Photo of young woman with son doing inhalation with a nebulizer at home. Mother of a young child making inhalation

by Christina England
Health Impact News

It is estimated that up to 15 million U.S. citizens are currently suffering from food allergies. In 2013, a paper published on the CDC website stated that between 1997 and 2011, the prevalence of food and skin allergies increased in children under age of 18. This is extremely worrying, as according to the Food Allergy Research & Education website, a food allergy sends someone to the emergency department every three minutes, which, according to them, amounts to approximately 200,000 visits to the E.R. every year.

Are Vaccinations Safe for Children with Food Allergies?

In 2010, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) published a paper titled Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Food Allergy in the United States. The paper described how the NIAID had joined forces with 30 professional organizations, federal agencies and patient advocacy groups to set guidelines for the management and safety of patients suffering from food allergies.

One of the sections highlighted was a section titled Vaccinations in Patients with Egg Allergies. The authors wrote:

In Summary: Patients who have generated IgE antibodies to an allergen are at risk for anaphylaxis with systemic exposure to that allergen. Thus, patients who have IgE-mediated egg allergy are at risk for anaphylaxis if injected with vaccines containing egg 17 protein. (own emphasis)

They continued:

More detailed information about specific egg-containing vaccines (measles, mumps, and rubella [MMR], MMR with varicella [MMRV], influenza, yellow fever, and rabies) is provided in … the Guidelines.

The EP recognizes that changes in these recommendations may occur in the future as there is an increased understanding of the risk factors for allergic reactions and as vaccine manufacturing processes improve and decrease the final egg protein content of vaccines. For the most current recommendations, health care professionals should refer to the Web sites of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP):

However, despite stating that patients who have an allergy to eggs are at risk of anaphylaxis if they receive a vaccine containing the egg 17 protein, it appears that they are recommending the vaccine anyway.

I say this, because in section they stated:

Measles, Mumps, Rubella, and Varicella Vaccine

Guideline 31: The EP recognizes the varying consensus recommendations of the different organizations on this particular vaccine and recommends that children with egg allergy, even those with a history of severe reactions, receive vaccines for MMR and MMRV. The safety of this practice has been recognized by ACIP and AAP and is noted in the approved product prescribing information for these vaccines. (own emphasis)

What I found interesting was the fact that the NIAID did not apply the same guidelines to any of the other vaccinations listed.

In fact, their recommendations for the flu vaccine clearly stated:

In Summary: The EP concludes that insufficient evidence exists to recommend administering influenza vaccine, either inactivated or live-attenuated, to patients with a history of severe reactions to egg proteins. Severe reactions include a history of hives, angioedema, allergic asthma, or systemic anaphylaxis to egg proteins (or chicken proteins). Less severe or local manifestations of allergy to egg or feathers are not contraindications. However, the EP notes that egg allergy is relatively common among the very patients who would highly benefit from influenza vaccination. Such patients include children and young adults (from 6 months to 18 years old for seasonal influenza, and from 6 months to 24 years old for H1N1 influenza) and all patients with asthma. It should be noted that live-attenuated vaccine is not licensed for use in patients with asthma. (own emphasis)

They continued:

Although ACIP and AAP, and also the vaccine manufacturers, do not recommend influenza vaccination in patients who are allergic to egg, several publications have described different approaches to giving the influenza vaccine to patients with severe allergic reactions to egg. These approaches, which depend on the ovalbumin content and the results of SPTs or intradermal tests with the vaccine, include a single dose of vaccine, two doses of vaccine, or multiple doses. However, the evidence supporting these approaches is limited by the small numbers of patients included in each study. Moreover, data indicate that, although the vaccines are relatively safe, there remains some, albeit low, risk of systemic reactions. Also, negative SPT results do not accurately predict safety of vaccination, in that 5 percent of patients with negative SPTs had systemic reactions to vaccination. (own emphasis)

With these recommendations in mind, we need to ask ourselves how many of our doctors are fully aware of any of these guidelines? If they are aware of this information, why are so many doctors not adhering to them?

Another concern is the fact that many governments are mandating vaccination. If they succeed, then this mandate may allow pharmacists and school nurses to vaccinate our children without having their full medical history. If they are also unaware of these guidelines, then this lack of knowledge could potentially put hundreds of thousands of children at risk.

The Opposite Advice Given by the CDC

What is even more worrying is the possibility that the CDC appears to be completely unaware of the NIAID guidelines, because they have given the following advice to patients regarding the flu vaccine in their guidelines:

Flu vaccines are among the safest medical products in use. Hundreds of millions of Americans have safely received flu vaccines over the past 50 years, and there has been extensive research supporting the safety of flu vaccines.

Furthermore, the advice that they give to patients with an allergy to eggs is the polar opposite to the advice given in the NIAID guidelines.

This is because, according to the CDC:

The recommendations for vaccination of people with egg allergies have changed for 2016-2017.

