Which Is Safer: Vaccines or Illnesses? |

Which Is Safer: Vaccines or Illnesses?

admin October 3, 2014

vaccines or illnesses

After my recent post, “15 Things We Need to Stop Saying in the Vaccine Debate,” there was a respectful response written by Erich of Grounded Parents, entitled “11 Things I’m Going to Keep Saying in the Vaccine Debate…and 4 We Shouldn’t.”

Erich agrees that it should be a parents’ choice and that we should have a respectful discussion.  He does believe that the science is in favor of vaccination and challenged me to reply and defend my position.  My original article wasn’t sourced (although I have a whole bunch that are right here), so I agree — we need some science here.  And given that it’s Vaccine Injury Awareness Month, this seems like a good time to respond.

Well, Erich, I’m always up for respectful debate.  And I appreciate your stance on parental rights and freedom.  

I would like to ask one thing (and I haven’t seen you do this, nor do I think you would, based on your article): no personal stories.  That means no scary tales about children dying of pertussis, nor of children dying of DTaP.  That’s not evidence (as I’m sure you know).  It’s frustrating to me to share studies and have ill-informed vaccine advocates come back with “But this baby died of pertussis because of people like you!”  Sigh.  Like I said, I don’t think that’s your style, but I’m going to say it for everyone who’s reading, too.

So let’s have a conversation about this.

The Crux of the Matter

When I first read the piece, I considered responding point by point.  But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that we need to just jump to the heart of the matter.

The argument that people ought to vaccinate — whether you believe in convincing them via education, or forcing them via government — is predicated on the idea that vaccination is orders of magnitude safer than potential complications of a disease.

So, we’ll look at it this way: getting a vaccine, or getting a disease.  (For now, we’ll ignore that at the present moment, children are unlikely to get most of these diseases.  That’s not relevant, and it might not be true if we stopped vaccinating.)

What we need to examine now is three main things:

  • How dangerous are these diseases — really?  
  • How dangerous are these vaccines — really?
  • Are there any benefits to any of the diseases?

We’ll assume there is benefit to vaccines automatically.  The other three questions need to be answered, though, more thoroughly than they have been.

You see, Erich, based on present, obvious scientific data (that is, data that directly relates to childhood vaccinations), I agree — vaccines appear to be far safer than the diseases.  However, I do not believe that the scientific evidence we currently have is adequate.  I’m going to point to some related research that calls into question what we believe about vaccine safety, and note some areas of research that we ought to be looking into.

It really comes down to this: do you believe the direct research about vaccines?  Or do you look at the related research and wonder if there’s more to the story?

How Dangerous Are These Diseases, Really?

The statistics on how dangerous these diseases are vary widely depending on where you read them.  We can’t possibly discuss all of the diseases here, so let’s use measles, one of the few we’re most commonly seeing now, as our example.  We’ll similarly use the MMR as our comparison vaccine.

Looking at the CDC’s fact sheet on measles complications, we see that:

Ear infections occur in about 1 in 10 measles cases and permanent loss of hearing can result.

I think that point is kind of fear-mongering, Erich, how about you?  I’m not surprised that ear infections can occur in 10% of cases, but we both know that the vast majority of ear infections won’t result in permanent hearing loss.  But that isn’t made clear here.  Parents are left believing that hearing loss is likely.

The same fact sheet also notes that pneumonia can occur (they bury the frequency — 5% — in the following paragraph, but they do state it’s a common cause of death — more fearmongering), and diarrhea occurs in 8% of cases.  Encephalitis is said to occur in “about” 1 in 1000 cases.  And death is supposed to occur in 1 – 2 out of 1000 people who catch the measles.

This is followed by this paragraph:

In developing countries, where malnutrition and vitamin A deficiency are common, measles has been known to kill as many as one out of four people. It is the leading cause of blindness among African children. It is estimated that in 2008 there were 164,000 measles deaths worldwide.

