There is no Anti-Vaccination Movement

Alicia Silverstone dares to “give you information” that you “might want to consider.”

It’s been 5 years since the mainstream media began writing about the “dangerous and misinformed anti-vaccination movement.” Who are the kooks in this crazy unhinged movement? Surely they are hanging out in labor and delivery rooms, throwing mercury on expectant mothers, making threats against anyone who vaccinates their newborn for a sexually transmitted disease. Certainly they are sneaking into Boy Scout meetings by posing as den mothers and brainwashing neighborhood parents into hosting chickenpox parties. They organize violent protests, vandalize the homes of known pediatricians, and detox children at slumber parties without parental consent.

Take a look around you—undoubtedly someone from this “anti-vaccination movement” has infiltrated your very own social circle. Thank goodness for the media, otherwise you would never have known.

Except, there is no such thing as the “anti-vaccination movement.” A “movement” is a growing organization of people, all pushing toward a common goal. People who exempt their children from vaccination don’t have a “common goal.” There is no target percentage of “anti-vaccination” they conspire to achieve. There is no agenda to push down anyone’s throat. There is no point in time at which they hope to declare victory. The only thing that exemptors have in common is this: they don’t care what you do with your kid. They only care about their own.

The “pro-vaccination movement” is funded—in cash, in product donations, and in intellectual manpower—by people who have gotten rich from the manufacture and sale of vaccines. Sure, they have uncompensated foot soldiers of uncertain mental stability, but the driving force is from a higher level. The goal of the “pro-vaccination movement” is to have 100% compliance with the vaccine program. Exemptors? Exemptors don’t care if anyone complies.

The “pro-vaccination movement” teams up with local health departments to get state legislators to sponsor laws that take away parental rights. Exemptors? They don’t care how anyone else parents their children; just don’t tell them how to parent their own.

The “pro-vaccination movement” goes to their contacts in the pharmaceutical-owned media to call names and paint portraits of ignorance and mis-education of the parents who exercise their right of exemption. Exemptors? Most of them don’t have any friends in the media and if they do, they sure aren’t slinging mud. Why? Because they don’t care what other people are doing with regard to vaccines.

See the pattern here? One group is trying to force the other group to bend to its will, but the roles aren’t what the media tells you they are. There is no such thing as an “anti-vaccination movement.”

The common thread in all of these scenarios is this: the exemptors aren’t making anyone else do anything—they are minding their own business and worrying about their own. Do they talk? Sure. Do they answer questions? Absolutely. Do they call your home and threaten you— claiming to know where your children go to school—if you write a pro-vaccination piece on your little mommy blog?

No. No one reads your little mommy blog and exemptors certainly aren’t threatened by what you write on it.

Exemptors aren’t convinced that vaccines are safe enough to be administered to all children across the board and they don’t subscribe to the notion that they’re effective enough to create vaccine-induced herd immunity.  What, they’re not allowed to talk about that?

Where did this idea of there being a dangerous movement underfoot come from, you wonder?

Let’s look at what else happened five years ago: Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, admitted in an interview that HHS “reached out to the media to get them to stop giving equal weight in their reporting” of the views of parents of vaccine injured children.

Wow. Did you hear that? One of the highest-ranking officials in the US Health Department admitted feeling threatened by moms and dads who tell the story of what vaccines did to their children. But worse than that, she admitted to gagging the media from speaking about it, which turned the tides and created the non-existent “anti-vaccination movement” out of thin air. In September of 2007 Jenny McCarthy went on Oprah to talk about vaccines and her son’s autism. Two years later the media was gagged by the US Health Department and Jenny was made into a villain.

Despite what the media says, there is nothing new or trendy about being an exemptor, and it certainly doesn’t have any roots in Malibu or Beverly Hills. Laws granting freedom from vaccination are celebrating their 117th birthday this year so instead of picturing a sexy actress like Alicia Silverstone when you think about exemptors, picture Queen Victoria (born in 1819), who, despite being the first member of the Royal Family vaccinated for smallpox, was the reigning Monarch during the birth of Conscientious Objection.

Even in the 1800s there were people who proclaimed the smallpox vaccine to be dangerous after seeing their family and friends become disabled or die after inoculation.  Then they witnessed vaccinated neighbors come down with smallpox years later, so they weren’t convinced of the vaccine’s effectiveness, either.  Some things never change, huh?

