Note: Today is the 1 year anniversary of Laura Hayes' presentation. Worth reading as the environment has grown worse and worse over the last year.

Dear AoA Readers,

I wanted to share the video link and transcript for the vaccine-related presentation I gave in Utah this past Friday titled, "Why Is This Legal?"

A big shout out to symposium organizer, Kristen Chevrier. She and her Your Health Freedom team planned an informative 2-day event featuring a wonderful and well-spoken array of speakers, for whom video links will soon be available at Your Health Freedom.

As always, I am hoping my presentation will open eyes and ears to the terrible truth about vaccines.

Please share...together, we might just save a child and their family from a lifetime of needless suffering.

Thank you,

Laura Hayes

“Why Is This Legal?” by Laura Hayes, delivered on 11-2-18 in Utah

This evening, I am going to be speaking to you about vaccines, specifically, their inexcusable lack of safety, the toxic and hazardous ingredients contained in them that have no business being injected into any human, and the catastrophic results we continue to witness due to their use. In the time I have, I will only be able to scratch the surface of the harm that vaccines cause, both to the individual recipient, and to subsequent generations, if the recipient is still able to reproduce. I won’t have time to delve into the lack of efficacy or necessity for vaccines, but suffice it to say that their failure rate is high, their “efficacy” is based on measures which are unproven and unreliable, and injecting poisons, toxins, neurotoxins, carcinogens, immune- and nervous-system destroyers, endocrine disruptors, ingredients that have never been clinically approved, and unknown ingredients that are not required to be disclosed, is in no way health-inducing or protective, for any one, at any age. As I like to say, one does not need to be a PhD in biology or chemistry, or an MD, or even academically astute to understand that the practice of vaccination is not founded on any valid science. Common sense, basic science, and parental instincts are more than enough to discern the truth about vaccines. Now, let’s launch into the topic of vaccine safety, an oxymoron if ever there was one.

Not too long ago, in a vaccine-related forum to which I belong, someone proposed that we launch a meme campaign titled, “Why Is This Legal?”. It was in response to yet another teenager becoming paralyzed after receiving Merck's Gardasil vaccine. I find why is this legal to be a compelling question to ask with regard to vaccines, our nation’s vaccine program, and vaccine mandates.

My hope today is to stimulate thinking, questioning, researching, and analyzing, resulting in drawing your own conclusions versus relying on those of the self-proclaimed “experts”.

With regard to the question why is this legal, we are going to cover a number of pertinent questions specific to vaccines:

1. Why is it legal to mandate even one, much less scores of, invasive medical procedures that include long lists of serious, often permanent, risks, including death, chronic illness, and severe disability? Bear in mind that mandated medicine makes informed consent impossible. If there is no choice, then voluntary consent is made null and void. Remember, informed consent involves a formal opting in, and should never require a formal opting out…a simple “no thank you” should always suffice when one wants to decline or refuse any medical treatment or procedure for oneself or one’s child. Additionally, mandated medicine makes the ethical practice of medicine impossible. The hallmark of ethical medicine is that of prior, completely voluntary, and fully informed consent. Coercion, force, mandates, penalties, and the elimination of individual and parental rights can have no part in the practice of ethical medicine. Perhaps most importantly, mandated medicine, which includes vaccine mandates, violates a most fundamental human right, the right to decide what one allows, or doesn’t allow, into oneself and one’s child. To quote legal scholar and human rights activist Mary Holland, “Without that right, what meaningful right do we have?” So we must ask, why is it legal to mandate vaccines in a free and ethical society?
    
2. Why is it legal to inject that which is universally acknowledged to be neurotoxic, meaning it damages both nerves and the brain? Mercury and aluminum, both known to be seriously neurotoxic for the past 100 years, are knowingly and purposefully used in vaccines…mercury as a preservative, and aluminum as an adjuvant. There is no safe level of mercury or aluminum for any human. Vaccines contain levels of both that far exceed federal “safety” limits for these toxic heavy metals, yet, their use in vaccines continues, and it continues with the knowledge and approval of our government regulatory agencies. Additionally, a host of other metals has recently been discovered in vaccines as nanoparticles, including lead, stainless steel, tungsten, a gold-zinc aggregate, platinum, silver, bismuth, iron, and chromium, none of which is listed as an ingredient. Humans have zero need for the majority of those metals, and injected metals may end up trapped in the body forever. What are the individual adverse effects of these metals when injected? What are their synergistic effects, including when combined with mercury and aluminum? What are all of these metals’ effects on the developing brain, nervous system, and immune system of a fetus? an infant? a toddler? a young child? a pre-teen whose hormones are increasing? a pregnant woman? the elderly? The ever-increasing rates of autism, asthma, seizure disorders, tics, speech and language disorders, behavioral and learning issues, mood disorders, Type 1 diabetes, MS, rheumatoid arthritis, Guillain Barre syndrome, POTS, and Alzheimer’s should be huge clues as to the effects these metals are having on human health, development, fertility, and longevity. With a century’s worth of knowledge and proof about the dangers of these metals to humans, why is it legal to inject them, not just once, but on a regular and frequent basis over the course of a person’s life, now beginning in utero, and recommended until death?
    
