There is a theory often spoken of in the circles I’m a part of and a lot of times it’s posed as a question: “are we trading childhood infections for chronic disease?”

I tend to think that we are. For example in the 60s when measles rates were impacting an estimated 3 to 4 million cases a year [1], I wonder what the rates for childhood cancers, neurological issues, and autoimmune diseases were. I’ve been trying to find any evidence that we even collected data on cancer rates in children at that point and all I can find are articles celebrating the fact that 84% of cancers in children are now survived by “five years or more.” [2]

I don’t want to minimize the success of better treatments and lives saved by the advances in technology etc. It does however bother me that our measure for success is 5 years. If the cancer comes back and ends up killing the child after that timeframe, it is still considered a success. And even if most children go on to live into adulthood, we cannot ignore that the rates are still rising. I doubt the 60s saw annual rates of 1 in 285. [3]

Chronic disease is on the rise in children. “An estimated 43% of US children (32 million) currently have at least 1 of 20 chronic health conditions assessed, increasing to 54.1% when overweight, obesity, or being at risk for developmental delays are included.” [4] The 20 chronic health conditions were as follows:

  1. learning disability
  2. ADHD
  3. depression
  4. anxiety
  5. conduct or behavioral problems
  6. ASD (autism spectrum disorder)
  7. developmental delay
  8. speech problems
  9. Tourette’s syndrome
  10. asthma
  11. diabetes
  12. epilepsy or seizure disorder
  13. hearing problems
  14. vision disorder
  15. joints or bone problems
  16. brain injury or concussion
  17. environmental allergies
  18. food or digestive allergies
  19. migraines
  20. chronic ear infections

If you’ve read as many vaccine package inserts as I have, many of these diagnoses will be quite familiar from their post marketing surveillance sections.

Cancer isn’t mentioned in this study, but most vaccines have a 13.1 section that states, “…has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential or impairment of fertility.” [5]

Some package inserts don’t have a number 13 section anymore. The numbers skip from 12.6 to 14. [6] But even if they don’t have that disclaimer, the fact remains that despite many carcinogenic ingredients, no vaccine is tested long enough to answer this question, and no studies have been done to even look into this. “You can’t find what you don’t look for” seems to be the motto.

Besides the fact that some of these vaccines may be contributing to the rise in childhood chronic conditions, what if some of the infections were actually protective? There’s actually an entire library of studies showing that childhood infections decrease your risk for cancer later on in life. Let’s list at least a few.

“In one of the largest studies to date, an international consortium led by researchers in the Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center at Baylor College of Medicine reported an inverse relationship between a history of chicken pox and glioma, a type of brain cancer, meaning that children who have had the chicken pox may be less likely to develop brain cancer. They found a 21 percent reduced risk of developing glioma with a positive history of chicken pox. Furthermore, they identified the protective effect was greater in higher grade gliomas.[7,8]

History of mumps infection provides immunity against a certain type of ovarian cancer. [9]

Albonico et al found that adults are significantly protected against non-breast cancers — genital, prostate, gastrointestinal, skin, lung, ear-nose-throat, and others — if they contracted measles (odds ratio, OR = 0.45), rubella (OR = 0.38) or chickenpox (OR = 0.62) earlier in life.[10]

Montella et al found that contracting measles in childhood reduces the risk of developing lymphatic cancer in adulthood. [11]

Glaser et al also found that lymph cancer is significantly more likely in adults who were not infected with measles, mumps or rubella in childhood. [12]

“Results: Increasing levels of social activity were associated with consistent reductions in risk of ALL (acute lymphoblastic leukemia). Conclusion: These results support the hypothesis that reduced exposure to infection in the first few months of life increases the risk of developing acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.” [13]

“Wild-type varicella zoster infection (WTVZV) up to 8 yr of age has been shown to protect against atopic dermatitis (AD) and asthma. Results: WTVZV up to 8 yr of age is associated with decreased odds of subsequent asthma…allergic rhinoconjunctivitis…and AD…decreased total serum IgE levels. WTVZV was associated with decreased allergic sensitization.” [14]

“We observed that a higher number of infections was associated with a lower risk of mortality from CVD (cardiovascular disease). This result can also be explained by the ‘hygiene hypothesis’. The more opportunities for infections during childhood produce and activate more regulatory T cells, which leads to the suppression of atherosclerosis. Conclusions: Measles and mumps, especially in case of both infections, were associated with lower risks of mortality from atherosclerotic CVD.”[15]

“Childhood contagious diseases had a protecting effect against CHD (coronary heart disease). Conclusions: Protection from infections usually suffered during the childhood before the era of MMR vaccination may predispose the individual to CHD.” [16]

Considering that heart disease is the number one killer in the US (one person dies of it every 36 seconds, it accounts for 1 in every 4 deaths—diagnoses now starting at the age of 20—and costs us over 300 billion annually), knowing that childhood infections prevent against it is important. [17] One wonders how many lives would have been saved if we hadn’t declared war on childhood infections over the past few decades.

And no, people don’t have to die from measles, mumps, chicken pox, or rubella. The deaths were negligible even when they were endemic and we didn’t have vaccines. In fact, there is a study from 1977 that used to be required reading for medical students proving that surgeries, vaccines, and antibiotics combined were responsible for only 1% (and if they’re very generous, 3.5%) of the lowering of all cause mortality from 1900 on. [18] Even if vaccines had more of an impact than that, we now have treatment options we didn’t have back then and there’s a whole portion of our society who confidently treat these infections at home with absolutely no repercussions. Even if we all stopped vaccinating tomorrow I have my doubts that the death rates would be even as high as they were before vaccines were introduced which again, were nothing compared to the rates of heart disease, or cancer now. [19]

Here are the actual numbers put together by my favorite duo at

Reminder that for CHILDREN the rate of cancer from 0-20 years, is 1 in 285 right now. I think those numbers would fall in fatality and serious harm. There are very few that don’t have lasting effects from chemo itself. There are some stats that point to the fact that nearly 100% of people will have a diagnosis of cancer in their lifetime at some point.

I know there are many factors that contribute to the chronic diseases that kill so many of us, and I’m not saying it would all go away if we went back to letting these infections happen in childhood like they were meant to, but it is interesting that these infections we are taught to fear have protective benefits against the two top killers in our society. Heart disease and cancer.

The main focus these days is a tunnel vision, fear-induced obsession with stomping out all infectious disease as if all pathogens are the biggest, most evil threat to our health, when a closer look at the data reveals that they’re not all bad, they even have some benefits, and it also begs the question, why aren’t we doing more to prevent heart disease and cancer? Could it be because they’re both making billions of dollars in profits for pharmaceutical companies annually?

And we still haven’t touched on SIDS, neurological problems, and autoimmune conditions. All exponentially on the rise in our children. Autism alone is a huge topic we should all be discussing but is barely even on anyone’s radar until they themselves are touched by it. You can read my thoughts on that topic here.

Cancer and autism alone are both largely malfunctions of a person’s immune system. Does it not make sense we should be asking questions of the products designed to trick our immune systems given 72 times from when we’re inside the womb until we’re 18?

I’m once again thanking God for his grace in leading me down the path that shook the foundations of my belief in the system of allopathic medicine and has taught me greater reliance on him and the things he has placed in nature to give us health and the gumption to take responsibility for the truth versus outsourcing that knowledge to well-meaning, but sometimes very ignorant experts and doctors. I welcome childhood infections as a challenge to use the tools I’ve accumulated and the knowledge I’ve incorporated. Fear dissolves as knowledge builds and feeling empowered as a mom is absolutely the best! So thankful to be a part of the community that is turning away from dependency on a system that is focused on so many of the wrong things and has very little to offer in the form of solutions that actually contribute to healing or health. Come join us. 😉


One thought on “What is the Trade Off?

  1. Thank you once again for writing about an important topic. It SHOULD be important to everyone but what can you say …. Blessings to you as you bless others. Because some do want to hear these things. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s