infection despite exposure while those who recovered were never again infected. (4)(5) Thus we see that the basic understanding of the cause and consequence of disease has been observed for centuries. It is the basic premise in which the practice of immunization has been built.
Modern vaccination practices appear to have their pathogenesis in the work of Edward Jenner (1749-1823). As a boy, Jenner was subjected to abusive methods of variolation, where the scabs of smallpox victims were applied to open wounds inflicted by the administrators such as the local apothecary.(6) Despite a 75% survival rate for natural smallpox infections, there were no cures. (7) The "cures" of those days were barbaric and poisonous, likely killing as many people as smallpox itself.
As an adult, Jenner became obsessed with finding better methods to prevent smallpox. His patients and local farmers would deliberately infect themselves with cowpox, believing that recovery from this mild disease provided better protection from smallpox. In 1796, Jenner formulated a vaccine from cowpox sores, and via two cuts in the arm, introduced it into a young boy named James Phipps. (8) Phipps never contracted smallpox, however. Jenner also inoculated his own son, and both Phipps and Jenner's son died at ages 20 and 21 respectively from tuberculosis, which has been linked to the smallpox vaccine. (9) Despite these deaths, Jenner continued testing this vaccine on many others producing varying results such as vaccine-induced smallpox and vaccine-induced tuberculosis.
Jenner's Witches Brew Science Takes Root
Jenner, in 1798, formulated a new vaccine, which combined "horse-grease" (11) and cow-pox matter as he had proclaimed his first formulation in 1796 as having "no protective virtue." (12) His new vaccine was met with public disdain and disgust and his experiments failed. He was ridiculed. Jenner then returned to promote his original formulation. By 1807, he convinced the Royal College of Physicians and the British Parliament that his once defunct and admittedly unprotective vaccine was safe and effective, and as well could produce large revenues.(13) Not trusting the scientific solutions being offered, some countries banned variolation. Yet, quite surprisingly, Jenner's vaccine became compulsory and mandatory in many other countries. The smallpox vaccine was widely used until 1979 when the World Health Organization (WHO) declared smallpox eradicated from the face of the earth.(14) However, much interest and process has been initiated today to readopt and resurge the smallpox vaccine due to recent threats of bioterrorism precipitated with the 9/11 World Trade Center cataclysm.
Vaccination Pseudo-Science Continues To This Day
Jenner's legacy promulgated the vaccine frenzy of modern times. Vaccines are so praised and glorified that they are often given the title of "The Sacred Cow" of modern medicine and defended with zealous and concerted might by Public Health organizations and Pharmaceutical companies. This pseudo-ritualistic worship of The Sacred Cow has ruined the careers of doctors who dare question it,(15) and jailed parents who have refused mandatory vaccinations.(16) There are also many well documented cases of children who have been killed by vaccines where the parent (s) are charged and in some cases, convicted of murdering their children. A cursory glance at the government's Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System data-base shows thousands upon thousands of deaths and disorders associated with vaccines (18) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) admits this only represents at best, 10% of the actual occurrences of adverse vaccine reactions.(19) The Sacred Cow is a false deity and a harsh demon indeed.
The Vaccine Agenda Is Built On A Myth
One of the greatest lies you will ever hear is that vaccination programs caused the decline of childhood diseases in the 20th century. This is complete fiction. The truth is well documented that these rates declined by 90% before the introduction of mass/routine vaccination campaigns. This evidence is shown in different countries and the World Health Organization was forced to concede that sanitation, better hygiene and antibiotics are the main reason disease mortality and morbidity have declined.(20)(21)(22)(23) Despite overwhelming evidence, proponents of the Sacred Cow continually covet this accomplishment as their own. Realizing that this deception is "the rock" of the Sacred Cow church is essential in seeing the myth and hypocrisy of vaccines.
Vaccines Loaded With Toxic And Destructive Contaminants
To further grasp the vaccine beasts' evil, one need only examine the ingedients of these highly toxic concoctions. Many Christians will be appalled at how vaccines are made and the contents, which resemble a witches brew. We will explore the make up of each individual vaccine in future articles of CRUSADOR in great detail, however, in short, vaccines contain toxic chemical components such as, but not limited to:
Formaldehyde (Embalming fluid constituent)
Thimerosal (Nearly 50% mercury)
Aluminum Phosphate (Highly toxic and carcinogenic)
Antibiotics (Anti = Against Bio = Life)
Phenols (Corrosive to skin - toxic to all cells)
Aluminum Salts (Corrosive to tissue - neurotoxic)
Methanol (Alcohol - toxic)
Isopropyl (Alcohol - toxic)
2 Pheoxyethanol (Alcohol - toxic)
Unknown? (The full make up of vaccines are not known. Vaccine manufacturers do not divulge their secret formulas and are protected by law in this under the guise of "proprietary data."
In addition to these toxic chemical components, there are other toxins and poisons, which are antigenic components. These are essentially proteins capable of causing the disease and eliciting an immune response. They are the central features of each vaccine. For example, Polio vaccines or Influenza vaccines contain either killed, live or "acellular" antigens. In short, vaccines contain the pathogenic disease they are trying to prevent.
There are also contaminants and additives as well as ingredients that get included during the "serial passage" or growing of the vaccine pathogens, such as but not limited to:
Animal Blood/Serum (Calves, pigs, horses, sheep, etc.)
Animal DNA (Calves, pigs, horses, sheep, etc.)
Chicken Embryo
ABORTED FETAL TISSUE (In the Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Chickenpox vaccines)
Simian ImmunoVirus - 40 (SV-40 is a monkey disease parallel to AIDS/HIV)
Mycoplasma (Linked to Chronic Fatigue/CFIDS, and many other degenerative diseases)
Endotoxins (Toxic)
Unknown Pathogens/Contaminants (Again... proprietary data)
There are many other components not mentioned however, the above should shock Christians and most religious faiths. Most do not know that their children and families are being injected with animal and human blood/serum and aborted fetal tissue (Human Diploid Cells). (24)(25)
An extra biblical book known as the Book of Jasher has a pertinent passage that seems to show the ungodliness of vaccines. The book of Jasher is referenced in Joshua 10: 13 and 11 Samuel 1: 18. Although it does not actually appear in the Bible, Jasher discusses in great detail some of the events that were going on at the time of Noah and why God ultimately brought the flood and destroyed the world. When examining, the make-up of vaccines, Jasher takes on monumental spiritual importance.
"And the sons of men in those days took from the cattle of the earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air: and taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order therewith to provoke the Lord; and God saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon earth, all men and all animals."
(Jasher 4:18)
It seems rather obvious to me that when blood and DNA from various species are put into vaccines and then iniected into people it is an affront to the Lord and a violation of his law. And what about the fact that some vaccines are even using human fetal tissue? It's very interesting that Jesus said it would be like the time of Noah when identifying the times before he returns and here we see the cross mixing of species in the manufacturing process of vaccines and a movement to force vaccinate the entire planet. Perhaps as Christians, we need to be looking much deeper into the whole vaccination issue.
Toxic Shots
One might argue that the quantities of these toxins in the vaccines are minute, yet this is simply not so. In the case of mercury, during a "well-child visit" where DTP (Diptheria, Tetanis, Pertussis), Hib (Haemophilus Influenza type B),(Hepatitis B) and OPV (Oral Polio Virus) are given, a child can receive 62.5 micrograms of mercury. The EPA guidelines for "safe" mercury levels are .1 micrograms per kilogram of bodyweight per day.(26) (Yes, that is .1 mcgs.) This equates to an average 5kg baby receiving 30 to 50 times the "safe" amount of mercury injected in a bolus dose in approximately 10 minutes time. If anyone were to inject a syringe with 62.5 micrograms of mercury, into a tiny baby, they would go to prison for many years. However, add numerous other toxins, chemicals, bacteria, or viruses to that syringe and allow your pediatrician to do it, and that person is hailed as a saver of children's lives.
Children are receiving a staggering amount of vaccines before they are five years old. The following immunization schedule shows that 37 plus vaccines will be injected into a child before the first grade.
Immunization Schedule+
Vaccine
Recommended at
Hepatitis B (Hep B)1 ............
Birth - 2 months,
1-4 months,
and 6-18 months
Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis
(DTAP or DTP) ...............
2 months,
4 months,
6 months,
12-18 months
and 4-6 years
Polio Vaccine (IPV) ............
2 months,
4 months,
6-18 months
and 4-6 years
Haemophilus Influenza type B (Hib)
2 months,
4 months,
6 months and
12-15 months
Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR)2
12-15 months
4-6 years
Chickenpox (VZV)3 .............
12-18 months
or 11 -12 years
Tetanus-Diphtheria booster (Td)4 .
