Frank Mangano: The CDC says that vaccines have saved millions of lives and that if they were to be stopped, nearly three million people would die from measles alone.  That said, should we get rid of vaccines entirely, or do they have some positive role to play when it comes to prevention?

Dr. Foster: Let’s consider all of the contaminated vaccines that have been injected into millions of people worldwide and compare those numbers against the lives that have actually been saved against an acute infectious disease.  One might argue, “Is it better to suffer from an acute infection, or suffer a drawn out protracted disease over many year’s time due to the side effects of the vaccines?”  This is a question about quality of life.

Many times, what we find is that after that six month process of vaccine preparation, when the vaccine is finally administered, the rate of infection has already declined and many people already have antibodies against the virus.   This is a concept called herd immunity.  Now, if anyone goes to Wikipedia to look up the definition of herd immunity, they’re not going to find the true definition.  They’re going to find a definition with a hidden agenda to sell and promote vaccines.

Herd immunity is immunity or protection against an infectious disease.  It normally happens because people in the group (or herd) have already been exposed to the infectious disease and developed antibodies to it.  According to the definition currently posted on Wikipedia, herd immunity can only exist if people are vaccinated.  This is ludicrous!  (I think the MD who wrote this definition must have missed that day in medical school where this concept was taught.)

Vaccines are merely an attempt to mimic what the body does naturally: When exposed to something infectious, the body creates antibodies against it to destroy it. Some people will have an infection and become immune; some people will merely be exposed, have a very mild or insignificant illness, but still develop antibodies against something.  When enough people in a population have developed antibodies against something infectious, the chances of that infection spreading through that population become very, very small.  This is “herd immunity.”

For any infectious disease, we see that the frequency of infectious diseases occurs like a bell-shaped curve.  At first, only a few people are infected.  Then the numbers grow steadily to reach a peak.  Then after the peak—the time when the most people are infected—the numbers steadily decrease until the “epidemic” dies out.  The numbers decrease because more and more people have been exposed and have survived and these people are now protected due to their natural antibodies that have formed.  They have developed “herd immunity.” This happens with most epidemics, with or without vaccination.   The Bubonic Plague was an epidemic.  It came, it peaked, and it died out, and no one ever had a vaccine.  But after the plague was over, the rest of the people who survived had “herd immunity.”

By the time a vaccine is administered for an infectious disease, we see that the bell-shaped curve is already on the decline—the number of infections is steadily going down anyway because of herd immunity.  So, many statistics that show vaccines are associated with a decrease in infection rates can be misleading, since the infection rate was going to go down anyway.  This is based on epidemiologic research on infectious disease.  Epidemiology is a field of medicine that studies the causes of diseases, how they are distributed amongst the population, when, where and how often they occur, who is more at risk, and how a disease will behave over time.  This is like “statistics” for diseases.

So, we know already that a certain number of people will get the flu each year and that each year, the number of people getting the flu is going to start with a few cases, reach a peak, and then go down naturally, regardless of whether or not a vaccine is used.  And each year, the flu is going to be a different strain.

Frank Mangano: What makes the H1N1 vaccine, in particular, bad?  Do you oppose it because it’s ineffective or because of its side effects?  Or is it a combination of both?

Dr. Foster: This particular vaccine was released before the six month testing period was up.  This is particularly concerning because the testing to determine if the cultures were grown correctly with the exact protein coat needed has not been completed.  This is a concern for contamination and even for effectiveness.  Remember, a vaccine is not going to work if you do not get an exact match on the protein coat of the virus or bacteria.  Remember also that a vaccine is a brand new chemical combination that has never before existed in nature, so we do not know exactly the effects it will have on human beings until we study it for a period of time.  Even after six months of studying a vaccine, can we really know the long term effects of a vaccine?  No one can know this for sure.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6