By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
State taking away medical freedoms

Editor, Ceres Courier,

I am writing this letter regarding SB277, the California State Senate bill that would take away a parent and doctor's medical freedom.

I am a senior research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and I have been conducting research for the past eight years on the links between environmental chemicals and autism. My research has led me to believe that vaccines are a major contributory factor in autism, particularly the aluminum, glutamate and formaldehyde that are present in many of the vaccines. I have identied glyphosate, the active ingredient in the pervasive herbicide, Roundup, as being synergistically toxic with these ingredients found in vaccines. For example, analysis of data from the Center for Disease Control's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reveals that the MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella) shows many more instances of severe adverse reactions in the reports from 2002 to 2015 than in the reports from 1990 to 2002. These reactions include hospitalization, seizures, shortness of breath, hives, and eczema. These same symptoms are found in allergic reactions to monosodium glutamate. I believe the reason is that there is much more glyphosate in the food supply in the later years, and the glyphosate makes the glutamate in MMR far more dangerous to the children. I have published papers in peer-reviewed scientic journals explaining the mechanism.

The United States, despite the massive amounts we spend on healthcare, has a dismal record in terms of health outcomes. We are dead last among industrialized nations on the rate of death on the rst day of life. Over half of our children suffer from at least one chronic condition such as asthma, food allergies, eczema, ADHD, autism, diabetes, obesity, etc. We require more vaccines than any other nation in the world, yet clearly this is not yielding any obvious health benets to our children.

While you may think that the benets for vaccination outweigh the risks, the science does not support this view. For example, infection with measles as a child carries a very low risk of death or disability, but affords a permanent immunity against future measles infection, which, importantly, can be transferred to an infant through breast milk. Infants are otherwise vulnerable to infection, because their immune system is immature, and measles is a much more serious disease in an infant than in an older child. By contrast, vaccination with MMR does not afford permanent protection, so infants born to vaccinated moms are often not protected by maternal antibodies. Neither vaccination of the mother during pregnancy nor vaccination of the young infant are viable options. There is potential harm to the fetus and/or infant from the glutamate in MMR, a known neurotoxin.

An increasing number of parents are becoming aware of the dangers vaccines pose to their children's health, and these parents should have the right to refuse vaccination for their children. America is known as the "land of the free," yet, remarkably, we are becoming less and less free to make informed choices on our children's health and safety. "First do no harm" is a mantra for medical intervention, yet it seems that it does not apply to vaccination. This bill, if passed, will take us in the wrong direction towards medical tyranny rather than health freedom.

Stephanie Seneff

LETTERS POLICY: Letters to the editor will be considered for publication but must be signed and include contact information. Letters should contain 250 words or less and be void of libelous statements. Letters may be sent to The Ceres Courier, 138 S. Center Street, Turlock CA 95380 or emailed to