Last Chance To Use Your Tax Credit!!

OMF Header

Oregon’s Political Tax Credit –
Use it or Lose it by December 31!

It’s your last chance to use your Oregon Political Tax Credit and support medical freedom in Oregon. Your contribution of $25, $50 or even $100 can make a difference to our coalition as we fight to protect our rights to medical freedom and informed consent—and it doesn’t have to cost you anything!

Sound too good to be true? It’s not…

Through our tax system, the state of Oregon gives each tax-paying Oregonian a $50 gift. But you can’t keep it—you either send the money back to the state in taxes, or you donate it to a qualified political action committee like Oregonians for Medical Freedom.

If you file an Oregon tax return, you may be eligible* for the Oregon Political Tax Credit which allows you to make a contribution of up to $100 (married filing jointly, $50 individual filers) to committees like ours and receive every dollar of it back when you file your income tax return next year.

This is not a deduction. It is a tax credit. That means that if you owe money to the state at the end of the year, you will owe up to $100 less. If you are due a refund, your refund will be that much more.

You must use it before December 31, 2015! Donate online today!

You can read more about the Oregon Political Tax Credit on our website here.

*Please note, due to a recent change in Oregon law, individuals with adjusted gross income over $100,000 or joint filers with combined income exceeding $200,000 no longer qualify for the Political Tax Credit. You can consult your tax advisor for more information. 

Should I get the Tdap While Pregnant? Does My Newborn Need the Hepatitis B Vaccine?

DebateQuoteSocratesYou can’t turn on the TV, pick up a newspaper, or surf the internet without coming across the debate about childhood vaccines.

Most of these articles, posts, and testimonials make the vaccine question seem like it’s completely black or white: either you’re reading that vaccines are a miracle and of absolute necessity and you should do all the vaccines the CDC and your pediatrician recommend without question (and that you are “selfish,” and “dangerous” if you do not), or you are discovering websites and columnists who insist that vaccines are all dangerous, vaccines will kill your infant, and all vaccines are bad. These anti-vaccine sites insist that if you want your baby to be healthy, you shouldn’t do any vaccines at all.


Whether you’re a first-time parent or you have a gaggle of children already, you may be starting to wonder what to do about vaccines.

You’ve heard over and over that “vaccines are safe and effective,” but something—maybe your Mommy Instinct—is telling you to beware.

It turns out that you’re not alone.

According to a CDC-sponsored study published in the American Journal of Preventative Medicine, “Childhood Immunizations, First-Time Expectant Mothers’ Knowledge, Beliefs, Intentions, and Behaviors,” only 75 percent of new moms plan to do the vaccines according to the CDC schedule.

  • 5 percent of new moms surveyed were planning to spread out recommended vaccinations;
  • 4 percent were planning to have their child receive some vaccines;
  • 5 percent, were undecided about vaccines.

The study also found that about 70 percent of new moms were not familiar with the recommended vaccination schedule and with the number of routinely recommended vaccines.

The study concludes: “Most who were planning to delay recommended vaccinations or were undecided relied primarily on socially available sources of vaccine information, rather than information provided by a healthcare professional. Improved access to vaccine information from healthcare professionals could foster better vaccine-related knowledge…”

I am a healthcare professional. I would like to foster better vaccine-related knowledge among expectant and new parents. I am also a pro-vaccine, pro-informed consent, pro-science pediatrician. I give vaccines in my office every day and I believe that vaccines are one important tool in the medical toolbox to prevent infections that can be dangerous and sometimes even fatal.

I have also seen firsthand how vaccines can cause devastating side effects, both immediately after the injection or by damaging a baby’s long-term immune and neurological health. As much as your doctor may downplay the risk of vaccines—and for most children the risk is small—vaccine injury is real. Some babies and small children can even die as a result of an allergic reaction to vaccines or from contamination in a hot lot of vaccines.

Every vaccine is not right for every baby at the same age.

The CDC schedule is not for everyone.

Questioning the timing, safety, and efficacy of some vaccines does not make you anti-vaccine, selfish, or dangerous.

You are the parent. You have to live with the consequences of the health decisions you make for your baby. Not your doctor. Not the CDC.

The best thing you can do is to make considered vaccine decisions that are logical and make sense based on the medical needs of your family, the prevalence of vaccine-preventable diseases, and the risks, benefits, and efficacy of each vaccine. A top down, one-size-fits-all vaccination policy is not necessarily in the best interests of your baby’s health.

