Category Archives: Health Care

States that restrict abortion have lower maternal mortality rates: Mexican study

unborn baby

LifeSiteNews: An international team of medical researchers comparing maternal mortality rates and abortion laws in 32 Mexican states claims it has disproven the claim of abortion promoters that easy access to abortion will reduce maternal deaths.

Comparing 14 states with constitutional protection for the unborn with 18 states with varying degrees of permissiveness over 10 years, the Chilean-Mexican-American team found that the less permissive states had a maternal mortality rate 23% lower, and a post-abortive mortality rate “up to” 47% lower.

Team member Dr. John Thorp of the University of North Carolina medical school said in a video released along with the study that it “pretty much refutes the conventional wisdom” that freer access to abortion will reduce maternal fatalities because abortions will be done in safe conditions.

The research director, Dr. Elard Koch, director of the sponsoring MELISA Institute and an associate researcher with the University of Chile’s faculty of medicine, said in the same video that the study does not show “making abortion laws less permissive will automatically decrease maternal deaths.”

But what it does show is that more difficult access to abortion has none of the negative impact on death rates claimed by organizations such as Planned Parenthood and the Guttmacher Institute.

At the same time, the study shows that states with more permissive laws had higher rates of violence against women. Meanwhile, those states with less permissive laws regarding abortion provided better prenatal care, more skilled maternity staff, and better emergency obstetrics.

Out of 10 factors examined, the one bearing the strongest relationship with reduced maternal mortality rate (MMR) was the mother’s literacy and education levels, which bring knowledge about pre-birth health and hygiene and dispel counter-productive folk “wisdom.” Less permissive states had better literacy rates.

Thorp said the results were not a surprise.  A similar study tracking Chilean MMR through several changes back and forth in abortion laws showed the same factors correlating strongly with a reduced MMR, especially female literacy maternal and access to modern medicine. It also showed that legal abortion access had little to no relevance.  Thorp also noted a study comparing abortion laws and the rate of complications arising from abortions in 23 U.S. states also showed that tighter abortion laws went with fewer complications.

Other factors the study found to be related to higher maternal death rates were “Poverty, malnutrition, and exposure to infectious diseases during the fertile age of women increase the risk of maternal death,” according to Sebastián Haddad, MD, a researcher at the Universidad de Anáhuac in Mexico.

DCG

Billing blunder: 13,000 in Washington State overbilled for health insurance

obamacare

KOMO: Nearly 13,000 people across Washington State experienced sticker shock this week after being billed three times their normal amount for health insurance.

A spokesman for Washington Healthplanfinder said the incorrect totals were withdrawn from bank accounts during the monthly payment process. The glitch meant hundreds of dollars were automatically deducted from customers’ accounts statewide. 

“We’re very upset about this issue and apologize to impacted customers,” said Michael Marchand, Director of Communications for the Washington Health Benefit Exchange. “We’re very concerned about this and we want to make sure that we’re able to provide remedies for those individuals.” The state expected to be able to reverse the incorrect withdrawals within the next 48 hours.

The glitch meant customers like Jim West were scrambling to get to the bank Tuesday morning to make sure accounts weren’t overdrawn. “For us it wasn’t a huge issue but a lot of seniors are on fixed incomes,” said West, of Lake Stevens. “I’ve seen one lady on Facebook that they’d taken an extra $800 out of her bank account. That can affect real people who are in need.”

This isn’t the first time the state’s health benefit exchange has run into problems. In December, 6,000 accounts were accidentally canceled. One month earlier, the health care exchange shut down after problems with tax credit calculations.

Marchand said Tuesday that customers were notified of this most recent problem via phone and email.

“Yes, this is part of the growing pains of an organization moving forward, but really, we’re a long-term play,” he said. “We’ve essentially created a marketplace where one hasn’t existed before. We’re fourth in the nation with lowering the rate of the uninsured. We’ve covered almost 640,000 lives and we’re continuing to make changes and improve.”

