'BMC Infectious Diseases' journal publication confirms measles vaccine does cause measles infection—but most of the time, even genetic analysis can't determine where the infection came from.
Now you’re getting to the point of why I and many other wholistic physicians used to write letters for parents to give to schools excusing their children from receiving ANY vaccines. Think again about the Amish - they’re very healthy. They don’t get vaccines. If you look at old books about the subject, you will read about how many doctors and parents came to this same conclusion you are considering. The same holds true for all Animals. Old books often describe how rabies vaccination, for example, disastrously changed the sweet disposition of puppies into dogs with aggressive personalities.
Then go down the rabbit hole of old books with testimonials by parents of how the introduction of pasteurized milk made their children sickly and prone to respiratory problems.
Louis Pasteur, the champion of the germ theory, was in the business of destroying doctors like Antoine Bechamp who knew that the health of the biological terrain is really what matters. The story goes that Pasteur finally recanted on his death bed, admitting that Bechamp had been right all along.
A more accurate way of telling when it's possibly the vaccine... when the symptoms are mild. The wild-type virus causes more severe symptoms, more pneumonia, more deafness, more blindness, more brain swelling, more diarrhea.
My basis is that I've studied microbiology, biochemistry, epidemiology, etc. excessively enough to deeply understand this stuff.
Severe symptoms from vaccine are rare because the measles virus in the vaccine has been artificially evolved (you might say "bioengineered") in non-human cells to weaken its ability to cause disease in humans (i.e. attenuation). That is why it is safe to assume *significant disease* is caused by the wild-type virus.
The MMR version of measles is also too weak to efficiently reproduce enough of itself to shed to others, so spreading of this weakened version is borderline impossible.
Shedding of the MMR has been proven. The MMR version is not too weak to efficiently reproduce. The MMR sheds for at least 29 days causing measles infection in those in close proximity to the ‘vaccinated’. The vaccinated are causing the outbreaks.
Shedding of measles vaccine RNA in children after receiving measles, mumps and rubella vaccination
This is a live, weakened virus in the vaccine. If RNA is shedding that's from the body breaking down the weakened virus. I could lick that RNA and nothing would happen to me.
All of those side effects/adverse reactions that come from the measles have a higher incidence and severity from wild-type measles. It's clear you're very interested in this, but it's even more clear you're in over your head. My writing is geared directly at people like you who are interested but need to take a step back to basics. You might like this series I wrote on how we're lied to about chronic disease: https://thescamdoctor.substack.com/p/youre-being-lied-to-about-chronic?r=6hgshq
The measles outbreak in Gaines County, TX occurred following an MMR vaccination clinic. Every outbreak since has followed an uptick of MMR injections in that community/state. Every. Single. One.
The MMR is a lab-mutated GOF strain bioengineered to increase pathogenicity and transmissibility, proven to shed for at least 29 days following injection. The MMR ‘vaccinated’ should be quarantined for at least a month to prevent infection of others and outbreaks except that is not what the powers-that-shouldn’t-be aka UN/WHO want.
You’re indoctrinated by the Rockefeller-captured/ controlled chemical-based allopathic ‘medical’ system [further corrupted by the UN/WHO] and pro-vaxx. I don’t trust blood-soaked pharma shills.
The injection of known neurotoxins, carcinogens, foreign human DNA (aborted fetal cells), foreign animal DNA, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (breaks the blood-brain barrier), GOF lab-mutated pathogens, etc. does NOT result in health.
There is shedding as well after they inject vaccines, chicken pox, measles. There is ongoing spreading from the spike protein producing experimental jabs as well. Product of gain of function …created . They did it! Look what they did with the live polio jab.. no, they did it, kids wereparalyzed all those kids in Africa.. Bill Gates.. 😡😓
That’s true too of the Typhoid vaccine. But on Measles, ‘they’ spend money for PR on frightening outbreak news reports in our high tech world, and feature expert MD interviews, but refuse to provide fact sheets or simple stories to tell people what happens with measles elimination in low income nations of uneducated people and no real public health or medical delivery system - a drug maker and US state department NON market region and population without biomedical mixed healthcare products being sold as if services: There are specific nutritional supplements that prevent or reverse the appearance of symptoms (ie disease outbreak).
