Customer Reviews

4.5 out of 5 stars
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Showing 1-10 of 31 reviews(1 star)show all reviews
141 of 207 people found the following review helpful
on March 6, 2014
Dr. Sears is a genius. No, not in an Albert Einstein or Pablo Picasso kind of way. He's more of an Oprah or a Madonna kind of genius. He's a genius because he has written a book that capitalizes on the vaccine-fearing, anti-establishment mood of the zeitgeist. The book tells parents what they desperately want to hear, and that has made it an overnight success.

Dr. Robert Sears is perhaps one of the best-known pediatricians in the country. The youngest son of Dr. Bill Sears, the prolific parent book writer and creator of, Dr. Bob has become the bane of many a pediatrician's existence. He has contributed to his family dynasty by co-authoring several books, adding content to the family website, and making myriad TV appearances to offer his sage advice. But Dr. Bob is best known for his best-selling The Vaccine Book: Making the Right Decision for your Child. This book, or at least notes from it, now accompanies many confused and concerned parents to the pediatrician's office. Parents who have been misled by the onslaught of vaccine misinformation and fear-mongering feel comforted and supported by the advice of Dr. Sears, who assures parents that there is a safer, more sensible way to vaccinate. He wants parents to make their own "informed" decisions about whether or how to proceed with vaccinating their children, making sure to let them know that if they do choose to vaccinate, he knows the safest way to do it. And for $13.99 (paperback), he'll share it with them.

In the final chapter of his book (entitled "What should you do now?"), after reinforcing the common vaccine myths of the day, Dr. Sears presents his readers with "Dr. Bob's Alternative Vaccine Schedule." He places this side-by-side with the schedule recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. He then explains why his schedule is a safer choice for parents who chose to vaccinate their children. Without a doubt, the alternative vaccine schedule is among the more damaging aspects of this book. It's the part that gets brought along to the pediatrician's office and presented as the the plan going forward for many parents today. But the book is also dangerous in the way in which it validates the pervasive myths that are currently scaring parents into making ill-informed decisions for their children. Dr. Sears discusses these now common parental concerns, but instead of countering them with sound science, he lets them stand on their own as valid. He points out that most doctors are ill-equipped to discuss vaccines with parents, being poorly trained in the science of vaccine risks and benefits. He then claims to be a newly self-taught vaccine expert, a laughable conceit given the degree to which he misunderstands the science he purports to have read, and in the way he downplays the true dangers of the vaccine-preventable diseases he discusses in his book. He then provides parents with what he views as rational alternatives to the recommended vaccination schedule, a schedule designed by the country's true authorities on vaccinology, childhood infectious disease, and epidemiology.

So what does Dr. Sears have to say, exactly, about the risks of vaccines, and just how out of touch is he with medical science and epidemiology?


Public versus individual health

It is not uncommon for people to be confused about how public health measures relate to personal or individual health. With regard to vaccines, some feel that recommendations made "for the good of the public " may not necessarily be for the good of the individual. Some feel that while they may understand the rationale for vaccinating on a societal level, they are unwilling or afraid to place the burden of potential vaccine risks on their child. Dr. Sears falls for this line of thinking, and leads parents to believe that certain vaccines protect the community but not the individual child. He gives polio as an example, stating that the risk of polio is zero, and that therefore the vaccine does not protect the individual child from disease. This, of course, is untrue. While new cases of polio no longer arise in the United States (thanks to the success of the polio vaccine) they still do in other areas of the world. As is true for many infectious diseases, imported cases and potential outbreaks are a quick airplane flight away. The more unvaccinated children we have, the more likely an imported case will lead to larger outbreaks of disease. So yes, vaccinating protects the individual child as well as the community at large. Ironically, polio would likely have been eradicated from the earth by 2002 had it not been for the propagation of a vaccine myth. In the impoverished Indian state of Uttar Pradesh (which, in the year 2000, accounted for 68% of all polio cases in the world), a myth that the polio vaccination campaign was really a government conspiracy to sterilize children prevented that campaign from accomplishing its true mission of ridding the world of this horrible disease.

