www.thinktwice.com    About Us    Vaccine Books      


Angry Letters

      Some people strongly disagree with our perspectives and oppose the free exchange of uncensored vaccine information. Here are a few of their letters.


More Angry Letters

Vaccine Debates


Q. I seldom get to see such an amassing of ignorance and false "facts" in one place. I suppose you'd like to bring back the iron lung, because that's what you're calling for. Take a look at the statistics on death rates from childhood illnesses before vaccines. And what happens when you're pregnant and your first child gets rubella? Have you ever seen tetany? I hope you never have to. And it's vaccines that make it possible for you never to see it. Please don't bother to reply. I've read enough of this stuff. Sincerely, a concerned educated person.

A. Please investigate this subject before you speak with incomplete information. Your self-righteous attitude, not our defense of every parent's right to accept or reject vaccines, is the true danger to humanity. You are so positive that you have all the answers that you've become blind to other possibilities. Where are your so-called "facts"? Show me your documentation. You make statements and expect them to be accepted as true simply because you made them. Intimidation and coercion are not good tactics. Instead, research this subject and then try exchanging ideas in an intelligent manner.

Q. My documentation is the CDC and the NIH. I'm a medical student. I've done lots of research. "Dangerous to humanity"? Like poliovirus?

A. Once again, I ask where is your documentation? The "CDC" and "NIH" is not documentation. List your studies and sources. Otherwise, a rational discussion cannot occur. You say that you are a medical student. Are they teaching you compassion, because I detect a self-righteous and arrogant attitude, and this may inhibit your abilty to effectively minister to the public.

Regarding polio, over 95% of the population can be exposed to the poliovirus and will not contract polio. This indicates that the poliovirus is not responsible for the illness that is associated with it. The health of the organism is the more significant factor. Doctors should be more concerned with promoting health than pushing drugs.

If you are so sure that you have all the answers, then disregard this email. However, if you can overcome the "emotional buttons" that are directing your actions, accept my offer: I have documentation that can alter your perceptions on this topic -- hundreds of studies from medical and scientific journals (Lancet, BMJ, etc.) -- all in one packet. This information was compiled by an Australian research scientist. This is information they aren't teaching you in class because it doesn't support the vaccine theory being promoted. Yet, all of the studies and information may be found in journals that you and your cohorts have come to respect. If you'd like, I will send this information to you as a gift. Just tell me where to send it. By the way, I am aware of numerous medical doctors who refuse to support the vaccine theory. How do you suppose they came to accept this controversial stance? You will be a much wiser (and compassionate) healer when you have a fuller understanding of the real facts.

Q. Well, now that you're being civil, maybe I'll read some articles. By the way, if a large percentage of the population does not contract a disease when exposed to the organism, that does not mean that the organism doesn't cause the disease. Contracting the disease depends on, yes, the health of the host, but also on the number of organisms (for instance, it takes the ingestion of a million or so cysts of some parasites to manifest illness), whether the person was exposed before (if you are exposed to a small amount, you may build natural immunity without feeling sick), etc. But the poliovirus is the infectious agent causing poliomyelitis. One of the things I saw on the pages again and again was "the doctor told me the benefits outweigh the risks." They DO -- for society, even if a small number of children die. Small, I say, meaning compared to the number of children who would die of those illnesses. Smallpox (wild) before its eradication. Polio. Diphtheria. And what would the parents say when their child died of one of these diseases if they knew we could prevent it but didn't? It is true: immunization is a medical procedure with risks and should be carefully explained to every parent so they can give consent or refusal. They are not inherently wrong, bad, or evil. Also, a logic flaw. Just because SIDS and immunizations occur in the same time period does not imply causality. I hate sensationalism and scare tactics, especially in an area as important as health. Is it possible to send those articles by email? I'm afraid I'd rather not send my address through email.

A. I'd like to make a few comments. You say: "Well, now that you're being civil, maybe I'll read some articles." Please note that your initial email set the tone for incivility. You simply wanted to "hit and run."

You say: "...the poliovirus is the infectious agent causing poliomyelitis." More accurately, the poliovirus is the infectious agent that may be found in the host when poliomyelitis occurs. It does not "cause" the disease. This is an important distinction, and separates the way allopathic doctors view the world from the way naturopathic health practitioners view the cause of disease.

You say: "One of the things I saw on the pages again and again was 'The doctor told me the benefits outweigh the risks.' They DO -- for society." Once again, I ask for your proof. In a later paragraph you deny a correlation between vaccines and SIDS, implying, as doctors are trained to do, that it is all merely coincidental. Yet you are perfectly content to assume that vaccines are responsible for benefiting society without documentation or proof.

You say: "Even if a small number of children die..." Obviously, you have never spoken to any of the many parents whose children have died from the vaccines, parents who were not informed of the risks and who were unaware that they had a choice. Your cavalier attitude will not integrate well with a profession in healthcare.

You say: "...a logic flaw. Just because SIDS and immunizations occur in the same time period does not imply causality." Let's get real. SIDS is a catch-all phrase clever doctors use to lump vaccine-injured children into. Coroners are medically trained and are members of the "medical brotherhood" taught to protect one another. Wake up before you become too entrenched within the lies you are being taught. You still have time to find a happy medium between wanting to help people and being able to live with yourself and sleep at night. The documentation and truth of the matter is available to anyone who is willing to explore the studies, speak to the parents, and investigate this matter with a truly open mind.

You say: "I hate sensationalism and scare tactics, especially in an area as important as health." I agree, that is why I wish doctors would stop scaring parents about the supposed dangers of these relatively innocuous diseases, and would come clean about the true risks associated with vaccines. Their sensationalism and invasive practices are a danger to society.

You say: "Is it possible to send those articles by email? I'm afraid I'd rather not send my address through email." The "packet" of free information that I am offering to send you is an Australian book written by a research scientist and includes studies from throughout the world. It is not available online. I believe it is in your best interest (and the interest of society) to accept my offer. [This book is out-of-date and no longer available. We now recommend Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies and the Vaccine Safety Manual for anyone interested in up-to-date vaccine books with extensive documentation from medical and scientific journals.]

Q. You are living in a fantasy land where you don't accept the large numbers of deaths before immunizations as proof that the diseases are dangerous. I do not wish to "discuss" this any more with you. Please do not contact me again. Thank you.

A. I'm sorry to see you leave in such a self-righteous huff (again!). I will honor your request to not contact you again. However, your "proof" is not the sort that I was taught in graduate school. You say that thousands of cases of SIDS following the administration of a shot is NOT proof of a connection, but somehow you rationalize that deaths from a disease before vaccines and lesser deaths from that disease after vaccines ARE proof of a connection. Which is it? Either a correlation between two events DOES indicate causality and IS "proof," or a correlation between two events DOES NOT indicate causality and IS NOT "proof." You can't have it both ways. By the way, there are millions of cases of cancer, hyperactivity disorder, learning disabilities, autoimmune diseases, and numerous other "new" diseases today that DID NOT exist prior to mass vaccines. By your reasoning we can assume that these are caused by the shots, which many researchers now believe and have substantiating evidence to confirm. In other words, the medical establishment's so-called miracle shots are actually damaging the immune systems of healthy human beings and creating new diseases. I believe you are the one living in a world of make-believe. And you are too pompous to investigate the evidence that could help you to formulate unbiased and rational perspectives. God help our civilization. P.S. If you do decide to open your mind, my offer still stands. I will then send you a complimentary copy of the book that we discussed.


Q. You f---ing bastards! Our town in Ontario, Canada is in the process of inoculation for meningitis after several recent deaths. Your web pages are being waved all over town as reasons not to immunize. I hope you sell a lot of books. I hope the proceeds assuage your conscience. It's statistically likely you'll kill a few kids a year with this horsesh--. I truly hope you rot in hell.

A. We are very proud of our website. We receive email letters every week from parents thanking us for the helpful information. Many tell personal stories about their own children who are now permanently brain damaged or dead from one or more of the vaccines.

Regarding meningitis, did you see the study of a Minnesota "epidemic"? They discovered that children who received the vaccine were 5 times more likely to contract the disease than if they were left alone. Other studies also show that the vaccine is responsible for causing the disease. Usually the media only reports that there is a terrible epidemic and that everyone must get vaccinated. They neglect to report that many of the victims were recently vaccinated, or contracted the disease from another child who was recently vaccinated and who is now spreading the disease. Call your local health department to see if you can find out how many of the victims were previously vaccinated. You may be surprised!

