It isn’t described as a failure, but the simple fact is that success of a vaccine would mean that there’s no need to protect newborns by vaccinating their already-vaccinated parents. Of course, that makes no difference to the vaccine pushers. If a vaccine’s failure can be used to sell more of it, the thinking seems to be, “Let’s go for it!”
Therefore, it should come as no surprise that parents are now being pressed to get revaccinated against pertussis, more commonly known as whooping cough. A nice, cozy, warm term has been developed to describe it—no doubt after extensive marketing testing. It’s called cocooning. Gives you a nice warm fuzzy, doesn’t it?
The whooping cough vaccine is, at best, acknowledged as less than effective. Like so many others, a single vaccination is not considered adequate. A series of at least three is insisted upon in babies. Now, parents of newborns are being pressed into having yet another, not only for the initially-recognized lack of efficacy, but also because of an admitted loss of whatever effectiveness it might have!
And none of that takes into consideration that the vaccine is producing a new, more virulent strain of whooping cough, one that is 10 times more deadly than the original version!
The pertussis vaccine is a case of failure upon failure upon failure. So, conventional medicine’s approach to that failure is to compound it even further, by urging yet more vaccinations, and this time it’s directed at people who are not generally considered at risk for getting whooping cough.
Pertussis vaccination carries serious risks. hey are, of course, hidden by the pharmaceutical-medical industry. Study after study claiming little danger is based on only short-term follow-ups. Worse, risks that do show up are hidden behind clever terminology. What do you suppose a hypotonic or hyopresponsive episode is? It sounds inocuous enough, something similar to sleepiness, but certainly nothing like a seizure. Yet, that’s exactly what those terms describe. We tend to think of seizures as involving hyperactivity of some sort—flailing or vibrating limbs, stiffening muscles, drooling, or other overt physical reaction. That, though, is not the only way a seizure can be evidenced. It can also be a lack of activity or response. That is an admitted, but masked, adverse effect seen in trials of TDaP vaccines (Typhus, Diphtheria, and Pertussis, the typical vaccination combination).
According to one study financed by the Canadian government and published by the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases, vaccinating parents against whooping cough is not an effective method of protecting infants. Even using hypothetical effectiveness—since efficacy has never actually been proven—when the actual rate of infant pertussis infection is considered, it would take at least a million vaccinations to prevent a single infant death and 100,000 vaccinations to prevent admission to an intensive care unit. According to that study, it would not be financially prudent for Canada to vaccinate newborn’s parents against pertussis.
Consider these facts:
In light of those points, even the one-in-a-million estimate of that study begs credulity!
But the story of risk goes even further. The reports of thousands in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is not considered as a particularly serious source of information. It’s described as anecdotal. That is, the so-called experts say that those reports shouldn’t be taken too seriously, since they’re made by nonexperts who could be mistaking negative events that would have happened anyway as being caused by vaccines. It’s so very easy to toss such information out as inconsequential—unless, of course, you’re one of those victims or the parent of a harmed child. It’s also an insult to the parents of vaccine-damaged children, who now number in the millions.
The reality is that nearly all the vaccine adverse event studies are financed, directly or indirectly, by Big Pharma. As is obvious, Big Pharma makes Big Bucks from vaccines, so they assure that the evidence the public sees is, generally, positive for their goal of increasing profits.
The simple fact is that Big Pharma and doctors profit immensely from vaccinations. Any excuse to increase the number is jumped on—even one as feeble as the idea of cocooning babies from disease. On the assumption that the vaccination works a certain percentage of the time, the Canadian government’s study found that the cost is far greater than any benefit that might occur, given even the best-case scenario, an assumption that the vaccine is effective, that it doesn’t cause a mutated and more virulent form of the disease, and that it doesn’t cause serious adverse effects.
It’s interesting that even though the Canadian government eliminated all those concerns in their study, they still determined that it makes no sense to cocoon babies by vaccinating their parents against whooping cough. In the United States, though, the government doesn’t look at it that way. People bear the costs themselves and the agencies involved are largely controlled by pharmaceutical corporations. Therefore, the CDC merrily recommends that parents of newborns be vaccinated.
Doctors profit quite nicely from extra vaccinations. They charge for them, of course, plus they charge for the office visit. Base prices for simply entering a doctor’s office vary, of course, but it’s never cheap. Fees run from around $60, and can go as high as several hundred. Getting new parents to make just one more doctor’s office visit is a highly profitable venture!
What’s the real reason for pushing whooping cough vaccines on new parents? Shall we count the ways? One dollar, two dollars, three dollars … a thousand dollars … a million dollars … still counting!
Tagged big pharma, cocooning, conventional medicine, newborn cocoon, pertussis cocoon, pertussis vaccine, pharmaceutical drugs, pharmaceuticals, vaccine, vaccine cocoon, vaccines, whooping cough, whooping cough cocoon, whooping cough vaccine