Anyone Who Tells You Vaccines Are Safe and Effective is Lying (2011)

By Dr. Vernon Coleman – 45 Q&As – Unbekoming Book Summary

• We all know there are two sides to every question. There are two sides to a piece of flypaper, too, but it makes a great difference to the fly which side he lands on. - Peter Seeger

• All are directly linked to vaccines in the scientific literature. On our website we have 1,400 peer reviewed studies published on NIH's website PubMed, linking various vaccines to all of those injuries. Well, they're making $60 billion a year selling us vaccines, but they're making $500 billion a year selling the remedies for the injuries caused by vaccines. - Robert Kennedy Jr.

• Truth wears no mask, seeks neither place nor applause, bows to no human shrine: she only seeks a hearing. - Anon

---

The "benefits" of vaccination are merely a pretext—a pretext for poisoning. It really is that simple.

It obviously wasn’t that simple when I first started questioning the childhood vaccination enterprise, and started coming to terms with what we had done to our two children.

You go through phases. You are trying to latch onto some concrete understanding of how this could be so.

As you progress through the different books and stages of understanding, thinking that you will find at least one vaccine that is necessary, safe and effective, you realise that there are none.

You start to see doctors, nurses, universities, media, courts, government and corporations all differently.

At one stage you might even glimpse Empire.

The benefits of vaccination are plenty, they are just not your child’s benefits.

The higher you go, the clearer it gets.

Nothing is more profitable than a poisoned baby. A poisoned baby is the greatest wealth transfer program yet invented.

Actually the only thing more profitable than a poisoned baby is a poisoned population.

Nothing is easier to control than a weak and poisoned population.

The profit permits the control that permits the profit…it’s circular and synergistic.

Poison. Power. Poison. Power…

I have shelves of books by now on vaccination, but honestly, they all just tell the same simple story.

It’s just poison, for the benefit of the poisoners.

With thanks to Dr. Vernon Coleman.

Anyone Who Tells You Vaccines Are Safe and Effective is Lying: Coleman, Dr Vernon

---

---

Related

• Vaccination, Social Violence, and Criminality

• Vaccination: The best of all possible worlds.

• Childhood Vaccination

• Vaccination: The Hidden Truth

• An Open Letter to Dads

• Interview with Josh Walkos

• Interview with Judy Wilyman PhD

• Interview with Larry Cook

• Grey Wolves

• The McDowell Triplets

Analogy

Imagine a town where everyone lives in poorly constructed houses with bad plumbing, contaminated water, and insufficient food. The residents frequently get sick. The town leaders gradually improve living conditions - installing proper sewage systems, providing clean water, and ensuring better nutrition. As people's health improves dramatically, a powerful construction company arrives and starts selling "special protective house paint" that they claim will prevent illness.

The construction company convinces the town leaders to make this paint mandatory for all houses, claiming it's responsible for the improved health of residents. They pay local painters hefty bonuses to apply it and silence anyone who points out that health improved before the paint arrived. Some children become ill from paint toxins, but these cases are dismissed as coincidental. When parents refuse to paint their houses, they're threatened with eviction.

The paint company continues developing new colors, insisting each is essential for protection, while the real factors that improved health - sanitation, clean water, and better nutrition - are ignored. The painters, now financially dependent on paint application bonuses, stop questioning whether the paint is necessary or safe, even as evidence of paint-related illness grows.

This parallels how the vaccination industry took credit for disease reduction actually achieved through better living conditions, while creating a profit-driven system that prioritizes vaccination compliance over genuine public health measures and patient safety.

12-point summary

1. Historical Deception: Disease mortality rates had dramatically declined due to improved sanitation and living conditions long before vaccines were introduced, yet this achievement was falsely attributed to vaccination programs.

2. Financial Corruption: The vaccination industry drives a profit-focused system where pharmaceutical companies make billions while doctors receive substantial bonuses for meeting vaccination targets, corrupting medical judgment.

3. Safety Research Gap: No proper long-term safety studies exist for vaccines, particularly regarding their effects on infant development or the practice of giving multiple vaccines simultaneously.

4. Suppression of Criticism: Critics of vaccination face systematic suppression through professional ostracism, media blackouts, and blocked research funding, preventing public access to critical safety information.

