Become a Member

Your membership in NHF will impact 7 billion lives on this Planet.

Join Us

Support NHF’s Work!

Please consider making a gift today to support the NHF’s work.


Free e-List

Get the latest updates impacting your health and health freedom!




The seasonal flu vaccine is now recommended every year for every man, woman and child from the age of 2 throughout the rest of life. This mandate is the result of the exaggerated H1N1 Flu pandemic of 2009 that proved to not even be a pandemic. This is a political vaccine with no scientific basis that will make millions for the flu manufactures and cause health problems for thousands. How does a person sift between the conflicting information provided? As a 30+ year independent vaccine researcher, I hope these facts will help you decide if you or your children will receive the seasonal flu vaccine.

The first H1N1 flu vaccine of 2009 has proven to cause many unwanted side effect. Between the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in Washington and other reliable sources, the side effects are stacking up and looking more like a horror film. Not only was the vaccine rushed to the market, it was based on flawed reports from the Center of Disease Control and the World Health Organization.

It is common knowledge that the flu vaccines have always had the potential to cause serious side effects. Each year the pharmaceutical companies release new flu shots that are virtually untested. They combine various flu virus strains based on an educated guess and then recommend the shot to everyone, including children and pregnant mothers. According to the CDC Vital Statistics Report 1999-2003, Influenza death for children under the age of 5 skyrocketed as they began to implement the flu vaccine for the children. From 1999 to early 2002, death rates were declining from 25 down to 10 per year then the latter half of 2002 the CDC mandated the flu vaccine for children and the death rate climbed from 25 deaths per year in 1999 to over 90 in 2002! Death is a pretty bad vaccine side effect!

1999 — 29 deaths
2000 — 19 deaths
2001 — 13 deaths
2002 — 12 deaths
2003 — 90 deaths (Year of mass vaccinations of children under age 5 years)
2006 — 78 deaths
2007 — 88 deaths
2008 — 116 deaths (40.9% vaccinated at age 6 months to 23 months)

What other side effects did we see with the H1N1 flu shot in 2009-2010? According to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), there were 178 miscarriages after mothers received the H1N1 flu vaccine and 70 other documented form reliable sources. Considering that only 10% of all adverse events get reported, we know that the true numbers were much worse. According to testimony before the CDC advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV), Thursday, October 28, 2010 presented by Dr. Renee Tocco, on behalf of the National Coalition of Organized Women, (NCOW) the number of miscarriages we as high as 3,587 nationwide. Miscarriages, a pretty bad vaccine side effect! Dr. Renee went on to testify that the H1N1 flu pandemic was based on false information from the Center of Disease Control and the World Health Organization. They claimed the pandemic in April 2009 was based on 56 maternal deaths saying it was a “Never before seen virus”. (This virus was in three flu vaccines given to thousands of people from 2006 forward: FluMist, Focetria (swine flu) and Fluvarin all contain the H1N1 virus.) They also stated the following: “In spite of the 178 VAERS fetal-death-associated influenza vaccine reports, the FDA has approved seasonal flu vaccines for the 2010-2011 flu season that, in addition to another “A” strain and a “B” strain of influenza, contain the “same” level of the “same” 2009-A-H1N1 viruses that were present in the 2009-2010 pandemic “swine flu” vaccines and has again approved several Thimerosal-preserved flu-shot formulation that may be given to pregnant women without a prominent “Warning: Contains Mercury” caution on the vial.” It is very clear that the Center for Disease Control is not about protecting people but focused on pushing unsafe vaccines on the unsuspecting public.

In 2010, Dr. Alicia Siston studied the 56 women who died supposedly from the H1N1 flu. Her study was referenced at this hearing, showing that most of these deaths were “Unconfirmed” as being H1N1 related deaths despite the fact that the CDC had tests that could have verified for certain that these were H1N1 related. The CDC used the death of these women to push their agenda...flu vaccines for every American, without sufficient cause.

Every vaccine has risks, even the manufactures of vaccines admit that some will die and get injured. Unfortunately for the injured or the families of the dead, the manufactures are completely protected from all liability. The following is from the vaccine package insert admitting that it can be dangerous for many, untested for safety in pregnancy and no studies showing how it may affect the nursing baby:

Section 8- This medication should not be used if you have certain medical conditions. Before using this medicine, consult your doctor or pharmacist if you have: history of allergy to egg or egg products, immune deficiency (e.g., agammaglobulinemia, HIV infection, leukemia, lymphoma, other cancers, radiation). Also avoid close contact with people who are immune-compromised (e.g., HIV infection, cancer therapy) for at least 21 days. This medication is not recommended for use during pregnancy. It is also not known whether FLUVIRIN® or FluZone can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. It is not known whether this drug passes into breast milk. Consult your doctor before breast-feeding.

How is it that they offer the flu vaccine at the airport, local drug stores, grocery store pharmacies and many other places where they do not have your medical rerecords? Are the doctors telling the pregnant women that your unborn child may be at risk? Are they telling Mom that the vaccine may also contain (Thimerosal) that can potentially harm the unborn developing brain and be dangerous for mother too? What happens if the Thimerosal passes into the breast milk of nursing babies?

Another huge problem is that all major hospitals and medical facilities are now requiring that all employees get the flu shots or get fired from their jobs! Imagine working as a nurse for 25 years only to be told that you no longer have the right to choose what drug you must take to keep your job. This is a direct violation of personal rights and over rides many state laws that give people the right to choose. It will not stop there…soon it will be the DPT (diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus) vaccine because of the pertussis outbreaks across the country. What vaccine will it be next, the cancer or AIDS vaccine? I am encouraging nurses and doctors to unite and fight these unlawful mandates. Perhaps when we have numerous law suits in the courts, they will stop acting like the medical mafia.

You now must decide who you are going to trust for your information and health care recommendations. I encourage all people to thoroughly investigate all medications and vaccines before they agree to inject them. I know it can be very confusing as conflicting information is everywhere. Ultimately, it is your right to choose what your family does.

As a 30 vaccine investigator, I know the dedication and time involved to make informed vaccine decisions. I personally no longer trust the CDC, the FDA and the current medical establishment who recommend routine vaccines for all people. They have failed to protect our families and no longer represent the people. This industry is fueled by greed, special interest groups and unfortunately our government is controlled by the big pharmaceutical companies.

Flu Mist: The nasal vaccine has never been studied to see if the viruses can penetrate the membrane between the sinus and the brain (barrier). When the CDC was asked if this had been studied by Dr. Mark Geier, their response was “NO.” Common Flu Vaccine Ingredients include:

Egg protein – causes egg allergies
Formaldehyde- Formalyn (formalin) is a 37 percent solution of gaseous formaldehyde which includes methanol. Known toxin used in embalming
Polysorbate 80 shown to cause infertility in mice
Sodium Chloride and Calcium Chloride
Monosodium Glutamate (MSG):C5H8NNaO4, a Stabilizer MSG – man made exciito-toxin
Potassium phosphate- a soluble salt which is used as a fertilizer, a food additive and a fungicide.
Thimerosal a form of mercury still found in some multi-vile vaccines.
Polyoxidonium- Synthetic polymers and nanomaterials display selective phenotypic effects in cells and in the body that affect signal transduction mechanisms involved in inflammation, differentiation, proliferation, and apoptosis.
Squalene- An oil based adjuvant that has never been approved in the US as safe, can cause blindness, autoimmune dysfunction and can inhibit sperm production. More than two dozen peer-reviewed scientific papers from ten different laboratories throughout the U.S., Europe, Asia, and Australia have been published documenting the development of autoimmune disease in animals subjected to squalene-based adjuvants. Novartis will make a flu vaccine using MF59 consisting of squalene.
Tween 80 - A recent study (December 2005) discovered that Tween80 can cause anaphylaxis, a sometimes fatal reaction characterized by a sharp drop in blood pressure, hives, and breathing difficulties.
Human Diploid Tissue- organ and tissue from aborted baby tissue is now used in manufacturing many vaccines.

Contraindications for administering the various Flu vaccines the manufactures package insert are dismissed. The package inserts claim the following:

MedImmune - Fluzone


8.1. Pregnancy

Fluzone and Fluzone High-Dose

Pregnancy Category C: Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with Fluzone or Fluzone High-Dose. It is also not known whether Fluzone or Fluzone High-Dose can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. Fluzone or Fluzone High-Dose should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed.

