My Appearance on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart

by Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 3, 2014

the daily show_mini

Last night, I appeared on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, a show which airs on the Comedy Channel.

I got word that my interview was going to air on last night’s show a bit too late yesterday to post a blog about it. I was also asked by the show’s staff not to alert readers prior to yesterday that the episode was in the works as this would give competitors a heads-up about their content.

If you missed it, no worries.  I’ve got the link to the show below.

The segment was filmed in April when I got an invitation to fly to New York and be interviewed by the hilarious and very talented correspondent Samantha Bee about my position of no vaccination for my children.

I had a great time and enjoyed the experience tremendously.  The Daily Show staff was very professional despite a grueling 4 1/2 hour interview.  We got started just after 11am and worked until 3:30pm without even a break for lunch! I got the feeling that these folks work this way basically every day!

Fortunately, the interview itself was punctuated with a lot of laughter at the hilarity of Ms. Bee’s antics throughout. Some of the funniest clips got edited out, which disappointed me.  But, all in all, it was a privilege to participate in a satire of such an important issue of our day.  I had a great time.

I knew before I accepted the interview that the goal of the segment would be to make me and parents like me look ridiculous – it’s comedy after all!

No worries.  This didn’t really bother me much.  I’m a blogger after all.  It’s pretty hard to hurt my feelings or make me feel embarrassed about much of anything!

My hope by doing the show was to demonstrate to the Moms and Dads who watched that it doesn’t matter how you are bullied or made fun of for the position to not vaccinate even when you are put up against the likes of Dr. Paul Awful Offit, the infectious disease pediatrician who is trotted out at every turn by the mass media to trumpet pro-vaccination propaganda.

The Daily Show segment was no exception.  I wasn’t surprised to see Dr. Offit included as part of the interview.

Incidentally, Dr. Proffit Offit and other vaccine defenders have significant financial ties to the very industry they promote and defend as reported by CBS news.  Why The Daily Show didn’t hammer him for this is disappointing.

CBS News reported:

Then there’s Paul Offit, perhaps the most widely-quoted defender of vaccine safety. 

He’s gone so far as to say babies can tolerate “10,000 vaccines at once.” 

This is how Offit described himself in a previous interview: “I’m the chief of infectious disease at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and a professor of pediatrics at Penn’s medical school,” he said.

Offit was not willing to be interviewed on this subject but like others in this CBS News investigation, he has strong industry ties. In fact, he’s a vaccine industry insider.

Offit holds in a $1.5 million dollar research chair at Children’s Hospital, funded by Merck. He holds the patent on an anti-diarrhea vaccine he developed with Merck, Rotateq, which has prevented thousands of hospitalizations.

And future royalties for the vaccine were just sold for $182 million cash. Dr. Offit’s share of vaccine profits? Unknown.

Are No-Vaxers “Science Deniers”

“The Epidemic of Idiocy” that The Daily Show segment labels the no-vaccination movement is head scratching given that the anti-vaccine movement is being led by the most educated in our society.

Are all those parents with college degrees, master’s degrees, PhDs and, yes, even many MDs that are saying no to shots for their kids complete idiots?

Of course not!

No-vax parents aren’t the real “science deniers”.  In fact, they the ones most interested in the science because they are digging into the research  and demanding unbiased, objective data to support vaccination, not the slanted version presented by the CDC and conventional pediatricians like Dr. Offit who makes millions supporting the very industry that handsomely maintains his lifestyle.

So Why Do an Interview Where You are a Target?

Ultimately, I decided to go and do the interview because I thought that bringing comedy to this subject was highly appropriate given how “up to their eyeballs in you know what” most people are when it comes to the vaccination issue.

My goal was simply to come off as a normal Mom who is determined and confident in my decision to embolden other parents that might not be as far along the no-vax track as I am.  I decided not to vaccinate in 1997 … google didn’t even exist then.  I read books and scanned microfiche at the library to educate myself about the other side of the vaccination issue that most are completely in the dark about.

I was pleasantly surprised when I saw the segment last night.  I honestly thought it would be much more one-sided than it was.

Of course, the juicy bits where I discuss many of the lies and inconsistencies of the pro-vaccine argument are all edited out.  They are just strung together as sound bites with no explanation to make it look like I’m off my rocker. I expected that … it’s comedy right?

The folks who are truly open minded and want to know why herd immunity as it applies to vaccination is a myth, why unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated, or the eye popping list of the dangerous ingredients in each and every vaccine vial that carry the high risk of autoimmune disease that burdens children for a lifetime can click here to check out the over 60 articles on various aspects of the issue here on this blog. Alternatively, go to the National Vaccine Information Center website (nvic.org) if you prefer.

The Segment Ends with Resignation of the No-Vax Position Which is Awesome!

In the end, I was happy with the segment as it seemed to conclude that nothing could be done to stop the no-vax trend which is completely true.  It also seemed resigned to allowing people to make up their own minds, which is fantastic!

One reader emailed me this morning with the same conclusion. No vaxers are called right wing, conservative nutjobs in the beginning of the segment and liberal idiots, the complete opposite, at the end.  It confuses the issue, makes fun of the whole argument between the two sides and ended up being good comedic journalism.  I’m glad I took the risk and did the show.

Besides, it was nothing short of thrilling to see the words “HERD IMMUNITY IS A MYTH” actually spoken on national television, as far as I know, possibly for the very first time. While some will brush it off as ridiculous, others will investigate and see that in fact it is true with regard to artificially induced immunity via vaccination.

Woot!

View the full episode here (the vaccination segment is about 10 minutes in).

What do you think?

Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist

 

Comments (162)

  1. Hello Sarah,

    I think I am one of the few males who read your blog.

    I saw your appearance on the daily show, and it made you look ridiculous. Of course, you knew that would happen, and you explained you knew it going in, but you are happy with what you could get out of it.

    I use google to find information and never will I feel bad about that. In the same vein, I do not feel bad when I go to the library and search the shelves for information. I also do not feel bad when I use observation and critical thinking when I make a decision.

    It seems scientists and government downplay the thinking skills of the population, and on top of that ensure they are not questioned… pure authority and the appearance of a dictatorship. If they were so sure they were right, they should let people make the decision they want freely, without red tape. Then, if unvaccinated kids die due to ‘lack of vaccines’, then that is all the proof we need. Let the ****ers die I say.

    Of course, they come out and say it destroys herd immunity, leaving the vaccinated population to get these diseases. Doesn’t that prove that vaccines will not work? If I choose t vaccinated for a disease before I travel to protect myself, and the area I go to the majority of people are not vaccinated, I should expect to get infected, right? Using their logic, getting vaccines before you travel makes no freaking sense.

    The decision if we should vaccinate uses lots of fear. We are told if we do not get the vaccines, our children will die. Many people are forced to get vaccinated.. the lose their rights. Democracy, or a friendly dictatorship?

    I disagree with vaccination not because I completely understand the science. In fact, I do not understand it at all, and that is worrisome. They use simple graphs and never say the negatives. Science is used by those in power to cement their authority, much like the power the church once had in our culture. I understand when something has truth mixed with lies, and I err on choosing not to vaccinate because I do not trust those who are in power, plain and simple.

    Power to the people.

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 29, 2014 at 4:41 pm

      Interesting take, Jay. Thanks for commenting. Along those same lines, I had dinner a few months back with a middle aged MD who told me that he doesn’t believe a single thing the CDC says anymore because there is always an agenda behind it and one that doesn’t favor health .. it favors control.

      Reply
  2. Handthatrocksthecradle June 19, 2014 at 8:59 am

    Good job. Despite the spin, you came across as very grounded. Like a mature parent forced to tolerate a pain in the neck, mischievous child, you were patient, firm and no nonsense , as well as unwavering in your convictions. No worries. You did not allow our side to lose any ground. They could have chosen an interviewee that was more aligned with the pro-vax propagandists’ manipulative depiction of an unstable, conspiracy minded anti-vaxer, but instead they chose a very normal, albeit unconventional person to interview. For me, that was some consolation at least. Remember, they have chosen to employ the tactic that the best defense is a good offense

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 19, 2014 at 9:04 am

      Interesting … during times when the camera was off, Samantha Bee and I discussed how we BOTH has a bad vaccine reaction to the tetanus booster in college. We both had the same problem .. mine was a bit more severe than hers as I had trouble breathing for months afterward (started within hours of the shot). My personal belief is that Samantha is a sympathizer with those who choose not to vax.

      Reply
      • Handthatrocksthecradle June 19, 2014 at 9:52 am

        Not completely sold by Bee’s off camera comments.. Grifters and sociopaths (am I being redundant?) always, and I mean always, feign empathy, even if they have to make it up on the fly.

        As a mother of a vax injured child, those two “comedy” pieces were as funny as a broken crutch. It confirms my suspicion that the Stewarts, Colberts, SNLs, and Oprahs of our society are very often propaganda tools for the oligarchs, which BTW, pretty much control mainstream media quite effectively.

        Was it not Hitler who commented something along the lines of “It is the luck of the ruler that men do not think”?

        It would not surprise me at all that Bee made these off-camera remarks. Having stopped short of dropping trou to take a vax on the cheek for sake of her art, perhaps she has more in common with the college educated “hysterics” she derides who question vax safety than she cares or dares to admit.