5. Brain Damage Link: Vaccines can cause brain damage, with governments quietly paying compensation to victims while publicly denying the connection. This damage is often relabeled as conditions like autism to obscure the vaccine connection.

6. Ingredient Concerns: Vaccines contain potentially harmful ingredients including mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, and animal tissues, along with numerous contaminants introduced during the manufacturing process.

7. Mandatory Vaccination Trend: Governments increasingly push for mandatory vaccination, prioritizing theoretical community benefits over individual rights and informed consent, while ignoring or suppressing evidence of vaccine dangers.

8. Compensation Reality: While vaccine injury compensation programs exist, they're designed to protect manufacturers rather than help victims, with families facing nearly impossible burdens of proof and inadequate compensation.

9. Medical Profession Transform: The medical profession has transformed from independent practitioners to agents of state vaccination policy, with financial incentives corrupting medical judgment and eliminating independent thinking.

10. Natural Immunity Superiority: Natural immunity provides more complete and longer-lasting protection than vaccines, while vaccine-induced immunity often proves incomplete or temporary.

11. Public Health Misdirection: Vaccination programs consume enormous resources while cheaper, more effective health measures like sanitation improvements receive inadequate funding.

12. Documentation Problems: Vaccine side effects are systematically downplayed, with temporal connections to injuries dismissed as coincidental and adverse reactions rarely properly documented or investigated.

Preface

Almost everyone who promotes vaccination is paid to do so. The supporters of vaccination have a personal interest in promoting vaccination. On the other hand, just about everyone who questions vaccination does so at great personal cost. Vaccination is big business and many of those who promote it, and make money out of it, do everything they can to protect an intellectually vulnerable but enormously profitable exercise. Experience tells me that this book will bring me much trouble, a great deal of abuse, a number of threats and considerable professional and personal inconvenience.

But I firmly believe that vaccination is one of the most offensive and dangerous of all modern medical practices, and I find it appalling that it is allowed to grow, seemingly unchecked and unquestioned. I don't believe anyone, anywhere, knows just how much harm is being done by the establishment's unquestioned enthusiasm for a practice which is of such doubtful value and which offers such potential for disaster. I hope this book will raise some questions and some doubts, and I hope that readers will share my concerns with their families, their friends, their neighbours, and their medical advisers.

Vernon Coleman, August 2011

45 Questions & Answers

Question 1: How did the historical success against diseases like smallpox influence modern vaccination policies?

The claimed success of smallpox vaccination created a foundation myth that has been used to justify all subsequent vaccination programs. However, one of the greatest medical falsehoods is that smallpox was eradicated through vaccination. During one of England's worst smallpox epidemics (1870-1872), the disease devastated the population despite widespread compulsory vaccination. In contrast, the town of Leicester rejected vaccination and relied on sanitation and quarantine, experiencing only one death during a subsequent epidemic while heavily vaccinated towns suffered numerous casualties.

The perceived triumph over smallpox led to an unbridled expansion of vaccination programs without proper safety testing or evidence of effectiveness. This historical narrative has been exploited by pharmaceutical companies and governments to promote vaccination as the primary method of disease prevention, while ignoring the role of improved living conditions, better nutrition, and sanitation in reducing disease mortality rates.

Two Control Groups: Sweden 2020 & Leicester 1885

Question 2: What evidence exists regarding vaccine safety testing before implementation?

No substantial research has been conducted to prove that vaccines are safe when given in combination or to young infants. The fundamental problem is that it would be ethically impossible to conduct proper safety trials on healthy babies, as parents cannot give informed consent for their healthy child to be potentially endangered. Drug companies and governments simply assume vaccines are safe because they want them to be, and no long-term safety studies are conducted or required.

The absence of proper safety testing is particularly concerning given that vaccines bypass the body's natural defense systems through injection. Instead of conducting thorough research, the establishment puts the burden of proof on critics to demonstrate dangers, knowing this is nearly impossible without cooperation from drug companies, government, or the medical establishment.

Question 3: How do financial incentives influence GP vaccination practices?

General practitioners receive substantial payments for giving vaccines and massive bonus payments for hitting vaccination targets. The basic payment structure is enhanced by a bonus system where GPs can receive up to £50,000 extra per year on top of their regular salary for achieving vaccination quotas. Most GPs don't even administer the vaccines themselves, instead directing nurses to do the work while they collect the profits.

The financial incentives have effectively bought the medical profession's compliance. GPs who question vaccination or fail to meet targets are financially punished, while those who vaccinate abundantly are rewarded. This creates an environment where doctors are motivated by profit rather than patient welfare, leading some to threaten removal of patients who refuse vaccines since this affects their bonus payments.

Question 4: What role did improved sanitation play in disease reduction compared to vaccines?

The dramatic decline in infectious diseases occurred primarily due to better sewage systems, cleaner drinking water, improved nutrition, and less overcrowding - long before vaccines were introduced. Examining mortality rate graphs alongside vaccine introduction dates clearly shows that improvements took place before vaccination programs began. The death rates from diseases like whooping cough, tetanus, diphtheria and others were already in steep decline due to these public health measures.

Sanitation improvements and better living conditions were the true heroes in reducing disease mortality, yet this truth has been obscured to promote vaccination programs. The medical establishment perpetuates the myth that vaccines were responsible, ignoring the clear historical evidence that clean water and effective sewage removal were the primary factors in disease reduction.

Question 5: How are vaccine side effects documented and compensated?

Vaccine side effects are systematically downplayed and documentation is poor, with many doctors dismissing adverse reactions as coincidental. In 2010 alone, the US National Vaccine Injury Compensation Programme officially recognized 2,699 cases of children being killed or injured by vaccines, with $110 million paid in damages. However, this likely represents only a fraction of actual cases since proving vaccine injury is extremely difficult.

The system is structured to protect manufacturers rather than victims. Drug companies rarely lose lawsuits related to vaccine damage because they have virtually unlimited resources to fight cases, while most families lack the means to pursue lengthy legal battles. Even when compensation is awarded, it often takes decades of fighting and the amounts are inadequate compared to the lifetime of care needed for vaccine-injured children.

Question 6: What is the connection between vaccination programs and autism rates?

The incidence of autism has increased dramatically in parallel with the expansion of childhood vaccination programs. While correlation doesn't prove causation, the epidemiological evidence is compelling - a US medical practice with 30,000 unvaccinated patients reports no cases of autism among their patient population. Furthermore, many parents have reported their children developing autistic symptoms immediately following vaccination.

Autism, in its more severe forms, appears to be a manifestation of vaccine-induced brain damage rather than a naturally occurring condition. The US government has reportedly accepted that vaccines may cause autism in some cases, though this is generally kept quiet. The medical establishment prefers the autism label over "vaccine brain damage" as it suggests a natural condition rather than an iatrogenic injury.

Real Autism Science - Lies are Unbekoming

Question 7: How do governments justify mandatory vaccination policies?

Governments promote vaccination primarily for economic rather than health reasons, aiming to reduce worker sick days and associated costs to the state. The underlying philosophy is that individual risk is acceptable for perceived community benefit - if vaccinating a million children prevents 1,000 parents from staying home with sick children, the government considers this worthwhile even if some children are permanently damaged by vaccines.

This utilitarian approach is never openly explained to parents, who are instead told vaccines are for their child's direct benefit. As public skepticism grows, more countries are moving toward mandatory vaccination policies, using coercive measures like preventing unvaccinated children from attending school or threatening parents with child protective services involvement.

Question 8: What ingredients are commonly found in vaccines and why are they concerning?

Vaccines contain a troubling array of ingredients including: aluminum (linked to brain damage), mercury-containing thimerosal, formaldehyde, animal tissues, antibiotics, and various chemical stabilizers and adjuvants. Many vaccines are cultivated using animal tissues or blood products, which can introduce dangerous contaminants. Documented contaminants have included: various animal viruses, enzyme inhibitors, carcinogens, and bacterial agents.

The combination of these ingredients, particularly when multiple vaccines are given simultaneously, has never been properly studied for safety. While the European Union bans mercury in household items like barometers for safety reasons, it paradoxically allows mercury-containing vaccines to be injected into infants. The presence of neurotoxic substances like aluminum and mercury is especially concerning given their known ability to cause brain damage.

The Unvaccinated - Lies are Unbekoming

Question 9: How does the medical establishment respond to vaccine critics?

