Monsanto has spent a lot of money trying to fight state labeling laws. Despite millions of dollars and deceitful ad campaigns, they haven’t been entirely successful. Laws mandating GMO labeling came close to passing in Oregon, California, and Washington. Vermont successfully passed a GMO labeling law, and initiatives to label genetically modified foods are being introduced all over the country.

Monsanto needed a federal solution to their problem, a federal law that could overturn the people’s will in Vermont and in other states. Unfortunately, Congress agreed. The bill is titled the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2015. It is better known by its critics as the DARK Act (which stands for Denying Americans the Right to Know). Despite vocal opposition from the public, independent scientists, and celebrities, the bill has passed the House and it is currently in the Senate’s agriculture committee. This bill, and California’s failed attempt to pass a GMO labeling law, motivated public responses from world-class celebrities. Refusing to passively accept corporate rule, many stars have become outspoken and have begun to use their fame in order to make it clear that they want to know what is in their food. Neil Young tells us in song.

Neil Young

If you don’t like to rock Starbucks A coffee shop
Well you better change your station ’cause that ain’t all that we got
Yeah, I want a cup of coffee but I don’t want a GMO
I like to start my day off without helping Monsanto

… From the fields of Nebraska to the banks of the Ohio
The farmers won’t be free to grow what they want to grow
When corporate control takes over the American farm
With fascist politicians and chemical giants walking arm in arm

… When the people of Vermont wanted to label food with GMOs
So that they could find out what was in what the farmer grows
Monsanto and Starbucks through the Grocery Manufacturers Alliance
They sued the state of Vermont to overturn the people’s will

Chuck Norris

In 2007 alone, the agricultural sector applied between 180 million and 185 million pounds of glyphosate to crops in this country. The home and garden sector applied 5 million to 8 million pounds, and industry, commerce, and government applied 13 million to 15 million pounds of glyphosate. It was the most widely used herbicide in U.S. agriculture and second-most widely used herbicide in the home and garden sector.

The reason it should be on our radar now is that glyphosate is under a standard registration review by the Environmental Protection Agency. The agency is determining whether glyphosate use should continue as is or be limited or even halted.

For years, various interest groups, as well as researchers and scientists from several countries, have complained that heavy use of glyphosate is causing problems for plants and animals, including humans. Studies have been conducted, and findings have been made.

…What do I believe when I read that even the EPA’s technical fact sheet on glyphosate states, for example, that chronic long-term exposure can cause kidney damage and reproductive effects?

And when an MIT study argues that glyphosate’s “negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body”?

Do I read this as it sounds – that maybe what is being called insignificant or low-risk in the short term could escalate into having a significant impact on health over the years? Is it something that could shorten a person’s life?

Jennifer Garner

My friend Gisele [Bundchen] and I are fed up with being kept in the dark about GMO and non-GMO labeling, I got involved because she said, “Do you know what’s happening?” She’s a firecracker. She said, “You have to educate yourself.”

It’s easy for me to shop at places where foods are labeled. Only 3% of the food we produce is non-GMO. But if that 3% is available to you, you kind of take that for granted, but the rest of the country is being fed food—certainly all of the animals that are being turned into our meat, they’re all being fed food that’s been genetically modified.

I cook for my kids, and we have a garden. We try to grow whatever we can, although I can’t say we have the hugest crop in the world, but I do try to pay close attention, and I do my best.

Gwyneth Paltrow

Next week I am going to DC to speak with members of the Senate about voting against a law that would let genetically modified organisms into our food supply without any labels! Monsanto and other big food do not want any GMO labeling. 89% of Americans do. And this law, which passed in the house last week, would overturn the states who have passed labeling laws. The evidence suggests that GMO’s are an environmental disaster, both in the long term and in the short. But I am not asking you to weigh in on whether they are good or bad. We just want a label! We have a right to know what is in our food like the 64 other countries who label or don’t allow GMO’s at all.

… Much the way I want to know if my food is farm-raised or wild or if my orange juice is fresh or from concentrate, I also believe I have the right, and we as Americans all have the right, to know what’s in our food. I’m not here as an expert. I’m here as a mother, an American mother, that honestly believes I have the right to know what’s in the food I feed my family.”

Roseanne Barr

The big island of Hawaii made GMOs illegal. We banned them. We worked so hard…Monsatan I call them. We banned their ass from the big island… It was signed into law.

Dave Matthews

Why would you want to know what’s in your food?

…. Here in America you don’t get the right to know if you’re eating genetically modified organisms.

… If there’s nothing wrong with GMOs, why not put it on the label?…MADE WITH GMOS!!

Tom Colicchio

It’s not surprising that as a chef, I want to know what I am feeding my customers. It’s also not surprising that as a father, I want to know what I am feeding my family. What is surprising is that some in Congress are working so hard to keep consumers like me in the dark as to what’s in the food we eat.

More and more consumers are taking an interest in the ingredients in the products they buy from the grocery store, including whether or not the food contains genetically modified organisms. However, in most cases, there is no way to determine whether or not what you buy at the grocery store contains GMOs. Even when packaging reads “All Natural,” it’s no guarantee that the product has not been genetically modified.

Who’s afraid of transparency? Who’s afraid of disclosure? People who have something to hide.

In a recent national survey, more than 90% of Americans favor GMO labeling. We should all be cheered by the fact that consumers want to be more knowledgeable about the foods they eat. That’s why it’s so disturbing that instead of making it easier for consumers to understand what’s in the food they are buying, there are some in Congress who are actively trying to deny us the basic right to know what we are putting in our bodies.

… I just want to know, I want to know what’s in my food. I really want to know what I’m feeding my family.

Eric Ripert

You don’t have to be a chef to know what is in your food.

Sara Gilbert

All we’re asking is to know what we’re eating and what our kids are eating.

Bill Maher

China labels GMOs – they put lead in baby food. We can’t have that in America, you know why? In America, corporations run the show. Even though nine out of ten Americans would at least like foods to be labeled. At least we know they are Frankenfoods. But it would hurt sales, so shut up and eat your mutant chili.

…Throughout the course of food labeling history, giant processed food companies have claimed that giving consumers basic information about their food would raise the cost of food and guess what? It never has. But that hasn’t stopped the chemical and junk food companies from using this faulty argument to mislead Californians into believing that a label to tell them if their food has been genetically engineered will raise the cost to their food. Enough with the scare tactics already don’t buy their BS.

Michael J Fox

I have a right to know what’s in my food, and you do, too.

… Until we know more about these newly invented foods, just label it.

Jack Johnson

I definitely think people have the right to know what’s in their food. I just shot a public service announcement for the Just Label It campaign, and I’m definitely behind Prop 37 [California’s attempt to pass a labeling law] and the idea that we are what we eat, so we should know what we’re eating. We all have the right to know what’s in our food. When you look at the fact that the European Union has completely banned GMOs, I think we have the right to at least know if we’re eating GMOs.

Julie Bowen

Every modern family has the right to know… What is in their food!!!! And I have the right to know what’s in my food! Don’t you want to know?!

James Franco

Large processed food companies have always claimed that giving consumers basic information about their food, using labels, would increase their grocery costs. And every time it’s been a lie.

Now those same companies are at it again, making more outlandish claims that your grocery bill will skyrocket under Proposition 37, which requires labels for GMOs, well it’s not true, and we’re fighting back with the truth.

… Isn’t labeling genetically modified foods just a fair idea?

Jim Carrey

I’m here to plant a seed today, a seed that will inspire you to go forward in your life with enthusiastic hearts and a clear sense of wholeness. The question is, will that seed have a chance to take root or will I be sued by Monsanto?

Ann Heche

We deserve to know what is on our food. The fact is, we are not being told the truth and there are no laws that demand it.

Rob Schneider

CALL YOUR SENATOR! TELL THEM TO VOTE NO ON THE DARK ACT 1599!! DEMAND THE RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT’S IN YOUR CHILD’S FOOD!

More Celebrities Who Have Spoken Out Against GMOs and Monsanto

• Alexandra Paul
• Ali Larter
• Alicia Silverstone
• Amy Smart
• Barbara Streisand
• Bianca Jagger
• Bill Maher
• Blue Sky Drive (Band)
• Chevy Chase
• Caley Chase
• Carter Oosterhouse
• Danny DeVito
• Darryl Hannah
• Dave Matthews
• Elijah Wood
• Emily Deschanel
• Emily VanCamp
• Exene Cervenka
• Frances Fisher
• Frank Delgado
• Gabriel Mann
• Glenn Howerton
• Ian Somerhalder
• James Taylor
• Jayni Chase
• Jillian Michaels
• John Cho
• Jordana Brewster
• Josh Bowmen
• Julie Bowen
• KaDee Strickland
• Kaitlin Olson
• Kimberly Elise
• Kimberly Van Der Beek
• Kristin Bauer van Straten
• Leah Segedie
• Mariel Hemingway
• Maroon 5 (Band)
• Mehcad Brooks
• Nell Newman, founder, Newman’s Own Organics
• Nick Wechsler
• Rashida Jones
• Roseanne Barr
• Russell Simmons
• Sarah Michelle Gellar
• Suzanne Somers
• Wilder Valderrama
• Ziggy Marley

None of these celebrities are presenting themselves as scientists. So far, scientific objections to genetic engineering (which are many, and well founded) have been completely ignored. Instead of raising scientific objections to genetic engineering, these celebrities are objecting to being denied the right to know what is in our food. At the heart of the matter is freedom, the freedom to choose what goes into our bodies. They want to know what is in their food. Don’t you want to know as well?

Recommended Reading:

• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done The Research
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done The Research
• Celebrities Against Circumcision

Sources:

• “A Rock Star Bucks a Coffee Shop” – Neil Young
• Do GMOs Accumulate Formaldehyde and Disrupt Molecular Systems Equilibria? Systems Biology May Provide Answers – Scientific Research An Academic Publisher
• Chuck Norris Raises Red Flag Over Monsanto – World Net Daily
• ‘Top Chef’ judge Colicchio on GMOs, and his food activism – MSNBC
• Americans have a right to know when GMOs are in their food: Why the DARK Act is such a huge threat – NY Daily News
• Sara Gilbert: Moms have power, make it count – She Knows
• Bill Maher on the Truth Behind Prop 37 – Food & Water Watch
• Jennifer Garner Grows Her Own Food – E Online
• Jim Carrey takes swipe at Monsanto during commencement speech – St. Louis Business Journal
• Gwyneth Paltrow on GMOs: ‘They could possibly be harmful’ – Nicholas Ballasy
• Gwyneth Paltrow and Neil Young vs. Monsanto – We Are Anonymous
• Celebrities Who Endorse Prop 37 – GMO Labeling
• Conceal or Reveal – Just Label It
• Celebrities Unite Against GMO Foods – Documentary Archive
• Right to Know – Vote Yes on Prop 37 – Food & Water Watch
• Celebrities Against GMOs – Free Your Mind TV
• These celebs want GMOs labeled – Grist

Vaccines and GMOs have more in common than many people realize. Both the biotech and the pharmaceutical industry use the same arguments to get you to accept their products. If you are against GMOs or vaccines, then you must be anti-science!

Nothing could be further from the truth. It is the people who research vaccines and GMOs who turn against them. In today’s busy world, most people don’t feel that they have the time to research every product. A desire for convenience and a touch of apathy motivates people to trust the government to guarantee the safety of our products. The same people who claim that they don’t trust their government paradoxically trust the FDA, the USDA, and the CDC. What most people don’t know is that the same studies that the regulators use to verify product safety are funded by industry. Those who stand to benefit the most from product approval are the same ones doing studies that verify safety for vaccines and GMOs.

An Informed Opinion Leads to a Predictable Point of View

That old adage, “When we know better we do better,” holds true for both vaccines and GMOs, and some of us know better than others. More often than not, it is the highly educated who refuse vaccines and buy organic. The political elite is no exception.

While Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton both espouse the benefits of GMOs, neither Hillary nor President Obama actually eat them. The White House doesn’t serve GMOs, and this elitism is not limited to Democrats. Both George Bush and Mitt Romney have strong ties to Monsanto, and both also only eat organic foods. If GMOs are not good enough for them, then why would they be good enough for you and your family?

It is the Highly Educated Who Refuse Vaccines

When it comes to vaccines, the situation is markedly similar. In Germany, a safer vaccine was offered to the politicians, soldiers, and civil servants than the rest of the population. Amid fears of a swine flu epidemic, the German government ordered the Pandemrix vaccine for the German public and the Celvapan vaccine for government officials and the military. Both vaccines vaccinated for the same disease; one was simply safer than the other.

Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) revealed that most of his children are not vaccinated.

I believe it’s the parents’ decision whether to immunize or not. And so I’m looking at my wife — most of our children, we didn’t immunize. They’re healthy. Of course, home schooling, we didn’t have to get the mandatory immunization.

The higher someone’s formal education and the more informed someone is about vaccines, the more likely they are to refuse them. Many former pharmaceutical employees refuse to vaccinate their children.

An education, whether formal or informal, changes you forever. When it comes to vaccines or GMOs, a little knowledge can go a long way. It is the same people who have read the vaccine warning labels and the people who learn about vaccine ingredients who invariably refuse them for their children. The more you know about GMOs, the less likely you are to eat them as well.

If knowledge is power, ignorance is powerlessness. It is ignorant to believe that we don’t need to know what is in our food because we are too scared of science. It is just as ignorant to believe that vaccines simultaneously work so incredibly well, and yet so phenomenally badly that everyone must have them. As GMO activists struggle to educate the world about what is in their unlabeled food, anti-vaxxers struggle to educate others about what is in vaccines.

The Same Struggle by Different Names

The struggles against GMOs and vaccines are intrinsically linked, and yet what happens more often than not, is that these activists fight against billion dollar companies alone, when the fight is essentially the same and the industries that oppose them are essentially the same people as well.

GMO activists want GMOs labeled for the same reason that anti-vaxxers oppose mandatory vaccines. They all want control over what is to be put in their bodies, or the bodies of their children. Admittedly, in vaccines, the struggle over labels is slightly different. Instead of having vaccines labeled (though some of the labeling is intentionally ambiguous) there is a push to get others to read the ingredients, and to read the warning labels. Most people refuse to even discuss what’s in a vaccine or the known risks involved in vaccination. One of the many known risks to vaccination is death. Dying from a vaccine or being permanently disabled is far more likely than dying or being disabled from the disease that the vaccine is supposed to prevent. This may sound hard to believe, but this is easily verifiable. Mortality statistics for all diseases are easily found by searching the Internet. For instance, measles hasn’t killed anyone in the U.S. in decades, but the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System admits to 329 deaths from the vaccine, and almost 7,000 serious adverse reactions. (Numbers for adverse reactions are most likely low due to underreporting.) The question becomes what’s worse, the disease or the vaccine? To those who know how to do the research, the answer is obvious.

Both of These Industries Want You To Trust Their Products and Not To Do Your Own Research

The majority of those opposed to vaccines and GMOs are highly educated. These people are not anti-science, they embrace the pro-precautionary principle. A good definition and description of the precautionary principle quoted from Mindfully.org follows:

When an activity raises threats of harm to the environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.

Key elements of the principle include taking precaution in the face of scientific uncertainty; exploring alternatives to possibly harmful actions; placing the burden of proof on proponents of an activity rather than on victims or potential victims of the activity; and using democratic processes to carry out and enforce the principle – including the public right to informed consent.

…Sometimes if we wait for proof it is too late. Scientific standards for demonstrating cause and effect are very high. For example, smoking was strongly suspected of causing lung cancer long before the link was demonstrated conclusively that is, to the satisfaction of scientific standards of cause and effect. By then, many smokers had died of lung cancer. But many other people had already quit smoking because of the growing evidence that smoking was linked to lung cancer. These people were wisely exercising precaution despite some scientific uncertainty.

Often a problem – such as a cluster of cancer cases or global warming – is too large, its causes too diverse, or the effects too long-term to be sorted out with scientific experiments that would prove cause and effect. It’s hard to take these problems into the laboratory. Instead, we have to rely on observations, case studies or predictions based on current knowledge.

According to the precautionary principle, when reasonable scientific evidence of any kind gives us good reason to believe that an activity, technology or substance may be harmful, we should act to prevent harm. If we always wait for scientific certainty, people may suffer and die, and damage to the natural world may be irreversible.

Rather than conduct (or publish) long-term independent studies, both the biotech and the pharmaceutical industries opt to do their own short-term studies. They also both successfully lobby governments for special protection from liability.

In 1986 a law was enacted making it illegal to sue vaccine manufacturers: The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. This law established a vaccine court, a system that will only compensate families for known vaccine reactions, and then far less than what actual standard liability would pay out. The vaccine court is funded by taxes on vaccines, and so far they have paid out over 3 billion. This court is far from fair or impartial. They pay a maximum of 250,000 dollars for wrongful death from vaccines, and they dismiss 80% of all cases presented to them. Buying the claimant’s silence is a common stipulation to receive any compensation.

A provision was added to the Agriculture Appropriations Bill that serves no purpose other than protecting the biotech industry at the expense of the public’s health. Specifically, HR 933, section 735 is the provision that makes genetically engineered foods immune from liability. This law has been dubbed the Monsanto Protection Act. President Barack Obama signed the bill into law.

If the pharmaceutical and biotech industries thought these products were safe, then why did they lobby the U.S. government for immunity from liability? It stands to reason that they wouldn’t spend millions of dollars lobbying for special protection from lawsuits if the products were safe to begin with.

Industry Funded Pseudoscience

It is difficult to find truly independent research on vaccines. Most vaccine safety studies use all of the toxic ingredients that are found in vaccines for both the control group and the group receiving vaccines – the same adjuvants such as heavy metals, aborted fetal cells, formaldehyde, etc. The only difference between the “placebo” and the vaccine is that the “placebo” doesn’t have the attenuated pathogen, or the “placebo” is an experimental vaccine. Real long-term safety studies that study vaccinated versus unvaccinated or long-term studies that look at the safety of the entire vaccine schedule are never funded by the industry or the U.S. Government. The CDC has blatantly refused to study vaccinated versus unvaccinated because they know what they would find.

There is a similar situation with GMOs. All of the safety studies published by the industry are short-term studies, 90 days or less. The reason for this is that the harmful effects of GMOs typically begin to show up after 90 days. Neither the biotech industry nor the U.S. Government ever published long-term studies. There have been numerous studies conducted in Europe and Russia that reveal kidney damage, liver damage, cancer, and other health problems linked to GMO consumption.

Biotech and the Pharmaceutical Industries Are Separate in Name Only

Monsanto and Pfizer used to be one company, a pharmaceutical company and a biotech company. Pfizer and Monsanto still maintain close ties with both companies staffed by a revolving door of scientists and businessmen that switch back and forth between both companies and regulatory agencies. When you consider how pharmaceutical companies make money (the more sick people are, the more money they make) strong ties to a biotech company should be a major concern to the public.

Many people who are opposed to GMOs are pro-vaccine and vice-versa. These views are far from consistent, and any activist that is against one and for the other is an activist who fails to grasp the issues at hand. If an activist can’t tell what vaccines and GMOs have in common, they could be more of a hindrance than a help to their cause. In an effort to avoid dividing their followers, most anti-GMO and anti-vaccine movements avoid discussing anything they see as unrelated to their cause. This demarcation hurts both movements, as there is strength in numbers. When fighting against the influence and propaganda of companies that are worth billions, a united front would be far more effective. A well known, but often looked over fact, is that many vaccines contain genetically modified ingredients. If you wouldn’t want to ingest GMOs, then why would you want to have them injected into your body or your children’s bodies?

Recommended Reading:

• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Doctors Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

Sources:

• Anti-GMO But Pro-Vaccine – The Sleuth Journal
• White House Will Not Say Where It Gets Its Meat (And I Don’t Blame Them)-Huffington Post
• Why Do Supporters of Genetically Engineered Foods Insist on Organics for Their Own Families? – Mercola
• In Germany, a Better Vaccine for Politicians? – Time
• Barry Loudermilk Says He Didn’t Vaccinate His Children – Huffington Post
• The Precautionary Principle – Mindful.org
• Can Measles Vaccine Cause Injury & Death? – National Vaccine Information Center
• The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 – National Vaccine Information Center
• How the Monsanto Protection Act snuck into law – Salon

It’s not a topic of polite conversation. It is wildly unpopular to criticize circumcision, and even more unpopular to call it what it is – genital mutilation. Whether the procedure is called genital mutilation or circumcision depends upon one’s country of origin and cultural influences.

Despite the innocuous and innocent sounding word for it, circumcision is a violation of our human rights regardless of whether the victim is a boy or a girl. The argument that circumcision is a matter of personal choice is semantically erroneous and illogical, infants do not consent to medical procedures, the parents do. Almost no one would consent to having so much of their genitals removed unless it were absolutely necessary. So of course, that is the lie told by medical professionals, that it is a necessary and beneficial medical procedure.

When discussing circumcision, many celebrities use profanity, because they have strong feelings about the subject. This is understandable; circumcision is a torturous, irreversible procedure. Doctors and nurses routinely lie to parents, telling them their baby slept through the procedure. In routine infant circumcision, anesthesia is rarely used (for fear of complications arising from the anesthesia), and more often than not, the infant goes into shock from the pain. Pro circumcision advocates want to push circumcision on infants, because babies cannot say no.

Alicia Silverstone

I was raised Jewish, so the second my parents found out they had a male grandchild, they wanted to know when we’d be having a bris (the circumcision ceremony traditionally performed 8 days after a baby boy is born). When I said we weren’t having one, my dad got a bit worked up. He couldn’t understand why not – I mean, it’s what our people have been doing for a really long time. Then he started listing reasons for doing it, like uncircumcised penises were hard to keep clean and can get infected, and that it doesn’t hurt the baby – although I’m pretty sure most babies scream and cry at their bris. But my thinking was: If little boys were supposed to have their penises ‘fixed,’ did that mean we were saying that God made the body imperfect? He made all this incredible stuff, and then he just happened to make the penis wrong?

… All those old ideas about why not to do it are totally outdated. A recent review by the American Academy of Pediatrics looked at the data from the past decades to see if there were really, truly any medical benefits to circumcision. Their conclusion? Nope! (2) And according to baby doctor genius and father of eight, Dr. William Sears, not only are there no medical benefits to circumcision, there are actually some pretty weighty drawbacks. The foreskin is packed with nerves (more than any other organ, actually), and removing it can diminish sexual pleasure. It helps protect the head of the penis, which, while also super-sensitive, was meant to be an internal organ. When it is exposed and is constantly rubbing up against clothing, it can become desensitized, which is also bad news when your son starts getting frisky.

Then there are the risks associated with what it is, in truth, a minor surgery: hemorrhage, infection, septicemia, gangrene, disfigurement, or, if too much foreskin is removed, the need for skin grafting later in life.

In case you’re still not convinced that you wouldn’t be committing your child to a life of bad Hebraic karma, consider that in Israel more and more parents are opting to celebrate the first week in their baby’s life with a brit shalom (the “covenant of peace”), a ritual alternative to circumcision.

Mario Lopez

Mario Lopez and his wife Courtney Mazza didn’t see eye to eye on circumcision.

In their reality television show, Saved by the Baby, they aired their dirty laundry while putting away clean laundry.

Mazza: ‘Cause I feel like some of the decisions you’re making, regarding the baby are your choice.

Mario Lopez: What are you talking about?

Mazza: Well ‘sighs’ the main thing that has been bothering me is the circumcision.

Mario: What’s bothering you about it?

Mazza: I don’t know how I feel about that, and every time we talk about it you shoot me down.

Mario: Well hold on, that’s not, I’m sorry babe but that’s not up for discussion. That-

Mazza: How is that not up for discussion?

Mario: Because-

Mazza: Did you make the baby yourself? Aren’t you worried about what people are going to think?

Mario: What do you mean what people are going to think?! What do you think of me? It didn’t hurt me.

Mazza: Well to be completely honest it was awkward for me.

Mario: What do you mean it was awkward?!

Mazza: Yeah it looks like a turtleneck.

Mario: I didn’t hear you complain! Oh really? Now it’s awkward?

Mazza: Well what am I going to say! I was thinking to myself, “What the hell is that?!”

Mario: Hey news flash by the way, this the way all men are born. I can’t believe you are even debating me on this. This is not debatable.

In an interview with Wendy Williams, Mario Lopez explained why it was so important to him to leave his son intact.

… So I said if we were having a boy that I didn’t want him to be circumcised. Because I don’t think that God makes mistakes and it’s not an optional part. And I know some of the women are probably like “Oh!” but believe it or not that’s the way a man is naturally born.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu_uYwDx_H8

Craig Ferguson

While interviewing a physician on his show, Craig brought a succinct argument in favor of leaving boys intact.

Craig: Did you read in the news last week that the city of San Francisco is considering, banning circumcision?

Dr. Masterson: Yeah and again but you know that’s a personal choice. And I talk to my patients, as an obstetrician I talk to my patients a lot about this. And really there’s a lot of health benefits, and some risk benefits but it’s really a social procedure. So you really have to decide do you want your son to look like you? Do you, you know is it a cultural thing? Is it a social thing?

(Obviously, she has a skewed perception of personal choice. When an infant is circumcised, parental choice has taken away personal choice).

And later in the conversation…

Craig Ferguson: But couldn’t you achieve the same effect (the health benefits of circumcision) by washing your pee pee on a regular basis?

Dr. Masterson: You absolutely could.

Craig: So we’re talking, you could have this chopped off or you can wash it. Your call.

Dr. Masterson: Exactly.

Craig: [sarcastically] That’s a tough choice there doctor I don’t know!

Howard Stern

I am so against circumcision. You know that’s a man-made fucking thing. It’s got to cut down on your sensitivity, on your penis. I’m circumcised because you know I grew up in America, that’s what they do. They cut you, but it’s got to be wrong.

…I am circumcised, and I tell you something, I despise it. I despise it. I despise it.

… I rue the day my parents mutilated me.

…You know, my mother is so into ‘natural’ everything. “The body is beautiful.” You should hear the rap. The body is beautiful; we should leave things natural. So, she wouldn’t get me braces. My teeth were as crooked as a four-way intersection in Washington DC, and green, and bu-bu-bu- wouldn’t get me braces. My teeth were so wrecked because “naturally the body will heal itself.” She’s like a Christian Scientist. But the penis? Right out the window! I am completely pissed off that I’m circumcised.

…I know my penis was mutilated and I called my mother … I said to my mother the other night, I’m really freaked out by this circumcision thing. I think that I was mutilated. I think my penis would have a lot more sensitivity. … I’m talkin’ to my mother and I said, Why did you have me circumcised, exactly?

She goes, “You know, at the time I didn’t even know why. They took my baby from me and they said you know,” ‘This is something you gotta do.’… caught up in the whole tradition, cause my, you know, my father was was like, ‘Hey, he’s gotta be circumcised, he’s gotta look like me.’

 And my mother goes, “I just remember being so out of it that, I knew it was the wrong thing, I knew it shouldn’t be done, somewhere in the back of my mind, but how dare I buck the system?”

 I go, “Well Gee! You’re such a loudmouth on everything else, why weren’t you a loudmouth on this?”

Gerard Butler

In an interview with Howard Stern he was asked if he was circumcised. His response was:

No! We don’t do that!

…Never having been circumcised I can’t say but all I know is for me it’s very sensitive, and when I’m having sex that’s the amazing thing.

Cameron Diaz

Apparently it’s very uncomfortable for people to hear how it works when you have to clamp on the foreskin, pull it over, and then slice it off. Yeah, that apparently is really uncomfortable for people to hear. Yeah, but I think it’s important to know. It’s sort of like, it’s the same way, America is the same way about their beef. They just want it delivered in a Styrofoam package with saran wrap over it. They don’t want to know how it got to you. [It’s] the same thing with circumcision.

Joe Rogan

It’s a weird fucking tradition that we need to end. People get really bad infections. It’s not, it’s not completely innocuous. Kids have lost their penises because, because of circumcision. It’s not common. Yeah man for what? To dress up his dick with a knife? It’s a dick; it’s not a Jack O’ Lantern. You don’t have to chop parts off of it to make it look better. That’s stupid.

…It’s a gross thing isn’t it man? It’s a weird thing that people still cut babies dicks. There’s no logic to it at all. No science. All that nonsense about stopping AIDS. Go Fuck yourself. You’re not stopping AIDS by cutting dicks. By the way you’re not getting AIDS from not washing your dick. That’s nonsense. You’ve got no statistics to back that up. It’s one of those things where it was done to us, and women say, “It looks gross, so cut it”. It’s a really fucked up situation that we still have to deal with this.

…We’re weird about visuals man. People mutilate their kids’ dicks because of visuals. That’s what circumcision is about. A lot of people… Look, I’m circumcised. I didn’t ask to be. I’m sure a lot of you are circumcised, and I’m sure a lot of you circumcise your kids. But when you really stop and think about it, its kind of fucking crazy. I only have daughters but me and my wife got in an argument about this shit and she goes if we have a kid and it was a boy, I would want him to be circumcised. I go, “Why?!” she goes cause uncut dicks are disgusting. I’m like how many have you seen?! It was so confident. It wasn’t like she’d seen two that weren’t that pretty and she was holding out, hoping for a cute one. It was like, ‘No, I’ve fucking seen them, Noooo. No, no.’ I’m just picturing a river of sleepy uncut dicks in her past, just. I’m like what are you saying? That’s ridiculous, what it looks. No, no, no, no, no, it looks gross. It’s all this extra skin. I’m like do you even know what a vagina looks like? Are you serious here? Have you ever been sober and squatted down in front of a mirror and taken a good assessment of what the fuck you’re packing? Because let me tell you something, the extra skin might be the best-looking part of that contraption. Because if you pull that apart, you’ve got the predator’s mouth! All right, and you’re really giving me a hard time about some extra dick skin?

John Leguizamo

[My wife and I] talked about it, and I said there’s no way they’re going to be circumcised, and she was totally cool with it. It’s a beautiful thing. It’s not medically necessary at all. Actually, from what I’ve read, guys lose feeling by doing that. I want my son to have all the feeling he can have. Growing up in New York City, a lot of my friends weren’t circumcised, and my dad’s not circumcised and none of my family members are circumcised, so to me that was normal. When I saw some white kids circumcised, it looked like a mutilated monster. It was weird to me…it was really bizarre.

Colin Farrell

[Women] They are kind of fucking fascinated with a foreskin, aren’t they? In Ireland, at birth we don’t get the tip of our fucking knobs chopped off. I fucking completely disagree with that. People say, “It’s much cleaner to have no foreskin.” What, have you never heard of a fucking shower? Of Q-Tips? Whatever you want to do, just clean the fucking thing. I was at the party with 20 people, one of them an agent from CAA, when somehow the subject of foreskins came up. She said, “I just don’t understand a foreskin. I’ve never seen one.” So I whipped out my dick and said, “Here, that’s all it is. A bit of skin.” I did a little Puppetry of the Penis thing and showed her what it was about. You would have thought she was at a circus the way she was looking at me.

Dustin Hoffman

Sometimes they say someone shouldn’t be circumcised because it’s more natural and they should be circumcised because of hygiene. But the argument against that is if you wanna clean under your nails, you don’t cut your nails off.

Ben Affleck

“I hate circumcisions! Get enough in me, and I’ll tell you how much I hate them!” 

Roseanne Barr

Jews must cease circumcising their male infants! It is a barbaric and backward cult mind control technique that produces ill effects in adults.

Sara Gilbert

Only 32.5 percent of babies are being cut these days, so [an intact baby] will be in the majority if you don’t do it.

Russell Brand

We don’t do it in England. It’s just more like, people don’t worry about it. They just, they just let it go, that sort of thing. … It’s a bit unfair, isn’t it, to do that to babies? I mean, you’re alive a little while, start chopping bits of his dick off. I don’t think God cares about that. He’s got a lot [going] on.

Daniel Tosh

Just for the record…I always wish I wasn’t circumcised.

Billy Joel

I got the, ah, ‘snip’, and I had nothing to say about that. And I’m still a little pissed off about that, actually. They should have asked first.

In the lyrics his song, So Long, Reverend Ike, he sang, “My circumcision grieves me.”

Russell Crowe

Russell Crowe is from New Zealand, though he’s lived most of his life in Australia. Circumcision is uncommon in both countries. Russell Crowe is a father of two intact boys. On Twitter he let his views on circumcision be known.

Proud to have my foreskin. It’s cold in Ireland. It’s like a turtleneck – but for my penis.

[I have] Many Jewish friends. I love my Jewish friends. I love the apples and the honey and the funny little hats, but stop cutting your babies.

Circumcision is barbaric and stupid. Who are you to correct nature? Is it real that GOD requires a donation of foreskin? Babies are perfect.

I will always stand for the perfection of babies. I will always believe in God, not man’s interpretation of what God requires.

Same as tattoos, plastic surgery. He is an adult and he “wants” it then off you go. Mothers were right to keep their babies intact.

Last of it, if you feel it is your right to cut things off your babies please unfollow and f**k off. I’ll take attentive parenting over barbarism.

When one of his fans tweeted him asking him if she should get her son circumcised he had a firm reply as to why she shouldn’t mutilate her son.

Twitter follower ‘Picknic11’ asked him: Do you think I should get him circumstanced?’

He replied, Here’s a life rule, if you can’t spell it, don’t do it.

Conclusion

Circumcision cannot be undone. Most of us have heard the casual dismissal, “Almost everyone is circumcised so it doesn’t matter.” Our contention is that it does matter. It is blatantly sexist to refer to female circumcision as genital mutilation and then to pretend that male circumcision is not mutilation as well. There are more erotogenic nerve endings in the foreskin than in any other part of the body, the clitoris included. The latest statistics we have seen places American circumcised newborns at 55%. But that means that 55% of America’s youngest generation will never know what sex with their entire penis would feel like. What’s worse is that the removal of foreskin robs both partners of sensation, though much more so for the man.

Far too often we also hear the argument that circumcision prevents disease.

Sadly, there aren’t any parts of the body that come with a lifetime guarantee against disease. Breasts can become cancerous, fingers can become arthritic, toenails can become ingrown, earlobes can develop malignant melanomas. Males are far more likely to have serious problems with their appendix than with an intact penis. If disease prevention is insufficient justification for the amputation of fingers, breasts, or the removal of toenails or the appendix, then we should take a moment to ask why routine infant circumcision is really done. If it doesn’t make sense to amputate or remove other body parts upon birth, then there is also insufficient justification for the amputation of foreskins. Male foreskin serves many purposes beyond heightened sensation. It also protect the glans, and this helps to maintain sensation later in life.

If we are to continue the practice of circumcision, then we must continue on our own terms as consenting adults. Parents cannot remove other body parts or tattoo their children upon birth. Why is this human rights violation still tolerated?

Recommended Reading:

• Circumcision, the Primal Cut – A Human Rights Violation
• Celebrities Who Have Spoken Out Against Vaccines

Sources:

• The Kind Mama: Alicia Silverstone on Circumcision – Peaceful Parenting
• Saved by the Baby – The Circumcision Discussion
• Mario Lopez: Circumcised or Not? Wendy Asks. Mario Answers. – You Tube
• Mario Lopez Condemns Circumcision – Howard Stern Show
• Craig Ferguson on Circumcision – You Tube
• The Tip of the Iceberg Famous Men Who Resent/ed Being Circumcised
• Actor Gerard Butler and Howard Stern penis talk – why circumcision is wrong ! – You Tube
• Cameron Diaz Talks Circumcision While Matthew Morrison Squirms – Exclusive! – You Tube
• Joe Rogan and Greg Fitzsimmons discuss circumcision – You Tube
• Joe Rogan talks circumcision- “I think it’s stupid…” – You Tube
• Joe Rogan Live From The Tabernacle – Circumcision Bit
• Say No! to Circumcision – Intact America
• 10 Celebrities Who Are Anti-Circumcision – The Stir Café Mom  

Although it is true that the majority of doctors support vaccines, most of them don’t even know what vaccines contain or their dangers. Their training ends with knowing how to administer them. They are taught vaccine reactions are rare and they are quick to share the same assurances with their patients. These assurances are not based on objective science but merely on what they were told, what they were taught.

Click here for part 1: Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

Whether layperson or scientist, high school drop out or M.D., no one can research vaccine manufacturers, vaccine laws, and vaccine injuries and then conclude that vaccines are 100% safe and effective. All you have to do is read the warning insert for any vaccine to learn that truth.

These following doctors rejected half-truths and lies. They did their own research.

Nancy Banks, M.D.

Dr. Banks earned her medical degree at Harvard Medical School. She also earned an MBA in finance from Pace university. She completed her internship and residency at Saint Luke’s Hospital and Mount Sinai Hospital and Medical Center. She is a board certified ObGyn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F_yj1T8Qu8

If you look at the ingredients of vaccines you’ll find that they have mercury, and they have aluminum and the vaccines are polluted with other kinds of viruses and the vaccines are grown, sometimes on human tissue. So these are vaccines that have elements that are neurotoxic and then of course they have other elements that can set up autoimmune reactions. So those are the kinds of things that we’re seeing in the children; we are seeing autoimmune reactions.

We are seeing an autoimmune reaction against the brain tissue. And so these children, unfortunately even the ones who are not developing the syndrome autism, are developing other syndromes such as ADD and ADHD and of course the secondary problem is the number of allergies that we’re seeing in our young children.

…There really is no firm evidence that vaccines DO what they say they DO. They say that the introduction of vaccines actually reduced the amount of infectious diseases, but if you go back to the beginning of the century you will really see that the thing that was reducing infectious diseases was an improvement in diet, an improvement in sanitation and an improvement in education.

…I think that the idea that we can we can put toxins and poisons into a perfectly healthy immune system, a bloodstream and not expect to get complications is naive at best.

…When you’re going to medical school you actually think that you’re studying science. But you’re studying the science that someone has decided that is appropriate for you. And the science that they consider not appropriate for you, you don’t study. 

… Most of the students who come out of medical school are not going to question that. They are simply going to say this is what I learned and so this is how I’m going to proceed. It must be true.

And they will go to the CDC or the FDA website and that website will repeat the things that they heard in medical school. And one of the things that I’ve found is that most of these doctors do not go to the original literature. They don’t read the literature that would really question whether or not these vaccines are safe.

Toni Bark, M.D.

Dr. Bark has earned a B.S. in psychology from the University of Illinois, and her M.D. from Rush Medical School. She completed her Pediatric Residency at the University of Illinois. After directing the Pediatric Emergency Room at Michael Reese Hospital, she began her study of homeopathic medicine. She has a private homeopathic practice. She has also earned a masters degree in healthcare emergency management from Boston University. In 2012 she became Vice President of the American Institute of Homeopathy. A highly educated physician, she has done the research.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qC1p2EJww_4

So I ran a pediatric emergency room and if people came in and they weren’t vaccinated, I was quite upset. Its not that I knew much about vaccines, I did a pediatric residency and you don’t really learn anything. You’re taught the schedule, that’s really what you’re taught about vaccines. You’re taught the schedule and that it produces antibodies and that’s it.

(After learning more about vaccines, she then changed her mind about their safety and effectiveness).

…The kids that come to me from other practices and are fully vaccinated often are the kids, well they are the kids in my practice with asthma, panic disorders, OCD, PANDAS [pediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders associated with streptococcal infections], autism, Asperger’s. My kids who never have been vaccinated in my practice, I don’t see those issue. I don’t have one child who was not vaccinated who also has asthma or food allergies or Asperger’s or autism or crohn’s or ulcerative colitis. None of these chronic inflammatory or chronic autoimmune diseases, cause that’s how I kind of see them. I don’t have that in my population that never was vaccinated or even that was probably vaccinated very delayed and selectively but often those kids are in families where the first child was vaccinated fully and there was problems. There was a vaccine reaction and so the parents decided not to and those kids of course, those kids were those who reacted badly, and so those kids are the ones I’m seeing.

…Physicians are really quite naïve about how things work politically and financially, and that things are really the bottom line.

…and we have medical ethics departments that are completely funded by Pharma. That’s a huge conflict of interest. We have a vaccine medical ethics department, the only one in the United States that is completely funded by not only Pharma but by the vaccine manufacturers themselves. So when they are publishing articles, doctors see this and don’t understand who’s funding them and they believe everything when things have been cherry picked. They read a study on Gardasil vaccine they don’t understand that a placebo is not a saline injection. Most doctors don’t believe me when I tell them that the placebo used in most vaccine studies is the aluminum adjuvant or it is an experimental vaccine.

Meryl Nass, M.D., ABIM

Meryl Nass is no stranger to research. She earned a B.S. in biology from MIT. She worked as a lab technician for two years in the Immunology Department at John Curtin School of Medical Research. She earned her medical degree from the New Jersey Medical School and the University of Mississippi Medical School. She completed her internal medicine residency at the University of Mississippi Medical Center. Afterwards, she worked as an emergency room physician for 14 years. She also taught internal medicine at the University of Massachusetts Medical School. She currently works as an internist and hospitalist at Mount Desert Island Hospital in Bar Harbor Maine.

Her research interests have included vaccine-induced illnesses, chronic fatigue syndrome, Gulf War Illness, fibromyalgia, and toxicology. She also used her skills as a biological warfare epidemiologist to study the world’s largest anthrax epizootic in Zimbabwe. (An epizootic is an animal epidemic.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oimq1YrDi3w

Prevnar was licensed with a big clinical trial conducted at Kaiser in Northern California with 38,000 children. Half received the Prevnar 7 vaccine, and half received an experimental vaccine for Neisseria meningitidis type C – type C meningococcal vaccine.

Now, that seemed a little odd to me. I mean…the control was another vaccine. That’s a problem. But that’s pretty common, because you don’t really know what the side effect profile is if you compare one vaccine to another, because each causes side effects. You don’t have an inert placebo for comparison.

…In this case, they didn’t even take a licensed vaccine, but they took an experimental vaccine as their comparator. The experimental vaccine has never subsequently been licensed in the U.S. So, there is no real understanding. There is no published list of what the side effects are for that experimental vaccine. We don’t even know what we were comparing it to. Here we had two experimental vaccines being compared to each other. Where is the data? We have no idea really what the safety profile was. Now when they’re bringing in the Prevnar 13, they compare Prevnar 13 to Prevnar 7 and say, “Well, the side effects are about the same, so it’s okay.”

…The company is conducting all the studies. The company decides how to present them, and the company decides how to conduct them. So, whether these studies actually give you an unbiased review of the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine [or not] is open to question.

…Children don’t usually die suddenly when they’re healthy; and you have to find a reason for that. There are certainly lots of teenage girls who have died relatively suddenly after Gardasil or developed severe neurological reactions.

…The problem is that vaccines can exert their effects, positively and negatively for a very long time. So for example, if you get a live virus vaccine, one hopes that you will be protected throughout your life.

So for smallpox vaccine it was shown that people had reasonable protection even fifty years after they were vaccinated. Obviously if the immune system is still revved up to protect you against smallpox fifty years later, there’s also the chance that, that revved up immune system may be causing more autoimmune conditions than it would have otherwise. All vaccines are designed to stimulate the immune system.

Jack Wolfson, D.O.

Dr. Wolfson earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Illinois. Afterwards he earned D.O. at the Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine. He is board certified in cardiology. Before meeting his future wife, Heather, he began to realize that conventional medicine was not preventing disease or curing disease, but merely treating the symptoms. Heather, a chiropractor, brought him into the world of holistic healing. He and Heather are now married with two kids, and neither of them are vaccinated.

I recently did an interview which was aired on NBC Phoenix. I was asked my opinion on vaccinations in response to the current measles outbreaks that have occurred at Disneyland in California. My reply has generated quite a bit of anger in thousands of people.

…I want to address all this misguided anger and see if we can re-direct it where it belongs.

Be angry at food companies. Sugar cereals, donuts, cookies, and cupcakes lead to millions of deaths per year. At its worst, chicken pox killed 100 people per year. If those chicken pox people didn’t eat cereal and donuts, they may still be alive. Call up Nabisco and Kellogg’s and complain. Protest their products. Send THEM hate-mail.

Be angry at fast food restaurants. Tortured meat burgers, pesticide fries, and hormone milkshakes are the problem. The problem is not Hepatitis B which is a virus contracted by drug users and those who sleep with prostitutes. And you want to inject that vaccine into your newborn?

Be angry at the companies who make your toxic laundry detergent, fabric softener, and dryer sheets. You and your children are wearing and breathing known carcinogens (they cause cancer). Call Bounce and Downy and let them know. These products kill more people than mumps, a virus which actually doesn’t cause anyone to die. Same with hepatitis A, a watery diarrhea.

Be angry at all the companies spewing pollution into our environment. These chemicals and heavy metals are known to cause autism, heart disease, cancer, autoimmune disease and every other health problem. Worldwide, these lead to 10’s of millions of deaths every year. Measles deaths are a tiny fraction compared to pollution.

Be angry at your parents for not breastfeeding you, co-sleeping with you, and stuffing your face with Domino’s so they can buy more Tide and finish the laundry. Breastfeeding protects your children from many infectious diseases.

Be angry with your doctor for being close-minded and not disclosing the ingredients in vaccines (not that they read the package insert anyway). They should tell you about the aluminum, mercury, formaldehyde, aborted fetal tissue, animal proteins, polysorbate 80, antibiotics, and other chemicals in the shots.

…Lack of exercise kills millions more than polio. Where are all those 80 year olds crippled by polio? I can’t seem to find many.

…Be angry with pharmaceutical companies for allowing us to believe living the above life can be treated with drugs. Correctly prescribed drugs kill thousands of people per year. The flu kills just about no one. The vaccine never works.

…Myocardial infarctions are already the leading cause of death in the world today. The situation could get much worse.

A prestigious journal reported that men who had measles and mumps as children suffered 29% less heart attacks and 17% less strokes! Women with a history of both infections had a 17% lower risk of cardiovascular disease and 21% lower risk of stroke. The journal Atherosclerosis recently published these shocking findings in the June 2015 issue (1).

By my calculations, natural infection with the measles and mumps will prevent millions of heart attacks and strokes. Why is this information not all over the TV and Internet? I will tell you why. Because mainstream media is in bed with Big Pharma who pay their bills. The politicians are slaves to their corporate masters. Our children should be exposed to every virus and bacteria for which a vaccine exists.

The polio virus led to symptoms in only 5% of those exposed. Rarely was paralysis an effect, and even then, the cause may have been pesticide induced, other viruses, or from arsenic. This was the 1940’s after all. Children who are breast fed, eat organic foods, and are not living in a cloud of chemicals will easily combat these infections.

…The sad truth is that we are too early in the mass vaccination campaign to really understand the long-term risks. The gold standard in medical research is the randomized, placebo controlled trial. That study does not exist for most vaccines and there has never been a trial on 69 doses of 16 vaccines versus a placebo. There never will be. We may never fully realize the damage done from this immune system onslaught.

You brought a child into this world. Protect them.

Lee Hieb, M.D.

Dr. Hieb received her undergraduate from Grinell College and the University of Iowa. She earned her M.D. from the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry. She did her orthopedic surgical residency with the U.S. Navy. She is a former president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, and she frequently speaks out against the perils of government-run health care. She ran for Governor in 2014 as a libertarian. Unfortunately, she lost the election.

The voices shrieking to forcibly vaccinate people are the same voices shrieking to support a woman’s right to choose abortion under Roe v. Wade. If a woman’s body is sacrosanct, if she has the right to choose to deliver a child or not, if she has total authority over her body, how can she not have the right to accept or refuse a vaccination?

Medical ethics are clear: No one should be forced to undergo a medical treatment without informed consent and without their agreement to the treatment. We condemn the forced sterilization of the ’20s and ’30s, the Tuskegee medical experiments infecting black inmates and the Nazi medicine that included involuntary “Euthanasia,” experimentation and sterilization. How can we force vaccination without consent? Vaccination is a medical treatment with risks including death. It is totally antithetical to all ethics in medicine to mandate that risk to others.

Science is never “concluded.” Mr. Obama and other ideologues may think the truth is finalized (“The science is indisputable”), but the reality is our understanding of disease and treatment are constantly being updated. Just like Newton’s mechanical paradigm of the universe was supplanted by Einsteinian physics, and physicists today modify that view, medical “truth” is not the truth for long. In an attempt to quantify change in medicine, years ago a cardiology journal discussed “The Half-life of Truth.” Cardiologists looked back in their journal at 20-year-old articles to see how much of what was believed then was still believed to be true. The answer? 50 percent. So in cardiology, at least – and in all of medicine to greater or lesser degree – only half of what we believe now will still be true in 20 or so years. The last word on vaccination is not in. It hasn’t even begun to be written.

If you believe absolutely in the benefit and protective value of vaccination, why does it matter what others do? Or don’t do? If you believe you need vaccination to be healthy and protected, then by all means vaccinate your child and yourself. Why should you even be concerned what your neighbor chooses to do for his child – if vaccination works? The idea of herd immunity is still based on the idea that in individual cases vaccines actually are protective.

Since 2005 (and even before that), there have been no deaths in the U.S. from measles, but there have been 86 deaths from MMR vaccine – 68 of them in children under 3 years old. And there were nearly 2,000 disabled, per the aforementioned VAERS data.

In countries which use BCG vaccinations against tuberculosis, the incidence of Type I diabetes in children under 14 is nearly double.

As reported in Lancet in 1995, inflammatory bowel disease (i.e. Crohn’s and ulcerative colitis) is 13 times more prevalent in persons vaccinated for measles.

…In 1982 William Torch, a prolific researcher and publisher on Neurologic topics, presented a paper (later published) at the American Academy of Neurology reviewing SIDS deaths. He reported that in 100 consecutive cases, 70 percent of SIDS deaths occurred within three weeks of pertussis vaccination.

…The dirty little secret in recent outbreaks of mumps, measles and pertussis is – they are occurring in vaccinated people in highly vaccinated populations!

…In 2008-2009, Australia had epidemics of whooping cough and measles. Health authorities there must reveal the vaccination status of children in epidemics. Eighty-four percent of Australian children who got whooping cough were fully vaccinated, and 78 percent who got measles had record of measles vaccination. In the 2010 outbreak of whooping cough in California, well over half the victims were fully vaccinated.

…Finally, it turns out that death and disability from many childhood diseases is preventable by means other than vaccination. Vitamin A has been known since the 1930s to reduce mortality from measles by 60 percent. Vitamin D is protective against viral illness. And numerous authors and studies have shown the damaging effects of chemical antipyretics (fever lowering drugs) on the natural course of disease – a practice still sadly in widespread use in America. Better understanding of disease mechanisms, utilizing nutritional support and better scientific care of the sick child are safer alternatives to widespread vaccination.

As one of today’s senior citizens who grew up in a Midwestern state in the 1930s, and as a doctor who has treated many children, I may have a special vantage point of time and experience in regard to the changes that have taken place in the health of America’s children since the relatively innocent times of the 1930s. At summer camps in the New Mexico Mountains that I was fortunate to attend, no boy had allergies, none was on medication, and no boy was ever sick with the common ailments of today. It was much the same in schools. I don’t recall ever seeing a child with easily recognized behaviors now described as hyperactivity (ADHD) or autism.

Today in stark contrast, approximately one-third of our youngsters are afflicted with the 4-A Disorders (Autism, ADHD, Asthma, and Allergies), as described and documented by Dr. Kenneth Bock. School budgets are being strained to the breaking points in providing special education classes for autistic and learning disabled children. Allergy problems are proliferating, as indicated by long lines of children at school nursing stations for their noontime medications.

…At the end of the day, the issue here is one of freedom, and freedom is the freedom to choose – even if we make a bad choice. The argument that I must vaccinate my children for the good of the community is not only scientifically questionable, it is an unethical precept. It is the argument all dictators and totalitarians have used. “Comrade, you must work tirelessly for the good of the collective. You must give up your money and property for the good of the collective, and now you must allow us to inject your children with what we deem is good for the collective.” If American’s don’t stand up against this, then we are lost. Because we have lost ownership of ourselves. Our bodies are no longer solely ours – we and our children are able to be commandeered for the “greater good.”

Michael W. Elice, M.D.

Dr. Elice graduated from Syracuse University and then the Chicago Medical School. He is is a board certified pediatrician, and he is certified in hyperbaric medicine. He has treated Autistic Spectrum Disorders, mitochondrial, immune and metabolic dysregulation for over a decade now.  Dr. Elice is on the board of NYFAC –New York Families of Autistic Children, National Autism Association – New York Metro Chapter and MAPS Physician.  He also teaches at New York university Medical School, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and he is an adjunct professor at North Shore University Hospital and the Cohen’s Children’s Hospital of the Long Island Jewish Medical Center.

As a board certified pediatrician, I took the same oath as all physicians, “to do no harm.”

The latest media presentation of the measles outbreak at Disneyland as a result of unvaccinated children is very upsetting to me.  We are being fed information that is essentially inaccurate by media journalists – none of whom have medical degrees – which may actually be promoting medical harm to our children.

The latest reports blaming a failure of the measles vaccine on the unvaccinated population are not accurate, and in some reports, not true at all.  In fact, over the past 30 years, there have been similar numbers of measles cases reported in various areas of the United States.

…Last year 1 in every 500,000 Americans came down with the measles. Nearly all recovered in a few days without serious consequences.  At the same time 1 in 68 American children were diagnosed with autism or for every case of measles there were 7000 cases of autism.  I ask myself which is the real epidemic here?

…I wish these journalists, vaccinologists and infectious disease specialists spent a week in my office.  I wish they would actually listen to the testimonials given to me by parents of autistic children who were obviously affected by these vaccines adversely.  I wish they would tell parents that the risk of dying from the measles in the United States is around zero.  I wish they would admit that they are being told by pharmaceutical companies not to report certain statistics or to cover up factual scientific information.  I wish they could be free to report honestly about vaccines rather than being dependent upon drug advertising and Internet information.

This is an emotional debate for sure.  If we discount emotion and fear, we would realize that a child may have a greater chance of getting struck by lightning, accidental drowning or possibly from adverse side effects of the MMR vaccination itself than from acquiring live measles infection.  I wish that my pediatric colleagues would offer parents factual pros and cons of vaccines in general so that a parent can make an informed decision and then give consent to vaccinate rather than being told that if their child isn’t vaccinated they will be thrown out of school and they are guilty of child abuse!

I am not advocating that vaccines be discontinued.  I am advocating that doctors and patients become aware of the ingredients of these vaccines, what they can potentially do to affect an adverse outcome in an immunologically compromised child.  Adverse reactions to MMR and other vaccines have been reported in numerous clinical trials and studies.  I am advocating that medical practitioners and researchers, not journalists, address the real medical epidemics of autism, asthma, GI disease and autoimmune diseases facing our society and people around the world. Stop hyping the safety of MMR vaccines which may actually be more dangerous than live measles and may be ineffective in preventing the illness which they are so anxious to report as a dangerous epidemic itself.  Let’s stop believing that the mainstream media is telling us the truth when all they are doing is shutting down any intelligent and open discussion about vaccine safety and how to improve it.

Check out part 1 of this series, Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research. If you’ve been vaccinated, check out How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children.

Further Reading:

• Even More Doctors Against Vaccines
• Influenza Vaccine – A Comprehensive Overview of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness of the Flu Shot
• The MMR Vaccine – A Comprehensive Overview Of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness
• How Plumbing, Not Vaccines, Eradicated Disease
• Autism and Vaccines: CDC Whistleblower Exposes Vaccine Dangers, Lies, and Cover-ups

Sources:

• About – Nancy Banks MD
• Nancy Banks on Vaccines – You Tube
• About US – The Center For Disease Control and Reversal
• Toni Bark – You Tube
• Dr Toni Bark, MD – You Tube
• Biography Meryl Nass, MD, ABIM – Web MD
• Meryl Nass on Vaccines – You Tube
• A Special Interview with Dr. Meryl Nass – Mercola
• Phoenix Integrative Cardiologist – Dr. Jack Wolfson – Wolfson Integrative Cardiology
• Arizona Cardiologist Responds to Critics Regarding Measles and Vaccines – Health Impact News
• Measles and Mumps Protects Against Heart Attack and Stroke – Vaccine Impact
• Meet the Candidate: Iowa Governor: Lee Deakins Hieb, Libertarian Party – The Des Moines Register
• How Vaccine Hysteria Could Spark Totalitarian Nightmare – WND
  Measles Matters – Aim Integrative Medicine

Let’s “pause” the discussion about mandatory vaccinations and push “play” on how best to keep the next generation healthy. According to Stephanie Seneff, PhD, a research scientist at MIT, by the year 2025 one out of every two children will be autistic given the current rate of increase. ¹

Dr. Seneff states, “Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.” We’ve been hearing this term “mitochondrial disorder” more and more lately. In July 2010, Hannah Poling’s family was awarded $1.5 million plus $500,000 annually for continued care after Hannah was severely injured from receiving vaccines for nine diseases at the same time– the typical recommended doses. The court determined Hannah had an “unknown mitochondrial disorder.” ²

In light of unknown mitochondrial disorders that may be lurking in children unbeknownst to doctors or parents, will the attempt to make them healthier by injecting more vaccines into them be successful? The effort to eliminate benign childhood diseases is not working. Bloating the vaccine schedule with more recommendations is not the answer. In the recommended schedule from the early 1970’s there are 23 doses of vaccinations for nine diseases.

If we take a look at the current schedule a whopping 67 doses of 16 diseases are recommended for children by age 18. Are our children healthier as a result?

According to a recent study by Neil Miller, the United States has the highest number of recommended vaccines in the first year of life. Thirty three other nations have a lower vaccine schedule and a lower infant mortality rate. Singapore, Sweden, Japan, Iceland, and France have some of the lowest rates in the world. ³

When penicillin was introduced in the 1940’s it was a wonder drug. Modern medicine had found the answer to disease. Kill the bacteria. What could be more effective and efficient than wiping out the culprits to ear infections, sore throats, wound infections and the like? Yet, today the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention along with the American Academy of Pediatrics state that antibiotic-resistant infections, or super bugs, are one of the world’s most pressing public health threats. ⁵ Trying to eliminate bacteria hasn’t been a panacea.

Bacteria and viruses are lifeforms which ultimately “find a way,” not to be easily annihilated. Normal bacteria found in the intestine, female genital tract and oral cavity help prevent overgrowth of potential pathogens and aid digestion.⁵ Bacteria are the only living organisms which can fix nitrogen. They are therefore essential to all life on Earth. Developing another antibiotic or another vaccine is not the answer. What about viruses?

Current news reports tell us we have not eliminated measles mumps or chickenpox. These benign childhood diseases have a natural life of ebb and flow. We see their return despite vaccination rates. They also play a vital role in the education and maturation of the developing immune system.

Some believe that the choice to not vaccinate a child is irresponsible. Claims abound that disease outbreaks are due to the percentage of unvaccinated. These children are viewed with suspicion and distrust as if they are intentionally inflicting others with diseases that they somehow manage to avoid but pass along to others. Yet, according to the New England Journal of Medicine a mumps outbreak during 2009 and 2010 occurred primarily among fully vaccinated children. ⁶

If Mother Nature intended for these benign illnesses to educate the immune system, how can this be accomplished without the risk of serious complications? The answer is called “homeoprophylaxis” also known as “HP.”

HP is the use of diluted and potentized disease products, called “nosodes” to elicit an immune response. This response will educate the immune system in a way that has been clinically shown to reduce the incidence of both infectious as well as chronic disease.

The goal of HP is the same as conventional vaccination – disease protection and improved health. The differences are many. The most obvious is the purity of nosodes compared to conventional vaccines. HP nosodes contain no additives whatsoever. No antibiotics, no preservatives, no detergents no foreign DNA, or unknown viruses or foreign DNA are present.

HP nosodes are administered on small sugar pellets. They dissolve on the tongue and enter the system by way of the natural route past mucous membrane. Here the natural process of disease recognition can begin in the way that Mother Nature intended. Bypassing this route by injecting a substance directly into the blood stream is like an ambush attack to the immune system. There is no opportunity to mount a preliminary response in a biologically appropriate way.

HP is given one disease at a time, as the human economy can manage effectively. If a child is sick, it is best to allow him to get well before introducing any other diseases to his system. Most medical professionals would say it is inadvisable to be giving a vaccine at that time. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention states that you should not vaccinate your child if he is “moderately or severely sick, with or without a fever.” ⁷

To summarize, homeoprophylaxis, or HP, is a disease prevention method that uses diluted and potentized disease particles. It respects the immune system by only introducing one disease at a time through a natural route of administration passing through mucous membrane.

The nosodes contain no adjuvants, preservatives, antibiotics, or detergents, and are not grown on mediums such as animal tissues containing foreign DNA or unknown viruses.

HP has been utilized since the 1800’s and was even made obligatory by the Prussian government in 1838 during scarlet fever outbreaks. It is commonly used for epidemic diseases that pose the risk of death or disability, but can also be used for diseases with a low mortality rate, or when traveling to an area where a specific disease is endemic.

The benefit of homeoprophylaxis is that it “educates the immune system” in such a way as to either protect from the disease, or if it’s contracted, an asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic case will occur.

Since the 1800’s, HP has been used for scarlet fever, cholera,⁸ smallpox, polio,^9, 10 pertussis,¹¹ diphtheria,¹² influenza,¹³ meningitis,¹⁴ Leptospirosis¹⁵ and more. The application as an alternative to the recommended government immunization schedule is relatively new.

Dr. Isaac Golden, PhD (Australia) conducted a 15 year study with 3000 children receiving HP. He found that those children exposed to the diseases included in the HP program were effectively protected at a rate of 91%.¹⁶ He continues to collect data today.

A very interesting finding of his work is the improved long term health outcomes of children using homeoprophylaxis instead of conventional vaccination. There were also improved long term outcomes when compared with unvaccinated children. It seems that allowing exposure to the natural disease in energetic form carries this benefit without any of the risks. ¹⁷

To quote Dr. Golden regarding these findings, “The explanation of this result remains open, but I would suggest that HP remedies stimulate the energetic immune response and this must lead to a maturing of the response in an analogous way that infection with simple diseases can help to mature the physical immune response.” ¹⁸

In other words, triggering an immune response at the energetic level, using vibrational remedies as opposed to material doses of disease antigen, plays a role in maturing the immune system. This is accomplished similarly to how Mother Nature operates in the developing immune system – gently and carefully, single disease by single disease.

While vaccination does provide a variable level of protection against many infectious diseases, its safety is not confirmed with any degree of certainty. In particular, long term health consequences of vaccines have not been adequately researched. In comparison, homeoprophylaxis has provided 200 years of clinical evidence showing us that it is safe, devoid of any toxic components, and yields positive long term health effects. Include a level of protection comparable to or better than vaccines, and practitioners have genuine choices available when it comes to preventing potentially serious infectious diseases.

Parents and healthcare practitioners wishing to implement HP may want to attend the 1^st HP International Conference in Dallas, TX. Dr. Isaac Golden will be the keynote speaker.

Recommended Reading:

• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Vaccine Side Effects and Why You Shouldn’t Vaccinate
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

Sources:

1. [up] Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT – Alliance for Natural Health
2. [up] Sharyl Attkisson. CBS News. September 2010 – CBS News 
3. [up] Miller NZ, Goldman GS. Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity? Human and Experimental Toxicology. 30(0) 1420-1428.
4. [up] Get Smart Programs & Observancesenters – CDC
5. [up] Microbes and Human Life – Life Materials Technologies Limited
6. [up] Mumps Outbreak in Orthodox Jewish Communities in the United States – New England Journal of Medicine
7. [up] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014) Retrieved from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/vac-admin/contraindications-vacc.htm
8. [up] Von Boenninghausen, C. Baron.1984. Bönninghausens Kleine medizinische Schriften [Lesser Medical Writings] (ed. Klaus H. Gypser), Heidelberg, 1984.
9. [up] Eisfelder, HW. Poliomyelitis Immunization: A Final Report. Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy. V. 54, Nov-Dec 1961, pp. 166-167.
10. [up] Francisco Eizayaga MD. Treatise on Homeopathic Medicine published by Ediciones Maracel, Buenos Aires, Brazil, 1991
11. [up] Shepherd, D., (1967). Homeopathy in epidemic diseases (First ed.). Essex, England: The C. W. Daniel Company Limited. p.18.
12. [up] Chavanon, P. 1952. La Dipterie, 4th Ed, St Denis, Niort: Imprimerie.
13. [up] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2014. Retrieved from: http://www.flu.gov/pandemic/history/1918/the_pandemic/fightinginfluenza/index.html
14. [up] Mroninski C, Adriano E, Mattos G. Meningococcin, its Protective Effect against Meningococcal Disease, Homœopathic LINKS Winter, 2001 Vol 14 (4) 230-4
15. [up] PubMed 2014. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20674839 Bracho G1, Varela E, Fernández R, Ordaz B, Marzoa N, Menéndez J, García L, Gilling E, Leyva R, Rufín R, de la Torre R, Solis RL, Batista N, Borrero R, Campa C. Large-scale application of highly-diluted bacteria for Leptospirosis epidemic control. Homeopathy. 2010 Jul;99(3):156-66. doi: 10.1016/j.homp.2010.05.009.
16. [up] Golden, Isaac (2012). The Complete Practitioner’s Manual of Homeoprophylaxis. Victoria, Australia. p 93.
17. [up] Ibid
18. [up] Ibid

Guess what? The nice folks charged with taking care of everyone have finally decided we were getting too much fluoride. The U.S. Public Health Service changed our drinking water standards for the first time since 1962.

The previously agreed upon level of fluoride was 0.7 to 1.2 milligrams of fluoride per liter of water, the amount of fluoride found in a single use of 95% of the toothpastes available on the market in the United States.

Is Fluoride Even Necessary?

Advocates claim that the addition of fluoride to the water supply is the reason for the decline in tooth decay since the 1950s. These same advocates ignore the fact that the same decline in decay rates occurred in all western countries. The majority of European countries that do not use fluoride have seen a 75% reduction in tooth decay over a forty-year period.

Fluoride’s Unsafe History

Where does fluoride come from? Before fluorine gas (the element that fluoride is derived from) was isolated, chemists dealing with it suffered from severe injuries, especially to the soft tissues of the respiratory tract. Manmade fluoride comes from industrial waste, and the FDA hasn’t carefully assessed it.

Forty percent of 12-15-year-olds in America show signs of fluorosis, an overexposure to fluoride that causes white spots on teeth. The deputy surgeon general is citing fluorosis as the main reason for the lowering of the recommended amount of fluoride in drinking water. Unfortunately, that’s not the only reason to reduce and eliminate fluoride in our drinking water.

Harvard scientists decided that the effect of fluoride on the young brain was a high priority topic of study, as several studies have found children’s IQs were reduced by fluoride exposure. It has also been linked to damaged learning and memory centers in the brain.

Fluoride is also toxic for bones, as the chronic ingestion of fluoride has been linked to skeletal fluorosis. It’s clear that the rate of dental damage from fluoride is on the rise, and it makes sense that the same damage is occurring in the skeletal system. There have also been links between fluoride and damage to the kidneys and thyroid.

Say No to Fluoride

With the growing tide of research confirming that fluoride is harming the brain and bones as well as the teeth it’s purportedly designed to help, 0.7 of fluoride per liter of water as the new standard still seems high considering it’s merely the low end of the previous recommendation. The fact that it has taken more than 50 years for the Public Health Service to lower the levels of fluoride in our water in the face of damning evidence shows how unwilling our government is to consider current research.

While the lowering of the recommended amount of fluoride is a step in the right direction, it is not enough. There are things that you can do to take care of and protect yourself even further. Learn about the best water to drink (see links 8 and 2 below) and learn how to make your own fluoride free toothpaste.

Further Reading:

• What’s the Best Water for Detoxifying and For Drinking?
• Symptoms of Dehydration & Benefits of Proper Hydration – Are you Getting Enough Water?
• Why Water Fluoridation Continues, Despite Flying in the Face of Science
• What’s in Your Water?

Sources:

• Feds Say It’s Time To Cut Back On Fluoride In Drinking Water – Shots, Health News from NPR
• Heal Cavities, Gum Disease, Naturally with Organic Oral Care – Toothpaste Recipes Included – Organic Lifestyle Magazine
• Why Water Fluoridation Continues Despite Flying in the Face of Science – Organic Lifestyle Magazine
• Tooth Decay Trends In Fluoridated Vs. Unfluoridated Countries – Fluoride Alert
• Fluorine – Chemistry Explained
• Fluoride & IQ: The 43 Studies – Fluoride Alert
• What are the long-term effects of ingesting fluoride on our bones? – com
• What’s the Best Water for Detoxifying and Drinking? – Organic Lifestyle Magazine

Imagine This

You bring a beautiful baby girl into this world. You count her fingers and toes. You can’t believe the wonder of this tiny, perfect human being. She trusts you to keep her warm, nourished, and safe from harm.

You and others hold down your baby or when she has grown and is a little girl. Someone uses a scalpel, a knife, a razor blade, a piece of glass, or some other sharp instrument to cut the skin off of her clitoris and remove all or part of it. Perhaps more is done. Perhaps the inner lips of her labia are removed. Perhaps the opening to the vagina is surgically altered. Perhaps the entire labia is sewn together leaving only a small opening, one that is not large enough to deliver a baby, not large enough to allow intercourse unless it is ruptured and torn.

If you live in the United States or Great Britain, you will probably go to the country from which you or your family originated – Africa, Asia, or the Middle East – to have this procedure performed because it is illegal in the United States and Britain. In Britain, you would face a 14-year prison term. In the United States? Probably 30 years, or more.

You love your daughter. Why would you do this?

You do this for social, cultural, or religious reasons. You do this because you have been raised to believe that female circumcision promotes cleanliness and reduction of libido, aiding in chastity before marriage. Your culture tells you your unaltered child is not marriageable. You do it because it was done to you or the mother of your child. You do this because it was done to all the women in your family. You do this because you believe it is the right thing to do.

The list of complications from female circumcision is long. At one end, we find infections, at the other end, sterilization or death. Altered vaginal openings may result in infant death or maternal death during childbirth. Sexuality is forever altered due to the loss of the clitoris and the damage done to other tissues. The circumcision is performed at various ages and can result in significant emotional trauma. This horrific practice continues primarily due to custom and religion.

Now Imagine This

You bring a beautiful, perfect baby boy into this world. In less than 24 hours, a nurse, doctor, or midwife comes to you with a clipboard and a form, asking you to sign permission to cut off the foreskin of your baby’s penis. Skin that nature provided to protect the glans. Skin that is filled with nerve endings that heighten sexual response. Skin that works with the penis during intercourse for normal sexual function, increasing pleasure for both the male and the female.

Why would you do this?

You do this for social, cultural, or religious reasons.

You do this because you have been told that male circumcision promotes cleanliness or prevents disease. You do this because it was done to you or the father of your child. Or you do this because you fell for the lame argument, “You don’t want him to be teased in the locker room for looking different, do you?”

History of Male Circumcision

Looking back at the history of male circumcision in the United States, we find that male circumcision has been the norm in this country for generations. We, as a culture, have been brainwashed into believing that an intact foreskin results in a lack of cleanliness that leads to disease, including cancer and HIV. But that’s not how this medical malpractice started in the United States. It began with the fear of sexuality – specifically, nocturnal emissions (wet dreams) and masturbation. Circumcision was claimed to cure or prevent both of these “horrific acts.” These claims were followed by more claims and “scientific” papers “proving” ridiculous cures through circumcision. These cures and preventions include:

• Prevents syphilis
• Cures epilepsy
• Prevents epilepsy
• Prevents spinal paralysis
• Cures bedwetting
• Prevents curvature of the spine, paralysis, and clubfoot
• Cures abdominal neuralgia
• Cures eye problems
• Prevents crossed eyes
• Cures blindness, deafness, and dumbness
• Prevents blacks from raping white women
• Cures urinary and rectal incontinence
• Prevents tuberculosis
• Prevents penile cancer
• Promotes chastity
• Prevents prostrate cancer
• Prevents venereal disease and cancer of the tongue
• Prevents cervical cancer in women
• Provides immunity to nearly all physical and mental illnesses
• Cures nervousness
• Prevents bladder cancer and cancer of the rectum
• Prevents urinary tract infections
• Prevents AIDS
• Prevents neonatal group B streptococcal disease
• Prevents HIV infection

The information above was included in an interesting slide show presented by the International Coalition for Genital Integrity. Their slides show the rise and fall of circumcision rates in the U.S. and the U.K. along a timeline in association with the misinformation pushed upon the American people through the medicalization of circumcision. (See link below).

The history of circumcision predates recorded history and is a global phenomenon. It is argued that the practice of circumcision came from cultural diffusion, that it was a practice that started with early man in Africa and was retained after humanity dispersed. The argument for this belief is simply that it was unlikely the practice started spontaneously across the globe in various cultures. However, we should bear in mind that many human behaviors started spontaneously and independently across the globe including agriculture, pottery making, tools, and weaponry.

It is also argued that foreskin (especially if it is tight) is a physiological barrier to early sexuality that aided in delaying reproduction, thereby favoring natural selection. Many cultures ritualized circumcision as a rite of passage from childhood to manhood—preparing the young man for a sexual union.

It was not only a tribal rite in many places across the globe. It was performed in ancient Egypt as shown by mummies and by hieroglyphics, it is also believed it was performed on slaves and conquered warriors as a show of dominance and humiliation.

Circumcision and Religion Today

People of the Jewish faith practice circumcision due to their belief that God commanded it of Abraham and his descendants (and those he bought) as “…a token of a covenant betwixt Me and you. …And the uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that should shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken My covenant.” Genesis 17:714

Cleanliness and hygiene are essential to the Islamic faith. Circumcision is believed to be an important aspect of cleanliness. “Five things are part of the fitrah: shaving the pubic hair, circumcision, trimming the moustache, plucking the armpit hairs, and cutting the nails.” Although they do not believe it to be a covenant between God and mankind, they do believe circumcision is submitting to the will of God. They believe female circumcision to be mutilation; it is strictly forbidden.

The Current Pro-Circumcision Argument

In 1975 and again in 1983 and 2005, the American Academy of Pediatrics stated, “…there is no absolute medical indication for routine circumcision of the newborn.” Today they state the following on their website:

“The American Academy of Pediatrics believes that circumcision has potential medical benefits and advantages, as well as risks. Evaluation of current evidence indicates that the health benefits of newborn male circumcision outweigh the risks and that the procedure’s benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it, however, existing scientific evidence is not sufficient to recommend routine circumcision. Therefore, because the procedure is not essential to a child’s current well-being, we recommend that the decision to circumcise is one best made by parents in consultation with their pediatrician, taking into account what is in the best interests of the child, including medical, religious, cultural, and ethnic traditions.”

The arguments for circumcision include:

• Fewer urinary tract infections
• Less risk of penile cancer
• Less risk of transmission of some STDs including HIV

Urinary Tract Infections

Multiple studies have consistently shown fewer urinary tract infections among circumcised infants compared to uncircumcised infants. However, it is important to note that urinary tract infections among all male infants are rare with an annual estimated rate of 0.18% in circumcised male infants verses 0.70% in uncircumcised male infants.

Penile Cancer

According to the American Cancer Society, “Risk factors for developing penis cancer include human papillomavirus (HPV) infection, not being circumcised, being age 60 or older, phimosis, poor hygiene, many sexual partners, and tobacco use.”

Penile cancer is rare. In the U.S. the current projected stats for 2015 are 1,820 new cases will be diagnosed and 310 men will die from penile cancer. It accounts for less than 1% of the cancers afflicting men; however, it accounts for up to 10% of cancers in men in some parts of Asia, Africa, and South America. Penile cancer is more common among Hispanic men than non-Hispanic men.

HPV, the human papilloma virus, is believed to be responsible for about 63% of penile cancers, though the CDC states that cancer registries do not collect data on the presence or absence of HPV in cancer tissue at the time of diagnosis.

HIV and Other STDS

When reading scholarly articles about circumcision and STDs, the logic or lack thereof in some of the reports is astounding. For example, in the report, Male circumcision: assessment of health benefits and risks, it states: “There is substantial evidence that circumcision protects males from HIV infection, penile carcinoma, urinary tract infections, and ulcerative sexually transmitted diseases.”

It also says, “Eight (studies) reported a statistically significant association between presence of the foreskin and HIV infection, one reported a trend towards an association, one reported no association, and one reported an increased risk with circumcision. To our knowledge, the latter report is the only one in the literature in which, after controlling for potential confounding factors, male circumcision has been associated with an increased risk for HIV infection.”

In another study, male circumcision and common sexually transmissible diseases in a developed nation setting, its conclusion is as follows: “From the findings of this study, circumcision of men has no significant effect on the incidence of common STDs in this developed nation setting. However, these findings may not necessarily extend to other setting where hygiene is poorer and the spectrum of common STDs is different.”

Circumcision is Painful

We do everything in our power to protect infants from fear and pain, and yet we pretend circumcision is not painful. In reality, it is both painful and traumatic.

Most babies scream frantically when their foreskin is cut off. Some defecate. Some lapse into a coma. The reason some babies don’t cry when they are circumcised is that they can’t cry because they are in a state of shock.” –NOCIRC

Risks of Circumcision

It is rare that a circumcision is completely botched, but it does happen. There are cases where the outcome is the loss of the glans, the shaft of skin, or the entire penis. And there have been cases of sexual reassignment due to the loss of a penis. Babies have died. Other risks include infection, excessive bleeding, and complications from anesthesia (if it was used). We do not know but can only guess at the emotional cost an infant suffers from the initial cut and up to 10 days or more of painful healing. We do not know how this trauma affects bonding during this crucial time.

Circumcised males may suffer from scarring, skin bridges, tearing and bleeding at the circumcision scar site, curvature of the penis, or tight, painful erections.

Not only have they lost the foreskin with all of its many nerve endings, most or all of the sensitivity of the glans has been lost as well. Many circumcised males resent the fact that they are not intact and were not given the choice.

Declaration of the First International Symposium on Circumcision

We recognize the inherent right of all human beings to an intact body. Without religious or racial prejudice, we affirm this basic human right.

We recognize that the foreskin, clitoris, and labia are normal, functional parts of the human body.

Parents and/or guardians do not have the right to consent to the surgical removal or modification of their children’s normal genitalia.

Physicians and other healthcare providers have a responsibility to refuse to remove or mutilate normal parts of the body.

The only persons who may consent to medically unnecessary procedures upon themselves are individuals who have reached the age of consent (adulthood), and then only after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of the procedure.

We categorically state that circumcision has unrecognized victims.

In view of the serious physical and psychological consequences that we have witnessed in victims of circumcision, we hereby oppose the performance of a single additional unnecessary foreskin, clitoral, or labial amputation procedure.

We oppose any further studies that involve the performance of the circumcision procedure upon unconsenting minors. We support any further studies that involve identification of the effects of circumcision.

Physicians and other healthcare providers do have a responsibility to teach hygiene and the care of normal parts of the body and to explain their normal anatomical and physiological development and function throughout life.

We place the medical community on notice that it is being held accountable for misconstruing the scientific database available on human circumcision in the world today.

Physicians who practice routine circumcision are violating the first maxim of medical practice, “Primum Non Nocere” (“First, Do No Harm”), and anyone practicing genital mutilation is violating Article V of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment…”  –  Adopted by the General Assembly, March 3, 1989 Anaheim, California USA

Conclusion

The truth is simple. There was no flaw that surgery can improve upon in the design of our genitals. The foreskin protects the penis. During infancy, the foreskin is adhered to the glans, protecting it from urine, feces, and friction from diapers. In later years, its protective cover keeps the glans moist and the skin soft while protecting it from trauma and injury, whereas unprotected glans become dry, calloused and desensitized. The two other functions of the foreskin are sensory and sexual. An intact penis is four times more sensitive than a circumcised penis. Genital integrity is the right of every human being. It’s time we put an end to this barbaric practice.

Sources:

• Where We Stand – Healthy Children.org
• Female genital mutilation – NHS Choices
• Jewish Practices & Rituals: Circumcision – Brit Milah – Jewish Virtual Library
• Penile Cancer – American Cancer Society
• HPV-Associated Penile Cancer Rates by Race and Ethnicity – CDC
• Male Circumcision – CDC Fact Sheet
• Personal Hygiene : Cleanliness is Half of Faith – The Religion of Islam
• Male circumcision: assessment of health benefits and risks; Stephen Moses, Robert C Bailey, Allan R Ronald – Departments of Medical Microbiology, Community Health Sciences and Medicine, University
• of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
• Male circumcision and common sexually transmissible diseases in a developed nation setting B Donovan, I Bassett, N J Bodsworth, Genitourin Med 1994;70:317-320