Making Aliyah? Consider Givat HaMoreh

Eretz Chemdah: An Inside View

Various Perspectives and Experiences of English speakers Living in Eretz Yisroel

Paving the Way

I am the youngest of eight siblings. We all grew up in England, and all of us ended up here in Eretz Yisroel for a few years of married life. That was the original plan—to be in this environment conducive to shteiging for a few of the formative years of life.

Most of my siblings had managed to make it here for at least two to three years before heading back to England. Finding that Yerushalayim was prohibitively expensive for a kollel couple, we had to think of an out-of-the-box solution for the longer term. Although we were still keeping two days of Yom Tov, we weren’t quite ready to leave Eretz Yisroel.

The new Litvish community in Givat HaMoreh, Afula, was the unlikely candidate. At the time we joined, there were about a hundred and fifty families, who, for the most part, were Israeli. The few English families that were there were mostly related to each other (and not to us), but it meant that there were enough people from a background similar to ours so as not to feel totally isolated. There were also a few Americans, as well as some English-speaking children of Anglo immigrants to Eretz Yisroel. Being that the Israeli members of the kehillah—almost all young couples like ourselves—were also far from their hometowns and “natural habitats,” they were more open to create new relationships with people a bit different from themselves, like us chutznikim. This was true even in regards to my wife, who at the time we came could barely speak in Hebrew.

Although the environment in Afula meant moving quite a bit out of our comfort zone, one thing that brought us here was the prospect of taking part in the creation of a new kehillah in Eretz Yisroel. That wouldn’t have been enough to make us stay, though—it took a while even here until we quit Yom Tov Sheini. Both my wife and I had almost all our family back in England, so we didn’t have any of the natural physical and emotional support that comes with living near family. We were basically staking it out alone in the wilderness, at least in the beginning.

Being a small community with most members not having family close by, this fostered an environment of mutual care and responsibility. This made up to some degree for the lack of family living close by. Having people around us who care about us was definitely a cause in the eventual shift to the realization that we are here to stay. This was in addition to the fact that the affordable housing here meant it was possible for us to seriously consider purchasing a home here, which would surely make our connection to this place much stronger.

Having lived here for about three years, we have come to appreciate our neighborhood and community. Members of the kehillah live peacefully with the surroundings, including traditional and not-yet observant neighbors, with some of them becoming inspired by the kiddush HaShemwe make as frum Yidden and decent people. The unfortunate occurrence of cars driving on Shabbos is not uncommon, considering we do live in a mixed neighborhood, but it is considerably less than what may sometimes be seen at the edges of some Chareidi neighborhoods of Yerushalayim, as this is a quiet neighborhood.

As far as chinuch is concerned, the local Chareidi cheider and school caters to a wide spectrum of backgrounds, including the diversity of the “Litvish” kehillah itself, which includes Bnei Torah who are Ashkenazim, Sephardim, Teimanim, and a bit of Chassidish-oriented as well, and both Israelis and chutznikim. The Chareidi populace of the general area, many of whom also attend these schools, includes also a few Chassidim as well as Sephardic baalei batim, which are very common to come across in these areas. The exposure to children from the homes of Yirei Shomayim from all different Chareidi backgrounds is, I think, an added benefit to the high scholastic standards of the schools.

After we settled here, others have considered following our path. My wife has a friend who eventually moved here with her husband, both originally from England, and I think it was much easier for them to make the move following our example. Of course, we also benefitted from their move as it meant having more people around us with whom we more closely identify, who speak the same language as we do, and share a similar mentality with us. We have a cousin from England who joined us here as well, and having us as cousins here already must have been a factor in their decision as well.

The kehillah now numbers about three-hundred families, bli ayin hara, kein yirbu, and although it seems that the kehillah will definitely stay a predominantly Israeli one, there is definitely room for us chutznikim who want to join and be a part.

Although in the beginning we had to move a bit out of our comfort zone, it has become our very own zone, and we are quite content with it—our own little piece of Eretz Yisroel.

Why Didn’t We Know About This?

One of the chutznik families here in Givat HaMoreh manage an apartment here that is rented out for weekends and short-term to vacationers.

A friend of mine was planning on terminating his stay in Eretz Yisroel, as it was just too expensive for him to stay being an avreich here. He decided to end his stay here with a weekend vacation and rented that apartment for a Shabbos.

After being exposed to the warm and fully functional kehillah here, and realizing that there were more English families here than only my own, he told me that it just never occurred to him that such communities existed where he would be able to afford staying here as an avreich. He was mistakenly comparing the finances of chutz la’Aretz to only Yerushalayim and its surroundings.

– Yehuda Orzel, Givat HaMoreh, Afula

This article is part of Matzav.com’s Eretz Chemdah series featuring English speakers, living in, settling, and building up Eretz Yisroel. For more info please contact yoel@naavakodesh.org or visit naavakodesh.org/eretz-chemdah

Reprinted from Naava Kodesh.

מזקנים אתבונן’ ר”ל *יותר* מן הזקנים, כננס ע”ג הענק’

תהלים קי”ט צ”ח-ק’:
מאויבי תחכמני מצותך כי לעולם היא לי.
מכל מלמדי השכלתי כי עדותיך שיחה לי.
מזקנים אתבונן כי פקודיך נצרתי.
פירוש הרב אבן עזרא:
מזקנים אתבונן, יותר מהזקנים כי פקודיך נצרתי מנעורי.
הושע י’ ט’:

מימי הגבעה חטאת ישראל שם עמדו לא תשיגם בגבעה מלחמה על בני עלוה.

הראב”ע:
מימי, יותר כמו מזקנים אתבונן מאויבי תחכמני ופירש שם עמדו על חטאי דורו כאילו עמדו עם בני בנימין הם בני עלוה כמו עולה והיתה לזעוה והי’ רק זועה והיום לא יפחדו שתשיגם מלחמה כאשר השיגה את בני בנימין מהשבטים וזה הכתב כמו כריח שדה שטעמו ראה ריח בני אשר ברכו ה’ כריח שדה.

FACT: Vaccination Does Not Always Work

My feelings about the vaccine debate

581 Replies

9th July 2019

As readers of this blog will know, my primary area of interest is cardiovascular disease, which a big and complex subject, where anyone questioning the ‘conventional’ ideas gets ruthlessly attacked. However, in comparison to the area of vaccination, the battles in cardiovascular disease pale into insignificance. Mere squabbles in the nursery.

I am a member of an on-line doctors’ community in the UK called Doctors Net. Not open to the public. Whenever any story about vaccination emerges, the vitriol, anger and naked rage is quite scary to observe.

Whenever the issue of MMR raises its head on Doctors Net, doctors have stated that Andrew Wakefield should be thrown in jail, and never allowed to earn any money ever again, that he is a crook and a criminal – and those are the nicer comments.

It is clear that, in the medical profession, there is an unquestioned faith in vaccination. That is, all vaccinations, for all diseases, everywhere – for everyone. Anyone who dares to hint that, ahem, there could be some negative issues associated with vaccination is subjected to withering contempt. ‘You will be responsible for killing millions of children.’ You don’t understand science.’ And suchlike.

When it comes to the science, it does amuse me that vaccination began before anyone understood any of the science – of anything to do with microbes and the immune system. It all began, so it is recorded, with the observation that milkmaids were much less likely to get smallpox.

This led to the idea that you should deliberately infect people with a bit of cowpox, to prevent them getting smallpox. Bold.

‘The terms vaccine and vaccination are derived from Variolae vaccinae (smallpox of the cow), the term devised by Jenner to denote cowpox. He used it in 1796 in the long title of his Inquiry into the Variolae vaccinae known as the Cow Pox, in which he described the protective effect of cowpox against smallpox.’ [from the website that cannot be named… Wikipedia actually]

This was suggested at a time when all doctors thought infections were spread by Miasma. Basically, a nasty smell. No-one had the faintest idea that there were bacteria, or viruses. Somewhat ironically, vaccination – giving a small amount of a substance to cure/prevent a nasty disease – became the underlying principle of homeopathy – which most doctors now angrily dismiss as ‘woo woo medicine.’

Clearly, vaccination did not start as science. It basically started as a hunch, based on no comprehension of the science at all. Of course, that doesn’t make it wrong, but you can hardly suggest it was founded on a thorough understanding of the human immune system. Edward Jenner did not know that such a thing existed, and nor did anyone else. It was just a good guess.

The science of vaccination then became, what I call, backwards rationalisation. ‘It works, now let us work out how the hell it actually works.’ Again, nothing wrong with this. The best science often starts with observation, not a hypothesis. Graphene is a recent example. Two scientists larking about in the lab with Sellotape and pencils.

Just in case you are wondering. Yes, I do believe that vaccination works. Or, to be more accurate I believe that some vaccination works. Most vaccination, all vaccinations?

However, I do speak as one who has had seven hepatitis B inoculations and, once, just about managed to provide a blood test to show that I had made enough antibodies – to allow me to work as a doctor. A friend, who worked as a surgeon, had twenty-two hep B inoculations, and never managed to raise an antibody. He did explain to me how he continued to work as a surgeon, but I have forgotten how he managed.

Which means that I have personal – and slightly painful – experience that vaccination is not equally effective for everyone. Why not? Does anyone care about such things? It seems not. Just close your eyes and vaccinate away. No-one can question anything. Such as, why do inoculations produce antibodies in some people, and not others? Kind of interesting you would think – but no. Question not, the mighty vaccination.

This is strange, because it has been clearly established that vaccination does not work in many people:

‘An outbreak of measles occurred in a high school with a documented vaccination level of 98 per cent. Nineteen (70 per cent) of the cases were students who had histories of measles vaccination at 12 months of age or older and are therefore considered vaccine failures. Persons who were unimmunized or immunized at less than 12 months of age had substantially higher attack rates compared to those immunized on or after 12 months of age.

Vaccine failures among apparently adequately vaccinated individuals were sources of infection for at least 48 per cent of the cases in the outbreak. There was no evidence to suggest that waning immunity was a contributing factor among the vaccine failures. Close contact with cases of measles in the high school, source or provider of vaccine, sharing common activities or classes with cases, and verification of the vaccination history were not significant risk factors in the outbreak.

The outbreak subsided spontaneously after four generations of illness in the school and demonstrates that when measles is introduced in a highly vaccinated population, vaccine failures may play some role in transmission but that such transmission is not usually sustained.’1  

We are told that if you reach a measles vaccination rate of 95%, in a population, you cannot get an outbreak. Seems that is wrong. You can get an outbreak in a 98% vaccinated population. Wouldn’t it be nice to know why?

It does seem weird that measles is the chosen battleground for the vaccine furies. I am not entirely sure why. You would think the highly vocal pro-vaccinators would point to smallpox, or polio – or suchlike. Although, to be frank, I look at smallpox and wonder. I wonder how the hell we managed to eradicate this disease so quickly and simply. The entire world successfully vaccinated in a few years – with a perfect 100% record. No vaccine failures, all populations in the entire world vaccinated? Quite some feat.

An alternative explanation is that some diseases naturally come and go. Measles, for example, was an absolute killer three hundred years ago. Captain Cook introduced it to South Seas islands. The mortality rate was enormously high in native populations that had never been exposed to it before. Gradually the death rate attenuated. In most of the Western World measles was becoming a ‘relatively’ benign disease by the time vaccination came along.

If we look back in history, the black death wiped out half the population of Europe. What was it? It was almost certainly not the plague, although many people claim that it was. From the descriptions of those who died from it, it seems it was possibly a form of Ebola (haemorrhagic fever).

‘The Black Death of the 1300s was probably not the modern disease known as bubonic plague, according to a team of anthropologists studying these 14th century epidemics. “The symptoms of the Black Death included high fevers, fetid breath, coughing, vomiting of blood and foul body odor,” says Rebecca Ferrell, graduate student in anthropology. “Other symptoms were red bruising or hemorrhaging of skin and swollen lymph nodes. Many of these symptoms do appear in bubonic plague, but they can appear in many other diseases as well.”

Modern bubonic plague typically needs to reach a high frequency in the rat population before it spills over into the human community via the flea vector. Historically, epidemics of bubonic plague have been associated with enormous die-offs of rats. “There are no reports of dead rats in the streets in the 1300s of the sort common in more recent epidemics when we know bubonic plague was the causative agent,” says Wood.’ 2

Of course, we cannot be sure what the Black Death was. We do know that it came, it killed, it went. It also appeared to leave a legacy of people with CCR5 Delta32 mutations. People with this mutation cannot, it seems, be infected by the Ebola virus (or, indeed HIV). Ebola and HIV both gain entry to cells using the CCR5 protein, and if it is missing, the virus cannot get in. [Yes, you can cure HIV by giving bone marrow transplant from a donor with the CCR5 Delta 32 mutation – little known fact].

Why would we have this mutation far more commonly in areas of Europe than, in say, Africa – where the Black Death did not occur? Unless it provided a survival advantage at some point, against a virus that was (or was very like), Ebola.

Looking back at smallpox, did vaccination get rid of it? Or did vaccination simply apply the final push to see off a weakened opponent?

The plague itself – where has it gone?

Yes, I do look at the official history of vaccination with a jaundiced eye. The greatest successes… Well, it seems inarguable that vaccination has created enormous health benefits. Polio and smallpox – gone. But has this been entirely due to vaccination – possibly? I am yet to be convinced.

In truth, I find the entire area of vaccination quite fascinating. But the problem, the great problem, is that even by writing this blog I will have said several things that cannot be said.

  • Vaccination does not always work – burn the unbeliever.
  • Vaccination may not have been entirely responsible for ridding the world of smallpox – burn the unbeliever.
  • Measles is not the killer disease that it once was – burn the unbeliever.
  • You can have measles vaccination and still get measles – burn the unbeliever.

To me, these are just facts, and to state them is simply part of valid scientific questioning. For some reason, I am not entirely sure why, to question any ‘fact’ about vaccination is to be flung into the outer darkness. People get very, very, angry. They close their minds and they get polarised. Parts of this blog will almost certainly be taken out of context and used to attack me.

I don’t really know how to open the debate out into something sensible. Something scientific, something questioning and positive. Screeching at people that they simply don’t understand ‘science’ is not a good approach. In addition, yelling that they are ‘killing thousands of children’ is not a way to conduct a debate.

I feel that I do understand ‘science’, whatever that means exactly. Or at least I understand the scientific method. Which primarily consists of questioning everything – and feeling free do to so. One thing I do know is that anyone who states that the science is settled, and inarguable, and all the experts agree, and must therefore be right – clearly does not understand anything about science. At all.

1: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1646939/

2: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/04/020415073417.htm

From Dr. Malcom Kendrick, here.

Rewriting History: Hilchos Tola’im

Hamodia Magazine (13 Cheshvan 5772, p. 5) published an interview with Rabbi David Bistricer, Rabbinic Coordinator for the OU’s Kashruth Division.

Getting the interviewee to admit to the ugly truth is like pulling weeds, but eventually bears fruit (for the careful reader, anyway).

The article begins like so:

Much of the discussion and publicity revolving around insects in vegetables appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon. Is that correct?

That is not correct. The Torah was written for all generations and outlines clearly multiple prohibitions that can be violated with the consumption of even a single insect. Chazal discuss various issues relating to insects in food, which were clearly relevant on a practical level during their times. Discussions involving the many detailed laws of hilchos tola’im are found in the Rishonim as well, including practical case-related questions and examples. Many of the contemporary issues are referenced in Shulchan Aruch and are addressed by both early and later Achronim. The subject of tola’im has been relevant to Klal Yisrael from the times of Moshe Rabbeinu to the resent.

Why does it seem, then, this is a relatively new issue?

That can be partly attributed to the fact that the extent of the problem depends on many variables, which are subject to change. The pervasiveness of infestation will depend on regional climate, individual seasons, specific fields, and their growers. Occurrence of insect infestation is less of an issue with geographical areas that are colder or are highly elevated, whereas warmer or lower areas are more prone to infestation, similarly, although infestation cannot be completely eliminated, growing practices, such as the use of certain pesticides and other controls, can reduce the extent of the problem. Therefore, since these practices may vary from grower to grower, these concerns could be a large problem for one, while much less of a problem for another.

Since there are so many factors and variables, individual experiences can vary. This is especially true from country to county.

Is that why every now and then there are newly discovered problems with certain kinds of produce that were previously thought to be insect-free?

That is often the case, since infestation outbreaks depend partly on the weather and are therefore just as predictable. There is such a thing as a bad season, and at times infestation can be cyclical. However, generally, when there are shifts, they tend to be downward, and nonissues become real, ongoing concerns, though that’s not always the case. Nevertheless, some of the newly discovered problems aren’t new at all and can be found clearly referenced and addressed in Shulchan Aruch and Poskim.

Does this help explain why in the past this was not as much of an issue?

That is partly correct, since the prevalence of infestation varies from region to region and depends on so many factors, such as those alluded to above. However, it also important to note that there are certain valid halachic leniencies that have been relied upon previous generations. There were instances in which halachic authorities adopted legitimate positions, whose foundations were built from the Shulchan Aruch, as these great Poskim recognized both the necessity to address the issues and the practical limitations of the times. Someone who is adequately versed in hilchos tola’im in Shulchan Aruch and the teshuvos that discuss these issues will understand this point.

It is very important not to disparage practices of previous generations that find support in Poskim. We are very fortunate that nowadays the attention and focus given to this area has improved increasingly throughout the years. We are fortunate that companies continue to find innovative ways to help ensure that the products they sell are naki mechashash tola’im (free of concern for the presence of insects), such as greenhouse-grown produce and state-of-the-art washing systems that implement the latest technology. We should be highly appreciative for all these current advancements and should be more thankful as they continue to improve. However, our appreciation should not come at the expense of questioning previous generations or the halachic positions of Gedolei haPoskim. We should just count our blessings.

…

Bingo!

As for the dialectical strictures against “questioning”, “disparaging”, etcetera. Hyehudi takes a contrary perspective, as explained many times over.