The medical establishment responds to vaccine critics through systematic suppression rather than scientific debate. Critics are banned from speaking at medical conferences, their research is blocked from publication, and their work is actively discredited. Rather than engaging with the substance of criticisms, vaccine advocates typically resort to ad hominem attacks, labeling critics as dangerous lunatics or flat-earthers.

This suppression extends to the media, which rarely allows critics airtime or print space. When critics do manage to present their views publicly, they often find themselves subsequently blacklisted. The establishment's unwillingness to engage in open debate suggests they fear their position cannot withstand scientific scrutiny. Meanwhile, pharmaceutical companies maintain their influence through extensive lobbying and control of research funding.

Question 10: What evidence exists linking vaccines to brain damage?

Brain damage is a well-documented side effect of vaccination, acknowledged even by manufacturers in their product information. The British Government has quietly paid compensation to hundreds of children who suffered brain damage from the whooping cough vaccine alone. Initial compensation amounts were £10,000, later increased to £20,000 - though these sums are inadequate for lifetime care needs.

The connection between vaccines and brain injury is further evidenced by the consistent observation of post-vaccination encephalopathy, often manifesting as inconsolable high-pitched screaming - a sign of brain inflammation. Despite this documented association, the medical establishment has shown little interest in investigating the full extent of vaccine-induced brain damage, preferring to classify such injuries under various alternative diagnoses.

Question 11: How has the polio vaccine controversy shaped vaccine safety discussions?

Millions who received polio vaccines in the 1950s and 1960s were unknowingly exposed to the cancer-causing monkey virus SV40. The American government was warned of this danger in 1956, but the doctor who made the discovery was ignored and her laboratory closed. Drug companies took five years before screening out the virus, and Britain continued using potentially contaminated vaccine stocks without withdrawal.

Most troublingly, the British Department of Health destroyed all records that could identify who received the contaminated vaccines in 1987. This destruction of evidence effectively prevented those who might develop cancer from taking legal action against the government. The polio vaccine controversy exemplifies how vaccine risks are systematically covered up rather than addressed.

Question 12: What is the relationship between vaccination and cot death?

Many infants who die of "cot death" (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) do so shortly after receiving their vaccinations. When Japan postponed routine vaccinations until 24 months of age, their incidence of cot death virtually disappeared. This correlation suggests that SIDS may actually be an undocumented vaccine reaction rather than a mysterious natural phenomenon.

The medical establishment dismisses these connections as coincidental, but has never conducted proper research to investigate the timing of SIDS deaths in relation to vaccination schedules. The fact that cot death is now the leading cause of death in children between one month and one year of age warrants serious investigation of its potential link to aggressive vaccination schedules.

Question 13: How do vaccine manufacturers influence medical research?

Drug companies effectively control vaccine research by funding most studies and suppressing unfavorable results. When research threatens to expose vaccine dangers, manufacturers have even sought court injunctions to stop the studies. They hire strong lobbyists to promote their interests and ensure that journalists remain "on message" while inconvenient truths are ignored.

The pharmaceutical industry's influence extends to medical journals, conferences, and educational materials. Research that might question vaccine safety or effectiveness is rarely funded or published. Even when independent researchers document problems, their work is systematically discredited or buried through the industry's extensive influence over medical institutions and media.

Question 14: What role do animal experiments play in vaccine development?

Animal experimentation in vaccine development is both cruel and scientifically unsound. Standard animal tests give results that can be accurately applied to humans only 38% of the time - worse than flipping a coin. Drug companies exploit this unreliability by claiming that harmful effects in animals don't matter because "animals are different from humans," while simultaneously claiming that absence of harm in animals proves safety for humans.

This duplicitous approach allows dangerous vaccines to reach the market while providing legal protection for manufacturers. More concerning still is evidence suggesting that many modern viral epidemics may have been generated by medical scientists working with animals in laboratories, particularly during cancer research and military bioweapon development programs.

Question 15: How has the flu vaccine effectiveness been measured?

Flu vaccines represent a particularly egregious example of profit-driven medicine masquerading as public health. The virus strains used in vaccines are essentially guessed at a year in advance, making their effectiveness largely a matter of luck. Moreover, the constant mutation of flu viruses means that any protection offered is short-lived, requiring annual revaccination - a profitable arrangement for manufacturers.

