A BULLET TO THE HEAD

[Guest guest]

A BULLET TO THE

HEAD

 

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO

November 21, 2009

NewsWithViews.com

It

seems people often need to experience a bullet to the head before they will

believe bullets can be deadly...and then they rue the day they ignored warnings

about playing with loaded guns.

Vaccination

seems to hold a similar place. People ignore words of caution and roll up their

sleeves to get a flu shot. It seems they think getting a vaccine is the same as

taking a multivitamin, and equally as benign. But when serious adverse events

occur, such as Guillain-Barre paralysis, a seizure disorder or even a death, a

jolt of reality lays bare just how damaging a “simple vaccine” can

be.

The

stranglehold of fear, perpetrated by those in white coats and by the medical

bureaucrats in Washington DC who take their marching orders from

pharma, is working hard to choke rationally thinking adults into submission. I

get emails almost every day that say something like, " I bought your DVDs

and your books...but I have a question: Should I get a flu shot? "

WHAT?@!>! My mouth drops. I have to clear my head and find a way to say,

" No, you should not get the flu shot " , being cautious to keep my tone

void of sarcasm. That may seem harsh, but in very turbulent times. Soft

language and hand holding until people “get it” is becoming

increasingly more difficult.

Being

in the business of waking people up to the hazards of vaccines certainly has

its ups and downs. A recent “up” was the public policy debate held

on November 10 at the University of Texas in Austin.

Sponsored by the Libertarian Longhorns, the Texas College Republicans and a few

other Texas

health freedom groups, the discussion called, " Are Vaccine Mandates Good

or Bad for Public Health? " was open to the general public. Interest in this

timely topic was reflected by the standing-room only attendance of the meeting.

 

Speaking

in support of vaccination and school mandates was Tom Betz, MD, MPH, Director

of Region 7 for the Texas Department of Health Services. Several of his health

department colleagues joined him in the audience but chose not to join him on

the stage. I had the pleasure of being teamed with Dawn Richardson, President

and Co-founder of PROVE (Parents Requesting Open Vaccine Education) in Austin, Texas and they of State Advocacy for the National

Vaccine Information

Center in Vienna, Virginia.

Our presentation was mostly about opposition to vaccine mandates but we were

able to address our opposition to vaccines in general. Based on the hundreds of

comments we received, the debate (found all on YouTube) was well received and

enlightening for all.

All

three participants were given the questions to review prior to the debate.

There is so much to say about vaccines that preparation was important to cover

key points, almost as sound bites; only three short minutes were allowed for

each answer. Our very professional moderator, Dr. Donna Campbell, allowed equal

time for each side.

During

the personal introductions, Dr. Campbell informed the audience that the plan

was to have two persons on each panel; but that Dr. Betz was the only person

from the Health Department who would agree to participate. Prior to settling in

on the stage, I had learned the reason why.

Shaking

Dr. Betz’ hand, I thanked him for joining the discussion. He returned the

niceties with a slight shrug, confessing that, “No one else wanted to do

it.” Surprised, I queried, “Why not? This is a great way to tell

everyone your message about vaccines.” My unspoken question was,

“Why didn’t the Health Department want to jump on the opportunity

to bury anti-vaccination ‘pseudo-science’, as you call it, once and

for all, in front of everyone?” He

quietly replied, “We’ve done these types of programs before; they

never go well.”

It

seems pro-vaccine arguments are being soundly defeated, time after time. And

the real vaccine “pseudo-science” is being exposed for the rhetoric

it is: factoids crafted by public health officials from the WHO and the CDC,

and then regurgitated by under-informed medical professionals to a naïve

public. Funny how medical bureaucrats and doctors are considered the

" experts " when it is strangely obvious they don't understand –

and probably don’t even read – their own medical literature.

The

Austin debate

was the next important step in exposing that the “science of

vaccination” isn’t so scientific after all. Vaccination has been

accepted as safe, effective and protective. The shots can be described as a

medical sacred cow, defined as “a medical procedure that is unreasonably

immune to criticism.” Doctors and patients who question vaccines are

ridiculed and marginalized. It is heresy to suggest that the status quo is

wrong.

Vaccine adverse events are

considered “rare,” so when reactions occur, steps are taken to

negate the association to the vaccine. Patients are discredited, parents are

dismissed. Doctors subject very ill persons to thousands of dollars of

inconclusive medical tests, rather than to simply acknowledge – and

rightfully assign causality – to the vaccine. When a person reacts to

penicillin or Paxil or any other drug, it’s it is blamed on the drug? Not

so with vaccines.

Going

to Austin was

an upbeat offset to other particularly disturbing news reported over the last

few weeks about the H1N1, swine flu vaccine:

• Several schools have vaccinated children without

parental consent.

•

The growing list of reported miscarriages.

•

A teen athlete who is now crippled.

•

Two students and a teacher in China

who died hours after getting the shot.

•

Children having hallucinations, and then committing suicide, after taking Tamiflu.

 

•

The strange and virulent outbreak in the Ukraine, where the WHO has been

deafeningly silent about its findings – but knows that whatever is the

cause, vaccination is the answer.

We

seem to regard germs the same way we think about terrorism: Random attacks that

can be deadly. All parties who promote vaccination hawk this view, particularly

those pushing both types of flu shots. Tens of millions have been spent in the US on national

advertising campaigns, and even Sesame

Street merchandising, to convince us that flu

shots are necessary to keep us well – and keep us alive. But perhaps we

have it backwards. Bugs can cause random, mostly benign attacks, particularly

among the healthy. But random, “deadly” attacks, with health

consequences that can show up years later? I’d worry more about the

vaccines.

After 200 years, with our many advances in

science and medicine, you would think that someone could develop a method to

protect babies and adults from infectious disease other than injecting them

with animal cells, stray viruses, heavy metals and toxic chemicals. Why do we

call this health and protection? Until my dying breath I will never understand

why people resolutely defend – and demand – the right to inject

themselves and their children with these risky patients.

For

those who meet resistance when trying to warn family and friends of vaccine

risks, the only thing to do, really, is to keep spreading the word. Don’t

be discouraged. You never know who is listening and you never know when the

seeds will sprout. Focus on those who are waking up and gratefully support

them. The rest, well sadly, they may have to find out the hard way what it

feels like to get hit by that stray bullet.

©

2009 - Sherri Tenpenny - All Rights Reserve