Health & Freedom

Vaccinations at the Point of a Gun

by Jack Phillips

According to Health Science Institute’s recent disclosure, the New York State Assembly is considering a bill which will, if enacted, require all children in the state to receive every vaccine that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommends. Twenty vaccines – some requiring multiple doses are presently recommended.

This is very good for our 100 year health care monopoly which already accounts for 17% of GNP. If the bill passes, the producers of vaccines will have an assured market in the state of New York.  Furthermore insurance companies, which are already turning the art of medicine into a business, will be able to increase health insurance premiums to take care of this new requirement.

But is this bill good for our children? What assurance do we have that these multiple injections of foreign proteins, preservatives and adjuvants are safe and effective? Considering that a NEW American disease, autism, suddenly appeared and became an epidemic after the CDC’s previous promotion of childhood vaccines, all taxpayers and especially parents should be very much concerned. It is notable that the manufacturers of vaccines are not liable for any damage that their products might cause. Our lawmakers have seen to that. If vaccines cause damage, taxpayers will pay the bills.

There are about 4000 cases pending in our courts involving damage to children allegedly caused by previously required vaccines. The first one has been decided in favor of the plaintiff. Taxpayers are obligated to pay the award – not the company whose product caused the damage. Despite these facts, incumbent lawmakers are busy insuring the profits of an industry that has already caused lots of sickness, heartbreak and inordinate expense to American parents.

Maybe the $100,000,000 per year the pharmaceutical industry spends on lobbying and campaign contributions have reduced interest in the welfare of our children. In any case the CDC should be required to prove that every vaccine which they recommend is safe and effective and also that every combination of vaccines will cause no damage.

Guardacil is one of these CDC approved vaccines. It is supposed to eliminate cervical cancer, but does not, according to Diane Harper, one of the principal investigators in Guardacil trials. It protects against 4 types of sexually transmitted human papilloma virus (HPV) according to Merck. However, HPV is easily detected and treated during annual gynecological examinations of women.  HPV does not always cause cancer, but the 16 million doses of Guardacil that Merck has distributed so far has resulted in almost 10,000 adverse event reports. About 6% roughly 600 have been severe including seizures and convulsions. Also seven young women died suddenly, of unknown causes, shortly after taking the vaccine. Evidently it isn’t so effective and it isn’t exactly safe.

There are alternatives to vaccines. During the Polio Epidemic in the 1940s, Frederick Klenner, M.S., M.D., a medical scientist as well as a physician, was curing polio and practically every childhood disease with injections or infusions of sodium ascorbate (inexpensive vitamin C). Klenner knew that this vitamin is one of the few naturally anti-viral substances. None of his 60 polio patients became paralyzed and they were usually cured within 72 hours. I consider it a crime that Americans do not regularly have access to the medical technology that Klenner developed. If this technology were available there would be little need for vaccines in my opinion and that of many other informed people.

Vitamin C infusions are not part of the standards of care – probably because they are too easy. A physician told me that she had used them to cure shingles, but at the risk of losing her license and possible jail time. The medical monopoly is good at suppressing advances in medical science that are effective and inexpensive.

This is an election year! Legislators want your votes! This is a good time for taxpayers, especially those who are parents, to tell them your opinions about this bill. An alternative would be to replace incumbents with candidates more interested in the welfare of our children.

Leave a Reply