Pro-Vaxxers Are Fabricating A New Science Based in Delusion

It seems the mainstream news is trying more forceably to construct their own form of science, a kind of science rooted deep into delusion and far from fact. Newsweek published an article entitled “The Anti Vaxxer Movement is Growing – We Need to Restore Faith in Science.” The article was written by Dr. Barbara Rath, who has a rather extensive academic background. Rath is a co-founder and chair of a pro-vaccine think tank, The Vienna Vaccine Safety Initiative. Yet, her placement on a vaccine safety think tank and her ability to remarkably overlook the indicated health risks of vaccinations are extraordinarily contradictory.

Newsweek’s propaganda piece begins with the following sentences: “The anti-vaxx movement has been gaining momentum in countries across the globe. In a world of post truth politics, more and more parents are buying into the belief that vaccines come with health risks” [1]. There is a lot to unpack here.

Immediately, the article begins by slurring anyone who acknowledges the health risks of vaccines by calling them an anti-vaxxer. When, in reality, anyone who decides to overlook the health risks of vaccinations and claim there are none is ignorant. Nothing more; nothing less.

The second sentence continues by stating, “… more and more parents are buying into the belief that vaccines come with health risks,” which implies that there are no health risks that come with being vaccinated. If Rath would simply read Merck’s product insert for its measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, she might be enlightened.

The insert includes the following warnings [2]:

For mothers, the contraindications to vaccination include pregnancy, as “the possible effects of the vaccine on fetal development are unknown,” since “there are no adequate studies of the attenuated (vaccine) strain of measles virus in pregnancy. However, it would be prudent to assume that the vaccine strain of virus is also capable of inducing adverse fetal effects.” The vaccine-strain mumps virus “has been shown to infect the placenta and fetus.”

Studies have shown that the vaccine-strain rubella virus can be transmitted to infants through breast milk. Whether this is also true of the measles and mumps virus “is not known.” Merck also advices that “pregnancy should be avoided for three months following vaccination” and that caution should be exercised when M-M-R II is administered to a nursing woman.” The vaccine also “has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility.”

Among those who should not receive the vaccine are children who are hypersensitive to any of the vaccine’s components, including gelatin and eggs, with the latter being included because the live viruses are propagated in chick embryo cultures.

The rubella portion of the vaccine is propagated in “human diploid lung fibroblasts,” specifically WI-38 (ATCC® CCL-75™), which is a female lung that has been in gestation for three months (an aborted female fetus) [3]. Other ingredients that may raise ethical questions are “fetal bovine serum” and “recombinant human albumin,” a genetically engineered human protein produced by Novozyems Biopharma US Inc [4].

Here comes the part Rath has, presumably, not read [2]:

Possible adverse reactions include: Fever, syncope (fainting), headache, dizziness, vasculitis (a condition in which the immune system mistakenly attacks the blood vessels, causing inflammation that can lead to severe problems, including aneurysms), pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas that occurs when the digestive enzymes it produces begin digesting the pancreas itself), diarrhea, vomiting, parotitis (inflammation of the parotid glands), nausea, diabetes mellitus, thrombocytopenia (a disorder in which there is an abnormally low amount of platelets, which help a blood clot), anaphylaxis ( a life-threatening allergic reaction that causes cardiac and respiratory arrest), arthritis (joint inflammation), arthralgia (joint pain), myalgia (muscle pain), encephalitis (swelling of the brain, which can cause permanent brain damage or death), Guillain-Barré syndrome (an autoimmune syndrome in which the immune system attacks the peripheral nervous system, which can result in paralysis or death), febrile seizures (convulsions brought on by fever), afebrile seizures (convulsions without fever, which may indicate epilepsy), pneumonia, measles-like rash, or “death from various, and in some cases unknown, causes.”

These are only a handful of the many possible side-effects of the MMR vaccine. Remember, too, this is only one vaccine. The CDC currently recommends nearly twenty vaccinations before the child is eighteen months old, and there are many more after that [5].

Astonishingly, Rath’s implication that vaccines have no health risks is clearly indicative of a pro-vaxxer, to coin the term of someone who ignorantly believes a vaccination has no health risks. Of course, however, Rath, her colleagues, and the mainstream news would gladly push the agenda that none of these risks exist and conceive their own form of science that is based in delusion.

Now, since we have discussed the first two sentences of the articles, let’s continue reading.

Rath writes, “Many still believe the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine is linked with autism, despite numerous scientific studies debunking this myth.” This sentence is twisted.

The research that shows there is no link between vaccinations and childhood neurological disorders only concerns one vaccine (MMR), even though children receive many, and one ingredient, thimerosal. By the way, half of the weight of thimerosal is ethylmercury, which is a known neurotoxin. While the link between all of the vaccines and all of their toxin ingredients is highly plausible, studies that debunk the vaccine-autism myth do not examine this whole picture. Instead, they examine only one vaccine and one ingredient. It is also essential to not only focus on autism as a result of large-scale vaccinations but also examine other negative side-effects, like the ones mentioned in the Merck insert [2].

Rath also noted, “The widening communication gap between patients and healthcare professionals.” Again, Rath is implying the patients' mindless ignorance is causing this gap to be created. However, it is because people are educating themselves by reading the advisory papers that come with the vaccine that is causing parents to be hesitant. Perhaps Rath should read the slips of the twenty immunizations that are recommended for a child by the age of eighteen months. 

I have said this before: I am not anti-vaccination; I am pro-medical consent. I believe people should be well-informed of medical procedures they undergo and choose whether the risks they will encounter outweigh the benefits they will receive. 

The most fundamental communication gap in the current age is the difference of what the mainstream news tells citizens and what the real news is, and this is a perfect example of the difference. The fact that someone with Rath’s educational and academic background claims that there are no health risks that come with vaccination is clearly indicative of this gap.


If you have any questions about any of our products or don’t know where to start, check out Healthmasters’ Basic Healthy Lifestyle Kit or call our office at 800.726.1834.