I would need to see trial safety data for each and every vaccine to determine if they are safe or effective. As far as I know, no such data exists. Thus, precautionary principle suggests all vax unsafe and/or ineffective until data suggests otherwise.
I don’t doubt that childhood vaccination has reduced the rates of many childhood illnesses but I am concerned that there seems to be no questions asked about the increased levels of childhood vaccination - especially in the US - and the increase in chronic childhood diseases and allergies. I have heard some US paediatricians who have been practising for decades say that they’ve never seen so many chronically sick children.
Is there possibly a role for ‘immune education’ through catching these childhood illnesses which (generally) are mild? Have we paid a price for decreasing childhood illnesses through an increase in allergies and autoimmune conditions? I don’t know but no-one every seems to even pose the question.
There is a place for childhood immunisation. However, I suggest that the full implications of this haven't been fully thought through, particularly for immunisation against diseases with a very low 'problem' rate.
As an example, we're currently hearing that all of our problems are due to 'immune debt', that is, we're not re-training (boosting) our immune system through regular exposure to different diseases. This is probably a real effect for small children, but for adults the timescales appear to be much longer than simply a year or two without the disease. Eg, most people aren't exposed to influenza viruses each year as a 'top up'. However, if we vaccinate everyone for measles when they're little and the disease essentially dies out (in western countries), then no-one will be getting this 'booster' effect -- is there a risk that we'll get a novel vaccine-escape strain emerging at some point, where the lack of any repeat 'boosting' of immunity results in rather high mortality rates, compared with if we'd not vaccinated everyone. Now, this is unlikely (measles evolves slowly) and I'd imagine that our current approach offers 'broad net benefit', however, is the risk fully understood?
In your reference to “immune education” you raise an interesting question.
Should relatively benign (and historically falling) acute ‘childhood diseases’ have been treated as a threat to the survival of the child, or should they been viewed as a means for the evolutionary maturation of the person, to be safely managed rather than suppressed.
I grew up in what now seems a dangerous pre MMR world where mothers actively encouraged their children to catch measles, (usually to get it over with). That said, I remember seeing anecdotal reports from mothers that post-measles infection their child appeared to have ‘matured’, as if casting a layer. This seems a strange positive result to even mention and unfortunately I am not aware of any studies or data to support the assertion. However, with recent concerns in some quarters that childhood measles vaccination might be implicated in later adult cancers perhaps it is time for a reappraisal of vaccine interventions, especially in the context of not only the exponential increase in both childhood and adult chronic disease but, as highlighted in “Turtles All the Way Down” the lack of proper trials for not just individual vaccines but the impact of the accumulated vaccine schedule.
No one disagree that injecting a toxic substance into the body will produce a measurable immune response. That’s the “settled science” bit. However as the above example of Chicken Pox / Shingles demonstrates whether the long term unintended consequences of the vaccine intervention results in long term stable ‘Health’ is a totally different matter.
Just reading Dissolving Illusions at the moment and then going on to Turtles All The Way Down. I’ve also recently seen a Children”s Health Defence video interview with Andrew Wakefield and the situation with measles is more complex. I’m beginning to doubt the case for more and more vaccines but haven’t read enough to comment yet.
I've followed your analysis of the pandemic since your first contribution to The Daily Sceptic and have been impressed by what you've managed to do with the scarce and sometimes obfuscatory data which government agencies have (and usually have not) made available. I was struck by similarities between the clear inadequacy and eventual ceasing of publication of covid data and the difficulties which Steve McIntyre encountered almost 20 years ago when he wanted to audit Michael Mann's "hockey stick" historical temperature reconstruction. After several years of frustration, the "Climategate" emails pulled back the curtain on what had been going on behind the scenes, showing the lengths to which various climate scientists had gone to in order to frustrate SM's efforts.
While it's probably too much to hope that here should be another "and then a miracle happened" moment in which an enterprising and public-spirited person somehow releases onto the internet a vast trove of covid data which has been gathered over the past 3 years, I wonder whether you've tried the rather more time-consuming approach via FOIA requests? Admittedly such methods weren't particularly successful for SM as the climate scientists became well-practised in finding reasons to refuse or nullify his enquiries but I'd be interested to know whether you've asked for data and, if so, what responses you've received.
I have consistently pondered for many years now why no childhood vaccine has been tested against a true placebo (i.e. not another vaccine). This is compounded by the inadequate monitoring (possibly by design) of adverse event rates. As a commenter has already mentioned, one has to assume all vaccines are 'unsafe and ineffective' until unequivocally proven otherwise using adequate RCTs with proper placebo controls.
