by Viera Scheibner (PhD)
Health Impact News

Do We Need a New Approach to Vaccine Recommendations? Wouldn’t it be More Logical to Stop all Vaccination Instead?

Perusing the history of any vaccination based on the study of medical research literature provides irrefutable evidence that all vaccines have obviously and evidently failed as means of preventing infectious diseases.

Crowcroft et al (2015) quite recently wrote,

”We are on a steep trajectory away from an era of inexpensive vaccines for diseases that are widespread in the absence of immunisation…Technologies such as searching genetic codes for possible antigens and the development of new adjuvants to stimulate immune responses also bring considerable uncertainty about safety and effectiveness.  …some sections of society are less likely to vaccinate themselves or their children. Those who hesitate to vaccinate are often highly educated, well resourced, and demand respect for their perspectives.”

The observed reality is that infectious diseases targeted by vaccination are far from being widespread in the absence of vaccination, in fact, they are evidently widespread despite and because of vaccination.

Crawcroft et al (2015) talked about a ‘novel vaccine’ for serogroup B meningococcal disease, Bexsero (Novartis, Basel), but the issues and problems apply to all vaccines.

Crawcroft and Britto (2002) called whooping cough a continuing problem, which has re-emerged in countries with high vaccination coverage [with inexpensive vaccines] and low mortality.  Then they contradicted themselves when writing,

”Pertussis has re-emerged …because of low coverage after a vaccine scare in the 1980s (in the United Kingdom) or the use of vaccines with poor efficacy (Canada, Sweden).”


“Germany stopped their vaccination programmes completely and only reinstated vaccination for pertussis after years of recurrent epidemics of whooping cough.”

In fact, according to Miller and Farrington (1988),

“In West Germany, unlike the UK, there are no national statistics on pertussis incidence, no national vaccination policy and no figures for vaccine uptake.  Local studies have shown that vaccination rates are low and that pertussis is prevalent particularly in 2-4 year age-group, which is typical of a country with low uptake, similarly serotype 2 predominates.”

Many German doctors did not even offer vaccination at all. This clearly indicated that pertussis was not a problem in the non-vaccinating Germany.

Whooping cough vaccine was introduced in the UK during the 1960s and national statistics on uptake rates are available from 1961.

According to Miller and Farrington (1988),

“Mortality data show that death from whooping cough declined before the disease was reduced by vaccination.”

Other published evidence contradicts the above assertion.

McFarlan et al (1945) reported on the trial of whooping cough vaccine in city and residential nursery groups (BMJ 1945; August 18: 205-208) and concluded that

“The evidence obtained from this investigation lends no support to the view that pertussis vaccine is of value in the prophylaxis of whooping cough; and it is suggested that the use of the vaccine should be discontinued till some positive evidence of its value is obtained in further carefully controlled trials.”

Wilson et al (1965) discussed difficulties in diagnosis and ineffectiveness of vaccination to prevent pertussis during an outbreak of paroxysmal cough spread widely in older children (8 to 12 years old) in general practice in Peebleshire. They wrote,

“When one or two of the immunized children developed similar cough we saw an opportunity to study the effectiveness of the protection given by immunization. We were particularly disturbed by the ineffectiveness of the vaccine in this very well immunized community…There was little evidence, if any, of protection, yet on the basis of the M.R.C. Report (1951) substantial protection should have been conferred by the vaccine…Only two patients could be described as seriously ill from this outbreak. There were no deaths, and no patients needed hospital admission…The immunization given against pertussis was ineffective in preventing the spread of an epidemic.”

This was also confirmed in the final Report to the Director of the Public Health Laboratory Service by the Public Health Laboratory Service Whooping Cough Committee and Working party,

“Among [195] vaccinated contacts under 5 years in homes in which B. pertussis was isolated, 52% developed paroxysmal cough…These findings suggest that much of the pertussis vaccine in use for five or six years before 1968 was not very effective.”

Another publication (Anonymous 1956) unwittingly disclosed what appeared to me clearly as an interesting manipulation of the data by not having any control children and all participants being given vaccines.

The Anonymous (1956) first referred to the 1951 report of the MRC in which there were no unvaccinated control children, all participants were given one of the five batches of pertussis vaccine from three different manufacturers. Also half of participating children were given vaccine and the rest an inoculum which looked like the pertussis vaccine but did not contain Haemophilus pertussis [this reminds me of Koch’s definition of his ‘tuberculin’ as a ‘brown liquid’].

“This procedure could not be continued after it was known that each of the different batches of vaccine used gave substantial protection, and it was decided that in all subsequent trials every child should be given pertussis vaccine, and that the results with one batch of vaccine should be compared with those of other batches tested at the same time in the same area. There were therefore no unvaccinated control groups, but in some of the trials records were kept of the incidence of pertussis in the siblings of vaccinated children when the vaccinated children and the siblings were known to be exposed to infection by a primary case in the family.”


“Twenty four of the participating children developed paralytic poliomyelitis during the study. Three children became ill less that 28 days after an injection, and all three were paralysed in the injected limb and nowhere else.”

This is compatible with the original definition of poliomyelitis as a provocation paralysis occurring after any vaccine injections (McCloskey 1950).

Altogether 231 children were diagnosed as cases of pertussis, and 59% of these were confirmed bacteriologically:

“Bacteriological evidence of exposure to infection was also obtained in many cases. Of the 801 vaccinated children exposure in their own homes to infection, H pertussis was isolated from the sibling – or siblings – to whom the vaccinated child was exposed in 64%. Of the 1,967 ‘other exposures’ H pertussis was isolated from the infected child in 43%.”

