What medical school textbooks (and the CDC) say is this: “Specifically, individuals who do not receive vaccine (e.g., because of a chronic or transient medical contraindication or low socioeconomic group) may have a different risk for an adverse event than vaccinated individuals.” In other words, risks that have not been accounted for and taken seriously may be present and masked by current studies that have healthy user bias.

CDC researchers have concluded “That studies are not “useful” unless HUB is controlled.” And it rarely has been in the past. In other words, not real double blind studies, but bullshit gathering of “administrative data” where people self select for the group they are in. It’s terrible scientific methodolgy!

They do clearly state that studies conducted with HUB are problematic. And that is most of them. They then go on to ignore their own concerns because they too are brainwashed into the absolute necessity of vaccines for public health, despite the costs to those who are injured and the clear (by their own metrics and words) overstatement of how beneficial they actually are. They’ve made a deal with the devil rather than push for better research methodology and safety initiatives. We don’t have a Federal Vaccines Injury Compensation program for nothing. We don’t prohibit suing pharmaceutical companies directly for no reason.

No-one wants a return to the time when polio or scarlet fever was a real concern. And no-one who has Guillain-barre or whose kid died as the result of a vaccine wants to have to make the choice between those two. We can demand better. It’s not that complex — unless you are a zealot who is ready to sacrifice other people’s lives and health for your own due to dogma and the religion of the divine perfection of vaccination.