11-16 years
Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine
2 months,
4 months,
6 months and
12-15 months
Polysaccharide Meningococcal Vaccine5
see footnote
Your doctor's immunization schedule may vary from this one based on individual facts and circumstances.
1All children and adolescents (through 18 years of age) who have not been immunized should begin the series at any time.
2If second dose not previously received then administer by the 11-12 year old visit.
3 VZV vaccine recommended at 11 -12 years of age for children not previously vaccinated, and who lack a reliable history of chickenpox.
4At least 5 years should have elapsed since the last dose of DTAP or DTP.
5College students living in dormitories should receive a single dose.
+These guidelines were developed from several sources including the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Advisory Committee of Immunization Practice (ACIP) and the U.S. Preventive Services Task For (USPSTF) and are reviewed annually and updated as appropriate.
A Satanic Assault Against The Blood
One does not need to be a doctor or scientist to see that the amount of toxins and poisons and the frequency of their administration to our children and families under the organized collusion of Public Health Officials and Pharmaceutical companies is nothing short of a systemic biolocical assault. It is, by definition - BIOTERRORISM.
Even if vaccines really did do all the amazing things that are credited to them, which they don't, it would still not justify the violation of the sanctity of human blood. One wonders how the human race has survived so long without vaccines when considering the praise and adoration given them by proponents.
The truth is, our bodies are symbiotic with nature and God has provided all sources of healing and immunity without having to rely on the destructive methods offered by the pharmaceutical industry, which is built on lies and deception.
Vaccines are contrary to God's protocols for health. They are unnatural, toxic blood contaminants and they are being pushed by a demonic force in an effort to attack and contaminate the blood of man, which, as the Bible records, is the life of the flesh (Lev. 17:11). Vaccines are not designed to protect and improve health despite claims to the contrary by the medical establishment. Vaccines disrupt and damage DNA, thus creating genetic disturbances and mutations in a healthy person, which eventually creates a cellular environment that is extremely susceptible to disease. Mass vaccination proarams are being pushed because the global elite are trying to implement a population control agenda. Just look at the destructive effects vaccines have had on the populations of Africa and how the AIDS epidemic is decimating this continent. In the book, Emerging Viruses, by Dr. Len Horowitz, he documents with convincing facts and figures that AIDS was a bioweapon developed by the U.S. government in collusion with several pharmaceutical firms and was administered through the Hepatitis B vaccine. When looking at their components and manufacturing process further, a spiritually enlightened person can easily understand that vaccines are nothing more than a demonic witches brew.
Vaccines Linked To The Mark Of The Beast
For those interested in numerology, it has been found that the word VACCINATION translates to a specific number, and easily so. Merely assign multiples of six to the alphabet. For example, A = 6, B = 12, C = 18, D = 24, etc. Then add the respective values in the word VACCINATION. The sum is 666, the number of the beast.(42) In fact, there are many, many other scriptural and historical postulates that correlate with Satan, witchcraft, ritual worship, blood sacrifice, etc., that will shock Christian scholars and laypersons.
Shattering The Statistics
There are many parallels and a direct satanic connection to vaccines that Christians should be aware of, however, lets explore the efficacy (or how well it works) of vaccines by looking at the measles vaccine. In 1900, there were 13.3 measles deaths per 100,000 persons and by 1955 the death rate declined by 97.7%, taking it to 0.03 deaths per 100,000. Note that this happened BEFORE the first measles vaccination.27 In the mid-1970's (post vaccination era), the death rate from measles remained exactly the same as in the early 1960's (pre-vaccine era).28 Further data shows that in the USA and England, there was a 95% decline in the measles death rate between 1915 and 1958,(29) again happening in the pre-vaccine era for measles. Also, before the measles vaccine was introduced, it was extremely rare for an infant to contract measles, but by 1993, more than 25% of all measles cases occurred in babies under one year old. CDC officials attribute this to the growing number of mothers vaccinated during the 1960's, 70's and 80's.(30)
In the U.S., measles vaccine has been available since 1957 and the triple antigen vaccine, MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) has been available since 1975. One would surmise that measles cases would have decreased, however, from 1983 to 1990 there has been a 423% increase in the number of measles cases. (31)
In 1985, the U.S. govemment reported that 80% of notified cases of measles occurred in vaccinated people.(32) Corpus Christi, Texas saw a measles epidemic in 1986 in which 99% of the children affected had been vaccinated against measles, and 95% were supposedly immune.(32) CDC official Dr. Atkinson states, "Measles tranmissions have been clearly docmented amoung vaccinated persons. In some large outbreaks, over 95% of cases have a history of vacciiiation."(34) Lastly, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a study that stated that those vaccinated against measles are 14 times more likely to contract the disease than those left unvaccinated.(35)(36)
Links To Vaccine Related Diseases
To sum up the efficacy of the measles vaccine, it is important to know that when one contracts measles, the body destroys the cells containing the virus. This consumptive process occurs at the site of rash which measles are known for. If we stop this process, as we try to do by vaccinating, then the virus survives and thrives in the body, to cause malady later on. High proportions of individuals who were vaccinated were found to have cervical cancer, skin. cancers and multiple sclerosis in adulthood.(37) As well, very serious nervous system and other reactions to measles vaccine have been repeatedly reported in medical literature. Autism is foremost at the center of a huge controversy as respected researchers have linked it to the measles vaccine.(38)(39)(40)(41) Careful analysis of other vaccine data reveals similar trends of non-safety, non-efficacy and adverse outcome for all other vaccines as well.
