Vaccination is one way of exposure to disease, but this unnatural process is mistakenly equated with immunization.

[Editor’s Note: In Why Vaccination Does Not Equal Immunization (Part 1) we discussed how natural immunity works. In part 2, we’ll continue our discussion on innate immunity and show why vaccines aren’t full proof.]

Natural immunity can be further broken down into active or passive depending on the way it is conferred.

Natural active immunity is established as a result of infections that take place following natural exposure to pathogens. Depending on the nature of the pathogen, naturally acquired immunity can be life-long and essential for establishing true herd immunity to certain diseases such as measles and chickenpox. 

Naturally-Acquired Passive Immunity

Natural passive immunity is conferred via the transplacental transmission of maternal antibodies to the fetus or to the infant via mother’s milk. Infants are born with maternal IgG immunoglobulins, which are the most common type of circulating antibodies. IgG is the only antibody that crosses over the placenta. Infants don’t produce their own IgG until about 6-12 months of age. Neonates can only produce IgM, which starts during the last trimester in utero and then they receive IgA from mother’s milk.

Breast milk has the unique ability to adapt in order to meet the infant’s unique requirements, providing nurslings with essential antibodies that can prevent, postpone, or attenuate diseases. In the first year of life, infants depend on their own non-specific immunity as well as on maternal passive immunity and protection conferred via breastfeeding.

A 2013 study by Elahi demonstrated that infant immune cells are fully functional, but are temporarily inhibited during the first two years of life. It seems that this is because the infant’s immature immune system is learning about its own complex inner habitat. This mode in which the immune system operates is meant to train and educate it about what is self, non-self, and what is commensal bacteria, so it knows how to discriminate friend from foe. 

Artificially-Induced Active Immunity

This leads to the question, then, of the usefulness of vaccinations. Artificially-induced active immunity is brought about by injecting antigens into the bloodstream by way of vaccines in order to stimulate the production of antibodies. It can be argued that from the purely practical aspect of efficacy, vaccinating young infants would be purposeless, as they are not able to efficiently produce antibodies.

The practice of vaccination is grounded in the germ theory and is based on the premise that antibodies are a progenitor of immunity. If certain antibodies are detected, it is thought, then the body can fight off the infection. Vaccines are tested for effectiveness by their ability to elicit a significant antibody response. However, a study on vaccine immunogenicity illuminates  that “in many instances, antigen-specific antibody titers do not correlate with protection.” The authors further explain that “very little is known on parameters of cell-mediated immunity which could be considered as surrogates of protection.” 

The concept of vaccination ignores one very important aspect of the immune system — the innate response. Innate immunity is the first line of defense against invaders but does not work with antibodies. Its’ main troops are the natural killer cells. People with antibodies against a particular disease can still succumb to that same disease they are supposedly protected against. Despite its weaknesses, the antibody model of immunity continues to persist as a major cornerstone of medical science.

Artificially-Induced Passive Immunity

Passive immunity can be conferred by way of introducing someone else’s antibodies. This type of immunity is short-lived, usually lasting only a few weeks or months, but offers immediate protection. Artificially-induced passive immunity, established by injecting preformed antibodies/immunoglobulins such as in the tetanus antitoxin, can be used to prevent tetanus in those who have a wound that is potentially at high risk of infection. Antitoxin administered in this way would be a better alternative to DTP vaccination against tetanus as it does not expose the patient to the full battery of toxic vaccine ingredients.

The production of lab-harvested antibodies, required to make antitoxin, can be difficult and costly, as it requires blood donation from hundreds or thousands of human donors. Another inherent problem with antibody therapy is the risk of serious allergic reactions to antibodies harvested from animals.

Vaccination Does Not Equal Immunization: The Titer Test

Vaccination is based on the oversimplified concept that inducing antibody production is a self-sufficient prerequisite for conferring immunity.

The mode of entry by which a vaccine is delivered into the body bypasses built-in primary and secondary lines of defense mechanisms. Vaccines fail to engage the complex chain-reaction driven platform, which comprises the matrix of the immune system and is thus designed to induce artificial hyper-stimulation necessary to elicit a response. By relying on antibody production, vaccines activate the humoral arm of the adaptive immune system while the cell-mediated arm remains suppressed.

This immune system-dysregulated response triggers a cascade of reactions leading to systemic inflammation and in many cases to a cytokine storm.A cytokine storm response is triggered by the overproductions of pro-inflammatory cytokines and immune cells, which may lead to serious sickness or death.

The Antibody Deception

In the 1940s, Dr. Merril Chase, a prominent immunologist, conducted groundbreaking research which led to the discovery of cell-mediated immunity and helped undermine the widespread tenet that antibodies alone protect from pathogens and disease.

Serum titers are used as a measurement of the concentration of particular antibodies in the bloodstream and adopted as the “golden standard” test of immunity against disease. But the presence of antibodies alone does not equate with immunity. Titers are proof of exposure to disease, but this does not automatically translate into a badge of protection. 

Evidence shows that individuals without a history of previous infection nor vaccination against the disease can remain asymptomatic upon exposure, yet antibodies can be detected, despite the lack of symptoms. Initial exposure does not necessarily result in disease in each and every case, but the presence of elevated antibodies shows that the individual has had immunity before exposure to the disease.

Also, persons with high titer counts can still exhibit symptoms of the disease upon subsequent exposure. Antibody concentrations following vaccination are a sign of infection, which means that the vaccinated person has been infected, not immunized. It can be argued then that antibodies are only artifacts of an immune response, and are therefore insufficient as a proof of immunity.

To think that one can be infected and protected at the same time is counter to logic. It is widely believed that vaccines confer immunity equal to that acquired by way of natural infection; however, this concept is based on purely theoretical and empirically unverified models.

Despite the distinct functions of the various branches of the immune system, they work closely together in a complementary manner and not under strict differentiation. 

True Lasting Immunity

Antibody-mediated response alone is insufficient. The cellular arm of the immune system is required for establishing true lasting immunity. The vaccination theory is based on the concept of humoral immunity. The presumption is that vaccines induce an immunologic response by way of injecting antigens in adjuvanted solutions, and that antibody production is sufficient for conferring immunity.This provides an insight into the flawed mechanism of vaccine protection not only in individuals but sheds light on the role of vaccine failure in the erosion of natural immunity.

The vaccine industry utilizes antibodies as the hallmark of immunity failing to acknowledge the significance of primary and secondary vaccine failure. Primary vaccine failure is observed in individuals who fail to mount an antibody response to vaccination, while secondary failure refers to the waning of vaccine-induced protection and reduction of antibody concentrations to non-protective levels.

The immune system is very complex, and the humoral/antibody response provides only partial insight into this immunologic phenomena. It would appear that the cell-mediated immune response plays a major part in combating disease and acquiring immunity, but even researchers admit this aspect of the immune system is still not well understood.

Natural immunity can never be emulated by way of artificial inoculation. The rising enthusiasm to promote vaccination programs and impose mandates stems from the false perception of the vaccine triumph in the alleged eradication of infectious diseases. It is nothing short of a fallacy sustained by the blind faith of those who embrace the myth of vaccination.

Zara is a Certified Homeopath with special interest in women’s health, organ therapuetics and natual approach to cancer. Zara holds B.Sc. in Geology and received formal training in Chemistry and Biology. In her free time, she is a singer and writer.

Submit your story or essay to Buzzworthy Blogs.

Leave a Reply

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