| AUTOMATIC COMPUTER TRANSLATION |  Tel: +44 (0) 20 8663 0044 Fax: +44 (0) 20 8663 0011 Burnhill Business Centre 50 Burnhill Road Beckenham Kent BR3 3LA England E-mail Clifford Miller Return to: Vaccine Damage. |
AUTOMATIC COMPUTER TRANSLATION 日 本 語 - 機械翻訳 |
|
Our government scares parents into vaccinations by claiming their child will die if not vaccinated when that is not true. It then irresponsibly dumps the parents with the problems when their child is injured by a vaccine, denying liability and taking little or no responsibility, as we can see in the case of the debacle over MMR and other vaccines: British Government's Reckless Disregard for Child Health Safety. When it comes to health issues like vaccination, you cannot trust any claims made by government and health officials. Government's track record for honesty in these areas, as in many others, is bad. Here judge for yourself
the risk to your child and assess the child health safety implications
for yourself. And remember no one is counting the risks to your
child of asthma, autism, allergies, diabetes and a host of
other conditions properly or at all. Information here
includes evidence prepared for the successful defence of
the GMC's
spectacularly failed witchhunt
against Dr Jayne Donegan. Dr Donegan was not just
exonerated: her defence was found proven; her vaccination
information shown to be soundly based on valid conventional medical
literature.
British
Government 48 Years Out of Date
Our government insists we
should vaccinate when the vaccines are causing so much harm and it
relies on out-of-date research and statistics:-
"Vaccinatable
Diseases & Their Vaccines" by Dr Jayne LM Donegan is
unique as containing legally proven valid medical advice for
parents. This was established in extensive 3 week legal
proceedings before the UK's General
Medical Council in August 2007. "Vaccinatable
Diseases & Their Vaccines" is over 60 pages long and
contains detailed vaccination information. It can
be purchased and downloaded from Dr Donegan's website.
I had the honour to represent Dr Donegan and the pleasure in seeing my client's position not only vindicated but her medical advice for parents proven in legal proceedings as valid to the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt - the standard then applied in the GMC proceedings. |
|
Infant Mortality - A
Bench Mark
Infants are the most at risk from all kinds of childhood infections, especially if not breastfed (breastfeeding passes on temporarily to the infant the mother's natural immunity against infectious disease). This means we can use the total of all infant mortality data of the last century as a benchmark. We can use this to tell us if a medical intervention like vaccination had much or any effect. We can do this by comparing:-
The following graph shows that if vaccination had any effect on overall infant mortality during the 20th century, the effect, in the context of infant mortality from all causes, was not of major significance. However, more can be learnt from the other graphs on this page in the comparison between overall infant mortality and mortality from a specific disease:-  |
|
Mumps vaccination takes the medical profession clearly and firmly into the territory of the criminal law. That puts most doctors and other medical professionals who administer the MMR into an interesting position. The comparison with our total infant mortality benchmark (see graph below) also shows mortality rates fell in step regardless to the present very low levels they are today. It can be seen mumps vaccination introduced in 1988 had no discernible effect. Mumps Vaccination & The Criminal Law Providing treatment to a patient that is not clinically needed and misleading patients as to the clinical need for a treatment so as to vitiate their consent can mean the administration of the treatment is a criminal offence: Appleton v Garrett (1995) 34 BMLR 23. Mumps Vaccine "Unnecessary" Says BMA According to The British Medical Association ('BMA') and The Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain (RPSGB):- "Since mumps and its
complications
are very rarely serious there is little indication for the routine use
of mumps vaccine": British
National Formulary ('BNF') 1985 and
1986
In the GMC's spectacularly failed witchhunt against Dr Jayne Donegan, this evidence from the BNF was put to the GMC's expert witnesses and accepted without a murmur. It is somewhat difficult evidence to contradict, bearing in mind the source. MMR Vaccine Unethical So how many parents are told before their child is given the MMR that the mumps vaccine is clinically unnecessary and giving the vaccine can expose their child to adverse reactions to the vaccines? The likely answer is, in general, "none". At the very least, administering any treatment in such manner, especially one that puts children at risk of adverse reactions is clearly unethical. Mumps Vaccination Not Justified As Public Health Measure Further, the medical profession and our Department of Health claim vaccination is a public health measure. It is claimed it is to prevent infectious diseases from circulating (achieving 'herd immunity') and thereby protecting the vulnerable. But as we can see with mumps vaccine, the recommendation of the BMA and RPSGB quoted above is a general one for all children, so there is no issue of this being a general public health measure. There is insufficient clinical benefit to children to introduce mass mumps vaccination. This shows giving MMR vaccine to children cannot be justified on clinical or ethical grounds. The reality is that our Department of Health thinks it is saving money if you do not go to your doctor if your child gets mumps and that you do not cost your employer and our economy money because you do not have to stay at home with a sick child. That is the only reason for including mumps vaccine in the MMR. Mumps Vaccine's Risk To Men And one consequence of this unnecessary measure, aside from autism and other health problems from vaccines, is that we are now putting young male adults at risk of orchitis because they did not catch mumps harmlessly when children. MMR vaccination is not effective in conferring full or lasting immunity across an entire population. As a result, one effect of its introduction has been to push mumps outbreaks into older age groups. Mumps now circulates in colleges and universities: Mumps and the UK epidemic 2005, R K Gupta, J Best, E MacMahon BMJ 2005;330:1132-1135 (14 May). 1
in 4 males who has achieved
puberty and has not achieved immunity to mumps runs the risk of
orchitis. Orchitis (usually unilateral) has been reported
as a complication in
20-30% of clinical mumps cases in postpubertal males. Some testicular
atrophy occurs in about 35% of cases of mumps orchitis: Mumps
- Emedicine. This means one of the male testicles
shrivels up. Affected men
can become sterile in one testicle. This affects one in every
nine
males who
catch mumps after puberty compared with none who catch it
before puberty. It is only because most men have two testicles
and only one is
affected that total sterility is rare. Most men would find that
little consolation. Having a shrivelled testicle would carry
psychological and practical consequences for any intimate physical
relationship in adult life. The message seems to be it
is better for a child to catch mumps naturally before puberty.
