Childhood vaccinations - yea or nay?

Started by Kaesekopf, April 24, 2023, 05:56:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic


I came up with a question to pose to you all.

How does the Forum collectively feel with regards to childhood vaccination (not thinking/speaking of the COVID one)? 

Are you for it?  Against it?  Did the COVID debacle change your mind? 

What do you think? 
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.


We should bring back the one from 6 or 7 years ago. Almost as good as the one about kids at Mass. I wouldn't vaccinate, Chef.
Schaff Recht mir Gott und führe meine Sache gegen ein unheiliges Volk . . .   .                          
Lex Orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi.
"Die Welt sucht nach Ehre, Ansehen, Reichtum, Vergnügen; die Heiligen aber suchen Demütigung, Verachtung, Armut, Abtötung und Buße." --Ausschnitt von der Geschichte des Lebens St. Bennos.


Quote from: Heinrich on April 24, 2023, 06:19:31 PMWe should bring back the one from 6 or 7 years ago. Almost as good as the one about kids at Mass. I wouldn't vaccinate, Chef.

I do not recall this thread?
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.

Francisco Javier

For reference, I did upper level masters/PhD classes in immunology and am now a medical student

I think that it is undeniable that vaccines have been able to alleviate a great deal of suffering in the world: smallpox has been eradicated, congenital rubella is practically nonexistent, polio has been basically eradicated (ironically the majority of new cases of vaccine induced).

That said, the whole industry is rotten to the core. If you listen to how healthcare people speak, they don't know anything beyond consensus and the consensus is based off of what the papers say, and the only way you get a paper published is if it says what pharma or the US gov wants it to say. I got chills hearing Martin Shkreli (who teaches basic finance online) saying vaccines are really the perfect business model - full compliance, 100% of people get them, no liability, etc etc. So even if a company has good intentions, if they develop a marginal vaccine that might harm 1 in 10,000 and deliver no real benefit, they might still push it out to get funding to continue cancer research or whatever and there's no real way to know. All scientists and physicians have received the message loud and clear that if you question this topic you will lose your reputation, your medical license, and then some

Anecdotally, I also know quite a few doctors who are skeptical, and I know a woman whose child was turned into a floppy retard after the MMR vaccine and then the government showed up and offered her a couple hundred thousand dollars but insisted she sign a NDA. How can you trust the data on the adverse outcomes when doctors gaslight you into thinking it was something else, and then if you have a rock solid claim they pay you hush money? There's no good data, and I am more and more beginning to suspect that is by design.

There's also the issue of vaccines used to have thimerasol, which they then removed after there was a backlash, while claiming it was still safe. Well, if it was safe then why remove it? The studies they used to say it was safe also were conducted on lab rats, and the dosing equivalent is never perfect, and in their own study the dosing they used was for 1 shot! where the average is 20+ doses of various concoctions of varying degrees of safety and efficacy.

There is also the issue of many vaccines being human fetal tissue / cell line derived. If something could not have been created without the murder of an innocent, I really don't want it in my body. I have heard from Catholic doctors (who may well be biased quacks in this case) that they noted all the supposed autism links came from the shots specifically derived from embryonic cell lines, although I have absolutely 0 data to back that up or believe its true. I personally think iPads and TVs and advanced maternal ages have caused far more autism than any shot but women don't want to accept their delay in settling down might have caused their children to face adverse outcomes. The Vatican has said that these fetal derived shots are acceptable as a remote cooperation in evil, although I am not entirely sure they fully understand the reality on the ground (ie the Vatican assumes it was one child murdered in the 1960s or whatever, when the reality is the demand continues for new experiments and encourages daily abortions and corpse desecration). The SSPX echoed the Vatican's statement and even said the COVID vaccine was acceptable so I trust their logic is sound even if their assumptions are not necessarily.

Francisco Javier

So, you've expressed some degree of skepticism.

I would say you need to sit down with the wife and have a chat once you've gathered some facts. Is she a ride-or-die woman who's actually willing to listen to whatever you say and trust you 100% no matter how hard it gets? Because she is going to be ridiculed and basically called a child murderer at every well child doctor visit she goes to. And it is important she goes to these visits because there's a lot going on in little kids that doctors are able to fix but only if they catch it early. You also will likely have your kids be blocked from all public schools, most diocesan Catholic schools will follow secular guidelines, and depending on your country it might even be illegal to have the kids unvaccinated. Colleges and all healthcare jobs basically require some degree of vaccination. So basically, how hard do you believe, and what are you willing to suffer for it?