People with egg allergies can receive any licensed, recommended age-appropriate influenza vaccine and no longer have to be monitored for 30 minutes after receiving the vaccine. People who have severe egg allergies should be vaccinated in a medical setting and be supervised by a health care provider who is able to recognize and manage severe allergic conditions.

How can the flu vaccine be dangerous to those suffering from an allergy to eggs in 2010 and not dangerous in 2016?

Do Vaccinations Cause Food Allergies or Vice Versa?

Whether vaccinations are safe for children with food allergies or not, many parents question whether the vaccinations were the cause of the problem in the first place.

Dr. Tim O’Shea has studied food allergies and vaccination in depth for many years. He believes that before 1900, peanut allergies were unheard of, whereas today, as many as 1.5 million children in the U.S. are allergic to peanuts.

In an article titled Vaccines and the Peanut Allergy Epidemic, he wrote:

The big change came with vaccines. Peanut oils were introduced as vaccine excipients in the mid 1960s. An article appeared in the NY Times on 18 Sept, 1964 that would never be printed today. The author described how a newly patented ingredient containing peanut oil was added as an adjuvant to a new flu vaccine, in order to prolong the “immunity.” The oil was reported to act as a time release capsule, and theoretically enhanced the vaccine’s strength. Same mechanism as with penicillin.

That new excipient, though not approved in the US, became the model for subsequent vaccines.

In other words, peanut oil was never approved as a safe ingredient for vaccinations, but the pharmaceutical industry decided to use it anyway.

What Has Peanut Oil in Vaccination Got to do with Peanut Allergies?

According to Dr. O’Shea, by 1980, peanut oil was considered to be an adjuvant – a substance able to increase reactivity to the vaccine. He wrote:

The pretense here is that the stronger the allergic response to the vaccine, the greater will be the immunity that is conferred. This fundamental error is consistent throughout vaccine literature of the past century.

He continued:

Why was peanut allergy so violent? Adjuvant pioneer Maurice Hilleman claimed peanut oil adjuvants had all protein removed by refining. The FDA disagreed. They said some peanut protein traces would always persist – that even the most refined peanut oils still contained some traces of intact peanut proteins. This was the reason doctors were directed to inject vaccines intramuscular rather than intravenous – a greater chance of absorption of intact proteins, less chance of reaction.

But all their secret research obviously wasn’t enough to prevent sensitivity. Mother Nature bats last: no intact proteins in the body. 60 million years of Natural Selection didn’t create the mammalian immune system for nothing. Put intact proteins, peanut or whatever, for any imagined reason into the human system and the inflammatory response will fire. And since the goal of oil emulsion adjuvants was to prolong reactivity in the first place – the notion of time-release – this led to sensitization.

What he is saying is this – if you vaccinate a child with an intact protein, an inflammatory response will take place. This is because the protein will eventually invade the bloodstream and when it does, the body sees this protein as a threat and therefore sets up a defense mechanism to include antibodies.

When an antibody is exposed to a protein, it triggers a release of histamine. The histamine in turn causes an inflammation, which leads to a sensitivity to that protein. This is a naturally occurring chain reaction of events.

More Evidence Comes to Light

In 2015, researcher Vinu Arumugham published a paper titled Evidence that Food Proteins in Vaccines Cause the Development of Food Allergies and Its Implications for Vaccine Policy. He stated that:

Nobel Laureate Charles Richet demonstrated over a hundred years ago that injecting a protein into animals or humans causes immune system sensitization to that protein. Subsequent exposure to the protein can result in allergic reactions or anaphylaxis.

Despite the fact that this information has been known and documented for over a hundred years, many of today’s vaccinations include a variety of food and animal proteins. According to his research, there are currently no specifications for limiting the allergen content in vaccinations approved for use today.

This practice puts children at a huge risk of having an allergic reaction because if there are no agencies regulating the number of allergens that go into a vaccination, pharmaceutical companies are free to do whatever they like.

Arumugham stated that:

Pertussis toxin and aluminum compounds act as adjuvants. These adjuvants are known to bias for IgE synthesis. Injecting food proteins along with these adjuvants increases the immunogenicity of the food proteins that are present in the vaccines. With up to five shots administered simultaneously, numerous food proteins and adjuvants get injected at one time. This increases the probability of sensitization.

He continued:

Numerous studies have demonstrated that food proteins contained in vaccines/injections induce food allergy. The IOM’s (Institute of Medicine) authoritative report has concluded the same. Allergen quantities in vaccines are unregulated. Today kids are more atopic. C-section births bias the newborn’s immune system towards IgE synthesis due to sub-optimal gut microbiome. C-section birth rates have gone up 50% in the last few decades. The vaccine schedule has increased the number of vaccine shots to 30-40 and up to five vaccines are simultaneously administered to children. Vaccines also contain adjuvants such as aluminum compounds and pertussis toxin that bias towards IgE synthesis. Given these conditions, the predictable and observed outcome is a food allergy epidemic.