3. Why is it legal to inject that which has been banned from topical use? Thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative used in the vast majority of influenza vaccines, in addition to some other vaccines as well, is no longer permitted to be used in over the counter products, such as ointments, creams, and contact solutions. However, it is still permitted to be used in vaccines, which are not topical products, mind you, but which are injected. Let’s take a moment here to review a bit of history regarding the use of mercury in medicine, specifically focusing on the ethyl mercury used in thimerosal. In 1929, the first and only “safety” study of injecting thimerosal into humans was performed on 22 subjects. All subjects died shortly after being injected with thimerosal, 7 within the first day. Granted, the study subjects were ill with meningitis, but that does not negate the fast-acting toxicity of thimerosal. To date, no additional safety study on thimerosal has been required by the FDA, rather, the one from 89 years ago is unbelievably permitted to be cited as proof of the “safety" of injecting thimerosal into humans. In 1948, the late Dr. Frank Engley discovered that thimerosal was toxic down to parts per billion, but his discovery was disregarded and not heeded, despite his multi-year work with the FDA, CDC, CIA, NASA, and NIH. Decades after his discovery about the toxicity of thimerosal at even the ppb level, he would tell parents of thimerosal-injured children, “They say nobody has ever researched thimerosal; I’m nobody.” In his final interview just 2 months before his death in 2008, he said, “Apparently the medical profession does not read the safety data sheets provided by Lilly and other chemical manufacturers made available to physicians, pharmacies, hospitals, and health departments. It states for thimerosal: toxic, mutagen, allergen, hypersensitivity, alters genetic materials, may cause mild to severe mental retardation, may cause mild to severe motor coordination damage, all sounds a lot like autism.” In 1980, an advisory committee to the FDA determined that ethylmercury, which is the kind of mercury used in the thimerosal in vaccines, was unsafe for use in over-the-counter products, such as ointments and creams. How long did it take the FDA to act on that 1980 report? 18 years! It was not until 1998 that thimerosal was banned from use in OTC products, yet, it was not banned from use in vaccines, which are more dangerous as they are injected under the skin, and most often, deep into the muscle tissues. In 2000, the Committee on Government Reform commissioned an investigation into the use of mercury in medicine, which is documented in the Congressional Record. Doctor after doctor testified to Congress over the course of the 3-year investigation as to the severely toxic and neurotoxic effects of mercury, especially the ethyl mercury used in thimerosal, including in minute amounts. These doctors also testified that the effects of mercury are cumulative, that no thimerosal should be permitted to be used in vaccines given to pregnant women, infants, and toddlers, and that there is absolutely no need for its use in vaccines. Congress was told that ethyl compounds penetrate cells better than methyl ones, that mercury uptake in the brain is 5X that of other tissues in the body, and that brain cells die in culture when exposed to ethylmercury. What did Congress do with this damning information about thimerosal being used in vaccines? Nothing, absolutely nothing. Instead, here we are 18 years after the commissioning of the investigation, and more than 74 million American babies later, with pregnant women, which includes their unborn children, infants, toddlers, and children of all ages, still being shot up with ethylmercury. That is reckless, unethical, and criminal. Today we hear from doctors, the media, and legislators that vaccines given to children do not contain mercury. Not true at all. Influenza vaccines are now recommended at 6 months, unbelievably again at 7 months, then 18 months, and 30 months, and every year thereafter. Sanofi Pasteur is the only manufacturer of the “preservative-free, single-dose traditional vials”, which are mercury-free flu vaccines, specifically for those aged 6-35 months, which covers the time period when infants and toddlers are to receive 4 flu vaccines. These “preservative-free” flu vaccines are different than those labeled “thimerosal-free”, as those labeled thimerosal-free are actually permitted to contain 1 mcg or less of mercury, with 1 mcg being 1000 times greater than the level which is permitted to be present in drinking water. According to industry reports for the 2015-2016 flu season, Sanofi Pasteur delivered around 200,000 doses of its preservative-free flu vaccine. In that year alone, based on a reported 70% coverage rate for those in the 6- to 35-month age category, 11.2 million doses would have been required to ensure that American infants and toddlers received only mercury-free flu vaccines. Thus, 11 million American infants and toddlers received flu vaccines containing mercury, despite false assurances to the contrary. CA actually has a law stating that it is illegal to give pregnant women and children under age 3 vaccines containing more than .5 mcg of Hg/.5 ml dose, with an exception for the flu vaccine which is permitted to contain double the amount of mercury (1 mcg/.5 ml dose). Yet, year in and year out, that law is violated, as Governor Jerry Brown continues to sign a waiver stating that the law can be ignored due to “shortages” of the specified vaccines. Clearly, Sanofi Pasteur can do the math just like you and I can. As the only maker of this particular vaccine, why do they choose not to manufacture the needed amount? Instead of signing a waiver every year, why doesn’t the governor of CA put pressure on Sanofi Pasteur to make enough so the CA law can be followed? Pregnant women are not receiving mercury-free flu vaccines, either. They are most often receiving either one with a whopping 25 mcg of mercury, which is 25,000 times that which is permitted in drinking water, or a purported 1 mcg or less of mercury, and neither is safe for mom or baby. Did you know that thimerosal-containing vaccines are legally classified as hazardous materials? As a matter of fact, it is illegal to throw away unused thimerosal-containing vaccines as infectious material or regular trash. Toxic waste management companies advertise that they can be hired to dispose of unused thimerosal-containing vaccines, as they must be treated as hazardous waste. Thus, thimerosal-containing vaccines are hazardous materials before use, and if unused. They are only non-hazardous, apparently, when they have been injected into a human being, who might be in the prime of their neurological development. Does that make sense to you? Why is it legal to inject mercury-laden thimerosal when it is not legal to use it in topical products, when it must be treated as a hazardous material, when it is a known neurotoxin, and when there hasn’t been a human safety study on it since 1929, in which all subjects died in short order?
    
4. Why is it legal to inject that which is used for the express purpose of inducing toxicity and inflammation, the two worst things for a developing infant? Today, I am going to focus on the use of aluminum-based adjuvants, which are used specifically to induce toxicity, but there are others, including squalene, endotoxins, and possibly more. I am guessing that you think the aluminum adjuvants that are used in vaccines have been clinically approved by the FDA, right? Wrong, they haven’t been, yet, they are permitted by the FDA to be used in vaccines. Such behavior by the FDA, and by vaccine makers, defies common sense and violates basic safety and ethics standards. To make matters worse, aluminum is an undisputed toxin and neurotoxin whose toxicity has been known for nearly 100 years. Permitting the use of aluminum in vaccines for babies is akin to permitting lead paint in government-approved teething toys and teething rings. Aluminum is also a known teratogen, meaning an agent or factor that causes malformation of an embryo. Permitting its use in vaccines for pregnant women is akin to permitting that which causes spontaneous abortion and/or deformity of the fetus…thalidomide comes to mind. It is also important to note that chemist Dr. Boyd Haley has shown that mercury and aluminum are synergistically neurotoxic, meaning that their individual neurotoxicity is multiplied when one is given in the presence of the other, as is often done when vaccines are administered. Forrest Maready has recently written a book titled Crooked: Man-Made Disease Explained. His focus is on the role of aluminum in today’s many chronic illnesses and debilitating disabilities. Suffice it to say, his theories are both compelling and frightening in their implications. He puts forth that some of the effects of the medicinal use of aluminum are fairly immediate, such as the many sets of misaligned eyes and crooked smiles we now see in infants and toddlers post-vaccination. Other effects are delayed, and will manifest as the aluminum injected via childhood vaccines, often stored for years in protective granulomas the body has formed around it to protect itself, is released as the granulomas begin to break down over time, and in response to illness, stress, intense physical exertion, and pregnancy. The result is the beginning, or exacerbation, of the many chronic illnesses we are now seeing…from Crohn’s disease, to chronic fatigue syndrome, to Alzheimer’s, to the growing list of neurological and autoimmune disorders that are becoming all too common. Dr. Chris Exley’s recent work on the role of aluminum in MS, Alzheimer’s, and Autism is also timely and critically important, providing additional support for many of Forrest Maready’s theories. The stopping of the medicinal use of aluminum, including its use in vaccines, is urgent. Why is this legal?
    
