On Vaccines and “Sciency” Folklore

vaccinations_1011949c

By Charlie Johnston

Over the next few months I will be writing regularly – and inviting others to weigh in – on a lot of nonsense that is passing for scientific rigor these days. I am deeply disturbed at how the anti-science left is hijacking the name and authority of “science” to baptize their ill-informed and anti-scientific schemes to control ordinary people’s lives.

I am also concerned that many serious Christians are so vested in the idea of having some monolithic evil power to blame for all that ails us that they, too, are falling prey to spouting pseudo-science. I worry that some of the dietary and environmental enthusiasms of some Christians are in near lockstep with New Age practitioners and leftist statists. I don’t much care what choices people make on things that don’t affect their personal faith, but I get very agitated when they try to impose those choices on everyone else or lobby for them as if they are the Holy Grail – and often because the effort requires that they make villains of people who are not villains.

Back when I was doing radio in the 90’s, I absolutely refused to run the public service announcements that tried to persuade people that heterosexuals were as likely to get AIDS as homosexuals. I had read several dense medical studies, including that of Harvard, and knew it was pure poppycock – and I was not about to promote what I knew to be poppycock during my shift. (I did run them a few times to mock them and explain the actual mechanics of transmission). For purposes of political correctness, as official policy, we were overstating the danger to heterosexuals, understating the danger to homosexuals, and understating the danger of infected athletes and other who were infected and bleeding openly. I don’t like pseudo-science, pseudo-history, or all the pseudos we have adopted as fact to prop up a culture based on lies and misinformation. I used to tell campaign staffers at meetings that I did not want paranoid alarmism nor rose-colored optimism. I wanted the facts as best they could vet them, for you can’t make good decisions from bad information.

I liked this little piece from National Review’s Ian Tuttle on the Anti-Science Left. There is a better piece that I will get to as we get serious about these things over the next few months. But frankly, some of the Christians I know, with their complex dietary formulas, lack only crystal therapy to be indistinguishable from a pagan ceremony. Again, I don’t care about people’s quirks and hobby horses. Heaven knows I have enough of my own. But we have reached serious times, and I worry that some of these things are going to provide leverage for the devil in battles to come.

I have been concerned about the often malicious hysteria directed against modern agricultural techniques, including genetic research. At the same time, I have stayed away from discussing the very serious questions we need to discuss on when we cross the line from solving problems to playing God, for fear that it will just incite incipient Luddism. One of our readers, Ed Allison, did a solid piece for me on GMO’s. I don’t agree with many of his conclusions, but it is long on evidence and logic and short on cheap polemics – and focuses on the ethical questions at the heart of the matter without demonizing anyone. I think it will be a great way to kick off this series of subjects. It got bumped a few weeks ago as the Joseph Cronin need rose, but I will print it later this week.

One of the things I have quietly rolled my eyes at in recent years has been the anti-vaccination activists. To say efforts to link vaccinations to autism are weak – and supported by tendentious studies that toss out all evidence contradicting the preferred conclusion is to give them too much credit. Anti-vaccination activism has largely been polemics dressed up in a smock. Except that Christians do, indeed, have solid, rational reasons to shun vaccinations. Medical manufacturers such as Merck, are using cells from aborted children as the culture in which the vaccines are developed. In fact, you cannot get a rubella vaccine in America that does not come in such a culture.

As usual, our friend Dan Lynch, whose apostolate has been tireless and solid, has the definitive case on the matter. He made it in a comment, but I reprint it in its entirety here:

Regarding vaccines, here is a story of two mothers. One mother who cared wrote to the Vatican, informed them of our immoral vaccines and research and received the first ruling in the world regarding moral guidelines for parental choice for vaccines. Her name is Debi Vinnedge and she formed the apostolate Children of God for Life. A recent article on her website said: “The Pontifical Academy for Life, in a statement released in 2005, said that parents could be justified in choosing vaccination. The statement did not say that this choice was preferable, let alone mandatory. What the Vatican did say, with undeniable clarity, was that parents have a moral obligation to insist on vaccines that are not prepared by immoral means: vaccines not derived from fetal remains. The Pontifical Academy for Life wrote that ‘there remains a moral duty to continue to fight and to employ every lawful means in order to make life difficult for the pharmaceutical industries which act unscrupulously and unethically.’ That was in 2005. It was in 2009—four years later—that Merck decided to stop making available the morally untainted vaccines for measles and mumps. The Vatican had called upon American Catholics to fight for the development of morally acceptable vaccines. Sad to say—with the honorable exception of parents who resisted the immoral vaccines, and groups such as Children of God for Life that supported them—we did not fight hard enough to dissuade Merck from taking a giant step in the opposite direction.” Read the full article here: http://www.cogforlife.org/2015/02/03/conscientious-objection-vaccinations/ Another mother spent over 20 years in commercial biotechnology. She is an inventor on 23 issued United States patents. She left the commercial industry and founded a pro-life biotech company whose mission is to end human trafficking in biomedical research. Her name is Dr. Theresa Deisher and she founded AVM Biotechnology. Help to support and produce morally sound vaccines and see her website here: http://soundchoice.org/ Read here for the story of where we are today: http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/efficacious-vaccines-produced-unethically Read here for the campaign for ethical vaccines: http://www.cogforlife.org/ Please respond to the Vatican’s call to the “moral duty to continue to fight and to employ every lawful means in order to make life difficult for the pharmaceutical industries which act unscrupulously and unethically.” Please support these pro-life Apostolates.

“In the shadow of your wings I take refuge till the storms of destruction pass by.” (Psalm 57).

Dan Lynch Apostolates promoting devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe, Jesus King of All Nations, Our Lady of America and Saint John Paul II Visit our website at http://www.JKMI.com E-Mail Us at JKMI@JKMI.com May Our Lady of Guadalupe keep you under the mantle of her protection and may the Reign of Jesus King of All Nations be recognized in your heart!

About charliej373

Charlie Johnston is a former newspaper editor, radio talk show host and political consultant. From Feb. 11, 2011 to Aug. 21, 2012, he walked 3,200 miles across the country, sleeping in the woods, meeting people and praying as he went. He has received prophetic visitation all his life, which he has vetted through a trio of priests over the last 20 years, and now speaks publicly about on this site. Yet he emphasizes that we find God most surely through the ordinary, doing the little things we should with faith and fidelity. Hence the name, The Next Right Step. The visitations inform his work, but are not the focus of it. He lives in the Archdiocese of Denver in the United States.
This entry was posted in Conversion, Solidarity and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

189 Responses to On Vaccines and “Sciency” Folklore

  1. After seeing the documentary “Expelled – No intelligence allowed” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5EPymcWp-g I began seeing the parallels between the current scientific community and their Nazi and Soviet counterparts. They are dangerous for the most part. For them “we the people” are nothing but a bunch of lab rats.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ellenchris says:

      You beat me to it, Carlos 🙂 I was going to post a reference to *Expelled* which is a brilliant expose` by Ben Stein of the current attitude of the scientific community toward any hint of deviation from Darwinist orthodoxy by anyone trying to function in the academic community. For anyone who has not yet seen this, it is well worth the time to do so because you not only get the information but also the flavor and emotional punch of how ruthless the scientific establishment can be against Christians, or any believer in God. As a former public school teacher, I can attest that there is a deep anger against the idea of Creation by any kind of higher Being (even if the word “God” is not used) such that students are not permitted to learn anything but a secular materialist viewpoint dressed up as “The Truth.” Take a look, folks.

      Liked by 1 person

      • charliej373 says:

        I am going to write a piece on evolution, Ellen. It is bizarre. I have no problems with it as a way in which God could have accomplished His purpose, but it is a thoroughly refuted theory. Every prediction it made has proved to be false. Now adaptation is not a theory; it is a fact. It all proved true. The left says some Christian oppose evolution because they fear it would disprove God…then solicitously say it does not. I say the left holds on to the theory because they think it disproves God.

        I think if Darwin were alive today, he would not be an evolutionist. He would not be a Christian, I don’t think, but he was an honest scientist. I really doubt that he would desperately hold on to a theory for ideological reasons when it has failed in every particular he predicted.

        When a leftist tells me I am anti-science because of this, I sweetly ask them in all seriousness how they explain the Cambrian Explosion. I have yet to encounter one who even knew what I was talking about – and I will not debate anyone on it who is not serious enough to know the most basic science involved.

        Liked by 2 people

        • ellenchris says:

          In Ben Stein’s movie he interviews a scientist who is also a philosopher named, David Berlinski. He has written a really great book called, *The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions* in which Berlinski makes utter mincemeat of Dawkins, Gould and company by showing not only their shoddy science but also their utter lack of any knowledge of or ability to use philosophical proofs. In addition, Berlinski has a sharp and very funny wit. He shows that most of these guys have an a priori desire for God not to exist, and so they trump up arguments that have no validity but which sound impressive and so impress the ignorant. The thing that really bothers me, however, is the number of young college students who have been given nearly no real education at all while being indoctrinated to believe all the junk science and illogical (in the technical sense) philosophy. The group that I pray for the most is “the Clueless.” I pray that God may show them the clues that are all around us.

          I look forward to your comments on evolution. That there has been development of species over time is evident. But no one can explain what the quality of being we call “Life” actually is no less where it came from apart from an intelligent purposeful Creator. Take a look at the Berlinski book, if you can (it is available on Kindle from Amazon). I think you would love it, and it is full of great ammunition.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Now you beat me to it EllenChris! I was going to mention Berlinski’s book too! I will add one more: Charlie, if you haven’t already, read this book: “Signature in the Cell” by Dr Stephen C. Meyer. One book that is not Christian but definitely good science is “Signs of Meaning in the Universe” by Dr. Jesper Hoffmeyer (Denmark) Both books together are a powerful argument in favor of advanced modes of information organization in the cell. Not easy reading but definitely useful.

            As for the clueless, one has to admit that decades of drugs (legal & illegal,) television, and bad education has finally closed the American mind if not the whole world’s. “The Closing of the American Mind” was late but accurate warning of what is going on now.

            Recently I tried to explain to a very angry Catholic lady (perhaps mentally unstable) that it is not a sin to “discern the times” and conclude that we may be close to a moment of divine intervention on the affairs of mankind. I tried to explain what a logical distinction was i.e. “astrology” is not “astronomy” being one bad (divination) and the other useful (science) but there was no way to penetrate that darkness. Eventually after a few comments I realized that several people following the conversation could not understand the idea of a logical distinction. One thing is to try to figure out the things God has reserved for Himself and another is to try to understand what He is revealing to us.

            Hey! We are not talking about high philosophy here but about a process that we make use of every day. i.e. uncooked chicken = risk of salmonella but well cooked chicken = good meal. Yet both are chicken. I can’t really make it more simple but the group looked like I was talking about some arcane mysterious and possibly heretical issue. Charlie, if this is not fixed pronto the human race is toast. A profound darkness has fallen upon us.

            Liked by 1 person

          • charliej373 says:

            You are absolutely right, Carlos. We have not been approaching a new Dark Ages, but have been in one for over a generation. Our technological sophistication persuades us we are geniuses, yet in basic reason – logic and philosophy, we are hideously crabbed and deformed.

            Liked by 1 person

          • MMBev says:

            Welp, late as I am to the conversation (depression has finally departed), I was completely convinced as a small child that evolution had serious problems. Who in their right mind after seeing those blue monkeys with wings, have given up the wings in the process of evolution. Wings and arms I say.

            Hi to everyone. I am glad to finally be me and be back.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Mick says:

            Hey, MMBev! Glad to see you back. Just yesterday I was thinking that we all hadn’t heard from you in a while, and I was wondering how you were. I’m glad you’re feeling better. 🙂

            Like

    • Mark says:

      Unfortunately some thing that should be neutral or good (science) is often used and abused for alternative motives, some being down right evil. Here is a report (stemming from the Kenya Conference of Catholic Bishops ) that 30% of Kenyan vaccine samples contained sterility-inducing antigen, see:
      http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=24102
      I believe this type of thing has happened in South America to in the past and, well actually, who knows how many times and places. Once groups cross an ethical line they are beyond it. Hard to have any faith or trust of worldly institutions.

      Like

  2. donna269 says:

    Oh my goodness….this is perfect. Can’t wait to dive into this after mass today! God Bless Charlie and Dan!

    Like

    • MMBev says:

      Oh, donna267, my thoughts exactly. And I have to wait until late tomorrow. The thought drives me crazy, (probably God’s idea), but it’s past midnight here, and if I am going to make it to Mass tomorrow morning, I have only about ten minutes (and even then, I’m cheating), before I have to turn the computer off. Talk about penance! Somehow He always knows what’s going to REALLLLY hit home.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Centurion_Cornelius says:

    Thanks, as usual, Charlie, for this piece on vaccines.

    Regrettably, I am way “over the hill” on this, in that I probably have been injected with every known vaccine to get into grade school, play sports, the military, and so forth. Hopefully, I’m not “damaged goods” or on the other hand an ad for supporting them; I thank our Blessed Lord daily for the many decades he has allowed me already in His service.

    An important thing we all learn as we grow older is, as God has created each of us to be “unique,” that every one of us has the potential to react quite differently to vaccines or their components. That’s the “physical” issue. We are all different.

    Probably just as important is the moral and spiritual dimensions of the force, coercion, or threat of adverse consequences employed to receive such injections; the ingredients and their sourcing; as well as the outfit making the stuff and whether the heavy hand of “Uncle Sam” will be employed at any level.

    It’s a lot more than a simple “cost vs. benefit” analysis.

    But I still need facts, figures, and guidance as to how to answer questions for my family and friends who: A) have minors who are “mandated” to get vaccines, and/or B) see nothing wrong with vaccines, or C) avoid them like the plague.

    Good to see you’ll offer up some timely and informative sources.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Karol Hogan says:

      Vaccination destroys natural immunity causing the body to attack itself after the foreign poisons sidetrack our first defence, the skin. I am a registered nurse who has seen the devastating effects of vaccination, too many first hand experiences to put here, but the evidence is overwhelming against vaccination. I gave up working in the ‘medical’ system 4 years ago as I could not stand the evil.
      I donate to Charlie’s site but after this article I am having doubts about the validity of his ‘angel’. I am praying to be guided on this at the moment before I cancel my donations.Karol.

      Like

      • charliej373 says:

        Okay, Karol, something is very wrong here. You do NOT donate to my site because I do NOT take donations. There is no donations button on this site. You may donate to some of the groups I list at the side, like the Julia Greeley Home or the Sisters for Life, but you do not donate to me. And what would this article have to do about my angel? He has had nothing at all to say on the matter, so how does he fit in at all? So is there some major misunderstanding here, or are you just making it up as you go along?

        Like

  4. Couldn’t agree with you more on this, Charlie. It really troubles me that so many Catholics rail against pesticides, GMOs, refinement processes, pasteurization, etc., as if they were intrinsic grave evils. I love Michael Brown and SpiritDaily, but I seriously hope he and many of his followers read this post of yours. Here’s what Church teaching has to say about these matters:

    CSDC (Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church) paragraph 458: “The Magisterium’s considerations regarding science and technology in general can also be applied to the environment and agriculture. The Church appreciates “the advantages that result — and can still result — from the study and applications of molecular biology, supplemented by other disciplines such as genetics and its technological application in agriculture and industry”. In fact, technology “could be a priceless tool in solving many serious problems, in the first place those of hunger and disease, through the production of more advanced and vigorous strains of plants, and through the production of valuable medicines”

    Like

    • Brian says:

      here is both an “abstract“ and download for those interested; http://www.enveurope.com/content/27/1/4/abstract

      Like

      • charliej373 says:

        Thank you Brian, though I am dubious about just about anything coming out of Europe on this subject. Europeans fought desperately to find some way to block American agricultural imports without causing a backlash on European exports to America for years before the GMO issue became their handle. Their demagoguing on “frankenfoods” finally gave them the leverage to achieve what they had wanted to achieve anyway for decades before it went into effect. They are not disinterested – and have gone to great lengths to support what was, at the time, clearly a political position. They are very fearful that if they do not prop up fears on this subject, they may still suffer a loss of American markets for their products or be forced to compete on level ground with American agricultural products.

        Like

      • GMOs might not be safe; I just take issue with Catholics who condemn them with the same vigor and perceived certainty with which they condemn that which we know by faith to be an intrinsic grave evil (e.g. abortion). I vividly recall in Michael Brown’s last book I read, Fear of Fire, him doing precisely this.