Here’s a secret you don’t see mentioned very often in the mainstream media: In my practice, it is often the best educated and most intelligent parents who question and alter the CDC schedule for their children. These are the moms and dads who read the scientific studies themselves, read the CDC’s website, and turn to other balanced and well referenced resources like the National Vaccine Information Center, Dr. Aviva Romm, M.D.’s website, Dr. Bob Sears, M.D.’s The Vaccine Book and Dr. Jennifer Margulis, Ph.D.’s Your Baby, Your Way.

I find it disappointing and a little baffling that so many pediatricians, OB-GYNs, and family doctors feel threatened by those well-educated and thoughtful parents who choose to delay or forego some vaccines on the current CDC schedule. Though your obstetrician or pediatrician may try to stick to the party line and push the entire schedule on you and your baby despite ample peer-reviewed evidence that this may not be the best choice, you can always say, “No, thank you. I need a little more time to consider. I do not want that vaccine at this time.”

Though I recommend parents follow the CDC schedule for some vaccines, pregnant moms should not get injections with aluminum (Tdap), which is a known neurotoxin that can cross the placenta and may harm your growing baby’s brain. Hepatitis B is a sexually transmitted disease. There is no compelling medical reason to give the hepatitis B vaccine to every newborn in America. Babies born to moms who do not have hepatitis B do not need this vaccine. You should wait until your children is a teenager and is thinking of becoming sexually active or is using intravenous drugs to get the hepatitis B vaccine series. There are numerous other recommendations I would make if I were your child’s doctor. You can learn more at and


For further information:


  1. Watch my video about avoiding toxins and staying healthy during pregnancy.
  2. Read this article by Dr. Cindy Schneider, M.D., on the flu and other vaccines during pregnancy
  3. Educate yourself and your doctor on why you should never give your child Tylenol before or after a childhood vaccine
  4. Find a vaccine-friendly doctor near you

Dr. Paul

PaulThomasDr. Paul Thomas, M.D. is an award-winning Dartmouth-trained pediatrician with nearly 30 years of experience in pediatrics. In addition to being board certified in Pediatrics, he is an expert on addiction and board certified in Addiction Medicine. His practice, Integrative Pediatrics, serves some 11,000 children in Portland, Oregon. He is the co-author of the forthcoming book, The Vaccine-Friendly Plan: Dr. Paul’s Safe and Effective Approach to Immunity and Health—from Pregnancy through Your Child’s Teen Years (Ballantine 2016).

The Measles Epidemic That Isn’t! Infectious Diseases Society of America Seems to Be in The Business of Fear-Mongering

scaredycatIn the press release, “One in 8 children at risk for measles, analysis shows,” (which you can find here… ) the Infectious Diseases Society of America plays with numbers and statistics to promote a sense that we are in some imminent risk of a measles epidemic. They lead off with, “gaps in measles vaccination rates place one in eight children at risk for becoming sick from the highly contagious illness, according to an analysis of national vaccination coverage being presented at IDWeek 2015™. Measles can lead to pneumonia, encephalitis, hospitalization and occasionally, death.”

They present that, “nearly 9 million children – infants through 17 – are susceptible to measles primarily because they haven’t received the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine, or have received only one of the two recommended doses.” Since the first MMR vaccine cannot be given until 12-15 months of age, and the second MMR is given at 4-6 years of age, and we have almost 4 million births a year in the USA, obviously there will be about 4 million who have not had the vaccine each year even when they are following the CDC schedule.

They make a big deal saying, “nearly one in four children aged three or younger are at risk, the study found.” Well if you are looking at those 0-3 years old and you have to be 12 months old to get the vaccine, then it should be 1/3 who are not vaccinated and thus at risk! We know from past studies that one vaccine is 95% effective. This leaves 5% of those who got their first vaccine on schedule at 12 months vulnerable until they get their second vaccine at age 4-6 years. The authors of this study know this, but play with these numbers to make it seem like there is some crisis on the horizon as more parents learn about the risks of the MMR and choose to delay or skip this vaccine.

A look at countries that have had significantly lower rates of immunizations, such as England in the past couple decades, shows that there are slight increases in the numbers of cases but very few deaths. We are not on the verge of some measles epidemic.

This type of “study” is no more than a ploy to frighten the population into getting the MMR on schedule regardless of your risk factors and regardless of other information that suggests the MMR may be associated with significant risks.

A look at the CDC data found here shows that the “epidemic” of measles that was blamed on Disneyland is over. Measles rates for 2015 have basically returned to baseline. We have had no deaths in the USA the past decade associated with measles infections. The Disneyland epidemic was hardly a blip on the map of measles infections.


