Environmental health for children

By Rafaele Joudry

Protecting your baby from toxic and dangerous interventions
Mothers who took thalidomide did not know until their babies were born that the drug would cause birth defects. The last generation of people who took to smoking cigarettes did not know what a serious health hazard they would prove to be. All the workers who installed asbestos in the 1950s, 60s and 70s did not know they were setting themselves up for mesothelioma and asbestos lung cancer. Likewise, mothers today do not know the implications for their children’s future health, when undertaking procedures such as ultrasound and vaccinations. There is sufficient evidence that these procedures may be harmful, to warrant every parent undertaking careful investigation before deciding if they will expose their children to these procedures. A few hours of research beforehand could save years of remedial therapy and thousands of dollars. It is my hope that many parents will read the following sections in time to make their own informed decisions at least for their next child.

Ultrasound
Ultrasound technology is based upon ultra high-frequency sound waves, which bombard the child in the womb at an extremely high rate of speed. To get an idea of what this may do, think of the situation where a woman with an extremely high voice can break a glass by singing an extremely high-pitched note. That is an example of what just ONE relatively slow sound wave can do. Ultrasound is super high frequency, which may have more detrimental effects. Ultrasound waves in laboratory experiments have been known to damage chromosomes, produce internal cellular heat which damages cells, retard the normal development of cells, and many other phenomena.

According to the World Health Organization and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Report, ‘It is not clear at this time whether ultrasound foetal monitoring is beneficial to the mother or foetus in terms of pregnancy outcome…If there is no generally acknowledged benefit to the monitoring, there is no reason to expose patients to increased cost and risk. The question of benefit has not yet been resolved…and the potential for delayed effects has been virtually ignored.’

Ultrasound technology carries potential risks which have not yet been evaluated, yet it is assumed to be completely safe and doctors are telling women that there is no risk. Having an ultrasound is not essential to a healthy pregnancy. However, most doctors are trained to use expensive technology and not trained to use hands-on skills. The fault is not with the doctors, but in the way they are trained.

Before you allow an ultrasound to be done on you, do some research, thoroughly question your healthcare provider about safety as well as the value of the information which would be received from doing the procedure. Don’t be afraid to refuse the test if you are not comfortable with the information you have discovered. It is your legal right to refuse any tests you do not want.

Evidence has been uncovered by scientists suggesting that ultrasound scans on pregnant women cause brain damage in their unborn babies. Several studies done in the 1990s hinted at this. In the most comprehensive study yet on the effect of the scanning, doctors have found that men born to mothers who underwent scanning were more likely to show signs of subtle brain damage.

Research has suggested that subtle brain damage can cause people who ought genetically to be right-handed to become left-handed. In addition, these people face a higher risk of conditions ranging from learning difficulties to epilepsy.

A team of Swedish scientists compared almost 7,000 men whose mothers underwent scanning in the 1970s, with 170,000 men whose mothers did not, looking for differences in the rates of left- and right-handedness. The team found that men whose mothers had scans were significantly more likely to be left-handed than normal, pointing to a higher rate of brain damage while in the womb. Crucially, the biggest difference was found among those born after 1975, when doctors introduced a second scan later in pregnancy. Such men were 32 percent more likely to be left-handed than those in the control group. Premature babies are five times more likely than normal to be left-handed. According to the Swedish researchers, the human brain undergoes critical development until relatively late in pregnancy, making it vulnerable to damage. In addition, the male brain is especially at risk, as it continues to develop later than the female brain.

Ultrasound scans in late pregnancy are now routine in many countries. It appears that as many as one in 50 male foetuses pre-natally exposed to ultrasound is affected.

The growing evidence that ultrasound affects unborn babies may cast new light on the puzzling rise in left-handedness over recent years. In Britain, the rate has more than doubled, from five per cent in the 1920s to eleven per cent today. Researchers have estimated that only twenty per cent of this rise can be put down to the suppression of left-handedness among the older generation.

Dr Francis Duck of the British Medical Ultrasound Society said, ‘When the first study suggesting a link came out, it was possible to ignore it, but now this is the third,’ he said. ‘What it demonstrates is the need to investigate the link further, and to look at possible mechanisms.’

Other research by scientists at University College, Dublin, confirmed the findings of earlier American research that ultrasound tissue-heating creates changes in cells and can cause bleeding in mouse intestines.

Patrick Brennan, who led the research, said, ‘It has been assumed for a long time that ultrasound has no effect on cells. We now have grounds to question that assumption.’ Four and a half hours after the mice were exposed, the rate of cell division had reduced by twenty two percent and the rate of programmed cell death had approximately doubled. Mr Brennan believes there will be similar effects in humans.

Although supposedly said to work with sound waves, ultrasound waves are not in the audible range, so their high frequency is not natural to the body. Dr. Mendelsohn wrote, ‘Ultrasound produces at least two biological effects—heat and a process called ‘cavitation’, in which bubbles are created that expand and contract in response to sound waves. The first time I saw this cavitation process in action, a chiropractor turned on the therapeutic ultrasound machine in his office and placed a few drops of water on the part of the machine that was applied to the patient. I wish every reader…could have been with me to watch that water suddenly boil and bubble’

Dr. Mendelsohn has done extensive investigations to learn the truth about ultrasound. He eventually ortained copies of documents researching the procedure, which anyone may receive by writing to: WHO Publications Center, 49 Sheridan Ave., Albany, NY 12210, asking for ‘Environmental Health Criteria 22: Ultrasound.’

Experiments cited in these documents indicated reduced foetal weight and reduced foetal organ weight in animals who received ultrasound. Researchers are noticing a small but definite reduction in newborn birth rate among human infants exposed to ultrasound. There is evidence that the immune systems of laboratory animals exposed to the procedure are affected. The procedure also affects the blood platelets which allow the blood to clot. This could lead to problems with circulation because of travelling blood clots. Of even greater concern, changes in the structure and composition of cells, including genetic material, have been suspected. In experiments with animals, these changes have resulted in defective embryos with a variety of problems. Much more is not known, than is known, and researchers postulate that it may be twenty years before we really know the problems incurred by ultrasound, including the possibility of cancer and, most commonly suspected, leukaemia. The mother might also experience congenital malformations.

Reading this information, one cannot but suspect that the increasing use of ultrasound is responsible in part for the increase in learning difficulties today.

The vexed question of vaccination
Vaccination is a complex and emotion-fraught question which all parents must address. My mistake was not arming myself with information sooner. My parents were well-informed on issues concerning natural health and stopped vaccinating their children in my early childhood, so I received fewer vaccinations than most.

However, I failed to fully investigate the reasons and pass on the knowledge about the dangers to my foster daughter, in time. Her active, healthy boy returned from his first round of vaccination with respiratory disturbances and fretful behaviour which had not been there previously. After the second round of vaccinations at eighteen months, his symptoms worsened. As he became a toddler, behavioural abnormalities showed up which were finally diagnosed as ADHD. His mother then informed herself, found supportive professionals and did not vaccinate her second child, who shows none of these behavioural disorders.

This alerted me sufficiently, and I decided to seek out well-informed scientific information. I went to visit one of Australia’s leading authorities on the subject of vaccination, Dr Viera Scheibner, who lives in the Blue Mountains. My eyes boggled as I walked into Dr Scheibner’s archive room. On the shelves were two hundred magazine holders, each containing about thirty scientific articles on vaccination, and another two hundred ring binders containing more articles. I asked if she had read them all; she had. It was clear that she is a true authority on the subject.

Of Slavic origin, Dr Scheibner holds a PhD in Natural Sciences. After an eminent scientific career, during which she published three books and some ninety scientific papers in refereed scientific journals in Australia and overseas, her study of babies’ breathing patterns and cot death in the mid 1980s clearly pointed to vaccines as being behind the majority of cot deaths. Together with Leif Karlsson, an electronics engineer, she developed Cotwatch, a breathing monitor to be used for babies thought to be at risk of cot death or ‘sudden infant death syndrome’ (SIDS). The team soon realised that the Cotwatch was sounding alarms when babies were affected by a range of stressful events, the most prominent being vaccination. In her own words, ‘It took over three years of research before we looked at each other and said, “Vaccines are killing babies”’. This introduced her to the subject of vaccination, which she has, as a result, been avidly studying ever since.

Despite extensive examination of orthodox medical research published on vaccines over the past one hundred years, Dr Scheibner told me she could find no scientific evidence that these injections of highly noxious substances prevent diseases. To the contrary, she found that they increase susceptibility to them, in addition to causing a host of immune disorders and other damage to the body, including the brain. She was therefore forced to conclude that they represent nothing but a medical assault on the immune system. Having vaccinated her own two daughters when she was a young mother (and also, more recently, having insisted on being given a tetanus vaccine herself) this was not easy to come to terms with.

Numerous other doctors who are true investigators in their own right, in that they are willing to go outside their standard medical education and search out their own evidence, have reached the same conclusions. Here are some quotes from some of these experts, featured in the video:

Vaccination: ‘The hidden truth’

‘… [my daughter’s] symptoms were intensifying after each vaccine…So I wrote to the governments and got figures.…I realised there was a lot of information that we were being told… which wasn’t true…’ Dr Isaac Golden—Homoeopath, Teacher, Author: ‘Vaccination: A Review of Risks and Alternatives’

‘They say openly in the [medical] legal system that if you advise against vaccination the A.M.A. will push to deregister.…These are symptoms that, if they were seen in a child who had not just been vaccinated, all us doctors would be a little concerned that this child perhaps had a type of viral meningitis. We wouldn’t just sit back and say, ‘That’s fine. Take some Panadol and it will go away.’ Dr Robyn Cosford—Medical Doctor

‘It is a well documented fact that the incidence and mortality from infectious diseases fell by 90% well before any vaccine was even introduced…This is not a rare occurrence. Epidemics in fully vaccinated populations are a rule rather than an exception….So [in the U.S.] they mandated vaccination and it resulted in a three-fold increase in whooping cough…’ Dr Viera Scheibner, Ph D Principle Research Scientist (Ret.), Cotwatch Monitor researcher.

‘Babies are injected with bits of animal, bacteria, viral DNA. They can be incorporated into the human genome.…Why is it that only since the ‘40s have autism, brain damage come about? Because this was when immunisation was introduced to a large extent.…Vaccines are a billion dollar industry, and there are at least a billion good reasons there why it’s continued.’ Dr Peter Baratosy—Medical Doctor, Author: ‘There is Always An Alternative’

‘Even once they’ve stopped vaccinating, residue results through infertility, arthritic conditions,… dogs have one seventh of the length of a generation that a human does, so what we are seeing in dogs today is what we will see in the future with humans, and that’s a really frightening thing.’

Ashleigh Oulton – Registered Dog Breeder: ‘Before he (Louis Pasteur—the “father of modern medicine” and originator of the Germ Theory of disease) died, he changed his mind. He ended up saying it’s not the germ, but the conditions within the body…’ Ian Sinclair—Natural Health Lecturer, Author ‘Vaccination: The Hidden Facts’

‘They don’t tell us that if your child misses the whooping cough vaccine it is less likely to develop asthma, …measles vaccine…inflammatory bowel disease, Hepatitis B or Hib vaccine …diabetes, …rubella vaccine …arthritis…’

‘I call it a cultural trance .…Most health experts… very rarely read their own professional journals—most of them are so busy….We believe health is not bought in a bottle or a syringe. Health is a direct result of healthful living, and natural health, there is no other sort.’ Greg Beattie—Father of 7 children, Author ‘Vaccination: A Parent’s Dilemma’

The evidence against vaccination
In our life times we were taught, and passively believed, that vaccination was a good thing and that it reduced disease.

Statistics were offered which showed a decrease in disease which was attributed to vaccination. In fact, deaths had already declined by more than 90% during the 20th century before vaccines were introduced. The main reason for the decline was, in fact, improved sanitation and better living conditions.
There has been no properly run, randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial to prove the effectiveness of vaccination. This will not occur because the pharmaceutical industries control all of the research and have too much to lose, since vaccination is a billion dollar industry.

Many articles in medical journals present evidence that vaccination works, and claim effectiveness. However, unbiased independent researchers who have examined the evidence have noted that many unscientific methods were used in these studies.

These include:

 

  • The use of toxic injections used in the placebo group.
  • Comparing groups which historically did not vaccinate, ignoring the fact that the reasons for this may pollute the evidence such as:
    – May have been already immune-suppressed
    – Low socio-economic status, leaving them more susceptible to disease due to poor nutrition and living
    conditions
    – Excluding participants on other technicalities which may falsely influence the statistics…

 

For those who will look, there are vast amounts of statistical evidence that vaccination is harmful. This is not widely published, and has been gathered by dedicated doctors who place their commitment to the truth ahead of their acceptability and recognition by the normal circles of the medical establishment. Dr Viera Scheibner cites the following evidence that disease outbreaks actually increased dramatically after the introduction of vaccines.

 

  • Whooping cough has been rising in the US since 1978, when vaccination was mandated for school entry.
  • The incidence of cot death dropped in Japan when the DPT vaccine was stopped.
  • Measles, which had virtually died out in Europe, rose again when measles vaccination programs were started.
  • Vaccines which the mother received herself in childhood, weaken the tranplacentally-transmitted immunity that should be passed on from mother to baby.

 

Vaccines are known to contain bacteria, viruses (or their protein envelopes) and a number of toxins with specific neurotoxic activity. An injected vaccine doesn’t go through the immune system. It actually gets direct access to vital organs. There is no natural filtration.

According to Dr Scheibner, the entire precept on which the theory of vaccination is based, is in error. The fact that the body produces antibodies in response to the vaccine, is the evidence used to say that immunity has been achieved. This is a false assumption, and a gross oversimplification of how the immune system actually works. For example, for immunity to be created there must be activation of the secretory antibody IgA, which plays an important role in the whole process. This, and many other processes which occur in the outer levels of defence, are bypassed by injections, leaving the immune system damaged and compromised instead.

In a properly functioning immune system, after a disease has been contracted, the person becomes immune to that disease. However, it has been found that vaccine recipients are not only still as susceptible to the illness, but that they can contract it more than once.

Development of the immune system is retarded by vaccines, so that by adolescence it has only reached the stage it should be at in childhood. This immune damage means that only those who have been vaccinated are contracting atypical forms of the disease—where the disease heads straight for the internal organs, bypassing the mouth, nose throat and respiratory system which are designed as the body’s natural immune defence system.
Oral vaccines do not eliminate this problem, as Dr Scheibner explains: ‘…What would be the difference between natural infection, which is through the gastro-intestinal system, particularly in polio, and the oral polio vaccine? The difference is this. When you get the natural infection, you get 10 cells of bacteria or 10 pieces of crystals of viruses. This is published. Vaccines contain billions of organisms, so it’s like a septic shock. It’s a massive overdose of infective material.’

Dr Scheibner says that what vaccination achieves is sensitisation, not immunization. Sensitisation is really the opposite of immunisation. Sensitisation, also called Anaphylaxis, creates increased susceptibility by confusing the immune system. Interestingly, immunologists themselves are becoming more uncomfortable about the fact that vaccine injections can only stimulate a significant IgG antibody response if they include toxic sensitising substances, referred to as ‘adjuvants’, in the concoction.

Vaccination can in fact lead to the development of auto-immune diseases, because of this confusion. What happens is that the immune system’s detection ability is damaged so it cannot identify the ‘good guys’ from the ‘bad guys’, resulting in the body attacking its own cells.

The importance of information Dr Scheibner believes in having full knowledge, and insists that it is imperative that parents educate themselves about the whole issue, because, as she says:‘Some of them may continue vaccinating their children. Or the other children in the family, thinking that it only happens to one in a million, which is not true. Every child is affected. Vaccinated children are not the same as unvaccinated. There is some damage in all of them. Allergies are number one. Or eating problems, mild digestive problems, it still is totally unnecessary.’

A network of concerned parents and professionals have dedicated themselves to making this information available to the public. The Australian Vaccination Network is an association which provides up-to-date information—that is not biased by pharmaceutical company interests—on the latest knowledge and research into the effects of vaccinations, alternatives and remedial therapies to deal with vaccinations’ after-effects. Thanks to the internet, it is now easy for families to access this health-saving information. If you are convinced that you do not want to vaccinate, visit www.avn.org.au to learn more about the AVN and their resources. Their magazine, Informed Choice, is an excellent resource for parents and practitioners wishing to keep informed.
If you need to know more in order to make the right decision for you, a very informative website on vaccination, which includes easy to understand scientific articles and many resource books and videos, is www.vaccination.inoz.com. There you can order the video, ‘Vaccination: The Hidden Truth’. This is a highly informative exposé of the facts about vaccination, with interviews by over twelve doctors, researchers and parents who have in-depth knowledge of the issue. The flier for the video asks, ‘Should we shoot first and ask questions later?’ Parents who like to make their own decisions will want to see this video before giving their children any further vaccines.

The medical and educational establishments exert great pressure on parents to vaccinate. It is very hard for a parent who is less educated than their doctor to refute apparently well-informed arguments put forward by a medical practitioner; and not to be intimidated when the day care centre says they must vaccinate. However, it is constitutionally illegal for vaccination to be mandated. A form stating conscientious objection, which must be signed by a sympathetic medical practitioner, will give the child access to educational facilities. Parents can join the AVN to get the necessary resources and referrals. Go to www.avn.org.au and then click on related links and then conscientious and medical exemption forms. However, be aware that if you take one of these forms to an average medical practitioner they may try to persuade you to vaccinate. The form requires that they inform you of the potential risks of not vaccinating your child. Most parents will need to find a supportive practitioner to give moral support if they are to go against the sanctioned medical position.

As a person armed with such extensive information about vaccination, Dr Scheibner is concerned about the fact that most parents simply believe what their family doctor tells them, when in most cases the doctor is simply following the established medical line with very little information. ‘We also need to tell the doctors,’ she says ‘ because they get a very limited education, and they believe anything they are told.’ Dr Scheibner’s concern is well-founded as she has confronted this ignorance in many settings, including courts of law. She explained to me in our interview: ‘As an example, the United States keeps publishing that there are only 12 cases of vaccine-caused poliomyelitis in the United States per year. One GP said that to me and I said ‘And you believe it?’ Learn to ask that question – ‘And you believe it?’ Well, don’t believe it. Because they only mark one in every 154 cases of vaccine-caused poliomyelitis per year. From the statistics I have examined, I estimate that the United States must have 12,000 cases of vaccine-caused poliomyelitis. And that’s about the size of it. Well, I said 12; you know—they just lost some zeros. They feel better like there’s some truth in it.’

For more information on this subject read the very informative article, ‘Do vaccines protect against diseases at all?’ by Bronwyn Hancock 1999.

Shaken baby syndrome
The following is an excerpt from work by Dr Viera Scheibner on her extensive research and advocation work in the area of so-called ‘Shaken Baby Syndrome.’

‘Recently there has been quite an ‘epidemic’ of the so-called ‘shaken baby syndrome’. Parents, usually the fathers, or other care-givers such as nannies have increasingly been accused of shaking a baby to the point of causing permanent brain damage and death. Why? Is there an unprecedented increase in the number of people who commit infanticide or have an ambition to seriously hurt babies? Or is there something more sinister at play?
Some time ago I started getting requests from lawyers or the accused parents themselves for expert reports. A close study of the history of these cases revealed something distinctly sinister: in every single case, the symptoms appeared shortly after the baby’s vaccinations.

While investigating the personal medical history of these babies based on the care-givers’ diaries and medical records, I quickly established that these babies were given one or more of the series of so-called routine shots—hepatitis B, DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus), polio and HiB (Haemophilus influenzae type B) —shortly before they developed symptoms of illness resulting in serious brain damage or death.

The usual scenario is that a baby is born and does well initially. At the usual age of about two months it is administered the first series of vaccines as above. (Sometimes a hepatitis B injection is given shortly after birth while the mother and child are still in hospital. However, a great number of babies now die within days or within two to four weeks of birth after hepatitis B vaccination, as documented by the records of the VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] in the USA.) So, the baby stops progressing, starts deteriorating, and usually develops signs of respiratory tract infection. Then comes the second and third injections, and tragedy strikes: the child may cry intensely and inconsolably, may stop feeding properly, vomit, have difficulty swallowing, become irritable, stop sleeping, and may develop convulsions with accelerating progressive deterioration of its condition and mainly its brain function.

This deterioration may be fast, or may slowly inch in until the parents notice that something is very wrong with their child and then rush it to the doctor or hospital. Interestingly, they are invariably asked when the baby was immunised. On learning that the baby was indeed ‘immunised’, the parents may be reassured that its symptoms will all clear up. They are sent home with the advice, ‘Give your baby Panadol’. If they persist in considering the baby’s reaction serious, they may be labelled as anxious parents or trouble-makers. So the parents go home, and the child remains in a serious condition or dies.

Until recently, the vaccine death would have just been labelled ‘sudden infant death’, particularly if the symptoms and pathological findings were minimal. However, nowadays, with an alarmingly increasing frequency, the parents (or at least one of them, usually the father) may be accused of shaking the baby to death. The accused may even ‘confess’ to shaking the baby, giving the reason, for example, that having found the baby lying still and not breathing and/or with a glazed look in its eyes, they shook it gently—as is only natural—in their attempt to revive it. Sometimes, ironically, they save the baby’s life, only to be accused of causing the internal injuries that made the baby stop breathing in the first place, and which in fact were already present when they shook the baby to revive it.’

Our choices
This information about the potentially damaging effects of chemical toxins, ultrasound and vaccination, will inevitably bring grief, remorse and anger to parents who find out too late what they might have avoided. However, it is better to be informed than not. On the encouraging side, the reports in Chapter 8 detail the positive changes which can be achieved in healing children with supportive therapies.
It is never too late for a child, or even an adult, to improve. Nature and the human body are incredibly resilient, always striving to heal, always recreating cells, always processing and clearing out foreign matter which the immune system rejects. Given half a chance, remarkable healing happens. So please be heartened by the new knowledge you have, by the fact that you have choices every day as to which chemicals, foods and other stimuli your family will be exposed to. Use this information to exercise those choices and help to create a toxin-free, naturally nurturing environment for your loved ones.

Rafaele Joudry is the founder and director of Sound Therapy International and the author of three books on Sound Therapy, including, Why Aren’t I Learning? Listening is the Key to Overcoming Learning Difficulties. Contact: Sound Therapy International, Phone 1300 55 77 96

Posted in Articles.

Leave a Reply