5. Why is it legal to inject that which is specifically included to help other ingredients permeate both cells and the blood-brain barrier? Polysorbate 80, present in the majority of today’s vaccines, is an emulsifier which helps carry other vaccine ingredients, including neurotoxic metals like mercury and aluminum, formaldehyde, antibiotics, viruses and retroviruses of both human and animal origin, Triton-X detergent, anti-freeze, phenol, MSG, and more, through cell walls into cells, and across the blood-brain barrier into the brain. It is important to remember that the blood-brain barrier is not yet even developed in an infant or toddler. One must ask what the results are of these toxic and neurotoxic ingredients, in addition to viral and bacterial materials, entering the cells and brain with special help from polysorbate 80. Can they be anything but harmful? Why is this legal?
    
6. Why is it legal to inject known carcinogens, meaning that which causes cancer? Vaccines include formaldehyde and glyphosate, known carcinogens. They also include possible carcinogens, including Polysorbate 80, MSG, phenol, and perhaps others. A few years back, I did a little research on formaldehyde. The Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for formaldehyde reads like a horror show. Formaldehyde is severely toxic, to the point of being fatal. It reacts violently with many other substances, including phenol, which is also included in some vaccines. It must be handled with the utmost caution, including the wearing of full protective gear. If spilled, immediate evacuation is required. Yet, this toxic, cancer-causing, fatal-to-humans ingredient is used in vaccines. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Round Up, is also present in vaccines, including in high levels in the MMR vaccine. Its maker, Monsanto, just lost a $289 million lawsuit in CA (later reduced to $78.5 million by the judge) because it was ruled that glyphosate caused cancer in a man who had been spraying Round Up on school grounds for years as part of his job. The MSDS for phenol reads like another horror show, and one of its chronic health effects is that it has mutagenic effects on mammalian somatic cells, meaning genetics-altering-and-damaging effects on the cells that make up internal organs, skin, bones, blood, and connective tissue. Additionally, phenol may be toxic to the kidneys, liver, and central nervous system. MSG is described as an “excitotoxin” by neurosurgeon, Dr. Russell Blaylock. It overexcites cells to the point of damage or death, including varying degrees of brain damage. Yet, all of these known and possible carcinogens, specifically formaldehyde, glyphosate, polysorbate 80, phenol, and MSG, are permitted in vaccines. Why is this legal?
    
7. Why is it legal to inject ingredients known to cause infertility? Once again, polysorbate 80 proves to be a dangerous ingredient, shown to cause damage and deformities to the uterus and ovaries of rats, leading to infertility. Polysorbate 80 is in 11 different vaccines, including Gardasil. Gardasil has caused Primary Ovarian Failure in girls and young women across the globe, rendering them infertile. Gardasil contains not only Polysorbate 80, but also sodium borate (borax), which is suspected of causing damage to fertility, and high levels of immuno-reactive aluminum. What is the synergistic effect of injecting all 3 of these ingredients at once? Another fertility-destroying ingredient that has been found in vaccines is HCG. HCG-laced tetanus vaccines were given to Kenyan girls and women, without their knowledge or consent, rendering them sterile. Which vaccines given to American girls and women might possibly be laced with HCG? Who knows, as all ingredients in vaccines are not required to be listed, and vaccine oversight is next to nil. In all truth, no vaccine recipient or parent truly knows what is in the syringes being injected into them or their children. This is something we must acknowledge and address. Think how carefully we now read food labels. Why is this not so for vaccines? Which of you, if you read the ingredients in vaccines, would permit your child to squirt the syringes into their mouths? If I injected an orange with the vaccines given to an infant in the first year of its life, which of you would be willing to eat it? Yet, somehow, when someone wearing a white coat walks into an exam room, we permit them to inject syringe after syringe of unknown, yet highly toxic and neurotoxic, ingredients into us and our children. We must become more informed. We must not be intimidated to insist that we be informed as to what is being recommended, and in many cases mandated, to be injected into our children. More importantly, we must demand that we be permitted to decline one, some, or all vaccines as we see fit with nothing other than a simple “no thank you”. There are no doubt other ingredients in vaccines which act as hormone and endocrine system disruptors and destroyers. Aluminum might definitely be among them. Is it healthful, wise, or ethical to inject ingredients proven and known to adversely affect fertility and cause sterility at the start of someone’s life, then continued through their child-bearing years? Why is this legal?
    
8. Why is it legal to inject that which causes asthma and allergies? Several studies have shown that vaccinated children have a much higher rate of asthma than unvaccinated children. Both the DPT and the DTaP appear causal, as well as Hib, HepB, and MMR. With regard to allergies, a 2017 study revealed that vaccinated children’s risk of being diagnosed with allergic rhinitis (hay fever) was 30-fold higher than that of unvaccinated children. Additionally, American children are suffering from life-altering, sometimes life-threatening, food allergies at rates unlike any previous time in history. What might be behind this? In two words, aluminum adjuvants. Lab researchers can create both allergic rhinitis and food allergies in lab animals by giving them aluminum adjuvants at the same time as allergens. Aluminum adjuvants, in layman’s terms, tell the body to have an overreaction whenever it encounters that to which it was exposed at the same time as the aluminum adjuvant. Thus, not only would that include all of the other ingredients in the vaccine being given that contains aluminum, but also to all of the ingredients in other vaccines being administered at the same time, to any foods the child is eating, and to any foods the mother is eating if she is breast feeding. It might also include seasonal and other environmental allergens to which the child is exposed at the same time as the aluminum-adjuvanted vaccine(s). Additionally, researchers are discovering that molecular mimicry may also be playing a part in the development of allergies in vaccinated children. Molecular mimicry refers to cross-reactive effects due to molecular similarities. Thus, an aluminum adjuvant stimulates the body to not only overreact to the ingredients in the vaccine(s) at the time of injection and in the future, but it also stimulates the body to overreact whenever it encounters anything with a molecular similarity to the ingredients in the vaccines, and to anything that has a molecular similarity to concurrent exposures at the time the vaccine was administered, including food and environmental allergens. It is no wonder that American children have rates of asthma and allergies that are through the roof. Bear in mind that both of these conditions can be life-threatening, are always life-altering, and are most often treated with pharmaceuticals, further enriching the coffers of pharmaceutical companies and doctors. Why is this legal to inject ingredients we know are capable of inducing asthma and allergies?
    
9. Why is it legal to inject ingredients that are not required to be disclosed on vaccine package insert ingredients lists, under the guise of “trade secrets”/“intellectual property”, or when deemed by the profiting pharmaceutical company to be “inactive” or “generally recognized as safe”? Yes, you heard that correctly. The FDA permits vaccine makers to self-certify that vaccine ingredients are inactive or safe, without having to submit any documentation, and they can claim that other undisclosed ingredients are protected under the categories of trade secrets and intellectual property. Undisclosed ingredients being injected into our children? Unacceptable, unethical, and inexcusably dangerous. Why is this legal?
    
10. Why is it legal to inject pregnant women with products that have never been tested for safety or efficacy in pregnant women, and which contain a long list of known toxins, neurotoxins, and carcinogens, in addition to foreign DNA, antibiotics, viruses and retroviruses, and poisons? It is well-known and accepted that pregnancy is an extremely vulnerable time for both the mother and the fetus, and all precautions to protect the mother and her baby must be taken. For years, it has been common practice not to give pregnant women any medications, with rare exception. It is also common practice to encourage pregnant women to avoid toxic exposures, unhealthy and artificial foods, and anything that might harm her developing baby. Despite this, in 1997, the ACIP (Advisory Council on Immunization Practices), which includes the heads of vaccine-making pharmaceutical companies, and which advises the CDC with regard to its vaccine recommendations, began to recommend flu vaccines for pregnant women after their first trimester. In 2004, the ACIP's recommendation expanded to include pregnant women at any time during their pregnancies, and then for their infants at age 6 and 7 months. In the 2009/2010 flu season, pregnant women were encouraged to receive not one, but two, influenza vaccines…the standard one, and another for H1N1. The result? A 4250% increase in fetal deaths! Yes, the CDC knew about this. No, the CDC did not take any corrective actions. Let’s review the ingredients in influenza vaccines that are now given willy-nilly to pregnant women as part of “standard of care” procedures. For starters, the vast majority of influenza vaccines contains either 25 mcg or 1 mcg of mercury in the form of the preservative thimerosal, and that mercury will cross the placenta and enter the fetus, where it will do damage. The carcinogen and extremely toxic formaldehyde is in flu vaccines, as well as polysorbate 80, the emulsifier which acts as an ingredient carrier we discussed earlier, Triton-X detergent, resin, the allergen gelatin, animal egg proteins and their associated foreign, viral DNA, and the antibiotic gentamycin (everyday we are learning more about the importance of the microbiome, and antibiotics are expert at destroying the good bacteria needed for a healthy microbiome). Do you find it contradictory and concerning that pregnant women are told to avoid the consumption of mercury-containing foods such as sushi and tuna, but are encouraged, often coerced, to permit the injecting of mercury directly into their bodies where it will undoubtedly reach their vulnerable and developing babies? That is true insanity, and common sense and basic science are all one needs to know to say a big fat NO to the flu vaccine, or any other vaccine, during pregnancy. And speaking of other vaccines recommended for pregnant women, in 2011, the ACIP began recommending that the Tdap vaccine be given in the second half of a woman’s pregnancy. The Tdap vaccine contains aluminum, which you recall is neurotoxic in and of itself, and which is synergistically neurotoxic when given in the presence of mercury, which is in the flu vaccine given to pregnant women. Again, why are such practices legal?
     
11. Why is it legal to inject that which has not been tested for carcinogenic effects, mutagenic effects, or impairment of fertility? Pick any vaccine’s package insert, and you will read that vaccines are not tested for cancer-causing capabilities, or for their ability to alter, damage, and destroy both RNA and DNA, or for their ability to impair fertility or cause permanent sterility. Vaccines are invasive medical procedures where all types of toxic, heinous ingredients that have no business in any human are being injected by the score, into people of all ages, on a very regular and frequent basis, from conception to death, and our government regulatory agencies do not require any proof that they don’t cause cancer, or genetic mutations, or reproductive damage? Again, that is insane, especially because cancer rates are now at 1 in 2 men, 1 in 3 women, fertility clinics continue to pop up across America to help those who are having trouble conceiving and/or carrying a child to term, and goodness only knows the many ways in which our genetics have been harmed by vaccines, but the ill health of Americans would suggest our genetics are under attack. No testing required in these 3 important areas…why is this legal?
     
12. Why is it legal to inject medical products that have not been required to be tested according to the scientific gold standard, i.e. that of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study? Not one vaccine, nor the myriad, haphazard combinations in which they are regularly administered, has ever been tested properly or been approved ethically. Rather, vaccines are permitted to be tested against another vaccine, against other combinations of vaccines, against reaction-producing adjuvants, such as aluminum adjuvants, or against a combination of one or more vaccines plus an adjuvant. Placebos, which are defined as inert substances that do not produce therapeutic effect or cause harm, are not used as controls in vaccine studies. Often, there is no control group in vaccine studies, only a study group. Study subjects selected are only healthy individuals, despite the fact that vaccines are given to all categories of people, healthy or otherwise. Broad age categories are studied, including from birth to age 10, without any indication of how many in each age category. One must wonder how often those who aren’t old enough to speak to report their symptoms are purposefully selected. Study groups are typically very small in number. Studies typically last for very short time periods, including just 4-5 days long. Parameters have been changed after the study results have been collected to make a vaccine appear safer than it is. Neither short term nor long term follow up is performed or required when it comes to vaccine studies, despite the fact that many vaccine injuries take weeks, months, or years to fully manifest, sometimes decades, as with the case of SV40-laced polio vaccines given in the 1950s through the early 1960s which caused many types of cancer in recipients decades later. An important fact to remember is that once you permit a vaccine, it cannot be recalled, removed, or deactivated. You, or your child, will be forced to endure the consequences, some of which might be immediate, and others which will play out over the course of a lifetime. And perhaps most damningly, the FDA has never commissioned or required that the most basic of studies be done when it comes to vaccines, that of a comparison study, comparing both the short and long term health and development outcomes of the completely unvaccinated to the vaccinated, be it for one vaccine, some vaccines, or the entire CDC recommended schedule. That should be disturbing to everyone. The only reason why the FDA would refuse to require or commission such a comparison study is because they already know the results, but they do not want the public to know. The health and development of the completely unvaccinated far exceed those of the vaccinated. There have been non-government/non-industry comparison studies done in the U.S., and elsewhere, and the results are crystal clear…the unvaccinated suffer far fewer health and development problems than the vaccinated. Further anecdotal evidence is provided by many families worldwide, in which older children were vaccinated, but not their younger siblings after parents realized the harm and devastation that vaccines had caused their older children. Not surprisingly, families worldwide report that their unvaccinated children have fared far better, experiencing much better health and far fewer developmental problems than their vaccinated siblings. Why doesn’t the media report on this? Why don’t our regulatory agencies act on this? And why is it legal to permit invasive medical procedures that have never been studied properly to be on the market?
     
13. Why is it legal to bypass the first parts of a person’s immune system, meaning their nasal, respiratory, and GI tracts, and instead, inject them intramuscularly, meaning deep in their muscle tissues, or subcutaneously, meaning under the skin, grossly over-stimulating and damaging the latter parts of the immune system? How does this in any way mimic that which happens in the natural world? How will doing so help protect a person when that person encounters the infection for which he was vaccinated via natural means, now that the first part of their immune system has not been properly activated or trained, and the latter part has been artificially overstimulated, tainted, and damaged? This would be akin to skipping the first half of a pregnancy, entirely, and somehow expecting that a normal, healthy baby will result. Our bodies are designed to work in systematic ways, and artificially stimulating our bodies in unnatural ways with one toxic insult after another is not health inducing, safe, ethical, or wise. So, why is it legal to perform invasive medical procedures on healthy people that will taint, derail, and permanently damage their immune systems? To quote a colleague, “Vaccines create herd susceptibility, not herd immunity.”
     
