By Dr. Mercola

Most people can now clearly see that the measles cases in Disneyland were a first-class propaganda con game, brilliantly played out by the pharmaceutical industry to ensure profitable cradle-to-crave control of our bodies.

It’s interesting to note that many of the same people staking out abortion rights using “my body, my choice” reasoning are simultaneously contradicting themselves when it comes to laws removing choices about use of pharmaceuticals like vaccines.

They cite the supposed threat that people refusing to government recommended vaccines pose a danger to society.

In their eyes, we’re all pharmaceutically deficient and must be forced to get lots of vaccines or be punished and segregated.

Now that discrimination against healthy unvaccinated children is legal in West Virginia, Mississippi, and most recently, California, where unvaccinated children are being denied the civil right to get a school education, one might ask, “Why are those sick with infectious diseases not being segregated and prevented from participating in society?”

If a healthy, unvaccinated child not infected with hepatitis B is too much of a threat to other children to attend public or private school, then why are children who are infected with hepatitis B (or other infectious diseases like HIV) also not barred from attending school?

It is illogical for the state to pass laws unfairly punishing healthy unvaccinated children by preventing them from getting a school education, and punishing unvaccinated adults by preventing them from being employed as health or child care workers while millions of children and adults infected with hepatitis B and C, HIV, syphilis and gonorrhea and other transmittable infectious diseases are allowed to go to school and be employed without facing similar discrimination and segregation from society.

If there’s any upside to the outrageous forced vaccination bill debacle that we have witnessed in California this year, it is that people are starting to see that the slippery slope into medical tyranny in America has been generously greased with pharmaceutical money.

It has also awakened many more people to the reality that defending our human and civil rights — loudly, and vigorously — has become imperative, as California lawmakers followed the money rather than their constituents, who showed up by the thousands in protest against SB 277.

Drug Companies Donated Millions to California Lawmakers

The new law (SB 277), signed by Governor Jerry Brown on June 29, 2015, denies parents in California the legal right to file a personal belief exemption to vaccination for religious and conscientious beliefs so their children can attend school.

While the medical exemption still exists, it’s an exemption that doctors deny to 99.99 percent of children under very narrow federal guidelines,1 so the law very effectively eliminates parent’s ability to make informed vaccine choices for their kids.

Parents in California, who refuse to give their school-aged children dozens of doses of the 10 federally recommended vaccines now mandated in the state, only have only one option left and that is to homeschool.

While this may be a hidden silver lining that might lead to a generation of more well-educated, well-adjusted children, homeschooling is not financially feasible for every family and not all parents have the educational background to homeschool their children, even if they wanted to do that.

What this means is that, if you reside in California and cannot afford to homeschool or move out of state, you are being forced to play vaccine roulette with your child’s health because truancy — failing to provide your child with compulsory education — is also a crime, punishable with fines and imprisonment under California law.2

Why such heavy-handedness?

As reported by The Sacramento Bee,3 the pharmaceutical industry donated more than $2 million to California lawmakers who, in turn, decided to gut the human right to informed consent to medical risk taking and the civil right to a school education.

The article lists the dollar amounts received by each individual member, noting that:

“Nine of the top 20 recipients are either legislative leaders or serve on either the Assembly or Senate health committees.

Receiving more than $95,000, the top recipient of industry campaign cash is Sen. Richard Pan, a Sacramento Democrat and doctor who is carrying the vaccine bill.

In addition, the industry donated more than $500,000 to outside campaign spending groups that helped elect some current members last year.

Leading pharmaceutical companies also spent nearly $3 million more during the 2013-2014 legislative session lobbying the Legislature, the governor, the state pharmacists’ board and other agencies, according to state filings.” [Emphasis mine]

How Will Mandatory Vaccination Law Eradicate Fact That Outbreaks Occur in Fully Vaccinated Populations?

There seems to be a blatant disregard for the truth when it comes to information disseminated by mainstream media and industry, medical trade, and public health agencies regarding the necessity for and effectiveness of government recommended and mandated vaccines.

For example, 90 percent of the children who contracted whooping cough (pertussis) in the 2012 outbreak in Vermont were vaccinated.4 Of 178 confirmed cases of pertussis in children aged six months to 18 years, 160 of them were vaccinated with DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis vaccine):

  • One child had received one to two doses
  • Eight had received three doses
  • Nine had received four doses
  • 74 had received five doses, and
  • 68 had received six doses

The recommended number of doses DTaP vaccine before entering kindergarten is FIVE, yet 38 percent of these kids who had received SIX doses – one more dose than recommended – still contracted whooping cough!