West, who is semi-retired, said he and his wife would be fine but feared what might happen to customers with less flexibility in their finances. “I think a state agency should be a little more careful with what they’re doing,” he said.

DCG

Rescued pig and blind dog become best friends

St. Bonaventure called non-human animals “creatures without sin.”

Raffy and Henry, though entirely different species, forged a beautiful and loving friendship.

Henry the pig was rescued from a factory farm when he was just a few days old. He was born in a farrowing crate, weak and cold, where his mom couldn’t even move around, let alone take proper care of him.

Henry's mom in a crate

Henry would have died if he had not been rescued by Brightside Farm Sanctuary.

Henry the piglet

While still a piglet, Henry met Raffy, a Golden Retriever who was born blind. Raffy became little Henry’s “mum” and best friend. Pig and dog would sleep, play, and even go for walks together.

Raffy and Henry

Now, Henry the pig is sick and dying. But his faithful friend, Raffy, will remain by his side to the end.

If you don’t already, you should know that the pork you buy in stores most likely came from a factory farm where pigs, cows, and chicken live their entire wretched lives, from birth to death, in cramped cages, and fed food loaded with hormones and antibiotics.

God bless the good folks of Brightside Farm Sanctuary in Tasmania, Australia! Click here for their website.

H/t The I♥Dogs Site and FOTM’s josephbc69

~Éowyn

Antibiotics-resistant superbug kills 2, infects 180 in Los Angeles

It’s here.

The antibiotic-resistant superbug dubbed “nightmare bacteria” is now a fact of life in the United States.

nightmare bacteria

A year ago, PBS’s Frontline reported that the largest U.S. outbreak on record of a strain of “nightmare bacteria” that infected 44 people at Advocate Lutheran General Hospital in suburban Chicago “is fueling alarm among public health officials about the spread of potentially lethal drug-resistant infections.” At the time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said just 96 cases of the infection had been reported to the agency since 2009.

The bacteria strain, known as carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae (CRE), is a form of superbug that lives in the gut and can carry a gene called NDM-1 that is resistant to practically all antibiotics on the market todayPerhaps more alarming, the gene can jump from bacteria to bacteria, making treatable infections untreatable.

Since the Chicago infection, the superbug has leapt across the continent to the west coast.

Chad Terhune reports for the Los Angeles Times, Feb. 18, 2015, that nearly 180 patients at UCLA’s Ronald Reagan Medical Center may have been exposed to the CRE “nightmare bacteria” from contaminated medical scopes, and two deaths have already been linked to the outbreak. UCLA declined to provide details on the two people who died, citing patient confidentiality. The number of CRE-infected patients may grow as more patients get tested.

UCLA said it discovered the outbreak late last month while running tests on a patient. This week, it began to notify 179 other patients who were treated from October to January and offer them medical tests. By some estimates, if the infection spreads to a person’s bloodstream, the bacteria can kill 40% to 50% of patients.

duodenoscope

At issue is a specialized endoscope inserted down the throats of about 500,000 patients annually to treat cancers, gallstones and other ailments of the digestive system, in a procedure called ERCP or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. These duodenoscopes are considered minimally invasive, and doctors credit them for saving lives through early detection and treatment.

But medical experts say some scopes can be difficult to disinfect through conventional cleaning because of their design, so bacteria are transmitted from patient to patient. The duodenoscopes typically involved in the CRE outbreaks have an “elevator channel” that doctors use to bend the device in tight spaces and allow for attachments such as catheters or guide wires. Experts suspect bacteria build up in that small area.

But Dr. Alex Kallen, an epidemiologist in CDC’s Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, said he hasn’t found any breaches in cleaning protocol at hospital outbreaks he has investigated. He believes the problem probably is more complicated than just a design issue: “There isn’t an obviously easy solution to employ. There is action on a lot of different fronts.”

The duodenoscopes are not the same type used in more routine endoscopies and colonoscopies.

UCLA said it immediately notified public health authorities after discovering the CRE bacteria in one patient and tracing the problem to two of the duodenoscopes. Dale Tate, a university spokeswoman, said UCLA had been cleaning the scopes “according to standards stipulated by the manufacturer.” After the infections were discovered, “the two scopes involved with the infection were immediately removed and UCLA is now utilizing a decontamination process that goes above and beyond the manufacturer and national standards.”

The UCLA outbreak is the latest in a string of similar incidents across the country that has top health officials scrambling for a solution. State and federal officials are looking into the situation at UCLA as they wrestle with how to respond to the problem industrywide.

Since 2012, there have been about a half-dozen outbreaks affecting up to 150 patients in Illinois, Pennsylvania and most recently at a well-known Seattle medical center, according to experts. These outbreaks are raising questions about whether hospitals, medical-device companies and regulators are doing enough to protect patient safety. Some consumer advocates are also calling for greater disclosure to patients of the increased risks for infection before undergoing these procedures.

Lawrence Muscarella, a hospital-safety consultant and expert on endoscopes in Montgomeryville, Pa., said the recent number of cases is unprecedented: “These outbreaks at UCLA and other hospitals could collectively be the most significant instance of disease transmission ever linked to a contaminated reusable medical instrument.”

CDC officials said they were assisting the L.A. County Department of Public Health in its investigation of the UCLA infections. Dr. Alex Kallen said the outbreaks are serious given the high mortality rate of this superbug and how difficult it can be to treat. He warns that additional cases might be going undetected.

Last month, Virginia Mason Medical Center (VMMC) in Seattle acknowledged that 32 patients were sickened by contaminated endoscopes from 2012 to 2014 with a bacterial strain similar to CRE. Eleven of those patients died. But VMMC said other factors may have contributed to their deaths because many of the patients were already critically ill. VMMC instituted a new quarantine process that sets the endoscopes aside for 48 hours so evidence of any bacterial growth can be found before reusing them. That has increased the time for equipment cleaning from a couple of hours to more than two days. VMMC said it had to purchase 20 additional endoscopes to compensate for that down time.

“There is either a design issue to be addressed or a change to the guidelines for the cleaning process,” said Dr. Andrew Ross, section chief of gastroenterology at VMMC. “It’s the role of the federal government to make some of those decisions.” Some patient-safety advocates say FDA regulators and industry officials have been too slow to respond.

A spokeswoman for the FDA said the agency was working to reduce the incidence of infections while maintaining access to a crucial medical tool by “actively engaged with the manufacturers of duodenoscopes used in the U.S. and with other government agencies such as the CDC to develop solutions to minimize patient risk associated with these issues.… The FDA believes the continued availability of these devices is in the best interest of the public health.”

Olympus Medical Systems Group, a major manufacturer of these endoscopes and UCLA’s supplier, said it was working with the FDA, physician groups and hospitals regarding these safety concerns and that all of its customers who purchase Olympus duodenoscopes “receive instruction and documentation to pay careful attention to cleaning.”

UCLA said it is notifying 179 patients and their primary-care doctors by phone and letter. UCLA offered to send patients a free home testing kit for a rectal swab, or they could come in to be tested.

Even before this incident, UCLA has struggled at times with patient safety. An influential healthcare quality organization gave the Ronald Reagan Medical Center a failing grade on patient safety in 2012. The hospital’s score improved to a C in the latest ratings from Leapfrog Group, a Washington nonprofit backed by large employers and leading medical experts.

Meanwhile, some doctors worry the outbreaks might deter patients from seeking care they need. “ERCP is a common and critical procedure in most hospitals today,” said Dr. Bret Petersen, a professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic’s division of gastroenterology and hepatology in Rochester, Minn. “It’s not a procedure we can allow to be constrained, so this is a serious issue we need to address.”