        Worst of all, in the event that she does hold those beliefs privately and still chooses to promote dangerous vaccine policies that will undoubtedly injure thousands of more children by holding anti vaxers and parents of vax injured children up to ridicule for some chuckles and blood money that she would euphemistically call a paycheck, that would make her an immoral, unethical hack IMO,

        Reply
        • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
          Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 19, 2014 at 10:10 am

          Not unusual for folks to make a living doing something they don’t believe in personally. Sad but true.

          Reply
          • Handthatrocksthecradle June 21, 2014 at 11:31 am

            When and if those individuals that vociferously extol the virtues of “herd immunity” agree to have their titer levels checked and its results made public, THEN agree to be publicly administered boosters in the event they show no immunity, then and only then can there be intelligent discourse about so-called herd immunity IMO.

            Until then, I will consider the Colbert, Stewarts and Bees, Offits, etc. elitist who waffle with respect to vaccines as people who talk out of both sides of their “entitled” mouths.

            It finally dawned on me why the pieces did not appear to take a stance entirely in support or against mass vax policies. (Clutch my pearls, what if there is any truth to autism/auto-immunity/ vaccine link?) On the one hand, they probably like the idea of vaccine freedom so that they or their progeny are not subject to forced vaccine policies. On the other hand, they would like to promote the idea of the “masses” getting their flu shots and THEIR kids vaccinated.

            God forbid their little Piper or Page should get sneezed on at the playground or at the petting zoo!

            If it is ANY time to get the net to contain the insane, it is now. We need to stop being on the defensive so much and call these hypocritical, rabid pro-vaxers out.

            Put THEM on the defensive for promoting dangerously insane and aggressive vaccine policies, particularly in light of the autism epidemic that continues to increase.

  3. Pingback: How Colbert and (Jon Stewart) Daily Show Improve American Politics? | Eslkevin's Blog

  4. Pingback: Jon Stewart Perfectly Mocks Liberals Who Deny Science | Blogsfera

  5. Wow Sarah, I am SO impressed by your reaction to your Daily Show appearance. I am not so sure I could remain as composed and continue to respond with such grace. I love John Stewart and to tell you the truth I was horrified at the segment. I am glad I read your response, it brings me back to the bigger picture instead of feeling so angry.

    Reply
  6. Pingback: Saying No To Vaccines Appears On The Daily Show |

  7. Pingback: Saying No To Vaccines Appears On The Daily Show « wchildblog

      • YAY!!
        so glad to hear that, and CONGRATULATIONS on the interview-you were great!!! I’m sure you got a lot of people thinking, and hopefully, doing some research on their own, keeping their kids unvaccinated.
        THANK YOU for doing what you do!!
        An aside, I want to mention-you are the one who I learned about (among other things) making kefir from, and now, not only does my whole family enjoy daily milk kefir, water kefir, and fermented veggies we make from the kefir whey, but we have turned on friends and family to it, too. Even my completely asleep in-laws enjoy making and drinking their own milk kefir. I always direct people to your kefir how-to videos when I share grains with them, and I hope they check out the rest of your site when they’re there ;)

        Thanks, and congrats again, Sarah!

        Reply
  8. Hi Sarah,
    Great job! I’m a special education advocate, helping parents to get the appropriate services for their kids. This year my practice was more than 50% vaccine injured, and those are only the ones who are diagnosed. Testified when they tried to make vaccine exemptions harder to get in Colorado this year — I find it hysterical that liberal educated me is lumped with the conservative crowd. But it was a party line vote — and I was incredibly appalled to see how my own party voted.
    Glad to have found your blog.
    Yael

    Reply
  9. Pingback: Activist Post: Saying No To Vaccines Appears On The Daily Show | The Invisible Opportunity: Hidden Truths Revealed

  10. Hi Sara,

    I think you did a great job. I’m happy I found your blog, and have realized how harmful vaccines are. Keep up the good work.

    Reply
  11. I’m sorry I didn’t like it. I’m not a fan of the sound bite mentality. I also question why Jon Stewart who typically brings subjects to light which are a bit under the radar, and typically gives people more opportunity to present the “other side”; would obviously take an attack position. I don’t care if it is a comedy, he should have had more respect. Not going to watch his show again.

    Reply
  12. Do you have the show in any other format? We Canadians aren’t able to see clips from the Daily Show.

    You’d think we were in another country or something. ;)

    ~A

    Reply
  13. Pingback: ActivistPost – Heather Callaghan – Saying No To Vaccines Appears On The Daily Show – 6 June 2014 | Lucas 2012 Infos

  14. Pingback: Saying No To Vaccines Appears On The Daily Show | Living For Longer

  15. Pingback: Polish Gazette - Saying No To Vaccines Appears On The Daily Show

    • So you are saying there isn’t a consensus outside of the people that actually understand, have a degree in, and spent their careers studying infections diseases and viral organisms. Really? Who gives a flying flunk what people that don’t understand the science, think? You realize that is what you said?

      “The people that really understand how all this stuff exactly works support them, but i don’t care what they say. I am with all the folks that REALLY just speculate without any real knowledge to support my stance.”

      I can get on board with stretching the “18 month plan” out over three years as opposed to overwhelming an infant/toddler. I can get on board with avoiding vaccines that prevent diseases that aren’t life-threatening, such as Offit’s anti-diarrhea vaccine and chicken pox. But to forgo every vaccine science has worked to discover and produce, just because someone makes some money off of it is a very misguided approach. Is there a problem with big pharma? Of course there is, but the problem is in the field of economics and politics. Not the actual science behind what they do.

      Reply
      • That’s actually not what she said. All she said was that there is no concensus outside the medical/pharmaceutical communities. In other words, plenty of scientists and other educated people exist outside of the medical/pharmaceutical communities who know enough about the so-called science, who know enough about the history of science and its mistakes, and who know enough about the current entanglement of science and corporate profit to make an educated decision to avoid vaccinations.

        Reply
  16. First, Sarah, thank you for taking the risk to put yourself out there. The comedy story was ridiculous, but also sided on the pro-vax side. That was disappointing to me. Here’s a better link:
    http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/pq3cmr/robert-de-niro
    Thank you for all the information you put out into the world, I love your site and blog!
    Leah E. McCullough
    Speaker and Author
    Freedom From Fibromyalgia: 7 Steps To Complete Recovery

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 5, 2014 at 8:58 am

      Those of us older than college aged have for the most part *never had a booster for decades*. Since it is well recognized that inferior, pathetic vaccine induced immunity lasts about 2 years and at the very most 10 years, over 50% of the population has been walking around with zero immunity for years. Herd immunity … baloney.

      Reply
    • There are obvious parts of that article that have been proven wrong. Like for instance Chicken Pox immunity is not for 20 years. They now give a booster.

      Reply
      • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
        Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 6, 2014 at 11:31 am

        Yes, indeed. Good point. Arrogant “assumption” is the mother of all scientific error. When my Dad was in medical school, he was taught that vaccine induced immunity lasted a lifetime like natural immunity. Whoops! Big mistake, big HUGE mistake wouldn’t you say?

        Reply
        • He was obviously taught wrong. Because tetanus/diphtheria boosters every ten years has been around for at least half a century. It has been known that even if you get and survive either of those bacterial infections, you can get it again.

          Also, some viral diseases do not confer permanent immunity. My mother was surprised when I got mumps a second time around. Though the fairy tale being given that you got it only on one side or the other, but during epidemics of mumps (like 1968 when I got it again), lots of kids got it a second time.

          It seems unreasonable to expect a vaccine to work better at providing immunity than the actual disease.

          Reply
  17. Sarah,
    You are a class act and my new hero. Thank you for having the guts and the grace that too few of us have!

    Reply
  18. I generally avoid comment sections, but I want to shout out some support on this important topic. What you did takes real courage. It is (sadly) refreshing to see even two extremes presented on this subject vs the universal vax drum typically heard.

    Reply
  19. Pingback: Anti-Science and Science Denial: It Isn’t Just for the Political Right? « The Skeptical Teacher

  20. Could someone please point me to where in the 21 minute show that Sarah’s portion is on? I keep getting bogged down by their commercials and I have better things to do than watch the whole show right now. I used to enjoy The Daily Show, but am in a phase of life where I don’t see the humor of making other people wrong. Thanks!

    Reply
  21. Sarah, all I have to say is keep on keeping on! All of us working hard day in and day out to shed light on the dangers and inefficacies of vaccines, not to mention the corruption, lies, and billion-dollar profits behind them, are making a HUGE dent!

    I love when they (the CDC, the FDA, the AAP, the media, etc.) can’t figure out which numbers to use for how many people are now NOT following the CDC-recommended vaccine schedule, and/or are NOT allowing vaccines for their children at all! They have to find (invent) the sweet spot between making people fear that not enough people are getting vaccinated while making sure that the number isn’t too high because then people will wonder what others know that they don’t know (i.e. that vaccines are NOT a good idea, and wreak havoc on humans of all ages!).

    Clearly, the current number of parents choosing not to allow vaccines for their children is growing exponentially (thank goodness!), thus the vaccine mania and fear mongering by all those whose bread and butter is tied to vaccine uptake.

    Your blog is excellent…keep up your great work!