The claim that flu vaccines prevent hospitalizations, deaths, or work absences lacks solid evidence. Instead, many recipients experience flu-like symptoms from the vaccine itself, while risking more serious side effects including Guillain-Barré syndrome, brain inflammation, and potential links to Alzheimer's disease in those receiving five consecutive annual shots.

Question 16: What is the connection between vaccination and Shaken Baby Syndrome?

Many parents accused of shaking their babies to death may be victims of misdiagnosis, as vaccine damage can produce identical brain injury patterns. The damage caused by vaccines can mimic the signs of traumatic injury, leading to wrongful accusations and convictions. In some cases, parents face murder charges while the true cause - vaccine-induced brain damage - goes unrecognized.

Medical authorities ignore this connection despite brain swelling and intracranial bleeding being known vaccine side effects. The establishment prefers to blame parents rather than acknowledge vaccine injuries, even when temporal relationships between vaccination and injury are clear. This results in a double tragedy: vaccine-injured children and wrongly accused parents.

We don't vaccinate! - Lies are Unbekoming

Question 17: How do vaccination rates correlate with disease incidence?

Historical data shows that disease rates often increased following the introduction of vaccines. In Tennessee, polio cases rose from 119 to 386 after compulsory vaccination. Similar patterns occurred in other states, with American polio incidence increasing by about 50% after mass immunization began. The case of whooping cough demonstrates that vaccine introduction made little difference to the already declining disease rates.

Disease incidence and mortality rates were dropping dramatically before vaccine introduction due to improved living conditions. Examination of historical records shows that vaccines were introduced after diseases were already well in decline, yet credit for this reduction was falsely attributed to vaccination programs.

Question 18: What methods are used to suppress vaccine criticism?

Critics of vaccination face systematic suppression through multiple mechanisms. These include professional ostracism, blocking of research funding, prevention of speaking engagements, and media blackouts. Medical journals refuse to publish critical research, while newspapers and magazines ban advertisements for books questioning vaccine safety.

The suppression extends to government investigations of critics, cancellation of planned interviews, and professional retaliation. Medical authorities have even banned certain doctors from speaking to NHS employees about vaccination concerns. This coordinated suppression ensures that the public rarely hears intelligent criticism of vaccination policies.

Question 19: How do vaccine injury compensation programs work?

Government compensation programs for vaccine injuries are designed to protect manufacturers rather than help victims. While the US program has paid millions in damages, it represents only a fraction of actual vaccine injuries. The burden of proof is placed entirely on families, who must fight through a complex legal system against government lawyers.

The system is structured to minimize payouts and maintain public confidence in vaccination programs. Even when compensation is awarded, the amounts are typically inadequate for lifetime care needs. Many families eventually give up due to the emotional and financial toll of pursuing claims.

Question 20: What impact do vaccines have on the developing immune system?

The practice of giving multiple vaccines to infants with developing immune systems has never been properly studied for safety. The human immune system is particularly vulnerable during early development, yet babies receive an increasing array of vaccines starting at just eight weeks of age. This aggressive schedule may interfere with normal immune system development.

Natural immunity development through normal childhood diseases is being replaced by artificial stimulation via vaccines, with unknown long-term consequences. The rise in allergies, autoimmune conditions, and chronic diseases may be linked to this early interference with natural immune system development.

Question 21: How has the number of recommended vaccines changed over time?

Modern vaccination schedules have expanded dramatically, with most children receiving 21 vaccinations against seven diseases by age two. This represents a massive increase from previous decades when only a handful of vaccines were given. The schedule continues expanding as manufacturers develop new vaccines for increasingly mild conditions.

The expansion seems driven more by profit potential than medical necessity. Vaccines are now created for relatively benign childhood diseases that were once considered normal development experiences. Each new vaccine addition represents significant profit potential for manufacturers and bonus payment opportunities for doctors.

Question 22: What is the evidence regarding multiple vaccines given simultaneously?

No research exists proving the safety of giving multiple vaccines simultaneously to infants. The potential interactions between different vaccines, their ingredients, and their effects on developing systems remain unstudied. The medical establishment simply assumes this practice is safe without scientific validation.

The complexity of potential interactions increases exponentially with each additional vaccine in the combination. The burden of toxic ingredients accumulates while the risk of adverse reactions multiplies. Yet this practice continues without proper safety studies or long-term monitoring of outcomes.

Question 23: How do vaccine contaminants enter the manufacturing process?

Vaccines are produced using living systems including animal tissues, cell cultures, and blood products from various species. This production method inherently risks contamination with foreign proteins, viruses, and other biological materials. Documented contaminants have included monkey viruses, avian leucosis virus, and various bacterial agents.

During the 1990s, British children received vaccines potentially contaminated with BSE-infected bovine material despite prior warnings about this risk. The full consequences remain unknown as no tracking system was maintained to monitor those exposed. This demonstrates how manufacturing processes can introduce dangerous contaminants that may not be discovered until years later.

Question 24: What role does herd immunity play in vaccination policy?

The concept of herd immunity is used to justify vaccinating individuals for community benefit rather than personal protection. Government policy aims for over 90% vaccination coverage to achieve theoretical herd immunity, regardless of individual risk. This utilitarian approach sacrifices some individuals for presumed community benefit.

The validity of herd immunity through vaccination remains unproven, as outbreak patterns don't consistently correspond with vaccination rates. Natural immunity acquired through disease exposure may provide more reliable community protection than artificial immunity from vaccines.

Question 25: How do pharmaceutical companies influence vaccine policy?

Pharmaceutical companies maintain control over vaccine policy through multiple channels including research funding, lobbying, advertising, and direct influence over medical education. They pressure governments by threatening to relocate their industries if policies don't favor their interests. Strong lobbying efforts ensure media compliance and suppression of critical viewpoints.

These companies have effectively purchased the medical establishment's cooperation through research grants, speaking fees, and other financial incentives. Their influence extends to government advisory committees, where individuals with industry connections often hold key positions in policy-making roles.

Question 26: What are the main arguments against compulsory vaccination?

Compulsory vaccination violates fundamental human rights by forcing medical procedures without informed consent. The State's insistence on mandatory vaccines prioritizes theoretical community benefits over individual health and safety. This approach ignores both the risk of serious adverse reactions and the lack of proper safety studies proving vaccine effectiveness.

The inherent conflict between personal liberty and state control becomes particularly concerning when vaccination is linked to school attendance, medical care access, or child custody. Making vaccination compulsory effectively removes the parent's right to make informed medical decisions for their children while protecting manufacturers and doctors from liability for adverse reactions.

Question 27: How has media coverage of vaccination changed over time?

Media coverage has become increasingly one-sided, with critical perspectives systematically excluded from mainstream discussion. Journalists now simply repeat official viewpoints from government sources and pharmaceutical companies without investigating safety concerns or questioning the evidence. The pharmaceutical industry maintains control through advertising revenue and direct influence over editorial policies.

Publications that once allowed balanced debate now refuse to publish or advertise books questioning vaccination safety. Critics are denied airtime on television and radio programs, while vaccine promoters receive unlimited platforms. This controlled narrative prevents public access to important safety information and alternative viewpoints.

Question 28: What evidence exists regarding long-term vaccine effects?

No long-term studies have been conducted to evaluate the safety of the current vaccination schedule or individual vaccines. Neither drug companies nor governments perform ongoing research to determine long-term consequences of vaccination. This absence of evidence is particularly troubling given the increasing number of vaccines given to young children.

The potential for vaccines to cause delayed reactions, chronic conditions, or generational effects remains uninvestigated. When health problems emerge years after vaccination, the connection is typically dismissed without proper investigation. The lack of long-term safety data represents a fundamental flaw in vaccination policy.

Question 29: How do vaccination policies differ internationally?

Different countries have adopted varying approaches to vaccination, demonstrating the lack of scientific consensus. Japan postponed routine vaccinations until age two after observing adverse reactions in infants. Some European countries have rejected certain vaccines that continue being used elsewhere, while others have introduced mandatory vaccination programs with severe penalties for non-compliance.

These policy differences reveal how political and economic factors, rather than scientific evidence, often drive vaccination programs. Countries that maintain vaccination choice generally report health outcomes equal to or better than those with strict mandatory programs.

Question 30: What role do health visitors play in vaccination programs?

Health visitors function as government agents promoting vaccination compliance, often using pressure tactics and threats to achieve vaccination targets. They rarely provide balanced information about vaccine risks and benefits, instead focusing solely on achieving maximum vaccination rates. Parents report feeling bullied and intimidated by health visitors who question their vaccination choices.

These professionals have essentially become marketing agents for pharmaceutical companies, abandoning their traditional role of providing unbiased health guidance. Their effectiveness is often measured by vaccination uptake rates rather than overall child health outcomes, creating pressure to prioritize vaccination over other health concerns.

Question 31: How has the definition of vaccine success changed over time?

The measure of vaccine success has shifted from actual disease prevention to the production of antibodies, regardless of whether these provide real protection. Originally, vaccines were judged by their ability to prevent serious illness and death. Now, success is often claimed based on statistical manipulation and redefinition of disease criteria after vaccination programs begin.

The medical establishment frequently changes disease definitions or diagnostic criteria to create the appearance of vaccine effectiveness. When vaccines fail to prevent disease, authorities claim they reduce severity rather than acknowledging the failure of their original promises.

Question 32: What are the financial implications of mass vaccination programs?

The global vaccine market reached $21 billion in 2010, growing at 16.5% annually. Mass vaccination programs represent an ideal business model for pharmaceutical companies because they target healthy people, require repeated administration, and enjoy government mandate. The costs extend beyond direct vaccine expenses to include administration, promotion, and caring for vaccine-injured individuals.

Governments commit massive resources to vaccination programs while ignoring more cost-effective public health measures like sanitation improvements. British taxpayers alone lost £150 million on unused swine flu vaccines in one program, demonstrating the wasteful nature of panic-driven vaccine purchases.

Question 33: How do vaccine promotional campaigns influence public opinion?

Promotional campaigns systematically exaggerate disease risks while downplaying vaccine dangers. Previously mild childhood diseases are rebranded as deadly threats once vaccines become available. These campaigns exploit fear and parental guilt while withholding critical safety information.

The pharmaceutical industry orchestrates these campaigns through direct advertising, media influence, and healthcare provider incentives. Doctors and nurses are recruited as unwitting marketing agents, repeating industry talking points without investigating their accuracy.

Question 34: What evidence exists regarding natural versus vaccine-induced immunity?

Natural immunity acquired through disease exposure typically provides more complete and longer-lasting protection than vaccines. Historical practices like "measles parties" allowed children to develop natural immunity when diseases posed least risk. This approach respected the body's natural immune development process.

Vaccine-induced immunity often proves incomplete or temporary, requiring multiple boosters. The artificial stimulation of the immune system through injection bypasses natural immune development pathways, potentially interfering with normal immune function.

Question 35: How has the medical profession's approach to vaccination changed?

The medical profession has transformed from independent practitioners making individual patient decisions to agents of state vaccination policy. Financial incentives have corrupted medical judgment, with doctors receiving substantial bonuses for meeting vaccination targets. This system rewards compliance and punishes questioning of vaccine safety.

Modern medical education eliminates independent thinking about vaccination, producing doctors who simply follow government directives without questioning safety or effectiveness. The profession has abandoned its traditional role of protecting individual patients in favor of implementing population-level policies.

Question 36: What role do vaccination targets play in healthcare policy?

Vaccination targets create a system of financial rewards and punishments that compromise medical ethics. Healthcare providers face pressure to achieve arbitrary vaccination percentages, leading to coercive practices against patients. These targets prioritize vaccination rates over individual patient welfare.

The target system transforms healthcare from a service focused on individual needs to a production-line approach where patients become statistics. Doctors who question targets or respect patient choice face financial penalties and professional ostracism.

Question 37: How are vaccine risks communicated to parents?

Vaccine risks are systematically downplayed or hidden from parents. Healthcare providers rarely discuss specific risks, contraindications, or the complete list of vaccine ingredients. Parents who request detailed safety information often face hostility or threats of being removed from medical practices.

The informed consent process has been reduced to a formality, with parents given incomplete information and pressured to comply quickly. Critical information about adverse reactions, vaccine ingredients, and manufacturer liability protection is typically withheld.

Question 38: What is the connection between vaccination and autoimmune conditions?

Growing evidence suggests links between vaccination and various autoimmune conditions. The introduction of foreign proteins and adjuvants through vaccination may trigger autoimmune responses in susceptible individuals. The rise in conditions like asthma, arthritis, and diabetes correlates with expanded vaccination schedules.

Despite these correlations, the medical establishment resists investigating potential causal relationships. Research proposals examining these connections face funding obstacles and professional resistance.

