VAXXED: 4 Actions to Improve Vaccine Safety

VAXXED: A Powerful Message
Photo by Naypong@FreeDigitalPhotos.net

The destruction of data by the CDC is a huge news story but the major networks on TV are not covering it. I learned about the documentary, VAXXED on social media.  I read that the Huffington Post censored an   article about the movie. I wanted to see it myself. I’m glad that it is at a   theater in Chicago for a week. Not the suburbs but in the city.

My husband doesn’t like to drive in the city, but he was a peach and drove me to  the one theater showing VAXXED. We took the expressway into Chicago, but we also had a long drive on Diversey Pkwy. The traffic was bumper to bumper.

VAXXED: A Powerful Message

The movie is not anti-vaccine. Medical researchers and parents, like me, have observed significant side effects from vaccines. Parents have raised questions and made a connection between a vaccine and a changed health status. The movie looks at the research that was done in response—and the data that was destroyed by the CDC. The movie is about vaccine safety.

As I watched the movie, events in my life as a parent resurfaced. I listened as a parent talked about multiple doses of antibiotics that her son received before getting the MMR at 15 months of age.  As she described the change in her son and their family, I recalled the pattern I had seen in my toddler. I had searched for answers.

My daughter had multiple doses of antibiotic followed by the MMR at 15 months. Soon after she had significant abdominal symptoms, bloating and diarrhea. Her language development came to a standstill, and she seemed to be in pain. The pediatrician prescribed a medication to calm her gut, but it made her worse.

So I had a consultation with a pediatric gastroenterologist. He listened to my observations and then asked me questions about my parenting. He suggested that I should let him admit her to the hospital so  he  could    observe her. He said I should stay at home while she was in the hospital. I cried on the way home from that consultation.

Instead my husband and I took her to a different gastroenterologist. He did an intestinal biopsy and mentioned some inflammation,  but no       diagnosis. He had no advice or treatment.

It is interesting that parents called Dr. Wakefield, a gastroenterologist, with stories similar to mine. Dr. Wakefield, along with other doctors, began a study that led him to question whether there was a link between the MMR vaccine, the  gastrointestinal symptoms and behavior changes.

I kept a journal with my observations related to the foods my daughter was eating. We went to an alternative medicine doctor and received help. I worked on strict dietary changes that made a difference. I feel very blessed that dietary measures, homeopathic medicine and nutritional support allowed my daughter to regain her health.

The research done by the CDC (in 2001 to 2004) showed an increase risk of autism when the MMR was given to black boys in the time frame 12 to 18 months. Children who had received the vaccine after 36 months had less risk. But the research team decided to destroy this data. Only Dr. Thompson kept a record of the study. His records were forwarded to Congress in 2015, but nothing has been done.

The film pointed out the limited testing that is done prior to approving vaccines. Little is known about the safety of giving multiple vaccines at one time. Our children are participating in an experiment that has consequences for their long term health.

The film recommends contacting our congressmen in the  House  of          Representatives and asking that they:

  1. Subpoena Dr. Thompson and have him testify.
  2. Revoke the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. This law releases pharmaceuticals from any liability.   They cannot be sued for     vaccine injury.
  3. Provide the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines as single vaccines     instead of the combined injection.   Japan gives the measles vaccine as a single dose.
  4. Require that vaccines receive the same level of testing as other medications.

If you have a chance to see VAXXED, please go. The research, the information, the interviews with parents and doctors, all provide a perspective that you can judge for yourself.

Linking with Healthy, Happy, Green and Natural,  A Little R & R, Whole Hearted Wednesday and Tuesdays with a Twist

Why does the U.S. Give More Vaccines than Other Nations?

needle-31827_1280

The topic of vaccines is controversial. I have read through some of the research and followed the issue.  My daughter had varying degrees of   reaction to the vaccines she received as a child, and after one final     vaccine developed fibromyalgia.   From my perspective, there is good   reason to question the number of vaccines that we are giving children and the timing of essential vaccines.

