Bartlett Democratic Club Speech, February 7,
FREEDOM OF CHOICE IS NOT FREE
Vaccination News, A Non-Profit Corporation
Picks of the Day
News (includes Breaking News) - a running tab of everything posted on this website since October 29,
download Adobe Reader
Bartlett Democratic Club Speech, February 7,
by Sandy Mintz
Note: As I have
time, I will add links to points that have been made here.
Hi everybody. Before I start,
I want to thank the Bartlett Democratic Club, Jean Graves, and all of you who
showed up today.
You know, I dont know about
you, but I really dont want to be here. Virtually every person I know and love has been vaccinated. The last thing I want is for there to
be problems with vaccines. So I am
here, not because I want to be, but because I have to be.
Please understand, at the
outset, that I am not against an informed parent choosing to vaccinate his or
her child. What I am against is bad
science being used to justify forcing parents to vaccinate. What I am against is bad science being used
to convince a parent to vaccinate. And
what I am against is a parent, any parent, being forced to do something that
has even a remote chance of harming their child.
What all parents deserve is
good information, untainted by conflict of interest, on the safety of
vaccines. They deserve the right to
choose whether or not to vaccinate their children. And those that choose to vaccinate, after weighing the known
benefits and risks, deserve safer vaccines.
Given time constraints, Im
going to cut to the chase.
Vaccine manufacturers are
behind pretty much everything we have been told about the safety of
Dr. Samuel Katz (who you
will hear more about later), developer of the measles vaccine
Government doesnt fund clinical studies of vaccines. Industry does.
We are letting the fox guard
It would be like trusting
the propaganda the cigarette companies provide on the safety of cigarettes.
And it gets worse. Medical journals are supported by drug
company advertising dollars. Vaccine
advisory committee members have
financial ties to the vaccine manufacturers and
routinely waive their conflicts of interest.
Even the American Academy of Pediatrics, or AAP, which makes
recommendations to our pediatricians, is not immune (pun intended). I have on my website copies of subpoenaed
letters from 3 vaccine manufacturers to the AAP discussing the almost $1
million they donated to the AAP during a 5-year period alone!
Im going to use Dr. Katz as
an example, because he is a very visible figure in the vaccine promotion
world. He has served on immunization
committees of the CDC, World Health Organization and Institute of
Medicine. He was chosen as the expert
on 60 Minutes defending the MMR vaccine, even though he developed the
vaccine! And he stated in the
Congressional Quarterly Researcher, I
make sure neither I nor any members of my family have financial interest in
does Dr. Katz explain the fact that in the year 2000, the
FDA noted, he has "associations with firms that could be affected by the (vaccine) committee
there are many more like him out there, making recommendations while making
money as a result of the recommendations they make.
gets even worse.
after the vaccine manufacturers threatened to pull out of vaccine production due
to all the lawsuits against them, guess what happened? Instead of saying, gee, maybe we should be
concerned, Congress passed a law covering the liability of the vaccine
manufacturers! So now we have
universally mandated vaccines, no liability for the makers of the vaccines, and
the vaccine manufacturers the very suppliers of the information we rely upon to
justify vaccine use. And guess who pays
for the liability coverage? The
vaccinated! There is a surcharge on every dose of vaccine, paid by the consumer,
which goes into a fund to pay compensation to known victims of
vaccination. So far around $1.2 billion
has been paid out.
of these facts, however, some good has come out of the Compensation Act. Parents of vaccine injured children used to
find it difficult, if not impossible, to get money to care for their
children. Now, more can. Maureen Forceskie, from Anchorage, is one
such mom who, thankfully, did. Her
April 2001 rally speech is included in your handouts.
Compensation Bill that Congress passed, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting
System, aka VAERS, was also created.
All suspected adverse vaccine reactions are required to be reported to
VAERS. From mid 1990 to mid 2000, over
100,000 adverse reactions were reported, many of them serious, many of them
deaths. Thats a lot of adverse
reactions. But its probably only a
small fraction of what is actually happening.
FDA commissioner David Kessler has said that it is thought 1% of serious drug
reactions are reported to the FDA. A
vaccine manufacturer testified that in their experience, a passive system
(which is what VAERS is) results in around 2%.
I dont know what percent of actual vaccine associated adverse reactions
are reported. I do know that parents
are being told by their doctors that even deaths within hours are not related,
and are being discouraged from filing reports.
Although reporting is required, there is a great deal of
doing so. Maureens speech is a
testament to that, as is the letter Ive included from Em,
Sophies Mom. Consequently it may well be that only 1-2%
of serious adverse vaccine associated reactions are
reported to VAERS.
there is no good reason why 100% of all possible adverse vaccine reactions
shouldnt get reported.
you an idea why anything less than 100% is a problem, let me share with you
some of what I have discovered or uncovered, as the case may be, in my
investigation of the VAERS database, which I now have on my computer.