World Opposition To Vaccines is Growing
Vaccine controversies are growing and the debate is being waged in developing nations worldwide. There are hundreds of organizations that have emerged along with thousands of doctors and scientists who are making a stand against vaccines. The power, greed, wealth and agenda of those who sell the church of the Sacred Cow and force devilish concoctions upon our children and families is formidable. Evil is powerful!
Conclusion
The case against vaccines is overwhelming, not just from a scientific standpoint, but from a spiritual standpoint as well. The church of the Sacred Cow wants us to believe that vaccines are benign and great. This gives them power, riches and control to advance their malevolent agenda of corruption. Do not be blinded. Even private insurance mega-companies who fund the best liability studies in the world are not blinded by vaccines. It is interesting in that there are three things which insurance companies have totally abandoned coverage for in damage to life and property:
1) Acts of God
2) Nuclear War and Nuclear Power Plant Accidents
3) VACCINATIONS...
Vaccines can be seen as a devilish war against the sanctity of human blood and mankind, and we shall see that as Christians, we have a duty to take a stand no matter what. Stay with us for future articles which will reveal even more shocking and revelatory data.
Authors Note:
Many thanks to Catherine Diodati, MA whose research provided a great deal of the historical data and to all the other tireless researchers whom I've drawn from to compile this article.
By Alan R. Yurko
A Look At Their History
Vaccines are credited as the greatest medical wonder of the 20th century, having allegedly eradicated certain diseases from the planet and declined morbidity en masse. (1)(2)(3) The 21st century has further embraced this lie and we see that there are now vaccines being developed and in existence for a rotunda of maladies varying from HIV/AIDS to varicella - zoster (chicken pox). There are even vaccines being developed for cocaine and alcohol abuse as well as acne and hair loss, among many others.
The concept of vaccination is novel and embraces a noble intention, which is why so many are easily deceived. For centuries, we have tried to find ways of inducing immunity in order to escape the consequences of disease. In Greek history, Thucydides (c. 460-400 B.C.) noted that during a plague, some people escaped infection despite exposure while those who recovered were never again infected. (4)(5) Thus we see that the basic understanding of the cause and consequence of disease has been observed for centuries. It is the basic premise in which the practice of immunization has been built.
Modern vaccination practices appear to have their pathogenesis in the work of Edward Jenner (1749-1823). As a boy, Jenner was subjected to abusive methods of variolation, where the scabs of smallpox victims were applied to open wounds inflicted by the administrators such as the local apothecary.(6) Despite a 75% survival rate for natural smallpox infections, there were no cures. (7) The "cures" of those days were barbaric and poisonous, likely killing as many people as smallpox itself.
As an adult, Jenner became obsessed with finding better methods to prevent smallpox. His patients and local farmers would deliberately infect themselves with cowpox, believing that recovery from this mild disease provided better protection from smallpox. In 1796, Jenner formulated a vaccine from cowpox sores, and via two cuts in the arm, introduced it into a young boy named James Phipps. (8) Phipps never contracted smallpox, however. Jenner also inoculated his own son, and both Phipps and Jenner's son died at ages 20 and 21 respectively from tuberculosis, which has been linked to the smallpox vaccine. (9) Despite these deaths, Jenner continued testing this vaccine on many others producing varying results such as vaccine-induced smallpox and vaccine-induced tuberculosis.
