The Germ Theory Is Just A Theory

For centuries, the idea of disease was widely accepted and understood as something that spontaneously happened.  In some parts of the world, disease was often associated with curses, sin and ungodly living.  This idea has come to be known as the spontaneous generation theory.  However, this theory was disproven by Louis Pasteur through his famous boiled broth experiment in the mid 1800's.  Even though he was not the first to propose the Germ Theory, he played a vital role to help it become widely accepted, in so much that he is now known as the father of microbiology.  He explained that broth sealed from exposure to air will not spoil while broth left open to the air would.  Through the birth of the Germ Theory - we now have the advancement of modern medicine that revolves around this very theory.  We have discovered countless of bacteria and viruses - understanding their individual roles and how they create disease.  Modern medicine has been created to fight these known agents, creating pill after pill after pill. Billions of dollars are spent every year on this theory.  Vaccines are produced to protect individuals against such dangers.  Everything we know now stems from this Germ Theory - I sure hope it's correct . . . I mean, it is just a theory after all -

We all have placed our lives in the hands of modern medicine.  We have blindly put our faith in a widely accepted theory.  Have you ever driven down a road you thought was the right one, and soon realized the possibility that it may be the wrong road?  There's a point in which we ponder in doubt whether we should stop now and turn around, or to just keep driving and hope to see something familiar.  Modern medicine is beginning to get to that point now where they may have realized they are down a wrong path, but are at the point of mixed doubt and pride.  They can't turn back now, so they keep going hoping they begin to see something familiar.

I hate to say it - but the germ theory seemed like the good road that we are having doubts about now.  New theories are being proposed in it's place and research is disproving the widely accepted theory.  I'm not saying there is an answer, and possibly that is why there hasn't been any change in direction so far - however, it is vital to really sit down and make the decision of turning around, or just keep going.  Should we continue with a failing health care or should we make the effort to turn back and rethink everything we have known to get back on the right road.  It's a paradigm shift - but that's what its going to have to take.

When we get sick and start running a fever - there are two sides to look at it.  There is the medical model in which states that an agent has invaded the body and is attacking the body.  In this model - it is accepted to take fever reducing medicine, antibiotics, or even pain killers until our body is relieved from this agent.  There is also the holistic model.  The fever is the body's own design to increase internal body temperature in defense to kill off that invading agent.  Most agents are heat sensitive and become inactive in high temperatures. - So then why in the world would we want to take fever reducing medicine which would ultimately help the agent and interfere with our own body's mechanism?  Why in the world would we take an antibiotic which suppresses our own immune system to actually fight the agent?  Why in the world would we take pain killers to rid of pain which is the body's response to telling us that something is wrong - so that we can be relieved of the pain while the cause is still within us?  Why in the world are we still following the medical model?

The germ theory states that for someone to get sick, there must be a causative agent present and in return implies that if there is a causative agent, then that person will get sick - but I question, is it the agent that makes us "sick"?  Let's take a look at one common bacteria - Staph Aureus.  This bacteria is a causative agent for many illnesses ranging from mild infections to very serious and fatal outcomes such as endocarditis, sepsis, or toxic shock - However, if I were to take a swab of your face and put it into a culture - there will be guaranteed Staph Aureus present in the culture.  This very bacteria is all over our body and face. We have billions of bacteria on and inside us - more than there are people in the world or sands on the beach.  We live with these bacteria all around us every second of every day - and yet we aren't "sick" every second of every day - so the question really is - What is making us sick?

The answer surprisingly comes from the medical profession itself which is overlooked - "If a microbe is in or around us all the time and yet causes no disease until we are exposed to stress, what is the cause of our illness, the microbe or the stress?" - Hans Selye - a pioneering endocrinologist who demonstrated the existence of biological stress (He is one with a brilliant and understanding mind which I would recommend looking up and researching).
When Selye poses stress as a major factor, I think we can simplify that as a biological imbalance.  We need to live in balance in several forms.  One major balance is stress - but it can be physiological balance, nervous system balance, nutritional balance, and even a balance between all of these.  Stress when it becomes overwhelming for our body to adapt can be crucial in our health.  Stress effects the nervous system which in turn effects every molecule within and around our body.  It lowers our immune system specifically and creates an imbalance within us - thus making us susceptible for disease.

There is another medical doctor among a few others who understands this model of disease which would be worthwhile to look up - drpalevsky.com - I recommend reading the section - "If Your Child Is Sick" - I may need to just make this it's own post, but this provides a detailed and effective explanation of what happens when we are sick.  Which brings up my next point - Are we really sick when we are "sick"

You often hear the phrases "I caught a cold," or "I got food poisoning."  We say these things with the idea in mind that we caught a "bug" which is making us "sick" - How do we know that we are sick? Our first clue is by the presence of symptoms such as a runny nose, a fever, diarrhea, vomiting, or a cough.  However we are misled by the phrase "Symptoms" when in reality these are biological mechanisms.  All these "symptoms" are not caused by an agent, but rather they are our own body's defense mechanism to destroy and rid of the agent.  We cough, sneeze, vomit, and run a fever as a natural part of our immune defense.  It is our own body creating these mechanisms - and yet we take pills and medicine to reduce these symptoms that our body needs and depends on. Are we now seeing how the modern model of medicine is failing?

Sure, there are some medical treatments that may rid of the agent that our body is fighting, however, it has failed to treat the cause which is the imbalance we have in our very own biology - and thus we continue to get sick over and over and over.  The Germ Theory is an accurate model when it comes to a population of boiled broth, however, when applied to human biology and physiology it fails. A medical treatment toxic enough to destroy an agent, is simply a toxin to our own body.  In order to destroy an agent, sadly we destroy our own body with it.  Instead of building up the body naturally and in harmony with our biology, we continue to destroy it one pill at a time.

Through advanced technology and research - the medical field has done some incredible things.  I don't doubt some of the amazing things that can be done medically.  But among the many medical marvels, we must also be aware of the many medical failures.  Over 106,000 people die each year in the US due to adverse drug effects (these are deaths due to accurate protocol and proper administrations, and do not reflect deaths by errors or overdose) - Iatrogenic death rate.  All medically induced deaths properly administered due to protocol totals itself just under 800,000 a year costing nearly $300 Billion every year. Iatrogenic deaths are among the top five causes of deaths in the US.  The other 4 causes of death are heart disease, cancer, stroke, and lower respiratory diseases - all preventable and lifestyle diseases in which the medical field is failing to treat - because they fail to treat the body.  With all their knowledge and technology and advanced medicine - they cannot stop the growing numbers of these diseases and conditions.  They have come to the point where they know they can't do anything about it, and yet thousands are dying and billions are spent on a Theory.  The Germ Theory, as much as it has provided us, has led us down the wrong road.  It is about time we stop and make the changes necessary to get on the right path.

Having symptoms is a good thing - it means our body has the ability to adapt and fight off infections.  We should acknowledge this understanding and do what we can to help our body in its proper and normal actions.  This means to build our immune system by filling ourselves with natural and healthy nutritional support, and bringing ourselves back into balance in every aspect.  We need to understand the body and it's capabilities in order to regain long lasting health and freedom.  We need to stop - and get back on track, back to health and happiness

Vaccines- Let's Discuss

I first feel like I need to apologize for doing a vaccine post. I told myself that this was one subject I wasn't going to touch on, and I've gone back and forth on this decision.  I know my choice may open up debate, and subject myself to criticism, but hey, at least I might finally get a comment on my blog.

I usually post information I have learned in class or other forms of information provided in my education.  I am on break right now, so this is not a lecture of some sort.  Rather, I have had much exposure to vaccine education and I will try to provide as much research and articles I can on certain subjects, mixed with my own honest opinions.  And when I say honest- I will come out and say that I am not for nor am I against vaccines.  This is not an idle position.  I have my own stance on the subject, planted firmly with conviction, but I feel that I do not have the right to force people one way or the other.  It is my responsibility however to provide complete information that will allow for others to make their own choices using reason and logic and not fear and persuasion.  I admit, I may sound a bit bias in this blog, but that's part of the reason for this post.  I recently have read on article which resembles how people are sadly misled and misinformed. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/04/cost-vaccine-refusal/

This article put blame on the unvaccinated people for starting a measle outbreak and costing $800,000 for the government to contain it.  Sounds pretty scary.  Really?  This article is filled with fear and misleading and incomplete information.  Was anyone seriously hurt?  I counted one in the ICU and another had sever asthma attacks, but that was only 2 people out of how many? 14? 21? 363? Their numbers seem to vary. And I failed to read anyone dying.  And I love how they bring in the children and mention someone with Down Syndrome and someone with Brain Cancer to play with the reader's emotions and yet never really say what happened as a result.  Probably because nothing did.  Let me see if I can fill in the missing sentence. "And infected, among others someone with brain cancer and someone with Down Syndrome . . . who came down with a fever, cough and cold for a fews days and soon fully recovered." Hmm, sounds very serious. And my favorite- How much is $800,000?  Is it a lot?  It sounds like a lot, but it's interesting how the article never explains anything or puts it into any comparison.  So it costs $800,000 unnecessarily spent to contain a disease that had no real threat.  Let's compare.  How much does it cost to vaccinate?  How much does it cost to pay to treat the side effects of these vaccinations? And how much money goes right into the pockets of the Pharmaceutical companies?  Funny how the article doesn't mention any more numbers.  Sounds incomplete to me, but most bias and fear based articles are.

It's articles like these that make me frustrated, only telling one side of the story and completely ignoring the other side.  But I say again I am not bias.  If there was an article saying that vaccines were evil and had no benefits- I would be the first to raise my hand and ask, "Did you forget about Polio and Small Pox?"  So, it's not a matter of whose right and whose wrong, it's a matter of being fair to the reader and provide the whole truth.  And if an article is going to attack one side, it's fair game to be put into question- as it should be.  But the one second I question this article, I get put with the stigma of, "You're just trying to stir controversy"  Really?  I never questioned vaccines, nor did I say anything "Controversial", I was just simply questioning the integrity of the article.  If one is going to be offensive over being questioned, sounds a little fishy to me.

My comments were called "controversial" by a friend who just recently graduated as an RN.  I was soon humbled by her vast knowledge on the subject and incredible research. (when I say "vast", I mean copied and paste and when I say "research", I mean studies manipulated by the pharmaceutical companies).  I was then asked to share my research.  First, I prefer logic over manipulated research.  Second, even if I did share any research, it would be labeled "unreliable" before even reading it.  Sorry, I'm not going to play "My dad is stronger than your dad" game.  I don't play those games.  Rather, I would like to play the, "Your dad is a dishonest Billionaire who takes advantage of his consumers for his gain who sacrifices health and ethics over money" game.  Let's play

What Are Vaccines?
          Vaccines are "a preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or artificially increase immunity to a particular disease." (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine)
"A suspension of attenuated or killed microorganisms (viruses, bacteria, or rickettsiae), or of antigenic proteins derived from them, administered for prevention, amelioration, or treatment of infectious diseases"
(http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/vaccine).  It was Edward Jenner who first discovered the idea of vaccines over 200 years ago when he noticed that the milkmaids who often became sick with cow pox, never got sick with small pox.  He put this to a test, injecting the neighbor's boy who had never been exposed to cow or small pox with the cow pox disease.  Weeks later, he injected the same boy with small pox and the boy never developed symptoms.  This was the beginning of modern day vaccines. (http://www.niaid.nih.gov/topics/vaccines/research/Pages/cowsVaccines.aspx).  Since then, through the several decades when society has been plagued by a disease, vaccines have been formed to help protect the public, which includes Yellow fever, Typhoid fever, Tuberculosis, Tetanus, Small Pox, Rubella, Rabies, Polio, Pneumonia, Mumps, Measles, Lyme's Disease, Hepatitis, Diptheria, Influenza, and several others that have recently developed.  I agree with Dr. Jennifer Barham-Floreani when saying that "Vaccination makes a lot of sense and the intention is honorable."

What Are The Results?
          This is the debatable issue, each side arguing one way or the other.  Using the MMR (Mumps, Measles and Rubella) vaccine, since this is the one in question from the article and often the most debated, the product insert stated on the Merck website states, "For measles, 894,134 cases reported in 1941 compared to 288 cases reported in 1995 resulted in a 99.97% decrease in reported cases; for mumps, 152,209 cases reported in 1968 compared to 840 cases reported in 1995 resulted in a 99.45% decrease in reported cases; and for rubella, 57,686 cases reported in 1969 compared to 200 cases reported in 1995 resulted in a 99.65% decrease."  Sounds impressive.  Even certain websites show graphs of dramatic decline in cases since the introduction of vaccines. (http://vaccinateyourchildren.wordpress.com/graphs-and-data).  While on the other hand, other websites argue that these same diseases were already in decline before the vaccines were administered. (http://www.vaccineinitiative.org/?p=290).  While both of these websites seem to be impressive one way or the other, in reality these websites are both flawed.  While those against vaccines show a decline before vaccinations, they only refer to deaths and not the number of cases.  Those pro vaccinations ignore the decline in deaths, but show the number of cases remained the same until the vaccinations were administered.  They argue that even though deaths were low, some of these cases included serious complications.  What they don't tell you is that these serious complications are rare.  In most cases, these diseases are treatable and soon recoverable.  "The decline in infectious diseases in developed countries had nothing to do with vaccinations, but with the decline in poverty and hunger." -Dr Buchwald, M.D.
But if vaccines have declined incidence, then there should be nothing to treat anyway.  Sounds good to me.  Graphs show a decline in cases of most of these diseases, but I question- At what price?

What Are The Effects Of The Disease vs Vaccination?
          This is where it gets interesting.  The CDC states that symptoms and complications of the Measles include fever, runny nose, cough, and rash with complications of ear infection, pneumonia, encephalitis, miscarriage in women who are pregnant, and possible death (in undeveloped countries). (http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/overview.html)
More complications include Strep, Blindness, Bronchitis, Hepatitis, SSPE, deafness, convulsions, and paralysis.  However, this same source states that the Measles primarily occur in children ages 6-15 years of age, where before vaccines almost every child had and recovered from Measles before the age of 15 yrs.  Following that statement, we read, "measles in teenagers and adults or in very young infants can be much more severe with serious complications." (http://www.nvic.org/Vaccines-and-Diseases/MMR.aspx).  So before vaccines, the measles were in children who often recovered without complications.  Now due to vaccinations, most cases of measles are now found in older children and adults which have more serious effects.  It also mentions the infants as well, but studies show that vaccines don't protect the infants anyway.  Vaccines are not supposed to be administered to children under the age of 15 months, and have never been studied for the effects of the vaccine under the age of 12 months.  And the mother who is vaccinated does not pass on antibodies to the child, while the mother who had natural measles will pass on antibodies to protect the child for the first year of life.  So, who is hurting the newborn child?  The natural measles where the mother passes on antibodies to protect the child, or vaccines where the infant is left with no antibodies for protection. I'll let you decide
So what about the effects of vaccines- looking at the MMR.  Here we go.  Panniculitis; atypical measles; fever; syncope; headache; dizziness; malaise; irritability; vasculitis; pancreatitis; diarrhea; vomiting; parotitis; nausea; diabetes mellitus; thrombocytopenia; purpura; regional lymphadenopathy; leukocytosis; anaphylaxis; phenomena; angioneurotic edema; bronchial spasm; arthritis; arthralgia; myalgia; encephalitis; encephalopathy; measles inclusion body encephalitis (MIBE); subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE); Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS); febrile convulsions; afebrile convulsions or seizures; ataxia; polyneuritis; polyneuropathy; ocular palsies; paresthesia; pneumonitis; sore throat; cough; rhinitis; Stevens-Johnson syndrome; erythema multiforme; urticaria; rash; measles-like rash; pruritis; burning/stinging at injection site; wheal and flare; redness; swelling; induration; tenderness; vesiculation at injection site; nerve deafness; otitis media; retinitis; optic neuritis; papillitis; retrobulbar neuritis; conjunctivitis; epididymitis; orchitis - and oh yeah Death.  Did you get all that.  And that's just from the vaccine directly, not to mention other indirect effects.  True, some of these conditions are rare, but when you start to add all the rare things together- They aren't exactly rare anymore.  My favorite is how the symptoms and complications of the natural measles are included in the complications of the vaccination- so what is the vaccine really doing?

Do Vaccines Prevent Disease?
          This was one subject I was called out on, asking if I didn't care about prevention.  Wait, when did the medical profession care about prevention, the same ones who prescribe one pill to take care of the effects of another.  I'm sorry, when someone came to you with diabetes symptoms- did you change their diet to prevent the progression of diabetes, or did you put them on insulin and watch them slowly decline?  Oh wait, so what you saying is that vaccines are suppose to prevent diseases.  Ok, let's take a look.  Some sources tell you that vaccines "create immunity that protects you from an infection without causing the suffering of the disease itself" (http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/vs-sv/vs-faq01-eng.php).  What they don't tell you is that it only boosts immunity for that particular disease.  The remaining results are staggering.  "Vaccinations depress our body's immune functions and that keeps us open to developing many other diseases" (http://www.mercola.com/article/vaccines/immune_suppression.htm).  There are several ways in which vaccines depress our immune system, but in general, the inoculation of a germ makes our immune system so tied up to that one particular disease that we become vulnerable to everything else.  Other diseases associated with vaccines due to immune suppression is Autism, Brain Damage, Seizures, Lymphatic Disease, Cancer, AIDS, Diabetes.  These aren't things to take very lightly.

"Cancer and other vile diseases are daily inflicted on virtuous families by vaccination." - Dr Edward Haughton, BAMD, MRCS

"Experts say 98 million Americans who took polio shots in the 1950s and 1960s may get a deadly brain cancer from the inoculations ... Researchers at the University of Chicago Medical Center say that a virus contaminated the polio vaccine and they have now found genetic material from the virus in a number of brain cancer victims." - Dr Jacob Rachlin quoted from Weekly World News of Lantana

When I think of vaccine prevention, I think of a basketball shoe.  Yes, a basketball shoe.  The basketball shoe has been developed over time, mainly to have a high top to prevent ankle injuries that often plagued basketball players.  In this noble cause they failed to acknowledge the poor support for the foot.  The lack of foot support has caused the foot arch to drop, creating flat feet and compromising the integrity of the structure of the foot.  Due to this change in structure, the knee is soon effected, and then hip and eventually the low back.  Soon enough over time one is complaining of foot pain, knee pain, hip pain, and back pain, but by golly they sure did prevent the ankle injury.  Vaccines are the same in fashion.  They do boost immunity for that particular disease, failing to cope for any other diseases that the body remains vulnerable to.

Is It Lying If You Don't Say Anything?
          I admit, this subject title is provocative, while I could just put, "What is in the vaccine?", but it wouldn't really prove my point.  I would be more pro vaccine if the injection was merely the disease like back in England 200 years ago with good old Edward Jenner.  I believe the birth of vaccinations started out as a noble and honorable task to protect the public.  Unfortunately, that same goal has been distorted.  In modern day vaccinations, the germ is accompanied with a variety of ingredients that are harmful.  It is shocking to me that many sources, even those pro vaccines show a list, maybe modified, but yet they do show a list of ingredients that are included, but yet act as if these ingredients have no effect.  Really?  They can't ignore that vaccines contain Mercury- and yet they mention it and pass it by as if it is not a neurotoxin or doesn't destroy the brain cells.

The reality of vaccines is the same as the reality of Dairy.  What do you hear about Dairy?  What are it's nutritional benefits?  Calcium . . . and that's pretty much it.  And using the logic that calcium is good for your bones, they add in the idea that "it does a body good".  What a Lie - Because what they don't tell you is that dairy also contains fats, phosphorus (which counteracts with the calcium, sometimes reversing it), bovine proteins which exceeds any amount a human really needs and is different than human milk, and several hormones (Both natural and injected).  While studies show dairy never has been proven to strengthen bones and prevent osteoporosis, what you aren't told is that dairy is associated with most children allergies, GI diseases, diabetes, Rheumatoid arthritis, obesity, and several other diseases.  And all you hear is how healthy Dairy is.  Probably the biggest Lie- well, besides vaccines.