The initial examination
has revealed some startling statistics.
To simplify things a bit, I looked at just one year, 1998. Here is some of what I found:
people vaccinated in the U.S. in January of 1998, just one month, 332 people
reported an adverse reaction that began within 2 days of receiving one or more
vaccines. In 22 % of those cases, it
was recorded that it was unknown whether or not the person had even
there no follow up? Does anyone from
the CDC or FDA monitoring this data even look at it? Do they even care? Why
collect all this information and yet allow it to be incomplete?
matters worse, because we dont know what percent of adverse vaccine reactions
get reported, we dont know if it was a few hundred, a few thousand, or many
thousands of January vaccinees who reacted within 2 days.
those January vaccinees also made a visit to the ER. But because unknown portions of adverse
reactions get reported, we dont know if those people represent hundreds or thousands
of people who went to the ER after having a serious reaction within 2 days of
vaccination in just one month alone.
81 U.S. infant deaths were reported to have occurred in
1998, most of them
occurring within days, over 40% by the day following vaccination. Not only that: around 60% had died by the 3rd
day, and over 70% by the 6th!
But we still dont know whether those 81 reported infant deaths mean
that hundreds or thousands died.
Wouldnt that be a good thing to know?
percentages have changed somewhat with the addition of more reports since the
speech, and may continue to change as more deaths are added.)
demand answers to these and other important questions concerning our
childrens health. And perhaps we
should question whether our children should be routinely vaccinated, at least
until we get and are satisfied with those answers.
sorry, I am really sorry, but there is definitely evidence against the
vaccines. And in spite of how difficult it is to get such information
published, there is plenty in the literature to worry anyone who is paying
attention. Meanwhile, VAERS is a gold mine and although it merely
documents an association between vaccination and an adverse event, it is
think of it - in most cases when an adverse event occurs shortly after taking a
drug, the drug is considered the most likely cause.
Phenylpropanolamine, or PPA, (which is
found in over the counter cold
medicine), was banned last year for over the counter use by the FDA, because
strokes were associated with it. This
is what should happen when a drug maims or kills.
thousands of children die, many thousands more are injured, often within hours
of receiving a vaccine, and the vaccine is automatically said to be
unrelated. It is only a coincidence,
they will tell us. They tell us this
without even knowing what is happening, how many it is happening to, or
how long after vaccination it happened.
child dies within hours or days of vaccination, the vaccination should be the
first thing suspected, not automatically rejected. And dont kid yourself - calling a death SIDS does not mean the
death was not related to the vaccine.
For what is SIDS, after all, but an infant death of unknown cause? Is no one curious as to the cause? Again, they will say, but that is when SIDS
occurs. Yes, that is when SIDS occurs
among the vaccinated. But what was the
SIDS rate prior to vaccines, prior to smallpox vaccine, prior to DPT? We dont have that information. So we dont really know what would be
happening were our children not being vaccinated at all.
if your doctor tells you some new or unusual symptom or disease is not related
to vaccination, dont believe him or her, because they CANNOT KNOW THAT and in
fact are required, by federal law, to report it. Not reporting these things just perpetuates the myth that there
is no evidence.
brings us to the poor quality of the research.
The Institute of Medicine, or IOM, which was mandated by Congress in
1986 to review the safety of the childhood vaccines, reported that it was
handicapped by the lack of good research.
Handicapped! How ironic is it
that they used that term? In spite of
being handicapped, however, they found evidence was consistent with or
indicates a causal relation in a number of cases, including between
encephalopathy and the pertussis component of the DPT vaccine. Thats brain inflammation. Brain inflammation in developing infant
brains. Imagine what that could be
doing to our kids.
experts, by the way, denied there was a connection right up until the IOM
report was published. Dr. James
wrote an editorial, which appeared in the Journal of the American Medical
Association about one year prior to the IOM report. It was entitled, 'Pertussis vaccine encephalopathy': it is time to recognize it
as the myth that it is. Shortly after
it was published, however, JAMA issued a correction it seems Cherry had
failed to disclose his financial ties to the industry
remember whos paying for the research.
many ways to skew research results. One
way is to compare the wrong groups. How
do you do it in the case of vaccinations?
By only comparing the vaccinated to other vaccinated children. You use either the less recently vaccinated,
or those receiving another vaccine, and then call them unvaccinated.
which finds no adverse effects from vaccination, which does not use never vaccinated
subjects as controls, is meaningless, and, in fact, has no control.
vaccination whatsoever is intervention.
