apple-at-800What parameters must be established to give a newborn the best chances for growing up HEALTHY today? Have you ever questioned this or simply believed a HEALTHY outcome was inevitable? A child develops in a similar manner to the way a plant develops. Let’s look at the two together.

  • A seed is planted in soil containing a nutritional source to initiate a process of growth.

  • A human egg is fertilized and planted into a uterus that provides a nutritional source to initiate a process of growth.

  • A plant will develop and will be sprayed with pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides. The residue of the toxins from these “treatments” will be absorbed by the plant along with the nutrients in the soil. It is important to realize these sprays do NOT ENHANCE THE NUTRITIONAL VALUE IN THESE PLANTS.

  • A fetus will develop and will receive the residues of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides from the food consumed by the mother. It is important to realize these toxins do NOT ENHANCE THE NUTRITIONAL VALUE IN THIS FOOD SUPPLY TO THE FETUS.

  • When the plant produces the end product it is “treated” to “preserve the length of LIFE.” As a result, food producers use any of 14,000 laboratory-made additives to make our food appear fresher, more attractive or last longer on the shelves. Again, it is important to realize this treatment DOES NOT CREATE AN ADDED HEALTH VALUE to the end product. It is used for APPEARANCE sake to:


  • When the mother gives birth to the neonate (newborn,) treatment is provided for the “preservation of LIFE.” During the first 6 months of life the newborn will receive 17 rounds of laboratory made additives, preservatives, adjuvants, viral and bacterial genetic components (also known as vaccines.) Again, it is important to realize this treatment DOES NOT CREATE AN ADDED HEALTH VALUE to the “end product” (the new born.) The new born is NOT HEALTHIER following a vaccination. Is it possible the vaccine is perceived by the parent to:


Whether you support or oppose this concept of development (food vs. child,) these treatments discussed do not:


  • as measured by nutritional value in food.

  • as measured by physical and mental development in newborns and infants.

The chemicals used in food create longer shelf life (NOT HEALTHIER FOODS.) This creates convenience for the customer, but causes complications from ingesting toxic chemicals.

The viral and bacterial genetic components along with the chemical preservatives injected in newborns and young infants are claimed to reduce morbidity and mortality (NOT CREATE HEALTHIER CHILDREN.) Following this protocol is convenient for doctors and creates greater compliance among parents while subjecting a segment of their children to LIFELONG NEUROLOGICAL INJURIES.

There is understandable FEAR elicited when parents are told by their doctors that abstaining from these treatments places their children at serious health risks. This FEAR is magnified by one sided BIASED reporting seen on TV, newspapers and magazines. I call this concept the ALL OR NOTHING approach. If every child isn’t treated following this protocol, the average consumer has been convinced by the health care industry that catastrophic events will follow.

Why then are Amish children whose vaccine participation levels (on the low end at 6% within the conservative Swartentruber Amish and the high end for the non conservatives at approximately 63%) not succumbing to these diseases and their potential life altering outcomes? Why aren’t they subjected to higher morbidity and mortality rates resulting from the diseases they aren’t being “protected” from?

What about other cultures and DEVELOPED countries with populations of children unvaccinated? Have you heard about these populations suffering any increases in morbidity and mortality as a result on abstaining from vaccinations?

FEAR and MANDATE are two inappropriate methods to achieve consumer compliance. Have you ever heard of:

  1. Dr. Sherri Tenpenny

  2. Dr. Suzanne Humphries

  3. Dr. Daniel Neides

  4. Dr. Mark Hyman

  5. Dr. Jeffrey Bland

  6. Dr. Kelly Brogan

  7. Chris Kresser

These are just a few doctors and licensed health care providers that have studied vaccines and offer scientific evidence justifying CONCERNS about our current vaccination program. Why have you never heard any of them on major networks revealing the SCIENCE behind their concerns? Why does Dr. Sanjay Gupta receive air time on major networks, but qualified doctors questioning the SCIENCE, SAFETY and EFFICACY are absent in this discussion? OnlyΒ  doctors supporting the current vaccine program get air time. Major networks sponsor Presidential debates so the entire nation can HEAR and LEARN the different sides and strategies of IMPORTANT ISSUES they face. Why isn’t the public entitled to hear a similar public debate among credible professionals representing BOTH sides of this important health topic?

When did we decide we were no longer capable as a nation to make individual health care decisions for our families and granted our government the right to mandate policy instead?


Life is rarely ALL or NOTHING. The truth is often found somewhere between these two points. Whether you choose to support or oppose the current vaccination program, it is crucial to understand that vaccines (just like chemical treatments used on plants)









  1. Healthy living and healthy choices will be made possible if we all abstain from living in the environment full of toxins and eat the food we buy from our local grocer unless we know for sure it is organic. The Amish live simply and grow their own food and tend to their livestock without the added hormones and antibiotics. Unless we all choose to lead their lifestyle I am afraid that we will continue to rely on prescription drugs and vaccines to ward off the diseases we all grew up fearing. I saw personally the ravages of polio before the vaccine. My brother was lucky enough to have survived without the major complications. It is a very complex matter and a scary one as well.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. People are often living their lives at 100mph. They don’t CREATE the NECESSARY time to LEARN and modify their damaging lifestyles. The reason I started this blog was to help people critically THINK about THEMSELVES and the PATH their lives were following. It was never to judge their choices, but rather to challenge conventional ideas and concepts. I wanted to share a perspective that could truly affect the quality of life people were living.

      It’s a slow process that requires patience. People are often defensive and unwilling to consider new ideologies fearing the unknown. This is why I pose questions rather than impose beliefs and personal values on others. In turn, I LISTEN to people’s responses to see if my ideas need reconsideration. It is a two way street that benefits my life as much as I hope it benefits others.

      Whether it’s vaccines, obesity, diabetes, cardiac disease or cancer, a constructive dialogue is essential to understand the NEEDS of the people and to open the eyes of the health care professionals beyond the boundaries of their education. It takes commitment on the patient’s part as well as the doctor’s part. As you state, all these conditions or procedures are very complex. This is why I believe the TRUTH rarely is found in ALL or NOTHING.

      Thank you for continuing to share personal information about yourself and your family. Readers are more inclined to LISTEN and LEARN from fellow readers. This improves their chances for discovering and implementing healthier lifestyles.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I love that you tackle difficult topics like this, because you handle them wonderfully and you make it appear so easy for you. I will be sharing this!!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thank you very much. Dealing with a topic this controversial needs to be shared in a manner that doesn’t IMPOSE a harsh bias. People won’t LISTEN if the writer aggressively and dogmatically attacks a health care policy that many believe only offers real benefits.
      My approach offers questions to the reader for consideration. If the questions seem reasonable, the reader begins to understand the CONCERNS even if they are not ready to CHALLENGE existing policies. I simply want the consumer to have the opportunity to hear ALL SIDES by QUALIFIED professionals to help THEM decide for THEMSELVES what they believe is in their family’s best interest. It is clear (at this time) media access to those QUALIFIED PROFESSIONALS with policy CONCERNS has been denied. Why would a journalist not be interested in investigating this topic that would likely increase public awareness and ultimately increase viewership. Is it possible that a Major Industry is using their influence to “recommend” staying away from this topic as they continue to provide Billions in advertising dollars that support these various media sources? Has the consumer considered this possibility? Is it also possible they don’t want to hear any other potential TRUTH that might conflict with their current beliefs? Turning a blind eye away doesn’t change the TRUTH. The more we respectfully and intelligently challenge these “TRUTHS,” the more these TRUTHS shift and change over time. This “challenge” is a POSITIVE CONCEPT; it seeks the potential for new paths with better outcomes.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Interesting read on a very controversial subject. I am a vaccine advocate but respect those who choose otherwise.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Like you, I support everyone’s individual decision. I just hope people search out information on ALL sides of the “story” to make the best informed decision possible. A family medical doctor’s input is certainly a point of reference, but is limited to their institution’s education and potential biases. Most people would probably have a difficult time naming a CREDIBLE SOURCE and the research they’ve been exposed to that opposed the current vaccine program. It seems to me to be an ADVOCATE or OPPONENT, requires quality information provided from both sides. In today’s world, most people do not seem to have easy access to the information representing these DIFFERENT sides. It would be similar to asking a Christian whether Christianity or Buddhism provides the “TRUTH” regarding religious practices. If the Christian Church is the only quality source of information, it is likely their congregation will accept their “TRUTHS.”


  4. Very well said Jonathan. While I am a vaccine advocate as well, I do really respect well written stuff like this that shows a different opinion. It has opened the door for me to think about it differently.

    And so true life is not so black and white It’s our responsibility as individuals to gain the knowledge required to make wise choices. I appreciate so much your continued pushing of this narrative through your blog.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thank you for your comment and your open mindedness. I think people are beginning to realize my posts regarding vaccinations are NOT INTENDED TO CONVINCE people that these procedures are right or wrong, but rather to ASK people to consider the basis on which they base their own judgement. Medical doctors in clinical practice (in general) are NOT trained on research protocols and analyzing data. They are trained to diagnose health problems. Once diagnosed their treatments are based on protocols established for them (not by them.) Doctors rely on information provided to them as accurate and honest. My question is this: What if the possibility existed that the growing rates of conditions like childhood mortality and childhood neurological impairment disorders was the result (or at least a component) of treatments given to children today? In your opinion, do you believe the program would be stopped cold turkey or do you believe (taking into account the Billions of Dollars and influence these billions of dollars has on the various players involved) countless lives would be sacrificed to maintain CONTROL over the TRUTH until a remedy could be discovered? Are we a nation that typically confesses and accepts responsibility and provides fair restitution willingly (based on our industries ethical and moral responsibilities) or are we a nation that typically tries to cover up the facts as we attempt to minimize the collateral damage while simultaneously attempting to find a “fix?”
      In addition, if we are advocates or opponents, what do we base these positions on? Do you think most people base it on what their doctors tell them or their curiosity and willingness to investigate the hard data itself? If doctors themselves do not have the training from med school to scientifically evaluate the data, what is the likelihood the average consumer will? If the average consumer is relying on the doctor’s information and the doctor is relying on the information coming from the health care industry and pharmaceutical industry, is it possible that a conflict of interest could cause the channeling of inaccurate information all the way down the chain to the public?
      As consumers, people may not have the technical skill to evaluate scientific analysis, but they do have the skill to ask themselves some basic questions to see if the answers support or oppose their positions advocating or opposing medical policies.
      AGE 0-5:
      (1) 1950- 3 vaccines/7 doses, 1974- 7 vaccines/13 doses, 1983- 7 vaccines/10 doses, 2013- 14 vaccines/36 doses
      The U.S. provides more vaccines than any other country in the world (and continues to grow.) Why is our childhood mortality rate significantly higher than the other DEVELOPED nations providing FEWER vaccinations?
      (2) In 1986 Congress gave the drug companies COMPLETE IMMUNITY against all lawsuits from vaccine related injuries. Notice between 1983-2013 the number of vaccines doubled. Have you witnessed or read anything showing the increase in the number of vaccines or the frequency given has improved the health of our children?
      I apologize for making this comment so long, but I will end it by asking you and anyone else reading this the following: Is it possible advocacy is based more on a NEED AND DESIRE TO BELIEVE our MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS and our DOCTORS than a true comparison we’ve made between the CREDIBLE information heard/read by the “AUTHORITIES” on BOTH SIDES?
      BEFORE you or anyone else read this comment, could you have named CREDIBLE AUTHORITIES in opposition of the current vaccine program/schedule?
      I pose these questions because I am trying to LEARN what ADVOCATES and OPPONENTS are basing their opinions on. I’m trying to see how open minded the public is to the possibility of DIFFERENT TRUTHS.
      If I haven’t completely exhausted you, I would appreciate if you would answer the questions I posed. I completely understand if you choose not to.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Now that is a detailed response, I like it! I can appreciate your passion on this Jonathan and I know you’ve researched this much more than I have. And I have to answer NO to your question about whether vaccinations would be stopped cold turkey if it became known they are doing more harm than good. You’re right, there is an enormous amount of cottage industries and protocols built up around continuing things the way we are, it would be difficult if not impossible to stop.

        And yes I do believe my thought process on this was formed by wanting to believe the authorities/medical “experts” so perhaps I have some work to do there in looking at things differently. I’ll be the first to admit that.

        I do think though there are a lot of smart people who have researched this and who have published studies showing the safety of vaccines and the dangers of removing them. That doesn’t mean they are correct though and like I said you’ve challenged my thought process on this in many ways so I much more open to debate on this subject.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Tricia,
          I so appreciate your honesty. Discussions are enlightening and energizing. When a dialogue transitions from OBJECTIVE CRITICAL THINKING into two people attempting to “prove their individual points” without LISTENING to the other person, it becomes draining and unproductive. In many of our posts, I have learned as much from you (which I greatly appreciate) as I hope I have been able to share.

          I agree with you that there are a lot of smart people that have produced quality research. In my opinion, the problem is we rely on these “smart people” and their results without ever:
          1. reviewing the material ourselves
          2. getting independent qualified people to confirm their findings
          3. making certain these people have NO CONFLICTING INTERESTS.
          4. searching for opposing views on research conclusions to understand the possibility of design flaws and biased conclusions.

          Conversely, advocates frequently jump on a bandwagon opposing the “establishment” without taking the time to LEARN the DETAILS. If a person supports or opposes a position, EMOTIONS should NOT be the guiding force. It interferes with objective thinking and analysis and brings us full circle back to a dialogue where two people attempt to “prove their individual points” without LISTENING to the other person. It once again becomes draining and unproductive.

          I will bet our future vaccination program will undergo several changes:
          1. Blanket liability protection for the manufacturers will eventually be repealed
          2. Mercury will be removed as a preservative from ALL current vaccines containing it.
          3. Increasing “whistle blower” activity exposing grave unethical behavior on the part of the government regulatory agencies will gain greater awareness as a result of social media. The major news networks will remain on the sidelines in fear of losing pharmaceutical advertising dollars.
          4. Mandatory vaccinations will run into constitutional legal conflicts as more industries attempt to mandate them.
          5. Dr. Andy Wakefield ( the discredited British Gastrointestinal Physician) will be vindicated.

          I don’t know if you’re a betting woman, but I’m willing to place a shiny Abraham Lincoln coin down on the table. πŸ™‚

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Totally agree with you Jonathan that objective critical thinking and respect for the other person is a requirement for a productive debate. it IS SO draining like you said when things devolve to just a matter of proving viewpoints. Blecch.

            Thanks for the compliment too on learning from my posts. I’ve definitely learned a lot from yours which is why I keep coming bak. That and you’re nice person with a very cute dog. πŸ˜‰

            I am a betting person and while I agree with many of your predictions on vaccines, I’m not so sure about Dr. Wakefield being vindicated. We shall see though!

            An Abe Lincoln coin for a bet though? lol.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. I appreciate you as a person with a kind heart and strong convictions. I would like to thank you for adding VALUE to my life as a result of our ongoing dialogues.
              Side Note: I have placed my Penny in an escrow account. I hope the accuracy in my belief in Dr. Wakefield ultimately permits me to keep this penny. πŸ™‚

              Liked by 1 person

      2. I applaud you for the passion you have in educating us about taking charge of our health. Neither the doctors, the government or big pharma really concerns themselves about our well being. We don’t ask questions, we will not get the answers. We learned to trust blindly to believe what is supposed to be good for us. We became too passive to be engaged in our own health mentally or physically. The blame is always on others than ourselves. I do not mean to be pessimistic, but sadly through my years in working in the field of weight loss consultant, medical therapy management, and health and nutrition , I see the same reluctance of some not all who are willing to better their health. The need for a quick fix, rather of a more disciplined approach.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. You’re not being pessimistic, you are sharing an objective view of the real world. People have a very strong emotional need to believe their doctors are acting in their best interest. People need to begin understanding that DOCTORS and CAR INSURANCE AGENTS share a similar loyalty as EMPLOYEES (in many cases) for the companies they work for.

          The auto insurance agent may help you with an auto claim, but their responsibility is to minimize their own company’s liability. Their assistance (in cases like this) actually save the company substantial money while appearing concerned with their client’s “best” interest.

          The doctor may identify a health concern, but their responsibility is to generate revenue by prescribing medications their company wants them to script. If the patient’s best interest was the TRUE FOCUS, doctors would be just as interested in correcting their patient’s diet, making sure their stress was being managed productively and making certain their patient was creating some time for exercise. Most office visits FOCUS on prescription medication compliance (a money generator,) NOT HEALTHY LIFESTYLE HABITS (a NON generator of revenue.)

          If people took the time to THINK about these two examples, they would have a better understanding of these FOR PROFIT BUSINESSES. For most people, this REALITY is too difficult to accept. They would rather place the doctor in the position to make their health decisions for them (that may negatively impact their health,) than take CONTROL and decide for themselves the BEST approach that suits their NEEDS.

          Liked by 1 person

  5. They used to spray apple and orange groves with arsenic.When they stopped, the residual arsenic washed into the soil. Organic farmers sometimes use a combination of ash (sulfur ) and other less harmful pesticides. We are coming around to a more stable food source with stores like whole foods popping up along with our local grocery stores. Thanks for being an advocate of good living!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Thank you for sharing your comment. There is a growing awareness and demand for better quality food products. Blog sites like yours are essential to help spread this important message. Keep up the good work! πŸ™‚

      Liked by 1 person

  6. You give sound advice to live by. I find your blogs so informative! I have nominated you for the “Blogger Recognition Award”. You have an outstanding blog. I hope you will accept the award. You need to go to my blog for details. Thank you for having a great blog! .

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I appreciate the nomination for this award so very much. I have been nominated in the past and unfortunately, had some fellow bloggers feel imposed upon with my forwarding the nomination to them. So many people put so much effort into sharing their passions with all of us. I have chosen to withdraw from participating in these awards to avoid repeating the same problem again. I am humbled by your nomination and want to make certain you realize I truly appreciate this great honor. I hope you understand.

      Congratulations on your nomination. After reviewing your site, I can see why you were nominated. It is a reward very much deserved! Keep the energy high and the calories healthy and reasonable. πŸ™‚

      Liked by 1 person

  7. maureenrose7 · · Reply

    Once again you’ve taken a difficult subject and created a very informative post! Im not surprised but always impressed by the work you put into these! To be honest if I were to be raising a child now knowing what I know I dont think I would be comfortable at all having them vaccinated. Instead I would opt to grow them up to rely on their healthy eaten habits and daily activity, showing them how to be in as much control of their own health as possible. Not to fear illness but teach them how to combat it before it sets in. Thanks for posting and I love your comment section! How you interact and answer each reader with helpful encouraging words as well as what your readers add to the post it always makes for a good read Jonathan!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. It is such a pleasure to see your response. I am NOT referring to your choice regarding vaccinations, but rather your intuitive choice to focus on the essentials that support HEALTH rather than the choice to focus on the distractions propagated by FEAR.

      Illness is part of HEALTH. It is a necessary experience to strengthen our immune systems and improve their awareness to pathogens. It is part of the equation to BALANCING LIFE.

      If people only experienced joy and happiness and never confronted pain and sorrow, do you think they would effectively handle such adverse emotions? By experiencing BOTH we LEARN and DEVELOP a basis of coping. Our immune systems respond in a similar fashion. This is a very simplified explanation for a very complex system that is more effective at combating disease than ANY man made alternative.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. maureenrose7 · · Reply

    Oh yes I agree with you completely! I know first hand that letting your body do the work it was designed to do with as liddle help from medications is absolutely the way to go! and truly the pleasure is all mine! πŸ™‚

    Liked by 2 people

Your comment can positively impact the lives of others.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: