When I started down the path of questioning the almighty vaccine, I took a stance that many inside the anti-vaccine movement would call… not so much “anti- vaccine”, just “safe vaccine”. In other words, I was arguing that vaccines were too risky for the rewards I assumed they provided. 

Many of you who identify yourself as part of the anti-vaccine movement have almost certainly felt this way in the past. Or perhaps you are at the stage in your research were you still think there is a reward in vaccines and they are just filled with dangerous ingredients.

And why wouldn’t you take this stance?

After all, we are told over and over that pathogenic microorganisms are so deadly that vaccines are the only way to protect the human race from their nasty infections. Therefore, this claimed protection is the reward in the risk vs. reward vaccine argument. 

Nevertheless, after several hundred hours of research into this subject over the last 7 or 8 years, my stance has drastically changed when looking at this risk vs. reward argument for vaccines. Before, I believed all the industry’s claims of how vaccines are needed to stop deadly pandemics– seen in the distant and not-so-distant past. However, now my stance is that there is no reward at all for vaccines. They are only risk!

Simply put, vaccines are the biggest medical hoax in the history of the planet because they simply have zero benefits and are very dangerous. Yet, they are pushed on everyone at alarming rates.

Online Yoga Classes

How dangerous are most infectious diseases?

This is often a tough pill to swallow for many who still fear the boogie man known as “germs”. But the fact of the matter is, almost all pathogenic microorganism infections are very mild.

Don’t take my word for it, look to the most fear-mongered of all pathogenic microorganisms– the boogie man’s boogie man, so to speak– polio.

Here is the mayo clinic’s opening paragraph for page on the symptoms of the polio viral infection:

Although polio can cause paralysis and death, the vast majority of people who are infected with the poliovirus don’t become sick and are never aware they’ve been infected with polio.

Ummm… What?!?!

We have all heard how the anti-vaccine movement is going to bring back “deadly polio outbreaks”.

The rhetoric goes something like this: “You anti-science, crazy, conspiracy theorist, anti-vaxxers are going to cause polio to come back…. Murderers”.

It’s always a little different depending on who is saying it, but there is always a central theme. They have been so programmed to fear pathogenic microorganisms that they accuse those not getting vaccines of being future killers who will cause mayhem and carnage by shedding a virus they don’t even have…

… And the polio virus causes an infection so severe that most people can contract the infection and not even know they have it because they are not symptomatic!!

And who are the Anti-Science Fear-Mongers?

This is a pretty big problem for the vaccine industry because  the vast majority of so-called “deadly microorganism infections” are just like polio… they are typically mild and often don’t even manifest symptoms.

Again, don’t believe me, spend an hour or so searching the symptoms of these “deadly” infections vaccines are “saving” us from. Doing so will show this to be true.

Therefore, we are tricked into getting shots, filled with horribly toxic substances, to protect from infections that largely never even manifest into symptoms!

But, what about all the Iron Lungs and havoc Polio created in the 50’s?

To understand this we must first know that polio was the first mass vaccination program in the United States. Therefore, there were massive incentives for the pharmaceutical industrial complex to make sure the program was a success. Sadly, history has shown us that wide-spread manipulation of stats occur when a huge industry are pushing to get their product into (or stay in) the market place. 

Some call this tobacco science because that industry was able to manipulate scientific studies to show their products were safe and we all know how that turned out. However, I like to call it corporate science, because it is not isolated to them.

The early polio program is a very good example of this. However, I really don’t want to get into the specifics because I spent a lot of time in my article The Claim of Eradication talking about the corruption needed to make this program look like a success. Although, I will say this… they flat-out lied about the numbers of polio cases dropping after the program started by making up new infectious diseases.

The truth is, polio cases actually rose when they started the program (see my article in the last paragraph for proof of this)!!

With that being said, the pictures of people being in iron lungs, and all the talk of the polio viral infection being so deadly, was almost certainly a misdiagnosis of pesticide poisoning, such as DDT. This was a “fringe” theory when proposed by Morton S. Biskind, M.D., in the late 1940’s, early 1950’s. However, many more doctors and scientist are getting on board today. 

All it really takes is looking at the symptoms of being poisoned by a lot of the pesticides being used back then, and the massive decrease in polio diagnosises after the banning of these pesticides, to have a pretty good idea what was causing all the polio diagnosises. The article Pesticides and Polio: A Critique of Scientific Literaturewritten by Jim West and published by The Weston A. Price Foundationdoes a fantastic job showing this.

Vaccines are fundamentally unsafe anyways

However, lets assume that these microorganisms are as scary as the industry has conditioned, laypeople and doctors alike, to believe. The whole idea of vaccination is a completely illogical way to counter these invading pathogens, making it impossible to create a “safe” vaccine. 

Think about it.

If there are these germs that cause nasty infections, how in the world is injecting said scary microorganism into the bloodstream the logical way to counter deadly infections? 

When you bring this up to semi-knowledgeable pro-vaccination advocates they often deflect from the question by stating you do not know how vaccines work because they are not shot in the bloodstream.

This is semantics.

Yes, vaccines are not technically shot in the bloodstream, the injection goes into the muscle. Nevertheless, the sole purpose of vaccination is for the pathogenic microorganism inside the vaccines to get to the bloodstream. From there, the pathogenic microorganism can move through the body, getting to the areas of the immune system that causes the innate immune system to start producing antibodies.

That is a summarized version of the theory behind how vaccines create immunity. The industry has us believe if a vaccine causes the immune system to create antibodies you are immune. However, the creation of antibodies can not happen in the muscle where the injection takes place. Therefore, the vaccine’s ingredients are designed to make it to the blood…

In other words, getting the ingredients to the blood stream is the goal of vaccination! 

Using semantics, by saying someone does not know what they are talking about because they say “injecting vaccines into the bloodstream”, is a red herring logical fallacy, in my humble opinion. Red herring logical fallacies deflect away from an argument you are losing (or about to lose) by changing the subject. In this case, they change the subject by making you defend your knowledge of vaccination. A person saying this may not even know they are using a red herring. They could just be repeating what they heard without realizing the goal of vaccines is to have the viruses or bacteria within them get to the blood, making their claim semantics. However, it is still a red herring to deflect away from the 800 pound gorilla in the room, which is: why would you be injecting an extremely dangerous pathogenic microorganism into your body in order  to protect it against? 

Logic dictates that if something can seriously attack your body, you stay away from it. Moreover, fortifying and building our body’s immune system to protect itself if said invaders happen to get past our bodies defense mechanisms (the tract systems that keep pathogens that enter the body via inhalation, or ingestion, out of the blood stream and away from the organs) is what would truly protect us from dangerous germs. 

The last thing you should do is inject the very scary germs passed the body’s defenses and straight into the bloodstream were it will be circulated throughout our entire body!

That is asinine and only leads to a body-wide infection you are desperately trying to avoid. 

Think about this; when you inject a pathogenic microorganism into your bloodstream and passed the body’s tract systems designed to keep these things away from the blood, the pathogenic microorganism will spread throughout the body. Unless, of course, the immune system can fight of the microorganism before it becomes a full body infection. 

This is common sense. Or it should be, that is… 

You simply do not inject a virus into your body, even if they say said virus is “weakened” (which still cause infections in the recently vaccinated, followed by shedding of said “weakened” vaccine strain virus, leading to transmission in others) , unless you are trying to have said virus cause an infection. 

Yet, this is what we, as a society, are doing to ourselves. We are so scared of getting an infection that we purposefully inject pathogenic microorganisms into our body…

…to prevent the infection!

And, make no mistake the pathogenic microorganism are indeed causing infections. There is literally no way around it.

This is why the mass polio vaccination program, mentioned before, resulted in more polio diagnosises. Again, you can click on the hyperlink to my before mentioned article on this to see proof. 

That is why people often get elevated body temperatures after the flu shot. The body is heating up to try to kill the virus that has invaded.

This is why most vaccine inserts list symptoms very close to what manifest with the wild viral/bacterial infection, as a known “adverse reaction”. In other words, the inserts will say a known “reaction” as having “flu-like” symptoms after getting the flu vaccine; or a “measles-like rash” after getting the MMR vaccine.

Measles is very fear mongered today. Therefore, when more children started getting the “measles-like rash” after vaccination, articles were written to assure parents this was an “allergic reaction” to the vaccine. 

Here are a few excerpts from one such article:

The rash looks a bit like the one caused by the disease itself: red dots on the chest and neck.

I wonder why? It goes on:

The rash usually appears about 10 days after your child was vaccinated, but sometimes shows up as early as the third or as late as the 28th day. It may be accompanied by mild fever

Hmm, sounds very similar to when symptoms occur after coming in contact with the wild measles virus. Coincidence, I’m sure. 

Anything else?

Since the vaccine is usually given in combination with the vaccines for mumps and rubella (German measles) in a mixture known as MMR, it can cause mild symptoms of mumps and rubella as well: swelling in the glands under the ears or a salmon-colored rash.

It is right there for everyone to see. After injecting the multidose vaccine, people have shown symptoms of being infected by the 3 viruses inside the vaccine…

Nothing to see here folks. Move along.

Well, they must have a good reason for this, right? lets see:

What causes it?

The rash is a reaction to the vaccine, which contains live, but weakened viruses. No one knows why some children get the rash and others don’t.

No– some of us understand what is causing this and why only some kids manifest the rashes…

Here is a real world situation of an infant getting the MMR vaccine, then the “measles-like rash”, and the justifications doctors use to dismiss it as not being the measles infection.

This all took place after the Disneyland outbreak being blamed on unvaccinated kids. This particular case happened in Baltimore to a one year old, recently vaccinated girl. 

Here is what  Dr. Leana Wen, Baltimore City commissioner of health had to say:

This child does have a lot of symptoms of measles and also has positive blood testing

So, the child gets a vaccine and manifest many of the symptoms of the measles virus. Since, this was so close to the Disney outbreak and people were so scared that it is spreading to people who and lived on the other side of the country, they tested for the measles virus (which is hardly ever done on kids manifesting “measles-like rash” or symptoms after vaccination). The test confirmed the vaccine strain of the virus was causing the symptoms.

So, they concluded the vaccine gave the girl the measles viral infection, right? 

No, the doctor said that since the vaccine strain caused the infection it is a false alarm!!! 

You can’t make this stuff up people.

The medical school’s pro-pharmaceutical curriculum have conditioned doctors into believing that only wild strains of a pathogenic microorganism can cause an infection. Case in point, when someone shows symptoms of getting an infection that has spread to the lungs or skin after vaccinated, it called an “allergic” reaction despite them isolating the vaccine strain virus in the patients throat. 

This spits in the face of science, logic, common sense and critical thought. 

In conclusion, after looking at all the evidence presented here, I feel very confident in my assertion that vaccines produce only harm, and zero good– making vaccines the biggest hoax in medical history.

Moreover, I find it hard to believe that someone can look at this information from an unbiased point of view, and not come to the same conclusion as myself. Therefore, getting people to question the main tenet of vaccination in this way, is how we will finally end the vaccination program forever.

After all, this is nothing more than an information war, which features one side with very good fear-based propaganda. To counter this, we must give the people the knowledge needed to see beyond the fear-mongering and look at the theory of vaccination with logic and critical thinking. 

Share