Jenner's Witches Brew Science Takes Root
Jenner, in 1798, formulated a new vaccine, which combined "horse-grease" (11) and cow-pox matter as he had proclaimed his first formulation in 1796 as having "no protective virtue." (12) His new vaccine was met with public disdain and disgust and his experiments failed. He was ridiculed. Jenner then returned to promote his original formulation. By 1807, he convinced the Royal College of Physicians and the British Parliament that his once defunct and admittedly unprotective vaccine was safe and effective, and as well could produce large revenues.(13) Not trusting the scientific solutions being offered, some countries banned variolation. Yet, quite surprisingly, Jenner's vaccine became compulsory and mandatory in many other countries. The smallpox vaccine was widely used until 1979 when the World Health Organization (WHO) declared smallpox eradicated from the face of the earth.(14) However, much interest and process has been initiated today to readopt and resurge the smallpox vaccine due to recent threats of bioterrorism precipitated with the 9/11 World Trade Center cataclysm.
Vaccination Pseudo-Science Continues To This Day
Jenner's legacy promulgated the vaccine frenzy of modern times. Vaccines are so praised and glorified that they are often given the title of "The Sacred Cow" of modern medicine and defended with zealous and concerted might by Public Health organizations and Pharmaceutical companies. This pseudo-ritualistic worship of The Sacred Cow has ruined the careers of doctors who dare question it,(15) and jailed parents who have refused mandatory vaccinations.(16) There are also many well documented cases of children who have been killed by vaccines where the parent (s) are charged and in some cases, convicted of murdering their children. A cursory glance at the government's Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System data-base shows thousands upon thousands of deaths and disorders associated with vaccines (18) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) admits this only represents at best, 10% of the actual occurrences of adverse vaccine reactions.(19) The Sacred Cow is a false deity and a harsh demon indeed.
The Vaccine Agenda Is Built On A Myth
One of the greatest lies you will ever hear is that vaccination programs caused the decline of childhood diseases in the 20th century. This is complete fiction. The truth is well documented that these rates declined by 90% before the introduction of mass/routine vaccination campaigns. This evidence is shown in different countries and the World Health Organization was forced to concede that sanitation, better hygiene and antibiotics are the main reason disease mortality and morbidity have declined.(20)(21)(22)(23) Despite overwhelming evidence, proponents of the Sacred Cow continually covet this accomplishment as their own. Realizing that this deception is "the rock" of the Sacred Cow church is essential in seeing the myth and hypocrisy of vaccines.
Vaccines Loaded With Toxic And Destructive Contaminants
To further grasp the vaccine beasts' evil, one need only examine the ingedients of these highly toxic concoctions. Many Christians will be appalled at how vaccines are made and the contents, which resemble a witches brew. We will explore the make up of each individual vaccine in future articles of CRUSADOR in great detail, however, in short, vaccines contain toxic chemical components such as, but not limited to:
Formaldehyde (Embalming fluid constituent)
Thimerosal (Nearly 50% mercury)
Aluminum Phosphate (Highly toxic and carcinogenic)
Antibiotics (Anti = Against Bio = Life)
Phenols (Corrosive to skin - toxic to all cells)
Aluminum Salts (Corrosive to tissue - neurotoxic)
Methanol (Alcohol - toxic)
Isopropyl (Alcohol - toxic)
2 Pheoxyethanol (Alcohol - toxic)
Unknown? (The full make up of vaccines are not known. Vaccine manufacturers do not divulge their secret formulas and are protected by law in this under the guise of "proprietary data."
In addition to these toxic chemical components, there are other toxins and poisons, which are antigenic components. These are essentially proteins capable of causing the disease and eliciting an immune response. They are the central features of each vaccine. For example, Polio vaccines or Influenza vaccines contain either killed, live or "acellular" antigens. In short, vaccines contain the pathogenic disease they are trying to prevent.
There are also contaminants and additives as well as ingredients that get included during the "serial passage" or growing of the vaccine pathogens, such as but not limited to:
Animal Blood/Serum (Calves, pigs, horses, sheep, etc.)
Animal DNA (Calves, pigs, horses, sheep, etc.)
