Shaken baby syndrome (SBS) commonly describes a combination of subdural hematoma, retinal hemorrhage, and diffuse axonal injury (DAI) as the triad of diagnostic criteria. In some, the presence of rib or other fractures is also taken as a sign of abuse.(1-3)

The basic issue to be reviewed here is whether or not in some instances in which a father, family member, or caretaker has been accused of causing the death of an infant or child from the SBS, the true cause of death was a catastrophic vaccine reaction.

 

This article concerns an unpublished series of 25 cases involving accusations or convictions for the SBS, largely collected by attorney and jury counselor Toni Blake of San Diego, California (personal communication, 2000), as well as some from personal knowledge, which have the following features: 1) All occurred in fragile infants born from complicated pregnancies. Problems included prematurity, low birth weights, drug/alcohol problems, diabetic mothers, or other maternal complications. 2) All infants were 6 months or less of age. 3) Onset of signs and symptoms occurred at about 2, 4, or 6 months of age, within 12 days of vaccines. 4) All infants had subdural hematomas. 5) Some had multiple fractures.

Few published studies on vaccine effects include before-and-after studies of immune parameters or brain function studies such as electroencephalograms, or long-term safety monitoring. Inadequate consideration has been given to the additive or synergistic adverse effects of multiple simultaneous vaccines, although in the case of toxic chemicals, two compounds together may be 10 times more toxic than either separately, or 3 compounds 100 times more toxic.(4,5)

 

 

 

As reviewed in an the amicus brief prepared for SBS cases by Toni Blake (personal communication, 2000), the following beliefs have become prevalent in courts dealing with the SBS: 1) Shaking alone in an otherwise healthy child can cause a subdural hematoma; 2) non-traumatic new bleeding in an existing subdural hematoma will always cause only minor symptoms; 3) a child suffering from an ultimately fatal brain injury will not experience any lucid interval; 4) short-distance falls by children are never fatal; and, 5) retinal hemorrhage occurs only in shaken babies. There is, however, a body of literature that casts doubt on the validity of these assumptions:

 

In the early 1970s, Guthkelch(6) and Caffey(3) offered concepts in the etiology of the shaken baby syndrome that have become widely accepted. This syndrome was presented in the context of a battered child with multiple injuries resulting from multi-directional forces. It was postulated that the weak neck muscles and the relatively large head size of an infant made him particularly susceptible to subdural injuries caused by shaking.(7) It should be noted that there was no experimental model to prove or disprove their theory, and no disinterested witness in their reports to confirm the shaking. In spite of this, the theory gradually became accepted as fact. However, several years later Duhaime et al developed a model in an attempt to demonstrate infant susceptibility to shaking. This team of scientists was unable to generate the force required to cause death or serious brain injury unless the head was impacted against a solid surface.(8,9) The authors of those studies concluded that severe head injuries commonly diagnosed as shaking injuries require impact to occur and that shaking alone in an otherwise normal baby is unlikely to cause the SBS.

 

The statement that rebleeding from a subdural hematoma requires new trauma is of doubtful validity. It has been demonstrated that the neomembrane surrounding an organizing subdural hematoma may itself bleed, and that expansion of a subacute/chronic subdural hemorrhage may cause new bridging veins to rupture, and that an acute clot may predispose to new bleeding.(10,11) New bleeding in an established subdural hematoma may occur spontaneously and without new trauma.(12) In the cited example, the child was in a hospital under the care of a physician.

 

Regarding belief #3, at least some children have lucid intervals prior to the development of symptoms, including those who die.(13,14) Ribas and Jane state that it is particularly important to emphasize that both contusions and intracerebral hematomas can cause neurologic deterioration after a lucid interval.(15)

 

Regarding belief #4, isolated reports of fatal falls and biomechanical analysis using experimental animals and adult human volunteers indicate the potential for serious head injury or death from as little as a two-foot fall.(7,16-19)

 

Finally, as to the assumption that retinal hemorrhages are always caused by nonaccidental head trauma, there is a report of 20 children resuscitated following events other than trauma, such as near-drowning, asthma, sudden infant death syndrome, and other causes, in which two children were found to have retinal hemorrhages.(20) In addition to this, retinal hemorrhages have been attributed to a vast array of causes, including MMR and DTP vaccines.(21)

 

It is noteworthy that vaccines such as pertussis are used to induce allergic encephalomyelitis in laboratory animals.(22) This is characterized by brain swelling and hemorrhaging similar to that caused by mechanical injuries.(23)

 

Misdiagnosing a vaccine injury as the SBS has resulted in imprisonments. Testifying in a case in which a father was accused of causing brain injury to his child, San Diego pediatric neurologist Thomas Schweller stated: "There is a tendency in some medical arenas to discount completely the history provided by the family if you find a subdural hematoma." He cautioned against assertions of 100 percent certainty, and stated that even a three-foot fall could cause a fracture.(24)

 

 

 

"Immune Paralysis," a Possible Role in Spread of Infections: There is a small body of medical literature suggesting that vaccines can bring about an immune paralysis, opening the way for spread of relatively minor infections, such as those of a viral nature, to other parts of the body. One such complication might be viral meningitis. In a small German study, a significant though temporary drop of T-helper lymphocytes was found in 11 healthy adults following routine tetanus booster vaccinations; in four subjects, the levels were as low as those seen in active AIDS patients.(25)

 

Parenthetically, if this was the result of a single vaccine in healthy adults, it is sobering to think of the possible consequences of the series of multiple vaccines given to infants. Unfortunately, other than clinical observations, we can only speculate as to these consequences. This simple before-and-after testing of immune parameters has never been repeated, as far as I am aware. A few studies are to be found that show depressed function of lymphocytes and segmented neutrophils following vaccines.(26-28) Unfortunately, these are of limited scope.

 

Historically, one of the earliest reports of disease spread following vaccines is found in the 1967 book, The Hazards of Immunization by Sir Graham Wilson.(29) Although not opposed to vaccines, the author did give an extensive review of their potential side effects. In a chapter entitled, "Provocation Disease," he described complications such as paralysis from poliomyelitis in an arm that had received a diphtheria/pertussis/tetanus (DPT) vaccine. In more recent times, a similar phenomenon was observed in Oman during a polio epidemic, in which it was found that a significantly greater proportion of polio cases had received the DPT vaccine within 30 days before paralysis than had controls.(30)

 

As to the possibility that vaccines may result in spread and escalation of minor viral infections into fulminant meningitis with resultant mimicking of the SBS, this area appears to remain unexplored.

 

Brain Edema and Perivascular Lymphocytosis: Other than occasional anecdotal reports, there is little to be found in the medical literature implicating vaccines in causing brain edema and perivascular/meningeal lymphocytic infiltrations in humans, probably because the phenomenon has never been systematically studied. There are several reports of infants who developed increased intracranial pressure with bulging fontanelles following DPT immunization.(31-33) but for the most part we must look to animal experiments for information in this area.

 

Perhaps one of the most revealing studies about the nature of vaccine reactions was that conducted by Munoz and co-workers,(34) in which an experimental encephalo-myelitis was elicited in mice by the injection of pertussigen, a derivative of Bordetella pertussis, along with mice spinal cord extract. Histologic findings of perivascular infiltrates, consisting largely of lymphocytes in the brain and spinal cord developed as a result. These findings suggest that histological appearances of vaccine-induced encephalitis may be similar to those seen in viral meningitis.

 

Although Munoz mentioned nothing about the presence or absence of brain edema in his report, Iwasa stressed the swelling of the brain as a complication of the pertussis vaccine.(23)

 

Vasculopathies, Autoimmunity, and Cerebral Hemorrhages: A scattering of reports suggest that the hepatitis B vaccine may play a major role, as yet largely unrecognized, in hemorrhagic complications from vaccines. Among the children diagnosed with the SBS were quadruplets who suffered subdural hemorrhages or bloody spinal fluid following hepatitis B vaccines. The mother of these children has been sentenced to l72.5 years in prison.

In a collection of abstracts from Med-Line research, from 1990 to October 1997, on adverse reactions from the recombinant hepatitis B vaccine, Dr. Andrea Valeri of Italy catalogued a total of 45 different types of reactions in the world literature (personal communication, 2000) Among these were necrotizing vasculitis,(35) vaccine-induced autoimmunity,(36) and segmentary occlusion of the central retinal vein.(37) In addition, vasculitis following hepatitis B vaccine has been reported.(38) Thrombocytopenia is listed as a possible complication in the Physicians' Desk Reference, 2001. In a report of 18 deaths of neonates following the hepatitis B vaccine by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 1991-1998, hemorrhagic phenomena were common, including two patients with cerebral hemorrhages, four with pulmonary bleeding, one with bloody diarrhea, and several with blood in upper airway passages.(39) A report in Postgraduate Medicine on acute hemorrhagic encephalitis cites vaccines as one of the possible causes.(40)

 

Reports of autoimmune/neurological type reactions from hepatitis B vaccine include the following: polyneuropathy,(41) uveitis,(42) Guillain-Barre Syndrome,(43) myasthenia gravis,(44) erythema nodosum,(45) CNS demyelination,(46-48) optic neuritis,(49) transverse myelitis,(50) visual loss,(51) rheumatoid arthritis,(52) and Reiter's syndrome and arthritis.(53)

 

In a study devised to provide an animal model for the systemic and neurological complications observed following the pertussis vaccine in children, Steinman and coworkers discovered a lethal shock-like syndrome in mice after immunization with pertussis vaccine and sensitization to bovine serum albumin. Post-mortem examination of the brains revealed diffuse vascular congestion and parenchymal hemorrhages in both cortex and white matter.(54)

 

As early as 1975, Urbaschek described the role of pertussis endotoxin in bleeding and coagulation disorders.(55) More recently, McCuskey et al described the initial responses to endotoxemia as microvascular inflammation with activation of endothelium from its normal anticoagulation state to a procoagulation state.(56) Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine also points out that the endotoxin from gram negative bacteria activates several steps in the coagulation process.(57)

 

Platelet injury by endotoxin may result in a dramatic rise in serotonin, which can initiate coronary chemoreflex causing hypotension, bradycardia, and cardiac collapse, sometimes seen in premature infants following vaccination.(58) It is also said that the hemorrhagic complications from the "black plague" of the Middle Ages were simply due to an unusually virulent form of endotoxin, a property common to all disease-causing bacteria (R. Reisinger, personal communication, 2000).

 

Consideration must also be given to the possibility that the various vaccines, given in combination, may be synergistic in causing hypersensitivity and autoimmunity.

At least two of the vaccines, H. influenza type b (Hib) and pertussis, are noted for their sensitizing potencies(59) and are routinely given together in infancy.

 

A New Syndrome? Based on observation and a limited but suggestive body of medical literature, it appears that we may be witnessing in many SBS cases the adverse effects from interactions of highly potent vaccines given in combination. These potentially include: Hepatitis B (hemorrhagic vasculopathies, autoimmune reactions, neuropathies), Hemophilus influenza (hypersensitization), tetanus (hyper-sensitization), and pertussis (hypersensitization, brain edema, and the effects of endotoxin in causing vascular inflammation and hyper-coagulability).

 

There now appears to be a new syndrome that develops within a 12-day period following immunizations, and which may include elements of adverse reactions from each of the vaccines listed above. The most important of these include brain edema and inflammation of blood vessels, resulting in increased fragility and friability of blood vessel walls. These in turn may lead to spontaneous hemorrhages from a shearing of subdural blood vessels and the development of subdural hematomas, thus mimicking what is now thought to represent the SBS.

 

These findings are as yet largely unrecognized because unsought. In the name of justice to those now wrongfully imprisoned for child abuse leading to the SBS, and to those who will be accused in the future, let us hope that this area receives the investigation that it deserves.

 

Vaccines, Scurvy, and Hemorrhagic Diatheses: In the 1970s, infant mortality among the aborigines was as high as 50 percent in some areas. Dr. Archivides Kalokerinos recognized cases of scurvy among children, whose diets were very poor. Observing that the children frequently died following immunizations, especially if they had colds, he recognized that there might be a connection between vitamin C deficiency and the deaths from vaccines. With improved nutrition and regular vitamin C supplementation, infant mortality was virtually abolished.(60) As a result of this work he was awarded the Australian Medal of Merit in 1978.

 

One of the primary roles of vitamin C in the body being that of producing and maintaining connective tissue, Dr. Kalokerinos hypothesized that with minor viral infections further depleting the body's limited stores, the administration of vaccines would precipitate fulminating scurvy in children already deficient in vitamin C. One of the primary complications of scurvy being hemorrhage from weakened blood vessels, vitamin C deficiency could conceivably play a role in vaccine-induced encephalopathy/hemorrhagic syndrome.

 

The Latent Period Following Immunizations: According to the current guidelines of the Congressional Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, the onset of encephalitis must occur within a specified time period, depending on the vaccine, for the vaccines to be recognized as having caused the encephalitis. (The accepted latent period for pertussis vaccine reaction is 3 days, and that for measles vaccine, 7 days). Inaccuracy in designating this time range could cause many misdiagnoses.

 

Most early literature dealing with vaccine-induced encephalitis is related to the pertussis vaccine. In 1930, Flexner noted a strong tendency for the nervous system manifestations to declare themselves between the 10th and 13th days.(61) In a review of 108 cases recorded before 1929,(62) the onset of encephalitis was strikingly constant, usually observed between the 10th and 12th days following vaccination, commonly with a febrile period on the 7th and 8th days followed by recovery until the onset of encephalitis. In 1929, an increase in severe neurological complications following infections and inoculations was noted, occurring on about the 11th day after vaccination.(63)

 

More than 50 years later, Munoz found the same latent period of 11 to 13 days in a mice study of experimental encephalomyelitis elicited by injection of pertussigen.(34)

 

Literature in the 1980s and 1990s reported an entirely different pattern, with the onset of encephalopathy largely falling within a 3-day period following immunization.(64-66) We can only speculate the reason for this changing pattern. Perhaps it could be attributed to the fact that, in those early years, children may have been given the pertussis vaccine alone or possibly in combination with tetanus and diphtheria vaccines, whereas in recent years they have been receiving the polio, hepatitis B, and Hib vaccines at the same time.