Can we just agree, Erich, that outcomes in a first-world country and outcomes in a third-world country are not the same?  We have the data to show that.  Heck, this CDC page shows that.  In a developed country, we should expect to see 1 – 2 deaths in 1000; in a third-world country we might see as many as 1 in 4.  Those are vastly different numbers.  Many people try to argue that we ought to vaccinate in the U.S. because of the scary outcomes in Africa, but this is comparing apples to oranges.  This paragraph actually doesn’t even belong in this CDC report, in my opinion, because it skews the “scariness” of the disease for U.S. parents.  From here on out, I’m going to ignore “global data” because it makes this argument messier.

Let’s take a look at the CDC’s Pink Book instead.  For those unfamiliar, it’s a manual meant for health professionals, not the public, and it tends to present more factual and less emotional information.

First, I note that the Pink Book states that measles is contagious starting with the prodromal phase, but not before.  In the prodromal phase, people will experience fever and cough.  The rash onsets 2 -4 days later.  This is actually a key point, because one of the arguments for universal vaccination is that people can spread illnesses before they know they’re contagious.  In this case, that’s unlikely.  People who have fevers and flu-like symptoms are probably not going to be out and about — or at least, they shouldn’t be.  (Which goes back to people needing to stay home when they’re sick.  Period.  That protects others without risk to you.)

In the Pink Book, we learn that the complication rates are based on cases that occurred between 1985 and 1992.  There were several measles outbreaks in those years (surprise! It’s not all recently occurring because of “anti-vaxxers”), but I’m not sure that’s very accurate data.  What we’ve seen with other statistics is that the people who are likely to get measles are the people who are already more susceptible to illness (those who can’t be vaccinated, for example) and so they’re more likely to suffer from complications than a general population group would be.

Let’s take a look at the complication rates in the 2010 – 2011 European outbreak.  There were about 30,000 cases each year in Europe, so this is a good sample size.  It’s also recent data.  There were 27 cases of encephalitis in 2011, which is roughly consistent with the CDC’s 1 in 1000 figure.  There were 8 deaths, which is far below the CDC’s figure of 2 in 1000.  The European data shows roughly 1 in 3000 death rate.

So, we can assume that 2 in 1000 is probably the highest death rate that we’d see in any large-scale outbreak — but it’s not the average.  Understanding that changes the risk profile somewhat.

But there’s more.  We can assume that not all cases of measles are going to be reported.  And the ones that are reported are likely to be the more serious ones (the ones needing medical attention).  Measles, being less common now, is more likely to be reported than it used to be.  But back in the 1950s, there were an average of 4 million cases a year, but only around 540,000 were actually reported.  That’s only about 12.5% of the total cases.

We’ll assume that the percent of cases that are reported is much higher now.  Let’s suppose it’s 70% (although we have no real way of knowing).  So, if there were 30,000 reported cases in Europe and that’s about 70% of the actual total, then there may have been around 43,000 total cases.  There were 8 deaths, which is then 0.00019% likelihood — or about 1 in 5000.

But as I said — we don’t know.  All we know is that it’s likely that not all cases are reported, and that the ones that are reported are more likely to be serious.  We also don’t know how many people may have been exposed and not come down with the measles (suggesting immunity — whether natural or vaccine-induced).  This study suggests that about 90% of people will get the measles if exposed, but not all.

Erich, I think you’d agree that this changes the risk picture of the disease quite sharply.  If we’re looking at a small outbreak in a susceptible and medically fragile population, we might see the level of risk that the CDC reports.  In a larger outbreak in a general population, though, the actual risk is much lower.  2 in 1000 death rate vs. 1 in 5000 death rate is extremely different.

I wish that we had more information in this area so that we could be more sure of the actual risk.  We can’t be, though.  But there’s clearly data to suggest that the risk isn’t as high as we’ve been led to believe.

(And it’s much lower than those parents who believe that their children will probably die without vaccines — as in, a high likelihood of death.  Facts just don’t bear that out.)

How Dangerous Are These Vaccines, Really?

Despite all this risk business surrounding measles, none of that would matter if the vaccine was extremely safe.  I mean, even if our children are only risking a 1 in 5000 chance of death — supposing they catch measles in the first place — why would we allow that, if there were another way?

(I do make my kids use car seats, obviously.  The risk-benefit analysis is pretty clear there.  In fact, the science to support extended rear-facing and proper seat use is sound and I’m very careful about this.  I’m the one who checks and re-checks how their seats are strapped into the car and how their straps are fitting their bodies so they’re as safe as possible.)