Chicken Embryo
ABORTED FETAL TISSUE (In the Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Chickenpox vaccines)
Simian ImmunoVirus - 40 (SV-40 is a monkey disease parallel to AIDS/HIV)
Mycoplasma (Linked to Chronic Fatigue/CFIDS, and many other degenerative diseases)
Endotoxins (Toxic)
Unknown Pathogens/Contaminants (Again... proprietary data)
There are many other components not mentioned however, the above should shock Christians and most religious faiths. Most do not know that their children and families are being injected with animal and human blood/serum and aborted fetal tissue (Human Diploid Cells). (24)(25)
An extra biblical book known as the Book of Jasher has a pertinent passage that seems to show the ungodliness of vaccines. The book of Jasher is referenced in Joshua 10: 13 and 11 Samuel 1: 18. Although it does not actually appear in the Bible, Jasher discusses in great detail some of the events that were going on at the time of Noah and why God ultimately brought the flood and destroyed the world. When examining, the make-up of vaccines, Jasher takes on monumental spiritual importance.
"And the sons of men in those days took from the cattle of the earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air: and taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other, in order therewith to provoke the Lord; and God saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon earth, all men and all animals."
(Jasher 4:18)
It seems rather obvious to me that when blood and DNA from various species are put into vaccines and then iniected into people it is an affront to the Lord and a violation of his law. And what about the fact that some vaccines are even using human fetal tissue? It's very interesting that Jesus said it would be like the time of Noah when identifying the times before he returns and here we see the cross mixing of species in the manufacturing process of vaccines and a movement to force vaccinate the entire planet. Perhaps as Christians, we need to be looking much deeper into the whole vaccination issue.
Toxic Shots
One might argue that the quantities of these toxins in the vaccines are minute, yet this is simply not so. In the case of mercury, during a "well-child visit" where DTP (Diptheria, Tetanis, Pertussis), Hib (Haemophilus Influenza type B),(Hepatitis B) and OPV (Oral Polio Virus) are given, a child can receive 62.5 micrograms of mercury. The EPA guidelines for "safe" mercury levels are .1 micrograms per kilogram of bodyweight per day.(26) (Yes, that is .1 mcgs.) This equates to an average 5kg baby receiving 30 to 50 times the "safe" amount of mercury injected in a bolus dose in approximately 10 minutes time. If anyone were to inject a syringe with 62.5 micrograms of mercury, into a tiny baby, they would go to prison for many years. However, add numerous other toxins, chemicals, bacteria, or viruses to that syringe and allow your pediatrician to do it, and that person is hailed as a saver of children's lives.
Children are receiving a staggering amount of vaccines before they are five years old. The following immunization schedule shows that 37 plus vaccines will be injected into a child before the first grade.
Immunization Schedule+
Vaccine
Recommended at
Hepatitis B (Hep B)1 ............
Birth - 2 months,
1-4 months,
and 6-18 months
Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis
(DTAP or DTP) ...............
2 months,
4 months,
6 months,
12-18 months
and 4-6 years
Polio Vaccine (IPV) ............
2 months,
4 months,
6-18 months
and 4-6 years
Haemophilus Influenza type B (Hib)
2 months,
4 months,
6 months and
12-15 months
Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR)2
12-15 months
4-6 years
Chickenpox (VZV)3 .............
12-18 months
or 11 -12 years
Tetanus-Diphtheria booster (Td)4 .
11-16 years
Pneumococcal Conjugate Vaccine
2 months,
4 months,
6 months and
12-15 months
Polysaccharide Meningococcal Vaccine5
see footnote
Your doctor's immunization schedule may vary from this one based on individual facts and circumstances.
1All children and adolescents (through 18 years of age) who have not been immunized should begin the series at any time.
2If second dose not previously received then administer by the 11-12 year old visit.
3 VZV vaccine recommended at 11 -12 years of age for children not previously vaccinated, and who lack a reliable history of chickenpox.
4At least 5 years should have elapsed since the last dose of DTAP or DTP.
5College students living in dormitories should receive a single dose.
+These guidelines were developed from several sources including the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), Advisory Committee of Immunization Practice (ACIP) and the U.S. Preventive Services Task For (USPSTF) and are reviewed annually and updated as appropriate.
A Satanic Assault Against The Blood
One does not need to be a doctor or scientist to see that the amount of toxins and poisons and the frequency of their administration to our children and families under the organized collusion of Public Health Officials and Pharmaceutical companies is nothing short of a systemic biolocical assault. It is, by definition - BIOTERRORISM.