Fluzone Intradermal

Pregnancy Category B: A developmental and reproductive toxicity study has been performed in female rabbits at a dose approximately 20 times the human dose (on a mg/kg basis) and has revealed no evidence of impaired female fertility or harm to the fetus due to Fluzone Intradermal. There are, however, no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women. Because animal reproduction studies are not always predictive of human response, Fluzone Intradermal should be used during pregnancy only if clearly needed. Healthcare providers are encouraged to register women who receive Fluzone Intradermal during pregnancy in Sanofi Pasteur Inc.'s vaccination pregnancy registry by calling 1-800-822-2463.

8.3. Nursing Mothers

It is not known whether Fluzone or Fluzone Intradermal is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when Fluzone or Fluzone Intradermal is administered to a nursing woman.

8.4. Pediatric Use


Safety and effectiveness of Fluzone in children below the age of 6 months have not been established. Safety and immunogenicity of Fluzone was evaluated in children 6 months through 8 years of age. [See Adverse Reactions (6.1) and Clinical Studies (14.1).]

Fluzone High-Dose

Safety and effectiveness of Fluzone High-Dose in persons <65 years of age have not been established.

Fluzone Intradermal

Safety and effectiveness of Fluzone Intradermal in persons <18 years of age have not been established. In a clinical trial, 97 infants and toddlers 6 months through 35 months of age and 160 children 3 years through 8 years of age were enrolled to receive two injections of Fluzone Intradermal. Infants and children in a control group received two injections of Fluzone. Fluzone Intradermal was associated with increased local reactogenicity relative to Fluzone. The size of the study was not adequate to reliably evaluate serious adverse events or the immune response elicited by Fluzone Intradermal relative to Fluzone.

8.5. Geriatric Use


In two observational studies of Fluzone in 118 adults 19 through 59 year

Flu Mist – MedImmune- Here are some points of interest taken from the package insert:

5.7 Limitations of Vaccine Effectiveness- FluMist may not protect all individuals receiving the vaccine.

8.1 Pregnancy

Pregnancy Category C

Animal reproduction studies have not been conducted with FluMist. It is not known whether FluMist can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman or can affect reproduction capacity. FluMist should be given to a pregnant woman only if clearly needed. The effect of the vaccine on embryo-fetal and pre-weaning development was evaluated in a developmental toxicity study using pregnant rats receiving the frozen formulation. Groups of animals were administered the vaccine either once (during the period of organogenesis on gestation day 6) or twice (prior to gestation and during the period of organogenesis on gestation day 6), 250 microliter/rat/occasion (approximately 110-140 human dose equivalents), by intranasal instillation. No adverse effects on
pregnancy, parturition, lactation, embryo-fetal or pre-weaning development were observed. There were no vaccine-related fetal malformations or other evidence of teratogenesis noted in this study.

8.3 Nursing Mothers

It is not known whether FluMist is excreted in human milk. Therefore, as some viruses are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised if FluMist is administered to nursing mothers.

8.4 Pediatric Use

Safety and effectiveness of the vaccine has been demonstrated for children 2 years of age and older with reduction in culture-confirmed influenza rates compared to active control (injectable influenza vaccine made by Sanofi Pasteur Inc.) and placebo [see Clinical Studies (14.1)]. FluMist is not approved for use in children — 24 months of age. FluMist use in children — 24 months has been associated with increased risk of hospitalization and wheezing in clinical trials [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1) and AdverseReactions (6.1)].

Package inserts for all flu vaccines

© 2011 Mary Tocco - All Rights Reserved


As if Merck does not have enough problems with vaccine production, the drugmaker apparently distributed charred bits of plastic shrink wrap in vials of various vaccines - including Gardasil for preventing HPV infection, Varivax for chicken pox, Pneumovax for pneumococcal disease, Zostavax for shingles and MMR II for measles, mumps and rubella, according to Dow Jones.

In 2008, the FDA issued a warning letter about manufacturing problems at Merck’s West Point, Pa., plant (read here). Since then, FDA inspection reports have cited more problems: the presence of metal particles in certain products, cracks in vaccine vials and delays in Merck’s reporting adverse event from products made at the plant to the FDA, Dow Jones writes.

The drugmaker maintains most problems have been resolved, but there were no subsequent health problems and the FDA has not issued another warning letter. Dow Jones, by the way, obtained the inspection reports, known as Form 483s, from the FDA under the Freedom of Information Act. “We do have a complex operation,” James Robinson, vp of vaccines product and technical operations, tells Dow Jones. “What we are seeing is that the severity and criticality of observations (by the FDA) are declining. What we’ve seen in the last few inspections tells us we’re on the right track.”

The problems are crucial to Merck, which is struggling to replenish its pharma product portfolio and jumpstart the vaccine business. Through the first half of the year, vaccine sales accounted for nearly 7 percent of $23.7 billion in revenue (look here). But vaccine production has been troubled for some time.

Over the past couple of years, Merck has struggled to maintain supplies of Vaqta for hepatitis A, ProQuad for MMR, Zostavax for shingles and Recombivax for hepatitis B (see here for the latest). And a year ago, Merck was finally able to restore production of all pediatric vaccines for the first time since 2007 (read this).

But how did pieces of protective shrink wrap find their way into incoming glass vials? The shrink wrap was not removed during washing and was subsequently charred during a heat-based sterilization process, according to an FDA inspection report in April, Dow Jones writes, adding that some vials made their to customers.

Since November 2009, Merck has submitted to the FDA at least 12 reports of charred shrink wrap found in vaccines, according to the FDA report. Eight arose from consumer complaints, and four stemmed from internal sample testing. Merck responded by switching from shrink-wrap to plastic or cardboard trays for incoming vials for a majority of its products, Robinson tells Dow Jones.

But in its April inspection report, the FDA said shrink wrap was still being used for some incoming vials, which the agency said made Merck’s initial response inadequate (see the report). Robinson said Merck expected to abandon shrink wrap on all incoming vials by year’s end. The FDA report also said patient safety risks associated with the charred shrink wrap couldn’t be ruled out. Robinson denied there have reports of adverse events associated with the shrink wrap, Dow Jones writes.


In May, Merck sent a letter to doctors advising them to look for brown particles in its vaccines as well as in vials of Antivenin, a treatment for black-widow spider bites. The drugmaker said small pieces of the shrink wrap, which it called an “inert carbon material,” can stick to the inside of product vials and turn brown during the sterilization process. Merck said the particles could lead to injection-site reactions, but should not affect sterility or potency. The drugmaker insists the particles were observed in very rare cases - less than one in six million vials overall.

In August 2010, an FDA inspector accused Merck of not reporting to the agency certain adverse events associated with patient use of its drugs within the required 15 calendar days (here is the report). Robinson said Merck is working to improve its on-time reporting of adverse events, and that it currently exceeds the industry average. Some adverse events are reported late because they take longer to investigate

In February 2009, an inspector found metal particles in certain products, as well as cracked vials. The report said Merck should have done more to investigate and address the causes of these problems (read the report here). Also, Merck had received complaints from doctors regarding bubbling and foaming in vials of certain vaccines. Robinson tells Dow Jones these problems have been resolved.

vaccine pic thx to lulu on flickr

“The greatest lie ever told is that
vaccines are safe and effective”

                                         Dr. Len Horowitz

The Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society recently issued a position statement that “opposes any legislation or regulation that would allow children to be exempted from mandatory immunizations based simply on their parents, or, in the case of adolescents, their own secular personal beliefs.”

In the statement, Infectious Diseases in Children, editorial board member Paul A. Offit, MD and others said any legislation being considered should contain certain provisions; notably, that parents who are claiming exemptions be given counseling about the importance of immunization to their own children, as well as to the community overall. Unfortunately they are not talking about genuine counseling but instead forced propaganda brain conditioning sessions.

These are the terrorists I wrote about in my free e-book The Terror of Pediatric Medicine and now also in Humane Pediatrics. It was sad for me, tragically so, that Fukushima happened the week I launched both my pediatric site and this new book, which creates a new paradigm for the practice of pediatrics and the care of the very young. Most of the officials and pediatric organizations are staffed with human beings of questionable character and integrity for they cherish their poisonous vaccines more than life itself. Dr. Offit and all these others are the ones who need counseling about how to return to a humane state of consciousness. That really is, for all practical purposes a real impossibility, so I am not sure what should be done with the lot of them.

“The primary reason cited by parents who are reluctant or who refuse to vaccinate is concern over safety and efficacy of vaccines. Lack of trust in the government, the perception that their children were not at great risk and that vaccine-preventable diseases were not severe are additional reasons often given by parents,” goes a vaccinationist’s propaganda article.

The total award paid as of August 6, 2008
was $1,804,415,262.35. 

                                                National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

On May 4, 2011 a new study by Neil Z. Miller and Gary S. Goldman was published online by SAGE, entitled “Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity?” This study is another in a long line of studies revealing evidence showing the more vaccines a baby receives, the more chance they have of dying from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).


“Crib death” was so infrequent in the pre-vaccination
era that it was not even mentioned in the statistics, but it
started to climb in the 1950s with the spread of mass
vaccination against diseases of childhood.
                                                Harris L. Coulter, PhD

Newborn babies are the most vulnerable of all beings. Vulnerability says it all when it comes to a newborn infant. It is easy to hurt most beings but little babies are the most vulnerable and the easiest to hurt. Parents are of course vulnerable to their infants vulnerability but most pediatricians would just squash both parents and their infants in their mania to vaccinate—to inject poisonous substances and heavy metals directly into their bloodstreams.

Children deserve the best medical treatment from the best form of medicine human intelligence can implement. What they get is the worst. Pediatricians start attacking babies almost the minute they come out of the womb. They are monstrous beasts and perhaps that label is too kind. One of the reasons civilization needs to crash hard is that these arrogant ones need to be extinguished from the human experience, purged from civilization so we can regain our humaneness.

The Pastoral Medical Association (PMA), to which I belong, finds that modern, conventionally-prepared immunizations do not conform to scriptural rules for hygiene. The PMA thus is “unable to support the application of conventional immunizations. We believe and support the God-given right of every individual to choose or refuse conventional ideas that conflict with their sincerely held religious beliefs as so ordained in the Supreme Law of the Creator.” Since there is something unhygienic about vaccines, meaning something wrong with them, we should not be surprised by the following chart:

Who Knows Best?

Many pediatricians refuse to offer services to parents who only want partial vaccines or who refuse them altogether, according to Infectious Diseases in Children editorial board member and practicing pediatrician, Richard Lander, MD. “At issue is the parents’ rights vs. that of the community or that of the minor,” Lander said in an interview. Lander thinks he knows what is best for the community and for minors but his assumptions and perceptions are based on a cruel arrogant type of medical consciousness. Doctors like Lander have both closed hearts and closed minds and cannot entertain the possibility that they have been terribly wrong about the vaccine question.

Dr. Stan Block says, “All of us in pediatrics know the routine for the two-month-old checkup. Perform the routine history and physical examination. Dispense routine advice. Administer routine vaccines. Then the impasse begins. About 75% of parents are totally respectful of and adhere to our immunization recommendations.” The remaining 25 percent are scared witless of the dangers and side effects that pediatricians insist are not there but actually are there according to formal statistics in the government’s vaccine damage database. After all, the government pays out billions of dollars to parents whose children have been severely hurt by vaccines that your local card-carrying pediatrician will swear to his or her last breath are safe.

Dr. Ari Brown writes, “Suspicious parents can be reassured of vaccine safety with proper communication strategies, openness and empathy. There are four types of parents when it comes to vaccines: 1) believers—those who believe vaccination is safe and necessary; 2) relaxed—those who are cautious but still trust their physicians; 3) cautious—those who don’t really have a problem with vaccines until seeing media coverage or speaking with friends; and 4) the unconvinced—those who staunchly believe that not getting vaccinated is in the best interest of their child. Pediatricians should target the cautious parents, who are typically scared but respond to education efforts. Many parents have been put off by physicians whom they felt were condescending. Physicians must maintain proper and sensitive communication habits despite time constraints with each patient. Break down their fears and see where they’re coming from. Fewer and fewer parents are asking about specific vaccines and instead have this global, vague mistrust. If you ask them to specify their fears, you can respond appropriately.”

Many doctors sink to the level of using openness and empathy to try to manipulate and trap parents into doing something against their child’s best interest. If they are fooled they might then have to regret that for the rest of their lives if their child suffers harm. There is no appropriate response to vaccine fears because they are too be greatly feared. Only an absolute animal of a person would inject ethyl-mercury or aluminum directly into the bloodstream of an infant. Parents who are fooled are not to be blamed for mostly they are mislead by their pediatricians who need the money more than they need integrity, honesty, and humility—all humane qualities being deliberately thrown out the window in medical school.

Dr. Brown continues saying, “The most effective pitch for a vaccine is one that is emotional and personal. You can throw out all the science and data and research, but at the end of the day, what really makes families comfortable is that you yourself are vaccinated and that you vaccinate your own kids. You must reassure your patients that you wouldn’t do anything different.” I have heard many stories through the years about doctors who do not vaccinate their own children but do it to other people’s kids.

The vaccine controversy seems to be a never-ending one. It is obvious from how pediatricians write that they are 100 percent sure that they are absolutely and undeniably right. If one studies the question hard enough it becomes evident that they are terribly wrong. To test that, all you have to do is present some hard evidence to your pediatrician and see how hard he or she hits the ceiling or bounces up against a wall. Confronting an oncologist or a pediatrician with solid information against something they adamantly promote immediately dissolves their smiles and empathetic nods, and they get downright mean. Their dark side surfaces and you can see they are not to be trusted with your children’s lives.

In England

“‘Sixteen jumbo jets crash killing everyone on board, 6,500 lives lost.’ Can you imagine that headline—everyone would be talking about it there would be a public outcry. Well, in the UK, at least 17 babies die every day; that is every day; almost 6,500 babies die every year. Where is the public outcry? There is none because they are babies; there are only platitudes and promises the next time will be different,” write Colette Murphy and Jo Hart.

Malnutrition, lead poisoning, vaccines, inappropriate medical care, violence, drugs, incarceration, HIV, and poverty wreck many postindustrial U.S. cities, all leave tiny victims in their wake. I don’t know how many children around the world die or are damaged by vaccines every year but we know that number to be quite substantial.

Vaccines Cause Cancer and Other Diseases

The steady escalation in the number of vaccines administered has been followed by an identical rise in the incidence of autoimmune diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, subacute lupus erythematosus, psoriasis, multiple sclerosis, asthma) seen in children. While there is a genetic transmission of some of these diseases, many are probably due to the injury from foreign protein particles, mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and other toxic agents injected in vaccines.

In the early 1900s an astute Indiana physician, Dr. W. B. Clarke, stated, “Cancer was practically unknown until compulsory vaccination with cowpox vaccine began to be introduced. I have had to deal with 200 cases of cancer, and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person.”

Interestingly this week the U.S. National Institutes of Health said that the strong-smelling chemical formaldehyde causes cancer. The NIH said Friday that people with higher measures of exposure to formaldehyde are at increased risk for certain types of rare cancers, including those affecting the upper part of the throat behind the nose.

The steady escalation in the number of vaccines administered has been followed by an identical rise in the incidence of autoimmune diseases (rheumatoid arthritis, subacute lupus erythematosus, psoriasis, multiple sclerosis, asthma) seen in children. While there is a genetic transmission of some of these diseases, many are probably due to the injury from foreign protein particles, mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde and other toxic agents injected in vaccines.

In the early 1900s an astute Indiana physician, Dr. W. B. Clarke, stated, “Cancer was practically unknown until compulsory vaccination with cowpox vaccine began to be introduced. I have had to deal with 200 cases of cancer, and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person.”

Interestingly this week the U.S. National Institutes of Health said that the strong-smelling chemical formaldehyde causes cancer. The NIH said Friday that people with higher measures of exposure to formaldehyde are at increased risk for certain types of rare cancers, including those affecting the upper part of the throat behind the nose.

Dr. Mark Allan Sircus, Ac., OMD, DM (P)
Director International Medical Veritas Association
Doctor of Oriental and Pastoral Medicine

As we approach the 10.000th participant in our survey, I would like to present to you a little (tiny) part of the results. Right now we are working on the technical side, which gives us some headache, as the data is so huge that the current server can´t handle it.

For this reason I present to you only one graph, which shows the results of the questions about atopy (spectrum of allergic diseases)


Asthma, hayfever and neurodermatitis  are seen very frequently today. A recent German study with 17461 children(most of them vaccinated) between 0-17 years (KIGGS) showed that 4.7% of children suffer from asthma, 10,7% of children from hayfever and 13,2% from neurodermatitis. These numbers differ in western countries, i.e. the prevalence of asthma among children in the US is 6% and is 14-16% in Australia (Australia’s Health 2004, AIHW)

The prevalence of asthma among  7400 (on the German site we have around 2200 participants) unvaccinated children  in our survey is less than 2.5%(the question included also cases of chronic bronchitis), hayfever 2,6% and neurodermatitis around 7%.

According to the KIGGS study over 40% of children between 3 and 17 years were sensitized against at least one allergen tested (20 common allergens were tested) and 22,9% had an allergic disease. Although we did not carry out a bloodtest, less than 11% stated that their children had an allergy.

The graphs show the illnesses for all participants irrespectively of their age. In the final results we hope to present to you the option to select specific age groups, gender and countries.

Participation at the survey

If you know somebody who is unvaccinated please let them know of the survey and forward the link to them. The link is:

It would also be very helpful to link to the survey on different websites. So if you have the possibility please support it by linking to the survey.


Article provided by


Despite widespread and concerted efforts to reassure parents about the safety and utility of vaccines, most parents continue to have concerns not only about the number of vaccines and frequency of administration, but also safety, side effects and proper testing, according to a new survey in Health Affairs.

“The widespread reports of concerns highlights an important point: Even if they are not associated with an intention to refuse some or all vaccines, concerns related to childhood vaccines are valid and need to be treated as such,” write the authors, who work at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US Department of Health and Human Services’ vaccine office.

The survey, which gather info from 376 parents or guardians of children six years old or younger, found that only 23 percent had no concerns about childhood vaccines. The level of concern was determined by dividing respondents into two groups: those who had had their youngest child receive all recommended vaccinations, or who intended that the child receive them; and those who did not intend to have their youngest child receive all recommended vaccinations (read the abstract).

As it turns out, 83 percent had already vaccinated their children with all recommendation vaccinations and 11 percent planned to do. Only 5 percent intended to vaccinate their children with some, but not all, of the vaccines, and just 2 percent indicated their children would not be vaccinated at all. The study did not use medical records to verify the findings, but the researchers write these are similar to the National Immunization Survey results, which are verified by healthcare providers.

“Parents intending their children to receive some, but not all, of the recommended vaccines demonstrated a more nuanced pattern of concerns related to childhood vaccinations,” they write. “They were more likely than expected to believe that children receive too many vaccines during the first two years of life and that vaccines may cause learning disabilities, such as autism. On the other hand, they were less likely than expected to believe that diseases that weren’t serious were prevented by vaccines. These differences also were statistically significant.”

Some specific figures: 38 percent say it’s painful for children to receive so many shots during one doctor’s visit; 36 percent say their child is getting too many vaccines in one visit; 34 percent say children get too many vaccines during the first two years of life; 30 percent say vaccines may cause learning disabilities, such as autism; 26 percent say vaccine ingredients are unsafe; 17 percent say vaccines are not tested enough for safety, and 16 percent say vaccines may cause chronic disease.

Consequently, the survey found many parents are fairly engaged in seeking vaccine info. Most parents actively serach before vaccination - 24 percent sought out ‘a lot’ of info; and 36 percent tried to find ’some’ info, while only 19 percent tried to find just ‘a little’ info about safety. But who are they asking and where are they looking?

Health care professionals were cited as one of the three most important sources of info by 85 percent, while family members were mentioned by 46 percent and friends were relied on by 22 percent. And 28 percent cited the the American Academy of Pediatrics and 26 percent mentioned the CDC as one of their top three sources.

The Internet was mentioned by 24 percent, which was higher than 10 percent cited in a similar survey done two years ago, the researchers note. But traditional media ranked less frequently as one of the top three sources of info for vaccine info. Newspapers were in the top three for 5 percent of parents, magazines and TV news program were important for 4 percent, radio for just 1 percent, and daytime or entertainment television shows for less than 1 percent.

“Discerning which parents have the least amount of confidence in routinely recommended vaccines is a complex task. Given the many individual vaccines in existence, it may be less, rather than more, useful to investigate broad concepts such as ‘vaccine confidence’ or ‘vaccine hesitancy,’ the researchers suggest in their conclusion. “It is also important to acknowledge that even if broad measures are developed and used, parents’ confidence may vary across specific vaccines.”

Vaccine picture thanks to lulu on flickr