Unvaccinated Children & Philosophical Exemptions

Forwarded by PROVE
In the December 27th issue the JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association), some doctors and CDC cronies published a study proclaiming the astounding finding that unvaccinated children are more at risk for measles and pertussis than vaccinated children. (Abstract available by clicking here.)

They went on to claim that “exemptors” put the public at risk because 11% of those who got the measles got them from an “exemptor”. Think about that statement and do the math for yourself – if 11% of the cases were contracted from an “exemptor, that means 89% were contracted from someone who was vaccinated! It seems like the study really showed that the vaccine didn’t work very well when actually put to the test of having to protect someone.

Phyllis Schlafly, president of the Eagle Forum, just wrote a fantastic column responding to this so called study, and I thought it was well worth passing on. It supports the right of parents to conscientious/philosophical exemptions for their children.

From the article…
So why do ACIP and FDA so gratuitously recommend so many vaccines for all children? JAMA’s editorial reveals the answer: these recommendations are monetary decisions masquerading as medical decisions.

Here are JAMA’s words: “Since federal funding for vaccines is determined by the ACIP through the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program, whenever possible the ACIP should endorse funding for vaccines that physicians and parents wish to administer.” In other words, the real purpose of ACIP and FDA recommendations is to release federal funds to buy the vaccines from the manufacturers.

Cui Bono in Vaccine Mandate