A control group represents those who are not receiving whatever
intervention is being studied. When you
are studying the effects of vaccination, the only legitimate, meaningful
control group is the NEVER vaccinated.
End of story.
is there any research actually supporting the notion that we should be
concerned? Yes, and such research is
plentiful, in spite of the obstacles against it ever getting published. The
following are some of the issues being addressed:
form of autism, called
regressive autism, is rising at an explosive rate. In some places the incidence of autism is 1
out of 150 children or more. This
autism, unlike the older one, occurs in previously normally developing children
who lose their skills, often shortly after the
MMR vaccine. This is not a question of improved diagnosis. You would not, could not, have missed these
children many of whom bang their heads, scream through the night, exhibiting
all sorts of heartbreaking and frightening symptoms.
of behavioral disorders among children has skyrocketed, now thought by some to
be around 1 out of 6. When I was
growing up, I dont remember any children in my classroom who could not control
themselves. Now such children are
commonplace. Remember that pretty much
established brain inflammation problem?
Minimal to major inflammation could be causing all sorts of problems in
childrens developing brains.
disorders and other forms of chronic disease like asthma have also risen
dramatically, including among
It is now thought by many that there is a benefit to getting these
childhood diseases, which may prime the immune system against chronic
diseases. Remember recent news that our
children need exposure to germs or they are more likely to have asthma? It is similarly thought that experiencing
these infectious diseases of childhood boosts the developing immune system of
children. There is also reason to believe that vaccines themselves may suppress
the immune system, thereby contributing to chronic disease.
of cell-culture contamination has long plagued vaccines. For instance, the polio vaccine given in the
late fifties, early sixties, was found to be contaminated by a carcinogenic
monkey virus, SV40. All existing stock
of the vaccine was allowed to be used up, rather than erode confidence in the
vaccine by recalling it. Some time after that polio vaccine was introduced,
cancer in children rose. SV40 is also
now showing up in tumors, including cancerous ones.
additives, like thimerosal, a form of mercury, and a known neurotoxin, are
thought to be serious problems.
Until recently, thimerosal was routinely used as a preservative in
vaccines. The symptoms of mercury
toxicity are virtually identical to the symptoms that many of these
autistic children display. Of course the
experts say there is no relation between this known neurotoxin and brain or
other damage. All the while they are
warning pregnant and nursing women, and children, to avoid foods containing
high amounts of it.
abhors a vacuum. Just as antibiotic
overuse has led to drug resistant strains, new vaccine derived strains of
disease are emerging, and can be more serious than the original disease.
evidence that vaccination may cause chromosomal damage.
the so-called experts will argue vociferously against there being a connection
between things like MS and vaccination, vaccines are commonly used to induce or
cause demyelination experimentally. MS
is a form of demyelination.
published in the
Lancet provided evidence that measles without rash,
that is, subclinical measles, causes a significant increase in serious adult
disease, including cancer. The
vaccinated often get subclinical cases, i.e., rashless disease. Measles and chickenpox vaccination in
themselves may be a form of rashless illness.
Many parents are comforted by the idea that their children are only
getting mild or symptom free cases of these diseases. But should they be? The
rash is the bodys way of removing the disease. Is vaccination and the suppressed illness it causes going to
predispose our children to serious things like cancer?
article found that 2 totally harmless herpes simplex viruses recombined in
mice, killing 62% of them. We are
combining all sorts of diseases in these vaccines and in our children without
any evidence that harm will not come of it.
epidemiology of these childhood diseases has changed so that high-risk groups,
infants and adults, who normally dont get these diseases, and for whom they
are considerably more serious, are now more likely to get them. We were originally told, without any
long-term research to support the claim - after all these vaccines had just
been developed - that immunity from the vaccines would be lifelong. Now that it turns out not to be true, we are
being told the solution is to revaccinate.
But repeated vaccination may neither be safe nor work. Is our future to be filled with large,
uncontrollable outbreaks, with infants and adults getting and dying from theses
diseases? Might it not have been better
to get these childhood diseases as children, when they are relatively
benign? Have we made these diseases
vastly more serious because of vaccination?
is, in developed nations like ours most of these diseases were declining both
in incidence and severity prior to the advent of vaccination. Many of them were considered a normal part
of growing up, some of us never even knowing we had gotten them. When death rates in
developing or Third
World nations are used as examples, rather than the rates in developed nations
like ours, to scare us into using vaccinations, we are being manipulated to
believe these diseases are more serious than they really are.
these diseases have become more serious than they used to be, because of
changing epidemiology and other adverse factors due to vaccination, then we
should admit it. The solution proposed
for vaccine-caused problems should not, however, be more vaccination!