Records were kept of the use of chloramphenicol in the siblings of vaccinated children.  It was found that the attack rate in 128 vaccinated children exposed to chloramphenicol-treated siblings with pertussis was 20% and that the attack rate in 673 vaccinated children exposed to infection by siblings not treated with chloramphenicol was 13%. Thus the use of chloramphenicol for the siblings of vaccinated children did not reduce the risk of the vaccinated children developing the diseases.”


“The studies were made to compare vaccines and not to ascertain their absolute value…Taking all vaccines together, the attack rate in 801 home exposures was 14%, ranging from 4% to 29%…In the controlled trials reported previously (M.R.C. 1951) the attack rate in the control unvaccinated group was 87%.  The evidence, along with the previously mentioned observations of Wheeler (1936), Kendrick and Eldering (1939), and Court et al.(1953), suggests that the vaccine used in the 1951-4 series of trials were highly potent unless the disease had recently changed its character and has become less infectious.  There is evidence that such a change had not occurred.”


“In the 56 households there were 69 vaccinated and 62 unvaccinated children. Fourteen (20%) of the vaccinated developed pertussis compared with 51 (82%) in the unvaccinated. The diagnosis of pertussis was confirmed bacteriologically in eight (57%) of the vaccinated, in 37 (73%) of the unvaccinated and in 34 (61%) of the initial cases providing the source of infection in the households.”

The conclusion was that the vaccines used were uniformly of high potency, even though the Anonymous admitted that there was a deterioration in the potency of the vaccines used (loss of potency of 40% per annum), based on the mouse-protection test.

Even if we do not consider a possibility that the figures were reversed, it was hardly an impressive result justifying the definition of pertussis as a vaccine-preventable disease.

Binkin et al. (1992) studied epidemiology of pertussis in Italy, a country with low vaccination coverage; at that time fewer than 40% of children younger than 3 years were vaccinated. They wrote,

“Approximately 25% of Italian children have experienced clinical pertussis by their fifth birthday…The incidence appears to be increasing in the 1- to 4-year age group despite increased vaccination coverage.”


Is Vaccine-led “Disease Eradication” a Myth?

Are there any diseases eradicated or reduced by vaccination?  

When I am put to the task to select the most instructive examples of published evidence of the futility of vaccination, two articles stand out: Langmuir (1962) and Sencer et al (1967).

Langmuir (1962) wrote in his article,

Medical importance of measles that

“Among all diseases measles has stood as the classic example of successful parasitism. This self-limiting infection of short duration, moderate severity, and low fatality has sustained a remarkably stable biological balance over the centuries. Those epidemiologists, and there are many, who tend to revere the biological balance have long argued that the ecological equilibrium of measles is solidly based, that it cannot readily be disrupted, and that therefore we must learn to live with this parasite rather than hope to eradicate it. This speaker, not so long ego, was counted among this group and waxed eloquent on this subject in print.

Happily, this era is ending. New and potent tools that promise effective control of measles are at hand. If these tools are properly developed and wisely used, it should be possible to disrupt the biological balance of measles. Its eradication from large continental masses such as North America and many other parts of the world can be anticipated soon.”

Then Langmuir turned his attention to the emotive side of measles disease, and wrote,

“The importance of any disease as a public health problem must be gauged from many angles. For example, using mortality as a criterion, heart disease becomes most important. Short-term morbidity makes the common cold rank high. For chronic disability, arthritis and mental disease dominate. For public interest and parental concern, despite of relatively low incidence nothing equals poliomyelitis.

According to these criteria the importance of measles cannot be compared with any of the diseases mentioned so far, but it should still be classed as an important health problem on 2 main counts. First, any parent who had seen his small child suffer even for a few days with persistent fever of 105 F with hacking cough and delirium, wants to see this prevented, if it can be done safely. Second, at last there is promise that something can be accomplished by organised health action.”

Comment: if measles were such an unpleasant disease, then it would be more prudent to think of effective treatments, such as vitamin C, and not suppressing fever. An age-old wisdom indicates that fever is an important natural healing process and mechanism and should not be suppressed. A child with measles should be kept warm and comfortable in a darkened room. This was a known effective home treatment some three hundred years ago.

Then, Langmuir analysed the CDC’s descriptive statistics on measles morbidity and mortality in the US in his Figure 1. He drew the attention of the reader to the stability of the measles morbidity rate and the steady downward trend in the mortality rates (between 1912 and 1959), and what he called a,

”somewhat ominous suggestion of the cessation of this downward trend since 1955 similar to the leveling off of the infant death rates during the past 6 years. The morbidity figures are testament to the stability of the biological balance of measles during the period. The decline in mortality demonstrates the degree to which we have adapted to this balance and have learnt to live with this parasite.”

Comment: an old-age wisdom, again, indicates that measles is not a parasite, but a natural process of developing natural immunity and a vital balance with the surrounding microscopic living environment.

“Eradication” of Measles Virus not Considered to be Scientifically Arguable

The second article of great interest is that by Sencer et al. (1967: ie. published only two years later) titled “A Statement by the Public Health Service,” in which they wrote,

“For centuries the measles virus has maintained a remarkably stable ecological relationship with man. The clinical disease is a characteristic syndrome of notable consistency and only moderate severity. Complications are infrequent, and, with adequate medical care, fatality is rare. Susceptibility to the disease after the waning of maternal immunity is universal; immunity following recovery is solid and lifelong in duration…The disease occurs ubiquitously throughout the world in periodic cycles of considerable regularity. With the exception of a few extremely isolated population groups, essentially all children experience the infection sometime before adolescence. The reservoir of infection is man himself … chronic carriers do not exist.”