    Reply
  22. Hi Sarah, Thank you for doing this all with such a great demeanor. I am grateful to you and organizations like the NVIC. My oldest child and I have both been injured due to vaccines and have been on the road to recovery for a couple of years now. I have had a chip on my shoulder about the vaccine issue and am working on letting go of my anger. Your ability to present the info and not get sucked into the drama is an inspiration. Thank you!

    Reply
  23. Rebecca Campbell June 4, 2014 at 6:02 pm

    Well we all know which way the daily show leans. We can just laugh at this and appreciate Sarah’s willingness to laugh because it is such a serious topic, it’s nice to lighten up once in a while. Anyone educated about the truth about vaccines can understand what Sarah was saying despite the obvious editing. Also, I really liked your white blazer Sarah, looking great. And you looked like what did I get myself into! when she started foaming at the mouth. I don’t know how you kept it together! Haha

    Reply
  24. You are brave! You mentioned the thousands of hospitalizations supposedly prevented from Dr. Offit’s vaccine, but there was no mention of the 200++ children who DIED following his vaccine. I wonder how THOSE PARENTS feel about his vaccine. It begs discussion on the issue of ethics whereby one group thinks sacrificing children on the left to save other children on the right is ethical. I certainly find it unethical when the parents are not given complete information and the right to decide the issue for themselves and they are bullied into the administration of vaccinations, and then AFTER THE FACT are informed that they cannot sue over the damage or death of their child. I would love to know how many of THOSE families – those harmed or killed by the rotavirus vaccine got compensated through the VICF. I would like to hear their stories. I bet they don’t hold Offit in high regard.

    Reply
  25. Dear Sarah:

    I am a parent, and like you, deeply committed to the wellbeing of my children and those in my community. I commend you for your courage in presenting your case on The Daily Show. But with respect, Lena’s comment is correct: “you and all the other parents who don’t vaccinate their kids are benefiting from the other millions of people who do”. This is the essence of herd immunity, and its success has allowed us to forget about the enormous suffering associated with infectious diseases. Sadly, as the number of vaccinated individuals in the community decreases, the protective effect of herd immunity is lost, and the risk of infection for your children increases, as it does for those who are too young or elderly to be vaccinated. By promoting a non- vaccination lifestyle, you actively amplify this risk.

    It is true, as Tz says that “few Children are going to the regions of Pakistan where Polio is going around”, but conversely polio only needs one infected individual to travel in the other direction to infect your community. And closer to home for example, measles can easily be caught in- or carried from- one US state to another.

    Vaccination is the most pragmatic way to prevent large scale suffering from these diseases, and the demonstrable success of vaccines is precisely why we now underestimate the suffering we will face if the diseases return.

    It would therefore be helpful to hear how you will protect your community from infection in absence of vaccination? One solution may be to live in a closed community, isolated from the world. Another may be to test each individual coming into the community for active infection and if positive, quarantine him/her. Neither solution seems terribly practical, so assuming that infected individuals will at some point visit your community and infect the unvaccinated, have you considered how your community will manage the subsequent outbreak? Vaccines are very effective in preventing the spread of infectious diseases and so vaccinating ourselves and our families is the responsible way to protect them and our communities.

    Reply
  26. I am one of those “health nuts”, I grew up the child of “health nuts”. Crazy people who went against the standard culture. Neither my 3 sisters nor I have every been vaccinated. Nor have our children been vaccinated. We have lived and traveled to many other countries and have been around sick people throughout our lives. We don’t run from people who have the flu. Yet we don’t get sick or we don’t get sick for long. People ask me what I do when I really get sick like for a week or two. I tell them the truth that I have never been sick for a week. If I feel by body I fighting something I chose the “health nut” way. I get my spine adjusted by my chiropractor, make sure I am sleeping enough and make sure my nutrition in as perfect as possible.
    Also my parents still live in the same neighborhood I grew up in and almost all of my friends parents are medicated, sick or dead. Versus my parents who are in their 70’s are healthy and strong and medication free! Maybe being different is better? It has been for us!

    Reply
    • Love your story and perspective, Joe! Thanks for sharing. My one vax-injured but stopped vax’ed child and her unvax’ed brothers are very proud of the fact that among their combined 27 years on earth, we can count 4 at the most vomits among them. And one was a carsick episode.

      I and my brothers were heavily vaccinated as children and we were some vomitting kids!! Back then it was oral polio drops and live measles and rubella vaccines. Today, my kids’ friends and vax’ed cousins have all had more vomiting episodes than they can count. Compare that to 4 yacks across 3 kids and 27 years.

      There’s good, healthy company on the road less traveled.

      Reply
      • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
        Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 6, 2014 at 2:31 pm

        Yes, my unvaxed children are much healthier than I am. I was fully vaxed but it was *fortunately* delayed until I was schoolage at least. I would be a much healthier adult if I had been unvaxed completely as a child. But, fortunately healthy diet keeps me going despite the toxic onslaught of the shots as a child. Better to never have that junk injected in the first place.

        Reply
  27. I have two questions for you.
    1) Could you live with yourself if your unvaccinated child got sick? And perhaps more importantly;
    2) Could you live with yourself if your unvaccinated child caused someone else to get sick (a not-yet-vaccinated newborn, a person who is ill with a vulnerable immune system, or another unvaccinated child?)

    I am a mother of multiples and I can’t tell you how scary it is to have multiple not-yet-vaccinated newborns and have to worry about these (preventable!) infectious diseases in my community.

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 4, 2014 at 6:48 pm

      My kids have all had whooping cough 7 years ago. This was discussed in the Daily Show interview, but conveniently edited out. They got it from a vaccinated child! No big deal anyway. I’ve seen vaxed kids with bronchitis that were far, far sicker.

      Reply
    • Could you live with yourself if you allowed your child to be vaccinated and he/she suffered irreversible neurological damage because if it? This does happen. In fact, it happens more often then unvaccinated people in the first world spread serious health problems in their communities.

      Reply
    • It makes me incredibly sad that so called smart people such as yourself can come to the conclusion that you shouldn’t vaccinate. I am a medical student who is having to devote time to learning about diseases that peer reviewed science has showed drastically decreased with the advent of vaccines, but are now coming back thanks to idiots like you. Your children are your own and if you want them to get diseases like pertussis, epiglottitis, and polio be my guest. The only problem is you are putting the rest of us at risk. And in case the rest of these idiots who agree with you are wondering, the fact that you don’t vaccinate and then don’t come down with these diseases is known as anecdotal, and is given practically zero credibility in the medical community. All meta analysis (which is the best) shows vaccines drastically decrease the rates of preventable disesases and save live.

      Reply
      • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
        Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 6, 2014 at 10:48 am

        There are an increasing number of MDs who disagree with you and would tell you that much of what you are learning via you pharmaceutical industry funded medical school education is slick marketing masquerading as science. We anti-vaxers are the ones who actually know the science and are digging in to demand objective answers. Question what you are learning and dig deeper than what you are being told in class.

        Reply
        • GradStudent2014 June 9, 2014 at 4:26 am

          Well, as someone who has gone to medical school, and is currently in a public health graduate program, I can tell you that anti-vaxxers are merely talked about as a social problem to overcome. We are trained to care for patients and to develop relationships, but 99.9% of the hundreds of MDs and public health officials I’ve met have not looked at anti-vaxxing positively.

          We don’t doubt you know a lot about vaccines. We don’t doubt your good intentions. But you have to understand that what you’re saying flies in the face of hundreds of years of basic science (since the 1700′s with the cow/smallpox vaccination). And it’s a shame too, because many of us agree that we have issues with bigPharma and corporate sponsorships, etc..

          There are very good points to be made, and we have very real problems in our society (especially with medical care). Most physicians are not happy with their career and see a lot of problems in the system.. but public health is something that the world actually agrees is a good thing. Believe it or not, most physicians aren’t in it for the money or power… we go to medical school because we actually do care about people. And it makes us sad when people try to tear down public health infrastructure. It hurts all of society, and puts everyone at risk for terrible infectious disease. This isn’t a conspiracy that convinced all these smart doctors/public health officials to think like this, this is hundreds of years of basic science and shared humanist values.

          Reply
          • Aw, it makes you sad when people try to “tear down the public health infrastructure?” It makes me sad when I take my 9 week old baby to the doctor and ask about an inherited predisposition to vaccine reactions and I am fearmongered into giving the shots and then my baby has an encephalitic reaction causing what is usually irreparable damage. It makes me sad when I receive thousands of emails on my site from parents whose babies and older children are injured after a routine vaccination and they are completely ignored by the medical community. It makes me sad when I ask my doctor if the vaccine still contained mercury and he insists it doesn’t and then when he finds out after the fact that it does while reading the package insert, he giggles and says, “Oops.” It makes me sad that doctors stick their heads up their asses and push the pharma dogma without actually looking at the evidence that is right in front of them.

            You want to know the real history of vaccination – watch Dr. Sheri Tenpenny’s DVD about the science of vaccines composed of CDC research and documents. That should be mandatory in medical school. When you step away from the brainwashing and start looking at the real data and real experiences, then you can be really sad. Better yet, spend an afternoon reading the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database. Then you’ll know what sad really is.

      • Peer reviewed has just become another label to decry authority over anything but. As much as we believe in science, like we did with religion, it is all incapsulated with human bias. There is no escaping it. The scientific method, just like per say, the ten commandments, presents a model to follow. However, unless we are truly without emotion, there will always be a potential for error. To err is to be human.

