Being a Rodef v What Science (and the gov and CDC) Actually Says
One of the accusations hurled at those who don't vaccinate is that "You want my child to die!"
Um, no. I actually care very much about your child.
"You want your kid to die!"
Are you paying attention to what you're saying?
Then the accusation is this: "Since you don't vaccinate, you want everyone to get infected."
No. Not being vaccinated does not mean I or my children are sick. It means we don't carry manufactured immunity. If and when we get sick a few things will happen.
1. We will deal with it.
2. We will quarantine our own children.
3. We will not expose our kids to anyone (except those looking to similarly build natural immunity)
Rare is the parent that chooses to not continue vaccinating their child (or their siblings) absent a personal experience with vaccine injury, either directly or in a close relative or friend. It is simply against human nature to break from powerful social norms and adopt a view that will only subject them to derision and ridicule.
If you are interested in understanding this view - you can read the first three documents at this address (it's a lot of reading, but you'll see how the government which mandates vaccines does not have science to back up their claims): https://icandecide.org/governments/
You can also read the transcript of a recent deposition of Stanley Plotkin, MD, who is the leading vaccinologist in the world, the developer of the rubella portion of the MMR vaccine and numerous other vaccines, and whose name is literally on the medical textbook for vaccines -- called Plotkin’s Vaccines, 7th Ed.: http://cijepljenje.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Schmitt-protiv-Schmitta.pdf)
Beyond safety, there are also issues with vaccine efficacy which render the decision to exclude partially-vaccinated and unvaccinated children attending yeshiva either wrong or irrational.
As far as the claim that the unvaccinated are a danger to everyone else, the argument of "Rodef" is sometimes employed - they are like a flying arrow or bullet who can easily hit a target because it has already been released but where will it hit?
Please consider the following information.
The primary argument made to exclude partially-vaccinated and unvaccinated children is that they and their parents are considered to be halakhically a rodef (rodfim in plural) because these children can catch the measles and be contagious and asymptomatic for a short period before symptoms appear (thereby prompting them to stay home). Regarding this claim, here are the facts:
According to the CDC, unvaccinated children that have the measles will be contagious and asymptomatic for at most one day. As explained by the CDC: “Measles typically begins with high fever, cough, runny nose (coryza), and red, watery eyes (conjunctivitis)” (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/signs-symptoms.html), that “Three to five days after symptoms begin, a rash breaks out” (Id), and that “Infected people can spread measles to others from four days before through four days after the rash appears” (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/transmission.html).
In other words, they will feel rather ill after one day of being exposed - this is what recently happened in Michigan, where the collector went to a doctor, who misdiagnosed him with bronchitis, because the doctor did not know what measles looks like. He was given anti-biotics for bronchitis (which did nothing) and then he went around collecting for his needs.
In contrast, it is well established that individuals immunized with measles vaccine can have subclinical measles (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15364464) and it has been demonstrated that “measles can spread from a majority of vaccinated, to a minority of unvaccinated people, causing overt disease” (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15364464). This means that unvaccinated children will at most remain in school for one day without symptoms while vaccinated children with subclinical measles will remain in school throughout the course of their infection. They will also be a danger to anyone who is unvaccinated - even and especially for medical reasons, which seems to be the exemption no one has a problem with.
After 20 years, approximately 30% of individuals that received two doses of the MMR vaccine will be susceptible to present with clinical measles due to waning immunity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17339511
That plus the fact that 2 to 10 percent of children directly after two doses of MMR do not have protective immunity (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3570049/), renders children without measles vaccine only a tiny fraction of the population that is considered susceptible to have clinical measles. One survey from 1994 (and it is likely the finding would be higher today) found that a mean of 77% of students with clinical measles were previously immunized. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8053748
Babies are more susceptible to measles infection today because of the measles vaccine campaign. As CDC explains: “The mothers of many infants who developed measles were young, and their measles immunity was most often due to vaccination rather than infection with wild virus. As a result, a smaller amount of antibody was transferred across the placenta to the fetus, compared with antibody transfer from mothers who had higher antibody titers resulting from wild-virus infection. The lower quantity of antibody resulted in immunity that waned more rapidly, making infants susceptible at a younger age than in the past.” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/meas.pdf
The death rate from measles declined by 98% between 1900 and 1963 (when the measles vaccine was introduced), the year prior to introducing the measles vaccine the death rate from measles was 1 in 500,000 Americans, measles was considered a mild childhood infection, and the evidence to support that the benefits of the measles vaccine outweigh the benefits is lacking (see citations in these documents: https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Measles-DIS.pdf; https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/MeaslesVRS.pdf)
If nonetheless a child that is not injected with measles vaccine is considered a rodef, then the children (and their parents) who are injected with vaccines for, inter alia, (i) acellular pertussis vaccine, (ii) diphtheria vaccine, or (iii) inactivated polio vaccine, must be considered rodfim:
The best available evidence from the FDA is that children vaccinated with acellular pertussis vaccine (the only pertussis vaccine used in the United States), as compared with unvaccinated children, are still contagious and infectious with pertussis for the same duration but have milder or no symptoms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828
The acellular pertussis vaccinated children therefore continue to attend school during the weeks they are contagious with pertussis while those that are unvaccinated and catch pertussis know to stay home. The death rate from pertussis historically and today remains multi-fold higher than it is for measles. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5106618/.
There are also more cases of pertussis than measles – for example, according to the New York State Department of Health, there were 691 reported cases of pertussis and 4 reported cases of measles in New York in 2017. https://www.health.ny.gov/statistics/diseases/communicable/2017/docs/cases.pdf
Hence, if children without measles vaccine are rodfim, then children that receive acellular pertussis vaccine must be rodfim as well since they will attend school while contagious for weeks with pertussis (considered more dangerous than measles) without sufficient symptoms to know to stay home (while the unvaccinated children that catch pertussis will know to stay home or will actually be immune from a prior infection and not contagious).
The diphtheria vaccine does not create antibodies to prevent the infection and transmission of the diphtheria bacteria. https://www.vaccines.gov/basics/types/index.html. This vaccine only produces antibodies against a toxin sometimes released by the diphtheria bacteria since it is this toxin that can be dangerous to humans.
Children vaccinated or unvaccinated for diphtheria both can become contagious and transmit the diphtheria bacteria, but the unvaccinated child is considered to have a greater likelihood of having symptoms and hence will remain at home while the vaccinated child is considered more likely to not have symptoms and hence will remain contagious and in school. Diphtheria is considered more dangerous than measles. Since the child vaccinated for diphtheria is considered more likely to attend school while contagious and asymptomatic than the unvaccinated child, the child vaccinated for diphtheria must be considered a rodef if the child without a measles vaccine is a rodef.
The inactivated polio vaccine (“IPV”), the only polio vaccine used in the United States, does not prevent contracting and transmitting the polio virus, which is typically shed through the feces and contracted by oral ingestion. As the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, headed by the WHO, CDC, and UNICEF, explains: “IPV induces very low levels of immunity in the intestine. As a result, when a person immunized with IPV is infected with wild poliovirus, the virus can still multiply inside the intestines and be shed in the feces, risking continued circulation. …. An increasing number of industrialized, polio-free countries are using IPV as the vaccine of choice ... because the risk of paralytic polio associated with … oral polio vaccine … However, as IPV does not stop transmission of the virus, oral polio vaccine is used wherever a polio outbreak needs to be contained, even in countries which rely exclusively on IPV for their routine immunization programme.” http://polioeradication.org/polio-today/polio-prevention/the-vaccines/ipv/ (See also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17429085 in which 91% of children without IPV colonized with attenuated poliovirus while 94-97% of children after three doses of IPV colonized with attenuated poliovirus.) Since children vaccinated with IPV are considered more likely to attend school while contagious and asymptomic than an unvaccinated child, the child vaccinated for IPV must be considered a rodef if the child without a measles vaccine is a rodef.
All vaccines carry the risk of death. For example, the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System (“VAERS”), which is jointly operated by CDC and FDA, received 1,967 reports of death in the last five years. https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html And an HHS-funded review of vaccine adverse events over a three-year period by Harvard Medical School involving 715,000 patients stated that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” https://healthit.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf Parents that don’t want to continue vaccinating usually have a reason to be concerned their child has an increased risk of serious injury from further vaccination. (This concern may even be shared by the child’s pediatrician but in New York and most other states it is impossible to obtain a medical exemption to vaccination even if the child’s life-long pediatrician agrees vaccines are contraindicated for that child.) Does this mean that anyone that pressures a family into receiving a vaccine against the judgment of the child’s parent (and potentially even the child’s life-long pediatrician, of which I know many cases) by threatening to deprive them of a yeshiva education is a rodef?
The point of the above is not to actually label children vaccinated with aP, Diptheria, or IPV rodfim, but rather to reveal that the decision by some to label children that have not received the Measles vaccine rodfim is plainly not grounded in logic or facts, but rather an emotional decision which also includes the worst that humanity has to offer – dehumanizing a minority (here partially-vaccinated and unvaccinated children).
If nonetheless, somehow, it were still proper to call a child unvaccinated for measles a rodef, then most adults previously vaccinated for measles are rodfim because they are susceptible to measles due to waning immunity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17339511. All adults that delay or don’t receive the flu shot are rodfim (no matter how sick these shots get you!). All adults that don’t receive their booster for diptheria (required every 10 years by the CDC) are rodfim (or is it the opposite?!). And, apparently, all babies are born rodfim since they are unvaccinated.
I have also always wondered how a Cohen can be injected with the MMR vaccine which contains the culture cell lines of aborted fetal tissue (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf), including approximately 150 nanograms cells substrate 19 double-strand DNA and single-strand DNA per dose fragmented to approximately 215 base pairs in length (which one lab found to amount to approximately 80 billion dsDNA fragments and 400 billion ssDNA fragments). Here is a video of the inventor of the rubella component of the MMR discussing aborted fetuses in developing this vaccine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NACBHtFMllA
Um, no. I actually care very much about your child.
"You want your kid to die!"
Are you paying attention to what you're saying?
Then the accusation is this: "Since you don't vaccinate, you want everyone to get infected."
No. Not being vaccinated does not mean I or my children are sick. It means we don't carry manufactured immunity. If and when we get sick a few things will happen.
1. We will deal with it.
2. We will quarantine our own children.
3. We will not expose our kids to anyone (except those looking to similarly build natural immunity)
Rare is the parent that chooses to not continue vaccinating their child (or their siblings) absent a personal experience with vaccine injury, either directly or in a close relative or friend. It is simply against human nature to break from powerful social norms and adopt a view that will only subject them to derision and ridicule.
If you are interested in understanding this view - you can read the first three documents at this address (it's a lot of reading, but you'll see how the government which mandates vaccines does not have science to back up their claims): https://icandecide.org/governments/
You can also read the transcript of a recent deposition of Stanley Plotkin, MD, who is the leading vaccinologist in the world, the developer of the rubella portion of the MMR vaccine and numerous other vaccines, and whose name is literally on the medical textbook for vaccines -- called Plotkin’s Vaccines, 7th Ed.: http://cijepljenje.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Schmitt-protiv-Schmitta.pdf)
Beyond safety, there are also issues with vaccine efficacy which render the decision to exclude partially-vaccinated and unvaccinated children attending yeshiva either wrong or irrational.
As far as the claim that the unvaccinated are a danger to everyone else, the argument of "Rodef" is sometimes employed - they are like a flying arrow or bullet who can easily hit a target because it has already been released but where will it hit?
Please consider the following information.
The primary argument made to exclude partially-vaccinated and unvaccinated children is that they and their parents are considered to be halakhically a rodef (rodfim in plural) because these children can catch the measles and be contagious and asymptomatic for a short period before symptoms appear (thereby prompting them to stay home). Regarding this claim, here are the facts:
According to the CDC, unvaccinated children that have the measles will be contagious and asymptomatic for at most one day. As explained by the CDC: “Measles typically begins with high fever, cough, runny nose (coryza), and red, watery eyes (conjunctivitis)” (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/signs-symptoms.html), that “Three to five days after symptoms begin, a rash breaks out” (Id), and that “Infected people can spread measles to others from four days before through four days after the rash appears” (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/transmission.html).
In other words, they will feel rather ill after one day of being exposed - this is what recently happened in Michigan, where the collector went to a doctor, who misdiagnosed him with bronchitis, because the doctor did not know what measles looks like. He was given anti-biotics for bronchitis (which did nothing) and then he went around collecting for his needs.
In contrast, it is well established that individuals immunized with measles vaccine can have subclinical measles (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15364464) and it has been demonstrated that “measles can spread from a majority of vaccinated, to a minority of unvaccinated people, causing overt disease” (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15364464). This means that unvaccinated children will at most remain in school for one day without symptoms while vaccinated children with subclinical measles will remain in school throughout the course of their infection. They will also be a danger to anyone who is unvaccinated - even and especially for medical reasons, which seems to be the exemption no one has a problem with.
After 20 years, approximately 30% of individuals that received two doses of the MMR vaccine will be susceptible to present with clinical measles due to waning immunity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17339511
That plus the fact that 2 to 10 percent of children directly after two doses of MMR do not have protective immunity (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3570049/), renders children without measles vaccine only a tiny fraction of the population that is considered susceptible to have clinical measles. One survey from 1994 (and it is likely the finding would be higher today) found that a mean of 77% of students with clinical measles were previously immunized. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8053748
Babies are more susceptible to measles infection today because of the measles vaccine campaign. As CDC explains: “The mothers of many infants who developed measles were young, and their measles immunity was most often due to vaccination rather than infection with wild virus. As a result, a smaller amount of antibody was transferred across the placenta to the fetus, compared with antibody transfer from mothers who had higher antibody titers resulting from wild-virus infection. The lower quantity of antibody resulted in immunity that waned more rapidly, making infants susceptible at a younger age than in the past.” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/meas.pdf
The death rate from measles declined by 98% between 1900 and 1963 (when the measles vaccine was introduced), the year prior to introducing the measles vaccine the death rate from measles was 1 in 500,000 Americans, measles was considered a mild childhood infection, and the evidence to support that the benefits of the measles vaccine outweigh the benefits is lacking (see citations in these documents: https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Measles-DIS.pdf; https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/MeaslesVRS.pdf)
If nonetheless a child that is not injected with measles vaccine is considered a rodef, then the children (and their parents) who are injected with vaccines for, inter alia, (i) acellular pertussis vaccine, (ii) diphtheria vaccine, or (iii) inactivated polio vaccine, must be considered rodfim:
The best available evidence from the FDA is that children vaccinated with acellular pertussis vaccine (the only pertussis vaccine used in the United States), as compared with unvaccinated children, are still contagious and infectious with pertussis for the same duration but have milder or no symptoms. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277828
The acellular pertussis vaccinated children therefore continue to attend school during the weeks they are contagious with pertussis while those that are unvaccinated and catch pertussis know to stay home. The death rate from pertussis historically and today remains multi-fold higher than it is for measles. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5106618/.
There are also more cases of pertussis than measles – for example, according to the New York State Department of Health, there were 691 reported cases of pertussis and 4 reported cases of measles in New York in 2017. https://www.health.ny.gov/statistics/diseases/communicable/2017/docs/cases.pdf
Hence, if children without measles vaccine are rodfim, then children that receive acellular pertussis vaccine must be rodfim as well since they will attend school while contagious for weeks with pertussis (considered more dangerous than measles) without sufficient symptoms to know to stay home (while the unvaccinated children that catch pertussis will know to stay home or will actually be immune from a prior infection and not contagious).
The diphtheria vaccine does not create antibodies to prevent the infection and transmission of the diphtheria bacteria. https://www.vaccines.gov/basics/types/index.html. This vaccine only produces antibodies against a toxin sometimes released by the diphtheria bacteria since it is this toxin that can be dangerous to humans.
Children vaccinated or unvaccinated for diphtheria both can become contagious and transmit the diphtheria bacteria, but the unvaccinated child is considered to have a greater likelihood of having symptoms and hence will remain at home while the vaccinated child is considered more likely to not have symptoms and hence will remain contagious and in school. Diphtheria is considered more dangerous than measles. Since the child vaccinated for diphtheria is considered more likely to attend school while contagious and asymptomatic than the unvaccinated child, the child vaccinated for diphtheria must be considered a rodef if the child without a measles vaccine is a rodef.
The inactivated polio vaccine (“IPV”), the only polio vaccine used in the United States, does not prevent contracting and transmitting the polio virus, which is typically shed through the feces and contracted by oral ingestion. As the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, headed by the WHO, CDC, and UNICEF, explains: “IPV induces very low levels of immunity in the intestine. As a result, when a person immunized with IPV is infected with wild poliovirus, the virus can still multiply inside the intestines and be shed in the feces, risking continued circulation. …. An increasing number of industrialized, polio-free countries are using IPV as the vaccine of choice ... because the risk of paralytic polio associated with … oral polio vaccine … However, as IPV does not stop transmission of the virus, oral polio vaccine is used wherever a polio outbreak needs to be contained, even in countries which rely exclusively on IPV for their routine immunization programme.” http://polioeradication.org/polio-today/polio-prevention/the-vaccines/ipv/ (See also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17429085 in which 91% of children without IPV colonized with attenuated poliovirus while 94-97% of children after three doses of IPV colonized with attenuated poliovirus.) Since children vaccinated with IPV are considered more likely to attend school while contagious and asymptomic than an unvaccinated child, the child vaccinated for IPV must be considered a rodef if the child without a measles vaccine is a rodef.
All vaccines carry the risk of death. For example, the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System (“VAERS”), which is jointly operated by CDC and FDA, received 1,967 reports of death in the last five years. https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html And an HHS-funded review of vaccine adverse events over a three-year period by Harvard Medical School involving 715,000 patients stated that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” https://healthit.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf Parents that don’t want to continue vaccinating usually have a reason to be concerned their child has an increased risk of serious injury from further vaccination. (This concern may even be shared by the child’s pediatrician but in New York and most other states it is impossible to obtain a medical exemption to vaccination even if the child’s life-long pediatrician agrees vaccines are contraindicated for that child.) Does this mean that anyone that pressures a family into receiving a vaccine against the judgment of the child’s parent (and potentially even the child’s life-long pediatrician, of which I know many cases) by threatening to deprive them of a yeshiva education is a rodef?
The point of the above is not to actually label children vaccinated with aP, Diptheria, or IPV rodfim, but rather to reveal that the decision by some to label children that have not received the Measles vaccine rodfim is plainly not grounded in logic or facts, but rather an emotional decision which also includes the worst that humanity has to offer – dehumanizing a minority (here partially-vaccinated and unvaccinated children).
If nonetheless, somehow, it were still proper to call a child unvaccinated for measles a rodef, then most adults previously vaccinated for measles are rodfim because they are susceptible to measles due to waning immunity. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17339511. All adults that delay or don’t receive the flu shot are rodfim (no matter how sick these shots get you!). All adults that don’t receive their booster for diptheria (required every 10 years by the CDC) are rodfim (or is it the opposite?!). And, apparently, all babies are born rodfim since they are unvaccinated.
I have also always wondered how a Cohen can be injected with the MMR vaccine which contains the culture cell lines of aborted fetal tissue (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf), including approximately 150 nanograms cells substrate 19 double-strand DNA and single-strand DNA per dose fragmented to approximately 215 base pairs in length (which one lab found to amount to approximately 80 billion dsDNA fragments and 400 billion ssDNA fragments). Here is a video of the inventor of the rubella component of the MMR discussing aborted fetuses in developing this vaccine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NACBHtFMllA
You can ignore all this and continue eating the lies you are fed about unvaccinated people being carriers of disease. Or you can face the reality that people who are unvaccinated are people like everyone else, and are only carriers of illness when they are sick (which doesn't happen all that often).
Comments
Post a Comment