California just signed into law mandatory vaccinations for all children entering public schools, private schools and daycare. The intent is to protect children from developing various types of illnesses. On the surface, this sounds like a laudable goal. There are various points that need further discussion to educate adults before forcing them to subject their children to these medical treatments.
• ARE THERE BENEFITS TO EXPOSING CHILDREN TO THESE DISEASES?
All doctors agree that the best form of immunity is “natural immunity.” This form requires regular exposure to the environment where people come in contact with each other on a regular basis and expose each other to these “germs” naturally. Regular exposure awakens and strengthens our body to naturally stimulate our immune systems to combat these diseases. We don’t feel sick in these situations, because our bodies are doing their job. If we bypass this natural process in favor of artificially inducing an immune response with vaccinations, this natural exposure no longer exists. Since vaccinations weaken over time, booster vaccinations would be required throughout our lives to provide a similar protection.
Most of the childhood diseases that are included in these vaccinations produce mild symptoms that last on average from 3-5 days. Is it possible that a very small percentage of children will die from the diseases? The answer is yes. Will a small percentage of children vaccinated suffer permanent neurologic damage resulting in lifelong care and funding by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program as a result of these vaccinations? The answer is yes.
The question becomes, how dangerous is exposure to these naturally occurring “germs” for children and adults? The reason this is a very important question is because future mandatory vaccinations will be developed for conditions that produce minimal risks to the population. The reason these vaccines will be produced is because the manufacturers of these vaccines have blanket liability protection against any and all lawsuits while generating billions of dollars from sales.
• SHOULD WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE BETWEEN VACCINES?
A good example of why this is an important question would be the chicken pox vaccine. When I was a child, this vaccine did not exist. This was a disease that most children developed without complications. Adult exposure to children exposed to chickenpox kept immunity strong and helped mother’s pass a level of protection on to new born children. Today, as children get vaccinated this natural recurring exposure dissipates. As they grow up and have children, this protection is no longer naturally passed on.
More importantly, this lack of natural immunity has allowed a more significant form of the virus to develop. The disease is known as SHINGLES. This was not a significant disease prior to the development of the chickenpox vaccine. Where natural exposure to chickenpox once caused a minor infection that produced lifelong immunity, today our healthcare system recommends BOTH chickenpox AND shingles vaccine. It is important to ask yourself, “do I believe the quality of my children’s life as well as my own will be improved with these two vaccines?” If natural exposure to chickenpox could provide lifelong immunity, why would anyone choose artificial immunity and and the need for future booster shots?” This is why I pose the question, “should we have the right to choose between vaccinations?”
• IS IT POSSIBLE THE COSTS TO THE CONSUMERS OUTWEIGH THE BENEFITS?
Prior to the media coverage of Disneyland and measles, our country did not suffer any increase in morbidity and mortality rates resulting from decreased percentages of vaccinations. It is unfortunate that words like “epidemic” and “outbreak” were associated with approximately 165 total cases throughout 24 states. If we take a second to look at a statistic completely unrelated to health care we would see that women throughout all 50 states are statistically paid salaries less than men doing comparable jobs with similar job performance results. As of 2013, there were 75 million women comprising 47% of the work force. Why do we accept this situation for 75 million women, but insist on government intervention with laws mandating changes in health policy resulting from 165 cases of measles (without ANY deaths!). Why the sudden rush to action? We have a government that waits until the 11th hour on almost every critical issue. What forces are driving these legislative actions for immediate change in this policy? There is no immediate danger; there are no new statistics showing our children are suffering greater degrees of illness or death, yet congress is moving quickly to change this vaccination policy. It is important to remember that this policy will be imposed on adults as well. The government is recommending that adults ages 18-death receive an additional 60-72 vaccinations. That number will grow because more vaccinations are in development as well. Can you see where initial good intentions may be ballooning into a policy that may benefit the manufacturers more than the population at large?
The three basic points addressed in this article justify ongoing discussions about our vaccination protocols. It is wrong of the media as well as doctors to say that those who question the current policy are without merit. They say that science has proven the justification for mandatory vaccinations. This can’t be viewed an all or nothing policy. The decisions need to be made between the attending physicians and their patients (or parental representatives); not the government.
If we are not allowed to make these choices, will the government then have the right to change policy on cancer care, diabetes, heart disease and obesity. If you refute this point by stating that these are non contagious health conditions, my rebuttal would be neither is tetanus. Tetanus is part of the mandatory vaccine program. Can you now see why additional dialogue is needed?