The World Health Organization (WHO) held the Global Vaccine Safety Summit in December and, thanks to a leaked video of the summit, revealed some alarming news. As W.H.O. Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan explained, there isn’t really a good safety monitoring system currently in place and adverse events are only discovered after the drug has been licensed and used.
We are told that vaccines are “safe and effective,” yet here is a top scientist saying precisely the opposite. Why was this alarming news not telegraphed by the mainstream media?
Crimes Against Humanity
At the Doctors Trial at Nuremberg after World War II, medical doctors and scientists were charged with crimes against humanity for experimenting on concentration camp prisoners. The medical communities were confronted with what leading professionals in their field had done in the name of advancing scientific knowledge and for “the greater good of humanity.”
The doctors facing judgment at Nuremberg cited U.S. eugenics laws from the 1920s in their defense, based on a 1905 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court. This ruling affirmed the authority of the state to force smallpox vaccinations on citizens in the name of the greater good.
Ultimately, many of the doctors protested that they were only following orders, simply implementing government policy. The Nuremberg Trials established this was not a valid justification, birthing the principle of informed consent.
Yale physician and law professor J. Katz remarked on the informed consent ethic as articulated in the 1947 Nuremberg Code:
“If not explicitly, then at least implicitly commanded that the principle of the advancement of science bow to a higher principle: protection of individual inviolability. The right of individuals to thorough growing self-determination and autonomy must come first.
For the Greater Good
The first principle of the Nuremberg Code is “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.” That principle stands today, as it did then, as a strong affirmation of the value of every human life, a timeless guide to good scientific research, and the ethical practice of medicine.
When doctors deprive patients of their freedom to decide what they will allow in their bodies, those doctors become tyrants. If the state can track down and force individuals to accept injections with biologicals of known and unknown toxicity, is there any limit to the individual freedoms the state can strip away in the name of the greater good tomorrow?
Thanks to state-mandated vaccination, children who haven’t received the full run of federally recommended vaccines are often excluded from daycare or state-run schools. Several pediatricians also refuse to treat children whose parents have declined even one of the 69 doses of 16 federally recommended vaccines. No delays and no exceptions are allowed for kids who are sick, have experienced adverse reactions in the past, suffer from severe allergies or autoimmune issues, or who have suffered suspected brain and immune system damage from vaccination.
CDC officials and medical trade associations have narrowed vaccine contraindications – the conditions or factors that serves as a reason to withhold a certain medical treatment due to the harm that it would cause the patient – so almost no children qualify for a vaccine exemption. The religious vaccine exemption exists in 47 states and the conscientious belief exemption in 16. These two exemptions are the only legal recourse for parents trying to protect children from vaccine reactions.
Medical lobbyists have recently targeted personal belief exemptions. In 2015, California lost both the religious and the personal belief exceptions, joining West Virginia and Mississippi as the three states with the strictest vaccination laws in the country.
The right and responsibility for making an informed decision about medical risk-taking belongs to the individual, or the parent taking the risk on behalf of a minor child. It does not belong to the doctor recommending the risk.
In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively declared that federally licensed vaccines are unavoidably unsafe by referencing the “vaccine’s unavoidable, adverse side effects.” Congress had removed all remaining product liability from pharmaceutical companies that manufacture vaccines 25 years prior to 1986. Since then, $4 billion has been paid to vaccine-injury claimants.
But two out of three claims are rejected. How many vaccine injuries have occurred, if $4 billion is only a third of the claims?
The only accessible monitoring system for adverse events, the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), with an average of 30,000+ events reported annually, actually represents approximately 1% of real unfavorable event numbers. In July of 2018, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) admitted in federal court that they had violated the 1986 National Childhood Vaccination Injury Act’s requirement that they submit biennial reports to Congress on the status of vaccine safety. HHS admitted that no such reports had ever been presented, not since the enforcement of the law (some 34 years ago). Also ignored is the abundant science demonstrating that live virus and vectored vaccines can infect, transmit, and shed.
Each one of us is born with different genes and a unique microbiome influenced by epigenetics that affect how we respond to the environment in which we live. All people do not respond the same to pharmaceutical products like vaccines. While doctors admit that some people are more susceptible to vaccine reactions, they are unable to predict who will be injured.
Is it time to revisit vaccine mandates? Vaccination is the medical intervention performed on the body of a healthy person. Who should have the right to decide whether a person gets a vaccine, the individual or the state? While we are all born equal under the law, we are not all born the same.
Read more from Lorraine Silvetz.