For Californians, see “How safe is your hospital? A look at California ratings“:

  • Kaiser Permanente hospitals consistently post some of the highest safety scores in California
  • UCLA Ronald Reagan hospital gets a C letter grade for safety; L.A. County-USC gets a D

See also:

~Éowyn

New study finds children of homosexual parents have more than twice the emotional problems as children of opposite-sex parents

gay parenting propaganda

Until recently, a long-standing conviction of sociologists is that children do better — as measured by their educational achievement, behavior problems, and emotional well-being — in married, heterosexual, two-parent households, when contrasted to single mothers, cohabiting couples, adoptive parents, divorced parents, and same-sex parents. As an example, in their 1994 book Growing Up With A Single Parent, sociologists Sara McLanahan and Gary Sandefur wrote, “If we were asked to design a system for making sure that children’s basic needs were met, we would probably come up with something quite similar to the two-parent ideal.” (Slate)

However, one of the arguments by supporters of same-sex marriage is that children of same-sex parents don’t do any worse than children of opposite-sex parents. Due to the Tyranny of Political Correctness, as well as flawed research methodology (e.g., small sample size), there’s been a scarcity of scientific data on how children of same-sex parents fare.

As Michael Cook points out in MercatorNet, Feb. 9, 2014, until recently nearly all studies of same-sex parenting were very small. One researcher found in a survey of 49 studies in 2010 that their mean sample size was only 39 children, and that only 4 of the 49 studies were random samples. The number of children being raised by same-sex couples is so small – 0.005% of American households with children — that capturing them in a random sample is like finding a needle in a haystack. The small and non-random samples, in turn, raise legitimate questions about the validity and generalizability of the studies.

But now, a study by Catholic University of America sociologist Donald Paul Sullins has overcome those methodological problems by employing more data than any previous study — a representative sample of 207,007 children, 512 of whom with same-sex parents, from the U.S. National Health Interview Survey.

Sullins writes in “Emotional Problems among Children with Same-Sex Parents: Difference by Definition” in the peer-reviewed British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science. that the two groups of children (same-sex vs. opposite-sex parents) were compared using twelve measures of emotional problems, developmental problems, and affiliated service and treatment usage, with controls for age, sex, and race of child and parent education and income. Instruments included the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) and the Kessler Scale of Psychological Distress (SPD).

Sullins found that “Emotional problems were over twice as prevalent (minimum risk ratio (RR) 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.7-3.0) for children with same-sex parents than for children with opposite-sex parents…. Joint biological parents are associated with the lowest rate of child emotional problems by a factor of 4 relative to same-sex parents, accounting for the bulk of the overall same-sex/opposite-sex difference.” The emotional problems included misbehavior, worrying, depression, poor relationships with peers and inability to concentrate.

In his study, Sullins examined whether other factors could explain the difference in the children’s emotional welfare, but concluded that none of them does. Those factors include:

  1. Instability: Children do not flourish in unstable environments. Gay and lesbian parents tend to rent rather than to own their own houses, which involves the trauma of pulling up stakes and resettling. Parental psychological distress is also associated with children’s increased risk of emotional problems. But Sullins found that neither renting nor parental psychological distress explains the differences in emotional well being of children.
  2. Homophobia: The most widely-accepted explanation of poor emotional and behavioral results amongst children in same-sex households is homophobia. Supporters of same-sex parenting attribute poor emotional well-being to stigmatization. These kids are damaged, it is said, because they have been singled out, teased and bullied. If their peers were less homophobic, things would be different. But Sullins dismisses this. “Contrary to the assumption underlying this hypothesis, children with opposite-sex parents are picked on and bullied more than those with same-sex parents.

Sullins concludes that “it is no longer accurate to claim that no study has found children in same-sex families to be disadvantaged relative to those in opposite-sex families.” As he puts it:

Joint biological parentage, the modal condition for opposite-sex parents but not possible for same-sex parents, sharply differentiates between the two groups on child emotional problem outcomes. The two groups are different by definition. Intact opposite-sex marriage ensures children of the persistent presence of their joint biological parents; same-sex marriage ensures the opposite. However, further work is needed to determine the mechanisms involved.

