Besides, EU can no longer deny Turkey, as it is in the status of candidate for more than forty years and has made great progress in human rights protection in order to meet the requirements for entry.

I also hold the opinion that Turkey deserves to be a member of EU. Firstly, Turkey is one of the founders of the Council of Europe and associate member of the European Union (EU) and its predecessors since 1964. According to the classification of Central Intelligence Agency, Turkey is a developed country with the seventh largest economy in the Council of Europe and the fifteenth in the world. In addition it is part of a customs union with the EU, one of the founding members of the OECD, OSCE as well as an associated member of the Western European Union. Thus, Turkey has alsredy close ties with the EU for a several decades. So, accession of this country into EU will be the most logic conclusion.

Vaccination is considered as a wrong also from the moral and ethical sides of view. Firstly, because production of many vaccines is associated with the murder of innocent animals, most often primates . In addition, the vaccine viruses are grown on the corpses and sick animals as in healthy animals they do not survive. Secondly, new vaccines before the approval for the massive use are tested on the ethnic groups of children and these children are mostly poor and illiterate whose parents blindly believe the doctor. So, there are many cases of failed tests which lead to many deaths and severe reactions.

Another disadvantage of vaccination is that modern vaccines are not so efficient as many people used to think. Firstly, there are still no any scientific evidence that vaccines develop 100% immunity and sometimes it doesn't reach even 50% . For example, up to 80% of people infected with diphtheria in 1990 had been vaccinated before several times, but that did not stop them to get sick. In a significant percentage of vaccinated children and adults the immunity failed to develop at all.

Secondly, vaccines can lose their quality due to improper storage. But even if the storage conditions are respected, there is always the possibility that immunity will not be stimulated.

Another argument against vaccination is that infants receive too many of them. For example in several countries, including Russia and Kazakhstan, according to the calendar of vaccination, during the first eighteen months of life the child should get 9 different vaccines, and the first (hepatitis C) - in the first 12 hours of life. Thus, at least half of the first 18 months of life the child has to be in the post-immunization period - that is, not be entirely healthy. In addition, the introduction of any vaccine is accompanied by inhibition of immunity ranging from 4.5 to 6 months. Obviously, it is too much for little, delicate and immature child's body...

Actually, the decrease or increase of any epidemic does not depend on universal vaccination of the population or abandon it. I have found some interesting historical facts that British history contains about smallpox. Scope of smallpox actually expanded with the introduction of the vaccine. Before 1853 (and full vaccination) there were occurred about 2,000 deaths over two years. After about 20 years after the vaccination program over the years began to act, there were occurred the greatest epidemic of smallpox with 23,062 victims. Cities with the most thoroughly forced to vaccination have been particularly affected ..

One of the main arguments against vaccination is that it destroys the natural immunity of the human and there is no one hundred percent guarantee that it will develop fully artificial immunity. There is scientific fact that after vaccination the child becomes more susceptible to disease, which he would never have fallen ill, if only did not receive any vaccinations. There are a lot of cases when absolutely healthy children after vaccines begin to suffer from different diseases associated with the suppression of immunity such as otitis, cold, sore throat, bronchitis, abrasion, autoimmune and other.

I think it is not good when young parents, fooled by vaccination propaganda, terrified by stories about horrible diseases and in addition, pushed by greedy doctors are running around in search of the right vaccines and the best vaccination centers instead of once and for all abandon all vaccination and safely and healthily raise their beloved children. Unfortunately, most of such parents do not concerned about what substances vaccine can contain. For example, some vaccines consists of mercury, aluminum, phenol, formaldehyde, mycoplasma, protozoa, viruses of animals and etc. All these substances are highly toxic, especially for children and none of the most perfect immunological study cannot predict how a child responds to these substances. So, vaccines can be dangerous and risky for children.

In my mind the best vaccine for baby is the one that hasn't been done. Parents will not have to worry about its consequences and will not need to give their child harmful (and often quite useless) drugs. Besides, the widespread practice of preparation to vaccination, when babies are fed with medicines, is directed not on prevention a truly dangerous complications but on avoiding an immediate and acute reaction in the first days after inoculation. Thus, the pediatrician did not have to record the post-vaccination complications and if the illness appears later it can be considered as mere coincidence.

I found another info about children who was born through cesarean. According data of western psychologists children who did not pass through a stage of contractions are afraid of changes, tend to be too sensitive, quick-tempered, anxious, exaggerating the complexity of the situation and their abilities to self-control and planning are decreased in compare with other children.