 

Other studies throwing light on the latent period include one from Japan, showing two peaks of histamine sensitivity in mice from pertussis vaccine, one on the 4th day and another on the l2th day.(67) In 1976, 20 percent of cases of severe neurologic damage following DPT vaccine occurred later than 3 days post-vaccine.(68)

 

In Vaccination and Behavioral Disorders by Greg Wilson, the author made the following comments about the latent period:(69) Contemporary studies on the pertussis vaccine select an arbitrary time limit in which reactions have to occur to be considered as vaccine related. This time limit is usually from 3 to 7 days. Perhaps the only study which explores the dynamics of the post-DPT reactions is an independent Australian study by Karlsson and Scheibner which, with a monitor which followed breathing volumes, found particular times of stress-induced breathing following DPT injections.

 

Times of stress-induced breathing occurred as early as day 2 and as late as day 21.(70)

Coulter and Fisher provide, in their book, A Shot in the Dark, a number of case reports, both published and unpublished, from their own files, with latent periods longer than 3 days.(71) However, they found an almost insuperable difficulty in obtaining dependable data on the latent period due to the extreme reluctance of doctors to report vaccine reactions, a pattern which has existed since the early days of vaccine programs.

 

There are a number of reasons for this reluctance. From their earliest years of training, doctors have been taught to look upon vaccines as one of the greatest achievements of medical science, and any question about them is often looked upon as disloyalty to the profession. "Most doctors have been taught very little in medical school about reactions, or the neurologic damage that can be caused by the pertussis vaccine."(72) A lawyer specializing in defending vaccine-damaged children stated: "As is the case with many pertussis vaccine-injured children, none of the treating physicians would commit themselves to a final etiological diagnosis. It is strange that parents of pertussis vaccine-damaged children often can only get an etiological diagnosis by hiring an attorney and seeing one of the few recognized experts in the U.S. on post-pertussis vaccine encephalopathy."(72)

Either of the two classes of immunity, humoral (antibody-producing) or cellular, can produce autoimmunity.(72) Obviously, the 3 to 7 day limitations on the latent period, which now stands as a medicolegal standard, excludes a recognition of the delayed-type (cellular) autoimmune reactions, which are thought to have latent periods ranging between 2 and 3 months.(73) By inference, it even denies their existence. Little is known about vaccine-induced autoimmunity because the area has been largely neglected in clinical and laboratory studies.(74) Large numbers of cases of vaccine-induced cellular autoimmunity could occur unrecognized and unreported because not sought.

 

Allergic Sensitization: The increasing incidence of allergic disorders in Western nations is now universally recognized, with every third child in industrialized societies suffering an allergic disorder.(75) Since this trend coincides with vaccine programs, reports are now appearing on the question of a possible causal relation. Among these are four controlled studies from widely separated geographical areas showing a marked increase in allergic disorders among fully vaccinated children as compared to those with limited or no vaccines.(76-79) Further indications of the propensities of vaccines, especially pertussis and Hib, to induce hypersensitivity reactions and/or encephalitis are to be found in a number of studies.(80-83) The action of vaccines in shifting the immune profile in favor of the T helper 2 (Th2) system#84 could play a role in the rapid increase in atopic disorders.

 

The Hib vaccine, which shares notoriety with pertussis for its sensitizing potential, paradoxically causes a temporary reduction in antibody in most adults and children following immunization. This could increase risk of invasive disease should the subject be harboring a colonization of H. influenza at the time of Hib immunization.(85)

Additionally, a 1991 report by the National Institute of Medicine cited evidence of a causal relation between the DPT vaccine and anaphylaxis.(86)

 

Rib and Other Skeletal Fractures: Although skeletal fractures in themselves are not attributable to vaccine reactions, when they are present they are often used as evidence of abuse by prosecutors in SBS trials.

 

In the case of rib fractures, a study of 2,080 children seen at a pediatric trauma center found that among 33 children with multiple rib fractures, these injuries were accompanied by severe internal thoracic injuries in 85 percent of the cases.(87) An absence of internal injuries, therefore, would weigh heavily for spontaneous fractures and against abuse.

 

There are two situations in which spontaneous fractures are prone to take place: temporary brittle bone disease (TBBD) and scurvy, with imperfect connective tissue formation in fetal or infant skeletal tissue. In 26 infants with multiple fractures that fit the criteria of TBBD,(88,89) there was a striking association between TBBD and decreased fetal movement during pregnancy, which might occur in extreme prematurity, multiple-birth pregnancies, and chronic oligohydramnios as a result of inadequate uterine space for fetal movement.

 

Vitamin C deficiency may contribute to inadequate connective tissue formation in the bones before birth, making them susceptible to green-stick fractures and/or metaphyseal plate (costochrondal junction) slippages in utero or during the mechanical stresses of childbirth. During the trial of a father accused of causing the SBS in which there were rib fractures, Dr. Kalokerinos quoted from an older text dealing with scurvy that states:

 

Scurvy disrupts these areas, the bone breaks down, and the ribs may over-ride, forming in typical cases "beads." Then healing commences with new bone formation looking just like true healing fractures. Furthermore, not all the ribs may be involved in this process, and the changes will not all occur at the same time --- giving the appearance of multiple fractures of different ages.(90)

 

A study of children at the Royal Children's Hospital, Victoria, Australia has cast doubt on the acceptance of multiple metaphyseal plate fractures as definite roentgenologic evidence of battering. This type of fracture occurs in scurvy without undue trauma to the child.(91)

Thimerosal (Mercury) Content: Some vaccines given at ages 2, 4, and 6 months of age contain thimerosal, including diphtheria/tetanus/acellular pertussis (DTaP) (25 micrograms of mercury in most preparations), hepatitis B (12.5 micrograms in some preparations), and Hib (25 micrograms in some preparations).(92) It is possible that some infants receive more than l00 times the amount of mercury that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says is the maximum allowable daily exposure. Current EPA standards limit the daily safe dose of mercury to 0.1 µg/kg, or less than 1.0 µg for the average two-month-old infant.(93)

For centuries, mercury has been known as a potent neurotoxin and one of the most toxic of the heavy metals. Recently it has also been shown to be sensitizing,(84) so that along with pertussis and the Hib vaccines, we have three potentially sensitizing agents in the vaccines given to this age group.

