A view on vaccination you never see in the pharmaceutically-hypnotized mainstream media

Robert Scott Bell, D.A. Hom., Doctors Prescription for Health Living, January 2010

As a homeopath, the healthiest kids that I see are unvaccinated.

The principle of vaccination rests on the concept of artificially stimulating antibodies in the hopes of preventing specific infectious disease in the future.

Historical revisionists controlling medical education have successfully convinced generations that every childhood disease results in death, completely ignoring homeopathic methodologies that result in significantly lower mortality and morbidity than allopathic methodologies.

Childhood diseases are a rite of passage that assist the necessary maturation of the immune system in preparation for healthy adulthood; one that is free of allergies and other chronic immune disorders. Suppressing the body’s appropriate response to the presence of predetermined pathogens is not a means by which the body is strengthened.

The symptoms of any given disease are merely the appropriate action by the body attempting to overcome it and are not the disease itself. Vaccination does not prevent disease; it suppresses the expression of disease. Those who undergo this medical rite of passage are typically rife with chronic inflammatory disease.

Should you acquire antibodies in response to normal viral-immune interaction, it should be noted that Nature and Nature’s God does not grant automatic, lifelong immunity. This should be a clue, especially to arrogant men who believe that they can do so artificially what life itself does not do naturally. If an antibody were sufficient to prevent disease, then adults who had childhood chicken pox would never get shingles, which is caused by the very same virus.

Ever since the adoption of Louis Pasteur’s misapplied Germ Theory, allopathic medicine has behaved like a perpetual war machine in pursuit of killing any microbe thought to be a disease-causing organism. Vaccination ignores Pasteur’s dying acknowledgement of the grave error he made in blaming the pathogen, instead of acknowledging Antoine Béchamp and the Law of the Terrain:

“The germ is nothing, the terrain is everything.”

In other words, germs don’t cause disease; they are the result of disease. “Disease” being an imbalance in an environment giving rise to pathogenic life forms.

Environmental imbalances are caused by toxins depleting key minerals such as selenium, resulting in a reduced detoxification capacity. More toxins produce more deficiencies which results in even more toxicity. Each compounds the other in an ever worsening spiral unless the cycle is broken.

Vaccination begins the negative downward spiral via the injection of toxic poisons; violating and bypassing many layers of normal environmental protection (skin, hair, mucus membranes, saliva, lymphatic tissue, etc.) in an effort to trick the immune system into an abnormal antibody response.

How often do kids confront the world with their internal milieu exposed directly to environmental toxins and microbes as is done in vaccination? Exposure in this way would normally be considered an unusual accident, but allopathic medicine institutionalizes such assault and calls it good medicine.

Iatrogenic disease is the inevitable result of this windmill-tilting attempt to prevent acute infection. While I believe vaccination is detrimental to patients, it is extremely beneficial to the economic model of modern medicine. Through vaccination, life-long dependence on pharmaceutical drugs is the de facto response to manage future iatrogenicity.

Thus, vaccination is the gateway drug for the health of Big PHARMA, where the business of disease is disease.

Homeopaths would rather assist children to overcome disease naturally by encouraging appropriate physiological responses to immune threats. The allopathic obsession with germ avoidance has weakened and retarded normal immune maturation, preventing the strengthening necessary to remain healthy throughout the aging process.

Optimal nutrition, adequate sanitation, and proper hygiene do more to reduce the incidence of serious childhood disease than any vaccination ever could. Eschewing vaccination is a responsible means by which we can protect the developing child and ensure a healthier, non-drug future.

Robert Scott Bell is known as the “voice of health freedom and liberty” and can be heard every week through Talk Radio Network on over 70 radio stations and the Internet. He regularly breaks stories affecting the health of millions of Americans that the mainstream media either ignores or suppresses.

This article originally appeared in the January 2010 edition of The Doctor’s Prescription for Healthy Living available online through Freedom Press Online.

Talking Heads on the Swine Flu Response 1976 and 2009: Ron Paul, can't stop making sense

Should we listen to bureaucrats or physicians when it comes to pandemic policies?

Government (and the bureaucrats scurrying within it with very rare exception) will never understand the terrain required for a truly deadly pandemic to flourish. Though it is obvious to those who study history and subsequently understand the unique environmental factors that give rise to historically significant pathogenic events.

It would be helpful if, before graduating from medical school, doctors-to-be were required to read and understand the teachings of:

Antoine Béchamp, Claude Bernard and Samuel Hahnemann, for starters. Additionally, Divided Legacy by Harris Coulter, should be on the required reading list.