I do not see any RCT comparing a new vaccine, current vaccine and placebo for anything on the childhood vaccination schedule. That said, if there is indeed evidence of vaccine safety I'd love to be directed to it to scrutinise. Maybe this is something you and your fellow independent analysists can investigate further?
Interesting article and I had forgotten the push for “herd immunity” by raising vaccination rates..
The arguments for reaching herd immunity fails for these viruses that have both alternatives hosts, massive geographic nuances that harbour or develop new strains and massive replication rates..
the low efficacy of C19 and flu is attributed to never being able to keep up with mutations..
It does appear true that vaccination has had dramatically benefits in the past in some diseases eg measles that have limited hosts..
so has antibiotics, herbicides and pesticides but they all have problems with the development of resistance..
there are vaccine resistant strains of polio in Afghanistan now as I understand...
So my caution is that weather it’s ivermectin, HCQ or vaccination the development of resistance is an ongoing reality we have to contend with... to me that says mass vaccination campaigns are dangerous in the long run.. this is especially the case for relatively minor disease like covid or flu... where the real killer is bacterial pneumonia anyway...
I think Dr Peter Murcolluch approach that uses treatments like steroids that mitigate symptoms and so provide higher survival rates make a lot of sense..
In agriculture a variety of approaches are being used in unison to manage resistance and relying on one silver bullet ..a “vaccine” is simply stupidity at its best..
it’s interesting that much of the rise in covid death can be attributed to withdrawal of antibiotics from treatment protocols due to the antibiotics resistance issues?
We think vaccines derived antibodies are bullet proof but clearly they are not..
One of the most logical things to do is to limit vaccination (where you have a safe product) to the most vulnerable...
The very opposite was done with Covid vaccines just as they implemented this strategy with antibiotics...
The important thing is that there is no one solution, disease management is warfare and tools need to used strategically, sequentially and in unison... a key strategy in herbicides resistance is using 2-3 modes of action in one season..
However even if you were successful in eliminating covid it would only leave other respiratory diseases a clear run to access the vulnerable..and there are millions of strains..
that means lifestyle, diet changes too are essential and the aim should be to reduce the reliance on highly specific interventions like vaccines and antibiotics.. to preserve them as long as we can..
I would need to see trial safety data for each and every vaccine to determine if they are safe or effective. As far as I know, no such data exists. Thus, precautionary principle suggests all vax unsafe and/or ineffective until data suggests otherwise.
I don’t doubt that childhood vaccination has reduced the rates of many childhood illnesses but I am concerned that there seems to be no questions asked about the increased levels of childhood vaccination - especially in the US - and the increase in chronic childhood diseases and allergies. I have heard some US paediatricians who have been practising for decades say that they’ve never seen so many chronically sick children.
Is there possibly a role for ‘immune education’ through catching these childhood illnesses which (generally) are mild? Have we paid a price for decreasing childhood illnesses through an increase in allergies and autoimmune conditions? I don’t know but no-one every seems to even pose the question.
There is a place for childhood immunisation. However, I suggest that the full implications of this haven't been fully thought through, particularly for immunisation against diseases with a very low 'problem' rate.
As an example, we're currently hearing that all of our problems are due to 'immune debt', that is, we're not re-training (boosting) our immune system through regular exposure to different diseases. This is probably a real effect for small children, but for adults the timescales appear to be much longer than simply a year or two without the disease. Eg, most people aren't exposed to influenza viruses each year as a 'top up'. However, if we vaccinate everyone for measles when they're little and the disease essentially dies out (in western countries), then no-one will be getting this 'booster' effect -- is there a risk that we'll get a novel vaccine-escape strain emerging at some point, where the lack of any repeat 'boosting' of immunity results in rather high mortality rates, compared with if we'd not vaccinated everyone. Now, this is unlikely (measles evolves slowly) and I'd imagine that our current approach offers 'broad net benefit', however, is the risk fully understood?
In your reference to “immune education” you raise an interesting question.
Should relatively benign (and historically falling) acute ‘childhood diseases’ have been treated as a threat to the survival of the child, or should they been viewed as a means for the evolutionary maturation of the person, to be safely managed rather than suppressed.
I grew up in what now seems a dangerous pre MMR world where mothers actively encouraged their children to catch measles, (usually to get it over with). That said, I remember seeing anecdotal reports from mothers that post-measles infection their child appeared to have ‘matured’, as if casting a layer. This seems a strange positive result to even mention and unfortunately I am not aware of any studies or data to support the assertion. However, with recent concerns in some quarters that childhood measles vaccination might be implicated in later adult cancers perhaps it is time for a reappraisal of vaccine interventions, especially in the context of not only the exponential increase in both childhood and adult chronic disease but, as highlighted in “Turtles All the Way Down” the lack of proper trials for not just individual vaccines but the impact of the accumulated vaccine schedule.