I won’t risk giving guidance here when you all know we either need to be exposed to wild virus and have nutritional (metabolic-immune) sufficiency to gain immunity (if only we lived in a pre-Covid world) or we are supposed to inject our kids.
Hi Jon: I reviewed the Shandong paper in the context of your comments, and will answer your question about my perspective on Germ and Terrain Theory (‘debate’). But I need to ask if you can kindly confirm the source of your specific comment about the measles shot being passaged in GOF research at a military lab. (1) What research citation? (2) Does that work relate to the specific live attenuated variant in this particular Shandong study (maybe it’s in the Shandong paper and I’ve missed it?).
It’s remarkable if US biodefense GOF products are being distributed and researched in China. And the Shandong paper is interesting non-the-less in the way researchers focus their analysis: They created an information vacuum by failing to report a base rate for total baby vaccinations (data they plausibly might not be able to access or gather).
Awesome! Thank you for the interaction here. In a May 2016 publication in 'The Journal of Infectious Diseases,' U.S. military biodefense experts explicitly state: “The live-attenuated measles vaccine was created by passaging the virus until mutations arose that altered virus tropism—a technique that could be considered, by current definitions, GOF research." https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/213/9/1364/2459266?login=false
Oh dear Jon! You are asking me to be thoughtful and articulate ? 🙏🏻😃… this is logically NOT the either-or binary question product sales agents, prescribers or public policy makers want us to assume it is, just because our yes-no answers fit their deal and quantify the size of their workload, pay and wallet.
So, thank you for a great question! I will get back to you on this with something considered a bit later tonight. 🤔❓🔍☀️😊
I agree about binaries. I'm just curious what your take is. Not even for debate or anything. I don't have my mind made up on the issue, so your input will help me out! No pressure.
Hi again Jon: I see how your article and citizens in general, are dealing with more than one generic or historic ‘debate’ on Germ and Terrain Theory these days.
The research paper you are discussing can generally support both in general, unless we look at the assumptions and faulty logic behind each of them as they are applied in modern biodefense. I can write something more fulsome about that based on the evidence in principle and practice.
Depending on your answer to my followup question to you, I sense I could help clarify and strengthen your analysis by eliminating some logical fallacies and defining erroneous public assumptions about those theories.
Either way, my comment about need for nutrients to better prevent or manage measles, can be explained for the benefit of both the unvaccinated and those wanting to ensure metabolic sufficiency to make good use of a vaccination, in terms of evidence supporting modern interpretations of Germ and Terrain Theory.
So, your question to me, about the debate opens fresh space for other kinds of debate and discussion that I sense you are touching upon in your emphasis on passage as a GOF technique in live yet attenuated ‘germ’ reproduction and products commercialization.
I assume most people want to do the right thing for themselves and others, and do not want to be defrauded of their health by the adverse but hidden effects of commercial products.
In a non-partisan way, we can and must do better on all accounts for more people valuing the God-given gift of life. So maybe it’s time to allow affordable non-patented resources into the politicized mandate for public health.
Until such time, here’s wishing you and we can be and stay well and adaptive.🙏🏻
"If genetic analysis can’t tell us whether a virus or a vaccine causes measles, why are we recommending vaccines?" Because the science says if you inject antigens (or the message to make them), you'll get serum antibodies, and you most certainly will. Unfortunately the science has morphed into religious ideology beliefs that those serum antibodies will stop infections from happening, stop the spread, and reduce severe symptoms. None of those are true, no matter how hard you believe them to be. https://rumble.com/v4wx7fi-the-power-of-antibodies-unveiling-the-truth-behind-artificial-immunization.html
Hopefully you know more about MMR than you do about hepatitis B, but I'll still venture to ask... Does immunity gained from surviving the wild-type infection reduce the chances of getting infected again?
Yes, immunity gained from a wild-type infection confers permanent protection against getting infected again. There are no confirmed, laboratory-verified cases in scientific records of an immunocompetent individual having measles twice after a bona fide natural measles infection. But, documented vaccine breakthroughs in both children and adults are relatively common in comparison. In fact, I talked with Dr. Ben Edwards who responded to the measles outbreak in Texas. He was vaccinated against measles and did get a measles infection with symptoms from that experience. One of his assistants who had a measles infection as a child was with him during that time and did not experience measles symptoms.
You're right, surviving a measles infection generally gives you life-long immunity and maybe a disability on the side. If you compare anything to zero, it's "relatively common in comparison," so that's a fairly useless argument. Here's what's more useful:
Severe symptoms, disabilities, and death are *much more common* from wild-type virus than from the weakened virus in the vaccine. Those matter more than the very rare breakthrough measles infections in vaccinated people.
A few years ago, a notice went out to every family in our school district that one student in one of the schools had a "possible case of measles". The health department advised that every student who wasn't "up to date" on their vaccines should get an MMR. People started commenting on social media, saying that "anti-vax" families were putting the public at risk. A friend of the family defended the family, and stated that the child was vaccinated.
A few days later, the health department released a statement saying that the child didn't have the measles, after all.
I sent a message asking the health department how it had been determined that the child did not have measles: was it just a clinical observation by a doctor, or had it been ruled out by a blood test? The health department claimed that they could not answer my question due to "privacy reasons". So, it's okay to notify the entire school district that there might be a case of the measles, but it's not okay to tell those same families how they know it wasn't the measles.
Your strongest point is the diagnostic blind spot: the Shandong paper shows that in most cases we cannot reliably distinguish wild-type measles from vaccine-strain VARI, so surveillance and safety monitoring are fundamentally crippled. That alone justifies deep concern about how these products are governed.
Where the paper really fails is not in proving your “95% of vaccinated babies get sick” line, but by never giving a denominator for how many doses were actually given—so nobody can calculate a true VARI rate. That gap is theirs, not yours, but it means your 95% figure applies only to the 189 identified VARI cases, not to all vaccinated infants.
The Shandong data also quietly validates both sides of the old germ vs. terrain argument: it treats measles as a specific RNA virus with distinct genotypes (germ), while showing that only a minority of vaccinated children develop VARI depending on age, immune maturity, and co-factors (terrain). The germ is necessary, but the host terrain strongly modulates who gets clinically ill and how severely.
The categorical error comes when we still try to analyze the measles vaccine as if it were a straightforward public health tool, governed only by classical medical principles. Your background material and the military-authored GOF review on measles vaccine development show it is also a military–industrial, dual‑use product, sitting inside biodefense and DURC frameworks rather than purely civilian pediatrics. Treating it as a simple, one‑size‑fits‑all “disease prevention technology” ignores that governance context and invites logical fallacies about both its risks and its benefits.
Once the vaccine is framed as a GOF/biodefense asset, it tends to be handled under military logic (strategic ambiguity, acceptable losses, information control) rather than medical logic (informed consent, individual safety, transparency). In that light, the Shandong diagnostic ambiguity and missing denominator look less like random sloppiness and more like patterns that are at least structurally compatible with that dual‑use governance environment.
Informed consent becomes essential in this setting, because people are being asked to participate in a system whose risk calculus they are not fully shown.
Your work is valuable precisely because you keep pressing those questions in public and reopening space for a non‑partisan, evidence‑based discussion of what we are actually doing when we call this “just a vaccine.”
I will let you know when I put out a fuller analysis of the Shandong paper + GOF + germ/terrain and other implications on my Substack.
Here’s to clear minds, better health, meaningful care and a good New Year!
To make things worse they count the injected as "unvaccinated" until two weeks after the injection. So if a child gets a fever or "measles like rash" or "atypical measles" or any measles diagnosis after getting injected with the MMR2 vaccine, they'll say it is because your child is "unvaccinated" and blame it on being a stupid "antivaxxer."
Bizarrely, and unfortunately, when confronted with the decision whether to defy officialdom or inject their child with measles, for the majority the path of least resistance is the latter.
Since 2019, we’ve all learned to assume the opposite of what we’re told by ‘the establishment’. Why else would corrupt ,Pfizer, Moderna, etc, demand zero liability through the insane 1985 PREP Act? Unjabbed MicK (UK patriot). We live longer!
Why are we recommending vaccines? GREAT QUESTION! Symptoms caused by the greatly weakened version of the virus are much milder and limited. Only 16% of vaccinated kids developed classic symptoms, that's a much smaller percent than kids who get the infection.
More importantly, the severe effects of Measles: lung infection, brain inflammation, deafness, blindness, immune system suppression, severe diarrhea are *even more rare* from the vaccine.
You get immunity from much less severe symptoms from the vaccine. You also get immunity to mumps and rubella while you're at it.
The case numbers used to justify renewed vaccination campaigns are not coming from those who are immunized, considering the overwhelming majority of measles cases in outbreaks are in people who never got the vaccine.
The point is, when you can’t tell, it’s the vaccine.
Exactly what happened in Texas and elsewhere as a result of hyper vaccination.
Now you’re getting to the point of why I and many other wholistic physicians used to write letters for parents to give to schools excusing their children from receiving ANY vaccines. Think again about the Amish - they’re very healthy. They don’t get vaccines. If you look at old books about the subject, you will read about how many doctors and parents came to this same conclusion you are considering. The same holds true for all Animals. Old books often describe how rabies vaccination, for example, disastrously changed the sweet disposition of puppies into dogs with aggressive personalities.
Then go down the rabbit hole of old books with testimonials by parents of how the introduction of pasteurized milk made their children sickly and prone to respiratory problems.
Louis Pasteur, the champion of the germ theory, was in the business of destroying doctors like Antoine Bechamp who knew that the health of the biological terrain is really what matters. The story goes that Pasteur finally recanted on his death bed, admitting that Bechamp had been right all along.
You're singing to the choir.
Isn't that, "'...preaching to the choir"?
Nevertheless, the additional information, which may not be know to all readers of this post, and which back up your statements, is appreciated.
A more accurate way of telling when it's possibly the vaccine... when the symptoms are mild. The wild-type virus causes more severe symptoms, more pneumonia, more deafness, more blindness, more brain swelling, more diarrhea.
What is your basis for this statement?
MMR shedding is evidence of GOF >>a vaccine that is bioengineered to increase pathogenicity and transmissibility.
My basis is that I've studied microbiology, biochemistry, epidemiology, etc. excessively enough to deeply understand this stuff.
Severe symptoms from vaccine are rare because the measles virus in the vaccine has been artificially evolved (you might say "bioengineered") in non-human cells to weaken its ability to cause disease in humans (i.e. attenuation). That is why it is safe to assume *significant disease* is caused by the wild-type virus.
The MMR version of measles is also too weak to efficiently reproduce enough of itself to shed to others, so spreading of this weakened version is borderline impossible.
Shedding of the MMR has been proven. The MMR version is not too weak to efficiently reproduce. The MMR sheds for at least 29 days causing measles infection in those in close proximity to the ‘vaccinated’. The vaccinated are causing the outbreaks.
Shedding of measles vaccine RNA in children after receiving measles, mumps and rubella vaccination
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38823291/
Serious complications reported by Merck in the ProQuad (MMR-V) product insert during vaccine post-marketing surveillance include:
• measles;
• atypical measles;
• vaccine strain varicella;
• varicella-like rash;
• herpes zoster;
• herpes simplex;
• pneumonia and respiratory infection;
• pneumonitis;
• bronchitis;
• epididymitis;
• cellulitis;
• skin infection;
• subacute sclerosing panencephalitis;
• aseptic meningitis;
• thrombocytopenia;
• aplastic anemia (anemia due to the bone marrow’s inability to produce platelets, red and white blood cells);
• lymphadenitis (inflammation of the lymph nodes);
• anaphylaxis including related symptoms of peripheral, angioneurotic and facial emema;
• agitation;
• ocular palsies;
• necrotizing retinitis (inflammation of the eye);
• nerve deafness;
• optic and retrobulbar neuritis (inflammation of the optic nerve);
• Bell’s palsy (sudden but temporary weakness of one half of the face);
• cerebrovascular accident (stroke);
• acute disseminated encephalomyelitis;
• measles inclusion body encephalitis;
• transverse myelitis;
• encephalopathy;
• Guillain-Barré syndrome;
• syncope (fainting);
• tremor;
• dizziness;
• paraesthesia;
• febrile seizure;
• afebrile seizures or convulsions;
• polyneuropathy (dysfunction of numerous peripheral nerves of the body);
• Stevens-Johnson syndrome;
• Henoch-Schönlein purpura;
• acute hemorrhagic edema of infancy;
• erythema multiforme;
• panniculitis;
• arthritis;
• death
Serious complications reported by Merck in the MMRII product insert during vaccine post-marketing surveillance include:
• brain inflammation (encephalitis) and encephalopathy (chronic brain dysfunction);
• panniculitis (inflammation of the fat layer under the skin);
• atypical measles;
• syncope (sudden loss of consciousness, fainting);
• vasculitis (inflammation of the blood vessels);
• pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas);
• diabetes mellitus;
• thrombocytopenia purpura (blood disorder);
• Henoch-Schönlein purpura (inflammation and bleeding in the small blood vessels);
• acute hemorrhagic edema of infancy (rare vasculitis of the skin’s small vessels occurring in infants);
• leukocytosis (high white blood cell count);
• anaphylaxis (shock);
• bronchial spasms;
• pneumonia;
• pneumonitis (inflammation of the lung tissues);
• arthritis and arthralgia (joint pain);
myalgia (muscle pain);
• polyneuritis (inflammation of several nerves simultaneously);
• measles inclusion body encephalitis (disease affecting the brain of immunocompromised persons);
• subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (fatal progressive brain disorder caused by exposure to the measles virus);
• Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)(disease where the body’s immune system attacks the nerves);
• acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) (brief widespread inflammation of the nerve’s protective covering);
• transverse myelitis (inflammation of the spinal cord);
• aseptic meningitis;
• erythema multiforme (skin disorder from an allergic reaction or infection);
• urticarial rash (hives, itching from an allergic reaction);
• measles-like rash;
• Stevens-Johnson syndrome (severe reaction causing the skin and mucous membranes to blister, die, and shed);
• nerve deafness (hearing loss from damage to the inner ear);
• otitis media (ear infection);
retinitis (inflammation of the retina of the eye);
• optic neuritis (inflammation of the optic nerve);
• conjunctivitis (pink eye);
• ocular palsies (dysfunction of the ocular nerve);
• epididymitis (inflammation of the epididymis);
• paresthesia (burning or prickling of the skin);
• death
The MMR is far more deadly than wild measles.
This is a live, weakened virus in the vaccine. If RNA is shedding that's from the body breaking down the weakened virus. I could lick that RNA and nothing would happen to me.
All of those side effects/adverse reactions that come from the measles have a higher incidence and severity from wild-type measles. It's clear you're very interested in this, but it's even more clear you're in over your head. My writing is geared directly at people like you who are interested but need to take a step back to basics. You might like this series I wrote on how we're lied to about chronic disease: https://thescamdoctor.substack.com/p/youre-being-lied-to-about-chronic?r=6hgshq
The measles outbreak in Gaines County, TX occurred following an MMR vaccination clinic. Every outbreak since has followed an uptick of MMR injections in that community/state. Every. Single. One.
The MMR is a lab-mutated GOF strain bioengineered to increase pathogenicity and transmissibility, proven to shed for at least 29 days following injection. The MMR ‘vaccinated’ should be quarantined for at least a month to prevent infection of others and outbreaks except that is not what the powers-that-shouldn’t-be aka UN/WHO want.
You’re indoctrinated by the Rockefeller-captured/ controlled chemical-based allopathic ‘medical’ system [further corrupted by the UN/WHO] and pro-vaxx. I don’t trust blood-soaked pharma shills.
The injection of known neurotoxins, carcinogens, foreign human DNA (aborted fetal cells), foreign animal DNA, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80 (breaks the blood-brain barrier), GOF lab-mutated pathogens, etc. does NOT result in health.
Stop lying. Stop gaslighting.
The virus clown show continues. A joke a minute.
I had measles when I was a kid and got a whole week off school. It was great
lol
There is shedding as well after they inject vaccines, chicken pox, measles. There is ongoing spreading from the spike protein producing experimental jabs as well. Product of gain of function …created . They did it! Look what they did with the live polio jab.. no, they did it, kids wereparalyzed all those kids in Africa.. Bill Gates.. 😡😓
Every vaccine is a lie from the pit of hell...literally! Designed for the sole purpose of bringing about more death and destruction!
Thank you, Jon!
I don't like any of them!
Yes they can, thats why they got caught. The measles ‘epidemic’ was FROM the injections. Measles was a created thing just like polio.
What were all of the measles cases before the invention of the vaccine?
Im saying there was never an epidemic ‘
That’s true too of the Typhoid vaccine. But on Measles, ‘they’ spend money for PR on frightening outbreak news reports in our high tech world, and feature expert MD interviews, but refuse to provide fact sheets or simple stories to tell people what happens with measles elimination in low income nations of uneducated people and no real public health or medical delivery system - a drug maker and US state department NON market region and population without biomedical mixed healthcare products being sold as if services: There are specific nutritional supplements that prevent or reverse the appearance of symptoms (ie disease outbreak).
I won’t risk giving guidance here when you all know we either need to be exposed to wild virus and have nutritional (metabolic-immune) sufficiency to gain immunity (if only we lived in a pre-Covid world) or we are supposed to inject our kids.
Leslie, what's your take on the whole terrain theory versus germ theory debate?
Hi Jon: I reviewed the Shandong paper in the context of your comments, and will answer your question about my perspective on Germ and Terrain Theory (‘debate’). But I need to ask if you can kindly confirm the source of your specific comment about the measles shot being passaged in GOF research at a military lab. (1) What research citation? (2) Does that work relate to the specific live attenuated variant in this particular Shandong study (maybe it’s in the Shandong paper and I’ve missed it?).
It’s remarkable if US biodefense GOF products are being distributed and researched in China. And the Shandong paper is interesting non-the-less in the way researchers focus their analysis: They created an information vacuum by failing to report a base rate for total baby vaccinations (data they plausibly might not be able to access or gather).
Awesome! Thank you for the interaction here. In a May 2016 publication in 'The Journal of Infectious Diseases,' U.S. military biodefense experts explicitly state: “The live-attenuated measles vaccine was created by passaging the virus until mutations arose that altered virus tropism—a technique that could be considered, by current definitions, GOF research." https://academic.oup.com/jid/article/213/9/1364/2459266?login=false
Oh dear Jon! You are asking me to be thoughtful and articulate ? 🙏🏻😃… this is logically NOT the either-or binary question product sales agents, prescribers or public policy makers want us to assume it is, just because our yes-no answers fit their deal and quantify the size of their workload, pay and wallet.
So, thank you for a great question! I will get back to you on this with something considered a bit later tonight. 🤔❓🔍☀️😊
I agree about binaries. I'm just curious what your take is. Not even for debate or anything. I don't have my mind made up on the issue, so your input will help me out! No pressure.
Hi again Jon: I see how your article and citizens in general, are dealing with more than one generic or historic ‘debate’ on Germ and Terrain Theory these days.
The research paper you are discussing can generally support both in general, unless we look at the assumptions and faulty logic behind each of them as they are applied in modern biodefense. I can write something more fulsome about that based on the evidence in principle and practice.
Depending on your answer to my followup question to you, I sense I could help clarify and strengthen your analysis by eliminating some logical fallacies and defining erroneous public assumptions about those theories.
Either way, my comment about need for nutrients to better prevent or manage measles, can be explained for the benefit of both the unvaccinated and those wanting to ensure metabolic sufficiency to make good use of a vaccination, in terms of evidence supporting modern interpretations of Germ and Terrain Theory.
So, your question to me, about the debate opens fresh space for other kinds of debate and discussion that I sense you are touching upon in your emphasis on passage as a GOF technique in live yet attenuated ‘germ’ reproduction and products commercialization.
I assume most people want to do the right thing for themselves and others, and do not want to be defrauded of their health by the adverse but hidden effects of commercial products.
In a non-partisan way, we can and must do better on all accounts for more people valuing the God-given gift of life. So maybe it’s time to allow affordable non-patented resources into the politicized mandate for public health.
Until such time, here’s wishing you and we can be and stay well and adaptive.🙏🏻
Well said!
"If genetic analysis can’t tell us whether a virus or a vaccine causes measles, why are we recommending vaccines?" Because the science says if you inject antigens (or the message to make them), you'll get serum antibodies, and you most certainly will. Unfortunately the science has morphed into religious ideology beliefs that those serum antibodies will stop infections from happening, stop the spread, and reduce severe symptoms. None of those are true, no matter how hard you believe them to be. https://rumble.com/v4wx7fi-the-power-of-antibodies-unveiling-the-truth-behind-artificial-immunization.html
Hopefully you know more about MMR than you do about hepatitis B, but I'll still venture to ask... Does immunity gained from surviving the wild-type infection reduce the chances of getting infected again?
Yes, immunity gained from a wild-type infection confers permanent protection against getting infected again. There are no confirmed, laboratory-verified cases in scientific records of an immunocompetent individual having measles twice after a bona fide natural measles infection. But, documented vaccine breakthroughs in both children and adults are relatively common in comparison. In fact, I talked with Dr. Ben Edwards who responded to the measles outbreak in Texas. He was vaccinated against measles and did get a measles infection with symptoms from that experience. One of his assistants who had a measles infection as a child was with him during that time and did not experience measles symptoms.
You're right, surviving a measles infection generally gives you life-long immunity and maybe a disability on the side. If you compare anything to zero, it's "relatively common in comparison," so that's a fairly useless argument. Here's what's more useful:
Severe symptoms, disabilities, and death are *much more common* from wild-type virus than from the weakened virus in the vaccine. Those matter more than the very rare breakthrough measles infections in vaccinated people.
A few years ago, a notice went out to every family in our school district that one student in one of the schools had a "possible case of measles". The health department advised that every student who wasn't "up to date" on their vaccines should get an MMR. People started commenting on social media, saying that "anti-vax" families were putting the public at risk. A friend of the family defended the family, and stated that the child was vaccinated.
A few days later, the health department released a statement saying that the child didn't have the measles, after all.
I sent a message asking the health department how it had been determined that the child did not have measles: was it just a clinical observation by a doctor, or had it been ruled out by a blood test? The health department claimed that they could not answer my question due to "privacy reasons". So, it's okay to notify the entire school district that there might be a case of the measles, but it's not okay to tell those same families how they know it wasn't the measles.
Dear Jon:
Your strongest point is the diagnostic blind spot: the Shandong paper shows that in most cases we cannot reliably distinguish wild-type measles from vaccine-strain VARI, so surveillance and safety monitoring are fundamentally crippled. That alone justifies deep concern about how these products are governed.
Where the paper really fails is not in proving your “95% of vaccinated babies get sick” line, but by never giving a denominator for how many doses were actually given—so nobody can calculate a true VARI rate. That gap is theirs, not yours, but it means your 95% figure applies only to the 189 identified VARI cases, not to all vaccinated infants.
The Shandong data also quietly validates both sides of the old germ vs. terrain argument: it treats measles as a specific RNA virus with distinct genotypes (germ), while showing that only a minority of vaccinated children develop VARI depending on age, immune maturity, and co-factors (terrain). The germ is necessary, but the host terrain strongly modulates who gets clinically ill and how severely.
The categorical error comes when we still try to analyze the measles vaccine as if it were a straightforward public health tool, governed only by classical medical principles. Your background material and the military-authored GOF review on measles vaccine development show it is also a military–industrial, dual‑use product, sitting inside biodefense and DURC frameworks rather than purely civilian pediatrics. Treating it as a simple, one‑size‑fits‑all “disease prevention technology” ignores that governance context and invites logical fallacies about both its risks and its benefits.
Once the vaccine is framed as a GOF/biodefense asset, it tends to be handled under military logic (strategic ambiguity, acceptable losses, information control) rather than medical logic (informed consent, individual safety, transparency). In that light, the Shandong diagnostic ambiguity and missing denominator look less like random sloppiness and more like patterns that are at least structurally compatible with that dual‑use governance environment.
Informed consent becomes essential in this setting, because people are being asked to participate in a system whose risk calculus they are not fully shown.
Your work is valuable precisely because you keep pressing those questions in public and reopening space for a non‑partisan, evidence‑based discussion of what we are actually doing when we call this “just a vaccine.”
I will let you know when I put out a fuller analysis of the Shandong paper + GOF + germ/terrain and other implications on my Substack.
Here’s to clear minds, better health, meaningful care and a good New Year!
To make things worse they count the injected as "unvaccinated" until two weeks after the injection. So if a child gets a fever or "measles like rash" or "atypical measles" or any measles diagnosis after getting injected with the MMR2 vaccine, they'll say it is because your child is "unvaccinated" and blame it on being a stupid "antivaxxer."
No, it'll be classified as a vaccine side effect. If it was reported as a measles infection, the country's incidence of measles cases would be so much higher. And if you don't know what incidence is, here's a intro: https://thescamdoctor.substack.com/p/youre-being-lied-to-about-chronic?r=6hgshq
Yes, I was going to mention the same.
Like gain of function bio-weapons...polio
From their point of view, it doesn't matter where the infection is coming from as long as people are becoming infected...
Bizarrely, and unfortunately, when confronted with the decision whether to defy officialdom or inject their child with measles, for the majority the path of least resistance is the latter.
Yes they can. Easily.
You just Genotype the virus.
Simple.
Since 2019, we’ve all learned to assume the opposite of what we’re told by ‘the establishment’. Why else would corrupt ,Pfizer, Moderna, etc, demand zero liability through the insane 1985 PREP Act? Unjabbed MicK (UK patriot). We live longer!
Why are we recommending vaccines? GREAT QUESTION! Symptoms caused by the greatly weakened version of the virus are much milder and limited. Only 16% of vaccinated kids developed classic symptoms, that's a much smaller percent than kids who get the infection.
More importantly, the severe effects of Measles: lung infection, brain inflammation, deafness, blindness, immune system suppression, severe diarrhea are *even more rare* from the vaccine.
You get immunity from much less severe symptoms from the vaccine. You also get immunity to mumps and rubella while you're at it.
The case numbers used to justify renewed vaccination campaigns are not coming from those who are immunized, considering the overwhelming majority of measles cases in outbreaks are in people who never got the vaccine.