Even if vaccines really did do all the amazing things that are credited to them, which they don't, it would still not justify the violation of the sanctity of human blood. One wonders how the human race has survived so long without vaccines when considering the praise and adoration given them by proponents.
The truth is, our bodies are symbiotic with nature and God has provided all sources of healing and immunity without having to rely on the destructive methods offered by the pharmaceutical industry, which is built on lies and deception.
Vaccines are contrary to God's protocols for health. They are unnatural, toxic blood contaminants and they are being pushed by a demonic force in an effort to attack and contaminate the blood of man, which, as the Bible records, is the life of the flesh (Lev. 17:11). Vaccines are not designed to protect and improve health despite claims to the contrary by the medical establishment. Vaccines disrupt and damage DNA, thus creating genetic disturbances and mutations in a healthy person, which eventually creates a cellular environment that is extremely susceptible to disease. Mass vaccination proarams are being pushed because the global elite are trying to implement a population control agenda. Just look at the destructive effects vaccines have had on the populations of Africa and how the AIDS epidemic is decimating this continent. In the book, Emerging Viruses, by Dr. Len Horowitz, he documents with convincing facts and figures that AIDS was a bioweapon developed by the U.S. government in collusion with several pharmaceutical firms and was administered through the Hepatitis B vaccine. When looking at their components and manufacturing process further, a spiritually enlightened person can easily understand that vaccines are nothing more than a demonic witches brew.
Vaccines Linked To The Mark Of The Beast
For those interested in numerology, it has been found that the word VACCINATION translates to a specific number, and easily so. Merely assign multiples of six to the alphabet. For example, A = 6, B = 12, C = 18, D = 24, etc. Then add the respective values in the word VACCINATION. The sum is 666, the number of the beast.(42) In fact, there are many, many other scriptural and historical postulates that correlate with Satan, witchcraft, ritual worship, blood sacrifice, etc., that will shock Christian scholars and laypersons.
Shattering The Statistics
There are many parallels and a direct satanic connection to vaccines that Christians should be aware of, however, lets explore the efficacy (or how well it works) of vaccines by looking at the measles vaccine. In 1900, there were 13.3 measles deaths per 100,000 persons and by 1955 the death rate declined by 97.7%, taking it to 0.03 deaths per 100,000. Note that this happened BEFORE the first measles vaccination.27 In the mid-1970's (post vaccination era), the death rate from measles remained exactly the same as in the early 1960's (pre-vaccine era).28 Further data shows that in the USA and England, there was a 95% decline in the measles death rate between 1915 and 1958,(29) again happening in the pre-vaccine era for measles. Also, before the measles vaccine was introduced, it was extremely rare for an infant to contract measles, but by 1993, more than 25% of all measles cases occurred in babies under one year old. CDC officials attribute this to the growing number of mothers vaccinated during the 1960's, 70's and 80's.(30)
In the U.S., measles vaccine has been available since 1957 and the triple antigen vaccine, MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) has been available since 1975. One would surmise that measles cases would have decreased, however, from 1983 to 1990 there has been a 423% increase in the number of measles cases. (31)
In 1985, the U.S. govemment reported that 80% of notified cases of measles occurred in vaccinated people.(32) Corpus Christi, Texas saw a measles epidemic in 1986 in which 99% of the children affected had been vaccinated against measles, and 95% were supposedly immune.(32) CDC official Dr. Atkinson states, "Measles tranmissions have been clearly docmented amoung vaccinated persons. In some large outbreaks, over 95% of cases have a history of vacciiiation."(34) Lastly, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a study that stated that those vaccinated against measles are 14 times more likely to contract the disease than those left unvaccinated.(35)(36)
Links To Vaccine Related Diseases
To sum up the efficacy of the measles vaccine, it is important to know that when one contracts measles, the body destroys the cells containing the virus. This consumptive process occurs at the site of rash which measles are known for. If we stop this process, as we try to do by vaccinating, then the virus survives and thrives in the body, to cause malady later on. High proportions of individuals who were vaccinated were found to have cervical cancer, skin. cancers and multiple sclerosis in adulthood.(37) As well, very serious nervous system and other reactions to measles vaccine have been repeatedly reported in medical literature. Autism is foremost at the center of a huge controversy as respected researchers have linked it to the measles vaccine.(38)(39)(40)(41) Careful analysis of other vaccine data reveals similar trends of non-safety, non-efficacy and adverse outcome for all other vaccines as well.