        The best we can do is trust ourselves in what we learn and observe and go with our gut. And love ourselves and those that don’t agree, regardless if the results are in our favor or not.

        Reply
        • Matthew A Armstrong June 8, 2014 at 5:12 am

          Uh, the whole “to err is human” is why peer review exists in the first place. That way, multiple people try to replicate the results. If they can, they’re proven to be correct.

          Reply
          • Hilary

            If you think peer review is about replication of results you are very much mistaken. Peer review is supposed to be where three or four “experts” who are supposed to have an understanding of the topic being proposed for publication, review the paper, recommend whether or not it be published and address any potential flaws they see in the results and methodology.

            If the topic is considered scientifically plausible with a solid scientific thesis behind it, then experts say so, and it is published.

            if it is not, then it’s not published.

            But sometimes it’s not published – not because it’s not worthy to be published, but because it’s medically and politically not expedient to do so.

  28. So, if in 20 yrs time, a resurgence of diseases which have been reduced during the 1980′s to 2010′s appears…. will you be equally as strident a supporter of vaccines?

    Reply
  29. First world problems…Take a trip to some places where mothers see their kids ravaged by preventable diseases all because they were unable to afford vaccines (or get access to vaccines) for their kids. God help us if any of this lunacy ever spreads to the developing world.

    Reply
      • Malawi is not the only developing nation, and I happen to be from one. The point I am making is that getting the measles or polio or any other of these horrible diseases is usually a matter of life or death, especially if you do not have access to the best health care. Holding a gun to someone’s head to get a shot is never the way to do it, but that doesn’t mean other developing nations have not tried education, making the drugs cheaper or free etc. (contrary to popular belief we are not all barbarians). In Primary school, we all got vaccinated at school. They sent home a letter to our parents, got it signed and you lined up for shots….they were free. Some students got exemptions, usually for health reasons or religious reasons (Most religious parents got it anyway and just didn’t tell their pastors). But the important thing was, you got it even if you parents could not afford it.
        Years later, we (my siblings and I) are educated parents and it never even entered my mind not to vaccinate. My uncle is a living testimony, he survived polio but he is severely disabled (my grandma was poor and lived in a rural area and he was not fully immunised)
        The long and short of it is that I think the US can afford an experiment like the one the Anti-Vax movement is trying, unfortunately I fear the currently limping health sector in my country will not fare as well.

        Reply
        • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
          Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 6, 2014 at 11:28 am

          Not sure your point here … this means it’s ok to put a gun to someone’s head to force them to get shots? Sorry, don’t agree. It is tyrannical not to mention highly unethical to force people into any type of medical procedure.

          Reply
          • My points were:
            1. “holding a gun to someone’s head is never the way to do it” I stated this in my post
            2. Malawi is not every developing country so not every country lines people up with a gun to their heads to immunise them. I would even be hesitant to even say this happens everywhere in Malawi
            3. In fact, most developing nations use a combination of education programs, ads (in buses, churches, schools to get people out), free clinics to get more people immunised immunised. Case in point, found out a student in my class had TB two months ago. She was sent to the hospital, we made sure that she was able to do do her exams in the hospital, she got all her study material and they came to the college and tested all the people who came in contact with her (no big scary guys holding guns to our heads). Luckily for us, no one at the school was positive, not too sure about her family, have not gotten an update and they are off for the summer
            4. Globalisation and travel probably help a lot too. If you are going to travel to certain countries (the US and Canada) to study or visit, you have to be fully immunised…

  30. Having just read the insert for the vaccine, Flulaval, produced by GlaxoSmithKline, I am more convinced than ever, we are in danger from vaccinations. The insert admits there is no clinical study, and there is mercury (which when tested independently showed 51 ppm of mercury). There are more reasons listed there regarding other problems with injecting their vaccine, but you can go to a pharmacist and request the information to do your own research.

    I am not anti-vaccinations without reason. I was vaccinated in the 40s as were my children in the late 60s. However, the wide use of dangerous chemicals like mercury (a proven harmful chemical and one which they “claim” has been removed) gives me cause to continue my present opinion. Why lie about something if there is nothing to hide? Furthermore, I don’t believe people are as much anti-vaccines as they are, and as I am, more opposed to the toxic ingredients.

    Scientists insist upon evidence yet do not see it necessary to provide scientific evidence themselves. I wonder if they were to ake out those toxic ingredients, could there be a meeting of the minds? .

    Reply
  31. Yes, it was a bit frustrating to see the anti-vaccinated side to be “bashed” by so-called scientific evidence when there is not enough data, but overall, I am glad you went through with it, knowing you would be painted in a particular light. It shows that more and more people are unhappy with the current system and hopefully this would evoke change, or at least research (if that would be too much to ask for) to show what really goes on with the vaccines that people want to claim are safe for our children when the public as a whole seems to be at high risk for multiple health disorders.

    Reply
  32. Sarah, while I would have advised against giving this show ANY publicity, I respect your convictions and willingness to put it out there.

    As soon as they say science and show the deceptive zoomed in graphs.. you know science and truth were not the goal.

    Keep up the fight.
    r

    Reply
  33. Tauna Grinager June 4, 2014 at 1:15 pm

    I saw the segment the same as you did, Sarah. It was a funny and lighthearted take on an issue that is very polarizing. By the end I felt they made it clear that vaccines aren’t an issue that’s going to go away or made into a black & white, good or bad, topic. My only disappointment is they didn’t make any real digs at Offit. I can’t say I’m at all surprised. Especially since The Daily Show’s way is to take one stance, usually the opposite of what they’re after, to get to their point. With that in mind, I almost feel like they are saying we who don’t vaccinate have a point. Just by them having Offit say on camera that non-vaccinators are highly educated, middle & upper class families in nice neighborhoods…that gives us more cred than some may believe. As you can see in comments everywhere, many still erroneously believe that most non-vaccinators are uneducated, don’t-trust-the-government types. That hasn’t been my experience at all.

    Reply
    • The point of the piece was about more than the vaccination debate, which obviously can’t be addressed in a 5 minute comedy piece. It was meant to point out that even the “highly educated, middle and upper class” is subject to the same kind of thinking you are fond of pointing out in others who don’t share your economic status, your overly large homes, and who may not have a diploma on their studio wall. Being skeptical of big Pharma is fine, and I’d agree with many of you that we depend to much on drugs to solve many problems. But vaccination has a demonstrated record of saving millions of lives. Your issue is indeed a first world issue. If you think you can solve large scale disease outbreaks from the aisle of your local Whole Foods, show the rest of us the cures you have for measles, polio, etc. I’ll believe it if I see it work repeatedly and against a rigorous peer review.

      Reply
  34. I’ll check out the interview but I had a quick question. My last son is vax free……he’s 5 now and very healthy. My only concern is with the tetanus shot. We live in the country and he’s very active- running around barefoot most days. I can’t find a safe alternative or solution to that shot. When he steps on a sharp object I worry about him and feel like I’m overly cleaning his wounds. Ideas?

    Reply
    • Dr. Russell Blaylock says to use hydrogen peroxide for deep wounds, as it will kill the tetanus virus if it happens to be present.

      Reply
  35. Full applause from a highly educated, “most likely to succeed” mom of a vaccine-injured first born followed by 2 extremely healthy unvax’ed sons. Cheers! The billion-dollar profit vaccine manufacturer’s PR engine is in extreme mode right now with the goal being to scare moms like you into fear of speaking out. Comedy is the perfect way to get “the other side of the story” in the media which is screaming measles these days. Well done, Sarah!! Hope you gets lots of new followers who refuse to just “roll up your sleeves and take the shot damnit!”

    Learn more #ageofautism #nvic.org #thinkingmomsrevolution
    Read #ingredientlabels Read #vaccinepackageinserts #yourbodyyourchoice

    Reply
  36. Full marks to you for braving the show, especially when you know they were going to try to diminish you and others that hold your position. It all helps the cause!

    Reply
  37. A Mom in The land of the Free June 4, 2014 at 11:55 am

    You were the best person to be on television with your confidence and straight forward facts! I couldn’t believe watching The Daiky Show w my teenage boys and there was my hero. I have been following your blog for the past two years, and have learned so much.

    I just want to add that the pro-vax people have more confidence in vaccines than the companies who make them as per the vaccine inserts and documentation that states what percentage a vaccine works. No vaccine is 100%, most are 40-60, maybe, depending on the few studies they choose to submit. Why does a consent have to be signed if there were no side effects or precautions, or a release of liability?

    I will add that even though I’m a nurse, I waited until my kids were going to school to get vaccines, which I was under the impression they were mandatory. I had leaned in nursing school that the only reason babies have a schedule of vax is to just make they get done (and pharma gets the money), not bc they are at higher risk; if parents wait, they might not get them done.

    I stopped, or reevaluated vaccines, in 2008, when the only one of my 4 children received the TDap (jr high recommendation by md at the time) and he came down with the worst pneumonia ever that winter. so bad his lung collapsed. It was the only time he ever got sick. So since I stopped, no more tdap, no flu, no gardisil (even though they have the basics.

