The Concept of Vaccination

by Patrick Quanten MD

We live in times that were once our future and some of us can still remember what we were promised. By now, infectious diseases would be a thing of the past. Antibiotics and a vigorous vaccination campaign would ensure a total success in the fight against infectious diseases. It is an easy copout to state that the reason for this obvious failure are people, people who refuse to vaccinate and those that are not committed enough to the project. Put the blame somewhere else if you can, why not? However, we have all been very committed to taking antibiotics and see what that resulted in: superbugs. The more we have tried to kill them the more powerful they have become. They didn't predict that one!

Predictions about vaccinations have a similar poor reality record. For the second year running the winter flu vaccination programme results deliver a very poor protection rate, told to us by the same medical authorities who are advocating this procedure. When it happened last winter they apologised to the public and they explained that the choice that was made in respect of one of the three viral ingredients turned out to be the "wrong" one. At that time they assured us that it would never happen again and that they were preparing a super-vaccine against flu for the coming winter, which would contain not three but four viral ingredients. And it is this winter we are being confronted with the true result of their actions. By their own admission it has been another failure. However, they have already announced that next winter the vaccine will be spot on. Ah well, that is all right then! You obviously know what you are doing!

What is behind these complete failures of vaccines, the return of old infectious diseases and the emergence of a whole bunch of new ones? It appears as if nothing we have undertaken against infectious diseases has had a beneficial effect in the long run. When that is the case the answer to the question "why" must be: because of a faulty thinking pattern. Nothing works because our basic concept of what infectious diseases are is wrong. We need to regroup at the beginning of this fascinating story.

Two hundred years ago a choice was made. It was decided that the origin of all infectious diseases was an invasion of a germ. An outside germ penetrates the organism and is the cause of an infectious process, which manifests in illness. From that time on we have always looked to explain our ill health through outside causes. This attitude is solely based on a choice.

At that time, science had already proven that germs originated from within the diseased tissue and spontaneously disappeared again once the tissue had recovered. The germs are feeding on the diseased cellular debris and once this food source has dried up the germs diminish and disappear. The disease within the tissue was said to be caused by sustained imbalances in life, by ongoing excessive tension and continual poisoning of the system. In other words, diseases are caused by toxicity either as a result of material overload of waste that the body has difficulty dismantling or as a result of mental overload, which causes the system to break down under the strain.

Over the following two centuries scientists have independently confirmed and reconfirmed this scientific fact. Added to which they found that almost all disease germs actually live in the body and in most cases are essential to the functioning of that body. They don't need to be hampered in their activity as that would cause damage to the smooth running of the system. So on the one hand there is mounting evidence that germs are our best friends and that they assist us in staying alive. On the other hand scientists have a continual struggle to prove definite links between the occurrence of specific germs in specific diseases. In fact, up to now nobody has ever been able to scientifically link any germ to any specific illness. A fact that is buried underneath the repetition of scary stories of ravenous monsters killing anything on their path. Fear rules the population while scientific fact rules knowledge. Fear calls for protection in the battle; knowledge brings peace.

Right at the beginning where the choice was made about what story to go with scientists had figured out how they were going to prove the story. Professor Koch, who lent his name to the bacilla that was deemed to be responsible for tuberculosis, publishes a theoretical scheme that will scientifically provide the proof that is needed to underwrite the story. This is known as the Koch's postulates. When all four are proven then and only then there is an established link between germ end disease.

  1. Every person with the specific disease should be found to harbour the said micro-organism.
  2. The said micro-organism should never occur in another disease or in a healthy person.
  3. The said micro-organism should be isolated from the diseased tissue and grown on its specific culture to prove it is alive.
  4. When such a micro-organism is injected into a healthy person it must always produce the specific disease in that person.

These postulates were accepted within the scientific community as a sound way of proving the theory. It is a fact that right up to this day these four conditions have never been met with regards to any proposed link between disease and germ. Never! Is the scientific conclusion then that there does not exist a link between a specific germ and a specific disease? The answer to that question is a firm yes. But the medical authorities still persist in their original choice and heavily promote the fear factor amongst the people they care so much about. Why is that? Because the medical profession does not use science; it promotes ideas that are useful for the health industry, their industry. The medical authorities have never embraced scientific facts brought to us in the form of quantum physics and the relativity theory. The past one hundred years they have successfully managed to ignore the scientific fact that all matter is a result of energy interactions and that matter can change instantly when the energetic field from which that matter originates is changed. In simple terms this means that the structure of the body and its function is a manifestation of forces within the person's energetic field. Anything that is not going so well within the physical shape of a person is caused by disturbances within his/her energy field. "Fixing" the physical matter of the body is not going to make the person any better!