        Like

        • donna269 says:

          if I had the choice between GMO or non GMO foods, I would clearly choose non GMO….sorry….the jury is out on GMO until it has been around for years to evaluate it’s true implications on human consumption. We don’t know what we don’t know yet. In the same breath, I would do the same for a new vaccine or any new med….wait it out. We often see people suffering grave future consequences (I think of Phen Phen and women who died from Primary Pulmonary Hypertension in pursuit of weight loss)….I never jump on a runaway train. I tell you this as a registered nurse of 34 active years who has seen modern medicine often accidentally kill people with good intentions….just my 2 cents

          Liked by 2 people

        • malachi99 says:

          Hi Daniel,
          Just for the sake of precision the question of the morality of abortion is not per se a matter of faith. I have had more than my fair share of battles with both Catholics and areligious on this issue to know that the argument is won by appeal to fact and sound philosophical reasoning. My bat sensors go into overdrive when people seem to abandon reason and revert to some species of fideism in support of their conclusions. Perhaps you might know not a few Catholics who err greatly in this manner especially regarding bioethical and sexual ethical issues.

          Like

          • You make an important point! Although let’s be careful with our distinctions on this one:

            Abortion’s intrinsically, gravely evil nature is, in fact, an infallible teaching of the Church; for the Church teaches infallibly not merely on Faith, but on morals as well. We *should* both understand and be able to argue — based on reason alone — that abortion is wrong. Absolutely. And that is definitely the way we should be approaching the issue with those outside the Church. However, it is equally true that we do not need any of those arguments to ourselves know with absolute certainty that it is indeed an intrinsic grave evil.

            Like

    • MMBev says:

      Just curious and maybe a comment further down answers my question. When I was having my children vaccinated, the number of diseases wasn’t all that large in number. The allergic, asthmatic, CF one, was given only one eighth of a dose each time until he received all of one vaccine.
      I have read and have no idea if it is true, that the number of diseases “covered” for immunization in a vaccine series has dramatically increased. (Like three in one when mine were done, and today as many as up to thirty in one vaccine series today.) If that is infact true, I can understand having problems. Our bodies can only contend with a finite number to create antibodies against. Since I have never researched this, I’d would appreciate any credible evidence for or against. Thanks.

      Like

  5. Joseph Jalsevac says:

    I have developed very serious chronic illnesses, including digestive problems. In my research into alternative health I have learned so much that causes me to believe our modern diet and lifestyle are extremely unhealthy and causing all kinds of major illnesses of body and mind. I am trying to adjust my diet and lifestyle accordingly but am uneasy and uncertain about how far to go. I know one Catholic farming family who have changed their diet radically and engaged in health cleanses, yet seem to have managed it without becoming obsessive, judgemental, or weird. This seems to me to be the goal, though few seem to be able to attain it.

    It just seems immoral to know that something is damaging to your health and to continue doing it, especially when it can effect your children and family. If it is charity help the sick, is it not charity to prevent illness of body and mind and all the attendant sins that may follow in their wake (I have experienced how the body can effect the emotions)? Yet I acknowledge that once you make it a priority to improve your health, there are innumerable spiritual dangers lurking amongst the gold nuggets of good advice in the alternative health world.

    Do you have any concrete suggestions?

    Liked by 3 people

    • charliej373 says:

      Well, Joseph, I don’t begrudge anyone their little quirks and beliefs, but a lot of the literature on this, replete with tendentious scientific mumbo-jumbo, is pure fantasy. Most of it is NOT based on actual reputable studies under objective and scientific discipline. Unless you are actually a trained scientist in the skill or a solidly trained and skeptical researcher who can work with raw data, the odds are that the majority of what you think you know is not so. When I was in media I used to get 500-page long treatises explaining to me why the Holocaust never happened or genetic proof that Caucasians were a superior race or genetic proof that negroids were a superior race and that George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were actually black men. I am thankful for it now, for though the purposes are different, pseudo-science obsessives use nearly the same style to “scientifically” prove whatever they are peddling.

      I think credential are over-rated in our silly society, but when you read some of these “scientific” books on how electrolyzed or ionized water is a miracle cure, or hydrolysis is going to solve all energy problems, first, do some research on the author. You will often find the crusading doctor is actually a podiatrist or some such with NO formal expertise in the field he is writing so authoritatively on – and then, do some basic reading on the fundamental principles of the discipline. A few objective college freshman texts will NOT make you an expert, but will usually make you conversant enough that you can recognize pure poppycock when you read it. Much of the tendentious “studies” on nutrition and agriculture today are pure fantasy, bearing as much relation to reality as a ‘dungeons and dragons’ video game. I have been reticent to speak about it, because the placebo effect in true believers is often real enough – and if people draw comfort and real support from it, I am not enthused about popping the bubble. But as it grows and people feel obliged not to just get comfort from their favorite stand-by, but actively become crusaders maligning people and industries that have actually solved problems of mass starvation and cured millions, I begin to worry about the effect on Christians of bearing such frequent malignant false witness, even if they are unaware that that is what they are doing.

      After my neurosurgery, I discovered that plain vanilla yogurt soothes my digestive system better than any antacid I have ever encountered. I told friends – and especially family, who share some of my genetic makeup – but I did not kid myself that this was a miracle cure for everyone. Most nutritional fads are the modern equivalent of snake oil. We laugh at snake oil now, but are unaware that the placebo effect did lead to some cures. Most of the laymen who propose themselves to me to be experts because of all they have read, upon questioning, have never actually read a single fully-vetted study from a reputable source such as the New England Journal of Medicine or the Harvard Medical Review – and are completely lost when we pull up a genuine empirical study of raw data that has been successfully replicated. They are no more experts than teens who have played 1,000 hour of World of War on their PlayStation are military experts.

      So yeah, in a series of recurring articles, we are going to delve into it. Both to eliminate some of the false witness being borne, to examine some of the serious ethical issues that are not being examined by the scientific community, and to help establish that those who think their “Christian” dietary regimen is going to save them are not depending on God, but on their own cleverness and, usually, a phalanx of snake oil salesmen.

      Like

      • MMBev says:

        Charlie, I am willing to bet that with your neurological problems, and Kim’s MS, you have been the unwilling “target” of many a kind person who has an absolute guaranteed cure for one or both. I don’t know if I actually break out in hives on my back when people begin to try to convince me (and sell me, as they are part of a pyramid) cures, total absolute cures for Cystic Fibrosis. One cannot reason with them. That’s impossible. They cannot register in their minds that perhaps the researches working and prescribing medications might become a bit irate if you began sneakily doctoring the person’s food, without their knowledge. They just get weirder and weirder. Some I have just had to block from email or phone. Oh, and did I tell you about the latest…..

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          My sister and I laugh about that. We are constantly bombarded with such things from people that mean well. Some are completely offended that I don’t drop everything and go try their miracle cure. Some of those get a little less so when I explain this is part of my complete reliance on God. But some of the most persistent are those who don’t know anything even about the difference between neurological and physical pain.

          Like

      • Joseph Jalsevac says:

        I’ve been around the alternative health world for about 4 years now. I know it is a very messy place with many mixed motives, junk science galore, and most disturbingly, re-packaged occult practices. But your exhortation to rely on conventional medicine because it alone is based on the absolute certainty of the modern scientific method does not stir me very deeply. For one thing, empirical data can be so badly and easily misinterpreted. For another thing, I, and those I know who are turning to alternative medicine and ‘natural’ foods have experienced such irrefutable results (though not miraculous) that we would never go back. The placebo effect as a universal explanation for all our positive experiences is not even remotely plausible, so you won’t convince people with that one. But more fundamentally, the idea of pursuing a ‘natural’ way of life and turning to ‘natural’ medicines (one can argue about the exact definition of the word) appeals to me as an obvious good.

        God did not say to Adam and Eve after the Fall, “Well, good luck, because you’re pretty much doomed to live a life of endless miserable ill health until the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution come along and teach you how to live and heal yourselves based on irrefutable knowledge.” Have you ever considered or read about the astonishing good health enjoyed by many uncivilized peoples (yes, as well as many terrible sicknesses that modern technology and medicine have eradicated)? Have you ever read of the work of Dr. Weston A. Price, who studied pre- or early-contact indigenous populations in the early 20th century and the wholesale negative health changes they experienced in the switch to modern Western diets and lifestyles? It is very compelling. It seems to me that the intellect was meant to complement the instincts on which we have relied throughout human history, but the modern medical approach seems to arrogantly assume that there is only one useful source of knowledge, and that anything found outside a peer-reviewed journal is so much day-dreaming.

        To me, health and well-being are the realm of the ordinary person, and the role of the expert is to act as a consultant. But the conventional medical approach seems to drip with arrogance and close-mindedness. It is a case of one extreme causing another – conventional medicine’s narrowness and brutality leading people to seek healing in an alternative world that lacks clear limits or boundaries. I just came back today from meeting an alternative health practitioner who I discovered to my chagrin practices Reiki and various energy healings. I am very concerned about the spiritual dangers inherent in the messy world of medicine right now, especially for Christians. Whether you like it or not, conventional medicine (and the mainstream diet and lifestyles) is failing many many many people very badly, and alternative practices and ‘natural’ approaches are actually genuinely helping people in such a way that shouting ‘placebo’ only makes you seem hopelessly close-minded. The problem is that people don’t know where to draw the line, because New Age an occult practices can also be very ‘effective’ in their sinister way, and are often so scrubbed free of spiritual language that Christians are being duped. There needs to be a middle ground here, and I was hoping you would be able to help articulate it, but unfortunately you are only leaning to one extreme.

        One last thing – in my tour through the medical world, I have come to realize that often when someone is touting a ‘miracle cure’, it is because they have discovered a piece of knowledge about the human body that has been neglected by mainstream medicine, and by applying it to people, have observed, in some of them, amazing results and healings, because in those people, that was the main problem with them! But enthusiasm is a devil, and they start imagining it is end all and be all of health, and the cure for everything. The answer is not to ascribe it to the placebo effect (which I do not deny exists) but to attempt to place that knowledge in the proper context and give it the proper weight.

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          Oddly, I agree with most of what you have to say. But why you seem compelled to put constructions on things to make it seem I said meant something other than what I did puzzles me. I did NOT say the modern methods are absolutely certain; I encouraged people to take responsibility for their decisions and treat professionals as the servants of the public they are called to be. I encouraged them to NOT bow to credentials, but ask pointed questions to make those decisions. I did NOT offer the placebo effect as a universal explanation; I said that even with junk that has no therapeutic value, such as ionized water touted as a miracle cure, the placebo effect can be real. The main thing I counseled was not to let enthusiasm grow so bold as to force you to demonize all who don’t tout your beliefs. I honestly hope you only read bits of what I wrote and so misinterpreted it…for if you read it all, it is hard to think otherwise that you are trying to bolster your point by badly deforming what I actually did say. Makes me kind of grateful for the people here who confined themselves to criticizing me for what I actually said.

          Like

          • Joseph Jalsevac says:

            Please excuse me for misunderstanding you. I will try to be more careful in the future.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            No problem. It is hard to remember all, but I think I recall you having made a few very insightful comments here before, so I would be surprised if it was anything other than a misunderstanding..

            Like

        • vicardwm says:

          Joseph, we too have experienced a lot better success in the alternative medical field than we ever did in mainstream medicine. Yes, many are also involved in questionable or outright occult practices. Our chiropractor/naturopath is a devout Catholic, for which I give great thanks to God. That said, he still does things that one could still question whether they are New Age, but at least he prays about it and genuinely tries his best to stay out of the realm where spirits/energies are invoked. He reads the conversion stories of former New Agers, etc. He stays far away from Reiki, for example.

          Some of the stuff just worries us because we are unfamiliar with it. Even Galileo was accused of being “occult” for his theories, because the mechanism was not understood. And Galileo accused Kepler of the same for his lunar tides theory, which was basically correct. I believe that many of the alternative practitioners have tapped into some truths which as yet are not fully understood scientifically, so that leaves them open to charges of being “occult”, but the results we have seen for us and for others of our friends who have gone to him are extremely positive.

          Here’s something interesting: you know the New Testament word usually translated as sorcery or witchcraft? The actual Greek word is “pharmakeia”. Make of that what you will….

          Like

          • CrewDog says:

            Frankly … I’m more concerned with RagHeads with sharp knives … and Nuclear Weapons … and missiles to deliver them … and a, former Crusader Christendom, that seems, totally, unwilling to acknowledge/confront same!!
            GOD PROTECT & SAVE US!!

            Like

    • For what it’s worth, my own personal concrete suggestion is this: don’t bother trying to become an expert; that takes time that the Kingdom of Heaven needs from you. Unless we clearly know something to be immoral based on our Catholic Faith, just trust what the WHO (World Health Organization) says.

      Like

      • charliej373 says:

        Alas, Daniel, I can’t go along with that. The WHO has actually been pretty good, but it is politicized enough that it has taken an active, often vigorous role in population controls efforts and advocacy.

        Like

        • Ah yes, but that would be something we clearly know to be immoral based upon our Catholic Faith! 🙂

          Like

          • charliej373 says:

            True, Daniel, but the larger point is that if they are willing to politicize the science for one ideological preference, how can we trust them not to politicize it in other cases? It goes to their fundamental credibility…which I regard as Ronald Reagan did Soviet arms reductions: Trust, but verify, since they have a record of sometimes cheating.

            Like

          • Agreed — if a particular issue seems like one with a weighty political push behind it, we should be especially cautious. But (for example) whether or not a certain pesticide is okay to use, I do not think qualifies as such a case. And we must be very cautious not to simply dismiss all of the credible findings of a qualified organization just because they have some erroneous views; Pope Francis in Evangelii Gaudium spoke well against this tendency that many Catholics have adopted. For example, so many Catholics want to simply reject anything positive the CDC has to say about a vaccine, or that the FDA has to say about a pesticide or refinement process, simply because these organizations have erroneous views on abortion.

            Like

          • Mick says:

            Or perhaps they reject the claims of the CDC because that particular governmental entity has a particularly glaring record of incompetence. Case in point: the CDC has admitted that this year’s flu shot, which is being mandated for health-care workers on locales throughout the country (under penalty of job loss), is only 23% effective. And the CDC’s handling of the ebola fiasco in Dallas would have been laughable if it hadn’t been for the sheer number of lives potentially at risk.

            Like

          • Well I certainly have no plan to become a CDC apologist ;-), but I am equally unwilling to categorically reject all of the CDCs claims simply because of those mishaps. The CDC, despite their errors, clearly has the common good as their objective. Now if we’re talking about a fundamentally ideologically corrupt organization; e.g. Planned Parenthood, that’s another matter entirely.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            Take a look, sometime, Daniel, at the other board affiliations of executives and directors at the CDC. For almost two decades, Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion advocacy groups have been working together actively, with much success, to get their people seated as CDC directors. The CDC does do a lot of good work, but it has been politicized. Did you know that, in most cases, if a woman dies from a botched abortion, CDC lists the cause of death as being a “complication of pregnancy.”? That props the pro-aborts up in their efforts to maintain that pregnancy is more dangerous to a woman than abortion. Now, most of their obvious distortions lie in the area of reproductive and abortion issues, but I strongly suspect their quietly growing left-wing advocacy status contributed to their ludicrous performance in the ebola scare.

            This is not to say that the CDC is an unreliable organization…I rely on it for many study points myself. But when I do, I keep in mind that it is not the rigorously objective organization it was even 30 years ago. Frankly, I feel much more confidence in its old reports and data collection then I do in its most recent. Once you start politicizing things even for what you think are the best of reasons, the rot spreads quicker than you expect it will.

            Like

  6. Jon says:

    Charlie:

    To be dismissive on vaccine skepticism and to label all who are as participants in ‘polemics’ is irresponsible. It is a disposition that is too trusting toward the pseudo-science of vaccinations themselves, and too uninformed of the thousands upon thousands of families that experienced injury or death directly from vaccines.

    Just delve into the “vaccine court” at the federal level in the US and learn of the billions of dollars already awarded to the thousands of American families that were able to prove the direct connection. Other countries have similar courts as well, including Italy, where a court has just concluded and awarded compensation on autism this month.

    Follow the money… Here’s a good exercise: walk into a Walgreens or CVS pharmacy in the fall, and literally count the number of flu shot signs and advertisements that are posted in just a single one of these stores. I have done this as a casual observation, and stopped when I reached 50 signs screaming FLU SHOT in my face at just one store. And this was typical. You may blindly think the flu shot promotion is about “public service”, and our “collective welfare”, but you would be sadly mistaken. It’s about making money, and that is why these stores are in business, as well as the pharma companies.

    US in past 10 years: Zero deaths from measles. 108 deaths from measles vaccine.

    Liked by 1 person

    • charliej373 says:

      I am not dismissive, John. I actually research what I write about, rather than saying such things as “follow the money” and reflexively dismissing everybody who does not agree with me as somehow evil in their intentions. I do not know the statistics on the last ten years that you report, but I will presume they are accurate. What I do know is that in 1960 there were over 440,000 new cases of the measles reported. The 60s were the big period of making such vaccinations ubiquitous. In 1970, there were 47,000 cases – one-tenth of what there were before vaccinations were introduced. In 1980, there were 13,000; 1990, 27,000 and since 1990 there has never again been as many as 1,000. A solid report on the conquest of measles is here.

      Now, I would not get my children – or grandchildren – vaccinated for measles unless a vaccine that did not use aborted children as the medium in which the vaccine was grown was re-introduced. But I would also not deny the very straightforward fact, overwhelmingly supported by the evidence, that in about a generation and a half, the regimen of vaccination wiped out the threat of measles in this country. And that is really the point I am getting at. The statist left routinely denies reality in pushing its agenda. The Christian right rarely does…but we do have a few hobby horses which we insist on believing regardless of what facts and evidence show.

      Like

    • donna269 says:

      US in past 10 years: Zero deaths from measles. 108 deaths from measles vaccine.

      this is a false statement….and running the circuit….
      http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/mmrdeaths.asp

      Like

      • Mick says:

        Donna, please correct me if I’m wrong, but I am unconvinced by the Snopes link. For starters, Snopes links to two articles which they use in order to support their claim that there were 4 measles deaths in the US in 2009 and 2010. However, when I carefully scanned both articles, I saw no mention at all of measles, let alone of measles deaths (although there were several references to deaths from influenza and pneumonia). I found the rest of the article unconvincing as well.

        My research turned up an article (http://vaccineimpact.com/2015/zero-u-s-measles-deaths-in-10-years-but-over-100-measles-vaccine-deaths-reported/) which states that the zero and 108 death numbers actually come from US government sources. In April 2014, Dr. Anne Schuchat, the director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, stated, “There have been no measles deaths reported in the U.S. since 2003.” Both the Associated Press and Fox News covered this story. Regarding the number of deaths associated with the measles vaccine during the same time period, a search of the US government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database (which is open to the public) shows that there have been 108 deaths associated with the four measles vaccines available in the US during that time period; and there have been 96 deaths associated with the MMR combination vaccine, which is currently the only available vaccine for the measles.

        The article which I referenced also has a fascinating chart (also based on US government statistics, this time the CDC’s Vital Statistics of the United States) which demonstrates that the measles vaccine was not in fact the cause of the near eradication of measles in the US. As the chart shows, in the late 1910s, measles resulted in the deaths of over 14 people per 100,000 in the US. By 1962, that number had nosedived to less than 1 death per 100,000. The measles vaccine was not introduced until 1963

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          Mick, this won’t fly. The clear thing from Donna’s link was that the organization made clear that they made no correlation – that they just noted those deaths where the children had received the measles vaccine in the previous year, regardless of cause of death. By the logic this internet meme is using – and you are getting alarmed over – I could also note the deaths of all children who had eaten corn flakes in the last month – and it would be a frightening high number, but would not be proof, much less evidence that corn flakes had anything to do with it. If I wanted to truly terrify, I could note all children who had breather air in the last few weeks…and the correlation would be 100% – but utterly irrelevant to what caused the children’s deaths.

          This fact is interesting, but utterly irrelevant. There may be an actual connection somewhere for somebody to find, but the way this was done is pure alarmist demagoguery that shows no connection to vaccine (nor makes any effort to) other than that was one of many things the child had done in the previous year.

          Liked by 1 person

          • donna269 says:

            thanks, got to the game late here….what Charlie said….that ONE article has caused utter hysteria nationwide….and it’s a disservice. It also shows how misinformed we can all be. Numbers lie and liars figure. VAERS specifically states they cannot correlate these deaths with the vaccine as they are simply listed as occurring after the vaccine. Also the claim of zero measles deaths is another lie as they reported 4 well within that time frame in the US (CDC) and that was the nation prior to recent outbreak. Measles can in fact cause death by resultant pneumonia and any child or adult who is immune suppressed or has asthma or lung issues is at risk when exposed.

            Like

          • Mick says:

            Charlie and Donna, I’m not trying to be difficult, but I think I need to respond. The CDC itself claims that there were zero measles deaths in the US between 2003 and April 2014 (as I said before, both the AP and Fox News quoted the CDC’s Dr. Schuchat on this); so if the number of deaths is in fact four and the zero number is a lie, then it is the CDC who is lying. And I do understand that the VAERS states that they have made no correlation between the deaths and the vaccines. And they are free (and perhaps even wise) not to make a correlation. But I decided to look at the VAERS myself, and I came up with some interesting information. I’m not saying that what I found is probative; but it certainly–to me, at least–seems strongly suggestive that vaccines-especially vaccines when given 6 or 8 or 10 at a time–can and do cause death more often than the government would like to let on.

            First, let me say that I am not a doctor or a nurse or a medical anybody. I’m just a homeschooling mommy who, as a math major and a “retired” lawyer, have a thing for numbers and research (and, for better or worse, also for disputation). I read the VAERS entries from January 2003 through mid-August 2011 before I ran out of time. I only considered entries in which the decedent had received the MMR (so, for instance, the soldier who got the anthrax and smallpox vaccines and then died was not considered). I looked at 50 records, so that it would make my computations easy to do without a calculator, since I had a baby sleeping on my lap at the time. Here’s what I found:

            (1) Only one of the decedents had received only the MMR shot; the other 49 received multiple shots before the onset of their fatal symptoms. So, for instance, one decedent received the MMR and the DTAP. Another received the MMR and the varicella (chicken pox) vaccines. Others received several combination and individual vaccines along with the MMR.

            (2) Five of the decedents (10%) were involved in vaccine safety studies at the time of their deaths. Four were involved in a DTAP study (one of these, a 3-year old, died of cancer which was NOT listed as a pre-existing condition with regard to participation in the study), and one was involved in a CPDT study (I have no idea what that is).

            (3) About one-third of the decedents (36%) had pre-existing conditions which might have contributed to their demise, but about two-thirds (64%) did not.

            (4) Almost one-half of the decedents (48%) experienced the onset of their fatal symptoms within three days of being vaccinated: (a) 10% experienced symptom onset on the day of vaccination; another 24% experienced symptom onset on the day after vaccination; another 10% experienced symptom onset the second day after vaccination; and 4% experienced symptom onset on the third day after vaccination. (b) 20% experienced symptom onset on days 4 through 7. This means that 68% of the decedents experienced fatal symptom onset within a week of vaccination. (c) 8% experienced symptom onset on days 8 through 14. This means that three-quarters (76%) of the decedents experienced fatal symptom onset within two weeks of having been vaccinated.

            As I said above, I’m not saying that these figures are probative of causation. However, I believe that at some point the evidence stops being merely anecdotal and should come to be viewed as data points suggestive of possible correlation. These are the VAERS’s own figures, and I’ve analyzed them as honestly as I can. I’ll be glad to admit that I’m wrong about this if one of you can show me where I’ve messed up. But these numbers, to me, are frightening; and I believe that I have every cause to be alarmed by them. This, to me, is not akin to being concerned about the number of deaths of children who have eaten corn flakes or breathed air in the past month.

            Liked by 2 people

        • donna269 says:

          VAERS is an incredibly flawed reporting system…..
          Like other spontaneous reporting systems, VAERS has several limitations, including underreporting, unverified reports, inconsistent data quality, absence of a control group that is not vaccinated, and inadequate data about the number of people vaccinated. Indeed, an autism activist named Jim Laidler once reported to VAERS that a vaccine had turned him into The Incredible Hulk. The report was accepted and entered into the database, but the dubious nature thereof prompted a VAERS representative to contact Mr. Laidler, who then gave his consent to delete the report. Laidler, James R. (July 27, 2005). “Chelation and Autism”. Neurodiversity Blog. Archived from the original on April 19, 2013. Retrieved October 8, 2013.

          Like

          • Mick says:

            I agree with you. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is an incredibly flawed reporting system. VAERS is, like you said, limited by under-reporting and such. However, with regard to the issue at hand, I would encourage you to consider taking a look at the VAERS entries that I examined (January 2003 through mid-August 2011). I believe that you will find that the vast majority of the 50 death records that I examined were reported to VAERS by physicians or nurses. They are chock full of medical jargon that would have made my head spin if I hadn’t gotten so much experience with doctor-y stuff because of my mother’s extended illness before her death, and because of my daughter’s hospitalizations and surgeries. I specifically excluded from consideration those entries for which the reports were clearly unverified or the data quality was clearly inconsistent. As for an unvaccinated control group, zero unvaccinated people died of measles from 2003 until April 2014, because zero people died of measles during that time period (as per Dr. Anne Schuchat, a high-up at the CDC, as contemporaneously quoted by the Associated Press and Fox News). Regarding there being “inadequate data about the number of people vaccinated,” I would suggest that to the families of those who died within a short time after having been vaccinated, the data are in fact adequate: the number is 1–their loved one, who subsequently died. The fact that countless other vaccinated people did not die within a short time after vaccination probably doesn’t matter very much to those whose loved one did die subsequent to being vaccinated.

            Regarding the issue of under-reporting of adverse reactions and deaths that might be connected to vaccinations, I realize that one cannot simply extrapolate from the numbers contained in the VAERS. However, I find the numbers startling. Of the 50 death records which I considered, nearly half of the people (24) experienced fatal symptom onset within just three days of having been vaccinated. Fewer than half of those (11) were reported to have had a pre-existing condition at the time of the onset of their fatal symptoms. In those cases, it is possible that the pre-existing condition may have caused or at least contributed to the patient’s death. However, over half of the 24 people (13) who experienced fatal symptom onset within 3 days of having been vaccinated were reported as having no pre-existing conditions at the time. In other words, one-fourth (26%) of all the people who were reported to have died subsequent to vaccination had no pre-existing conditions at the time of vaccination–and yet experienced fatal symptom onset within 3 days of having been vaccinated. To me, it seems reasonable to want the answers to two questions. (1) Why did these people die? If these people had no pre-existing conditions and yet within 3 days of vaccination suffered the onset of symptoms which led to their deaths, is it not reasonable to presume that there might very well be a correlation between their vaccinations and their deaths? (2) How many unreported cases are there of otherwise healthy people experiencing fatal symptom onset very shortly after having been vaccinated?

            On the one hand, I seem to be reading that we need to take VAERS at face value (just look at the numbers; there are no correlations). On the other hand, I also seem to be seeing that we should discount the numbers because of the system’s limitations. But we can’t have it both ways. The system, flawed as it is, is what we have. And for one 9 1/2-year period, it reveals that at least 13 people without pre-existing conditions experienced fatal symptom onset within 3 days of being vaccinated for illnesses including the measles; whereas during the same time period, the CDC claimed that no one died of the measles. This, I believe, should give us pause in our discussions about vaccines.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            If the onset within three days is correct, that suggests a pattern that should be investigated…that is suggestive. But since the source merely notes among deaths the casual fact they had vaccinations, it still is not logically sound to suggest that the vaccination caused it. It literally is like noting that everyone who died last year had breathed oxygen within 24 hours of their demise and then jumping to the conclusion that oxygen must have caused their deaths. Since nearly all children are vaccinated…and some children are going to die each year, this is not useful causative information. Where you get that is where there is an unusual and relatively consistent pattern. If even a handful of the children involved died within three days of the vaccination, that IS suggestive of a pattern that could indicate a causative factor and deserves investigation.

            Like

          • Mick says:

            Fair enough, Charlie. Here’s another look at the internals: of the 13 otherwise healthy people (in other words, no pre-existing conditions at the time of vaccination) who had symptom onset within 3 days of vaccination and subsequently died, all 13 were under the age of 2 years 1 month. Of the 12 otherwise healthy people who had symptom onset on days 4 through 7 after vaccination and subsequently died, all 12 were under the age of 3 years 1 month. So, of the 50 records I examined, exactly half were children under 3 years 1 month of age, with no pre-existing conditions at the time of vaccination, all of whom experienced fatal symptom onset with 7 days of vaccination.

            By the way. I did not cherry-pick entries; I started at January 2003 and went straight through (with the exceptions I mentioned in my last post) until mid-August 2011, until I had 50 reports for which the decedent had been given the MMR. Here’s the link, if you’d like to take a look.

            http://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?EVENTS=on&PAGENO=13&PERPAGE=10&ESORT=&REVERSESORT=&VAX=(MMR)&DIED=Yes&VAX_YEAR_HIGH=2015&VAX_MONTH_HIGH=01

            Would you say that this is suggestive of a pattern that could indicate causation?

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            I sure would…and definitely think it should have triggered an investigation. There could be several reasons (we have wrongly calculated the age at which a child can be safely vaccinated sounds the most likely – but something is definitely going on there if that is the case. It is a definite and anomalous pattern).

            Like

  7. NancyA says:

    I look forward to Ed Allison’s piece. I frequently find his commentary to parallel my own thoughts. Also appreciate Dan Lynch’s comment, which I missed, so thanks for reiterating it here.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Irish7 says:

    Can you give some examples of the dietary and other practices that give you pause? Or perhaps the mindset and approach troubles you more than the practices themselves? Are we talking about obvious New Age things …reiki, yoga, etc or more nuanced things like essential oils and organic food? This is such a timely post for me since as a mother I am trying to discern and research dietary choices and the validity of alternative medicine options as the writing is clearly on the wall concerning our current health system. I plan to read up on St Hildegaard and others who had vocations to healing/nourishing. It sounds like you plan to dedicate more writing to this topic so feel deer to disregard my question if the answer is to be continued.

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      This is going to become a regular subject, Irish, so you will get some of the specifics…but a lot is involved. For example, statistical analysis is critical. You occasionally hear people talk about how cancer is on the rise…there is a greater incidence of it than there used to be. That, actually, is true – but misleading. Some years back I was at lunch with a prominent doctor who was a friend and had spent several years in pure research before opening his practice – and the subject came up.

      “Look, Charlie,” he said, “the human mortality rate is 100%. It actually is a fixed-sum game. That means that any time you decrease the incidence of a particular cause of death, it must cause an increase in the incidence of another. Cancers are one of the slowest-developing causes before onset. So if you prevent people from dying of other diseases when they are younger, the odds that they will die of cancer when they get older go up dramatically. To see if there is a genuine epidemic, you need to work with age cohorts…is there a significant increase in the incidence among, say 16-23 year-olds from a century ago? If not, then with the formerly deadly diseases that have been cured, you would expect a steadily growing increase in older cohorts. There has not been a statistically significant increase among the youngest cohort in the last hundred years. The gradual increase in rates among older patients is largely a factor of them having survived different diseases that would have killed them even 50 or 60 years ago.”

      He also cheerily told me that every man who lives long enough will eventually develop prostate cancer.

      Liked by 2 people

      • MaryM says:

        I have a doctor who is 92 years old. She has been studying medicine since she was very young, is an ND and trained in acupuncture. She has cured and fixed many things that doctors would need to do intensive surgery on or write off as non-curable.
        She said that when she was young, before the Rockefellers took over the medical industry, that curing cancer was as easy as dealing with a cold.
        I also have big issues with the vaccination program. My son was vaccine damaged, as were several of my friends’ kids. It’s funny you don’t think that autism isn’t cause by vaccines, but the Amish and a non-vaccinating clinic in Chicago have no autism in their communities. Check Dr. Boyd Haley who has done a lot of research over the chemicals-mercury, aluminum, etc.- in the vaccines. Why would anyone inject this into children if they knew it was in there. There are also the incidences with the HPV vaccine and serious damage to the girls getting it, and then recently the measles vaccines that were given in Africa that the Catholic Bishops sent in themselves for testing and proved that there is an ingredient in it that will cause a woman to reject her fetus thus making her unable to ever have children. I’ve read they’ve used that in tribes in South America and Africa. All girls were vaccinated. Vaccines also cause reactions systematically in the body that can last for 2 years.
        Last year the bishops of Florida decided to mandate vaccinations for all Catholic school children with no religious exemption because the Catholic Church believes in vaccinations. http://www.orlandodiocese.org/images/stories/schools/pdf/BishopNoonanImmunizationLetter.pdf I was able to find a doctor who wrote a medical exemption for my daughter. BTW, the USCCB does approve of vaccines using embryonic stem cell lines. How contradictory and hypocritical is that? http://www.orlandodiocese.org/images/stories/schools/pdf/NationalCatholicBioethicsCenter.pdf
        A few weeks ago, several doctors from the CDC released information that the MMR did cause autism (Dr. Wakefield also proved it, but was ostracized and so did the book Evidence of Harm by David Kirby) but they were ordered to cover it up. This never made the news.

        Liked by 1 person

        • charliej373 says:

          Well, Mary, the statement that “curing cancer was as easy dealing with a cold” is, on some level, weirdly correct, for colds are incurable – and can only be waited out. We can treat the symptoms is all. Now we do not have to rely on a 92-year-old doctor’s memory for this…we have records going back for centuries. Not only records, but historical testimonies, that are consistent and nearly unanimous. Cancer has NEVER been easy to deal with.

          When did the Rockefellers take over the medical industry? I must have missed the memo. That is the sort of casual smear I am trying to get people to avoid – in this case, both of the Rockefellers and the medical industry. I thought it was the Jews…or the Freemasons…or maybe the Trilateral Commission. It is hard to keep the conspiracy theories straight sometimes when even the conspiracy theorists don’t agree among themselves on the true identity of Dr. Evil.

          The utter absence of autism among the Amish is a comforting urban myth, but as in most such cases, not true at all. It IS true that the incidence is only about a third as much as in the general population. The actual fact is impressive enough that I have to wonder why people feel the need to blow their credibility by making an even more impressive claim that collapses at first examination.

          Now, the USCCBs approval of vaccines using embryonic stem cell lines is, indeed, scandalous. I am hoping that, like most of us, they did not know and now that it has been fully publicly revealed, will make a new statement on the matter.

          Like

          • MaryM says:

            FDA DtaP Vaccine Insert Information – Adverse events with Autism as one
            Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids and Acellular Pertussis Vaccine Adsorbed
            Tripedia® DtaP Vaccine
            Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting. Because these events are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequencies or to establish a causal relationship to components of Tripedia vaccine.2

            Like

      • E. Allison says:

        Charlie, I know that everyone has to die of something, but I reject the notion that cancer is simply a normal way to die. Cancer is a mutation that is anything but normal. If cancer rates are up, it’s because of something that is detectable and preventable. Old men should die in their sleep from a heart that has beat for so many years, it’s just plain wore out and stops beating.

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          Ed, that simply is incorrect. Talk to any hospital or doctors group and you will find that, while cancer is a mutation, it is for many a normal process of aging. Some have less volatility in their genes than others, but you check with serious medical researchers and they will tell you if you could eliminate all causes of death, cancer would ultimately get everyone. Some might live to a couple of hundred years, but it is in the nature of tissue to eventually mutate. People get polyps, cysts and other things all the time – that have no cause other than it is part of the genetic programming. After a lot of enthusiasm about preventing cancer, just a few weeks ago Johns Hopkins released the results of a prolonged study. It showed, to their disappointment, that two-thirds of cancers are random mutations. Cells constantly mutate in our bodies from the time we are born. Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of those mutations are NOT malignant. But cellular mutation through life is, in fact, a normal and continuing process.

          I was a little surprised at this assertion coming from you, when it is contrary to all the medical and scientific evidence and reports for…well…for as long as there has been serious examination of it. The more it is studied, the more scientists conclude it is progressively less predictable than they thought. The best keys are early detection and better treatment therapies. For too many cancers, the problem is environmental…but for most, as Shakespeare said, the problem is in ourselves, not our stars.

          Like

          • E. Allison says:

            Charlie, I think we’re both dancing with the same partner. I understand that cell mutation is a fact of life and is considered, ‘normal’. I am also familiar with the assertion that malignancy is random. The immune system’s ability/inability to deal with it is what I believe, is not random. Just because the medical establishment today, has not recognized the pattern, or identified the environmental or dietary influences that are in play, that does not mean that they do not exist or won’t be found in the future. As you know, I would lean towards dietary influences. Modern medicine is a wonderful thing, but it is a continually evolving and changing science. After railing against cholesterol for decades as the cause of heart disease, that stance seems to be softening in light of new information that high cholesterol is itself a symptom of the root cause, and not the root cause itself.

            I have not read the study you posted from John Hopkins, but I will later this evening.

            Like

          • vicardwm says:

            I think it is more likely that cellular mutation occurs as a result of toxins and/or stresses on the body. Bad epigenetic changes, in other words…it is a normal process of aging in this toxic world of ours…I can go along with that.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            And yet, history shows us that it has been a normal part of the world since time immemorial. You want to know why there is a certain inevitability to it? Try original sin. That is not to downplay environmental causes we can mitigate at all. But you can go back as far as the purity of the garden after the fall and cellular mutation is a norm in this world. Trying to find an evil villain, other than the satan, for every random mutation – or for most random mutations, is just a subtle way of scapegoating and bearing false witness.

            Like

          • vicardwm says:

            Charlie, I see your point, but I don’t totally agree. Yes, in a fallen world, there will inevitably be cellular mutations, but that is not to say that we can’t reduce them to a minimum by learning and understanding what causes them. We have never really done that in human history. The Romans used to paint their homes with lead, for example.

            Like

          • E. Allison says:

            I don’t fully agree either. Yes, the flesh is fallen. Death entered the world through original sin, and the wages of sin is death. You get no argument there. I’m not saying that 100% of cancer is avoidable. What I am saying is that science isn’t even looking at the diets of cancer patients looking for a pattern. At least, I’ve never heard of such a study. GMOs aren’t labeled in the US, so there’s no way to track consumption anyway. Asbestos was once considered safe. Agent Orange was once considered safe. I believe Roundup will eventually be added to the list of blunders that caused incalculable suffering.

            False witness? Unless you have some divine insight to tell me that I’m wrong, you’re just a guy with an opinion based on what you think is true and what you think is false, with no justification to call me sinful in the matter.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            Nah, I am not calling you sinful, specifically, Ed. I am calling all of us sinful when we make casual statements that are not justified in fact, when we speak reflexively rather than deliberately. It is a common practice of modern times…and we are all creatures of the environment we inhabit. The flaws of the greatest saints are a mixture of their own failings…and of the errors common to their times. We are all affected by the cultural environment we swim in. Ours is marked by unjustified polemics. I say those often defame others casually – and that we as Christians are called to be more dutiful than that.

            Like

          • E. Allison says:

            Well, the last I knew, bearing false witness was a sin. So, unless you’re withdrawing your statement (that you have made repeatedly, publicly and privately) that those who say what I say, are bearing false witness, it’s pretty difficult not to take it personally.

            Look…. you asked me to write the piece on GMOs because you thought I was grounded in solid evidence and logic. That just does not line up with your choice to use this topic to show us all that we shouldn’t “make casual statements that are not justified in fact”. From my perspective, you are setting yourself up as the final arbiter on the matter. If you’ve done as much research on the subject as I have, then good on you. I can give you credit for basing your opinion on the evidence before you and coming to a decision. I think it’s unfortunate that you don’t come to the same conclusion as I did, but that’s life. But in the end, you’re just a guy with an opinion, just like me. We’re not going to resolve anything here on this forum. The best we can hope for is to still be friends when it’s over.

            Science has been wrong many times. I believe it is wrong on GMOs. I’m not about to change my mind because you say so. Science may have made it possible to feed the world, but the last I knew, half of Africa was still starving to death. What did we gain? Not much. Maybe after the rescue the political barriers to feeding those folks will come down.

            So, I truly do not understand what you’re doing Charlie. But I find myself in a very precarious position.

            Liked by 1 person

          • charliej373 says:

            Point taken, Ed. And I realized, after your last comment, that I have been a bit sloppy on what I mean by false witness. When you intentionally say something about someone or something that you know not to be true, that is defamatory and a particularly virulent form of false witness. I think in modern times we have persuaded ourselves that it is the only form of false witness. I know of no serious Christians who engage in that form.

            But to make or repeat accusations that we believe to be true but have not vetted is, when they are wrong, by definition, another form of bearing false witness. The former is a sin of commission, the latter of omission. I am not accusing serious Christians of defaming anyone, but I am very concerned about the damage we do to ourselves by the latter form – and am very concerned it is going to be much more serious before too much longer. I have done enough of the latter over a lifetime. My embarrassment at being called on such when I began doing public work caused me to take some pains to avoid it, but in the heat of the moment I still occasionally make accusations that I believe – but do not know – to be true. Whenever I do, I take it to confession.

            I am also not terribly concerned with what conclusions one comes to, provided it is grounded in reasonably verifiable facts and evidence. One very left-wing writer I frequently read and deeply admire is Camille Paglia. I disagree with her conclusions about 80% of the time or more, but have great confidence in her because she works from verifiable facts and evidence – and a coherent train of logic. She challenges me in ways that sharpen my own perspective – and helps me get out of my skin to look from a new perspective. I most certainly am NOT setting myself up as the final arbiter on these things. Rather, I am trying to get people to work from real evidence to justify their position, whatever it may be. Polemics is easier than research, but it becomes a crutch and has coarsened our discourse. And that is a danger to all of us.

            But you are right that false witness is a sin. We are all aware of the sin of intentional false witness. We need to be aware of the potential sin of unintentional false witness. Let me give one final example that may help. People may come to different conclusions from the same facts: Two examples of potentially true witness are:

            A) Abraham Lincoln was a good president because he signed the Emancipation Proclamation.
            B) Abraham Lincoln was a bad president because he signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

            It is up to the writer to defend his premise from there, but it springs from verifiable fact. Now, two examples of false witness:

            A) Abraham Lincoln was a good president because he did not issue the Emancipation Proclamation.
            B) Abraham Lincoln was a bad president because he did not issue the Emancipation Proclamation.

            Both these start from a false premise, so bear false witness whether the conclusion of the writer is positive or negative, and regardless of how sincerely he believes his original principle.

            I would find the defense of either of the first two propositions interesting and useful if well done, though I would certainly disagree with one of them. An exploration of the latter two would be useless to me, though I would almost certainly agree with the conclusion of one of them.

            Like

          • vicardwm says:

            E. Allison,

            I love what you are writing, but one small tweak. I don’t think science is wrong on GMO’s. I think science is right. However, “science” as done by large corporations with a vested interest in certain outcomes of studies may certainly be wrong on GMO’s. Distinguishing real science from what I call pundit science is where the trick lies.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            Alas, on that, I firmly agree, Vicar, and there is a lot more pundit science these days than the real thing.

            Like

      • barb129 says:

        My husband and I were talking about this over the weekend. We were down in the Smokies and walked around the old cemeteries in Cades Cove and it is sobering to see how many graves there are for babies, young children, and young women in childbearing years. We are so spoiled by modern medicine’s ability to save so many more people from early death. Some of those poor families lost 3, 4, 5 children and/or mothers in childbirth.
        I am so appreciative of some of the advances of modern medicine that allow so many more children to live to adulthood. What that doctor said rings true and we do all have to die of something.

        Like

        • CrewDog says:

          Yes! We have become spoiled by modern gadgets, science and medicine in the 1st World and have forgotten that in poor 3rd World places it’s not so pleasant …. probably another reason for The Storm? My Irish Grandfather had 18 children only half of whom made it to adulthood … pretty standard a 100+ years ago … go through any old graveyard and see all the deaths in 1918/19 … Spanish Flu that killed far more people, World-Wide, than WWI.
          In the USA these past six months … Measles, Ebola and Enterovirus D68 … anybody else here think these are Wake-Up Calls?
          GOD BLESS & HEAL ALL HERE!

          Like

      • MMBev says:

        Along those same lines, is the fact that there has been such an increase in the un necessary use of antibiotics, that certain bacteria become drug resistant. There was such an increase in drug resistant tuberculosis when large numbers of Aides patients were first dying that when my brother was actively assisting them in the last few weeks prior to death that he contracted drug resistant TB. In that situation, doctors just keep pumping the drugs into you anyway, hoping that your body will prove different than the petri dish shows. He was lucky, but he took all those drugs for quite some time. And we now have “super bugs”, most of which you pick up in the hospital.

        Even consistent, but intermittent use of antibiotics both oral and IV can end up resistant. My son hasn’t many options left unless some new drugs (or God) correct the situation.

        Like

  9. Irish7 says:

    Free not deer

    Like

  10. Bob says:

    I do look forward to more of this discussion on “wacky” science ad there are several factors involved we should consider and one of them is what used to be called the “gold standard” in science. That term used to mean the genuine best science but too often it means the ideas of those who have the power and the money, at least before it collapses, influencing scientific decision making. The multinational corporations, for example who can influence governments and regulators to accept things of dubious or even risky value. If Merck was a small corp do you think they would have been able to pawn off vaccines made with fetal stem cells when other options were available? And with the lack of ethics in our governments, the regulators are not doing their jobs to provide the most ethical science available.

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      You are absolute correct, Bob. The one statement I would take exception to is that Merck could not have gotten away with using fetal stem cells if they were a small corporation. In fact, our government bureaucrats WANT to justify the use of aborted children…so if they were a small corporation, they would more likely not have been allowed to use morally acceptable options had they fought to do so…witness Hobby Lobby, among others bucking the government mandates. What is reprehensible is that Merck has become just one more captain in the crony capitalist axis between Washington and Wall Street.

      Like

  11. Kris says:

    So I am very interested in knowing then if a vaccine is given that comes from these fetal lines, are we participating in evil by having our kids vaccinated? Are you also saying that the vaccines and links to autism and weakened immune systems is not validated by research? How would I be able to have a more definite understanding of all this? My own naturalpathic doctor tells me never to give the vaccines and especially not to take the flu vaccines. He is a credible doctor. I am curious what you have read. Thanks

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      Kris, I encourage you to do what you believe to be best for your family. If you trust your doctor and he has cared for you well, follow his counsel provided it does not conflict with any real moral principle. I am not saying that a vaccine could never have that effect. What I am saying is that ALL the reputable studies show no such statistically significant connection. That said, the body’s architecture is not a cookie cutter. Each person reacts somewhat differently to the same things. It is one of the troubles for doctors…they know how almost all people will react to certain treatments…but there are always the outliers.

      It is like air bags in cars. There are more than a few stories of people who were killed by the air bag – or were trapped in their car by their seatbelt and died when they would likely have lived if they had not had it on. Those are outliers. They are tragic…but the fact is that seatbelts and air bags have dramatically reduced the number of fatalities in car accidents. Get focused on the outliers where they caused death to the point where you quit wearing your seatbelt and disconnect your air bag and you are trading a small risk for a very big one. There is no such thing as zero risk. We make decisions on rational bases. So make your decision in peace and confidence that you do the best for your children based on what you know. What I ask is that you not become a crusader for others unless you are going to do the homework and not toss away evidence that contradicts it. AS I have said, I would not get my children or grandchildren a measles vaccine now. My parents were opposed to vaccinations for religious reasons. I didn’t care, but I received no vaccinations until I was in high school. I am far more worried about bearing false witness in an emotional crusade than I am in who gets vaccinated and who doesn’t.

      Like

  12. Mick says:

    Charlie, thank you for this piece. I would just like to say that while some of us Christians may, on the surface, appear to be almost indistinguishable from lefty neo-pagans, it’s often much more complicated than that. I will use my family as an example. I have Celiac disease, as do several of our children. So we’ve been gluten-free for over a decade. Along with gluten (which rules out pretty much every grain except rice), our kids and I have multitudinous food allergies (corn, cane sugar, soy, peanuts, cow’s milk, cinnamon, cloves, and ginger, to name a few) and chemical sensitivities (various antibiotics, perfumes, artificial dyes, over-the-counter meds, pesticides, and chlorine–so no chlorinated water for us). So we live in the country, grow most of our own food (organically, because of the pesticide allergies) and have had to resort to herbal medicine and homeopathy in order to keep my family healthy. We also have had health issues with various vaccines, almost certainly because of the numerous chemicals that they all contain. For one example, our 18-year-old ,as an infant, had such a severe reaction to the DPT vaccine that our very pro-vaccine pediatrician ordered that he never be given that vaccine again. So while we may outwardly resemble those with whom you take issue, we have valid reasons for our choices. And I know many Christians who are in a similar boat, and who have made similar choices. None of us view ourselves as into fads, zealotry, or pseudo-science.

    I don’t much care how other people choose to eat, or which substances they are willing to expose themselves to. However, I very much care when a lefty and righty loudmouths and government bureaucrats blame “anti-vaxxers” for the current measles outbreak and then push for mandatory vaccinations or even call for the jailing of parents who choose not to vaccinate their children. And while I agree that some of the rhetoric on both sides of this issue has often been overheated, I maintain that there are, in fact, some villains that need to be exposed and resisted. Two that come to mind are the current administration (who illegally allowed into this country tens of thousands of illegals, many of whom were infected with measles, TB, hand-foot-and-mouth disease, and enterovirus D68–and then secretly shipped them to dozens of locations around the country) and Merck (who discontinued production of some morally derived vaccines and then foisted upon us combination vaccines from immorally derived sources) come to mind.

    Liked by 4 people

    • charliej373 says:

      Interestingly, Mick, I agree with everything you said. And I should note, when government official start talking about sending people to jail for not getting their kids vaccinated, then I think all patriots have a near duty NOT to do it. And I am not unmindful that our current govt. bureaucrats are way too eager to use common practices to sneak in their little surprises. I rather suspect that if I were making the decision today and my children were still little, I would probably resist vaccinations because I do not trust the government-industrial crony capitalist complex not to sneak in foreign agents. My loss of confidence in government is almost comprehensive.

      Liked by 2 people

  13. ellenchris says:

    Anecdotal evidence is NOT scientific proof. It is one way to cause confusion. However, for what it is worth, I offer a personal anecdote. The son of a friend was a normal, healthy boy with no developmental problems at all. *Immediately* following his first set of vaccinations around age two, he went into a deep state of autism from which he still suffers. It is this kind of thing which is causing parents so much concern. It is true, and the scientific evidence demonstrates this fact quite clearly, that the incidence of autism in infants and young children has jumped from one is several hundred thousand births to something like one in about 200 births in the past couple of decades. I am sure that someone out there will have more precise statistics, but this is a pretty good ballpark estimate from what I have read. This is a huge cause for concern, and the situation really needs a full and energetic study of the causes.

    Here is my take on the problem: there is no evidence available that this is some huge, nefarious plot to harm children. There is no evidence that the act of vaccinating is dangerous in and of itself. However, there does seem to be some evidence out there that there is insufficient care being taken by drug companies to make sure that contaminants or ingredients used to carry and preserve the vaccines are truly harmless. For example, in the recent past there have been serious questions asked about the presence of mercury in some vaccine solutions. Drug companies make zillions of dollars from vaccines and have the political clout to at least try to control the publishing of reports that would question the benefits of their products. It is a good thing to check into questions like this and to hold companies accountable for any harm that their products might cause.

    That being said, I understand and greatly sympathize, Charlie, with the point you are trying to make. There is always going to be some horrendous issue that is getting people stirred up into a frenzy and accusing other people of evil motives. If we as Christians are saddened by people treating us this way, we should not treat other people — and especially not each other — this way.

    In his wonderful book, *The Screwtape Letters* C.S. Lewis has his senior devil say: “The great thing is to get them [the humans] all running toward the same side of the boat that is already listing.” In other words, creating passionate polemics is a great way to sink the boat by unbalancing everyone on board and getting everyone to run frantically and senselessly over the side.

    Charlie, you have said this many times in many ways: we need to keep our whole attention totally fixed on Jesus in order to receive His life and goodness and to wait upon and accept His direction. So far, He has not called me to espouse any cause as a full time job. He has called me to defend and support the ultimate value of the right to Life whenever and however I can — but only as the next right step in front of me. If He ever tells me to charge for the guns in the future, then that will be His business to lead, guide and give me the ability to do so in His own way. How can we know what He really wants us to do unless we are fully surrendered to Him, becoming people after *His* own heart?

    Liked by 1 person

    • NancyA says:

      I do not feel prepared to make a lengthy, annotated explanation of this, but must at least mention that there is a theory that vaccines are part of an assault on the immune system that some people are predisposed to fall victim to… There is also the suggestion that vaccines contain previously unrecognized viral strains that some vulnerable vaccine receivers cannot adequately fight. While it may be true that no well funded studies have shown causation, I don’t think it is possible in this age to expect full integrity in even (or especially?) the reputable sources of peer reviewed publications.

      Liked by 5 people

      • charliej373 says:

        Thank you, Nancy. That is the sort of logical and reasonable grappling with the problem that may lead us to answers…moral, practical, and scientific.

        Liked by 1 person

      • E. Allison says:

        Well said, thank you for that Nancy. I would put the fact that people with already compromised immune systems are more susceptible to disease in the ‘common sense’ column. The fact that we’re talking about infants/toddlers, you have to wonder what could have happened to them to compromise their immune systems so young. It may well be genetic predisposition. Or it may be something environmental.

        I’d like to suggest something else entirely. *WARNING* Unsupported opinion, dead ahead!

        In today’s hustle and bustle world, many mothers feed their infants formula instead of breast feeding them. The vast majority of infant formula is soy based, and the vast majority of soybeans grown in the US is GMO (93%). In my upcoming guest column on GMOs, I mention the work of Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a Senior Research Scientist at MIT. She suggests a link between the consumption of GMOs, (and by default, the consumption of glyphosate, a.k.a. Roundup), and autism. There’s a video I will link to, where Dr. Seneff details her findings and theories. I’m sure you’ll find it very interesting.

        Liked by 4 people

        • vicardwm says:

          Sounds very interesting! I love Dr. Seneff….a very good researcher. Her articles are often carried by the Weston Price Foundation journal, which I highly recommend. They provide good scientific research in their journal and advocate eating a natural diet. Their philosophy is similar to paleo, but not identical. I would also highly recommend a classic in nutritional literature “Nutrition and Physical Degeneration” by Weston A. Price.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Mick says:

            Vicar, after reading your excellent posts about your wife, I am not at all surprised to see you reference Dr. Weston A. Price and the foundation’s journal. My husband and I have been getting the journal since 2002 and have been eating the recommended diet since then (like I said up-thread, we have lots and lots of food allergies and chemical sensitivities). “Nutrition and Physical Degeneration” is indeed a fabulous resource. Do you also have Sally Fallon Morrell’s book, “Nourishing Traditions”? I have found it to be amazingly helpful.

            Liked by 4 people

          • vicardwm says:

            Mick, YES, we do have (and LOVE) Nourishing Traditions! What a great resource! We truly feel God led us to the WAPF after praying about how to eat. I am a convert to Catholicism and before that, I was getting SO confused trying to sort out which denomination was right. Once I found Catholicism, the confusion and searching stopped. It was similar for the WAPF – it was so confusing trying to figure out how to eat ; so many conflicting theories! Once we found the WAPF, the confusion and searching were over. Of course, there is no guarantee of infallibility like we have with the Church, but they are open to new information and scientifically rigorous. Their philosophy also makes sense and jives with God’s design.

            Liked by 3 people

          • SteveBC says:

            Yes, vicardwm, “Nutrition and Physical Degeneration” is indeed a very high-quality work. I hope people will read it.

            Liked by 2 people

    • Bob says:

      And some argue that autism, if genetic, often shows signs about the age vaccinations are done, so, if my child was vaccinated last month and shows signs of autism this week it would seem suspicious. Some say some children are more sensitive to the contaminants and are less able to detoxify their systems. I have read some research, suggesting that feeding children probiotics to strengthen their immune resistance or supplamenting antioxydents to children to increase their abillity to detox themselves may be helpful and is worth considering.

      Liked by 1 person

    • MaryM says:

      The statistics you want have to do with autism would be that the incidence of autism has increased as the vaccine schedule increases. I believe right now it’s 1 in 88. The last statistic that I knew of last year for vaccines for children is the standard 49 doses of 14 vaccines by 6 years to total 69 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18? http://www.nvic.org/downloads/49-doses-posterb.aspx
      I was able to treat my son’s autism with diet, chelation and supplements. No one can tell he has it, but he still has some memory, language and auditory processing issues that we deal with. I was also able to cure all of his food allergies with diet and probiotics.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mary Ann says:

        I agree that the increased schedule is problematic. One in 88!!!! I remember when autism first emerged in the popular press, in the 70’s, and it was said then that it was very rare, less than 1/1000. Now it’s 1 in 88? Good for you for what you did for your son.

        Like

      • MMBev says:

        Thank you. That gives an answer to my question of whether of not the number of vaccines has increased since mine has theirs. Wow! THAT’S and increase! Little ones do not have a “well developed” immune system. It’s one of the reasons that breast feeding is so important for months after birth. That way they receive protection through from the mother’s milk.

        Like

  14. vicardwm says:

    I have to tell you the story of my wife. It is a great privilege to be married to her, as she has what I would call a sensitivity to the true and the good, and an utter repulsion for anything evil or false. I have learned so much from her that it’s unbelievable. She cannot so much as watch the evening news or watch most movies because of the evil they contain. She knew that contraception was wrong even as a child in liberal Eugene, Oregon. No one told her – in fact, they told her the opposite. She just knew. When she encountered faithful Catholic ministry in college, she recognized the truth immediately. This sensitivity does not just extend to spiritual things, but physical things as well. I like to say that she’s “the canary in the coal mine.” She cannot eat GMO’s or anything that’s been treated with pesticides. Well, she can, but she will pay a heavy price for it. Because of her, and her prayers that God would show us how to eat, our entire family started eating gluten-free, organic, and non-GMO, and lo and behold, we all started feeling a lot better and some health problems that we thought were “just part of life” simply evaporated. Now we pretty much just eat fresh food from local farmers as often as possible, and prepare it simply as our ancestors have done. Just as our recent generations are stupid to throw out the spiritual wisdom of the ages, I believe it is just as stupid to toss out the down-to-earth wisdom of ages past.

    As far as vaccines, she has had reactions to those as well (as a child). Thankfully, nothing catastrophic, though. Vaccines do have a lot of toxic components in there, and there are doctors that theorize that it’s precisely the human genetic material that is in some vaccines that causes autism and sometimes cancer. Other than that, of course, there’s mercury, aluminum, various chemicals, contamination that sometimes is present, etc. I found the following articles very interesting on vaccines:

    http://blog.drbrownstein.com/should-mickey-and-minnie-mouse-be-vaccinated/
    http://blog.drbrownstein.com/toxic-vaccines-and-autism-a-cdc-coverup/

    There are also the messages of “Luz De Maria”, who theologian Peter B, who researches messengers, says is one of the most highly rated messengers out there right now, both because they have been confirmed by miracles and backed by serious theologians. She talks in her messages occasionally about GMO’s, pesticides, and vaccines about being dangerous and unhealthy for us.

    Personally, I don’t think vaccines are causing autism or the increasing chronic health problems in a vacuum, but they are part of an ever increasing toxic soup all around us, most of which is foisted on us after SHORT-TERM studies show no obvious harm. Whatever position you hold on vaccines, though, I’d urge you to be careful of them for the simple reason that the government seems to want to increase the pressure to take them. Science is one of the big false “gods” out there right now. Science itself is great, but watch out for who is paying for, and interpreting the studies.

    Liked by 4 people

  15. James and Berny Berger says:

    I just tried clicking into your article from the National Review On-line – the Anti-Science Left, and my Malwarebytes intercepted me and blocked my access to the link stating it was a malicious website… So maybe something got into your link?

    Berny Berger

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      I don’t think so, Berny. It sometimes sets off my malware alerts, too. Some of the sites which are not subscription have gotten so big on adware that they frequently trip false positives. National Review and another I read regularly do that a lot. It is the ads on their pages, not the content. I did not want to loosen up the settings on my malware, so I just click through it. I pity the poor internet security companies. The increase of pop-up and other ads on such sites is making it so they have to recalibrate. Too loose, and you let in genuine malware…too tight and you get too many false positives.

      Like

      • SteveBC says:

        Charlie and the Bergers, I recently read credible reports that hackers are using the ad networks to carry viruses. Apparently, this is becoming a serious problem. One part of the problem is that no legitimate set of companies or websites actually appears to be the obvious choice to go about addressing this problem. I suspect that your problems will get worse. Note that it is not the website that the ad appears on, nor is it the ad itself, but rather somehow hackers are piggybacking on the ads to hack your computer. As antivirus companies or Google or Apple or Microsoft, etc., try to address this issue, the attempts will be intrusive to your experience.

        I am not an expert on this matter, so take my comments as observations only.

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          Thanks, Steve. That makes sense. If you find that they have come up with some solution, would you let me know? I regularly update my security, so if they solve it, I should be good. But even though it was coming on National Review, I just let the antivirus block it and NEVER reported it as a false positive. It would make sense they are piggybacking on trusted sites in hopes people will report it as a false positive – and then they have access. I will deal with the annoyance and keep it blocked.

          Like

          • SteveBC says:

            I will keep an eye on the issue. However, I think it will be dealt with by lots of different, incremental steps, most or all of which will slowly be incorporated into your software. I think you’re doing exactly what you should do. Give it time, and we can hope that the intrusions of the monitoring security methods will get less obtrusive. Unfortunately, as is true for so many aspects of internet security, I don’t think there will be one final 100%-accurate way to clear such attempts from our experiences. It actually appears to be a pretty complex issue to solve. However, if a full solution does appear and I find out about it, I will (try to!) remember to let you know.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            Oh, I know very well there will never be a full solution. The battle in technology is always a neck and neck horse race. The good guys pull ahead, then the bad guys adapt and up their game…then the bad guys pull ahead and the good guys adapt and up their game. It is why it is so vital to regularly update. If you are using the systems and settings of even six months ago, which provided you with perfect protection then, you are like a wounded wildebeest on an open plain teeming with lions.

            Like

          • SteveBC says:

            Good image! Very evocative. Though I am wondering why you believe that you had perfect protection six months ago. Such sweet faith in your technology is so endearing. 😀

            Like

          • MMBev says:

            I am a wounded and bleeding Wildebeest, facing about a hundred lions. The plain is forty miles flat in all directions.

            Liked by 1 person

  16. Bob says:

    On GMO foods, I once gave a talk on it and focused on three issues. BT toxins in corn, Soy and others. BT toxins, which plants are genetically modified to contain, are toxins which kill insects by destroying their digestive systems. Are we sure these same toxins will not disrupt human and other animal digestion?
    In the battle to develop soy corn, and others which can survive ever larger amounts of Glycophosphate and other weed killers as the weeds are developing resistance to these agents. And increasingly resistant crops are being developed which allow more intensive spraying of weedkillers. Are we sure these chemicals are not producing environmental dangers vs. developing more natural methods of weed control?
    In countries like India subsistence farmers have for generations saved seed for planting the next crop. Monsanto and others now have patents on these GMO seeds and farmers are not allowed to replant but must buy their seeds from Monsanto and if their crop fails they can lose everything. So generations of traditional farming methods have been disrupted by the multinationals. Those concerned about GMOs have other concerns but I talked of these as the concerns can be more easily understood by these three issues.
    As for yogurt soothing the digestion there is good evidence that the probiotic bacteria used to culture yogurt and other daily products can be helpful for digestion. And rather than wait for costly scientific studies on something like that, as the product has few if any downsides, I have suggested that people, like my wife try it and see if it helps. With drugs by contrast where side effects are a real risk we would like the studies on safety done before using them.

    Liked by 3 people

  17. anne says:

    oh dear all this science stuff is too much for me. All i can say is Jesus, i Trust in You. i actually feel overwhelmed by all of this.

    Like

  18. CrewDog says:

    This post is about Vaccines but it should “Read”: “Vaccines, Over-Reaching/Onerous Government Regulation, Oversight and Tax Codes”. Where are much/most of “Our” Vaccines, Drugs, Foodstuffs, Electronics, Cameras, Toys, Clothes, Shoes and Autos made … and Why?? … and why must we talk to some “Guy/Gal in India” to get a fix/answer about any of the above …. and Why? … come 15 April in the USA you can expect a Wrong IRS Answer 50% of the time … if Ya can get through at all. I’m too old to worry about much Earthly $&^% but I do have Kids/GranKids and the fact that they are runnin’ out of antibiotics to “Kill” the SuperBugs is more of a medical problem to me … but … If The Storm be Coming … none of the above matters … I suspect!?
    GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

    Like

  19. Donette says:

    Thank you Anne and Crew Dog for those responses. I’m onboard with all your statements. Now if someone would just tell me how to respond to grandchildren who are between the ages 18 to 22 and who laugh at my telling them about the coming storm via email and texts with the response, “Gramma is sending more information about the end of the world.” All this other stuff just drives me nuts. I feel like the little Dutch boy and the finger in the hole of the dyke. All that happens is more holes, and less fingers. I don’t see how any of this changes things. We are past due for a chastisement. I want to get past the threat. I’m tired of seeing the rain fall equally on the guilty as well as the innocent. (And please don’t someone say, “None of us are innocent.)

    Like

  20. Mary says:

    If vaccines were held to the same level of accountability as other pharmaceuticals or any other product perhaps there would be safer vaccines and more trust and acceptance but as there is not and parents who do win damages in vaccine court are usually not allowed to disclose anything regarding their case or claim, suspicion seems warranted. Vaccines are often contaminated and it is very expensive to purify them for bacterial, viral and fungal contaminants as the technology to do so is still being developed using human immune system receptors which is the only guarantee a vaccine is safe. Vaccines contaminated by mold are dangerous, why Thimerosol was put in there in the first place, to kill fungus. Fungal synergy increases virulence and infectivity. People are born immuno compromised today due to many environmental factors and there are tests which show whether a person can withstand a vaccine or not but they are not in use either, this would save untold vaccine injury. A proper immune response to a vaccine requires proper immune function. A baby at one day old does not even have it’s own immune system and yet is vaccinated for a virus it will likely never encounter outside a hospital accidental jab with an infected needle by an infected person and even then highly unlikely unless a drug user, so why, at one day old? And 39 by age 5, the current vaccine schedule. And a proposed 150 by adulthood. When you really study the science, including evolutionary science, vaccine suspicion is not unwarranted at all.

    Liked by 3 people

  21. Ceri says:

    Thank you for this timely article. I am praying a novena to St. Michael for discernment on whether or not to vaccinate my two youngest children. I have to admit that I am even more torn after reading all of the comments. You see, I think I am one of “those” people you might be talking about. I have 6 children from the ages of 18 to 1 year old. I have been around long enough to see how “the experts ” touted it’s safe, it’s safe only to turn around and quietly change their minds. Take amalgam (mercury ) fillings as a small example. When my husband was 21 he received a flu shot. He became very I’ll and almost died. It caused an auto-immune response and he was left with type 1 ( juvenile ) diabetes. He will die without 2 injections of insulin a day. The irony is that because he’s a type 1 diabetic, his doctors recommend that he get a flu shot. They say that the live virus shot that he received so many years ago was ultimately found to be “problematic”. The new and improved shot… Well, it’s safe, it’s safe. The real question is. ..WHO can you trust? The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation? WHO? The CDC? Or how about the news with their constant drumming about getting vaccines.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Fran says:

      I don’t know who to trust either, Ceri. It seems like there are so many more people I know who are suffering from severe allergies to autoimmune diseases to cancer, and also with some very weird diseases or medical conditions that have doctors scratching their heads. The unusual has become usual. And you are right, the “experts” tell us something is good or safe, and then change their story later. I just feel that we have all been exposed to so many different harmful toxins in so many ways, that no one but the Lord can get us back to where we should be.

      Liked by 1 person

      • vicardwm says:

        This is a very good point. Studies of the history of science have shown that AT LEAST 50% of what “science” believes now will be proven wrong later. Even if the scientific method is reliable, our biases injected into interpretation of the studies cause us to make assumptions that are unwarranted. A study of cardiology revealed that even after 40 years, close to 50% of what was believed was proven to be wrong.

        So science is a VERY fickle and unreliable master. It’s safer to go with the wisdom of the ages. Remember when “science” assured us that baby formula was better than breastfeeding?!? What a colossal mistake.

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          Excellent point, Vicar…and one that would serve us so well if scientists would take it to heart. In fact, the actual scientific method encouraged skepticism of our own scientific certainties as the surest means to progress. Modern leftists have gutted much of the scientific method and made it into a sort of Temple to Isis.

          Liked by 1 person

  22. Alphonsus says:

    In science, one must find a credible source of information. This source (the National Academies) is credible. The press release for the report “Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality” provides a summary of findings from a meta-study of >1000 published papers conducted 4 years ago. It is worth reading, although there may be a more current study available somewhere (though not at the NAS site that I could find).

    http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13164

    Like

  23. Ceri says:

    BTW Charlie, I think I’m on to you. My husband and I are converts as well. Before I started reading your blog I had become quite content in my faith believing that I had done the hard spiritual work. Oh no, you have struck nerves in just about every article you’ve written. I was grateful for the break cause here you go again. Thanks !

    Like

  24. donna269 says:

    In an effort to remove myself from prescription medications I have started taking a few vitamins on a regular basis. One that has dramatically improved my health, my husband’s health and my son’s (24 yrs) is a good probiotic. Gut health is essential for all good things in your body. I have virtually eliminated my son’s cystic acne with giving him probiotics twice daily. It is good for MOOD elevation as well because our brain is closely related to our gut health….for me it has helped with my anxiety, skin health, sleep and belly health. My husband was a long time cynic but once he saw the turn around in my son….who I also added L tryptophan nightly to his regimen for depression….he came on board. He could not believe the difference in my son in one short month…Yes it took a whole month but now my son comes down when he wakes up and takes his Primal Defense capsules and at bedtime he takes his L tryptophan. Of course, every psychiatrist tried to get him on Prozac and Lexapro and Zoloft. He has ZERO side effects from this simple regimen. We also all take Lypo Spheric Vitamin C for winter health and none of us have had as much as a sniffle even when surrounded by the flu.

    I should add, we eat whole foods. Non hormone meat, organic veggies and fruits as well. We got off processed foods which make us severely depressed….this has been our experience and although not science, it has worked for all of us here.

    Liked by 3 people

    • charliej373 says:

      Now this, Donna, strikes me as the sort of ordinary prudence that makes a lot of sense. I worry a lot about the promiscuous use of psychotropic drugs, even among children, in America. I think we are treating a lot of things as “conditions” that, in healthier times, were called “life.”

      Like I said, I do not think Vanilla Dannon Yogurt is a wonder drug – or will do wonders for everyone – but it has been for me.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Lin says:

      Donna,
      Thanks so much for sharing about how the nutritional support helps your son’s mood. I have an 18yo son who is very moody….I’m going to look into getting him on a probiotic. We do eat whole foods and avoid processed items and sugar.

      Liked by 1 person

      • donna269 says:

        I forgot to mention Vitamin D3!

        Liked by 1 person

        • Lin says:

          Hi Donna,
          Thanks for mentioning D3! My son has a consultation with our naturopath today and we’ll be sure to ask about this for him!

          Like

        • Mick says:

          Donna, a couple questions: First, what is L tryptophan? Second, when you mention Vitamin D3, I wonder if a good cod liver oil supplement might do the same thing? My doctor put me on Vitamin D3 some time ago, but I didn’t do well on it. I think it was a synthetic D3 (is there a non-synthetic version?) I’ve heard that cod liver oil is high in Vitamins A an D, so I was just wondering.

          Oh, another question… how much Vitamin C do you and your family taking in the winter months? Thanks!

          Like

          • E. Allison says:

            Mick, if I may, I can’t comment on L tryptophan, but I can recommend Carlson cod liver oil. I get the lemon flavored. If you can stomach it, the fermented cod lever oil is really good for you, but I couldn’t take the liquid. Even the smell turned my stomach. You can get it in capsule form, but it is very expensive that way. I know I’m on the lunatic fringe, but I also don’t see anything wrong with getting some from the sun, without wearing sun screen. Just don’t get burnt.

            Like

          • Mick says:

            Ha, Ed! I don’t sunburn. I never use sunscreen. I’m black, and we really do not sunburn unless we’re out in full sun for many, many hours (well, it only takes a handful of hours in Florida; but we have weaker sun in the Frozen Tundra). And I LOVE being out in the sun.

            Thanks for the recommendation. Carlson’s is the brand we use. The fermented stuff is awful. I about bankrupted my family buying the capsules during my last pregnancy. But the baby (19 months) actually likes the fermented CLO/high vitamin butter oil gel. Ick.

            Liked by 1 person

          • charliej373 says:

            Well, Mick, my former son-in-law is black – and a dark black…and he always wears sunscreen, because he does burn. I had commented once about one of the benefits of being black is that you don’t burn – and he corrected me. During the course of a summer, I saw him, indeed, get significantly darker. (If they write his biography, they might title it “50 Shades of Ebony.”

            Like

          • donna269 says:

            Hi Mick: We take Vitamin D3 plain…I don’t know about Cod Liver Oil…Not sure if it has the most utilized D in it. My son and I take 2000mg in the winter months. My serum Vitamin D and his are always too low. They should be 50 and we hit 27 to 33 not on supplements. As for Vitamin C we only take Lypo Spheric 1000mg by LivOn Labs….it is very weird….looks like a packet of a mucus and you have to put it in a little water and shoot it down. But it is the MOST absorbed Vitamin C product out there. Most people just pee out what they take in but this is suspended in phospholipids for max absorption….it’s expensive but worth it to keep us healthy in the dark winter months. I have been exposed to flu all winter as a high school nurse and haven’t gotten sick yet….and I usually do succumb ultimately no matter how careful I am….

            Like

          • donna269 says:

            Mick:
            L tryptophan is an amino acid….there is a great book by Julia Ross MD entitled The Mood Cure….she has gotten more people off of prescription meds by using L tryptophan…a harmless amino acid. It has been reintroduced on the market. Years ago some people died from a batch of Japanese L tryptophan that was tainted with something and the FDA removed it from the market. It has been reintroduced about 3 years ago….it is a wonderful natural sleep aid. It also acts as a natural antidepressant at higher doses…..Vitamin D3 we take at 2000mg daily during the winter months. In the summer, 30 minutes in the sun without sunscreen is enough natural Vitamin D3….finally we take Lypo Spheric Vitamin C….by Liv On labs. It is the only Vitamin C that is absorbed as well as Intravenous Vitamin C. It is pricey and we only use it in the winter to keep from getting flu/colds etc….

            Like

          • Mick says:

            50 Shades of Ebony! Really?! I’m gagging, I’m laughing so hard. I will say that I think of sunburn as the it-hurts-and-it’s-red-and-it’s-peeling sort of thing. Of course, I get several shades darker during the summer, but I don’t peel and it never hurts.

            Like

        • MMBev says:

          In regards to Vitamin D3, I can only relate my personal experience.

          Two years ago, I thought I was dying. I assumed that the tumor piece has grown, and was doing so more rapidly despite the assurances of the neurosurgeon and MRI’s that it wasn’t. I was too exhausted to do anything. The day/night I slept over 26 hours without waking, I went to see my doctor. So back to testing. I had almost no Vitamin D in my body, so I wasn’t too far wrong in my assumptions, just the cause. I began taking 5000 IUs per day. This Christmas, I cut back to 3000 IU’s and see her for tests this week.

          I cannot believe the difference this has made to my energy and ability to function when I am awake.

          Like

          • donna269 says:

            Yes Bev….every family practice doctor in the US is now testing for Vit D levels annually because it is essential for good health to be between 50 and 100….I actually have a chromosome deficiency called VDR TAQ which prevents me from utilizing Vit D from my foods so I have to get it through sunshine or through heavy supplementation in the winter months and what a difference it makes for me! God bless you BEV

            Liked by 1 person

          • charliej373 says:

            And thank you, Donna. You are a nurse practitioner who has some real expertise – both in sound fundamental practice and healthy home nutritional practice. You are an asset in helping to steady – and genuinely prepare – people. I’m glad you’re here.

            Liked by 3 people

        • Mick says:

          Thanks, Donna!

          Like

    • kris says:

      I wanted to laugh when reading your post as , except for l tryptophan, my family takes exactly what you are taking. My son who has an immune challenging illness has not been sick for over 5 years where before he was on an antibiotic 4 times a year. I would also add the use of products like Kombucha, organic sour kraut, which use age old food preservation techniques that is the same as in yogurt, food safe bacterias. Funny.

      Liked by 1 person

  25. Lily says:

    I have researched vaccines as best as I can for almost 8 years, as I have 4 young children. You are correct, I can barely read some of the scientific papers, and I do not propose to be an expert. It is very difficult to make a confident decision with information of unknown credibility. I am sure the vaccines have reduced infectious disease, but I am not sure that they are actually safe in a short term or long term way. The vaccine cautions on the insert are as scary to read as the dangers of the infectious disease. I appreciate all the commenters here that share the same concerns as I do, and also that you don’t think they are that dangerous, Charlie. I found it interesting to read a number of public domain books via Achive.org, because it seems as if people have had these concerns since the smallpox vaccine became available. Apparently the smallpox vaccine was accused of spreading leprosy and syphilis. I think at least more could be done to show real safety rather than making anti-vaxxers into villains. At this point, I don’t know if I would believe them anyway. It certainly doesn’t improve their credibility to me when vaccines are forced on people who otherwise object.

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      Well, Lily, I have not said that I think current vaccines are safe. I say that they could be safe…and that they once were a great benefit. I think people may be mounting the right crusade on this matter, but for some of the wrong reasons. I think it important to get the reasons right – or at least evidence and logic-based – and as you will see from my piece later today, that is what I am really trying to trigger.

      Like

    • kris says:

      I always was amazed that only with vaccines was I required as a mom to sign a waiver to not hold the doctor responsible for any ill effects from the vaccines. There were strong antibiotics that are known for issues with people and we do not sign waivers when the doctor gives us a prescription. I always thought this was very weird.

      Like

  26. Mary Ann says:

    I am against GMO crops because of their effects on the environment and food chain, and because of their destruction of ancient farming techniques and tyranny over farmers worldwide. Also, if a corporation can sue you because some of their patented crop got into your crop, that is enough reason….

    Liked by 1 person

  27. donna269 says:

    MaryAnn, I agree. Charlie, have you have seen Food Inc? It’s pretty scarey. Not sure I am comfortable with the people who make my carpeting, also be in charge of genetically engineered soy beans….it’s a bit Sci Fi….

    Like

  28. Francine says:

    WOW!!!! There is so much here. And I’m going to add mud to the water.

    Vaccinations are a very difficult topic and you addressed a couple of the multitude of concerns in a concise and accurate manner. However, I believe that the research that supports vaccinations needs to be tempered with the fact that some of the vaccinations given today aren’t the same ones that we studied and are referenced. Formulas change, the age in which we give the vaccine change, company processing procedures, etc.

    Another issue that you didn’t touch on is the vaccination schedule. In my own field of midwifery, I know that sometimes we utilize schedules that aren’t in most of the patients’ best interest, but serve a larger “good” (pap smears in early pregnancy come to mind). Some vaccination recommendations are based on compliance and ease of visits. The reality is that most parents make more frequent visits to the pediatrician in the early months. As they gain experience and tackle the “firsts” of so many things, they feel more comfortable spacing out appointments or discontinue frequent check ups all together. I believe that vaccination schedules take issues like even this into consideration. That doesn’t make it bad, but it does muddy the waters as we research.

    I have dealt with both end of the spectrum that you reference. And it is easy for those earnestly attempting to follow the narrow path in a Godless culture, to become confused or lost. The fight with the devil in these days is a viscous one. But I also see where I can be wrong in understanding someone’s path….it is a never ending battle.

    I have met with couples that seemingly felt that all physicians were instruments of the devil. And that every cesarean section was his tool. We *know* that c-sections save the lives of women and babies daily. Three minutes of research will convince the majority of rational adults that they should thank God for this advancement in medicine (I have also dealt with a small percentage that firmly believed that every emergency could have been solved with a vitamin or juicer!) The research is solid on this. But, I will continue to scream that the research does not show the human cost of the overwhelming number of UNNECESSARY sections. The increased risk of death because of multiple surgeries that COULD and SHOULD have been avoided by a health system that doesn’t work on a time in money scheme. There are couple that dealt with YEARS of continual abstinence that eroded relationships because they felt overwhelmed by the idea of another c-section and recovery. The research also avoids the topic of the clear increased risk to the next baby conceived following even the most necessary of cesareans. This IS a pro-life issue even when the research doesn’t point us in that direction.

    But then, when you think you’ve met the family that is the epitome of all that is wrong with the “natural” route, God humbles you again. My number was given to a family that was being forced by local hospital policies to have yet another c-section, because of a previous one. They had met with hospital administrators, were willing to travel, etc. They called me after a mutual friend provided my number. The husband was a loving leader of his very large family. He genuinely wanted what was best for his wife and child. Unfortunately, it seemed to me that he would need to work towards the best c-section he could. I warned him against the pride that could tempt us to reject the path God was providing in our desire for the “natural” way. The family did what appeared to the outsider to be reckless and irresponsible: they had that baby at home alone! With only the two of them even awake. And despite all MY fears for them, they had a spectacular birth that glorified God in unimaginable ways. And yet again, I went back to humbly trying to figure this all out….

    My point is that I don’t think we can solve all this on a blog posting. Discernment is continually required. And CHARITY! In my examples it is easy to find blame with the rushed doctor, the couple that “gambled”, the hospital system, etc. But I don’t think it’s quite that easy. In these times there are a lot of grey areas. C-sections SAVE lives and also have the potential for abuse and a destructive side. Certainly, there could be two sides for the family that had a baby at home alone.

    OK. My current vocation as mama to many little people, is calling! I hope I’m wrong and someone does solve all this today. In which case, please send me the flow chart! The baby has his six month appointment on Friday 😉

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      Francine, thank you, this is brilliant. Solidly grounded, neither dependent on trusting what “our betters” tell us nor irrationally fearful or dismissive of actual data. If this is not the best comment I have yet received on the subject, it sure is in the running!

      You are right that we can’t solve this in a website post. But that is not my intention. My intention is to get us to behave faithfully, charitably, and logically when considering such matters. Well, the scores are in and you got top marks in all three categories. Even the East German Judge gave you a nine across the board. So this is the best comment I have yet received on the subject. Thank you.

      Like

  29. ellenchris says:

    Here are the names of our dear and glorious brothers who laid down their lives to testify to the Name of Jesus Christ rather than make a submission to Allah in order to save their lives in this world. Holy and Glorious martyrs of Libya, pray for us that we may have the courage to live our Faith to our death: 1. Milad Makeen Zaky 2. Abanub Ayad Atiya 3. Maged Solaiman Shehata 4. Yusuf Shukry Yunan 5. Kirollos Shokry Fawzy 6. Bishoy Astafanus Kamel, 7. Somaily Astafanus Kamel 8. Malak Ibrahim Sinweet 9.Tawadros Yusuf Tawadros 10. Girgis Milad Sinweet 11. Mina Fayez Aziz, 12. Hany Abdelmesih Salib 13. Bishoy Adel Khalaf 14. Samuel Alham Wilson 15. Worker from Awr village 16. Ezat Bishri Naseef 17. Loqa Nagaty, 18. Gaber Munir Adly 19. Esam Badir Samir 20. Malak Farag Abram 21. Sameh Salah Faruq. The Peace of Christ be upon their families and friends.

    Liked by 5 people

    • charliej373 says:

      God bless you, Ellen. Thank you for sharing the names. May God bless all who must live in terror. We are in dark times…but God’s Army is girding its loins…may the murderous butchers tremble at the reality that God is coming…and in His time, so are we.

      Liked by 1 person

      • ellenchris says:

        We do not live in terror — we live in the peace of Christ. I understand completely what you mean, and agree. Pray for peace, courage and consolation for their families. But these wretched people put out the videos and pictures because they think it will make us afraid of them. Fear Nothing — the Kingdom Comes!! Whether we live or die, it is in Christ. Our Lord has said: “Do not fear those who can kill the body, but can do nothing more (as though that were not enough) ONLY fear the destruction of both soul and body in hell. Therefore, we do not fear. I put the raspberry on their terror — they are the cowards who fear the Truth!

        Like

        • MMBev says:

          Step Three: Be a sign of HOPE to all you meet. Hope overcomes fear. Once the fear is overcome, that person can begin to think like a rational human again. His thoughts will lead him to Light. He will ask us, and we are to show him the LIGHT OF CHRIST, and then HIS LOVE which if he chooses rightly, will put him beyond the enemies reach.

          Like

      • Monica Joseph of the Blessed Sacrament, OCDS says:

        I second Charlie’s “thanks,” ellenchris. Reading the names makes it so much more real. I have been so distraught over the torture and slaughter of our persecuted Christian brothers and sisters and my not having any real way to help. I pray for them. But, now, as martyrs, they are the ones who will pray for us. Still, in justice I would love to see a defense mounted for them. God bless the Egyptian president and King Abdullah who at least responded with force to the murder of their citizens.

        Liked by 1 person

  30. marghfi says:

    Hi Charlie,
    I was very surprised and not a little disturbed by your lack of charity in this blog toward those of us who are concerned about mass vaccinations of infants and children, as well as adults. GMO foods are also a legitimate concern for some of us who read this forum. Lumping us in with “New Age practitioners and leftist statists” and with “some of the Christians I know, with their complex dietary formulas, lack only crystal therapy to be indistinguishable from a pagan ceremony” in the same article is insensitive and troubling. My husband and I have been SERIOUSLY studying the vaccine debate for about 16 years. When I say seriously, I mean reading everything pro and con that we can about the matter. We started out very open minded without an opinion, but what we’ve learned is that big pharma companies work hand in hand with the CDC and in some cases sit on the boards which recommend using certain vaccines. This is a very real conflict of interest, which has not been rectified. Also, even though some of the live viruses contained in vaccines have been tested, they have not been tested when combined with other vaccines in the same shot. I’m not stating that vaccines do not work, but I am stating that there is evidence that they do harm-in some cases severe harm. I have seen vaccine injured children. In our own pediatrician’s office, a 12 year old girl died from a booster shot she received. The government has a special court to oversee these cases and which does “pay out” a limited sum (limited by the government) to parents whose children are vaccine injured. Also, in reference to the response from the Vatican about parents having a moral duty to petition pharma companies to make untainted vaccines, the document also stated that parents who choose to not vaccinate their children should not be persecuted because of it, as they are following their conscience (because of the aborted fetal cell lines contained in many vaccines.) Here is a link to some info on what is really happening with the vaccine industry, CDC, and some concerns about what vaccines are derived from and how they are interacting with the human body: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQsVTlMsQrI
    In Christ,
    M

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      Well, Marghfi, you are pretty much right. I intentionally overstated my case in a provocative way. The reason is that I have been horrified by the often uncharitable and malicious way that many Christians are willing to smear their opponents when it comes to this subject. I want to get people’s attention both so we can speak about the matters from facts and evidence – and with regard to a balance in assessing it…giving both reasonable credit when it is due and offering reasonable criticism when it is due. I am offended that so many Christians treat opponents in this matter as one-dimensional cartoon villains. I have pondered for months on how to introduce this subject…and I thought holding up a mirror to the high-handed way the conversation would be a good starting point. I follow up later today with a piece on what my intention is…then Wednesday will follow up with a guest piece from one who disagrees with me but has made a reasonable, evidence-based case for his position – and on that piece, I will not respond in the comments section so that all may have their say.

      I may be wrong, but I wanted to set the terms of discussion by example early on…and was mildly uncharitable and sarcastic in the piece we are discussing…but much more mildly and uncharitable than many Christians are when discussing this subject.

      Like

      • Bob says:

        I was not offended my friend and don’t think any of should be if we have thought through our positions. done some reasonable research and are ready to be corrected if evidence shows us otherwise. As for vaccines, as for any medical intervention we must remember that if a thing works well for most there are some who will have bad reactions. Perhaps spacing them out waiting until later,finding ways to build up children’s immune systems , etc can help reduce the risks. Also as the FDA is partly funded by those it is supposed to monitor and regulate the danger of a conflict of interest always exists. The first link is a critic of the FDA and Dr Mercola is an advocate of more natural health approaches.
        http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/05/01/fda-budget-increase.aspx and the second is a link posted from Forbes which is less opinionated.
        http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamattina/2013/08/07/is-the-fda-being-compromised-by-pharma-payments/

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          I would have been surprised had you been offended, Bob, as your comments have been evidence-based, thoughtful and solidly considered. In fact, I was going to cite your approach in a later article.

          Like

      • MMBev says:

        Now let me see…..consecration of Russia…..wasn’t that what you did (charitably, of course) to us on that topic? Ah, practice, practice, practice. At least it isn’t the piano, and there are no pennies on the backs of our hands as we play. (And, yes, my mother was a piano teacher, and she could hear if a penny dropped from the kitchen. That was why I quit as soon as she let me.)

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          Well, actually, yes. Ha! You’re a fraud, Bev…you play all scattered and confused sometimes, but your mind traps the essence! On some things that we are deeply emotionally or polemically vested in, you have to first break the knee-jerk…and one of the ways to do it is to trigger it in a way that does not carry permanent consequences – so the person doing can see they have done it.

          I used to tell my clients often that your enemies can wound you, but your friends will kill you. I would explain what I meant was that you will always check and vet what your enemies charge. But your friends will tell you unvetted things you want to hear. Some will be accurate, many will not be…and some will have no relation to reality at all. Since you are inclined to believe it anyway, if you go out spouting it unvetted, you can destroy your credibility in a heartbeat. That’s okay for arguing for fun at a family gathering, but will destroy you if you are a public figure who says it in a public forum.

          I am trying to get across that we all need to act like the public figures – the Army of Christ – that we are becoming, and so bridle our tongues. One of my general rules is that once I can make my opponent’s case better than he can, I am ready to speak publicly on it. And if, in the process, I learn a few things I did not know, think of a few aspects I had not before…and adapt my own position to the new information and insights, I have spared myself some embarrassment and gotten a little closer to the truth, myself.

          Liked by 2 people

          • MMBev says:

            Gosh, this sounds so much like my parents “five books rule”. There was no internet then. My father would have just disappeared altogether if there had been. He didn’t consider a person was reading if they were not delving into at least six books at one time.

            I almost explode when I think of how much fun we are going to have in heaven.

            Like

      • Mick says:

        Charlie, you don’t need to post this reply; but… I really think I should say this. As a math-geeky, lawyer-ish, disputation-prone individual, I see what you were trying to accomplish by your intentional overstatement and provocations. But as a Christian and as a woman (we do naturally tend to be more sensitive and emotive/emotional than men), I’m puzzled by your decision to respond to your experience of a lack of charity by being uncharitable yourself. Our Lord tells us not to return evil for evil, but to repay evil with good.

        It seems to me that the people who were offended by your provocativeness or who were surprised or a bit stung by it may have been responding to this apparent disconnect: As our sherpa, many of us in your little family hope or even expect that you will lead by example. We certainly don’t expect you to be perfect (the good Lord knows I’m not!); but in your efforts to teach us and to make your points, we do hope that you will be a sign of hope to those around you (us), rather than seeming to take out on us your frustrations that were caused by people other than us.

        Some of us can take this in stride. I mean, in every family it sometimes happens that we bite the head off of somebody because somebody else ticked us off. But perhaps you risk driving away some of your little flock if you appear to be exacting an eye for an eye (or maybe exacting some third party’s eye) rather than turning the other cheek. I certainly know that there are times to engage the enemy rather than turn the other cheek; but those of us here in your little family–those of us who have educated ourselves, who mostly keep our views and opinions to ourselves, and who have prayerfully discerned God’s will for our families regarding nutrition, vaccination, and such–are not the enemy. And if you should do good and not evil to the enemy, shouldn’t you do even more good to your family and friends?

        I’m not trying to bust your chops, Charlie. And, like I said, I’m not expecting you to post this. I just wanted to let you know why some people may be upset by the way you introduced this topic. In my posts on this topic, I have tried to be well reasoned, calm, and kind. I have tried not to be irritable, reactionary, or irrational. If I have failed, please forgive me. And as somebody said up-thread, or perhaps in another thread: In necessary things, unity; in uncertain things, freedom; and in all things, charity.

        Liked by 1 person

        • charliej373 says:

          No, this deserves airing, Mick. I have been contemplating writing about this since last summer. I have “test-marketed” my approach many times with individuals who are offenders. I have found that people who are the most insistent on these things are the most unwilling to hear any charitable interpretation. In fact, I have had people I otherwise respect or have affection for tell me how naieve I am and that I am ready to compromise with evil. I had thought to just leave it be and gently try to move people along. But the visitation on Dec. 20, 2014, when I was shown the fountains of demons spewing up and shooting out into the world gave it all a pressing urgency. I could feel the devil taunting me that he had a little foothold on many of the best of Christians and he was going to destroy them with it. I could hear his malevolent mirth in the distance.

          In my work in the old days, sometimes if the troops were getting obsessed with vengeance or malicious mischief, every once in a while, I would throw a public tantrum. Only once was I not in complete control of myself when I did…but sometimes a hatred gets so obsessive and fevered that the only way I have ever found to effectively break it is first throw a tantrum, which is way out of character for me (not to be confused with a little rant, of which I am occasionally given). You get people’s attention that way…break the fever more by how you say it then what you say…then you can talk calmly about it. I knew after Dec. 20th that as much as I would prefer to leave this alone, many otherwise noble souls were going to be lost because of it if it was not broken.

          And so I was deliberately provocative. I may be wrong, but even in my provocation, I was much more gentle than many are when speaking of agribusiness or health researchers. Even the greatest saints threw tantrums at times. St. Padre Pio was given to slapping people when he was irritated. St. Teresa of Avila was routinely crankier with people than I was in this piece that was notably cranky for me. I was faced with the reality that in the midst of crisis, this lack of charity that so many faithful Christians show was the portal to their downfall – and that a gentle prod had not worked at all…not a single time…in my private test efforts with individuals. With some very kind people, their faces would contort with furious rage as they shot me down when I would try to say something nice about Monsanto. I am not just responsible for telling you true, but for doing it in a way that will get the most to listen.

          Some will certainly be stung at my sarcastic barbs in this piece. Some will probably, indeed, quit reading me. But I feel confident that fewer will go over the cliff of destruction because of their fevered malice on something they thought it was okay to be feverishly malicious about. There may have been a better way to do this, but I am just a little guy with a big job. In any case, it was not lightly considered on my part.

          I was actually quite heartened by most of the response. After everyone had acted with such dispatch, resolve and fortitude to help Joseph Cronin, I had felt that, whoa…this is a very special group we have here. With this, most readers took a measured, often passionate defense of their belief but without the wrathful contortions that usually accompany such discussions. Some of the comments were breathtakingly charitable with very precise criticisms. It made me think we really have already grown into a force that will weigh in heavily as the battle gets underway…one that does not open itself to satan’s wiles by swinging wildly, but also does not shrink from the battle out of timidity or fear.

          Like

          • vicardwm says:

            I have to admit – I do think Monsatan is a more apt name than Monsanto. That is due to what I am 99% sure is truth, rather than malice. Your point is well taken, though. Our side has to educate with scientific data and even our anecdotal stories rather than simply issuing epithets. Five years ago, I would have mostly been on board with vaccines, GMO’s, etc. and I’m grateful that someone took the time to present information to me charitably. I’m sure that most involved with Monsanto really think they are doing great things for the world.

            And we do have to realize that none of us are getting out of here alive, so this is all of secondary importance. However, it IS of importance since, if we are right, all of these toxins cause physical and mental degeneration which worsens with each passing generation where this is not corrected. I have to tell you – now that we are eating healthily, not only do we FEEL better, it is EASIER to act morally.

            After reading a book called “Our Stolen Future”, I am pretty much convinced that homosexuality is often a result of environmental toxins that the mother is exposed to (or already has within her) at the time of gestation. The book pretty conclusively shows that this happens in animals in polluted regions. Somewhat amusingly, the authors themselves pooh-pooh the same connection in humans, but that’s because they’re ideologically on the left.

            Like

          • charliej373 says:

            Well, Vicar, it would be a source of delight to the satan if he could pervert one of the companies that played a major role in ending scarcity into a source of evil. But it would also be a source of delight to him if he could fill honest Christians with a malicious loathing for one of the major players in ending scarcity as a source of starvation.

            Like

          • vicardwm says:

            Charlie, I’m not sure that GMO crops are actually any more hardy over the long-term. There seems to be some evidence that they are not, but I have not looked into this in great detail. Perhaps your guest poster will have some information about that point.

            Like

          • SteveBC says:

            OK, Charlie, I get it. Having been pounded into the ground by my guiding spirits many times and finding valuable lessons appearing as a result of such tactics, I get why you did it. However, using disconcerting methods to achieve good ends is still disconcerting! We deserve to have some fences mended, and your succeeding post is a big help in that regard.

            I have a number of issues with vaccinations, including that vaccination by injection appears to miss the stimulation of the first line of immune defense, which is in the skin. My hypothesis is that our current vaccine paradigm is fundamentally flawed because of this. Vaccine substances should be rubbed on the skin or inhaled not just once with chemicals designed to shock the immune system into awareness (a bad idea, it would seem obvious) but many times, say daily for a month. Such would be much more gentle to the body, would not require shock chemicals, and would engage all branches and aspects of the immune system repeatedly until a true and life-long immunity would develop. Use of injection methods may be why so many vaccines currently in use are being found to fail to produce the life-long immunity they were expected to produce, with the result that authorities are now pushing boosters.

            If true, such a fundamental flaw in the paradigm invalidates and makes suspect many of the expectations and claims made for vaccines. I will feel *much* better about vaccines when the following are true:

            1) Researchers and vaccine companies spend the time to truly understand the process of vaccinating instead of simply adopting a flawed system because it’s handy. We need to structure vaccines to enter the body in the way the body expects inimical bugs to enter and is prepared for.

            2) Vaccine manufacturers and doctors understand that different people have different abilities and capacities to handle either individual vaccines or schedules calling for multiple vaccinations in a short period of time. The current forceful, manipulative, one-size-fits-all approach is, in a spiritual perspective, a blight because it fails to celebrate and recognize the beautiful variability of all of us humans.

            3) The government and courts return accountability to manufacturers rather than shifting such responsibility to the government and taxpayers (a *very* bad idea). I have often considered that the government did this at the behest/demand of the manufacturers because the manufacturers know that the vaccines really are damaging to at least some substantial number of people, but I may be paranoid here. Certainly, it allows for lazy, destructive, or just plain dirty techniques to be used by manufacturers without consequence except for the generation of higher margins. From a spiritual perspective, it lets pharma companies be tempted by profit without responsibility and to move away from true service toward their customers.

            4) Researchers and doctors need to cull out many of the diseases from the list of diseases currently vaccinated against. Just because some of the scourges that existed 100 years ago were well-handled does not at all mean that any and every disease needs a vaccine. We need to find ways for children and adults to deal with these diseases in other ways, and such ways do exist in some cases. We also need to recognize that vaccinating an entire population puts enormous numbers of people at risk of damage, when few of them would ever be at true risk of developing the disease in their lifetime. What I believe to be a faulty paradigm is currently combined with over-vaccination to try to make up for the lacks of both, but in some cases this does not work. Tetanus, for example, is way over-vaccinated/boosted, based on my own experience with the disease and my research into the way it is given over a person’s lifetime. Some diseases are vaccinated against simply because the medical establishment is unable to process other possibilities for preventing or treating a disease. This is absolutely true for tetanus, given my experience. There are undoubtedly other candidates for removal from the list, especially if the vaccine actually isn’t particularly effective or has been found to be correlated with unfavorable or even fatal reactions.

            With so many people reporting difficulties and given the fault in the paradigm, the medical establishment, pharma companies, and government should at least step back at this point and reconsider their entire approach to this issue. Too much money without responsibility, too much opportunity for government to exercise control, too much fear inculcated into people everywhere to drive them to vaccinate. We need a thorough rethink. Until that happens, we need to *increase* freedom of choice in this field and *vastly* improve our methods for diagnosing and tracking both positive and negative outcomes for both the population of those who choose to vaccinate and the population of those who choose not to vaccinate. We have to be able to tease out causes and not simply correlations, since there are other possible causes than a vaccine. We are far from that approach.

            With so many evidences of misunderstanding and harm, prudence dictates caution and re-examination.

            Like

  31. Monica Joseph of the Blessed Sacrament, OCDS says:

    Mary Ann,
    I have similar concerns about GMOs for the reasons you stated. The fact that farmers have to buy seeds again every year, instead of being able to save them from year to year as they used to be able to do, seems an injustice to me.

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      Actually, the scarcity of legacy seeds is the thing that bothers me the most of the information that is currently available. I don’t like that at all.

      Like

      • CrewDog says:

        There are Legacy Seed Outfits Out-There on the Internet but I don’t know how legitimate?
        There is always going to be a small % of folks who have a problem with this drug/vaccine or that. I can’t help but wonder if that cocktail of drugs, especially the anti-anthrax vaccine, given to me during Gulf War I had something to do with early on-set of Old People Problems!? The USA is probably the most over prescribed DrugLand on the Planet and the amount of drugs given to children should raise a Red Flag as well as the poorly regulated imports I mentioned before ……. but ….. If Charlie/Others are correct … and reading the Front Page these last few days does not convince me otherwise ….. all this worry about vaccines & drugs is going to be replaced by “REAL NASTY STUFF” that will ….. ;-(
        GOD GUIDE & SAVE ALL HERE!!

        Like

        • Monica Joseph of the Blessed Sacrament, OCDS says:

          CrewDog,
          I have come to love your spirit. Your posts always make me feel better, protected somehow. Your warrior courage shines through. This nation was blessed to have had you as a defender. If more had had your spirit (and I speak to myself, as I am more timid than anything), it seems to me we would be in a better place today.
          God bless you for your service.

          Liked by 1 person

          • CrewDog says:

            Thanks Monica J. …. and Thank You for your Service and Prayers … and for all my Comrades In Faith here … and everywhere!! We all got Jobs to do and often the jobs are not what we really wanted or planned for. I never planned on an AF Career but poor timing … I wanted to be a Captain for Southwest Airlines ;-(… you would be surprised how many Career Military never planned to “Stay” ……. I’d bet it’s the same for lots of folks … We Plan … God Laughs 😉 ………… God knows what He is doing … Me? … Not so much!
            GOD GUIDE & SAVE ALL HERE!

            Like

  32. diane says:

    I agree with anne – way too much information for my little head to absorb – I struggle enough with doing God’s will and not mine. All i know is that God is in the midst of all this – all of it – and He indeed brings all things to good. This is what I know to be true and this I depend on. If I slip up because the world/the satan or my ignorance – He will draw me back to Him, when it is His desire to do so, as He wills, when He wills and as much as He wills. My little head can barely hold the information I need to do my daily work and take care of my family. Wow – you guys are good. But I gotta say I don’t envy you for having so much knowledge at your finger tips. God Bless you all for being there in the ranks where some of us are needing your input to carry on.

    Liked by 1 person

    • charliej373 says:

      Bear with me a bit, Diane. This is neither going to become a medical nor a science blog. But in every walk of life we are tempted to sin, sometimes in subtle ways. The heart of where I am going with this is how to behave with the dignity of soldiers of God. It is a necessary part of girding our loins. When I have laid out the narrative fully, you will need to know little about science or medicine, you will not have to choose a right choice versus a wrong one, but we will reach some critical things we need to keep in mind in assessing such things and advocating on behalf of our position. Have some patience…my purpose is far different from what it looks from this right now…but it is necessary right now to discuss these technical matters to get to where we need to be in order to take the next right step.

      Liked by 2 people

      • audiemarie2014 says:

        Very interesting, Charlie. I think I’m beginning to understand where you might be going with this. I hope I’m right, because I certainly need to learn how “to behave with dignity of soldiers of God.”

        Liked by 1 person

        • audiemarie2014 says:

          Oops, I left out the word “the” when quoting you, Charlie. Should’ve read, “to behave with the dignity of soldiers of God.”

          Like

    • Bob says:

      I think a larger problem, Diane is that there are often no perfect choices, to vaccinate or to not vaccinate, for example, and we need to learn what we can and make the best choices after prayer we can. One thing that may help is that, while we were discussing many things here, most of us are confronted with a few decisions at a time. To vaccinate or not to or when to. Do I want to eat GMO foods, why or why not, and are there reasons to think some foods may be affecting me or a family member? And if we are praying and trusting God I need to trust He will bring a thing to my attention if it is important. We can all feel so overwhelmed in this day of on line and other media info with so many things people think we should be concerned and worried about, and writing this I am thinking, am I concerned with the best thing, putting God first?

      Liked by 1 person

  33. diane says:

    Thank you Charlie, I feel a bit more comforted than before – I am a simple person but boy I was feeling like a simpleton.
    You took that away – thank you.
    God Bless you all.
    Love. I do.

    Liked by 2 people

  34. Lily says:

    Thank you Charlie. So it is more about our motives and thought processes – being logical and faithful.

    Liked by 2 people

  35. anne says:

    Charlie, like Diane.i needed that explanation because to be honest i had decided to give your blog a miss over all of this. I am concerned that if i get too caught up in detail it will lead me away from Trust, Hope. To be honest, there is so much out there that it is too much for me.
    for some time, i have been asking the Lord to bring everything down to simplicity. In everything! Just follow Jesus, the Way, the Truth and the Life.

    Liked by 1 person

  36. chrisj says:

    I don’t have the time and energy to go through all the comments, but I was disturbed by your manner of discussing the topic and from my point of view it weakens your credibility. I’m no scientist and I presume neither are you. I’m guessing neither of us has first hand labratory proof of our positions. At most we have second hand information to go on.

    Well, there are bona-fide scientists on both sides of the issue. Here’s a retired scientist who worked for the Canadian Government for 20 + years who tried to reassure the people of the safety of GMO’s now explaining his misgivings on them. http://commonsensecanadian.ca/gmo-whistleblower-canadian-federal-scientist-speaks-out/

    Like

  37. Donette says:

    Charlie, When I would volunteer at the Pittsburgh Center for Peace, Dr. Petrisko would say to those who were helping and talking about multiple important projects eg. Pro-Life issues, protesting in front of abortion centers and a host of other important jobs, “Those, he would say, are important issues that must be addressed and there are those who have been called to do just that, but we here are not called to do all of those activities or we would splatter like a shot gun. Our mission is focused and it is to inform as many people as we can about Our Lady’s messages.

    Reading your response to Diane, gave me a bit of relief, particularly when you said:
    ” Have some patience…my purpose is far different from what it looks from this right now… ”

    I had reached a point where I was uncertain what you actually saw as your mission. The Cronin activity, and the vaccines and science information threw me off. I hope to see a narrowing of the scope of your operation so I, personally can function in my spiritual and mental activities like a rifle and not a shotgun. I hope you understand from where I am coming. I need to be able to recognize my next right step.

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      Donette, the Cronin situation most certainly is part of my mission. I am not here to merely talk the principles I preach, but to live them when a situation arises. That boy and his family had no one speaking for them. The hospital was planning to pull the plug Friday. It almost certainly would have been done if a lot of people here had not decided to take the next right step and offer prayer and the help we could to that family. Although I am not writing much about it now, primarily because I am not interested in making Joseph a spectacle, I remain in contact with the family and will do occasional updates. I spoke with George yesterday afternoon. The rest of the family is there now and they are staying with his father for now. Things look very good for George to get the transfer finalized for his job. The faith and resolve of many of the folks here made that possible.

      Now this is something else…and you will see soon enough where I am going with it and why it is important – even vital – to what we have ahead of us.

      Like

      • malachi99 says:

        Would I be right to infer that you foresee (not as a soothsayer 🙂 ) forced mandatory vaccination in the not to distant future?

        Like

        • charliej373 says:

          Not really. Governments are trying to…and the American gov’t. may succeed briefly, but there just isn’t enough time I don’t think for them really to get many large programs in place before it becomes time for them to go.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Mick says:

            In America, as far as I understand, the biggest targets for mandatory vaccinations–other than health-care professionals–are students who attend public schools (and to a lesser extent, private schools). In Michigan where I live, it used to be that any parent with a medical, religious, or philosophical objection to vaccinations merely had to present to the school a letter or form to that effect; and the school had to give that child a waiver. But starting last month on January 1, the new law is this: Any parent with a religious or philosophical objection to vaccines (I’m not sure if the new law covers medical objections) has to go to the County Health Department (aka the government) and attend an “educational” class all about the benefits of vaccines and the risks of not being vaccinated (benefits and risks being defined by the government, naturally). Then the parents must sign a form (I would imagine that the signature is under penalty of perjury, but I don’t know that for a fact) which states that the parents have received the “education” and that they understand that by not vaccinating their kids, they are putting their children AND OTHER PEOPLE at risk. Only then will the government issue the vaccination waiver for the child who attends the public schools. (I’m not sure if this applies for private-school attendance; I didn’t look into that issue.)

            As a former legal beagle (woof!), this raises some red flags in my mind. First, what used to be an unequivocal right has now been reduced to a privilege that the government may or may not decide to grant. And the granting of the privilege depends on the parents’ signing a form which quite possibly–perhaps even probably–would open them up to government interference (being investigated for child neglect if their kid gets sick) or legal action (being sued or even prosecuted if someone else gets sick after their child gets sick and comes in contact with said “someone else”).

            Like

  38. MMBev says:

    Our choices are going to become smaller and much more restricted, and maybe ultimately be reduced to zero. We really are going to have to rely on Our Lady of Tepeyac, The Prayer of Miraculous Trust given to us by God. When Jesus walked the earth, they didn’t have anything even close to what we have had. And everywhere that Jesus went, He often began by curing the sick and driving out demons. When we have nothing too, we can count on His assistance through His mother.

    Liked by 1 person

  39. Julia says:

    Well Charlie, I have just read these comments. I too was sent away to reassess what your site was all about after reading the article.

    I was concerned are we being press ganged into a certain Charlie type political view of the world which I could not reconcile with as an older person with health issues. Time is not on my side anymore good Sherpa, and I lived my political passions in more youthful times.

    Now in retirement, it is my hope to learn to walk more closely with my beloved Jesus. I like to think Holy Infant of Prague, the infant Divine King will walk me through my final life section.

    I’ve made my mistakes, now the most important things are learning to live in Gods Holy and Divine Will the best I can with His grace. I love your motto, Trust, Do, Love.

    But I will continue to read your posts, and thank you for your faithful sound sharings. May God direct and guide you, for you hint at a very challenging task in opening our eyes to guarding our minds and tongues against dark influences, so as not to fall into any diabolical idealogical traps.

    Or do I read you correctly. God bless you now and always.

    Like

    • charliej373 says:

      No, I think you read me correctly, Julia. In the end, it makes no difference to me whether one vaccinates or doesn’t – or chooses GMO foods or doesn’t or even reasonably advocates for their position. But it makes a lot of difference to me when one tries to impose their choice on everyone else or demonizes their opponents – and I think that endangers their souls. And I also do not think government should seek to impose a “one-size-fits-all” solution to these things, either. When it does, I feel it is almost a patriotic duty to rebel against those government dictates.

      Liked by 1 person

  40. Julia says:

    Well Charlie, all I can say is. There might be snow on the chimney; but there sure is one hell of a fire in that there Sherpa belly. God bless and keep up the fight.

    Like

  41. Spikenard says:

    I’d like to re-visit the MMR / Autism link. The Children of God for Life website has several links with references, among them: http://www.cogforlife.org/SCPI042014.pdf explaining “Very
    few children are vaccinated in Somalia – less than 20% were vaccinated until recently. In the US they are ALL vaccinated. In Somalia there was no autism, they did not even have a word for autism. In the US and other countries where Somalis have emigrated and been vaccinated, they have very high rates of autism.”

    As well, see here: http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/11/out-of-africa-a.html

    There is also a study done by Dr. Theresa Deischer , who is an expert in the field of adult
    stem cell therapies and regenerative medicine. She graduated with honors and distinction from Stanford University, and obtained her Ph.D. in Molecular and Cellular Physiology from the Department of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Stanford University. It demonstrates how in many countries spikes in Autism followed directly after certain vaccines were introduced. http://www.cogforlife.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/congresstestimony.pdf
    “I have already mentioned that the UK 1988 birthyear changepoint in autism disorder is associated with the switch from animal to human fetal produced MMR. In the US, the switch was first approved in late 1979, and by 1983, only the human fetal produced MMR II was available in the US (Appendix T), coinciding with the 1981 birthyear changepoint for autism. In 1989 a second dose of MMR was added to the US vaccination recommendations to be given not less than 28 days after the first dose. We cannot determine the significance of this second dose without accessing each child’s immunization record 5 because while it is geared towards 4-6 year olds, the recommendation allows it 28 days after the first dose, and we know that significant numbers of children (up to 20%; Appendix M page 2) receive vaccinations earlier than recommended. More significantly a compliance campaign was undertaken after measles outbreaks in 1988 and 1989 that brought compliance with MMR from as low as 49%, and perhaps even lower (Appendix N) between 1986 and 1989 (birthyears 1984 to 1987), to over 82% in 1991 (Birthyear 1989, NHIS). Introduction of a second recommended dose in 1989 and the compliance campaign correlate with the 1988 calculated autism disorder birth year changepoint. MMR vaccination
    rates increased from birth years 1987 to 1989 by at least 20% and as much as 30-40%, and the
    changepoint is calculated to be 1988.4. In 1995 the chickenpox vaccine was approved in the US and correlates with the 1995.6 autism disorder birthyear changepoint. The rate of chickenpox uptake corresponds to the post 1995.6 birthyear changepoint slope (Appendix E and O).
    13. Similar associations between autism disorder changepoints and human fetal DNA containing
    vaccines are evident for Canada, Denmark, Japan, and several South East Asian countries.”

    Research done by Dr. Laura Hewitson proving monkeys inoculated with MMR demonstrated Autistic behavior, but not the control group of monkeys, was disqualified due to the fact that Dr. Hewitson’s own son had Autism. Please see here: http://vactruth.com/2012/04/29/monkeys-get-autism/

    It all begs the question – why aren’t more definitive studies done? Could a definitive link lead to millions in lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers and that is why? I don’t know, but to me it seems more plausible there’s a connection between Autism and vaccines than not.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s