“Despite the extent of the epidemiologic knowledge of measles, health officials have been frustrated in their efforts to bring this disease under control. During the last 50 years the doctrine has become widely accepted in health circles that since control measures have failed, man should learn to adapt himself to the measles virus.”

So far so good, but then the authors wrote,

”Thus, by judicious use of immune globulin for modification of the disease among exposed young children at great risk, and by providing adequate medical care to all patients, the damaging effects of the disease could be mitigated. Until very recently, this deep respect for the biological balance of the human race with measles virus had become accepted doctrine. Eradication was not considered to be scientifically tenable.”

“All this has now changed. With the isolation of the measles virus and the development of, and extensive field testing of several potent and effective vaccines, the tools are at hand to eradicate the infection with the general application of these tools during the coming months, eradication can be achieved in this country in the year 1967.”

Documented Exemption from Vicious Vaccine-driven Cycle among Non-Vaccinating Amish Communities

The year 1967 came and went and the prophesied eradication failed to be achieved. Instead, large and regular outbreaks and epidemics of measles continued occurring in the vaccinated all over the countries with high vaccination compliance.

The only communities with preserved natural epidemic cycles, including the non-occurrence for 18 years, were the non-vaccinating Amish

In contrast, the well-vaccinated non Amish communities continued having epidemics with shorter and shorter interepidemic intervals, and even continuous epidemics over of more than 2 years duration. The same applies to whooping cough.

The only children exempt from this new, vaccine-driven vicious cycle, are the unvaccinated.

Researchers of the Longmuir’s era should have considered that the natural infectious diseases are contracted via natural portals of entry, the nose and mouth, and the skin is there to prevent the entry of any microorganisms and toxins via the skin and hence prevent them accessing any vital organs.

This was already known then that the introduction of such substances via the skin (by-passing the normal portals of entry) results in anaphylaxis, sensitisation, which means increased susceptibility to the targeted diseases, ie. a harmful immune response opposite to prophylaxis. Immunity is not achieved that way (Scheibner Medicine: partnership of trust and faith. rapid response 25 Febr 2014).

The lack of understanding of the very essence of the “medical importance of measles” by Langmuir and his generation of researchers has resulted in catastrophic consequences for humanity.

Yes, vaccination disturbed the natural biological balance of infectious diseases. It effectively prevented acquiring natural immunity to measles, pertussis and other so-called ‘vaccine-preventable diseases’ and also increased the susceptibility to the related and unrelated bacterial and viral infections and a great number of conditions such as sebaceous skin diseases, degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, immunoreactive diseases (asthma, allergies), autoimmune diseases (diabetes, lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis), cancers, chronic ill health and chronic fatigue syndrome, behavioural and mental disorders, all organ damage as listed on product information of all vaccines and other pharma products, and many other ‘modern’ disorders, including decreasing healthy life expectancy. It reflects the enormous extent of fundamental ignorance on the part of medical profession of the workings of the human body and especially of immunology and biology. The list is endless.

There aren’t too many other medical procedures, with the exception of antibiotics and anti-pyretics, developed at that time as the vaccines, that remained the same in principle. Most have developed further and even more have been abandoned as obsolete and outdated and replaced with new and modern methods and procedures.

Unfortunately, the philosophy of orthodox medicine to misinterpret symptoms as harmful and trying to suppress them rather than seeing them as vital guides to diagnosis, and working with the body’s natural immune mechanisms, hasn’t helped.

Moreover, insisting on the archaic philosophy blinded medicos to the most obvious and forgetting that the basic method of empirical sciences  is observation; in medicine it means case reports.

This has been demonstrated by Koprowski (1962) who referred to a letter to the duchess Sophia, mother of the future George I of England, Princess Elizabeth Charlotte (Liselotte) von der Pfalz, Duchess of Orleans and widow of the younger brother of Louis XIV, as follows:

“Our misfortune continues. The doctors have made the same mistake treating the little Dauphin as they did ministering to his mother, the Dauphiness. When the child was quite red from the rash and perspired profusely, they [the doctors] performed phlebotomy and administered strong emetics; the child died during these operations.  Everybody knows that the doctors caused the death of the Dauphin, since his little brother who had the same sickness, was hidden away from the 9 physicians who were busy with his older brother, by the young maids, who have given him a little wine with biscuits.

Yesterday, when the child had high fever, they wanted also to perform phlebotomy but his two governesses were firmly opposed to the idea and instead kept the child warm.  This one also would have certainly died if the doctors had had their way.

I don’t understand why they don’t learn by experience. Had they no heart when they saw the Dauphiness died after phlebotomy and emetics, not to dispose of her child.”

Original Ebola Outbreaks Caused by Highly Contaminated Injections – An Opportunity for Clinical Trials?

Koprowski (1962) summarised the still relevant historic message,

“Avoid physicians and thou will be cured.”

If ‘preventative’ measures in relation to natural infectious diseases were to start nowadays, I don’t think that any vaccines would be developed. At least I hope so.

Are there any diseases controlled or eradicated by vaccination?

Starting with smallpox vaccines, continuing through typhoid, diphtheria and later through DPT and other vaccines, the highest incidence of targeted diseases occurred in the vaccinated.

Famously, the Leicester citizens’ boycott of smallpox vaccine stopped smallpox epidemics in their city.