Question 39: How do vaccine advocates respond to safety concerns?

Vaccine advocates typically respond to safety concerns with dismissal rather than scientific engagement. Critics are labeled as dangerous or uninformed without addressing their specific concerns. The standard response involves citing population statistics while ignoring individual cases of vaccine injury.

This defensive approach prevents honest examination of vaccine risks and benefits. Rather than engaging in scientific debate, advocates often resort to appeals to authority and consensus rather than addressing evidence.

Question 40: What evidence exists regarding vaccine effectiveness in preventing disease?

Historical data shows disease rates were declining significantly before vaccine introduction due to improved living conditions. Mortality rates for most targeted diseases had dropped 90% or more before their respective vaccines became available. The contribution of vaccines to disease prevention has been greatly exaggerated.

Many vaccinated individuals still contract the diseases they're vaccinated against, while vaccine-induced outbreaks occur in highly vaccinated populations. The effectiveness claims often rely on statistical manipulation rather than real-world evidence.

Question 41: How has the role of informed consent changed in vaccination programs?

Informed consent has been effectively eliminated from vaccination programs through mandatory policies and coercive practices. Parents face increasing pressure to vaccinate without being given complete risk information or genuine choice. The medical establishment treats vaccination as an obligation rather than a medical choice.

Healthcare providers rarely provide comprehensive information about vaccine risks and alternatives, violating traditional informed consent principles. Parents who attempt to make informed decisions often face discrimination or threats of medical care withdrawal.

Question 42: What impact do vaccination programs have on public health budgets?

Vaccination programs consume enormous public health resources while cheaper, more effective health measures receive inadequate funding. The focus on vaccination diverts resources from basic public health improvements like sanitation, nutrition, and housing that historically proved more effective at disease prevention.

The true costs extend beyond direct program expenses to include treating vaccine injuries, maintaining promotional campaigns, and operating compensation programs. These costs are rarely factored into public health budget analyses.

Question 43: How do religious and philosophical exemptions affect vaccination policies?

Exemption provisions increasingly face restriction or elimination as vaccination policies become more coercive. While historically respected, religious and philosophical objections to vaccination now face systematic opposition from medical authorities and governments. Parents seeking exemptions face increasing bureaucratic obstacles and professional discrimination.

The erosion of exemption rights reflects a broader move toward mandatory vaccination, ignoring individual conscience and religious freedom. Some jurisdictions now require parents to receive "education" about vaccination before allowing exemptions.

Question 44: What evidence exists regarding vaccine effects on infant development?

No comprehensive studies examine the impact of multiple vaccines on infant development. The practice of vaccinating eight-week-old babies, whose immune and nervous systems are still developing, has never been proven safe. The potential for vaccines to interfere with normal development remains uninvestigated.

The increasing rates of developmental disorders correlate with expanded infant vaccination schedules. The medical establishment dismisses these correlations without proper investigation of potential causal relationships.

Question 45: How has the relationship between doctors and patients changed regarding vaccination?

The doctor-patient relationship has been corrupted by financial incentives and governmental pressure surrounding vaccination. Doctors now function more as state agents enforcing vaccination policy than as patient advocates. The traditional trust between doctors and patients has been compromised by conflicts of interest.

Many doctors now refuse to treat unvaccinated patients or families questioning vaccination, abandoning their professional obligation to provide care regardless of patient choices. This represents a fundamental shift from medical care based on individual patient needs to population-level enforcement of vaccination policies.

---

---

I appreciate you being here.

If you've found the content interesting, useful and maybe even helpful, please consider supporting it through a small paid subscription. While everything here is free, your paid subscription is important as it helps in covering some of the operational costs and supports the continuation of this independent research and journalism work. It also helps keep it free for those that cannot afford to pay.

Please make full use of the Free Libraries.

Unbekoming Interview Library: Great interviews across a spectrum of important topics.

Unbekoming Book Summary Library: Concise summaries of important books.

Stories

I'm always in search of good stories, people with valuable expertise and helpful books. Please don't hesitate to get in touch at unbekoming@outlook.com

For COVID vaccine injury

Consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment as a resource.

Baseline Human Health

Watch and share this profound 21-minute video to understand and appreciate what health looks like without vaccination.