Concerns about vaccine administration safety have long been at the forefront of public conversation, and while arguments that vaccines may negatively affect health have been dismissed by naysayers, Dr. Suzanne Humphries offers compelling new evidence that suggests vaccines do maintain serious risk factors, and that vaccination policy is need of reform.
In her “Honesty vs. Policy” video series, Dr. Humphries discusses alarming health care policies implemented across many healthcare facilities in the United States, including a policy in which, upon arrival, acutely ill patients are visited by a pharmacist advocating for on-site administration of a host of vaccines. At this time, patients are given a single fact sheet provided by the CDC, which as Humphries notes, maintains significant biases. In many cases, vaccines are scheduled before patients are even visited by a physician, even though official documentation suggests a physician has approved the vaccination.
This practice has been justified by the argument that vaccines are proven to eradicate harmful contagious diseases; however, no justification can be given for administering vaccines to patients who are so sick they require hospitalization. Vaccinating an individual who is severely ill, or perhaps even nearing death, is not a course of action recommended by scientific literature. In fact, Dr. Humphries struggled to find any published literature that supported hospital administration’s staunch belief that vaccinating ill individuals was safe. So she began conducting her own research, which brought to light many key problems. Primarily, aluminum has been proven to cause granulomatous, autoimmune diseases, nephrotic syndrome, TTP, and other serious conditions, and aluminum is present in a long list of commonly administered vaccines. These commonly-administered vaccines also contain mercury, which when combined with aluminum, results in a compounded level of toxicity. Additionally, at the time of Humphries’s investigation no studies on chronically or acutely ill individuals had been conducted to determine if there were any risks associated with aluminum-containing vaccines.
While Humphries’s concerns about her own hospital’s vaccination policy were dismissed, despite widespread support from her colleagues, doctors have started to compile the vaccination histories of acutely ill patients. In 2013, a compelling paper was published that identifies a relationship between the administration of the influenza vaccine and autoimmune diseases, and recommends that acutely ill patients and individuals with autoimmune diseases be carefully assessed based on a benefit-to-risk ratio before receiving a vaccine.
In other words, no patient should receive a vaccine upon arriving at a hospital.
Since that time, additional papers have been published to show a strong link between aluminum-containing vaccines and the emergence or worsening of chronic illnesses. As the body of scientific evidence begins to grow thanks to research funded by scientific organizations like the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute, Humphries points out that scientific research is finally supporting what she witnessed firsthand among her patients for years.
Ultimately, Humphries’s story underscores that there’s still much to be known about the negative effects of vaccines, and policies that refuse to recognize this knowledge gap do not have patients’ best interest in mind.