Outbreaks of typhoid in the army occurred right after mass vaccination (Wright 1901).

A huge diphtheria outbreak in the vaccinated occurred in the 1940s in Nazi Germany and in the Nazi occupied countries.

A documented 300% increase in the incidence of whooping cough starting in the 2-months old DPT recipients in the USA in mid seventies (Hutchins et al 1988).

Tetanus as a disease is an eminently instructive example of the harmful anaphylaxis caused by vaccine injections, and including Ebola. Based on the WHO reports, the original cause of the first Ebola outbreaks were unsterile and highly contaminated non-disposable injections used by the primitive ‘health’ centres in Africa (Scheibner. Ebola; an opportunity for a clinical trial? rapid response 19 October 2014; and Scheibner. Ebola: an opportunity for a clinical trial? rapid response 20 October 2014).

The typical tetanus disease with tetanic spasms, hydrophobia and the inability to swallow, follows the introduction of the causative organism, Clostridium tetani, via a deep puncture wound, straight into the blood stream, bypassing the normal portals of entry, the nose and mouth.

When asking a doctor about it, we would usually be told that there is no such thing as natural immunity to tetanus. However, there is. Veronesi et al. (l983) wrote that,

“Reports from India based on serologic surveys indicate that 40%-80% of the unvaccinated population have antibodies to tetanus in their blood,”


“All nine animals studied showed antibody to tetanus toxin.”

They also wrote,

“Before the discovery of tetanus toxoid, Tenbroeck and Bauer [1] reported that they were able to detect antibody to tetanus toxin in the blood of one third of a group of inhabitants of Peking (Beijing) China. Since then there have been many similar reports concerning animals mainly herbivores [2] and humans living under poor hygienic conditions [3-5]. Recently, similar reports have been reviewed by the authors in many different countries [3-5-14].”

Ebola virus disease is so virulent because the virus as a rule entered via a deep puncture wound: unsterile and contaminated non-disposable injections (Scheibner. Ebola virus disease. rapid response; 14 January 2014).

The US outbreaks of measles in even 100% vaccinated populations started in 1963 with the licensure and mass use (Sencer et al. 1967) of  measles vaccines. The destruction of transplacentally-transmitted immunity (Lennon and Black 1986; Mulholland 1995) predicted by vaccine researchers early in the piece, resulted in pertussis and measles occurring in newborn babies in all countries with high vaccination compliance.

Which “Witch” Hunts? The Great Vaccine Cover-up: Herd Immunity Destroyed by Fully Vaccinated, not Unvaccinated

Outbreaks of provocation paralysis (infantile paralysis) provoked by all vaccinations (McCloskey 1950) are well-documented.

Law (Assaulting alternative medicine: worthwhile or witch hunt? rapid response 10 March 2012) pointed out, that

“Given that the WHO has recently announced to all and sundry that India is now officially polio free, let’s have a look at the WHO’s own data…Despite claims that there were 30,000+ cases of polio in 1995, only 1,005 cases of AFP were notified in 1996, all of them being diagnosed as polio. In 2011, there were 60,849 cases of clinically diagnosed polio-like paralysis one (1) of which was confirmed as polio…No doubt Professor Colquhoun is celebrating the wonderful success of the polio vaccination programme in India where children still got polio until recently even after having 30 plus polio vaccinations. I wonder if redefining what was called polio before vaccination eradication programme to AFP, or polio-like paralysis is what the good professor would call a medical success?”

Natural infectious diseases of childhood (both mortality and morbidity) were on the downward trajectory 50 years before any vaccines were administered in mass proportions. The main reasons were better nutrition (especially better vitamin C status), sanitation, clean water and uncrowded living conditions.

Generational immunity acquired by repeated exposure and inherited and acquired natural immunity cannot be overlooked, either.

The concept of herd immunity.

The largely unvaccinated Amish (claiming religious exemption) had not reported a single case of measles between 1970 and December 1987, for 18 years (Sutter et all 1991, as above), while the well-vaccinated non-Amish communities experienced regular 2-3 year epidemics in even 100% vaccinated populations.

Provaccinators, yet again, claimed success and set a date for measles eradication (1 October 1982). Instead, large measles outbreaks occurred in the vaccinated non-Amish, starting in 1982, and on 5 December 1987 in the Amish.

The situation simply confirmed Hedrich’s (1930) evaluation of measles epidemic cycles (2-3, 11, and even 18 years).

Pertussis followed similar dynamics motivating provaccinators to claim success with early pertussis vaccination. However, it did not take long and, just as with measles, pertussis outbreaks in fully vaccinated populations followed mass vaccination drives.

Instead of abandoning the obviously ineffective vaccination, the culture of “lies, damn lies and statistics” set in.

Sweden discontinued pertussis vaccine use for 11 years in 1979; whooping cough became a mild disease and stopped occurring in babies and young children below one year of age (Isacson et al. 1993). Very few doses of pertussis vaccine were administered, however even those few recipients developed pertussis (one in 3). 372 (61%) of the 377 parents interviewed, reported clinical pertussis in their unvaccinated children (confirming Hedrich’s (1930) concept of herd immunity).

Hedrich’s herd immunity meant that when about 50% of susceptibles in a community get measles the epidemic stops until, again, a similar number of susceptibles has accumulated.

The measles outbreak cycles can be 2-3, 11, but also up to 18 years, quoting the example of Scotland.

The way proponents of vaccination are trying to use the herd immunity concept to entice people to vaccinate is false and misleading and simply irrelevant. Hedrich based his observations, conclusions and definitions on natural immunity to measles.