World Opposition To Vaccines is Growing
Vaccine controversies are growing and the debate is being waged in developing nations worldwide. There are hundreds of organizations that have emerged along with thousands of doctors and scientists who are making a stand against vaccines. The power, greed, wealth and agenda of those who sell the church of the Sacred Cow and force devilish concoctions upon our children and families is formidable. Evil is powerful!
Conclusion
The case against vaccines is overwhelming, not just from a scientific standpoint, but from a spiritual standpoint as well. The church of the Sacred Cow wants us to believe that vaccines are benign and great. This gives them power, riches and control to advance their malevolent agenda of corruption. Do not be blinded. Even private insurance mega-companies who fund the best liability studies in the world are not blinded by vaccines. It is interesting in that there are three things which insurance companies have totally abandoned coverage for in damage to life and property:
1) Acts of God
2) Nuclear War and Nuclear Power Plant Accidents
3) VACCINATIONS...
Vaccines can be seen as a devilish war against the sanctity of human blood and mankind, and we shall see that as Christians, we have a duty to take a stand no matter what. Stay with us for future articles which will reveal even more shocking and revelatory data.
Authors Note:
Many thanks to Catherine Diodati, MA whose research provided a great deal of the historical data and to all the other tireless researchers whom I've drawn from to compile this article.
MMR + Chicken Pox Vaccine = More Seizures
http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2008/03/mmr-chicken-pox-vaccine-more-seizures.html
So CDC removes its preference for the MMRV vaccine, but does not change it's preference to the MMR and separate chicken pox vaccine. It just does not state a preference. Because half the seizures is not worth stating a preference?!
This does not just call for a preference, it seems to make the MMRV obsolete. What they had before the MMRV was safer.
Is the CDC's priority the health of children or the health of Merck's bottom line?
MMR + Chicken Pox Vaccine = More Seizures
Getting the Merck MMRV (Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Chicken Pox combo vaccine), rather than the MMR and separate Chicken Pox vaccine, results in "slightly more" or more than double the seizures, depending on how you want to spin the story:
"It found a rate of febrile seizure of nine per 10,000 vaccinations among MMRV recipients, and four per 10,000 among children who got separate MMR and chicken pox shots. Of 166 children who had febrile seizures after either type of vaccination, 26 were hospitalized and none died, the CDC said."
So CDC removes its preference for the MMRV vaccine, but does not change it's preference to the MMR and separate chicken pox vaccine. It just does not state a preference. Because half the seizures is not worth stating a preference?!
This does not just call for a preference, it seems to make the MMRV obsolete. What they had before the MMRV was safer.
Is the CDC's priority the health of children or the health of Merck's bottom line?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Children who get a combined vaccine against measles, mumps, rubella and chicken pox are slightly more likely to have seizures compared to those getting two separate shots for the same diseases, U.S. officials said on Thursday.
The seizures are not usually life-threatening and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said it was no longer expressing a preference that children get the so-called MMRV combined vaccine rather than two shots -- the MMR vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella (German measles) and a separate one against varicella (chicken pox).
The CDC said it made the change after seeing evidence that children who got the combined MMRV vaccine faced an elevated, but still very small, risk of suffering febrile seizures after vaccination compared to those who got the two shots.
A febrile seizure is a convulsion in young children associated with an increase in body temperature, often from an infection. While frightening, the seizures are not usually dangerous and only a small percentage of children who experience one go on to develop epilepsy.
Dr. John Iskander, the acting director of the CDC's Immunization Safety Office, said it remained very important that parents get their children vaccinated against these diseases.
"These are vaccines that have had enormous public health benefits," Iskander said.
The CDC said the availability of the MMRV vaccine, made by pharmaceutical company Merck, already was limited in the United States because of manufacturing constraints unrelated to vaccine safety, and was not expected to be widely available until 2009.
The CDC said a study examined the risk for febrile seizures seven to 10 days after vaccination among 43,353 children ages 12 months to 23 months who received the MMRV vaccine and 314,599 children of the same age who received the MMR vaccine and chicken pox vaccine administered separately.
It found a rate of febrile seizure of nine per 10,000 vaccinations among MMRV recipients, and four per 10,000 among children who got separate MMR and chicken pox shots. Of 166 children who had febrile seizures after either type of vaccination, 26 were hospitalized and none died, the CDC said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)