No one disagree that injecting a toxic substance into the body will produce a measurable immune response. That’s the “settled science” bit. However as the above example of Chicken Pox / Shingles demonstrates whether the long term unintended consequences of the vaccine intervention results in long term stable ‘Health’ is a totally different matter.
Great article, I didn't know about the negative aspects of the chickenpox vaccine.
Just reading Dissolving Illusions at the moment and then going on to Turtles All The Way Down. I’ve also recently seen a Children”s Health Defence video interview with Andrew Wakefield and the situation with measles is more complex. I’m beginning to doubt the case for more and more vaccines but haven’t read enough to comment yet.
I've followed your analysis of the pandemic since your first contribution to The Daily Sceptic and have been impressed by what you've managed to do with the scarce and sometimes obfuscatory data which government agencies have (and usually have not) made available. I was struck by similarities between the clear inadequacy and eventual ceasing of publication of covid data and the difficulties which Steve McIntyre encountered almost 20 years ago when he wanted to audit Michael Mann's "hockey stick" historical temperature reconstruction. After several years of frustration, the "Climategate" emails pulled back the curtain on what had been going on behind the scenes, showing the lengths to which various climate scientists had gone to in order to frustrate SM's efforts.
While it's probably too much to hope that here should be another "and then a miracle happened" moment in which an enterprising and public-spirited person somehow releases onto the internet a vast trove of covid data which has been gathered over the past 3 years, I wonder whether you've tried the rather more time-consuming approach via FOIA requests? Admittedly such methods weren't particularly successful for SM as the climate scientists became well-practised in finding reasons to refuse or nullify his enquiries but I'd be interested to know whether you've asked for data and, if so, what responses you've received.
I have consistently pondered for many years now why no childhood vaccine has been tested against a true placebo (i.e. not another vaccine). This is compounded by the inadequate monitoring (possibly by design) of adverse event rates. As a commenter has already mentioned, one has to assume all vaccines are 'unsafe and ineffective' until unequivocally proven otherwise using adequate RCTs with proper placebo controls.
I do not see any RCT comparing a new vaccine, current vaccine and placebo for anything on the childhood vaccination schedule. That said, if there is indeed evidence of vaccine safety I'd love to be directed to it to scrutinise. Maybe this is something you and your fellow independent analysists can investigate further?
Interesting article and I had forgotten the push for “herd immunity” by raising vaccination rates..
The arguments for reaching herd immunity fails for these viruses that have both alternatives hosts, massive geographic nuances that harbour or develop new strains and massive replication rates..
the low efficacy of C19 and flu is attributed to never being able to keep up with mutations..
It does appear true that vaccination has had dramatically benefits in the past in some diseases eg measles that have limited hosts..
so has antibiotics, herbicides and pesticides but they all have problems with the development of resistance..
there are vaccine resistant strains of polio in Afghanistan now as I understand...
So my caution is that weather it’s ivermectin, HCQ or vaccination the development of resistance is an ongoing reality we have to contend with... to me that says mass vaccination campaigns are dangerous in the long run.. this is especially the case for relatively minor disease like covid or flu... where the real killer is bacterial pneumonia anyway...
I think Dr Peter Murcolluch approach that uses treatments like steroids that mitigate symptoms and so provide higher survival rates make a lot of sense..
In agriculture a variety of approaches are being used in unison to manage resistance and relying on one silver bullet ..a “vaccine” is simply stupidity at its best..
it’s interesting that much of the rise in covid death can be attributed to withdrawal of antibiotics from treatment protocols due to the antibiotics resistance issues?
We think vaccines derived antibodies are bullet proof but clearly they are not..
One of the most logical things to do is to limit vaccination (where you have a safe product) to the most vulnerable...
The very opposite was done with Covid vaccines just as they implemented this strategy with antibiotics...
The important thing is that there is no one solution, disease management is warfare and tools need to used strategically, sequentially and in unison... a key strategy in herbicides resistance is using 2-3 modes of action in one season..
However even if you were successful in eliminating covid it would only leave other respiratory diseases a clear run to access the vulnerable..and there are millions of strains..
that means lifestyle, diet changes too are essential and the aim should be to reduce the reliance on highly specific interventions like vaccines and antibiotics.. to preserve them as long as we can..
Herd immunity models are useful from a scientific point of view for thinking about how diseases spread, etc.
They shouldn't be used as a basis for medical decisions in the real world.