The documented fact that even with 100% vaccination compliance major measles epidemics occur means that vaccines are totally ineffective in providing any herd immunity. Quite to the contrary, they destroy it.

Sweden was doing quite well when the country discontinued pertussis vaccination (Isacson et al. 1993).  Small babies (especially below six months of age) did not contract whooping cough. The disease became mild with very few hospital admissions.

When Sweden resumed pertussis vaccination (with acellular vaccine) in mid 1990s, despite assurances to the contrary, not only the pertussis incidence went up, but the babies under the age of one (and conspicuously between 2 and 6 months of age) contracted the disease already during the trials of acellular vaccine straight after the first dose of the vaccine, as unwittingly documented by Olin (1995). That was the reason why “the trial was discontinued before the expected termination date.”

However, despite this clear failure, pertussis vaccination (with the acellular vaccine) was re-instated.

Epidemics in the vaccinated have continued. The acellular pertussis vaccine showed itself just as ineffective as the whole cell variety.

Japan moved the DPT & P vaccination age to two years in mid seventies with similar effect as observed in Sweden, including a substantial fall in the overall infant mortality (Japan moved from 17th to the first, lowest, IM in the world (Jenny Scott 1990).

The UK experienced similar dynamics, also in mid seventies. After the first media reports of brain damage linked to DPT vaccine, the UK parent’s compliance fell down to 30% or even 10%), but according to Fine and Clarkson (1982), paradoxically, the inter-epidemic period did not decrease after the 1974 fall in vaccine uptake.

Pertussis incidence and hospital admissions fell markedly and so did the overall infant mortality. Macfarlane (1982) wrote,

”The postneonatal mortality fell markedly in 1976, a year on which a sharp decline in neonatal mortality rate began. Between 1976 and 1979, however, neither the late neonatal nor the postneonatal mortality rates fell any further. Indeed, the postneonatal mortality rate increased slightly among babies born in 1977.”

Obviously, when the compliance started climbing, so did the infant mortality rates in England and Wales and Glasgow. Epidemics in the vaccinated also followed.

Preston (1994) analysed the pertussis situation and wrote,

”In the mid-1970s, the general public and many health care professionals in Britain lost faith in the safety of whole-cell pertussis vaccine. This reaction (largely in response to fears about vaccine-induced brain damage) was unjustified, and caused vaccine uptake in infants to plunge from 80% to 30%.”

Preston compared this with the situation in Massachusetts and wrote,

“An apparent increase in incidence in 1989-91 was largely due to wider surveillance and the introduction of serologic diagnosis for adolescents with not less than 1 week of paroxysmal coughing…”

And, Stott and Davis suggested that, in the absence of a positive culture, the term “pseudo-whooping cough” is appropriate for paroxysmal cough of less than 3 weeks duration. Although the authors of the Massachusetts report express concern about the diagnosis of pertussis in fully vaccinated children, they do not tell us how many of these children had positive cultures, culture positivity being the only reliable laboratory test.

Cincinnati likewise experienced a resurgence of pertussis in 1993, with 223 culture-positive cases. Although 82% of diagnosed “cases” between 6 months and 6 years of age had received at least three doses of (Connaught and Lederle) vaccine, the criteria for clinical diagnosis are not stated, nor are we told the number of culture-positive cases in this age group…Both consider panic measures, such as neonatal vaccination, immunisation of pregnant women and boosting with acellular vaccine.”


“The vaccine cannot be expected to protect against pseudo- whooping cough.  Nevertheless, there are several good reasons for genuine failure of pertussis vaccination.”

Epidemics of Measles, Mumps, and Pertussis Increasing in Magnitude and Frequency where there is High Compliance with National Vaccination Programs

Vaccine-driven deranged age distribution of infectious diseases targeted by vaccination,  

In all countries with national vaccination programs, all vaccine-preventable diseases experienced deranged age distribution.

The normal age distribution of measles and whooping cough is with the majority of cases (about 90%) occurring between about 4 to 10 years, with no occurrence below the age of one year and after 10 years.

The deranged vaccine-driven occurrence is when the majority of cases occur below the age of one and especially below six months (due to the lack of transplacentally-transmitted immunity), and very little between 4 and 10 years of age, followed by a high occurrence in teenagers and adults.

The present situation is that in all developed countries with high vaccination compliance epidemics of pertussis, measles, mumps, etc. occur with increased frequency and magnitude in small babies, and, in the older vaccinated.

Vaccine-driven atypical measles 

Another vaccine-driven phenomenon is the atypical form of infectious diseases, of which the atypical measles is the most researched and documented one. In normal natural measles, rash first appears on the forehead and chest and moves to the extremities. In atypical measles, rash first appears on the extremities and moves to the chest and head resulting in pneumonia and meningitis which resist all orthodox treatment, creating a very undesirable situation. It is the reflection of the Hering’s law of  appearance of symptoms. According to Hering, a famous German-American homeopath, in natural measles the rash first appears on the forehead, then moves to the trunk and the extremities. In atypical measles, the rash first appears on the extremities, then moves to the trunk and the head. The result are pneumonias and meningitis which resist all orthodox medical treatment and prolonged convalescence and recovery.

Fulginiti (1967) described the occurrence of atypical measles in the children who had received inactivated (killed) measles virus vaccine five to six years previously.

Nichols (1979) described continuing outbreaks of atypical measles even after the switch to the ’live’ measles virus vaccine.

“Substantial Underreporting of Pertussis, Substantially Inflating the Perceived Effectiveness of Vaccination” – Time to Burst the Disinformation Balloon

Vaccine-driven bacterial and viral resistance

It is well-documented that vaccinees develop vaccine-targeted diseases straight from the vaccines (smallpox, typhoid, polio, pertussis measles), usually after the first dose.

Right from the beginning of any mass vaccination, outbreaks of any targeted diseases occurred in the vaccinated.

Wright (1901 as above) commented on typhoid outbreaks in the army straight after typhoid vaccination.

The biggest epidemics of smallpox occurred in the vaccinated.

Perhaps one of the most instructive evidence was published by Hutchins et al. (1988 as above). They wrote,

”During the period 1980-1986, a total of 17, 396 cases of pertussis were reported to CDC…The annual incidence of reported pertussis rose from 0.5 cases per 100,000 population to 1.7/100,000. Infants less than 12 months old had the highest average annual incidence…Children 1-4 years of age accounted for 25% of all cases but had an average annual incidence of only 1/7th that of infants.”

Their figure 2 reveals a steady downward trend in the incidence and mortality from pertussis between 1922 and until mid seventies; therafter the downward trend in pertussis morbidity stopped and went sharply upwards, while pertussis mortality remained high but stationery.

The reason is unwittingly provided by Hutchins et al. (as above) who wrote,

“In 1978 a national childhood immunization initiative was began. Individual states passed legislation requiring proof of immunization for school entry at 5-6 years of age.”

The vaccination age started at 6-8 weeks (and not at 5-6 years) and large numbers of very young infants were vaccinated within a short period of time. Hence the observed major increase of pertussis in those babies straight after the first dose.

Sutter and Cochi (1992) studied pertussis hospitalisations and mortality in the US between 1985 and 1988 and concluded that there was a substantial underreporting of pertussis, substantially inflating the perceived effectiveness of vaccination. They wrote,

“Based on their indicators the national health impact of pertussis is considerably higher than previously published reports suggested. Applying the age-specific hospitalization rates, 187,867 to 515,930 cases of pertussis may have occurred during the study period, instead if only 14,057cases reported to the CDC. They concluded that that using different methods of estimation, approximately 121,340 pertussis cases may have occurred during the study indicating 11.6% vaccine efficacy. Considering that the pre-vaccine era pertussis occurrence was in the order of 240,000 cases, vaccination has made no inroads into the pertussis incidence.”

Polio outbreaks occurred in many developed and developing countries straight after mass vaccination drives (Scheibner. Preventing polio by vaccination. rapid response 3 August 2012).

Vaccine driven polymorphism, mutations and microbial resistance

ScienceDaily source: Welcome Trust Sanger Institute (28 January 2011)  published an article titled How bacteria keep ahead of vaccines and antibiotics:

“A new study has used DNA sequencing to provide the first detailed genetic picture of an evolutionary war between Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteria and the vaccines and antibiotics use against it over recent decades…The study unmasks the genetic events by which bacteria such as S. pneumoniae respond rapidly to new antibiotics and vaccines.”

It was known already 24 years ago that this bacterium evolves and reinvents itself genetically in response to human interventions. The pathogen evolves and reinvents itself with remarkable speed. The degree of diversity was a real surprise in such seemingly closely related organisms.

Dr. William Hanage, Associate Professor of Epidemiology at Harvard Schoold of Public Health, and visiting reader at Imperial College London, wrote,

”The remarkable amount of variation at these hotspots hints at ways S. pneumoniae can evade vaccines against these antigens.”

“While the latest vaccination measures in the US have almost completely removed the target pneumococcal strains from the population, the pathogen has deep resources to draw on in response. The research suggests that variants that allowed some bacteria to escape the new vaccines were present before the vaccine was introduced. These variants then flourished. Expanding to fill a ‘gap in the market’ as the grip of the dominant strain was weakened through vaccination.”

Similar phenomena of adaptation and evasion have been documented with other pathogens such as B. pertussis (Mooi et al. 2014), measles (Super measles warning: Dr Claude Miller, National Health Laboratory in Luxembourg 2001), and Haemophilus influenzae strain b (Brown et al. 2009), and all other vaccines.”

This observation, however, doesn’t represent any success, rather a dire warning that all vaccines will drive all microorganisms to change into new forms and create ‘virgin’ populations with no prior immunological experience and hence continued epidemics of serious new deadly disease.

This is already happening. Octavia et al (2012) reported,

“Australia is experiencing a prolonged epidemic of pertussis that began in 2008…The data suggests increasing selection in favour of [new] strains carrying prn2 and ptxP3 under the pressure of acellular vaccine-induced immunity.”

Such “immunity” is obviously useless and the term itself indeed misleading because the observed epidemics occur preferentially in the vaccinated.

Provaccinators often talk about ‘waning vaccine immunity’, vaccine-driven mutations, changes in serogroup, and polymorphism (Cassiday et al. 2000)

The benefits of natural infectious disease

Langmuir’s reasons as above for attempting to eradicate measles is hardly a valid scientific reason to tamper with and destroy the biological balance of an important natural process instrumental in developing a life-long natural immunity not only to measles but also a life-long natural immunity to a number of other conditions as demonstrated by Ronne (1985).

He established that adults who never developed the skin rash of measles, suffer more frequently from non-measles associated diseases: autoimmune and immunoreactive diseases, seborrhic skin diseases, degenerative bone and cartilage diseases and certain tumours.