example of a disease which is really not all that serious, but which our
children are now expected to get a vaccination for in order to attend school,
is Hepatitis A. Let me share with you
what the textbook Vaccines says about Hepatitis A Virus or HAV. Infection with HAV may produce a wide
spectrum of outcomes from silent or subclinical hepatitis at one end, through
typical acute hepatitis with jaundice, to fulminant hepatitis at the
other. The single most important factor
in determining the outcome of HAV infection appears to be age. Whereas greater than 90% of infections
acquired before the age of 5 years are silent, the proportion of infected
individuals with symptoms increases steadily, reaching approximately 25% by 15
years and 90% or above in adults. The
duration of illness varies but most patients feel better, have lost their
hepatomegaly, and have nearly normal liver function test results within 3
weeks. In the large 1989 Shanghai
outbreak, 90% of a subset of 8647 hospitalized patients observed carefully had
completely recovered in 4 months and all had recovered in one year. Relapse consisting of renewed symptoms,
elevated liver function test results, and possibly detection of virus in stools
has been found in up to 10% of cases, but recovery is universal. Hepatitis A never becomes chronic.
Is that a
vaccine you feel your child should be required to have?
about Hepatitis B? Unless an infant is
born to a Hepatitis B positive mother (and dont forget that mothers can be
screened to see if they have it), there is virtually no chance that an infant
will get the disease. Why should
infants get a vaccine to protect sexually promiscuous or intravenous drug using
teens and adults? Why should anybody
have to do that?
than infants, most people who get Hepatitis B completely recover.
infants arent likely to get Hepatitis B, anyone else is not likely to have
long-term problems if they DO get it, and those that do get it in most cases
have only themselves to blame.
And then theres
the chickenpox vaccine, originally developed mostly to avoid the cost of work days lost. Hey, why not let the parents decide? Those that can and want to stay home and care for their normally
not all that sick kids, how about letting them do so and still be able to
attend our public schools? (After they
have recovered, of course.) That way
they can avoid the not so unlikely prospect of having their children get chickenpox
as adults, when it really can be a problem.
Health will say that these vaccines must be mandatory or these diseases will
spread. But if the vaccines work,
anyone choosing them will be protected.
If they dont prevent the spread of the disease to the vaccinated, what
is the point? It hardly seems right
that those who dont want to be vaccinated should be required to be vaccinated,
because vaccines dont always work.
whatever extent vaccines are being required because the immune suppressed
cannot be vaccinated, and are more vulnerable to the adverse effects of
disease, while my heart goes out to such people, they are not more important
than children who are harmed by vaccines.
Nor should the notion that vaccination may in itself be creating immune
suppression be left out of this equation.
there is documented proof of outbreaks in
100% vaccinated populations. Now, whose fault is that?
also consider any notion of "public health" to be suspect, which
sacrifices the individual to some alleged higher goal. Many of us find it
way scarier that the state would sacrifice children to someone's idea of the
common good, than to take our chances with Mother Nature. Who
decides? What's the right number? Who's counting? Even in
wartime, the draft of adults is only used very judiciously and sparingly. We also go to considerable effort to avoid
enemy civilian casualties. Yet we seem
to think nothing of sacrificing our own innocent children.
bottom line? We need good information,
we need a choice, and we need it now. If
we had such a choice, the vaccine manufacturers just might improve their
products. Why, on earth, do they need
to improve them now, when we are required to have their vaccines, and they are
not accountable for the outcome?
way, remember our old friend Dr. Katz?
He has a niece who chooses not to vaccinate her children, and yet he
considers her a good parent, even though he personally disagrees with her
parents deserve the right to choose what we feel is best for the children we love,
and for whom we are responsible. No one
else will be expected to care for our children if the vaccines or diseases maim
them. No one elses heart will be
broken like ours if they are killed or otherwise harmed.
stop ignoring what is happening to our children. The Alaska Legislature will only change our laws if we ask them
to. And ask we must. Please join me in this fight. Our children need us.
2008 by Vaccination
News, A Non-Profit Corporation. All
Rights Reserved. This content may be copied in full ONLY with copyright,
contact, creation, authorship, and information intact (including all links),
without specific permission, and ONLY when used in a not-for-profit format. If
any other use is desired, permission in writing from
Sandy Gottstein is required.
Vaccination News Home Page
(for best results, right click to "open in new window")
information, data, and material contained, presented, or provided here is for
general information purposes only and is not to be construed as reflecting the
knowledge or opinions of the publisher, and is not to be construed or intended
as providing medical or legal advice. The decision whether or not to vaccinate
is an important and complex issue and should be made by you, and you alone, in
consultation with your health care provider.