Are Doctors Being Trained to Manipulate Patients About Vaccines?

Are Doctors Being Trained to Manipulate Patients About Vaccines?
The number of parents questioning the safety of vaccines, the ingredients used, and the expanding 70-dose CDC schedule is growing, and medical organizations are trying to understand why. Numerous studies have been conducted to learn the reasons more parents are selectively refusing vaccines and what tactics may work best to overcome their doubts. Proponents of mandatory vaccine laws are now hosting medical conferences on how to use the right sound-bites to persuade parents to follow the full vaccine protocol without question. But shouldn’t these seminars be designed to help doctors take a closer look at vaccine safety in order to better understand the legitimate concerns parents have?
The main reason more and more parents are now opting out of vaccination is safety. No doctors can discuss vaccines transparently with their patients without revealing the many possible side effects both the CDC and FDA disclose. Ironically, safety is the one aspect of vaccination that Pro-Mandate supporters don’t want doctors to talk about. But isn’t an honest conversation really what informed consent is all about?
The only goal of these Pro-Mandate conferences is to reduce vaccine refusal, regardless of how legitimate parental concerns are. Those who support this agenda are recruiting doctors to help. The problem is doctors are supposed to be impartial. They are supposed to be invested in the well-being of each patient individually, which means any course of treatment can vary depending on the child. Addressing parental concerns about vaccine safety acknowledges that there is risk, that parents should be fully informed about the risk, and that we need to better understand why some people have reactions. Instead, the new directive in these conferences is to use emotional tactics to persuade parents that vaccines are safe enough without admitting there is any risk.
This new strategy has been featured in several recent news magazines sent to all pediatricians and was unveiled at the Confronting Vaccine Resistance Conference in New York, hosted by Senator Pan (D-California) and Dr. Offit (creator of the rotavirus vaccine). They’ve determined that pediatricians who capitalize on the emotion of the doctor-patient relationship may be more successful in persuading parents who won’t follow the full vaccine protocol to change their mind.
But no parent should be emotionally manipulated. Educated parents who research vaccine safety on a deeper level conclude that vaccines have more risks than they are being told by their doctors. And many parents just don’t trust much of the vaccine safety research anymore due to conflicts of interest in the pharmaceutical industry. Parents now know that many of the doctors and researchers (including the former head of the CDC) who determine vaccine policy receive funding from vaccine manufacturers.

Harvard Trained Immunologist Demolishes California Legislation That Terminates Vaccine Exemptions

Harvard Trained Immunologist Demolishes California Legislation That Terminates Vaccine Exemptions
IPV (inactivated poliovirus vaccine) cannot prevent transmission of poliovirus (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #1). Wild poliovirus has been non-existent in the USA for at least two decades. Even if wild poliovirus were to be re-imported by travel, vaccinating for polio with IPV cannot affect the safety of public spaces.  Please note that wild poliovirus eradication is attributed to the use of a different vaccine, OPV or oral poliovirus vaccine. Despite being capable of preventing wild poliovirus transmission, use of OPV was phased out long ago in the USA and replaced with IPV due to safety concerns.
Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but rather acquired from deep-puncture wounds contaminated with C. tetani spores. Vaccinating for tetanus (via the DTaP combination vaccine) cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is intended to render personal protection only.
While intended to prevent the disease-causing effects of the diphtheria toxin, the diphtheria toxoid vaccine (also contained in the DTaP vaccine) is not designed to prevent colonization and transmission of C. diphtheriae. Vaccinating for diphtheria cannot alter the safety of public spaces; it is likewise intended for personal protection only.
The acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine (the final element of the DTaP combined vaccine), now in use in the USA, replaced the whole cell pertussis vaccine in the late 1990s, which was followed by an unprecedented resurgence of whooping cough. An experiment with deliberate pertussis infection in primates revealed that the aP vaccine is not capable of preventing colonization and transmission of B. pertussis (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #2). The FDA has issued a warning regarding this crucial finding.[1]
Furthermore, the 2013 meeting of the Board of Scientific Counselors at the CDC revealed additional alarming data that pertussis variants (PRN-negative strains) currently circulating in the USA acquired a selective advantage to infect those who are up-to-date for their DTaP boosters (see appendix for the CDC document, Item #3), meaning that people who are up-to-date are more likely to be infected, and thus contagious, than people who are not vaccinated.
Among numerous types of H. influenzae, the Hib vaccine covers only type b. Despite its sole intention to reduce symptomatic and asymptomatic (disease-less) Hib carriage, the introduction of the Hib vaccine has inadvertently shifted strain dominance towards other types of H. influenzae (types a through f).These types have been causing invasive disease of high severity and increasing incidence in adults in the era of Hib vaccination of children (see appendix for the scientific study, Item #4).  The general population is more vulnerable to the invasive disease now than it was prior to the start of the Hib vaccination campaign.  Discriminating against children who are not vaccinated for Hib does not make any scientific sense in the era of non-type b H. influenzae disease.
Hepatitis B is a blood-borne virus. It does not spread in a community setting, especially among children who are unlikely to engage in high-risk behaviors, such as needle sharing or sex. Vaccinating children for hepatitis B cannot significantly alter the safety of public spaces. Further, school admission is not prohibited for children who are chronic hepatitis B carriers. To prohibit school admission for those who are simply unvaccinated – and do not even carry hepatitis B – would constitute unreasonable and illogical discrimination.
In summary, a person who is not vaccinated with IPV, DTaP, HepB, and Hib vaccines due to reasons of conscience poses no extra danger to the public than a person who is.  No discrimination is warranted.

Whether or not to vaccinate your children has long been a hot button issue.
Almost all of “science” believes it’s a very good idea. However , there are a good chunk of parents who reject this.
Count rap’s strangest man Kevin Gates among them. He goes anti-vax in a video with Rolling Stone, and claims his young son and daughter are far ahead of other kids their age because they were never vaccinated.
“I know why she’s so accelerated. She’s never been vaccinated before,” Gates says of his 3-year old daughter. “That’s why she’s so accelerated, she doesn’t have mercury in her body or things to that nature.”
Listen to Gates’s words below.