Here are some ingredients found in vaccines. Let's take a look at what they don't tell you:

1. Mercury - (Thimerosal) - Neurotoxin and decrease mental function (while arguing that Mercury has no effect, they have taken it out of vaccines, all except the Flu vaccine- probably making it the most dangerous)
2. Aluminum - A toxin also decreases mental function, associated with Alzheimer's disease
3. Formaldehyde - carcinogenic
4. Antibiotics - cause of allergies
5. Acetone - neurotoxin
6. Antifreeze - cardiovascular dysfunction and acute kidney failure
7. Gelatin - cause of allergies
8. Egg Yolk - cause of allergies
9. 2-phenoxyethanol - toxic to cells and immune depressent
10. MSG - allergies, seizures, and brain tumors.

And those are just a few to mention.  There is also a list of preservatives.  Preservatives?  The Billionaires don't want to lose money, so just use preservatives and keep them on the shelf.  And I thought Twinkies were bad.  To be honest, if I had to choose a vaccine and a twinkie- I would chose the twinkie.  At least I would enjoy it- and have a greater chance to live longer.

If vaccines aren't preventive, then how can one protect themselves from diseases?  According to an article, the recent outbreak of Cholera in Haiti has shown incredible understanding of disease prevention.  The article states that those with proper hygiene, clean water, and good health are protected against the disease much more than those in poor living conditions.  Even more surprising is that it states that vaccines are no use, or at least will not be as effective as good living conditions.  (http://blogs.agu.org/geospace/2011/02/17/clean-water-education-haiti-cholera).  So what does that say about true prevention?  The key to protection is good health and building our immune system naturally.

Last Question - Where Is The Money?

          I truly would hope one would ask the question - Why is it so forced upon us to get vaccinated?  Hopefully this will enlighten any thoughts.  The medical doctors who force these vaccines on all of us are "Trained" at a medical school which is funded by the Pharmaceutical companies . . . who by the way provide the very vaccines given.  (Sounds like a conflict of interest to me).  And why don't we hear about this . . . oh yeah, they also fund the "Research".  The Pharmaceutical company is a Billion dollar industry.  You think they care about your health?  They just care about the money.  Just look at the H1N1 vaccine.  That vaccine was mass produced within months- untested- and for what- to protect us against a disease that was less threatening than the more common Flu.  And what about the Flu vaccine?  There are thousands of strands of the Flu and it changes every year.  There is no way a vaccine can prevent the Flu- yet, we are forced to get the vaccine.  It's the biggest scam of the medical profession.  What about the HPV vaccine?  Studies are now finding that the vaccine doesn't prevent cancer, and in fact in some cases can cause cancer.  I just found a website where they are now testing a vaccine for MRSA (a superbug that was created by the medical profession) and also for Traveler's Diarrhea. What?  Really?  Let's see how this conversation goes:

Patient:  I'm traveling and I'm afraid of getting Traveler's Diarrhea

Doctor:  Well, we have a vaccine for that

Patient:  But doesn't the side effect consist of Diarrhea

Doctor:  Not Traveler's Diarrhea, just "Diarrhea" symptoms

If you thought that was funny, check out this bit of info:
"VACCINES are the continuing success story, earning over $27 billion in 2009 alone, despite difficult economic times for the pharmaceutical industry . . . By 2012, vaccines are expected to bring in more than $35 billion in revenue." (http://www.iirusa.com/vbc/home.xml)

"Novavax Awarded $179M Contract by U.S. Govt:" (http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/03/01/novavax-awarded-17m-contract-govt-develop-flu-vaccines/)

"VaxInnate receives $196 million federal contract" (http://www.nj.com/business/times/index.ssf?/base/business-5/1303451138281250.xml&coll=5)

Are you kidding me.  Not only are these companies making Billions off of us- They are funded by the Government.  And that's just for vaccines alone.  Ethics have been thrown out the window.  We are taken advantage of.  We are being lied to.  They are making Billions based on our health, and I can't even question it?  If trying to be truthful is "Controversial"- then let's start stirring things up!