Is it responsible to ignore the historical fact that those “treated” by homeopathic medicines, for instance, during numerous historically-recorded disease outbreaks, had significantly higher survival rates when compared to those treated with allopathic medicines?

Just imagine how calmly and rationally we could prevent pandemics, much less treat those who succumb to infectious diseases (whether it is viral, bacterial or fungal), once the real disease process is acknowledged and understood by those who shape public health policy.

Pathogenic microbes can only grow in an environment hospitable to their growth. Change the terrain and you change what grows there.

Now, if we could only apply that to the District of Columbia.

Microbial Resistance is Futile; The Future Looks Bright Silver

Headline: Antibacterial wipes can spread superbugs: study "...many studies have shown that health care workers, including doctors and nurses, often fail to even wash their hands as directed."

Do they even teach Ignaz Semmelweis in medical school any more? Despite the inadequacies of the Germ Theory, washing hands between patients is still a good idea. However, the overemphasis on -- and Howard Hughes-like obsession with -- pathogenic microbes keeps the medical profession distracted from the true path to wellness. That leads us, once again, to Antoine Béchamp and the Law of the Terrain. More on that in a moment.

Utilizing allopathic pharmaceutical toxins to kill nature has given rise to the new strains of drug-resistant super-bugs that strike fear in the heart of hospital patients (and their doctors) everywhere. It is folly to think that we could eradicate anything in nature without impacting negatively on ourselves in the process. Arrogant men do not learn from history -- even history of the medical variety. Just read Divided Legacy by Harris Coulter and you will see how much history is kept from us (or are we kept from it?). Our removal from conscious awareness of the Law of Cause and Effect has effectively rendered us too immature to understand the consequences of our actions -- or even that there are consequences.

Why are super-bugs in the news? Because we created them. Let me rephrase that. We altered the terrain so that this old "life-form" could express new DNA for the sake of its survival. Wouldn't it have been easier to alter the terrain of the host so that it would no longer be hospitable to pathogenic microbial overgrowth? Of course, that would not have allowed the spawning of a multi-national, multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industrial complex. The Law of the Terrain is not good for their business. Actually, it's "your knowledge of this law and your willingness to live a life in accordance with it" that's not good for the drug/vaccine industry.

Multi-drug resistant microbes are good for their business as long as you can be convinced that the only solutions are to be found in Big Pharma and Taxpayer funding for new drug development. Once you realize that the only real solutions are in your backyard garden or your neighborhood health food store, sell your Merck stocks. In hospitals, the patient population is largely comprised of immuno-compromised people being fed drugs instead of food for their well-being. Unless you consider Jell-o vegetables with no nutrients as food, you understand how the milieu of the hospital patients is assaulted until they check out. By all means, if you have a loved one in a hospital, please bring him food (and Silver Hydrosol).

Yes, it's OK to go after the microbes, but not so much if the substance upon which you rely is also toxic to you and your liver. You may kill some bad guys, but in the process, you will also find yourself in a weakened state post-infection. What does this mean? You may be more susceptible to future infection from any and all microbes, including those now resistant to the pharmaceuticals in which you trust. We can only prevent this anti-bacterial madness when we wake from our drug-induced slumber to realize that clearing the terrain and restoring its integrity is all that we need to do to prevent infection, whether it be new or old. Band-Aids with antibiotics? Think again. Impregnated with silver? Now you're using nature's tool.

A Shot to the Head in Biological Darkness

Headline: Experts Agree: Vaccines Give Health Care A Needed Shot In The Arm "Disparities in access, inconsistent funding, public misperceptions, and scientific roadblocks, such as the disappointing results of HIV/AIDS vaccine trials, all stand in the way of more widespread use of immunizations."

Big Pharma wants us to perceive that all vaccines are safe and efficacious. Unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. From where do the public "misperceptions" come? They are largely the fault of the CDC and its need for immunological secrecy.

Over one billion dollars have been paid out to families of children who have been injured or killed by vaccination since the October 1, 1988 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (Public Law 99-660) put the the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) into play.

Misperception? Parents just want to know why government agencies are more interested in protecting pharmaceutical companies over their children. Of course, this is where parents have lost sight of their primary mission as protector of their own children. It is not the role of the federal government, nor medical authorities, to protect your children from biological ignorance. Just how bad a job must they do before we wake up and realize the callous disregard with which the federal government protects us? Just look at the FDA. Over 784,000 Americans meet their maker each year due to substances and methods which they approve in the medical realm.

It's not a stretch to say that FDA sucks pretty bad at accomplishing its stated mission. Harvey Wiley has rolled over in his grave so many times now that there's probably a sink hole all the way to Chinese heparin.

To which public misperception do the vaccine "experts" refer? Their great concern is that you might actually learn about the immunological truth of vaccination. It is based upon Louis Pasteur's victim consciousness-based biological paradigm. It is wholly incomplete and immature -- which is why you can't "fix" vaccines. They are built on a foundation of microbial quicksand. Even the most solid-looking building cannot be saved by changing the window treatments if it is built on a false foundation. This is what the thimerosal distraction amounts to -- changing the window dressing while the structure is falling down around you.

Yes, it's true that vaccination can limit the "expression" of a given disease, but the question of whether it is the best (or even a good) way of preventing it is never considered. Those with budgetary conflicts of interest running into the billions cannot conceive that childhood diseases may actually be nature's way of strengthening immune function for future generations. What are the long-term ramifications of preventing normal childhood immune development?

Name another culture in medical history that ever had a cancer rate of 1 in 2 men and 1 in 3 women.

"Living longer" does not explain a cancer epidemic in children, much less diabetes and neurological diseases in the young and younger. Each successive generation raised on vaccination instead of optimal nutrition suffers inevitably from a lack of true immunological understanding. In our pharmaceutical society, all biological symptoms have become indicative of a drug or vaccine deficiency, rather than a deficiency of knowing how to live correctly.

I reiterate, we have been convinced that the only way to live is by "pasteurizing" anything that is microscopic and moves. When will we put Pasteur out to pasture? Paging Antoine Béchamp.

Vaccination may be a shot in the arm to the pharmaceutical industry, but it is a shot in the head to the children sacrificed at the altar of the Church of Biological Mysticism. Sure, the road to autism is paved with good intentions, so what? Why do you think that more and more parents are reluctant to subject their children to mass vaccination?

Medical "experts" are even claiming that the failure to produce an "HIV" vaccine is a reason "shot" compliance rates are waning. In the case of the super-villain retrovirus, what they fail to acknowledge is that HIV has never been caught in the act of doing anything on the order of that which is later diagnosed as AIDS. This is another cognitively dissonant moment in vaccine worship.

How would they be able to tell the difference between an HIV antibody that is naturally derived (and used to mean certain death) and one that is vaccine-induced (and would, according to welfare scientists such as Robert Gallo) mean certain life? Perhaps we should all read up on the one man who has steadfastly remained scientific while the AIDS industry devolved into a primordial slime of political and pharmaceutical corruption. Antibodies in the era of AIDS conveniently mean opposite of what they used to indicate when there was some semblance of immunological sanity, prior to Big Pharma's purchase of Big Government.

It used to be considered blasphemous to question the third rail of medical politics. Now even formerly vociferous proponents of the vaccine religion are questioning its unquestionability.

It's just a shame that so many children were sacrificed along the way. Will yours be?

Drugs, Vaccines or Nutrition?

UK to force drugmakers to share info "Until a drug has been used by millions of people, the rarest and deadliest side effects may remain unknown." I have often called vaccination a form of Russian Roulette, except that with each violation of a child's dermal layers the bullet always goes in. What you don't know is when it will explode.

Drug companies play a similar game with their synthetic ingestibles, but at least the scientific community acknowledges their toxicity and the mortality rate is widely disseminated. This is why responsible doctors (not totally an oxymoron) warn their patients not to take a drug within five years of receiving FDA approval. It is in those formative years in the monopoly market for drugs that all the "unexpected" deleterious effects are reported. It is fairly simple to cover them up during the approval phase of a drug's history (see Vioxx for one) but much more difficult to hide once people in the real world start dropping like flies on the new meds.

When it comes to vaccination, medical authorities are loathe to link anything deleterious to them, lest compliance rates start dropping precipitously. Why is it that vaccinations have been elevated to unquestionable sacrament? Is it not reasonable to honestly and thoroughly investigate ALL of the potential long term consequences of artificial antibody stimulation? Vaccine-worshippers, whether heavy in a science background or not, attack those who merely question the lack of long-term safety data, even if those questioners are not anti-vaccination.

And what if someone is anti-vaccination? He is treated as a heretic rather than met on the merits of his argument. It is said that if people stopped vaccinating, the whole world would run amok with diseases supposedly eradicated by pharmaceutical injection. While it may be true that certain diseases may become more prevalent by reducing reliance upon the suppression techniques of allopathic medicine, the argument that more people will die is based on abject ignorance of natural healing principles.

Vaccine-apologists are not even aware that they are super-glued to the dogma of an immature understanding of the immune system, based upon Louis Pasteur's Germ Theory. It is NOT true that the mere presence of or contact with a pathogen results in disease, much less death from it. The truth is that coming into contact with disease-causing organisms (pathogens), whether exogenous or endogenous is a normal EVERYDAY occurrence, typically not even resulting in a sniffle.

Even the dreaded polio virus, which was on its way out without Salk's intervention, did not cause paralysis in everyone that it touched. A healthy person might not even know he contracted the virus, but by virtue of his functioning immune system remained largely asymptomatic in overcoming the potentially paralytic virus.

Given that some were immune compromised and did succumb to the viral infection with disastrous results, is vaccination the ONLY way to prevent paralysis to polio, for example? Of course that's an absurd supposition and completely ignores the identification of the Law of the Terrain by Antione Béchamp. When you are healthy and you have a fully functioning immune system, your body has the know-how and the capability to fend off attacks from any microbe known or unknown to man.

Perhaps this is shocking to read, because generations have been to taught to fear the microbe, despite the fact that it is the terrain that determines what can actually grow in it.

In homeopathy, we can also use the "polio" nosode to gently sensitize the immune system and alert it to any potential pathogenic presence. This is done without any danger of causing the disease upon which you are focusing, much less an iatrogenic death caused by the allopathic vaccine intervention.

Should one succumb to any given disease, it is ALSO not true that there is nothing that you can do except antibiotics and other toxic drugs. Whether it be homeopathic medicine, silver hydrosol, olive leaf, oregano oil, garlic, mushrooms, liver support or thousands of other substances and holistic techniques, there are numerous methods to assist a "victim" of microbial overgrowth.

Those that decry an honest discussion regarding the best way to prevent and treat disease, do not understand the concept of treating the whole person rather than the disease. Give me the capability to restore full energy and function to the immune system and I care not what "named disease" is encountered, it will be countered. Don't fear the fever. Embrace it and support it and keep it within safe limits (much higher than most people are willing to admit) and watch the beauty and brilliance of the natural world do its job as if according to some higher plan.

If you are concerned about fever, remember homeopathic phosphorus (homeopathic belladonna for children). If you catch it early enough, remember homeopathic Aconitum.

Who is responsible? The person who relies upon artificial immunity with unknown long term consequences (think chronic diseases of degradation) or the person who does everything within his power to shore up optimal immune function should life do what life does. Life is pro-life, it seeks to strengthen us by experience. Although I tolerate your "belief" in vaccination, I demand that you respect my understanding of the biological milieu as one that needs not rely on allopathic sorcery for its survival.

Whether it be drugs or vaccination, if the damage happens to your child, the risk is 100%. Whether you believe that I am right or wrong in my perspective on the immune system, you cannot justify forced compliance with pharmaceutical intervention as long as one child may die as a result of your public health enforced compassion. What say you?

Biologically Correct Political Incorrectness

Vaccine Failure Is Setback in AIDS Fight "The multiple surprises have reminded researchers how much they still do not know about HIV's biology. It has also focused attention on questions they never asked." How about this one: Why is it that in every other disease "having an antibody" is good news as it indicates that your immune system has met and overcome the challenge, while in the medical world of Bob "Dr. Seuss" Gallo, an antibody indicates inevitable death? Horton, do you hear the WHO -- or the NIH, CDC or FDA? They still do not get it and probably never will.

Abject immune collapse is not the fault of a retrovirus -- especially one never actually isolated from the blood of an AIDS sufferer. If a medical reporter ever looked into (and actually understood) the pathological gymnastics that needed to occur before doctors could point to something they call HIV, the AIDS jig would be up. That is, if they were ever actually allowed to print the truth regarding the shaky foundation that is the HIV causation hypothesis.

You know you are on thin ice when someone yells "Hey, you're on thin ice!" and your response is to curse them for telling you, rather than just getting off the ice.

Are you really a monster if you point out the flaws and scientific-deficiency disease prevalent among HIV-apologists? Where is the vaccine after all these years? And what happens if the vaccine were to stimulate antibodies against HIV? Would these be the ones that signal that you will live? How will they tell them apart from the ones your immune system produced naturally that mean you are going to die? Do the tests actually detect antibodies to HIV, or are they cross-reactive to many potential antibodies?

Questioning the science of AIDS does not make you a "denialist." However, if you are marginalized for your stance by those with pharmaceutical conflicts of interest, you get a gold star in my science book. Scientists who still support Robert Gallo's HIV-test "religion" designed to drive the world to varying degrees of toxic chemotherapy should have their grants revoked and redirected to Peter Duesberg's lab at U.C. Berkeley.

How dare I point out that the so-called antibody tests for HIV do not actually prove the presence or absence of HIV or AIDS? Read the FDA approved inserts for yourself. Ask Kary Mullis, winner of the 1993 Nobel Prize in chemistry, if PCR is an appropriate detection method for HIV in the blood? If HIV behaves as a pathogenic microbe at all (and I'm not conceding the point), it would be due to an exhausted, toxic and deficient biological milieu. Of course, this would require that pharmaceutical pseudo-scientists actually study and understand Antoine Béchamp and The Law of the Terrain (you can hear about Béchamp by clicking this link).

How many billions must be wasted on a failed hypothesis before the scientific method is again restored to immune deficiency disease inquiry? If questioning the real cause of AIDS is shocking to you, perhaps you could do a bit more reading here: Rethinking AIDS. What if everything you thought you knew about AIDS was wrong?

If you think that I am stating that people are not suffering from multiple immune deficiencies, then you obviously can't read. The immune deficiency is real. The CAUSE is in question. Have you read Professor Peter Duesberg on AIDS?

Only the brave will learn the truth. The cowards will continue to hide behind Taxpayer stolen funds and drug company supported "activist" groups. The first wave of deaths that occurred among those diagnosed with AIDS in the early years (once treatment was available) were actually killed by AZT. This is an admitted fact. Did any of the medical experts who advocated such a disastrous treatment protocol even lose grant money?

AIDS as it is "conventionally" viewed is another "Germ Theory" based failure in the sad history of Death By Modern Medicine. I have been writing on this topic years before "blog" was even a word at my website: http://rsbell.com. If you want to learn more than I have time to write about anew, go there and search for "HIV" and "AIDS" to learn more than you may want to know.

One request: Before striking out in blind emotion, do your homework. Continue to let others tell you what to think and believe about AIDS at your own immune peril. The truth is quite empowering, which may actually be the reason that the medical establishment is so fearful that you may learn it. How powerful is fear? Strong enough to get people with nutritional deficiencies and drug proficiencies to ingest pharmaceuticals able to kill the healthiest among us, much less those who can least afford to be intoxicated by FDA approved substances. How powerful is knowledge? It's not enough to know. The real question is: Are you willing to act on what you know to be true?

Click Here. Ga. girl helps link autism to childhood vaccines "...it does say the government concluded that vaccines aggravated a rare underlying metabolic condition that resulted in a brain disorder 'with features of autism spectrum disorder.'" Yet, government welfare scientists are engaged in desperate attempts at damage control while parents across the land slowly regain courage and confidence in protecting their children from the needles of BIG PHARMA...
When will it be that "enough children have suffered" at the hands of the vaccination paradigm? It has become painfully obvious to many that our misplaced faith in welfare scientists doing the bidding of vaccine manufacturers results in collateral damage far outweighing the theoretical benefit of limiting the expression of childhood diseases. Many thousands of children have suffered in order that we may wake from our immunologically-ignorant slumber and finally say "enough is enough." There are so many ways to strengthen the immune system that do not involve injecting synthetic medicaments into the youngest among us. None of those other options fill the coffers of Big PHARMA or enhance the budgets of the FDA and CDC, however, so if they come along, it may be kicking and screaming. Do you know how little homeopathic nosodes actually cost with NO SIDE EFFECTS? We could reduce billions of dollars of pharmaceutical fraud and government waste just by learning about Antione Bechamp and applying what WE ALREADY KNOW about the Law of the Terrain. But nooooooo, like lambs to slaughter, those who worship at the Church of Biological Mysticism still believe in the vaccine sacrament. Is there any good news? Yes. Despite their attempts at damage control, Big Government and Big PHARMA are losing true believers at a record rate, no small thanks to the vaccine-autism link and the recent revelation that the feds finally acknowledged it. Despite this, methinks they protest too much that "they didn't really." Thousands of children have lost a connection to this world because parents did not wake up in time. Let it be that those children were not injured or killed in vain.