Jenner not only shared his knowledge through published literature, he also shared the vaccine itself, giving samples to other physicians and anyone else who requested it. Use of the cowpox vaccine grew as those who received it from Jenner passed it on to others. In 1800, Dr. John Haygarth was responsible for the introduction of the vaccine in the United States when he sent some of Jenner’s cowpox vaccine to a physics professor at Harvard University. After introducing the vaccination in New England, professor Benjamin Waterhouse convinced Thomas Jefferson to try the vaccination in Virginia. It was this contact between Waterhouse and Jefferson that led to the establishment of the National Vaccine Institute and the implementation of the United States’ first national vaccination program (2).
The first mandatory vaccination law in the United States was enacted in 1809 in Massachusetts, giving the government the power to enforce mandatory vaccination or quarantine in the event of a disease (smallpox) outbreak that posed a threat to the public health (10). Throughout most of the 1800s vaccination against smallpox in the United States was voluntary, though coercion was often used to convince citizens to receive the procedure. During the 19th century the widely held belief that those who suffered the ravages of poverty were responsible for their own circumstances due to a lack of moral fortitude contributed to the success of “the vaccinators.” Outbreaks of smallpox, and other highly contagious diseases such as scarlet fever, measles, and diphtheria almost always originated in populations of impoverished immigrants living in overcrowded conditions characterized by poor sanitation and lack of access to heat, clean water, or nutritious food. Because illness and poverty were so frequently and closely linked, proponents of vaccination promoted acceptance of the procedure on moral grounds to increase the numbers of those who were willing to accept vaccination against smallpox, even as the incidence of the disease continued to decline in the general population (6).
Two outbreaks of smallpox in New York’s German and Italian immigrant communities around the turn of the century set the stage for the establishment of policies for compulsory vaccination. In response to the increasing number of infections, Brooklyn’s Republican Mayor, Charles Schieren, appointed Dr. Z. Taylor Emery to head the city’s health department. Emery was charged with increasing vaccination coverage, particularly among the city’s immigrants. To achieve this goal, Emery was granted the power to mandate vaccination and enforce quarantines for anyone who refused. The number of health department employees responsible for delivering vaccines (e.g., “vaccinators”) was increased, eventually numbering more than 200, and teams of vaccinators fanned out across the city enforcing the procedure in tenements and apartment buildings that housed mainly poor, immigrant families. Colgrove (6) reports that according to the official “Rules for Vaccinators” quarantines could be ordered and enforced by the Sanitary Police only if there had been a confirmed case of smallpox infection in the vicinity. However, according to reports published in the Brooklyn Daily Eagle newspaper (cited in Colgrove, 2006), as time went on, it became increasingly common for families to be quarantined without cause, even in the absence of any identified cases of infection. According to Colgrove’s review, families who were quarantined were denied access to employment or even food deliveries until they eventually acquiesced to the demands of the vaccinators (6).
The city’s homeless population was targeted by the vaccinators, who descended on the rooming houses where the 2,400 homeless members of Brooklyn’s society congregated. Colgrove (2006) reports on the language of a health department publication, which reveals the attitudes toward those who lived in poverty. According to Colgrove, the report discussed the importance of targeting Brooklyn’s 72 lodging houses, stating, “In them are gathered nightly a large proportion of those homeless and vagrant ones in our population whose unwholesome heredity and unsanitary lives render them liable not only to the commission of crimes, but to the contraction of disease” (Colgrove, 2006, p. 25).
To ensure the highest possible rate of vaccination among the city’s homeless population, the proprietors of the lodging houses were forced to require their tenants to produce proof of vaccination status as a condition of receiving a room for the night. Proprietors who failed to comply with the mandate were threatened with loss of licensure (6).
As the aggressiveness of Emery’s teams of vaccinators continued to increase, they began targeting businesses and enforced mandatory vaccination on employees who were threatened with losing their jobs if they did not comply. In his review of the social context of Brooklyn in the 1890’s, Colgrove (2006) reports that the fact that the city was in the middle of a severe depression most likely had a significant impact on the willingness of employees to accept vaccination rather than risk unemployment. Colgrove also notes that the effects of the depression most likely contributed to the zeal with which the vaccinators pursued their prey, as the administrators of the smallpox vaccine were paid thirty cents for each person they vaccinated.
As public complaints against the vaccinators increased, one letter published in The Daily Eagle newspaper charged that paying the vaccinators in this manner “created an incentive for them to ‘terrorize or intimidate healthy people to be revaccinated by them under penalty of quarantine for refusal’” (Colgrove, 2006, p 23).
During the smallpox outbreak of 1893-1894 resistance against compulsory vaccination increased and several legal challenges were filed by the Anti-Vaccination League, which was a grass-roots organization based in Brooklyn and comprised largely of homeopathic physicians. Throughout the mid-to-late 1890s, the Anti-Vaccination League filed several lawsuits against the local government and Emery, asserting that the actions of the vaccinators were infringing on the Constitutional rights of United States citizens. In addition, there were frequent allegations that the vaccinators falsified death records in an effort to cover up the fact that their zealous activities were resulting in death for a percentage of those citizens they were charged with protecting (6).
Despite multiple challenges from the Anti-Vaccination League during the 1890s in Brooklyn, the conflict leading to the seminal legal ruling regarding compulsory vaccination did not begin until the winter of 1902 and it took place in Boston, Massachusetts. The case of Jacobson v. Massachusetts involved an adult, Henning Jacobson, who refused smallpox vaccination and also refused to pay the $5.00 fine imposed for not complying with the health board’s order of compulsory vaccination. At trial, Jacobson presented evidence that vaccination was dangerous and frequently caused serious injury or death, and that he himself had been harmed by vaccination as a child. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court, which ultimately ruled that The State (in this case, Massachusetts) was not unreasonable and had not violated Jacobson’s Constitutional rights because in the midst of the smallpox epidemic, laws enacted by the state had a “real and substantial relation to the protection of the public health and safety” (10; Welborn, 2005, p. 1-2).
The ruling of the Supreme Court affirmed the sovereignty of individual states to enact and enforce laws to protect the public health and safety, with the only provision being that in doing so, state laws did not violate the United States Constitution or infringe on rights granted by it (10).
Dr. Tenpenny is an outspoken advocate for free choice in healthcare, including the right to refuse vaccination. As an internationally known speaker, she is highly sought after for her ability to present scientifically sound information regarding vaccination hazard and warnings that are rarely portrayed by conventional medicine.” -Huffington Post [read full bio]
Huffington Post Article: When it Comes to Vaccine Safety: Veterinarians Are Better Than Pediatricians
My Position on Vaccines:I am frequently asked “my position” on vaccines. That position has evolved over time, but in a nutshell:
- I oppose the “one-size-fits-all” public health policy imposed by state rules and implemented by physicians regarding childhood vaccination.
- I oppose a system that forces parents to inject their children, against their better judgment, in exchange for an education that they have paid for with their tax dollars.
- I oppose a system that forces parents to make decisions based on fear. Any physician who forces a parent to vaccinate through threats—threatening to turn them into Children’s services for “medical neglect” or threatening to dismiss them from their medical practice—is not the physician you want caring for your family’s health. I am opposed to those behaviors.
- I support the freedom to refuse any medical procedure, including the right to refuse a vaccination, and I am willing to fight to defend that choice. Once people understand the real risk of the viral “vaccine-preventable” infections vs. the risks of vaccines designed to prevent the infections, I believe people should be allowed to make a choice regarding which risk they are willing to accept.
- I am in favor of true, complete informed consent, which means a person hears the full spectrum of pros and cons regarding a medical option and then is given the choice to refuse this therapy. Our current public health policy does not allow that option.
- I am pro-information. Most of the information given to the general public is incomplete and even deceptive. Information stimulates discussion. Vaccination needs to be questioned and debated. That cannot occur without substantiating information to support a contrarian position on vaccination.
I sincerely believe that vaccines cause more harm to the health of the individual than the “protection” and “benefit” they are proclaimed to provide. Staying healthy without vaccines is not only possible, but being vaccine-free is the only way to maintain a lifetime of real health.
War on Anti-Vaccine Activists
The Vaccine Culture War is heating up. Ground zero is America, Europe and other economically developed countries, where the pharmaceutical industrial complex is raising an iron fist to protect multibillion-dollar profits by disempowering the people.
In America, professors and doctors in academia and government are profiling parents by class and race to shame and discredit those challenging vaccine orthodoxy. Elite members of the highest paid professions in our society are using academic journals and mainstream media to openly preach fear, hate, prejudice and discrimination against people who disagree with them about vaccination.
Who vehemently states that anyone who speaks out with concerns over the safety of vaccines are “anti-vaxxers” pushing “propaganda,” while also assuring everyone that vaccines are not only safe, they save lives? The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funds the World Health Organization (WHO), the CDC, NIH, big pharma, universities, mainstream news, and UN factions.
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have paid Harvard over $65 million dollars for data reports to support his agendas, control “misinformation,” and for research. Point in case: in January 2020, Harvard released a study on misinformation about vaccines, titled ‘How trust in experts and media use affect acceptance of common anti-vaccination claims.’ Notice at the end, it states that the funding for the study came from Science of Science Communication Endowment of the Anneberg Public Policy Center. The Center was founded by Walter and Leonore Anneberg in 1993 and is part of the University of Pennsylvania. The Gates Foundation has funded the University of Pennsylvania millions of dollars for various agendas. They have also funded the Anneberg Foundation Trust in 2012 and again in 2018. Their website boasts hosting former President Barack Obama three times for international meetings, and portray a photo of Obama with Chinese President Xi Jinping. In 2018, Gates paid Harvard $250,000 to “determine how to effectively debunk health related and other mis and disinformation falsehoods traveling on social media platforms.” So whereas, this “study” states that there is “no conflict of interest,” one might find that hard to swallow.
Despite their greatest attempts to conceal all of this, by making deals behind closed doors in the shadows of the government, while removing all liability from pharmaceutical companies – there have been $4.1 billion in vaccine injury and death claims paid out with taxpayer dollars. There are thousands of adverse reports in the VAERS system, whereby, only 1% of adverse events are even being reported. This is all fact. But rest assured – “vaccines are entirely safe and save lives.” Any other narrative will be squashed.
In 2008, the WHO’s former head of the malaria program, Dr. Artara Kochi, raised serious concerns about the Gates Foundation undermining scientific creativity that “could have implicitly dangerous consequences on the policy making process in world health.” He went on to state,
“Gates has created a ‘cartel,’ with research leaders linked so closely that each has a vested interest to safeguard the work of others. The result is that obtaining an independent review of scientific evidence (…) is becoming increasingly difficult.”
When the Gates Foundation pays out billions to the WHO, Harvard and other universities, institutes, George Soros’s “health watch” organizations, the CDC Foundation, and the Kaiser Foundation to produce reports to influence policies, push for funding necessity, and provide “data” to back up their need to fulfill their agendas, you can bet your bottom dollar they are going to protect their “research” and stance, especially after they’ve received millions in government grants.
To lift the veil of illusion from those that have been indoctrinated, is an exhaustive feat. When world renowned scientists are destroyed for revealing their evidence, their work discounted by the WHO and those at the upper echelons of the healthcare industry, that should raise eyebrows, but the indoctrinated can’t see the cartel who have made us all complicit and co-conspirators of their endeavors, while the IRS has blackmailed us to pay our “cut” to this mafia. This playbook goes far beyond the healthcare industry, and flows right into their other agendas as well. The climate change hoax is another great example of paying off scientists to propagate an agenda, fear monger, generate government grants, and control a narrative that has proven to be 0-41 for their doomsday predictions. Chew on that.
Mandatory Vaccination as a Condition of School Attendance
Many states had laws on the books regarding compulsory vaccination against smallpox as a prerequisite for school enrollment, beginning in the early 19th century (11). The first recorded mandate in the U.S. was in 1827 when smallpox vaccination became a requirement for entry into public school (12). However, the laws were not widely enforced or challenged until the smallpox epidemic of 1893-1894 (6). In 1894 a lawsuit was filed against the principal of a public school in Brooklyn, seeking admittance of the two children of a physician, Charles Walters. Dr. Walters was involved with the Anti-Vaccination League and his children had not been vaccinated against smallpox (6).
Despite the fact that court rulings had generally been decided in favor of the civil rights of adults who had challenged mandatory vaccination (6), the earliest cases involving school attendance were decided in favor of the state and local authorities. In the case of Walters v. Public School No. 22, The Court ruled that compulsory vaccination could be enforced through city and state laws as long as they did not violate the U.S. Constitution in doing so. The basis for the judge’s decision was that attendance in a public school was a privilege and not a right. Colgrove reports the findings of the case, quoting the judge’s ruling, “A common school education, under the existing constitution of the State of New York, is a privilege rather than a right… It follows that the State can certainly exercise this discretion by debarring from attendance at the public schools such persons as are unwilling to adopt a precaution which, in the judgment of the legislature, is essential to the preservation of the health of the large body of scholars” (6; Colgrove, 2006, p. 28-29).
The question of whether mandatory vaccination against smallpox as a condition of attendance in public school violated Constitutional rights was heard again by the Supreme Court in 1922, and again The Court ruled that mandatory vaccination was legally enforceable, basing its decision on precedent established by the Jacobson v. Massachusetts case of 1905 (11).
The Expansion of the Childhood Vaccination Schedule
During the first half of the twentieth century there was a great expansion in vaccine research, leading to the development of new vaccines for pertussis, diphtheria, and tetanus in 1902, 1926, and 1938, respectively (9). The polio vaccine was licensed in 1955,
followed by the development of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccines in the late 1960s (9). Although smallpox vaccination had been a requirement of school attendance for decades, it was during the late 1930s that compulsory vaccination against other illnesses began to be instituted for children enrolling in public school (11). By 1942, nine states had adopted laws requiring immunization against diphtheria, in addition to smallpox vaccination for school children (11). It was not until the 1980s that laws regarding vaccination of children in public school were expanded to include more than one or two vaccines. Many of the laws concerning mandatory vaccination of school children sprang up as a result of measles outbreaks in the 1960s and 1970s (10).
Examination of the childhood immunization schedules from the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) reveals that in 1983, children vaccinated according to the schedule received eight injections against seven illnesses by the time they were 18 months old. Vaccinations were administered beginning at two months of age and were said to protect against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (DTP), polio, measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) (13).
By 1994, the ACIP’s recommended childhood schedule included 21 injections against nine diseases by the age of fifteen months, more than doubling the recommendations made in 1983 (14). The major difference between the 1983 schedule and the 1994 schedule involved immunizing infants against Hepatitis B, and against Haemopholis Influenza type B (HiB). The series for immunization against hepatitis B was begun within hours of birth for infants born to mothers who tested positive for the hepatitis B virus, and at two months of age for those whose mothers were not infected (15).
The current (2010) childhood vaccination schedule from the ACIP recommends 27 injections (many of them containing multiple vaccinations) against fourteen illnesses by the age of eighteen months. An additional ten or eleven injections (depending on the child’s birth date), against eleven illnesses are recommended prior to school entry (16).
Currently, a child living in the United States must be vaccinated fifty times prior to entering kindergarten in public school, according to the ACIP recommendations. Because the laws regarding compulsory vaccination prior to enrollment in public school are based on acceptance of recommendations from the CDC, and because the Supreme Court has upheld the legality of individual states to enforce laws mandating vaccination as a requirement for receiving education through the public school system, parents of children attending school in the U.S. are now “required” to vaccinate their children against hepatitis B and chicken pox, even though neither illness has ever been associated with significant mortality in children living in the United States (17, 18, 19). (Please note that the term “required” is in quotation marks because that is what mainstream media and those who take a pro-vaccine stance would have us believe. All parents in the U.S. have the legal right to declare exemptions from vaccination. Please see information posted on VaxTruth regarding your legal right to Medical, Religious, or Philosophical exemptions.)
Continued on next page…
