- The book "Vaccine Epidemic" argues that the current vaccine system is flawed, driven by corporate greed, biased science and government coercion, threatening individual rights and health.
- The authors assert that vaccination decisions should be a fundamental human right, with individuals or guardians having sole authority over medical interventions, citing risks to life, liberty and security.
- The book highlights gaps in vaccine safety research, financial incentives in the U.S. vaccine industry and lack of transparency, calling for independent, rigorous scientific evaluation.
- Habakus and Holland endorse biomedical treatments for autism and chronic conditions, arguing for individuals' right to choose their preferred therapies, including diet, supplements and detoxification.
- The authors push for stronger vaccine exemption rights and open discussions with pro-vaccine advocates, emphasizing ethical, science-based health policies that respect autonomy while balancing public health concerns.
In the ongoing and often heated discourse surrounding vaccines, a provocative new voice has emerged with the publication of the book "
Vaccine Epidemic: How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children" by Louise Kuo Habakus and Mary Holland.
This work, which has quickly become a focal point in the vaccine debate, raises critical questions about the intersection of public health, individual rights and the influence of powerful entities. The authors argue that the current vaccination paradigm is deeply flawed, posing significant risks to personal freedoms and public health.
The debate over vaccines is not new, but "Vaccine Epidemic" brings a fresh perspective by challenging the prevailing narrative that vaccines are unequivocally safe and necessary for all. The book enters a landscape dominated by pro-vaccine advocates, such as Paul Offit, author of "Deadly Choices," and Seth Mnookin, author of "The Panic Virus," who argue that vaccines are essential for maintaining herd immunity and protecting public health.
Habakus and Holland, however, argue that vaccination choice is a fundamental human right. They contend that because vaccination poses a risk to life, liberty and security, individuals or their guardians should have the sole authority to decide whether to vaccinate. The authors assert that society benefits from the cumulative impact of free and informed healthcare choices, and they question the validity of herd immunity as a justification for mandatory vaccination.
A central theme of "Vaccine Epidemic" is the critique of vaccine safety science. The authors cite the Institute of Medicine and other experts who acknowledge that fundamental questions about vaccine safety remain unanswered. They highlight the conflicts of interest within the U.S. vaccine program, where vaccines are a lucrative business and all stakeholders – pharmaceutical companies, government agencies and medical professionals – have financial incentives.
Habakus and Holland argue that the current system lacks transparency and accountability. They point to the financial ties between government agencies and pharmaceutical companies as evidence of bias. The authors advocate for more rigorous and independent research to address the gaps in vaccine safety science.
The book also delves into the authors' belief in the validity of biomedical interventions for autism spectrum disorders and other chronic conditions. They cite considerable science and anecdotal evidence supporting treatments such as diet, vitamin and mineral supplementation, chelation and gastrointestinal treatment. Habakus and Holland argue that individuals should have the right to choose the practitioners and remedies they believe are best for their health.
One of the most contentious arguments in "Vaccine Epidemic" is the call to expand vaccination exemption rights. The authors assert that individuals have the right to free and informed consent for all medical interventions, including vaccination. They believe that in practice, not just in theory, individuals must have the right to make their own decisions about their health.
Habakus and Holland emphasize the importance of dialogue and engagement, urging leaders of the pro-vaccine camp to publicly debate their different views. They believe that open discussion is crucial for moving toward a more balanced and informed understanding of the issues at stake.
The authors argue that mandatory vaccination policies violate the rights to liberty and security of person. They contend that when vaccinations result in death, such policies violate the right to life. They argue that even in the face of epidemic disease, compulsory vaccination policies should be scrutinized and less invasive alternatives considered.
Habakus and Holland provide a historical context for their arguments, highlighting the evolution of human rights and medical ethics since the early 20th century. They argue that a thorough reconsideration of compulsory vaccination mandates is long overdue, given the advancements in our understanding of human rights and individual freedoms.
In conclusion, "Vaccine Epidemic" makes a compelling case for vaccination choice as a fundamental human right. It challenges readers to rethink their assumptions about vaccines, to question the motives of those who profit from them and to demand transparency and accountability from the government and healthcare system. The book is a call to action for a more nuanced and informed discussion about vaccines, one that respects individual rights and prioritizes public health.
Learn more about the book "
Vaccine Epidemic" by watching the video below.
This video is from the
BrightLearn channel on Brighteon.com.
Sources include:
Brighteon.ai
Brighteon.com
Parler
Gab
Copy