In 1853 vaccination for smallpox became mandatory, with fines for non-compliance and imprisonment for non-payment of the fines.  This led to massive demonstrations by the working class, celebrities, and parliament members.  In 1885, with over 3,000 prosecutions pending in one county alone, a demonstration of 20,000 people led to what eventually became the exemption of Conscientious Objection of 1898.

The 1898 Vaccination Act removed penalties for not vaccinating and allowed parents who did not believe that vaccination was safe or effective to obtain an exemption for their infant children. But there was a catch—in order to obtain the exemption they had to satisfy the requirements of two magistrates before the child was 4 months old. Unsurprisingly, many magistrates refused to perform their duties under the law and the intention behind granting liberty from vaccination floundered.

The exemptors pushed harder and the British government responded by passing the 1907 Vaccination Act. With that, a parent could exempt their child by mailing a written declaration to the local Vaccination Officer that stated their belief that vaccination would harm their child’s health. In 1908 a whopping 17% of the British population filed for Conscientious Objector status.  It was the advent of the modern Philosophical Exemption, born of oppressive government intervention and community meddling in parenting rights.

That, my friends, was an “anti-vaccination movement.”

So no, in 2015 there is no “anti-vaccination movement,” but keep it up.  Keep hurling insults in the media, keep schmoozing with local law makers.  Keep going after infant children to receive vaccines that you yourself haven’t had in decades.  Keep on talking about this “anti-vaccination movement” and exemptors are going to give you something to talk about, mark my words.  Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

182 thoughts on “There is no Anti-Vaccination Movement

  1. Do you not think that if vaccines could be proven to cause injury, or even be reasonably associated with injury, the personal injury lawyers would jump on it in a minute and soon we would be bombarded with commercials us offering compensation? They have done it with plenty of other products produced by “big pharma.” If you truly believe you and others have been injured, there is a way to prevent future harm. It’s called a class action suit. But you have to have your ducks in a row. You have to be able to prove cause and effect. Certainly it stands to reason that plenty of children have suffered disease and injury after being vaccinated. Why? Because millions of children have been vaccinated and millions of children fall ill every day. The question is can you show that vaccines caused any of these illnesses? I understand that there are countless anecdotes claiming that this is exactly what happened. But until scientists can prove a correlation, no lawyer is going to take the case. If you really care about the health of your children, you will insist there be an anti-vaccination movement and force the studies to be done. Why insist there is no movement when this is exactly what you need?


    1. Omg why are u even on a forum discussing a topic u obviously know nothing about? My gosh, if u had researched this topic for even 10 minutes, u would have learned that pharmaceutical companies CANNOT BE SUED OR HELD LIABLE FOR ANY VACCINE THEY MAKE!!! And that my friend, is why there is no class action lawsuit. There is however a fund to pay out to those injured. Look up VAERS.

      Liked by 3 people

    2. Do you not think that if vaccines could be proven to cause injury, or even be reasonably associated with injury, the personal injury lawyers would jump on it in a minute and soon we would be bombarded with commercials us offering compensation?

      Obviously you are not familiar with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and the 2002 law passed by congress giving the vaccine industry “BLANKET IMMUNITY” from all vaccine damage claims. The Vaccine Makers are immune from any lawsuit. If a family can meet the criteria to have their case heard in the vaccine court (NVICP) the cannot use a personal lawyer. A government lawyer from the justice department is assigned to represent what is really an administrative hearing. The average wait to hear if your case will be heard is 8 years. The full burden of proof is on the plaintiff because also written into the vaccine law is “NO DISCOVERY”. The vaccine makers will not provide you with any documentation to prove your case like in a regular trial. Despite this obstacle the court began the vaccine makers have paid out more than $2.8 billion in compensation awards.

      The question is can you show that vaccines caused any of these illnesses?

      It doesn’t matter to the vaccine industry, the CDC/FDA/WHO/Congress or Senate. Or the Supreme Court, if you can prove a vaccine injury because they, SCOTUS gave the vaccine industry “Blanket Immunity”.

      But until scientists can prove a correlation, no lawyer is going to take the case.

      Don’t take this wrong but you are absolutely clueless about what has been going on since 1986. Please keep up. Vaccine injury has been proven in the US and in other countries: U.S. Media Blackout: Italian Courts Rule Vaccines Cause Autism: http://healthimpactnews (dot) com/2015/u-s-media-blackout-italian-courts-rule-vaccines-cause-autism/.

      If you really care about the health of your children, you will insist there be an anti-vaccination movement and force the studies to be done.

      You also are not familiar with the conflict of interest and revolving door relationship between the CDC-pharmaceutical industry-HHS-FDA-IOM-WHO-IOH-NIH-major universities connected to hospitals that have strong financial ties with the pharmaceutical industry and now the Pentagon which has gone into the vaccine making business. This is know as the Medical Industrial Complex:
      -http://drhyman (dot) com/blog/2011/04/29/the-dangers-of-the-medical-industrial-complex/#close
      The above article is pretty simple. Go to this link called Dollars for Doc and it give you an idea of the money that passes between big pharma and doctors, hospitals and universities.
      http://projects.propublica (dot) org/docdollars/

      Liked by 1 person

      1. One question: if you have a sick child, will you not take that child to a doctor who may prescribe life-saving medicine because you do not trust “big pharma”?


      2. I wrote a reply soon after reading this post and apparently neglected to click Post Comment afterward! I will attempt to recreate it:

        My mistake. I have since read the US Supreme Court decision on February 22, 2011, in the Bruesewitz v. Wyeth case. The bottom line in that decision is that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was created to provide compensation for claims of injury but not totally destroy the vaccine market, which would leave no option for the vast numbers of American citizens who desire to have their children vaccinated against dangerous diseases.

        Having said that, I also understand the Court’s dissenting opinion argument that protecting the vaccine makers against liability does not encourage them to be diligent in making vaccines as safe as possible.

        The NCVIA is comprehensive and generous, I believe, in outlining the types of injuries that may result from vaccines and the time periods in which these injuries must manifest themselves. The vaccine makers tax their products to fund compensation for injury claims and pay for legal fees and costs associated with claims, even those that are not successful. After reading about the Hannah Bruesewitz case, I am puzzled as to why the Vaccine Court dismissed it. Hannah apparently suffered seizures and injury immediately after receiving the DTP vaccination and years later she still suffers from Residual Seizure Disorder and she remains impaired. The Act does not require that cause and effect be proven, only that it be shown that the injury occurred immediately after vaccination. The injury must be listed on the Vaccine Injury Table. Residual Seizure Disorder appears on the list. Why Hannah’s case did not meet these criteria, I do not understand. Perhaps someone can enlighten me.

        Vaccines, like any medicine or medical product, are not perfect. It is not within human capability to produce anything perfect. It is not within human nature to do anything perfectly. Luckily, we have recourse when we suffer harm from the negligence of others. In the case of vaccine harm, we have The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Our courts and tribunals are also human and mistakes are made. Still, we must rely upon them to make wise and logical, not emotion-based, decisions. Unfortunately, the laws that protect us can also be our undoing. Juries in tort cases often award large sums of money to victims out of empathy and are not entirely inclined to consider proven facts only. That’s the positive side of human nature at odds with justice.

        In conclusion, I have deep sympathy for those who believe they have been harmed by vaccines. I also have deep concern for our collective national health if vaccine makers are held liable for injuries not proven and they cease to make vaccines altogether. That scares me.

        To answer the question as to why I responded to this blog at all: I followed a Facebook link in a post made by my beloved niece. She and I see eye to eye on many issues concerning conscientious parenting (home birth, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, choice in circumcising newborn males, etc.) We diverge on this topic. When I read the comments following the link, I was appalled. It was difficult to sort through all of the vitriol, sarcasm, mocking and name calling to find any useful comments. I found myself constantly fight the urge to debase myself and to fall into that same trap. The interesting thing about respect is that you cannot earn it without first giving it. If you desire others to understand and consider your argument, you must speak to them with respect. Otherwise, you alienate them and do your cause no good. It is easy to let our emotions get the best of us and cause us to reveal our baser nature. But what is our goal? Is protecting the health of our children our goal? Is our goal to show our children that we can do it in a civil, respectful (and therefore productive) way? I sincerely hope so.


      3. What do the one-time head of Autism Speaks, the one-time head of the CDC, the one-time President of Merck and the current Executive Vice President of Merck all have in common???? Ding, ding, ding… they are all the same person. Can you say conflict of interest?


      4. I am trying to fact check your comment concerning Robert Ring. I see that he was head of the Autism Research Unit at Pfizer and worked for a decade with with Wyeth’s Discovery Neuroscience Division. I looked at Merck’s current board of directors and he is not listed. Mr. Ring is not listed as a former director of the CDC. I need help. Please send me links from sites (not associated with anti-vaccine messages) to show me what I am missing here. Thanks.


    3. Doctors and pharmaceutical companies have been absolved from liability by the U.S. government for vaccine injury. That is why the personal injury lawyers are not jumping on the “payout” for vaccine injury. And, we are not “bombarded with commercials” offering a class action lawsuit because the belief system of the masses are being purposely orchestrated, nay, designed by astroturfing.


    4. Congress closed the door on suing the vaccine manufacturers for disability or death caused by their vaccines (because by the late ’80s there were so many multi-million dollar, successful lawsuits), providing only corrupt Vaccine Court, which throws out any case that uses the obscene a- word. Read Wayne Rohde’s Vaccine Court. This is a travesty, a debacle, in which millions of people have been severely brain-damaged or killed by vaccines, or sickened with autoimmune disease or many other conditions caused by vaccines. At least one in five children is now severely damaged by vaccines, one in 36 with autism (U. of Minnesota 2013), one in nine asthma (pertussis vaccine), one in fifty peanut allergy (HIb vaccine), one in then another allergy, one in twelve ADHD, one in six a learning disability, one in a hundred a seizure disorder, one in ten bowel disease, one in 450 diabetes, all usually if not always caused by vaccines.


    5. In the US you can’t sue for a vaccine injury in a regular civil court. It goes to a special Federal Vaccine Court. Unlike a regular tort case, the personal injury lawyers don’t get their big bite off the top of the settlement

      Liked by 1 person

  2. You’re playing a game of semantics with the word “Movement.” I’ll tell you how anti-vaccine propaganda is a movement by the evidence that exists. It doesn’t have to be a known group, or have specific goals and numbers in mind. The evidence shows that there are a growing number of people who are opposing vaccination, and they do with the same pseudoscience, semantics and authoritarian like approach. They base their stance (more like a military approach) on miss-information to the peril of everyone. This isn’t about “parenting” as you call it. This is about a decision to protect; especially your child who cannot do so on their own. What you need is a proverbial slap upside the head to knock you from this dream state. We are currently in the midst of an outbreak of measles and you want to fight a battle of allowing you to “Parent” however you like? What does it take, TB, diphtheria, smallpox? About all I can equate your lack of sensibility to is the Westborough Baptist Church Group.

    If an outbreak personally effects your community as a result of your decision, do you really want your lack of intelligence known worldwide and to become a spectacle by example? Perhaps, before this happens, government will mandate immunization (by vaccination) so that your lack of intelligence around this issue doesn’t need exposure. Your children depend on you to make intelligent decisions, not to follow fear mongering pseudoscience. They also greatly benefit by parents who admit when they are not the professionals in some cases. You may benefit from a lesson in the basics of research in addition to biology 101. If either of these subjects are unfamiliar to you or of absolutely no interest to you, then you need to question YOUR “research,” and the methods by which you arrived at your decision.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Here’s just one cut and pasted phrase out of this article, it says: “No one reads your little mommy blog and exemptors certainly aren’t threatened by what you write on it.” Excuse me? That’s not journalism. “News articles” that digress into personal, angry rants directed at a person are not “news.” While this article has some interesting history, like the history of vaccines in the 1800’s, you can’t even consider those facts to be credible. Because the author undoes her credibility with comments like that. There are a lot of really good articles about vaccines out there that are written very well. This article was not written to present facts, it was written to convince you of a certain opinion. Like here’s another quote: “…Department of Health and Human Services, admitted in an interview that HHS ‘reached out to the media to get them to stop giving equal weight in their reporting’ of the views of parents of vaccine injured children. (new paragraph) Wow. Did you hear that?” When an article uses phrases like, “Wow, Did you hear that?” I interpret it the same way as if a person spoke to me that way. It’s belittling. Has someone ever told you a shocking fact, paused, and then said, “Wow, did you hear that?” I hope not. You’d think they were rude. My point is articles like this really, really discredit the anti-vaccine movement by making everyone involved seem illogical and crazy. I should re-write this article and remove all the phases put in there just for shock value and leave just the facts ’cause then you’d have a great article. This is exactly the problem with every article about vaccines, they’re all written this way.


      1. Why do you have a blog where readers can click on “reply” and state an opinion if you don’t care what someone has to say? Begging your pardon, but that seems extremely immature. What, exactly, are you afraid of?


      2. I sincerely hope that you have some medical credibility and by that I don’t mean that you’ve read and posted on a wide variety of blogs. It makes complete sense for parents to fear vaccinations. It makes complete sense for parents to choose to not vaccinate due to those fears. However, it does not make sense for an “author” to take stances on an issue without providing links to current research that supports their statements. You have failed to provide those links and also have failed to present any examples (statistical or anecdotal) more recent than the year 1908.

        It makes sense that people would hold the same beliefs as you, just not that they’re citing you as a reliable source to this information.


    1. Concern trolling is the practice of initiating a false flag debate by assuming the exact opposite point of view as the one actually held by the speaker. The purpose of concern trolling is to instill confusion and doubt within the targeted group by raising issues under the pretext that the troller empathizes with the said group so much that they feel the need to “alert” or “inform” that they are somehow being misled.

      I noticed you did not provide any specific articles on “a lot of really good articles about vaccines out there that are written very well”, you intention is to distract, not to interact.

      Trolls Just Want to Have Fun
      On February 8th, 2014, University of Manitoba’s Erin Buckels and two of her colleagues published a psychology paper on the personalities of trolls on the Internet. According to Slate’s summary of the paper, Buckels tried to investigate whether people who are prone to engage in trolling can be characterized by certain personality traits that would fall in what the researchers refer to as the “Dark Tetrad”: Machiavellianism (willingness to manipulate and deceive others), narcissism (egotism and self-obsession), psychopathy (the lack of remorse and empathy), and sadism (pleasure in the suffering of others). According to the paper, their study found significant correlations between exhibition of sadistic traits and trolling behavior.

      You may just want to take a look at the study.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. This is a Mommy Blog not CNN. It just happens to be written by a Daddy. Nice try though, thanks for playing!


  4. The Progressive Radio Network would like to invite the viewers of this article to review the work that we have compiled on the risks associated with vaccinations. We understand that people on both sides of this issue have received misinformation that may have swayed their beliefs. has made a point to provide our viewers with quality research documenting the unwanted side-effects and inefficiency of vaccinations. We believe that the Anti-Vaccination Movement has received backlash for “not providing followers with scientific backed informative studies”, and many of the supporters of this movement have been labeled as “Scientific Deniers”. Although some of the movement may be misinformed, we base our information on scientific fact. Our goal is not to sway any person’s belief system, but more to educate both sides of this serious issue.


  5. Vaccine safety is not a debate. By engaging in ‘debate’, we give an undeserved license to criminals. Follow the simple logic, and please, thee is NO debate here.

    Fact 1. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen.

    Fact 2: If i slipped formaldehyde into your orange juice and urged you to drink it, that would be be a criminal act. It is illegal to knowingly poison people. I could and should be jailed.

    Fact 3: most vaccines contain formaldehyde.

    Some psychopath knowingly put poison in a vaccine, and is pushing you to take it. Arrest the people who put carcinogens in vaccines, and then arrest the pediatricians and other doctors who purposefully inject poisons into people. There IS NO DEBATE. It is illegal to poison people. Let’s use the law and jail the vaccine makers, and their cheap whores in the medical profession. Poisoning is attempted murder. And we ‘debate’ vaccine safety??

    Liked by 5 people

    1. …Formaldehyde is only a carcinogen in very high doses (much higher than is in any vaccine. The most basic rule of toxicology is that the dose makes the poison. Even water can be a “poison” if you drink enough of it.

      Also, it’s already in orange juice, as well as oranges themselves. It’s found naturally in oranges for the same reason it’s found in even a newborn baby’s system (and in much higher levels than is found in any vaccine, btw); formaldehyde is a byproduct of metabolism.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. To be fair, there is an anti-vaccination movement, and I’m proud to be in it. I have MS from a vaccine reaction (tetanus booster paralyzed both arms the same day, brachial plexus neuropathy, and I was later diagnosed with MS), my daughter reacted to the hep-b vaccine at birth with vaccine encephalitis, at 18 months she reacted to the DTaP booster by having her only two words erased, and she was diagnosed with autism two months later. My father was paralyzed for the last three years of his life by a flu vaccine.

    People must be told how dangerous vaccines are, much more dangerous than the vaccine-preventable diseases are or would be even if no one vaxed for them. They must be taught better ways to treat them when they occur. At this time, the vaccine companies are exerting ever more power, controlling government agencies and politicians, the entire medical cartel, and the mainstream media, fanning hysteria over an outbreak of measles with not a single bad outcome, denying the huge numbers of the vaccine-damaged in a frenzy to rake in ever more money. Now they’re salivating at the idea of forced vaccine mandates, first for school kids, then all kids, then all adults.

    No. We’re not going to permit that. We got over a 100,000 signatures on our We the People petition against vaccine mandates yesterday (possibly fraudulent attempt to bury it over the weekend, but that’s all in the past now), which is still increasing in signatures and will for the foreseeable future. It’s one of the most popular We the People petitions in all of history, is at number seven now and will possibly reach number one in time. We’re fighting for children’s (and adults’) lives, against tremendous odds. The pharma companies pay hundreds of paid shills to combat us on every vaccine article on any blog across the Internet, trying to mold public opinion the way they want to. And we fight them. Every day, in every way. We will not let them take any more children’s lives than we can help, than we can save with our witness and our knowledge.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. I think that when she says that “there is no anti vax…” it’s to mean by and large in relation to the full court press that’s coming out in the media against them and the laws that they’re enacting it doesn’t really exist. They have no political pressure, no friends in the media, no real agenda legislatively. They’re a loosely organized bunch of people who dare to ask questions and use their own eyes and ears to notice the actual world they live in, and not just the one that’s brought to them on TV.


  7. I am from Australia where our government has decided that parents who do not wish to immunise their children will no longer recieve government welfare. I have also noticed that here in Australia the media and internet campaign seems decidedly more poisonous than it is in the States. Perhaps it is because we have a smaller population, but there seems to be a proportionately larger group of angry supporters of the pro-vaccination lobby and they are much more likely to engage in abuse and even threaten acts of terrorism.

    We vaccinated all our kids. I have one son with Aspergers Syndrome and two other children with Dyslexia. I cannot in all honesty say that any of this was directly the result of vaccination. However, I can say that I have spent the last ten years researching trends in government decision making re health and other issues both in our country and overseas. I no longer believe that our government is working for us, or has our best interests at heart, and our politicians, on both sides of politics, are patently useless at running the country, let alone informing parents on the best course of action for their children.

    My daughter was vaccinated with most of the usual suspects, but as she grew into her teenage years and the government pushed to have kids vaccinated against a whole host of other newer diseases (including cervical cancer ?) I began to get really uncomfortable. I did not want my children continually plugged with chemicals and medications when they have always been extremely healthy and have never been ill with anything worse than a bout of bronchitis one year when it reached epidemic proportions in our city. What no vaccine against broncitis? Shame on you Australian Government.

    I might add that my father, who never had any immunisations other than the ones required when he emigrated from Britain in the 60s (we all had to have them – and I have just had a rather nasty epiphany regarding this – need to do more research), was always as strong as an ox and was nearly ninety when he died of old age…not cancer, not heart disease, not alzheimers, not anything other than plain old chronological deterioration. He did have Aspergers however. Thus my sudden concern re the immunisations he had in the 60s.

    So began the journey into skepticism and research.

    My daughter wants to work with children either as a teacher or a childcare worker. She loves kids, and always has and it has been her dream to teach. But she has been told she has to be fully up to date with her immunisation schedule, including all of the recent flu shots, and will probably be expected to keep up with the flu shots. She will not be able to pursue her deepest desire to work with children because of this insane and unrelenting push to force every human being in Australia to be immunised.