This seems to confirm findings published in The New England Journal of Medicine,5 which showed that a child’s odds of contracting whooping cough increases 42 percent each year after receiving their fifth dose of the DTaP vaccine. California also experienced a whooping cough “epidemic” last year. According to the California Department of Public Health (CDPH):6

“The last epidemic in California occurred in 2010, however, the overall incidence of pertussis has increased since the 1990s. One reason for the increase is the use of acellular pertussis vaccines, which cause fewer reactions than the whole-cell vaccines that preceded them, but do not protect as long.”

The CDPH also notes that among the 8,215 pediatric cases with vaccination history information, “806 (10 percent) had never received any doses of pertussis-containing vaccine” — which is just another way of saying that 90 percent of them hadreceived at least one dose of DTaP.

There is a willful disregard for the facts when it comes to doctors lobbying for “no exceptions” mandatory vaccination laws, when they often refuse to admit the truth about who can be infected and spread disease.

They don’t want to talk about vaccine failures and just how many fully vaccinated children are still getting sick with B. pertussis whooping cough. (Studies have also demonstrated that recently vaccinated individuals, who are given live virus vaccines, are able to shed and transmit vaccine strain virus infections to other people.7 )

Besides waning pertussis vaccine effectiveness, the fact that fully vaccinated individuals can become asymptomatic pertussis carriers is another reason why reported pertussis outbreaks still occur, despite very high vaccination rates. It’s NOT because there are so many unvaccinated people running around spreading disease.

In fact, according to a study8 published in the June issue of the British Medical Journal (BMJ), asymptomatic pertussis transmission by vaccinated individuals may be the most significant factor. As reported by The New York Times:9

“Benjamin M. Althouse and Samuel V. Scarpino… tracked infections through three time periods: 1920-45, when no vaccination was available; 1946-2005, when the whole cell vaccine was used; and 2006-13, when the whole cell vaccine was replaced with the acellular version…

Using epidemiological evidence and genomic analyses of the bacterium, [they] conclude that the switch to the acellular vaccine from the more effective whole-cell vaccine accounts for the recent increase in incidence. In addition, they say, the vaccine complicates estimates of prevalence by hiding many infections…

[A]symptomatic transmission explains why ‘cocooning’ — vaccinating all those who come in contact with babies too young to be vaccinated — does not work. Transmission by people who do not know they are infected may also mean that achieving herd immunity — that is, vaccinating enough people to provide protection even to the unvaccinated — will be difficult, if not impossible, using the acellular vaccine.”

The Ramifications of Denying Children of an Education

Denying children an education for failing to receive dozens of doses of federally recommended and state mandated vaccines by the age of six is likely to backfire in many ways. For example, according to a study10 featured in The Atlantic,11 a surprisingly large percentage of high school dropouts die prematurely:”

‘The difference in “the number of deaths that we can attribute to finishing high school or not is on par with the difference between current and former smokers,’ said Chang, a public-health professor at NYU…”

Similar findings were published in 2008.12 The main culprits for early death among the undereducated are smoking, obesity, and high blood pressure. According to Chang: “In public health and public-health policy, there is a lot of emphasis on [addressing] health behaviors: smoking, obesity, nutrition, drinking, et cetera. There should be more attention paid to education, which is a more fundamental driver of these behaviors.”

If improved public health was truly the goal, lawmakers would not waste their time on passing laws mandating the use of pharmaceuticals.

They’d focus on addressing true, known killers — including prescription drug overdoses and the rising threat of antibiotic-resistance. They also would not sacrifice children’s civil right to a school education by pretending that excluding unvaccinated children from schools will really protect and improve the public health.

Those of us, who are old enough to remember the days when parents wanted their children to play with a child sick with chickenpox or measles so they could get natural, long lasting natural immunity to once common childhood infections, know that the vast majority of kids recovered without complications. Parents back then also knew that there were far more complications from contracting childhood infections in later years.

Vaccine Errors and Recalls Are VERY Common

The issue of medical errors is a serious one. In the US, at least 210,000 Americans are killed by preventable hospital errors every year. When deaths related to diagnostic errors, errors of omission, and failure to follow guidelines are included, the number skyrockets to an estimated 440,000 preventable hospital deaths each year. In all, preventable medical errors are the third leading cause of death in the US.

Mistakes occur just about everywhere, including in pediatric clinics, where you’d think they’d be extra careful. During an audit of a Salem County “Free Shots for Tots” clinic, officials discovered that in one year, five children were given the wrong vaccines. This may not sound like a lot — until you find out the clinic only vaccinated 22 individuals in the year audited.13 Five out of 22 is a rather significant error rate.

Two of the children received expired vaccines. One received flu mist, despite being too young to receive it. In the fourth case, officials are still trying to determine exactly which vaccine was actually given… The worst error was made with a two-year old boy who received a high dose of Gardasil in lieu of the vaccine he was supposed to get…

NBC News14 noted that: “Health officials are not sure whether the child would suffer negative effects, but said he may be at risk of neurological damage. Shots of the HPV vaccine are given to boys and girls starting at age 9. The audit also found $20,000 worth of vaccines were not properly refrigerated.”

In another story demonstrating similar reckless disregard for vaccine risks, 250 immigrant children held at a Texas detention facility were given adult doses of a hepatitis A vaccine, according to a recent Medical Daily report.15 An adult dose is about twice the amount prescribed for children. According to Crystal Williams, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association:

“Volunteer attorneys at Dilley, as well as those at similar detention centers… have long noted disturbing patterns of what appears to be inadequate health care for the women and children. This latest permutation is beyond appalling — it is putting children at risk not just for short-term reactions but for unknown long-term risks.”

The idea that vaccines are safe is also undermined by the number of manufacturing errors that occur. Would it shock you to find out that vaccines have the highest number of recalls of any drug? According to a 2012 report by business intelligence experts GBI Research,16 vaccines “fail to meet safety standards.” Between 2007 and 2010, 14 recalls for vaccines were made, for reasons such as:

  • Serious adverse events
  • Labeling errors
  • Quality defects (reduced levels of potency, presence of contaminants, such as glass particles, etc.)
  • Manufacturing defects

Do Not Expect Mainstream Media to Report the Truth on Vaccines

Every vaccine comes with potential side effects.15 Yet, when those who have been injured by vaccines or their families express outrage for what happened, they’re muzzled and the mainstream media rarely reports on their plight. When a reporter or news outlet does cover a case of vaccine injury or death or discuss vaccine risks and failures, there are usually repercussions. Such was the case when The Star in Canada ran an article about several young women who became ill after getting the Gardasil vaccine. The paper ended up removing the article, noting that:16

“The story included the caveat that none of these instances had been conclusively linked to the vaccine. However, the weight of the photographs, video, headlines, and anecdotes led many readers to conclude the Star believed its investigation had uncovered a direct connection between a large variety of ailments and the vaccine.

Some doctors and public health officials were troubled by the story treatment and by the lack of reference to the many studies which conclude the risks of Gardasil are low…

All vaccines, including Gardasil, have side-effects. The better known they are, the more safely the vaccine can be deployed. This is what the article sought to achieve as well as to note that acknowledged risks are not always properly communicated. We remain committed to this line of reporting. However, we have concluded that in this case our story treatment led to confusion between anecdotes and evidence. For that reason, the Gardasil story package of Feb. 5 will be removed from our website.”

But what about all the media articles talking about the benefits of vaccination without ever mentioning any of the risks or failures? If “confusion” was sufficient for failing to present both sides of a story, almost every vaccine article published by the mainstream media would need to be removed. Very rarely does the media present a balanced view of the very real potential risks versus theoretical benefits of vaccination and almost never is there an examination of the shoddy nature of the industry’s vaccine research.

It is no wonder that liability free vaccine manufacturers have no incentive to conduct sound vaccine science and why there is no government funding of independent research into vaccine risks that could answer the question of whether many vaccines do more harm than good.

While Mandatory Vaccination Laws Are Enacted, Federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Is Failing

Oftentimes, vaccine-injured victims are victimized yet again by statements suggesting that they or their children are acceptable collateral damage to protect the “greater good” of society. In order to convince the public that the lives of those injured by vaccines are less important than the lives of those injured by infectious diseases, deaths attributed to infectious diseases get plenty of headlines, even though such deaths are generally rare in developed countries like the U.S. (especially when compared to the death rate of conventional medicine and pharmaceuticals).

One of the most recent examples is a young woman whose death was used to stoke the fear and propaganda whipped up by mainstream media this year about measles.19 She had a number of health problems, her immune system was suppressed by the multiple drugs she was taking, and her death was initially attributed to pneumonia. However, reportedly the coroner doing the autopsy found evidence that she had been infected with measles even though she had been vaccinated and did not have typical measles symptoms prior to her death.

Yet the newspaper headlines all INCORRECTLY screamed “Measles Death” rather than properly acknowledging the true cause of her death was likely due to a number of health issues, including the multiple drugs she was taking. Her death was the first reported “measles death” in the U.S. since 2003. It was conveniently publicized just after Governor Jerry Brown signed the law eliminating the personal belief vaccine exemption in California.

All this propaganda is used as ammunition to try to convince everyone to fear measles and support draconian vaccination laws like the one just enacted in California. While Americans in three states have already lost their right to make informed vaccine decisions for their children and must gamble their children’s health in order to give them a school education, the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) is failing.

In a recent Stanford News20 article, Clifton Parker writes: “The safety net that Congress created to protect children who suffer from vaccine injury is not working as intended, a Stanford law professor has found. ‘The bottom line is that the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was supposed to offer ‘simple justice’ to vaccine-injured children. But it has largely failed to do so.”

Few Are Ever Compensated When Injured by a Vaccine

Since 1988, the federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) has adjudicated more than 14,000 petitions for vaccine injury and death. Under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Congress set the VICP up as a no-fault alternative administrative dispute resolution system intended to protect the vaccine supply in the U.S. by shielding vaccine makers from high jury awards in civil court, while compensating children injured or killed by government recommended and mandated vaccines.

The VICP, which is jointly operated by the Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice, and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, was supposed to be a non-adversarial and less time consuming, traumatic, and less expensive alternative to a vaccine injury lawsuit against pharmaceutical companies marketing vaccines and doctors administering vaccines negligently. In reality, it has turned out to be a very adversarial, lengthy and unpleasant process for many families whose loved ones have been harmed by vaccines.

So far, VICP has paid out $3.2 billion to 4,150 child and adult claimants who have been harmed by government recommended and state mandated vaccines. About 10,000 cases have been dismissed, with two out of three vaccine injured plaintiffs turned away empty handed. Because the government does not publicize the existence of the VICP, very few Americans even know about it or apply for compensation after they or their children were harmed by vaccines.

Adding insult to injury, the process is exceedingly slow, with the average case taking over five years to adjudicate — a far cry from the 240-day deadline originally set by Congress for all adjudication decisions. Most people also need a lawyer in order to have any chance at getting federal vaccine injury compensation, which completely defeats the purpose of keeping vaccine injuries outside the traditional civil justice system.

“[E]ven when children are found to be entitled to compensation, governmental lawyers have sometimes hassled petitioners over relatively piddling amounts. For example, in one case, a dispute arose whether a 14-year-old girl with profound mental retardation was or was not entitled to a $40 pair of high-top tennis shoes,” Parker writes. Now, the US Supreme Court is being asked to decide on a standard for vaccine injury compensation. As reported by The Insurance Journal:21

“Congress created what’s known as the vaccine court… [to] compensate those who are hurt in the pursuit of a greater public good… ‘The government is in a difficult position,’ said Ed Kraus, a professor at the Chicago-Kent College of Law who represents plaintiffs in vaccine cases. He said the U.S. is walking a tightrope in trying to protect all Americans’ health as well as those few who have bad reactions to vaccines…

The case the Supreme Court will this week consider taking was filed by the parents of Ilya Dobrydnev, who had a hepatitis B vaccination in 2001, when he was 10. He had a fever, swollen lymph nodes, inner ear inflammation and eventually debilitating memory loss. Now 23, he’s disabled by chronic fatigue syndrome.

In 2004, his lawyer petitioned the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. The vaccine court… in 2013 granted his parents $1 million and annual payments to cover the cost of his care. The U.S. Justice Department challenged the decision the next year, saying there wasn’t sufficient evidence of cause to support such an award, and a federal appeals court overturned it.

The Dobrydnevs’ Supreme Court petition claims the government set too high a bar and asks the justices to order the vaccine court to adhere to the more victim-friendly standard their lawyer contends was envisioned by Congress. ‘I happen to think vaccines are extremely important for public health,’ said their lawyer, Mark Friedlander… ‘But if something goes wrong, people think the government’s going to be there for them. They’re not.'”

Read the full article here.

Sources and References: