Critique of Vaccinations: Part 1

Introduction

Most of you readers have heard various arguments against vaccinations. The bulk of these, at least in my experience, involve discussions of the mercury-based preservative, thimerosal, and highly suspected links to the epidemic of autism. More sophisticated arguments have presented issues of animal DNA in vaccines, as well as the IgG immune system (well worth reading, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2002/03/27/vaccine-infants.aspx). The reader can view these arguments elsewhere as I do not intend to repeat them.

Americans are a soft people who do not like difficult or complex answers or treatments. They very much enjoy believing in the mainstream school of medicine in which there is a magic pill or shot for every illness that exists. This sort of thinking manifests itself throughout American life. Need to lower the crime rate or clean up a super-corrupt police force? Hire a new chief of police. Are tests scores low in your local government school system? Find a superintendent who will promise to raise them. Football team losing too much? You guessed it, find a new coach.

Thus, non-mainstream approaches to battling infectious diseases already fall on impatient ears with their complex explanations, the need for patients to recognize certain types of illnesses, the need for proper nutrition, etc. Getting a shot is convenient. And “they” make it so darn easy since you can receive a whole battery of them at one sitting.

Christian philosopher Cornelius Van Til used to talk about unbelievers sitting in front of a giant fact hole. They would say, “Give me another fact, and I will believe.” Of course, they never do. Or if they do believe, it is always some amount of time after the argument. Despite facts, reasoned arguments, and proofs, many will not believe in the Triune God. In short, they do not have the gift of faith — but they don’t have the gift of rationality either when it comes to thinking about theism.

Similarly, those who defend and voluntarily belong to the vaccination lobby stand in front of a giant fact hole. Consequently, I don’t want to engage these people according to their folly. And against the vaccination lobby’s best biochemists and research physicians, I could never hope to go tit-for-tat when answering detailed specifics of their arguments. So I need to outflank these folks and not let them set the stage for debate.

Public Health and the Decline of Infectious Diseases – Prior to Vaccines

The vaccination lobby likes to claim credit for the declining rates of infectious diseases in America and the West — diseases such as smallpox, polio, and influenza. Of course, a fuller analysis indicates that other issues affecting the public health were occurring while inoculations were being implemented. More drainage ditches were being dug to limit standing pools of stagnant water — hence lowering the threat posed by mosquitoes. Sewage systems were spreading, thus limiting the spread of disease due to human waste. Sources for potable water became ubiquitous. Better sanitation concerning refuse disposal waged war on rats and mice. Better ways of killing mosquitoes, rats and mice began to appear. Along those lines, here’s one short article showing that some folks in India think the problem of cholera is better fought with improving the water supplies — not focusing on the symptoms of the problem (http://sanitationupdates.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/sanitation-vs-vaccination-in-cholera-control/).

What else happened? As the US and the West in general grew more prosperous, people were able to afford better food. The development of railroads contributed mightily to the availability of better foods, as did refrigeration. The washing of hands with soaps became more commonplace. Better housing allowed for better living. Advances in the textile industry made better and warmer coats more affordable and more widely available.

Here’s a good example of the declining trend in measles, which occurred well before the measles vaccine was introduced, http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/Images/graph3.gif. Similar data appears for polio, http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/Images/graph1.gif (both live and dead vaccine varieties in the US and Great Britain) and for whooping cough or pertussis, http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/Images/graph2.gif. The original article from which these charts were extracted is a source of good information on the subject of vaccines (http://www.jpands.org/hacienda/article36.html).

Another way of putting it to the vaccine lobby: correlation does not imply causation. Here’s another example of faulty conclusions being initially drawn from a set of data. From the Wikipedia entry on “Correlation does not imply causation” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation):

“In a widely-studied example, numerous epidemiological studies showed that women who were taking combined hormone replacement therapy (HRT) also had a lower-than-average incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD), leading doctors to propose that HRT was protective against CHD. But randomized controlled trials showed that HRT caused a small but statistically significant increase in risk of CHD. Re-analysis of the data from the epidemiological studies showed that women undertaking HRT were more likely to be from higher socio-economic groups (ABC1), with better than average diet and exercise regimes. The use of HRT and decreased incidence of coronary heart disease were coincident effects of a common cause (i.e., the benefits associated with a higher socioeconomic status), rather than cause and effect as had been supposed.”

The Human Body and Systems Engineering

A seldom addressed fact concerning vaccines is the issue of systems engineering. For those of you in your fifties, you may remember the whine on AM radios when your car was accelerating. This was due to the time-varying electric and magnetic fields produced by the ignition system. AM radios have an inherent problem with external noises sources, such as lightning, ignition systems, blow dryers, kitchen mixers, etc., degrading their audio performance. It is inherent to amplitude modulation. Needless to say that measures were taken to limit the EM fields produced by the ignition system, and the radio broadcast industry as a whole migrated to FM broadcasts for content demanding higher fidelity.

The aforementioned scenario is an example of failed systems engineering (much of this was due to the limitations of the technology at the time, so I do not wish to speak too harshly). The ignition system interfered with the AM radio, and the AM radio was susceptible to the ignition system.

So what does this have to do with vaccines? By way of analogy, everything.

People are complex for a number of reasons. Obviously there are different blood types. Some people are inherently stronger than others. There are several major racial groups. Different groups of people are more susceptible to different diseases. Descendants of those who lived through the Irish Potato Famine display a higher propensity for developing thyroid hormone resistance (think of insulin resistance, but applied to the T4 hormone). Blacks are almost the only population group in the US to develop sickle-cell anemia. Jews of Ashkenazic descent are more prone to develop Tay-Sachs disease.

Even in smaller groups, different illnesses manifest themselves. I have a litany of problems: Metabolic Syndrome X, modified lactic acidosis, and primary hypo-capnia (low venous CO2 levels). And yet my brother has none of these problems! And we come from the same parents.

But the vaccine lobby tells us that one vaccine is possible for protecting an incredibly diverse population group, with no ill effects, except for maybe 10 or 100 people out of control group of 100,000 or even 1,000,000. Yeah, right.

As the radio needed to be designed for a problem with ignition noise, so too do treatments have to be formulated for each individual. Those with hyper-coagulable disorders (thick blood) are better off not using ultraviolet blood irradiation to deal with some pathogens. Instead they should use colloidal silver or hydrogen peroxide (both of which are predominantly water solutions — hence they dilute the blood while spreading either colloidal silver or H2O2). But someone with kidney problems and blood of a more normal viscosity would probably be better off being treated with ultraviolet blood irradiation due to less renal load.

Another example: inosine is great for people with multiple sclerosis or elevated peroxynitrite levels (ONOO-), because it raises uric acid levels, and most people with those two problems have low uric acid levels. But not all of them do! Giving inosine to someone with both elevated ONOO- and uric acid levels will be detrimental to their health in the long haul. And this is a relatively simple compound, yet its use is quickly contra-indicated with just a single variable.

Let’s say you have twenty (20) factors in people that can impact how a vaccine affects a person. An individual might have all of those factors, or he may have none of them. And keep in mind that the order and grouping of those different conditions will have different impacts. That doesn’t sound like many, does it, and in fact using twenty factors is ridiculously low. Well, those twenty factors, when grouped in every conceivable combination result in over 1,000,000 possibilities! (If every possible combination is to be a considered for a group with “n” elements, then the number of possibilities is the result of 2^n, or “two raised to the nth power,” which in this case is 2^20.) Do you really think any drug company on the face of the earth has the money and time to track down all of those people and test for all of those different conditions? To ask the question is to answer it. Vaccine theory cannot be adequately tested to guarantee the safety of 99% of people or even 90%.

But Americans love their “one size fits all” type of treatment.

One problem, among many, that has risen with antibiotics, is that they have led to the evolution of “cell-wall deficient” bacteria of the same general family (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L-form_bacteria). Such cell-wall deficient bacteria are immune to the effects of antibiotics. This raises the question: is the widespread use of vaccines leading to the creation of similar “super-bugs”?

Government Research Funding Monies

Why isn’t there more research spent on non-vaccine methods for curbing infectious diseases? Ask yourself, why do so many universities and laboratories keep promulgating the global warming hoax? The same mechanisms are at work: science-by-consensus and government-funded institutions. If you don’t receive any monies, you can’t research non-government mandated subjects because you won’t receive any government monies. And those who control the spigots of government funding really do appreciate research results and direction that are in alignment with the prevailing mindset. That means you will be pro-vaccine and pro-global warming. That is, unless you have real integrity and are willing to fund your own research and perform work with fewer resources. That’s why so much of the real research work going on today is being done out of small clinics and out of garages.

Hal Lewis, a physicist, recently resigned from the American Physical Society due to their lack of integrity on the global warming issue. If you read his letter of resignation, just think of the subject of vaccines instead of global warming, and you’ll understand the reason why little to no anti-vaccine research is done (http://www.thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1670-hal-lewis-my-resignation-from-the-american-physical-society.html).