Mumps - The Official Statistics The official UK mortality statistics for mumps in England and Wales for the 20th Century compared to general infant mortality show mumps mortality was at very low levels and fell in line with general infant mortality. This also shows that modern medicine had little to nothing to do with the decline in mumps mortality over the 20th Century. The improvement is attributable to improved living conditions and not the medical profession or drug industry.
|
|
Measles
Measles - The
Official Statistics
 With
the data plotted on a logarithmic scale as shown above we can see the
striking and clear trend towards a rapid and natural diminution in
measles mortality over time.
Myth "Millions of Lives Saved" This official data shows it is a myth promulgated by drug companies and medical professionals that vaccination saved millions of lives and that vaccination has been responsible for eradicating infectious diseases. Any independent scientist looking dispassionately and objectively at this data will have great difficulty coming to any conclusion other than the claims are a myth. The UK data shows that:-
What the medical profession, government and drug companies also do not tell us is that we can expect all harmful effects of measles to have diminished in the same way with the same rapid fall over time. Death (mortality) is the most extreme form of adverse effect of disease. So if mortality reduces like this, then it is a reasonable and scientific hypothesis to predict we should expect other harmful effects of measles to have reduced in a similar fashion as time has gone by. We have seen many infectious diseases diminish in a similar fashion without any vaccines being required, such as cholera and typhoid. It is nothing new. So if children were to catch measles naturally now, and if there were a great many cases, it does not follow that there is anything to be concerned about. So in summary, well nourished first world children are now unlikely to die from or be harmed by measles. One of the problems with measles however, is that modern doctors do not always know how to manage cases of measles, so if any child ever does die, it may not necessarily be measles which was the main reason. US Measles Declined Without Vaccines We can also see very much the same decline in the severity of measles occurred in the USA. The graph below is from a peer refereed medical paper: Englehandt SF, Halsey NA, Eddins DL, Hinman AR. Measles mortality in the United States 1971-1975. Am J Public Health 1980;70:1166–1169. The red dotted trendline has been added. This assists to show that in the USA measles mortality was falling regardless of whether vaccination was used. This data shows that by 2010 we could expect overall measles mortality in the USA to fall to approximately 1 in 25 million by 2010 if vaccines were never used. This data also shows vaccination can be phased out.  Nutrition Scientifically More Effective So why was measles mortality falling like this all by itself without any help from the medical profession? Measles mortality is inversely related to median family income: Englehandt SF, Halsey NA, Eddins DL, Hinman AR. Measles mortality in the United States 1971-1975. Am J Public Health 1980;70:1166–1169. As people became better off financially, having more money in their pockets, they could afford to feed their children regularly and with better food. Scientifically this is significant if looking for effective treatments for ill health. The effect nutrition has on controlling infectious disease is that it applies to all ill health and not just infectious childhood diseases: Improved Nutrition & Clean Water Is By Far Most Effective Intervention British Medical Journal Rapid Responses - 25 Jan 2008 - Clifford G. Miller. Data like that in the graph above shows, for example, how we can help protect children in the third world not just from measles but from other diseases by making available the vitamins and minerals which help children's immune systems to work all by themselves, thereby protecting children from a much wider range of disease threats. For real scientists looking at this, it tells them that we can develop treatments for diseases by researching how nutrition aids in combating disease and developing treatments based on the adminstration of vitamins, minerals, other nutrients and supplements. Drug companies in general are not keen on this. What is more, they have not been doing it because it is against their financial interests even though it is in the public interest for every human man, woman and child in the world. Drug Company Commercial Incentives to Attack Alternative Medicine The above official data helps to show us why drug companies have commercial incentives to encourage attacks on other areas of medicine. The measles mortality data, and other similar data on infectious disease, shows that herbal medicines, food supplements, vitamins and minerals do have greater therapeutic uses in the treatment of disease than something like vaccines. Alternative forms of medicine are therefore a significant potential commercial competitor to the pharmaceutical industry. As many products vitamins, minerals and herbal medicines are freely available and not patented, it could be difficult for drug companies to benefit from developing new treatments based on nutrition, even though we could help the third world and their children considerably. Additionally, nutritional remedies have a great safety record compared to pharmaceutical industry drugs. And that makes sense. Good food does not tend to kill people so treatments based on good nutrition