| To Vaccinate or Not To Vaccinate?
The question of whether or not to vaccinate should be asked about
each vaccine specifically. In the case of the Swine flu vaccine
the answer is straightforward: each of us is free to choose to receive
an unproven, potentially harmful treatment promoted by the pharmaceutical
lobby, or to rely on time-tested practices or well-researched alternative
treatments. In the interest of promoting a conscious decision on
the matter, I would like to share the following thoughts about influenza
and vaccinations in general:
1. The science behind vaccine research is not as clear-cut
as it is presented by medical media. Medical doctors are often
just as much influenced by media reports and by patient demand
which as said may be based on misinformation. Because the flu
virus is constantly evolving, the actual ability of the latest
vaccine (whether conventional or H1N1 flu) to confer protection
can only be guessed. Besides, not every ‘flu’ is due
to the flu virus: there are other viruses that cause flu-like
symptoms. Past history of flu vaccines shows that sometimes vaccinated
individuals were more rather than less likely to get the flu.
A broad-spectrum approach based on hygiene and immune boosting
clearly has the potential of being more reliable if properly pursued.
2. Historically speaking, vaccinations were typically introduced
when diseases were already
on the wane due to improved living conditions, nutrition,
sanitation, heating, etc., and have never been proven to have
been the main contributors to the decline or elimination of those
diseases as if often claimed by vaccination advocates. For example,
the 1918 Spanish flu epidemic arrived in the wake of World War
I, with many populations depleted from several years of war and
related economic stress. Other factors such as the lack of antibiotics
(which hadn’t yet been discovered) further muddle the picture.
Therefore comparing then and now makes for good polemics but is
not scientifically responsible.
3. The cost-benefit ratio of vaccines — whether the protection
conferred by the vaccine outweighs any potential harm from it
— varies depending on the population: in populations
where infectious disease is the main cause of morbidity or mortality
(third-world countries, immuno-compromised, elderly, etc.) such
use may be justified, but in populations where chronic disease
dominates, or in relatively healthy individuals, such use may
be unjustified. This is because vaccinations carry known and unknown
side-effects, some of which only become manifest years later;
although the medical establishment often dismisses such claims,
based on the collective experience of the naturopathic and homeopathic
professions the short-term side-effects of vaccinations are under-reported,
and their long-term effects have been poorly researched to date.
This is especially true in the case of the flu vaccine which is
constantly altered to match the current form of the virus and
applied widely shortly thereafter.
4. For a reasonably healthy individual the flu is rarely dangerous,
and vaccinations often fail to produce an immune response in precisely
those individuals for whom the flu would be dangerous, because
their immune system is unresponsive to begin with. There are immune-boosting
methods that reduce the risks of the flu, such as vitamins C and
D and immune-boosting herbs and mushrooms such as Astragalus and
Reishi. Traditional hygienic practices are especially important
during the flu season.
5. Chronic avoidance of the flu may have negative long-term
consequences, because periodic exposure to the virus may be
a crucial component in the maintenance of a healthy immune system.
An interesting observation is that individuals afflicted with
severe chronic illnesses such as cancer, schizophrenia, epilepsy,
and multiple sclerosis often have a prior history of absence of
acute illnesses (including the flu, colds, and fevers).
6. Vaccination has been observed clinically to be associated
with lowered overall health and vitality: while a vaccine
may confer protection from a specific disease, this may be at
the cost of leaving the organism more vulnerable to other disease
agents. In the long term this strategy produces increased dependence
on external protection from disease agents, and may produce developmental
delays. In the case of children, there are serious concerns about
the long-term safety of vaccinations, and at any rate children
that are allowed to experience acute illnesses naturally (so long
as they can be guaranteed access to both conventional and complementary
treatments) are observed to develop better than average, often
undergoing a spurt of development following an acute illness.
Thus at least in the Western world where hygiene is up to par
and access to medical care is universally available, vaccinations
are not the most reasonable, cutting-edge solution to infectious
diseases.
7. Environmentally speaking, vaccination encourages faster
mutation of the flu virus, because viruses evolve to adapt
to the changing environment imposed by anti-flu vaccinated populations.
This may have unknown adverse public-health consequences in the
long term, potentially upsetting the evolutionary balance between
the flu virus and the human population.
8. The naturopathic approach to flu prevention relies on improving
the overall health of the organism through various material or
spiritual means: improved lifestyle and nutrition, judicious use
of herbs and nutritional supplements, constitutional homeopathic
treatment, and so on. The long-term side-effects of this approach
include increased vitality, happiness and fulfilment, and resistance
to a wide array of diseases. Philosophically speaking, naturopathic
medicine discourages a fear-based approach to medicine, instead
encouraging individuals to address overall health and vitality
so as to minimize the risk when exposed to any strain of the flu.
9. Most ominously, it seems that the Swine flu scare has been
manufactured by the pharmaceutical lobby, which has convinced
the governments worldwide to purchase vast quantities of vaccines.
Reports about complications or deaths from the Swine flu are mostly
unsubstantiated, because the majority of people are not tested
for the identity of the virus they carry, or because such occurrences
may not be any more frequent than during other (regular) flu seasons.
These vaccines, though mostly not yet delivered, will, it seems,
be used on schedule regardless of whether the Swine flu turns
out to be unusually virulent. For the time being it appears to
be mildly more dangerous than the regular flu, not any more virulent,
and on path to becoming nothing more than yet another variant
on the seasonal flu; no pandemic is or ever was in sight. Therefore
it remains incumbent on the individual to decide whether to support
such practices by getting vaccinated or to vote against them by
refusing to do so. Meanwhile, falling for the Swine flu scare
may result in unnecessary complications from unproven vaccinations,
in relying on an ineffective vaccination instead of pursuing more
reliable alternatives, and in emergency wards overflowing with
minor cases and thereby preventing patients who truly experience
serious complications from the flu (a regular occurrence during
every flu season) from receiving proper treatment.
Reference Sources: homeopathyzone.com
November
10, 2009
 ...............................................................................................................
|
