I've been slowly reading Vaccination Deception: How Vaccines Prevent Optimal Health by Teddy H. Spence, DDS, ND. It's a hard one for me, because I really don't like two opposite views without being able to really find truth. And even though I'm not even half through the book, I'm struck by the claims within it. And because those claims are so very bad, I can't easily come to grips with it in my mind. If the things this book claim are true (and at least some of them seem very plausible, without having double-checked the research myself), then I can't just chalk it up to a 'difference of opinion.' No, if these things are true, then the 'other side' isn't just lazy, it's wicked. THAT'S what's hard to swallow.
For one: He links vaccines to cancer. Me: Plausible - vaccines are often created using animal DNA, and foreign DNA seems unwise to introduce straight into our systems without expecting some eventual reaction. Isn't cancer intentionally caused in lab animals by that practice?
He links to SIDS, which seems to hold up, if the statistics on countries where infant vaccination isn't done are accurate. No infant vaccines, virtually no SIDS.
Some things I'd like to know more about: The 'renaming' of polio and other 'vaccination-eliminated' diseases. Spence claims that the incidence of polio and other diseases only seemed to drop because of a change in classification. Polio became "aseptic meningitis," "atypical measles" became a common diagnosis, etc. "Call it anything, but don't call it by the diseases for which you were vaccinated or the vaccine would be implicated." Something I found intriguing was the way polio was dealt with in one area: They eliminated "sugar and ice cream" and polio rates dropped drastically that year. When the sugar industry responded the following year, the rates rose again. Another 'cure' was being administered in Australia; a woman was treating patients with muscular training exercises and physical therapy.
(*side note - this fits anecdotally with family history. Gigi was very sick for a long time during her childhood, after which she couldn't walk. Her brothers thought she'd "forgotten how" and spent no small time dragging her up and down the fields, one on each side of her, until she 'relearned' how to walk. Some years ago a doctor asked her if she'd had polio, and she described that time in her life. He 'could tell' by her inability to wrinkle or fissure her brow, which, at least to him, signified having polio at some point.)
Also, why the "48-hour" window within which time a vaccine can be blamed for a reaction? That seems highly suspect to me. Is it truly so they can avoid facing the possibility that a condition 3 days later, or 3 weeks later might have something to do with the barrage of injections given a newborn or infant?
Will we ever get to real truth in this issue? I attribute many claims above to the author, but truly he defers to several different authors, scientists, and researchers for his claims. I could google them, but I have no doubt that, being controversial as this issue is, I will find each and every one of them 'discredited' by some medical association or government institution.
The last thing, the thing that's hard to wrap my mind around, is what in the world could be the motivation for perpetrating such a worldwide deception? I have to get out my tin foil hat here, because the only things that fit are pretty dark and conspiratorial. Population control? Doing away with the lower classes a la Margaret Sanger repackaged? Perhaps the last two-third of the book will offer some insight.
I'll keep you posted.