This post is inspired by, and in response to, the article referenced below by Age of Autism (#1); The article discusses the number of applicants to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html) and the frustration that knowledge of the existence of this program is not being advertised/promoted in compliance with the law. The writer of the AoA piece also ponders what the response might be if applicants to the NVICP paralleled what is believed to be the under-reporting of adverse vaccine events to the VAERS database.
They focus on children, as they are still currently the primary recipients of vaccines. But adults are increasingly targeted as well - link #2 takes you to a .pdf of the current recommended vaccine schedule for adults.
But wait - there's more! Link #3 takes you to a .pdf with a list of vaccines in development ...
What concerns this writer, like the writer of the AoA article, is what's unseen, and unknown.
We have more chronic disease than ever before - inflammation is emerging as an important theory in disease, and vaccination (through various ingredients) promotes inflammation (#4, just as an example). Barbara Loe Fisher of the NVIC has written a book about this (#5);
I wonder if autism (brain inflammation or encephalitis) is only a marker of **apparent** vaccine injury that has been associated with vaccination (as so many have bent themselves in pretzels to say vaccines have never been *proved* to cause autism). I wonder if there are other medical problems that are co-incident to receipt of vaccination but have not yet been identified as such?
Children with autism are the canaries in cages ... but there is a huge reservoir of people coming down with flaming cases of black lung disease as well - there are actually far more of them, but because this takes longer to develop it is not acknowledged, and the connection to the cause is easier to deny, even harder to directly link.
We don't know what we don't know - that is what concerns this writer about vaccines. We do not know the consequences to our bodies of exposure to various aspects of vaccines, in particular, ingredients that are unintended (ie: dna from substrates used as growth mediums, or other viruses also associated with growth mediums), or from intentional ingredients, like adjuvants (ie: squalene or aluminum), let alone preservatives that are already implicated in various problems (ie: thimerasol);
The scandal of polio vaccine contaminated with SV40 is well documented - what's next?
People should be free to choose the risk they are willing to take - some would be willing to accept the risk of infectious disease, but unwilling to take the risk of vaccines. Others would rather take a vaccine now for short-term risk reduction of having an infection and accept the possibility of unknown longer term risk of vaccination. People should decide this for themselves.
If only the pharmaceutical companies were required to accept risk as well - what irony that they are shielded from the consequence of any adverse response to vaccination. It begs the question, why do they need that legal shield if vaccines are as safe and effective as they are said to be?
If adverse events to vaccination is under-reported now, when vaccines are primarily promoted to and for children, how large might the unseen part of the iceberg really be if adult vaccines are increased?