Dissolving My Vaxxed Illusions

Breaking free from the prison of my mind.

Waking up to vaccination malfeasance has really gotten to me, and I’ve been wondering why it would bug me so much.

I arrived in Australia, in late 1992, having left war torn Iraq. I chose to leave an authoritarian state and start a new life in what I considered to be the best address on earth. It never crossed my mind that the free state I ran towards was built on an invisible yet highly sophisticated authoritarian government-corporate fascist enterprise that bullied its population to inject its children with multiple dangerous disease causing chemicals…for the greater good.

Multigenerational indoctrination is real. Prisons of the mind are real.

And so it is that the two beautiful children we brought into this “free land”, we injected with those chemicals, giving them a range of conditions that included:

• Stutter and delayed speech development

• Hyperactivity

• Asthma

• Vitiligo

• Hay fever

It is a fascist totalitarian enterprise that managed to sleep walk me into doing this.

I wonder; if you are hypnotised, are you free?

I am going to meander around in this vaccination rabbit-hole for quite some time as I come to terms with all of this.

I’m about two thirds through Dissolving Illusions and without a doubt its one of the most important books I have ever read. Books that reorient you to reality are pretty rare and this is one of them.

The book has a website that includes a gallery of photos and graphs help you “see” the decline and virtual vanishing of disease BEFORE vaccination came along.

Graphs & Images - Dissolving Illusions | Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History

Here is whooping cough (pertussis) in the US.

Here is measles in England/Wales:

The thesis, proven in the book, is that disease vanished as water, nutrition, sanitation, sewerage and working conditions improved. Vaccines did NOT rid us of disease, our own immune systems did. Pharma simply came along and took the credit and in so doing made us all sick again.

I watched Vaxxed 2 recently.

Vaxxed 2 - CHD TV: Livestreaming Video & Audio (childrenshealthdefense.org)

Suzanne Humphries, one of the two authors of Dissolving Illusions features prominently in the documentary.

Here it is on Rumble.

Here it is on Odysee.

It’s a profoundly important documentary from 2016 that has had the full weight of the censorship machine against it.

If you have little kids that you are injecting according to “the schedule” and especially if you have a baby on the way…this is for you. You will see first hand what vaccine injury looks like but even more importantly you will see, in the last 30 minutes, what unvaccinated children look like. As emotional as I was listening to the injured, seeing what real health looks like in children who have never had a single injection is something else. Family after family come on screen and tell you that they have NEVER needed to take their child to a doctor, that they NEVER had an ear infection and that they NEVER had to take an antibiotic. Human natural immunity, when left undamaged, turns out to be an incredible shield against disease.

Watching these super healthy children come on camera one after another made me think back to Kennedy Jr. in his Tyson interview where he said:

All are directly linked to vaccines in the scientific literature. On our website we have 1,400 peer reviewed studies published on NIH's website PubMed, linking various vaccines to all of those injuries.

Well, they're making $60 billion a year selling us vaccines, but they're making $500 billion a year selling the remedies for the injuries caused by vaccines.

The two least profitable versions of humanity are dead people and healthy people.

The most profitable version is an unhealthy person. They have the greatest “lifetime value” as they would say if you were studying an MBA.

Some people know what they are doing but in the main, the system leans towards “unhealth” unconsciously. The system leans towards sustaining itself. Unhealth sustains. Health doesn’t.

Witnessing the health of the unvaccinated I couldn’t help but reflect on the conditions we gave our kids. I know we got off lightly though as you will see from the stories of the injured.

The documentary spends some time on Gardasil (HPV vaccine), and Gardasil injured kids. Again, something that we sleepwalked our daughter into.

The theory is that it will help prevent cervical cancer in girls and penile cancer in boys (both claims are lies). At 42 minutes Robert Kennedy Jr. explains that children that take the vaccine are 37x more likely to die from the vaccine than from cervical cancer.

