Why Childhood Vaccines are Big Pharma’s Holy Grail

James A Shannon, director of the US National Institutes of Health 1955-68, said: ‘No vaccination can be proven safe before it is given to children.’

When he made that statement, it was still possible in the US to sue vaccine manufacturers under tort law for vaccine-induced deaths and injuries, which is no longer the case.

Today the US has the world’s most aggressive vaccine schedule and ranks as the sickest country, with the highest infant mortality, in the developed world. The UK does not lag far behind.

Vaccines carry three separate areas of potential risk. Firstly, they artificially stimulate the immune system to produce antibodies, which temporarily inhibits another part of the body’s defence mechanism. In an infant, whose immune system is just developing, this high demand of energy can in some cases overwhelm its metabolic reserves, and cause brain inflammation. The brain is the highest energy-consuming tissue in the body, followed by the gastro-intestinal tract and the immune system.

Secondly, vaccines contain chemicals, metals and drugs. Thirdly, according to the former pharmaceutical R&D executive Sasha Latypova, traditional vaccines are consistently contaminated with plant and animal proteins which hyper-sensitise the body, especially in children, giving rise to allergies.

In the US in the 1970s there were three inoculations recommended for children: the combined diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (whooping cough) (DTP), polio, and the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR), introduced there in 1971. The DTP which was used in the US until 1992 contained the carcinogen formaldehyde. Both the DTP and the MMR contained the preservative thimerosal, which is almost 50 per cent mercury, and in infants can pass through the blood-brain barrier.

A wave of sudden infant deaths (SIDs), severe brain injuries, seizures and other neurological problems were linked through studies to the DTP. In 1977, a study published in the Lancet established that the risks of the whole-cell pertussis used in the DTP vaccine exceeded the risks associated with wild pertussis. Six years later, in 1983, a National Institutes of Health-funded study found that Wyeth’s DTP vaccine was killing or causing severe brain damage to 1 in 300 vaccinated children.

Lawsuits against the manufacturers shot up. In 1984, the president of pharmaceutical manufacturer Lederle declared that the dollar demand of DTP lawsuits against the company was 200 times greater than their total sales of DTP vaccine in 1983. Another vaccine manufacturer, Connaught Laboratories, had damages suits filed against it in 1985/6 amounting to a billion dollars. Wyeth, now Pfizer, faced a similar plight, and bankruptcy threatened the industry as insurers withdrew their indemnity cover.

The industry therefore lobbied Congress for a liability shield from damages, which led to the passing of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986, and the establishment of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) in 1988, administered by the US government through the Health and Human Services Department.

Parents of vaccine-injured children from 1988 were directed to apply to what is commonly referred to as the ‘Vaccine Court’ to present their cases. This was supposed to be a neutral forum where the adversarial nature of civil litigation was removed, their cases would be dealt with swiftly and compensation, where applicable, paid in a timely manner. The reality could not be more different, and how the ‘Vaccine Court’ actually operates will be described in Part 2.

Meanwhile, freed from any consequences and related costs of selling unsafe products, vaccine manufacturers wasted no time in creating new lucrative vaccines and lobbying Congress to include them in the Childhood Vaccine Schedule. That same year of 1988, Hepatitis B and the Hib vaccine, against haemophilus influenza type B, were introduced, both containing mercury-laden thimerosal. In The Real Anthony Fauci, Robert F Kennedy Jr writes that more than 450 studies attested to thimerosal’s devastating toxicity, and because testosterone amplifies the neurotoxicity of the mercury molecule, boys were disproportionately affected.

Cases of autism, ADHD, speech delay, and other neurological conditions soared, in direct parallel with the fast-expanding vaccine schedule. In 1986 autism cases in the US were approximately 1 in 2,500. By 2017 they had jumped to 1 in 36. From the three recommended vaccines in 1986, by 2017 the schedule had risen to 69 doses of 16 vaccines.

Not one paediatric vaccine has ever been tested for safety against a genuine placebo. In 2017 TV producer Del Bigtree asked the US Department of Healthand Human Services (HHS) how it justified licensing any paediatric vaccine without first conducting a long-term clinical trial in which the rate of adverse reactions in the subject group was compared with a control group receiving an inert placebo. In January 2018 the HHS replied: ‘Inert placebo controls are not required to understand the safety profile of a new vaccine.’ 

If randomised control trials (RCTs), the so-called gold standard of safety testing, are kicked aside, how can any conclusions reached on the safety profile of a product be scientifically valid?

There are, however, real-life comparison studies between cohorts of vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

As reported by RFK Jr’s Children’s Health Defense, for years American paediatrician Paul Thomas, now retired, witnessed healthy 12-month-olds regress into severe autism following the MMR vaccination, so in 2010 he devised a new, bespoke approach to the vaccination of children in his practice Integrative Pediatric.  He offered parents a comprehensive discussion and autonomy over whether to vaccinate their children as per the US schedule, selectively vaccinate them, with longer intervals between shots, or not vaccinate them at all.

As reported in TCW yesterday, he and colleague James Lyons-Weiler PhD studied the health outcomes of the children over almost ten years, and in 2020 published the results in a groundbreaking paper which showed unequivocally that unvaccinated children enjoy better health than vaccinated children. The results showed a dramatic reduction of cases of ADHD and autism. They were almost entirely absent in the unvaccinated cohort, and greatly reduced in the partially vaccinated cohort. The same applied to anaemia, asthma, allergies, dermatitis, eczema, ear and eye infections and sinusitis.

In a recent discussion with Paul Thomas, the mother of an autistic son explained that he had been developing normally until he received the MMR vaccine, when his temperature shot up, he came out in an appalling rash, and screamed incessantly while hitting his head against the wall. She said she kept telephoning her paediatrician, who said it was ‘normal’.

Dr Thomas explained that when paediatricians say it is ‘normal’, what they mean is it is ‘common’. Many in the medical profession have become so blinded by dogma that they see frequency as indicating normality and cease to recognise what is profoundly abnormal.

That one vaccine-generation child in two graduates from high school in the US taking medication for a chronic condition should be regarded as both highly abnormal and an indictment of US public health policy.

How this has been allowed is, at least in part, down to the corrupted working of the US Vaccine Court, and the total protection from liability this gives to Big Pharma and its profit driven vaccine enterprise, and I will discuss this in Part 2.

Source