Of course herd immunity, an epidemiological concept, is of vital importance to public health. We know that Dr. Sears understands at least this much, because he advises parents who fear giving their children the MMR vaccine not to tell their neighbors, lest too many parents develop similar fears. He warns that an increasing number of unvaccinated children will result in a resurgence of the disease. He couldn't be more correct. Enlarging pockets of unimmunized and underimmunized children around the country have already resulted in outbreaks of disease. These vaccine-preventable outbreaks are just harbingers of worse outbreaks yet to come, should this trend continue.

Throughout his book Dr. Sears highlights common parental concerns about vaccines. He follows these not with fact-based discussions, but with subtle (and often not so subtle) words of reinforcement. For example, Dr. Sears often downplays the potential danger of vaccine preventable diseases, or the risk of infection for the unimmunized child. Although the book is rife with such misinformation, I will limit my discussion to just a few examples to give a sense of the distortions involved.


In his chapter on the DTaP vaccine (against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis), in the "Reasons some people choose not to get this vaccine" section, Dr. Sears states:

In truth, tetanus is not an infant disease...Also, diphtheria is virtually non-existent in the United States. So, one could create a logical argument that a baby could skip the tetanus and diphtheria shots for a few years and be just fine.

tetanus in infant tetanus in infant

Infants with tetanus

Perhaps Dr. Sears is unaware that tetanus is indeed a disease of infants, and potentially of anyone. And to make the case that because diphtheria (or any infectious disease) is not endemic to the United States it is therefore not a threat to unimmunized children, betrays Dr. Sears' naivete when it comes to basic principles of epidemiology and infectious disease. Epidemiology and history has shown us that when vaccination rates drop sufficiently, outbreaks of seemingly vanquished diseases return with a vengeance. Diphtheria is no exception. In the newly independent states of the former Soviet Union, declining childhood and adult vaccination rates against diphtheria have played a major role in a massive epidemic of that deadly disease. And as we see more and more pockets of unvaccinated children around this country, we are beginning to see the reemergence of horrific vaccine preventable diseases. Recent outbreaks of invasive Hib disease and of measles should remind us how important it is to maintain our herd immunity against these scourges of the not-so-distant past. Of course, Dr. Sears never challenges the unsupported concerns about vaccine risks. He simply restates these concerns, and then adds fuel to the fire, supporting the irrational fears that led to this growing trend of underimmunization.

Epidemiological missteps

Dr. Sears' understanding of epidemiology and vaccine adverse event surveillance is startlingly poor. He purports to break new ground by doing the first ever statistical vaccine risk-benefit analysis for parents. Unfortunately, his calculations are meaningless as he misunderstands the most basic concepts, like cause-and effect, and fails to grasp the significance of vaccination rates in determining the likelihood of contracting a vaccine-preventable disease. Dr. Sears bases the risk of a child suffering a severe vaccine reaction on his analysis of VAERS data. VAERS (the CDC's Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) is a passive surveillance system that everyone (doctors and patients alike) is encouraged to use anytime a vaccination is followed by an adverse event, whether or not they suspect the vaccine is the actual cause of the event. Being an open, voluntary, passive reporting system, VAERS is susceptible to fraud and abuse, as anyone can submit a report. The purpose of the system is to give a very broad look at possible unforeseen events related to vaccination. It is a screening tool, from which trends can be observed, possibly triggering true validated analyses. Raw VAERS data simply cannot be used to analyze the risk of vaccine reactions, because the data does not tell us anything about causality. Despite this, Dr. Sears and others continue to misuse VAERS data, representing it as a true estimate of vaccine adverse events. To quote the CDC,

The purpose of VAERS is to detect possible signals of adverse events associated with vaccines. Additional scientific investigations are almost always required to properly validate signals from VAERS and establish a cause and effect relationship between a vaccine and an adverse event.