What can I say, I strongly recommend you watch the doco and get others to watch it if you can. It might be the only place that you will see what healthy unvaccinated kids and people look like.

Dissolving Illusions begins with a wonderful foreword by Dr. Jayne L. M. Donegan.

In it she describes her own awakening. Here is her story with some thoughts and comments along the way:

Vaccination is regarded as the most important health advance in the 20th century by most health professionals and laypeople. Although the dramatic decreases in morbidity and mortality from diseases that occurred in the course of the 20th century have been credited to the introduction of specific vaccines, scant acknowledgment has been given to improving social conditions.

Despite questioning the safety and efficacy of vaccination by reputable medical men since its introduction, debate has been, and is, increasingly discouraged.

Information published in scientific journals is used to support this position, other views being regarded as “unscientific.”

It was a received “article of faith” for me and my contemporaries, that vaccination was the single most useful health intervention that had ever been introduced. Along with all my medical and nursing colleagues, I was taught that vaccines were the reason children and adults stopped dying from diseases for which there are vaccines.

We were told that other diseases, such as scarlet fever, rheumatic fever, typhus, typhoid, cholera, and so on, for which there are no vaccines at the time, diminished both in incidence and mortality (ability to kill) due to better social conditions.

This is such an obvious point!

If vaccines got rid of disease, did they get rid of every single disease? If not, what happened to the diseases that vaccines didn’t “save us from”? They just seemed to go away…why? Yep, you guessed it: water, nutrition, sanitation, sewerage and working conditions improved.

You would think—as medical students who are supposed to be moderately intelligent—that some of us would have asked, “But if deaths from these diseases decreased due to improved social conditions, mightn’t the ones for which there are vaccines also have decreased at the same time, for the same reason?” But we didn’t.

The medical curriculum is so overloaded with information that you just have to learn what you hear, as you hear it: nonvaccinatable diseases into the social conditions box and vaccinatable diseases into the vaccines box and then on to the next subject.

Everything I was taught and read in textbooks, both before I qualified as a doctor and through all my post-graduate training, reinforced this view.

Along with most doctors, I regarded parents who would not vaccinate their children as ignorant or, if not ignorant, sociopathic, for withholding what I believed was a lifesaving intervention and putting everybody else at risk by reducing herd immunity.

In Vaxxed 2 many brave doctors show up for interviews. They are all asked what they were taught at university about vaccines, and they all say the same thing. Pretty much nothing, just that there is a childhood vaccine schedule and that the kids need to stick to it. They even manage to get an immunologist (with a PhD) onto the show…same thing.

Nothing on risks, all on benefit…make sure the kids get it.

They are the foot soldiers of a drug cartel and I do not give them a pass. They might not get taught it at university, but they willfully shut down their curiosity when let loose on the public and aim for purposeful conscience comforting ignorance on anything to do with vaccines.

Paediatricians are the absolute worst.

In Forrest Maready’s short book Unvaccinated, and towards the end he talks about what medical students study at university about vaccination.

Finally, the really strange thing about doctors (and nurses) and vaccines - they are not taught much about them in school. Hardly anything, actually. Compared to the hundreds of hours an anti-vaxxer is likely to have spent studying vaccines, most health care providers know next to nothing. They learn a lot about disease and the immune system and assume that vaccines interact similarly. Unfortunately, they don't. As I mentioned about the ACT problem with the whooping cough vaccine, they are very different. Physicians may spend a few hours learning the schedules recommended by the government and spend a few hours learning which vaccines should be administered subcutaneously (under the skin) as opposed to intra-muscularly. Beyond that, they learn almost nothing about vaccines.

I was so confused by hearing this; I bought every book listed on the medical curriculum of a prestigious medical school. I even bought some auxiliary books that were not required but on the optional, "recommended" reading list. After going through each and every book on the list - over thousands and thousands of pages - there were only 4 pages that talked about how vaccines work! There were 11 pages that listed the vaccine schedule recommended by the government, but besides that, 4 pages that talked about vaccines.

I made a video about it, showing the books and how little a prestigious medical school's curriculum spent teaching about vaccines. Many doctors and nurses got in touch with me to confirm this had been their experience in medical school. Of course, students learn more than what is taught from their schoolbooks, but I imagine the disparity continues into their classroom and residencies.

Once I understood that doctors and nurses learn very little about vaccines in school, I began to realize why they are so hostile to people like myself who ask honest questions about them. I have written books on the subject, but there are many, many amateur anti-vaxxer mothers and fathers out there who are much, much smarter than me. Any of us could easily stump an average pediatric doctor or nurse on vaccines with some of our common knowledge.

Now back to Dissolving Illusions and Dr. Jayne L. M. Donegan:

Indeed, at special clinics in the 1980s, I used to counsel parents who wouldn’t vaccinate their children against whooping cough—which was regarded as the problematic vaccine in those days. I acknowledged that there were dangers associated with the vaccine. I was a truthful doctor, but I told them the official line: that the disease was 10 times more likely to cause death or disability than the vaccine, so any sane person would choose to vaccinate.

What changed?

In 1994 there was a massive measles/rubella vaccination campaign in the UK. Seven million schoolchildren were vaccinated against measles and rubella to protect them from an epidemic of measles, which was said to be imminent.

In those days, there was only one measles shot in the schedule—it is a live viral vaccine and was supposed to be like the wild measles virus. We were told, “One dose and you are immune for life.” I did realize that one shot, however, might not protect every child—no vaccine is one hundred per cent effective—but the chief medical officer said that even two shots of this “one-shot vaccine” would not necessarily protect children when the epidemic came and that they would need a third. He also said that the best way to vaccinate children was en masse to “break the chain of transmission.”

This left me in a quandary. Obviously, the risk-to-benefit ratio of the vaccine was in favor of the vaccine if it was safer than the disease and if it stopped your child from getting the disease. This is what most parents expect to happen and certainly what they are encouraged to believe.

But if children can have the one-shot vaccine twice and still get the disease so they need to have a third shot, this means they can be exposed to all the risks of the vaccine two or three times… and at the same time, all the risks of the disease as well. Did I need to reevaluate what I had been saying to parents?

Also, if the best way of “breaking the chain of transmission” of an infectious disease was to vaccinate en masse, why did we vaccinate babies with all those different vaccines at two, three, and four months of age (UK schedule)? Why didn’t we just wait for two or three years and then vaccinate all those who had been born in the interim en masse to break the chain of transmission?

Good questions!

This was the start of my long, slow journey researching vaccination and disease ecology and learning about other models and philosophies of health and natural hygiene such as those used by the great pioneers who cleaned up our cities and built clean water supplies and sewage systems.

I spent hours in libraries looking at archived journals and textbooks and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) getting out dusty volumes from the middle of the 19th century to make graphs of death rates from diseases for which we have vaccines but which, for some reason, have not been drawn - or made available to doctors or parents by the ONS or the Department of Health.

I read what prominent men of science, medical officers for health, and doctors wrote about vaccination and its sequelae that never made it into today’s textbooks and found out what anyone with even a passing acquaintance with disease figures of the 19th and 20th century knew. For example, by the 1950s when the whooping cough vaccine was introduced, data showed that whooping cough was killing only 1 percent of the numbers of people who used to die in England and Wales 50 years before.

Official data showed that the same happened with measles. Indeed, when the measles vaccine was introduced to the UK in 1968, the death rate continued to drop steadily, even though the initial uptake of the vaccine was only 30 percent and didn’t get above 50 percent until the 1980s.

Even the much-heralded success story of smallpox vaccination was not what it seemed. The enforcement of the compulsory smallpox vaccination law in 1867, when the death rate was already falling, was accompanied by an increase in the deaths from 100 to 400 deaths per million.

Yes, the “holy” smallpox vaccine managed to increase smallpox death and prolong widespread smallpox disease for about a century! Smallpox vaccination is one of the greatest man-made medical disasters, exactly the opposite of what all medical textbooks and Google will tell you.

Two Control Groups: Sweden 2020 & Leicester 1885

After overcoming an awful lot of fear, I came to the gradual realization that it was true what people on the outside had been telling me, that “health is the only immunity.” We don’t need protecting from out there.

We get infectious diseases when our bodies need to have a periodic cleanout. Children, especially, benefit from childhood spotty rashes, or “exanthems” as they are called, at appropriate times in order to make developmental leaps, so long as they are treated appropriately. In my experience, the worst complications of childhood infections are caused by standard medical treatment, which involves suppression of all the symptoms.

Has this knowledge helped my career? It has certainly enabled me to give better advice to parents about treating childhood illness and to be able to provide parents with enough information to give truly informed consent for medical interventions such as vaccination.

My research also led me to being asked, in 2002, to act as an expert witness for the mothers of two unvaccinated children whose absent fathers were applying to the court for a vaccination enforcement order. I wrote a report based on my research, fully referenced, carefully using the methods and results of the studies I quoted to give my opinion, rather than the conclusions of the authors, which are often not supported by their results.

The experts for the fathers and the children were members of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). They recommended vaccination for both children. If they had advised that vaccination was not necessary for these individual children, they would have been seen to be contradicting government health policy based on JCVI recommendations, which is a conflict of interest that was not explored in the case.

The judge decided that my opinion was less valid than theirs, and the mothers lost their case. When it went to appeal, one of the appeal judges called my evidence “junk science,” and on this basis I was charged with Serious Professional Misconduct by the General Medical Council (GMC) of the UK, which could have resulted in being struck off the Medical Register, banned from practicing as a doctor, and losing my livelihood.

In 2007, after a long, drawn-out case lasting three and a half years, the GMC panel completely exonerated me. They did not merely acquit me, but said they were “sure that in the reports you provided you did not fail to be objective, independent and unbiased.”

The successful outcome notwithstanding, the case took an inevitable and heavy toll on my children, our family, and my professional life.

In their meticulously researched book, Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Mr. Roman Bystrianyk take you right back to the roots of disease and the connection between living conditions, nutrition, and health.

They systematically piece together the information you need to pierce the myth that vaccination is what saved us from the infective scourges of the past. More worryingly, they also show how vaccines may be instrumental in creating a many-headed hydra of overt and covert disease, which is hardly recognised, barely understood, and may well be of immense consequence to our children and future generations.

With all this information there, waiting to be found, why don’t more doctors go and look for it?

Why do doctors not even entertain the possibility that the Universal Childhood Vaccination Program may not be the unmitigated success that it is portrayed to be?

Why do doctors not even consider that there may be other ways of achieving health that are better and longer lasting?

In my opinion, the biggest obstacle to independent research and thinking is the professional consequence of stepping out of line and being seen to be different—as I know to my cost. As George Bernard Shaw says in his preface to “The Doctor's Dilemma” 1906:

Doctors are just like other Englishmen: most of them have no honour and no conscience: what they commonly mistake for these is sentimentality and an intense dread of doing anything that everybody else does not do, or omitting to do anything that everybody else does.

So next time you are in your doctor’s office and you say, “I’m worried about the safety of vaccination,” and you are told, “You don’t understand, you’re not a doctor…” remember that, if you are a doctor and say, “I’m worried about the safety of vaccination,” you will be told, “We’re charging you with serious professional misconduct…”

Dr. Jayne L. M. Donegan, MBBS, DRCOG, DFFP, DCH, MRCGP, MFHom

13 June 2013, London, UK jaynelmdonegan@yahoo.com www.jayne-donegan.co.uk