99% of people get vaccinated in the US and most turn out to be some level of acceptable health wise. They might be gluttonous druggies or drunkards or porno-addicts with crippling depression, but I think it's unlikely to be due to vaccines.

So I think it is fair to say, why should I vaccinate my kid for a 1 in a million benefit if there is a 1 in 10,000 risk??? And you'd be correct. But you do have to choose your battles, and a 1 in 10,000 risk might be acceptable to you to otherwise be able to participate in so-called normal society. Maybe you want to make a principled stand against big pharma - good for you, and I will as well.

But please, understand ahead of time the costs and the benefits of each option

I will also say, I was skeptical of COVID vaccines from the get go, but this was because I recognized that there was a multi-year psychological manipulation campaign going on about vaccines. Every single reddit thread that said like "Who is the worst type of person" or "Who do you hate the most" would have the top comment with thousands upon thousands of likes saying "People who let their children die because they don't trust the vaccine science" or retard takes like that. It was obviously not organic, and you would think maybe murderers or perverts would get the most hated slot, but nope, it was always soccer moms trying to do the best for their kids. I also recognized that the biggest good-boy points you could get in your med school applications was promoting vaccines in developing nations and searching for new vaccines, which of course made me wonder - why?
It didn't all click til covid, and it still doesn't, but I am personally very very very skeptical of the entire industry. Something is rotten in the state of Big Pharma, even if I can't quite tell what it is

Francisco Javier

Lastly I would remind you that it doesn't have to be an all or nothing scenario.

Does your child really need 3 doses of HepB vaccine immediately after birth, when it's a blood borne disease that really only affects drug addicts and those who engage in sodomy? And the protection offered by those 3 doses seems to fade for the majority of people after 10 years.

What about HPV, which was rushed thru the regulatory process and seemed to have far more adverse outcomes than other shots, and protects against a STD? I get it, we live in a fallen world and kids will make their own mistakes and maybe it makes sense to prophylactically damage mitigate. But do you need to vaccinate your male son against female cervical cancer causing viruses? Do you really want to give your daughter a shot and explain to her it will be to protect her from the consequences if she decides to be a whore? Admittedly that's not fair and HPV is ever increasing in the general population, so perhaps her husband might carry it, etc etc.

What about MMR which is fetal cell derived and some say linked to autism? Well you could go to Japan and get a vaccine against each component that doesn't use fetal cells. But it will cause you headaches getting schools to accept the documentation. You could also just have your daughter wait for her rubella dosage until before her wedding - a big reason for the shot is to prevent horrible birth defects if a pregnant mom develops rubella. That would be reasonable if you had a concern of too many shots too fast. You can spread them out over more time, cut out the ones you think are unnecessary, and generally try to exercise your judgement or find a Catholic skeptic physician you trust.

The flu shots seem to make people feel sick and there is very little evidence they do anything for the vast majority of the population (maybe the help the elderly?)

The Covid shots appear to neither have been safe nor effective, and my faculty are now majority against recommending further doses to pretty much anyone. They might claim it was a good decision at the time, and maybe if more people complied the outcome would have been better, but the current scenario is they mostly are disparaging of people still pushing the shot.

What about Polio? Well, there's a lot of debate as to the actually history here, but let's just take the science at face value. There is no more Polio in the wild in the US. So why vaccinate against it? In case some third worlder comes over here and starts a new plague? I think they are blaming orthodox jews for doing this lol. If your kid is going to travel to Pakistan, sure, get them a polio vaccine and the risk-reward makes sense. But why vaccinate for a disease that hasn't been in your country in generations? There was also a manufacturing error with this that likely had the negative fallout suppressed, but they couldn't cover up the 40,000 cases of polio it caused (

What about chickenpox? Well, you can get better more durable immunity from a real infection, and I don't think anyone dies from chicken pox, and there's some controversy as to whether natural infection is better for reducing your risk of shingles down the line (painful reactivation of the virus, can cause blindness or debilitating pain). I do think it seems to be effective in preventing the disease tho. Are there side effects? I don't trust the government to tell me if there were, but again, 90%+ of kids get it nowadays - although you probably didn't get the shot urself if u were a millennial

Also, maybe each shot in itself is fine, but what is the combined effect? Each shot will have a different risk-reward that is up to you as the father to decide whether or not is worth while - don't let any nerd in a white coat tell you that there is a duty to protect the population at large. Your duty is to your child, and you cannot let your child be used as a means for the common good.

