If you're anything like me, you can't resist reading anything new that spews from the nonsensical mouth of Dr. Paul Offit, vaccine pusher extraordinaire. I can't help but find myself repeatedly clicking these links, as if I'm not expecting to read some non-scientific drivel about how safe and effective vaccines are. I should know better by now, I suppose. After all, they say if you don't want to get pissed, don't read something you already know you won't agree with.
I must have an anger management problem, so I took the bait and clicked on Paul Offit's latest NY Times article, titled: "What Would Jesus Do About Measles?"
And of course, now I'm pissed.
Let me begin by saying that I really don't enjoy writing about Paul Offit, although I've done it before in an open letter addressed to him, in response to an article praising him for trying to teach doctors how to combat "parents that question vaccines". I think he's a despicable human being that has no regard for the safety of the children he says he's trying to "save". Let's not forget, this is the same guy who co-invented the live virus Rota-virus vaccine; the one that is supposed to prevent your precious little one from getting a nasty but typically benign version of diarrhea that killed about 30 babies annually in the U.S before the vaccine was introduced. Now it actually kills more, for some reason.
Dr. Offit's vaccine is given to your child at 2 months and 4 months, along with the DTaP(Diphtheria, Tetanus, & Pertussis), HiB(Influenza), Hep B 2(Hepatitis B), Pneumococcal(Pneumonia), and IPV(Polio). To put it in perspective, your child gets 8 different vaccines(per CDC recommended schedule) http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/ ,at only two months of age, and again at 4 months of age.
If injecting foreign animal and human DNA into your newborn seems like a splendid idea, perhaps this excerpt from a news article in 2010 will dampen your rosy outlook:
On May 7, 2010, the FDA announced that RotaTeq vaccine was contaminated with DNA from two porcine circoviruses: PCV1 and PCV2. To date the vaccine manufactuer, Merck, has not given any information regarding if, or when, PCV1 and PCV2 will be removed from this vaccine. Although PCV1 has not been associated with clinical disease in pigs, PCV2 is a lethal pig virus that causes immune suppression and a serious wasting disease in baby pigs that damages lungs, kidneys, the reproductive system, brain and ultimately causes death. The FDA recommended temorpary suspension of the use of Rotarix vaccine on March 22nd after DNA from PCV1 was identified in Rotarix, but did not call for suspension of the use of RotaTeq vaccine after PCV2 was found in RotaTeq. On June 1st, NVIC called on Merck to volunartarily withdraw RotaTeq from the market until PCV2, especially, is removed from the vaccine.
RotaTeq vaccine is manufactured by Merck and was licensed by the FDA in 2006. Description: RotaTeq is a genetically engineered vaccine made of live, attenuated human-bovine hybridized reassortant rotaviruses. Other ingredients include sucrose, sodium citrate, sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrate, sodium hydroxide, polysorbate 80, cell culture media, and trace amounts of fetal bovine serum. It does not contain preservatives.
Anyone still want to wait in line to inject this concoction into your baby, to "prevent" a slightly possible case of Rota-virus? If so, I see I still have work to do here.
Very well, let's consider a recent CDC study that proved that breast milk actually combats the live virus inside the vaccine. They found that women who breast feed their infants were much more likely to actually contain a natural "vaccine" for Rota-virus in their bodies. In other words, the vaccine is rendered ineffective in most cases because the natural super power of the breast milk actually defeats it, which of course means, if you're breast feeding, you really don't need to worry about your baby getting Rota-virus anyway. What's the point of the vaccine? Furthermore, the CDC study concluded with the notion that perhaps mothers should stop breast feeding during the time period of the vaccine administration so the "vaccine could be effective".
I'll give you a minute to process that logic.
At the risk of going too far down this rabbit hole and losing focus on what I set out to write, I'll conclude this section by saying that Paul Offit's Rota-virus vaccine is, in my humble opinion, and the opinion of many doctors, the most worthless vaccine on the market.
Only the flu vaccine rivals it in sense-lacking, universally accepted stupidity.
Still, he's made undisclosed millions on it. Merck reported paying $182 million for the patent, so we can assume he's living pretty handsomely, after splitting a percentage of the profits with his co-inventors. Don't forget his high paying gig at the Children's Hospital Of Philadelphia, whatever various venues pay him to come out and praise vaccines, plus his continued Merck Perks(sounds like a gas station club or something, doesn't it) - so it's understandable that Dr. Offit would continue to market his own and other vaccines as completely safe. In fact, he's been infamously quoted as saying that infants can handle 100,000 vaccines at the same time. No, that's not a typo. Apparently people thought it was, because when the understandable backlash occurred from making that statement, he altered his statement to something much less ridiculous: "Babies should theoretically be able to handle 10,000 vaccines at one time".
Well at least that's not crazy...
But, moving on to the main attraction: Paul Offit's recent article in the New York Times.
We've already established Dr. Offit's conflict of interest in this arena, so it's surprising that so many people buy into his rhetoric. He is still widely regarded as a highly respected doctor, and is basically the national poster boy for the childhood vaccine program. He is the Chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases, and the Director of the Vaccine Education Center at the CHOP. What an illustrious title.
Surely we can trust someone with such a highly regarded vocation to tell us the truth in all areas related to his topic.
Below is a you tube video of Offit being interviewed on vaccines, and being rebutted by Dr. Boyd Haley, a renowned scientist from the University of Kentucky. It's well worth a watch. There, you can see just how easily Offit spits lies off the tip of his tongue, even when he obviously has no idea what the answers are to the questions being asked.
Clearly, Offit cannot be trusted to give us accurate information. He is concerned with his own professional status, and quite enjoys being labeled "The hero of the Vaccine Debate".
So it was no surprise when I saw him attempting to tackle a subject as serious as Jesus and what He would do if the measles were around when he walked the earth 2000 years ago.
Offit begins by making quite a confusing observation about parents who question or refuse to have their children vaccinated:
"Parents have chosen not to vaccinate their children because they can; 19 states have philosophical exemptions to vaccination, and 47 have religious exemptions. The other reason is that parents are not scared of the disease. But I’m scared. I lived through the 1991 Philadelphia measles epidemic."
Ok, first of all, I'm going to color code his quotes in "puke green", because... well, it's apropos.
Second, the statement that parents choose not to vaccinate "because they can" is like saying parents take their kids to church because they can. Yes, of course they can. It's a free country in which our freedom of speech, and freedom of religion, and freedom of health choices are not only backed by a little thing called the constitution, they are also the backbone of our civilization.
Well, used to be.
He goes on to say that the other reason is that parents are not scared of the disease. Ok, I'll give him that one. I know I'm not scared of the measles. Not one bit. It's not because I haven't lived through a "terrifying epidemic"; it's because Measles only very rarely comes with severe effects, especially in established countries with good sanitation and an understanding of how best to treat illness, such as vitamin A, C, and D.
If the Measles really killed 1-3 kids out of 1,000 cases, as the CDC is famous for saying, then I might actually be a tad nervous. However, the death rate for measles, even before the vaccine was introduced, was only 0.002%. That kind of percentage doesn't make me shake in my boots like it does Paul Offit, if in fact he's telling the truth.
I recently discovered a UK government website that beautifully highlighted the reported cases and deaths ratio of Measles since 1940. In 1994, there were 16,375 (reported) cases of Measles in England and Wales, but 0, that's zero, deaths that year from the Measles. This is a dead give-away to anyone questioning the scare stats that the CDC uses.
Clearly, the death rate is not anywhere near what they'd like us to believe, especially in civilized countries.
Next, Offit tells us he is scared, because he survived the great measles epidemic of 1991.
Everyone else remembers this particular scourge like I do, right? I was only six at the time, but I vividly remember the national panic that ensued from 1,400 Philadelphians coming down ill with the Measles, and how much of a nightmare the whole thing was.
Ok, that's sarcasm.
I don't remember it. Nobody seemed to panic back then, because it was still considered a normal childhood disease; mostly benign, and one that came with great health benefits, including life long natural immunity. Oh, what we've done to ourselves in only 25 years...
Now comes professor Offit's history lesson, of which we again don't know the extent of the truth:
"Between October 1990 and June 1991, more than 1,400 people living in Philadelphia were infected with measles, and nine children died. The epidemic started when, after returning from a trip to Spain, a teenager with a blotchy rash attended a rock concert at the Spectrum. By Nov. 29, 96 schoolchildren had been stricken with the illness; a week later, it was 124; by the end of December, the number had risen to 258, and the first child had died. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent a team to determine whether the strain of measles was particularly virulent. It wasn’t. Investigators found that the deaths had nothing to do with the strain that was circulating and everything to do with the parents.
Two fundamentalist Christian churches — Faith Tabernacle Congregation and First Century Gospel Church — were at the heart of the outbreak. Children had not been vaccinated, and when they became ill, their parents prayed instead of taking them to the hospital to receive the intravenous fluids or oxygen that could have saved the lives of those with the worst cases. “If I go to God and ask him to heal my body,” said a church member, Gordon Korn, “I can’t go to a doctor for medicine. You either trust God or you trust man.”"
You can see what he's doing, right?
Early on, he's attempting to vilify parents who refuse vaccinations, as well as Christians, by painting pictures of extreme scenarios that get people worked up. It's the same tactic as the mainstream media has been using to vilify "Anti-Vaxxers" for their beliefs. Unfortunately, this tactic actually seems to work on many people, and consequently, this type of uneven and biased journalism has taken the country by storm.
As for Offit focusing on this particular church in his historical anecdote, I think most people would be able to recognize that this is quite an extreme case, and that most modern Christian "anti-vaxxers", myself included, would seek some sort of medical help if our natural remedies weren't working, and would pray that God would heal our children, as well as guide the doctors in helping to preserve our children's health.
I think it's fair to say that most Christians would not necessarily agree with the mentality of the specific church presented here - we can recognize that God gave us the knowledge and tools to often successfully mend each other and treat illness, so most Christians I know wouldn't refuse medical help if their children were having severe reactions to any illness.
Some might disagree with me there, but my point is only that Offit using this particular case to lump all "anti-vaxxers" together in the "loony bin" is divisive and sneaky at best. I looked into Offit's stats here, and from what I read, they appear to be fairly accurate. Again, this particular case is an extreme one that shouldn't be used in arguments to lump people of all beliefs, faiths, and religions together. We all know that parents questioning vaccines aren't one size fits all, like our childhood vaccine schedule. We don't come in just one color. Why attempt to lump us into categories? The answer is because Christianity is often used as a scapegoat to win the public's opinion. This country is not what it once was, and the Christian way of life is not viewed as "attractive". Offit is intentionally appealing to the secular crowd here by painting Christians as crazy people. Sadly, this works sometimes. But, he apparently forgets that not all people questioning vaccines are Christians. This will come back to bite him later.
Let's move on.
"Public health officials turned to the courts to intervene. First, they got a court order to examine the churches’ children in their homes, then to admit children to the hospital for medical care. Finally, they did something that had never been done before or since: They got a court order to vaccinate children against their parents’ will. Children were briefly made wards of the state, vaccinated and returned to their parents. At the time, a religious exemption to vaccination had been on the books in Pennsylvania for about a decade.
To prevent doctors from violating his church’s beliefs against vaccination, the pastor of the Faith Tabernacle Church asked the American Civil Liberties Union to represent him. It refused. “There is certainly a free exercise of religion claim by the parents,” said Deborah Leavy, the executive director of the A.C.L.U. of Pennsylvania, “but there is also a competing claim that parents don’t have the right to martyr their children.”"
Here, Offit not-so-subtly hints at the fact that forced vaccination "works". It's quite a doozy from left field, really. Again, this is an extreme case, where the church refused to vaccinate their children based on obviously strong beliefs that vaccines do more harm than good. Keep in mind also, that vaccinating people once they're exposed to a virus is completely useless. A vaccine wouldn't have helped these sick kids like proper nutrition would have.
However, the health officials apparently trumped constitutional freedom of religion and parental rights, and got a court order to vaccinate the children anyway against the parent's will. Here we get a glimpse of the not-so-distant future if we allow people like Paul Offit to have their way. He clearly implies that this violation of rights and privacy is a good thing. Reminds me of Nazi Germany, but maybe that's just me.
Offit's story here is devoid of many facts and historical aspects of refusing vaccination. He never delves into why the kids were so sick from a typically mild disease, or why the parents refused vaccines in the first place. Reading his story, one gleans that the kids weren't vaccinated simply because the parents didn't trust men, and trusted God instead. It's supposed to sound silly, except that, to most Christians, this is a primary fundamental of Christianity. We do trust God with our lives. He's the One who created us and who gave humans superior mental capabilities to that of any other species on earth. We are told over and over again throughout scripture that God is all knowing and all powerful; that He has a plan for us. We're also told to treat our bodies like temples, and it's easy to see why when we study our bodies. We still don't fully understand things we've been studying for generations, like our immune systems, aspects of our DNA, and how our brains work. We don't understand the feeling we get when we pray, or that chill down our spines when we're listening for God to speak to us. It's beyond our comprehension, and most of us believe God never intended for us to "tweak" or immune systems to prevent the very things He created from affecting us in various ways(i.e viruses, bacteria, etc). This aspect of Christianity is obviously beyond Dr. Offit's comprehension, which gives us a glimpse into his morals and spirituality.
But, you know what's not beyond our comprehension? The fact that vaccines contain harmful and toxic ingredients. Ingredients that have been known to negatively effect certain people in various ways. Known carcinogens, foreign DNA, toxic heavy metals, and chemicals are all injected into us like it's completely normal.
"Anti-Vaxxers" see that this is dangerous and risky, and don't want to take the chance that our precious little ones especially are injured by vaccines.
Below is a video of a famous congressional briefing held in 2013 that highlights just how real vaccine injury is, and just how hard it is to get compensated for a vaccine injury.
As you can see, it's not beyond our comprehension as to why some parents wouldn't take a chance with vaccines, especially when we consider the time frame(1991) that Offit is describing in his article. In 1991, public trust in vaccines was very low, thanks largely in part to the DPT vaccine, which was injuring and killing more people than any other vaccine in history. It is understandable that during this time period, many parents(not just Christians) would have seen the dangers first hand, and promptly refused vaccines for their children. Below is a link the HRSA site that highlights "Vaccine Court", and the vaccines that caused issues. Remember, those receiving settlements through vaccine court are only a fraction of those who are actually negatively effected by vaccines:
"At the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, we saw more than 200 children in our emergency department and admitted about 40. Children would come in, covered in rashes, squinting in the bright light (a side effect caused by eye irritation), struggling to breathe and often extremely dehydrated. It was like being in a war zone. When I asked their parents why they had done what they had done, they all had the same answer: “Jesus was my doctor.”"
Offit vividly describes the bloody carnage in his waiting room as if being in a war zone. I'm sure there were amputated limbs, puddles of blood, and dead bodies everywhere too, but for some reason he doesn't highlight those details here. He's comparing 40 kids(about 3% of the infected) admitted to the hospital over the course of three months to being in a war zone. Do I even have to illustrate how over-the-top this analogy is? He might as well have told us they were each given 10,000 MMR's to help ease the pain and promptly sent on their way.
Look, I'm not belittling those that actually have died from the measles, or war, for that matter. It's not a joke. But comparing survivors of a relatively small measles outbreak to people that actually do go and fight for our country's freedom, sometimes losing their lives in the process, is sick and twisted.
Next, he tells us that the parents of these kids all had the same answer: "Jesus was my doctor". I'm no hospital director, but I don't have to be even remotely sharp to tell you that is highly unlikely. I've never heard anyone say that before, although there is some merit to the statement. Jesus is life. When we get to where we're going, we won't need doctors anymore. I can't wait. But I wouldn't be saying that phrase to anyone, especially to my doctor. Let's just confidently assume he's stretching the truth again with that statement.
"It seems to me that if religion teaches us anything, it’s to care about our children, to keep them safe. Independent of whether one believes in Jesus, or that the four Gospels are an accurate account of what he said and did, you have to be impressed by the figure described. At the time of Jesus, around 4 B.C. to 30 A.D., child abuse was the “crying vice” of the Roman Empire. Infanticide and abandonment were common. Children were property, no different from slaves. But Jesus stood up for children. In Matthew 25:40, he said, “Verily, I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of my brethren ye have done it unto me” — a quote that could be emblazoned onto the entrance way of every children’s hospital in the world."
At this point, it becomes quite clear that Dr. Offit really doesn't know anything about religion or care about people who do. However, we already knew that. He's the author of a book titled: "Bad Faith - When Religious Belief Undermines Modern Medicine". You can check it out on Amazon.
Clearly Dr. Offit believes that he and his peers are God - or at least equivalent to him. So much so, that he blatantly challenges any parent that dares to suggest that God created us and also our immune systems, and we shouldn't be altering them into something they shouldn't be. Apparently obvious to Offit, is that God didn't know what he was doing when he created earth and its inhabitants, and forgot to complete the immune system.
Then, thousands of years after the original creation, he created people like Edward Jenner(smallpox) and Jonas Salk(polio) to fix the things He overlooked. Now we have Paul Offit(rota-virus), the self appointed second coming of the Messiah, declaring that he and all modern medicine is perfect, sinless, and fully complete. That's a hell of a claim. And unfortunately, it's only partially in jest. If you stand back and look at the whole picture, it becomes clear that many doctors, including Offit, actually feel this way to some extent.
He(Offit) seems to know very little of "religion", but proves a formidable history buff, finding time to compare Roman infanticide and abandonment to not vaccinating. Why not, right?
Notice Offit's quote: "Independent of whether one believes in Jesus, or that the four Gospels are an accurate account of what he said and did, you have to be impressed by the figure described." This is what you call a dead giveaway of someone who doesn't believe that the the bible is true. They acknowledge it, but never affirm it, instead choosing to tip-toe around the subject of belief. Offit is only using these quotes to try to appeal to a certain crowd; they do not reflect his own beliefs.
However, for someone who appears to know little about "religion", he's spotted suddenly quoting Jesus Himself. No doubt he was forced to see these words many times throughout his career.
He attempts to twist Jesus' words to apply to the topic of vaccines & medicine to the issues of Jesus' day. The sad thing is, it probably worked on a few people, and they've probably pulled their old WWJD bracelets out of storage and driven to the nearest doctor's office to catch their kids up on much needed booster shots.
"Constantine, the first Christian emperor of Rome, passed laws protecting children from abuse and poverty. Christian monasteries became prototypes for modern-day hospitals. And missionaries brought medicine to the four corners of the earth in Jesus’ name.
So why didn’t representatives from other churches or other religions stand up for the children suffering from measles in Philadelphia? The reason is obvious. No one likes to tell someone else how to practice their faith. It’s an understandable instinct — to a point. And that point was reached in Philadelphia in 1991."
Thank God for Constantine, who helped change a lot of things for the better - temporarily - in Rome almost 2,000 years ago. But what Offit attempts to illustrate is a picture of malnourished and poverty-stricken kids of ancient times being spoon fed healthy concoctions of mercury, aluminum, animal tissues, formaldehyde, and chemicals that hadn't even been invented yet, all in the name of Jesus. All to help the poor and needy. I don't think I need to stress that this is a silly analogy he's using..
His "obvious" reason that he gives for other churches not standing up for the measles-stricken children of 1991 is that no one likes to be told how to practice their faith. Yes, that is obvious, now that I think about it.
Not many people like being told that what they feel isn't true or valid, or that it's less important than somebody else's faith. No one could ever convince me that there is no God, because I've felt Him. I've lived for Him. I've read His words. I know beyond the shadow of a doubt(as does any true Christian) that God exists. I place my faith in Him, and I find my peace in His grace. When someone tells me this faith is meaningless, I tend to get defensive. It's a natural emotion; one that He tells us to curb. We are to turn the other cheek when persecuted for our faith; but it's pretty easy to get defensive of how you feel.
So maybe Offit's got a point there. We are content in whatever faith God's led us to, and don't like being told that the government knows better than our Creator. We know they don't, and when the two contradict each other, rest assured the government will run into resistance. Our faith is how we govern our lives. We are also told to "submit to Caesar", but we live in America circa 2015, where we still have God-given freedoms to live individually and make informed decisions for our families. Not to mention no one's suggesting that we don't pay our taxes.
Apparently a typically benign disease like the Measles is something to forcefully bypass our personal freedoms for. I shouldn't be surprised that Offit would sound so proud of that.
"In the wake of the current epidemic, several states have proposed legislation modifying or eliminating philosophical exemptions to vaccination. No lawmaker, however, dares to touch religious exemptions. It’s political dynamite. But with an estimated 30,000 children in the United States unvaccinated for religious reasons, that is a dangerous mistake.
Parents shouldn’t be allowed to martyr their children — or in this case, those with whom their children have come in contact. Religious exemptions to vaccination are a contradiction in terms. In the good name of all religions, they should be eliminated."
In his closing remarks, Dr. Offit pops out of the closet like the dreaded boogey man and finally makes clear his intention for writing this ridiculous article. It turns out, Dr. Offit only pretended to be interested in "religion" at all just to illicit the support of weak minded Christians before putting the cherry on the top of his sundae: "Religious exemptions to vaccination are a contradiction in terms. In the good name of all religions, they should be eliminated."
I just threw up in my mouth a little. This is the point, as a Christian, that I need to bite a hole in my tongue and not spout off what I so badly want to write. Offit holds a special place in my heart, and only God gets to know the wicked thoughts I have about this man. I'm not proud of it, but I'll admit that they're there. I'm working on it..
The only part of this that gave me any glimmer of hope for our country was when he says no lawmaker would dare to touch religious exemptions. Not because it's not right of course, but because it's political suicide. Thank God there are still enough people in this country who are driven by faith and live for God to know that lawmakers still respect it. After all, our religious rights are protected by the US constitution. At this point. Only God knows the future of this country, and we can't yet guess his purpose for all of this. We do know that vaccines are not in any way biblical. If you thought Offit was going to prove that wrong, think again. His arguments were about as solid as soup.
But why should we fight to maintain our religious exemption rights?
1. First and foremost for me are aborted fetal cells being used in about 75% of all vaccines. I have a huge problem with abortion, and an even bigger problem with a "science" that supports it and doesn't feel it's wrong. Abortion is murder. That is an undeniable fact, no matter if you're pro-choice or pro-life. We know that there have been many aborted fetuses used in the development of vaccines, as well as countless animal lives sacrificed in the name of Science.
I could have easily been aborted myself, as an 80's child who was adopted out of a broken, adulterous marriage that ended because of me. I've always been appreciative of my biological mother for choosing to go through with the "inconvenience' of birth and all the steps to put me up for adoption. I then grew up in a conservative, Christian home for which I'm infinitely thankful. My whole future depended on one woman's decision to easily abort me and be done with a miserable situation, or drag out said miserable situation for all nine months, and go through the work of filing for adoption and picking out parents.
Needless to say, I'm pro-life, and will be until I die.
2. However, even if vaccines didn't use aborted fetal cells, they are still proven to come with risks; some well documented; some unknown. As a Christian whose body is a temple for the Spirit(1 Cor 3:16-17), I refuse to play Russian Roulette with my kids. They are very important to me, and I refuse to inject them with something I know could cause harm, especially when I don't fear the disease they are supposed to be vaccinated for. Just because other people may fear them isn't my problem or my kid's problem. The truth is, those people have been programmed to fear a typically mild, benign childhood disease. They've also been programmed to believe that we have vaccines to thank for the "elimination" of all "vaccine preventable" disease. This is not the case, as documented in disease/vaccine graphs from throughout the 1900's.
No one, even the infamous Paul Offit, can tell me to do this. I'll adhere to my religious freedoms in every way I can.
3. Supporting the multi-billion dollar vaccine industry should not be mandatory, or made law just because a well known doctor says it should. This is a man who is very wealthy himself. Jesus would have probably told Dr. Offit to sell all his possessions and follow him. I'm not sure how he would have responded to that, but it seems clear to me that the outcome would have been similar to the account we read of in Matthew 19:16-22.
The bible says in 1st Timothy 6:10-11: "For the love of money is the root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs. But as for you, O man of God, flee these things. Pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness."
I see a much different version of "religion" than Dr. Offit does. Since God's Word is my ultimate authority, I will fight to defend my faith as I am able.
You see, Paul Offit and other wealthy, influential people like him should never open the can of "What Would Jesus Do", because they will eventually reap what they sew.
Their kryptonite is when they underestimate "Anti-Vaxxers" ability to see through the lies and deception.
We are people that have banded together and widely recognized the truth. Weak-minded articles like the Offit NY Times piece highlighted here, although they're widely praised by the media and other influential personalities, don't do anything to convince the average citizen that he has a point.
He never did tell us what Jesus would do with the measles, did he?
Perhaps he realized mid-writ that he was opening a big 'ol can of blasphemy.
Perhaps he realized that Jesus healed people with miracles, not vaccines.
Or perhaps he realized that that Jesus never actually mentioned fearing anything, but was an advocate for peace and life everlasting.
If anything, Jesus was not happy when money was being used for corrupt ways(Matthew 21:12-16), and got a little angry Himself. Whether Offit cares or not is unknown; only God truly knows his heart.
Public knowledge = Kryptonite for people like Paul Offit. The more people that share the knowledge that vaccines are more dangerous and less effective than the "experts" claim, the harder it's going to be for him to be taken seriously.
Now is the time to stand up for your rights, and write your congressmen, your senators, and even your doctor. Most doctors never spent much time researching vaccines except what their pharma-supplied textbooks, professors, and drug reps told them were benefits to vaccination. Most doctors, if they're not pharmaceutically influenced, will look at material we present.
Remember, the science is actually on our side.
There are no legitimate safety studies on the current vaccine schedule, testing on babies or pregnant women, extensive studies of individual ingredients, or studies on the health of unvaccinated children compared with vaccinated children. Even the studies that do exist can be found to use words like 'maybe" 'probably" and "further research is needed".
Vaccines have never been proven safe. Rest assured.
They may not "harm" everyone, but the fact remains that they continue to harm some, and until they are looked at in much more depth(I suggest five years of drug companies flipping their research funds for their marketing funds), we as parents have every right to refuse vaccination for our young guinea pig---I mean, er, children.
I leave you with a video of the most recent CDC whistleblower, William Thompson, and his plea to congress to research the ongoing fraud in the CDC. Dr. Thompson has since been granted federal immunity by the Obama administration, and will testify to congress. He has already turned in over 100,000 documents of evidence that the CDC planned out and orchestrated a plan to coverup data that proved there indeed existed a link between vaccines and autism: