Interview with Dr Suzanne Humphries
Vaccination is one of the most controversial medical procedures, and relatively it is impossible to make an informed decision, if you do not know the views of her supporters and her opponents. And in the study of these views it is important to meet with the historic context. Hello friends, this is Dr. Mercola, helping you to gain control over their health. In order to determine and assess the historical context, we've invited nephrologist Dr. Suzanne Humphries, who devoted a considerable part of his medical career to reveal to people the history of vaccination, which you need to know. Let me welcome you and thank you for coming today, Dr. Humphries.
Thank you, Dr. Mercola.I believe that our audience would be interested to know how and under what circumstances you first became interested in this topic.
It happened in 2009, when the hospital where I worked, came a few patients. They, without question from my side, told me that she felt fine until then, until they have been vaccinated. Prior to that, I'm pretty indifferent to vaccination. I have vaccinated their patients on dialysis; I was vaccinated and largely believed what I was taught in medical school.
And then I began to notice that my patients, often when they had a serious illness, such as inflammation, heart attacks, congestive heart failure, and one even had cancer, and he underwent chemotherapy in the first day of their stay in the hospital already did the assignment. My patients on the first day of their stay in the hospital are vaccinated before I had them examined, and the appointment was given my name. It made me pay attention, that things happen without my consent. I complained about this hospital administration. And ironically, it is this, is the resistance that I faced then, led me to the current path.
I had to study the issue of vaccination to disprove all the arguments that were given me, such as: vaccines are safe and effective, they simply cannot create so many problems, and that they changed the appearance of the disease throughout the world. I must say that later I agreed with the latter but not for the reasons they said.
However, it turned out that in the medical literature there was absolutely nothing that could speak in favour of vaccination of a patient in an acute condition. Once they called the expert in order to explain to me. But the arguments of experts is still not consistent with scientific data. These arguments do not support the paradigm, which they proclaimed. My patients were in acute condition, they had inflammatory diseases, and I didn't want them vaccinated. I said that I was confusing the nursing staff, canceling vaccinations to their patients. That's about how it started.
Thank you for this digression. I would be interested to know what made you write the book "Dispelling illusions: disease, vaccines and the forgotten history", which really exposes a huge amount of confusing information disseminated about vaccinations.
It started with the hostility which I had to face only because I did not agree that vaccines are safe and effective and they can do almost anyone, no matter how he was sick. I was throwing out arguments that smallpox was eliminated through immunization, polio, at least, in our hemisphere, managed to escape with the help of vaccination, and that this is God's gift to mankind. All of this information gradually penetrated into me during my medical education. I never approached it critically. I somehow had no reason for this, or at least I thought so.
This research, performed by me only to argue against the view expressed to me the arguments about the justification for vaccinating patients on the first day of their stay in the hospital, and made me start to study the history of smallpox and polio, although it is, in fact, had no relation to what was happening around me.
When I did my own research on this topic, I was amazed at what I found out was the complete opposite of what I was explaining and what I believed in all my life. Now I do not believe that smallpox helped to eradicate the vaccination against smallpox. Now I don't believe that polio helped eradicate the polio vaccinations. These are some really complicated, long and complex history, and vaccination is all the time changing. Actually very easy to put people dust in the eyes and make all sorts of statements, because people absolutely do not know anything, and the history of this issue is very complex.Before we go any further, take a look at these amazing charges. Honestly, when I first read it in your article on the website of the Weston price, I was just amazed at the arguments. Maybe you could briefly formulate them for our audience? Because, as you mentioned, this is the strongest argument given in support of vaccinations, because it is evidence from the history. If you challenge this fact or ignore it, you become a heretic, a mentally ill, irrational person or provider, which need to be isolated from society and who need to take away his license to practice.Could you at least... I mean, please, do not pay attention to how much time will it take, as I think this is truly a key point. It is so important that I would like to ask you to try to summarize it in a way that any ordinary person could understand and explain it to their friends or neighbors.
You want me to tell about smallpox and polio?Yes. Because I think this is the basis of all the arguments presented in favor of vaccinations. If you do could shake this or at least to awaken strong doubts, I think you have every reason to declare the insolvency of modern vaccines, the protection of which it is impossible to give such arguments, and in many cases is connected with them only negative information.
Well. There are several things about which I can speak with confidence, and one of them is that behind every vaccine is based on a story. Each vaccine had its own weaknesses, your method of distribution. All diseases are different, and the history associated with all vaccines, is also different. But when I began to study smallpox, I knew absolutely nothing about her except that when I was in school immune to her we were determined to put up us in a row to check whether we have a scar or not, and it's so unscientific when it comes to immunity, which nanouchka and can not be.
But in fact, the vaccine for smallpox was developed long before was at least something is known about the immune system. Simply put, it was made by scraping pus from the abdomen of cows. Sometimes there was a genetic disease of goats. There mingled and horse pox. Sometimes there mingled with human smallpox and a little glycerin. It was all shook, then took something like the edge and some times they pierced the skin.It was some old cow?
Sometimes people did four or five of these red circular formations on the body — sometimes on foot, sometimes on the hand. But what I didn't know is that many people have died after they were inoculated. There were many people who after vaccination developed severe form of smallpox, and they died. Often the disease was more severe in vaccinated than unvaccinated. There is a statistic that shows that the mortality among the vaccinated was higher than among the unvaccinated. Think about smallpox. Imagine that in those days was an outbreak of smallpox. It was very difficult to distinguish whether it was chicken pox, monkey pox, or smallpox. In those times any smallpox was considered to be smallpox-although the vaccine ever in General and not this specific virus. Since Edward Jenner made a vaccine, it has never been human smallpox, vaccines have always used the smallpox virus animals. It was the most contaminated vaccine from ever getting to market, is so polluted that Dr. Paul Offit didn't even want to resurrect it, when it was assumed that there was a danger of bioterrorism.
Let's look at a city like Leicester in England. People in town noticed that they had the highest vaccine coverage in the vaccinated world, and the outbreak of smallpox occurred from them even more than before. People in town got together and held a rally. It was the mayor and some officials involved in health issues. They agreed to stop vaccinations. The population no longer had to force vaccinations. And in those days imprisoned, took away the furniture or made to pay a fine for refusing to vaccinate their young children and their families. People protested against this.
The result was far from predicted. Predicted that the entire planet will be the highest outbreak of the disease and that the residents of Leicester and risk their health all over the world, as it is not made vaccination mandatory. But we in our book showed — and we gave it the graphics of morbidity and mortality for this disease that both figures dropped dramatically after vaccinations were discontinued.
This very story shows that the reason that the disease has disappeared, was not vaccinated; the reason that the disease has disappeared, was the isolation of the [patients] and the improvement of sanitary conditions. When in this city someone was ill with smallpox, it was separated from the rest of the family asked to keep the patient at home, in the room, and care for special people, usually those who already had the disease and was immune to it. By following these simple guidelines has led to a sharp reduction in morbidity.
Among the cows there was a rumor that those who had contracted cow pox, often found on the cow's udder, became immune to smallpox. And it really was just a rumor, because in fact there were many milkmaids who fell ill with natural smallpox after the cow had been ill with smallpox. But hearing Edward Jenner and started all this. He began to take some pus from these cows, rubbed it in the stomach of cows and waited until rashes. As soon as the pustules took something like a scraper, removed the pus, which it was formed, it was collected in a test tube, and the vaccine was ready.That is, he actually injected the cows smallpox?
Not smallpox, it was cow pox.Milkmaids who had cow pox, contracted from cows. They rubbed the pus of the cows...
Cow pox is a disease of cows. If there was a non-infected cow, then the cow was infected. But instead of it getting infected udder infected belly, because then it was easier to scrape off a large amount of pus.
It's a skin vaccine. Most vaccines these days — it's an intramuscular vaccine. But this particular vaccine was administered multiple punctures of the skin until then, until it formed an abscess. And it was believed that thus the person has developed immunity. Even if you read contemporary documents Center for disease control (CDC), they don't know how long [has developed immunity]. They believe that the vaccine can provide immunity for approximately 10 years. But we don't know that for sure, because the likelihood that each vaccine the percentage of people who have it "began", will be different.
The theory was that will develop a certain cellular and humoral, or antibody mediated, immunity. If you are exposed to real smallpox, because vaccinia virus is close to the variola virus you'll be immune to this disease. But if you look at the medical records of those times, you will notice that doctors, who are very opposed to this, which at first was for this practice, and then began to oppose it. That is what we with the Novel and studied the literature, containing mortality, morbidity and mention of the doctors who were against vaccination.
However, when making such vaccinations, or, in any case, when such a vaccine was inoculated Jenner, who developed it, no one knew nothing about the cellular and humoral immunity. But as I understand it and how it follows from the literature reviewed me now because I believe that these vaccines do not generate cellular immunity, isn't it? And this is the problem: they form the humoral immune system and make it unbalanced, so that it creates an imbalance in the immune system and even causes a predisposition to cancer.
True. The answer to this question really depends on what kind of vaccine and at what age she was introduced. If vaccinations to babies, you almost always creates the state of imbalance towards T helper type 2 (Th2), which is a very unhealthy condition. If you wait longer, it's usually more of T-helper cells type 1. But it's all adaptive immune system. When we talk about the cellular immune system in General, we're talking about a system that is already there and able to fight off diseases. This innate immune system.
Vaccines in fact do not have much influence on the innate immune system. They have more effect on the adaptive immune system. Some of them really increase cellular immunity. But basically it is to produce antibodies, because cells need to produce antibodies. They typically perform both functions, but it depends on the age and vaccine. Basically, they lead to the development of less desirable forms of immunity, namely immunity to T helper type 2. But this is not always the case. Vaccine Calmette and guérin (BCG) will actually give you more of T-helper cells type 1. The vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) cause the production of more T helper type 1 than other vaccines. The result really varies depending on what vaccine we're talking about.Well. Thanks for the explanation. But this is apparently the problem, and related to many vaccines, such a distortion of the distribution of types of immunity, leading to other problems.
Yes. But the difficulty is that the measurement of the cellular immune response is very expensive. Easier and cheaper to look for antibodies. But when it comes to such diseases as measles, you can be agammaglobulinaemia (a condition in which there is antibody production), but imagine that if you get measles, you will respond and everything will be fine. You can easily recover and you will be immune to 75 years, as those who have no agammaglobulinemia. Although to determine whether you have immunity or not, uses antibodies, everything that gives this approach, it is only a picture of what happened. Actually it doesn't tell you that you sure you have the immunity, because in order to become immune to the measles, you do not need these antibodies.It's a very important consideration because it is the traditional method of determining immunity. If you wish to obtain exemption from vaccination and prove that you have immunity, you need to do the analysis, which measured the number of antibodies that relates to the humoral immune system. But there's nothing that would take into account the condition of the cellular immune system.
That's it.That is, in the best case it will be very roughly from a scientific point of view.
Not only approximately, sometimes it's just wrong. You can have a lot of antibodies, there are many reports of people who had a very large number of antibodies to tetanus, or normal quantity, but who were ill with tetanus in a very severe form. I have work that showed that people who did not have antibodies against poliomyelitis, reacted to the virus as if they already had immunity. In fact, antibodies can help us understand what is really going on. Sometimes the relationship is, but it cannot be taken for granted.Well, we discussed one of the major arguments used to justify a program of inoculation. Another argument is, of course, polio. Could you explain more about this vaccine and the historical perspective that is used to justify mass vaccination.
Yes, of course. Actually it took me much more time to study polio, because a) it seemed much more interesting and b) it's closer to our generation. Many today are vaccinated against polio. And we still hear about outbreaks of the disease, while smallpox, we believe long-vanished disease. But if you look at monkey pox, you will realize that actually we do not have confidence that smallpox has disappeared.
When we turn to polio, we will see that his story is absolutely amazing, if you look at the policies associated with the research on this vaccine, and how scientists have been fired if they did not agree with the program, conducted by the national Foundation for infantile paralysis (NFIP) in the late 1940's-early 1950-ies. We are talking about the vaccine, developed by Jonas Salk.
At the time you anyone could make a diagnosis of polio. If you go to the hospital any doctor could diagnose by clinical signs after two physical examinations, where it was identified by one or more groups of paralyzed muscles in 24 hours. Actually there are many viruses that cause these symptoms. But then everything led to the emergence of such symptoms is called the polio. Then developed a vaccine. It's a totally different story. In the book I devoted a whole story with polio 70 pages.
When was developed the vaccine, there was a small problem. Several Swedish scientists tried to tell the American scientists that inactivation with formaldehyde will not work as planned. They drew attention. But it turned out that they were right. Right in that live polio virus, which was included in the injection of vaccines immediately after the vaccine was made, might seem dead, but then sometimes revived directly in vitro, while she stood on a shelf.
In fact, it turned out that the formaldehyde did not kill all the viruses in these vaccines, and these vaccines were administered to people. The upshot was that the paralysis from the vaccine were seen in a greater number of people than could suffer from paralysis from wild, natural poliovirus. Needed something to do. Several changes have been made to force the American public who have invested a lot of money and years of faith in this vaccine, believing that the vaccine is working as expected. It was necessary to make so that it works.
This was modified diagnostic criteria for polio. Previously, you had two exams within 24 hours. It replaced two examinations within 60 days. Don't forget that most people recovered after 60 days. All those people who had put polio no longer fell into this category, because by this time the paralysis has passed. Those were the techniques.
And then more tests. Have not done blood tests or stool. But after the vaccine, in Michigan occurred the epidemic. I think it was in 1958. About 2,000 people were diagnosed with polio. So how were vaccination, believe that could be so many people with polio find it difficult, so we decided to spend some serological tests. It was discovered that in fact polio was very small. In my opinion, about a quarter of those who had any signs of infection with poliovirus, and interestingly, were not found any virus, such as Coxsackie virus, echo or other enteroviruses, which can cause the same syndrome.
Even just due to the fact that to have conducted tests and have changed the diagnostic criteria, the incidence of polio dramatically decreased, and this occurred regardless of the existence of the vaccine. Here are some of the things happened then.
One of the questions the answer to which I had to find for myself was this: if this is true, why we don't come across a cropped and shrunken limbs? Why we see elderly people who have one leg shorter than the other? After all, it was still one of my arguments. I needed to find answers to their own questions. I had to answer not only the questions of others, because I myself once believed in these shots.
It turns out that if the hospital fell, the child with a shortened (due to spasm?) hand or foot that often occurred at that time, they are immediately sent into surgery. The children included in the surgical room crying, and came out of it crying because it was very painful suffering. The arm or leg was placed in plaster or imposed on her bus for a period of anywhere from six months to two years. But if you do that all, especially those still growing, it will lead to atrophy of the limbs. So the reason why we met many people with such hands and feet is barbaric operations, transplanting ligaments and in General the way they treated acute disease.
And then there was a nurse from Australia. Her name was sister Elizabeth Kenny. So they called nurses "sister". She was one of the first physiotherapists. She has developed a very successful method of treatment for these children. She couldn't stand Lubkov. She said it was absolutely the wrong treatment, and pretty much humiliated orthopedic surgeons around the world what she was doing. And she did it without the slightest hesitation.
But she was invited the same in Minnesota. He founded the clinic, which she chaired. Not only is she very successfully corrected the horrors, which brought patients, orthopaedic surgeons, but also treated patients in the acute state. Its the case of patients did not reach such a cropped and shrunken limbs. But now, no matter where they advertise the polio vaccine, you will always show those kids who was put in the plaster. But this can not be done for children with polio! After all, this immobilization leads to part of the pathological changes.
And there are more. I want to say that I could go on, but...Yes, but first I have a few questions. First, I would like to note that we called the procedure vaccination. Perhaps more appropriate would be to call it immunization, because that's what are trying to achieve. But the term "vaccination" is derived from variola, the name of the virus, vaccinia virus (VACV or VV). It was the first vaccine.
Yes, it is.And secondly, there are some rumors that I have read before and according to which a large part of the epidemic of polio was historically associated with increased consumption of sugar especially in the summer when people ate ice cream in large quantities. I would like to know revealed is your research for such interactions, and confirmed whether the validity of such claims.
Yes. Was a Dr. Benjamin Sandler who wrote an entire book about it. I alluded to this in our book. The polio virus is an enterovirus. Just as in our days, the integrity and composition of the intestinal flora is very important when it comes to confrontation of any intestinal infection.
A diet that includes a lot of sugar will 1) interfere with the operation of your cellular immunity and 2) will ruin your intestinal flora. I believe you know it. I wanted to know why it happened, because, of course, it has been shown that among populations, reduced consumption of sugar, the incidence of polio fell sharply. I think it was shown already then, or in North or in South Carolina.
It was so unbelievable that no one was listening to him. The situation was the same as when Dr. Frederick Klenner was trying to say that cured 100 % of patients of intravenous infusion of vitamin C, and people just shrugged their shoulders and continued to discuss something. They simply do not fit in the head. In fact, the same thing happened with a diet low in sugar, which was very effective because of the action that it has on the immune system and gut flora.
The same applies to the dikhlordifyeniltrikhloretan (DDT). DDT is a substance that causes severe harm to the intestine, its walls and flora. This is one of the reasons why DDT can not only independently (in the absence of virus — Approx. transl.) cause all the symptoms of polio, but to do poliovirus virulenta significantly and actively in the body: it disrupts the normal function of the intestine.Modern equivalent — glyphosate.
You are absolutely right.I interviewed Dr. don Huber who is an expert in this matter, and, of course, Dr. Stephanie Seneff, which conducted several studies on this topic. They claim that it destroys the microbiome. Huber is very adamant claims that glyphosate is much more toxic than DDT.In fifty years there will be people who will conduct interviews on the matter and discuss it. Because, I suspect, in our lifetime... I'm sure that these disputes about the immunization will not go away. This practice is so deeply rooted in the medical paradigm, if you will try only to Express doubts about her and discuss these facts, these snippets of history that is completely ignored, you'll just find it unreasonable man. Thank you for letting me interrupt you and add something. Could you continue your story, explaining other interesting historical aspects of the immunization programme against polio.
Yes. There was a period when there was an injectable vaccine. Was 1955, when after vaccination with this vaccine was a huge number of patients with paralysis, because the vaccine was not properly have been inactivated. All the blame was falling on one company — "Cutter of Laboratories". But later, after the Act on freedom of information, found out that firm "Wyatt" is also responsible for a series of vaccine that was not properly have been inactivated.
Manufacturers of vaccines because so afraid to do this vaccine right now, which apparently this virus is very difficult to inactivate. They began to breed it. This is what started to write Dr. Herbert Ratner. He was from the city of oak Park in Illinois. I was lucky because I was able to get a large number of his old records which he kept until his death. He said that this was due to many problems. He had everything documented, all of that was happening, the distribution of these vaccines contained the live virus.
After it was paralyzed a lot of people and the credibility of injecting the vaccine came under threat, the idea that we need to change the vaccine, and to change it to a vaccine administered orally, as actually injecting the vaccine does nothing to stop transmission of the virus. The vaccine can be swallowed. She may still settle in your gut, come out the other end and go to the other person. Theoretically, the only thing that makes injectable vaccine, it gives you a certain amount of immunity in the blood.
That is, the situation is exactly the same as with tetanus. The vaccine will be effective if blood is found with a virus before the virus is found with the nervous system.
It was decided to create a vaccine for oral application, as it is the most close to the natural path of infection. This is what is known under the name of the vaccine in solution. The use of injectable vaccines has been discontinued. The controversy on this subject partly subsided. Oral vaccine to stop transmission of wild type virus, but she contributed to the transmission of the vaccine virus. The fact that it is possible to weaken the virus as much as necessary, which is achieved by passing it through different animals to get it to mutate enough that he at some point ceased to be so deadly or so infectious. But once you put the vaccine, or the virus back into its natural host, it mutates again and goes back to its original state.
You can give oral vaccine to the infant and it can be weakened. But even in the vial, in the vial before it is given to a child, the virus begins to return into its original dangerous condition. When the baby swallows the vaccine, it will have a certain amount of immunity in the intestine. But what will come then the baby will have the mutated virus. This often causes problems, especially in people with depressed immunity.
For example, in Finland still find mutated virus in the sewers, and no one knows how it got there. This vaccine was used there very long, and it was not so long ago. I think it was in 1980. They don't know where it comes from.
This is a risk that carries of oral vaccine, and in fact that is why this vaccine ceased to use in our country. Because more patients became infected as a result of applying peroral