    I do not believe the hostility of the many people on the internet who want to abuse those who decide not to immunise their children especially when they have undeniable medical evidence right in front of them which tells them it would be completely insane to do so. I am talking vaccine injury now. Where is the compassion and empathy, not to mention the concern for those kids and their families? There is none.

    On the basis of this evidence alone (the point blank refusal to understand or look into vaccination injury) I agree that those who are violently anti-choice (including our government) have an agenda which they are not sharing openly with their constitutents.

    Every other medical procedure in this country is preceded by consent, including organ donation. Why all of a sudden is immunisation an enforcible medical procedure?

    Liked by 4 people

  8. I have a flu shot injury. I know that that doesn’t count for much because at this point it’s still ‘anecdotal’ and not ‘science’. But…at the start of this winter I received at my Dr.’s urging a flu shot. A few days later I had a terrible pain at the sight of the injection, which has happened to me before. This time was different however in that the sore spot began to move; traveled over to my neck, and then down to my arm, and then it turned into a weird shooting numbness, and then it traveled down to the two fingers on my left hand. They’re numb now, on the tips…it seems like they will be forever. I’ve read other stories on the internet about numbness, but has anyone here ever heard of a case like mine?


  9. The problem is that vaccine manufacturers CAN be held liable if they screw up.

    If they screw up, their products will be “avoidably unsafe”


  10. One thing I will say for sure is that I am suppressed at how little evidence is behind this movement. Many of the claims made by anti-vaccers are sweeping generalities bases on anecdotal evidence with very little scientific proof. I think that this movement has become so strong because autism is a growing diagnosis along with many other spectrum disorders. Parents of these children may be gasping at anything to find an answer to the questions that the scientific community cant even provide conclusive evidence on.


    1. Have you ever thought that maybe medical science may not have the ability to prove the claims right or wrong?
      Also it may not be in their best interest to prove the claims right, especially if coming from a corporate science perspective.
      Of course there needs to be good science in this to sort out the true cases from the mistaken ones, but there is sure plenty of smoke about to suggest there is a fire. Just how big the fire is remains the question.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. You know what Aubrie? Parents don’t have to prove squat – the people who are forcing this crap does. They have not proven that vaccines are safe. They do not do conduct trials or studies using legitimate placebos. They do not conduct studies comparing the vaccinated against the unvaccinated. They do not conduct long term studies. And they do not study the schedule- not even close. There is no proof that vaccines are safe. If you choose to cite studies that claim so, you are going to be citing a study that is not rigorous (see above) and done by those with vested interests (either direct or indirect).

      Liked by 1 person

  11. “AGENTS ARREST MAN IN THREATS” read the headlines in a LEE Ent. toilet paper, the Quad City TIMES. Dr. Kenneth Tennant was targeted for being vocal on the RISKS & FAILURES of VACCINES. Google: Kenneth Tennant (USA vs Veterans and the First Amendment). Next, the gov’t has targeted his wife & children. Go to:, click Docket Search, see STATE v Greg Tennant (my minor son). Scott County Iowa Dist Court judge Dalton, after over four(4) months on our appeal admitted that the STATE violated due process, but, instead of the REQUIRED dismissal (Title V, USC, secs 556, 557 & 706 Voids Jurisdiction where due process is violated) Dalton ordered a do-over. IOWA is a de Facto gov’t run by PERVERTS & PEDOPHILES. Gov Terry Branstad & Sen. Chuck Grassley have behaved with depraved INDIFFERENCE to calls for INVESTIGATIONS and PROSECUTIONS of Rogue judges, state & federal. US Marshals & FBI PROTECT these perverts & pedophiles who are in positions of power and authority. Nancy Schaefer: CPS is kidnapping children using family courts for sex with pedophile judges, senators, congressmen, bankers…You Tube: The Franklin Cover-Up. Go to:, click: Docket Search, see STATE v Greg Tennant, click: “FILINGS” witness how each judge takes turns violating due process, ignoring/neglecting to answer pro se pleadings, etc., depriving Greg of his right to be heard and self-defense, defrauding citizens / taxpayers of honest gov’t. – Dr. Kenneth Tennant, 3935 Rolling Hills Dr., Bettendorf, Iowa (52722) (563) 343-5565 PLEASE SHARE


Comments are closed.