Regarding your personal attacks against us, please try to develop a more tolerant approach when communicating with people who hold different views. You don't have a lock on truth, and parents are entitled to make their own decisions based on all of the available information.

Q. Duhhhhh..... The overwhelming majority of the population gets vaccinated (90%+). The vaccine takes about two weeks to become effective. Some of those vaccinated have already been exposed, and may even be about to show symptoms. That some people get the disease shortly after an injection is statistically expected. In fact, if no one who has been vaccinated gets the disease the infection chain may have already been broken, and the immunisation campaign may have been an overly cautious response from the Medical Officer of Health.

The vaccine is only given to populations at risk. The vaccine has 85%+ effectiveness but is not perfect. Therefore (slowly now) a moderate exposure to the math would allow you to calculate the expected ratio of people who had been vaccinated to those who had not been. There's an excellent example of this calculation on the CDC website, but unlike myself I guess you wouldn't bother to check out an opposing viewpoint. (I was on your page, remember? We can't all have a lock on the truth.) Let's make it simple. Wearing a red shirt to school makes you 90% resistant to getting beaten up, 98 of the 100 kids in the school wear a red shirt. The two who do not get beaten up. 10% of the balance get beaten up (10% of 98=9.8). SO.... almost five times as many kids with red shirts as kids without get beaten up. (BUT 100% OF THE KIDS WITHOUT A RED SHIRT GET BEATEN UP.) A parent would be wise to send their kid to school with a red shirt on. Tragically people like you get to some of them with the "almost five times as many people..." story and GET THEIR KIDS KILLED.

Attenuated virus vaccines have a well documented and incredibly tightly controlled possibility of causing the disease they are designed to prevent. Approximately 8 children a year in North America get Polio from the vaccine. Before we started to vaccinate, between 20,000 and 30,000 a year got wild polio virus (mainly in swimming pools). While those 8 children are a terrible cost, we pay it because the alternative is to return to the days when 20,000-30,000 got the disease. The only wild polio cases in the last decade in North America were 18 Amish kids, who had not been vaccinated, who got the disease through a foreign contact. Luckily the surrounding populations were sufficiently immunised to stop the chain of infection. If you can convince as many as 20% of the population to stop vaccinating for Polio you can pretty much guarantee a return to the "summer epidemics." Conversely, if we can immunise the entire planet for a few short years we will have sent the disease to the same place we sent Smallpox (2,000,000-3,000,000 deaths a year prevented).

I would challenge you to produce one study documenting vaccination for Bacterial Meningitis causing the disease. ONE. If you can't, maybe you would be so kind as to abandon your commercial interests where those interests are causing children to be crippled and killed. (Feel free to email me a copy or advise a website address. Of course I'll be waving around this email as proof of your inability to do so if you can't.)

Children die from a multitude of causes; disease, SIDS, diet, parasites, child abuse. However they die their death is tragic. Some children are brain damaged. For some this is the result of a fever (Fever can be brought on by disease or from dehydration). For some, it is a result of substance abuse by expectant mothers; there are dozens of causes. Again, this is tragic however it happens. You don't do the world any favor by telling horrible stories of children who have died or were found to have been brain damaged who were also immunised. Show a causal link. At least show enough statistical data to demonstate an epidemiological link. There's a reason you don't. The link doesn't exist. CDC and FDA spend a fortune looking for one. They have a vested interest in finding one. (Doing so would guarantee funding out to infinity.) They haven't found one. Neither have you. If claiming one exists (where the statistics clearly show one doesn't) ends up killing one child; that child's death is on your head.

I agree with your statement that parents are entitled to all the information. Unfortunately, what you are selling is not information, it is clearly opinion. Information is "x% of the population was innocculated, y% of those innoculated got the disease, z% of those not innoculated got the disease, the vaccine claims to protect a% of the time." From that, a competent parent could assess the data. What you publish is sensationalistic and designed only to sell fear, uncertainty and doubt (and books). Unfortunately, most parents have poor math background and couldn't/wouldn't do the calculations.

It is equally unfortunate that some parents realize that if every kid other than theirs was innoculated, their kid would get the same protection as the immunised ones. (There'd be no one available to infect them.) These are the two reasons for mandatory immunisation -- as a society we have hired experts to evaluate the data and to put themselves on the line by making the call.

CDC, FDA and the manufacturers have a strong vested interest in not putting dangerous vaccines on the market. Medical authorities expose themselves to liability by ordering an immunisation campaign. These campaigns are only ordered when the societal benefits (preventing contagion) dramatically outweigh the economic (vaccine isn't free -- though at least here the Government pays for it) and human costs (side effects) of the campaign.

Now I don't expect you to change what you're doing, but I'm going to try all the same. One of the challenges with the internet is that people like you can publish whatever they want, even if it results in deaths, without any censure or liability. People with no math background can publish statistical surveys which are totally meaningless, but can write them to be emotionally compelling enough to gull similarily poorly educated readers, potentially to their deaths. Your writing is brilliant, compelling, persuasive, and hopelessly wrong. For the children, please stop.

A. Dear sir, you are an intolerant and condescending individual. Your statements condemning us to hell and impugning our intelligence and integrity are clear indicators of your own moral stance. May I assume you are a member of, or associated with, the medical and pharmaceutical industries? Nevertheless, I will respond to your statements.

You say: "Duhhhhh..... The overwhelming majority of the population gets vaccinated (90%+). The vaccine takes about two weeks to become effective. Some of those vaccinated have already been exposed, and may even be about to show symptoms. That some people get the disease shortly after an injection is statistically expected. In fact, if no one who has been vaccinated gets the disease the infection chain may have already been broken, and the immunisation campaign may have been an overly cautious response from the Medical Officer of Health."

I say: This is standard party-line propaganda. Scientists warn that there is an increased susceptibility to the disease following vaccination! And the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) told doctors to warn parents to look for signs of the disease following the shot. Telling patients the vaccine takes two weeks to become effective without divulging the fact that the vaccine is likely to cause the disease is pretty clever.

You say: "The vaccine is only given to populations at risk."

I say: This is not true. In April of 1985 when the Hib vaccine was approved for general use in the U.S., it was recommended for all children two years and older. Yet 75% of all cases occur before that age. This leads me to another concern. How many Hib vaccines came on market since 1985? If the vaccine is so safe and effective, why do they keep coming out with a "new and improved" version?

You say: "The vaccine has 85%+ effectiveness but is not perfect."

I say: In preliminary studies conducted by the CDC comprising six areas of the U.S., the Hib vaccine showed an overall efficacy rate of 41 percent. However, published reports on the vaccine's effectiveness often show higher results because members of the medical industry attempted to skew the results by excluding areas where their findings didn't agree with the conclusions they sought. ["Policy Statement, (HbPV)," AAP News, Nov 1987] For example, children who received the Hib vaccine in Minnesota were found to be 5 times more likely to contract the disease than children who did not receive the vaccine. The Minnesota state epidemiologist, Michael Osterholm, concluded that the Hib vaccine increases the risk of illness. ["Meningitis Risk Seen from Use of Vaccine," St. Paul Pioneer Press Dispatch, April 21, 1987] But the Minnesota data was conveniently disregarded by Hib researchers who had the responsibility of submitting impartial conclusions to vaccine policymakers.

You say: "Therefore (slowly now)..."

I say: Your snide, condescending remarks are uncalled for.

You say: "A moderate exposure to the math would allow you to calculate the expected ratio of people who had been vaccinated to those who had not been. There's an excellent example of this calculation on the CDC website, but unlike myself I guess you wouldn't bother to check out an opposing viewpoint. (I was on page, remember? We can't all have a lock on the truth.)"

I say: All of our information comes from "opposing" viewpoints. Where do you think it comes from? Lots of "anti-vaccine" information may be found in medical journals and from CDC sources. Most of the negative data, however, is simply disregarded or denied by your "impartial" scientists and policymakers, and rarely makes it into the public media.