14. Why is it legal to inject multivalent vaccines, meaning more than one vaccine in one syringe, and/or multiple vaccines at once, be they monovalent, multivalent, or a combination thereof? When an adverse reaction occurs, administering vaccines in such a haphazard, reckless way makes it impossible to trace it back to a specific vaccine. Babies and children are given a number of trivalent vaccines in the form of the MMR, DTaP, and Tdap vaccines, and worse, there are now pentavalent and hexavalent vaccines being given to infants and toddlers, which involve administering 5 or 6 vaccines via one syringe (DPT-HepB-Hib and DPT-polio-Hib-HepB). What are the effects of doing that? Unbelievably, they have not been studied in any meaningful way, if at all, but the results can be seen in the even higher rates of adverse reactions when multiple vaccines are given at once. For but one example of a meaningless and unethical “safety” study, the “control” used for Sanofi Pasteur’s Pentacel vaccine (DTaP + polio + Hib) was the same 5 vaccines (DTaP + polio + Hib) given via 3 shots. I am not making this stuff up! You can Google edu to find a listing of vaccines and their package inserts. I encourage you to read through just 1 per night for the next week to see for yourself the absolute proof that there is no proper or ethical studying or approving of vaccines…none. Furthermore, the majority of adverse reactions that are actually admitted are written off as of no importance. For example, more than 50% of those receiving Pentacel, following any dose during the 3-dose study, experienced fussiness/irritability and inconsolable crying. Those are the only means an infant has of communicating, and should be taken very seriously! They are signs that something is wrong, and should not be brushed off or categorized as not serious. More than 30%, following any dose of Pentacel, experienced injection site reactions, including tenderness and increased circumference of the arm. If your baby was bitten by a spider, would you write off tenderness and an enlarged arm as no big deal? No, these are symptoms that something harmful has happened. Other adverse reactions included fainting, changes in mental status, and seizures. The category “Serious Adverse Events” was not used until reactions such as bronchiolitis, dehydration, pneumonia, gastroenteritis, encephalopathy, asthma, and deaths, 5 of them in a relatively small sample group, were mentioned. Are those risks that any thinking parent would take if they were properly informed of them? Think of the careful consideration that is supposed to be given when a person is taking more than one drug at a time. Why is this same consideration and caution not taken when injecting multiple vaccines at one time, be they in 1 syringe, 3, or up to 8, as can happen at a “catch up” appointment? And bear in mind that for each infection that is being targeted, the vaccine for it might contain multiple strains of that infection, further increasing the viral and bacterial exposures for the child. When in nature is a human ever exposed to so many infections at once? How do you think an infant or toddler, whose immune system is immature and still in development, is going to handle such a barrage of toxic, viral, and bacterial assaults? More importantly, why is this legal?
     
15. Why is it legal to administer more than one vaccine at one time when doing so has never been studied? This is related to the point we just covered. Not only are vaccines improperly studied and unethically approved on an individual basis, but there are no safety studies required for giving multiple vaccines at once, be they monovalent, multivalent, or a combination thereof. For any vaccine that has been approved, and we now know how meaningless that stamp of approval is, it can then be given together with one or more other vaccines that have been approved, in virtually any combination, without having been studied when given at the same time, and without limit. Why is that legal?
     
16. Why is it legal to give someone more than one vaccine when only 1 is being prescribed? For example, when someone is prescribed a tetanus vaccine, they are most often also given a diphtheria and a pertussis vaccine. That is akin to being prescribed penicillin, and being forced to take 2 other antibiotics at the same time. Or being prescribed a blood pressure medication, and being forced to take 2 other drugs at the same time. Or ordering a drink at a bar, and being forced to drink 3. Why is that legal?
     
17. Why is it legal to inject another human, of any age, with any the following categories of substances: poisons, toxins, neurotoxins, carcinogens, heavy metals, aborted fetal tissue from human babies, viruses and retroviruses of both human and animal origin (including from birds, pigs, dogs, and monkeys), antibiotics not needed due to illness, nanoparticles of various metals and contaminants for which the body has no use and which may persist versus being eliminated, food proteins which needed to be broken down in the GI tract, glass shards, food-and-blood-poisoning bacteria, polysorbate 80 which will enable all of the above to enter cells and the brain, and who knows what all else? Furthermore, these categories of substances are permitted to be injected in unstudied combinations, made in heinous environments that when actually monitored by the FDA are often cited for dangerous contamination reasons, which I have heard regularly need hazmat crew clean ups, and which are often manufactured in other countries with little to no oversight by U.S. regulators, including possibly China, for which it is said the FDA is permitted to monitor only once every 14 years, and only with advance warning of their arrival. I asked a friend of mine who has been in law enforcement for more than a decade what the charge and penalty would be for knowingly poisoning another person, and for doing it unknowingly. If intent can be shown, the charge is attempted homicide. If done unknowingly or ignorantly, the charge is criminal negligence. In either case, it is a criminal act, punishable by time behind bars. Doctors have sworn an oath to “First, do no harm.” It is their business to be aware of exactly what they are doing and prescribing. It is their obligation to read, know, and understand the package inserts for the products they are injecting into their patients day in and day out. It is their ethical duty to listen to patients and parents who report terrible reactions post-vaccination, and act on such information in a way as to help and protect that patient, in addition to their other patients. It is my opinion that doctors and nurses who vaccinate are legally and morally culpable for the harm they are inflicting via vaccinations. Unfortunately, due to the 1986 NCVIA, they are not legally or financially liable for the deaths and harm they cause via vaccinations. One must ask which vaccines they would still be willing to administer if they were personally liable. Why it is legal for doctors, nurses, and now pharmacists, too, to inject the aforementioned categories of substances into other human beings when it would be a criminal act for anyone else to do so?
     
18. Why is it legal for pharmaceutical companies to do their own “safety” and “efficacy” testing? In case this is news to you, that is exactly what is permitted to happen during the FDA vaccine approval process. Pharmaceutical companies perform their own vaccine studies, which you now know are worse than bogus, as they are unethical and fraudulent, which I would argue makes them criminal, yet that is all that is required by the FDA. No independent testing by an entity that does not stand to profit in any way from the vaccine is required. We also know that placebos are not used as controls in vaccine studies. As a result, when the pharmaceutical company tells the FDA that their new vaccine did not cause any more deaths or harm than the death-and-harm-causing “control” they used, they are permitted to declare it “safe”, and the FDA approves it, which then quickly leads to the CDC recommending it, followed by states mandating it. An analogy I like to use to illustrate the absolute ludicrousness of this approval process is this: Cocaine is safe because I tested it against heroin, and it proved to be no more deadly or harmful than heroin, therefore, it is safe. Why is it legal for those who will profit to do their own safety testing, and why is it legal to approve invasive medical procedures that have not been tested in any meaningful, scientific, or ethical way?
     
