An Open Letter to Open-Minded Vaccine Enthusiasts
Injecting a new opinion...
This article has been found to be safe and effective at provoking blank stares. Side effects include yawning, opening a new tab, and reconsidering what life decisions brought you here. If your symptoms persist, contact your email spam filter.
Enjoy!
An Open Letter to Open-Minded Vaccine Enthusiasts
Like with so many public conversations, discourse on the need for vaccines often begins with sweeping conclusions like “vaccines save lives” or “vaccines cause autism” which generate no greater understanding of the underlying cost-benefit analysis behind the decision. I’d like to provide a short antidote to that here for people who may disagree with me, a rational explanation for why you should not vaccinate your future children or grandchildren, which doesn’t depend on a slew of studies which frankly no normal person has the time and mathematical acumen to truly break down critically.
This was the thought process behind my decision to not vaccinate my children, which I came to in the peaceful summer of 2019, as unbeknownst to my very pregnant wife and I, our society was on the cusp of a sort of inoculation mania. And yet as much as vaccine skepticism has increased since the beginning of the COVID-19 lockdowns, there is a growing moderate position of segregating criticism of the new mRNA vaccines from “normal vaccines”.
This segmentation of criticism is utterly misguided. From a systems-conscious perspective we should all be aware that the methods of information and monetary control that enabled the religious zeal, top-down corporate enforcement, and financial destruction of dissenters that defined the COVID-19 hysteria was not a sudden pique of madness, but rather the apotheosis of a decades-long march through the institutions. A power structure still in total control of the medical and education systems.
And for those eager to move on from discussion of the COVID-19 Vaccine, who may consider it “old news” at this point, it is my unfortunate duty to remind you that it has been added to the CDC childhood vaccination schedule and is on track to be given to several million 6-month old infants in the United States alone over the next several years.
“Children aged 6 months–4 years should get two or three doses of updated COVID-19 vaccine depending on which vaccine they receive.”
- CDC Release, May 14, 2024
I fear this will result in a lot of children having induced health conditions due to parental fear of a now defanged virus that never presented serious symptoms in children. As with our broader vaccine schedule, the burden of treatment has been shifted onto those who can’t complain, and with the furor on social media moving on to more pressing topics like which septuagenarian will pretend run the nation, an entire generation is being silently poisoned beneath our awareness.
But if you are drawing a line at the COVID shot when your pediatrician pops the question, or plan to decline the rapidly approaching RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) Vaccine which uses the same mRNA technology and which I expect to see on the childhood schedule by the end of 2025, then you’re going to be lumped in with the rest of us “anti-vaxxers” in terms of potentially being scrutinized or kicked out by your medical provider. So why not learn about your new bed-fellows, the full-bore “anti-vaxxers”, and hear without prejudice why some of us are so skeptical of the “normal” vaccines.
At the highest level, we need to remove our own recency bias in regards to childhood vaccination. Those already familiar with the topic will be aware of the 1986 Vaccine Act which provides vaccine manufacturers protection from any liability in regards to injuries caused by their products once approved by the Department of Health and Human Services. Perhaps unsurprisingly, following this total removal of liability there was a massive boom in the number of federally recommended vaccines (effectively required to participate in public schooling and other activities) beginning in 1989. It was an ideal situation from the manufacturer perspective; the customers had to buy the product, it didn't have to work, and so long as there wasn’t an immediate catastrophic reaction they wouldn’t complain either, there was no downside to selling more vaccines.
The average 1 year old child went from receiving 6 vaccinations, to around 20. And you’ll notice that this was not in response to a public outcry or terrible childhood outcomes. On the contrary, childhood health outcomes have been declining since 1989.
This is yet another example of elite theory in action. The powerful set the orthodoxy, and distrust in vaccines is crowned as a “low prestige” opinion — in fact there are very good odds you’re cringing at me right now. After all, you were vaccinated (and likely circumcised) and turned out okay.
But I don’t want to argue statistical outcomes or abstract trends. I don’t want to tell you anything really, I want you to answer a question for yourself — and after you do so, whether you agree with me or not, I will be satisfied we engaged in a genuine exchange of ideas.
The one questions is…
One Limiting Factor
What is the limiting factor in the safety of vaccines? Or put another way, what is stopping me from giving my child a dozen doses of every vaccine known to man in one sitting?
That’s it. That’s my question for you.
I am not attempting to set up a strawman here; aspirin for example is a completely appropriate medicine to use in some circumstances, and yet I can point to an exact limiting factor in it’s application, biological mechanisms of action where respiratory alkalosis and metabolic acidosis are induced, causing respiratory and other issues to the point of death.
