Argumente gegen die routinem�ssige Mumpsimpfung

Abstract

Routine immunization against mumps was included in the MMR-elimination-programme of Switzerland despite the lack of any public health necessity. Seven years later, the theoretical presumptions of the mumps immunization campaign are challenged by practical experiences: An unnecessary vaccination proves to be of insufficient efficacy, yet associated with an unexpected high complication rate and bears thus the risk of discrediting also other immunizations in the general public. What could be considered a particular immunization failure reveals important inconsistencies of the entire MMR-mass-immunization-campaign. The project remains epidemiologically highly vulnerable and thus hazardous. Because of its constraining effects on the general population, compatibility with basic civil rights can be questioned. The reasons why some 20% of the Swiss population refuse mumps vaccination are little investigated so far. Nevertheless, research can provide important clues for further investigations in this field. As the maturation of the immune system follows learning principles, the question arises whether childhood diseases are not essential for the normal development of immunocompetence. In cancer therapy new attention is drawn to hyperthermia and thus to the healing potential of fever. And finally, there are concerns about the longterm effects of manipulations of the natural balance between man and microorganisms.

Impfpromotion in der Schweiz: von der Fragmentierung des Denkens und Handelns

“…Literatur zitiere ich hier nur beispielhaft; detaillierte Referenzen finden Sie in unseren Publikationen [27][28][29][30][31][32].…”

“…il n'y a pas, d'urgence d'un point de vue épidémiologique; -les vaccinations relèvent effectivement du libre-arbitre des parents; -la vaccination n'est pas indispensable à la plupart des enfants resp. elle n'écarte pas un danger grave pour la plupart d'entre eux; -l'efficacité des vaccinations est surévaluée; -l'utilité de certaines maladies infantiles est probablement sous-évaluée [27][28][29][30][31][32].…”