The Judgment on Vaccines Is In
by Jim Carrey
Recently, I was amazed to hear a commentary
by CNN's Campbell Brown on the controversial vaccine issue. After
a ruling by the 'special vaccine court' saying the Measles, Mumps,
Rubella shot wasn't found to be responsible for the plaintiffs'
autism, she and others in the media began making assertions that
the judgment was in, and vaccines had been proven safe. No one
would be more relieved than Jenny and I if that were true. But
with all due respect to Ms. Brown, a ruling against causation
in three cases out of more than 5000 hardly proves that other
children won't be adversely affected by the MMR, let alone that
all vaccines are safe. This is a huge leap of logic by anyone's
standards. Not everyone gets cancer from smoking, but cigarettes
do cause cancer. After 100 years and many rulings in favor of
the tobacco companies, we finally figured that out.
The truth is that no one without a vested
interest in the profitability of vaccines has studied all 36 of
them in depth. There are more than 100 vaccines in development,
and no tests for cumulative effect or vaccine interaction of all
36 vaccines in the current schedule have ever been done. If I'm
mistaken, I challenge those who are making such grand pronouncements
about vaccine safety to produce those studies.
If we are to believe that the ruling of
the 'vaccine court' in these cases mean that all vaccines are
safe, then we must also consider the rulings of that same court
in the Hannah Polling and Bailey Banks cases, which ruled vaccines
were the cause of autism and therefore assume that all vaccines
are unsafe. Clearly both are irresponsible assumptions, and neither
option is prudent.
In this growing crisis, we cannot afford
to blindly trumpet the agenda of the CDC, the American Academy
of Pediatrics (AAP) or vaccine makers. Now more than ever, we
must resist the urge to close this book before it's been written.
The anecdotal evidence of millions of parents who've seen their
totally normal kids regress into sickness and mental isolation
after a trip to the pediatrician's office must be seriously considered.
The legitimate concern they and many in the scientific community
have that environmental toxins, including those found in vaccines,
may be causing autism and other disorders (Aspergers, ADD, ADHD),
cannot be dissuaded by a show of sympathy and a friendly invitation
to look for the 'real' cause of autism anywhere but within the
lucrative vaccine program.
With vaccines being the fastest growing
division of the pharmaceutical industry, isn't it possible that
profits may play a part in the decision-making? That the vaccine
program is becoming more of a profit engine than a means of prevention?
In a world left reeling from the catastrophic effects of greed,
mismanagement and corporate insensitivity, is it so absurd for
us to wonder why American children are being given twice as many
vaccines on average, compared to the top 30 first world countries?
Paul Offit, the vaccine advocate and profiteer,
who helped invent a Rotavirus vaccine is said to have paved the
way for his own multi-million dollar windfall while serving on
the very council that eventually voted his Rotavirus vaccine onto
our children's schedule. On August 21, 2000 a congressional investigation's
report titled, "Conflicts in Vaccine Policy," stated:
It has become clear over the course of
this investigation that the VRBPAC and the ACIP [the two main
advisory boards that determine the vaccine schedule] are dominated
by individuals with close working relationships with the vaccine
producers. This was never the intent of the Federal Advisory Committee
Act, which requires that a diversity of views be represented on
Isn't that enough to raise questions about
the process of choosing the vaccine schedule?
With many states like Minnesota now reporting
the number at 1 in 80 children affected with autism, can we afford
to trust those who serve two masters or their logic that tells
us "one size fits all" when it comes to vaccines? Can
we afford to ignore vaccines as a possible cause of these rising
numbers when they are one of the fastest growing elements in our
children's environment? With all the doubt that's left hanging
on this topic, how can anyone in the media or medical profession,
boldly demand that all parents march out and give their kids 36
of these shots, six at a time in dosage levels equal to that given
a 200 pound man? This is a bias of the most dangerous kind.
I've also heard it said that no evidence
of a link between vaccines and autism has ever been found. That
statement is only true for the CDC, the AAP and the vaccine makers
who've been ignoring mountains of scientific information and testimony.
There's no evidence of the Lincoln Memorial if you look the other
way and refuse to turn around. But if you care to look, it's really
quite impressive. For a sample of vaccine injury evidence go to
We have never argued that people shouldn't
be immunized for the most serious threats including measles and
polio, but surely there's a limit as to how many viruses and toxins
can be introduced into the body of a small child. Veterinarians
found out years ago that in many cases they were over-immunizing
our pets, a syndrome they call Vaccinosis. It overwhelmed the
immune system of the animals, causing myriad physical and neurological
disorders. Sound familiar? If you can over-immunize a dog, is
it so far out to assume that you can over-immunize a child? These
forward thinking vets also decided to remove thimerosal from animal
vaccines in 1992, and yet this substance, which is 49% mercury,
is still in human vaccines. Don't our children deserve as much
consideration as our pets?
I think I'd rather listen to the more
sensible voice of Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the National
Institute of Health, who says:
Listen to the patients and the patients
will teach...I think there is an inexcusable issue, and that's
the lack of research that's been done here...A parent can legitimately
question giving a one-day old baby, or a two-day old baby [the]
Hepatitis B vaccine that has no risk for it [and] the mother has
no risk for it. That's a heavy-duty vaccine given on day two [of
life]. I think those are legitimate questions.
Dr. Healy is also calling for a long overdue
study of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. Dr. Frank Engly, a researcher
and microbiologist who served on the boards of the CDC, FDA and
EPA during the 70s and 80s, warned:
The CDC cannot afford to admit thimerosal
is toxic because they have been promoting it for several years...If
they would have followed through with our 1982 report, vaccines
would have been freed of thimerosal and all this autism as they
tell me would not have occurred. But as it is, it all occurred.
In all likelihood the truth about vaccines
is that they are both good and bad. While ingredients like aluminum,
mercury, ether, formaldehyde and anti-freeze may help preserve
and enhance vaccines, they can be toxic as well. The assortment
of viruses delivered by multiple immunizations may also be a hazard.
I agree with the growing number of voices within the medical and
scientific community who believe that vaccines, like every other
drug, have risks as well as benefits and that for the sake of
profit, American children are being given too many, too soon.
One thing is certain. We don't know enough to announce that all
vaccines are safe!
If the CDC, the AAP and Ms. Brown insist
that our children take twice as many shots as the rest of the
western world, we need more independent vaccine research not done
by the drug companies selling the vaccines or by organizations
under their influence. Studies that cannot be internally suppressed.
Answers parents can trust. Perhaps this is what Campbell Brown
should be demanding and how the power of the press could better
serve the public in the future.