Alt-Vaxx Is Not Anti-Science
Surprising correction: I am not an anti-vaxxer, nor am I "the king of the movement," I am simply a responsible, caring, and evidence-based doctor who finds himself in possession of shocking data the world must see ["Alt-Vaxx," WW, March 20, 2019].
What would you do if you stumbled on vital information that could spare almost 100,000 children the fate of autism each year in the USA?
What if that information would stand in stark contrast to the accepted paradigm, and be so unbelievable it would almost certainly be rejected at face value?
This is the dilemma I faced, which led me to accept an interview with Willamette Week.
Unfortunately, here is the data I presented they chose not to publish:
Of the 3,345 patients born into Integrative Pediatrics since June 2008, the autism rates are as follows:
Out of 715 unvaccinated children, just one was diagnosed with autism.
Out of 2,629 Vaccine-Friendly Plan (alternative schedule), just six were diagnosed.
Compare these rates to the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccine schedule rate of 1 in 45 children being diagnosed with autism.
The above data was obtained by an independent pediatrician, neonatologist, and informatics expert, commissioned to pull the data, at the request of those wanting to know the outcomes for my practice.
Now you know why I want everyone to know about this. What should our response be to information like this? I suggest we all demand studies that compare the nonvaccinated and the partially vaccinated to those fully vaccinated according to the CDC schedule.
I also propose that we stop the vaccine mandate laws—like House Bill 3063—that will force the CDC schedule in a one-size-fits-all manner on the citizens of Oregon. The measles crisis being used to push the agenda of mandated vaccines is actually no crisis at all. Ninety-five percent of Oregonians are immune to measles (our vaccine rate for that one), and not a single case during this outbreak has been acquired in the community. All have been household contacts of those involved in the initial outbreak. Of the 73 measles cases, there was just one hospitalization and zero deaths.
I'm in favor of vaccines and the measles vaccine (MMR), but I am also in favor of informed consent and patients' rights to choose. What kind of message are we giving our children when we say they have no rights to choose what is injected into their bodies?
Dr. Paul (Paul Thomas, M.D. FAAP)
Board-certified pediatrician for 15,000 patients at Integrative Pediatrics
This article about Dr. Paul Thomas is a regurgitation of all the reporting on the vaccine issue. Anyone who is anti-vax is anti-science, end of story. Was there no compelling argument presented by this doctor or any of the many mothers who object to the MMR vaccine in particular? Was the question even posed as to why children under 2 years old need to be given a triple-dose vaccine? Why no mention of how vaccine companies are immune from prosecution and that there are many vaccine injuries reported each year? This article, like so many others, merely smears those who question the safety and necessity of this vaccine and throws them in with those who are against all vaccines. Shouldn't children be allowed to develop their own natural immunities before injecting a cocktail of chemicals, which some mothers are convinced have caused autism in their children? Isn't it reasonable to at least give them a few sentences to explain their reasoning? All we got was this doctor and those who question the MMR vaccine are frowned upon by the scientific community. The reporter should have done her job by including all the salient arguments that helped her to arrive at her summation. WW has done some excellent investigative reporting, but that was not the case with this story.