    I will add that when one of my sons was going to college, our Gen Med Internist recommended vaccines for college, chix pox, meningitis, and a few other new ones. He told her that I, his mom, was questioning the value of vaccines, and he wouldn’t get them. He came out of the office to the waiting room and said, guess what the doctor said, “I don’t vaccinate my kids either but I am required to offer them.” Ironically she is married to another well known MD at a local children’s hospital.

    Thanks for putting this issue in a better perspective!

    Reply
  38. I think people may visit your website after seeing the interview… maybe just for the gel recipe :-) And that’s good news! What I found interesting is that Samantha did her job (tried to make you look stupid crazy) but she didn’t do it with a lot of enthusiasm. She has small children… I wonder if a day with you made her think about her own decision. You did well in a nearly impossible situation– congrats!

    Reply
  39. When I went to the link you provided I got a show with guest Ricky Gervais. I tried searching for your name and only came up with one person – not you. What date were you one the show?

    Reply
  40. Sarah, you wrote, “Dr. Offit and other vaccine defenders have significant financial ties to the very industry they promote and defend…” Last Dec. on her blog, Dr. Amy Tuteur accused you of the very same thing. “Sarah does say:
    In order for me to support my blogging activities, I may receive monetary compensation or other types of remuneration for my endorsement, recommendation, testimonial and/or link to any products or services from this blog.
    Surprise! Sarah links to the products needed to make raw milk “formula”.”
    How do you respond?

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 4, 2014 at 6:57 pm

      A Mommy Blogger making pennies on a link to a reputable company that makes a quality product *and making full disclosure of this fact on the page where the links are featured* is much different than a scientist making millions year after year on patents for vaccines many of which paid for by the government with taxpayer money where no such disclosure and conflict of interest is ever made.

      Reply
  41. Congratulations on your appearance, Sarah. Honestly, I was surprised you were pleased with the result. And I also didn’t see anything funny about the interview at all. In fact, I thought it was more of the same ‘make people who don’t vaccinate look like idiots’ propaganda. I was also really sad to see Jon Stewart join Stephen Colbert in pitching Offit’s ‘pit neighbor against neighbor’ approach.

    I’ve been a fan of both shows for many years but sadly will no longer watch. I didn’t see it as brave on Samantha Bee’s part. And I didn’t see much satire. As the parent of two severely vaccine damaged children, I just saw more of the same BS I’ve had to deal with over the past 12 years.

    But I do applaud you for giving it a go. Now that is brave!

    Reply
  42. Thanks for being brave and appearing on The Daily Show. Many of us know the same facts you do supporting the non-vaccination choices but to go on show and be skewered like that takes guts.
    Wishing you well!

    Reply
    • I don’t think Sarah was skewered at all. Skewering is what used to happen all the time in the past. It has happened repeatedly to Barbara Loe Fisher, author and mom of a vax-injured son, and I’ll always remember the shock the NVIC team expressed when the brave moms who declined vaccines for their children were baited and switched by CBS and Dan Rather with a very scathing piece. That was skewering. I still dislike Dan Rather, CBS and his producer for misleading those moms into thinking they would have a balanced piece.

      This time it was different. Offit admitted that the tipping point was here – that means sooo many moms have opted out of vaccines that industry is concerned. Giving voice to it tells people something’s going on, and a tipping point means Sarah is not alone not by a long shot!!

      Offit also said it was affluent, well educated moms who are saying no to vaccines. Another endorsement that will prompt some viewers to question things – like, hey the media is saying those who don’t vax are wacked, but here’s the leading pro-vaccine spokesperson calling them highly educated. What gives? Maybe I should look into this.

      Bottom line is the A-students you knew in school who are moms today are taking the time to get educated on vaccines and they are not liking what they are learning. (NOT all obviously – some of the a-students are Docs – right) But the tipping point means the B-students are now looking critically at things too. When it gets to the c-students we may finally have a much-needed and long overdue policy of informed consent to vaccination.

      I’m not anti-vaccine, just anti-forced vaccine and anti-corporate BS. No government should ever have the power to force people to inject chemically-intensive, oftentime GMO biologics into themselves or their children against their will. Especially not here in America.

      Reply
  43. Hi Sarah! I enjoyed the Daily Show piece and I’m glad you had the courage to take part. I chose to vaccinate my children. However, I did read many of your views and links to studies and articles before making my decision. I found you to be well informed. You did not seem like a person who overlooked scientific data as you were accused of in the piece. I applaud you for speaking out for the sake of comedy.
    Amy\’s last post: It’s Been A Thong Day- June 2, 2014

    Reply
  44. I just saw you on Jon Stewart. I love his show. Although I don’t agree with on the vaccination issue, I thought it was totally cool that you went on the show. You looked great and it was fun. I love most of the stuff you write about. I am just not on board with the vaccination issue.

    After reading your blog all these years I thought I was seeing an old friend on TV.

    Reply
  45. Great job!!! I have followed your blog for years!!! It has brought us nothing but amazing health!!! thank you for all that you do!!!!

    Reply
  46. The thing with not vaccinating is, if you get the disease, you spread it around. I might not have it as bad because of bone broths and fermented foods, but others might do a lot worse. I wouldn’t want to be responsible for spreading the disease around knowing that it might do a lot more harm to them.

    Not that I want to vaccinate, but this is one thing makes me think if I should.

    Any thoughts?

    Reply
    • Krista, the problem with your thinking is that you assume if you vaccinate you won’t get the disease and you also assume that vaccinated persons do not spread disease. Both of those assumptions are scientifically invalid.

      Reply
      • Trevor “disease” among other commonly used ambiguous terms among the antiVax community is all too vague. Vaccinated individuals are at FAR less risk of spreading or being infected with the disease to which they are vaccinated against. Non preventable diseases will still circulate. My question is, if you have other diseases to fight.. Why use your ATP and immune system up fighting what’s already preventable? I just don’t see the logic in not vaccinating. It’s totally non evidence based. And very foolish.

        Kristi vaccinating is the most efficient method of preventing a disease. It is specific to the infectious agent, very efficient in helping a persons body prepare, and these so called toxins are minute compared to what we are subjected to each day in everything we touch breathe and ingest. Non vaccinating individuals simply ignore the body’s glorious ability to metabolize minute non organic matter (many of these so called toxins are present in your body already if not all). I invite you to Stear clear of those like Sarah Pope who have a self motivated interest in making your health choices for you. This data that she refutes is more than she could collect on her own. I doubt she could collect enough to refute even a scraping of the surface of the science behind vaccinations. I invite her to try.

        Reply
  47. I watched the interview and was wondering if your parents had you vaccinated as a child and what have been the side effects from those vaccinations? I think that was the question that should have been aired (if it was asked at all). Personally, I think it’s quite ignorant to NOT have children vaccinated.

    Reply
    • I was vaccinated as a child and did not vaccinate my own children after my first suffered a very serious reaction right after a round of shots. And the reaction lingered with months of screaming pain. My child stopped making eye contact with me that day (we had beautiful eye contact and 2-way communication prior to that day) and we later found out she has extreme astigmatisms and it is reasonable for me to wonder if the brain inflammation my daughter experienced that day and the days that followed damaged her vision forever.

      It’s an inconvenient truth that the “most researched” medical intervention on the planet has never been studied before for it’s ability to cause vision damage. Never. In fact, the entire group of children who have had life-changing vaccine reactions (and billions of $ have been paid to them) this group has never been studied before. NEVER. So how can industry say vaccines are uber-safe when those who are injured by them haven’t been studied?

      My generation born in the 60′s and the first to receive mass vax has never been studied. My parents generation got reading glasses in old age. My generation got glasses for nearsightedness in elem, middle and high school. I personally got glasses for near sightedness a few months after a tetanus shot when I had 20/20 before that. Coincidence? Maybe but my point is WHY has this not been studied?

      There’s more that hasn’t been studied with regard to vaccines than has been studied. Anyone with a discerning brain who looks into it will find that what makes it to the news is industry-sponsored PR and propaganda versus scientific facts.

      The vax-vs-unvax study needs to be done and the people and children who have been damaged by vaccines need to be studied as well. And while you’re at it, please reverse the HUSH money provisions to their vaccine-damaged settlements so they can freely tell the world their stories of how their children were permanently disabled, harmed and damaged by vaccines.

      More .02 from the other side of the debate.

      Reply
    • Felix, it is anything BUT “ignorant” to not have children vaccinated.

      “ig·no·rant [ig-ner-uhnt]

      adjective
      1. lacking in knowledge or training; unlearned: an ignorant man.

      2. lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact: ignorant of quantum physics.

      3. uninformed; unaware.”

      If there’s one thing that can be said about the average parent who chooses not to vaccinate their children it’s that they are informed and aware. Bucking your family, your pediatrician, and your local school system’s norms is NOT something someone does lightly. Most parents who have made that choice have made it after many hours of study, including things like the CDC’s website, vaccine package inserts, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. You know what’s really ignorant? Pretending that vaccine injury does not exist and pronouncing all vaccines “safe and effective” as though there haven’t been billions of dollars paid out by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, as though there haven’t been a number of vaccines withdrawn due to large amounts of serious adverse events, as though eyewitness testimony of thousands of caring, observant parents doesn’t “count” as “data,” because no one with the dollars and authority to do so has bothered to quantify it.

      Reply
  48. NY? Somehow putting your kid with a thousand others in various states of health to be indoctrinated in a place called school (like fish?) makes the state’s rejection sound like a blessing. Even before Columbine and Sandyhook. Homeschool or die.

    I’m not strictly no-vax, but it depends on the actual risk in 2014, not 1920. Certainly not for newborns. But few Children are going to the regions of Pakistan where Polio is going around. The rest is to eat healthy and do other healthy.things.

    Reply
  49. Sarah, your statements on the show implied that no amount of evidence could ever convince you that vaccines are safe and effective. Is that truly the case?

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 3, 2014 at 9:13 pm

      Actually, that part was edited out to make it look that way. What actually happened is that I told Samantha that if vaccine proponents wanted to convince parents like me that vaccination is safe – the first thing that would need to be done is to conduct a true, clinical trial of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children and assess their overall health. This has *never* been done .. the CDC doesn’t want it done as it knows what the answer would be .. the health of unvaccinated children is far superior to vaccinated children most who seem to have some sort of chronic problem. There is a bill before the US Congress right now to demand such a study be done, introduced by Florida Congressman Bill Posey. There is plenty of correlative data indicating that the health of unvaccinated is much better than vaccinated, which is all we have to go on right now.

      Reply
      • “..vaccinated children who seem to all have some sort of chronic problem.”

        Are you claiming all children who are vaccinated all have “some sort of chronic problem?” You demand a nearly impossible study to prove efficacy but do you have peer-reviewed published data that vaccinated children “all have chronic problems?” That has not been true for my family, all vaccinated. I represented the US in Rowing at the 76 Olympics. My daughter is a competitive college swimmer and my son is on his high school’s varsity baseball team, as a 14 year old freshman. Nice genes I guess, but I would never go so far as using my irrelevant anecdotal data to make such a massively broad brush statement.

        Besides, any study like you demand would not convince you if it returned a negative. First, it would have to be worldwide to be large enough. This study (say, 500 unvax/5000 vax) – which would be very difficult and expensive to do – would only be able to detect a more than 15-fold difference in autism prevalence between the two groups. It could detect as little as a 7-fold difference, but only if we were willing to accept a beta error (chance of erroneously saying there is no difference when there is a difference) of over 50%.

        Would you accept the results of such a study if the results did not prove causation? I doubt it. So you seem to demand an impossible study to even consider altering your rigid stance, but feel free to use, at best, anecdotal data to suggest “all vaccinated children have chronic problems.”

        Reply
        • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
          Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 3, 2014 at 10:39 pm

          Impossible study? I don’t think so. This type of study should have been done long ago.

          Reply
          • You’re right Sarah, I have a child so injured from vaccines that his needs 24 hr care and lives in a group home, that’s why I am against vaccines. I never questioned anything until my child got sick. Test after test showed that was full of mercury, his life was totally high-jacked and for what! for the greater good? You know how many of the people pushing for me to vaccinate helped out financially with special schooling, doctor visits, resit care? Not a damn one. No one’s thanked me for the life of my son. We shouldn’t have to choose between brain damage or measles, allergies or mumps, autoimmune disorder or rubella. Vaccine damage has totally stolen his life and he is paying for my ignorance, NOTHING is worth that. ..vaccines are dangerous biologicals and there is no convincing me of otherwise.

          • That “study” you linked to is a self-selected internet “study” conducted a German Homeopath, and dissected here by Orac and his commenters:

            http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/08/31/an-anti-vaccine-administered-survey-back/

            What you propose (a prospective, randomized double blinded study), is patently unethical because infants and children who are in the unvaccinated arm of the study, would be left unprotected against serious, sometimes deadly, vaccine-preventable-diseases.

            How would you design a study which wouldn’t expose infants and children to these deadly diseases and would be approved by an Institutional Review Board, Sarah?

          • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
            Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 4, 2014 at 6:44 pm

            It’s not unethical as the babies who would be unvaccinated would be so because the parents don’t want them vaxed. The fact is that the provax community is terrified about such a study because the results would show that the “benefits” of vaccination are far outweighed by the lifelong damage to children’s health via burdensome autoimmune disease. Hopefully the bill before the US Congress to require this study will pass.

          • This could be done now – today. My kids weren’t vaccinated. Lot’s of my friends didn’t either. How do our kids compare with asthma, diabetes, ulcers, tooth decay, ADD, the list goes on and on. And don’t get me started on how many vaccinated kids get chicken pox – that’s how my kids contracted it. Just find out for goodness sake! The test subjects walk among us.

        • droopus, You say that you wouldn’t use anecdotal evidence to make a “massively broad brush statement” but that is EXACTLY what you are disingenuously trying to do. At the same time you are questioning Sarah’s “rigid” stance. Seems to me you are the one with the fixed prejudices against “impossible studies”.

          By the way, Sarah is not trying to inject you with medicines and toxins of unproven efficacy, is she? The burden of proof lies with the pharmaceutical industry. The current predetermined pseudoscientific “tobacco science” evidence just doesn’t cut it. I think it would be very helpful if an unbiased study were presented (such as the one proposed by the congressman) to provide this burden of proof. Hopefully it will not be shot down, in one way or another by the pharmaceutical industry and their shills. The public deserves good science to base their decision on.

          Reply
        • Congratulations on your outstanding and healthy children!
          However, I do fear you’ve misquoted Sarah and based your retort on a misinterpretation of what she really said. Read her reply again. She did not say what you quoted and accuse her of saying. “Most” and all are two different words.
          I consider myself open minded on the issue and am willing to hear and consider your position but only if you can keep your facts straight and quote appropriately. No harm or disrespect is intended toward you. I am simply addressing what was glaring to me in your comment as I read it.

          Reply
      • “the health of unvaccinated children is far superior to vaccinated children who seem to all have some sort of chronic problem”

        source?

        Reply
        • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
          Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 3, 2014 at 10:38 pm

          http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/survey-results-are-unvaccinated-children-healthier/

          This type of correlative survey of thousands of children is the best we have at this point until the bill before Congress hopefully gets passed forcing the CDC to conduct a formalized study comparing the two groups. Also, talk to Moms with large families … the first few vaccinated and the younger ones not vaccinated. You will be shocked at the stories they tell you.

          Reply
          • I have only 4 kids. The first 2 were totally vaxxed. They have suffered through chronic ear infections, asthma, AdHD, speech disorders, undiagnosed aches and joint pains. My third was vaxxed until age 2. She has suffered candida overgrowth, she’s underweight and sickly. My last child has had no vaccines and is “strong like bull”. He’s 3, has only ever had minor colds, no ear infections, eats everything and is the picture of health. I really don’t need studies done to confirm vaccines cause damage. I’ve seen it cause immediate damage. In the hospital, when my 2nd was given that first shot in the leg, a large strawberry hemangioma formed instantly! When I asked the docs and nurses they brushed it off and said how those birthmarks can appear after birth and it was just a coincidence. She was and is my sickest child. I wish I had dug deeper then and not continued to vaccinate because she has suffered irreparable damage.

          • Your link in your article to the study is not functioning. Regardless, the only studies around this have serious problems. They are internet surveys, with absolutely no controls any other factors, or even basic confirmation that the self-reported results are accurate.

      • “if vaccine proponents wanted to convince parents like me that vaccination is safe – the first thing that would need to be done is to conduct a true, clinical trial of vaccinated vs unvaccinated children and assess their overall health”

        Pick a single endpoint. Specify the threshold that will cause you to abandon whatever hypothesis you choose. Then it’s trivial to provide you with the sample size.

        Reply
      • A trial like this cannot be done, but it is not for the reasons that you state. First of all, without a randomized controlled trial, if it were the case that vaccinated children had a higher prevalence of chronic diseases vs. unvaccinated, you could not simply say that this is due to the vaccine. I can think off the top of my head of MANY reasons why this might be the case. Most importantly, most people who don’t vaccinate their kids are weather, with access to healthy food, better education etc. Lower socioeconomic status is certainly something that could cause more chronic health conditions in unvaccinated children, although I have not seen data to suggest that. Additionally, it would be unethical to do a randomized controlled trial like you lay out because it is unethical to have any arm of an RCT receiving substandard care. Have you heard of the Tuskegee study, a famously unethical research study where curative penicillin was withheld from African American men with syphillis in order to continue studying the natural history of syphillis? As soon as there is a standard of care in place, it is unethical to give anyone in a research study the substandard quality of care, and quite simply put there is wide consensus that vaccination is the standard of care because it saves lives.

        Reply
        • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
          Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 4, 2014 at 6:45 pm

          Another option, the CDC can do a retroactive study … they do this all the time already.

          Reply
          • Yes, they have done several. Sallie Bernard of SafeMinds even helped with the design of one of them. Many are listed here:
            Vaccine Safety: Examine the Evidence. The list also includes several studies done in other countries like the UK, Canada, Finland and Japan.

            Though it does not have the most recent one from Australia, which makes the consensus even more global: Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies (a pdf of the uncorrected proof).

            I know it won’t change your mind, but it helps to note that several retrospective studies have been made. Sorry for the correction of the word. It is one of those that is similar in spelling, but differs in meaning. Just like using mortality graphs showing incidence of disease went down, when you need to show the graphs for morbidity. Similar names, very different meaning.

            Mortality graphs in diseases show how well medical care has improved (antibiotics for secondary bacterial pneumonia, ventilators, induced comas for encephalitis,etc). Morbidity graphs show how the rates of disease incidence have changed. A much better measure of a vaccine’s effect.

            By the way, I had never heard of you blog until yesterday. I will be sure to check out your articles, especially the recipes. One of my kids is vegetarian, so I need more ideas for him (the savory bread pudding was a “meh”).

            My small city yard is done in a combination of English cottage with organic edibles. Though I wish that instead of four espaliered apple trees for my front fence, that I done some plum, or other fruit tree. I have too many apples (many went to the food bank last fall).

          • Nicole makes a good point. Also, there would be no way to control for living in a population of 80-95% vaccination rates. I know the anti vaccination movement does not believe herd immunity is a thing it would still need to be controlled for in the study. Also, we are not all vaccinated the same. Soldiers get some other vaccines not given to the general population. Those with immune deficiency are given less vaccines, but they will be sicker. Who decides which vaccinations are included in the vaccination group? If a new vaccine comes out is the vaccinated group allowed to receive it? What about people that receive booster shots when their antibody titer is low? I know it sounds like a simple study. Put those who didn’t receive a vaccine in one group then put the people who did in another and see what happens. However, there are too many variables that cannot be controlled for a retrospective study to give any meaningful data. A prospective study where you assign babies randomly into vaccine and no vaccine groups and see what happens in the future, as Nicole said would be unethical.

          • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
            Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 5, 2014 at 9:02 am

            I find it amusing that pro-vaxers squirm and say it is “impossible” to do a decent study of unvaccinated vs. vaccinated children and assess overall health. Must not be too sure of your position. LOL.

          • I am pro-vaccine and have a doctorate in a health science, my husband is a physician, who I’m sure to everyone’s great surprise receives no compensation from pharmaceutical companies (and he is a specialist who does not administer vaccines), so I’d argue that we are pretty well educated. Our 2 year old is fully vaccinated and healthy, without any chronic health issues whatsoever. I am 30 weeks pregnant and will be receiving a TDaP vaccine in a week because scientists and other non-google educated entities have proven that newborns born to mothers who receive that vaccine in pregnancy develop antibodies to pertussis, which is lethal to an infant (even if their mother breastfeeds or uses elderberry syrup or otherwise rejects science. Do you know how I know this? Because I know a child of a mother like this whose 6 week old died from pertussis. Do you know where the baby got pertussis? From her unvaccinated 4 year old sister. Vaccine preventable illnesses are deadly.)

            Anyway, I don’t oppose a study like the one you want, in fact, I would also love to see the results because I think it would quiet down a community of people who rely on google for their education. But, as several intelligent people above have pointed out, there are far too many variables for a retrospective study and it would be medically unethical to do an RCT on this (because we know vaccines are safe for the majority of people and protect against horrible diseases, so we cannot ethically NOT vaccinate a child). Not to mention that even if you reject herd immunity, it still exists, which means that unvaccinated kids are benefitting from vaccinated ones and we can’t eliminate that variable. To look at overall health, you’d need to have kids from the exact same socioeconomic class, eating the exact same foods, seeing the exact same physicians, going to the same childcare facilities, living in the exact same environment. And even then, it would be impossible to attribute their health to vaccines because that’s not how the immune system works. It’s like sets of identical twins where one gets cancer and the other doesn’t. Those children receive the same care, eat the same foods, breathe the same air, get the same medical care, even share genes, and yet one gets cancer and the other stays completely healthy.

            The human body is far, far more complex than you seem to appreciate. The study you want won’t happen and it has nothing to do with anyone being afraid of the outcome. I am not the least bit concerned about what this study would show, because I’m pretty sure it would show that the anti-vax anecdata is nothing more than hubris and denial, which would be fantastic for all families in this country and across the world.

          • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
            Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 6, 2014 at 1:05 pm

            I never googled anything to decide against vaccines. I read medical textbooks and scanned microfiche at the library. All google has done is put the same thing I read in 1997 at people’s fingertips. Smart people will find the truth if they dig in and search. Google is not necessary to find this information. It just makes it more convenient.

          • Kate, you mention the pharma-phrase of those educated by google not once, but twice. I find this rather ridiculous since google is a search engine, not a source. No one ever accused anyone of being educated by the Dewey-Decimal system!

            As you get your TdaP, I am sure my son’s anecdotal story won’t even enter your mind. He received his at 9 weeks old. He had an encephalitic reaction and began screaming non-stop. He went from a robust 10 pound baby to failure to thrive within weeks. He developed leaky gut syndrome, severe GERD with aspiration, phenol-sulfur transferase (you might want to check in with the google school for that one), a chronic weepy eye, and severe hypotonia. He began banging his head on the wall and floor as soon as he could crawl. And yes he developed autism. His blood work showed tetanus titers three times what is considered immune from just the first shot and he had toxic heavy metal levels. Funny but true story – he was completely recovered using a homeopathic remedy made from the DTP vaccine. Homeopathy is like cures like – a very similar principal upon which vaccinations appear to be based. You can scoff at that but nothing will ever deny my truth.

            And then when you are vaccinating your newborn baby, I’m sure you won’t give a moments thought to my older daughter who got the measles after her MMR vaccine – just like I did from an MMR revax in college. I developed severe allergies, exercise-induced anaphylaxis, and fibromyalgia which lasted over a decade until finding alternative medicine. My daughter on the other hand, developed Guillain-Barre Syndrome and what the doctor called, “non-polio poliomyelitis.” She would become paralyzed after any viral illness or fever. She had severe allergies, asthma, and chronic ear infections to boot. She then developed HSP, a vasculitis and nephritis. She was paralyzed from the neck down and bleeding internally. Her kidneys were losing both blood and protein. The pediatric nephrologist said it would take a year for steroids to stop it. A homeopathic remedy cured her in a few months. Oh, and she also caught the chicken pox from a recently vaccinated child who shared it with the other 15 kids in her preschool class. Despite the fact she already had wild chicken pox.

            Since you are so well educated, you must know the only known cases of polio in the United States in the past 15 years were from the vaccine itself, right? And you must know of the 2010 pertussis outbreak in CA, a data review showed 81% were fully vaccinated and 11% had at least one of the series. This means those who were vaccinated were significantly more likely to contract pertussis than those not vaccinated. The researchers conclusion was that the current pertussis vaccine was insufficient to prevent outbreaks. Increasing boosters hasn’t helped but created vaccine-resistant strains. Hmmm… quandary.

            So you can spout off all the pharma-phrases you want. But I will agree with you on one thing and say it back to you, the human body is far too complex for you and many others to appreciate. One size does not fit all. Vaccines may mean illness prevention for some, but for others, it means the exact opposite. So good for you for choosing what you think is best for yourself and your baby. I would never wish what happened to us on anyone. But sorry, I have sacrificed enough for the greater good. It’s time for me to look out for my own.

            Some day I’d love to talk medicine and ethics. But there isn’t enough space here for me to get into it.

      • Sarah, you just claimed that you know the answer, that unvaccinated chidren are far superior in health to vaccinated children “most of who seem to have some sort of chronic problem.” Yet you also mentioned that the study you want has never been done. So where is your own evidence for your claim? This last post of yours lacks logic. If this indicates your thinking pattern I am very skeptical about the way you form your conclusions. Where is your evidence for the outlandish claim you make about how most of us vaccinated people have “some sort of chronic problem?” Don’t depend on Congress to pay for a study. If there’s anything behind your anti-Vax movement, I’m confident that you have evidence for this claim and that many reputable research institutions would have backed you up by now. But I suppose they are all paid for by vaccine makers and the research community is all co-opted right?

        Reply
        • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
          Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 5, 2014 at 8:57 am

          The mounds of anecdotal evidence (just open your eyes and observe) and also tons of correlative data from surveys and other studies which I link to in my blog. Dr. M. Eisenstein MD of Chicago has been keeping records for many years of his pediatric patients and overwhelmingly, the unvaccinated have far superior health and fewer problems.

          Reply
  50. Sarah,
    My husband and I are “right wing nut jobs”, but enjoy Samantha Bee and others who do these satirical sketches. You held your own, showed the type of downright buffoonery we put up with when going against “the norm,” and looked beautiful. Plus, it was fun to see a fellow blogger on the big screen!!
    Alison\’s last post: Dad’s Famous Potato Salad

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 3, 2014 at 9:18 pm

      I think Samantha is great too .. she did a super job with the segment and it was so fun to work with her for a day. She managed to get a lot of info out there for folks who are willing to dig in and research to think about. It took guts for her to tackle this very touchy subject. Look what happened to Katie Couric when she tried! Thanks for stopping by to say hello :)

      Reply
  51. Would never go on TV as they would surely manipulate your side of the story to fit the show, but I applaud your courage for doing so anyways. The mocking comedy is really awful. Of course, you can never teach a pig to fly… the comments are full of small minds.

    Reply
  52. Hi Sarah,

    Thanks so much for writing about your experience on the show. I don’t support your view in the slightest bit and do find this whole movement to be rather foolish, but I respect your opinion. Im a huge fan of The Daily Show but do often wonder why people would agree to appear in one of the segments knowing its penchant for mocking its interview subjects.