But for “normal” vaccines, what is the limiting factor? Is it the abundance of a specific ingredient? If so, which one(s)? Is there a set reaction to them the body needs between each shot? If so what process needs to conclude before another shot is given?
Whether you agree with me or not, I would like you to seriously consider and have an answer in mind to this question. If you have any answer at all, I’d even encourage you to write it down before continuing this article. This is the beginning of an adult conversation on the appropriateness of any medical treatment.
But whatever your decision may be on this, the “experts” as defined by the current medical system uniformly say it’s fine to multidose your vaccines.
“Theoretically, there’s not a maximum number of vaccines you can get at the same time if you’re willing to have sore arms — you could get four or five together,”
-Sten Vermund, MD, PhD, professor of public health, infectious disease epidemiologist, and pediatrician at Yale Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut.”
This unfortunately seems to be the incurious party line. In fact, I encourage you to search “how many vaccines you can get at once” with your search engine of choice — the results are quite unhinged!
Finding the answers to these extremely simple questions is quite difficult, and in asking them you will quickly realize just how few people have considered them.
Some Possible Limiting Factors
What I hope this question makes clear is that to discuss the real risks of a medical procedure, we must first discuss the actual mechanics of a medical procedure (as is more common with surgery).
Traditional vaccines have three components: an antigen (the “germ” you want immunity from, usually in an inert form), some kind of stabilizing filler liquid, and an adjuvant (this is necessarily something toxic to the human body, in order to induce a reaction from your immune system to the inert antigen).
It may surprise you that among vaccine risk aware people it’s generally accepted that vaccines do offer protection from specific pathogens, and that the antigens themselves are fairly harmless. There are some concerns about contamination from stray DNA from human or animal fetal cell lines used in the creation of the vaccine, but for the most part it’s the adjuvant that is usually seen as the limiting factor in vaccine safety. There are two primary mechanisms by which it’s thought to present issues:
Adjuvant Toxicity: Aluminum has now largely replaced mercury as the adjuvant of choice by manufacturers, and there are concerns it collects in the brain, particularly at the microscopic (nano) scale it is broken into when used in vaccines. We handle aluminum quite often in our lives, and even ingest it accidentally without issue, but it’s very much not something you want floating around sub dermally or leaking into your bloodstream.
Adjuvant Induced Immune Drift: Adjuvants are extremely effective at providing an antibody response, and vaccine success is generally measured by antibody presence following vaccination. There is a line of thought that repeated activation and irritation of our immune system by such potent injections shifts our immune systems into overdrive to the point they target our own bodies (causing auto-immune disorders), target a random non-infectious item the recipient is exposed to during adjuvant response (inducing an allergy), or alternatively that an immune system trained to respond with hyper-specific antibodies to antiquated pathogen strains reduces the overall flexibility of our immune systems.
But ultimately these are just ideas. The entire vaccine debate is clouded by the fact we rely on broad statistical modeling to determine very personalized health risks, the clarity of which is only compounded by a fog-of-war from intense levels of corruption, actual technical barriers to layman understanding, and growing obsession with scientism/credentialism. If you try to find a debate between experts on both sides you will unfortunately be sorely disappointed. I’ve searched long and hard, and only found one instance of it, with several others that were planned until the “pro-vaccine” side pulled out at the last moment.
As someone who took the leap with zero vaccines for my children, I can only share that anecdotally I had constant ear infections and intense asthma as a child, and my two children have never had a single ear infection and are allergy free. I should note for those unaware, recurring ear infections are strongly associated with DTaP vaccination by vaccine-skeptical researchers.
That’s not to say I haven’t wrestled with my decision, as I hope you do too. We all have to deal with very imperfect information here. It shouldn’t be on you as a parent to make a decision under these conditions, and yet it is. And there’s a chance it may be the most important decision of your life.
Interested in supporting? Tooky’s Mag is now accepting subscriptions!
We’ve also recently released a novella ‘Improvidence’, a Lewis & Clark style adventure across the post-collapse ruins of America, is available now: https://a.co/d/3AGjHU2
The most likely “causes” of ear infections are bottle feeding, formula feeding (those are two independent risk factors), daycare attendance, simply because all of the above collectively leads to a generally and frequently sick children due to both physical and chemical manipulation of a child. It happens so that the majority of these children are also vaccinated. They say vaccines work worse in sick children too so often breastfeeding is recommended for vaccines to even work as part of the ongoing government effort to engineer a human that does not die and is never sick.
Thank you for your thoughtful, clear, but gentle open letter. I am sympathetic, and agree that this is a matter to be determined based on each particular case and the thoughtful conscience of those considering the risk.
I think it shouldn't be a big deal for anyone to be suspicious of the vaccine industry--the vulnerability of each of us, to these protected industries, seems to naturally draw out an instinctual sense of warning in us.