He wrote,

“We think that the rash is caused by a cell mitigated immune reaction, which destroys the cells infected with the measles virus. It this is correct, the missing exanthema may indicate that intracellular virus components have escaped neutralization during the acute infection. This may late lead to the aforementioned diseases…The presence of specific antibodies at the time of infection interferes with the normal immune response against the measles virus, in particular with the development of the specific cell mitigated immunity (and/or cyto-toxic reactions). The intracellular measles virus can then survive the acute infection and cause diseases manifesting in adult age.”

Shaheen et al. (1996) wrote,

“Epidemiological studies have led to speculation that infections in childhood may prevent allergic sensitisation…we investigated whether measles infection protects against the development of anergy in children of Guinea-Bissau, West Africa. 395 young adults, first surveyed in 1978-80 aged 0-6 years, were followed up in 1994.”

The authors then analysed 262 individuals still living in Bandim, a semi-rural district of Bissau, for whom measles history, documented in childhood, was judged to be reliable.

They found that:

“17 (12.8 percent) of 133 participants who had had measles infection were atopic compared with 33 (25.6 percent) of 129 of those who had been vaccinated and not had measles…After adjustment for breastfeeding and other variables, measles infection was associated with a large reduction in the risk of skin-prick test positivity to house dust mite…Measles infection may prevent the development of atopy in African children.”

Simpanen et al. (1977) documented remission of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (Still’s disease) after measles.

Thiers et al.(1969) documented healing effect of natural measles on psoriasis in children.

Hitoshi Yamamoto (2004) documented spontaneous improvement in intractable epileptic seizures following acute viral infections.

Wahn (2000) documented that recovery from natural measles infection reduces the incidence of atopy and allergic responses to house-dust mites to half that seen in vaccinated children.

Measles Outbreaks Continue Today in Fully Vaccinated Children – Media Blackouts Unabated

Outbreaks of measles have continued in fully vaccinated children to this day in all developed countries with high vaccination compliance indicating not only a failure to control/eradicate measles but providing evidence that it is the vaccinated who get and spread the disease (Robertson et al. 1992; Gustafson et al. 1987).

Proponents of vaccination are blaming the unvaccinated while it is the vaccinated that get measles. Talking about unvaccinated babies getting infectious diseases is also misleading because it in fact only indicates the destruction of the transplacentally-transmitted immunity, another deleterious (and generational) effect of vaccines. The example of such situation has developed with pertussis (Scheibner.  Jabbering about jabs.; rapid response 15 September 2008).

Even though the medical researchers and the pharma industry are well-aware of the vaccine’s ineffectiveness and real risk of serious damage, the ignorant and inexpert media continue conducting uninformed, but often vicious campaigns of misinformation and demonisation of natural infectious disease and attacking the healthy unvaccinated.

They ostentatiously interview young ignorant and unqualified people and celebrities simply expressing their irrelevant opinions and ideas of how good vaccines are and how irresponsible the unvaccinating parents are, and argumentum ad hominem rather than argumentum ad rem.

ALL Outbreaks and Epidemics Occur in the Vaccinated Population

Many eminently ignorant, unwise and often hostile politicians are prone to resort to  enacting unconstitutional, illegal and draconian measures, criticised even by the proponents of vaccination, by proposing to ‘punish’ and ‘chase’ parents who refuse vaccination by withholding certain financial benefits, or even barring the unvaccinated from pre-schools and child care centres, totally blind to the most obvious, namely that all outbreaks and epidemics occur in the vaccinated.

In summary, medical research provides important scientific factual evidence against continued use of vaccines, which is an outdated, ineffective and unsafe medical technology. Moreover, the evidence of the benefits of natural infectious diseases in providing a life-long specific and non-specific immunity has also been mounting.

Vaccination should be abandoned, which would allow natural immunity to be gradually restored.

(The readers can find the relevant graphs in Scheibner “A Critique of the 16-page Australian provaccination booklet” entitled “The Science of Immunisation: Questions and Answers,” IMCV 2012.)

About the Author

Dr Viera Scheibner is Principal Research Scientist (Retired) with a doctorate in Natural Sciences from Comenius University in Bratislava. After an eminent scientific career in micropalaeontology during which she published 3 books and some 90 scientific papers in refereed scientific journals in Australia and overseas, she studied babies’ breathing patterns with the Cotwatch breathing monitor developed by her late husband Leif Karlsson in the mid 1980s. Babies had alarms after vaccination, indicating stress. This introduced her to the subject of vaccination. She then started systematically studying orthodox medical papers dealing with vaccination issues. To this day she has collected and studied more than 100,000 pages of medical papers.

Her research into vaccination has culminated so far in two books and a number of shorter and longer individual papers published in a variety of scientific and medical publications. She has also conducted frequent international lecture tours to present the results of her research to parents, health and medical professionals and anyone else who is interested. She has also provided a great number of expert witness reports for court cases relating to deaths and injuries caused by vaccines, such as so-called “shaken baby” syndrome. (


Crawcroft et al. 2015. Do we need a new approach to making vaccine recommendations?  BMJ; 30 January: 350; h308:1-6 (Analysis).

Crawcroft and Britto. 2002. Whooping cough – a continuing problem.  BMJ; 325. 29 June : 1537-1538 (editorial).

Miller and Farrington. 1988. The current epidemiology of pertussis in the developed world: UK and West Germany. Tokai J Exp Clin Med; 13

(Suppl): 97-101.

MacFarlan et al. 1945.  Trial of whooping cough vaccine: in city and residential nursery groups. A Report for the Medical Research Council.  BMJ; August 18: 205-208.

