Study Proves Unvaccinated Children Are Healthier

[GloriaPatri]

As recently as 1985, there were only 3 vaccines in the schedule: DTP, MMR and polio. Today, there are 49 doses of 14 vaccines before the age of 6 and 69 doses of 16 vaccines by the 18 years of age. Taken together, more than 70 different chemicals, heavy metals, human cells/DNA, animal cells/DNA, and know carcinogens are injected into children.

How can that be harmless?  Common sense would dictate this is crazy. fwiw, I would be fully supportive of vaccination if the ingredient list wasn't so dang toxic, or didn't have dead children in the mix.  To that end, I do support Catholics who choose not to vaccinate.

The most important issue for Catholics in this debate is the preponderance of aborted fetal cell usage in so many vaccines, and the numbers keep growing. How can any Catholic comply?  I just don't understand how we're all just going along with this.  It's horrifying.

The most comprehensive site that addresses this evil issue: 
https://cogforlife.org/2015/09/09/new-aborted-fetal-cell-line-emerges-for-vaccine-production/

pdf - vaccines with aborted fetal cells
https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf

We're Catholic!   How is there even an argument that we should absolutely resist all vaccines that use aborted fetal cells?

Anything, and I mean anything, can be toxic when it's present in the body at certain levels. All of the things in vaccines are present in levels far, far below their toxicity levels. Those carcinogens you're so worried about? Not toxic at those scant levels. Hell, the same principle applies to the food you eat. Mercury is present in plenty of fish, but I don't see any of you protesting against the consumption thereof.

[GloriaPatri]

Also, a study of a measly 666 children is statistically insignificant when compared to the millions of children who are vaccinated. And I would remind everyone that vaccination is obviously not the only component to being healthy. An unvaccinated individual who eats a healthy diet and stays physically active is of course going to be healthier than a vaccinated individual who stuffs themselves with junk food and lives a sedentary life.

[PerEvangelicaDicta]

Ok, got it.  Some here are fine with this.  We'll have to agree to disagree.

[Greg]

How do children in the third world and in the jungles of Brazil, cope without vaccines?  They must be staggeringly healthy, correct?

I bet there's hardly any of them getting ill or dying of anything.

[Quaremerepulisti]

The most important issue for Catholics in this debate is the preponderance of aborted fetal cell usage in so many vaccines, and the numbers keep growing. How can any Catholic comply?  I just don't understand how we're all just going along with this.  It's horrifying.

...

Can those who defend modern vaccines please address this critical moral issue?

Certainly.  Use of such vaccines is not cooperation with sin, whether material or formal, in any accepted definition of the term.  Thus there is no real moral issue at all, and this "critical" moral issue is merely something hyped by Pro-Life Inc. to keep the $$$$ rolling in from the masses - their outrage over this is just about as great as the thought that mothers who have their unborn children killed might actually be prosecuted for their crimes. 

Yes, cells were taken from aborted fetuses way back when and cell cultures formed from them (via mitosis), and these cultures were used so that the weakened viral strains used in vaccines could reproduce.  So what?  Yes, the abortion was a grave sin.   Taking cells from the dead fetus for a good purpose, not so, anymore than taking cells from any other dead body (e.g. for the purpose of matching DNA to a suspected murder weapon).  Nor is there any specific connection to abortion; the same cells could be obtained from a fetal or neonatal biopsy.

[Quaremerepulisti]

This study has just as much validity as those social science studies that "prove" that children fare better if they are in a homosexual "family".  The OP didn't even bother to link to the actual study (there's rigor for you!).

http://oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U.S.-children.php

There are some legitimate questions regarding vaccines, but come on.  If you think this "proves" anything regarding unvaccinated children vs. vaccinated children, it only proves you have no critical thinking skills and no understanding of how empirical science actually works.  Even the authors admit this is a convenience sample and not a representative one, and one where there are clear motives for individuals to decide to participate or not which will bias the results.

[Habitual_Ritual]

Dr. Mark Geier, PhD discusses alarming aspects of the flu vaccine safety, efficacy & mercury

[Habitual_Ritual]

. Mercury is present in plenty of fish, but I don't see any of you protesting against the consumption thereof.

Trace Amounts: Ethyl Mercury vs. Methyl Mercury

[OCLittleFlower]

I'm anti-vax, and I think DominusTecum takes this waaaaay too far.

Weigh the moral issues, side effects, etc vs the risks associated with the disease. 

I still say I'd vaccinate if there was something equivalent to parvo in humans -- lives in the soil for 5+ years, kills most of those who contract it, etc.  Even polio is better than that (most never showed symptoms).

[dolores]

Child rape and child vaccination both involve forced penetration of an underage victim without consent. What's the difference?

By that logic, I suppose forcing an unwilling child to eat his vegetables before he can leave the dinner table would qualify as a type of rape as well.

[rbjmartin]

This study, which was released in March, is the first of its kind. It is the first time a study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children has been done using a particular vaccine and within a relatively uniform population. Does it prove definitively that all vaccines are bad? Of course not, but it should silence those who claim all vaccines are safe or that the current vaccine schedule is unassailable, as well as those who say that anyone who questions the safety of vaccines is "un-scientific."

http://www.ebiomedicine.com/article/S2352-3964(17)30046-4/abstract

The Introduction of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis and Oral Polio Vaccine Among Young Infants in an Urban African Community: A Natural Experiment

Highlights
•When DTP and OPV were introduced in Guinea-Bissau in 1981, allocation by birthday resulted in a natural experiment of being vaccinated early or late.
•Between 3 and 5 months of age, children who received DTP and OPV early had 5-fold higher mortality than still unvaccinated children.
•In the only two studies of the introduction of DTP and OPV, co-administration of OPV with DTP may have reduced the negative effects of DTP.

Few studies have examined what happened to child survival when DTP and OPV were introduced in low-income countries. These vaccines were introduced in 1981 in an urban community in Guinea-Bissau from 3?months of age in connection with 3-monthly weighing sessions. Children were therefore allocated by birthday to receive vaccines early or late between 3 and 5?months of age. In this natural experiment vaccinated children had 5-fold higher mortality than not-yet-DTP-vaccinated children. DTP-only vaccinations were associated with higher mortality than DTP?+?OPV vaccinations. Hence, DTP may be associated with a negative effect on child survival.

Results
Among 3–5-month-old children, having received DTP (±OPV) was associated with a mortality hazard ratio (HR) of 5.00 (95% CI 1.53–16.3) compared with not-yet-DTP-vaccinated children. Differences in background factors did not explain the effect. The negative effect was particularly strong for children who had received DTP-only and no OPV (HR?=?10.0 (2.61–38.6)). All-cause infant mortality after 3?months of age increased after the introduction of these vaccines (HR?=?2.12 (1.07–4.19)).

Conclusion
DTP was associated with increased mortality; OPV may modify the effect of DTP.

[rbjmartin]

Interesting bits from the study above:

From 4.2:

If anything the unvaccinated children had slightly worse nutritional status before 3?months of age than the children who were subsequently DTP vaccinated (p?=?0.09) (Table 2); the unvaccinated children travelled more than the DTP vaccinated children. These biases would tend to favor rather than increase mortality in the DTP group and the estimates from the natural experiment may therefore still be conservative.

From 4.3:

There is only one other study of the introduction of DTP. In rural Guinea-Bissau, DTP (±OPV) was associated with 2-fold higher mortality (Aaby et al., 2004a). All studies that documented vaccination status and followed children prospectively indicate that DTP has negative effects; a meta-analysis of the eight studies found 2-fold higher mortality for DTP-vaccinated compared with DTP-unvaccinated, mostly BCG-vaccinated controls (Aaby et al., 2016) (Appendix A).

The negative effect of DTP was much worse in this natural experiment than has been reported in previous studies of DTP. This is presumably due to the "unvaccinated" control children in previous studies having been a frail subgroup too frail to get vaccinated. Previous studies have not been able to compare DTP-vaccinated children with "normal" controls. Hence, most previous studies have probably underestimated the negative effect of DTP.

From 5 (Conclusion):

DTP was associated with 5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated. No prospective study has shown beneficial survival effects of DTP. Unfortunately, DTP is the most widely used vaccine, and the proportion who receives DTP3 is used globally as an indicator of the performance of national vaccination programs.

It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.

[Josephine87]

Child rape and child vaccination both involve forced penetration of an underage victim without consent. What's the difference?

By that logic, I suppose forcing an unwilling child to eat his vegetables before he can leave the dinner table would qualify as a type of rape as well.

When a child is suspected to have appendicitis, the doctor or nurse has to check by sticking a finger up their butt!  At least, that was how it was when I was 3 years old.     

Still not rape and rather insulting to those who are actual victims of rape.

[Chestertonian]

Child rape and child vaccination both involve forced penetration of an underage victim without consent. What's the difference?

By that logic, I suppose forcing an unwilling child to eat his vegetables before he can leave the dinner table would qualify as a type of rape as well.

When a child is suspected to have appendicitis, the doctor or nurse has to check by sticking a finger up their butt!  At least, that was how it was when I was 3 years old.     

Still not rape and rather insulting to those who are actual victims of rape.

indeed

[Greg]

Unvaccinated children appear very small.  Not sure I'd want half a dozen midgets.