Questioning Vaccines Is Not
                                                                 “Fueled By Ignorance”
                                                           By: Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO
                                                                                    July 2007

                                                            The vaccine debate is escalating.  
                                                            With 18 states currently considering
                                                            laws to mandate the new HPV
                                                            (cervical cancer) vaccine for school
                                                            entry, the number of persons
                                                            questioning the necessity of
                                                            vaccination is at an all-time high.  

Those promoting vaccination seem to be pulling out all the stops to defend
their positions.  

On February 4, 2007,
New York Times Online published a review of a new book,
“VACCINE: The Controversial Story of Medicine’s Greatest Lifesaver”,
by Arthur Allen.  

Here is a portion of David Oshinsky’s review:

“Allen is sympathetic to parental fears regarding the dangers of various
vaccines, though he remains skeptical that scientific studies of these dangers,
no matter how rigorous, will open many minds.  

At this point, he writes, much of the “antivaccinist” leadership is composed of
counter cultural types who view life through the prism of conspiracy theory: the
government lies, the drug companies are evil, the medical profession is corrupt;
trust the Internet instead…. To a large extent, says Allen, this antivaccination
impulse is fueled by an ignorance of the past.  

Vaccines have done their job so well that most parents today are blissfully
unaware of the diseases their children are being inoculated against.  

The end result is a culture that has become increasingly risk-averse regarding
vaccination because people have greater trouble grasping the reward.  The
problem appears to be growing.  

As more children go unvaccinated in the United States, there has been a rise in
vaccine-preventable diseases.  

Meanwhile, fewer pharmaceutical companies are now producing vaccines, citing
the high cost of testing, diminishing markets and a fear of litigation.  

For Allen, a reversal of these trends will require something long overdue: a
frank national discussion about the risks and benefits of vaccination.  His
splendid book is a smart place to begin.”  

Allen’s book is one more in a recent series of books that give tribute to the
"wonder of vaccines."  The author and reviewer promote their views by
disparaging intelligent adults and dedicated physicians who have researched
the problems associated with vaccines and consider mass vaccination to be
the casualty-causing loss leader of the pharmaceutical industry.  

The drug companies count vaccine injuries as few, at least in part, because
safety is concluded through the use of large epidemiological studies.  

The larger one makes the denominator, the easier it is to discount the size of
the numerator.  For example, 231 injured in a study that involved 679,900
persons makes the percentage of those injured appear unarguably small.  

But vaccine injuries are real despite claims that occurrences are rare.  Fears of
developing autism as a result of vaccination have been dismissed by
mainstream medicine, which prefers to attribute the increase incidence of
autism, currently at 1 in 166 children, to a
“better diagnosis.”  

Thimerosal (mercury) in vaccines has received much attention in the
association with autism.  Undoubtedly, many children have been damaged by
mercury in vaccines as the numbers of successful recoveries using chelation
therapy attest.  

However, the rate of autism in California has continued to escalate despite the
removal of mercury from most of the childhood vaccines.  

The rest of the ingredients in the vaccines need to be investigated with the
same intensity as mercury.  The answers regarding these toxic substances are
still forthcoming.  

Another avenue being heavily investigated is the search for genetic causes of
autism spectrum disorders.  The identification of a corrupted gene will point an
incriminating finger at defective parents as the
“cause” of their child’s autism.  

A better use of scare research funds would be to investigate which bio-medical
treatments are most effective for these ill children.  

An exponential growth of childhood illnesses such as allergies/asthma,
diabetes, ADD-ADHD and cancer has occurred over the last 10 years.  

Instead of suspecting the large numbers of vaccines now being injected into
children by the time they enter kindergarten, drugs designed for adults have
been given expanded approval for treatment of children.  

Healthcare providers continue to view vaccination in the same way as
described by Mr. Allan’s catchy book title:
“Medicine’s greatest lifesaver.”  

This accolade is attributed to the reduction of childhood infectious diseases
such as chickenpox, mumps and three-day measles.  

But can a negative truly be proven?  The assumption of conventional medicine
is that all children will be exposed and if exposed, all unvaccinated children will
get sick.  This is a faulty assumption.  

If a vaccinated child does not contract chickenpox, is it due to the protection of
the vaccine?  Or was it because the child was never exposed to the virus?  
What if an unvaccinated child is exposed but does not become sick?  