Moreover, most of science's evidence for vaccines is post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc. But it negates that there was already a long established declining trend in disease mortality before the advent of vaccines. Vaccines happened then a drop in death occurred yes, but the drop in death from infectious disease was happening anyways as sanitation and nutrition improved.

then you have wacky stuff like the CIA using fake vaccines to track people down?? Very strange.'s%20family%20DNA,-This%20article%20is&text=The%20CIA%20organised%20a%20fake,a%20Guardian%20investigation%20has%20found.

And then of course, why is Bill Gates who's a huge eugenicist from a family of eugenicists so focused on vaccines?

Then you have decade old videos that were "debunked" claiming to search for a way to immunize people against religious extremism (eg. target the VMAT2 gene that is allegedly linked to an openness to religious experience)

Sorry to spew paragraphs at you, but this is me partially making an inchoate argument to myself and I will certainly need to come back to this post and fill in details as I learn more. Please let me know if you find any websites that seem compelling from the dissident side.


The big impetus is some friends from church are way into Pam Acker and her book on vaccinations. 

The stuff she spouted on some podcast or something didn't pass my sniff test, so I'm trying to delve a little more into it.  So far, I've seen her use scare language to justify her position.  She also plays fast and loose with some things, so it's made me... wary.  The problem with me, too, is I can figure out things enough to be dangerous, but I'll never be a doctor and I'll never have moral certitude.  :lol: 

I appreciate the posts, Francisco.  If you've got more, keep 'em coming.  :lol: 
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.


If anything the last three years and the covid vaccine debacle will tell you is that big Pharma is corrupt and has corrupted medicine for the last 50 years.

My personal experience:
Did the 6 in 1 at 2,4, 6 month with eldest who is now 20 but stopped after that when I read 'what the doctors will not tell you about your vaccines' which I had to ask the local library to get for me as internet was not widespread at that time.
This was around Wakefield (who by the way his work was never discredited or disproved  and had originally been printed in the BMJ but his ethics were, he drew blood examples from kids at a birthday party without parents consent and rightly so, he shouldn't have done it but his findings are still solid, ) so my son was due his MMr and I thought to myself I really need to know why I am hesitant about this and read the book.

I never vaccinated my kids again and had 3 more after my son.  So 20 years in, my kids are the healthiest on the block and each have had an antibiotic only once in their life.  Never missed school except for the odd day.  I've never had swathes of earaches, tummy bugs, gastroenteritis and other so called normal childhood illnesses.  They have all had the chicken pox and survived.  None have autism issues, none on the spectrum.  I've minded other peoples kids over the years and watched as every family I know who vaccinate spend thousands each year on doctors visits and prescriptions and endless trips to a+e for chronic gut conditions or infections. 

This may not be enough information for you KK which is totally fine but I can only go by my experience which has been one of zero regret for our decision.  The idea of a vaccine in itself is probably good but the disgusting corrupt pharma add so many seriously toxic ingredients to your vaccine vial, you cannot trust the outcome.
 What I find really annoying is that millions of parents for 40/50 yrs have sounded the alarm over how their children are vaccine damaged and the arrogance of the academia world to disregard a mother or fathers complete understanding that their child was totally fine one day and the next, gone i.e not connected to them anymore and you can literally see the lifeless eyes. PARENTS KNOW.
 I don't think you can get it now but Vaxxed did the bus tour across USA and got personal stories from vaccine injured families who were obviously pro vax in the first place to get them and it would break your heart to listen to the stories.  One mother and father who had triplets saw each baby slip away right before their eyes within hours of the vax on the same day.  It is billion to one chance that 3 babies with the same DNA who were perfect one minute and then within hours on the same day regress and it NOT be the vaccine.  Those babies were about 13 at the time of the video and those parents were getting up in the middle of the night changing nappies that were flung around the bedroom of almost adults but at least the herd is fine, right!!.

