Month: May 2019

Abortion and Vaccines – safety

There are multiple commonalities between abortion and vaccines: Complications, Safety Studies and Agendas being considered more important than people. 


After an abortion if there is a complication the woman may or may not go back to the abortionist for on-going care. She may go to an ER where she may or may not reveal she had an abortion and that her presenting problem is a result of abortion. Regardless, there is no formal collection of data to record the frequency or type of complication following abortion – and abortionists have every reason to keep the current system.

In the same way, many people (children especially, but primarily because they receive the most vaccines) may end up in the ER following vaccination. A vaccine history may or may not be taken, or the fact that a vaccine was recently received may or may not be reported by the patient (or his/her parents). Because vaccines are presumed to be safe, adverse events subsequent to (temporarily related) vaccination may not be attributed to vaccination and reported to VAERS. SIDS following vaccination is a glaring safety signal that has been consciously ignored for decades.

The one way in which this is dissimilar is that those receiving vaccines generally have an on-going relationship with the medical provider who gave it (though that is changing as healthcare related entities like pharmacies, dentists, optometrists, etc have not begun providing vaccines). However, even if a patient experiences an adverse event following vaccination they are generally not believed, so even if they return to the provider who gave the vaccine their concerns may be dismissed.

Safety Studies

The problem is that vaccines are assumed to be “safe and effective” – the mantra, this talking point has been repeated for so long and so often that it is assumed to be true regardless of the lack of actual hard evidence to support it. Hard evidence: meaning multiple, long-term randomized double-blind placebo controlled trials (where the placebo is biologically inert, like normal saline) comparing vaccinated with unvaccinated.  

Follow-up data or lack thereof

At least vaccines have the VAERS option to report adverse events following vaccination. VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It is a passive system and widely acknowledged to be woefully inadequate in terms of collecting data regarding problems after vaccination. There is no similar system in place for abortion. 

Programs, agendas more important than people 

Here again, there are commonalities between abortion and vaccines. When those receiving these medical products or procedures report problems after ward they are dismissed and disbelieved. For both of these medical procedures there have been numerous studies looking into safety issues – mostly with generally reassuring results which conflict with the reports of individuals (multitudes).  However, these safety studies are not designed to determine safety or efficacy as they are endless rounds of epidemiological studies rather than randomized, double blind placebo controlled trials. This sets providers up for significant cognitive dissonance – and given the pressures of daily practice, it is far easier to believe “the data” rather than the hurting individual in front of them. It is far easier to question the individual instead of the “evidence”. It’s also much better for business. How convenient. 

The purpose of abortion is a dead baby – hurting a woman’s child always hurts the mother. Women, and our children deserve better than abortion. 

Vaccines may or may not be safe and effective. Vaccination began before we knew anything about the immune system and has continued regardless of what we’ve learned. It has been given a free pass and has not been subject to the kind of studies that would provide hard numbers about both safety and effectiveness. Assumption isn’t science. We deserve better from those who are tasked with providing us with this information.