But Dr. Sears uses VAERS data to come to the conclusion that "for about every 100,000 doses [of vaccine], one person suffered a severe reaction." He fails to mention that VAERS data tells us absolutely nothing about the risk of developing a vaccine reaction, severe or not. He then takes this number and, by assuming every vaccine dose has the same risk attached to it of creating a severe reaction, determines that a child has a 1/100,000 chance of developing a severe reaction for each vaccine dose he receives. By inappropriately and misleadingly using VAERS data, Dr. Sears concludes that,

The risk that any one child will suffer a severe reaction over the entire, twelve-year vaccine schedule is about 1 in 2600.

He then calculates that,

The risk of a child having a severe case of a vaccine-preventable disease is about 1 in 600 each year for all childhood diseases grouped together.

And then asks parents the ultimate question, concluding with an example of his trade-marked, passive-aggressiveness,

Is vaccinating to protect against all these diseases worth the risk of side effects? That's the million dollar question.

Of course, the answer is so overwhelmingly "yes" that it's difficult to conjure up the energy to respond to Dr. Sears' misleading analysis. Not only does he start his statistical sleight-of-hand by inappropriately using VAERS data, he then calculates the risk of acquiring a vaccine preventable disease using current disease incidence rates. What he doesn't acknowledge is that those rates are predicated on current vaccination rates. The reason a child today is at low risk for contracting these diseases is precisely because our vaccination rates are so high!


Dr. Sears fails to mention that, while the incidence of severe invasive Hib disease is currently very low, it was actually common in the pre-vaccine era. In the years before the introduction of the vaccine in 1987, approximately 1 in 200 children below the age of 5 acquired invasive Hib disease. He admits that the vaccine is responsible for keeping the disease at bay, but then states,

HIB is a bad bug. Fortunately , it's also a rare bug, so rare that I haven't seen a single case in ten years...Since the disease is so rare, HIB isn't the most critical vaccine.

If parents follow the extremely dangerous, backwards logic of Dr. Sears, we are certain to see the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases rise, as we are now just beginning to see in the US. Rest assured, it doesn't take long for a disease to reemerge once vaccination rates drop.


Dr. Sears' discussion of measles consists of a series of downplayed statements. He describes the rash as one that "can look similar to rashes...of other diseases, so its not easy for a doctor, much less a parent, to recognize." And he states that the disease is "transmitted like the common cold". The clinical presentation of measles is striking and very difficult to mistake for any other illness. As I was taught during my residency, there's no such thing as a mild case of measles. Every child with the disease is very ill appearing. And, while it is transmitted by respiratory droplets like the common cold, it seems the sole reason for making this statement is, again, to liken it to other, less dangerous viral infections. In answer to his self-posed question "Is measles serious?", Dr. Sears replies,

Usually not. Most cases, especially in children, pass within a week or so without any trouble. However, approximately 1 in 1000 cases is fatal...Now that measles is rare, many years go by without any fatalities.

He then makes the astoundingly misleading statement,

The possible complications of measles, mumps, or rubella are very similar to the side effect of the vaccines themselves.

Because I can't fathom he is that ignorant of the facts, I am inclined to believe that Dr. Sears is simply being deceitful. Here are the facts about the complications of measles:
One in 1000 cases of measles results in encephalitis, with a high rate of permanent neurological complications in those who survive.
Approximately five percent develop pneumonia.
The fatality rate is between one and three per 1000 cases.
Contrary to Dr. Sears' statement, death is most commonly seen in infants with measles.
Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE) is a rare complication of measles infection that occurs years after the illness in approximately 10 of every 100,000 cases.

Here are the facts about complications of the measles vaccine:
It causes fever and a mild rash in 5-15% of recipients.
0.03% will have a febrile seizure - likely not a result of the vaccine itself, but simply a child's individual predisposition to febrile seizures.
One in 10,000 children will have a more serious event following the vaccine, such as a change in alertness, a drop in blood pressure, or a severe allergic reaction.
Approximately 1 in 25,000 cases is associated with an asymptomatic drop in the blood platelet count, which quickly returns to normal without any consequences.

Dr. Sears uses reactions listed in the vaccine package insert as if they are true vaccine side effects. This is analogous to using VAERS data to draw conclusions about vaccine reactions, since there is no evidence that any of these are causally related. Most side effects listed in package inserts occur at the same rate as background or placebo rates. Nevertheless, Dr. Sears goes out of his way to reinforce parental concerns, even though the facts are right at his fingertips. The section entitled "Reasons some people choose not to get this vaccine", that occurs at the end of each vaccine discussion, further reinforces parental fears by simply restating parental concerns with no attempt at setting the facts straight. In a box at the end of his discussion of the hepatitis B vaccine, he does attempt to explain the concept that temporality does not imply causality. Ironically, he states in this explanation,

Parents who have watched helplessly as their child develops neurological problems within weeks of being vaccinated will probably always be 100 percent convinced that the vaccine caused the problems. The fact that neurological complications are listed in the product inserts lends credibility to their case.

And so does Dr. Sears with the insidious, misleading messages he uses in his book. He concludes his discussion of causality with this confused statement,

I'm sure the truth of the matter is somewhere between causality and coincidence. Hopefully someday we will know for sure which side effects are truly vaccine related.

Of course we will never "know for sure" if every report of an extremely rare event following a vaccine is causally related or not. We continue to monitor trends and conduct rigorous surveillance, and follow that with sound epidemiological studies when concerns arise. This is why we can say, with good confidence, that these vaccines are extremely safe, and that Dr. Sears' concerns and equivocations are misleading at best.


Throughout his book, Dr. Sears discusses the common fears concerning vaccine dangers, never correcting when these fears are based on myth or misinformation. Rather, he presents them in a "we just don't know enough" manner (even when we do), or as matters of fact (even when they're not). Dr. Sears raises the concern in his book that the recommended schedule of childhood vaccines may pose a danger. He suggests that we just don't know if the chemicals contained in the vaccines (which he lists in alarming fashion) may be too great of a burden for the developing child.


In the very first page of the book's preface, Dr. Sears tells his readers that he is "not going to discuss, at length, mercury or thimerosal in vaccines because, thankfully, these have been taken out of virtually all vaccines" (my emphasis). This is followed by more language that makes it clear he believes thimerosal wasa dangerous additive, and that the little remaining thimerosal in the vaccine supply (contained in one form of the influenza vaccine) is still a risk. Of course, we know that the thimerosal in vaccines was unlikely to ever have been a danger to children, but Dr. Sears uses the same old misinterpretations of the science and conspiracy theories to arrive at the conclusion that it was. In fact he point blank states that "vaccine manufacturers knew that we were overdosing babies with mercury, but no one in the medical community realized the possible implications for almost ten years." This kind of fear mongering is no different than that spewed by the folks at Generation Rescue, and lacks any basis in science. In his section on vaccine ingredients, Dr. Sears (again, either naively or dishonestly) discusses the rise in the rate of autism diagnoses as possibly a result of thimerosal in vaccines. He cites the same tired and poor references (and an article from the LA Times) we've heard before from the likes of Jenny McCarthy, and then asks "so who do we believe?". Again, that question is left hanging.


Of particular concern to Dr. Sears is the potential dangers of aluminum, which has become his new post-thimerosal villain. Although he worries aloud in his book that "aluminum may end up being another thimerosal", Dr. Sears is unaware that such a comparison doesn't exactly strike fear in the hearts of the scientific community.

Many vaccines contain aluminum as an adjuvant. An adjuvant is a substance that boosts the ability of a vaccine to induce an immune response. It acts locally at the site of injection, as a signal to the immune system, drawing a heightened response to the injected vaccine. Ironically, without adjuvants we would need a larger dose of the vaccine to induce an immune response. I doubt that would go over well in anti-vaccine circles.

Unfortunately, Dr. Sears' concerns about aluminum are the result of a distorted reading of what is known about aluminum toxicity and the risk of vaccines in children. In discussing "controversial ingredients", he states

...some studies indicate that when too many aluminum-containing vaccines are given at once, toxic effects can occur.

In fact, no such studies exist. He does correctly state that there is very little known about the pharmacokinetics of intramuscularly injected aluminum as it occurs in vaccine adjuvants, but he goes on to distort what we do know about aluminum toxicity into a rationale to fear our current vaccine supply and schedule. For instance, we know that aluminum has been blamed for producing neurotoxicity in some patients with renal failure on long-term dialysis, and in some extremely premature infants given prolonged courses of aluminum-containing intravenous nutritional solutions. But this is not comparable to the exposure of healthy infants to adjuvant-containing vaccines given intramuscularly on a few, discrete occurrences over a period of months. Similar to the way the safety data for methylmercury is often incorrectly applied to the ethylmercury in thimerosal (and incorrect inferences of toxicity made), Dr. Sears uses safety limits set for something else, and incorrectly applies them to the aluminum in vaccine adjuvants.

Dr. Sears uses the FDA's maximum permissible level (MPL) of aluminum for large volume bags of intravenous fluids given chronically to premature infants (25 µg/L), and extrapolates it to adjuvant-containing vaccines. He also uses the number 5 µg/kg/day as the amount of aluminum found to cause toxicity in some premature infants receiving intravenous feeding solutions that contain aluminum. What he doesn't mention is that the 25 µg/L number comes from studies showing that this concentration produces no tissue aluminum loading, and that it was chosen to allow room for other exposures. In fact, it is estimated that the aluminum in these intravenous feeding solutions accounts for only 10-15% of the total parenteral aluminum intake per kg body weight that premature infants receive in a given day while in intensive care. The number was set low to leave room for the other sources of parenteral aluminum these infants receive. Still, Dr. Sears uses this number as his standard against which he compares the aluminum content of vaccines. This is misleading for a number of reasons. First, the 25 µg/L MPL for parenteral feeding bags says nothing about the maximum amount of aluminum that can be safely injected. This is obvious as the number is expressed as a concentration, not as an absolute amount of aluminum. The average premature infant would likely receive 100 ml/kg/day of solution, and therefore roughly 2.5-5 µg per day of aluminum from this source. Again, accounting for only about 10-15% of the parenteral aluminum the infant would receive in a given day. Dr. Sears does acknowledge that the number isn't a maximum permissible amount of aluminum for injection, but he uses it anyway stating, in essence, that it's all we've got. But it isn't all we've got, as we shall see in a moment.

The fact that these intravenous, aluminum-containing solutions are administered continuously over long periods of time, whereas vaccines are administered in discrete unit doses at intervals spaced out over time, is also not taken into consideration in Dr. Sears' discussion. But his use of the FDA limits for intravenous feeding solutions is misleading also because it ignores the difference between intravenous and intramuscular or subcutaneous injection of aluminum, as in the case of vaccines. In fact there is evidence, which Dr. Sears must have missed in his exhaustive review of the literature, that the aluminum from vaccines behaves differently than intravenously administered aluminum, and that the body burden of aluminum from vaccines is not so concerning when placed in the context of the background body burden of aluminum.

One piece of evidence that the aluminum in vaccines is handled by the body quite differently than the aluminum in intravenous solutions comes from studies looking at the intramuscular injection of aluminum-containing adjuvants into rabbits. Rather than entering the blood stream directly and accumulating in tissues, as with intravenously injected aluminum, intramuscularly injected aluminum-containing adjuvants are first dissolved by organic acids in the interstitial fluids, and are then rapidly eliminated.

Another reassuring look at aluminum exposure from vaccines comes from an analysis by Keith, et al. from the ATSDR. They looked very closely at the the way in which all sources of aluminum exposure in the infant contribute to the total body burden of aluminum, including inhalation, oral, dermal, and vaccine exposures. They took into consideration uptake, transfer from the blood, release from the injection site, distribution patterns, and retention and elimination rates of aluminum. They used the Priest formula to assess the fate of aluminum once it has entered the body via any route.
R = 0.354dt−0 .32 (where R is the retained fraction, d the uptake dose in mg Al, and t the time in days following uptake. The equation is summed for repetitive intakes such as with multiple vaccinations.)

Comparison of the aluminum body burden from vaccines to that from ingested breast milk, in relation to the oral MRL for aluminum for infants at the 5th and 50th percentiles for weight, is shown in the figure below (taken from the original article). The analysis assumes injections of vaccines according to the following schedule, with the corresponding aluminum content:
Birth: Hep B (250 µg)
2 months: Hep B + DTaP (1100 µg)
4 months: DTaP (850 µg)
6 months: Hep B + DTaP (1100 µg)
12 months: DTaP (850 µg)

While this leaves out the PCV and Hib vaccines, only one brand of Hib vaccine contains aluminum, and the PCV vaccine contains only 125 µg of aluminum. Thus, this analysis accounts for the bulk of the aluminum that comes from the vaccine series.

Aluminum body burden

As can be seen in the figure, aluminum spikes occur on the day of injection, followed by rapid elimination within a few days. Despite slight and brief overlaps between the vaccine and MRL curves at the time of vaccination, the vaccine curves always fall between the dietary intake curves and the MRL curves. The authors conclude that, in the context of the overall body burden of aluminum with which infants are born and which is added to by ongoing oral, inhalational and parenteral sources, vaccines are likely to constitute only a minor, transient part.

While there is good reason to be confident that the aluminum in vaccines is not the dreaded neurotoxin Dr. Sears fears it is, in his book he suggests otherwise. His mantra is that there are now so many vaccines in the routine schedule that we are overloading our children's bodies with toxic aluminum. This is neither borne out by the science, nor is it likely given what we know about aluminum and the way in which children are exposed via vaccinations.

1111 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
31 of 46 people found the following review helpful
on February 6, 2015
Preying on the worries and fears of new parents by shoveling them a bunch of misinformation. Doctors and researchers have spent decades researching the optimal schedule for administering these scientifically proven safe medicines. Please don't give this man your money and please, please vaccinate your kids.
11 commentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
54 of 81 people found the following review helpful
on February 9, 2015
Please read about the overwhelmingly evidence not cited by Robert Sears that says alternative vaccine schedules are not in the best interests of your child. His muted treatment of the dangers of disease outbreaks is troubling. Do research about the undervaccinated child who started a measles outbreak in southern CA and was a patient of Sears.
88 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
43 of 65 people found the following review helpful
on February 9, 2015
Wikipedia Entry on Dr Bob Sears:
"In 2008, an "intentionally undervaccinated" seven-year-old boy— a patient of Sears — was identified as the index patient who started a measles epidemic in 2008, an epidemic which was the largest outbreak in San Diego since 1991 The epidemic "resulted in 839 exposed persons, 11 additional cases (all in unvaccinated children), and the hospitalization of an infant too young to be vaccinated....[with] a net public-sector cost of $10,376 per case.... 48 children too young to be vaccinated were quarantined, at an average family cost of $775 per child."
".... less than coincidental that Orange County, California, the same county where Sears practices, has "reported the highest rate of measles in the state last year. It’s also home to some of the state’s highest numbers of unvaccinated children. Of the 20 people infected by the current outbreak [at Disneyland], at least 15 were not vaccinated."
33 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
7 of 11 people found the following review helpful
on April 18, 2015
We are certainly all coming from a place of love and concern for the health and safety of our children when we explore issues relating to their health. However, withholding vaccines is dangerous, and there is no scientific proof for an extended schedule. However, Dr. Sears has a serious financial stake in fanning the flames of this debate. Please read this brief paper from the American Academy of Pediatrics that outlines the problems with Dr. Sears' approach before buying this book or requesting an extended vaccine schedule for your child.

With recent outbreaks of infectious diseases due to the reduction of herd immunity, it is simply too dangerous to follow an unproven, extended vaccine schedule.
11 commentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
29 of 45 people found the following review helpful
on January 21, 2015
This book reflects nothing of evidence based medicine. It is a frightening example of the dangers of misinformation, and more disturbingly, how quickly readers assimilate it. Dr Sears is an anachronism who represents a tiny minorty of his profession.
11 commentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
72 of 113 people found the following review helpful
on December 31, 2013
As a pediatrician I remain deeply disgusted and disturbed with the harm Dr. Robert Sears has done to vaccination rates in the US in the last 10 years. This year will be the worst for the US for whooping cough since 1955 and the worst for measles in 20 years. Thanks a lot, Dr. Sears! A recent article in the peer-reviewed journal Pediatrics (published by the American Academy of Pediatrics) showed that the largest clusters of whooping cough cases in California (during the 2010 California whooping cough outbreak that killed 10 newborns too young to be able to be vaccinated) were in the areas with the highest numbers of parents electively not vaccinating their children (search engine this if you don't believe me). Why don't these parents vaccinate? Well, you can thank Dr. Sears and his books for that because he scares parents out of vaccinating with his vaccine lies and misinformation. Dr. Sears is a disgrace to pediatrics and is guilty of medical malpractice, IMHO, for his vaccine misinformation. And if you want to know just how great Dr. Robert Sears thinks he is, consider this--he won't take your medical insurance to see your child. If you want to see Dr. Bob, you must pay cash up front because he's too good to take the health insurance you work so hard to get. Remember, this book by Dr. Sears is not peer-reviewed--he wouldn't dare send it to anyone other than his editor. And remember that Dr. Bob simply made up his so-called "alternate" vaccine schedules. Despite that he has had almost a decade of promulgating his "alternate schedules", Dr. Bob apparently couldn't be bothered to test them and collect any sort of safety/efficacy data from the parents who have used them. Think about that simple fact, parents. All Dr. Sears wants is your money and his fame. He doesn't care about your child's health, for if he did he would not be an anti-vaccinator. And how do I know he truly is an anti-vaccinator? Because he is an administrator on a facebook page of a group called "Parents and Others Against Vaccination". That says it all right there. I sincerely wish Amazon would not carry or sell this book. I believe it represents a direct threat to public health. --Chris Hickie, MD, PhD
1717 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
2 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on September 7, 2014
This book should be banned. The author should know better, but just because you are a doctor, does not mean you cannot be a blithering idiot. I wonder if he can even tie his shoes. THERE ARE NO REALISTIC RISKS FROM VACCINES! If Jenny McCarthy says vaccines are bad, that's dumb. But so is she, so hopefully anyone smarter than her won't believe her shiite. But this guy should know better. I bet he's one of those idiot docs out there who gives his patients antibiotics for a common cold just to kiss parental buttocks.

The only 'scientific' study showing a 'link' between vaccines and autism was retracted and the author lost his British medical license for fraud related to his research. Don't patronize this idiot by giving him your money, much less believing him. If you do, hope your child doesn't become the next helen keller from complications of measles (look her up on wikipedia if you don't know who that is). Or die from or even kill another infant from whooping cough. Or get the incurable common flu and ruin a few weeks of your life. Or send you both to the ER at 4 in the morning with vomiting and diarrhea from stomach flu. Or get chicken pox, etc...

And don't believe his foolishness about alternative vaccination schedules. They are the way they are for a reason. Because they don't work if you don't do it the way that millions of dollars of research show it needs to be done to get the best immunity. And speaking of dollars, no, vaccines are not a money making scam. The costs to develop any medicine is very high and almost all vaccines are losing money or barely breaking even. If you don't want you kids to get 'too many' vaccines because they will cry, toughen up or drown them now. Life has many things worse than a shot waiting for them. Better toughen them up now than have them end up messed up for life because you pampered them too much.

Jeff Wade MD
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
22 of 35 people found the following review helpful
on January 26, 2015
We are a big fan of Dr. Williams Sears in our household. However, as medical researchers and engineers with two small children of our own, we are deeply disturbed by Dr. Bob Sear's "factual" rendition of vaccine knowledge in this book. People who embrace his "delayed vaccination schedule" put their children at greater risk for serious and sometimes deadly diseases, as well as for greater risk of vaccine side effects. In fact, a former patient of Dr. Bob started a measles outbreak in California.

A much better (and fact-based) vaccine book would be "Do Vaccines Cause That?!" or anything by Dr. Paul Offit.
44 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
on May 18, 2015
Very disappointed.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Customers who viewed this also viewed

What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About(TM) Children's Vaccinations
What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About(TM) Children's Vaccinations by Stephanie Cave (Paperback - March 16, 2010)


Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.

Your Recently Viewed Items and Featured Recommendations 

After viewing product detail pages, look here to find an easy way to navigate back to pages you are interested in.