Attempts have been made to block a documentary on the subject.  This film, VAXXED: From Cover-up to Catastrophe is going to be shown in Chicago at the Century Centre Cinema, May 27 to June 2. My husband and I will go to see it the first day. (stay tuned for my review)

In the past fifteen years the CDC has continued to add vaccines to the childhood schedule. It seems that the goal is to replace the child’s immune system with a growing list of pharmaceutical agents.

It is worth noting that the United States is 26th among nations for infant mortality rate. Japan and Finland are at the top of the list with a rate of 2.3 infant deaths per 1,000 live births. In the United States the rate is 6.1 deaths per 1,000 live births.

Japan and Finland must be doing some things right in their health care system. It is interesting that both countries give fewer vaccines than the United States. In the first two years of life Japan gives a total of 9 injections. In the states the CDC has 20 injections on the schedule for the first two years of life. Finland gives fewer vaccines as well.

So which vaccines are left out? Neither Japan nor Finland gives  the     hepatitis B vaccine to infants. In the U.S. the first dose of the hepatitis B vaccine is given 24 hours after birth.

Japan and Finland do NOT give the chicken pox vaccine routinely. In Japan the chicken pox vaccine, mumps vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine and flu vaccine are voluntary. In addition Japan gives the measles vaccine alone—not in the combined MMR.

My personal experience as a mom has led me to question both the MMR and the hepatitis B vaccine. I wrote about the decline in my twin’s health following the MMR vaccine.  If I had it to do over I would have at least    delayed the MMR vaccine.  No, I would have refused it.  This vaccine is  developed from aborted fetal cells.

It is reasonable to expect our government to take an interest in the wellbeing of children. The movie trailer for VAXXED points to destruction of data and possible corruption in the CDC. This needs to be investigated.

What can we do to insure vaccine safety? It doesn’t make sense to go down a path of more and more vaccines without carefully checking out claims of corruption. Sometimes we feel powerless against the status quo, but we can contact our congressman in the House of Representatives to press for an investigation. A phone call, letter or e-mail has an impact. What is more important than the health of children?

Update: VAXXED is being shown in Washington D.C. 5/25 – 26. Urge your congressman to attend!

Vaccines

Linking with Whole Hearted Wednesday,  Titus 2 Tuesday and  Tuesdays with a Twist

Rubella: Virus & Vaccine

The letter R in MMR stands for rubella. When I was a kid we called it the German measles. (Not to be confused with regular measles–or rubeola–which was in the news this year.) My siblings and I all had rubella when we were growing up; we got a fever and a rash. We stayed home from school for a few days. According to the CDC the symptoms are often mild and complications don’t happen often. Adults are more likely to have complications than children.

But rubella can cause birth defects if a woman has rubella during pregnancy. The vaccine issue popped up again as I worked on some continuing education for nursing. After reading about lab tests that check for infections during pregnancy, I went to the CDC’s page about rubella.

Being infected with rubella in the first three months of pregnancy has the most risk. The rubella virus can affect every organ in the body of the developing fetus. According to the CDC this is the reason that the rubella vaccine was developed—to avoid congenital rubella. The virus can also have delayed effects. Here is the quote that jumped off the page.

Manifestations of CRS [congenital rubella syndrome]may be delayed from 2 to 4 years. Diabetes mellitus appearing in later childhood occurs frequently in children with CRS. In addition, progressive encephalopathy resembling subacute sclerosing panencephalitis has been observed in some older children with CRS. Children with CRS have a higher than expected incidence of autism.

Recently I was reading research reports that described the development of the rubella vaccine. Timo Vesikari described the research in an article.

Under the seniors I was to do much of the work: vaccinate pregnant women prescreened to be seronegative for rubella and scheduled to have a legal abortion a week or two later. The plan was to isolate rubella (vaccine) virus from the products of conception [the baby] and, in fact, we succeeded in doing that. *

The process of developing the rubella vaccine in the current MMR vaccine involves making use of viable fetal cells that are infected with rubella.

