Modified Live Vaccines
These are laboratory modified live vaccines. A quote from Dr Jean Dodds — "many vets trace the present problems with allergic and immunological diseases to the introduction of MLV vacs."
Other types of vaccines such as Vector vaccines are laboratory engineered, using transfer of genes.
Vaccination is a method of exposing animals to an organism that has been modified so that no disease would be created, but immunity to that organism would develop. Vaccination would thus prevent suffering by stopping the acute expression of the disease.
The allopathic model assumes vaccines to be useful and safe, with occasional aberrations. (Allopathic viewpoint).
Historically vaccinations ‘stopped’ epidemics by limiting the spread of contagious disease, for example the reduction of rabies in most domestic animals since the 1950’s, and canine and feline distemper virus diseases and the feline rhinotracheitis epidemic in the 1960’s.
Vaccinations appeared to lead to decreased mortality, especially in young susceptible animals — domestic pets were living longer, healthier lives.
It would appear that Jenner (Smallpox vaccine) and Pasteur (the Germ Theory) had saved the world…
The Germ Theory states… that ‘germs’ produce disease;
The other view is that the germs are there as a result of, or opportunist to, a disruption in the healthy functioning of the body. Pasteur argued whether germs caused disease or were incidental to disease. Homeopathy recognises both concepts with the emphasis on the latter. Modern medicine does too but the emphasis in on the former. Even Pasteur finally admitted that ‘the microbe is nothing, the terrain everything”.
|THE HISTORY OF VACCINATIONS:
||Jenner – first vaccination of cowpox.
||Pasteur – the Germ theory of disease.
||Pasteur – vaccine for Rabies and Anthrax (viruses were still yet to be discovered).
His success with Rabies was nowhere as great as he claimed.
||Koch – theories of vaccination.
||1929 Fleming – penicillin, the first antibiotic.
A noted veterinarian reported that just after the 2nd World War, Distemper was rife, especially among susceptible breeds such as poodles, spaniels and sheepdogs. Cats also suffered an epidemic of Infectious Panleukopenia, which spread so fast and wiped out so many cats it was thought at first to be a poisoning. Despite this, subsequent generations grew up strong and free until four years later the diseases swept through again. This time the animals stood a better chance of withstanding it and nowhere near all the animals affected actually died.
By the beginning of the ‘50s mortality from these epidemics had declined to such a level that it was thought they were eradicated. And it was just at this time… that these vaccinations came on the scene. They were attributed to stopping the epidemics by limiting the spread of contagious diseases. Rabies had been reduced in most domestic animals, since the 1950’s, canine and feline distemper (different viruses) and the feline rhinotracheitis epidemic of the late 1960’s. Domestic animals were living longer healthier lives thanks to these vaccines.
The late 1970’s saw the canine parvovirus epidemic and the subsequent diminishment of the disease following vaccination. Vaccination was championed. However as time passed, more and more cases of vaccinated dogs were coming down with Parvovirus, some so soon after the vaccination it appeared the vaccine was causing the disease or at least making them more susceptible. The first feline leukaemia virus vaccine appeared at this time, hopefully to halt this terrible disease, (feline leukaemia virus disease is similar to HIV and AIDS syndrome in humans). Although not a success, cats were appearing that were tested and found free of the virus, only to succumb shortly after vaccination.
The Inflammatory Response — Friend or Foe?
As part of the vaccination process, the body will respond with inflammation, temporarily or long-standing. This reaction causes an ‘allergic’ state, the most fatal of course, being anaphylactic shock. Traditionally inflammation has always been seen as a desirable response, which aids the body in the healing process. This assumed that the body was reacting to the foreign invader. However, if we do not accept this and claim that the inflammatory process is set up and used by the invader as a means of hiding from the body’s defence system, then the whole disease process needs a radical rethink. And it is surely one of the reasons for including aluminium in the adjuvant, which attracts the inflammatory response following administration of the vaccination by injection thus protecting the ‘enemy within’.
Routes of Vaccinations
Natural infection in most cases is via a body orifice. The stimulation to the local parts of the immune system alters the body to the oncoming challenge and ensures a response. If the local defences overcome the challenge there is no further problem. If this is not successful then the body’s prepared systemic system becomes active. Even in cases where infection is introduced by bites there is till an initial local reaction. Vaccination by injection short circuits this process and exposes the overall system to an assault it is not ready to meet. The inclusion of adjuvants assist in preventing the body to prepare for this assault.
Adjuvant — a substance added to a prescription to assist in the action of the main ingredient.
Apart from the modified micro-organisms, there are many ‘additives’ or adjuvants in veterinary and human vaccinations.