is unlikely to either. We can also see the commercial threat and marketing opportunity such a rapid decline in disease mortality like that of measles during the 20th century presented to drug companies. If they were to grab a market for vaccines in disease prevention, it was essential to introduce vaccination as rapidly as possible before the decline in mortality became even greater. In marketing terms, by ignoring the natural decline in disease mortality and claiming all the benefit for vaccines, this convinced the world the improvement in health was all due to vaccines and that "millions of lives" were saved. The latter point is clearly untrue as we can see from this data. So drug companies have claimed the benefit of a decline in infectious disease which has little or nothing to do with their vaccines. In contrast, we see constant attacks on nutritional, herbal and alternative medicine in the media and political lobbying efforts to introduce new laws to make it more and more difficult for all forms of medicine which do not rely on modern pharmaceuticals to continue for the good of humanity. This is not good for your health, your children's health or that of your friends and relatives. Natural Treatment vs Complex Chemicals If the data on the decline of measles and other infectious diseases shown here were acted upon, this could change the medical paradigm forever. Currently pharmaceuticals rely, in general terms, on complex unnatural chemical compounds as medicines being given to people. These compounds very often are given to encourage the human body to act in a way it was not designed to. If science applied to medicine was developed which instead relied on giving the human body the naturally occurring materials the body needs to fix itself and in the most efficient manner, we could more than likely have a much safer healthier approach to healthcare. It could very likely lead to rapidly improved health across the board. This approach would be to work with the way the body works as it is designed to do and as it has evolved to work over many millions of years, and not against it. Medicine's Minimal Contribution to Public Health The following graph uses the decline in infant mortality from all causes as a benchmark against which to compare measles mortality in the general population. It is the same England and Wales data as the previous graph but is plotted on a linear and not logarithmic scale. It shows the trend in the declines of both these very different kinds of mortality (all-cause infant, and all-population measles) have been very similar over the 20th century and therefore have little or nothing to do with modern medicine or vaccines. Also, as infants are the most sensitive to disease mortality this chart confirms the information from the USA regarding health being related to financial well-being. It demonstrates that the major improvements in public health in England and Wales over the 20th century are predominantly attributable to improved nutrition and living conditions and very little to do with developments in drugs or medicine.  |
|
As with mumps, rubella vaccination again
takes the medical profession into
the territory of the criminal law. That again puts most
doctors and other medical professionals who administer the MMR into an
interesting position.
Rubella Vaccine & the Criminal Law As with mumps vaccine, providing treatment to a patient that is not clinically needed and misleading patients as to the clinical need for a treatment so as to vitiate their consent can mean the administration of the treatment is a criminal offence: Appleton v Garrett (1995) 34 BMLR 23. Rubella Vaccine Unnecessary for Children Aside from a rash the adverse effects of rubella for children are minimal. Vaccination against rubella is of no clinical benefit to a child. If a pregnant woman catches rubella infection during the first three months of pregnancy and the child survives, this poses a risk to the unborn child of being born with congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), involving multiple congenital abnormalities. Prior to the introduction of rubella vaccine, the number of annual cases in the UK was small, around 50 per annum. Additionally, 92% of rubella cases deliver normal healthy children: DANISH MEDICAL BULLETIN MARCH 1987 - WAVES Vol. 11 No. 4 p. 21 . This small risk can also be reduced either by making sure all women have caught rubella as children or by vaccinating those who have not prior to puberty. This minimises the exposure of children to the vaccine and hence to unnecessary risks of adverse vaccine reactions. To get an idea of the risk, in comparison birth defects from any other cause are much higher: "Birth
defects affect about one in every 33 babies born in the United States
each year. They are the leading cause of infant deaths, accounting for
more than 20% of all infant deaths. Babies born with birth defects have
a greater chance of illness and long term disability than babies
without birth defects.": Birth
Defects US
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention -
accessed 11th May 2008
Rubella Risks Grossly Exaggerated To see how egregious is the exaggeration
of risk from rubella in order to scare parents into vaccinating their
children, see the following:-
MMR Vaccine Unethical
It would seem therefore that giving the MMR vaccine, especially to infants aged around 18 months old and to 4 year old pre-schoolers, appears unethical. How many parents are told before their child is given the MMR that rubella vaccine is clinically unnecessary and giving the vaccine can expose their child to adverse reactions to the vaccines? How many parents are told the risks are lower if the child is vaccinated when older? The likely answer is, in general, "none". Rubella - The Official Statistics A graph for rubella mortality is not included because death from rubella over the last century was so rare the figures are insufficient to plot a graph worth showing. |
|
Back
The
Official StatisticsTetanus
A Pointless Vaccination
Here you can see how pointless and irrelevant tetanus vaccine is, yet every infant is put at risk of adverse effects of a vaccine by being given three separate doses of a tetanus vaccine at just 2, 3 and 4 months as part of the triple jab, Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus (DPT). They may also get "pre-school booster", in addition to getting one if they visit casualty with any cut. The comparison with our total infant mortality benchmark shows mortality rates fell in step regardless and the vaccine made no discernible difference to mortality. Each dose of the DPT contained the known mercury containing neurotoxin Thiomersal injected directly into an infant's body and in quantities substantially higher than that advised by the UK's Committee on Toxicology as "tolerable". This was meant to have been phased out by October 2004, but how much stock of the old vaccine was still in use after that time is not known. Here are the official UK mortality statistics for tetanus in England and Wales for the 20th Century compared to general infant mortality:-  Tetanus Vaccine's Imperceptible Contribution to Public Health As can be seen, our
benchmark general all-cause infant
mortality was falling at very much the same rate as tetanus mortality,
thereby demonstrating again that neither medical intervention nor
vaccines had much if any effect. This graph demonstrates that the
administration of tetanus vaccine is likely to be pointless and puts
children especially at risk of adverse reactions to the vaccines.
There is only one respect in which modern medicine could have had an indirect effect. This came with the social reforms of 1947-48 which saw the introduction of the National Health Service. Coupled with this was the start of the reduction in numbers of farm workers with the start of increased mechanisation and industrial scale farming in Britain after the 1939-1945 World War. The numbers of farm labour fell by half post war and the increase in mechanisation also reduced the chances of the injuries which were likely to result in tetanus Fewer agricultural workers coupled with better access to healthcare would result in better treatment of wounds. Tetanus thrives in deep wounds which are not properly cleansed. So by having fewer agricultural workers and better wound care could reduce the incidence of tetanus cases. So if the reduction in tetanus mortality in the 1950s is anything other than part of the continuing decline with better standards of living, those two reasons are the most likely explanations. |
|
Diphtheria Vaccine Myth The supposed "success" of
diphtheria vaccine is another nonsense non science myth of the
vaccinology religion. Diphtheria vaccine was introduced to the UK in
1940. There was a sudden fall in diphtheria mortality from 1941
to 1946 (see graph below). It is certain beyond doubt
that diptheria vaccine played no part
in this fall. The records show most children went unvaccinated until after the
major fall. But we can identify what was most likely
responsible - you may be surprised - (see graph below). Our total
infant mortality benchmark on the graph also shows the vaccine made no
discernible
difference to diphtheria mortality at any other time.
By the end of 1941 "about 36 percent of school age children had been immunised but only about 19 percent of the younger children": British Journal of Nursing October 1948 p121. It was not until 1946-7 - after the substantial fall in diphtheria mortality had taken place that a major effort was made to vaccinate the children who had been missed. 969,000 children under 5 were "immunised": British Journal of Nursing October 1948 p121. With an annual birth rate in the region of 200,000 that represented most of the children born during 1941 to 1946. The majority of children had not been vaccinated and it was predominantly the under 5's who were but mainly in 1946-7 and not earlier. So diphtheria vaccination could not have been responsible for the fall. But read on and be surprised to learn the what was in 1940 and remains effective today in reducing disease mortality. The World Health Organisation is using it now in the third world for the same reason. Diphtheria The Official Statistics It can be seen that the benchmark decline in general infant mortality (ie. all causes of infant death) closely follows the decline in diphtheria mortality in the general population. This again demonstrates that the decline in diphtheria mortality was part of a general trend and had little or nothing to do with the introduction of vaccination. We can also see the impact of the social health and welfare reforms of 1944, 1947 and 1948. Free school milk provided, among other nourishment, vitamin A to help children's immune systems fight disease. It is vitamin A which the World Health Organisation is keen to provide to third world children now for the same reason:-  |
|
Whooping
Cough - The Official Statistics The decline in general
infant mortality closely
follows the
decline in Whooping Cough mortality in the general population.
This again
demonstrates that the decline in Whooping Cough mortality was part of a
general trend and had little or nothing to do with the introduction of
vaccination:-
 |