One should remember that measles in the 1800’s was epidemic and had a high fatality rate. Prior to the introduction of the MMR in 1963, measles was almost nonexistent in the USA. While the MMR gets most of the credit for the huge reduction in measles, in fact it has been improved nutrition and sanitation that has been responsible for the eradication of measles. The book, “Dissolving Illusions, Disease, Vaccines and the Forgotten History,” by Suzanne Humphries, MD and Roman Bystrianyk provides excellent data and references for those wanting the facts.

I suspect our children and society would be better served to have the MMR being given at age 3 rather than to babies 12-15 months old, and we could then check measles titers (IgG) at age 4-6 years to determine what percentage of children might need a booster dose. This approach would result in far less side effects and probably provide more than adequate herd immunity to prevent measles from spreading through the community.

What we need from our infectious disease experts is a willingness to challenge the status quo when it comes to the vaccine schedule. We need to look at long term comparative schedules, and track immunity and side effects from vaccines. Sadly, vaccines are added, and added, and then more are added to the CDC schedule. There is never a long term analysis of how children do who are unvaccinated, partially vaccinated, or fully vaccinated. Until such studies are done, it seems we are stuck with the best minds being forced to come up with reasons we should continue business as usual and give all the vaccines to all the children.

We hear over and over the mantra, “vaccines are safe and effective”. Of course everyone knows that some children suffer catastrophic side effects. Some are triggered into autism. Some die. Many are suffering from a new syndrome ASIA (Autoimmune Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants). Should we accept this as the cost of doing business?

Who pays the price when a child is damaged by a vaccine? I assure you that it is not the infectious disease experts that make the vaccine schedule recommendations, and not the companies that manufacture the vaccines (they are immune from liability). It is our children and the parents who must care for these children.

I’m a pro vaccine pediatrician. I’m also not a fan of the MMR before age 3. I’ve heard too many times the sad story of a child who was completely normal at age 1 year, who regressed into autism after the MMR vaccine. You’ll read that it’s been proven there is no link. Tell that to the families in my practice who watched this happen before their eyes. Tell that to CDC researcher Dr Thompson (whistle blower) who felt compelled ethically to risk his career and expose that the data that showed no link between the MMR and autism had been manipulated. The data that showed a link was excluded after the study was done, intentionally, to make sure the paper could present data that showed no link.


Measles is not a significant risk here in the USA. We have had no deaths – NONE – caused by measles in the past decade. Meanwhile, back at the farm, we have seen the autism rate jump from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 67. It’s not just the MMR responsible for this, but what if it is part of the puzzle?

Infectious disease doctors don’t see autism, developmental delays, and the host of chronic disease our children are experiencing. At least they don’t see it as in any way linked to the vaccine schedule they promote. You can’t see what you don’t look for! Studies will come showing the huge improvement in health for the selectively and unvaccinated children. What will be important is that we not throw out the baby with the bath water. Vaccines have been a huge benefit to society and our children. We simply must individualize and selectively vaccinate.

Minimize the injection of toxins, by NOT getting the Tdap while pregnant, and don’t give the Hepatitis B vaccine to infants whose mothers do not have Hepatitis B. Wait until age 3 to give the MMR. Consider delaying the Hepatitis A vaccine until your child is school age, if at all. Only give one aluminum containing vaccine at a time. There are risks and benefits to these recommendations. Discuss them with your physician.



Dr. Paul



Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome- Treatment of Newborn Addicted to Opiates

happy babyNewborns of moms who are on opiates go through acute withdrawal at the time of delivery since they have been continuously exposed to opiate drugs (pain pills, heroin, methadone, etc.) then at birth are suddenly without these opiates.  The symptoms of withdrawal in an infant can be mild irritability to seizures. Tremors, increased tone (we would comment “the baby seems strong”), and poor feeding are common.

The studies are now showing less neonatal symptoms for women on Buprenorphine compared to those on methadone. You can read more about this here…

This has been my experience in my addiction clinic where we have had 4 pregnancies now on Buprenorphine. Each delivered babies who had absolutely no withdrawal symptoms. Three of the four were weaned to 1-3 mg by the time of delivery and one was on 12 mg at the time of delivery.  It should be noted that weaning the dose while pregnant has been discouraged due to fear of relapse and the risk that would put on the fetus.  I have found for motivated moms, as long as they know they have an addictionologist willing to support them should a weaning process get difficult, and they will have access to more Buprenorphine should they need it, we have had 100% success with a very slow and gradual taper of the dose.

You can read here for  a great overview with tools for managing the neonate in withdrawal.



Dr. Paul


1 2 3 4 38