19. Why is it legal for pharmaceutical companies to ship their vaccine products in “separated lots”, making it difficult, if not impossible, to immediately identify a “hot lot”, meaning a lot of vaccines that is causing even more deaths and harm than is accepted as “normal”? No other drug is permitted to be shipped in separated lots, only vaccines receive this special status. Why is this legal?
     
20. Why is it legal for those who manufacture and administer vaccines to be liability-free? To what other product, what other industry, and what other occupation do we afford such protection and indemnification? If doctors and nurses were not liability free, which vaccines would they actually be willing to administer? If pharmaceutical companies were not liability-free, which vaccines would they continue to sell? We gained insight into the latter question in the 1980s. Vaccine-making pharmaceutical companies were losing so many multi-million dollar lawsuits due to the grave harm and deaths their vaccine products were causing that most stopped making and selling vaccines. The 3-4 who wanted to continue then begged and bribed Congress to make them liability-free, and unbelievably, Congress agreed! At the very point in time when Congress should have issued an immediate moratorium on each and every vaccine to get to the bottom of why vaccines were causing so much harm and so many deaths, they instead indemnified those who were making and administering vaccines, essentially giving them the green light to proceed recklessly. The result was an almost immediate tripling of the vaccine schedule for U.S. children, and the simultaneous skyrocketing of illnesses previously extremely rare or virtually unseen in children, including Autism, Type 1 diabetes, seizure disorder, asthma, anaphylactic peanut allergy, speech and language disorders, including a complete lack of speech, juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, transverse myelitis resulting in paralysis, Crohn’s disease, GI disorders, food and environmental allergies of all sorts and of increasing severity, tics, leukemia and other cancers, and more. Why is it legal for any business or any professional to operate with zero liability for their products and actions?
     
21. Why is it legal for doctors to ignore, dismiss, deny, and denigrate those who report vaccine-induced injuries and deaths to them versus immediately submitting such reports to VAERS, the CDC, the FDA, the VICP, and the pharmaceutical companies? Why are doctors not required to immediately stop the use of any vaccines by which their patients have been injured or killed? Why are doctors not required to assist the vaccine victim or parent to file a claim with the VICP? Why is it legal for doctors to do absolutely nothing after a vaccine injures or kills one of their patients? If a mother reports that her child fell from a tree and broke his arm, she is believed. If a mother reports that her child ate strawberries then developed a rash, she is believed. If a mother reports that her child accidentally consumed some toxic cleaner and then began vomiting, she is believed. But, if she reports that her child received 5 syringes full of vaccines last week and her previously healthy and typically developing child is now having non-stop seizures, or inconsolable crying, or is no longer speaking, or is no longer engaging in eye contact, or can no longer walk, or all of the above, she is not believed. She is told that the plethora of vaccines that were injected into her child have absolutely nothing to do with the symptoms she is now reporting. Why is it legal for parent reports of what happened to their child post-vaccination to be handled this way, which results in improper care for the child, lack of support for the family, and further harm down the line when more vaccinations are administered because the parent wrongly believes the doctor who told her that the timing of the illnesses, development of odd behaviors, and loss of previously-acquired skills was simply coincidence?
     
22. Why is it legal to silence those who “win” in the VICP via gag orders as a requirement to receive their compensation settlement…as though there is any compensation when vaccines destroy one’s health and development, or take a life? Why would those involved in public health not want every potential vaccine recipient to know the real risks of the invasive medical procedures they are considering, or being forced to permit? Victims who prevail in court in non-vaccine-related lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies are not barred from speaking or from sharing details of their case and compensation. Why is this legal when it comes to vaccine-related cases won in the VICP?
     
23. Why is it legal to disregard the “Precautionary Principle” with regard to vaccines? There is undeniable dispute about the safety, efficacy, success, and necessity of vaccines…well beyond the level that should have kicked the precautionary principle into high gear. Additionally, we now have growing mountains of evidence that vaccines are causing grave injuries and premature deaths, yet the vaccine machine continues to roll forth at an ever-increasing rate. Parents worldwide are screaming from the rooftops about what vaccines did to their children. Teens are organizing in many countries to speak out about how HPV vaccines have destroyed their health and lives, and in some cases, parents must do the speaking as their teens were killed by an HPV vaccine. Adults of all ages are reporting chronic and debilitating ill health effects following vaccines they have received in adulthood, effects that render them unable to work, that drain their financial resources, and that leave them sick for years on end with little to no help from the ones who vaccinated them. Literally millions of people worldwide are speaking out in various ways and in various forums regarding how vaccines have harmed and killed their children, themselves, and their loved ones. Yet, their voices are completely shut out and shut down by mainstream media, which relies on advertising dollars from Pharma. Medical trade industry organizations, also heavily Pharma-funded, deny, demean, and denounce vaccine victims. Legislators, put into office by and indebted to Pharma, turn a deaf ear to the vaccine horror stories told to them by their constituents, and instead vote for legislation increasing vaccine mandates and further restricting, sometimes completely eliminating, parental rights and medical choice freedom. Why is it legal for those in positions of power and influence to completely disregard the precautionary principle with regard to vaccines?
     
24. Why is it legal for pharmaceutical companies and trade industry groups to fund the campaigns of law makers, to lobby government regulators and law makers, and to initiate and fund legislation? This ties in to the point above. Undue and unethical influence by wealthy and powerful pharmaceutical companies, and by the trade industry groups which they heavily fund, has led to what is literally a Vaccine Holocaust. It is the billions of dollars and resulting power that pharmaceutical companies have been permitted to wield that has led to forced medicine in the form of vaccine mandates. It is Pharma dollars and power that have led to the failure and refusal of mainstream media to report on the sobering reality of prolific and horrific vaccine-induced injuries and deaths now plaguing our children, and people of all ages, in never seen before numbers and severity. And it is Pharma dollars and power that have led to the willful ignorance of the vast majority of those in medicine and related industries regarding how vaccines are destroying our children, schools, communities, and country. In CA, where I live, it is next to impossible to get a face-to-face meeting with your representatives. Lobbyists for corporations and trade industry groups, however, have no problem securing regular meetings with CA legislators. It is corporate-paid lobbyists who are introducing legislation in our country, both at the state and federal levels. There was no citizen in CA who pushed for SB277, the recent rights-and-freedom-stripping bill in CA which has made home schooling the only viable option for parents who want to protect their children from vaccine harm. Medical exemptions are still permitted, but are expensive and increasingly difficult to obtain, and are often only granted, and begrudgingly at that, after a child has already suffered a permanent or catastrophic vaccine injury. As if the state of things in CA wasn’t tyrannical and troubling enough, Senator Richard Pan has recently stated and written that he may propose legislation that would change rules for medical exemptions if the upward trend of their use continues. He also stated that he would love to see home schooled children be vaccinated. Thus, he and his Pharma masters are not going to stop with their legislation until there is virtually no way out of the 70 vaccines currently recommended by the CDC from birth to age 18 for each and every child in CA. Additionally, per SB277, the list of mandated vaccines can be added to at any time by the CDPH without any public input or legislative vote. To add further insult to vast injury, many colleges and universities in CA are now requiring a number of vaccines, with the only opt out being a medical exemption which is subject to the individual school’s review and acceptance. I have discussed CA, but your state may be the next target of Pharma’s tyranny. The long and strong arm of Pharma seems to have no limit to its reach. Why is Pharma’s legislative and regulatory influence legal?
     
