Flu Vaccine - Shot or Not?

Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.

by Carissa Erdman

Every year at this time we are bombarded and badgered by mainstream medicine about flu shots.  I have written several articles on these topics, so I hesitate to bring you yet another series on the flu shot.  Since they don’t give up trying to shoot you up with this poison, I take it as my duty to continue to inform those who haven’t heard the alternatives available.  The next two articles were actually written by my oldest daughter as an English composition essay.  I couldn’t have written it any better, so I’m just going to present it in a two part series.  (Part 1 & 2 combined here)

A study of vaccinations in infants and of Infant Mortality Rates published in Human and Experimental Toxicology has shown that vaccines are linked to high infant mortality rates – the more vaccinations infants receive, the more infants will die (Miller). With this knowledge, what parents would willingly allow a child to receive unnecessary vaccinations that have the potential to harm the child? The answer, quite simply, is none. This is especially true if there is a natural preventative with nearly the same or a greater success rate as the artificially produced vaccine. Such is the case with the influenza vaccine. The influenza vaccine is unnecessary for people of any age because the industry falsely portrays information to the public about the vaccine’s creation, effectiveness, and necessity; the flu shot industry also attempts to conceal studies proving vitamin D a highly effective alternative to an influenza vaccine.

Neuroimmunology, Part 3

Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.

This week I’m going to go back to the immunology information I learned at the seminar a few months ago. We have gone into great detail on the subject of how your immune system responds to a natural exposure to a disease versus a vaccination.

Now, we’ll look at the starting point of your immune response. The care of the mother and the initial care of the infant play a huge role in the health of the baby. We all know that don’t we? Significant new research is showing that we haven’t known the half of it!

Would you believe the latest studies show that when a woman is pregnant, her diet, environment and care of herself affect not only her child, but her grandchildren and even her great-grandchildren? That is mind blowing! The way this is possible is through something called the epigenome. The epigenetic response is how you respond to everything that happens to you, including your environment, diet, child abuse, vaccinations, clean water or pesticide laced vegetables. Your genome doesn’t change as we age, but your epigenome changes drastically as we are influenced by our environment. That good news is that you can do something about your mother’s bad habits.

Whooping Cough Revisited

Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.

I had another article about mothers and babies’ immunology in line for this week, but I just can’t pass up the recent news on the ineffectiveness of the whooping cough vaccine.

Here is a quick refresher on medicine’s view of vaccines. They totally believe that receiving a vaccine for whooping cough is the same as actually getting it. We know this to be completely false in the world of real scientific evidence.  Their own evidence bears this out. They have real data showing real failure of the current vaccine. They show that after the last ‘booster’ at around six years of age, the ‘protection’ rate falls from 95% to 71% in five years. Now, do you think your natural immunity, from getting the disease itself, would forget how to fight this disease in five years? No, it’s impossible.

The information that the whooping cough vaccine ‘wanes’ in effectiveness has been known for years.  Its just that this year there is a major outbreak of it in vaccinated people all over the USA.  Back in 2010, there was a major outbreak in California. They had over 1500 cases of reported whooping cough, and 10 infants allegedly died.

Neuroimmunology, Part 2

Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.

Did you know that 80% of your immune system is in your gut? All of the bacteria in your body are called the Bionome. You can control the 80% in your gut; the other 20% is beyond your control, for good or bad. As science learns more about our defense mechanisms, they are realizing that antibodies to disease are but a small part of our lines of defense. Unfortunately, antibody titers are all that conventional medicines approach to disease control cares about. A TH1 response occurs in reaction to naturally obtained infectious diseases.   A TH2 occurs with vaccines and with a few other areas of body responses, like toxin and allergy mediation.

You want a TH1 response for most insults to your immune system. What is involved in a TH1 response? It includes the first, second and third lines of defense. The first line of your body’s defense of itself is actually any barrier that blocks invasion at a portal of entry (mouth, nose, ear, eye, etc.) This line of defense limits access to internal tissues. It is your skin, secretions of eyes, mouth and mucous membranes. It really isn’t a part of the immune system, per se, because it doesn’t involve recognition and response, just barriers to entry. This is where your bionome is important. It’s like a yellow alert to your system.

Neuroimmunology, Part 1

Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.

I recently attended a twelve hour continuing education seminar titled, “Neuroimmunology: Patterns of Influence,” by Dr. Stephen Marini, M.S., D.C., PhD. Today’s article comes from this seminar.  It is going to concentrate on some challenges to the medical paradigm that are held so dear by most physicians, yet makes so little sense when compared to verifiable, scientific truth. This is a very difficult subject to write about due to its complexity, but is vitally important to understand when learning about how to stay healthy naturally.

The conventional medical paradigm holds to some very wrong headed public health ideas, which completely drives their research agendas and public health policy. First off, medicine believes the immune system is independent and autonomous (works alone without help). Scientific research shows this to be completely false. Can thoughts of the mind affect your physical health? You bet.  Have you  ever heard of the placebo effect? Does physical trauma affect the psyche or nervous systems? Sure. No one system stands alone, yet this is how medicine treats the immune system when it tries to fake it out with immunizations for contagious disease.

They believe that natural immunity (actually getting a disease and recovering) is the same as artificial immunity (shots). It is not!  This subject will be another whole article.

Alternative Artificial Sweeteners

Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.

In this article on sweeteners, I will present a few acceptable alternatives to the chemical slurries commonly used. There are six sweeteners to consider: stevia, stevia based alternative, xylitol, dextrose or pure glucose, and lastly, sugar and honey in moderation.

We’ll start with my favorite of the bunch, stevia. Stevia belongs in the herb and shrub genus in the sunflower family. It comes from the Central and South Americas. It is 300 times sweeter than sugar, has no calories, no fat, carbs or sugars. It has a negligible effect on blood glucose, so diabetics and low carb dieters can use it without worry.

Artificial Sweeteners

Articles by Dr. Erdman are for informational purposes, and are not to be taken as specific medical advice.

How many of you think you are doing yourself a favor by reducing calorie intake with artificial, no calorie sweeteners? You know the pink, blue, yellow, and now green packets. Advertisers entice people to use artificial sweeteners as a means to lose weight. Did you know it doesn't really help at all? Would you believe it actually makes you fatter? Studies show that artificial sweeteners have adverse consequences, including tricking the body into desiring MORE calories. Plus, the long list of side effects connected to them just doesn't make sense for your health. This week, we’ll look at the ones you should avoid, and in the next article we will cover what you can safely use as alternate sweeteners.

First, to prove my point above, a study by the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, presented this report at an American Diabetes Association meeting. Diet sodas are not a “guilt free” treat at all. After following 474 diet soda drinkers for 10 years, they found that their waists grew 70% more than those who drank non-diet sodas. For those who drank 2 or more diet sodas a day, their waists increased, on average, over 500%. Waist size indicates the amount of fat at your organs, which is strongly linked to type II diabetes.