Sullins emphasizes that it is not that all children in same-sex homes will be emotionally damaged — “Most children in most families achieve a level of psychosocial function that is not characterized by serious emotional problems.” However, even if most kids are all right, more of them are all right in intact marriages with their opposite-sex biological parents.

According to MercatorNet editor Michael Cook, Sullins’ defiant rebuttal of the “no difference” hypothesis is sure to stir up a hornet’s next as the Supreme Court prepares to trawl through arguments for and against same-sex marriage, because it will be impossible for critics to ignore Sullins’ research findings.

But Cook also warns that Sullins should be “ready to go all 15 rounds” because he surely will be besieged by detractors. Cook points out that when University of Texas sociologist Mark Regnerus attacked the “no difference” hypothesis, his career was almost destroyed by trolls who trashed his data, his competence and his integrity.

Please pray for Donald Paul Sullins, a married Catholic priest with three children (he used to be an Episcopalian), and Professor of Sociology at the Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C.

To send Professor Sullins a message of support, here’s his email address:

psullins@gmail.com

~Éowyn

Shocker, not: “I have to pay back my Obamacare subsidy”

 

healthcare

CNN Money: Janice Riddle got a nasty surprise when she filled out her tax return this year. The Los Angeles resident had applied for Obamacare in late 2013, when she was unemployed. She qualified for a hefty subsidy of $470 a month, leaving her with a monthly premium of $1 for the cheapest plan available.

Riddle landed a job in early 2014 at a life insurance agency, but since her new employer didn’t offer health benefits, she kept her Obamacare plan. However, she didn’t update her income with the California exchange, which she acknowledges was her mistake. Now, she has to pay back the entire subsidy, which is forcing her to dip into her savings.

Riddle: "Blindsided and shocked"...

Riddle: “Blindsided and shocked”…

“I was blindsided that the subsidy has to be paid back,” said Riddle, adding she didn’t even use the coverage, which she had until she qualified for Medicare in October. “I’m in shock…but I have no choice. Do I want to argue with the IRS or the Obama administration?”

Like Riddle, many Americans on the exchange will likely have to pay back some or all of their subsidies. Between 4.5 million and 7.5 million taxpayers received subsidies for insurance premiums when they signed up for coverage on Obamacare exchanges, federal officials said. These folks had to forecast their 2014 income when they applied. Those who underestimated their earnings either will receive smaller tax refunds or will owe the IRS money.

Some enrollees, however, had a change in circumstances — such as a raise, new job, marriage or baby — during the year that could affect their subsidy level. Obamacare enrollees were supposed to contact their exchange so it could revise their premium. Some people, however, did not know they had to notify the exchange or simply didn’t bother.

Also, just because someone qualified for a certain subsidy at the beginning of the year doesn’t mean they are ultimately entitled to it. It’s the total annual income that matters, so if an enrollee got a big raise mid-year, his entire subsidy may have to be repaid.

Early data is in from some tax preparers. Some 53% of Jackson Hewitt clients who received subsidies have to repay part or all of it, with the largest being $12,000, said Mark Steber, chief tax officer. The rest overestimated their income so they are getting even larger refunds. One taxpayer is collecting an additional $7,500.

Some Obamacare enrollees who have to pay back their subsidies are now thinking twice about enrolling for 2015.

obamacare

Erica Cherington, 32, was “very happy” to enroll in Obamacare last year so she could address some health issues. She only had to pay $89 a month for a Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield plan, thanks to a $284 monthly subsidy. She let herself be automatically re-enrolled for 2015.

During 2014, however, the Newark, N.J., resident landed a new job with a higher salary. Now, she has to pay back $600 of her subsidy. To avoid this happening again, Cherington called the federal exchange to update her income, which she hadn’t done when she changed jobs. Her revised monthly premium: $156 a month.