But we know that vaccines aren’t without risks.  What we need to understand is, how serious are those risks?

We know — everyone acknowledges — that vaccines commonly produce minor side effects, like low fevers, redness or swelling at the injection site, and possibly some pain or sleepiness.  For most, this wears off in a day or two.  This isn’t really a concern, any more than an uncomplicated case of measles is a concern.  Temporary discomfort is not what we’re really worried about here (are you with me on that, Erich?).

Let’s pull up the package insert for the MMR to get a feel for the complications and frequency that they list.

For most reactions, the insert doesn’t list frequency.  It only lists potential adverse reactions.  It does note that arthralgia (joint point) occurs is 0 – 3% of children, and 12 – 26% of adults (I think adults might think more carefully about receiving this vaccine!).

Some of the adverse events listed include:

  • Atypical measles
  • Fever
  • Fainting
  • Headache
  • Irritability
  • Diabetes
  • Pancreatitis
  • Nausea
  • Vomiting
  • Diarrhea
  • Thrombocytopenia
  • Arthritis
  • Encephalitis
  • Guillain-Barre
  • Seizures
  • Pneumonia
  • Death

This is not an exhaustive list and you should know that I chose the more serious reactions to include, for the most part.  (Primarily because no one is surprised by a minor ear infections, redness, swelling, or other minor side effects.)  No frequencies are listed but we would expect that the more serious the adverse event, the less frequently it would occur.  It is estimated on this package insert that atypical measles will occur in 6 – 22 out of 1 million vaccinated individuals.

(So we already know that it’s not “1 in a million” for serious reactions.  It’s more than that, according to this package insert.  But how much more?)

Let’s keep looking to see if we can find better data on how frequently serious side effects actually occur.  Next, we’ll turn to VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.  They keep a database of adverse events that are reported to occur after vaccination.  These are not independently verified or studied and cannot be proven to be linked to the vaccine, but are reported because they usually occur shortly after vaccination and are likely linked.

Something we need to note very quickly:

The term, underreporting refers to the fact that VAERS receives reports for only a small fraction of actual adverse events. The degree of underreporting varies widely.

 VAERS admits that most vaccine reactions are not reported.  Serious reactions are reported more frequently than minor reactions.  But we don’t know what percentage of serious reactions are actually reported.

According to the VAERS database, there were 54 serious reactions from the MMR in 2013.  That includes death, permanent disability, and life threatening.  (It doesn’t include hospitalization or emergency room visits.)  The CDC says that about 10 million doses are given per year.

Let’s assume that half of all serious reactions are reported (I’ll talk more about that in a minute).  So that’s 108 serious reactions out of 10 million doses, or about 1 in a million very serious reactions (death or permanent disability).  This is probably why most people claim it is a “one in a million” chance, but as you’ll see in a minute, Erich, this isn’t really so accurate.

If we extend the VAERS data to include any reaction that requires an emergency room visit or hospitalization, then we come up with a number of 908 adverse events (this still does not include adverse reactions classified as non-serious).  If we assume that, say, 30% of those were reported, then we can estimate about 2700 “serious” reactions.  That is or about 2.7 out of 10,000.

This is all assuming we have accurate numbers on vaccine reactions, which most sources say we don’t.  The CDC itself says that underreporting is an important issue, and they don’t even begin to guess how bad the problem is.

If we take a look at the so-called “Vaccine Court,” a special system that allows parents to bring their case before U.S. judges to see if they can get compensated, there are 64 cases that have actually been heard and ruled on so far in 2014 (I don’t know how many were related to the MMR specifically).  We also see that, in 2013, there were almost 1000 cases brought, over 600 of which were dismissed.  In 2012, it was almost 2700 cases brought, and fewer than 300 were compensated!  

We can probably assume that most of the cases brought were caused by vaccines, or at least correlated with them — what parent would go through the hassle of this legal process if they weren’t sure that their child’s issue was caused by a vaccine?  And we can assume that these are more serious reactions, too, because if they were minor, parents wouldn’t be seeking compensation.

We can also assume that probably only a fraction of parents who believe their child was injured by a vaccine ever go through this process.  I’ve talked to many families who say their child was vaccine-injured who never even considered this, because of the time and upheaval involved in doing so.  Let’s say 10% of families ever go through this process — if that’s true, assuming an average of 1000 court cases per year, then perhaps 10,000 children are seriously injured by vaccines per year.  (Remember that these numbers are based on all vaccines, not just the MMR.)

I know we’re wading into shaky waters here.  Talking to families?  Assumptions of percentages of underreporting?  Correlation doesn’t equal causation?

We just don’t have better data than this, unfortunately.

I believe that a lot of children are vaccine-injured and it’s been dismissed.  There are all kinds of cases out there of babies who received vaccines and died within 12 hours, and whose death was ruled as SIDS.  There are stories of parents whose children are screaming in a high-pitched manner and banging their heads into the walls (indicative of encephalitis) but when they call the doctor, they’re told it’s “normal.”  But it isn’t.

Let’s just suppose that 3000 children per year are injured by the MMR (1/3 of the 10,000 number of children injured by all vaccines, and slightly more than the 2700 number that was true if 30% of serious events were reported to VAERS).  That seems reasonable, doesn’t it, Erich?  Based on the information that we have?  That’s 3 out 10,000.  That’s as high as the estimate of measles deaths.  Really, slightly higher.

This muddies the waters a lot, Erich.  It seems that vaccines and measles are about equally safe, although measles might have a slight edge.  Plus, we don’t actually have good statistics on vaccine injuries — we truly, honestly do not, which is incredibly sad for the families afflicted by vaccine injuries — so it might even be a worse picture than this.   

 We also need to consider that we’re not arguing here for stopping vaccination all together, we’re only arguing for choice.  It’s possible that if we stopped vaccinating children who were at specific risk of vaccine injury, we would see the safety profile of the vaccine go up.  And, since a lot of people will continue to vaccinate regardless, we still have to think about those thousands of children who are dying or being permanently disabled by vaccines each year.  Is that acceptable, so that a handful might not die of measles?  I don’t think it is.  (Which is why it needs to be a personal choice.)  The parents who want to protect their children through vaccination should; and the parents who want to opt out, should — and there’s clearly data showing that either choice is viable.

That’s what I have right now.  I wish we had better statistics.  I wish we knew for sure about the overall health outcomes of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated.  I wish a lot of things.  But mostly I wish parents on the fence had access to all of this information, and the right to make the choice they feel is best without any harassment.

How do you feel about vaccines vs. illness?  Which worries you more?

This is the writings of:



  1. I am much more afraid of the long term use of vaccinations. None of my children were vaccinated. None of them had allergies or asthma.They all have very strong immune systems. None of my old aunts who are in their 80s or 90s got vaccinated and not one of the five of them have ever gotten cancer. One things I am finding interesting with this Ebola crisis is that those who have come to the states with it all have recovered so far, mostly from being given IV fluids. Every one is crying for a vaccine but I am wondering if healthy bodies and sanitation practices could even fight this deadly disease since those who come here are living…


  2. Excellent post. We need for critical and sane voices in the vaccine discussion.


  3. I just recently found you and I am so glad I did, what a wealth of information all in one place.
    I worry more about vaccine injury than I do illness. My kids are pretty healthy, I exposed them to CP a few times hoping they would get it and get it over with, I refuse to vaccinate against an illness everyone in my family history had and survived. My kids had selective vaccines early on but I did delay vaccines and now I refuse to give boosters after digging deep into the truth of vaccines.
    I get bullying comments about not vaccinating and how I am putting others at risk and I’m selfish and don’t I care about others…..I don’t see it that way. If my kids are sick we stay home, that’s caring about others. So if they did get the measles they wouldn’t be exposing anyone else to them because if they felt flu like systems with a fever we wouldn’t leave the house.


  4. The most interesting aspect to the vaccine debate is this desire for scientific studies. All of the scientific studies currently ongoing and you know what? We still have heart disease, we still have cancer, we still have high rates of auto-immune disorders. Why do we keep glorifying these “scientific studies?” They aren’t PROVING or DISPROVING anything, especially when it comes to vaccination!

    Most of the studies in favor of vaccination are biased studies performed by the very makers of the vaccines. How can we trust that information? How can we trust scientists who are paid to manipulate the data to agree or disagree. If we need studies, we need UNBIASED studies!

    This is where the problem lies. We have over-glorified science. We have become so adamant that without the scientific studies, it is impossible to have credibility. Well, we can search for all the scientific evidence our little hearts desire but I really don’t think that is necessary. People need to look around. People are sicker than they have ever been! People are so worried about measles and mumps, pertissus, chicken pox, HPV – we are vaccinating for everything under the sun because we are afraid of death, yet the lifestyles we live are toxic and we are still dying from PREVENTABLE diseases everyday despite the research and despite the studies. All of this science – it’s really doing us a lot of good. *SIGH*

    I don’t need a scientific study to tell me that something has gone incredibly wrong. If people want to put their faith in science and unilaterally trust that big profitable businesses have a genuine desire to help – more power to those individuals. The current approach is not working. If people want to faithfully believe in a flawed system that is their pergoative. But, don’t call me crazy because I won’t participate and follow the lead. I don’t need research when I have common sense.

    Kate – I thoroughly enjoy your blog and have shared it with everyone I know in an effort to help educate others on alternative approaches. You are the first online blogger than I have found that I can agree with whole-heartedly! 🙂


  5. It is so easy to react with emotion in this debate, but you keep your head and take a cold hard look at the facts. That is the best way to approach this topic and come to a decision that you will be able to live with. Thank you for this article!


  6. Fantastic article helping spell it all out.


  7. Now let’s assume that only 1% of actual serious vaccine reactions, including permanent disabilities, life threatening reactions and deaths, are reported. That was the figure once published in JAMA, as the finding of a relevant study.

    Now let’s consider that with the real number of serious vaccine reactions being in essence open ended, an unknown, the statement that vaccines are safe is meaningless.


  8. Yes I agree! With my 1st child I studied the diseases and the rates of illness and death they caused, and easily decided to taje my chances w natures version. I am unvaccinated, father distrusted them, my children and grandchildren r all unvaccinated, none r autistic, or got the diseases


  9. Such good information. I would think that anyone who actually reads your article would at least see why people question whether or not to get the vaccine. If the risk of injury from a vaccine is likely as high as the disease itself, the case for vaccines gets pretty shaky.It’s my personal opinion that vaccine injuries are WAY under reported. I can name a list of people that I personally know who’s child has had a serious (meaning ER worthy) reaction within 24 hours of the vaccine and were told that it could not possibly be from the vaccines they received. Really? When a child gets vaccines and has bad reactions that are listed on the vaccine inserts, it’s somehow not related? We’re talking stark changes in behavior and seizures that the child has never experienced before, and all of a sudden it happens within 24 hours of a vaccine, and it’s not related? It sounds to me like denial by doctors who have been taught their entire medical career that vaccines are the savior and they are safe. If the doctor will not acknowledge that the patient is having a serious reaction to a vaccine, how will it get reported accurately?


  10. Great article. If people take proper care of themselves, they can build their immunes against these diseases. If someone was to get these diseases, they can be fought off naturally. I see no good reason why we need to pump toxic chemicals into our bodies when we could just do it naturally. I have 5 kids. 3 of them I vaxed until they were 4, 5, and 6 years old, then quit. I believe all 3 of them suffer from issues that are vaccine related, and that is un-doable. My 4th I vaxed for 12 months and quit. My 5th has had no vaccines. Since I’ve learned how to keep my family healthy naturally, my kids are healthy all year long. The few times they have gotten sick, they are sick for about a day or two compared to everyone else being sick for a week or more. I truly believe vaccines destroy the immune system and cause many other issues that are not necessary.


  11. I am still on the fence about vaccinating my son (leaning towards not vaccinating) but Tetanus scares the crap out of me! I’m not sure that it’s deadly, but it seems like a horrible thing to have and if the vaccine actually worked, I’d consider giving that one to my son.


  12. My child was injured by one dose if MMR vaccine in 1999. When we called the doctor to report the incessant high pitch screaming, we were told it was normal. When we went back explaining that our daughter could not breastfeed or stand to be touched, that she had changed since her shot, they said it was not related and would not file an adverse reaction report. We did not know and were not told we could file one ourselves. Our daughter was one year old, we gave no further vaccines. She is now 16 and has suffered her whole life with sensory integration issues, joint pain, a tic, and digestive issues. I know many many adverse reactions are not reported because mine was one of them. Parents are not making fully informed decisions because they do not have all of the information.


  13. Excellent article and easy to read. Most of the articles on vaccines are so technical that I am lost after the first paragraph. I wish I had paid more attention to my first child’s reactions to the vaccines. High fevers and screaming for long periods of time led to me calling the doctor and being told this was normal. That child has been diagnosed with autism. The next six children did not suffer from extreme reactions, but the eighth child started having seizures after the first immunization given at six months. With that, I stopped all vaccines and our last child has only had a few that I have decided to let him receive. He is our healthiest child yet! Homeschooling gives me this choice. When I put my children in public or private school they insisted we vaccinate.


  14. This is so thorough – thank you so much for taking the time to collect all this data. The idea of vaccines absolutely scare me more than the disease. Especially now after seeing all the numbers on it. I would love for everyone to read this and actually understand it.


  15. I know you don’t like me, Kate. Despite the fact that they’re neither rude, nor ad hominem attackers, you delete my comments on your Facebook page. You have every right to only approve pro-Kate comments when you moderate, of course; your site, your rules.

    But I genuinely want to know: when your readers brought up the vaccine vs disease discussion and turned it toward Ebola – a disease with a >40% fatality rate in the best case scenario! – why did you use sad-faces when discussing the fact that a vaccine is in clinical trials? Why didn’t you point out that no herb in any essential oil has ever been shown to cure Ebola? Why did you not address about the tens of thousands of those who are infected and dying in West Africa, or WHO projections around the growth of the epidemic? It makes you seem dogmatic rather than thoughtful, and as if you’re more concerned about not alienating your audience than presenting the facts as they are


  16. Seriously, one of the most informative, very well written, thought out articles I have ever read regarding this matter! It literally made me shake from how well this was put together. I even leaned over to my husband and said ” this article I’m reading makes me wish it was a live debate and I was in the audience.” This is something I am so passionate about, and have chose not to vaccinate, but at times it is hard to debate without it turning personal and very heated. Amazing, amazing, amazing! I too, believe it should be a choice, but an informed choice. I can’t ever understand how many people will never take the time to do the research for themselves, especially when it affects your children. Mind Boggling.


  17. […] I just read this post from Modern Alternative Momma questioning if getting a vaccine or if sickness is safer for children and found it very interesting and informative. […]


  18. […] about the benefits and safety of vaccination. She started it. I responded, and two weeks ago, she wrote back. So I expected that the next time you heard from me, it would be to thoroughly refute her new […]


  19. Your assumptions turned me off with this article.

    “Let’s assume that half of all serious reactions are reported” I think more than half would be. Why not? What reason would they not report them? If someone is having a serious reaction it is just downright stupid not to get medical attention and would be very distressing to think that Doctors are not then reporting these reactions.

    “We can probably assume that most of the cases brought were caused by vaccines, or at least correlated with them — what parent would go through the hassle of this legal process if they weren’t sure that their child’s issue was caused by a vaccine?”

    Let’s not. I have seen a person saying that they have lazy eye and that they believe that was caused by a vaccine and they seem to genuinely believe this. Even though they were born with lazy eye and refused to wear their glasses as a child. (Really upset I can’t post pictures here to show you the screenshot) along with lots of other laughable things. While I do think these parents honestly believe the vaccines have caused harm it is clear that the judge does not feel as if enough evidence is provided. This would be like saying “Let’s assume most serial killers who plead not guilty are innocent. Why would they go through all the trouble of hiring a good lawyer to defend themselves?” It all comes down to evidence that can be shown.

    I am looking forward to this continued debate.


  20. Thank you – I’ve been researching vaccines for 14 years and I’ve never run across the “pink book” before. Learned something new – thank you!


  21. Oh and for that troll above, as in criminal justice, it is estimated that less than 10% of anything is reported – i.e. crime, rape, injury, etc.

    There is no reason to assume that vaccine damage would be any different, and since so many buy into the bullshit, would probably actually be a LOWER %, not higher. I never reported both of my daughter’s vaccine injuries, one which is life long because I simply didn’t know about reporting it back then and the doctors ASSURED me (ass in both words, I just noted, assumptions and assurances) that it could NOT be the vaccines. Then I made it to a specialist for my second child who confirmed my ideas but still didn’t tell me about reporting the injury OR that there was a compensation program, which you have to file for within the first three years of onset. How very convenient.


  22. […] a vaccine preventable (and I use that term lightly) disease are really rather quite low. Read Which is Safer: Vaccines or Illnesses? You may find that the fear tactics so many of us have bought into don’t actually hold as much […]


  23. Big pharma uses fear tactics in conjunction with the politicians to put our children’s heath at risk. We do most pediatricians refuse to provide the vaccination package inset to the patients’ parents? Hmm. because the pharmaceutical bonus checks are more important to them. What ever happened to doctor’s oath do no harm? Most politicians, including Pan, big phrama and pediatrician and part of the evil elite. Does formaldehyde, aluminum, and toxic waste sound familiar? That is what your are giving your children by vaccinating them. Most people are ill informed and making inept decision about giving their children the poison injection, acronym MMR. Merk sound familiar.


  24. Hi Kate, thanks for sharing this information with us. I am a researcher and have been researching this topic for 3 years and have chosen not to vaccinate due to the inconsistencies of the data, lack of studies on the current schedule, inefficient aluminium adjuvent studies, and also inefficiency of some vaccines (whooping cough is notoriously inefficient).
    I just wanted to add something to your discussion which may be both concerning and surprising. Prof Exley is a leading researcher in aluminium and recently found that there are NO clinically approved (aluminium) adjuvants, there are only clinically approved vaccines. He discovered this in 2016 from discussions with the FDA, with manufacturers of aluminium adjuvants, and with the European medicines agency.
    He has been studying aluminium for over 30 years, and for a long time he thought there were 2 adjuvants that had been studied and approved to be safe.
    He goes on to explain…
    In our vaccine trials we are using aluminium adjuvants as placebos or controls (not saline like in pharmaceutical trials). As a result we are not testing the safety of the adjuvant. We have no idea of the impact of aluminium adjuvants as a result.
    He goes on to explain the 3 forms of aluminium adjuvants…
    “Alhydrogel – poorly crystalline form of aluminium hydroxide – the most frequently used of the aluminium adjuvants.
    Adju-Phos – what I originally assumed was clinically approved, which I now learned that that is not the case. It is Aluminium hydroxyphosate and is what is used in human vaccinations.
    An important distinction between Alhydrogel and Adju-Phos, is that Alhydrogel has a crystalline property, and Adju-Phos is not crystalline in its property (amorphous)
    There is a third compound called ‘Imject Alum’ which is being used liberally by research scientists as a surrogate for aluminium adjuvants in human vaccinations, it is readily available, you can buy it quickly and easily, and many researchers for many years have been using it to try and work out how to aluminium adjuvants work. It is not an aluminium adjuvant, it is more like an antacid, similar in properties to what you take to control stomach acid. We need to stop using it to research aluminium adjuvants.”

    So not only is there NO clinically approved studies for aluminium adjuvants, but the aluminium adjuvant studies are using a different form of adjuvant that is crystalline and not the same as that in vaccines. The non-crystalline (amorphous) form that is in vaccines has been found to cross the BBB blood brain barrier, which is rather concerning.
    Please see further info in the conference presentation by Prof Exley below.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Hi, I’m Kate.  I love medical freedom, sharing natural remedies, developing real food recipes, and gentle parenting. My goal is to teach you how to live your life free from Big Pharma, Big Food, and Big Government by learning about herbs, cooking, and sustainable practices.

I’m the author of Natural Remedies for Kids and the owner and lead herbalist at EarthleyI hope you’ll join me on the journey to a free and healthy life!

Meet My Family
Love our content? Sign up for our weekly newsletter and get our FREE Nourished Living Cookbook!