Welcome to the blog of Indian 007

Like a beacon unto the world ...

Saturday, May 11, 2013

How MI6, CIA spend tax money on propping up drug production

RT (Russia Today)

Annie Machon is a former intel­li­gence officer for the UK's MI5, who resigned in 1996 to blow the whistle. She is now a writer, public speaker and a Director of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
Published time: May 07, 2013 10:48
Edited time: May 07, 2013 12:01
An Afghan farmer collects raw opium as he works in a poppy field in Khogyani District of Nangarhar province on April 29, 2013. (AFP Photo)
An Afghan farmer collects raw opium as he works in a poppy field in Khogyani District of Nangarhar province on April 29, 2013. (AFP Photo)
Afghan President Hamid Karzai, has recently been criticized for taking 'ghost money' from the CIA and MI6. The sums are unknown – for the usual reasons of 'national security' – but are estimated to have been in the tens of millions of dollars. While this is nowhere near the eye-bleeding $12 billionshipped over to Iraq on pallets in the wake of the invasion a decade ago, it is still a significant amount.With both the CIA and MI6 secretly providing 'ghost money' bribes to the Afghan political establishment, it’s likely that Afghans will increasingly support a resurgent Taliban and the drug trade will be further propped up.

And how has this money been spent?  Certainly not on social projects or rebuilding initiatives.  Rather, the reporting indicates, the money has been funneled to Karzai's cronies as bribes in a corrupt attempt to buy influence in the country.

None of this surprises me. MI6 has a long and ignoble history of trying to buy influence in countries of interest.  In 1995/96 it funded a 'ragtag group of Islamic extremists,' headed up by a Libyan military intelligence officer, in an illegal attempt to try to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi.  The attack went wrong and innocent people were killed. When this scandal was exposed, it caused an outcry.

Yet a mere 15 years later, MI6 and the CIA were back in Libya, providing support to the same 'rebels,' who this time succeeded in capturing, torturing and killing Gaddafi, while plunging Libya into apparently endless internecine war. This time around there was little international outcry, as the world's media portrayed this aggressive interference in a sovereign state as 'humanitarian relief.'

And we also see the same in Syria now, as the CIA and MI6 are already providing training and communication support to the rebels – many of whom, particularly the Al Nusra faction in control of the oil-rich north-east of Syria are in fact allied with Al-Qaeda in Iraq.  So in some countries the UK and USA use drones to target and murder "militants" (plus villagers, wedding parties and other assorted innocents), while in others they back ideologically similar groups.

fghan policemen destroys a poppy field in the Nad-e Ali district of Helmand province on March 20, 2013. (AFP Photo)
fghan policemen destroys a poppy field in the Nad-e Ali district of Helmand province on March 20, 2013. (AFP Photo)

Recently, we have also seen the Western media making unverified claims that the Syrian regime is using chemical weapons against its own people, and our politicians leaping on these assertions as justification for openly providing weapons to the insurgents.
Other reports are now emerging that indicate it was the rebels themselves who have been using sarin gas against the people. This may halt the rush to war, but not doubt other support will continue to be offered by the West to these war criminals.
So, how is MI6 secretly spending UK taxpayers' money in Afghanistan? According to Western media reporting, it is being used to prop up warlords and corrupt officials. This is deeply unpopular amongst the Afghan people, leading to the danger of increasing support for a resurgent Taliban.
There is also a significant overlap between the corrupt political establishment and the illegal drug trade, up to and including the president's late brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai. So, another unintentional consequence may be that some of this unaccountable ghost money is propping up the drug trade.
Afghanistan is the world's leading producer of heroin, and the UN reports that poppy growth has increased dramatically. Indeed, the UN estimates that acreage under poppy growth in Afghanistan hastripled over the last 7 years.  The value of the drug trade to the Afghan warlords is now estimated to be in the region of $700 million per year.  You can buy a lot of Kalashnikovs with that.
On the one hand, we have Western governments bankrupting themselves to fight the 'war on terror,' breaking international laws and murdering millions of innocent people across North Africa, the Middle East and central Asia, while at the same time shredding what remains of our hard-won civil liberties at home.
On the other hand, we apparently have MI6 and the CIA secretly bankrolling the very people in Afghanistan who produce 90 percent of the world's heroin. And then, of course, more scarce resources can be spent on fighting the failed 'war on drugs,' and yet another pretext is used to shred our civil liberties.
This is a lucrative economic model for the burgeoning military-security complex. However, it is a lose-lose scenario for the rest of us.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

Thursday, April 4, 2013

A Critique on: Obama the antichrist? Global warming a myth? Lizard people controlling the world? Conspiracy theory research reveals bizarre beliefs prevalent in US

The Truth Seeker published the following critique of an article on "Conspiracy Theories" carried by the Independent.

Introduction – April 4, 2013

The following article portrays “conspiracy theories” as the exclusive preserve of the weird and/or gullible.
After all, who else would “think the Bush administration deliberately misled the public over weapons of mass destruction in an effort to start the Iraq war…”
Or that …”a New World Order controls the world”.
From the poll conducted by the Public Policy Polling it would appear that a substantial and growing number of Americans do. So the corporate media is now fighting a rear guard action to persuade us that such “bizarre beliefs” are without foundation.
Note too that in reporting on the survey the Independent doesn’t analyse why 11% of Americans think the U.S. government was complicit in the events of 9/11. As if the very notion wasn’t worthy of serious consideration.
However, what really caught my attention was the finding “that 37 per cent of Americans also think global warming is a hoax “.
The fact that a growing number of people give credence to such “bizarre beliefs” has obviously got the scribes at the Independent working overtime. After all,  little more than a decade ago the very same Independent was reporting Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past“.
Since then of course, the record breaking cold winters and heavy and sometimes unseasonable snows have helped expose the Independent’s “global warming” for what it is.
From which we can conclude that the Independent is yet another mouthpiece owned by the elite — in fact it’s owned by a Russian oligarch – and used to manipulate and misinform the public. While its journalists are in every sense of the term “intellectual whores”.
Finally it should be noted that the Independent lumps all “conspiracy theories” together — putting notions about “lizard people” together with accusations of U.S. government complicity in 9/11. Despite compelling evidence pointing to U.S. government collusion in 9/11, that has been pointedly ignored by publications like the Independent.
This lack of discernment and genuine analysis is a tell-tale sign that what follows is an attempt at dumbing down.

Obama the antichrist? Global warming a myth? Lizard people controlling the world? Conspiracy theory research reveals bizarre beliefs prevalent in US

John Hall – The Independent April 4, 2013

One in five Republican voters believes Barack Obama is the ‘antichrist’ and nearly a third of all Americans think a secret power elite controls the world, according to new research on conspiracy theories.

A national poll conducted by the Public Policy Polling organisation found that 37 per cent of Americans also think global warming is a hoax, while 11 per cent of the population think the US government allowed the September 11 terrorist attacks to take place.

The surprising results form part of the PPP’s in-depth study of how political affiliation can dictate the likelihood of an individual believing in various conspiracy theories.

The research found 34 per cent of Republicans polled believe a New World Order controls the world, compared with 35 per cent of independent voters and just 15 per cent of Democrats.

While a total of 44 per cent of Americans think the Bush administration deliberately misled the public over weapons of mass destruction in an effort to start the Iraq war, that breaks down to 72 per cent of Democrats and just 27 per cent of Republicans.

Other conspiracy theory beliefs have similar political overtones. Only 23 per cent of Democrats think global warming is a hoax, but over half of Republican voters think climate change is an elaborate myth.

Meanwhile 33 per cent of Republicans think Saddam Hussein was in some way connected to the September 11 attacks, while 78 per cent of Democrats disagree with them.

Some conspiracy theories saw Democrat and Republican voters more united however, with a total 51 per cent of Americans thinking there was a larger conspiracy at work in the assassination of President John F Kennedy, and more than one in ten believing in Bigfoot.

A combined 29 per cent of US voters also believe aliens exist, while 21 per cent think an alien craft crashed at Roswell in 1947.

The full list of PPP’s finding can be found by clicking here, but select highlights appear below:

* 37% of voters believe global warming is a hoax, 51% do not. Republicans say global warming is a hoax by a 58-25 margin, Democrats disagree 11-77, and Independents are more split at  41-51. 61% of Romney voters believe global warming is a hoax

* 6% of voters believe Osama bin Laden is still alive

* 21% of voters say a UFO crashed in Roswell, NM in 1947 and the US government covered it up. More Romney voters (27%) than Obama voters (16%) believe in a UFO cover up

* 28% of voters believe secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order.  A plurality of Romney voters (38%) believe in the New World Order compared to 35% who don’t

* 28% of voters believe Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9/11 attacks.  36% of Romney voters believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11, 41% do not

* 20% of voters believe there is a link between childhood vaccines and autism, 51% do not

* 7% of voters think the moon landing was faked

* 13% of voters think Barack Obama is the anti-Christ, including 22% of Romney voters

* Voters are split 44%-45% on whether Bush intentionally misled about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. 72% of Democrats think Bush lied about WMDs, Independents agree 48-45, just 13% of Republicans think so

* 29% of voters believe aliens exist

* 14% of voters say the CIA was instrumental in creating the crack cocaine epidemic in America’s inner cities in the 1980’s

* 9% of voters think the government adds fluoride to our water supply for sinister reasons (not just dental health)

* 4% of voters say they believe “lizard people” control our societies by gaining political power

* 51% of voters say a larger conspiracy was at work in the JFK assassination, just 25% say Oswald acted alone

* 14% of voters believe in Bigfoot

* 15% of voters say the government or the media adds mind-controlling technology to TV broadcast signals

* 5% believe exhaust seen in the sky behind aeroplanes is actually chemicals sprayed by the government for sinister reasons

* 15% of voters think the medical industry and the pharmaceutical industry “invent” new diseases to make money

* 5% of voters believe that Paul McCartney died in 1966

* 11% of voters believe the US government allowed 9/11 to happen, 78% do not agree

Thursday, March 14, 2013

60 Lab Studies Now Confirm Cancer Link To A Vaccine You Probably Had As A Child

By Liberty Beacon,  March 05, 2013            NATIONAL HEALTH FEDERATION

Dr. Maurice Hilleman made astounding revelations in an interview that was cut from The Health Century — the admission that Merck drug company vaccines had been injecting dangerous viruses into people worldwide.
Bear in mind that Dr. Hilleman was the developer of Merck’s vaccine program. He developed over three dozen vaccines, more than any other scientist in history. He was a member of the U.S. National Academy of Science, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society.
He received a special lifetime achievement award from the World Health Organization. Hilleman was one of the early vaccine pioneers to warn about the possibility that simian viruses might contaminate vaccines.
I think it’s important to remember history when it comes to vaccines, especially in light of current developments.
For starters, the HPV vaccine Gardasil, which is being vigorously pushed on unsuspecting young girls and women to theoretically guard against cervical cancer still has never been proven to actually prevent cancer. On the contrary, evidence suggests that under certain circumstances the vaccine increases your risk of precancerous lesions by nearly 45 percent, and an ever increasing number of girls are being seriously injured by this unnecessary vaccine.
As of December 13, 2010, 20,915 adverse reactions had been reported in the United States alone, including 89 deaths, 297 miscarriages or stillbirths, and 370 reports of abnormal pap smears post vaccination.
All of this from a vaccine that has only been on the market for four years!
Making matters worse, as of 2009 the US FDA approved Gardasil for use on young boys as well, and the first male death has also been reported. In September of last year, a young boy died just eight days after being vaccinated with Gardasil.
So what’s going on here?
Is it possible that vaccines sold by drugmakers like Merck are causing lethal disease? Judging by history, the answer may be yes.

Contaminated Polio Vaccine Responsible for Human Cancer Cases

In 2002, the journal Lancet published compelling evidence that contaminated polio vaccine was responsible for up to half of the 55,000 non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma cases that were occurring each year.
What was it contaminated with?
SV40, a cancer-causing monkey virus. The puzzle began in 1994, when Dr. Michele Carbone, a Loyola University researcher, found the virus SV40, which had never before been detected in humans, in half of the human lung tumors he was studying. Since then, 60 different lab studies have confirmed the results, and SV40 has been found in a variety of human cancers, including lung-, brain-, bone-, and lymphatic cancer.
At first no one could fathom how the virus had been transmitted into the human population.
But in the censored interview with Dr. Maurice Hilleman above, Hilleman admits Merck’s responsibility in unleashing this virus via their polio vaccine, as well as the likelihood that there was an importing and spreading the AIDS virus in the same manner.

Just Who is Dr. Maurice Hilleman?

Now, for those of you who may think Dr. Hilleman was just another crackpot (he passed away in 2005), think again. He was, and still is, the leading vaccine pioneer in the history of vaccines. He developed more than three dozen vaccines—more than any other scientist in history—and was the developer of Merck’s vaccine program.
He was a member of the U.S. National Academy of Science, the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the American Philosophical Society, and received a special lifetime achievement award from the World Health Organization.
When he was chief of the Department of Respiratory Diseases with what’s now the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, he discovered the genetic changes that occur when the influenzavirus mutates, known as shift and drift. He was also one of the early vaccine pioneers to warn about the possibility that simian viruses might contaminate vaccines.So Dr. Hilleman knew what he was talking about. And in his own words, “vaccines have to be considered the bargain basement technology for the 20thCentury.”

Vaccines Can Cause the Very Disease They’re Meant to Prevent, and Worse

For years, researchers suggested that millions of vials of polio vaccine, contaminated with SV40, infected individuals between 1953 and 1963 and caused human tumors, and by 1999, molecular evidence of SV40 infections were showing up in children born after 1982. Some experts now suggest the virus may have remained in the polio vaccine until as late as 1999.
Still, the FDA and health authorities turned a blind eye.
In addition, just like Gardasil may well increase your risk of cervical cancer rather than reduce it, the live polio vaccine has also been found to cause polio. And, in rare instances the virus in the vaccine has even been known to mutate into a much deadlier version.  As reported by MSN News in 2009, genetic analysis has proven such mutated viruses have caused at least seven separate outbreaks in Nigeria.
According to the CDC the last case of wild polio in the US—meaning polio caused naturally and not due to the live polio vaccine—occurred in 1979. From 1980 through 1999, there were NO wild polio cases in the US. Instead we had 144 cases of vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) caused by live oral polio vaccine.
Polio outbreaks in Haiti and the Dominican Republic in 2002 were also traced back to a strain of oral polio vaccine (OPV) that mutated back to virulence.
According to a report by Neil Z. Miller of the Global Vaccine Institute, the live polio virus from the vaccine can remain in your throat for one to two weeks and in your feces for up to two months. So not only is the vaccine recipient at risk, but he or she can potentially spread the disease to others.
In 1999, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommended that the United States replace the live-virus vaccine with an inactivated “killed” virus vaccine, which is what remains in use today. However, the inactivated polio virus vaccine has not been without its share of serious side effects either.

Rotavirus Vaccine Contaminated with Pig Virus

Last year, the US FDA suspended the rotavirus vaccine Rotarixafter an independent lab discovered it was contaminated with “a substantial amount” of DNA from the porcine circovirus. In pigs, this virus causes poor growth, weight loss, weakness, enlarged lymph nodes, skin rashes, difficulty breathing, jaundice, stomach ulcers, and sudden death.
As expected, both the FDA and GlaxoSmithKline spokespeople stated that the contaminated Rotarix vaccine carried no known human health risks. However, this is easy to say since there are no studies to confirm or deny a link between these viruses and human disease.
In the case of the polio vaccine, the link between the SV40 virus and human cancer wasn’t discovered until 40 years later!  It is actually surprisingly common for vaccines to contain various animal matter, including foreign animal tissues containing genetic material (DNA/RNA).
Once the Rotarix contamination was discovered, new technology was used to test eight infectious attenuated viral vaccines, and in addition to Rotarix, two others contained “unexpected viral sequences”:
  1. A measles vaccine was found to contain low levels of the retrovirus avian leukosis (AVL) virus—a virus known to cause cancer in chickens. This despite the fact that vaccine manufacturers have been required to use eggs from leucosis-free stocks for over 40 years.
  2. Rotateq, Merck’s rotavirus vaccine, was found to contain a virus similar to simian (monkey) retrovirus—the SV40 virus previously linked to human cancer.
Are you willing to bet that they a) know what they’re talking about, and b) are telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the potential health dangers of all these vaccines?

HPV Vaccine Now Routine for Boys as Well…

So far, very few parents have voluntarily lined up their sons for the HPV vaccine, but that may soon change. As reported by Paging Dr. Gupta, the American Academy of Pediatrics’ 2011 schedule of recommended routine vaccines for children and teens now includes the HPV vaccine for boys aged 9-18 as well.
Folks, this is a disaster in the making. I shudder to think about the statistics we’ll see in a few years if parents fall for this nonsense.
I urge you to consider the risks already revealed in the four short years since Gardasil came on the market. Already, there are close to 21,000 reported incidents of adverse effects and death, despite the fact that only two out of every 10 women in the approved age group have gotten the vaccine so far.
Add to this the fact that an estimated 90 to 99 percent of all adverse effects are never reported, and the abnormally large risks of the HPV vaccine compared to other vaccines should give most people reason to pause.
Although the FDA ultimately dismisses all side effects, including deaths, as being within the norm, even they have stated that:
“In VAERS, a higher proportion of Gardasil reports were of syncope [fainting] and VTEs [venous thromboembolic events] compared with other vaccines.
And according to the National Vaccine Information Center, the incidents of miscarriage and still birth events from Gardasil supersede the same event from all other vaccinations.
According to a recent Sane Vax press release on PR Log:
“There is no doubt the vaccine’s safety and efficacy has not been thoroughly investigated. And independent investigation on the safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix must be conducted before there are more injuries and deaths.”
What’s most frustrating about this is that not a single one of these 21,000 children and young women needed to be harmed or die.
There are still outstanding questions about whether HPV is or is not the direct cause of cervical cancer. The FDA knows there are many other co-factors involved with the development of cervical cancer, and as of 2003 acknowledged that “most infections (by HPV) are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer.” The same news release also states that “with proper screening, cervical cancer is avoidable, and if caught early, curable.”
In essence, three years before the HPV vaccine came upon the scene, they knew that what was needed—if anything—was simply improved screening methods, such as regular pap smear testing for girls and women that are far less risky than getting an HPV shot.
Interestingly, and disturbingly, routine pap smears have DECLINED, coinciding neatly with the release of the HPV vaccine. Between 2007 and 2010, cervical cancer screening rates declined by nearly 7 percent, the New York Times reportedin December of last year.
When you consider that the HPV vaccine increases your risk of cancer if you’re already infected with certain types of HPV, this is a double-whammy of bad news since rarely, if ever, are girls and women given HPV pap screening before they get an HPV shot.
It’s all madness! Not only is the HPV vaccine is one of the mostunnecessary vaccines on the market, it is also the most dangerous! And now they want to unleash it on young boys, and they’re trying to get it approved for older women as well.

Weighing Benefits versus Risks

Even without a potential contamination scare, there are serious risks to every vaccine. The HPV vaccine is a perfect example. So before vaccinating you really need to be certain that the benefits will outweigh those risks.
In the case of Rotarix, along with RotaTeq (a similar vaccine made by Merck), the benefits are very questionable, especially if you live in the United States or another developed country. Typically, when a child in the United States contracts rotavirus, and most do in infancy and early childhood, all that is required is lots of rest, good nutrition and plenty of fluids to prevent dehydration from diarrhea. This infection also provides natural immunity that will protect your child for life.
Along with showing little benefit for a disease that is typically entirely treatable with fluids and rest, a recent drug review by the FDA found that Rotarix is associated with an increase in pneumonia-related deaths in children, compared to a placebo.
So with this particular vaccine, children living in developed countries like the US are potentially taking on serious risks with what appears to be very little benefit — and that was before the contamination was uncovered.
In the case of the HPV vaccine (Gardasil and Cervarix) the choice is clear. It has a high rate of risk and the potential benefits are unproven:
  • In more than 70 percent of cases, HPV clears up on its own within a few weeks or months. In over 90 percent of cases, it’s gone within two years, causing no symptoms or disease.
  • Only about 26 percent of girls and women ages 14 to 59 have been exposed to any HPV strain at all; and
  • Only 2 percent have been exposed to strains 16 or 18 – the two that Gardasil and Cervarix protect against – meaning this vaccine is completely unnecessary because HPV infection very rarely leads to cancer.
  • Women whose partners wore condoms during vaginal intercourse are 70 percent less likely to become infected with HPV. That’s a FAR greater level of protection than you can get from this vaccine!
The moral of the story?
Do your homework before subjecting your children to any vaccine. A great way to get started is to simply use the Search Feature at the top of each of my Web pages and search my site as it contains a litany of research on vaccine safety, and the lack thereof. The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) also provides well-referenced information on vaccines and diseases, such as HPV, rotavirus and polio.
 Source: http://www.thenhf.com/article.php?id=3643

Tuesday, March 12, 2013

Studies Demonstrate The More Educated You Are, The Less Chance You Will Vaccinate

 Dave Mihalovic , PreventDisease.com

More educated parents are less likely to vaccinate, which contradicts the misconceptions of many health professionals who profess that parents don't vaccinate because they are under-educated, poor or misinformed.
One publication of medical research linking the MMR vaccine to autism in The Lancet in February 1998 sparked a decade-long controversy about the triple jab. Following the initial publication, the uptake rate of the MMR vaccine dropped from 92% in 1997/98 to 80% in 2003/04.
A report examines how the response to the MMR controversy varied between parents with different levels of education. It revealed that:
  • Before 1998, highly educated parents were up to 8% more likely to take up the MMR vaccine than parents with lower education.
  • By 2002, this gap had not only closed; it had actually been reversed, with highly educated parents being 2-3% less likely to accept the MMR vaccine.
  • Most of the relative decline in the MMR uptake by highly educated parents occurred soon after the controversy broke when the media coverage was still relatively low.
  • After the increased media attention in 2001 and 2002, there were no discernible differences in trends across educational groups.
  • The controversy also appears to have had effects on the uptake of other childhood vaccines: after 1998, highly educated parents also reduced their relative uptake of other non-controversial childhood vaccines.

The relative decline in uptake by highly educated parents also potentially has wider significance. Generally speaking, individuals with more education have better health. This is possibly because they are better informed about how to achieve better health outcomes. The finding that highly educated parents were the first to react to the information that the MMR had potential side effects is consistent with this hypothesis.

More encouraging for anti-vaccine advocates is the finding that highly educated parents also reduced their uptake of other non-controversial childhood vaccines, a good sign that most of the hidden toxins in vaccines are slowly being discovered by parents and the public in general.

Another finding published in the journal PLoS Medicine, showed that parents with more education were less likely to let their daughters get HPV shots. It also adds to a growing body of evidence that suggests vaccination efforts are being rightfully eroded not by people who are under-educated, but by upper-middle class folks with degrees.

"People are slowly empowering themselves by cross referencing reputable information in the alternative media and questioning the frequent pseudoscience of public health officials, academics or doctors which make up the bulk of vaccination misinformation." said Naturopath, Dr. Dave Mihalovic.
"They're used to making choices in their jobs and in their life, one. And two, they make those choices based on information. And the information that one gets here probably is primarily through places like the Internet, which is a source of both good and bad information about vaccines," vaccine expert Dr. Paul Offit said when asked to comment on the study.

The study comes on the tail of another published Tuesday which showed that there has been a sharp increase in the percentage of U.S. parents who are refusing to vaccinate their children or delaying vaccination against the advice of the medical community.
That study, presented at an international conference in Vancouver, found 39 per cent of parents refused or delayed vaccinations for their children in 2008, up from 22 per cent in 2003.
Offit, who is chief of infectious diseases at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, was not involved in either study.
The HPV study was conducted primarily by researchers at the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control and the University of British Columbia.
The group surveyed parents of Grade 6 girls who had been eligible to get HPV or human papillomavirus vaccine through a free, school-based program in B.C. in the 2008-09 school year.
Lead author Dr. Gina Ogilvie said lots of studies had explored whether parents intended to let their daughters get vaccinated, but the group wanted to follow up to see what drove parents' decisions to grant or decline permission for their daughters to get the shot when it was available.
About half of the 4,000-plus randomly selected households agreed to take part. Just over 65 per cent of the daughters in those households had received the vaccine; 35 per cent of the parents had refused permission.
Parents were asked to describe the primary reason behind their decision and asked for secondary reasons as well.
Nearly half (47.9 per cent) of those who let their daughters get HPV shots said they did so because they had confidence in the effectiveness of the vaccine. Advice from a doctor and concern for the health of the daughter also played into yes decisions.
Among the parents who said no, concern about vaccine safety was listed as the major reason for the decision (29.2 per cent). A substantial portion -- 15.6 per cent -- felt their daughters were too young to get the vaccine and listed that as their major reason.
When the researchers compared the families that said yes and those that said no, interesting differences came to light.
Girls from two-parent households were less likely to have been given permission to get the shot. And parents with more education were more likely to have said no.
Ogilvie called it "the main surprise" of the study. "This is a flip from our traditional understanding," she said.
A 2004 study by researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control showed children ho hadn't received any shots at all "tended to be white, to have a mother who was married and had a college degree, to live in a household with an annual income exceeding $75,000 and to have parents who expressed concerns regarding the safety of vaccines and indicated that medical doctors have little influence over vaccination decisions for their children," said the study, published in the journal Pediatrics.

Offit said the trend is indeed a shift.
"The surprising part is that someone who would be better educated would be less likely to get the vaccine," he said.
Another study in the journal The American Journal of Public Health, which surveyed 11,860 families, found that mothers who had not finished high school were 16% more likely to have completed the whole vaccination schedule for their children.

Lower education levels and socioecomonic status was associated with higher completion rates for vaccination.

Rates of compliance were also higher in Hispanic and black low income families.

"It's a an excellent example of how more education and awareness translates to better health," said Dr. Mihalovic.

Dr. Kronenfeld, a professor of sociology in the School of Social and Family Dynamics at Arizona State University, said
'“There is a controversy among more educated mothers about the safety of certain kinds of immunization, That may be part of what is going on here, but we don’t know for sure.”

Vaccination rates for children insured by commercial plans dropped almost four percentage points between 2008 and 2009, even though the rate of children on Medicaid getting vaccinated is rising.

"Rates had been gradually improving in the commercial plans. This was the first time we'd seen a drop -- and it was a pretty big drop," said Sarah Thomas, vice president of public policy and communication for the National Committee for Quality Assurance, which recently released its annual State of Health Care Quality report.

Although vaccination rates last year were still mostly higher among children in private health plans rather than Medicaid, researchers and other experts suspect that a counterintuitive trend in American demographics is at work: Parents in a relatively high socio-economic bracket -- with more education and relatively high incomes -- forgoing vaccines because of fears about their safety, with poor individuals taking good advantage of their access to free or extremely low-cost care to have their children immunized.

"We didn't really explore the reasons [for the trend], but one leading hypothesis is that parents have decided not to get their children vaccinated because of concerns about the potential for side effects and even autism," said Thomas.

The authors found a drop in several routine childhood vaccinations. Measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccines decreased from 93.5 percent in 2008 to 90.6 percent in 2009; diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough rates fell from 87.2 percent to 85.4 percent in that one-year period; and the proportion of kids getting vaccinated for chickenpox fell from 92 percent in 2008 to 90.6 percent in 2009 (Source: US News Health, 3rd November 2010)

Parents are gradually waking up to the dangers of vaccines. Those who have a university education and a well paid job, are in a better position to research vaccinations and know their rights. Education is power and they and those most invested in health and research are most likely to avoid vaccinations at all costs, a trend that is welcome and timely for future generations.


Dave Mihalovic is a Naturopathic Doctor who specializes in vaccine research, cancer prevention and a natural approach to treatment.