 

Brain Function: In a 1955 study, electroencephalograms (EEGs) were performed on 83 children before and after pertussis immunization. In two children, the EEGs became abnormal following the vaccines in the absence of signs or symptoms, suggesting that mild but possibly significant cerebral reactions may occur in addition to the reported very severe neurological changes.(94)

 

The implications of this study are enormous, considering the very large number of children diagnosed with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, previously called "minimal brain dysfunction." Unfortunately, as Greg Wilson commented, "Studies such as Low's, which closely examine individual children, are extremely rare in the study of vaccine reactions and virtually nonexistent in today's literature."(70) A literature search disclosed only one other comparable study, done in Japan. Immunizations were given to 61 children with a history of febrile seizures or epilepsy, who had not had a seizure for one year. Epileptic spikes reappeared after 10 immunizations and increased after 10 out of 73 vaccines given, including DTaP, diphtheria/ tetanus (DT), and Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG).(95)

 

 

 

This article has been written to show that the theories on which the SBS is based are both undocumented and flawed and that convictions in many cases of the SBS may have been the result of misdiagnosis, the true cause of death or injury having been vaccine-related.

The larger issue is the adequacy of vaccine safety testing. There is a growing public outcry over mandatory vaccines, much of it originating from parents who believe their children have been seriously harmed.

 

Parents demand the right to accept or reject vaccines for their children based on informed consent. Some believe that the dangers of current vaccines may approach or even exceed the dangers of the infectious diseases themselves. It is difficult to answer their questions because there have been little more than token investigations of potential serious adverse effects. We need definitive investigations into both the immediate and longterm effects on the immunologic and neurologic systems.

 

Acknowledgment: The inspiration for this article has been largely the case of Alan Joe Yurko, an infant who died at 10 weeks of age, soon after receiving a combination of 6 vaccines. The father is now serving a life sentence, having been convicted (wrongly, many believe) of causing the SBS.

 

 

1. David TJ. Shaken baby (shaken impact) syndrome: non-accidental head injury in infancy. Royal Soc Med 1999;99(Nov):556-561.
2. Weston IT. The pathology of child abuse. In: Heifer RE, Kempe CH, eds, The Battered Child, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1968, pp. 77-100.
3. Caffey J. On the theory and practice of shaking infants: its potential residual effects of permanent brain damage and mental retardation. Am J Dis Child 1972;124:161-169.
4. Chester AC, Levine PH. Concurrent sick building syndrome and chronic fatigue syndrome: epidemic neuromyasthenia revised. Clinical Infect Disease 1996;18(Suppl b):S3-S48.
5. Abou-Donia MB, Wilmarth KR, Jensen KF, Oehme FW, Kurt TL. Neurotoxicity resulting from exposure to pyridostigmine bromide, DEET, and permethrin: implications of Gulf War chemical exposures. J Toxicol & Environ Health 1996;48:35-56.
6. Guthkelch AN. Infantile subdural hematoma and its relationship to whiplash injury. BMJ 1971;11:430-431.
7. Plunkett J. Shaken baby syndrome and the death of Matthew Eappen: A forensic pathologist's response. Am J Forensic Med and Path 1999;20:17-21.
8. Duhaime A-C, Gennarelli TA, Thibault LE, et al. The shaken baby syndrome: a clinical, pathological, and bio-mechanical study. J Neurosurgery 1987;66:409-415.
9. Duhaime A-C, Alario AJ, Lewander WJ, et al. Head injury in very young children: mechanisms, injury types and ophthalmologic findings. Pediatrics 1992;90:179-185.
10. Kawakami S, Chikama M, Tamiya T, Shimamura Y. Coagulation and fibrinolysis in chronic subdural hematoma. J Neurosurgery 1989;25:25-29.
11. Parent AD. Pediatric subdural hematoma: a retrospective comparative analysis. Pediatric Neurosurgery 1992;18:266-271.
12. Lindenborg R. Mechanical injuries in the brain and meninges, In: Spitz W., ed., Medicolegal Investigation of Death: guidelines for the application of pathology to crime investigations, ed 3, Springfield, Charles C. Thomas, 1993, pp. 585-636.
13. Nashelsky MB, Dix ID. The time interval between lethal infant shaking and onset of symptoms: a review of the shaken baby syndrome literature. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 1995;16:154-157.
14. Plunkett J. Restricting the time of injury in fatal inflicted head injuries (letter). Child Abuse Neglect 1998;22:943-944.
15. Ribas GC, Jane JA. Traumatic contusions and intracerebral hematomas. J Neurotrauma 1992;9(Supp D):S269.
16. Gurdjian ES, Roberts VL, Thomas LM. Tolerance curves of acceleration and intracranial pressure and protective index in experimental head injury. J Trauma 1966;6:600-604.
17. Mahajen BM, Beine WB. Impact attenuation performance of surface installed under playground equipment. Report to the Consumer Safety Commission, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C., Publication # NBSIR 79, Feb. l979, p. 1707.
18. Reichelderfer TB, Overbach A, Greensher J. Unsafe playgrounds? Pediatrics 1979;64:962-963.
19. Collantes M. Playground surfaces and head injury: Evaluation of the importance of using the Head Injury Criteria (HIC) to estimate the likelihood of head impact injury as a result of a fall onto playground surface materials. U.S. Product Safety Commission, Washington D.C., 1990.
20. Goetting MG, Sowa B. Retinal hemorrhage after cardiopulmonary resuscitation in children: an etiologic reevaluation. Pediatrics 1990;85:585-588.
21. Roy FH. Ocular Differential Diagnosis, ed 6. Philadelphia, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, 1997.
22. Levine S, Lowinski R. Hyperacute encephalomyelitis. Am J Pathol 1973;37:247-250.
23. Iwasa S, Ishida S, Akama K. Swelling of the brain caused by pertussis vaccine: its quantitative determination and the responsible factors in the vaccine. Japan J Med Sci Biol 1985;38(2):53-65.
24. Hanchette J. Kaplan S. Vaccines are blamed for injuries: Defendants increasingly turn to ill effects of inoculations to explain shaken baby syndrome. Gannett News Service, Detroit News, Sept. 4, 1998.
25. Eibl M. Abnormal T-lymphocyte subpopulations in healthy subjects after tetanus booster immunization, (letter). New Engl J Med 1984;310:198-199.
26. Toraldo R, Tolone C, Catalanotti P, et al. Effect of measles-mumps-rubella vaccination on polymorphonuclear function in children. Acta Paediatr 1992;81:887-890.
27. Munyer TP, Mangi RJ, Dolan T, Kantor FS. Depressed lymphocyte function after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination. J Infect Dis 1975;132:75-80.
28. Beckenhauer WH, Gill MA. Immunosuppression with combined vaccines. J Am Vet Med Assn 1983;183:389-390.
29. Wilson, G. The Hazards of Immunization. London, Athlone Press, The University of London, 1967.
30. Sutter RW, Atriarca PA, Suleiman AJ, et al. Attributable risk of DPT (diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus vaccine) injections in provoking paralytic poliomyelitis in Oman during a large outbreak. J Infect Dis 1992;165:444-449.
31. Jacob J. Manning F. Increased intracranial pressure after diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus immunization. J Dis Child 1979;133:217-218.
32. Gross TP, Milstien JB, Kuritsky JN. Bulging fontanelle after immunization with diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus vaccine and diphtheria-tetanus vaccine. J Pediatr 1989;114:423-425.
33. Mathus R, Kumari S. Bulging fontanelle following DPT. Indian Pediatr 1981;18:417-418.
34. Munoz JJ, Bernard CC, Mackay IR. Elicitation of experimental encephalomyelitis in mice with the aid of pertussigen. Cellular Immunology 1984;83:92-100.
35. Kerleau JM, Levesque H, Lair G, et al. La Vaccinazione anti-hepatite B e una nuova cause di vasculite necrotizzante? (lettera) [Is hepatits B vaccination a new cause of necrotizing vasculitis?] Rev Med Interne, 1997;18:491-492.
36. Cohen AD, Shoenfeld Y. Autoimmunita indoni dai vaccini. J Autoimmunity 1996;9:699-703.
37. Granel B, Disdier P, Devin F, et al. [Occlusion of the central retinal vein after vaccination against viral hepatitis B with recombinant vaccines: 4 cases]. Presse Med 1977;26:62-65.
38. Cockwell P. Vasculitis related to hepatitis B vaccine (letter). BMJ 1991;301;1281.
39. Niu MT, Salive ME, Ellenberg SS. Neonatal deaths after hepatitis B vaccine: the vaccine adverse event reporting system, 1991-1998. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1999;153:1279-1282.
40. Behan PO, Moore MJ, Lamarche JB. Acute necrotizing hemorrhagic encephalopathy. Postgraduate Medicine 1973;54(4):154-160.
41. Ribera EF. Polyneuropathy associated with administration of hepatitis B vaccine. New Engl J Med 1983;309:614-615.
42. Fried M, Conen D, Conzelmann M, Steinemann E. Uveitis after hepatitis B vaccination (letter). Lancet 1987;2(8559):631-632.
43. Shaw FE. Postmarketing surveillance for neurologic adverse events reported after hepatitis B vaccination: Experience of the first three years. Amer J Epidemiol 1988;127:337-352.
44. Biron P, Montpetit P, Infante-Rivard C, Lery L. Myasthenia gravis after general anesthesia and hepatitis B vaccine. Arch Intern Med 1988;148:2685.
45. Goolsby PL. Erythema nodosum after Recombivax HB hepatitis B vaccine. New Engl J Med 1989;321:1198-1199.
46. Herroelen L, de Keyser J, Ebinger G. Central-nervous-system demyelination after immunisation with recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. Lancet 1991;338:1174-1175.
47. Nadler JP. Multiple sclerosis and hepatitis B vaccine. Clin Infect Dis 1993;17:928-929.
48. Kaplanski G, Retornaz F, Durand J, Soubeyrand J. Central nervous system demyelination after vaccination against hepatitis B and HLA haplotype (letter). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1995;58:758-759.
49. Anonymous. Hepatitis B vaccines: reported reactions, World Health Organization Adverse Drug Reaction Bulletin, Aug, 1990.
50. Trevisani T, Gattinara GC, Caraceni P, et al. Transverse myelitis following hepatitis B vaccination (letter). J Hepatol 1993;19(2):317-318.
51. Brezin A. Visual loss and eosinophilia after recombinant hepatitis B vaccine. Lancet 1993;342:563-564.
52. Vautier G. Acute sero-positive rheumatoid arthritis occurring after hepatitis vaccination. Brit J Rheumatol 1994;33:991.
53. Hassan W. Reiter's syndrome and reactive arthritis in health care workers after vaccination. BMJ 1994;309:94.
54. Steinman L, Sriram S, Adelman NE, et al. Murine model for pertussis vaccine encephalopathy: linkage to H-2. Nature 1982;299:738-740.
55. Urbaschek. Fortschr Med 1975;93:1067-1071.
56. McCuskey et al. Review: the microcirculation during endotoxemia, Cardiovascular Res 1996;32:752-763.
57. Keith R Powell. Sepsis and shock. In: Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine, ed 14. New York, McGraw-Hill, pp. 747-748.
58. Pourcyrous M, Korones SB, Crouse D, Bada HS. Interleukin-6; C-reactive protein, and abnormal cardiorespiratory responses to immunization in premature infants. Pediatrics 1998;101:461.
59. Terpstra GK, Raaijmakers JA, Kreukniet J. Comparison of vaccination of mice and rats with Hemophilus influenza and Bordetella pertussis as models. Clin Exp Pharmac Physiol 1979;6:139-149.
60. Kalokerinos A. Every Second Child. Australia, Thomas Nelson, 1974.
61. Flexner S. Post-vaccinal encephalitis and allied conditions. JAMA 1930;94:305-311.
62. Gorter E. Post-vaccinal encephalitis. JAMA 1933;101:1871-1874.
63. Anon. Postinfectious encephalitis: a problem of increasing importance. JAMA 1929;92:1523-1524.
64. Menkes JH, Kinsbourne M. Workshop on neurologic complications of pertussis and pertussis vaccination. Neuropediatrics 1990;21:171-176.
65. Menkes JH, Neurologic complications of pertussis vaccine. Ann Neurol 1990;23:428.
66. Cody CL, Baraff LJ, Cherry JD, Marcy SM, Manclark CR. Nature and rates of adverse reactions associated with DTP and DT immunization in infants and children. Pediatrics 1981;68:650-660.
67. Horiuchi S et al. Two different histamine-sensitizing activities of pertussis vaccine observed in mice on the 4th and 12th days of sensitization. Japan J Med Sci Biol 1993;46:17-27.
68. Fox R. Letter: immunization against whooping cough. BMJ 1976;1(6007):458-459.
69. Wilson G. Vaccination and Behavioral Disorders. Linsmore, NSW, Australia, Tuntable Creek Publishing, 2000, p. 49.
70. Karlsson L, Scheibner V. Association between non-specific stress syndrome, DPT injections and cot death. Presented at Second Immunization Conference, Canberra, May 27-29, 1991.
71. Coulter HL, Fisher BL. A Shot in the Dark. Garden City Park, New York, Avery Publishing Group, 1991.
72. Janeway CA. Immunobiology, ed 4. New York, Current Biology Publications, 1999, p. 495.
73. Shoenfeld Y. Aron-Maor A. Vaccination and autoimmunity - 'vaccinosis': a dangerous liaison? J Autoimmunity 2000;14:1-10.
74. Cohen DC, Shoenfeld Y. Vaccine-induced autoimmunity. J Autoimmunity 1996;9:699-703.
75. Steering Committee, the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC). Worldwide variation in prevalence of symptoms of asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, and atopic eczema. Lancet 1998;351:1225-1232.
76. Odent ME. Pertussis vaccine and asthma: is there a link? JAMA 1994;271:229-231.
77. Alm JS, Swartz J, Lilja G, Scheynius A, Pershagen G. Atopy in children with anthroposophic lifestyle. Lancet 1999;353(9163):1485-1488.
78. Kemp T, Pearce N, Fitzharris P, et al. Is infant immunization a risk factor for childhood asthma or allergy? Epidemiology 1997;8:678-680.
79. Hurwitz EL, Morgenstern H. Effects of diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus or tetanus vaccination on allergies and allergy-related respiratory symptoms among children and adolescents in the United States. J Manipulative & Physiol Therapeutics 2001;23:1-10.
80. Kosecka U, Berin MC, Perdue MH. Pertussis adjuvant prolongs intestinal hypersensitivity. Intl Arch Allergy Immunol 1999;119:205-211.
81. Munoz JJ, Peacock MG, Hadlow WJ. Anaphylaxis or so-called encephalopathy in mice sensitized to an antigen with the aid of pertussigen (pertussis toxin). Infection & Immunity 1987;55:1004-1008.
82. Odelram H, Granstrom M, Hedenskog S, Duchen K, Bjorksten B. Immunoglobulin E and G responses to pertussis toxin after booster immunization in relation to atopy, local reactions and aluminum content in the vaccines. Pediatric Allergy Immunol 1994;5:8-123.
83. Patrizi A. Sensitization to thimerosal in atopic children. Contact Dermatitis 1999;40(2):94-97.
84. Taylor-Robinson AW. Multiple vaccine effects on atopy. Allergy 1999;54:398-399.
85. Daum RS, Sood SK, Osterholm MT, et al. Decline in serum antibody to the capsule of the Hemophilus influenza type b in the immediate post-immunization period. J Pediatrics 1999;114:742-747.
86. Institute of Medicine. Adverse Effects of Pertussis and Rubella Vaccines, Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1991.
87. Garcia VF, Gotschall CS, Eichelberger MR, Bowman LM. Rib fractures in children: a marker for severe trauma. J Trauma 1990;30:695-700.
88. Miller ME. Temporary brittle bone disease, a true entity? Seminars in Perinatology 1999;23:174-182.
89. Miller ME, Hangartner TN. Temporary brittle bone disease associated with decreased fetal movement and osteopenia. Calcified Tissue Intl 1999;64:137-143.
90. Hess AF. Scurvy, Past and Present. Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott Co., 1920.
91. Hiller HG. Battered or not - a reappraisal of metaphyseal fragility. Amer J Roentgenology Radiotherapy & Nuclear Medicine 1972;114:241-246.
92. Institute for Vaccine Safety, Johns Hopkins University, www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm.
93. Halsey NA. Limiting infant exposure to thimerosal in vaccines and other sources of mercury. JAMA 1999;282:1763-1766.
94. Low AL. Electroencephalographic studies following pertussis immunization. J Pediatrics 1955;47:35-39.
95. Nouno, Togawa K, Yamatogi Y, et al. Adverse effects on EEG and clinical condition after immunizing children with convulsive disorders. Acta Paediatr Japonica 1990;32:357-360.

