Dear Doctor

Our daughter is due for her two month check-up - which we are looking forward to. We also understand that she is expected to receive her first round of immunisation - Diphtheria/ Tetanus/Whooping Cough, Polio, Hib - which we are not looking forward to!

We have thought long and hard about what is best for our daughter and have read as widely as we can on the subject so that we can make an informed, responsible decision. Our conclusion is that we are not in favour of daughter receiving vaccinations, unless you can guarantee in writing - and have a Public Liability Policy that will cover this - that she will not suffer any adverse effects as a result of them, either in the short or long term.

We share our reasoning behind these conclusions below. I would ask that you treat our views with respect, even though they might not coincide with your own beliefs or those of the Health Visitors. (I am enclosing a copy of this letter for you to forward to their department.)

Immunisation has been practised now for over a century. We've been led to believe that it's a necessary part of childhood, that it's been totally responsible for the decline in disease, and that as parents we should not question its validity 100 years later without being labelled "irresponsible". Fundamentally however, the statistics show that even before immunisation was introduced there was already a decline in diseases like diphtheria, cholera and typhoid due to better sanitation and hygiene, better living conditions and improved medical care. Who is to say that this wouldn't have continued?

What troubles us is about the "official figures" proclaiming the success of vaccinations is that in all likelihood they have been massaged to prove the effectiveness of Government-funded immunisation programmes. For instance, they must by definition include children who had already acquired natural immunity? Not everybody gets the cold or flu virus when it's circulating, so this must also be the case with others diseases. Moreover, "research" which proves the effectiveness of immunisation at an individual level is also suspect because it has been funded by pharmaceutical companies who have a huge vested interest in these programmes. Why else would they offer financial incentives to doctors to encourage them to achieve immunisation targets?

Our reasons for questioning the vaccine approach to fighting disease today are:

• It assumes that all children are at the mercy of micro-organisms which are themselves totally responsible for disease and doesn't take into account the overall health of the child. With vaccination, only the antibody to the injected vaccine is stimulated in the body and therefore the virus by-passes the process of illness and recovery which the body usually goes through when under an attack. So there is no guarantee of immunity - and even if it is temporarily acquired, it certainly won't last a life-time. Moreover, because it's an induced immunity, we're told that it cannot be passed on from mother to child.

On the other hand, when this process is allowed to happen naturally, the child develops life-long immunity which can be passed on to the next generation by a breast-feeding mother. The child is also likely to develop an immune system which responds more rapidly to other infections. Perhaps we could even go so far as to welcome common childhood illnesses such as chicken pox, measles and mumps as a means of developing a healthy immune system. Moreover, as we understand it, when a child is exposed to something like Measles naturally, in most cases they will experience nothing worse than flu-like symptoms. Yet once they have got over it, they will enjoy true immunity for the rest of their life.

• It pays lip-service to the World Health Organisation when it says: "The best vaccine against common infectious diseases is an adequate diet". Such a diet features a wide range of nutrients based on unrefined foods and containing plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables. As parents our preference is to spend time and energy feeding our child well (organically whenever possible) so that she is in the best possible shape to resist disease and recover from illness rapidly and effectively. We are prepared to take the time to nurse her through illness and are in favour of supporting her immune system at this time - and hopefully strengthening it - rather than suppressing it by an automatic recourse to antibiotics.

• It ignores the many instances where fully vaccinated individuals have nevertheless contracted the disease and passed it on to non-vaccinated populations. The US is currently experiencing a measles epidemic. This, it appears, is not due to the irresponsible behaviour of the unvaccinated non-white populations but is mostly occurring among young educated adults who have dutifully received their shots. Indeed, in a study of whooping cough cases in the US and Canada, one third to one half had been fully vaccinated. Furthermore, there are a considerable number of cases of whooping cough being introduced to children through their fully vaccinated siblings.

You may not be aware either that when a brand-new national UK newspaper, "Planet on Sunday", ran a lead story about the scandal of the government's cover-up over jabs, it lasted for one issue. What pressure was brought to bear on the publisher, who knows. But the adverse affects of mass immunisation were all too apparent in the article.

• It doesn't ask what happens to these live viruses in the body over time. Numerous studies show that they consume large portions of the immune system, eventually causing autoimmune disease like MS. Because the vaccine is introduced directly into the circulation, it has free and immediate access to the major immune organs and tissues. Having gained access, elements of the vaccine can stay for prolonged periods or perhaps even permanently. This constant presence and the body's repeated attempts to expel these foreign substances, can dramatically weaken the immune system and lower the body's ability to fight other invading diseases. Moreover, instead of providing protection, vaccination may drive the disease deeper into the system and cause the body to harbour the disease chronically.

• It doesn't take into account that vaccines may only work in a hit-and-miss fashion, coffering temporary immunity - the length of which no-one understands. Vaccines might confer temporary immunity (but we can never prove it) and then wear off at the point when exposure to the disease is most dangerous. For instance, it must be better to let a child get German Measles than wait until she becomes a mother and run the risk of harming her child. In any case, if vaccines are supposed to trigger the body into producing specific antibodies immediately, then why is it that some people with measurably high levels of these antibodies still get the disease while others showing low levels do not.

• It accepts without question that vaccines contain other substances besides bacterial and viral particles, which are known to be carcinogenic. As a result, the very real and evident risk of febrile convulsion, encephalitis, paralysis and death are ever present every time a child is vaccinated. Vaccines contain protein, preservatives, neutralisers and carrying agents. (Formaldehyde and Mercury are both known carcinogens and Aluminium is implicated in Alzheimers disease.) This cocktail of toxic chemicals is injected directly into the bloodstream without going through the normal process of assimilation and detoxification by the skin, mucous membranes, or the liver. It also appears that these risks are multiplied in the case of a triple shot whose separate components carry individual risks. If our child cannot cope with a naturally acquired infection by drawing on her complete immune defences, how can she cope with the barrage of viruses and toxic chemicals of a vaccine that bypass most of these.

• It ignores the growing evidence that vaccination leads to long-term damage of the immune system allowing diseases like cancer, multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, leukaemia and encephalitis to creep in. As early as 1993 the National Academy of Science Institute of Medicine in America concluded that "virtually all vaccines given to children have been proven to cause damage". When you consider that these viral elements are injected into the still-developing immune system of child, it hardly seems surprising. The damage is most obvious when it's of an immediate nature, such as shock, convulsions or paralysis - heaven forbid! - with more cases emerging of children becoming permanently brain damaged within a few days of being immunised. Yet the high-pitched screaming of an 8-week old baby following a vaccination could just as easily go unnoticed, even though this may indicate the possibility of brain damage. And when that same child reaches school and is diagnosed as dyslexic, or hyperactive, or abusive would anyone think to link it to vaccination? Has anyone noticed that the epidemics of such conditions began appearing at precisely the point when mass vaccination programmes began. And what about our four million asthmatics? And why are there so many cases today of meningitis?

• It ignores warnings that bacteria resistant to common antibiotics are about to be labelled one of the most serious problems faced by the global medical community, according to the World Health Organisation. In other words, despite our extensive, expensive immunisation programmes we're still losing control; the vaccines are mutating. This suggests to us that society would do better to focus the money on educating people in strengthening their natural immune system rather than bombarding it with vaccines which carry such nasty risks with no guarantee that they are going to work.

As the parents we enjoy excellent health, which you'll appreciate by looking at our medical records. We invest considerable time, money and energy on improving and maintaining our health through diet, exercise and preventative practices. So far we are very fortunate to have a very healthy, very alert, strong baby whom we're nurturing as long as we can through the mother's breast milk. So you can understand why we are not prepared to jeopardise all this without your written assurance that the benefits of immunisation do outweigh the risks.

Thank you for listening to where we are coming from on this matter. Our purpose in writing was not to challenge you personally but to challenge the basis on which we are expected to have our child vaccinated. Looking forward to a constructive response.

© Mary Nondé, Reiki Master and Feng Shui Consultant

Please show your appreciation for the information by sending a contribution to The Studio 4 Grange Cottages, Broad Common Lane, Hurst RG10 0RD, England.

Note:Legal disclaimer. This article is copyrighted to Mary Nondé -1999-2001. Authorisation is granted to distribute only in its entirety including this section. The article represent a perspective and should only be used as such. Decision to have your children vaccinated or not (and any resulting consequences) is and will always remain your parental duty.

Thank you in advance and please feel free to pass on the full content of this article and our web address www.nonde.freeserve.co.uk to anyone.

Kind regards, Mary Nondé