    In terms of your criticism that they edited out a lot of good points you made, this is no different, basic common sense dictates that more than likely a lot of what you said would be edited out before you even participated, after all its a a 4 min story. But you did make a point that I can’t easily ignore about Dr. Outfit. There probably is some ulterior motive and often it is financial, but I also cannot ignore the opinion of the multitude of medical professionals who aren’t figureheads, saying the same thing.

    The fact of the matter is, you and all the other parents who don’t vaccinate their kids are benefiting from the other millions of people who do. If my child is vaccinated and your child isn’t, then of course you don’t have to worry about anything. You have the buffer of millions of vaccinated children to protect you. They are the ones quelling the spread of infectious diseases. Go live in a place without those buffers and then stand on your soapbox.

    I also want to address one other thing you mentioned in your post, about educated people. The smartest people do the stupidest things. Look at history, look at the news, look in your own circle of friends – are they all shining beacons of the education system despite degrees and ivy league school attendance?

    Reply
    • “smartest people doing the stupidest things???”, how is protecting your child from having poisons and cancer causing chemicals injected into their body a stupid thing to do ? I wish every day that I had been that smart !
      When you see vaccines injure your child and damage his life so he can no longer talk and isn’t able to potty train until age six, it gives you a different perspective. I started doing my research too late. Here’s a very informative documentary for anyone who’s interested in learning more about vaccines. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1m3TjokVU4

      Reply
    • If your child is fully vaxed, why are you worried about catching something from my kid? Oh, is it because these vaccines aren’t 100% effective? Then why give them? My unvaxed kid got the chicken pix from a vaxed kid who shed the virus. How is that for herd immunity?!

      Reply
  53. This is a topic that is very sensitive to me right now, as I live in the state of New York and was denied religious exemption for my son prior to attending school last year. Just got a reminder another DTaP booster is required and must be completed before he can step his foot in the door come fall. I feel very bullied by this whole topic, but THANK YOU Sarah for having the guts and courage to give it so much attention and to continually put yourself out there, thanks for fighting the good fight, you are my hero!!

    Reply
    • Will they take a report on the titer. I always have titers run on my kid. (They always come back too high.) He hasn’t had a booster since he was little.

      Reply
  54. The segment was very comical (in typical Jon Stewart fashion), but I do think that it made light of a very serious issue. BTW – I’m against vaccinations.

    I don’t think you came off any more closed minded than the science dude that was interviewed. The whole point of the segment was really just to get laughs, so it is edited to make each side seem a bit closed minded.

    The mere fact that they are giving the ‘no-vaxers’ that much air time, lends credence to the growth of the no vaccination movement – otherwise they wouldn’t have bothered with it.

    Big kudos for landing the gig !!
    Susan Ritter\’s last post: Forget About Make Up – Radiant Beauty Emanates From Your Inner Foundation

    Reply
  55. The problems we have with our society’s ‘for profit’ health care is a valid but separate argument.

    For those of us that did not read your extensive written opinions on the topic, how do we explain the huge percentage decline of cases of (very) serious diseases if not on the effectiveness of vaccines? This should be a starting point because most of us do not actually choose to vaccinate because ‘someone simply told us to do so’… but because there is no other explanation we can think of to explain why our children are not being affected by Polio or the numerous diseases our grandparents were seeing in their communities when they were young.

    We need to figure out what to do with our ‘for profit’ healthcare industry separate from this discussion because ‘cost and profit’ interfere with these basic questions being addressed clearly and in every discussion:

    Why have the cases of these serious diseases declined after people vaccinated their kids?

    Why have they shot up now that people do not vaccinate in percentages they used to?

    Reply
  56. Edmond Dantès June 3, 2014 at 2:25 pm

    After seeing your appearance on the Daily Show, I felt you looked small-minded and nearly identical to conservatives who wish to deny climate change is an issue (Not an issue I wish to get into at present, but works well to illustrate). I have continued to read up on the subject and in particular your dispute with “Herd Immunity”. Your article uploaded in February on this topic was an almost like for like copying of an article published by Dr. Russell Blaylock.

    In addition, I think you do not dispute the idea of “herd immunity” because it is a relatively straightforward logic problem. Given a subset of people who come in contact with each other, the less people who can carry the disease will decrease the probability that someone who is not immune to the disease will become sick. Therefore the only point at which I can discern you disputing is the effective length of vaccine, and how its effective length can stop this cycle and cause people to not be completely immune.

    I have not done much research on the topic of effectiveness of vaccines over time, but I feel the crux of you argument depends on the data being particularly poor. By the same submitted logic of “natural herd immunity”, you would also have to consent that if given sufficient boosters to maintain immunity, herd immunity would still be present.

    Reply
    • Edmond, vaccinated individuals can still be carriers of disease. Just because you touch a piece of raw chicken and don’t get sick doesn’t mean you didn’t have salmonella on your hand and spread it to everything you touched. Same goes for the human body which can have pathogens on and in it and spread them without becoming infected itself. This is very obvious logic. Lots of things live on our skin but never make it past that physical barrier into our bloodstream, but we can still pass them around through contact.
      The idea that vaccines create herd immunity is a joke when you start to think about it.

      Reply
  57. Hi Sarah, I thought you did a great job! It was very brave of you to do an interview like this because you know they are going to try to make you look like an idiot and make a joke of it. If you hadn’t gone on the show, they would have found somebody else, and that person may not have been as confident and assured as you so I thought you represented very well. :)

    Reply
  58. Sarah, I, for one, think you did a fantastic job. Knowing you’re going to be ridiculed for your beliefs on national television in front of millions of people and doing the interview anyway takes guts, my friend. I applaud you, even if that interview did make you look like you lost in the end. I’ve been following you and gleaning from your wisdom for over four years, and I’m not about to stop. Thanks for being bold!
    Lindsey\’s last post: What About the Farm? + Hiccups + The Unknown

    Reply
  59. IMO, you came across as closed minded. I was not familiar with your blog or with the arguments of the anti-vaccination movement before watching the video. I still really don’t know much about either. It seems to me that your argument is that vaccines are a money making scam that has fooled darn near all doctors in the world. Not to mention Bill and Melinda Gates. I look forward to seeing comments that help me better understand your position.

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 3, 2014 at 12:00 pm

      Thanks for the feedback. There are a lot of articles on this blog that should help you with that.

      Reply
    • Kurt, there is indeed a major debate amongst scientists, doctors, and yes parents. You can learn more about it by watching our movie, The Greater Good greatergoodmovie.org and checking out our Catalogue of Science that contains links to 200 published peeri-reviewed studies at the “Learn More” tab on our website.

      Reply
    • Bill and Melinda gates are trying to reduce the world population through eugenics. You obviously have done no research on this issue.

      Reply
      • So making sure families will be sure their children will grow to adulthood by providing clean water, sanitation and vaccines, and making sure women are educated so they can learn about their choices is “eugenics”? I’ve never knew that was its definition. I thought it was more related to the forced sterilization of the “feeble minded”, as those with intellectual disabilities were called just a few decades ago.

        Educated women who have confidence their children will actually grow up tend to have smaller families. There is a Swedish statistician, Hans Rosling, who has made several videos explaining this. If you have an open mind you should watch some. I particularly like the population growth explanation with Ikea boxes (well, he is Swedish).

        Reply
  60. Rational thinker June 3, 2014 at 11:50 am

    You really thought this was a win for the anti-vaxers? Really? Wow…just wow. It does make your steadfast positio in the face of scientific evidence understandable though. Shouldn’t your blog really be titled – never let a few facts get in the way of my opinion? Recommended reading for you: Sway.

    Reply
    • Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist

      Yep, as far as I know, I am the first person to speak the words “HERD IMMUNITY IS A MYTH” on national TV. Most people will brush it off as ridiculous, but the critical thinkers will research and and find out it is in fact true with regard to vaccinations.

      BIG WIN. YES!!!!!!!

      Reply
  61. Yeah your whole mentality on the subject is hilarious. I loathe this mentality by you so called organic people. Face it you are WRONG!

    Reply
    • Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist
      Sarah TheHealthyHomeEconomist June 3, 2014 at 11:47 am

      You are welcome to vaccinate if you like :) Don’t you love that we live in a free country?

      Reply
      • Way to stay above the fray, Sarah.

        There’s no way that I would ever participate in a show like the Daily Show for fear of the skillful editing. They could have probably even edited your comments to appear pro-vax if they wanted to!

        All in all, I think the issue is so polarizing at this point that it’s hard to have a good discussion without it getting personal and insulting really fast. Makes it hard for those of us still researching to stay clear of the rotten fruit lobbing from both ends and just get the facts. Good for you for speaking your mind and keeping respect in the equation.

        Reply
        • You make it sound like there is fair debate. The fact is that the vaccine industry makes money off of vaccinating people. I don’t make any money when I bring my argument forward against vaccination. It is all about health and facts.

          Reply
      • And this is exactly how it should be. If my neighbor wants to get vaccinated, that’s fine. I will choose not to and choose not to vaccinate my children. Freedom should be the law of the land.

        Sarah I think this was a win if only for the exposure you got through a very popular TV show. Congratulations and thank you for your bravery, especially in the face of so much opposition.

        Reply
  62. Pingback: My Appearance on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart » Nourishing News

  63. Pingback: My Appearance on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart » Nourishing News

Leave a Comment

CommentLuv badge

Login to your account

Can't remember your Password ?

Register for this site!