vaccines
When speaking about big and powerful pharmaceutical companies, one of the first things that should come to mind is scientific fraud, instances of which emerge with alarming frequency. A recent corruption leak, for example, was exposed from a study that was published in the British Medical Journal by researchers at the Nordic Cochrane Center in Copenhagen. The study showed that pharmaceutical companies were not disclosing all information regarding the results of their drug trials. This particular study dealt with antidepressants, exposing multiple dangers associated with these drugs. (source)

(You can read more about that particular study here.)

This type of fraud is quite common, health professionals are well aware of it. Two years ago, Dr. Richard Horton, the current Editor-In-Chief of one of the most reputable reviewed medical journals in the world, published a letter stating that "the case against science is straightforward," emphasising that "much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue" and that "science has taken a turn towards darkness." (source)

Another great quote that really hits the point home:
"The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it's disgraceful."

~ Arnold Seymour Relman (1923-2014), Harvard Professor of Medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Medical Journal (source)(source)
Vaccines Are No Different

The most recent example of fraud specifically pertaining to vaccines comes from Dr. William Thompson, a senior CDC scientist and author of some of the most widely cited studies debunking any link between the MMR vaccine and autism. (Thompson, et al. 2007, Price, et al. 2010, Destefano, et al. 2004)

The studies concluded that "the evidence is now convincing that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine does not cause autism or any particular subtypes of autism spectrum disorder." (source)

A decade later, Dr. Thompson came out publicly, admitting that that it was "the lowest point" in his career when he "went along with that paper." He went on to say that he and the other authors "didn't report significant findings" and that he is "completely ashamed" of what he did, that he was "complicit and went along with this," and that he regrets having "been a part of the problem." (source)(source)(source)

Thompson's attorneys, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Bryan Smith of Morgan & Morgan, also released a statement from Dr. Thompson, which mentioned Hooker: "I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes including autism spectrum disorders. I share his belief that CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent." (source)

Even pro-vaccine politicians were contacted, as these documents were sent to Congress. One of them reads as followed, as illustrated by congressman Bill Posey:
"Mr. Kennedy writes that, according to Thompson, 'for the past decade his superiors have pressured him and his fellow scientists to lie and manipulate data about the safety of the mercury-based preservative thimerosal to conceal its causative link to a suite of brain injuries, including autism.' "
Again, this is just one example of vaccine fraud, and a recent film titled Vaxxed, which gained more attention because of Robert De Niro, goes into more detail.

For more examples, and to view more studies and learn more about why more parents are choosing not to vaccinate their children, you can read an article we published on it by clicking the link below:

The Top 6 Reasons Why Parents Should Never Be Forced To Vaccinate Their Child

Herd Immunity Myth

Herd immunity is a theory stating that if the majority of a population can become "immune" to a disease via vaccination, diseases will either be eradicated or at least kept under control. It refers to a pattern of immunity that should protect a population from invasion of a new infection.

Herd immunity forms the backbone of pro-vaccine arguments, with smallpox and polio being the most commonly cited examples of diseases said to have been eradicated by vaccines. My question is, where is the science behind the belief that the herd can be protected by vaccinating enough people? Or that any disease has been eradicated from the planet thanks to a vaccine?

These beliefs are widespread in mainstream circles, but when one sits down to look at the evidence, a different picture emerges.

Measles, for example, was fairly common 50 years ago and hardly a cause for concern. You would get it, get better, and then be immune to it for the rest of your life. Death via measles was rare, just as it is in the present day, a fact which has largely been attributed to vaccination.

The truth is, measles vaccine failures have been documented for a quarter of a century around the world. You can read more about that in an article we published about it last year, here.

According to Lucija Tomljenovik, a post-doctoral research fellow in the department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at The University of British Colombia:
The statement that high levels of vaccination prevent disease outbreaks is not accurate as infectious diseases do in fact occur even in fully vaccinated populations as well as individuals. The likely reason for this is that vaccines primarily stimulate humoral immunity (antibody-based or Th2 responses) while they have little or no effect on cellular immunity (cytotoxic T-cells, Th1 responses), which is absolutely crucial for protection against viral as well as some bacterial pathogens. This may be the reason why vaccine-induced immunities are transient, requiring booster shots, while naturally acquired immunity conferred by the cellular immune system in the absence of vaccination tends to be permanent. Taken together, these observations may explain why outbreaks of allegedly vaccine-preventable diseases do occur in fully vaccinated populations and why, immunity (or its absence) cannot be reliably determined on the basis of serologic determination (measure of antibody levels) [137], which is the most common measure of vaccine efficacy in clinical trials. (source)
She also outlines reports of infectious disease outbreaks despite high vaccination coverage, and calls attention to immune system functioning in the absence of vaccinations — we develop lifelong immunity to diseases when our bodies deal with them naturally.

Another great article that documents the history of disease outbreak in vaccinated populations comes from Dr. Suzanne Humphries, a conventionally educated medical doctor who worked in medicine from 1989 until 2011.

Here is an article of hers about herd immunity that's heavily sourced, and below is a video of her explaining why this theory is flawed.


Dr. Larry Palevsky, a board-certified pediatrician trained at the New York School of Medicine, is another doctor, out of hundreds, who has shared what medical school doctrine on vaccines looks like, saying students are taught that vaccines are completely safe and effective. During his years of medical practice, it became clear to him that, as he "read through the research, listened to more and more parents, and found other practitioners who also shared the same concern that vaccines had not been completely proven safe or even completely effective, based on the literature that we have today," this story was wrong.

When it comes to herd immunity specifically, he says:
This whole concept of herd immunity is very interesting, because we were taught that herd immunity occurs because a certain percentage of a population gets an active illness. Therefore by a certain percentage of getting the active illness, they impart a protection onto the remaining part of the population that has not gotten the illness yet. And so the herd that is getting the illness is shedding the illness and protecting those who have not gotten it.

In vaccine science, we are extrapolating or concluding that if we vaccinate a certain percentage of people, we are imparting protection on those who have not been vaccinated. And that has NOT been shown to be true, because the true herd immunity in theory is based on an ACTIVE DISEASE, and we know that despite what we're taught, vaccination does not mimic the natural disease.

So we cannot use the same model of herd immunity in a natural disease in the vaccination policy. But unfortunately, we do use it even though it cannot be used because it doesn't have scientific backing. What's most interesting to me is that the entire concept of herd immunity fails to acknowledge that there is a life cycle of the viruses and the bacteria all on their own, and that what turns them on and off may have nothing to do with the percentage of people who have been infected.
Below is an interview of him explaining a little bit about why he, and many others, feel the way that they do.


Concluding Comments

I am by no means anti-vaccination, but it's clear that there are many things that need to be looked into and need to be changed. Scientific fraud is unacceptable, and the many organizations charged with acting in our best interests, like the FDA, who instead manipulate the media to promote fake science, need to be held accountable.

I believe vaccines hold great potential and could become a powerful tool to aid the greater good, but as things stand now, there are too many questions and not enough answers. Herd immunity is just one of the problems with vaccines being discussed today.

This is a dense subject that can't be tackled in one short article alone. Please refer to the below linked article to find out more information about why so many more parents are choosing not to vaccinate their children.

The Top 6 Reasons Why Parents Should Never Be Forced To Vaccinate Their Children