Letter in support of
congressional hearing on vaccines

August 12th, 1999

Congressman Dan Burton
Government Reform Committee
US House of Representatives
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Congressman Burton,

This letter is in support of your Government Reform Committee hearing on Vaccines; Finding the Balance Between Public Safety and Personal Choice. After speaking with your staff member, Mrs. Beth Clay, I had to forward you the appalling story regarding the death of our son, Alexander. I have also included some of the facts that my husband and I have uncovered since our son's death that link vaccination with brain cancer.

On August 10th, 1998 our only child, Alexander, was diagnosed with the most common pediatric brain cancer, medulloblastoma. He was two years old. Our lives were shattered. The next six months became a race against time to try to understand the disease, find the appropriate treatment, and save Alexander.

After two brain operations Alexander recovered quickly. We wanted to give our son the most effective cancer therapy possible. After weeks of research, many conversations with parents who had children with brain cancer, and conversations with doctors from all over the world, we selected the Burzynski Clinic in Houston, Texas. We arrived there and incredibly we were turned away. Dr. Burzynski said he was not allowed to accept Alexander. I'll never forget it. We sat in an examining room. Alexander was smiling at the doctor.

"Why can't you take Alexander?" I asked Burzynski.

"The FDA dictates who I can and can't accept," Burzynski said.

Burzynski explained to us that the FDA would only allow him to accept children who had suffered through chemotherapy and/or radiation and still had "measurable tumor" left in their brains. Alexander hadn't had either of these "world class treatments" but already endured two brain operations (16 hours of surgery in total) and was tumor free for the moment. He had paid a dear price to be tumor free. His optic nerves had been injured so that his big brown eyes were stuck pointing in opposite directions, he lost the ability to cry and laugh and he temporarily lost the ability to walk.

"Please accept my son. He's only two years old. His whole life is in front of him. I know your treatment works. I've spoken to several parents whose children are here. They had malignant brain tumors like Alexander but now they're alive and well. You have to treat my son," I begged.

Dr. Burzynski said simply, "I am sorry but I can't." Burzynski was saddened but he was powerless. The FDA had made him turn away many children just like Alexander.

Chemotherapy was started soon after and Alexander died in my arms three months later.

Because of the FDA, Dr. Burzynski has to turn away over 90% of the cancer victims who come to him, many of them children. Burzynski's cancer therapy is non-poisonous to the body and light years ahead of the crude poisonous treatments - chemotherapy or radiation - offered by conventional medicine. If Burzynski could accept Alexander and other children like him his cure rate would increase. It's a clever ploy on the part of the FDA to only allow Dr. Burzynski to accept children who have already had chemotherapy and/or radiation and whose cancer has returned. Then nothing can save those children. When Alexander's cancer returned while he was on chemotherapy, he died within two weeks.

Who is the FDA really protecting? Why would the FDA not want Dr. Burzynski to have a high cure rate? Dr. Burzynski's therapy is a better product - it is not toxic to the body and it is much more effective against cancer. But every year, chemotherapy and radiation gross tens of billions of dollars for the drug companies and the medical establishment. If Dr. Burzynski's treatment was allowed to be accessible, imagine the market share it would take from chemo and radiation. Imagine the money it would cost the drug companies and the cancer doctors. It could literally cost them billions.

Alexander was originally diagnosed with medulloblastoma. The cancer that took his life was called leptomeningeal sarcoma. How did one cancer turn into another? By the carcinogenic (by definition the "DNA changing") effects of chemotherapy. In fact, nearly all chemotherapy drugs are listed as "Class I - Known Human Carcinogens" with the FDA. Yet every day hundreds of children are injected with these deadly chemicals.

Alexander's immune system was completely destroyed by the chemo and he had no strength to fight the new cancer.

Whether we are talking about childhood vaccinations, therapy for cancer, treatments for cardiovascular diseases or any of the other big money makers, the interests, motives and actions of the federal government are completely inseparable with the motives and goals of the drug producers and the AMA leadership. After all, we are talking about the exact same people. The same doctors who work for the major drug companies and own stock in those corporations take a rotation through the FDA. They will work at this governmental "regulatory" body for a few years, make decisions that protect their investments and careers, and then return to the drug companies for reportedly bigger salaries and stock options. Over the last twenty years, the most powerful people at the FDA have been employees, grant recipients, board members or research "affiliates" of the major pharmaceutical corporations.


Why did our strong two-year-old boy have a brain tumor? There is no cancer on either side of our families going back three generations. Both of our paternal grandmothers lived to almost 90! Two of Alexander's great-grandparents are still alive today.

My husband and I started to review everything we knew about Alexander's health. Alexander never had been a good sleeper. At four months old, when most babies start to sleep through the night, Alexander actually got worse. He used to wake us up at least four times a night and yell. We also recalled an evening when Alexander was about seven months old. It was a couple of weeks after he had received his latest round of vaccinations shots. He started crying very loud and long and he suddenly had convulsions that lasted about five minutes. I held him in my arms. He calmed down but it had made him very tired. The next day I called his pediatrician. I was told that little children sometimes get excited and can have spasms. It was nothing I should worry about. A couple months later, Alexander would have another episode of "spasms."

After the age of one, Alexander began to have eczema outbreaks that would cover the back of his legs. I went to the pediatrician. He said that lots of little children have food allergies and he gave me cortisone cream. The cream didn't help very much. I used vitamin E and almond oil, which seemed to help a little.

But why would Alexander get cancer? He always had been a good eater. He was very strong and tall for his age- in the top 95 percentile in weight and height compared to other children. We didn't live near a nuclear plant, I didn't work near pesticides. My husband worked in an office. Since 1992, we had lived in Marina del Rey, a suburb by the beach in Los Angeles. Of course, Los Angeles is not known for its fresh air, but none of his little friends had cancer.

We started to do research on medulloblastoma - the brain tumor that Alexander was originally diagnosed with. The tumor had been identified in the 1920's by two of the first neurosurgeons, Drs. Percival Bailey and Harvey Cushing. They removed medulloblastomas and other brain tumors at the Surgical Clinic of the Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in Boston. We read their articles and books and studied their graphs on the survival rates of children with medulloblastoma. We learned that after "100%" of the tumor had been surgically removed it would grow back within six to twelve months (assuming no additional therapy was attempted). This suggested to us that the original tumor took approximately that same amount of time to grow.

Alexander had been very irritable and threw up a lot in November 1997. The pediatrician told me it was a viral infection, a stomach flu. Alexander often had ear infections around this time. Then in March 1998, Alexander threw up again and told me he had pain in his tummy. I thought he had swallowed a button or little toy. That night, the pediatrician on call told us to go to the emergency room. There, Alexander threw up more. The ER doctor told us that Alexander had a viral infection. The next day, his pediatrician told me the same thing. This was five months before he would be diagnosed with a three-inch malignant tumor growing in his brain.

We now understand that sometime between November 1997 and March 1998 the tumor began to grow.

What had happened to Alexander at or before that time which could have led to cancer? I opened Alexander's "medical file" and suddenly saw all the vaccines he received within weeks or months of these symptoms. My husband and I focused on the DPT, the IPV and OPV and Hepatitis B vaccine. What were these vaccines all about? What was in them? And more importantly what were the side effects on an infant's brain?


After extensively researching the medical literature, we have identified six ways that vaccination may cause cancer, either directly or indirectly. After reading this you may wonder why aren't these subjects being actively pursued? Childhood cancer is on the rise, why aren't the "authorities" conducting objective research to determine the risks? The answer is simple - money. Nearly all the medical research in this country is funded by drug companies or the U.S. government (viz. taxpayer's money). Both parties have an inherent interest in, at a minimum, maintaining the status quo. What would motivate a drug company to pay for a study that demonstrates that their products cause cancer? Do they want to commit fiscal suicide? Why would the federal government pay for research that presents the dangers of a program that they have ostensibly mandated?


We will begin with a very basic question - are vaccines carcinogenic? And the answer is that nobody knows because no studies have ever been done. The inserts that the vaccine manufacturers must place with each and every vial of vaccine state this fact. Here's a summary of what the vaccine manufacturers publish about their products for the eyes of physicians. This information is taken directly from their inserts as it is published in the Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR, 51st edition, Medical Economics Co. Inc., 1997). The last column is of most interest.

Chickenpox (Varicella) Merck Varivax 12 months and older No studies conducted
DTP Lederle Tetramune 2 months to 5 years "Tetramune has not been evaluated for its carcinogenic or mutagenic potential."
DTP Lederle Tri-Immunol 2 months to 7 years No studies conducted
DTP Connaught (subsidiary of Pasteur Merieux) Tripedia 15 months to 7 years "Tripedia has not been evaluated for its carcinogenic or mutagenic potential."
DTP Lederle Acel-Immune 17 months to 7 years "Acel-Immune has not been evaluated for its carcinogenic or mutagenic potential"
DTP(whole cell pertussis) SmithKline Beecham (subsidiary of Pasteur Merieux) DTP 6 weeks to 7 years "Animal and human studies concerning possible carcinogenic or teratogenic effects have not been done."
Hepatitis A SmithKline Beecham (subsidiary of Pasteur Merieux) Havrix Over two years old "Havrix has not been evaluated for its carcinogenic or mutagenic potential."
Hepatitis B Merck Recombivax "infants" No studies conducted
Influenza type b Haemophilus b conjugate with diphtheria protein Lederle HibTITER 2-71 months "HibTITER has not been evaluated for its carcinogenic or mutagenic potential."
Influenza type b Haemphilus b conjugate with tetatus toxoid conjugate Connaught (subsidiary of Pasteur Merieux) ActHIB 2 months to 5 years No studies conducted
Japanese encephalitis virus Connaught (subsidiary of Pasteur Merieux) JE-VAX One year and older "No studies have been performed to evaluate carcinogenicity or mutagenic potential."
Measles live Merck Attenuvax 15 months and older No studies conducted
Measles, Mumps, Rubella live Merck M-M-R 15 months and older No studies conducted
Measles, Rubella (live) Merck M-R-Vax 15 months and older No studies conducted
Mumps (live) Merck Mumpsvax 12 months and older No studies conducted
Polio (live) Lederle Orimune 6 weeks to 18 years No studies conducted
Poliovirus (inactivated) Connaught (subsidiary of Pasteur Merieux) IPOL "infants, children and adolescents" "Studies in animals to evaluate carcinogenic potential have not been conducted."
Rubella and mumps (live) Merck Biavax II 12 months and older No studies conducted
Rubella (live) Merck Meruvax 12 months to puberty No studies conducted

None of the vaccines injected into children have ever been tested for their carcinogenic (cancer causing), mutagenic (mutation causing), or teratogenic (developmental malformation causing) potential. Not a single one. Can these chemicals that are injected into healthy children cause cancer? The people manufacturing the vaccines (the drug companies) and the bureaucrats mandating the drugs can't say because no studies have ever been conducted.

In summary, federal and state governments are mandating that infants and children swallow and be injected with substances that have never been tested for their ability to cause cancer, mutations or developmental malformations. In the meantime, the drug companies are grossing billions of dollars on sales of these potentially carcinogenic products.



If you call the American Association of Pediatrics and ask them what is the safe dosage of mercury derivatives, aluminum and formaldehyde to be injected into an infant, they may suspect child abuse. After they have calmed down, they will explain that there is no safe dosage because these are all potentially carcinogenic substances. But mercury derivatives, aluminum and formaldehyde are ingredients in most vaccines. How is it possible that they're safe? The answers depends on who is injecting them. If you or I inject our child with mercury or formaldehyde we are going to jail. But if a drug company and a doctor inject the same chemicals then they are perfectly safe.


Vaccines are comprised of viruses and viruses can be carcinogenic. According to mainstream science a number of viruses with oncogenic (cancer causing) properties have been identified over the last twenty years. The information below comes from the chapter entitled "Etiology of Cancer: Viruses" from the 5th edition of the book - Cancer: Principles & Practice of Oncology. (One of the book's editors is Dr. Vincent De Vita, Jr., former director of the National Cancer Institute.) This chapter lists various viruses and the cancers associated with them:

VirusAnd the Human Cancer associated with them:

Hepatitis B — Hepatocellular carcinoma
Hepatitis C — Hepatocellular carcinoma
Epstein-Barr — Burkitt's lymphoma
Epstein-Barr — Hodgkins disease
Epstein-Barr — Immunoblastic lymphoma
HPV-16, HPV-18, 33, 39 — Anogenital cancers and some upper airway cancers
HPV-5, HPV-8, HPV-17 — Skin cancer
BK, JC — Brain tumors (possible), Mesotheliomas (possible)
HTLV-I — Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma
HTLV-II — Hairy cell leukemia

Murnane Poeschla E, Wong-Staal F. Etiology of Cancer: Viruses, p.169, Cancer: Principles & Practice of Oncology; Fifth Edition, edited by V. T. DeVita Jr., S. Hellman, S. A. Rosenberg. Lippincott-Raven Publishers, Philadelphia, 1997.

The association between some viruses and some cancers is a well-accepted medical fact. Are there other viruses that may cause or lead to other cancers? Of course. There are literally tens of thousands of viruses, but only a small percentage has been tested for their ability to cause cancer. In fact, some viruses use a "team approach." One virus by itself may be relatively benign but when it is combined with other viruses it "helps" the first one cause cancer. These viruses are literally called "helper viruses." How many various combinations of different viruses can lead to cancer, no one knows. But when you consider that:

  • Children are injected with bacteria (that contain viruses)
  • Children are injected with viruses themselves as per the vaccine
  • The bacteria and virus vaccines are grown on animal tissue (i.e. monkeys, eggs, etc.) that also contain their own population of viruses

There is no way of knowing what viral combinations have formed and what is in the final "soup" that will be injected into a healthy infant. The toxicity test that vaccine manufacturers use is as crude as can be imagined. They inject mice with the vaccines and if a given percentage still eat and put on weight than the vaccine is pronounced safe for children. Unbelievable!


Oncologists and neurosurgeons at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and UCLA Medical Center told us that pediatric brain cancer is on the rise? Why? Why are more and more children getting cancer in their brains? Could it be due to the various types of brain injuries caused by vaccines?

The fact that vaccines can cause temporary or permanent brain damage is an established fact. Even the manufacturers admit it. For example, the manufacturer of one of the DTP vaccines (Lederle), warns pediatricians on their insert that their vaccine can cause "neurological complications such as convulsions, encephalopathy, and various mono and polyneuropathies including Guillian-Barre Syndrome…Permanent neurological disability and death have been reported…"

- Physicians' Desk Reference, 51st edition, Medical Economics Co. Inc., 1997

There is an abundance of medical literature going back one hundred years that suggests a connection between cancer and chronic injury caused by viruses or bacteria. It appears that cancers have a tendency to form in organs that are injured or irritated by viral or bacterial infections. For example, it is well known that people who have various forms of hepatitis (viruses that infect the liver) are at a much higher risk for liver cancer. This fact was presented in a recent article published in the European Journal of Cancer Prevention. The authors wrote, "Chronic disease conditions…are well established as risk factors for cancer development. These may be due to viruses (for example, in the case of hepatitis and liver cancer), bacterial infections, parasite infestation or physical trauma."

- Moore, MA, Tsuda H, Chronically elevated proliferation as a risk factor for neoplasia. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 1988 October; 7(5): 353-385.

The same line of reasoning suggests that a viral infection of the brain (which vaccines are known to cause) can lead to cancer of the brain. It's a rational conclusion and a reasonable question to ask, but no one from the drug companies or the federal government is asking it.


In the 1950's and 1960's the polio vaccine injected into millions of children contained an unexpected guest - another virus that was growing on the same monkey kidney cells in which the vaccine was being grown. This virus was named Simian Virus 40 (SV40) because it was the 40th simian or monkey virus found. Unfortunately, this virus was also found to cause cancer. The vaccine manufacturers changed their monkeys (African green monkeys) but this wasn't enough. Today SV40 is found in many human cancers including many pediatric brain cancers. Coincidence? I don't think so. It turns out that SV40 can be passed horizontally (i.e. between father and mother) and vertically (i.e. between mother and child). In fact, SV40 is often associated with medulloblastoma, the most prevalent pediatric brain tumor. When scientists injected young hamsters with Simian Virus 40 over 80% developed brain cancers. Here are a few of the studies that have looked at SV40 and human cancers:

In 1979, Drs. Jaqueline Farwell, George Dohrmann, Lorraine Marrett and J. Wister Meigs wrote a paper entitled: Effect of SV40 Virus-Contaminated Polio Vaccine on the Incidence and Type of CNS Neoplasms in Children: A Population-Based Study, in which they found a substantial increase in childhood brain tumors, especially medulloblastoma, when the mothers had been inoculated with vaccines containing SV40. They wrote: "In the late 1950's and early 1960's, an increase occurred in the number of central nervous system tumors diagnosed in children as recorded in the Connecticut Tumor Registry. From 1955 to 1961, polio vaccine was used in Connecticut, which subsequently was found to contain the virus SV40. In animal models SV40 has produced central nervous system tumors… particularly striking rises in gliomas (astrocytoma, spongiblastoma, and glioblastoma multiforme) and medulloblastomas were noted in children born during 1956-1962…Among medulloblastoma patients, 10 of 15 were exposed to SV40. This rate of exposure is high and significantly greater than among controls (children without brain tumors)…SV40 may selectively induce malignant tumors…In summary we demonstrate a strong association between exposure to SV40 and the development of medulloblastoma…(and) the occurrence of gliomas."

In 1987, Drs. George Roush, Theodore Holford, Maria Schymura and Colin White of the Yale University School of Medicine published a book on cancer risks. In it they wrote:
"Infectious agents have been strongly associated with childhood brain tumors. An excess of central nervous system malignancies occurred in a cohort (a group) of offspring (children) whose mothers were inadvertently exposed to polio vaccine contaminated by Simian Virus 40 (SV40). Medulloblastomas bore the strongest relationship to the contaminated vaccine." Roush G, Holford TR, Schymura MJ, White C, Cancer Risk and Incidence Trends: The Connecticut Perspective, Brain, Cerebral Meninges, and Cranial Nerves, Ages 0-19, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health Yale University School of Medicine; The Hemisphere Publishing Company, 1987.

In this 1995 study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, SV40 was again found in various human brain tumors but not in any healthy brain tissue. The researchers wrote:"…we found SV40 DNA sequences in five of six choroid plexus papillomas, eight of eleven ependymomas, three of seven astrocytomas…None of the 13 normal brain tissues were positive for SV40 DNA." — Martini F, et. al., Human Brain Tumors and Simian Virus 40, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, September 6, Volume 87, 1995

In 1997, when researchers looked for SV40 in other human cancers such as mesotheliomas (a kind of lung cancer), and osteosarcomas (a kind of bone cancer that kills children and adults), they found them. The doctors wrote:
"We decided to test human mesotheliomas and osteosarcomas for SV40 based on…the enormous increase in the incidence of mesotheliomas in the second half of this century which coincided with the inadvertent inoculation of millions of people with SV40 contaminated polio vaccines… SV40 or closely related DNA sequences are present in specific types of human tumors."

— Rozzo P, et. al, Evidence for and implications of SV40-like sequences in human mesotheliomas and osteosarcomas; Conference: SV40 a Possible Human Polyomavirus National Institute of Health January 27 and 28, 1997

This paper, like the previous one, was presented at an SV40 seminar at the National Institute of Health in 1997. In it the authors state that SV40 is found in most brain cancers and that it can spread from one generation to the next. They also mention that more people who are vaccinated have brain tumors versus those who have not been vaccinated. They wrote: "SV40 amplification products were detected at high prevalence in primary human brain tumors: 83% of choroid plexus papillomas, 75% ependymomas, 47% astrocytomas, and 37% glioblastomas…35% osteosarcomas, and Ewing's tumors…These results indicate that SV40 is associated with human brain and bone neoplasms (cancers)…SV40 infection (may be spread) by blood transfusion and sexual transmission in the human population.
"…a viral co-factor should be taken into consideration as a possible cause of… human brain and bone tumors…a higher incidence of brain neoplasms (brain cancers) was noted in cohorts (groups) of vaccinated persons. In this as well as in other studies, a high prevalence of SV40 was detected in brain and bone tumors that affect early childhood." — Martini F, et. al, Simian Virus footprints in normal human tissues, brain and bone tumors of different histotypes; Conference: SV40 a Possible Human Polyomavirus - National Institute of Health January 27 and 28, 1997

And in this most recent study published in January of this year, researchers found SV40 in all the brain tumors they examined. They wrote: "We found SV40…sequences in all brain tumor types investigated. High frequencies were found in low-grade astrocytomas, anaplastic astrocytomas and secondary glioblastomas (59%)…Presence of viral DNA was also found in pediatric brain tumors…" — Huang H, et al, Identification in human brain tumors of DNA sequences specific for SV40 large T antigen, Brain Pathology, January 9, 1999

So here's the obvious question - Is the SV40 from the 1950's and 1960's back to haunt us? Are parents passing cancer on to their children?


This is a very broad subject so we will only present the highlights:

Cancer is often associated with immune deficiency. Scientists believe that the reason one person gets cancer and another doesn't is because the second individual has a "stronger" or "more competent" immune system. But vaccines can cause a child to become immune deficient. It is known that vaccines can cause immune deficiency through various mechanisms including:

  • Vaccines cause commitment of T-lymphocytes to a specific antigen and T-lymphocytes posses one of the major defenses against cancer. In other words, vaccines cause important cells in our immune system (T-cells) to commit themselves and once an immune cell becomes committed to a specific antigen, it becomes inert and incapable of responding to other challenges.
  • Vaccinations can cause the T-cell count to temporarily and significantly decrease to the levels found in AIDS patients.
  • Vaccines cause depression of lymphocyte function.

This means that vaccines can actually cause your immune system to be weaker in its response to other viruses and bacteria. Scientists are beginning to understand that the inoculation of billions of organisms into the human body viz. vaccination is an abnormal event and causes the body to react in an abnormal way. This reaction, even if is only the formation of antigens, requires the energy and the attention of the immune system. If the immune system is reacting to the sudden and strange invasion of billions of vaccine organisms, it may not be able to pay the same level of attention to protecting the body against other threats such as cancer as it did before the invasion/vaccination.

In addition, according to a report by the Medical Advisory Committee of the Immune Deficiency Foundation published in 1992 (made possible by a grant from the American Red Cross) "most immune deficiencies cannot be diagnosed until a child is one year old." And one of the most important contraindications for childhood vaccines (a reason not to be vaccinated as stated by the vaccine manufactures) is to not administer a vaccine to "a child with impaired immune response." Wait a second here. We have a contradiction. By the time a child is one year old they have already received a number of vaccines. Yet, we are told by the vaccine manufacturers, that we should not vaccinate an immune deficient child. But diagnosing an immune deficient child cannot be done until the child is one year old. I don't know if this is circular logic, a paradox, or a "Catch-22." What is clear is that it is irresponsible and a potentially dangerous practice.

How often are children immune deficient? According to the Immune Deficiency Foundation: "The primary immonodeficiency diseases were originally thought to be quite rare. In fact, however, some of the primary immunodeficiency diseases are relatively common… because there are so many primary immunodeficiency diseases when taken together as a group of disorders, they become a significant health problem, occurring with a frequency comparable to leukemia and lymphoma in children and four times as frequently as cystic fibrosis." The Clinical Presentation of the Primary ImmunodeficiencyDiseases, A Primer for Physicians, Produced by the Medical Advisory Committee of the Immune Deficiency Foundation, Towson, Maryland, 1992.

So what's the answer to this "paradox"? The answer is that every vaccination is a game of roulette with your child's life.


Scientists are learning that DNA is not a blueprint that is "carved in stone" and locked away and untouchable. It turns out that DNA can be cut, torn and spliced and pieces can be inserted, deleted, truncated, fused, mutated and amplified. What kind of organism can change our DNA? Viruses. It turns out that viruses and viral sequences (pieces of DNA from a virus) can actually be inserted into our cells and into our own DNA. Researchers like John Martin M.D., Ph.D. of the Center for Complex Infectious Diseases in Rosemead, California, and Howard Urnovitz Ph.D. of the Chronic Illness Research Foundation in Berkeley, California are discovering that viruses especially viruses in various combinations can invade our cells, change our DNA and even hide from our immune system. Some of these changes include turning on oncogenes (growth genes that can cause cancer). Remember that all vaccines contain millions of viruses from the bacterium or virus itself, the tissue it was grown in, or contaminants. These viruses may exchange sequences, pick-up animal DNA or combine in other unknown ways. Once in the body the range of damage they may reap is only now being recognized.


I am not suggesting that vaccination always leads to cancer. What I am suggesting is that in the same way vaccination can lead to encephalitis (damage of brain tissue) it can also, in some cases, lead to cancer. Why does one child become autistic from the vaccine and another gets Crohn's disease? Why does one child get Guillian-Barre Syndrome from a vaccination and another die of SIDS? Why does one child get reoccurring seizures and the other cancer? How many other viruses is that child carrying? What other latent or hidden infections do they have? How strong is their immune system? How many vaccines can an infant handle before some invisible threshold has been crossed and the body becomes sick? Alexander got 16 vaccinations from the age of 2 months to 17 months old. My grandparents got one childhood vaccine and they are both alive today. My parents, both born in 1937, got a total of two vaccines up to 17 months old. According to my vaccination booklet (my parents kept wonderful records) I was vaccinated only seven times before I reached 17 months. In fact, my first vaccine came at the age of 5 months, not two months like Alexander.

Every new childhood vaccine that is introduced means more profits for the drug companies so there is a tremendous incentive to keep adding more and more. Alexander got vaccinated against chicken-pox, a "disease" that kept our generation at home from school for one week. Do we really need a vaccine against chicken-pox? The drug companies will answer "yes."

So I will ask the question again: How many vaccines can an infant handle before some invisible threshold has been crossed and the body becomes sick? This is not an easy question to answer but it should be asked! Sadly for all the children who are about to be maimed and killed by the vaccines they will soon receive, the answer to this question is only being pursued by a handful of independent scientists (researchers who are not being financed by the drug companies or the government). These scientists operate outside medical orthodoxy on "shoe-string" budgets. Mainstream science, the "science" of the drug companies and the government is not interested in the truth. They have no interest in knowing the real answer. Why ask a question when the answer can only hurt you?

Dr. Howard B. Urnovitz possesses a degree in Microbiology and Immunology and is the Scientific Director of the Chronic Illness Research Foundation. He testified to the following in front of the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.

1. The human body retains a genetic memory of the foreign substances to which it has been exposed, including viral and bacterial vaccines;
2. Each individual responds to foreign substances differently, based on his or her own unique genetic background;
3. There appears to be a limit on how much foreign material to which the human body can be exposed before some level of genetic damage occurs and a chronic disease initiates.

Each generation gets more vaccinations. Each generation has more immune related diseases. Where are all the new "auto-immune" diseases coming from? (Such as Crohn's disease, Guillian-Barre syndrome, asthma, encephalomyelitis, multiple sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, chronic neuropathy, stiff-man syndrome, retinopathy, primary biliary sclerosis, pernicious anemia, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, etc. etc.) And regardless of the self-serving pronouncements by the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute, cancer rates continue to climb.

By giving each generation more and more vaccinations are we not creating populations of genetically damaged mutants?

There are a lot of unknowns in respect to childhood vaccination. But as parents, nobody ever waved them in front of us. Nobody ever said that there's over 50 years of evidence that vaccines can cause brain damage. Nobody ever said that we don't know if vaccines cause cancer because we never tested it. Nobody told us that if Alexander was immune deficient he shouldn't get the vaccines. Nobody ever told us that Alexander's symptoms (before he was diagnosed with cancer) of vomiting, "spasms" and eczema were signs that this child could not endure the vaccinations. Nobody ever told us that monkey viruses that have been found in vaccines are known to cause brain cancer.

What would happen if parents were provided with full disclosure or "informed consent" as is legally required with any medical procedure? Some parents might say "no thanks" to the vaccines. But then this could take a bite from the billions of dollars earned by the vaccine manufacturers.

Between the greed of the drug companies and the impotence of our government, parents and children have been forced into making a dangerous trade. Have we traded mumps for autism, polio for SIDS and whooping cough for cancer? We are not suggesting that there exists a one to one relationship, but we are suggesting that our government has traded one group of diseases (relatively benign childhood diseases) for another group of diseases (complex, permanent, disabling and deadly). That trade continues to be made without our permission and without good science. For example, for years, pediatricians and pediatric neurologists were finding that the pertussis vaccine can cause neurological side effects - some temporary, others permanent. However as late as the 1980's some physicians were fighting fifty years of clinical observations. They claimed that there was no link between the pertussis vaccine and permanent and disabling brain damage. As it turns out these doctors were employees of the drug companies that manufactured the vaccines.

According to the book A Shot in the Dark: Why the P in DPT vaccination may be hazardous to your childs health, by H.L. Coulter and B.L. Fisher, one of these doctors, James D. Cherry received money (nearly a half a million dollars) from Lederle. Lederle manufactures vaccines including various brands of DTP, Hib, influenza, and poliovirus. It also manufacturers countless other drugs. Lederle is a division of American Cyanamid the manufacturer of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and all the other "wonderful chemicals" poisoning the earth, our food, water and air, the animals, the plants and our bodies.

Writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in March 1990, Cherry stated that it was a "myth" that pertussis caused encephalitis. Such a statement is an insult to 50 years of dead or disabled children and 50 years of grieving parents. But if you investigate who Cherry is, his position makes sense. He is a recipient of funds from one of the largest manufacturer of vaccines. What's the money for? Is it just a coincidence that he has also testified in over 125 lawsuits on behalf of vaccine manufacturers who were being sued by parents of vaccine damaged children. But here's the problem: as a doctor he is considered "independent" and "credible." His research, analysis and conclusions are considered "objective." He is a peer reviewer for JAMA which means that he has influence as to what gets published and what doesn't get published — what gets communicated and what doesn't get communicated to children's doctors. His articles in JAMA and other prominent medical journals are read by thousands of doctors. When Dr. Cherry says encephalopathy from vaccines is a "myth" those words are believed. Children are vaccinated. After Alexander received his DTP vaccinations he had convulsions. We called his pediatrician and the doctor told us that it was nothing to worry about because "sometimes little children get excited." The pediatrician didn't consider encephalopathy. Our pediatrician was probably aware that there was a controversy regarding the pertussis vaccine but that no scientific consensus had been reached. But the controversy is artificial. On one hand there was 50 years of maimed and dead children and pediatricians and pediatric neurologists who knew encephalopathy when they saw it. On the other hand you had prominent doctors like Cherry. The two sides seemed to have an equally objective point of view. Doctors on either side of an important question, rationally debating a medical issue where lives are at stake. But this "controversy" is a fiction.

On one hand you have experience, observation and clinical skills. On the other hand you have a drug company protecting its immense profits. People like Cherry are not doctors if you define doctors as truly objective and rational professionals who are seeking truth. People like Cherry are MD's for hire. Their positions and arguments are a direct result of who is paying them. Sadly, there are many many Ph.D's and MD's like Cherry. People need to be paid and some people want to be paid more than others. As mentioned above, today there are two major employers of science— the drug companies and the U.S. Government. Since he who pays the piper calls the tune, the prevalent point of view throughout the medical literature is the position of the drug companies and the government. In respect to vaccines, where one of these entities stops and the other starts is hard to discern. The government mandates the vaccines and corporations like Lederle produces them. Where is the incentive for either of these two parties to admit that vaccination can harm? To admit this would subject the government to severe criticism and cause the drug companies to loose millions of dollars.

Another corruption of the scientific process is that "scientists" like Cherry can help determine the frequency of adverse events that are reported. How often does autism, SIDS, encephalitis, permanent neurological damage and cancer result from vaccination? The vaccine manufacturers through their pay-rolled scientists decide. Is an infant's sudden death that takes place twelve days after vaccination counted as vaccine related or does it have to take place within seven days or three days or 24 hours? Who chooses the number? If you scrutinize the data on the frequency of adverse reactions you will find that the very corporations manufacturing the vaccine financed most of those studies. In other words, the vaccine makers have chosen the number for their own ends. They have chosen a number that will ensure that most vaccine related deaths and injuries will not be counted as such. Your child died seven days after the vaccinations? Sorry, she had to die within 24 hours for it to be linked to the vaccines. Therefore, cause of death is unknown.

The most powerful doctors in America are those affiliated with drug companies. The influence of the drug companies is so complete and profound that the agenda of the drug manufacturers has become the agenda of mainstream medicine and the U.S. government.


Our son, Alexander was our life. At two years old Alexander was bilingual in English and French. He was full of joy and laughter. He loved life. He loved looking at the little ants in the earth. He would say, "Look Daddy they go vite, vite, vite" (fast, fast, fast). He loved going to the beach, in particular the tide pools looking for "gaga crabs" and "little tiny animals." When I asked my son, "Alexander you want to go rollerblading? He used to give me a big smile and say: "Yeah, rollerblading with Mommy" and run to the closet to get the rollerblades. We used to go fast on the bike path along the beach. Alexander was in his special purple stroller holding his apple juice bottle and Mommy would push. But Mommy will never push the stroller again with her beautiful son who loved life.

I'm only left with his handsome pictures, his special smell in his little clothes, his bag of special cars, memories of laughter and pain, a little brown sandwich bag with his curly brown locks, his smiling face on the videos and his beautiful innocent little voice which always said: "Mommy, I'm happy, happy, happy."

Alexander used to say: "Mommy, Daddy and Alexander, the Team!" Yes, my love we will always be the team, but a family we are no more.

Yours Sincerely,
Raphaele Moreau-Horwin (Alexander's Mommy)
Michael Horwin (Alexander's Daddy)


Vaccinations Alexander Received from age 2 months to 17 months:
Within 15 months my son received 16 vaccinations. But how many viruses? This was the same time his brain cancer began to grow.

DTP 8/12/96 10/10/96 12/14/96 11/7/97

IPV 8/12/96 10/10/96

OPV 11/7/97

MMR 7/7/97

HbPV 8/12/96 10/10/96 12/14/96 7/7/97

Tuberculin (Only checking for the antigen) 7/7/97

HEP B 12/14/96 1/2/97 3/7/97

VARIVAX (chickenpox) 7/7/97



© Raphaele and Michael Horwin, 1999 - 2002