A case manager who handles disability payments, Cherington is now considering dropping her coverage and paying the penalty instead. “It’s not really affordable,” she said of her new premium. “I don’t know if I’ll be able to keep it.”

I don’t want to say “I told you so”, but we did:

DCG

Physicians say aborted human fetal cells used for measles vaccine may cause autism

3 months old human

Jay Carpenter, M.D., writes in Crisis magazine, Feb. 13, 2015:

In recent days a controversy has arisen over whether parents should be required to vaccinate their children. Some politicians [notably Sen. Rand Paul] with presidential aspirations were criticized for defending the rights of parents to make that decision. As an internal medicine doctor, I believe strongly in the efficacy of vaccines. I also believe strongly that our vaccines (and all of our medical advances) should be safe and derived in a morally principled fashion.

There is an ethical concern about the measles vaccine issue that I do not believe the American public is aware: a component of the current MMR vaccine is derived from an aborted fetal cell line. As such, there is a large group of Americans who will not avail themselves of this “tainted” therapy.  The unfortunate truth is that there are ethical, morally acceptable alternative vaccines that are simply not made available to Americans.

Measles is a viral disease that can lead to infection of the brain (encephalitis) in 1 in 1,000 cases, resulting in serious neurologic complications and sometimes death. In addition, it can lead to other problems such as pneumonia. Vaccines for measles are now commonly combined in the MMR vaccine with vaccines for rubella and mumps. These diseases can also result in deadly complications. Vaccination can nearly eliminate the risks from these viral infections.

In order for vaccines to be made for viruses, the virus must first be isolated, then grown in a cell line to provide sufficient numbers of the virus. That viral material is again isolated and put into a vaccine to be injected into the recipient. In isolating the virus after it is grown in a cell line, particles from the cells, including particles of the host DNA in which it was grown, are collected and become part of the material that is injected into the recipient. When the cell line used is of human origin, legitimate concerns about the consequences of injecting another’s DNA into the recipient have been raised and not yet answered.

The rubella virus used in the rubella component of the MMR vaccine was obtained from a fetus that was aborted in the 1970s. To make the current MMR vaccine, it is grown in a human cell line, WI-38, that was derived from a 3-month-old fetus that was electively aborted in the early 1960s because the parents felt they had too many children. The cells from that original fetus have been kept in culture media, and have given rise to multiple daughter populations that are use in making vaccines.

The strain of virus used in the measles and mumps components of the MMR vaccine were derived from the blood of living children who had the disease in question and is grown in chick embryo cells, hence, there is no ethical concern about these components of the vaccine.

Prior to 2009, Merck, the manufacturer of the MMR vaccine used in the U.S. and in many other countries, made available individually separate vaccines for mumps and measles that were derived from the ethically acceptable sources as described. In 2009, they stopped making these vaccines available, despite reassurances to the contrary. Since then, Merck has refused to license these vaccines to other companies who were interested in making them available to the public. It has been since 2009 that the incidence of measles in this country has risen, so it is not inconceivable that legitimate ethical concerns have been at least one factor for the decline in the rate of measles vaccination.

The ethical problem is not isolated to the MMR vaccine. Cell lines from aborted fetuses are used in the vaccines for Hepatitis A, chicken pox, shingles, rabies, some small pox vaccines, some polio vaccines, some combination polio vaccines such as Pentacel and Quadracel, and in some of the new Ebola vaccines. Additionally aborted fetal cells are utilized in some treatments for hemophilia, cystic fibrosis, and rheumatoid arthritis. The fact is, that none of these need to come from such sources, but could be made from other cell lines readily available in research circles.

For instance, the Kitasato Institute in Japan makes MMR vaccines that are ethically acceptable. Regrettably, the FDA decided not to allow their importation into the United States. Individuals can travel to Japan to receive these vaccines, but obviously, that is not a sensible solution to improving vaccination rates significantly.