He concluded that:

Meanwhile, urgent action is needed to limit the problem. Unlike anaphylaxis, food allergies caused by vaccines may only be diagnosed weeks or months after vaccination.

If doctors are not informed of a possible link between vaccines and food allergies, either by vaccine package inserts or by peer reviewed published papers, how are they going to make the connection and report the event to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)? This makes VAERS ineffective to study this problem.

We believe that he is absolutely correct, because if doctors do not know that vaccinations can cause an allergic reaction, then they are unlikely to make the connection.

What Animal and Food Proteins do Vaccinations Contain?

Vaccinations can contain a variety of animal and food proteins. These include ovalbumin, casein, gelatin, and soy. Vaccinations can also contain ingredients such as polysorbate 80 and sorbitol, which according to Arumugham are manufactured using food sources, and include coconut palm, sunflower, tapioca, wheat, corn, vegetable oils, legume oils and nut oils.

For those who are unsure:

Ovalbumin is the major protein constituent of chicken egg whites.

Casein is a protein in milk.

Gelatin is a protein obtained by boiling skin, tendons, ligaments, and/or bones with water.

If there is no regulation to how much of these ingredients a vaccine can contain, then no one knows what level is safe.

Claire Dwoskin, of the Dwoskin Family Foundation agreed. She wrote:

A more subtle and troubling point is that the aluminum adjuvants contained in many vaccines augment the food proteins’ immunogenicity (a substance’s ability to provoke an immune response). When numerous food proteins and adjuvants get injected in one sitting, as is the case when multiple shots are administered simultaneously, the probability of sensitization greatly increases.

Ms. Dwoskin believes that because there are currently no regulations as to the safe level of food proteins or adjuvants being added to vaccinations, this could have a serious effect on the health and safety of children today. She continued:


The Institute of Medicine admits that food proteins in vaccines “occasionally induce…sensitization … and subsequent hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis.” Despite this knowledge, the allergen content in vaccines is entirely unregulated. No safe level or limits have ever been established or enforced for the allergens contained in vaccines.

In this context, it is hard to disagree with Arumugham’s suggested solutions. The most obvious response—one that would likely alleviate much suffering—is to remove food proteins and aluminum compounds from vaccines as soon as possible. To decrease the odds of allergic sensitization, it also makes sense to adopt the precaution of decelerating the vaccine schedule and administering one vaccine at a time. In the interim, the link between vaccines and food allergies needs to be openly discussed so that the public can be more fully informed about vaccine risks.

As approximately nine of the CDC’s vaccinations contain food and animal proteins, is Ms. Dwoskin right to be concerned?

It appears that she is, because according to Arumugham’s recent response to a paper published in the British Medical Journal, Arumugham stated that:

Vaccines of course are artificial injections of food allergens, causing the development of food allergies.

Referring to a 2015 study, by Dr. Alice E. W. Hoyt et al. on the relationship between the number of vaccinations containing alum and IgE production in children, Arumugham explained that:

The vaccines caused increases in peanut, almond, milk, egg, soy and wheat IgE. Let’s look at the food proteins contaminating the vaccines the patient received. Prevnar 13 contains casamino acids (cow’s milk derived) and soy peptone broth. Polysorbate 80 from EMD Millipore may contain wheat proteins. Polysorbate 80 is present in many vaccines including Prevnar 13. Polysorbate and other excipients derived from vegetable sources are present in many other vaccines and most suppliers do not have allergen information. So polysorbate and other excipients could also be a source of peanut and almond protein contamination of vaccines.

MMR contains chick embryo culture proteins and the vaccine package insert4 has a warning for patients with egg allergy. Some egg proteins may be common to or cross react with chick embryo proteins.

He continued:

For case 2, again, MMR could have been the cause of the increase in egg IgE. Clear evidence that food proteins in vaccines turn them into food allergy booster shots that boost the severity of food allergies. Children are taking longer to outgrow allergies. How can they outgrow their food allergies, if we insist on giving them food allergy booster shots? This latest evidence adds to the solid body of scientific evidence, demonstrating a causal relationship between food protein contaminated vaccines and the development of food allergies.

If Arumugham is correct, and the large number of injections of food allergens are responsible for the development of food allergies in children, then this research would strongly support Ms. Claire Dwoskin’s recommendation to remove all food proteins and aluminum compounds from vaccines as soon as possible.

Further Reading: Allergens in Vaccines Are Causing Life-Threatening Food Allergies

Leaving a lucrative career as a nephrologist (kidney doctor), Dr. Suzanne Humphries is now free to actually help cure people.

In this autobiography she explains why good doctors are constrained within the current corrupt medical system from practicing real, ethical medicine.

One of the sane voices when it comes to examining the science behind modern-day vaccines, no pro-vaccine extremist doctors have ever dared to debate her in public.

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.