25. Why is it legal to restrict and eliminate parental rights with regard to medical decision making for their children? Children belong to their parents, not to the state. Parents know their children best. They know their family medical history best. They will personally bear the responsibility for any and all health-related decisions they make on behalf of their children, and therefore, the decisions are theirs alone to make. Furthermore, the U.S. Constitution guarantees parents the right to direct the upbringing and care of their children, as they see fit, and that most certainly includes their children’s health care and medical decisions. Why is it legal for state legislators to enact laws that violate the highest law of our land, the U.S. Constitution?
     
26. Why is it legal to eliminate access to daycare, pre-school, elementary school, and high school (in effect, to one’s local community), college, medical care, including life-saving surgery, summer camp, housing for the elderly, and a growing number of professions, because an individual or parent chooses not to permit one, some, or scores of risk-laden medical procedures for themselves or their children? Why is this legal to remove childcare, academic, community, medical, housing, and economic access to law-abiding citizens?
     
27. Why is it legal to violate the U.S. Constitution with regard to religious freedom, parental rights, and due process when it comes to the mandating and use of vaccines? Our country was founded on religious freedom, but that Constitutionally-protected freedom has been thrown out the window when it comes to vaccines in many states, and in certain occupations, including all branches of the military, as religious exemptions to vaccination are either not permitted or honored. Parental rights, also guaranteed by the Constitution, have been thrown out the window in all states due to the existence of either vaccine mandates or requirements for both school entrance and daycare. What Constitutional powers have been bestowed upon legislators giving them the authority to mandate that parents inject their babies and children with scores of vaccines containing toxic, poisonous, and heinous ingredients made in heinous ways, ingredients that they wouldn’t allow into their morning cups of coffee? Furthermore, vaccine mandates and the 1986 Act both violate the 14th Amendment, which states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the U.S.; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” With our Constitution still the law of the land, why are vaccine mandates and the liability protection provided by the 1986 Act legal?
     
28. Why is it legal to make false claims about vaccines, when that is not permitted for other products? When companies, advertising agencies, and people make false claims about products and services, including for pharmaceuticals, they are routinely sued and guilty parties are financially penalized. Not so with vaccines.They have a special status reserved only for them. Not only are they liability-free, they are above public scrutiny, and the science on them is declared to be “settled”. Over and over consumers are told that vaccines are nearly 100% safe and effective, and those continually making such claims are not challenged in a court of law, prosecuted, or penalized. To give you an example from my own state, CA, in 2015, Senator Richard Pan, who is also a practicing pediatrician, spoke at UC Berkeley’s Public School of Health. He made the false claims that thimerosal is not in childhood vaccines and that water is the most dangerous substance in vaccines. Neither the Medical Board of CA, nor other legislators, nor the media countered or corrected either of Senator Pan’s false claims, nor were any charges brought against him. This man who tells dangerous lies is the lawmaker who did Pharma’s bidding in CA and led the charge to enact SB277 in CA, mandating that all CA children receive multiple doses of 10 different vaccines in order to attend daycare and in order to gain entrance to any public or private school. During hearings for SB277 in CA, false claims about vaccines were rampant, including: that they are safe, which by definition means that they don’t cause harm; that they are effective, which by definition means that they don’t fail, and that they don’t cause more harm than the infection they are supposed to prevent; that they are needed to protect immune-compromised children, as though it is one child’s job to protect another child, versus the parent’s job; that current vaccination rates above 90% are not high enough, with no mention that the threshold rates continue to be arbitrarily raised due to frequent vaccine failures, and due to increasing resistance and refusal to vaccinate, which is the result of mounting vaccine injury and death tolls; and that vaccines are needed to protect CA children, with no mention of the many risk-free ways to protect CA children. For one last example of false claims, the New York Times recently ran an article which began, “The HPV vaccine, which prevents cervical cancer and other malignancies…” The truth is that HPV vaccines have never been proven to prevent cancer of any kind. Will the NYT be prosecuted for this false claim? No, the NYT’s false claim will go legally unchallenged, and will be largely believed by Americans who still place their trust in the veracity of the fourth estate. Why are those who make false claims about vaccines not being prosecuted and penalized, as with other products, including other medical products?
     
29. Why is it legal in a country that calls itself “free” to force parents and an ever-growing number of individuals to submit to multiple, unneeded, increasingly unwanted, risk-laden, potentially-fatal medical procedures for their children and themselves? Why have we citizens permitted our state governments to mandate even one vaccine, much less the 70 vaccines the CDC now recommends between birth and age 18? That is scores of unsafe, invasive medical procedures for children who are not in need of medical care. That is insanity. It is tyranny…it is medical fascism…it is immoral…it is not American…and it most certainly is not protecting, maintaining, or enhancing the health and development of American children, who have never been sicker or more disabled in the history of our country, and who die more often in the first year of life than in any other developed country. Why do we as a country continue to turn a blind eye to the truth before our eyes and a deaf ear to vaccine victims and their families? Why do we go along to get along, be it at the doctor’s office, in conversations with friends, at work, at church, or in social situations? Folks, this is something worth speaking out about at every opportunity. It is not an exaggeration to state that we are talking about the future and survival of humanity being at stake due to the many ways in which we are being poisoned, often without our consent, and the earliest and most egregious way is via vaccination. Why is it legal to force invasive medical procedures on anyone in the 21st century in the land of the free and home of the brave, be it a baby, a college student, a medical resident, an enlistee in the military, the electrician who services the elevators in a hospital, the elderly woman in a nursing home, the daycare worker in CA, or the nurse who works at a hospital?
     