Politicians and some in the media have suggested mandating vaccinations of children against the moral objections of their parents. Those same public figures would serve us better by helping to promote the manufacture or importation of vaccines that are derived ethically. Parents and their children deserve wholesome untainted vaccine alternatives to promote the health and the safety of their children.

MerckMerck KGaA, the original parent company of the American Merck & Co. Inc., is headquartered in a glass pyramid. Hmm. . . .

Note: Merck is a U.S. pharmaceutical company and the 7th largest pharmaceutical company in the world. Headquartered in Kenilworth, New Jersey, the company was established in 1891 as the United States subsidiary of the German company Merck KGaA, founded 1668. Merck & Co. was confiscated by the US government during World War I and subsequently established as an independent American company.

In addition to Dr. Jay Carpenter’s warning (above) about Merck using aborted human fetal cells to derive its MMR vacines that include the measles vaccine, another physician, Dr. David Brownstein, maintains that the current measles vaccine, specifically the human DNA from aborted fetal cells, may be causing the recent increase in autism. He writes:

There is concern that the increase in autism that has occurred may be due to the introduction of human DNA–from fetal cells–in the MMR and chicken pox vaccines.(3) A scientific review from Dr. Helen Ratajczak, a former scientist at a pharmaceutical firm, reviewed the body of published research since autism was first described in 1943. Dr. Ratajczak stated, “What I have published is highly concentrated on hypersensitivity. The body’s immune system is being thrown out of balance” by the increasing number of vaccines given in a short period of time. She also felt that the introduction of human DNA contained in vaccines has markedly increased the risk of developing autism. Presently, human tissue is used in 23 vaccines. Dr. Ratajczak feels that the increased spike in autism may be related to the introduction of human DNA into the MMR and chicken pox vaccines. She goes on to state that the foreign DNA from vaccines can be incorporated into the host DNA which causes the immune system to fight against the foreign cells. This could start an inflammatory process that never ends, leading to chronic illnesses like autoimmune disease and allergies. Maybe this is why we are seeing so many children with severe, life-threatening allergies to common foods like peanuts.

Is the measles vaccine 100% safe? No way. I wrote about the problems with the MMR vaccine in past blog posts. I showed you research by Dr. Andrew Wakefield which found measles virus in the lymph tissue of 12 autistic children. These children never had measles, but they were vaccinated with the measles vaccine. Dr. Wakefield felt that vaccine could be causing the gut inflammation that most autistic kids suffer from. For that crime, he was prosecuted by the media and the medical profession. I wrote to you in August, 2014, (http://blog.drbrownstein.com/toxic-vaccines-and-autism-a-cdc-coverup/) that the Center for Disease Control—CDC—altered a 2004 study which hid the data that supported Dr. Wakefield’s research. A CDC whistleblower and author on that 2004 paper came forward to announce the 2004 paper was a fraud; the CDC hid data in the paper which showed a clear link between the early administration of the MMR vaccine and autism.

[…] I am still waiting for the highest levels of our Government to examine the CDC fraud. We need the U.S. Congress to call an open hearing to address this matter. Until this matter is resolved how can you fault any parent for questioning the safety of the MMR vaccine?

Perhaps Dr. Wakefield’s research was fraudulent (I have studied it and I don’t think it is). Until we know the truth from the CDC, a parent cannot know for sure whether the MMR vaccine is safe to give their child.

One last comment. Both of my much-older-than-I sisters had measles. Back then, it was a benign illness that everybody got. Just like chicken pox. That generation did just fine with measles. They did not suffer the plethora of autoimmune, allergic and chronic illness that the younger generations suffer from. Perhaps we need to do research comparing vaccinated with non-vaccinated populations. Unbelievably, this work still has not been done. There has not been a single randomized, controlled study of a vaccinated versus a non-vaccinated population.

H/t California Catholic Daily and FOTM’s MomOfIV

See also:

~Éowyn