You say: "Let's make it simple. Wearing a red shirt to school makes you 90% resistant to gettingbeaten up, 98 of the 100 kids in the school wear a red shirt. The two who do not get beaten up. 10% of the balance get beaten up (10% of 98=9.8). SO...almost five times as many kids with red shirts as kids without get beaten up. (BUT 100% OF THE KIDS WITHOUT A RED SHIRT GET BEATEN UP.) A parent would be wise to send their kid to school with a red shirt on."

I say: You conveniently distorted the facts. 100 percent of unvaccinated children do not contract the disease. In fact, the unvaccinated children that I know are more robust and healthier than their vaccinated friends. But the truth of the matter is, you and I don't know the true rate of infection (and incidence of secondary diseases) because controlled studies are not conducted. Legitimate science would compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Longitudinal studies are needed to accurately measure the true extent of adverse events and the actual incidence of disease. Then, to assess the benefits and risks of the vaccine, several factors must be evaluated. These include the number and severity of major and minor ailments. For instance, are children in one group more susceptible to ear infections, multiple sclerosis, or childhood leukemia? Children in both populations should be evaluated from early childhood through adulthood for vision, hearing, fine motor coordination, IQ, learning disabilities, emotional development, socialization, psychological stability, levels of socioeconomic attainment, and other measures of developmental well-being. Control-group tracking will produce honest information on which to base future decisions.

You say: "Tragically people like you get to some of them with the 'almost five times as many people...' story and GET THEIR KIDS KILLED."

I say: You interpreted the information I gave you in a biased manner. As noted earlier, children in the study who received the vaccine were 5 times more likely to contract the disease. This means that each child had a 5-fold risk increase of contracting the disease. Your analogy doesn't apply to this situation. You may wish to peruse the original study.

Also, contrary to your "holier than thou complex" I believe parents are capable of reading and interpreting information. They are entitled to make decisions regarding the health and welfare of their children. God help those who simply accept your half-truths and distorted data. The FDA keeps a database containing the names of thousands of vaccine-damaged babies because their parents didn't know there were risks involved. Your attempt to lay a guilt-trip on us for empowering parents to investigate vaccines prior to submitting to them is a common psychological tactic referred to as "projection." It is a misguided attempt to assuage your own guilt and confusion by seeking out a convenient scapegoat. You may wish to explore your own emotions.

You say: "Attenuated virus vaccines have a well documented and incredibly tightly controlled possibility of causing the disease they are designed to prevent. Approximately 8 children a year in North America get Polio from vaccine. Before we started to vaccinate, between 20,000 and 30,000 a year got wild polio virus (mainly in swimming pools). While those 8 children are a terrible cost, we pay it because the alternative is to return to the days when 20,000-30,000 got the disease. The only wild polio cases in the last decade in North America were 18 Amish kids, who had not been vaccinated, who got the disease through a foreign contact. Luckily the surrounding populations were sufficiently immunised to stop the chain of infection. If you can convince as many as 20% of the population to stop vaccinating for Polio you can pretty much guarantee a return to the 'summer epidemics.' Conversely, if we can immunise the entire planet for a few short years we will have sent the disease to the same place we sent Smallpox (2,000,000-3,000,000 deaths a year prevented)."

I say: During the 1950s and 1960s millions of people were given polio vaccines that were contaminated with the SV-40 virus (undetected in the Simian monkey organs used to prepare the vaccines). SV-40 is considered a powerful immunosuppressor and trigger for HIV -- the name given to the AIDS virus. It has been found in brain tumors, leukemia, and other human cancers as well. Researchers consider it to be a cancer-causing virus. Thus it is clear that vaccine researchers are stumbling around in the dark. For every disease they claim to cure, they create two or three new ones! (As another example, look up the April 1995 issue of Lancet: recipients of the measles vaccine are 3 times more likely to contract Crohn's disease.)

You say: "I would challenge you to produce one study documenting vaccination for Bacterial Meningitis causing the disease. ONE. If you can't, maybe you would be so kind as to abandon your commercial interests where those interests are causing children to be crippled and killed. (Feel free to email me a copy or advise a website address. Of course I'll be waving around this email as proof of your inability to do so if you can't.)"

I say: Where have you been? There are plenty of studies showing the Hib vaccine can cause the disease. I've already given you some references. Look them up. Then "wave them around." Here are some other studies; be sure to look them up:

Adverse reactions following the administration of the Hib vaccine,including convulsions and anaphylaxis are recorded in this study:

Milstien, J.B., et al. 1987. "Adverse reactions reported following receipt of Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine: an analysis after 1 year of marketing," Pediatrics; 80(2): 270-74.

Here are other studies showing the Hib vaccine may cause the disease:

Osterholm, M.T., et al. 1988. "Lack of efficacy of Haemophilus bpolysaccharide vaccine in Minnesota," J. of Am Med. Assoc.; 260(10):1423-28.

Ward, J., et al. 1990. Efficacy of a Haemophilus influenzae type bconjugate vaccine..." N. Eng. J. Med. 323(2): 1393-1401.

Granoff, D.M., et al. 1986. "Haemophilus influenzae type b disease in children vaccinated with type b polysaccharide vaccine." N. Engl J. Med.315: 1584-1590.

Sood, S.K., et al. 1988. "Postvaccination susceptibility to..." J.Pediatr.; 113: 814-819.

Santosham, M., et al. 1991. "The efficacy in Navajo infants..." N. Engl J. Med.: 324(25): 1767-1772.

I can point you to many more studies regarding problems associated with the Hib vaccine. (I am also willing to send you a 300 page publication containing hundreds of significant vaccine studies published throughout the world, information I believe you should have access to. This publication is very academic, and could be shared with your peers. Just tell me where to send it.)

You say: "Children die from a multitude of causes; disease, SIDS, diet, parasites, child abuse. However they die their death is tragic. Some children are brain damaged. For some this is the result of a fever (Fever can be brought on by disease or from dehydration). For some it is a result of substance abuse by expectant mothers; there are dozens of causes. Again this is tragic however it happens. You don't do the world any favor by telling horrible stories of children who have died or were found to have been brain damaged who were also immunised. Show a causal link. At least show enough statistical data to demonstate anepidemiological link. There's a reason you don't. The link doesn't exist. CDC and FDA spend a fortune looking for one. They have a vested interest in finding one. (Doing so would gaurantee funding out to infinity.) They haven't found one. Neither have you. If claiming one exists (where the statistics clearly show one doesn't) ends up killing one child; that child's death is on your head."

I say: If half a dozen people throughout the nation were to experience severe gastrointestinal distress following the ingestion of aspirin or tylenol, the FDA would consider recalling those products immediately. Yet, every year an average of 12,000 to 14,000 adverse events following the administration of vaccines -- including hospitalizations, brain damage, and death -- are reported to the FDA. The FDA refuses to investigate a single case. Don't you consider this curious?

Nevertheless, several studies do exist showing a causal link between vaccines and certain ailments. For example, two independent studies show a link between chronic fatigue syndrome and the rubella vaccine. Other studies show correlations between DPT and SIDS. Others still, show correlations between the DPT vaccine and asthma. I already mentioned the Lancet study on measles and bowel disease. So the links and studies do exist, in spite of the bias against research seeking correlations between vaccines and other ailments.

Regarding the stories on our website, you and I disagree regarding whether they are beneficial to the world. We permit parents to tell their stories because they know the vaccines damaged or killed their children. You and your comrades live in a highly analytic world where truth and reality are rationalized away, where "science" and "statistics" are manipulated to suit your purposes. I don't believe your concern for the health of our children is sincere, or the claims by these parents would be investigated. You simply dismiss them with the wave of a hand and request for "proof." Yet the FDA and CDC hold most of the cards and aren't interested in following up on these parent's stories -- 12,000 to 14,000 stories annually of perfectly healthy children prior to the shots who were damaged or killed after receiving them.

Again, your claim that an unvaccinated child's death is on my head represents your own attempt to alleviate the great anxiety you must feel regarding the thousands of vaccine-related injuries and deaths.

You say: "I agree with your statement that parents are entitled to all the information. Unfortunately what you are selling is not information, it is clearly opinion. Information is "x% of the population was innocculated, y% of those innoculated got the disease, z% of those not innoculated got the disease, the vaccine claims to protect a% of the time", from that a competent parent could assess the data. What you publish is sensationalistic and designed only to sell fear, uncertainty and doubt (and books). Unfortunately, most parents have a poor maths background and couldn't/wouldn't do the calculations."

I say: Where are the opinions that we are selling? Be specific. Your generalizations are figments of your own imagination. Again you present the same analogy ("x% of the population was inoculated...", etc.) as before, yet I don't see it on our website. It must be great fun to set up straw houses and knock them down.

We are not trying to sell fear, but uncertainty sure would get parents to begin thinking on their own. It would break the unhealthy bond they have with their doctors, and would empower them to take responsibility for the decisions that affect them and their families. I have seen too many parents blindly trust their pediatricians with regard to vaccines. Once the child is damaged, the pediatrician denies all responsibility and the parent is left with the realization that they were indeed responsible for the child. Now it is too late, and it is painfully clear that no one is going to help them with the care of their vaccine-damaged child.

You say: "It is equally unfortunate that some parents realise that if every kid other than theirs was innoculated, their kid would get the same protection as the immunised ones. (There'd be no one available to infect them). These are the two reasons for mandatory immunisation -- as a society we have hired experts to evaluate the data and to put themselves on the line by making the call."

I say: Tell me, do unvaccinated children run the risk of contracting the disease, or are they reaping benefits from the vaccinated children by gaining a passive immunity? It can't be both ways, although you seem to be implying this. It sure seems that you will make whichever claim is expedient at the moment.

Also, who are these experts? I haven't come across any. Are you one? And what do you mean by claiming these "experts" put themselves on the line by making the call? The only ones "on the line" are our innocent children being subjected to these mad experiments.

You say: "CDC, FDA and the manufacturers have a strong vested interest in not putting dangerous vaccines on the market. Medical authorities expose themselves to liability by ordering an immunisation campaign. These campaigns are only ordered when the societal benefits (preventing contagion) dramatically outweigh the economic (vaccine isn't free -- though at least here the Government pays for it) and human costs (side effects) of the campaign."

I say: Which medical authorities expose themselves to liability? The Vaccine Compensation law essentially removed the incentive to produce safer vaccines, and protects vaccine producers and policymakers. Also, why should there be any liability if, as you claim, there are few problems associated with vaccines?

You say: "Now I don't expect you to change what you're doing, but I'm going to try all the same. One of the challenges with the internet is that people like you can publish whatever they want, even if it results in deaths, without any censure or liability. People with no math background can publish statistical surveys which are totally meaningless, but can write them to be emotionally compelling enough to gull similarily poorly educated readers, potentially to their deaths. Your writing is brilliant, compelling, persuasive, and hopelessly wrong. For the children, please stop."

I say: For the first time in all of our exchanges, I finally sense heartfelt concern coming from you. Perhaps we do have the same desires -- to protect children and benefit society. We just believe in different approaches to achieving this goal. The way I see it, you and your vaccine comrades are legalized drug pushers, selling your poison to unsuspecting parents and innocent children. I have seen and read your so-called statistical surveys; many are biased and totally meaningless -- the same charges you make against me. You hide behind the guise of "expert" convincing the masses they are too dumb to understand how you arrived at your "brilliant" conclusions. They must simply follow your lead, never questioning your omnipotent guidance. When I read the local newspapers I am warned of frightening epidemics (of chickenpox!), and you dare to accuse me of making an appeal to the emotions and utilizing scare tactics.

Regarding the internet, our country was founded upon the principles of freedom. You freely publish your vaccine propaganda, just as we provide alternate information. Everyone has the responsibility of sifting through the data and arriving at their own conclusions. We do not advocate non-vaccination, although I personally think it is a stupid and dangerous practice. We promote informed consent, and the freedom to choose for or against the shots. For the children, please investigate further, and stop bullying those who disagree with your opinions.

Q. Please mail [copies of the studies and the academic vaccine publication]. I was operating from the viewpoint that you were deliberately being coy so you could sell books. Frankly, that isn't supported by your responses, so I'm operating on the thesis that one of us is profoundly misguided.

A. I am pleased that you agreed to accept my offer. I gathered a few studies and articles, along with the scholarly publication that I mentioned, and prepared it for the mail. You should receive my package shortly, as I am sending it via Air Mail. Although I don't harbor any illusions that you will change your views, perhaps you will come to have a better understanding of the basis on which many people choose to reject the shots. We are not all ignorant, misguided parents. Many of us have thought the issue through and came to our own conclusions following our research on the subject.

By the way, there are many other websites similar to our site. I have personally visited more than a dozen of them. There are numerous books and articles on this topic as well. Many are written by medical doctors.

Drop me an email when you receive the material, and again after you've had a chance to digest some of the information.


Q. You need to get some newer articles on your website. Everything I saw there was old news. Also, you take comments out of context. When you weigh the potential rare side effects of vaccines against the potential diseases that they prevent, vaccination wins out. The recent literature shows that while antibody levels may be so low as to be unmeasureable in vaccinated people, it is believed that certain "memory cells" are ready to send out antibodies if needed. Hepatitis is a foul, deadly, disabling disease: prevention by vaccination will save countless lives.
--A Nurse

A. You're right. A lot of the information, such as babies continuing to die as a result of vaccinations, is old news. It has been happening for as long as vaccinations have been around, and continues to this day. It is also old news that doctors and nurses continue to bury their heads in the sand by denying the obvious. Stop protecting the medical industry and old belief systems. Begin investigating the untold damage being wreaked upon our children.

By the way, the email we received just prior to yours came from a family man whose child was killed by the hepatitis B vaccine. He informed us to watch "20-20" this evening because they are doing an expose' on this vaccine. Obviously, our website is not the only source of truthful information available to parents.

Also, were you aware that France suspended use of the hepatitis B vaccine because of its association with multiple sclerosis? Here is another email that we received shortly after receiving your letter. We receive several of these daily. So much for your "rare" adverse reactions theory. Or are you going to claim, as doctors and nurses usually do, that there is no correlation, and a parent's report is merely "anecdotal"?

Email: Our 6 year old son became ill after his 1st dose of Heb B vaccine and had a fever of 103 degrees for 5 days after his second dose. He had a fever that did not go away. Three months later he was diagnosed with Rheumatic fever. One month later his blood counts dropped and he was rediagnosed with A.L.L. leukemia. Has A.L.L. ever been linked with Heb B vaccinations? If so, can you offer suggestions on what can be done? Thanks for your help.

Q. Have you been able to document one, single proof about the hepatitis B vaccine?

A. There's plenty of documentation, much of it listed on our website under the heading of "Studies," the remainder within the scientific literature.

Q. The child in your letter was probably in the early stages of ALL, which would explain his fever.

A. Where is YOUR proof that the child was "probably" in the early stages of ALL?

Q. You don't state if the Rheumatoid diagnosis was demonstrated seriologically, or if it was a differential diagnosis that later changed to ALL (which has happened in other cases). You print partial truths as if they are facts, and that is what I object to.

A. Where are these partial truths? You are the one claiming vaccine damage is rare. That is a lie.

Q. I saw the show on "20/20" last night. You'll notice that there were no physicians on there who agreed with those patients about the correlation between hepatitis B and the patients' conditions.

A. Of course not. When doctors speak out against vaccines they are ostracized and threatened with the loss of their livelihood.

Q. Simply because one event occurs after another is not proof that the first caused the second.

A. Of course not. But burying your heads in the sand won't make the truth go away.

Q. For every anecdote you come up with, there are virtually thousands without post-vaccination incident.

A. Again, where is your proof. Every year more than 12,000 reports of adverse vaccine reactions are made to the FDA. The FDA admits that is probably only 10% of the total. Yet, they refuse to investigate these cases so they can continue to claim, like you, that "simply because one event occurs after another is not proof..."

Q. Believe me, researchers are looking into effects of vaccinations; they do listen to adverse reaction reports.

A. I've got no reason to "believe" you. And who are these "researchers"? Many work for the pharmaceutical companies and have serious conflicts of interest. Others are commissioned to come up with predetermined results. This is obvious when their conclusions are inconsistent with the data in their studies. And "adverse reaction reports," as I've just noted, are NOT investigated.

Q. Look what they've done with DPT: all infants are now supposed to be given the acellular pertussis only.

A. Yet medical policymakers denied for decades that there was a problem with the original DPT -- after sacrificing thousands of children.

Q. You've got to come up with more scientific proof than you have shown.

A. The proof is apparent to anyone who seriously wishes to investigate this subject.

Q. As for Mr. Miller, he writes of satanic rituals, "disgusting" methods of creating vaccines. He has no credibility with me.

A. Yet his books allow parents to realize doctors are not being honest with them. And his books are not the only ones written on this subject. We also offer an excellent book by Dr. Viera Scheibner: "Vaccination: 100 Years ofOrthodox Research..."

Q. You need to have clear-headed, sensible people expressing your point of view, in non-inflammatory language.

A. We need to have an honest exchange of information on this subject, made fully public, without intimidation from arrogant medical professionals. And parents must be free to accept or reject vaccines for their children.

Q. The reason that hepatitis B has become part of the infant vaccination schedule is because those infants who are exposed to hepatitis B have a 50% chance of developing cancer of the liver.

A. This is another lie perpetuated by the medical establishment and that you are only too happy to repeat. I have seen and read the original arguments promulgated by vaccine policymakers for vaccinating infants against hepatitis B. Infants were considered "accessible" whereas the at-risk populations were not. Now that the hepatitis B vaccine and the policy of vaccinating all infants (who are not an at-risk population) has come under increasing public scrutiny, the medical cartel and vaccine policymakers had to "discover" and promote another reason for vaccinating infants. Also, France suspended use of this vaccine, but you and your medical cronies continue to turn the other cheek to the serious damage being incurred by innocent people as a result of the medical establishment's (and your own) callous disregard for the evidence, and your refusal to seriously investigate these cases.

Here is another email we just received. I'd be interested in your response:

Email: To whom it may concern, My twins were immunized with the new chickenpox vaccine. Since then, they have had reccurring rashs that appear to look like chickenpox, mostly around the diaper area and legs. They showed up 3 days after vaccinations. Nothing has worked to treat the bumps. Have you had any other inquiries about this vaccine? Thanks.

Q. Sounds like a ringer to me. Some patients have a mild rash after receiving the varicella vaccine, but it usually takes a week to develop. At any rate, the children's rash should be worked up by the doctor, if not by a dermatologist.

A. What is a "ringer"? Here is another story we just received. The vaccine-damage stories keep coming, yet medical denials, excuses, and incomprehensible rationalizations continue. What is your response?

Email: Dear Thinktwice, to begin with, my son passed away April 17, 1998 after a battle with febrile seizures. The first time my son experienced a seizure was the night of having his four month immunization. Before that he was a normal healthy baby. We are finding it hard to not believe the seizuring had either occurred from the pertussis vaccine that day, or the pertussis vaccine had triggered an underlying problem. His autopsy showed to be inconclusive. To give you a little more background his first seizure was about an hour long, and he had to be given a lot of drugs to stop it. The next one occurred a few months later, and at one year old the seizuring almost took his life. He kept having recurring seizures all that day and again had to almost be put into a comatose state to stop them. He was put on Depakane and for the next year he was almost seizure free, until he started with two, one-minute seizures starting in September. That week, our son was hanging on for life. He started out with a seizure that day that lasted 4 hours, again being filled with medication to stop it. Nothing short of a total coma could help him, and the seizures were then unseen. We made the decision to remove his life support, for the doctors told us he was brain dead. We are left with a lot of unanswered questions and want to know if the vaccine was the cause of his seizures. We would greatly appreciate some information on related cases or any other information you can give us. Thank you.

Q. Another anecdote about a sick baby... All of the symptoms that these infants have were there before vaccines were ever developed.

A. You speak about "scientific evidence" but only when it is convenient and supports your pathetic arguments. Where is your scientific evidence that "all of the symptoms that these infants have were there before vaccines were ever developed." You make large sweeping statements like this without specific knowledge of the case in question and without substantiating documentation regarding other similar cases.

Q. You are obviously connecting all sick babies to the vaccines that they had.

A. No, just the obvious cases.

Q. You should also print all of the anecdotes about pertussis outbreaks.

A. Many pertussis outbreaks are initiated and spread by children recently vaccinated with the pertussis vaccine.

Q. Do you have a scientific background, or are you an activist?

A. Do you have a background in heath CARE, or are you an NIH (National Institutes of Health) scientist? I am an intelligent individual capable of thinking and reasoning on my own. I am also a sensitive and caring human being, disgusted by the pseudo-science the medical establishment fabricates and promotes. I am also concerned about the parents who are being forced to make life and death decisions regarding the welfare of their children without the benefit of ALL available information relating to those decisions. You and I (and by extension, the medical establishment) may disagree on the safety and efficacy of vaccines, but parents are entitled to make informed decisions.

Also, there is a great irony in your insinuation that a "scientific background" is required to think and reason in a logical manner. You may exhibit your condescension and place labels on me, and others like me, if you wish, but that will not alter the larger debate now taking place within the public arena. Your incomplete ideas and faulty conclusions regarding the risks and benefits of vaccines are being questioned and scrutinized by intelligent people throughout the world.

I am still wondering what you meant by "ringer." I am trying to figure out if you were claiming the chickenpox letter was a fake, or that the mother somehow made up the story to purposely implicate vaccines. If that was what you meant, then I grossly underestimated the depth of medical denials. Here is another email we just received.

Email: I am a mom of a 2 1/2 month old. My husband is in his second quarter at chiropractic school. We decided that we would not have our son vaccinated. However, when I got to the clinic the doctors started making me feel guilty and I realized how ill prepared I was. I gave in to the shots because they started talking about spinal menengitis etc. Well, my son cried for 3 days straight. He would not nurse and he got a rash and still vomits. Is there anything that can flush his body of these toxins? I am now doing research on these vaccinations. This website has been extremely helpful. I plan on not continuing these shots. Thank you and get back to me if you possibly can.

Q. The mom was not made to feel "guilty," she was simply told about the diseases that vaccines prevent, and how her infant would not be protected from them.

A. May I assume that you were present in the doctor's office? Once again, you make a bold statement without a shred of knowledge about the specific case and without presenting your evidence for such a statement. You are very good at exhibiting the very qualities you accuse others of.

Q. When you have scientific evidence, then you'll have some credibility with me.

A. The scientific evidence is available; you simply choose to ignore it. Also, we don't seek credibility with you. Your pseudo-scientific indoctrination appears to be complete -- sadly, at others' expense.


Q. I do not discount the stories of suffering chronicled by your websight. Immunization may indeed cause anaphylactic shock, seizures, and even cases of the disease that they are meant to prevent. Scientists have never said the vaccines are without risk.

A. Most of the "scientific" studies on vaccines discount the true rate of adverse events.

Q. However, in a good many cases, vaccines are the only scientifically proven method to combat disease.

A. Numerous studies are now showing correlations between vaccines and several new diseases. Read the scientific testimony and studies presented in recent Congressional Hearings. Links to this information may be found on the opening page of the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute.]

Q. Indeed, one of the reasons that adverse reactions are now so notable is that vaccines have been overwhelmingly efficacious in fighting diseases and rendering them almost extinct.

A. That is the main theory being promulgated. However, disease rates were dropping long before several of the vaccines were mass marketed. How do you explain the drop in several other diseases for which no vaccines have been created?

Q. The bottom line is society is much better off with vaccines than without them.

A. That's your opinion.

Q. Earlier this century, it was common to see individuals rendered deaf and/or blind because of rubella.

A. Approximately 40 to 60 children annually were born with deformities prior to the introduction of this vaccine. This rate remains constant today. And this does not include cases denied by doctors that do not make it into the statistics. For example, yesterday I received an email from a woman whose rubella vaccine, administered just prior to her pregnancy, was the most likely cause of her child's deformities.

Q. And polio incarcerating people in iron lungs.

A. Polio vaccines are incubated in monkey kidneys. During the 1950s and 1960s more than 60 million people received vaccines that were contaminated with SV-40, a well-documented cancer-causing virus. Take a look at today's cancer rates after 30 to 40 years of mandatory vaccines. Who has the right to determine which diseases we must be subjected to?

Q. And babies suffocating by cough from B. pertussis bacteria.

A. The pertussis vaccine is a death trap. Numerous studies bear this out. Sudden Infant Death Syndrome is an epidemic in "civilized" countries where vaccines are mandated. In fact, when pertussis vaccine rates drop, so do cases of SIDS, as shown in Japan when parents stopped vaccinated their children due to well publicized cases of death following this vaccine.

Q. And others dying from diphtheria.

A. This disease rate dropped mainly due to improved sanitation measures.

Q. Yes, vaccines come with a stiff nonpecuniary price. But the alternative to society is far, far worse. If we were to analogize the logic of your website to another societal problem, then Americans should stop driving because so many perish in automobile accidents.

A. People have a choice whether or not to drive. Vaccines are mandated. That is the difference. We do not advocate against vaccines. We promote informed consent and the freedom to accept or reject without intimidation.

Q. Didn't anyone see the October PBS special on the history of polio before the vaccine? Your website is prima facie proof that we are headed into another Dark Age, where nonscientific people hold vulgar sway over the populace, creating a reservoir of contagion in the process.

A. All of our information is documented from medical and scientific sources.You are the one who is being emotional. We are simply presenting the facts that rarely make it into the mainstream media.

If you wish to discuss vaccines based upon the documented evidence, I'll continue to provide you with data. However, you did not address my comments and appear more interested in personal attacks than in debating the issue. This sort of reaction is the hallmark of someone who is either fearful of facing the truth or who possesses an inferior knowledge of the subject in question.

By the way, each year the FDA receives between 12,000 and 14,000 reports of adverse events following vaccines. These include hospitalizations, permanent brain damage and death. If any other drug on the market had a fraction of this result, the drug would have been recalled long ago and removed from society. So keep in mind that thousands of families agree with us that vaccines should not be mandated in a free country.

Also, if vaccines are so wonderful how do you explain that during the 1950s, prior to mass vaccinations, the USA had the 2nd best infant mortality ratein the world. Today, after 40 years of mass immunizations, and a childhood series of more than 34 vaccine mixtures prior to entering 1st grade, the USA dropped to number 24? In fact, as each new vaccine is added to the mandatory schedule, infant mortality rates increase!

Q. That is a total misuse of statistics. That's like comparing the record of the Cleveland Browns in the 1950s to infant mortality. In the 1950s, the USA, coming out of WWII provided the highest standard of living and the best access to health care. Hence, the 2nd best infant mortalitiy rate. Also, in the 1950s, the use of noxious, powerful recreational drugs was limited to beatniks and not unwed mommies. Couldn't those factors be the etiology of infant mortality?

A. Misuse of statistics? The AMA boasts that the USA has the best health care available, and that it has consistently gotten better since WWII. The comparison is appropriate: infant mortality rates prior to mass vaccinations vs. infant mortality rates following mass vaccinations. It is identical to the logic used by vaccine proponents regarding disease rates: high rates prior to vaccines vs. low rates following vaccines. You can't have it both ways.

Q. Just because an individual who has been vaccinated gets Crohn's disease does not mean the vaccine caused it. It is bedrock science that one must use principles laid down by Koch and Pasteur. You must taken the victim, isolate an etiologic agent, grow that agent on other media, and then introduce the agent to another mammal, and induce the disease in it.

A. Obviously you didn't read the Measles/Bowel disease study but nevertheless are prepared to discount it because it contradicts your world view. It's a well formulated study and is accepted as credible research in scientific circles.

Q. Unless you do that, you are engaging in wild speculation and propaganda, and not science.

A. Psychologists have a term for your use of language -- projection -- the attempt to ascribe to others the very traits we ourselves exhibit and choose to deny. You need to re-read your own remarks.

Q. You mentioned that Salk used monkey kidney to produce the vaccine. Can you answer me why that was? There was a very good reason for that. By the way, what is an obligate intracellular parasite?

A. These two comments avoid the fact that mad scientists spead cancer through vaccines, no matter what the reason. Also, your persistent attempt to avoid responding to real concerns shows a callous disregard for the facts as well as lives. And your arrogant, condescending and self-righteous tone has no place in a serious discussion.

Q. This past month PBS had a wonderful documentary about life in the 1950s prior to the polio vaccine. How the virus spread unchecked in the summer like a humid miasma. And then how it wreaked it's havoc: death, disability, row after row of children in iron lungs. And then they interviewed some of the same individuals in the iron lungs today. That tape is available from either your local PBS station, or probably a state university.

A. I've seen and read plenty of vaccine propaganda. I have no problem with people who choose vaccines, after having been given access to complete information regarding risks involved. People that choose against vaccines are entitled to that option as well.

Q. What college did you attend? Did you graduate? What degree?

A. I graduated from college with honors. I have a degree in psychology (where scientific research and courses in statistical analysis are required). I am also a member of Mensa. However, I fail to see how this is relevant to the conversation. Our comments can be judged on their own merits. Medical doctors who speak out against vaccines are ostracized from the medical community. Non-medical doctors are patronized and told they have no right to participate in the debate.

Q. If I can arrange for you to debate scientists on the PBS NOVA program, would you like to give it a go?

A. I've debated medical doctors on national TV and radio, including Dr. William Atkinson, chief epidemiologist of the National Immunization Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Doctors are generally the least prepared to defend their point of view because they rarely substantiate their statements. They make sweeping generalizations or bogus comments and expect them to be accepted without question. Perhaps scientists are better prepared. Yes, I am willing to participate.

Q. [No response.]


Q. Why don't you also include the millions of children who are alive today because of immunization, or is the truth contrary to what you want to tell the public? You maintain you are informing the public but you do not give them both sides of the coin but rather examples of extemely rare life-altering side effects.

A. If you want the standard propaganda, you can visit most medical practitioners or the thousands of pro-vaccine websites, all of which, by the way, only give "one side of the coin." Also, contrary to your belief, vaccine damage is quite common -- between 12,000 and 14,000 adverse events following vaccines are reported each year in the U.S.

Q. Sadly they do occur, but to abandon immunization is to jeopardize the lives of so very many young and old. This site reminds me of watching the X files...possible but not probable.

A. You may wish to visit with the families of vaccine damaged children, most of whom were not informed by their doctors of the severe risks involved. Also, many other countries do not mandate vaccines due to the risks and liability. (France is in the midst of a class action suit by 15,000 citizens due to severe problems with hepatitis B vaccine. Meanwhile, our website receives daily emails from parents whose children are collapsing from this shot, and our government and medical establishment choose to keep their heads buried in the sand.)


Q. I am disappointed that you have no data on the other side of the question, that is, how many lives have been saved by vaccination; literally billions.

A. Our website is designed to provide information regarding the dangers and ineffectiveness associated with vaccines, information that is rarely provided elsewhere. Where is your concern for this inequity when doctors and the media fail to provide a balanced perspective? Also, current studies are showing correlations between vaccines and several new diseases -- an indication that for every disease you claim the CDC or WHO saved people from, two or three new ones were created.

Q. Why not present the CDC and WHO data on vaccination rates and disease rates? Then people can decide for themselves. Or is this too objective a picture for evaluating what is called a "satanic ritual"?

A. I already explained our position above. We are not pawns to these organizations. Also, we do present information and let people decide for themselves.

Q. If you are disgusted by how vaccines are manufactured, I wonder if you are also appalled by modern practices of cutting off the sexual organs of plants and grinding them up to make food for humans!

A. Your "analogy" is ridiculous and shows little sensitivity to the thousands of people who have been damaged or killed by vaccines. In fact, each year the FDA receives between 12,000 and 14,000 reports of adverse events following vaccines, including hospitalizations, brain damage, and death. Our website receives reports daily.

Q. As a healthcare provider, I am more than aware of the risks inherent in any form of intervention. To improve the health of the world's population in general, it is necessary that some individuals will be at risk for complications. Even providing clean water carries a risk to individuals. Do you propose we go back to dying in our teens from water-borne pathogens? Please take a more global view of the consequences of health interventions. It is certainly necessary to scrutinize processes and risks involved, especially in the profit-motivated arena of American healthcare, but you cannot blindly criticize an intervention like vaccination without considering benefits AND risks.

A. We believe that you would do well to inform yourself of the global ramifications of a vaccine industry run amuck. Where are the longitudinal studies? Lets compare the health and well-being of vaccinated vs.unvaccinated individuals. Compare doctor and hospital visits, disease rates,intellectual capacity, socioeconomic status, and other indicators of social well-being. In the meantime, until such studies put to rest valid questions and concerns, people are entitled to informed consent and freedom of choice. Vaccines are not magical shots that ward away the evils of humanity; they are powerful drugs foisted upon society by a materialistic industry more interested in protecting their monetary interests than in the health and welfare of our children.


Q. I am a student at Monash University in Australia. At the moment I am researching the issue of immunization, and I was very interested in your website. The purpose of my research is to conduct all my interviews and inquiries over the Internet. I was wondering if you would be able to answer some quick questions. Although, I can probably find the answers, I need some primary information, so it would be much appreciated! Thank you.

A. I can provide you with some brief answers. I suggest that you read some of the many good books that we offer on this topic, and investigate the research studies in medical journals if you truly want a more complete view regarding this issue.

1. What are the primary issues against immunization?

A. Vaccines have documented dangers, including brain damage and death. Some researchers are now finding correlations between the shots and new autoimmune diseases. This data is well referenced in many of the books that we offer.

2. What evidence supports these views?

A. This information is documented in medical and scientific journals throughout the world. I recommend acquiring a copy of Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research by Dr. Viera Scheibner. I can't list all of the references for you because you must do your own research project.

3. Although some people have severe side effects to vaccination, what about the babies and adults who die because of preventable diseases?

A. The authorities are not being honest about the true rates of adverse events due to vaccines, and they overstate the benefits. Also, in reference to your first question, this issue is as much about freedom of choice (health freedom and the right to raise our children without government interference) as it is about the shots themselves.

4. What is suggested as an alternative to vaccination?

A. Homeopathic remedies have been suggested. However, most of the diseases are not as dangerous as authorities would have us believe. For example, chickenpox was always considered a tame illness until they invented the chickenpox vaccine and began marketing it. Now the authorities are warning us about the grave dangers of this childhood illness.

5. Can anything else be used to prevent disease?

A. Raising our children in a sanitary environment with good hygienic measures, breastfeeding them as infants, and providing them with a healthy diet and lots of love are my recommendations.

6. Any other primary information would also be extremely helpful.

A. I recommend that you investigate this topic further. Do not just accept the "official" position on vaccines. Vested interests are involved in the mass marketing of this saleable commodity. We regularly receive email from parents telling us their horror stories -- they had healthy children until they received their shots. Doctors say stories of vaccine damage are "anecdotal," but when thousands of parents tell similar stories, the "anecdotes" create a pattern, and that is a sad testament to the truth.


Q. I just read your article having to do with childhood vaccinations and found it very disturbing. I have a hard time believing that this is all a conspiracy and that we are killing our children. However, I do have an open mind and would like to know where you got your information concerning the hidden government database and the information on how vaccines are made, particularly the part on the use of aborted fetuses -- that's absolutely disgusting! Any information you could provide would be greatly appreciated because I have children that are currently going through the vaccination process. Thank You.

A. I'm glad to hear you are remaining open to the possibility that vaccines may do more harm than originally suspected. Parents need to become better informed on this important topic.

In 1986, Congress passed The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Public Law 99-660. At that time the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) was established. This is a centralized reporting agency that was established to track reports of vaccine damage (authorities don't investigate the reports). This information is publicly accessible, although access to such information must now be gained through the Freedom of Information Act.

To begin your research, consider some of the excellent vaccine books that we offer. Hard-to-find diskettes containing 17,000 records of VAERS data from the FDA are also available. Information about vaccine production--including the use of aborted fetuses--can be found in the Physician's Desk Reference (PDR) at the library. Original sources are posted elsewhere on this website, and in some of the books that are offered. Best wishes regarding your upcoming vaccine decisions.


Q. Your webpage is wonderfully balanced, factual, and unbiased. You are obviously diligent scholars. However, you didn't mention burning skulls and chicken's feet, though that would have gone together nicely. Do you smoke hash a lot?

A. Actually, we are diligent scholars. What about you, do you always just accept information at face value? If you have something intelligent to discuss, we would like to hear it. It is rather immature of you to simply make childish statements anonymously and then leave. Try researching this subject before you present such poorly thought out comments.


Q. I don't agree. The risk that our children have an accident or even die is far greater when we put them into a car, and that doesn't seem to keep parents from driving with their children in cars. What response do you have about this?

A. The same day that we received your email notice, we received four other emails thanking us for offering such vital information. I respect your belief that vaccine risks are small in comparison to the purported benefits. That's what makes America good -- having the freedom to hold different beliefs and make choices. However, keep in mind that your beliefs are not in conformity with the facts. Talk to the thousands of parents who thought vaccines were safe and who now have brain-damaged children as a result of the shots. They would not agree with you. Look at government statistics where 12,000 to 14,000 people contact the FDA annually to report an adverse event after receiving one or more of the shots. They would not agree with you either. Please investigate this issue further before closing your mind to the very real problems associated with vaccines.


Q. Dear Thinktwice, I'm 13 years old and in the 8th grade. I'm doing a research project that is concerning the pros and cons of immunizing a child. I think this subject is incredibly important. I need information from both sides of the story and you seem like a reliable source. If you could please send me any information you might have on this subject I believe that it would greatly enhance the outcome of my paper. Also, if you wouldn't mind answering a few questions I have, that would be wonderful: 1) Why don't you think immunizations are safe and effective? 2) Do you think the DPT vaccine is a cause for SIDS? If so, then what medical proof is there to support your opinion? 3) How often do children have a SEVERE adverse reaction to the vaccine? 4) Why do you think that immunization is no longer needed in the USA? 5) Do you think if the government would put the money they use to financially reimburse families for their child having an adverse reaction, and put it towards parent information classes, that the taxpayer's money would be put to a much more efficient use? 6) If immunizations aren't safe then why does the government continue to encourage people to vaccinate their children? 7) Based on your best estimations what do you feel the current number of cases faced annually in the USA would be for polio, diphtheria, and other immunizable diseases if the current vaccination programs were dropped?

A. I am pleased to see such a bright and inquisitive young lady researching a topic of such importance. Most people simply assume that vaccines are safe and effective because the "authorities" tell this to us. However, my research indicates that the vaccines are a dangerous experiment inflicted on humanity. The short-term benefits are fraught with many problems, including numerous children sacrificed to the noble goal of eradicating disease. The long-term perils are just beginning to be understood, including an assortment of new diseases, immune system damage, possible genetic restructuring, and social problems associated with these conditions. I will now briefly answer your questions. Look for a package in the mail; I am sending you some information.

1. a) Immunizations are not safe because they damage and kill thousands of children every year. The federal government does not deny this because in 1986 they established a compensation program to pay parents when their children are impaired or killed by the shots. When a parent goes to the doctor or a clinic to have their children vaccinated, some of the money used to pay for the shot is set aside to go into this special fund. The government determines how much money should go into the fund based on their calculations of how many people (mostly children) will be seriously hurt or killed (sacrificed) by each vaccine. In the last few years more than $1 billion dollars was paid out to individuals or their families for this purpose. Thousands of cases remain pending in the courts. You may read about this on pages 57-64 in my first book on this topic, Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective? I am sending you a copy.

1. b) Vaccines are often not effective because in many so-called epidemics, the people that were vaccinated are the ones struck with the disease. In fact, the evidence indicates that the vaccine itself was responsible for causing the ailment. I provide numerous documented cases of this in my books.

2. The medical establishment likes to deny a connection between the DPT vaccine and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, but the evidence is overwhelming. One of the best studies that I am aware of was conducted by Dr. Viera Scheibner in Australia. She measured the breathing patterns of children before and after receiving the DPT vaccine and discovered increased degrees of apnea (loss of breathing) following the shots. I discuss this in my first book on pages 36 and 37. I am also including a copy of Dr. Scheibner's book so that you can read about the study firsthand.

3. In the last four years, the FDA received more than 50,000 reports of adverse reactions following the administration of a shot, including more than 700 deaths. Yet, doctors are refusing to report suspected cases of adverse reactions to vaccines even though they are required to do so by law. The government acknowledges that these figures probably represent less than 10% of the true number. Keep in mind that these figures do not include most of the thousands of cases of SIDS reported each year, nor the thousands of kids that are permanently brain damaged or autoimmune impaired following the shots.

4. The Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute is not against vaccines. We are against mandated vaccines that are foisted upon an unsuspecting, uninformed population. Our struggle is for a full disclosure of all pertinent vaccine information and the freedom to choose whether or not to have one's children vaccinated.

5. I believe that alternatives to preventive health are stifled by the powerful medical lobby, and that if people were aware of their options and free to choose among them, we'd live in a happier, healthier society.

6. I believe that government authorities are generally unaware of the magnitude of the problem. They make their decisions based upon the recommendations they receive from their medical advisors. The medical monopoly continues to recommend the shots because they have been trained to perceive things in a particular way. Their limited and myopic view prohibits them from accepting data that conflicts with their rigid thinking. Also, one must not overlook the liability involved if medical and government agencies were to be honest with the people.

7. If vaccination programs were ended overnight, I believe that cases of polio would drop since every case in the U.S. during the past several years was caused by the vaccine. Diphtheria and tetanus would remain low. Cases of mumps would rise, but this is a relatively harmless disease. Cases of pertussis would initially rise but eventually stabilize. Fatalities would be low, especially in comparison to current damage being wreaked by the pertussis vaccine. Rubella is another relatively innocuous disease, and often passes as a common cold. It is potentially dangerous to the fetus of a pregnant woman if she is exposed to it during her first trimester. About 12 fetuses were affected annually prior to the vaccine. This figure increased 5-fold after the vaccine was introduced [CDC figures]. This pales in comparison to the reports I am receiving indicating correlations between this vaccine and cases of autism, a serious form of brain damage. I am also receiving numerous reports of autoimmune ailments associated with this vaccine (and substantiated with studies), including chronic fatigue syndrome and rheumatoid arthritis. Measles, in my estimation, would cause the most problems because it is especially troublesome in populations that have not been exposed to it. The artificial immunity conferred on the population during the last 40 years would probably contribute to an initial rise in fatalities, at least until a herd immunity was once again achieved.


Q. Ever have polio? People forget what it was like not too long ago, before the vaccine, when polio affected thousands. I don't understand how you can say that creating a vaccine is disgusting. Is it more disgusting than having our society crippled, infectious disease killing our loved ones, our children? The number [of children hurt by vaccines] is minimal. It's very sad. I agree one hundred percent that information must be given prior to a vaccine so that if a person (child) is in danger, the parent can make a decision. Let us stress the side effects of any medication, but also the miracle of having the technology to prevent horrible and disgusting diseases that have in the past killed millions or taken away a cripple-free life! Thanks.

A. I'm sorry, but you do not have complete information on polio or the other vaccines. I don't have the time to debate with you, but much of the information that you need to gain a more well-rounded perspective is documented in the medical literature, elsewhere on this website, and in many of the books that we offer. If you are truly interested in forming an objective opinion regarding this topic, you will investigate further.


Q. Just to set the record straight, if it weren't for vaccines, millions of our children would die from many diseases. The risks of paralysis or mental retardation are lower than ever because of medical advancements and knowledge concerning vaccines. I am upset to see so many books written in order to discourage immunizations. It is far better for one to die than to see an entire nation rotting in disease. Yes, there are cases in which negative reactions due to vaccinations occur, yet there are far more cases in which lives were saved due to these shots. The good effects outweigh the bad. I cannot see how halting these helpful shots could advance us medically. To the contrary, it would put us back to the years of great suffering and sickness. I believe and know that immunizations are for the greater good and that they fight against death every day.

A. Your assertions represent the standard propaganda promulgated by the medical establishment and pharmaceutical companies. Vaccines are responsible for breaking down the immune systems of otherwise healthy individuals. They commit valuable T-cells to unnatural foreign proteins and other toxic substances. Our children are not healthier today than they were 40 years ago prior to the advent of mass vaccination programs. Look at the figures. In the late 1950s the United States had the 2nd best infant mortality rate in the world. Today, after more than 40 years of forced immunizations, we are number 24. Where are all of the new autoimmune diseases coming from? Autism was unheard of, by that name or any other, prior to 1943, just a few years after the pertussis shot came on the scene. Today there are thousands of cases of this serious form of brain damage occurring every year. Do you really think there is no connection. What about the explosion of hyperactivity disorder, attention deficit disorder, and learning disabilities. Recent studies indicate that 15 to 20 percent of our children are now learning disabled. These are neurologically based diseases. Many have their inception with post-vaccinal encephalitis. Do the research yourself and you'll be able to confirm this.

Also, look at Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. The medical establishment uses this term as a catch-all diagnosis to bury the truth that vaccines are killing thousands of babies every year. Studies prove that children experience serious breathing difficulties -- apnea and hyponia -- for up to 60 days following vaccination. Yes, there are studies proving this! Now, with each new vaccine that is added to the list of "mandatory" shots, SIDS is occurring more often, and in older and older children. New catch-all terms will be needed: Sudden Toddler Death Syndrome, and perhaps, eventually, Sudden Adolescent Death Syndrome, to cover the effects of the mandatory vaccines being foisted on high school and college students. When will this madness end?!

Because of the inherent problems associated with vaccines, the decision regarding whether or not to vaccinate should be a personal one, made by the parents of the children. It is immoral to mandate vaccines when there are so many unanswered questions. Simply telling people they are wonderful because the medical industry, backed by the pharmaceutical industry, says so, is no longer enough. We live in a different time -- people want to take more responsibility for their decisions. They want to have access to information from several sources, not just from those with vested interests. You would do well to rethink your "beliefs" about vaccinations, and to drop your self-righteous promulgations. There is another side to this important issue, and everyone gains when the debate is brought out into the open where it belongs.


Q. I think your site is rubbish!

A. We receive several emails daily from parents describing how vaccines damaged their children. Do you think their children are rubbish as well?


Q. What would happen if we all stopped vaccinating? Would all of these diseases start up again like before we had them?

A. No.


Q. Alright lets see how strongly you believe that parents should make well informed decisions by hearing the facts. Print my personal story if you really care. I am the mother of a 10 month old unimmunized baby. I am well informed on the vaccine debates and chose from ideological reasons not to immunize my kid. My baby contracted Haemophillous Influenza Meningitis which is a bacteria there is an immunization against. He had a low grade fever for one day and suddenly started vomiting. I immediately rushed to the ER when he became sleepy and I couldnt wake him up. He was immediately transferred to the ICU and was on a breathing machine for two days until he started breathing on his own. But he is not the same baby anymore. His follow up exams show that he has some brain damage and I want to die for NOT immunizing him. I think it is harder to be a parent on this side and to admit that I was wrong than to be the one claiming that immunizations did harm. You must print my story for fairness so that mothers can make informed decisions.

A. Hello, we're very sorry to hear about your situation. Sadly, there are potential tragedies regardless of the choices we make. For example, we received the letter below at the same time that we received your letter. Best wishes on your baby's recovery and your peacefulness.

I am a mother of two. My first born was vaccinated against my will, the nurse told me if I didn't do so I would be turned into Social Services. Richard (my son) received his Hep. B shot and two weeks later his Hep. B booster. Within hours of the vaccine he went paralyzed on the right side and following was seizure activity. He is now 9 years old and suffering seizure activity and learning disabilities. I moved from Alaska where the state accepted a religious exemption form to attend public school. I am now in Diamondhead Mississippi where the exemption form is not accepted. This state is going to deny my children a public education because of something that nearly killed my first born son. Is there anyone who can help?


Q. Hello, I have just visited your website for the first time and felt compelled to contact you. As an intelligent, educated health information specialist, sites like yours can't help but offend me. Total bias does not provide good information -- health or otherwise. For example, each of the "articles" in that section is heavily weighted against immunization and most, if not all, have rather sensational titles. I find it interesting that your disclaimer addresses who you are not (healthcare providers or lawyers) and only lightly suggests that further investigation might be in order. I do embrace complementary and alternative medicine but consider it irresponsible both to myself and to the people who seek information direction from me to look at only one side of any issue. Thank you for your attention.

A. We provide information that is not being provided by "official" immunization websites. This is how we balance the fraudulent vaccine information that is constantly bombarding society. We agree with you when you "consider it irresponsible both to myself and to the people who seek information direction from me to look at only one side of any issue." That is why you should contact all of the "official" websites mainly sponsored by the medical industry, including the CDC, FDA and pharmaceutical companies, and demand that they end their biased practices and start posting honest information thus enabling parents to make intelligent, informed decisions.



More Angry Letters

Please read our DISCLAIMER. Copyright © 1996-2017. All Rights Reserved.