So we shouldn't be surprised that we are not winning the fight against infectious diseases, against cancer, against depression, against dementia, against obesity or diabetes or MS. We will never win the fight simply because it isn't supposed to be a fight; it is supposed to be a symbiosis. We need to work together with all that surrounds us and all other forms of life.

At the very early stages of an epidemic, one is unable to establish a contact in which the offending germs can be passed on between the persons involved in 98% of the cases. Almost never has there been the kind of contact that is required for the germ to be spreading from one person to another. This failure has lead to incredible stories of germ survival and ingenious germ trickery to establish a plausible jump from one diseased person to the next. Plausible to those that believe in fantastic story telling, beyond the realm of nature. The more these stories are being told, strengthened by a language alien to people and brought to you by an obviously very clever person, the more engrained they become in the fabric of our lives without anybody having to prove their validity as, by now, everybody knows. Advertising is more important than truth. It is a shame that we have allowed this rule into our lives. It is criminal that they use this rule with regard to our health.

Not only is it not always possible to isolate from the diseased tissues the bacteria that are said to have caused the disease but with regards to viruses the truth is that in all those years of viral horror stories no one has managed to isolate and purify any virus at all. "Proof" of viral infections is delivered and accepted by the medical profession in a very indirect way. The occurrence of certain proteins or bits of RNA in a blood sample is all the evidence these highly intelligent people who claim responsibility for our health need. These proteins or RNA bits are said to belong to the virus although the authorities know that proteins are building blocks used in all living organisms and that RNA bits occur in all cells. There is no specificity that attaches them to specific structures. The same ones may occur under very different circumstances. In other words none of these tests are disease or viral specific! And the reality shows this. Your HIV-test is known to become positive under a variety of circumstances amongst which we note a bad cold. There is a known cross-over between positive tests and no specific scientific conclusion can actually be made on the basis of the test result. Yet they keep doing just that!

In the same way one cannot draw any conclusions from antibody testing. The occurrence of a high level of certain proteins within a blood sample - proteins that are said to be "specific" in targeting a specific virus - gives us no specific information about anything as, once again, there is a multitude of overlapping results. Furthermore, this high level of antibodies is used as evidence for the existence of the infection and exactly the same high level is used as proof of the existence of immunity, of protection against the infection. To say the least, a little bizarre, no?

So, the problem with vaccination is a fundamental one. We have been thinking about the infectious process in the wrong way. The enemy is not lying in wait outside of us. The only identifiable enemy we have lies within each and everyone of us: it is you. The disease process is a manifestation of an imbalance within life itself. This creates debris within the tissues. This rubbish needs to be removed and micro-organisms, that will feed on this debris, might be generated within the tissue itself. The conclusion is that we do not have an enemy on the outside and that we therefore do not need protection. We cannot protect ourselves. When you think you do need to be protected, you are fighting windmills, Don Quichote dela Mancha!

The concept of vaccination as a means of protection against disease is simply incorrect. If it isn't keeping you safe from infection, what makes you think it is going to prevent cancer? The promotion we are inundated with in respect of cervical cancer and the need for a vaccination programme against it is becoming ludicrous. Even specialists within their own medical field are pointing out that there has never been an established link between the Human Papiloma Virus and cervical cancer. It is a theory; read, a story. If the virus, even in their way of thinking, cannot be linked to the cancer how is a vaccine against the virus going to give you protection against developing cancer? Why try it then? Because you are oh so afraid. A frequently repeated suggestion of hope is the straw you are clutching to. The thought that that straw could possibly harm you is not allowed to enter into your head. But even worse than that is the fact that it prevents you from looking for valuable answers. As long as you do not have a way forward, a possible solution to the problem, you are desperate. As soon as someone offers you that hope you cling to it for dear life and you believe. That is the end of your search, and you are choosing to remain in the dead end street they guided you in.

Science is not capable of delivering all the answers we need, not yet. But it is very foolish not to accept and live by the facts that are known. Only living the truth as we already know it can possibly project you in the direction of finding out some more bits about the truth. When you do not incorporate the truth we know, you can never find the truth you are looking for.

What we know is that we do not need to protect ourselves against infectious diseases. If vaccination is offering you that protection it must be a lie because protection against infectious disease does not exist. The concept that we need protection is plainly wrong, proven by science. It is definitely so!

February 2016


Patrick Quanten has been a general practitioner since 1983. The combination of medical insight and extensive studies of Complementary Therapies have opened new perspectives on health care, all of which came to fruition when it blended with Yogic and Ayurvedic principles. Patrick gave up his medical licence in November 2001.
Patrick also holds qualifications in Ayurvedic Medicine, Homeopathy, Reiki, Ozon Therapy and Thai Massage. He is an expert on Ear Candling and he is also well-read in the field of other hard sciences. His life's work involves finding similarities between the Ancient Knowledge and modern Western science.

Order your copy