Originally published in the Medical Sentinel 2001;6(3):83-89. Copyright ©2001 Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.

Recently there has been quite an "epidemic" of the so-called "shaken baby syndrome". Parents, usually the fathers, or other care-givers such as nannies have increasingly been accused of shaking a baby to the point of causing permanent brain damage and death. Why? Is there an unprecedented increase in the number of people who commit infanticide or have an ambition to seriously hurt babies? Or is there something more sinister at play?

Some time ago I started getting requests from lawyers or the accused parents themselves for expert reports. A close study of the history of these cases revealed something distinctly sinister: in every single case, the symptoms appeared shortly after the baby's vaccinations.

While investigating the personal medical history of these babies based on the care-givers' diaries and medical records, I quickly established that these babies were given one or more of the series of so-called routine shots-hepatitis B, DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus), polio and HiB (Haemophilus influenzae type B)-shortly before they developed symptoms of illness resulting in serious brain damage or death.

 

The usual scenario is that a baby is born and does well initially. At the usual age of about two months it is administered the first series of vaccines as above. (Sometimes a hepatitis B injection is given shortly after birth while the mother and child are still in hospital. However, a great number of babies now die within days or within two to four weeks of birth after hepatitis B vaccination, as documented by the records of the VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] in the USA.) So, the baby stops progressing, starts deteriorating, and usually develops signs of respiratory tract infection. Then comes the second and third injections, and tragedy strikes: the child may cry intensely and inconsolably, may stop feeding properly, vomit, have difficulty swallowing, become irritable, stop sleeping, and may develop convulsions with accelerating progressive deterioration of its condition and mainly its brain function.

 

This deterioration may be fast, or may slowly inch in until the parents notice that something is very wrong with their child and then rush it to the doctor or hospital. Interestingly, they are invariably asked when the baby was immunised. On learning that the baby was indeed "immunised", the parents may be reassured that its symptoms will all clear up. They are sent home with the advice, "Give your baby Panadol". If they persist in considering the baby's reaction serious, they may be labelled as anxious parents or trouble-makers. So the parents go home, and the child remains in a serious condition or dies.

 

Until recently, the vaccine death would have just been labelled "sudden infant death", particularly if the symptoms and pathological findings were minimal. However, nowadays, with an alarmingly increasing frequency, the parents (or at least one of them, usually the father) may be accused of shaking the baby to death. The accused may even "confess" to shaking the baby, giving the reason, for example, that having found the baby lying still and not breathing and/or with a glazed look in its eyes, they shook it gently-as is only natural-in their attempt to revive it. Sometimes, ironically, they save the baby's life, only to be accused of causing the internal injuries that made the baby stop breathing in the first place, and which in fact were already present when they shook the baby to revive it.

 

No matter what the parents say or do, everything is construed against them. If they are crying and emotional, they will be accused of showing signs of guilt. If they manage to remain composed and unemotional, they will be called calculating and controlling-and guilty because of that.

 

In another scenario the distraught parents try to describe the symptoms to an attending doctor in hospital or a surgery but are totally at a loss to understand what has happened to their baby. To their shock and dismay, they later discover that while they were describing the observed symptoms, the doctor or another staff member was writing three ominous words in the medical record: shaken baby syndrome.

 

Many of these parents end up indicted and even sentenced to prison for a crime that somebody else committed. Some of these cases have been resolved by acquittal on appeal or have been won based on expert reports demonstrating vaccines as the cause of the observed injuries or death. However, only God and a good lawyer can help those parents or care-givers who happen to be uneducated, or have a criminal record, particularly for violence, or have a previous history of a similar "unexplained" death of a baby in their care, or, worse still, a vaccine-injured baby with a broken arm or fractured skull. More and more often, the unfortunate parents are given the option of a "deal": if they confess and/or plead guilty, they will get only a couple of years in prison; but if they don't, they may end up getting 20 years.

I was told by a social worker in the United States that many foster parents are rotting in US prisons. First, they are forced to vaccinate their charges, and then, when side effects or death occur, they are accused of causing them.

 

Inevitably the possibility exists that infanticide or child abuse is involved in some of the cases. However, there is no determinable reason why so many parents or other care-givers would suddenly begin to behave like this. It is incredibly insensitive and callous to immediately suspect and accuse the distraught, innocent parents of harming their own baby.

Let's now have a look at medical literature dealing with shaken baby syndrome and child abuse.