There is lots of evidence that with modern hygiene standards and proper sanitation since the 50's that health improved and this started before vaccines became widespread but the big pharma hijacked that as a sign that the vaccines have saved lives. There was a whistleblower who was recorded in a phonecall who worked for a vaccine company and he talked about how they shredded so much information during trials on side effects so that their product could get to market (I'll try to find it but its extremely difficult now). Look at FDA board which is made up of former BIG PHarma CEO's, look at the fact you cannot sue the company if your child becomes vaccine injured, you literally sign a waiver at the doctors (in our case here anyway).  So many red flags over vaccines but I can only say that we as a family have survived very well and fully functioning after refusing them.

Yes you do need a spine to face into the dr's when you do rarely need them and possibly KK if you decide not to jab then it would be great if you could accompany your wife as it can be nasty sometimes (I must have a face like a bulldog when they ask me about their jab history coz I never got it too bad but I know of some terrible stories where mothers are brow beaten over their decisions.) 

Francisco....what an excellent well thought and well presented response


Hundreds of babies were murdered (electively aborted) in order to create one fetal cell line. Life Site News has numerous interviews with whistleblowers on how women seeking abortions were paid to have a special type of hysterectomy in which the baby is removed along with his or her embryonic sac.

For the Human Kidney Cell HKC-line, the infants were not given any painkillers and his or her kidneys were removed within 20 minutes of their births. Pam Acker is not the only whistleblower. If you look you can find court testimony which backs up what she and other whistleblowers have seen.

Not all vaccines use electively-aborted fetal-cell lines in their research and production. Lists are available online.
To have courage for whatever comes in life - everything lies in that.
Saint Teresa of Avila


I'm not vaccinating my kids at all. I was vaccinated as a baby and young child, as well as my husband. I think the Covid thing has further affirmed the skepticism on vaccines. I heard of vaccine injuries related to early childhood vaccines and I struggle with auto-immune issues (eczema, weird allergies to certain foods) to this day (not genetics) so I'm hesitant.

They also give babies the Vitamin K shot and Hep B vax right after birth, and I'm opposed to those as well.

Francisco Javier

Quote from: MushroomRooster on April 26, 2023, 11:09:51 AMI'm not vaccinating my kids at all. I was vaccinated as a baby and young child, as well as my husband. I think the Covid thing has further affirmed the skepticism on vaccines. I heard of vaccine injuries related to early childhood vaccines and I struggle with auto-immune issues (eczema, weird allergies to certain foods) to this day (not genetics) so I'm hesitant.

They also give babies the Vitamin K shot and Hep B vax right after birth, and I'm opposed to those as well.

Can I ask why you are opposed to a Vitamin K shot at birth? I have not previously heard any safety objections, it is not ethically compromised like some vaccines might be, and scientists do know conclusively that it is a necessary part of the clotting cascade. Babies apparently don't get enough vitamin K from breastfeeding and are at increased risk of bleeding (most worryingly in the brain, also in the gut) until they start eating solid foods. Maybe breast-fed babies in the western are adequately provided, and the real deficiencies are more found in baby formula fed kids, I don't know. I am just interested to hear the justification - do you think it's unnatural, not necessary (low absolute risk reduction), expensive, or dangerous?

My gut reaction would have been to dismiss a vitamin K injection concern, but since COVID I now am more open to contrary opinions.

I will say since briefly looking into it there appears to have been one paper that could not be replicated purporting to detect a 3x increased risk of childhood leukemia in children who received vitamin K intramuscular (IM) injections. Assuming this is your concern:

The total population risk of children developing leukemia is roughly 5 in 100,000. It should be noted ~90% of hospital births receive vitamin K injections intramuscularly. If we trust the original data (that 10+ studies failed to replicate), we might say that the real risk would have been 1.5 without the vit K (3x reduction).

European studies indicate that there is a risk of serious bleeding between 4.4-7.2 per 100k if you don't get any vitamin K
That risk drops to 0-0.4 per 100k if you get the vitamin K shot.

So to me, you are preventing a 4 in 100k chance of cancer with a roughly equal or double chance of severe and often fatal bleeding. (ASSUMING YOU TRUST THE DATA WHICH IS NOW A HUGE QUESTION). So I can see why some doctors might stick their nose up at this opinion and just dismiss you.

Of course, a more prudent response would be to say, OK, how about I just give my baby oral vitamin K. And indeed, it looks like a sizeable chunk of European countries did this at various points and this can reduce the chances of bleeding until basically being in line with IM, perhaps slightly inferior. Another source says this can reduce bleeding risk to being between 0-0.9 per 100k which is statistically indistinguishable from the Intramuscular injection.

"In the case of parental refusal, healthcare providers should inform parents of the slightly inferior alternative (2 mg oral vitamin K at birth, followed by 1 or 2 mg oral weekly for 3 months when breastfed)" according to one paper.

Also, reading through the literature seems to have a theme of a potential big difference is doctors would rather do a one and done injection, because some people (unstated: illiterates, druggies, minorities, single moms, the poor) might not comply with the oral vitamin administration well enough. It is also unstated that doctors get paid in the US significantly better for procedures, so there is an incentive to spend 1 minute giving a shot vs spend 30 minutes trying to convince someone to take vitamin pills that might prevent a 5 in 100k bad outcome -- all of this where the doc would make more money in that 1min than he would for a 30min conversation.

So thank you for your objection to vitamin K, I am now ambivalent about vitamin K injection rejectors where I was previously somewhat hostile. I don't think there's any real harm in accepting a vitamin K shot (and it's almost certainly beneficial), but I think it is a moot argument because you can get 50-100% of the benefit from just giving oral vitamins. And if you don't want to give your kid vitamin K orally, that might be a poor decision (5 in 100k risk of serious adverse outcome) but it's not a huge deal in absolute terms - it's probably worse for you to be speeding on your way to the doctor's appointments post-partum.

To phrase it another way: you'd have to have twenty thousand babies to mess one of them up badly by refusing the vit k shot

Something else I saw on the CDC website is that about 1 in 100-250 babies will develop some sort of bleeding that appears to be non-severe and is mostly prevented with vitamin K. They then deliberately conflate this common bleeding with the need for the shot, but all the stories they list are talking about the 5 in 100k rare brain bleed (which they don't tell you is extremely rare). It is totally disingenuous and it had me confused for 15 minutes about why they say it's so common but then the actual study papers say it's incredibly rare.

Some articles I liked:,leukaemia%20or%20any%20other%20cancer.
this study seems to show the vit k deficiency bleeding as much more common than the other studies, not sure why but it also shows near parity between IM and oral. The general point of this paper is that it seems to more strongly argue for SOME form of vit K for newborns


@Francisco Javier

Yes, I'm suspicious of the shot, like any vaccine and the "risks" don't seem to concern me.
Reason for the shot could be because of circumcisions, forceps/vacuum delivery (cause trauma to the head), and c-sections. The shot itself could cause jaundice as it thickens the blood. And it has a "black box warning". Personally, I don't want to mess with a newborn's natural process, by injecting all these things into its premature system.

Delayed cord clamping (until white and limp) would allow the baby to get all the blood it needs from the placenta.


I declined the Vit K on my babies but was open to it if they had any trauma and my first was vacuum birth so he got it.  Its just not necessary at that time of babies life and God does not get it wrong so I trust Him that He knows better.


Vitamin K is fat soluble and should be in breast milk.  Perhaps Western women weren't eating their greens and are themselves deficient.

I take a mixed Vitamin K pill daily.
"But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God (Jn 3:18)."

"All sorrow leads to the foot of the Cross.  Weep for your sins."

"Although He should kill me, I will trust in Him"


When the government steps in ( thanks Regan) and signs an act that makes vaccine companies immune to prosecution and creates a government entity to review your vaccine injury or death case and decide if its legit....something is fishy. 
I have never vaccinated my kids.  Funny thing is....I was a total left wing back to nature organic hippie starting in the early 90's.  Back then, the leftie anti establishment rebels were all against favorite magazines...Mothering and Compleat Mother gave me all the educationof vaccines I needed. ...and now the left views them as their sacrament.  It makes me chuckle....where have all the hippies gone?
Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat.