Imagine what Pasteur, Jenner or other pioneers in the history of immunizations might think of what has happened to vaccines since their early discoveries. Their intentions and accomplishments were admirable, yet the current vaccine controversy isn’t about polio or smallpox. Those tragic diseases are now history.
Might there be a few elephants in the room among current debates between the the pro VS anti vaccination camps?
Heated battles between the pro vaxxers and anti vaxxers will only deflect attention to real solutions and an end to the vaccine controversy. Emphasis on anti this and pro that only drives us apart. Don’t both sides in the end want similar things like safety, freedom, and health support from science?
A scientist will question everything, for by its very nature valid science demands it. I’m not a scientist, but am an avid researcher – maybe even a chronic one. I have also been a science teacher and am not easily fooled by junk science that ignores the scientific method. Same goes for ‘science’ that lacks validity and the crucial foundation of carefully controlled variables and reporting unbiased findings.
Inside the crazy arena of the war over vaccines, there are some questions still not easily answered. Shadows of the vaccine controversy that are critical remain for the most part ignored or else unknown – ergo the ‘elephants in the vaccine room’. A few of those elephants hiding inside the vaccine war arena are questioned and discussed here.
Maybe some of these questions and hidden pieces of the controversy might spark a new perspective. Either way, maybe your mind is open enough to at least consider their importance. It’s a toss as to which side of the debate is the majority as it changes fast. Much is suppressed while shills are busy spreading propaganda. This is not a time to hide out in silence and ignore such crucial issues as the vaccine controversy.
What happened in 1983 that changed the direction of the entire vaccine industry? Do you know?
Up until 1983 pharmaceutical companies were legally liable & responsible for the vaccines they manufactured. However at that time they approached Congress and threatened to stop making vaccines because they couldn’t afford the lawsuits. Some did stop making them and for awhile there were shortages in supply.
Congress agreed to grant these drug companies indemnity, so they were no longer liable.
This was a huge turning point.
Soon after this liability for companies who manufacture vaccines was eliminated, an avalanche of new vaccines were introduced. Now an ever increasing vaccine list is being forced upon us, and that list has increased by at least FOUR times since the 80s!
Children today receive more vaccines before they are six months old than we received by the time we graduated high school. And it does not stop there, since hundreds of new vaccines are in the planning stages, all of which could be required if this trend continues.
So the real controversy is not so much a matter of being against ALL vaccines but rather against the avalanche of new ones being lumped inside a VERY controversial mandate.
The controversy and concerns NOW are more about …
* WHY open floodgates for SO many new vaccines and then mandate them with no safety accountability? *
Where do we draw the line on the number of necessary vaccines and boosters our children receive if the manufacturers won’t? Remember, the companies who make vaccines are not liable for any possible reaction, even death!
“By 2007 American children were being told by government health officials and pediatricians to get 48 doses of 14 vaccines by age six and 53-56 doses of 15 or 16 vaccines by age 12. In May 2007, CNN Money reported predictions that vaccine industry sales will more than double by 2010.”
During the 1980s the US government began to uphold the weight of accountability for vaccines. To that end, billions in tax dollars has been collected for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).
If you believe that vaccines are safe, then why has our government paid more than 2 billion in damages to those injured by them? And only done so with the stipulation of a “no fault’ process? (see below)
IMPORTANT ==> A significant part of this VICP program is that it was designed as ‘no fault’ – meaning that that no one is allowed to go on legal record saying that the vaccine caused the injury – that any record of ‘fault’ is not a part of the process. Therefore lawyers (and media) can and do claim that, “No link has been established.” Yet that link is the very basis for the program.
Could it be that this ‘no fault’ agreement to forbid disclosure might be cause for so many to assume that vaccines are safe?
Since 1989, 11 new vaccines have been added to the schedule. There are now 35 shots of 14 vaccines containing dozens of pathogens. Parents can not easily determine exactly what was injected because there are as many as 13 pathogens in one vaccine.
And yet, even though thousands of cases were filed for damages to the VICP, the vast majority were dismissed by those appointed to oversee the program. So that VICP government trust fund holds a running surplus wealth in the billions in funds collected from taxpayers over decades.
“… two out of three individuals applying for vaccine injury compensation have been turned away empty handed even though to date about $1.8B has been awarded to more than 2,200 plaintiffs out of some 12,000 who have applied. And they learn that nearly 5,000 of the vaccine injury claims are sitting in limbo because they represent children who suffered brain and immune system dysfunction after vaccination but have been diagnosed with regressive autism, which is not listed on the Table of Compensable Events. Yet there is $2.7B sitting unawarded in the Trust Fund and people suggesting all sorts of ways to use that money for all sorts of reasons other than for compensating vaccine victims.”
Who are the people appointed with the power to oversee this massive VICP trust fund?
Many with the power over these billion in tax dollars have strong ties to pharmaceutical companies. One is an attorney for Pfizer and others are medical professionals with strong ties to pharmaceutical companies.
Since drug companies do not want to be held accountable for their vaccines and government approved this, WHY would government then put drug companies in charge of that same accountability?
About Personal Rights: The Arena Beyond Accountability
Beyond the science of vaccines and their credibility enters another arena in this debate, that of human rights of informed consent. Beyond the science and right/wrong of accountability issues, we also now face whether we even have a right to decide whether to vaccinate or not or to even know what is inside the syringe. Yes, there are bills like this in the works that could completely remove those rights.
Given the dramatic increase in numbers of required vaccinations AND the complete absence of accountability for them, why would we not have every right to question them?
Should the right to decide for ourselves what we allow in our own bodies be dictated by government?
If we accept that much critical information about vaccines has been suppressed, then shall we allow those who intentionally hid that information to make decisions about what is ‘for the good of society’?
Where will it end? One possible solution is to repeal the indemnity so that pharmaceutical companies are once again simply held accountable for the vaccines they manufacture. Can you think of a reason why any large manufacturing company should be exempt from liability for the products they bring to the market? Especially when it is injected into the bodies of children?
Those who wish to vaccinate regardless of how many new ones are recommended each year without liability? They can continue doing that if they choose. Those who do NOT wish to follow that herd regardless of risk only insist on that same freedom and right to choose.
End the Mandate <== Sign petition.
Your attention and input is appreciated. Thanks.
This controversy also applies to vaccines for our pets. More and more vaccines are not only recommended but required by law without data to prove they are necessary or even safe.
A few examples:
Why might a 150 pound dog receive the exact same dose of a rabies vaccine as a 5 pound dog?
Why are rabies vaccines given yearly when data suggests that one shot is sufficient for protection for life?
Read more here > “The High Cost High Risk World of Modern Pet Care”
Another article you might like… How to Change the World
More info about vaccines:
Chemist gives reasons not to vaccinate and use vaccine exemption forms instead
Latest posts by Carolan Ross (see all)
- Media Narratives Contradict and Censor Themselves - March 19, 2018
- Selling Amazon FBA:State Sales Tax and Nexus Nightmares - April 25, 2017
- List of LEGIT Alternative Media Sources - February 6, 2016