Must there be a Pro and Con to vaccinations?

We need a middle ground.

By Mark Bolton


Pauline Hanson and Insiders

Last Sunday morning’s ABC’s Insiders gave us the chance to see and hear One Nation’s leader, Senator Pauline Hanson being grilled by host Barrie Cassidy.

As usual, the regular and predictable rhetoric stumbled from her mouth — but like most people who see Senator Hanson for what she really is, I’m used to her noise.  No more harm is being done because she’s already done the harm, and she is talking to the converted.  Nothing is going to change their minds, nor the minds of people such as me.

However, as most people not living under a rock will now know, the good senator decided to speak about Australia’s mandatory vaccination policies.

By brunch last Sunday two things were very obvious to me.  The anti-vaccination lobby will have been pleased as punch that Senator Hanson addressed the policy  — and the pro-vaccination lobby will have been more than hysterically ecstatic Senator Hanson addressed the issue.


We all know of the Yes lobby and the No lobby.  There is though at least one more group that wishes to be heard, and wishes to be taken seriously — the middle group.  It’s just a group of people we might call (for the sake of an actual name) ‘go with caution vaccination group’.

When it comes to a mandatory policy that demands the pumping of chemicals into children, as if every single human-being reacts the same to an introduced chemical(s) into their blood-streams, surely hearing the other sides of this vitally important issue would be not only welcomed, it would be demanded.

But different opinions are not being demanded.  Different opinions in fact are being closed down.  Anti-vaccination campaigners can’t even access speaking venues in this country because the venues are being threatened.

Personally I do not agree with the straight out anti-vaccination lobby group — but demanding they be silenced is NOT helpful, nor does it support the freedom-of-speech we wish to protect (when it suits).

Despite my disagreement to this lobby group’s closed minded views, just like my disagreement’s to the closed minded pro views, it’s not like they are preaching ‘hate’ — simply a strictly alternative position to the strictly established views.

Anti-vaccination lobbyists are one thing.  They are a lobby group just like the big-pharma lobbyists.  Then there’s the middle ground — ordinary people simply concerned about a belief being forced down our throats that all children will not not suffer a bad reaction to certain ingredient(s) in a vaccination(s).  To my way of thinking; questioning the rigidity sounds sensible.

The problem is, if this group of ordinary people speaks out — ordinary people who have legitimate concerns — then they are treated with hatred and contempt.  They are bullied by the established views and wrongly labelled as anti-vaccer’s.  Yet another societal divide, which falls into the hands of those who benefit from the divide.

There are at least three interest groups at play here.  Pro-vaccinators, anti-vaccinators — and the camp I sit with – cautious vaccinators.  Not one of these groups I believe for one second wishes to see children suffer — despite many of the accusations that fly around — particularly from the establishment.


Flu Vaccine worked – I got the flu.

Middle of last year, and I found myself having a discussion with my doctor about vaccinations.  The subject was brought up by my doctor because she wanted me to have the Flu vaccination.  My response was that of a thank you but no thank you.  Less than five minutes later my doctor and I were having a shouting match in the corridors of this rather large practice.

Our disagreement went from my personal decision to not have a Flu jab to the rights and wrongs of any government giving itself the power to demand parents do to their children something they as parents do not believe in, and/or feel safe doing.

Compulsory vaccinations vs the rights of parents who are forced to choose homelessness and starvation because they fear dozens of chemicals being planted into the bodies of their children.  Either/or?  Really?

In 2012, I was offered a free Flu vaccination and it seemed a sensible decision to have the jab.  In retrospect, very silly considering my body has regularly held the Flu at bay.

Why did I have the jab?  I was told that a particularly nasty Flu was expected that year.  An expectation that I have heard every year since.

Less than a fortnight after the vaccine, I became very ill.  Can you guess?  If you think ‘The Flu’ – go to the top of the class.  Sure enough, and for the first time in many, many years, I became ill with Flu.  I’ve not had a Flu since (touch wood).


Back to the argument in the medical centre.  My doctor was very angry with me for believing the Flu jab gave me the Flu.  I was becoming agitated because she wasn’t listening to me.  “A coincidence” is what she kept saying.

The “coincidence” word pops up a lot when it comes to ill health following a vaccination.  Especially when parents speak out about how their child was completely healthy one moment to changes ranging from a slight difference in behaviour to complete incapacitation – and even death.

The common denominator in the many hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of “coincidences” is?  A vaccination or vaccinations.

I know personally of a young teen boy whose life changed severely following a vaccination.  His dream was to join the RAAF, to fly – and if need be – to defend his country.  About a fortnight following this vaccination he was in the emergency area of the hospital.  He was fighting for his life.

A “coincidence”? — or is it possible his immune system is unable to tolerate an ingredient or ingredients that are placed into the vaccine?

As a child, his mother suffered ill affects following a Rubella vaccine.  Those ill affects continue.

Is it possible there is a genetic weakness in some families?  I can’t see why the immune system is somehow invincible when it comes to genetic weaknesses.

Place yourself in this mother’s position.  I mean really empathise.  Would you not be scared to have your other children exposed to vaccinations?  Would you want your already sick child to have more vaccinations?  Your choices are: lose your Family Tax payment that will leave you homeless — or take a risk — a huge risk?  Would you really want to be in her shoes?

Vaccines Don’t Harm

I’ve been told by medical professionals, read and heard interviews with medical professionals who are rigid supporters of vaccinations across the board.  They all conclude that it’s impossible for a vaccine to hurt certain people, certain groups of people, or certain cultures.  Any following vaccination health issues are ‘coincidences’ – end of story.

This argument makes no sense whatsoever to me, and I’m not alone.  For example; I can eat a peanut and not die.  I can eat seafood and not die.  I know two people who can’t even risk eating out in case there is a life threatening (to them) mistake made in the kitchen.  What about Penicillin allergy

I struggle to comprehend this idea that not everyone can tolerate the same foods and medications – yet the chemical ingredients in vaccines are safe for everyone?  It’s impossible!

I stress again — my concerns does not mean that I’m anti-vaccines.  It simply means that I find it impossible to accept the logic that what doesn’t hurt me won’t hurt you.  What this boils down to then is ‘be a good girl or boy and take one for the team — but we’ll deny this is what we’re saying.’

This very same point I’m making is one of the points made by Senator Hanson during last Sunday’s Insiders.  But she stuffed up with the suggestion there is a test, and because she is not overly concerned with facts, every credible point she did make was lost.

If there is a pre-vaccination test then I don’t know about it — and if there is by chance a test the cost is bound to be out of the reach of the only people who will benefit from this test.

In conclusion;

Evidence of far too many “coincidences” leaves me and many other concerned people reasons to doubt the official beliefs.  In the late 50’s and early 60’s, anyone who questioned Thalidomide WILL have been shouted down by the government, medical and corporate worlds.

Chemie-Grünenthal, the German-pharma that manufactured and marketed Thalidomide KNEW what it was doing but the profits were all that mattered to the profiting stakeholders.  Government’s knew too.  Why is today’s considered knowledge any different than the considered knowledge of the 50’s and 60’s?  I urge you to read the link at the beginning of this paragraph.

There is so much information out there to view.  Not all of those blindly in favour of vaccinations have it correct.  They can’t have it correct – unless that disease named “coincidence” is to blame.  Equally, not everybody blindly opposed to vaccinations can have it correct.  They can’t have it correct because many don’t suffer ill affects following vaccinations.


This divide and hatred of those for and against must stop.  Both extremes need to come together and realise that maybe nobody is wrong.  Parents who choose to vaccinate their children is not an indicator that they love their child any more than those parents who choose differently.

I also struggle to understand the argument put forward that a non-vaccinated child is a risk to vaccinated children.  If a vaccinated child is at risk then the vaccine can’t be anything but worthless.  Why then the motivation to jab every single child?

Finally, I’m not speaking as a parent because I’m not one.  It’s a bit of a blessing to not have to battle these incredible mine-fields of what to do and what to not do.  All I’m suggesting is think about each other as peers — not think about each other as parents who do or don’t vaccinate.

I leave you with this very interesting article about what can be found when research is done, and the spin is removed.  What happened when a UK doctor appeared as an expert witness to help two mothers prove in court that their children didn’t need to be vaccinated?

Information about vaccinations Immunise Australia Program

PLEASE: If there is on-line debate about this, I ask you to please respect each other’s views.


2 thoughts on “Must there be a Pro and Con to vaccinations?

  1. I was pressured to have the flu vax, especially working in a hospital. I rarely get sick at all so I decided not to have it. I watched all those around me have many more sick days than I ever did. I am not drawing the conclusion that the jab necessarily made them sick (even though I do know a few people weren’t feeling well after the jab) but maybe some people are just more predisposed to illness than others.

    As for your point re parents being concerned about their kids mingling with kids who don’t have vaccinations, your argument is slightly flawed. I don’t think having vaccination is a guarantee that you absolutely won’t get whatever affliction – so if the vaccinated kids are exposed to other sick kids, then it does mean they are exposed to a higher risk.

    Quite ironically, I gave relented and am getting my first flu jab this year as I get public transport every day and just thought I would.

    As usual, a very well wrtten, informative and well balanced article.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Thank you Carolyn. Looks like we’re both people with strong immune systems. I’m not suggesting for one moment that the old common cold hasn’t grabbed me every now and then and I’ve complained it’s the Flu. Mainly because I’m male haha. Nah, not really – I’m not really the typical “I’m dying” person.

    That brings us to another point about vaccinations, and them being mandatory. Why do some people require them more than others? Why do some people not require them? Why do some suffer reactions to vaccines? For me the answer keeps coming back – nobody has the exact same immune system.

    Naturally children have no resistance yet to everything but I do also wonder if loading children with vaccinations is helping build natural resistances.

    I understand too that we’re a different country than when we were born. Though by how much I’m not sure? Australia is more multi-cultural then ever before (thank goodness – I love it) and each new culture will introduce new variations that require individual new resistances. Likewise they have to come to terms with domestic illnesses.

    Then I think of how many war-torn European’s came to OZ post WW2. It appears our generation survived on a few vaccines – not the couple of dozen of today. Or did everyone of our generation survive without health issues? Maybe some of our peers became ill because of the vaccination program of the day?

    All of this is up for debate – and Senator Hanson in my opinion is 100% correct here. It’s a debate we must have instead of two sides pitted against each other and someone in the middle (lobby groups, politicians and media) fanning the flames to keep the divide status quo. As I asked above – why is this divide being promoted instead of a sensible debate being encouraged? It’s an important question.

    Finally, what of this mandatory vaccination or starvation/homelessness policy? It’s Third Reich in design – plus what homeless and hungry family is going to be healthy?

    Nothing of this vaccinations system makes sense unless the money trail is followed. Some 40 Billion a year to pharma’s. How many kick-backs and ‘cost of business’ (aka settle out of court law suits) payouts will it take to affect the profits of big pharma? Just like the horrifying Thalidomide cover-up, huge profits give cause of doubt when considering motives.

    Thanks again for your kind comments – and thanks for participating 🙂


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.