 

Caffey (1972, 1974)1,2 described the "whiplash shaken infant syndrome" as a result of manual shaking by the extremities with whiplash-induced intracranial and intraocular bleedings, linked with permanent brain damage and mental retardation. He referred to his own paper, published almost 30 years prior to the above-quoted papers, which described what he called "the original six battered babies in 1945". The essential elements in this description were subdural haematomas, intraocular bleedings and multiple traction changes in the long bones. These findings became a benchmark of the "evidence" that a child had been shaken before developing these signs.

 

Reece (1993)3 analysed fatal child abuse and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and considered the critical diagnostic decisions. He emphasised that distinguishing between an unexpected infant death due to SIDS and one due to child abuse challenges paediatricians, family physicians, pathologists and child protection agencies. On the one hand, they must report instances of suspected child abuse and protect other children in the family; and on the other, all agree that the knowledge in this area is incomplete and ambiguity exists in many cases.

 

Duhaime et al. (1992)4 wrote that "patients with intradural haemorrhage and no history of trauma must also have clinical and radiographic findings of blunt impact to the head, unexplained long-bone fractures or other soft tissue inflicted injury, in order to completely eliminate the possibility of spontaneous intracranial haemorrhage such as might rarely occur from a vascular malformation or a bleeding disorder".

 

While it is not disputed that some parents and care-givers may cause the above injuries by mistreating infants, one must take great care in interpreting similar pathological findings of injuries caused by other insults which have nothing to do with mechanical injuries and mistreatments of infants.

 

I shall never forget the father of a 10-month-old infant, who, after being acquitted on appeal of causing shaken baby syndrome, said words to the effect, "We still don't know what killed our baby". It did not occur to them and nobody told them that it was the vaccine that killed their baby.

 

So what else can cause brain swelling, intracranial bleeding, ocular retinal haemorrhages, and broken skull and other bones? Ever since the mass vaccination of infants began, reports of serious brain, cardiovascular, metabolic and other injuries started filling pages of medical journals.

 

Indeed, vaccines like the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine are actually used to induce encephalo-myelitis (experimental allergic encephalomyelitis) in laboratory animals (Levine and Sowinski, 19735). This is characterised by brain swelling and haemorrhaging of an extent similar to that caused by mechanical injuries (Iwasa et al., 19856).

 

Munoz et al. (1981)7 studied biological activities of crystalline pertussigen-a toxin produced by Bordetella pertussis, the causative agent in pertussis and an active ingredient in all types of pertussis vaccines whether whole-cell or acellular-in a number of laboratory experiments with mice. They established that minute amounts of pertussigen induced hypersensitivity to histamine (still detected 84 days after administration), leucocytosis, production of insulin, increased production of IgE and G1 antibodies to hen egg albumin, susceptibility to anaphylactic shock and vascular permeability of striated muscle. A dose of 546 nanograms per mouse killed 50 per cent of mice. Typically, the deaths were delayed. When a dose of five micrograms of pertussigen was administered, most mice did not gain weight and died by day five; the last mouse died on day eight. A one-microgram dose of one preparation killed four out of five mice. They first gained weight from days two to five, but then remained at nearly constant weight until they died. Even the one that survived for 16 days (it was then killed) experienced crises (stopped putting on weight) on the days when the others died. Had that one lived longer, it might have died on day 24. This is another of the critical days-identified by Cotwatch research into babies' breathing-on which babies have flare-ups of stress-induced breathing, or die, after vaccination.

 

Interestingly, when laboratory animals develop symptoms of vaccine damage and then die, it is never considered coincidental; but when children develop the same symptoms and/or die after the administration of the same vaccines, it is considered coincidental or caused by their parents or other carers. When all this fails, then it is considered "mysterious".

Delayed reactions are the norm rather than the exception. This has been explained as a consequence of an immunological intravascular complexing of particulate antigen (whole-cell or acellular pertussis organisms) (Wilkins, 19888). However, vaccinators have great difficulty with this, and as a rule draw largely irrelevant timelines for accepting the causal link between administration of vaccines and onset of reactions-usually 24 hours or up to seven days. However, most reactions to vaccines are delayed, and most cases are then considered unrelated to vaccination.

 

One only has to peruse a product insert of hepatitis B vaccine to see that besides local reactions, a number of neurological signs may occur, such as paraesthesia and paralysis (including Guillain-Barre syndrome, optic neuritis and multiple sclerosis).

Devin et al. (1996)9 described retinal haemorrhages which are emphatically being considered the sure sign of child abuse, even though these can be and are caused by vaccines. Goetting and Sowa (1990)10 described retinal haemorrhage which occurred after cardiopulmonary resuscitation in children.

 

Bulging fontanelle due to brain swelling was described by Jacob and Mannino (1979)11 as a direct reaction to the DPT vaccine. They described a case of a seven-month-old baby who, nine hours after the third DPT vaccination, developed a bulging anterior fontanelle and became febrile and irritable.

 

Bruising and easy bleeding is one of the characteristic signs of the blood clotting disorder, thrombocytopenia-a recognised side-effect of many vaccines. Its first signs are easy bruising and bleeding and petechial (spotlike) rash. Thrombo-cytopenia may result in brain and other haemorrhages (Woerner et al., 198112).

 

The convulsions which follow one in 1,750 doses of the DPT vaccines (Cody et al., 198113) can result in unexplained falls in bigger children who can sit up or stand, which may cause linear cracks of the skull and other fractures. When one considers that babies are supposed to get a minimum of three doses of DPT and OPV (oral polio vaccine), then the risk of developing a convulsion is one in 580, and with five doses the risk rises to one in 350. This means that a great number of babies develop convulsions after vaccination between the ages of two to six months, at about 18 months, and at five to six years. The convulsions often occur when the parent or another carer is not looking, and the child, while standing or sitting on the floor, simply falls backwards or onto its arm.

 

All these signs can be misdiagnosed as a result of mechanical injuries, particularly so because vaccinators simply refuse to admit that vaccines cause serious injuries, or they only pay lip service to the damage caused by the pernicious routine of up to 18 vaccines with which babies are supposed to be injected within six months of birth.

 

The court system should therefore be more open to the documented viable and alternative explanations of the observed injuries, and be more wary of the obviously biased statements of the provaccination "experts", that nothing else but vigorous shaking can cause retinal haemorrhages-even though such statements only reflect their ignorance. Such "experts" then go home and continue advising parents to vaccinate, and thus, with impunity, they cause more and more cases of vaccine-injured babies and children.

The term "Munchausen syndrome per proxy" has been used to identify individuals who kill or otherwise harm a child in order to attract attention to themselves. The term was used in many instances in the 1980s when earlier attempts were fashioned to explain some of the cases of sudden infant death.

 

According to Meadow (1995),14 "Munchausen syndrome per proxy" is flamboyant terminology originally used for journalistic reasons. It was a term commonly applied to adults who presented themselves with false illness stories, just like the fictional Baron von Munchausen who travelled on cannon balls. The term is now used to apply to parents of children who present with false illness stories fabricated by a parent or someone else in that position.

 

While the term may have some validity in describing this special form of child abuse in the documented cases of parents slowly poisoning their child or exposing it to unnecessary and often dangerous and invasive medical treatments, more recently it became a way for some doctors to camouflage the real observed side-effects of especially measles (M), measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and measles-rubella (MR) vaccinations in the UK. Many thousands of British children (up to 15,000 in my considered opinion) developed signs of autism usually associated with bowel symptoms after being given the above vaccines in 1994.

 

The Bulletin of Medical Ethics published two articles, in 1994 and 1995, dealing with this problem. The October 1994 article ("Is your measles jab really necessary?") stated that during November 1994 the UK Government would be running a mass campaign of measles vaccination with the intention of reaching every child between the ages of five and sixteen.

It claimed that the purpose of this campaign was to prevent an epidemic that would otherwise occur in 1995, with up to 200,000 cases and up to 50 deaths. The article also showed that since 1990 there have been only 8,000 to 10,000 cases of measles each year in England and Wales, and that coincidentally there was an epidemic of only about 5,000 cases in Scotland in the winter of 1993-94. Between May and August 1994 the notification rate in England and Wales dropped sharply, so there was nothing that clearly suggested an imminent epidemic.

 

The nine-page article in the August 1995 issue of BME stated among other things that on 14 September 1992 the Department of Health (DoH) hastily withdrew two brands of MMR vaccines following a leak to the national press about the risk of children developing mumps meningitis after administration of these vaccines. Both brands contained the Urabe mumps vaccine strain which had been shown to cause mumps meningitis in one in 1,044 vaccinees (Yawata, 199415).

 

Based on the epidemiology of measles, there was never going to be a measles epidemic in 1995 and there was certainly no justification for concomitant rubella vaccination. The mass campaign was planned as an experimental alternative to a two-dose schedule of measles-mumps-rubella vaccination. The UK Government knowingly misled parents about the need for the campaign and about the relative risks of measles and measles vaccination. The DoH broke the European Union's law about contracts and tendering to ensure that specific pharmaceutical companies were awarded the contracts to provide the campaign vaccines. All this must have been extremely fortunate for the drug companies in question, since the supplies of measles and rubella vaccines-which they'd been left with in 1992 and for which there was virtually no demand-were soon to go out of date.

 

The vaccination campaign achieved very little. Indeed, in 1995 there were twice as many cases of serologically confirmed rubella in England and Wales as in the same period of 1994: 412 cases against 217. Six cases of rubella in pregnant women were reported. The data indicate that more measles cases were notified in the first quarter of 1995 (n=11) than in the first quarter of 1994 (n=9). Despite this, there were several claims from government doctors that measles transmission had stopped among school children. Higson (1995)16 wrote that two DoH officials tried to justify the success of the measles and rubella vaccination campaign by using data that cannot be used to give year-on-year comparison for measles infections. Indeed, he wrote that the data collected by the public health departments on the measles notifications show no indication of benefit from the highly expensive campaign. The British government spent some £20 million purchasing the near-expiry-date measles and rubella vaccines.

 

Some 1,500 parents are now participating in a class action over the damage (most often the bowel problems and autism) suffered by their children.

 

Wakefield et al. (1998)17 published a paper in the Lancet in which they reported on a consecutive series of children with chronic enterocolitis and regressive developmental disorder which occurred 1 to 14 days (median, 6.3 days) after M, MMR and MR vaccinations. They also quoted the "opioid excess" theory of autism, that autistic disorders result from the incomplete breakdown and excessive absorption of gut-derived peptides from foods, including barley, rye, oats and milk/dairy product casein, caused by vaccine injury to the bowel. These peptides may exert central-opioid effects, directly or through the formation of ligands with peptidase enzymes required for the breakdown of endogenous central-nervous-system opioids, leading to disruption of normal neuroregulation and brain development by endogenous encephalins and endorphins.

 

A number of British parents approached me last year and complained that their children had developed behavioural and bowel problems after vaccination (as above), and that instead of getting help from their doctors they were told that they just imagined the symptoms or caused them in order to attract attention to themselves. The term "Munchausen syndrome per proxy" was used. It caused a lot of hardship and marital problems and did nothing for the victims of vaccination. Their stories were horrifying.

 

In summary, the trail of vaccine disasters is growing. Not only do vaccinations do nothing to improve the health of children and other recipients, they cause serious health problems and hardship for their families by victimising the victims of vaccines.

 

Parents of small children of vaccination age should use their own judgement and should educate themselves about the real dangers of this unscientific, useless, harmful and invasive medical procedure. No matter how much vaccines are pushed, vaccination is not compulsory in Australia (though the Liberal Federal Minister for Health has announced his plan to make it so in the near future-which, to me, sounded more like a threat at the time), and parents do not have to vaccinate their children. Those parents who think they are safe when they follow the official propaganda may be in for a rude awakening: they may be accused of causing the harm which resulted from vaccination.

 

I also urge medical practitioners to use their own judgement and observations and study the trail of disaster created by vaccination. They should listen when their patients and especially the parents of small children report side effects of vaccinations.

 

The inability to listen and observe the truth has created a breed of medical practitioners who inflict illness rather than healing, who become accusers rather than helpers, and who are ultimately just covering up-whether consciously or unknowingly, but with frighteningly increasing frequency-for the disasters created by their useless and deadly concoctions and sanctimonious ministrations. Maybe the term "Munchausen boomerang" should be introduced to describe those members of the medical profession who victimise the victims of their own harmful interventions (vaccines in particular).

 

I would like to remind those who may still think the risks of vaccine injury are outweighed by the benefits from vaccines, that infectious diseases are beneficial for children by priming and maturing their immune system. These diseases also represent developmental milestones. Having measles not only results in a lifelong specific immunity to measles, but also a non-specific immunity to a host of other, more serious conditions: degenerative diseases of bone and cartilage, certain tumours, skin diseases and immunoreactive diseases (Ronne, 198518). Having mumps has been found to protect against ovarian cancer (West, 196619). So there is no need to try to prevent children from getting infectious diseases.

 

Moreover, according to orthodox immunological research, vaccines do not immunise, they sensitise; they make the recipients more susceptible to diseases (Craighead, 197520). It is the vaccinated children who suffer chronic ill health (asthma and constant ear infections being two of many vaccine side effects); who develop side effects to diseases like pneumonia or atypical measles (which carries a 12 to 15 per cent mortality risk); or who may have difficulty going through even such innocuous diseases as chicken pox because their immune system has been suppressed by vaccines.

 

In my closing remark, I urge parents to ask themselves a few questions. Have you noticed how much the vaccines are pushed by threats, coercion, victimisation and monetary punitive measures, with parents then being accused of causing what are clearly side effects of the vaccines? Would you succumb to the same type of pressure if any other product were pushed with the same vengeance? Wouldn't you be suspicious and ask what's wrong with the product if it has to be forced upon consumers? Why do so many informed parents, as well as many informed medical doctors, now refuse vaccination? Shouldn't you be suspicious of a medical system which forces itself upon you, which won't accept responsibility for vaccine injuries and unlawfully tries to take away your constitutional, democratic and legal right to have control over your own and your children's health without being hassled and victimised?

Endnotes:

About the Author: