There are major confrontations between holistic medicine and modern Western medicine, but none is more contentious than the matter of vaccinations. As usual, there is no right or wrong answer but particularly in the case of vaccinations, there is no reason to believe that vaccinations are correct and safe for all. When dealing with undernourished and immunosup-pressed masses such as in the troubled states of Africa, the vaccination programme probably saves millions of lives each years. Of interest, however, is a well-documented report on the use of vitamin A instead of vaccinations against measles, which showed an unequivocal comparative success rate between the two treatments with regard to preventing undernourished children from developing measles pneumonia, a serious and often fatal condition. This trial has, to my knowledge, not been repeated, basically because vitamin A costs next to nothing whereas a vaccination costs a substantial amount. Studies cost money and there is no advantage for pharmaceutical companies to spend money on studies that invalidate the use of their products. All governments are advised by specialists, often on the payroll of pharmaceutical companies, so the truth is hard to get to. Personally, I am unsure of what that truth is.
There is a lot of information on the pros and cons of vaccinations but the negative information is rarely fed to the overburdened and busy GP. I make special mention of the measles vaccine later because the government in Britain in 1994 vaccinated eight million children between the ages of five and 15 years with, in my opinion, no true care or concern of the down side. The powers that be boasted that they had saved 50 lives and over 3,000 hospital admissions, but reports that were leaked to the popular press six months later suggested that the expected epidemic (the official reason for doing this mass vaccination programme) may never have occurred and there may have been up to 1,500 adverse reactions to the vaccination reported. There have been several reported cases of autism and the same number of a Crohn’s-like disease in children that have been directly attributed to the measles vaccination. These are only the reported cases and may represent the tip of the iceberg because Gps might not yet be correlating the onset of these conditions with the measles vaccination. At the time of writing there is a powerful and contentious debate going on between a research fellow at the Royal Free Hospital, London and senior scientific colleagues. There has been a study of 12 cases of autism that suggest a direct correlation to the MMR vaccination and this adds substance to the reports mentioned above.
The principle of vaccination is the administration of a very small amount of either dead or non-functioning virus, which causes the body to respond by forming antibodies. If an individual comes into contact with the live virus the body will have memorized it as having been present before and the antibodies will attack the invading agent and kill it. Usually vaccines are given by injection (the exception is one of the polio vaccines, which is given orally). Theoretically, this is a sound method of defence.
There is, however, a consensus of opinion in the holistic medical world against the use of vaccines. There is some concern that the process of manufacturing these vaccines allows entry into the body of proteins that, being similar to our own, cause the body to form antibodies against ourselves. There is also the hypothesis that by stimulating the body in this artificial way the natural response is in some way diminished. Introduction of these infections directly into the bloodstream by injection also bypasses primary defences found in the mucus membranes and skin. The body, therefore, produces an antibody defence but none other.
Add to this the fact that vaccinations caused problems when they were first used and, even up to 1992, when two of the three types of measles vaccine were taken off the market because of adverse side effects, vaccinations have proved to be risky. Until 1995 I advised parents of children and those considering travelling to utilize vaccines but also to take homeopathic remedies at the same time in an attempt to counteract any adverse effects and also stimulate the body to a better response against the agent in the vaccine. I have, however, recently read a considerable amount about the matter of vaccination and my advice now is different. Please read on.
I have, at this time, chosen not to vaccinate my children and, unless more information comes my way, I will avoid their coming into contact with vaccinations.
These are my views; they may be right or wrong. Please may I ask everyone to obtain and read The Vaccination Handbook (published by WHAT DOCTORS DON’T TELL YOU) and make their own judgements. Copies may be available through me or my clinics or by calling WDDTY on 44 (0) 171 354 4592 with a credit card number. This publication gives an overview that I think is very accurate.
Basically there is strong evidence that vaccines:
Do not work as well as we are told.
Have greater risks attached than we are told.
May be more dangerous than the disease itself in well-nourished, healthy children.
If asked by a parent or intended traveller about vaccinations, I ask them to read The Vaccination Handbook and then I support whatever decision they wish to make, whether using homeopathic remedies either with or without regular vaccination, and am fully behind their decision. I do not recommend an individual to take or avoid vaccinations but I do state that I will not be vaccinating my children and neither take nor prescribe vaccines except under unexpected circumstances in the future.
Should I vaccinate my child? This question boils down to a parent asking themselves the following question: is my child or my child’s place in society more important? If vacci- nations are carrying an unexpected and unassessed risk then they should be avoided. However, statistically it can be argued that vaccinations do reduce the incidence of disease when given to large populations. The view I take is that children who are liable to be susceptible to infections need vaccinations whereas those who are healthy do not.
A parent, I think, should be able to give an affirmative (’yes’) t0 the following questions and if they can they should not vaccinate their child. On the other hand if any of these questions bring forward a negative (’no’) answer then the child should be vaccinated.
Is my child well nurtured, in a clean and hygienic environment, and likely to stay in such an environment?
Is my child well nourished and am I aware of his/her nutritional requirements?
Is my child in good health and genetically predisposed to stay that way?
Am I an observant parent with the time and and knowledge to notice a depreciation in my child’s state of health?
If any of these questions received a negative answer, it is possible that with some education from a nutritionist or naturopath the answer may become ‘yes’. If all the answers are ‘yes’ then seriously consider not vaccinating the child. If any of the answers are ‘no’, look to vaccinate but follow the advice in this section. • If an individual or a parent feels that they cannot fulfil the above recommendations, or if the individual or child is in an immuno-compromised state or will be unavoidably subjected to infection, then I feel that the use of a vaccination is less likely to cause a problem than the contraction of a disease and vaccinations should be taken.
Ensure that an individual or a child has no underlying condition that may pre-dispose him or her to the effects of childhood illnesses.
Visit a nutritionist to establish good individual and family nutrition.
Discuss matters of hygiene with a complementary medical practitioner.
If considering the use of vaccinations, ensure that there are no previous reactions to other vaccines, eggs, and that there is no current serious illness. Vaccinations may cause reactions or provoke a reduced immune response.
If taking regular vaccines, use the homeopathic remedy that corresponds to the disease process. This should create a body response to the infection should it be introduced by a faulty vaccine . Government statistics (not truly acceptable scientific evidence) do show that homeopathic remedies can act as vaccines and there is evidence of lower levels of infection in groups that have received the correct homeopathic treatment.
I hypothesize that the use of a remedy in a child who will come into contact with the natural infection will bolster their immune system at that time. A remedy will not cause an immunoglobulin (antibody) response. However, if an individual contracts an infection within, say, one month of taking a suitable homeopathic remedy, the immune response may be much swifter and more effective and therefore set us a lifelong immunity without the child even knowing the infection had been contracted. I must stress that this is all theoretical. If I extend this hypothesis, then the use of homeopathic remedies just prior to taking orthodox vaccinations may create a better response and, possibly, protect against the potential side effects or an immune system overload.
Diphtheria Diphtherinum 200
Hepatitis (A, B and others) Lycopodium 200 and Chelidonium 200
HiB (Haemophilus See Meningitis influenzae B)
Meningitis Belladonna 200 and Iodoformum
MMR (Measles, mumps Pulsatilla 200 and rubella)
Polio Lathyrus 200
Tetanus Hypericum 200
Tuberculosis Tuberculinum 200
Whooping cough Pertussin 200 (pertussis)
The measles vaccine
I make special mention of the measles vaccine because of the recent mass vaccination programme that occurred in Britain in 1994.
Interestingly, but not surprisingly from a financial point of view, the powers that be are recommending that the vaccination programme is repeated because more than the estimated numbers of children have not shown a positive response and have not developed immunity. I discuss below a strong argument against continuing these mass vaccinations.
At the moment, if an epidemic were to strike the country approximately 50 children would be expected to die and over 3,000 would be hospitalized with serious complications. (I mention here that there is no correlation between the health of the child and the type of child who may succumb to measles. All children, whether well-nourished, nurtured and loved or those less fortunate, are bracketed together.)
In 1994, eight million children were vaccinated. Four million of those were girls between the age of five and 15 years. The minimum of children who did not respond to the vaccine is estimated at ten per cent. This means that 400,000 girls are not immune to measles. Over the next ten years these 400,000 children are unlikely to come across measles because it has been eradicated from 90 per cent of their peer group. They will therefore not be able to develop natural immunity.
Let us assume that over the next ten years 25 per cent of those children not immunized will bear their own child; 100,000 infants will therefore be born to mothers who carry no immunity to measles. The antibodies (immunoglobulins) that defend against measles pass from the mother’s bloodstream into their baby’s while still in the womb and will protect infants for up to six months. Breast-fed babies will also receive antibodies but in the 100,000 infants born to mothers who are not immune, no measles protection will be conferred.
Every paediatrician in the country will tell you that measles in an infant is far more serious and potentially far more lethal.
There may be a 90 per cent reduction in the chances of contracting measles because we have vaccinated the herd, but are we protecting the interests of those 100,000 infants in the generations ahead?
Finally, after all the orthodox pressure applied to parents, the number of cases of measles in children who were vaccinated doubled in 1994.
Pay heed to the notes above.
Breast-feed as long as possible.
Vaccinate as late as possible.
Only consider ‘measles parties’ if the original child has a mild case and your child is healthy.
Remember that many infections such as rubella can be tested for by a simple blood test.