You may not have heard about a study published in September in the Journal of Neurotoxicology about what happens to newborn rhesus macaques after they are given a single dose of a thimerosal-containing Hepatitis B vaccine.
Nine scientists co-authored the study.
In the introduction, they explain that in 1991 Hepatitis B was recommended for all newborns, regardless of gestational age or birth weight, within twelve hours of life, even if their mothers test negative for Hepatitis B.
“We were unable to identify pre-clinical or prospective neurotoxicity studies that assessed the safety of this policy,” the authors write.
Translation: the vaccine was recommended for newborns without anyone in the government, the medical, or the scientific community establishing in advance or afterwards that the vaccine was safe.
It was a “routine” Hepatitis B vaccine that made me first question the CDC vaccine schedule.
When a nurse in the hospital bustles in and tells you to give your baby a vaccine against a SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASE you know you don’t have and your husband does not have, it gives you pause. When that same nurse becomes angry because you decline to inject your little frog-legged creature with a combination of possibly toxic chemicals that may well be completely unnecessary, you start to get suspicious.
Why would anyone in the medical establishment get upset at the parents of a healthy baby who simply ask for a few days to consider a suggestion and read up on it?
Perhaps because the nurse had already prepared the vaccine and my refusal meant the hospital could no longer charge me for it?
Perhaps because the nurse thought it is appropriate to scare parents, bully parents, vilify parents who want to be sure what a hospital is recommending is safe?
The truth is there is a lot about vaccinations that we do not know.
The truth is vaccinations are pharmaceutical products made by a multi-billion dollar industry that are injected intramuscularly into a baby’s body.
The truth may well be that 90 percent of the vaccines we are giving our children are unnecessary.
The truth may well be that the exponential number of vaccines we are now giving children (four times as many as when I was growing up in the 1970s) may well be harmful to our children’s long-term health.
Back to the study.
The scientists found that infant monkeys given the vaccine had delayed sucking, rooting, and snouting reflexes:
Infants were raised identically and tested daily for acquisition of 9 survival, motor, and sensorimotor reflexes by a blinded observer. In exposed animals there was a significant delay in the acquisition of three survival reflexes: root, snout and suck, compared with unexposed animals.
They conclude that more study is necessary:
In summary, this study provides preliminary evidence of abnormal early neurodevelopmental responses in male infant rhesus macaques receiving a single dose of Th-containing HB vaccine at birth and indicates that further investigation is merited.
Fair enough. Very scientific and politic. Let’s continue studying whether this vaccine is harmful in monkeys. But since my job as a parent is to keep my baby safe and free from harm, I am not in the mood to be politic. Here’s the bottom line (CDC are you listening?): it’s time to STOP giving the Hepatitis B vaccine to human infants who are at no risk for Hepatitis B.
Vaccine advocates will tell you there is no longer thimerosal in the vaccine. That’s certainly an improvement. But it’s not enough to guarantee the vaccine is safe. And, since the vaccine is totally unnecessary in the first place, the thimerosal question is actually irrelevant.
If you’re pregnant and planning to have a baby in the hospital, you will be pressured into accepting this vaccine.
But if you do not have Hepatitis B and your baby does not need a blood transfusion, there is absolutely no reason for your baby to get the vaccine.
Just say no.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.