Wilson et al.1965. Whooping-cough: difficulties in diagnosis and ineffectiveness of immunization. BMJ; 11 Sept: 623-626.

Anonymous 1956. Vaccination against whooping cough. Relation between protection in children and results of laboratory tests. BMJ; August 25: 454-462.

McCloskey. 1950. The relation of prophylactic inoculations to the onset of poliomyelitis. Lancet; April 18: 659-663.

Binkin et al. 1992. Epidemiology of pertussis in a developed country with low vaccination coverage: the Italian experience. Pediatr Infect Dis J; 11: 653-661.

Anonymous. 1973. Efficacy of whooping cough vaccines used in the United Kingdom before 1968. BMJ; 3 February: 259-262.

Langmuir. 1962. Medical importance of measles. Am J Dis Child; 163: 54-56

Sencer et al. 1967. Epidemiologic basis for eradication of measles in 1967. Pub Health Reports; 82(3): 253-256.

Koprowski 1962. The role of hyperergy in measles encephalitis. Am J Dis Childhood; 103: 103-108.

Wright 1901. On the changes affected by anti-typhoid inoculation in the bactericidalpowe45 of the blood; with remarks on the probable significance of these changes. Lancet; Sep 14:715-723.

Hutchins et al. 1988. Current epidemiology of pertussis in the United States.

Tokaj J Exp Clin Med; 13 (Suppl): 103-109.

Veronesi et al. 1983. Naturally acquired antibodies to tetanus toxin in humans and animals from the Galapagos Islands. J Infect Dis; 147(2): 308-311.

Lennon and Black. 1986. Maternally derived immunity in era of vaccine-protected mothers. J Pediatrics; 108(1): 671-676.

Mulholland 1995. Measles and pertussis in developing countries with good vaccine coverage. Lancet; 345. Febr 4: 305-307.

Sutter et al. 1991. Meaesles among the Amish: a comparative study of measles severity in primary and secondary cases in households. J Infect Dis; 163: 12-16.

Hedrich 1930. Monthly estimates of the child population “susceptible” to measles, 1900-1930. Baltimore, MD. Am J Hygiene: 613-635.

Isacson et al. 1993. How common is whooping cough in a non vaccinating country? Ped Infect Dis J; 12)4): 284-288.

Olin 1995. Acellular pertussis vaccines – a question of efficacy. J Hospital Infections; 30(Suppl): 503-507.

Fine and Clarkson 1982. The recurrence of whooping cough: possible implications for assessment of vaccine efficacy. Lancet; March 20: 666-668.

Macfarlane 1982. Infant deaths after four weeks. Lancet; October 23: 929-939.

Preston 1994. Pertussis vaccination: neither panic nor complacency. Lancet; 344, August 20: 491-492.

Stott and Davis. 1981. Pertussis vaccination and pseudo-whooping cough. BMJ; 282, June 6: 1871.

Fulginiti et al. 1967. Altered reactivity to measles virus. Atypical measles in children previously inoculated with killed-virus vaccines. JAMA;  202(12): 1075-1080.

Nichols 1979.  Atypical measles syndrome: a continuing problem. Am J Public Health; Febr; 69(2): 160-162.

Sutter and Cochi 1992. Pertussis hospitalizations and mortality in the United States, 1985-1988. Evaluation of the completeness of national reporting. JAMA; Jan 15; 267(3): 386-389.

Mooi et al. 2014. Pertussis resurgence: waning immunity and pathogen adaptation – two sides of the same coin. Epidemiol Infect. Feb 13; 142(4): 685-694.

Brown et al. 2009. Invasive Haemophilus influenza disease caused by non-type b strains in northwestern Ontario, Canada.  Clin Infect Dis; 49: 1240-1243.

Octavia et al. 2012. Insight into evolution of Bordetella pertussis from comporative genomic analyses: evidence of vaccine-driven selection. Mol Biol Evol; Jan 10; 28(1): 707-715.

Cassidey et al. 2000. Polymorphism in Bordetella pertussis pertactin and pertussis toxin virulence factors in the United States, 1935-1999, J Infect Dis; 182: 1402-1408.

Ronne 1985. Measles without rash in childhood may result in disease later in life.  Lancet; January 5: 1-5.

Shaheen et al.1996. Measles and atopy in Guinea-Bissau. Lancet; June 29; 347(9018): 1792-1796.

Simpanen et al. 1977. Remission of juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (Still”s disease) after measles,. Lancet; November 5; 2(8045): 987-988.

Thiers et al. 1969. Suspensive effect of measles on chronic psoriasis in children: 2 cases. Lyon Med; November 9: 222(40): 839-840. PubMed- indexed for MEDLINE.

Hitoshi Yamamoto et al. 2004. Spontaneous improvement of intractable epileptic seizures following acute viral infections. Brain and Development; 26(6): 377-379.

Wahn 2000. The immunology of fetuses and infants. What drives allergic march? Allergy; 55(7): 591-599.

Roberston et al. 1992. A million dollar measles outbreak in fully vaccinated secondary-school population.  NEJM; March 26; 316(13): 771-774.

Gustafson et al. 1987.  Measles outbreak in fully vaccinated secondary-school population. NEJM; March 26; 316(13): 771-774.

Scheibner 2008. Jabbering about jabs. rapid responses; 15  September).

Scheibner 2012. A critique of the 16-page Australian provaccination booklet entitled “The Science of Immunisation: Questions and Answers.” In: International Medical Council on Vaccination (MCV); 51pp.

Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?


One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”

However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.

The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.

Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.

In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.

Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.

These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.

In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.