Isn’t that a testament to the health of the child’s immune system?  Not every
child in a classroom exposed to influenza comes down with the flu.  

Studies comparing the health of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated populations of
children are very much needed.  

A patient population from which this type of data could be accessed is the
nearly 35,000 unvaccinated children cared for by Homefirst Health Services in
metropolitan Chicago.  

The good health of these children can be assumed; there have been no
reported cases of autism among this group.  Examining the health histories of
these children would be a telling exercise.  

Discovering that large numbers of these unvaccinated children have not
contracted
“vaccine-preventable diseases” would deliver a serious blow to the
concept that vaccination is needed to keep children healthy.  

An even more provocative study would be to examine how many drugs and
other health problems exist among these 35,000 unvaccinated children.  

If vaccines were safe, manufacturers would not require federal legislation to
protect them from liability.  If vaccines were effective, no one would question
the value of their use.  If vaccines were good for us, state mandates would not
be necessary to force them upon children.  

A growing number of adults are investigating vaccines and discovering the
truth about their contents.  Vaccines are grown on monkey kidneys, chicken
embryos and contain bovine (cow) serum.  

Vaccines contain particles of viruses, bits of bacteria and measurable amounts
of aluminum, gelatin, polysorbate 80, MSG and other chemicals.  

A responsible adult who concludes that this combination of pathogens and
chemicals can be harmful is not a
“counter cultural type who views life through
a prism of conspiracy theory”
as Mr. Allen contends.  

Understanding that autoimmune reactions can be the consequence of
injecting animal cells and foreign chemicals into the body does not require a
medical degree or PhD.  

Instead of calling them names, parents and physicians who question and
challenge the dogma that has been spoon-fed to the general population for
nearly two centuries should be commended.  

In his book, Mr. Allen apparently calls for
“a frank national discussion about the
risks and benefits of vaccination.”
 I wholeheartedly agree.  The real health
risks of vaccination are well documented but rarely discussed.  

Beyond the impact of vaccines on health, the economic ramifications of
vaccine injuries need to be exposed.  

Vaccine manufacturers and government officials attempt to justify the cost of
vaccine programs by showing a correlation between dollars spent on
immunization compared to healthcare dollars saved.  

For example, in 2005 it was reported that vaccinations saved more than $52
billion in total health care costs and 33,000 children’s’ lives.  Because injuries
are reported as rare, dollars spent to care for those who are injured are never
published.  However, the medical expenses of a vaccine-injured person can be
substantial and needs to be included in the economic profile.  

A distinct example comes from a study of VAERS reports between 1990 and
1995.  A total of 697 patients were identified who experienced syncope (fainting
spell) within 12 hours following vaccinations.  Six patients had falls that
resulted in a serious head injury, including skull fracture, cerebral bleeding and
cerebral contusion.  

All six patients experienced the episode within 15 minutes of vaccination and
were injured either in, or just outside, the office or clinic where the vaccination
was given.  

Three of these patients required surgery, and two were left with substantial
residual deficit at six months to two years after follow-up.  Even though the
number of patients in this report is small, these costs of their lifetime care
could be in the millions of dollars.  

Keep in mind this report encompasses only one injury example.  Similar
analyses for all other injuries should be undertaken.  The expenditure of
healthcare dollars to care for injured individuals could negate any meaningful
“savings” touted by vaccine pundits.  

Since the government is the largest purchaser of vaccines, the cost to the
American taxpayer for mandated state vaccination programs needs to be
discussed.  

The Vaccines For Children Program (VFC) allows children and teens to get
vaccines through Federally Qualified Health Centers or Rural Health Centers,
purchased by government dollars, if their private health insurance does not
cover the vaccine.  

In addition, mandated vaccines increase the cost of insurance for everyone,
even those who do not have children or do not want to receive the vaccines.  
These costs, in addition to the requirement to vaccinate children in exchange
for a public education, must be part of that
“frank national discussion.”  

Yes, Mr. Allen, a nationwide open discussion is long overdue.  

By: Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, July 2007

Article:
Questioning Vaccines Is Not Fueled By Ignorance
http://drtenpenny.com/question_vaccines_by_Tenpenny.aspx