30. Why is it legal to hurt babies…first with painful jabs in their limbs as they are brutally and callously held down, causing dangerous stress responses…then by forcing the dastardly ingredients in vaccines under their skin and deep into their muscle tissues…ingredients that will immediately begin a cataclysmic series of events which will manifest over the course of the child’s lifetime? Might be a high fever and high pitched scream in a couple hours, or misaligned eyes and a crooked smile by the next day, or the start of a lifetime seizure disorder a week later, or the beginning of chronic and alternating diarrhea and constipation, or facial and vocal tics the following month, turning into full-blown Tourette’s down the line, or paralysis within days to weeks, or the loss of language shortly thereafter, or never developing it at all, or an autism diagnosis by age 2, or asthma by age 3, an anaphylactic peanut allergy discovered upon first exposure to peanut butter, problematic attention and learning issues by age 5, a Type 1 diabetes diagnosis at age 9, anxiety disorder diagnosed in high school, or primary ovarian failure, meaning infertility, diagnosed in college. I cannot recommend strongly enough that you read Forrest Maready’s recent book, Crooked: Man-Made Disease Explained, to gain a better understanding of how the aluminum that is present in toxic levels in the majority of today’s vaccines is gravely harming our children, especially and uniquely when paired with the restraint involved in session after session of vaccinations, and during circumcision for boys. This pairing of injected aluminum plus restraint creates the setting for horrific harm that is now manifesting in our boys and girls, in various and sex-specific ways, ways that will take your breath away, and that will make you cringe and cry. To those who say it’s no big deal to have your baby jabbed and stabbed time and again, while being restrained, I say read the book…and better yet, use common sense and parental instincts to see vaccination for the barbaric and unsafe practice that it is. To those who say vaccines are safe, I say you have never read a vaccine package insert, you have never read the list of ingredients and then researched each and every one, and you have never watched or read the many documentaries and books that offer irrefutable proof that vaccines are not safe by any stretch of the imagination. If I pinched your newborn or infant, you’d deck me. If I put the ingredients in vaccines into your baby’s bottle and then fed them to your baby, you’d have me arrested. If I knowingly caused your baby brain damage, or knowingly paralyzed them, or knowingly made it so they would never talk, or comprehend, or if I knowingly ruined your baby’s ability to ever live independently or have a family of their own, you’d probably take me out with your own bare hands. Yet, doctors and nurses are doing these terrible things to our children every single day, via vaccinations. Why is this legal to hurt babies and children?

Hopefully, I have stimulated some serious questioning about vaccines, and the legality and ethics of them. For those new to questioning what they have been told about vaccines, you might be asking yourselves questions such as:

1. Without vaccines, how do we protect our children? First, I would refer you back to the list of questions just posed…how is any of what we just covered “protective” for children? We must remember that we have been very purposefully and strategically taught, by those who profit from vaccines, be it directly or indirectly, to fear the infections for which there is a vaccine. And just because an infection might be somewhat frightening does not mean the vaccine for it is safe, effective, or needed, nor does it mean the vaccine for it has been properly studied or ethically approved. It is important to note, despite current teachings, that health does not come through a needle, pill, or spray. If you review the span of history, it can be gleaned that vibrant health and longevity come through sanitary living conditions, sound nutrition, clean, untainted water, regular exercise and movement, proper rest, avoidance of toxins and poisons (not the injecting of them), proper supervision of children, safe living conditions, a loving family and supportive social circle, faith, purpose, wise choices, and yes, the occasional infection. Like our other bodily systems, including our brain and our muscles, our immune system becomes stronger and more efficient when challenged, naturally, not via manmade, artificial, toxic means. Nature includes many remedies when infections are encountered. Such centuries-old, common-sense, risk-free natural remedies are rarely taught, but are regularly scoffed at in today’s world where pharmaceutical products are pushed at every turn as being the best and only answer. In today’s world, we must question consensus, and seek out information that is not provided by highly-profitable corporations who are creating and controlling the health care narrative. And that narrative is about their wealth, not our health. As a matter of fact, their bottom line does best when each of us is somewhere between sick and dead for as long as possible. Lifetime customers is what they are after, and that first vaccine leads to the first antibiotic, which is followed by the next set of vaccines which leads to the next antibiotic or two, which is followed by more vaccines which then lead to more pharmaceuticals, invasive medical procedures such as the insertion of ear tubes, appointments with specialists, and on and on it goes. In today’s medical-and-pharmaceutical-crazed world, we protect our children best when we protect them from iatrogenic harm, which means harm caused by doctors, nurses, and medical treatments and procedures. To confirm this, ask the millions of parents who dutifully took their children to “well baby” appointments, the code name for vaccination appointments, never to have their child be well again.
    
2. Why would doctors do something that would harm us and our children? This is a common question with a number of answers. First, the majority of doctors knows only that which they have been taught. Medical school curriculums are provided courtesy of pharmaceutical companies in large part. Medical students are taught which drug to prescribe for which symptom. When asked what they are taught about nutrition, the answer is “little to nothing”. When asked what they are taught about vaccines, they mention a 2-hour course on how and where to inject multiple syringes into the 4 limbs of a tiny baby, and that they are to follow without question the CDC’s recommendations for vaccinations. Once in practice, doctors receive their vaccine information from pharmaceutical reps, who give only glowing reviews of the products they have been hired to push. Typically, doctors do not take the time to read vaccine package inserts, which are damning in and of themselves, yet which often do not tell the entire sinister story. If they read about vaccines at all, it is most often industry and government propaganda, touting the safety, efficacy, and necessity of vaccines, while completely ignoring vaccine failures, dangers, ingredients, injury and death reports, fraud, whistleblower testimony, and the corruption that exists from manufacture to mandate and beyond. Furthermore, doctors are monetarily compensated for high rates of vaccine uptake, and penalized in various ways for the opposite. Speaking out against vaccines in any way, shape, or form results in being “Wakefielded”, something the vast majority of doctors chooses to forego.
    
3. What about those, including doctors, who state that there is a “safe” way to vaccinate children, be it a delayed schedule, skipping one or two of them until they are older, or giving only 1 vaccine at a time (remember, many are multivalent, and necessitate giving a minimum of 3 at once)? I say, beware of such dangerous and unfounded advice. Think of all the facts we have covered tonight: not one vaccine has been studied properly or been approved ethically; each contains a heinous cocktail of toxic and hazardous ingredients; and each has the potential to gravely harm, permanently disable, make chronically ill, and kill, and those risks are greatly multiplied when they are given together, which is how they are most often administered. Here is a vivid analogy for you. If a parent were beating their child 7 times per week and was convinced to reduce the beatings to 3 times per week, that sounds safer in theory, but it is in theory only. Since any of the beatings could be fatal, or cause profound injury or permanent disability, a reduction in frequency and/or spreading out of the beatings is still not safe, or advisable. Just as there is no safe beating of a child, or safe schedule for beating a child, there is no safe vaccine, or safe schedule for vaccinating a child. We cannot, and should not, defend that which is indefensible, and that includes the barbaric and reprehensible practice of vaccination.

My bumper sticker messages to leave you with tonight are:

Why is this legal?

and

Vaccine-free is the way to be!

Thank you.

Post-script:

To watch and/or read my previous WAPF presentation, an 80-min. comprehensive overview of many vaccine-related issues, click here. To read, watch, or listen to more by me, go to the home page of ageofautism.com and click on the Special Reports tab at the top of the page, or simply click here.