GlaxoSmithKline and Merck & Co are two major veterinary medicines producers. Their vaccines may contain aluminium phosphate, red rhesus monkey foetal lung cells, bovine foetal serum, vesicle fluid from calf skins, MSG, gelatine, guinea pig embryo cells, albumin from human blood, human diploid cells from aborted foetal tissue, neomycin, potassium glutamate, chicken protein, **thimerosal and formaldehyde.
The addition of aluminium creates inflammation, which draws the immune system to the site of the vaccine. Cats are unique in that inflammation can turn into cancer. In the 1990’s many cats and dogs began showing up with a tumour at the site where a feline leukaemia or rabies vaccine was given. These cancers arose at the site of the vaccination and aluminium was found in many of these tumours — this substance is added to vaccines to extend the life of the vaccine.
The average life expectancy is less than 3 years once the cancer is in place. There is no known treatment. They are highly malignant and highly invasive.
||The World Health Organisation classes adjuvants as Class 2 Carcinogens.
||The Rhesus monkey population was decimated in the interest of adjuvants.
||Thimerosal — a preservative that contains ethyl mercury and is strongly suspected of causing autism and other learning disabilities.
CAN VACCINATONS PREVENT DISEASE?
Only acute diseases can potentially be prevented by vaccinations as they are truly generated by an infectious organism. Acute diseases have symptoms that are constant over a period of time and generally affect those exposed to it. Once the individual has recovered further exposure does not result in further disease. Measles, mumps and chickenpox in children, feline pan leukopenia in cats and canine distemper and canine hepatitis in dogs are examples. In all cases susceptibility of the individual must precede exposure.
A veterinary example of an acute disease is infectious bovine tracheitis, which causes severe respiratory and genital infections. There has been no difference in the vaccinated population and those allowed to develop a ‘natural immunity’.
An interesting finding by Christopher Day, UK Veterinarian, during a study of kennel cough in boarding kennels, was that vaccinations actually increased susceptibility to the disease.
An immune system malfunction is the primary factor in chronic disease.
There is also a link between vaccination and auto-immune diseases — the administration of foreign proteins early in a pet’s life is believed to confuse their immune system in its immature condition, so that later in life it will have difficulties discerning between own body proteins and foreign proteins.
Most vaccinations are now live and ‘foreign to the body. Repeated vaccinations lead to incorporation of the virus in the genetic material of the cell, constituting a constant antigenic challenge. The only way this can be met is for the antibodies to turn against the cell itself and destroy it. Auto-immune diseases result as an over active immune system attacks itself, unable to distinguish between host and foreign substances. Auto-immune diseases include auto-immune haemolytic anaemia, pemphigus, ‘rodent’ ulcers and eosinophilic granuloma. These diseases are not considered to be caused by an infective organism.
Organisms that do appear in Immunodeficiency diseases are not the cause of the condition, merely a symptom. They can of course cause considerable damage to an immune compromised individual but illness (i.e. an immunodeficiency state) must pre-exist and precede the infection.
Examples of immunodeficiency diseases are feline leukaemia virus, feline infectious peritonitis and some upper respiratory conditions. In dogs, the kennel cough complex, and possibly canine parvovirus.
The (not) so surprising evidence is that vaccines do not actually protect populations from disease, though they do appear to modify the pattern in which the acute disease is manifested. Statistics are constantly thrust upon us that seem to prove that vaccinations have been tremendously successful in wiping out disease — to give the illusion that these vaccinations are useful. The visible symptoms of the disease have been suppressed (everyone assumes it is a success), however under the surface another disease pattern arises — the vaccine connection is not made.
A vaccine is a means of producing immunity using a vaccine to stimulate the formation of appropriate antibodies., which, indirectly, offer protection against disease. Vaccinations are used to protect against many viral, bacterial, protozoa and parasitical diseases. It is usually given by injection but may be administered orally e.g. lungworm vaccine in cattle. Vaccination by injection short-circuits the stimulation to the local parts of the immune system, which alert the body to the coming challenge, and ensures a measured response. Injections expose the overall system to an assault it is not ready to meet.
Success depends on knowing exactly how the immune system works. But the immune system is more complex; it involves the whole individual (which is why some are more susceptible than others). Vaccinations do not take this factor into account. The initial effect of systemic vaccination in dogs has been shown to reduce the immune response for up to three days, after which there is a compensatory response. In addition to the effects on the immune system, there is a significant effect on the endocrine system. The gland most potentially affected is the thyroid.
The presence of antibodies in the blood is a sign that the animal has put up a useful immune response to exposure to a disease organism and stayed healthy. That’s what antibodies, in healthy animals, are all about. A vaccination ‘speal’ is that the presence of antibodies is direct evidence that the animal have been encountering this ‘dangerous germ’ — so there is a good chance they are sick or will get sick. Therefore they will need a vaccination. Interpreting antibodies as a sign of ill health is downright fraud.
The efficacy of a vaccine is expressed in terms of the level of antibodies provoked. Antibodies only tell us something about humoral immunity, totally disregarding cellular immunity. Evidence has shown that on many occasions there is poor correlation between the level of antibodies and actual immunity.
The ultimate aim of the vaccination program is to eradicate the disease. This has never succeeded before and it is unlikely that such could ever be achieved. (Smallpox was eliminated by rigid quarantine measures, not by vaccination).
In 1978 the American Veterinary Medical Association recommended that vaccines for dogs and cats be administered yearly. This recommendation was without scientific validity but with the high incidence of ‘preventable’ disease and vaccines that had debatable efficacy, scholars felt it most prudent to vaccinate annually.
Why did it become an accepted protocol?
Some years ago Vets were seeing a neurological disease they called ‘old dog encephalitis’ which they believed to be a form of canine distemper in older dogs to which vaccinations were administered as puppies but not as adults.
It was thus assumed that their immunity had ‘lapsed’ and that more repetition of the vaccination would prevent the syndrome. This theory was never proven and eventually more vaccines became repeated on an ‘annual’ basis although need was never established. Interestingly children who had been vaccinated for measles were more likely than unvaccinated children to show neurologic disease if infected with measles. There has been some attempt to link measles or distemper viruses with development of multiple sclerosis in humans. Since measles and canine distemper belong to the same class of viruses (paramyxovirus), there may be a similar mechanism working for both.
Annual vaccinations now became a major part of veterinary medicine. Owners were told that this was all that was necessary, creating a false sense of security for the pet owners and a sure market for vets.
Dogs and Cats immune system matures at six months. Recent studies reveal that if a MLV (Modified Live Vaccine) is given after six months of age it produces immunity, which is good for life. If another MLV vaccine is given as a ‘booster’ a year or so later, the antibodies from the first vaccine neutralise the antigens of the second vaccine. The result is — no effect, except that the pet has had another adjuvant assault on the immune system and is again subject to the risk of allergic reactions and IMHA. (Immune modulated Haemolytic Anaemia).
A quote from a conventional textbook written by respected veterinary scholars Phillips DVM and Schultz PhD:
“A practice that was started many years ago and that lacks scientific validity or verification, is annual re vaccinations. Almost without exception, there is no immunological requirement — immunity to viruses persist for years or for the life of the animal. Successful vaccination to most bacterial pathogens produces an immunologic memory that lasts for years, allowing an animal to develop a protective secondary response when exposed to a virulent organism.”
As early as 1997 Dr Ron Schultz, then the most prominent immunologist in veterinary medicine, said that giving vaccines like rabies, distemper and parvovirus annually had NO effect. Letters distributed by the AVMA re: the annual use of vaccinations have been ignored by over 90% of American vets. Charging a patient for an ineffectual annual booster is FRAUD.
Recently the Veterinary Universities and the American Veterinary Medical Association have studied just how long these vaccines last and have finally concluded that ANNUAL VACCINATION IS UNECCESSARY. There are some diseases like leptospirosis for which the duration of immunity is short and they do have to be given every year, but only to a dog at risk of developing the disease. These vaccines are only 60-80% effective.
The argument for boosters is also based on the ‘need’ to see in the animal in case there is some disease process emerging. And while the pet is being examined, it may as well have a booster to make sure nothing ‘emerges’. It empowers the veterinary profession and creates a false sense of security for the owners.
MYTHS, LIES AND MORE DAMNED LIES
|Vaccines are effective:
Previously vaccinated parvovirus, snuffles and kennel cough animals can suffer recurrences. How many owners have picked up their animals from Boarding Kennels (even Quarantine Kennels) only to find their pet with a cough or nasal and eye discharges, even though they and every other cat and dog in the facility have been vaccinated.
Christopher Day, a leading British homeopathic veterinarian, compared the effectiveness of vaccination and homeopathic vaccination for kennel cough in dogs at a boarding kennel. (The kennel had been experiencing recurrent outbreaks of kennel cough period to the study.)
The intent of the study was to evaluate the use of a homeopathic nosodes for prevention of the disease. However, it was found that orthodox vaccination actually increased susceptibility to the disease. Incidentally, the homeopathic nosode proved to be effective at preventing kennel cough. See Homeopathy & Vaccination
Some animals do not respond to vaccinations, antibodies fail to form, or form only at a level that is inadequate for proper protection. There are also some individual animals (and people) who cannot accept the vaccine challenge, with inherited faulty T and B cell function. These B and T cells are components of the immune system that identify foreign invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that they cannot cause future harm. Merck warns that patients with B and/or T cell immunodeficiencies should not receive live virus vaccines due to the risk of sever or fatal infection. (Features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies include food allergies, inhalant allergens, dermatitis and eczema.
Modified live virus vaccines (MLV) replicate in the patient until an immune response is provoked; if a defence isn’t stimulated then the vaccine continues to replicate until it gives the patient the very disease it was intending to prevent. Alternatively a compromised immune response will lead to the inflammatory conditions of pancreatitis, encephalitis, arthritis, and the cancers and leukaemia, where the body attacks it own cells.
Vaccinations are only responsive in acute disease. Vaccination adverse reaction risk is enhanced at times of great hormonal activity. (Usually sexual activity). The BCG vaccination against TB is completely ineffective yet millions of doses have been administered.
The absence of vaccination is the cause of epidemic outbreaks.
It is almost always suggested that immune campaigns are responsible for a drop in morbidity and mortality of that disease. Most of the time a significant decline in mortality was in place long before the vaccine was in use. On different occasions the number of vaccinated diseases increased after vaccination campaigns e.g. polio, smallpox, measles.
In many situations the incidence of communicable disease were declining BEFORE the vaccination programmes were enforced, once the vaccination programmes were put into place, the incidence of these disease INCREASED. In many cases deaths occurred after the individual was vaccinated.
There is the fact of epidemic outbreaks in strongly immunised populations. The USA is the most highly vaccinated country for measles yet measles cases are growing year by year, involving even more adults and infants. Again in the USA an aggressive vaccination programme for infectious bovine rhinotracheitis has proved to be just as (non) effective as the policy on no vaccinations to cattle in Australia for the same disease. The result? No difference in immunity or infection rates despite similar rates of infection at the outset 15 years ago.
The immunisation campaigns against small pox in Sumatra, had to be stopped because the more the population was immunised, the more casualties were reported.
A World Health Organisation study revealed that vaccinated people are 14 times more likely to contract measles than those not vaccinated. Outbreaks of measles continue to occur even among 100% vaccinated populations. Statistics demonstrate there has been no influence on the epidemiological disappearance of diseases like whooping cough, TB, and diphtheria.
Vaccinations are safe:
Canine Distemper – The major ACUTE symptoms are watery discharge from nose and eyes, conjunctivitis, vomiting, diarrhoea, loss of appetite, emaciation, watery faeces (offensive, mucous, often bloody), loss of weight, spasms, fits, paralysis, red footpads, pneumonia, pustular eruptions.
Repeated vaccinations have changed this acute picture to become chronic, creating a susceptibility to new acute forms of distemper like parvovirus. Some of the chronic conditions have been given names as ‘new’ diseases, Apprehensiveness, developing viciousness — mostly to strangers, normally affectionate — now hides away, independent dogs now become clingy, overly affectionate, will chew on anything used to restrain or confine it; desires to travel away from home, swallows wood, own faecal material, stones, destructive with clothing, convulsions, throat problems, increased sexual desire even in neutered animals, sexual aggression, humping.
The continued use of measles vaccination, like canine distemper to which it has a close similarity, has promoted the rise of ‘new’ diseases with ataxia, retardation, meningitis and learning disabilities. It may also be a factor in Guillain-Barre syndrome, blood clotting disorders and juvenile onset diabetes (not too dissimilar to the ‘altered’ post vaccination state of Canine Distemper symptom changes.
Whopping Cough is still another disease where exactly the same outbreaks have occurred. And as with the measles vaccination, there are several known harmful effects from this vaccination. Sudden Infant Death Syndrome increased after children were given their pertussis vaccination and again, like measles vaccination, retardation, learning disorders, projectile vomiting, excessive sleepiness, convulsions, etc. Used in animal experiments, it produced anaphylactic shock and caused an acute auto immune encephalomyelitis.
Cats – The symptoms of feline pan leukopenia are mucopurulent discharges from eyes and nose, watery, often blood tinged diarrhoea, fever, dehydration, unkempt appearance, lassitude, loss of appetite, rapid weight loss.
The chronic picture in cats presents as having a finicky appetite, lazy, chronic dehydration, leading to — cystitis, bladder stones, emaciation, hyperthyroidism, inflammatory bowel disease, and chronic upper respiratory infections. Feline leukaemia can look like chronic pan leukopenia with fever, anorexia, lymphadenopathy, anaemia and thrombocytopenia.
The vaccination programmes seem to have changed the individuals expression of the disease — changing, once again, acute forms of disease into long term chronic disease with a range of symptoms that are given new names as being ‘distinct diseases’ when all they are, are the expression of the acute old diseases modified by vaccinations.
Vaccine-induced diseases – Polio is one disease that people extol the virtues but this disease was also on the decline prior to vaccinations,. Following the Salk vaccination program, reported cases of polio were significantly higher than before mass inoculations. Continued use of the vaccine are even in Dr Salk’s words, “the principle, if not the sole cause’ of all reported polio cases in the USA since 1961.
On the island of Madeira for example, polio was unknown until vaccination was introduced. The massive parvovirus vaccination program is creating immunosuppression in these dogs, leading to an upsurge in inflammatory bowel disease and cardiomyopathy. Convulsions are not uncommon. And aggression and personality disorders are now all too common place, even in breeds known in the past for their gentle and affectionate natures.
Non-specific reaction to vaccines in general may be a contributing factor in hyper and hypo thyroidism, lupus, FIP, FIV, chronic hepatitis, renal failure and allergies, all of which are now commonplace in my clinic.
Andrew Wakefield, a British MD, uncovered the link between the MMR vaccination and autism, and was fired from his job.
Vaccinations can cause allergic thyroiditis resulting in hypothyroidism. Whatever affinity an organism has for an organ system will surface with vaccine reactions. This may explain the appearance of epidemic diseases that were virtually non-existent a few years ago — inflammatory bowel disease, (in dogs and cats), cardiomyopathy, asthma, degenerative myelopathy, hyperthyroidism, extremes of clinginess and aggression, nymphomania, faeces eating and allergies.
There are of course, other factors in the emergence of these conditions yet it is difficult to rule out a vaccine-induced problem.
Aboriginal children – When their mass vaccination programme was commenced in 1960’s – 1970’s, infant mortality rates were markedly increased. (Kalokerino Dettman).
Immunisation leads to impairment of the immune system through a number of pathways.
a. Vaccination impairs the immune reserve especially at a young age, and does so in a tenfold way compared to natural disease.
b. The exposure to the micro organism is different than from a natural disease. High amounts of virus are injected compared to the low numbers that often cause immunity in natural disease without even showing symptoms. Intramuscular injects skip the first biological barriers (the mucosa of the respiratory tract and digestive tracts), that produce IgA and thus play a primary role in the induction of natural immunity.
c. Vaccines are administered very early in life into a very immature immune system. Following birth, the young live in a state of immune-suppression that started during pregnancy to co exist with the mother. By the time the infant reaches 6 months his system has been seriously challenged by several vaccines a number of times.
d. Suppression of the immune system is also demonstrated by the provocation of new diseases after immunisation against others. A number of autoimmune diseases are potentially vaccine-induced.
e. Chasing ‘virulent’ micro-organisms only creates biological ‘holes’, which are at once filled up with mutant forms of the organisms they fight.
f. The premise of the whole system of vaccination is that infectious disease depends entirely upon an infectious agent, completely disregarding the ‘terrain’, the strength of the individual’s immune system, etc. If these other factors made absolutely no difference to the disease process, then every contact with an infectious agent would result in disease. Our daily experience proves just the opposite. The vaccine philosophy is based on Pasteur’s “Germ Theory’ which even Pasteur finally admitted didn’t hold up.
There is a long list of side effects after vaccination. We are told that in the long run, immunisations are safe and do not interfere with chronic diseases. This is plainly incorrect. There is strong evidence that the suppression of acute disease goes along with increased risk for chronic impairment.
Short attention spans were noticed in many cases following vaccinations, over 73 % did so within 3 months of being vaccinated. That same percentage of dogs was diagnosed with epilepsy following vaccinations (within 3 days to 3 months).
Over 72% of dogs that were considered by their owners to be nervous, first exhibited these traits within three months post vaccination period.
Another aspect of vaccination is the growing number of dams and queens who have been vaccinated and have no natural immunity to pass on to their offspring.
Thousands of cats died from a 100% fatal vaccine-induced fibrosarcoma at the vaccination site. Has your vet ever warned you about this? Or does he tell you he will use a different site next time he vaccinates to prevent the problem!
Vaccine particles have been found within the cancer mass so does it matter where the site is? Cats may now be vaccinated in the leg or tail so they can amputate when cancer appears.
Dogs also develop cancer at the vaccination sites. Any such ‘swelling’ or abnormality is quickly surgically removed. This reaction has also happened at the sites where chemical flea control has been applied (Ed).
Horses can develop a swelling in the area of infection, or a stiff neck, possible abscess, high fever, lethargy and diarrhoea.
Vaccine-site cancer is a possible sequel to human vaccines too since the Salk vaccine (polio) was said to carry a monkey retrovirus that produced inheritable cancer. (The monkey retrovirus keeps turning up in human cancer sites). It is also widely acknowledged that vaccines can cause a fast acting, usually fatal, disease – autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (AIHA). Individuals can die in agony within a few days.
Think of your recently vaccinated dog or cat as having just received three, five or even seven different diseases, totally by-passing her skin, nose and mouth. Her natural filters have been circumvented, and as a result, her immune system may become overworked, weakened, or even overwhelmed, potentially setting the stage for a degenerative disease.
The vaccine is only to be given to healthy dogs. What happens to the compromised dog? The danger of developing the disease for which the vaccine was intended to prevent is high. Distemper is the biggest culprit, especially in a dog with Cushing’s or diabetes.
Inherent to the combination of different live vaccines is that new recombinant viruses could form, of which the pathogenicity and cancerogenicity is absolutely unknown. Inherent in this are the risk of chromosomal damage, with impairment of the genetic information and the possibility to pass on our problems to the generations to come.
The age at which initial vaccinations are given is important. Maternal antibodies in nature not only protect against death from the appropriate disease but also to protect the immature immune system from having to copy with a severe challenge before it is able.
A risk also inherent to vaccination at a young age is that diseases, which are relatively harmless at that age, are shifted to either adults or infants, where the risk of complications is considerably higher.
Vaccinations appear to be capable of removing the natural intelligence of cells.
Why would vaccinations be more likely than the natural disease to lead to chronic illness?
a. Exposure in a natural infection in most cases is via a body orifice. This allows the body to begin a local response, both specific and non-specific, some hours or days before the virus reaches the internal organs.
• Specific = the formation of antibodies at the site of exposure.
• Non specific = white blood cells and body chemicals directed to any foreign materia.
Injections by pass the local immunity and force the body to depend one hundred percent on its own internal immunity.
b. Repetition of vaccinations forces a repeated response of the immune system leading to an excessively stimulated immune response. This is abnormal, as local antibodies in the mouth or nose would repel a natural exposure without allowing penetration into the body. Vaccinations by injection short circuit this process and expose the overall system to an assault it is not ready to meet.
c. Vaccinations break down the inoculated substance thus rendering it unrecognisable by the body defence mechanism. If a dog or cat had been previously exposed to a similar challenge, the body would not recognise the similarity. The use of adjuvants also distorts the immune response pathways.
A questionnaire by veterinarians Dodds, Day and vaccine researcher Schreiber, drew 3800 responses. Dogs – 66% reported illnesses occurring within 3 months after vaccinations. 49% occurred within 30 days and 20% within 7 days. These were allergies, arthritis, cancer, and encephalitis, heart conditions, rear-end paralysis, skin problems, plus a large number of dogs that contracted the disease they had been vaccinated against.
Vaccinations have been scientifically proven:
The entire immunisation doctrine is firmly based upon scientific facts. Yes, the release of a vaccine is preceded by intense research and a lot of high tech. But let us not confuse the amount of money spent or the impressive technology used with what we mean by ‘scientific’. Science has to be a logical system, that allows an explanation of why things happen, and to predict what is going to happen under any given circumstance.
This is NOT the case with immunisations.
Both the animal and humans immune system is only partially understood. The discovery of the HLA system very clearly demonstrated that every individual is unique and is immunologically, quite different from the next individual. Some dogs will get arthritis, some dogs cancer, others never do.; the vaccination program completely ignores this fact. They pretend that everyone has the same susceptibility to any disease. Millions of pets are being immunised against diseases they could never have. Is this scientific and is there any reason to defend that policy?
There is no alternative to vaccination.
Natural infection is proven to provoke higher blood levels of antibodies than immunisation does, therefore they last longer. There is no chronic impairment of the immune system after natural disease.
Childhood diseases seem to be protective against chronic disease in later life; it would appear logical to simply undergo the natural disease e.g. kennel cough, snuffles.
The risk of complications to such disease can be largely reduced by several techniques — Good diet, good nursing, good sanitation, and noting a healthy mental and emotional state.
Some infectious diseases can hardly be considered as a benefit to the patient e.g. Canine Distemper or Tetanus. Firstly avoid the disease using methods described above, secondly avoid impairment of the immune system and thirdly restore the immunology capabilities of the organism. (Homeopathy does this very well).
RESEARCH & REPORTING
Conventional medicine works on the risk / benefit ration — all conventional pharmaceutical drugs come with side effects — but if it can be shown to help more animals than harm them, then the dangers are ignored — can we trust the conventional manufacturers to supply data from both sides of the coin?
Evaluating the effectiveness of vaccinations
Following vaccination two things happen:
1. the disease for which they are vaccinated doesn’t appear,
2. the overall health of the individual is to be measured as an indicator of the vaccine effectiveness (or destructiveness, depending on how you look at it).
Two potential harmful outcomes:
1. The animal gets the disease from the vaccine (because some version of the disease is in the vaccine to begin with).
2. He doesn’t get that disease but at some time later he develops another condition caused by the vaccination.
Vaccine reactions are defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the first shot is given; but a reaction can be gradual; deterioration and neurological problems develop over time. Conventional analysis has established this is so with disease, why would it be any different with vaccinations. If chemical poisoning can occur gradually, why couldn’t that be the case with a vaccine, which contains mercury, aluminium and other known toxic substances?
66% of all illnesses reported occurred within the first 3 months after vaccination.
49% of all illnesses reported started within 30 days.
29% of all illnesses reported occurred within 7 days.
A large number of dogs contracted the very illness they had been vaccinated against. Research has also shown that Polyarthritis and other diseases like Amyloidosis (which affects the organs of dogs), were linked to the combined vaccination given to dogs.
There is a great deal of research (despite the poor funding from the canine industry) to confirm that vaccines can cause a wide range of brain and central nervous system damage. Even Merck states in its own manual that vaccines (that is, its own products) can cause encephalitis. This nervous system ‘impairment’ also includes ‘paresis, involving partial or incomplete paralysis, especially hind limb paralysis.
Testing vaccination reaction on laboratory animals:
Every animal has a different response to a chemical — sensitivity, age, sex, diet, stress, and emotional responses. The only reliable test for vaccination reaction has to be performed on the recipient of the drug, for example immediate acute reaction, delayed reaction, apparent non-reaction, (but other symptoms appearing) and of course the results of these studies cannot be included in the scientific literature because the reactions are not repeatable in every other animal, in fact even the individual may have a different reaction next time it is vaccinated.
A team at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine conducted several studies to determine if vaccines can cause changes in the immune system of dogs that might lead to life-threatening immune-mediated diseases. It was sponsored by the Haywood Foundation who themselves were suspicious of changes in the human immune system.
The vaccinated, but NONE of the unvaccinated dogs in the Purdue studies developed autoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including fironectine, laminin, DNA, albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and collagen. Vaccinated dogs were attacking their own fironectine with is involved in tissue repair, growth and cell multiplication. The dogs’ own DNA was compromised.
The dogs in the experiments were re-homed and no further research on them was done. On going studies by Purdue demonstrated significant rise in the level of antibodies dogs produce against their own tissue, Some have targeted the thyroid gland, red blood cells and (were) responsible for the heart conditions presented in the Cavalier King Charles Spaniel.
The multi-billion dollar international vaccine industry has never sponsored long-term study – in humans or animals — to ascertain t the risks of vaccines. Testing on animals to determine the long-term efficacy of vaccinations is not evaluated either. Animals are kept alive for 1-3 years, when they are vaccine challenged to establish efficacy and then killed. Testing does not have to determine the actual duration of immunity, as manufacturers are only required to show minimum rather than maximum duration.
There have been no proper long-term studies on any vaccinations using a control group; no correct follow-up taking into account the fact that vaccines can induce problems over time, various symptoms and serious problems which fall outside the range of the disease for which the person / animal was vaccinated.
There have never been any studies to show exactly what vaccines do in the body from the moment they enter. And they are usually given by injection, thus escaping the first line of body defence.
Merk, a multinational vaccine producer, has commented that doctors and vets do not have time to study all the side-effects of every drug, therefore much of their understanding need to come from pharmaceutical representatives. And they also have to be concerned with income from their Practice.
Drugs in the veterinary field such as Rimadyl and Deramax have been shown to have death as a potential side effect, after they had passed all the safety and licensing requirements, and after thousand of animals died.
The burden of proof in establishing the efficacy and safety of vaccinations must rest on the manufacturers and those who licence them for use, NOT the owners of animals who witness the sometimes-disastrous effects. In many cases there have been preconceived ideas about the roles of vaccines, leading to liberal interpretations. For example, ‘under-reporting’ where, in spite of presenting symptoms, it may be assumed that if the patient had been vaccinated, it cannot be that disease — hence it is not reported.
Can we trust the large drug companies that fund the research for training upcoming doctors and veterinarians? Can we trust the research? There is major competition for the research dollar. The news media rely on big business for advertising income — can we trust what we read? How do we reach the information that is not printed?
Professionals in practice rely upon drug company big business to supply them with up to date information — do we honestly believe this is impartial information? The drug companies bamboozle vets with complex, self-styled ‘statistics’ — for example, the Corona Virus Vaccination was developed only for use with puppies as it is not a disease of adult dogs. Despite this the drug company’s marketing department was marketing it for adult dogs. The drug company’s excuse…(our) marketing obviously doesn’t talk to the Research and Development Dept!
The Vaccine Industry is knowingly and willingly keeping up the illusion of the necessity and benefits from immunisation.They do so by:
• disregarding scientific knowledge,
• neglecting on-going analysis and study,
• manipulating public opinion and
• lobbying with the responsible decision-makers.
This attitude is one of deliberate and therefore criminal neglect of public health to simply save the prestige of a few dyed-in-the-wool medical thinkers and for the financial benefit of pharmaceutical companies.
Modern medicine success is based on the myth that it is very successful on every frontier. No acknowledgement is given to the decline in disease due to improved living conditions (cleaner water, advanced sewage systems nutrition, and a decrease in poverty).
The American Veterinary Medical Association asked the USDA to revise their standards for licensing vaccinations back in 1998. Since that time the USDA have;
i. Licensed vaccinations that have no effect
ii. Licensed vaccinations that don’t even contain the virus or disease to which they were intended to protect
iii. Licensed many adjuvant vaccines
USA government agencies appear to back the drug business by insisting on 1-3 yearly rabies vaccinations for the life of the pet when lifetime immunity is established after a maximum of two vaccinations. The United States Drug Assoc. requires drug companies to prove 85% efficiency but they don’t have to prove how long this lasts. If they test at 3 months and the vaccine is only good for 4 months they will get a licence.
When the now-defunct Reporting Network by the American Veterinary Association initiated studies, it was discovered that thousands of cats in the USA yearly developed terminal cancer at the vaccination site (100% fatal). Adjuvants in vaccines are five times more likely to be responsible for these cancers. Vaccine-induced fibro-sarcomas are many times more resistant and aggressive than non-vaccine-induced fibrosarcomas.
We want to see veterinarians quit giving unnecessary and unsafe vaccines. It is unethical to charge someone for something that has no effect, or to administer something to a patient, which could cause a 100% fatal cancer, without warning the client?
When a ‘responsible’ pet owner takes their healthy pet for their annual booster what happens when the animal develops epilepsy, behavioural problems, arthritis, thyroid disease, diabetes, a skin complaint, allergies or heart / liver / kidney damage, or paralysis of the rear end, colitis or even caner, leukaemia, or another immune-compromised disease following vaccination. Usually neither the owner nor the vet suspects a link. If the owner enquires, there is an immediate denial of a link between the vaccination and the newly emerged ‘disease’.
Should there be a discloser statement given to every owner prior to vaccination? Whose responsibility is it — the individual vet? When even the American Medical Veterinary Association refuses to take action little can be expected from the NZ Veterinary Association. At present there is NO reporting required on vaccine reactions. There is no government requirement and drug companies have no obligation to respond. Demand for transparency has got to come from the Owner.
HOW TO DIFUSE THE BOMB
Why would the pet owner subject themselves to a system of medicine that has not been investigate thoroughly, is based on faulty logic and has proven side effects that endanger the health of their pet. More importantly — why aren’t the vets asking the same questions? Sure vets spend a lot of time and money studying but if the end result is to stop questioning the reasons behind what is taught or to just ‘accept’ the spin-doctors of the drug companies ‘facts’, then they have sold their soul to pay for it.
The public don’t question the vet’s decision, the vets don’t question the information underpinning that decision, the Lab reports are always right — how far down the rabbit hole does your pet have to go to get a fair deal?
The core of the problem is to quit the vets getting their information from drug companies. Continuing education should not be allowed from a speaker who is a paid employee of a drug company or who has a vested interest in the use of the material. Disallow anyone to contribute to research where a conflict of interest may arise.
Ask yourself AND your vet the following:
a. Is the disease life-threatening?
b. What is the probability of your animal being exposed to the disease in your animals’ susceptibility’ time frame?
c. What is the effectiveness for the vaccine the vet is using (this will be in the manufacture’s diatribe of course)?
d. Is this vaccine safe? (see above),
e. Does your vet explain the risks or side effects of the vaccine your animal is being given?
It is unethical to vaccinate an unhealthy animal.
Any skin problem, infertility issue, respiratory disorders, possible inheritable condition (kidney disease in Persian cats for example), nervous disorder (seizures), incontinence, recurrent down turn in health, cancer, arthritis, impaired hearing, sight or smell, abnormal behaviour patterns, are all ill-health issues.
Vaccinations should be restricted to genuine epidemic life-threatening diseases. The age at which vaccinations are commenced needs to be seriously reconsidered. We need to protect the immature immune system from over challenge. Vaccinations need to be modified to include only those ingredients that are essential to produce a natural body response, and this includes adjuvants and the method of administration.
It is not a local body requirement or a legal obligation to vaccinate. If necessary refuse to have a vaccination on the basis of religion or philosophical grounds as health concerns obviously don’t matter.
Currently the owner is made to feel it is a crime to refuse a vaccination. It is equated with irresponsible ownership.
The decision to vaccinate or not should lie with the owner who can make an informed choice. Whatever your decision — base your choice on facts, not fear!
The medical fraternity like that bet, it’s betting that fear will win.