Home
Subscribe (free)
About NaturalNews
Contact Us
Write for NaturalNews
Media Info
Advertising Info

Top 3 things that show vaccines are flawed and antiquated


Vaccines dangers
Most Viewed Articles
Popular on Facebook
http://www.naturalnews.com/048582_vaccines_dangers_flawed_science_immunity.html
Delicious
diaspora
Print
Email
Share
(NaturalNews) Sometimes we just refuse to see the writing on the wall. It's not because we are bad people, but rather, we just can't stand to allow our ego to be bruised. When this stance is taken, it becomes very difficult to admit any weakness or wrongdoing even though evidence and logic may suggest otherwise.

We have plenty of manufactured evidence on why vaccines work and really need to be forced on anyone who doesn't comply, but have we really looked at other pieces of evidence that may suggest they have outworn their welcome?

It's time to examine the argument that vaccines have had their heyday in the modern developed world, and need to be archived completely.

Flawed research

The mantra of the vaccine industry is that they are proven safe and effective due to their research. The gold standard of research is the double blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT), which means people are split into 2 groups randomly and participants are given the real thing or a placebo. Results are charted as to whom gets better or worse, and there is no bias as no one knows the placebo or intervention group.

How many vaccines have been using this gold standard? NONE. Why? Researchers state that they can't perform an RCT because it would be unethical to not give a child a vaccine because if they die of something that could have been prevented then they are held responsible. Whether this is reasonable or not, it doesn't change the fact that they do not use the proper standards when testing a "medicine" that is later injected into billions of people across the world that could have dire consequences.

So instead of doing this research, they check to see if a person builds antibodies to the antigen that is in the vaccine. If they are built, it's considered safe and effective. However, these studies are rarely done on children younger than 4 years old, so how exactly could they say it's effective for babies?

Regardless, the whole premise of vaccines is you get injected with a foreign invader to see if you produce antibodies that would fight off such an infection. If you can't produce antibodies, the vaccine would be deemed ineffective and should not be approved or used.

What makes this especially interesting is the fact that babies don't produce antibodies until after the age of 6 months. So why would anyone under the age of 6 months be given a vaccine if they can't produce antibodies? Even if you believe in the effectiveness and safety of vaccines, giving any child under the 6 months a vaccine is completely pointless, based on the vaccines industry's own premise!

With a minimum of 12 doses recommended before 6 months by the CDC, the vaccine industry is destroying a child's immune system in this absolutely fruitless endeavor.

Not solving any problems not already under control

When you care to look at historical charts and numbers, it's plain to see that many of the diseases being vaccinated for were already under control naturally before the vaccine industry butted in to steal all the glory. And the symptoms were not life threatening over 95% of the time, and most recovered with 24-72 hours. It's important to note that this was also at a time where poor living conditions and inadequate nutrition were rampant, which would only add fuel to any outbreak.

To use a modern day example about how vaccines are not solving any problems, lets talk about the measles. In 1920, the peak of the measles outbreak, the death rate was 1.6%. In 1955, the death rate was less than 3 in 10,000,000 cases! The measles vaccination program began in 1963, long after the mortality rate was negligible!

The same type of results could be echoed for polio, typhoid and scarlet fever, rubella, pertussis, diphtheria, and more. So instead of being the "antidote" to these diseases, vaccines were really the anecdote.

Nutrition and sanitation trumps vaccines for immunity

The most interesting part about the vaccine debate is the lack of discussion around the lifestyle and living conditions 60 years ago, and those of today. Sanitation, personal hygiene, and nutrition is exponentially better today than it was in the 20's through the 50's, when the spikes in deaths occurred for most of the diseases being vaccinated against. Improvement in all 3 of those areas alone should make many of these diseases as scary as the common cold.

When fully understood, these improvements alone make the modern day vaccination scares and "outbreaks" look ridiculous. After all, when you know how to take care of the only thing that really matters in the case of any communicable disease, you fail to get scared. You're already prepared.

To learn more about how to really be protected, read The Vaccine Debate: The Elephant In The Room No One Is Talking About, and check out How to Detoxify from Vaccinations & Heavy Metals.

Sources:

http://myemail.constantcontact.com

http://healthimpactnews.com

http://www.cdc.gov

http://www.aimintegrativemedicine.com

About the author:
Derek Henry took a deadly health challenge that conventional medicine couldn't solve and self-directed a one-in-a-million health journey that found him happier and healthier than he had been in his entire life. As a result of this rewarding journey, he now spends his time writing, coaching, and educating thousands of people each month who want to enjoy similar results under their own direction.

Find out how you can reverse disease and thrive with a holistic approach.
Join the Health Ranger's FREE email newsletter
Get breaking news alerts on GMOs, fluoride, superfoods, natural cures and more...
Your privacy is protected. Unsubscribe at any time. | Learn more...

More news on vaccines dangers



comments powered by Disqus