The full list of ingredients in the current MMR according to the CDC’s website: Medium 199, Minimum Essential Medium, Phosphate, recombinant human albumin, neomycin, sorbitol, hydrolyzed gelatin, chick embryo cell culture, WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts. WI-38 refers to the specific line of cells developed from an aborted fetus of approximately 3 months gestation.

Why does this bother me? The combined measles-mumps-rubella vaccine  became part of the vaccine schedule in 1971. The early version of this vaccine was developed from duck embryos. In 1971 abortion was not legal in the United States and a negative political reaction was feared. The Wistar Institute in Philadelphia was working with Finnish researchers to avoid censure. Finland legalized abortion some years before the U.S.

The vaccine developed from fetal cells was approved and became the standard in 1979. At 12 or 15 months of age children received the first dose of the MMR vaccine. In 1970 the rate of autism was 1 in 10,000. In 2012 the rate was 1 in 88. The rate continues to become more frequent. The current rate of autism is 1 in 59 children.

If a fetus that is infected with the virus during pregnancy can show long-term effects on health during childhood, is it possible that in some children the vaccine can cause long-term effects? At 12 to 15 months of age a child’s immune system is not mature. The immune system continue to develop to age two. How do we know the full impact of giving this live virus vaccine?

The FDA licensed the MMR vaccine based on eight groups of children that were given the vaccine (834 children total). The focus of the study was on the immune response to the vaccine–blood tests were done initially and 6 weeks later.

The studies revealed that a large portion of children (up to 55%) developed respiratory infection following the vaccine. Another 40% of children developed gastrointestinal illness. These side effects sometimes continued beyond 42 days but were not studied. No research on side effects and risks. Click here to view the studies submitted to the FDA.

We are learning with new research that the health of the gut impacts both mental and physical health.

Is it possible that the rubella portion of the MMR, in combination with other factors, contributes to the rising autism rate? A large number of research studies indicate that this is possible. Click here for a link to the studies.

Do we completely understand how the vaccine impacts a toddler over an extended time? Currently it is pretty much up to parents to report reactions. The mantra in the medical field is that vaccines are safe ; only parents seem to be tracking reactions.

The current vaccine injury program requires that severe reactions be documented in a timely fashion. Only with this documentation can the family have a hearing before a special court.    If the court decides that a vaccine caused the injury, the family is compensated. The U.S. government has paid over 4 billion dollars in compensation for vaccine injuries. Keep in mind that it is pretty much up to parents to contact the VAERS court.

Who is looking for the side effects that may occur over an extended period of time? Who believes the observations of parents?

The current CDC schedule requires 2 doses of the MMR: first one at age of 12 – 15 months, second one at age 4 – 6 years. The second dose is given because 2 – 5% of children don’t develop an immune response after one dose. If a child has had one MMR vaccine she may not need a second dose. A blood test can determine if a child has antibodies. A second dose might not be necessary.

In hindsight I wish that I had been better informed about vaccines when my children were little. I urge parents to become educated on this topic.    As Christians, how do we feel about the injection of cells derived from an aborted fetus into a healthy toddler? a child whose immune system is still developing?

CORRECTION: Although the rubella vaccine from fetal cells was developed in 1969 it was not initially accepted in the United States. The first rubella vaccine was developed from duck embryos. The vaccine developed from fetal cells was licensed in the U.S. in 1979 and replaced the vaccine developed from duck embryos.

Link to research article: “From Rubella to Rotavirus and Beyond” by Timo Vesikari

Link to “Isolation of attenuated Rubella-Vaccine Virus from Human Products of Conception and Uterine Cervix” 

Updated: 4/15/2019

*Vesikari, Timo, M.D., PhD., “From Rubella to Rotavirus and Beyond”, Human Vaccines & Immunotherapies, vol. 11, issue 6, 2015 pp. 1302-1305.

Vaheri, Antti M.D., “Isolation of Attenuated Rubella-Vaccine Virus from Human Products of Conception and Uterine Cervix” New England Journal of Medicine: June 1972