Rapid Expansion of Erratic & Destructive Global Weather

In this episode of Geoengineering Watch Global Alert News, Dane connects many dots linking hidden controllers, governments, academia and elites to the destruction of our planet.

Topics discussed include:
  • Our air is being systematically contaminated by sources that are hidden from the public.
  • Microplastic pollution have been found in snow from again the Arctic to the Alps.
  • Micro plastics and polymers are present in cancerous human lung tissue.
  • Covert climate engineering operations, known scientifically as Solar RadiationManagement (SRM), involved jet aircraft spraying of heavy metal, chemical and polymer nano particulates into the atmosphere for the stated purpose of blocking some of the sun’s incoming thermal energy — for the stated purpose of slowing down global warming.
  • Aluminum, barium, strontium, and other toxic heavy metals are all climate engineering elements, all highly toxic, all are showing up in lab tests of precipitation all over the world.
  • The intentional dumping of tens of millions of tons of toxic particles in the atmosphere, part of SRM operations, is the biggest single source of incredibly dangerous atmospheric particulate pollution of all.
  • Vaccines and fluoride are discussed as assaults on human health.
  • Geoengineering is linked to collapsing food supplies.
  • Censorship and surveillance are being used to control the masses.
  • We are living in an artificially induced state of consciousness that resembles sleep.

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. ~  Krishnamurti

A small body of determined spirits fired by an unquenchable faith in their mission can alter the course of history. ~ Mahatma Ghandi

 


Source: Geoengineering Watch

by Dane Wigington
August 17, 2019

 

Geoengineering Watch Global Alert News, August 17, 2019, #210 ( Dane Wigington )

https://youtu.be/MQBYfGw-qdQ?list=PLwfFtDFZDpwtijqkJiOyc-WJOaGWOfVGG

 

Extreme heat and haze continues here in Northern California, while plastic particles are being found in the air from Colorado to the Alps, and even in the Arctic.

Weather all over the world is becoming rapidly more erratic and destructive.

What factors are playing a part in the complex weather/climate equation?

How can we know what we are not being told by any “official” source?

Who gets to decide what is “real” news, and what is not?

What happens when governments know they can no longer hide dire unfolding scenarios from the public?

The totality of converging challenges that we collectively face is daunting. Can we yet make a difference for the better?

Waking populations to the wider horizon is imperative, that task will require the effort of all who are awake and aware already.

Share credible data from a credible source, make your voice heard, make every day count.

Dane Wigington

 

 




Activist Post Applies for NewsGuard’s Coveted “Conspiracy” Blacklist

Source: Activist Post

 

Activist Post Response To NewsGuard’s Request About Editorial Practices

by Activist Post Editors
August 16, 2019

 

Activist Post is being considered for NewsGuard’s exclusive “conspiracy” news blacklist. They recently contacted us about our editorial practices to see if we qualify for this great honor. For those who don’t know, NewsGuard is creating warning labels to protect you from misinformation on the interwebs. They’re very credible with a former Director of CIA and Secretary of the DHS on their board.

Activist Post came from humble beginnings as a free Blogger site during the wild days of the Internet. Back then, Facebook recklessly allowed grown adults to freely discover and share content without any filters or pseudo-state fact checkers. Feral humans could feast on any information they desired. Greedy advertisers didn’t care about your political leanings or if you believed in chemtrails. It was a level playing field for independent bloggers to compete in the marketplace of ideas. As a result, millions consumed Activist Post content without knowing it can turn their minds into gravy.

Because someone may be exposed to untruths on the Internet, warning labels are just common sense. A wise man named Morpheus once said “Most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to defend it.” That’s why we support NewsGuard’s mission of “restoring trust and accountability” in news.

And, if we’re being honest, landing on another conspiracy blacklist would give us major street cred. Imagine an upstart “truther” blog trying to compete with us without NewsGuard’s mark. Imagine anyone seeking to question the official narrative of events. Who are they going to trust? That’s right, a NewsGuard certified conspiracy site.

Editorial Practices

Activist Post does exactly opposite of the corporate media: we ask questions, research, and give our honest take on events. Our agenda is to expose corruption and promote peace and individual liberty.

Our information-gathering process begins by wearing our most comfortable pajama pants, making fresh Costa Rican coffee, and taking a deep drag of sativa cannabis to get the creative juices flowing. Then we examine the corporate media to find which lies piss us off the most. We expose those lies with data and sources, and explain why they threaten peace and freedom. Rinse and repeat.

For instance, every source that NewsGuard labels as “trusted” produces a constant stream of lies and propaganda to promote more war abroad and a nanny police state at home.  Their pathetic journalism and naked agenda gives us an endless supply of content.

Conspiracy Credentials

  1. We don’t believe the official story of September 11th. Building 7 and all. We don’t know what really happened, but it seems clear that someone in power “hated us for our freedoms” judging by how many we lost following that event. Ask your NewsGuard advisors Tom Ridge and Michael Hayden for more details about spying on all Americans without a warrant and molesting innocent people at airports after 9/11.

  2. We think the official reasons for going to war in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Iran are complete bullshit. Non-existent WMDs and humanitarian bombs to spread democracy, really? Some alternative sources claim they’re about resource control which seems plausible. However, we go even further. We believe the cabal wants to gain control of the few remaining independent central banks on earth. After all, why occupy nations by force when you can enslave them through phony debt? And somebody’s got to protect the US dollar from competition, right?

  3. We think the left-right political paradigm is manufactured to give people the illusion of choice. It’s never been more obvious that politics is a reality show. Incidentally, democracy doesn’t ensure freedom anyway, especially when the public is brainwashed with only one narrative.

  4. We believe central banking and the fractional reserve system makes politics irrelevant.

  5. We think the war on drugs is immoral, illogical, ineffective, and criminally harmful. It destroys more lives than drugs themselves. And it’s a convenient excuse for government to violate the rights of peaceful people. It appears to be a conspiracy too.

  6. We are pro-choice for vaccines. We oppose forced medication. Gasp!

  7. We don’t think CO2 is a pollutant.

  8. Our YouTube channel was terminated before it was cool for saying sex robots were objects, not subjects. It must’ve triggered the robot censors presumably because it thinks it’s alive.

  9. We were labeled “Russian Propaganda” for publishing unfavorable things about Hillary Clinton. A claim we admitted to here.

  10. We have acquired “Strong Conspiracy” ratings from other agencies:

  • MediaBiasFactCheck about Activist Post – “Sources in the Conspiracy-Pseudoscience category may publish unverifiable information that is not always supported by evidence. These sources may be untrustworthy for credible/verifiable information, therefore fact checking and further investigation is recommended on a per article basis when obtaining information from these sources.”

  • Washington University academic paper features Activist Post as one of the “Influential Domains in Alternative Narratives.”

  • SourceWatch labels us a conspiracy site for the books we recommend. Whatever you do kids, don’t read these books.

  • RationalWiki says Activist Post’s specialty is “left-wing conspiracy-mongering.”

  • US News and World Report says Activist Post is a “fake news site to avoid at all costs” citing FakeNewsWatch.com, a site that no longer exists likely due to civil lawsuits…

We hope this is enough to qualify for NewsGuard’s conspiracy warning. The label would help us keep undesirables away. We only want free-thinking individuals who prefer peace, love and liberty at Activist Post. Close-minded, indoctrinated tools who want more war, hate, and oppression will have a safe space at NewsGuard’s green-check websites.




Americans Can Handle an Open Discussion on Vaccines—RFK, Jr. Responds to Criticism from His Family

from Children’s Health Defense

 

CHD NOTE: In early May 2019, Politico Magazine published an article written by three of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s relatives, criticizing his advocacy for safe vaccines. After numerous requests, Politico magazine has refused to publish his response.

 

by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
August 15, 2019

 

Three of my Kennedy relatives recently published an article criticizing my advocacy for safe vaccines. Our contentious family dispute highlights the fierce national donnybrook over vaccinations that has divided communities and raised doubts about the Democratic Party’s commitment to some of its defining values: abhorrence of censorship, wariness toward excessive corporate power, support for free speech, religious freedom, and personal sovereignty over our bodies, and the rights of citizens (codified in the Nuremberg Code and other treaties to which we are signatories) to decline unwanted government-mandated medical interventions. The debate has also raised questions about the independence of our press and its role as a champion of free speech, and First Amendment rights as a bulwark against overreaching by government and corporations.

I love my family and sympathize with their anxieties when I call out government officials for corruption. The Kennedys have a long, close, and continuing relationship with public health agencies so it is understandably difficult for us to believe that powerful regulators would lie about vaccines. “All issues are simple,” the saw goes, “until you study them.”

Those conflicts motivate them to recommend ever more vaccines with minimal support from evidence-based science.

 

My skepticism

I’ve arrived at my skepticism after 15 years spent researching and litigating this issue. I have watched financial conflicts and institutional self-interest transform key sectors of our public health bureaucracies into appendages of the very pharmaceutical companies that Congress charged them to regulate.

Multiple investigations by Congress and the HHS Inspector General have consistently found that an overwhelming majority of the FDA officials directly charged with licensing vaccines, and the CDC officials who effectively mandate them for children, have personal financial entanglements with vaccine manufacturers. These public servants are often shareholders in, grant recipients from, and paid consultants to vaccine manufacturers, and, occasionally, patent holders of the very vaccines they vote to approve. Those conflicts motivate them to recommend ever more vaccines with minimal support from evidence-based science.

HHS partners with vaccine makers to develop, approve, recommend, and pass mandates for new products and then shares profits from vaccine sales.

The pharmaceutical industry also enforces policy discipline through agency budgets. FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from industry. The World Health Organization (WHO) gets roughly half its budget from private sources, including Pharma and its allied foundations.  And CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents  and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which is over 40% of its total budget. Further, Pharma directly funds, populates and controls dozens of CDC programs through the CDC foundation.  A British Medical Journal editorial excoriates CDC’s sweetheart relationship with pharma quotes UCLA Professor of Medicine Jerome R. Hoffman “most of us were shocked to learn the CDC takes funding from industry… It is outrageous that industry is apparently allowed to punish the CDC if the agency conducts research that has potential to cut into profits.”

HHS partners with vaccine makers to develop, approve, recommend, and pass mandates for new products and then shares profits from vaccine sales. HHS employees can personally collect up to $150,000 annually in royalties for products they work on. For example, key HHS officials collect money on every sale of Merck’s controversial HPV vaccine Gardasil, which also yields tens of millions annually for the agency in patent royalties. Furthermore, under the 1986 Act that created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, HHS is the defendant in Vaccine Court and is legally obligated to defend against any claim that a vaccine causes injury. Despite high hurdles for recovery, HHS pays out hundreds of millions of dollars annually (over $4 billion total) to Americans injured by vaccines. Hence, if HHS publishes any study acknowledging that a vaccine causes a harm, claimants can use that study against HHS in Vaccine Court. In June 2009, a high-level HHS official, Tom Insel, killed a $16 million-dollar budget item to study the relationship between vaccines and autism by the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee. Insel argued that petitioners would use these studies against HHS in vaccine court.

Such conflicts are a formula for “agency capture” on steroids. “Instead of a regulator and a regulated industry, we now have a partnership,” says Dr. Michael Carome, a former HHS employee who is now the director of the advocacy group Public Citizen. Carome says that these financial entanglements have tilted HHS “away from a public health perspective to an industry-friendly perspective.”

In 1986, Congress—awash in Pharma money (the pharmaceutical industry is number one for both political contributions and lobbying spending over the past 20 years) enacted a law granting vaccine makers blanket immunity from liability for injuries caused by vaccines. If vaccines were as safe as my family members claim, would we need to give pharmaceutical companies immunity for the injuries they cause? The subsequent gold rush by pharmaceutical companies boosted the number of recommended inoculations from twelve shots of five vaccines in 1986 to 54 shots of 13 vaccines today. A billion-dollar sideline grew into the $50 billion vaccine industry behemoth.

Since vaccines are liability-free—and effectively compulsory to a captive market of 76 million children—there is meager market incentive for companies to make them safe. The public must rely on the moral scruples of Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, and Pfizer. But these companies have a long history of operating recklessly and dishonestly, even with products that they must market to the public and for which they can be sued for injuries. The four companies that make virtually all of the recommended vaccines are all convicted felons.  Collectively they have paid over $35 billion since 2009 for defrauding regulators, lying to and bribing government officials and physicians, falsifying science, and leaving a trail of injuries and deaths from products they knew to be dangerous and sold under pretense of safety and efficacy.

Doesn’t it require a kind of cognitive dissonance to believe that vaccines are untainted by the greed, negligence, and corruption that bedevil every other pharmaceutical product?

For American kids born in 1986, only 12.8% had chronic diseases. That number has grown to 54% among the vaccine generation (those born after 1986) in lockstep with the expanding schedule.

 

No safety testing

Such concerns only deepen when one considers that, besides freedom from liability, vaccine makers enjoy another little-known lucrative loophole; vaccines are the only pharmaceutical or medical products that do not need to be rigorously safety tested. To win an FDA license, companies must safety test virtually every other drug for years in randomized comparisons against an inert placebo. Yet, not a single vaccine currently on the CDC schedule was tested against an inert placebo. Without placebo testing, regulators have no capacity to assess a medicine’s risks. During a January 2018 deposition, Dr. Stanley Plotkin, the world’s most influential vaccinologist, acknowledged that researches who try to ascertain vaccine safety without a placebo are in “La La land”. According to Dr. Drummond Rennie, Deputy Editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association, “It is the marketing department, not the science, that is driving the research.”  It seems plain wrong to me that Democratic-controlled legislatures across the country are frantically passing coercive mandates for pharmaceutical products for which no one knows the risks.

Furthermore, safety testing, which typically requires five or more years for other medical products, often lasts only a few days with vaccines—not nearly long enough to spot cancers or chronic conditions like autoimmune disease (e.g., juvenile diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis), allergic illnesses (e.g., food allergies, allergic rhinitis, eczema, asthma), or neurological and neurodevelopmental injuries (e.g., ADD, ADHD, narcolepsy, epilepsy, seizure disorders, and autism). Manufacturers’ inserts accompanying every vial of mandated vaccines include warnings about these and over 400 other injuries including many serious immune, neurological, and chronic illnesses for which FDA suspects that vaccines may be the cause. Federal law requires that the package insert for each vaccine include “only those adverse events for which there is some basis to believe that there is a causal relationship between the drug and the occurrence of the adverse event.”

Many of these illnesses became epidemic in American children after 1986, coterminous with the exploding vaccine schedule. For American kids born in 1986, only 12.8% had chronic diseases. That number has grown to 54% among the vaccine generation (those born after 1986) in lockstep with the expanding schedule.  Evidence including HHS’s own surveillance reports, manufacturers’ inserts, and peer-reviewed studies link all of these injuries to vaccines. However, the associations are not definitive because CDC has failed to conduct the necessary randomized studies to prove or disprove causation.

HHS has directed the Institute of Medicine (IOM, now the National Academy of Medicine) to oversee the CDC’s vaccine safety science. IOM has repeatedly rebuked the agency for failing to study whether vaccines are causing these epidemics. In my experience, vaccine proponents rarely cite specific peer-reviewed studies to support their assertions that all vaccines are safe, relying instead on appeals to authority; CDC, FDA, WHO, or the AAP. My relatives, for example, argue that vaccines are safe because WHO, HHS, CDC, and FDA say so. But HHS designated the IOM as the ultimate arbiter of vaccine safety. And IOM says that the existing scientific literature does not support these claims.  Despite requests by the IOM, CDC has steadfastly refused to perform safety studies.

In total, three IOM reports (19911994, and 2011/2012) investigated 231 adverse events associated with vaccines. For 34 conditions, IOM found that the evidence supported a causal connection between the vaccine and the adverse event. But for 184 adverse events, fully 80% of the conditions reviewed, the IOM found that HHS’s evidence was inadequate to accept or reject vaccine causation. How can our public health officials claim safety when there is no follow-up research on reported adverse events?

… the  IOM [Institute of Medicine now the National Academy of Medicine] study and the follow-up HHS study in 2014 both say that CDC has never performed a study to support CDC’s claim that DTaP does not cause autism.

 

Autism and vaccines

Let’s drill down on bedrock dogma that science has thoroughly debunked any links between autism and vaccines. That assumption is so engrained that media ridicules anyone who questions this orthodoxy as a dangerous heretic. But, look for a moment, at the facts. In 1986, Congress specifically ordered CDC to determine if pertussis-containing vaccines (DTP, later DTaP) were causing autism.  Then, as today, many parents with autistic children were claiming that vaccines were a cause of their child’s autism and DTP/DTaP vaccines were/are a popular suspect.

On its website, CDC declares that, “Vaccines don’t cause autism,” citing IOM’s comprehensive 2011/2012 literature review of vaccination safety science. However, the IOM study and the follow-up HHS study in 2014 both say that CDC has never performed a study to support CDC’s claim that DTaP does not cause autism.  The same is true for Hep B, Hib, PCV 13, and IPV. The only vaccine actually studied with regard to autism is MMR, and a senior CDC scientist claims the CDC did find an increased rate of autism after MMR in the only MMR/autism study ever conducted by the CDC with American children. Moreover, HHS’s primary autism expert recently provided an affidavit to the DOJ explaining that vaccines can cause autism in some children.

Autism has grown from about 1 in 2,500 prior to 1986 to one in 36 among vaccine generation children today. Why are we content with the CDC’s claim that the exponential explosion of autism is a mystery? CDC spares no expense systematically tracking the source of 800 measles cases. But when asked about the cataclysmic epidemic of upwards of 68,000 new autism cases annually, CDC shrugs. Why are we not demanding answers? “CDC is paralyzed right now when it comes to anything to do with autism,” explains former senior vaccine safety scientist Dr. William Thompson, who is still a CDC employee. Thompson told Congressman Bill Posey under oath that CDC bigwigs ordered him to destroy data that showed a link between autism and vaccines and to publish a fraudulent study dismissing the link. Today, he is remorseful, “When I see a family with a child with autism, I feel great shame because I have been part of the problem.”

… there are a hundredfold more adverse vaccine events than are reported.

 

We are killing children

HHS has also ignored its statutory obligations to study vaccine injuries and improve vaccine safety. In 1986, Congress—recognizing that drug companies no longer had any incentive to make vaccines safe—ordered HHS to study vaccine injuries, work to improve vaccine safety, and report to Congress on its progress every two years. A year ago, I brought a lawsuit that forced HHS to admit that in 36 years it had never performed any of those critical studies.

Post-licensure vaccine safety surveillance is also in shambles. The CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), to which doctors and patients may voluntarily report adverse vaccine events, received 58,381 reports in 2018, including 412 deaths, 1,237 permanent disabilities, and 4,217 hospitalizations. An HHS-funded review of VAERS concluded that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported” to VAERS. This suggests that there are a hundredfold more adverse vaccine events than are reported. The CDC has nonetheless refused to mandate or automate VAERS reporting.

Dr. Aaby was one of five co-authors of a 2017 study of the diphtheria tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine, the most widely used vaccine on earth, which found that children who received DTP had ten times the risk of dying compared to DTP-unvaccinated children.

On March 9, 2019, Dr. Peter Aaby issued a scathing rebuke to the world’s public health agencies for continuing to allow pharmaceutical companies to sell vaccines without proper safety testing.  Dr. Aaby, who has authored over 300 peer-reviewed studies, is one of world’s foremost authorities on WHO’s African vaccine program and the winner of Denmark’s highest honor for health care research. Dr. Aaby was one of five co-authors of a 2017 study of the diphtheria tetanus, and pertussis (DTP) vaccine, the most widely used vaccine on earth, which found that children who received DTP had ten times the risk of dying compared to DTP-unvaccinated children. For thirty years, doctors, including Aaby, never noticed the danger because vaccinated children were succumbing to illnesses and infections apparently unrelated to the vaccine. It turns out that while the vaccine protected children from diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis, it so badly weakened their immune systems that they were dying in droves from unrelated infections. The researchers concluded: “The DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis.”  In March, an alarmed Aaby plead for a policy change, “Most of you think we know what our vaccines are doing. But we don’t…. We are killing children.”

The world’s most aggressive vaccine schedule has not given our country the world’s healthiest children. We now rank 35th in overall health outcomes—just behind Costa Rica, making the U.S., by most measures, including infant mortality, the sickest in the developed world. In addition to those 400 chronic diseases and injuries that FDA suspects may be vaccine related, the vaccine generation suffers unprecedented levels of anxiety and depression and behavioral disorders running the gamut from aggression to anorexia. Peer-reviewed animal and human studies have linked all these symptoms to vaccines. The present generation is the first in a century to lose I.Q., having suffered an extraordinary drop of seven points.  Researchers concluded that some environmental cause is the trigger. In the U.S., SAT and, more recently, bar exam scores are plummeting. Could these declines be the outcome of injecting virtually every child with multiple doses of two of the world’s most potent neurotoxins—mercury and aluminum—in bolus doses beginning on the day of birth? Shouldn’t we be doing the research to reject this hypothesis? The logical approach to doing so would be to compare health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated children. For years, public health officials, including the IOM, have urged CDC to conduct such studies.

In 2013, the IOM found that, “No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes… between entirely unimmunized populations of children and fully immunized children…. Furthermore, studies designed to examine the long-term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the immunization schedule have not been conducted.” In a 2008 interview, former NIH Director Bernadette Healy explained that HHS refuses to perform safety studies out of fear that they will expose dangers, “that would scare the public away” from vaccines.  Healy continued, “First of all, I think the public is smarter than that… I don’t think you should ever turn your back on any scientific hypothesis because you’re afraid of what it might show.”

… the absence of press scrutiny leaves industry no incentive to improve vaccine safety.

 

Media malpractice

The suppression of critical safety science documented by the IOM would not be possible without a mass epidemic of media malpractice. Mainstream and social media outlets which collectively received $9.6 billion in revenues from pharmaceutical companies in 2016 have convinced themselves they are protecting public health by aggressively censoring criticism of these coercively mandated, zero liability, and untested pharmaceutical products.  But, the absence of press scrutiny leaves industry no incentive to improve vaccine safety.  Muzzling discussions of government corruption and deficient safety science and abolishing vaccine injuries by fiat is not a strategy that will solve the growing chronic disease epidemic.

The children who comprise this badly injured generation are now aging out of schools that needed to build quiet rooms and autism wings, install wobble chairs, hire security guards and hike special ed spending to 25% to accommodate them. They are landing on the social safety net which they threaten to sink. As Democratic lawmakers vote to mandate more vaccines and call for censorship of safety concerns, Democratic Presidential candidates argue about how to fix America’s straining health care system. If we don’t address the chronic disease epidemic, such proposals are like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The good news for Pharma is that many of these children have lifelong dependencies on blockbuster products like Adderall, Epi-Pens, asthma inhalers, and diabetes, arthritis, and anti-seizure meds made by the same companies that made the vaccines.

My uncle and my father argued that in a free and open society, the response to difficult questions should never be to shut down debate.

My belief that all or some of these injuries might be vaccine related has been the catalyst that wrenched so much of my focus away from the environmental and energy work that I love, and prompted me to become an advocate for vaccine safety. I have sacrificed friendships, income, credibility, and family relationships in an often-lonely campaign to force these companies to perform the tests that will definitively answer these questions.

People will vaccinate when they have confidence in regulators and industry.  When public confidence fails, coercion and censorship became the final options.  Silencing critics and deploying police powers to force untested medicines upon an unwilling public is not an optimal strategy in a democracy.

My uncle and my father argued that in a free and open society, the response to difficult questions should never be to shut down debate. What we need is science, not censorship. I am not anti-vax. I am pro-safety and pro-science. I want robust, transparent safety studies and independent regulators. These do not seem like the kind of radical demands that should divide our party or our families. As Americans and Kennedys, we ought to be able to have a civil, science-based debate about these legitimate concerns.

 




Aluminum, The Smoking Gun: Author of Retracted Aluminum Adjuvant Sheep Study Speaks

Source:  The Highwire

 

Lluís Luján from the Department of Veterinary Pathology University of Zaragoza, Spain is a respected researcher. But when his study with sheep showed disturbing behavior changes when injected with aluminum adjuvants, his paper was suddenly retracted. Read the emails and watch the interview below and judge for yourself if Luján experienced scientific censorship.


“This is the story of a scientific misconduct and editor & editorial corruption. An accepted paper in Pharmacological Research (Elsevier) was withdrawn last March 8th 2019 by the editor without a single reason other than non-declared conflicts of interest, fear of science and for sure pressure from external, not-revealed forces. You can read the story in the following emails and make your own conclusions. Our paper links the use of aluminum as vaccine adjuvant with behavioral changes in sheep and it must be extremely relevant to the field of vaccine safety that has forced them to behave in such a non-scientific, corrupted way.“

Lluís Luján
Department of Veterinary Pathology
University of Zaragoza, Spain


Del Bigtree’s interview with Lluís Luján:

 

https://youtu.be/q7x-tYmiwfk

 

THE SMOKING GUN: ALUMINUM – Symbol AL | HighWireTalk with Del Bigtree

Video Notes:

How a Shocking Aluminum Study Was Censored;

Research Scientist Injured During Merck’s Gardasil Trial;

Prof. Chris Exley “Aluminum is a Greater Threat Than Global Warming.”

At the center of the safety of vaccines is aluminium.

Join the HighWire as we look at aluminium from the 13th Keele Meeting on Aluminium held in Mexico.

Scientists come together to look at the dangers of aluminium. Everything we use contains aluminium, so we need to make sure it isn’t creating long term issues.

We interview Dr Lluis Lujan on the study he did around aluminium and pigs concerning vaccines and the causes vaccines containing aluminium had on these animals. Dr Lujan’s study was withdrawn before published. Today he is here to speak about his research.

In this episode, we speak to Sesilje Peterson, MSc, PhD about her experience of the Merck’s Gardasil Trial.

Prof Chris Exley joins to discuss aluminium and how it is “a Greater Threat Than Global Warming”.

Here is some more information on aluminium:

Symbol: Al

Atomic mass: 26.981539 u

Atomic number: 13

Density: 2.7 g/cm³

Melting point: 1,221°F (660.3°C)

Discoverer: Hans Christian Ørsted

Did you know: Aluminum is used to make aluminium soda cans, which are easily recycled to make new things as well as used in vaccines.




Chlorpyrifos: Playing Pesticide Politics with Children’s Health

Source: Children’s Health Defense

by the Children’s Health Defense Team
July 25, 2019

 

Chlorpyrifos—described by some as “the most dangerous pesticide you’ve never heard of”—is an insect-killing organophosphate. Organophosphates trace their roots back to Nazi-era IG Farben nerve gases; contemporary scientists still describe the compounds as “junior-strength nerve agents” that have a mechanism of action comparable to sarin. Dow Chemical—the company that helped bring the world mustard gas during World War I and napalm and Agent Orange during the Vietnam war—is the manufacturer of chlorpyrifos-containing insecticides.

In the U.S., the agriculture industry applies millions of pounds of chlorpyrifos annually to at least 50 major food crops. Farms around the world also use the chemical “heavily and ubiquitously.” Chlorpyrifos-sprayed crops include some of the foods most likely to be consumed by children, such as corn, soy, apples, oranges, strawberries and nuts. Researchers have linked both prenatal and postnatal chlorpyrifos exposure to brain damage even at the lowest detectable doses. They also note that exposure “is not limited to agricultural environments, as [organophosphates] are ubiquitous in food, dust, and air”—although adults and children who eat an organic diet display significantly reduced levels.

Flagging exposure to chlorpyrifos and other organophosphates as a risk factor for autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) and other developmental problems—including higher-order cognitive deficits, attention deficits, lower IQ scores and impaired working memory—concerned scientists have been sounding the alarm for quite some time. Yet, despite the substantial body of evidence documenting adverse effects not just on human health but also on wildlife and the environment, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proclaimed on July 18 that it will take no action other than to “continue to review the safety of chlorpyrifos.”

… the agency admitted that it was unable to conclude that the risk from aggregate exposure from the use of chlorpyrifos met federal safety standards.

A history of stonewalling

As the Union of Concerned Scientists has remarked, the EPA does not regulate chemicals “willy-nilly” but “usually has to be pushed, sometimes hard.” This observation may help explain the EPA’s erratic behavior and frequent stonewalling with regard to chlorpyrifos over the past two decades. For example, emerging health and environmental concerns prompted the slow-moving agency to disallow household uses of chlorpyrifos in 2000, but in 2006, the EPA did not hesitate to reauthorize the insecticide for widespread agricultural use.

In 2007, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Pesticide Action Network (PAN) petitioned EPA to ban chlorpyrifos, citing its neurotoxicity. The EPA ignored the petition until November 2015, when, under pressure from a federal court of appeals to respond to the petition, the agency admitted that it was “unable to conclude that the risk from aggregate exposure from the use of chlorpyrifos” met federal safety standards. After hinting at the strong possibility that it would ban chlorpyrifos in or on food, the EPA received over 80,000 public comments supporting such a ban. Yet, even as sister countries such as the United Kingdomwithdrew their approval for most agricultural uses of chlorpyrifos around the same time, the EPA then made an about-face decision, rejecting the “science-based conclusion reached just a few months before.” The EPA also chose to ignore a 2017 report written by some of its own scientists (along with researchers at the Departments of Interior and Commerce), which concluded that chlorpyrifos was “likely to adversely affect” 97% of the nearly 2000 endangered species examined (1778/1835), including plants, birds, fish, mammals, reptiles and others.

To explain the reversal, observers have pointed to massive lobbying by Dow Chemical in 2016—to the tune of $13.6 million—while also calling attention to meetings in this time frame between the company and Administration officials. In April 2019, noting the EPA’s 12 years of foot dragging on the NRDC/PAN petition, a federal appeals court again scolded the EPA, ordering it “to issue a final decision with respect to the petition objections within 90 days.” On July 18, the EPA complied with the court order by stating that it would do exactly…nothing.

… the authors noted that while the inherent toxic properties of pesticides warrant the strictest and most comprehensive risk assessment possible, regulators mostly rely on industry-driven research that often biases safety assessments in an industry-favorable direction.

Reliance on biased toxicity studies

Just half a year prior to EPA’s July 2019 reiteration of its do-nothing stance on chlorpyrifos, leading toxicology experts at Harvard, the Karolinska Institute and Stockholm University published a scathing critique of the chlorpyrifos regulatory review process. Writing in the journal Environmental Health, the authors noted that while the “inherent toxic properties” of pesticides warrant the strictest and most comprehensive risk assessment possible, regulators mostly rely on industry-driven research that often biases safety assessments in an industry-favorable direction.

And so it has gone with chlorpyrifos. The authors of the critique point to the multiple strands of evidence from independent studies (epidemiological, in vivo and in vitro) that consistently highlight “adverse health effects of chlorpyrifos exposure on the developing nervous system, associated with lowered IQ at school age,” noting that these harmful outcomes occur “at exposure levels far below those recognized to cause effects on brain development in an industry-funded developmental neurotoxicity…study commissioned for regulatory purposes.” Curious about the “divergence” in the conclusions of independent and industry-funded researchers, the Environmental Health authors obtained and examined the original raw data and study methods used by industry, identifying a number of omissions and irregular research practices that “inappropriately decrease the ability of the studies to reveal true effects.” Concluding that the test reports submitted by the chlorpyrifos manufacturer “may be misleading,” the authors state:

This discrepancy affects the ability of regulatory authorities to perform a valid and safe evaluation of these pesticides. The difference between raw data and conclusions in the test reports indicates a potential existence of bias that would require regulatory attention and possible resolution.

Moreover, the EPA has shown itself to be all too willing to ignore science or make do with manipulated science for other neurotoxins as well.

Par for the course

The EPA’s betrayal of its mandate to protect the public and the environment has prompted some to describe the agency as “a hall of funhouse mirrors,” where organizational goals get “distorted and twisted from their original form, reversed and turned upside down until you start to wonder what exactly was real in the first place.” Although some are portraying the EPA’s regulatory capture as a recent phenomenon, the agency’s decades-long chlorpyrifos saga reveals this assertion to be disingenuous. Moreover, the EPA has shown itself to be all too willing to ignore science or make do with manipulated science for other neurotoxins as well. In the fall of 2019, for example, a lawsuit against the EPA will move forward that faults the agency for its “exceptionally cavalier” (but industry-friendly) decades-long dismissal of the large body of human and animal evidence demonstrating that the fluoride chemicals added to drinking water are neurotoxic.

Nor is the EPA the only captured federal agency “dominated by the industries it presumably regulates.” Accounts are legion of federal agencies predisposed to cater to corporate agendas rather than the public interest—including the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and energy agencies. Without pressure from the citizens to whom they are ultimately accountable, it seems likely that these agencies will continue to place children’s health somewhere toward the bottom of their priority list.




U.S. Congress Bipartisan Vote for Pentagon to Be Investigated for Using Insects as a Biological Weapon

Source: Activist Post

By Aaron Kesel
July 26, 2019

 

In a real-life X-Files episode, United States House members are reportedly concerned in a bipartisan vote that the Pentagon may have unleashed biological weapons or entomological warfare in the form of ticks or other insects that caused the spread of Lyme disease.

Roll Call, a congressional-focused newspaper reports that on July 11th the House secretly decided through a voice vote to support adding an amendment to the 2020 defense authorization bill that would require the Department of Justice to look into whether the Pentagon/CIA/DoD umbrella weaponized ticks.

According to Roll Call, New Jersey Republican Rep. Christopher Smith wrote the amendment demanding the inspector general “conduct a review of whether the Department of Defense experimented with ticks and other insects regarding use as a biological weapon between the years of 1950 and 1975.”

Smith, also ironically a co-chairman of the Congressional Lyme Disease Caucus, further told Roll Call,“We need answers and we need them now.”

First, let’s define biological warfare based on the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention. The definition of a BW agent is pretty clear:

Microbial or other biological agents, or toxins whatever their origin or method of production, of types and in quantities that have no justification for prophylactic, protective or other peaceful purposes.

It’s an indisputable fact that the U.S. has had a longstanding policy for human experimentation, experimenting on its civilian population for decades since the 1950s (Cold War) doing a total of 239 “germ-warfare” tests over populated areas, according to The Washington Post. Even before the Cold War and WW2, the U.S. was involved in eugenics experiments like forced sterilization for undesirables across at least 24 states — prior to even the Nazis being involved in the same practice years later.

In fact, there were a whopping 64,000 cases of forced sterilization in the United States, but this number does not take into account the sterilizations that took place after 1963. Around that time, women from different minority groups were singled out for sterilization in various different experiments. The number increases even more if the sterilizations after 1963 are taken into account, increasing the number of sterilizations in the United States to a massive 80,000. The documentary in the tweet below tells the tale.

 

The American eugenics movement received extensive funding from various corporate foundations including the Carnegie Institution, Rockefeller Foundation, and the Harriman railroad fortune.

In 1972, United States Senate committee testimony brought to light that at least 2,000 involuntary sterilizations had been performed on poor black women without their consent or knowledge, according to an in-depth article on eugenics in the U.S. entitled “6.6: Eugenics in the United States.”

This author has previously written about one biological warfare project used during the Cold War, Operation LAC, or (Operation Large Area Coverage.)

Yes, this is your secret history of previous deep state experiments. The U.S. Army inside the continental United States, revealed by a professor of sociology at St. Louis Community College, Lisa Martino-Taylor, experimented by spraying zinc cadmium sulfide particles over much of the U.S. across several cities including St. Louis and Texas; that project was known as Operation LAC (Large Area Coverage.)

To recap, the U.S. Army also secretly tested carcinogenic chemicals on unknowing residents of Canada in Winnipeg and Alberta during the Cold War in testing linked to weaponry involving radioactive ingredients meant to attack the Soviet Union, as Activist Post reported.

The incidents occurred between July 9, 1953, and Aug 1, 1953, when they sprayed six kilograms of zinc cadmium sulfide onto unsuspecting citizens of Winnipeg from U.S. Army planes. The Army then returned 11 years later in 1964 and repeated the experiments in other parts of Canada including  Suffield, Alta. and Medicine Hat, Alta., according to Lisa Martino-Taylor, National Post reported.

Even further, the United States held open-air biological and chemical weapons tests in at least four states – Alaska, Hawaii, Maryland and Florida – during the 1960s in an effort to develop defenses against such weapons, according to Pentagon documents. According to the documents, artillery shells and bombs were filled with nerve agents like sarin and VX gas.

These tests were part of Project 112, a military program in the 1960s and 1970s to test chemical and biological weapons and defenses against them. Parts of the testing program done on Navy ships were called Project SHAD, or Shipboard Hazard and Defense, Miami Herald reported.

The CIA also did several unethical human experiments in the United States. In one instance they injected radioactive material into hospital patients without their consent at all. Other experiments were performed on pregnant women in Nashville who were given a radioactive iron cocktail to ingest so that researchers could determine if cancer could be passed on to their offspring. Even children were fed radioactive oatmeal as part of a “science club,” Martino-Taylor said.

The previous report didn’t note whether the experiments in Canada were connected to Operation LAC, though it has several similarities to the project. It also wasn’t mentioned whether this was a bigger part of Project 112. However, for years the Canadian government has denied that it tested any bioweapons in Alaska and Alberta, as well as spraying “simulated bio-weaponry across North American cities, including Winnipeg.

Pathogens for War, by University of Western Ontario historian Donald Avery, notes that Canadian scientists were intimately involved in U.S. bioweapons research until 1969 when then-president Richard Nixon unilaterally ended the program. Significant quantities of toxins, including sarin and the nerve agent VX, were stockpiled at Canada, Suffield until at least 1989, The Star reported.

The United States allegedly scrapped its biological weapons program in the late 1960s and agreed in a 1997 treaty, the “Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons” to destroy all its chemical weapons.

The goal “was to deter the use of biological weapons against the United States and its allies and to retaliate if deterrence failed,” the government explained. “Fundamental to the development of a deterrent strategy was the need for a thorough study and analysis of our vulnerability to overt and covert attack.”

For years many rumors have surrounded New York’s Plum Island and Maryland’s Fort Detrick (the same base that anthrax originated from that was used in an attack on media and politicians after 9/11) may have infected insects for biological weapon tests and then released those insects outside of the lab in a live experiment, leading to the spread of viruses/diseases.

Fort Detrick is home to Battelle’s Top Secret Bio laboratory the (National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center – NBACC) under a U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) contract for the last decade. Battelle was awarded a $344.4 million federal contract (2006 – 2016) and another $17.3 million contract (2015 -2026) by DHS.

There are three main forms of entomological warfare – insects directly used as weapons, insects used to destroy crops, and insects used as vectors to inflict disease, according to Ryan C. Gott, Ph.D.

Early History Of Entomological Warfare:

R.K.D. Peterson in 1990 at the University of Nebraska detailed the history of insects allegedly used as biological weapons also known as entomological warfare (EW) throughout history. (archived.)

According to Peterson, the American Civil War from 1861-1865, marked the first instance of alleged use of an insect as a weapon of war. The Confederacy accused the Union of deliberately introducing the harlequin bug, and Murgentia histrionica, into the South.

Tremendous crop damage resulted in the South because of this pest. This allegation was never proven, and it now appears that the harlequin bug moved on its own into the South from Mexico. However, humans may have aided in the movement of this pest.

Disease relationships (microbial and insect vector) were elucidated in the early twentieth century. As soon as the mechanisms were known, military planners began to apply them as possible warfare agents.

The next alleged use of insects as a biological weapon that is notable was in 1943 when Adolf Hitler agreed to establish an SS biological weapons research station at Posen. As the Russians got closer to the research station, work then accelerated at the station, but no real advances were made before the Russians occupied the station on March 1945.

At the Posen BW research station, the Germans performed work on diseases such as the plague, cholera, typhus and yellow fever.  They also performed experiments on the feasibility of using insects such as the Colorado potato beetle to attack Allies’ potato crops. The Germans were accused of dropping cardboard boxes filled with Colorado potato beetles over England from 1941-1943, according to research by Peterson. However, the containers were never recovered, but abnormalities associated with the presence of the beetles prompted Sir Maurice Hankey, head of Britain’s biological warfare effort, to write a memo to Winston Churchill airing out his concerns.

That’s not the only alleged insect biological weapon; as British invasion fears grew after the successful evacuation from Dunkirk, rumors spread that the Germans had created an omnivorous strain of grasshopper which would soon starve the British into surrendering. It turned out that this was a myth. However, the fact that Nazi doctors used human subjects for experiments into insect-borne diseases is no myth. Concentration camp inmates were intentionally infested with typhus-infected lice by SS doctors at Natzweiler, Dauchau, and Buchenwald. Many of these doctors and scientists were sentenced to death by the Nuremberg Tribunal after the war.

There was also several attacks launched against China by Japan from 1939-45; plague-infected fleas were disseminated directly out of aircraft or via specialized bombs that deployed the fleas. In 1944, an assault team was assembled to sprinkle plague-infested fleas around the Saipan airfield, which the Americans held at the time. However, that operation was stopped after the ship carrying the assault team was sunk by an American submarine and the experiment was never accomplished. But just because that attack failed doesn’t mean that other attacks didn’t.

Potentially one of the most disturbing cases involves Dr. Shiro Ishii a microbiologist and a Japanese army medical officer during the Second Sino-Japanese War and World War II. As Ishii moved through the ranks, Ishii was placed in charge of building and running Unit 731, a top-secret biological weapons research and development facility, The Guardian reported.

Unit 731 was established in northeast China in a Japanese puppet state on nearly 6 square kilometers of land. Officially, Unit 731 operated as a water purification plant and lumber mill, part of the Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of the Kwantung Army. Ishii and others working at Unit 731 would eventually kill well over 10,000 Chinese citizens and prisoners of war (POWS.) If that’s not enough, the scientists referred to their victims as maruta or “logs,” both of which referenced the cover story of being a sawmill and revealed their complete disregard for the lives of the people they tested.  Unit 731 investigated, among many deplorable things, the best disease and vector combinations to attack an enemy and the best way to introduce that vector, via water supply, air, and through insects, i.e. entomological warfare.

The Soviets also ran experiments with fleas in Mongolia before and during the war. In one account, political prisoners and prisoners of war were chained in tents with pens of diseased rats until the subjects were bitten by disease-infected fleas. Supposedly, in the summer of 1941, one of the prisoner/experimental subjects escaped and began an epidemic that was controlled only because the Soviets then bombed the entire Mongol community.

In 1952, China accused the U.S. of engaging in germ warfare against the people of North Korea. The Chinese began producing large amounts of evidence which suggested that the U.S. was spreading bacteria-laden insects and other objects over the Korean countryside.

Also, various plagues suddenly appeared in areas where there had not been a single documented plague for over 500 years.

Chinese entomologists accused the U.S. of distributing disease-carrying anthomyid flies, springtails, and stoneflies with P-51 fighters. Also, accusations were leveled stating that America was contaminating areas with plague-infested rats and fleas, and anthrax-infected flies and spiders. In all, the U.S. was accused of dropping ants, beetles, crickets, fleas, flies, grasshoppers, lice, springtails, and stoneflies. The alleged associated diseases included anthrax, cholera, dysentery, fowl septicemia, paratyphoid, plague, scrub typhus and typhoid, according to Peterson.

The Chinese also set up an international scientific commission for investigating the facts about bacterial warfare. The commission, consisting of scientists from all over the world, ruled that the United States probably did engage in limited biological warfare in Korea.

In 1962, General Stubbs went on the record and admitted to Congress that insect strains were being developed that were resistant to insecticides.

Finally, in 1969, President Nixon stated for the unilateral destruction of biological weapons. Just three years later, the U.S. signed on to the Biological Weapons Convention, which banned the development, production, stockpiling, transfer, and acquiring of biological weapons. In 1975, the U.S. also signed the Geneva Protocol of 1925, which further banned the use of these weapons in war. The treaties, however, do not ban research by nations, which in the U.S.’s case may mean it continued the entomological warfare experiments it started on fleas, rats and other creatures that were used as carriers of diseases.

Covert Operations Using Entomological Warfare:

In 1970 and 1972, Sand Fly Fever tests were performed on humans according to a declassified U.S. Army report – US Army Activities in the US, Biological Warfare Programs, 1977, vol. II, p. 203. During the operation known as Whitecoat volunteers were exposed to bites by infected sand flies.Operation Whitecoat was a bio-defense medical research program carried out by the US Army at Fort Detrick, Maryland between 1954 and 1973.

For decades, the U.S. Army examined whether infected mosquitoes could be used to kill our enemies in “entomological warfare.”

Some of the most notable entomological warfare experiments include – Operations Drop Kick, Big Buzz, May Day, Whitecoat, Big Itch and Bellweather. And these are just what are public knowledge and declassified.

“In these excerpts from a March 1981 Army report, you can marvel at how much it would have cost to launch a yellow fever-infected mosquito attack on a city (with a handy ‘Cost per Death’ chart included!),” Smoking Gun writes. (archived)

Smoking Gun also wrote an in-depth article analyzing the documents (here.)

Operation Whitecoat: Infected flies tested to bite humans.

Operation Big Itch: Field tests were performed to determine coverage patterns and survivability of the tropical rat flea Xenopsylla cheopis for use as a disease vector in biological warfare.

Operation Big Buzz: 1 million A. Aeugupti mosquitoes were produced, 1/3rd were placed in munitions and dropped from aircraft, or dispersed on the ground. The mosquitoes survived the airdrop and actively sought out human blood according to the experiment.

Operation May Day: Aedes Aegupti mosquitoes were dispersed in Georgia, USA.

Operation Bellweather: The U.S. Army Chemical Research and Development Command, Biological Weapons Branch, studied outdoor mosquito biting activity in a number of field tests at Dugway Proving Ground, Utah, in 1960. Virgin female Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, which had been starved, were tested on soldiers out in the open.

Still, parts of the 1981 U.S. Army report such as the “Mass production of Aedes Aegypti” have not been declassified like Operation Drop Kick which was fully redacted. This means the experiments could still be ongoing under a different name or the same operation moniker.

Aedes Aegypti, also known as yellow fever mosquito, has been widely used in U.S. military operations. The same species of mosquitoes are alleged to be the cause of dengue, chikungunya and even the Zika virus.

If the current review by U.S. Congress determines that the Pentagon has created insects as biological weapons, the House is demanding that the inspector general must present Congress with information including “whether any ticks or insects used in such experiments were released outside of any laboratory by accident or experiment design.” It is an unnerving truth that the government may be responsible for having unleashed a custom-made pathogen as part of a biological human experiment.

Synthetic Biology And Manmade Viruses

Even if by accident (which is less likely given the deliberate releasing of insect weaponization above), that’s not so bizarre either. In 2009, the German news agency Spiegel reported that a Swine Flu container exploded on a train in Switzerland. This may have been what was behind the outbreak of Swine Flu during the same year despite denial in the article.

In the midst of global fears of a swine flu pandemic, a container with swine flu exploded on a train carrying over 60 people.

Luckily, however, it was not the mutated swine flu virus that has killed around 150 people in Mexico. The police quickly reassured the public that there was no danger of any infection.

Likewise, China also had an incident of an outbreak which resulted in five top officials of the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) punished for the outbreak of SARS. The investigation found that the release of the virus was due to the negligence of two CDC employees who were infected and not deliberate, China Daily reported.

In 2017, scientists at the University of Alberta put together from scratch a relative of the smallpox virus, the horsepox virus, Scientific American reported. Although not deadly to humans, or horses for that matter, the fact remains that such a feat can be accomplished by scientists.

In 2014, another scientist – Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin-Madison – genetically manipulated the 2009 strain of pandemic flu virus H1N1 Swine Flu in order for it to “escape” the control of the immune system’s neutralizing antibodies, effectively making the human population defenseless against its reemergence, Independent UK reported. 

That same year, scientists at the same University in Wisconsin-Madison headed by Kawaoka created a life-threatening virus that closely resembles the 1918 Spanish flu strain that killed an estimated 50 million people, which was condemned by their colleagues as “crazy.”

Last year, a major U.S. government report from  National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine warned that advances in synthetic biology now allow scientists to have the capability to recreate dangerous viruses from scratch; make harmful bacteria more deadly; and modify common microbes so that they churn out lethal toxins once they enter the body. The report did not mention entomological warfare weapons.

The Guardian reports:

In the report, the scientists describe how synthetic biology, which gives researchers precision tools to manipulate living organisms, “enhances and expands” opportunities to create bioweapons. “As the power of the technology increases, that brings a general need to scrutinize where harms could come from,” said Peter Carr, a senior scientist at MIT’s Synthetic Biology Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts.”

The report calls on the U.S. government to rethink how it conducts disease surveillance, so it can better detect bioweapons, and to look at ways to bolster defenses, for example by finding ways to make and deploy vaccines far more rapidly. For every bioweapon the scientists consider, the report sets out key hurdles that, once cleared, will make the weapons more feasible.

The Guardian references one of the first believed cases 20 years ago where geneticist Eckard Wimmer of Stony Brook University in New York recreated the polio virus in a test tube. Also occurring last year, a team at the University of Alberta built a vaccine for their infectious horsepox virus. “The virus is a close relative of smallpox, which may have claimed half a billion lives in the 20th century,” reports The Guardian. “Today, the genetic code of almost any mammalian virus can be found online and synthesized.”

A book published earlier this year titled Bitten: The Secret History of Lyme Disease and Biological Weapons—predated the House call for an investigation. This book may have inspired Smith to propose the bipartisan amendment that is co-sponsored by Maryland Republican Andy Harris and Minnesota Democrat Collin Peterson who are echoing the calls for an investigation.

Another book that is recommended reading by this reporter and that was used in excerpts of writing this article is Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects as Weapons of War. by Jeffrey A. Lockwood, a professor of natural sciences and humanities at the University of Wyoming.

If the U.S. used vector-borne diseases such as plague (carried by fleas), yellow fever and malaria (mosquitoes), typhus (lice), Q fever (ticks), and dysentery (flies) in conflicts from the Napoleonic campaigns through World War I, what was stopping the continuation of those entomological warfare experiments until the modern-day era on ticks with Lyme disease? The answer is: absolutely nothing.  It’s clear that the Pentagon’s umbrella in the military was experimenting on entomological warfare, and now the government needs to compensate millions of Americans who may have been infected from the covert release of pathogens piggybacked on insects and animals alike.


Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post. Support them at Patreon.




Laughing All the Way to the Bank: Vaccine Makers and Liability Protection—Conflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health: Part III

Source:  Children’s Health Defense

by the Children’s Health Defense Team
May 23, 2019

 

[Note: This is Part III in a series of articles adapted from the second Children’s Health Defense eBook: Conflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health. The first eBook, The Sickest Generation: The Facts Behind the Children’s Health Crisis and Why It Needs to End, described how children’s health began to worsen dramatically in the late 1980s following fateful changes in the childhood vaccine schedule.]

…the unprecedented health crisis beleaguering American children began around the same time that Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.

When it comes to telling the story of vaccine injuries and how frighteningly commonplace they have become, denial, censorship and lies seem to be ruling the day—for now. However, future public health historians will surely acknowledge that the unprecedented health crisis beleaguering American children began around the same time—1986—that Congress let the genie out of the bottle by passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA).

While the Act marked a depressing turning point for American children and their families, it was a bonanza for the pharmaceutical industry. The industry protections offered by the Act—which essentially awarded vaccine makers blanket immunity from liability for injuries resulting from childhood vaccines, “no matter how toxic the ingredients, how negligent the manufacturer or how grievous the harm”—sparked a gold rush of vaccine development.

By the close of 2017, analysts valued the highly consolidated global pharmaceutical market at over $1.1 trillion (U.S. dollars).

The big four

The Act’s banishment of liability as a business worry catapulted vaccines from a “neglected corner of the drugs business” into a major economic driver of the medical and pharmaceutical industries. In the U.S., four companies have been the principal beneficiaries of the no-liability business environment for childhood vaccines. The four pharmaceutical giants—GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Merck, Pfizer and Sanofi Pasteur—manufacture every vaccine on the U.S. childhood schedule. In addition to the “big four,” companies such as Seqirus and MedImmune(AstraZeneca) have been crowding into the increasingly lucrative adult vaccine market.

By the close of 2017, analysts valued the highly consolidated global pharmaceutical market at over $1.1 trillion (U.S. dollars). The four leading vaccine makers ranked third, fifth, sixth and seventh globally in terms of total revenues. All four also registered increases in annual revenue from 2017 to 2018–5%-6% for Merck and GSK and 2%-3% for Pfizer and Sanofi.

 

Manufacturers of Vaccines for Children and Adolescents in the U.S.

 

The companies’ strong vaccine sales helped ensure these record profits. For example, Pfizer’s $136-a-shot Prevnar-13 vaccine (with four doses advised before preschool age) earned the company nearly $4 billion in a single year, “about double what it made from high-profile drugs like Lipitor and Viagra.”

There are also other factors working in favor of record-breaking vaccine profits, outlined in a 2014 report in The New York Times on “soaring” vaccine prices. These include:

  • Market entry of new vaccines at “once-unthinkable” prices
  • Reformulation of old vaccines with a higher price tag
  • Requirements for multiple doses and boosters
  • Monopoly market positions for some vaccines
  • Patents on manufacturing processes (vaccine patent applications rose “tenfold in the 1990s to more than 10,000”)
  • Guaranteed purchases by the federal government (Vaccines for Children Program)
  • Guaranteed coverage by private insurance and the Affordable Care Act, meaning that “patients often do not notice the prices.”

Convicted felons

None of the leading vaccine manufacturers are strangers to lawsuits or large financial settlements for drugs in their product line that, unlike vaccines, are subject to courtroom liability. Over the past decade, in fact, GSK, Pfizer, Merck and others have paid out billions in punitive settlements for products deemed to be deceptive or harmful. In the case of Merck, the company’s payouts included $950 million in federal fines following evidence of a “deliberate corporate conspiracy” related to its bestselling painkiller Vioxx. The FDA approved the drug in 1999, but Merck reluctantly withdrew it from the market in 2004 after studies showed that it doubled serious health risks and had resulted in at least 60,000 deaths. Merck pleaded guilty to criminal charges over its illegal marketing of Vioxx and settled 27,000 lawsuits for $4.85 billion.

Dubbed by some as the “Help Pay for Vioxx” vaccine, Gardasil has been a major revenue booster.

Merck enjoys a unique monopoly position for four vaccines, including its blockbuster human papillomavirus (HPV) Gardasil vaccine and both measles-mumps-rubella vaccines (MMR and MMR-plus-varicella or MMRV). Merck brought Gardasil to market in the aftermath of the Vioxx scandal. Dubbed by some as the “Help Pay for Vioxx” vaccine, Gardasil has been a major revenue booster. In a single quarter of 2016, for example, in which Merck posted a profit of $2.2 billion, the company saw a 38% jump in sales of HPV vaccines (due to “increased pricing and demand”). Similar trends have been evident for Merck’s other vaccines, with a 27% increase in MMRV vaccine sales in the same quarter of 2016 after the CDC added the vaccine to its pediatric stockpile. Growing global vaccine sales, including in China, helped Merck continue to “beat Wall Street expectations” in 2018.

What, me worry?

From a consumer standpoint, Merck’s track record with Vioxx raises the question of whether the American public can believe the company’s claims about the safety of its vaccines. Can a company that confessed to illegal activity and paid out almost $5 billion to settle lawsuits for a drug it knew to be harmful be considered trustworthy when it markets expensive and profitable vaccines such as Gardasil? The same question can be asked regarding the other vaccine manufacturers.

In 2007, Merck had to recall over a million doses of two childhood vaccines because it “could not guarantee the products’ sterility.” A year later in 2008, an investigation by the Philadelphia Inquirer described an unpublished FDA review of one of Merck’s largest U.S. vaccine plants, which identified contaminated children’s vaccines and a failure to follow good manufacturing practices. The review noted 49 areas of concern in all. What was the plant leadership’s response to the FDA’s troubling findings? “Nobody’s perfect.” Considering that pharmaceutical companies want to continue injecting our children with liability-free and largely untested vaccines from pregnancy on, this executive’s cavalier attitude hardly inspires confidence.

In our FREE eBookConflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health, CHD takes the position that conflicts of interest and unethical behavior encumber the key public and private players involved in U.S. and global vaccination programs to such an extent that public skepticism is not only understandable, but justified. The loss of confidence in vaccine safety must be addressed with independent, unbiased science. As we publish subsequent parts of the eBook, we will illustrate how lack of integrity and ethical betrayals are impeding sound public health policy and vaccine safety science, while gravely undermining children’s health.




Xenobiotics in Vaccines: The Place to Start REAL Scientific Investigations

Source:  Natural Blaze

by Catherine J. Frompovich
May 19, 2019

 

Since vaccine issues are ramping up on both sides of that unique ‘political spectrum’, i.e., legislation introduced almost daily at both state and federal levels, which specifically mandate vaccines while adding penalties for not submitting oneself or one’s children to “poison darts” called vaccinations, AND consumer push-back more evident now than ever, I thought it might be helpful to understanding and to discussing intelligently the topic of toxic vaccines and their ingredients [XenobioticsIF there were broader or more comprehensible information, including definitions of just what is in most, if not all, vaccines.

Thanks, and a big hat tip to Eileen Dannemann for sharing recent information wherein I found a most significant file titled “Vaccine Ingredients” published online by WAVE (Worldwide Association For Vaccine Education) embedded wherein vaccine ingredients are listed alphabetically along with their chemical signatures; possible/probable adverse health effects and/or reactions; and even their common industrial uses.

However, I think the list, for as extensive as it is—220 entries, probably is not complete since no recombinant DNA [DNA that has been formed artificially by combining constituents from different organisms (online Dictionary)per se are listed; no growth mediums, e.g., vaccine growth “broths” per se, as listed in the CDC pink book of Excipient and Media Summary”; nor what probably could be termed “trade secrets ingredients,” which are certain elements that gain or guarantee U.S. patents as “proprietary secrets.” Even FDA and CDC may not know what they are!

WAVE’s alphabetical chemical listing includes the following number of entries:

# 1; A 21; B 6; C 8; D 14; E 4; F 6; G 8; H 13; I 8; K 1;
L 7; M 24; N 4; O 2; P 25; R 3; S 30; T 12; V 20; X 1; Y 2
[It’s a great resource to save and introduce as part of any vaccine discussion.]

To my way of thinking, an in-depth, analytical science discussion—not consensus science as practiced by the CDC, FDA and Big Pharma—must become the basis for considering ANY legislative actions regarding vaccines/vaccinations since they, by their very chemical natures, violate basic human rights, regardless of “herd or community immunity,” an impossibility since diseases have ways of outsmarting and morphing into other organisms.

No one—not even governments, as the Nazis in World War II found out—can get away with using humans as guinea pigs to determine ‘science research data’, even for national security projects! Wasn’t that what the Nuremberg trials after World War II were supposed to have established?

However, I really don’t think so. The United States government, under Project Paperclip, for all intents and purposes, performed and still is carrying on ‘weaponized medicine’ experiments.

Are vaccines a part of that agenda?

Should we and/or Congress ask that question of the U.S. military?

The only way to find out is to hold the U.S. Congress accountable for the 1986 Vaccine Law, plus demand Congress exercise its oversight powers, instead of being cozy friends with Big Pharma’s lobbyists who generously donate and fund pro-vaccine Congress members’ election campaign coffers.

See Database details drugmakers’ contributions to Congress”

“Contributions help keep the door open for company lobbyists,” said Brendan Fischer, Director, Federal Reform Programs at the Campaign Legal Center.

Here’s a website that can give you the contributions any member of Congress received from Pharma: Pharma Cash To Congress. Have fun!




RFK, Jr.: Gardasil “The Science” Video and Other Jaw-Dropping Facts

Source:  Children’s Health Defense

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.—“Many of the things I’m going to say today would be slanderous if they weren’t true. And, if they are not true, then Merck should sue me. But Merck won’t do that. And they won’t do that because in the United States, truth is an absolute defense against slander.”

 

https://youtu.be/aluDs5SQjD8

 

This must-watch video details the many problems with the development and safety of Merck’s third-highest grossing product, Gardasil. Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CHD’s Chairman and Chief Legal Counsel, ask that you watch and share this video so that you, and others, may make an informed decision of whether or not to give your child, boy or girl, a Gardasil vaccine. It can also be a useful tool for pediatricians who are trying to understand how this vaccine, that is actually causing health problems with young people, could have been approved by FDA and then recommended by CDC. The video is full of jaw-dropping facts about Gardasil and the clinical trials leading up to its release upon an unsuspecting public.

 


Transcript of “The Science” presentation:

Download “The Science” Transcript

Read transcript below images.










 

Children’s Health Defense and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Science Day Presentation for Gardasil

 

Hi, I’m Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and I’m making this video for the sake of parents who are trying to make an informed decision of whether or not to give their child, their boy or girl the Gardasil vaccine.

I’m also making this video as a tool for pediatricians who are trying to understand how this vaccine—if it’s actually causing all of these problems with young girls—could have been approved by FDA and then mandated by CDC.

Virtually all of the things that I’m going to talk about in this video are available to the public on public documents as I’m going to show.

Finally, I want to say this about Merck which is the company that makes the Gardasil vaccine.

Many of the things that I’m going to say today would be slanderous if they were not true. And if they’re not true then Merck should sue me. But Merck won’t do that and they won’t do it because in the United States truth is an absolute defense to slander. And second of all Merck knows that if they sue me, I’m going to immediately file a discovery request, and many, many, more documents are going to emerge that illustrate even more fraud by this company on the American public and the people all over the world.

Finally, as a footnote I’m not going to talk today about the specific biological mechanisms that allow this vaccine to cause harm in human beings. That information is out there it’s in dozens of peer-reviewed, published scientific documents. Many of these are described on our website and I urge people to go to the Children’s Health Defense website to educate themselves on those issues.

Today we’re going to talk about the clinical trial about Merck’s fraud in that process…and this is Merck’s claim:

The HPV vaccine will “eliminate cervical cancers and other HPV associated cancers.”

The danger of dying from HPV cancer in this country is 1 death in 43.5 thousand people.

Imagine you have a deck of cards but instead of 50 cards. There’s 43,500 on a on a big, big table and one of those cards is a black card. If you get that, you die.

So, Merck’s deal is that it’s going to remove that black card from the deck. But in order to play the game and make sure that Merck removes the black card, everybody who participates has to put in $420 because that’s the cost of the three-dose Gardasil vaccine.

So, here’s Gardasil by the numbers. So, the cost of the three-jab series average is about $420. There are 76 million children who essentially have been mandated by CDC to receive these vaccines. A blockbuster product from Merck, and global revenues from this vaccine today are about $2.3 billion dollars. It’s the third largest product in the company’s inventory.

The cost of saving one American life is 18.3 million dollars. People could argue whether or not that’s a reasonable value of a human life. What I would say was is that the criteria that we should use for evaluating reasonableness—is there a cheaper way to save more lives? And people would argue that Pap smears are the most effective way that 80 percent of cervical cancer deaths have already been eliminated by Pap smears. And this is the most effective technology.

Incidentally in another context HHS has already put a value on human life and the value is $250k. That is the maximum number that the vaccine compensation program will pay for killing an American citizen.

Prior to marketing the vaccine, the FDA licenses the vaccine, and in that licensing process Merck had to show that the vaccine was safe. According to Federal regulations the word “safety” means “relative freedom from harmful effects, taking into consideration the character of the product in relationship to the condition of the recipient at that time.”

So, what is the condition of the recipients of that target group for this vaccine. And this vaccine targets millions of preteens and teens, for whom the risk of dying from cervical cancer is practically zero. Cervical cancer’s median age of death is 58. It is first diagnosed at age 50 (median).

A teenage girl or boy has zero chance of dying of this illness. Which means the threshold for giving this medication is very, very high.

Secondly it is mandated in some jurisdictions So the government is actually—government officials are actually—coming in and ordering people to take this medical intervention. So, we have to be sure that the threshold for risk, “the risk profile” for that medical intervention should be very, very low.

Third, unlike other medical interventions Gardasil recipients are perfectly healthy. So, when you give medication to a healthy individual you have to make sure that the risk profile is practically zero. And in order to determine risk, there is a standardized protocol. And it’s called double-blind placebo studies. What does that mean?

It means that the drug company that’s trying to license this product gives the medication to one group of people, maybe 5,000 or 10,000 people, and gives a placebo, an inert placebo, either an identical looking pill that is inert—it’s either saline or sugar—to a similarly situated group of 5,000 or 10,000 people and it’s double blind meaning that neither the patients nor the researchers knew who got the placebo and who got the actual medication.

And you can see here, here’s what the NIH says about the National Institute for Health placebos: an inactive substance that looks like a drug.

So here are typical examples:

Lipitor was given during its study phase to about 17k subjects. Half of them received Lipitor half of them received a sugar pill that looked identical to Lipitor and they were observed and studied for up to 3.3 years.

Why for so long? Because many of the injuries that are caused by medication are latent—they don’t show up for two or three or four or five years cancer for example may not show up for four or five years after the exposure. Autoimmune diseases and allergies and these kind of things take a long time to diagnose. Enbrel for that reason was delayed for 6.6 years and against a control group that received a saline injection.

Botox, there was a national emergency to get Botox to market so people could get their wrinkles cured, was studied for 51 weeks and it was studied against a saline injection.

Now I’m going to show you one of the really outrageous frauds that Merck committed during the clinical trials. This is an insert that is part of every vaccine package. And you can go on the Internet right now and look up that Merck product and search and find these two tables.

In the initial table you can see a there are three columns and this is a table that just looks at injuries at the vaccine site for redness and itching and bruising and pain at the vaccine site and they use one…there were 5,000 girls—5,088 girls who got the Gardasil vaccine.

Number two, there were 3,470 girls who got the AAHS control, what is that? That is the adjuvant in the vaccine. That is a toxic neurotoxin, that’s put in the vaccine to make it more long-lasting to provoke an immune response in the subject of the vaccine.

And most people believe that it is that aluminum adjuvant that is causing all of these injuries in the girls who are getting the vaccine. And there were 3,470 people who received just the neurotoxin with no antigens and no other vaccine components.

And you have a third group which is the placebo group. What I want you to look at is at these numbers. That in the Gardasil and AAHS control there is virtually the same number of injuries.

And when you get to the saline placebo, that injury rate is cut in half.

Now let’s go to the table where they talk about real systemic injuries…autoimmune diseases, and instead of showing us real science, which is to show us what happened to the saline group, they hide the saline group as a way of fooling you, your pediatrician and the regulatory agency by compressing it into the aluminum group and they never tell us. They say this is a combination of the aluminum adjuvant and the saline placebo. They don’t tell us how many in each category were compressed there. The real thing that you need to watch here is what happened.

These are all very, very serious injuries. These are injuries that in some cases people would feel were worse than death—and that affect people and debilitate for a lifetime in many cases.

And if you look at the bottom of the Gardasil group an astonishing 2.3 percent of the girls in the clinical study who received the Gardasil vaccine got ill from autoimmune diseases, many within seven months of taking the vaccine.

And look what happened in the aluminum group—the same number exactly. 2.3 percent.

Nobody, no parent would allow their daughter to take a substance that had a one-in-40 chance of giving them a lifetime disability.

World Health Organization says that using a spiked placebo, or a faux-cebo as Merck did with Gardasil, puts you at a methodological disadvantage that “it may be difficult or impossible to assess vaccine safety.”

Dr. Stanley Plotkin, who developed the polio vaccine…who developed the pertussis vaccine, who developed the rotavirus vaccine—the Stanley Plotkin award is the Nobel Prize of vaccinology it’s given to the top vaccinologist every year—and what he says is:

Unless you have a true control group you are in LA LA LAND.

Finally, the American Medical Association says the absence of double-blind placebo testing and short-term studies of chronic disease are “the indicia of marketing masquerading as science.”

And that’s what Merck gave us.

The Cochrane Collaboration—thirty thousand scientists from all over the world who came together to create an independent assessment of medical protocols which they saw as being increasingly controlled by the industry—The Cochrane Collaboration said the use of active comparators probably increased the occurrence of harms and the comparative group thereby masking harms created by the HPV vaccine.

And that indeed was Merck’s point…to hide those harms.

So, if you do the math women are 100 times more likely to suffer serious adverse events from the Gardasil vaccine than they are to be protected from cervical cancer.

So now we have a very different bargain in this card game that we’re playing with Merck.

If 43 thousand cards and the black card—the death card is gone—but now, there are a thousand blue cards which if you pick one of those by mistake you have a good chance of getting an autoimmune disease. Nobody would take that bargain.

So, in order to get the FDA license to market this vaccine Merck did a number of studies, which are called protocols. We don’t know how many they did because they’re not telling us they never disclosed it.

The one we’re most concerned with is protocol 18. The reason protocol 18 is critical is because that was the basis for FDA giving Merck the license to produce and market the vaccine.

Why is that? Because protocol 18 is the only one in which the target audience for this vaccine. 11- and 12-year old girls was actually tested, and had a control group. The other ones looked at big cohorts of women were 16 to 25-year old and 16 to 26-year old women.

Protocol 18 looked at girls and boys from ages 9 to 15. It was a total of 1200 children. and almost 600 controls. That is a very, very, tiny group of people to study in order to determine the safety of a product is going to be marketed to billions of children around the world.

Now I’m going to show you one of the key fraudulent flimflams that Merck used to get this license. FDA said they approved Gardasil based on protocol 18 because protocol 18 was of particular interest because it’s the only protocol in which Merck used a true saline placebo instead of the aluminum adjuvant as a control.

That’s what Merck told FDA and the CDC but Merck was lying. It actually did not use a true saline placebo. It used what Merck called the “carrier solution.” Which is all of the components of the vaccine except for the aluminum and the viral particles the antigen.

Among the compounds that we know were in the carrier solution are Polysorbate 80 which we have no idea what the safety profile is because it’s never been tested for safety independently in vaccines. Sodium borate which is borax which is banned by FDA in food products and all food products in the United States, and is banned altogether in Europe, genetically modified yeast, (there’s no safety test ever been done on it in vaccines) L-histidine, the same, and possibly DNA fragments.

I say possibly because we know there are DNA fragments in the final vaccine, we don’t know how they got there. And Merck has lied about the DNA fragments from the outset.

And despite these potentially toxic components of compounds that are in the vaccine, the 596 children that were given the carrier solution fared much better in the other than any other cohort in the study. The girls and boys who receive the carrier solution were the only significant cohorts with no serious adverse events for the first 15 days.

And here’s another one of the gravamen of the fraud that Merck committed in its Gardasil trials, but it turns out in the protocol 18 study, it appears Merck cut the amount of aluminum that was given to the vaccine group in half. They tested a completely different formulation. If true, we theorize that they took the aluminum out to reduce the number of injuries and to mask the really bad safety profile of this vaccine.

And since the protocol 18 data are not based on the Gardasil vaccine formulation, the trial itself constitutes rank scientific fraud.

Here’s another bag of tricks that was used by Merck in order to skew the clinical trials results in favor of Gardasil.

Merck and its researchers use what they call exclusion criteria—for example people who had zero allergies, people who had prior genital infections were thrown out of the clinical trials. People who had over four sex partners in their entire lives were excluded from the trials. Anybody who had a history of immunological or nervous system disorders, people with chronic illnesses and seizure disorders, people with other medical conditions, people who had reactions to vaccine ingredients including the aluminum, yeast and the benzonase. or anybody with a history of alcohol and drug abuse.

If you really wanted to know whether the vaccine was helping people—if it was effective—wouldn’t you want those people in your study wouldn’t you want people who had a genetic vulnerability to cancer in your study to see if it actually was capable of preventing cancer.

Then Merck had one catch all exclusion category which was any condition which in the opinion of the investigator might interfere with the evaluation of the study objectives. Well, that gave Merck and its paid investigators complete control to throw people out of the study who they thought might make the study look not successful. All of these exclusionary categories gave Merck the ability to limit the study to people who were like All of these exclusionary categories gave Merck the ability to limit this study to people who were like an elite club of superheroes…the people who get the vaccine are not the same people they tested on. They tested it on the Avengers. They didn’t test it on, you know, Joe Bag-of-Donuts … the people are actually receiving this vaccine in day to day life. And by doing that they were able to mask whatever injury might show up in a larger and more vulnerable population who are actually receiving the vaccine.

Experts used an arsenal of sloppy protocols to again, hide vaccine injuries. Among these, Merck gave report cards—the daily journal report cards— only to 10 percent of the people who they tested the vaccine on and told those people only make reports for 14 days after the injection. And the report cards were only designed to collect jab site information. So, redness, itching, bruising, fever.

And they ignored altogether the autoimmune diseases and menstrual cycle problems and fertility problems and pain and dizziness and seizures and all of the other things that we’ve now seen are associated with the vaccine. In fact, there are numerous girls who report that they were injured that they attempted to report those injuries to Merck, and that Merck rebuffed them.

Furthermore, Merck gave extraordinary discretion to its researchers to determine what was a vaccine injury in what was not a vaccine injury and because there was no inert placebo, it was completely within their discretion. If a girl came back with seizures or autoimmune disease or menstrual cycle problems they could just say to the girl, well that’s not related to the vaccine.

In some cases, we know that Merck actively covered up and lied about injuries that it had a duty to report to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. For example, in the case of Christina Tarsell, a Maryland girl, who died from the Gardasil vaccine, Merck lied about that death in its official reports of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It told the system that Christina’s doctor had told Merck that her death was the result of a virus.

And the doctor adamantly denies that. Merck has refused to remove the misinformation from the VAERS system.

Furthermore, Merck lied to the girls who participated in these studies, telling them No.1, that the placebo was saline and that it contained no other ingredients. And No. 2, that the study in which they were participating was not a safety study. They were told that there had already been safety studies and that the vaccine had been proven safe.

What did this do for Merck? It made it so the girls were less likely to report injuries associated with the vaccine. Because they believed that the vaccine that they were receiving had already been proven safe and that any injuries they did experience maybe a month or two months or three months after the vaccine must be simply coincidental and had nothing to do with the vaccine.

Despite all of these efforts by Merck to discourage those from reporting vaccine injuries during the clinical trials, half of the girls in the Gardasil group and half of them in the aluminum adjuvant group reported serious injuries after receiving the vaccine.

In order to conceal the link between these injuries and the vaccine, Merck invented a brand new medical metric that had never been heard of before called “new medical conditions” and it dismissed all of these new injuries which affected 50 percent of the girls who received the vaccine and the adjuvant as “new medical conditions”, unrelated to the vaccines, simply sad coincidences.

Many of these diseases were serious diseases—blood lymphatic diseases, anemia, endocrine diseases, autoimmune diseases, G.I., Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, vaginal infections musculoskeletal injuries, arthritis, neoplasm, Hodgkin’s disease, neurological diseases, psychiatric diseases, depression, reproductive and breast disorders, menstrual irregularities, and pain. Over 3 percent of the girls—1 in 30—in both groups required surgical and medical procedures.

So, this card game that we’re playing with Merck has now become a really bad bet.

Merck has removed the one black card but you now have a 1 in 40 chance of drawing a blue card and getting an autoimmune disease that may afflict you for the rest of your life and you have a 1 in 2 chance of having some other serious medical condition.

So now let’s look at Merck’s central claim which is that the Gardasil vaccine will prevent cervical cancer.

Merck’s in a sweet position here, let’s face it because the target group vaccine is 11-year olds, and the median age of death for cervical cancer is age 58. Merck essentially is making this bargain.

It’s telling the 11-year old girl if you take our vaccine 47 years from now you won’t die of cervical cancer. And of course, that truth is you can’t make a vaccine that proves that it’s going to prevent cancer 47 years from now. There’s no way to test for that.

So, Merck used a shortcut. It said we’re going to prove that it prevents these what it called surrogate end points. The best thing that Merck had come up with was CIN2 and CIN3 lesions which it called precancerous lesions even though most of those lesions never mature into cancer.

So how can you call something precancerous when it was never going to turn into cancer?

And here’s what a study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology said about Merck’s scheme: CIN3 is an imperfect diagnosis of precancer, and an intermediate surrogate for cancer.

Their own attorneys told them for these products, the indication is the surrogate, not the ultimate.  Promotion cannot make any claim, vis-a-vis the ultimate end point, based upon the fate of a surrogate endpoint.

Merck has another problem. Recent peer reviewed scientific studies indicate that perhaps only a third of cervical cancer cases are even associated with the HPV vaccine. That would completely put the lie to Merck’s claims that Gardasil is going to eliminate cervical cancer altogether.

So now we have a really dubious deal because we need to put that black card back in the deck because now, we have doubts about whether or not this vaccine can prevent cervical cancer at all.

But the news gets worse. Gardasil may actually cause cancer. Gardasil’s insert states Gardasil has never been evaluated for potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity. And Gardasil’s ingredients include possible carcinogens including human DNA.

And look at this…This is Merck’s own pre-clinical trial records and those records show that girls or women, who already had HPV—had been exposed at some point in their life to it—actually had a negative efficacy of 44.6 percent.

What is negative efficacy? It means those girls had a 44.6 increased risk of getting those precancerous lesions. To make things even worse, there are recent scientific studies that suggest a phenomena of what is known as type replacement—some 200 different strands of HPV, some of them are more cancerous than others, and the current HPV vaccine goes after 9 of those 200 viral types. What these studies indicate is by eliminating those particular strains of the virus it opens up an ecological niche in the woman so that more lethal and virulent viruses can actually colonize that spot and dramatically increase the risk of cervical cancer.

So now Merck’s deal is looking really grim. Not only do we have a one-in-40 chance of getting an autoimmune disease and a 50 percent chance of getting some serious medical condition but now the cancer risk has been reinserted and actually amplified.

And now let’s look at some of the non-cancer injuries that Merck found in its preclinical studies.

The miscarriage rate in the preclinical studies after Gardasil doubled the background rate. The birth defects in the Gardasil group were five times the rate of birth defects from the control group. As to reproductive disorders an astonishing 10.9 percent of the women in the pool group reported reproductive disorders within seven months of receiving Gardasil compared to 1.2 percent in the placebo group. The death rate in the Gardasil group and the clinical trials was 8.5 per 10 thousand.

Death risk from this vaccine according to Merck’s own studies is 37 times the risk of dying from cervical cancer.

Oh, now look at the deal that Merck has offered us they’ve actually increased our risk of dying by 37 times.

So now let’s look at post-licensing surveillance. So, Merck can argue that we might have missed something in our pre-licensing studies but surely if there were any injuries being caused by this vaccine we would see them in post-licensing surveillance.

And the problem with that is that the post-licensing surveillance system, the principle one, is called the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. The system is a voluntary system that simply does not work. It’s broken. In fact, in 2010 HHS hired another federal agency the agency for healthcare research quality and a group of Harvard researchers to study Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and those researchers found fewer than 1 percent of adverse events of vaccines are ever reported.

But even under that system, Gardasil has distinguished itself as the most dangerous vaccine ever invented.

In fact, when you compare it to Menactra which is a meningitis vaccine that’s given to the same age group—teenagers—Gardasil had an 8.5 times more emergency room visits, 12.5 times more hospitalizations, 10 times more life-threatening events and 26.5 times more disabilities than Menactra.

The vaccine court which is within HHS has made awards for numerous deaths and very, very serious injuries from the Gardasil vaccine. So, HHS itself admits that this vaccine kills people and it’s given compensation to the families that were injured.

The same wave of serious injuries and deaths that have been seen in nations around the globe, when they adopt mandates for the Gardasil vaccine. Even Gardasil’s own insert, the package insert that the company provides, acknowledges that the injuries that can be caused by this vaccine include death, pancreatitis, fatigue, malaise, immune system disorders, autoimmune diseases, anaphylaxis, musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders, nervous system disorders, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, that’s brain injuries, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and other neuron diseases, paralysis, seizures, Transverse myelitis, and vascular disorders.

In Australia, in 2015, the Australian Department of Health Therapeutic Goods Administration reported that the adverse rates in girls is 17 times the incidental rate for cervical cancer throughout their lifespan. The country only looked at a handful of conditions including demyelinating disorders, complex regional pain syndrome and premature ovarian failure. There are many, many other injuries that included hospitalizations that were not subject to that study.

India suspended its Gardasil trials after numerous deaths and serious injuries.

A south Asian Journal of Cancer found that “a healthy 16-year old is at zero immediate risk of dying from cervical cancer but is faced with a small, but real risk of death or serious disability from a vaccine that has yet to prevent a single case of cervical cancer.”

Japan de-recommended Gardasil three months after it had added the vaccine to the immunization schedule. Japan’s health ministry discovered adverse events reported after Gardasil’s approval were many times higher than other vaccines on the recommended schedule—these included seizures severe headaches partial paralysis complex regional pain syndrome and an undeniable causal relationship between persistent pain and the vaccination.

Japanese researchers found that the adverse event rate for the HPV vaccine was as high as nine percent and that pregnant women injected with the vaccine aborted or miscarried 30 percent of their babies.

In 2015 the Japanese Association for Medical Sciences issued official guidelines for managing symptoms of injuries caused by the Gardasil vaccine and the association announced there was no proof that this vaccine even prevents cervical cancer.

Alarmingly Merck’s own studies indicate that the Gardasil vaccine may disproportionately impact Asian women. For example, in protocol 19 there were 8 deaths among 3800 women and 7 those were Asians. That was 87 percent for Asian women, while only 31 percent of study participants were Asian.

Denmark in 2015 announced the opening of five new HPV clinics to treat women who were injured by the Gardasil vaccine. The day that they announced that opening there were 1300 applicants for treatment in those clinics.

In Colombia in 2014 800 girls in the town Carmen de Bolivar were grievously injured by Gardasil vaccine. Protests erupted all over Columbia. The attorney general of Colombia ordered the National Health Service of that country to immediately begin treating girls who were injured by the Gardasil vaccine and 2017 Colombia’s highest Constitutional Court ruled that the HPV vaccine would no longer be considered mandatory in Colombia and ordered that girls who showed symptoms after receiving the vaccine be given appropriate medical care.

Pompilio Martinez, who now teaches at the National University of Colombia, described the HPV vaccine as “a crime against humanity.”

Recent studies have shown that in nations with robust HPV vaccination programs and heavily vaccinated populations—in the UK and Sweden and Australia—were actually seeing dramatic upticks rises in the rate of cervical cancer rather than the downtrends that Merck promised everybody.

Now I’m going to show you some of the reasons why your pediatrician is insisting despite all of this evidence that your daughter or son gets the HPV vaccine. And the reason is the pediatrician is getting his information from agencies that have compromised through financial entanglements with Merck.

This is what the FDA is telling the public about vaccine safety:  it says that vaccines are regulated by FDA and undergo a rigorous review of laboratory and clinical data to ensure the safety efficacy and purity and potency of these products.

But this is a very different story the FDA is acknowledging in-house, (and this comes from a 2007 document—this is the year that Gardasil got its license from the FDA), FDA’s inability to keep up with scientific advances mean that American lives are at risk. FDA is evaluations and methods have remained largely unchanged over the last half century. The world looks to FDA as a leader today. Not only can the agency not lead, it cannot even keep up with the advances in science.

But, the most troubling problem at FDA is it has nothing to do with incompetence. It has to do with corruption. The panel within FDA that licenses new vaccines and anoints them as safe is called the Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, the acronym is VRBPAC. And in 2000 Congress investigated VRBPAC because of charges of corruption from outside the agency.

And here’s what the congressional committee found: the overwhelming majority of members, both voting members and consultants have substantial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.

Conflicts of interest rules employed by FDA have been weak enforcement has been lax. Committee members with substantial ties to pharmaceutical companies are given waivers to participate in committee proceedings. In many cases significant conflicts of interest are deemed to be in conflict at all.

And here are some specific examples of the conflict of the advisory committee that approves vaccines:

  • Three out of five FDA advisory committee members who voted to approve the rotavirus vaccine in December of 1997 had financial ties to the pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.
  • One of the five voting members had a 9 plus million dollar contract for a rotavirus vaccine.
  • One of the five voting members was the principal investigator for a Merck grant to develop the rotavirus vaccine.
  • One of the five voting members received approximately a million dollars from vaccine manufacturers toward vaccine development.

Once they get by FDA, vaccine companies then go to CDC, where another committee, which is called ACIP Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, will then take that vaccine that FDA has licensed and they will put it on the recommended list which means it becomes essentially mandatory for 76 million American children.

A listing on CDC’s recommended list is the holy grail for vaccine companies. It means a bonanza of wealth for those companies. If ACIP votes to add your vaccine to the recommended list, it means:

  • mandating the vaccine to millions of American children, (half of those are paid for by the government);
  • Immunity from liability for the manufacturers so nobody can sue them no matter how dangerous that vaccine is, no matter how toxic its components no matter how grievous your injury, you cannot sue that vaccine manufacturer for damages liability;
  • Inclusion of the Vaccine for Children’s program which is a program that guarantees that half the vaccines that you manufacturer are going to be purchased by the CDC at full cost.

This means billions of dollars for companies that are fortunate enough to get their vaccines listed on this recommended list. It means that you’re going to sell 74 million vaccines to people who have no choice—you have no marketing cost you have no advertising cost, you have limited testing expenses, and you have no liability for injuries caused by your vaccine.

In 2006 and 2007 while Gardasil was getting its approvals, ACIP did not pretend to base its recommendations on scientific evidence. It only adopted evidence-based standards in 2011.

But what did it base its recommendation on? It turns out it was mainly just friendships and money.  The conflicts at ACIP are as bad as the conflicts within the FDA.

This is from the same year—2000— investigation by Congress quote the CDC grants blanket waivers to ACIP members each year that allow them to deliberate on any subject regardless of their conflicts for the entire year. ACIP members are allowed to vote on vaccine recommendations even when they have financial ties to the drug companies related to similar vaccines.

The ACIP’s prolific use of working groups to track vaccine policy is outside the specter of public scrutiny, opens the door to special interest access. ACIP’s policy of allowing government employees to vote encourage the system where government officials make crucial decisions affecting American children without advice or consent of the governed.

Here is a typical committee panel that approved Merck’s rotavirus vaccine. The majority of ACIP’s members were conflicted and their most recent vote. Again, this is Congress’s words not mine.

  • The chairman served on Merck’s immunization Advisory Committee the same committee that approved Merck’s vaccine.
  • Another member who shares the patent on a vaccine underdeveloped for this same disease at $350,000 grant from Merck to develop this vaccine and was a consultant from Merck.
  • Another member was under contract with the Merck Vaccine Division.
  • Another member received salary from Merck and other payments.
  • Merck another member was participating in vaccine studies with Merck.
  • And another member received grants from Merck.

And unfortunately, that congressional investigation had virtually no impact on the way CDC does and continues to do business. For example, a 2009 report by the inspector general of HHS on the same conditions existed at CDC had systematic lack of oversight. Ninety seven percent of committee members’ conflict disclosures had omissions. 58 percent had at least one unidentified potential conflict. 32 percent of the committee members had at least one conflict remained unresolved and the CDC continues to grant waivers.

This shows that CDC is really just an arm of the vaccine industry it shouldn’t be regulating the industry. It’s part of it.

This is CDC’s entire budget $11.5 billion, and almost half of that almost 5 billion dollars goes to purchasing and promoting vaccines. And this little sliver here is the Immunization Safety Office.

That’s how much money, less than 1 percent of the total goes to vaccine safety.

Not only that but Merck exercises control over CDC through the CDC Foundation. Merck contributes millions of dollars every year to the CDC Foundation. The CDC Foundation has received six hundred and twenty million dollars from Merck and other pharmaceutical companies to pay for 824 programs at the CDC.

Merck representative sit on the CDC Foundation Board and control the agency activities.

This is what the British Medical Journal said about those conflicts:

“Most of us were shocked to learn that the CDC takes funding from the industry. It is outrageous that industry apparently is allowed to punish the CDC if the agency conducts research that has the potential to cut into profits.”

Corruption is systemic at FDA too shockingly 45 percent of FDA’s budget comes from the industry. Pharmaceutical companies pay billions of dollars in fees annually to FDA to fast track drugs. Between 2000-2010 pharmaceutical companies paid 3.4 billion dollars to FDA to get drug approvals, and those payments by industry have caused FDA and CDC to treat the vaccine makers not as a regulated entity but as partners and clients and friends.

According to Michael Carome, who is a former HHS employee “Instead of a regulator and regulated industry, we now have a partnership that relationship has tilted the FDA away from public health perspective to an industry friendly perspective. And that’s why your doctor does not know the truth about Gardasil.”

This is another thing your doctor probably doesn’t know. The government agency NIH actually developed the key component for the Gardasil vaccine and NIH owns part of the patent and receives royalties on it. Not only does NIH the agency receive millions and millions of dollars annually from the vaccine, but also the individual scientists who worked on the vaccine within the agency are entitled to make one hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year in royalty payments from Merck.

Oh, every time your pediatrician sells one of those four hundred and twenty dollar vaccines to your child or you, NIH scientists and HHS scientists and the agencies themselves are making money on that transaction. And that’s why your doctor doesn’t know what’s happening because he’s getting his information or her information from those agencies.

So, there are many, many, other shocking conflicts that I don’t have time to talk about today between Merck and the other regulated vaccine makers and the industry that’s supposed to be protecting the public from that regulated industry.

I just want to talk for a moment about one example. From 2002 to 2009 Julie Gerberding was the director of CDC and she oversaw all, all of this crooked science that went into the approvals in 2006 and 2007 of Merck’s Gardasil vaccine. She was rewarded by Merck.

When she left the agency in 2009, she was hired by Merck as the president of its vaccine division and Merck gave her a salary of 2.5 million dollars a year, and 38 million dollars in stock options. And that kind of dough buys a lot of loyalty from regulators.

They know what’s at the end of the line for them if they behave and if they do what Merck and the other company has asked them to do. And these are the reasons that your pediatrician, who’s giving your daughter that Gardasil vaccine believing that it may someday save her life doesn’t know about the risk and perils and the inefficacy that are attended to that vaccine cause that regulators from whom he’s getting or she’s getting her information have been corrupted by this company.

And most of you probably know this is a difficult issue for people like myself who are concerned with vaccine injuries to address, because the press will not cover these issues because there’s 5.4 billion dollars that go from these companies to advertising on TV and radio and newspapers and on the web every year and nobody wants to lose advertising revenue. And the Congress has been bought off the regulatory agencies have been captured and we can’t use the courts because you can’t sue a vaccine maker for injuring yourself or your child.

We’ve figured out ways around those laws and we’re going to sue Merck. And if you are Merck and you’re listening to this tape.

We’re going to come for you and we’re gonna get justice for these girls and these boys who you’ve injured because of your greed.

And if you’re a mother or a father who are listening to this, we’d like your support. It’s just the fact that the more monetary support the Children’s Health Defense has, the more of these cases that we can bring and we’re going to get justice. And we’re going to bring these cases, and sue companies like Merck until we get that justice. We want your money and we want your support and we want your membership.

But more than anything, we want you to protect your child on this vaccine and for other injuries and for that reason we made this tape. Not only so that you can be informed about the science and you can ask the questions of your pediatrician or you can give him a copy of this tape and ask him to watch it and respond to it.

And if you’re a pediatrician I would ask you to actually look at the science and not resort to appeals to authority because, to say “well I know it’s safe because CDC says it’s safe”, or WHO says it’s safe or the AAP says it’s safe because all of those agencies and organizations have been corrupted by pharmaceutical industry money. You need to actually look at the science.

And you need to read the science critically and if you do that, you’ll find that the things that I’ve talked about in this tape are real. That these injuries are real and that we have got to save our children from this cataclysm.

I want to thank you for listening to this video and urge you to join Children’s Health Defense.




Jon Rappoport Speaks Out About WordPress Take-down of His Blog

Source:  Jon Rappoport’s newsletter

by Jon Rappoport
May 13, 2019

 

I say, “Dear Parents, All over the world they are injecting your children, from the day of their birth, with poisonous chemicals and germs, and they’re calling it a miracle.  But it isn’t.  It’s devastating.”

And then, someone somewhere behind a curtain who’s hidden his name-badge in his underpants says, “Censor that man.  Cut off his expression.  He has no right to say what he’s saying.”

The Soulless Ones are at it again.

Many of you now know that, last Saturday, WordPress took down my blog without warning or notice.  After 10 years—boom.  Gone.  We are in the process of restoring the blog through “other means.”  Meanwhile, my home page at NoMoreFakeNews.com is still up, and you can let others know to go there to sign up for the email list to receive my articles in their inbox on a regular basis.  You can also order products at that same home page.

I strongly suspect that my articles criticizing vaccines triggered the censorship move.  The justification would be: well, we must protect the health of the public and your influence could be quite negative in that regard, etc.

Information, evidence, opinion are all now subject to the preferences of “those in charge,” who of course “only have the best interests of The People at heart.”  Sure.

The reality is: when there is something called official science, then unofficial science must be trampled on and stamped out—the word “official” tells you that authorities are pushing lies down on people’s heads and those lies must be maintained and never doubted.  Unofficial science becomes dangerous.  It contains repressed truth.

I’ve learned that first-hand over the past 35 years working as a reporter.  All my major investigations have been “unofficial,” and in every one of those cases, there was someone standing in the middle of the road behind barricades shooing people away and warning that there was nothing OFFICIAL to see by going farther.

THE RIGHT TO HAVE AND EXPRESS AN OPINION OR VIEW OR FINDING are under attack.  Structures that would enable persons to express an opinion publicly are censoring certain voices.  They don’t have to give a reason.  They just do it.

They might say a writer “violated community standards.”  What community, and what standards?  Oh, the ones they make up and pretend exist.  Those communities and standards.  Or perhaps “the community” they’re talking about is some collection of goody two-shoes robotic idiots they’ve convinced to form an organization and make a so-called mission statement in line with official truth.  Blank minds, blank stares, earnest faces.

The age of rational argument and debate, if it ever existed, appears to be over.  Now it’s just FIND THE CONTRARY VIEW and silence it.

Of course, I’m not the first person to be censored recently.  And I’ve noticed that the black-listing hasn’t worked.  Those independent reporters and analysts and editorialists and activists are still talking and writing.  I’ll do the same.

You can help.  Spread my articles any way you can.  Get others on my email list.  Consider ordering my three MATRIX collections. Get in touch with WordPress and let them know how you feel and what you think.  Refuse to obey the Law of Silence.

There is a WE here.  It isn’t a collection of dumb know-nothings.  It’s many individuals who happen to have arrived, separately, at a similar place: the crossroad where a choice is made for justice and against surrender.

If you’re not already there, get there.  If you’re there, make your presence count.

The game isn’t lost.  It isn’t over.

It’s never over.




Vaccination as Orthodoxy: Conflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health — Part I

Source: Children’s Health Defense

 

by the Children’s Health Defense Team
May 9, 2019

 

Note:  With this article, Children’s Health Defense is launching its second eBook:  Conflicts of Interest Undermine Children’s Health. The first  eBook,  The Sickest Generation: The Facts Behind the Children’s Health Crisis and Why It Needs to End, described how children’s health began to worsen dramatically in the late 1980s following fateful changes in the childhood vaccine schedule. This part of our new eBook outlines the political developments in the late 1980s that allowed these changes to happen and describes the widespread conflicts of interest that continue to overshadow the U.S. vaccine program.


Vaccination has been a cornerstone of U.S. government public health policy for decades. Although the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)—initially called the Communicable Disease Center—opened its doors in the early 1940s with a mandate primarily focused on malaria eradication, it rapidly pushed to “extend its responsibilities  to other communicable diseases,” including many of the illnesses subsequently targeted by vaccination.

The CDC has operated as the standard-bearer for the nation’s vaccination efforts ever since. However, a close look at the agency’s behavior—and the statements of internal whistleblowers—reveals that, for all intents and purposes, the CDC functions as a subsidiary of a  “rapacious”pharmaceutical industry  in partnership with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and numerous “outside parties  and rogue interests” that all benefit from their endorsement of a highly profitable vaccine orthodoxy. The powerful vaccine “gospel” has swept up regulators, medical trade associations, physicians, science journals, the popular press and others “in a kind of  consensus dogma” that has become “more important than the children [these institutions were] supposed to protect.”

Over a century later, it is clear that vaccine policy-makers are the ones whose “organized and aggressive” public relations apparatus is relentlessly waging war on questioners, effectively branding them as heretics.

The Medical Marketplace Comes First

Economic and political interests have steered U.S. vaccination programs since at least the  19th century, when the medical establishment and its government and industry allies recognized that vaccination provided a new income stream and a compelling opportunity “to augment their authority in a competitive medical marketplace.” Historical documents show that, from the earliest days, vaccine proponents have promoted a one-sided agenda, sidelining deeper inquiry into safety and efficacy and castigating individuals who dare to raise questions. In a blatant example of the pot calling the kettle black, Dr. William Bailey belligerently declared in an  1899 issue of  Public Health Papers and Reports  (a precursor to the American Journal of Public Health) that vaccination’s “enemies are organized and aggressive in their warfare against it.”

Over a century later, it is clear that vaccine policy-makers are the ones whose “organized and aggressive” public relations (PR) apparatus is relentlessly waging war on questioners, effectively branding them as  heretics.

Independent scientists who cast doubt on vaccine orthodoxy find themselves facing  personal attacks  rather than impartial scrutiny of their research.

In recent months, the “war” has intensified, seemingly with buy-in from legislators, regulators, researchers and the private sector. Consider the following:

  • In November 2018, payouts from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program crossed over the $4 billion threshold, and the government reported a surge in autism rates (1 in 40 children)—yet when two congressional Committees held kangaroo-court vaccine hearings a few months later, they ignored vaccine safety issues and instead used the proceedings to demonize the unvaccinated.
  • Reflecting the “outsized dependence of both political classes and media outlets on pharmaceutical industry contributions and advertising revenue,” a Congressman requested that private social media and Internet companies censor information critical of current vaccine policies and products. In a cogent response, another Congressman asked, “If vaccines do not cause injuries, why has the Vaccine Injury Trust Fund paid out $4,061,322,557.08 for vaccine injuries?”
  • 2019 has marked a ballooning of legislative attempts to violate the bedrock principle—and fundamental human right—of free and informed consent to all medical interventions, including vaccines. Citizens seeking to uphold their religious and philosophical rights to vaccine exemptions face increasingly punitive actions. Even medical exemptions are under attack.

There is more and more evidence of a coordinated effort to suppress any and all information that might be unfavorable to the vaccine program. Some of this verges on the slapstick, such as the last-minute cancellations by four pro-vaccine-mandate speakers who declined to show up at a scheduled event at Yale to debate “The Science of Vaccines” with Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in March 2019. Other incidents are less entertaining:

  • In February 2019, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), gave false information to Congress, denying that measles vaccination can cause encephalitis (brain inflammation), even though vaccine package inserts have always listed encephalitis as a risk of measles vaccination.
  • In January 2019, a renowned medical expert signed a sworn affidavit explaining how he told Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyers in 2007 that “vaccinations could cause autism” in a subset of children. The DOJ fired him as an expert witness, kept his opinion secret from the public and misrepresented his opinion in federal court in order to continue to debunk vaccine-autism claims.
  • In a March 2017 publication, CDC authors acknowledged that many individuals involved in California’s 2015 measles outbreak were “recent vacinees,” briefly citing “unpublished data” showing that the vaccine strain of measles caused the infection in almost two-fifths (38%) of the tested cases.

Nonetheless, the CDC continues to demand that parents unhesitatingly allow their children to receive endless vaccine doses during pregnancy, infancy, childhood and adolescence. If someone (even an experienced doctor) dares to propose a less immunologically burdensome approach, the PR machine instantly jumps into overdrive to discredit him or her, despite the fact that respected, peer-reviewed science—including from the Institute of Medicine (IOM)—supports these concerns.

When companies perpetuate misleading vaccine safety claims—exaggerating the benefits and concealing the risks—and regulators obligingly politicize their vaccine recommendations and decisions, trust is damaged still further.

Waning Public Confidence

Although a barrage of assurances, both nationally and globally, continues to tell consumers that vaccines are safe, confidence in vaccine programs is declining worldwide. The medical journal Pediatrics reported in 2013 that nearly nine in ten U.S. pediatricians (87%) had encountered parents who questioned the CDC childhood vaccine schedule, up from 75% of children’s doctors in 2006. The surveyed pediatricians also reported receiving frequent requests to follow an alternative vaccine schedule (almost one in five parents) and, over the seven-year period, a doubling of the percentage of parents refusing at least one vaccine. Where honored, parents’ wishes for a slower and more selective vaccine schedule are amply rewarded, with practice data demonstrating better health outcomes and a far lower risk of autism.

Even the most ardent vaccine proponents recognize that the erosion of public trust is at least partially their own fault—the result of factors such as “heightened [public] awareness of the profit motives of the vaccine industry,” lack of transparency on the part of industry and conflicts of interest among policy-makers. These observers even admit that “financial and bureaucratic reasons” prompt “vaccine manufacturers, health officials, and medical journals… not…to acknowledge the risks of vaccines.”

When companies perpetuate misleading vaccine safety claims—exaggerating the benefits and concealing the risks—and regulators obligingly politicize their vaccine recommendations and decisions, trust is damaged still further.

In 1967, when childhood vaccines were much fewer and farther between, Dr. Graham Wilson (one-time Director of the Public Health and Laboratory Service for England and Wales) warned of the need to pay ongoing attention to vaccine safety, stating:

“It is for us, and for those who come after us, to see that the sword which vaccines and antisera have put into our hands is never allowed to tarnish through over-confidence, negligence, carelessness, or want of foresight on our part.”

Forty years later, Congressional Representative Dave Weldon, himself a physician, harshly criticized the federal agencies charged with ensuring vaccine safety for failing to heed Wilson’s cautions.

The loss of confidence in vaccine safety must be addressed with independent, unbiased science.

The U.S. government’s Healthy People 2020 initiative states that “childhood immunization programs provide a very high return on investment,” but Americans should be asking just who is garnering the positive returns. Globally, the vaccine industry is on track to more than double its worldwide revenues by 2024—from $32 .5 billion in 2015 to a projected $77 billion—but highly vaccinated children in the U.S. and elsewhere are suffering. As described by Children’s Health Defense in the eBook, The Sickest Generation: The Facts Behind the Children’s Health Crisis and Why It Needs to End, children’s health has worsened dramatically since the late 1980s—“precisely the same time that the U.S. started expanding the types and total number of vaccines required for school attendance.” Over half of American children have at least one chronic illness, and neurodevelopmental disorders and pediatric autoimmune conditions have climbed to historically unprecedented levels. There is abundant evidence that vaccines are making children sicker, not healthier—representing an unquestionably negative return on investment for children, families and society.




Dr. Brian Hooker Exposes Fraud at the CDC – Congress Refuses to Hold Hearings

Source: Vaccine Impact

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

 

In what is perhaps one of the most in-depth public interviews ever recorded with Dr. Brian Hooker (over 90 minutes), who is featured in the recent film VAXXED which is creating major controversies in film festivals all across the U.S. as powerful vaccine special interest groups try to censor the film, Dr. Hooker reveals on the National Safe Child Show how his 10 year fight with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) resulted in one of the top vaccine scientists at the CDC contacting him to become a whistleblower regarding vaccine research fraud.

Dr. William Thompson of the CDC was a co-author of a landmark vaccine research paper published in 2004 that supposedly proved that there was no correlation between the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella 3-combo vaccine (MMR) and autism. However, in phones calls between Dr. Thompson and Dr. Hooker in 2014 that were secretly recorded, Dr. Thompson revealed that the CDC deliberately hid and destroyed data that showed there was in fact a link between the MMR vaccine and autism among certain groups of children.

Since that study was published in 2004, justifying retaining the MMR vaccine in the CDC schedule of childhood vaccines, autism rates have sky-rocketed, with over 1 million children being diagnosed with autism during this period.

After the phone conversations between Dr. Hooker and Dr. Thompson went public, Dr. Thompson hired a whistleblower attorney, and sent all of the data that he had retained showing the fraud to U.S. Representative Bill Posey. According to Dr. Hooker, Dr. Thompson was also deposed and filed an affidavit that Congressman Posey retains in his possession.

Yet in spite of these revelations, not one Congressional committee chair has called a hearing to subpoena Dr. Thompson and investigate fraud at the CDC.

In this interview with Dr. Hooker on the National Safe Child Show and Tammi Stefano, Dr. Hooker explains how he was harassed and opposed by the CDC as he spent over 10 years filing over 100 freedom of information acts (FOIAs) to recover raw data sets used to publish research on vaccines by the CDC. After 10 years, and with the help of Congressman Bill Posey, Dr. Hooker finally got the raw data he had been seeking, and performed his own analysis on the data. He found that the CDC had deliberately hid data that opposed their own public statements on vaccine safety and autism. His press release announcing this CDC fraud quickly went viral in social media and in the Alternative Media, while the mainstream media used the usual analysts to defend the vaccine industry and attack Dr. Hooker.

That would all change a few months later, as Dr. Thompson from the CDC began telephone conversations with Dr. Hooker leading him to even more data that had been hidden by the CDC. The news never received mainstream media attention, and nothing was done in Congress. In this interview with Tammi Stefano, Dr. Hooker will reveal why this information continues to be censored. It became the subject of the film VAXXED produced by Del Bigtree (see: Producer of VAXXED Speaks Out: “This is Bigger than Watergate”) and directed by Dr. Andrew Wakefield.

Every citizen of the United States, whether pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine or anywhere in the middle, should be outraged at this fraud, and the ongoing censorship of this CDC fraud.

Watch this comprehensive interview with the man who uncovered this fraud, and then urge your elected officials to also watch it, and to immediately call Congressional hearings on CDC vaccine fraud, and subpoena Dr. William Thompson.

Outline of Interview with Tammi Stefano and Dr. Brian Hooker

1. Intro: VAXXED Movie, background on Dr. Brian Hooker – Researcher and father of vaccine-damaged son

beginning to 7:54

2. Does the public currently have access to all the information available regarding vaccine safety to make wise choices?

7:54 to 9:23

3. Vaccines forced upon Parents – Mary Holland, Law Professor and Researcher at NYU, Addresses U.N. on Informed Consent – Nuremberg Code on Medical Ethics

9:23 to 13:26

4. Parents of Vaccine-damaged Children and Families Refusing Vaccines Risk Losing Their Children to Child Protective Services (CPS)

13:27 to 14:40

5. The CDC Guidelines/Vaccine Schedule with 47 Vaccines by Age 6 – Is There Solid Science/Research on Vaccine Safety and Injuries for so many Vaccines?

14:40 to 19:00

6. Corruption and Conflicts of Interest at the CDC – CDC Largest Purchaser of Vaccines ($4 billion per year) Yet Oversees Vaccine Safety

19:00 to 24:00

7. Brian Hooker’s 10 Years Fighting the CDC to Recover Raw Data and Reveal Fraud on Vaccine Studies – Dealings with Dr. William Thompson

24:00 to 29:30

8. Dr. Thompson of the CDC Contacts Dr. Hooker in 2013 After Fighting for more than 10 Years – Confesses that Fraud Did Occur at the CDC – Dr. Hooker’s Son Targeted

29:30 to 38:23

9. Is there a Connection Between the MMR Vaccine and Autism?

38:24 to 45:54

10. Secretly Recording the Dr. Thompson Phone Calls to Protect the Truth about Vaccine Fraud at the CDC

45:54 to 50:00

11. One Million Children Diagnosed with Autism – At this Rate will be One out of Every two Children with Autism by 2032

50:01 to 52:03

12. How Congressman Posey Got Involved – A Lone Voice in Congress Opposing the Pharmaceutical Industry

52.03 to 59:55

13. Why is the CDC still Employing Dr. William Thompson since he has become a Whistleblower on CDC Fraud?

59:56 to 1:11:26

14. What is this CDC Vaccine Fraud Costing the American Public? (Trillions of dollars!)

1:11:27 to 1:16:05

15. Mercury in Flu Shots is Negatively Affecting our Senior Citizens Health

1:16:05 to 1:17:43

16. Dr. Julie Gerberding Ran the CDC when the MMR Vaccine Fraud was Occurring – She Later Left the CDC to Work in Merck’s Vaccine Division (Maker of MMR Vaccine)

1:17:44 to 1:22:52

17. The CDC Routinely Destroys Federal Records Illegally by Deleting Emails and Erasing Hard Drives

1:22:53 to 1:28:57

18. Is the Entertainment Industry Our Best Hope to Bring This Corruption to the Public? Film Producer Picks up Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s Story

1:28:57 to 1:34:54

19. Dr. Brian Hooker – A True American Hero!

1:34:55 to end

Take Action!

Contact Jason Chaffetz, Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and ask him to hold a hearing on CDC vaccine fraud and subpoena Dr. William Thompson!




Will Nanotechnologies and the New 5G Network Become the Most Powerful Weapon System the World Has Ever Seen?

If you are being introduced to some of the topics covered in this article for the first time, it might come across as “conspiracy theories” or far-fetched sensationalism.

And while some of the predictions of how this technology can be used in the future might seem to be speculative at this point, it is based on hard evidence of what is really happening TODAY, in areas like geoengineering, nanotechnology, and the new proposed 5G networks.

None of these technologies are speculative. They are already being used. The only questions remaining are who will control these technologies, and to what extent will they be implemented?

What is written here by John P. Thomas is the result of years of research. To fully understand these topics, you will need to read the links to previous investigative reports, and follow the footnoted references as well to examine the evidence for yourself.

You will not read any of this in the corporate-sponsored “mainstream” media networks.

~ Brian Shilhavy




Will Nanotechnologies and the New 5G Network Become the Most Powerful Weapon System the World Has Ever Seen?

 

by John P. Thomas
April 17, 2019
Source

 

When the nanotechnology in human bodies is activated by special frequencies from the 5-G network, we could experience the most powerful weapon system that has ever been invented.

Unlike atomic weapons that kill everyone and create a toxic disaster for both the winners and the losers of war, the pairing of nanotechnology that is in our bodies with the high frequency radiation in the gigahertz and terahertz range will create weapons that can fulfill an incredible number of functions for those who control the technology.

 

Clean and Neat

This weapon system has the potential to individually identify and monitor the location of all people on the Earth.

This weapon system has the potential to monitor emotions and thoughts of individual people.

This weapon system has the potential to transmit instructions to individuals and to groups that will create thoughts and trigger emotional responses. It will even be able to restrict the ability to logically evaluate situations and create alternative solutions to problems.

This weapon system has the potential to target individuals who have been deemed as uncooperative and neutralize them for the greater good of society. This will be accomplished by disrupting neurological activity, weakening human immune systems, causing pain, creating life-threatening illnesses, and producing premature death.

I realize that this all sounds like rather far-fetched speculation and fantasy, but there is enough evidence to support these claims and enough evidence to begin taking proactive steps to protect ourselves from what is rapidly coming toward us.

Let’s look at some of the powerful evidence that has led me to draw these conclusions.

 

Former Catholic Nun Sister Keri Burnor Targeted for Death through Nanotechnology

 

Keri Burnor was a Roman Catholic nun when she was sexually assaulted by a priest. She filed criminal charges against the priest in 2001. He was found not guilty. [1]

She did not understand why the district attorney failed to adequately work to obtain a conviction. As she investigated the collusion between the attorney, the judge, the Roman Catholic Church, the Vatican, and the members of St. Joseph’s Abbey in Massachusetts where the sexual assault occurred, she opened a Pandora’s box of systemic evil emerging from the deep state. The deep state refers to the financial power structure that controls governments around the world. [1]

Keri Burnor did not shrink back with her defeat in court, but began to position herself as a helper to others who had been abused by clergy.

Eventually her work with other victims of sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church and the information she learned about the activities of the Jesuit order and their infiltration of the command structure of the U.S. military led to her being interviewed on several internet radio programs.

She documented her findings on her website and spoke openly about what she knew to be the truth. She then became a marked woman and her activities were monitored from that point forward. [1]

Eventually there would be more than ten attempts on her life using nanotechnology, high frequency energy transmission systems, radioactive substances, sound weapons, and various other weapons. [1]

See also:

The Catholic Church and Pedophilia: Trafficking Children as Sex Slaves

Whistleblowing Priests Killed to Prevent Exposing Pedophilia Problem in the Catholic Church?

 

There is much more Behind her Story than a Sexual Assault

Keri Burnor discovered that St. Joseph’s Abbey was built with funds donated in large part by a Knight of Malta and his wife. Their names are inscribed on the front of the Abbey’s main altar – J. Peter Grace and his wife Margaret. [1, 2]

 

Mr. Grace was the president of the giant chemical manufacturer called W. R. Grace and Co. Mr. Grace played an instrumental role in bringing Nazi SS officers and Nazi scientists to the United States after World War II. He did this through project Paper Clip, which wiped away evidence of their Nazi involvement and approved more than 900 German scientists to come to the United States. [2]

Mr. Grace then put many of the former Nazi scientists to work in his company. He also worked with the CIA to imbed many others in CIA mind control programs such as MK Ultra. [2]

As a high-ranking Knight of Malta, he occupied one of the highest non-ecclesiastical positions in the American Roman Catholic Church. It has been said that Knights of Malta are free to pick up the phone and chat with the Pope whenever they have the need or desire. [2]

Keri Burnor also had evidence that St. Joseph’s Abbey continued to be an undercover location for CIA operations. She believed that some monks (not all of them) in the abbey were actually CIA operatives engaged in clandestine activities. [1]

 

Keri Burnor became a Targeted Individual Marked for Death

In 2011, she had sinus surgery. After the recovery she knew that somehow things were not right. She eventually discovered that she had been implanted with weaponized military grade nanotechnology during the surgery. She went through highly specialized testing, which conclusively showed that her body was transmitting radio wave signals to an unknown receiver. [1, 3]

She had pain, bloody ears, noises in her head, and numerous other unexplained symptoms. She had to shield herself from frequency transmissions, take 75 pills a day, and sit in a sauna for an hour a day for 3 months in order to get the stuff to break up. [3]

Eventually highly sensitive scientific instruments confirmed that her body was no longer emitting frequencies. [1, 3]

 

Psychological Evaluation

Keri Burnor arranged for an extensive psychological evaluation. The evaluation confirmed that she was not delusional, paranoid, schizophrenic, or abnormal in any other way. [1, 3, 4]

Based on scientific evidence of having been exposed to military grade nanotechnology and having had that technology cleared from her body, the doctor concluded that her mental status was normal. [1, 3, 4]

These are Keri Burnor’s comments about why this happened to her. She stated:

I believe it was because I exposed St. Joseph’s Abbey as a CIA front. Not all the monks are bad or all the monks are CIA covers, but there is no question in my mind now that the monastery was erected for a specific purpose and it is related to national security.

The monastery was protecting those who were conducting mind control MK ultra experiments. They used children for this. [3]

 

Additional Attempts on Her Life

Keri Burnor then started being stalked by various men. She took a close-up photo of one of the men and gave it to the private investigator she hired to keep her safe. He discovered that the man was an international hired assassin. [3]

The private investigator was then picked up and chained to a chair and subjected to four hours of questioning. One of her attorneys was beaten close to the point of death and the lives of other attorneys were threatened. [3]

After all this, the private investigator advised Keri Burnor to assume an alias and go into hiding. He helped her do this and she spent more than five years on the run. [3]

There were numerous other attempts on her life. One of which involved the spraying of her car’s interior with nanotechnology. Laboratory tests confirmed that the nanotechnology was designed to promote the rapid onset of three kinds of cancer, which could have caused death in as soon as 30 days. [1, 3]

Keri Burnor now works with other targeted individuals who have been intentionally exposed to military grade nanotechnology to help them detoxify the technology from their bodies and to restore them to health. [5, 6]

 

How can Nanotechnology become a Weapon against the General Public?

It might be easy to assume that Keri Burnor’s story is unique, because she was specifically targeted for death because of what she knew. However, that would be a misguided assumption.

The truth is – we are all being exposed to nanotechnology every day through the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, the pharmaceuticals and supplements we take, and of course through vaccines. This is not military grade nanotechnology, but it still can become a weapon against people.

Over time, nano exposure, when combined with radiation from the 5-G system, will become a mechanism of human control and even become a threat to our lives.

 

Smart Cities will be the Command Center for Human Control

I have previously written extensively about 5-G and its dangers. I have discussed various reasons for the international fervor about deploying the 5-G system as fast as possible to create “Smart Cities.” See:

20,000 Satellites for 5G to be Launched Sending Focused Beams of Intense Microwave Radiation Over Entire Earth

What Do Crowd Control, Burning Skin, and Superbugs Have in Common? 5G

Telecom Giants and Federal Government Forcing Local Governments to Radiate Your Home with 5G Microwaves

5G Technology is Coming – Linked to Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes, Alzheimer’s, and Death

Can New 5G Technology and Smart Meters be Used as Weapons?

Based on my recent investigations, I now see an even deeper plan behind the Smart Cities movement. It is about targeting us all for control, and when necessary, targeting us for elimination.

We are all being targeted, not because of what we know, but because that is the plan of the deep state to manage and control all human life. This is the ultimate aim of “Smart Cities.”

The real agenda behind Smart Cities is not fast internet downloads and self-driving cars! The real agenda of the Smart Cities movement is to control what we think and how we behave. It is about keeping tabs on our physical locations and to make sure we don’t do anything other than the jobs that we have been assigned.

Ultimately, the controllers of the worldwide network of Smart Cities will decide who lives and who dies. They will kill through targeted use of the 5-G Smart grid. They will stimulate accelerated disease progression – unexplained heart attacks, rapid onset cancer, untreatable flu, and trigger depression and suicide.

For those who need more evidence, I refer you to a page of U.S. patents describing some of the technology that has already been designed to monitor human activity from a distance and to influence human activity.

November 15, 2015 – Invasive Tech Patents

 

How is this Possible? – How will this be Accomplished?

To answer these questions, we need to begin by looking at the nature of nano substances.

Nano structures are built up from nano particles. They are assembled to form nano crystals, nano films, nano wires, nano tubes, etc.

Nano particles are very tiny. The measurement of the smallest dimension will be between 1 NM (nano-meter) and 100 NM. One nano meter is 1 billionth of an inch. A human hair is between 50,000 NM and 100,000 NM thick. [7]

Other components of nanotechnology are viral-like fragments, which contain XNA. The laboratory manufactured XNA components will insert themselves into human cells and take over the functioning of some of the DNA and RNA which are the building blocks of our genetic material. XNA is chemically very similar to DNA and can be easily incorporated into human cells and can reproduce itself. [9]

 

Nano Particles don’t Behave like Larger Particles

The nature of nano structures is to gather together. When conditions are just right, they will become self-assembling. [7, 8, 9]

In other words, they will join together in planned configurations to form technology that can be used for a variety of purposes. [7, 8, 9]

Nano materials are much more likely to be toxic to human life even though larger particles of the same materials may not be harmful. [10]

 

Three Phases of Development Leading to Smart City Control over Human Life

There are three phases to this program – expose, replace, and activate.

This entire process became possible when our immune systems were disarmed by glyphosate, the active ingredient in the world’s most widely used herbicide. This allowed nanotechnology to enter our bodies and our cells to reload new information into our genetic code. [11]

Once the information is fully loaded it can be activated by frequencies. Not the Gigahertz frequencies that will be used in 5-G, but by the next level up – Terahertz frequencies, though the same 5-G hardware may be used to beam terahertz frequencies at our bodies. [11]

When a person is targeted for activation he will experience symptoms such as: pain and aching, feeling like you are on fire, feeling like electric shocks are moving through your body, experiencing severe fatigue, feeling physically and emotionally drained, and feeling as if you have been beaten up and taken out of action.

You will be overwhelmed by thoughts that tell you it is impossible to resist or stop what is happening – so just give up. [11]

It is important to know that there are countermeasures that can be taken at the current time to reduce nano from the human body and if the point has been reached where activation is in process, it is still possible to resist and recover. The situation is not hopeless. [11]

 

Exposure to Nano – It cannot be Avoided

There are at least six sources of exposure to nano materials. The air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, the pharmaceuticals and supplements we take, and of course vaccines.

Historically, the beginning point for a large portion of our exposure to nano substances came from aerial spraying programs. Various substances have been sprayed into the atmosphere for many decades some of which are nano size materials.

This geoengineering program (chemtrails) is supposedly designed to protect us and the Earth from the effects of the sun in an age of elevated atmospheric carbon. This propaganda campaign is designed to convince us that human use of fossil fuels is the cause of disruptions in the Earth’s climate.

Previous articles on geoengineering:

Controlling Weather for Profit: Geoengineering and World Dominance

Artificial Clouds and Geoengineering: Public Exposed to Toxic Chemicals

Covert Chemical Geoengineering Programs – A Real Threat to Public Health

The aerial spraying program consists of both high altitude and lower altitude particle releases.

The high-altitude spraying seems to be more about supplying material that benefits the HARP program, [11] which is a directed energy weapon system that is used by the U.S. government and the Canadian government [12] to prevent rain, or to create destructive storms, floods, earthquakes, and fires.

The lower altitude spraying appears to be releasing particles that are intended to infect or expose human beings to nano substances of various types.

These substances enter our bodies when we breathe. These substances also fall into the water we drink and are taken up by plants into their systems. These substances collect on our skin and are difficult to remove. They coat the leaves of plants and cannot be washed off. Nothing can escape this exposure. [12]

In addition, nano substances are intentionally added to thousands of manufactured foods and cosmetics as colorings, flavorings, preservatives, and stabilizers.

Products that contain glyphosate residue such as most grains produced in the United States (both organic and non-organic) also contain nano substances which are plant adjuvants. These nano plant adjuvants make the herbicide work more effectively and cannot be removed from the grain. [12]

Nano titanium dioxide is added to many pharmaceuticals and even supplements to facilitate absorption of other substances in the pills and capsules.

Most colloidal products such as colloidal silver, gold, zinc, and other metals now contain nano particles of these metals. They no longer contain moderately large particles of the metals, which the body can easily excrete. Nano-sized particles behave very differently in the body. Instead of providing health giving benefits, nano size metals act like toxins. [12]

 

Putting the Pieces Together

So, all human beings on the planet have been and are being exposed to the building blocks of nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is slowly and systematically being built up in our bodies.

When the 5-G system gets fully implemented it will secretly use terahertz frequencies to turn on and utilize the nanotechnology that has been incorporated in our bodies.

The nanotechnology has the potential to receive and transmit data, influence our minds, and exert harmful effects depending on the will of those who control the system of Smart Cities.

 

Self-Repairing and Self-Reproducing Technology

Nanotechnology is not only self-assembling – it is also self-repairing and self-reproducing. [12]

This means that even if we could surround ourselves with a bubble and somehow only consume unadulterated nano-free food and water, we will still have to contend with existing nanotechnology in our bodies that will seek to keep expanding its presence.

 

Ultimately Everyone Could be Targeted for Activation

In the future when the systems of 5-G and nanotechnology are fully activated, we could all be targeted individuals. Not just a few dissenters and outspoken people, but all of us will be potential targets – to be used, influenced, abused, and destroyed based on the will of those who manage the activities of the deep state for the sake of the greater good.

 

New 5-G Documentary

I interviewed filmmaker Sacha Stone in January of 2019 when he was in the process of finishing his latest film. His name will probably be familiar to you if you read the Health Impact News article about the International Tribunal on Natural Law, which has been gathering evidence about child trafficking and child sacrifices during the last year. See:

800K Children in the U.S. Missing Each Year – International Tribunal Exposes Pedophilia Problem – Victims Testify of Child Sex Trafficking and Satanic Ritual Abuse

Former Catholic Nun Keri Burnor’s testimony that we referenced at the beginning of this article is part of this Tribunal’s efforts.

During my interview with Sacha Stone, we discussed a wide range of topics which included the position of the Vatican in world politics, the under-reporting of children who are being trafficked and sacrificed in satanic rituals, and his latest documentary on the topic of 5-G, which was in the process of being finished at that time.

His new documentary was released to the public at the beginning of April and is entitled: 5G APOCALYPSE – THE EXTINCTION EVENT – Monitoring the Planned Poisoning of Humanity.

Sacha Stone described the film. He stated:

I am about to release a film on the subject matter of 5-G. In the film I interviewed weapons development experts and world leading molecular biologists. The film speaks to the truth of what is going on with phased array antennas and interrogation technology.

Putting phased array antennas in orbit around the Earth is about the most godless and frankly wicked thing our governments could do. They have no idea of what they are doing, because they are comprised of a body of technocrats and bureaucrats – they are simply pen-pushing functionaries. The people who are driving the functions that those people undertake are vested and nested special interests.

Behind those vested and nested special interests are invariably occultic interests. Again, that takes us back to the Vatican complex and the Jesuitical complex of issues. [13]

 

Watch Sacha Stone’s Documentary:

 

Countermeasures Designed to Overcome the Newest Weapon System

It should not be assumed that our exposure to nanotechnology and the 5-G system represents a hopeless situation.

First of all, there is a small movement to reject 5-G. The city of Brussels has rejected the installation of the 5-G network. [14]

Perhaps this is a beginning point for a movement that other cities will follow.

As Keri Burnor learned, it is possible to excrete nanotechnology from the body. I found equipment for helping the body eliminate nanotechnology which can be built at home. Taking baths with certain ingredients can remove nano materials. There also are many ways that can be used to block gigahertz and terahertz electromagnetic frequencies from entering our homes and offices.

For those of us who value the clear functioning of our minds and want to protect ourselves from thought control, emotional lethargy, chronic disabling pain, paralysis of the will, and death from this system – we will need to take strong steps to protect ourselves and our families.

As the 5-G system is implemented around the world – including 5-G from satellites, we will no longer be able to go to remote locations with the hope of escaping EMF exposure.

We also can’t avoid nano contamination. We all have been infected with nano substances from numerous sources, including even organic food.

The good news is that it is possible to expel nanotechnology from the body and to prevent nano from reaching a level where it can be activated with terahertz frequencies.

Future articles will address some of the things that we can do to reduce our exposure to nano substances and our exposure to electromagnetic frequencies.

The future may be grim for humanity, but we don’t have to lay down, roll over, play dead, and wait until the newest weapon system takes control over our minds and brings us to an early grave. There are steps we can take to protect and preserve our lives and our freedoms.

The first step is awareness, and that is the main purpose of this article.

 

References

[1] “Testimony from Targeted Individual, Keri Burnor,” Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Human Trafficking and Child Sex Abuse, International Tribunal for Natural Justice, September 14, 2018.

[2] “Who is J. Peter Grace?” Christ the Wall Hermitages.

[3] “Weaponized Nano! Part 2 Ex Catholic Nun Sister Keri Burnor speaks with Erik Markham,” February 2019.

[4] “Targeted2Free Success Results by the grace of God,” Christ the Wall Hermitages.

[5] “History of Sister Keri Burnor,” Christ the Wall Hermitages.

[6] “Christ the Wall Hermitages.

[7] “Nano Data,” Augment in Force.

[8] “Nano-Modifications,” Charlotte McCoy, Augment in Force, 2003.

[9] “XNA – Artificial Life-Artificial Intelligence or Alien Life-Alien Intelligence,” Augment in Force.

[10] “Engineered Nano Materials,” Augment in Force.

[11] “TIs activated w/Terahertz radiation,” Tony Pantalleresco, Augment in Force, 7/12/2018.

[12] “Tony Pantalleresco The Dangers Of Nano Particles To Your Health!,” 1/11/2016.

[13] I interviewed Sacha Stone by Skype at his home in Bali on 1/17/2019. His documentary can be viewed here.

[14] “Brussels: The First Major City To Halt 5G Due To Health Effects,” Worldhealth.net, Anti-Aging News, 4/5/2019.




Toxic Aluminum in Vaccines

Source: Jon Rappoport’s Blog

by Jon Rappoport
April 15, 2019

 

I hope that aluminum, an ingredient in many vaccines, keeps moving up on the chart of key issues in the vaccine wars. The mainstream medical forces believe they can ward off any critiques. They’re wrong. But the exposure of the truth has to keep escalating.

At Robert Kennedy, Jr.’s site, the World Mercury Project, there is a science library of studies referring to toxic aluminum in vaccines. I recommend reading all the citations. They’re highly informative, and some of them make excellent ammunition. Here are a few examples:

“Aluminium has been shown to be present in brain tissue in sporadic Alzheimer’s disease. We have made the first ever measurements of aluminium in brain tissue from 12 donors diagnosed with familial Alzheimer’s disease. The concentrations of aluminium were extremely high…Overall, the concentrations were higher than all previous measurements of brain aluminium except cases of known aluminium-induced encephalopathy…The unique quantitative data and the stunning images of aluminium in familial Alzheimer’s disease brain tissue raise the spectre of aluminium’s role in this devastating disease.” (“Aluminium in brain tissue in familial Alzheimer’s disease,” Ambreen Mirza, Andrew King, Claire Troakes, Christopher Exley. Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology, November 2016.)

“Vaccine adjuvants and vaccines may induce autoimmune and inflammatory manifestations in susceptible individuals. To date most human vaccine trials utilize aluminum (Al) adjuvants as placebos despite much evidence showing that Al in vaccine-relevant exposures can be toxic to humans and animals…It appears that Gardasil via its Al adjuvant and HPV antigens has the ability to trigger neuroinflammation and autoimmune reactions, further leading to behavioral changes…In light of these findings, this study highlights the necessity of proceeding with caution with respect to further mass-immunization practices with a vaccine of yet unproven long-term clinical benefit in cervical cancer prevention” (Rotem Inbar, Ronen Weiss, Lucija Tomljenovic, Maria-Teresa Arango, Yael Deri, Christopher A Shaw, Joab Chapman, Miri Blank, Yehuda Shoenfeld. Immunol Res, July 2016.)

“Infants and young children throughout the world receive high quantities of aluminum from multiple inoculations. Incremental changes to the vaccination schedule during the past several years significantly increased the quantity of aluminum in childhood shots. Numerous studies provide compelling evidence that injected aluminum can be detrimental to health. Aluminum is capable of remaining in cells long after vaccination and may cause neurologic and autoimmune disorders. During early development, the child’s brain is more susceptible to toxins and the kidneys are less able to eliminate them. Thus, children have a greater risk than adults of adverse reactions to aluminum in vaccines. Millions of children every year are injected with vaccines containing mercury and aluminum despite well-established experimental evidence of the potential for additive or synergistic toxicity when an organism is exposed to two or more toxic metals.” (Neil Z. Miller. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Winter 2016.)

“In young children, a highly significant correlation exists between the number of pediatric aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered and the rate of autism spectrum disorders. Many of the features of aluminum-induced neurotoxicity may arise, in part, from autoimmune reactions, as part of the ASIA syndrome [Autoimmune Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants]. Aluminum is added to vaccines to help the vaccine work more effectively, but unlike dietary aluminum which will usually clear rapidly from the body, aluminum used in vaccines and injected is designed to provide a long-lasting cellular exposure. Thus, the problem with vaccine-derived aluminum is really twofold: It drives the immune response even in the absence of a viral or bacterial threat and it can make its way into the central nervous system. It is not really a matter of much debate that aluminum in various forms can be neurotoxic.” (Chris Shaw, L. Tomljenovic. Immunologic Research, (2013) 56:304–316 DOI 10.1007/s12026-013-8403-1.)

Based on these, and many other suggestive citations from studies, what honest researcher wouldn’t want to probe the aluminum-vaccine issue to its depths?

A recent paper by several authors, including aluminum expert, Christopher Exley, details a finding of alarmingly high levels of aluminum in the brains of children with autism. The research doesn’t implicate vaccines directly, but it certainly points the way to follow-up investigation—and what should be a moratorium on the production of vaccines using aluminum.

Robert Kennedy, Jr.: “Dr. Exley’s findings have shocking implications for today’s generation of children who receive 5,000 mcg. of aluminum in vaccines by the age of 18 months and up to 5,250 additional mcg. if all recommended boosters, HPV and meningitis vaccines are administered.”

Here is a list of U.S. vaccines containing one or more aluminum adjuvants: Dt, Td, DTaP, Hib, Hep A, Hep B, HPV, Meningococcal, Pneumococcal, DTaP-IPV, DTaP-IPV/Hib, Hep A/HepB.




CHD Launches Immediate Legal Challenge Against NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Forced-Vaccination Order

Source: Health Impact News

BREAKING: NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio Orders Forced Vaccinations in Brooklyn

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

 

Just days after the New York Supreme Court struck down a ban on unvaccinated children in Rockland County, New York, after declaring a state of emergency over a measles outbreak, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has taken even more drastic actions in certain Jewish populated neighborhoods in Brooklyn, ordering forced vaccinations for measles.

“There’s no question that vaccines are safe, effective and life-saving,” de Blasio said. “I urge everyone, especially those in affected areas, to get their MMR vaccines to protect their children, families and communities.”

There have been no reported deaths due to measles anywhere in the United States this year.

The Mayor’s order goes beyond what Rockland County Supervisor Ed Day ordered, and includes EVERYONE who is unvaccinated within zip codes 11205, 11206, 11221 and 11249 which are part of Williamsburg, Brooklyn, to be vaccinated within 48 hours.

From the order:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that any person who lives, works or resides within the 11205, 11206, 11221 and/or 11249 zip codes and who has not received the MMR vaccine within forty eight (48) hours of this Order being signed by me shall be vaccinated against measles unless such person can demonstrate immunity to the disease or document to the satisfaction of the Department that he or she should be medically exempt from this requirement.

According to WCBS radio in New York:

Members of the city’s Health Department will check the vaccination records of any individual who may have been in contact with infected patients.

Those who have not received the vaccine or do not have evidence of immunity may be given a violation and could be fined $1,000.

Health Department Banning Unvaccinated Students from School

Accoriding to Spectrum News NY1:

“The school will be held responsible if an unvaccinated child is there. In that case, there can be fines levied,” said Mayor Bill de Blasio.

Mayor de Blasio says the health department is now issuing what’s called Commissioner Orders to force yeshivas and childcare centers in Williamsburg  to comply.

“If a school does not address this situation in short order, there’s even the option for the Health Commissioner to have the school close down,” De Blasio said.

State Sen. David Carlucci is pushing legislation that would end most exemptions for vaccinations for children going to school.

“If you have a medical exemption and a doctor signs off on it, then that is totally fine. But we have to stop this practice of allowing people to opt out of the vaccination process,” Carlucci said. (Source.)

Watch the announcement:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Children’s Health Defense have joined the legal response to this order, and issued the following Press Release:

CHD Launches Immediate Legal Challenge Against
New York City’s Public Health Emergency Due to Measles

In an unprecedented move, the New York City Health Commissioner on April 9, 2019 has imposed an emergency forced vaccination order, requiring ALL people living in four Brooklyn zip codes to receive the MMR vaccine (if they do not have proof of immunity or medical contraindication) within 48 hours or risk criminal and civil penalties. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio made the announcement.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said today that it’s “legally questionable” whether people can be forced to get vaccinated if it violates their religious beliefs.

“Look it’s a serious public health concern, but it’s also a serious First Amendment issue and it is going to be a constitutional, legal question,” Cuomo said.

“Do we have the right — does society, government have the right to say ‘you must vaccinate your child because I’m afraid your child is going to infect my child, even if you don’t want it done and even if it violates your religious beliefs?’ So that is, that’s an issue that’s going to be legally questionable and I’m sure it’s going to go down that path,” Cuomo added.

Children’s Health Defense is supporting a legal effort to restrain this order immediately. Vaccination choice is a human right. While New York City unquestionably has the authority to isolate infectious individuals, and even to quarantine them, and to exclude unvaccinated children from schools during an outbreak in that school, it does not have the authority to require vaccination for all individuals on the basis of zip codes with vaccines that explicitly carry the risk of death. This government overreach requires challenge.

Thank you for your support.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the CHD Team

READ THE ORDER




If Truth Be Told About Aluminum (Aluminium), A Neurotoxin In Vaccines

If Truth Be Told About Aluminum (Aluminium), A Neurotoxin In Vaccines

by Catherine J. Frompovich, Natural Blaze
April 8, 2018

 

Aluminium is neurotoxic. Its free ion, Al3+ (aq), is highly biologically reactive and uniquely equipped to do damage to essential cellular (neuronal) biochemistry. This unequivocal fact must be the starting point in examining the risk posed by aluminium as a neurotoxin in humans. Apr 30, 2014

Source: What is the risk of aluminium as a neurotoxin?

Nothing explains the aluminum free ion Al3+ more intelligently than the following:

The likely principal antagonist in all such events is Al3+ (aq) and its mechanism of action will involve numbers of different agents or intermediates. For example, we know that aluminium is a potent pro-oxidant, its interaction with the superoxide radical anion establishing, fuelling and sustaining redox cycles. The potency of these effects are all the more significant in that the enhanced formation of reactive oxygen species may be accelerated at sites which are distinct and divorced from locations housing the cell’s anti-oxidant machinery. For example, aluminium sinks such as the extracellular senile plaques of Aβ42 and the intracellular chromatin of neuronal nuclei are both likely targets of aluminium-driven oxidative damage. Aluminium is an excitotoxin and a number of mechanisms have been described, whereby aluminium induces elevated and sustained levels of intracellular Ca2+ with significant implications not only for cellular energy metabolism, but also uncontrolled phosphorylation of biomolecules. The presence of biologically reactive aluminium imposes an immediate energy requirement upon a neuron, whether simply because of the need to produce more Ca2+-buffering proteins or because of the requirement to clean-up the consequences of hyperphosphorylation, for example, through autophagosomal activities. Aluminium is a mutagen and the phosphate-rich environment of the nucleus predisposes it to the accumulation of aluminium and subsequent alterations in the expression of genetic materials. The latter may be subtle but sufficient to bring about significant alterations in neuronal physiology over extended time periods. Aluminium is, of course, a powerful immunogen, being the preferred adjuvant in vaccination and immunotherapy. This activity as an adjuvant, and concomitantly as an antigen, at injection sites in skin or muscle must also be considered for focal accumulations of aluminium within the CNS and such reactivity may underlie aluminium’s suggested roles in autoimmunity. [3–5]

[CJF emphasis]

Source: Taylor & Francis Online

And yet, consensus-vaccinology-science doesn’t get it! Why?

There has to be another designated reason, plus rationale, for poisoning the CNS (central nervous system) of a human starting in infancy with mandated hyper-containing-aluminum-salts (as adjuvants) in any of 3 formulations, i.e., Aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, and potassium aluminum sulfate (alum):

Aluminum adjuvants are used in vaccines such as hepatitis A, hepatitis B, diphtheria-tetanus-containing vaccines, Haemophilus influenzae type b, and pneumococcal vaccines, but they are not used in the live, viral vaccines, such as measles, mumps, rubella, varicella and rotavirus.

Source: Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia

Proving the above

To check the quantities of aluminum in any vaccine on the CDC/FDA schedule for infants, children and adults, please search each vaccine using the following resource: Vaccine Package Inserts. Scroll to Section 11 Description, which lists the type of aluminum and the number of micrograms, plus other ingredients.

Medical Care

The most important part of emergency medical treatment is the recognition of possible aluminum toxicity based on risks (eg, renal insufficiency, aluminum exposure) and symptoms (eg, altered mental status, anemia, osteoporosis).

Treatment of aluminum toxicity includes elimination of aluminum from the diet, TPN, dialysate, medications, antiperspirants, and an attempt at the elimination and chelation of the element from the body’s stores.

Source: Aluminum Toxicity Treatment & Management (July 10, 2017)
https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/165315-treatment

Research

Research at Keele University in Staffordshire, UK, has shown for the first time that an individual who was exposed to aluminum at work and died of Alzheimer’s disease had high levels of aluminum in the brain.

[….]

Professor Chris Exley, of The Birchall Centre, at Keele University, said: “The results showed unequivocally that the frontal lobe contained an average aluminum content which was at least four times higher than might be expected for an age-matched control brain.

Source: Elevated brain aluminium, early onset Alzheimer’s disease in an individual occupationally exposed to aluminium
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140212093300.htm

Dr. Christopher Exley, PhD, premiere aluminum researcher for close to 30 years, recently has had his funding in aluminum research halted!
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/funding-halted-for-professor-chris-exley-linking-vaccines-to-autism-8xvwp0g8p

Medications

The medication, deferoxamine mesylate, may be given to help eliminate aluminum from your body. This substance works through a procedure known as chelation, which helps the body remove poisonous materials.

Source: Aluminum Toxicity

http://www.winchesterhospital.org/health-library/article?id=164929

Notation should be made, and even emphasized, that the allopathic medical paradigm disapproved of chelation as a “quack-medicine” modality when used by holistic and integrative physicians, and actually prosecuted some physicians for using the modality! The above indicates just how screwed up allopathic medical science actually is, since allopathy now incorporates what it previously condemned. Go figure!

Thus, the mechanism of Al toxicity appears to be different in the two cell lines. It is possible that the principal neurotoxic target of the metal is glial and when these cells are in a compromised state, this may secondarily impact the neuronal population and thus eventually lead to neurodegeneration.

Source: Differential Toxicity of Aluminum Salts in Human Cell Lines of Neural Origin: Implications for Neurodegeneration
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161813X00000073

The purported ‘science’ behind vaccines must be investigated.

Why? Most annual flu vaccines are not subject to the testing as other vaccines. The reason: Because they are formulated from a ‘sophisticated guessing game formula’ based upon what strains appeared prevalent in the previous Australian winter flu season!

However, veterinary medicine has taken a different look at animal vaccines, which is discussed in Vital Vaccination Antibody Titers Versus Vaccination
https://todaysveterinarypractice.com/vital-vaccination-series-antibody-titers-versus-vaccination/

All the above indicates the need for independent – no Big Pharma – involvement in assaying the neurotoxic effects of aluminum in vaccines given to infants as early as 24 hours old, especially in view of the Autism epidemic in the USA, i.e., one in 34 in New Jersey!, and spreading globally.

Congress, why aren’t you performing your Oversight duties?

Resources:

Aluminum Toxicity
https://myersdetox.com/aluminum-toxicity/

8 Ways to Protect Yourself from Aluminum Poisoning
https://universityhealthnews.com/daily/nutrition/8-ways-to-protect-yourself-from-aluminum-poisoning/

 

Connect with Natural Blaze




Three New Reasons to Question Vaccine Effectiveness Amid “Anti-Vaxxer” Censorship

Source: Truthstream Media

by Melissa Dykes
April 5, 2019

 

There are a lot of reasons people question vaccines in a country with the most aggressive vaccine schedule in the world where citizens are not allowed to directly sue vaccine manufacturers for vaccine-induced injuries.

While the censorship rages against the so-called “anti-vax” community to shut down online content that even questions the safety and effectiveness of vaccines on various platforms including YouTube, Facebook, and even Amazon, it’s quietly coming out all over the place that our vaccines just really aren’t as effective as the CDC, Big Pharma, it’s lackeys (again, this), and the pro-vaccine crowd would have everyone believe.

Straight away, here are three reasons that have popped up in recent weeks why people are questioning the effectiveness of vaccines.

Fully Vaccinated Sailors & a Mumps Outbreak

The Business Insider reported March 29, 2019 that 27 US Navy sailors have been quarantined at sea for several months now due to a viral outbreak of what they are craftily referring to as a “probable case of the mumps”:

A US Navy warship deployed to the Persian Gulf has been stuck at sea for months due to a viral outbreak of what’s likely the mumps, and servicemembers are continuing to fall ill as the medical workers try to get the situation under control, Fifth Fleet told Business Insider Thursday.

If you were not aware, all branches of the US military require a full battery of vaccines for all new recruits. According to this chart on military vaccines administered for Basic Training and Officer Accession Training, updated Feb. 2019, “Measles Mumps and rubella (MMR) are administered to all recruits regardless of prior history”. Meaning, that even if these servicemembers received their required MMR vaccines as children, they would have been given yet another upon entering the Navy.

So… Why are they getting mumps?

Well, that depends who you ask. The Business Insider promptly changed its headline to add the word “rare”.

Meanwhile, what most people don’t know is that two former Merck virologists blew the whistle on the MMR vaccine’s effectiveness nearly a decade ago by filing a qui tam action lawsuit against Merck & Co. in August 2010.

As you can see from the suit, the former Merck scientists claim that “by using improper testing techniques and falsifying test data,” Merck is concealing the fact that the company knows specifically that its mumps vaccine is “far less than” the 95 percent effectiveness the company claims.

The introduction to the 2010 whistleblower lawsuit against Merck & Co.

Note that the suit is specifically about the efficacy of the mumps vaccine, including MMR II and ProQuad versions.

Not only that, but the former Merck virologists also claim this is a “decade-long scheme to falsify and misrepresent the true efficacy of its vaccine”. So this has allegedly been going on since at least 2000, and the lawsuit has been prodding along ever so slowly since 2010.

It’s 2019 now. I wonder how long they’re gonna drag this thing out, don’t you?

On an MMR aside, it was also reported in the March 2017 edition of the Journal of Clinical Microbiology (Vol. 55, Issue 3) that, “During the measles outbreak in California in 2015, a large number of suspected cases occurred in recent vaccinees” and “Of the 194 measles virus sequences obtained in the United States in 2015” a whopping “73 were identified as vaccine sequences”.

So there’s that. New technology is allowing researchers to sequence viruses and find out if they are wild — or from a vaccine.

CDC Announces in March 2019 that Children Are “Less Protected” by Whooping Cough Vaccines than They Once Were

On March 14 it was reported that CDC researchers analyzed lab samples from whooping cough patients between 2000 and 2013 and determined that the bacteria that causes whooping cough has undergone genetic changes over time. In short, the vaccination they are currently administering to children for pertussis, including in the DTaP vaccine, is no longer effective because the whooping cough bacteria has mutated. How long has that been the case? Hard to say.

And yet, the USA Today article still went on to claim, “The best protection against whooping cough remains the DTaP vaccine”.

Really? How does that work? (Oh, right…)

“We’re making the best use of the vaccine, while we’re frantically doing research to make a better one,” Dr. William Schaffner, professor of preventive medicine at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, told NBC News. Not sure how they can “make the best use” out of a vaccine that they basically just admitted is pretty well worthless.

Dr. Schaffner also noted that a new vaccine for whooping cough “is nowhere near ready”.

CDC Says This Year’s Flu Vaccine Has an Overall Effectiveness of Just 47%

But take a look at this breakdown, as per Table 2 of the CDC’s Feb. 15, 2019 MMWR (click to enlarge):

While the overall adjusted effectiveness for all age groups comes out to 47 percent, the older one gets, the less effective the flu vaccine becomes. That 47 percent actually breaks out as 61 percent overall for ages six months to 17 years; 37 percent overall for 18-49 years; and just 24 percent overall for people age 50 and over.

CNN once again spoke to Dr. William Schaffner (guess he’s the go-to soundbite guy on vaccines for our nation’s mainstream media outlets this year?) who said, “those who get flu after receiving vaccine” (Wait, isn’t that supposed to be the point? Taking a vaccine to prevent the flu? Oh sorry, continuing — ) “are less likely to require hospitalization and are less likely to die of the illness”.

He followed that with, “The vaccine is not perfect, but give the vaccine credit for softening the blow.”

Is that the best spin they’ve got? How many other times in life is a 47 percent hailed as a success? That’s less than half a chance that the shot is worthless.

Then again, maybe they are comparing the 2019 flu vaccine to last year, when it was reported that the 2018 vaccine would only be 10 percent effective. At the announcement, doctors were still telling people that 10 percent is quote “better than nothing” and Dr. Pardis Sabeti, a Harvard professor and infectious disease expert, doubled down on CBS This Morning with, “In fact, in a year where it’s low effectiveness, it’s even more important that everybody get it so we can get as much resistance and we don’t allow the virus to thrive and grow and keep changing.” [emphasis added]

That logic is just… painful to behold.

Cui Bono?

Maybe now is a good time to point out that major pharmaceutical companies spend billions of dollars every year peddling their wares.

By billions, we’re talking nearly $30 billion in 2016 alone. Big Pharma forked over $9.6 billion to mainstream media outlets for the privilege of running direct-to-consumer (DTC) ads that year. That means American viewers saw an astounding 663,000 TV commercials for pharmaceuticals in 2016. You can barely make your way through a show on most major networks these days without at least one generic stock footage filled commercial where a friendly voiceover actor — after listing off a vague set of symptoms followed by a bunch of nightmarish side effects — implores us to become our own drug sales rep and ‘ ask our doctor today’ for whatever drug will supposedly make our lives as great as the people smiling their way through the generic stock footage.

The US is one of only two countries in the entire world where pharmaceutical companies are legally allowed to sell drugs directly to consumers (the other is Australia). Nowhere else on the planet is DTC pharmaceutical advertising allowed. Our government representatives, well funded by Big Pharma campaign contributions and surrounded by the industry’s lobbyists ($27.5 million in 2018), are well aware of the fact that this practice is a cost effective way of turning viewers into patients. A 2008 House Commerce Committee report states,

“Every $1 spent on direct-to-consumer advertising results in up to a $6 increase in sales. One study demonstrated that every $1,000 spent on direct-to-consumer advertisements resulted in 24 new prescriptions.”

Recently, an FDA medical adviser straight up told Yahoo! Finance, “Congress is owned by pharma.”

The point, however, is with numbers that substantial, there is no possible way for mainstream outlets to pretend with a straight face that they do not have a vested interest in how their reporters treat topics like, oh, I dunno, vaccines.

“If nearly $10 billion was spent on advertising, where did the other $20 billion go?” you might ask. Well, dear reader, it went to persuading doctors and other medical professionals (who may or may not get interviewed by media outlets for their “professional” opinion) of “the benefits of prescription drugs”.

The Bottom Line

The establishment figures that sell vaccines and the corporations that produce them act like vaccines are completely risk-free, so even if there’s only a ghost of a chance a vaccine will actually be effective as promoted or promised, then it’s worth it. The problem is, more and more people are realizing that vaccines are not 100 percent safe and without side effects. Those side effects are worth discussing, especially when we’re dealing with vaccines which the CDC has admitted are not as effective as they should be or Merck scientists-turned whistleblowers are litigating over.

The package inserts for vaccines list a wide and sometimes horrifying array of side effects. The MMR Insert, directly off Merck’s own website, says, “M-M-R II has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility.”

Ahem. Why not? Doesn’t that seem like an important thing to evaluate??

The government’s no-fault Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid out $4 billion to vaccine injured Americans since it was set up in 1986. That’s the same year Congress signed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which in essence set up a system that does not allow Americans to directly sue vaccine manufacturers for vaccine injuries.

It’s probably not a coincidence that the schedule of vaccines went from seven injections and 24 doses in 1983 before this legislation was passed, to a whopping 51 injections of 70 doses by 2016.

Meanwhile, this is the kind of sentiment being posted on social media about so-called “anti-vaxxers”:

Sigh…
Where do I even begin?

 

We the People have to be able to talk about vaccines.

https://youtu.be/a3EHrjfLXaw

 




Vaccines for Profit and Destruction

Source:  Jon Rappoport’s Blog

by Jon Rappoport
April 3, 2019

 

“Whatever else modern medicine has wrought—and it has given birth to some impressive technical fixes and pinpoint trauma care—it has produced an unprecedented transformation of society into a universal hospital. Medicine, Rockefeller motivated, makes disease, and then treats what it has made. There is no other commercial operation on the planet that exceeds its reach or profit. Create an endless problem, and then pretend to solve it: that is the secret mission. Make the solution a new problem begging for more answers: that is the strategy. Reduce vitality and life-force: that is the objective. Control of the disabled is far easier than control of the robustly healthy.” (Notes on Vaccines, Jon Rappoport)

I point your attention to a recent riveting article, “Vaccines: Gateway Drugs by Design,” at Robert Kennedy, Jr.’s World Mercury Project. The author of the article is Kristina Kristen.

Kristen lays out a case for drug companies as creators of disease, via their childhood vaccines—which diseases they then treat with their own hugely profitable drugs. A closed circle.

Key quotes from the article:

“The main vaccine producing companies, the ‘BIG 4’, Merck, GSK, Pfizer, Sanofi, who make all our children’s vaccines, list the very illnesses now seen in epidemic numbers in our children, in their own vaccine inserts, as potential adverse effects.”

“The drug ‘treatment’ side of the equation, which is substantially more lucrative than the ‘gateway’ vaccine side the BIG 4 already monopolized, now also increased substantially. The vaccine manufacturers began to capitalize on the known adverse effects of their vaccines, and have since created drugs for the ‘treatment’ side of the equation as well. The lack of incentive to make safe products, which created the bloated vaccine schedule, became the gateway to the lucrative drug treatment side for these companies. Today, the BIG 4 monopolize vaccines as well as the drug ‘treatments’ for chronic illnesses known to be induced by vaccines. First, vaccines push kids off the cliff, and then vaccine makers profit from ‘rescuing’ those they don’t kill.”

“It is NOT A COINCIDENCE that the same BIG 4 companies, GSK, Merck, Sanofi and Pfizer, the largest manufacturers of vaccines in the U.S., happen to also produce the top grossing drugs that treat the most common side effects from their own vaccines: Autoimmunity, asthma, anaphylaxis, allergies, ADHD, rheumatoid arthritis, epilepsy, etc.”

“Vaccines, in fact, make up the foundation of the BIG 4 trillion-dollar drug skyscrapers [companies] built on treating the chronic illnesses they KNOWINGLY create with their vaccines (again, the adverse effects are written in their vaccine inserts).”

One example among many: Advair, a drug for asthma, manufactured by vaccine giant GSK, which brought in $4.36 billion in sales, in 2017. Asthma is a common effect of childhood vaccinations.

Author Kristen is documenting the charge that medical drug producers are essentially creating the diseases they then “treat” with their own medicines.

From my own experience with hospitals and doctors, I can say that, for the most part, medical personnel are unaware of any possible connection between vaccines, childhood diseases, and drugs purportedly designed to reduce the effects of the vaccines. These doctors and nurses would never believe there is a closed circle based on profits.

But there is more. The drugs used to treat the adverse effects of vaccines cause their own expanding disease outcomes—and then new drugs are developed to treat these illnesses.

The federal government, in collusion with media networks, has covered up the disastrous death numbers resulting from medical care. For years I’ve been documenting the research that reveals those numbers. For instance, see “Is US Health Really the Best in the World?” This review was written in 2000 by Dr. Barbara Starfield, at the time a revered expert at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. It was published on July 26, 2000, in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Starfield concluded that, every year in the US, the medical system killed 225,000 people. That would be 2.25 million deaths per decade. In a 2009 interview, Starfield told me that 225,000 was a conservative estimate…




If Truth Be Told About Cowpox & Smallpox Diseases: Scientific Differences That Caused a Pharmaceutical Fairytale

Source:  Natural Blaze

by Catherine Frompovich
March 25, 2019

 

 

“I hope that someday the practice of producing cowpox in human beings will spread over the world – when that day comes, there will be no more smallpox. – Edward Jenner

 


 

Holy cow!

Edward Jenner did not know cowpox and smallpox were/are two different organisms or diseases!

And the pharmaceutical industry followed charlatan Edward Jenner into a perpetuity of high profits and criminal scientific misdemeanors for which Big Pharma and vaccine manufacturers are not being held accountable within product liability law, at least in the USA, due to the actions of the U.S. Congress in 1986 when it passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA).

By 1985, vaccine manufacturers had difficulty obtaining liability insurance. … Because of this, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) in 1986, establishing a federal no-fault system to compensate victims of injury caused by mandated vaccines.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injury_Act]

[Who says vaccines are safe, if Congress in 1986 recognized injuries caused by vaccines? Don’t people have the inherent right to protect themselves and their children from known vaccine adverse health effects, especially neurotoxins and toxic chemicals?]

 

Cowpox Definition

noun

a viral disease of cows’ udders which, when contracted by humans through contact, resembles mild smallpox, and was the basis of the first smallpox vaccines.

[Dictionary online]

Cowpox is a viralskininfectioncaused by the cowpox or catpox virus. This is a member of the Orthopoxvirus family, which includes the variola virus that causes smallpox. Cowpox is similar to but much milder than the highlycontagious and sometimes deadly smallpox disease.

[https://www.dermnetnz.org/topics/cowpox/]

 

What is the treatment for cowpox?

However, studies in mice suggest a role for the viral DNA polymerase inhibitor cidofovir, given parenterally, topically, or in an aerosolized form, for disseminated cases of cowpox. Patients should be made aware that their lesions are potentially infectious, but no person-to-person transmission has been reported. Jun 19, 2018

[https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1131886-treatment]

 

Medical Care

Because cowpox is generally a self-limited disease, treatment is largely supportive. Patients often do not feel well and require bed rest or, occasionally, hospitalization.

[https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1131886-treatment]

 

What is the treatment of cowpox?

There is no cure for cowpox, but the disease is self-limiting. The human immune response is sufficient to control the infections on its own. The lesions heal by themselves within 6–12 weeks. Often patients are left with scars at the site of the healed pox lesions.

Patients may feel unwell and require bed rest and supportive therapy. Wound dressings or bandages may be applied to lesions to prevent spread to other sites and potentially to other people.

Patients with underlying skin conditions, such as atopic dermatitis, may be at greater risk of generalised cowpox.

[https://www.dermnetnz.org/topics/cowpox/]

 

How many people have died from cowpox?

The scourge of the world. An estimated 300 million people died from smallpox in the 20th century alone. This virulent disease, which kills a third of those it infects, is known to have co-existed with human beings for thousands of years. Feb 17, 2011

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/empire_seapower/smallpox_01.shtml]

 

The question above refers to cowpox, but the data “spinmiesters” cite smallpox deaths!

What kind of transparency, plus scientific accuracy, is that in reporting medical and health information over the Internet? Doesn’t that represent an example of real fake news?

Vaccine MIS-information probably is the primary example of fake news on the Internet!

I believe I can make that statement unequivocally, as the above discussion of cowpox not being smallpox clearly demonstrates, plus my researching vaccine science data since the 1980s!

In England, the Royal Society For Public Health, Vision and Practice published online its 36-page report “Moving The Needle, Promoting vaccination uptake across the life course,” which clearly sets out the projected long-range plans for all the vaccines coming from Big Pharma.

In the above Report’s section titled “Responsibility of the press,” we find this:

The press, therefore, has a responsibility to share accurate, evidence-based information about vaccinations, given the vital role vaccinations play in improving and maintaining the health of the population. [Pg. 32] [CJF emphasis everywhere]

No truer words spoken, but definitely not practiced by mainstream media!

There are thousands of peer-reviewed articles regarding the dangers and downfalls of vaccines, their ingredients and harms [vaccine package inserts Contraindications, Adverse Events] etc. published online, and

Is there an obvious Conclusion?

If Jenner’s ignorance, misinformation and ‘scientific’ lie(s) have been promoted since the 1700s, isn’t it time to confess the mistake; correct the science; and re-establish scientific integrity within medicine and pharmacology?

Remember, “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”, is a law of propaganda often attributed to the Nazi Joseph Goebbels.




A Perfect Nightmare: Cryptoklepto

Source:  Giza Death Star

by Joseph P. Farrell
March 25, 2019

 

Regular readers here will be accustomed to my occasional rants and warnings about crypto-currencies. And those who are familiar with those rants will understand that I’m not an investment advisor, much less a “policy maker” (thank God!). I’m a hack from South Dakota who likes to indulge in high octane speculation. And today I want to do double duty and give not one, but two, high octane speculations about three very seemingly unrelated articles, shared by Ms. K.M., Mr G.L.R.,  and Mr. E.G. (who also kindly shared his own speculations in his email, which I will attempt to outline because they impact on my own). In addition to that, Catherine Austin Fitts also shared a story from the Bank of International Smugglers… er… I mean… the Bank of International Settlements, that is also germane to my high octane speculations. So with all those caveats on the record, let’s dive into the first article:

Oregon Bill Would Create Banking Alternative for Cannabis Industry, Bypass Federal Reserve

Now let’s cite a few paragraphs then summarize what the implications are:

A bill filed in the Oregon House would establish limited state-chartered banks to serve the cannabis industry. Final passage of this legislation would remove a major federal roadblock in front of the developing industry in the state and further nullify federal prohibition in practice.

Rep. Pam Marsh (D) and Rep. Ken Helm (D) introduced House Bill 3169 (HB3169) on Feb. 28. The legislation would create a self-contained, state chartered banking system for the cannabis industry in Oregon.

Because marijuana remains illegal under federal law, cannabis businesses in states that have legalized marijuana remain effectively locked out of the banking system. If a federally chartered or insured financial institution touches marijuana money, it takes on significant legal risk. The federal government insures or charters virtually every bank in the U.S. As a result, cannabis businesses have been forced to transact almost exclusively in cash. Passage of HB3169 would bypass the federal banking system and create a limited banking alternative for the marijuana industry in Oregon.

HB3619 would authorize banking institutions and credit unions to organize as limited charter cannabis financial institutions. Cannabis businesses would be able to deposit funds in these institutions and write “special purpose checks” for the following:

(a) To pay fees or taxes to a public body;

(b) To pay rent on property that is leased by, or on behalf of, a cannabis business;

(c) To pay a vendor that is physically located in Oregon for goods or services associated with a cannabis business; and

(d) To purchase bonds issued by a public body.

Oregon is among a growing number of states simply ignoring federal prohibition, and nullifying it in practice.

So what do we have? (1) A growing number of states that are fed up with the ever-growing unmanageable marsh monster in Swampington, D.C.; and by the same token (2) a growing popular distaste for far-off bureaucrats making decisions as representatives of corporations and banksters about how local people with live, run their lives, and govern themselves; (3) a determination to create local or regional means of financial transaction, with media of exchange actually backed by something (in this case, marijuana). When Ms. K.M. sent along this email, she indicated that her suspicion was that this was but the camel’s nose in the door.

If one looks at this list, I suspect she’s right, for almost anything could be used to create such banks, from marijuana to gold – think of Texas’ state bullion depository – to food or, to borrow a page from the Nazis for a moment, Feder’s “labor treasury certificates,” which represented a kind of “state surplus” medium of exchange. In other words, Oregon’s move is of a piece with Texas’ bullion depository in a sense, and part of wider moves by several states in the United States that have passed “constitutional money” resolutions. These moves all occur, let it be noted, in the same time frame that several countries are trying to repatriate their physical gold reserves, a trend that was kicked off by Germany a few years ago, and which list has grown to include Australia, Austria, the Netherlands, and of course, Venezuela.

Meanwhile, of course, the globalist banksters are not idle, and have been noticing the growing trend of dissatisfaction with their grand scheme of creating a global centralized government with billionaire busybodies telling everyone else how big their toilet bowls can be, how many vaccines their children must have, how many showers per week they can take, and most importantly, has been throwing up road blocks to those countries trying to repatriate their gold. Recall the difficulty Germany encountered for a while trying to do so. Venezuela was simply told “you can’t have your gold because we don’t like you,” no doubt because Venezuela was not Germany and could not make as big of a fuss.

Which leads to the second article shared by Mr. E.G.:

Gold – Preparing For The Next Move

Now, again, I’m not an investment advisor, nor are my speculations to be construed as such. I only share my own personal reactions to what appears to be emerging, which brings us to Mr. E.G.’s speculations which are quite similar to my own. The crucial crux interpretum of this second article appears to be this:

The finances of any government whose unbacked currency is the national pricing medium are central to determining future general price levels. Just taking the US dollar for example, the government’s debt to GDP ratio is over 100% (in 1929 it was less than 40%). At the peak of the cycle, the government should have a revenue surplus reflecting underlying full employment and the peak of tax revenues. In 1929, the surplus was 0.7% of estimated GDP; today it is a deficit of 5.5% of GDP. In 1929, the government had minimal legislated welfare commitments, the net present value of which was therefore trivial. The deficits that arose in the 1930s were due to falling tax revenues and voluntary government schemes enacted by Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt. Today, the present value of future welfare commitments is staggering, and estimates for the US alone range up to $220 trillion, before adjusting for future currency debasement.

Other countries are in a potentially worse position, particularly in Europe. A global economic slump on any scale, let alone that approaching the 1930s depression, will have a drastic impact on all national finances. Tax revenues will collapse while welfare obligations escalate. Some governments are more exposed than others, but the US, UK, Japan and EU governments will see their finances spin out of control. Furthermore, their ability to cut spending is limited to that not mandated by law. Even assuming responsible stewardship by politicians, the expansion of budget deficits can only be financed through monetary inflation.

That is the debt trap, and it has already sprung shut on minimal interest rates. For a temporary solution, governments can only turn to central banks to fund runaway government deficits by inflationary means. The inflation of money and credit is the central banker’s cure-all for everything. Inflation is not only used to finance governments but to provide the commercial banks with the wherewithal to stimulate an economy. An acceleration of monetary inflation is therefore guaranteed by a global economic slowdown, so the purchasing power of fiat currencies will take another lurch downwards as the dilution is absorbed. That is the message we must take on board when debating physical gold, which is the only form of money free of all liabilities.

Gold can only give an approximation of the loss of purchasing power in a fiat currency during a slump, because gold’s own purchasing power will be rising at the same time. Between 1930 and 1933 the wholesale price index in America fell 31.6% and consumer prices by 17.8%. These price changes reflected the increasing purchasing power of gold, because of its fixed convertibility with the dollar at that time.

When Mr. E.G., shared his speculations on what all this meant, he proposed the following: that there were discernible signs that central banks were moving toward the creation of a crypto-currency world, or a cashless society, with the crypto-currencies or some type of digital currency backed by (1) gold, and (2) collateralized space assets.  This, in essence, was my own speculation at the 2014 Secret Space Program Conference in San Mateo, Nuttyfornia. There I proposed that space assets had been collateralized from a very early period in the post-World War Two era as a component of a secret system of finance. More importantly, recent stories seem to indicate this may have been the case, as a few years ago we were treated to stories about certain asteroids having astronomical resources that were valued in the quadrillions of dollars, handy things to have floating around when the toxic derivatives on the books are calculated to be in the quadrillions of dollars. Additionally, he pointed out that some governments have already committed to becoming cashless within a few years, for the simple reason that it gives them – and their controlling central banks – the ability to tax in real time.

I suspect – strongly – that Mr. E.G.’s and my own speculations about the collateralization and backing of digital currencies are, indeed, the “game plan” of the banksters who, sensing the rising tide of revolt against their plans for centralization and telling everyone else how they can and should live, are speeding up the process as fast as they can. With that in mind, consider this article shared by Catherine Austin Fitts about digital and crypto-currencies from the BIS (the Bank of Institutionalized Swag…er… Bank of International Smugglers… er… Bank of International Settlements… it is difficult to keep all these players sorted out):

1/10The future of money and payments Speech by Agustín Carstens General Manager, Bank for International Settlements

There’s so much in this speech to give one pause that to do a thorough job of reviewing it would require several blogs. But there are a few paragraphs that jumped out(Note, in the article, CBDC stands for “central bank digital currencies”):

Banks play an important role as provider of financial services to citizens and businesses. Imagine that the Central Bank of Ireland and the ECB were to offer deposit accounts to everyone and then issue debit cards and mobile phone apps for you to make payments with. In such a scenario, the central bank would be taking on the customer-facing business lines. Presumably, the central bank would need to recruit new staff to handle this line of business and to handle customer enquiries (sic). Now, I can tell you that central bank staff are very good, and they would be capable of taking on customer-facing tasks. But that is not the main issue.

Safety could be an important reason to deposit money in the central bank. In times of uncertainty, more customers would prefer to have deposit accounts at central banks, and fewer at commercial banks. A shift of funds from commercial banks to the central bank could be gradual at first. But the trickle could turn into a flood.

If bank deposits shift to the central bank, lending would need to shift as well. So, in addition to the deposit business, the central bank would be taking on the lending business. The central bank would need to meet business owners, interview them about why they need a loan, and decide on how much each should receive.

We can ask ourselves whether this is the kind of financial system that we would like to have as the ultimate set-up. I grant that this thought experiment may have gone too far. For instance, the central bank could make do without a lending operation if it sends customer deposits to the commercial banks by opening central bank accounts at commercial banks. In effect, the central bank would be lending to the commercial banks so that they could lend on to the customers.

In his speech, Mr. Carstens points out that the above scenario is a “thought experiment”, and throughout the rest of the speech he simply points out that cashless payments are a growing trend in certain countries (notably China). The implication is that “it’s a technological inevitability,” and of course, he gives the usual caveats that central bankers are extraordinarily cautious people and don’t want to leap into a course of action without knowing the full consequences.

But the consequences are spelled out in his speech: central banks simply take over all the functions of ordinary banks, including direct deposits, lending, and clearing functions for individual and corporate customers. With the BIS sitting on top of it all, of course. Notably, there is not much said about accountability in such a system, so the question needs to be baldly and nakedly stated: should we trust such a system, given what we’ve seen from Mr. Globaloney lately?

I don’t. Given my “druthers,” I’d much rather trust Texas’ bullion depository, or Oregon’s “cannabis certificates” than the Tower of Basel. And that brings us to the final article. At the beginning of his speech, Mr. Carstens points out that there is much discussion about the “digital” component of “central bank digital currencies.” However, he quickly (and deftly) shifts the discussion to the “central bank” component as if it were another implied inevitability. In doing so, he avoids the real issue: cyber systems are simply not secure, and as such have no integrity and make it much easier for looting, fraud, and outright theft to occur, and in a central banking pyramid, that means the banksters themselves will be the primary looters, frauders, and thieves. Consider this final article shared by Mr. G.L.R:

Study Finds That Overwhelming Majority Of Bitcoin Trading Volume Is Faked

And what’s true of Bitcoin is true for all cryptocurrencies, without exception. What’s of concern here is the same problem I’ve raised elsewhere, and in different contexts: crypto-currency works for those who have the ability to create large computer systems and algorithms to execute trades, and do so with the most efficient speeds. Accordingly, market activity is not reflective of genuine human trading activity. In other words, take the same criticism of equities, commodities, securities and currency markets, and now apply it to crypto-currencies. Ultimately, the trend is toward ever greater centralization, because this is what the technology requires and demands to function profitably. And none of it – none of it – is secure.  Add to this the fact that one must trust these banks to tell us the truth about how much gold, or space assets, is really backing those blips on the screen. And the more centralized, the more remote from your neighborhood, and its economic realities, they will be.

So, as far as I can see, this is a recipe for a perfect nightmare for pretty much everyone, except, of course, the banksters.

What this means is, I suspect, that one will see increasing local and regional pushback from states, provinces, and localities and more abandonment of the globalist agenda.

See you on the flip side…




Solutions: Open Science

Source:  The Corbett Report

 

“The idea that science should be opened to the wide public—even to the wild public—is one that produces a great deal of consternation among the defenders of the scientific status quo. What role do the unwashed masses have to play in the hallowed halls of the modern Church of Science? Aren’t these spaces reserved for the white-robed priests of this secular religion?

Thankfully, as more and more innovators step up to the plate to provide ideas for the wider public to access scientific knowledge and play an increasingly important role in developing, sharing and using that knowledge, the ideas of “citizen science” and “open science” are no longer something to be laughed at.” ~ James Corbett

 

by James Corbett
March 22, 2019

 

In the face of the crisis of science, it is easy to throw our hands up and watch as the old guard of the scientific establishment circles the wagons and goes back to business as usual. But there are real solutions to these problems, and we all—scientists and non-scientists alike—have a part to play in implementing them. Today on The Corbett Report we explore Solutions: Open Science.

 

https://youtu.be/MlVVUgWsBRo

Watch this video on BitChute / DTube / YouTube or Download the mp4

 

TRANSCRIPT

Biostitutes selling dodgy data to to the highest bidder. Scientific frauds fudging figures to publish before they perish. Statistical charlatans p-hacking significant results in the confidence that no one will be checking their work.

Last time on The Corbett Report, we examined The Crisis of Science, or, more precisely, the crises of science: the Replication Crisis; the Crisis of Fraud; the Crisis of Publication; and the Crisis of Peer Review. We also explored the shared root of these problems in the rise of Big Science, where large-scale capital investments are increasingly a requirement for cutting edge research.

DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER: Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present—and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

SOURCE: Eisenhower Farewell Address

Big Science requires Big Money, either from Big Corporations or Big Government. But as we have already seen, when Big Corporations are funding the research, the “science” is invariably skewed in the interests of the company who is paying for it, and when Big Government is funding the research, the “science” is invariably skewed by political interests, lobbyists, and military contractors. Even worse, we sometimes get the admixture of the two, combining Eisenhower’s twin nightmare of a military-industrial complex with a scientific-technological elite.

This is the problem facing humanity at the crossroads of the 21st century, on the cusp of innovations in robotics, computing, genomics and other breakthrough sciences that have the potential to transform our world forever—for better or for worse.

In the face of such monumental challenges, it is easy to throw our hands up and watch as the old guard of the scientific establishment circles the wagons and goes back to business as usual. But there are real solutions to these problems, and we all—scientists and non-scientists alike—have a part to play in implementing them.

Today let’s explore Solutions: Open Science.

This is The Corbett Report.

Ever since the publication of John Ioannidis’ groundbreaking 2005 paper, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” the scientific community has been engaged in a debate about what this crisis of science signifies, what kinds of measures are needed to fix it, and even whether there is really a crisis at all.

But as the data continues to pour in from every field of study, the results are by now unquestionable: the scientific institutions that exist today are producing extremely untrustworthy results.

BRIAN NOSEK: […][I]s there actually a reproducibility crisis? And Nature went as far as to say “Let’s ask people and see if they agree that there is a crisis.” And so they surveyed 1,500 researchers and 90% of them agreed that there is a significant crisis or I don’t know what a slight crisis is but a slight crisis.

SOURCE: Professor Brian Nosek on the reproducibility crisis and open science in psychology

JEVIN WEST: In industry, CEOs and leaders in the field of in biotech and pharma are coming out and saying “Well, we’ve known this for a long time. We already know that, you know, probably fifty percent of the studies published in top-tier academic journals can’t be repeated. We know it. We can’t repeat it in our labs.” This should be unnerving because we depend on science to fly in those planes, to get that antibiotic that you need when you get sick and have an infection when you land in the emergency room. This is a big deal.

SOURCE: Calling Bullshit 7.4: A Replication Crisis

IOANNDIS: They could replicate only 6 of the 53 landmark studies for oncology drug target projects and the conclusion was that “the failure to win the war on cancer has been blamed on many factors but recently a new culprit has emerged: too many basic scientific discoveries are just wrong.” And we just need to do the whole job from scratch as if these papers did not even exist.

This is very worrisome. Hedge funds don’t trust science any longer. So this is from a business journal. They claimed that at least 50% of published studies, even those in higher academic journals, cannot be repeated with the same conclusions by an industrial lab. And the potential for not being able to reproduce academic data is a disincentive to early stage investors. At least one firm now is hiring CEOs to independently validate academic science prior to putting up serious money. What this means is that these companies, these hedge funds, they they say that the scientific literature it’s just for the scientists, it’s not serious. It’s more of a toy. And if you really want to be serious and not waste your money, you’d better try to do it from scratch and make sure that it works. Otherwise, you’re running a very large risk.

SOURCE: CLB | Dr. John Ioannidis on The Reliability of Biomedical Evidence and How to Improve It

It is getting harder for researchers to deny that there is a problem. But as with any such crisis, if the problem is defined narrowly enough then the “solution” to that problem can be limited to a few cosmetic alterations of the existing system.

If we take the crisis of science as merely a problem with shoddy statistical analysis, for example, then surely all that is needed is to put more time and effort into training scientists in the proper use of statistical tools. With an increased awareness of the problem of p-hacking or other statistical tricks, journal editors and reviewers could put extra time into scrutinizing the results of statistical analyses in research papers.

Or if the crisis is simply a problem of fraud, then an awareness campaign about the problem could pressure researchers to publish their raw data for scrutiny by the wider scientific community.

If the crisis is just a result of the publication pressures that modern academics are subjected to, then the creation of alternative journals that publish negative results or inconclusive findings could provide an outlet for researchers to earn publication credit while being forthcoming with their failures.

Indeed, all of these problems and many more have been identified and all sorts of solutions have been proposed or even implemented to help remedy them.

There are growing calls to raise the threshold for “statistical significance,” issuing guidelines for the use of p values in research, or even outright banning the use of p values in papers, as the journal Basic and Applied Social Psychology did in 2015.

There are calls for more publications to require scientists to publish raw data, methodology and other relevant information along with their research so that their experiments can be more reliably replicated.

A number of journals dedicated to publishing negative and null results have been created in recent years, and in 2017 the Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine ceased publication after declaring that it had succeeded in its mission of convincing other, mainstream journals to publish more articles reporting negative or null results.

Sites like RetractionWatch keep an eye on the fraud, abuse, mistakes and misdeeds of scientists, publishers and institutions around the world, drawing attention to scandals and problems in the system rather than trying to sweep them under the rug.

All of these ideas, and many more, are important and necessary steps in fixing some of the problems that have come to plague modern institutional science. But they are not sufficient to solve the crisis of science. Because, as even the leaders of this movement to re-imagine science will readily admit, this crisis is not about p values or publishers or practices. It is about the nature of the scientific community itself.

IOANNIDIS: Who should take responsibility for the replication culture? Well, I think that one option is if you have the whole field coalescing—which is what’s happening in genetics—it could be the same investigators. If you have multiple investigators, each one of them kind of cross-checking each other, they can have multiple analytical teams look at the same data. Hopefully that would be pretty objective.

Someone might fear that this might be too much inbred so you need different investigators, and if you want different investigators then who is that going to be? If you have an all-inclusive consortium approach it’s difficult to find such people. Maybe you can find some who still belong to the same school and therefore you don’t have really independence in the replication process.

One option is to try to see if there’s investigators of competing theories and hypotheses. If they can be convinced, if they can look at the data—well, provided the data, the methods, the software, the script is available—if they can also repeat a study according to what they think is the best way to do it and they get the same results, I think this is very very strong evidence. But that model may not necessarily always be available.

You can have also combinations to the above, or you can open the process to the wide public. Now, the wide public could also be the wild public. Now lots of senior investigators will start saying, “I’m a senior scientist. I have trained for 500 years to become so experienced, and how can I have someone who’s clueless, who has never tried his hands on the field look at my research? We need to be careful, but we also need to be open. And there’s many research questions that indeed involving the wide public in some sort of citizen scientist model might be the way to go and to compare notes on what we get.

SOURCE: ESOF 2018 – Enhancing reproducible research – John Ioannidis

The idea that science should be opened to the wide public—even to the wild public—is one that produces a great deal of consternation among the defenders of the scientific status quo. What role do the unwashed masses have to play in the hallowed halls of the modern Church of Science? Aren’t these spaces reserved for the white-robed priests of this secular religion?

Thankfully, as more and more innovators step up to the plate to provide ideas for the wider public to access scientific knowledge and play an increasingly important role in developing, sharing and using that knowledge, the ideas of “citizen science” and “open science” are no longer something to be laughed at.

At the root of this revolutionary approach to the scientific process is the understanding that access to scientific knowledge is the key to enabling meaningful public participation. In the wake of the open everything ethos that the internet has helped to foster it may be difficult to remember, but the debate over whether or not scientific data and discoveries should be locked away behind paywalls and kept within the cloistered confines of academia was one that was raging just a few short years ago. And it was a debate that cost at least one activist his life.

ALYONA MINKOVSKI: Well, today we have news for you about Aaron Swartz. He’s the executive director of Demand Progress, a co-founder of Reddit, and he’s been a frequent guest on this show. But yesterday he was arrested and charged with violating federal hacking laws for downloading four million document documents from JSTOR from MIT’s network. Now, if convicted of the felony charges Swartz could face up to 35 years in prison and a 1 million dollar fine.

JSTOR is a company that provides digitized copies of academic journals. It’s used in universities all over the country, and they’ve already come out saying that they did not refer this case to the feds and that all the information has been returned. But the arrest is once again shone a light on the fight for open access to information.

SOURCE: Aaron Swartz Arrested: The Open Access Debate

AMY GOODMAN: Aaron Swartz committed suicide on Friday. He hanged himself in his Brooklyn apartment. He was 26 years old.

His death occurred just weeks before he was to go on trial for using computers at MIT—that’s the Massachusetts Institute of Technology—to download millions of copyrighted academic articles from JSTOR, a subscription database of scholarly papers. JSTOR declined to press charges but prosecutors moved the case forward. Aaron Swartz faced up to 35 years in prison and million dollars in fines for allegedly violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. When the case first came to light the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz said, quote, “stealing is stealing whether you use a computer command or a crowbar, and whether you take documents, data or dollars.”

SOURCE: “An Incredible Soul”: Lawrence Lessig on Aaron Swartz After Leading Cyberactivist’s Suicide. 1 of 2

In 2008, internet pioneer and cyber visionary Aaron Swartz penned the “Guerilla Open Access Manifesto” laying out the basis for the Open Access Movement.

Information is power. But like all power, there are those who want to keep it for themselves. The world’s entire scientific and cultural heritage, published over centuries in books and journals, is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations. Want to read the papers featuring the most famous results of the sciences? You’ll need to send enormous amounts to publishers like Reed Elsevier.

There are those struggling to change this. The Open Access Movement has fought valiantly to ensure that scientists do not sign their copyrights away but instead ensure their work is published on the Internet, under terms that allow anyone to access it.

The document ended with a call to action:

We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with the world. We need to take stuff that’s out of copyright and add it to the archive. We need to buy secret databases and put them on the Web. We need to download scientific journals and upload them to file sharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open Access.

As we now know, this document, innocuous as it may seem, led to tragedy, as Swartz’ own attempt to liberate the information from JSTOR—a digital library of academic journals—led to his arrest and, ultimately, his death. But the Open Access Movement did not die with Aaron Swartz. Today, an increasing number of researchers are committed to publishing in open access journals and in online spaces, like the Public Library of Science (PLoS) website, that are freely available to the public.

But the idea of open access is not about knowledge for its own sake. It is about the radical potential of such a movement to open the doors of academia’s ivory towers and to encourage a greater role for the public in the scientific process. Open access is just the first domino in a series of ideas that lead to a radically different view of science and its place in society.

The first level of public participation in the scientific process itself involves a “citizen scientist” model that is drawing increasing attention from the wider scientific community. In this model, interested amateurs help scientists to collect, store, process and even analyze data as part of a wider research project. The modern manifestation of this idea takes its cue from the life sciences, where outdoor enthusiasts have been called upon to help projects like the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme, tracking the range and size of local butterfly populations, and the North American Bird Phenology Program, keeping tabs on the location and migration patterns of various bird populations.

With the advent of personal computing and the internet, these initiatives were extended to even more arcane fields of scientific research. Pioneered by projects like SETI@home, which uses spare computing resources of volunteers on the internet to analyze radio signals for signs of extraterrestrial intelligence, citizen science portals such as Zooniverse have been created to allow non-specialists to participate in a wide array of research projects across nearly every conceivable discipline.

But this model of citizen science, heavily promoted on the Ted Talk circuit and in the mainstream scientific press, does not question the fundamental divide between scientists and the wider public. In these cases, volunteers are merely being used to collect data or to dedicate their spare computing power to analyzing data as part of a larger project directed by a team of scientists.

More radical still are ways that people are coming together to collaborate on solving problems themselves. In these projects, participation in every step of the process is encouraged and ideas are debated and discussed openly as a self-formed group discovers the answer to a question they themselves have asked.

MICHAEL NIELSEN: So my talk today is about open science, which sits in roughly the same relationship to science—basic scientific research, mostly academic research I’ll be talking about—as open source software does to the commercial software world. And so what I want to explore is the extent to which open-source principles or style principles can be applied to the practice of basic scientific research.

We’re going to start off with an example where this has been done successfully. So, the example starts with this man: Timothy Gowers. Gowers is a mathematician. He’s actually one of the world’s leading mathematicians. He’s, amongst other things, the recipient of the Fields Medal, which is often called the Nobel Prize in mathematics. Gowers, in addition to being a Fields Medal-winning mathematician is also a blogger. That’s not that uncommon actually amongst leading mathematicians. Of the 42 living Fields medalists, four of them in fact have started blogs. So that’s about one in ten, which I don’t know how that compares to the general population but it’s pretty good.

Anyway, in January of 2009, Gowers wrote this very interesting post with the title “Is massively collaborative mathematics possible?” And what he was proposing to do in this post was to use his blog as a medium to attack a difficult unsolved mathematical problem—a problem which he said he would “love to solve”—completely in the open using his blog as a way of posting his partial progress and his ideas. And what’s more, he issued an open invitation inviting anybody in the world who thought that they had an idea to contribute to post that idea in the comments section of the blog. So he called this experiment “the polymath project.”

Well, the polymath project got off to actually quite a slow start. In the first seven hours after he opened his blog up to comments, not a single person wrote in with any suggestions. But then a mathematician at the University of British Columbia named Jozsef Solymosi posted a suggestion—basically it’s a simplified variation of the original problem, which he was suggesting might be a bit easier to attack. And then 15 minutes after that, a high school teacher, in fact, from Arizona named Jason Dyer wrote a short suggestion. And just three minutes after that Terence Tao—also actually a Fields medalist, he’s a mathematician at UCLA—posted a suggestion. And so things were really off and running at this point.

Over the next 37 days, in fact, 27 different people would post 800 substantive mathematical comments containing 170,000 words. That’s a lot of mathematics done very quickly. It was hard actually . . . I was following along—I didn’t contribute substantively, but I was following along quite closely—and it was difficult simply to find the time just to read all the contributions. It was really going remarkably quickly. You’d see people you know they propose an idea in a very half-baked form and then often it will be very rapidly developed sometimes by other people. Sometimes of course it would be discarded, but other times it would then be incorporated into the canon of knowledge. Gowers described this process as being to normal research as driving is to pushing a car.

And at the end of the 37 days he used his blog to announce that the problem had most probably been solved. In fact, a generalization of the original problem which they were attacking. They still had to go back and check that they hadn’t made any silly mistakes. In fact, everything did indeed check out ultimately and they wrote two papers based on it. It took months more to do all the cleanup work, but the back of the problem had in fact been solved at this point.

Now of course the reason I’m talking about this polymath project is not really so much because of the particular mathematical problem. You know, it’s not important because it solved a particular mathematical problem; it’s, rather, important because of what it suggests. It suggests that we can use some of these sorts of tools as kind of cognitive tools to potentially speed up the solution, not of simple everyday problems but actually of problems which challenge some of the smartest people in the world. Yeah, that’s really exciting. These are problems right at the limit of human intellectual ability. And not just, you know, one particular problem, but perhaps broadly across many different fields.

SOURCE: Michael Nielsen: “Reinventing Discovery” | Talks at Google

The implications of this type of spontaneous, collaborative problem solving extend far beyond the field of mathematics. In a world that is increasingly being transformed by scientific pursuits—and where the cost of mistakes are correspondingly high—a public that is skeptical about scientific institutions, government regulators and other supposed “authorities” is increasingly taking responsibility for scientific fact-checking into their own hands.

One stark demonstration of this fact came in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear meltdowns in March 2011. As we now know, Japanese officials withheld data from the government’s own “SPEEDI Network,”  a computer system that had been set up specifically to provide forecasts of nuclear radiation fallout in the event of an emergency. When the data was finally released months later, it was revealed that local officials, having been kept in the dark by government scientists, had evacuated residents directly into the path of the fallout.

The situation left residents and concerned citizens around the globe scrambling for accurate, up-to-date information about radiation readings, and distrustful of the government agencies who were interested in keeping that information from the public. The response was a spontaneous, volunteer-organized citizen science project called Safecast that designed a radiation measuring device that would be able to take radiation readings of an area every five seconds and upload that data to an open source database.

The product of this remarkable initiative has been the creation of the largest database of its kind in the world, one that has been independently verified as accurate. And it was started and continues to operate as an independent, decentralized, global volunteer project of concerned citizens, scientist and non-scientist alike.

SEAN BONNER: “[. . . ]And then [in] March 2011 in Fukushima, this earthquake tsunami and nuclear meltdown, like, triple thing happened, and everybody was very confused. We didn’t know what was going on and I had these connections in Tokyo, so I was reaching out to try to find out what’s going on.

Other people were scrambling around and nobody really knew what was happening, and the little bit of information that was starting to come out really made no sense. People would see a map like this would be published and, like, what does this even mean? I don’t even know. Nobody knew. And so I started talking to Joi again, and Joi introduced me to his friend Pieter, who lived in Tokyo and had lived in Tokyo for like 35 years and had family who was in one of the areas that got really severely impacted by the tsunami.

So we just started talking about how can we get some information together, because there’s no information available for people. Nobody knows what’s happening. And so we thought, “OK, let’s reach out to everybody we know. We’ve got to find somebody who knows something about this—the different pieces—and we can pull them together and, you know, continue this conversation somehow. So we all reached out to whoever we might know that might have some connection.

And so, for me that looked like my hacker friends at their crash base in Los Angeles and at Tokyo hackerspace. My friend Matt Alt, who I had done the Toei website with, who was now living in Tokyo, and he helped translate a lot of the Japanese stuff that was coming out from the official news sources on stuff. Bunny, who I knew from hacker conferences and who jumped in and started helping us build hardware. Haian, who was a designer that I knew from Ideo, and she was creating visualizations with the data we were putting together. And Paul, who I knew from the Metro blog in Dublin who jumped in and started helping us write the back-end software to manage it all. And Joi and Pieter had the same sort of thing. They found all these people and pulled them together. And so we all got together and created this thing that ended up being this organization called “Safecast.”

At first, we just duct taped some Geiger-counters to car windows and started driving around and tried to get an idea of what was happening. And [we] realized that those measurements were changing much faster and it was a little bit of a different story than kind of these big averages that were being published by any thing official . So we created a hardware and software platform and these little devices that have GPS on them and Geiger counters, and they take readings every five seconds and then upload it into this giant data-set. You could attach them to cars or bikes or anything and we could take them around. And so we started putting these maps together, and these circles are the evacuation zones.

So we started seeing this story where inside of the evacuation zones, maybe the levels weren’t necessarily that bad, but outside of the evacuation zones they were they were much worse. And this this was kind of conflicting because there were most certainly situations where people had been moved from areas with low radiation into areas with high radiation and we didn’t quite get what was going on.

So seven years on, this is what our data looks like in that area. We really mapped out every street and created this absolutely perfect picture of what’s happening. But an important piece of this is that we’re not going and measuring. Rather we created the tools and the platform so that the people there can measure on their own. So these areas are being measured by the people who live there and are impacted by it and this really gave them a chance to have a say in what was going on with it. They got to measure stuff, they weren’t getting answers from other places. But it also had some very interesting real-world impacts in that it forced the officials to do something.

They actually changed the evacuation zones after we published this data showing that these things were different. And we expanded this out and this is the data we have for Japan. It’s basically every single street in Japan. We’ve measured time and time and time again. But it turns out that the data that wasn’t available in Japan, also [it] wasn’t available anywhere else in the world. Nobody had this kind of stuff, so we started reaching out to other people, and people in other places are measuring.

So this is what we have in Europe and this is what we have in the US. And you can see these, they’re—you know, Sony attached a sensor to a car and went on a drive down a road, right? This is what we have around the world. And obviously there’s some major holes that we still need to help fill in, but it’s getting there and it’s already the largest data-set that’s ever existed of its kind in any way. Almost 100 million data points. And we put all of the data into the public domain. And it’s actually growing faster all the time, it’s not slowing down in any way.

So, if you remember, I said that maybe some people will kind of participate once something gets going. I’ve learned through this that sometimes some is all you need. You don’t need everybody to do it, you just need some people who are gonna be active with it. And with Safecast I tried to build in these things that that I noticed in all of these other things, where the people are independent on their own. We gave them the tools, we gave them the best practices, but they’re doing the thing on their own without any hindrance or control from outside on this.

There’s lots of different ways for people to help with the project. Some people are making visualizations, some people are collecting data, some people are building devices. All of these different things people can do with it and then again, it removes the reliance on some outside authority for the people in the areas that are measuring it.

But it’s not just about disaster and stuff. So this is Peter—who I mentioned before—and a few years ago we went to Washington DC to put on a workshop about Safecast and what we’re doing with this.

So if you wanted to see the publicly available radiation data for Washington, DC, the day before our event, it would have looked like this. There’s absolutely nothing available. So we had this two-day event where people came in and they built their own sensors, found out how they worked, understood it, got their sensors up and running, and then we sent them out [to] walk around Washington DC and just measure stuff and then come back and we’ll put everything together. And so this was the data that was available just after one day of people walking around. We mapped out the whole city and found some interesting stuff. There’s, like, the World War II memorial over here that was built with very radioactive granite and all these different things that you might not have known otherwise and that was really cool for people.

But a much more interesting thing happened shortly thereafter, in that the US government released their data-set of radiation in Washington, DC, right? So they had this data, but since they were the only people that had the data they kept it secret and then as soon as there was another comprehensive data-set available there was no reason for them to keep it secret anymore and so they released it.

And so it’s this kind of thing where releasing this open data actually creates even more public data than we had our hands in at all, which is where people start throwing around these kind of words like “revolution.” Which is cool, but the result of that is that, you know, this does in fact change the world in in all of these ways.

And so I’ve been talking a lot about radiation, but last year we actually started measuring air quality as well because that’s another thing that maybe if we’re putting sensors in it might be really useful to people. And so this is where we just put a bunch of them around Los Angeles last year and on the system right now you can see what’s happening right now, or five minutes ago, or historical over the last week, or over the last month. And you start seeing these trends, and where all this—and you start comparing the data from all the different sensors, and start kind of understanding what it is that people are breathing in the city.

So, to tie this back into the sort of citizen science idea right, I don’t really like separating this out like somehow “citizen science” is different than real science or something. Because if it’s valid science it’s valid science. It doesn’t matter who’s doing it as long as the results stand up.”

SOURCE: re:publica 2018 – Sean Bonner: Citizen Science and Environmental Data: Why Everybody beats Anybody

In some ways, Safecast is the fulfillment of the vision that Aaron Swartz laid out in the Guerilla Open Access  Manifesto. Open access, open source data, extended peer review and other such proposals for reforming the practice of science do not offer the public the chance to peek behind the curtain at the doings of the scientists; they help tear down that curtain, and the distinction between scientists and the wider public generally.

But the story of Safecast also provides a key insight into why citizen science is needed now more than ever. From nuclear energy to genetically modified foods to vaccines to gene editing to nanotechnology to autonomous weapons, the debate over scientific knowledge and discoveries is increasingly important, and political. The pace of science in the 21st century is dizzying, and as the abilities of science to transform our world accelerates, the debate over the proper place for these technologies in society is increasingly being handed over to the scientists themselves.

But this has the process exactly backwards. As philosophers of science like Andrea Saltelli and the co-authors of Science On The Verge point out, our naive conception of scientists as apolitical arbiters of truth is going to have to be adjusted to the reality of modern day science before the entire process of scientific knowledge production is undermined.

JAMES CORBETT: In this day and age, science has become specialized on models and statistics in a way that, I think, in the popular conception of “folk science,” is not the central pursuit of ultimate truth. In what could be termed “folk science” or the “Cartesian dream”—[which] are a couple of terms that are used in Science On The Verge—people tend to think of science in a certain mindset, but obviously that doesn’t apply to the way that science is conducted these days. What can you tell us about that difference between the popular conception of science and the way it is actually practiced in modern policy settings?

ANDREA SALTELLI: For me, this is a core problem of modernity. There is really a chasm between how science is perceived by the general public and by the scientists themselves for a large majority. A kind of positivistic vision of science as an offspring of the Enlightenment, which is concerned with the production of fact separate from values and emotion, and science as objective, and so on and so forth—and hence a science capable of informing policy with the production of disinterested and objective knowledge—and the reality of what science is, and the many uses to which science is put—from the construction of algorithms, to visual intelligence, to the production of various kinds of chemicals which may or may not be extremely dangerous, opioids, neonicotinoids for pesticide, and then the chapter of military technology and and so on and so forth. So we have a science today in the practice of the working scientist which is quite far from the vision of Enlightenment science, and I think this difference is a problem in the center and we should resolve it. Otherwise we risk having a very polarized discussion about science which can only have as a result a collapse of trust in science

CORBETT: And of course that is part and parcel of that “Crisis of Science” that I was gesturing towards recently on the podcast. And I did note a specific line jumped out at me from the preface of Science on the Verge which was written by Daniel Sarewitz. He wrote, “The use of science in guiding human affairs is always a political act.” Now that’s a bold statement because again I think that rubs up against the conception—the sort of folk science conception—that science is completely value neutral and we’re just looking at facts and evidence about the world. But the use of science and guiding human affairs is always a political act. What does that mean in the modern context, where we’re dealing with such incredibly important matters that have policy implications for everyone around the globe?

SALTELLI: Well there is a long chain of consideration which should be put down there. [The] first one is even when we are talking about a simple piece of datum—as Jerry Ravetz writes in one of his early books—before a single datum is collected, a lot of the work has already been done by way of framing the problem, defining what it is that needs to be tackled and how it can be measured and so on and so forth. So, when the social scientists say that data or evidence is a result of a social construction, this doesn’t mean that this is arbitrary. It’s simply what it means. It’s the result of a negotiation, a social construction but unfortunately there is—because of this postivism or neo-positivism very often found in natural sciences—this tendency to regard this as a dangerous intrusion of social sciences into natural sciences.

So that, for instance, typically—you may know that natural scientists strongly resent being the subject of study from the social sciences. When they go there as anthropologists and measure what science in action actually does, following the title of a famous book of Bruno Latour. So there is this kind of science war now always boiling in the underground, which makes this conversation a bit difficult because if it were not for that, the idea that the production of evidence for policy is a political affair, it would be a no-brainer! Of course! Because not only you have the datum, but then the datum becomes evidence, and then the evidence must be constructed as an argument. And this is not something which a policymaker does by himself, he does it with a scientist. So obviously it’s a high political affair.

SOURCE: Interview 1424 – Andrea Saltelli on The Crisis of Science

If science is always a political act, then drawing a line around scientific activity and preserving it as the special domain of an elite cadre of specialists is itself an act of disenfranchisement. By pushing the public away from the scientific field, those with a political or corporate agenda to push can use their money to subvert the scientific process behind the scenes, and hide behind the ivory tower walls when the public questions the pronouncements of the scientists.

This is why open access, open data, open science is so feared by the status quo establishment, which benefits from the symbiotic relationship between big business, big government and big science.

None of this is to say that the expertise of trained scientists will no longer be needed as radically decentralized scientific endeavours like Safecast rise to the fore. But it is a sign that the public no longer has to sit on its hands and watch helplessly as an unquestioned and unquestionable priest class hoards their data and their findings for the benefit of the corporations and governments who foot their bill.

Given the immensity of the challenges we face as humanity pushes the boundaries of the possible in ever bolder ways, it’s easy for those on the sidelines to throw their hands up and leave this all for the scientists to sort out. Or, worse yet, to turn their backs on science and the scientific method altogether. But these problems are bigger than the scientific community, and their solutions will involve all of us to engage in the process of redefining science and its place in society.

As concerned citizens, we either become part of the solution by engaging in the emergence of the open scientific community, or we become mere spectators as the big questions are increasingly asked and answered for us.




German News About HPV Vaccine Injuries & Lack of Transparency of Side Effects

Source: Children’s Health Defense

March 25, 2019

https://youtu.be/sowhw-r59-c

Translation (editor’s notes in parentheses) –

Moderator:
Good evening. Welcome to Westpol. Ten years ago, it was a world sensation. The cervical cancer vaccine was the first cancer vaccine. A breakthrough in cancer prevention. It certainly protected many girls and women from the disease. But even this vaccine can have side effects. And this even though the European Medicines Agency considers this vaccine safe and that it is unnecessary to educate patients and doctors about risks. 
The 15-year-old Paula from Langenfeld trusted this assessment. Now she is paraplegic, recognized as vaccine injury.

Paula:
Everything changed. I always wonder what I will do after graduation. Will I be accepted despite my wheelchair?

Nina Katzemich:
We are not sure the European Medicines Agency is always acting in the interest of patients.

Jan Salzmann, Internist:
The risk outweighs the medical benefits.

Male Voiceover:
Just two years ago, sports were Paula’s favorite hobby. Today even small movements are problematic. Two years ago, the now 15-year-old felt a strong back pain. Only hours later, her legs were paralyzed.

Paula:
I worry how others perceive me. They see a wheelchair and think, “That poor girl.” But I despise pity.

Male Voiceover:
A look back. Westpol had previously visited the family six months ago. Paula was vaccinated against cervical cancer shortly before the paralysis, her mother told us then.

Mother:
We had not been well informed. We slid trustingly into the biggest disaster of our lives.

Male Voiceover:
Back then, everybody denied the possibility that Paula’s paralysis could have been related to the vaccine.

Now suddenly state support is available for the necessary lift Paula needs to navigate the stairs. For retrofitting the bathroom. To widen doors so that they will accommodate the wheelchair. At the end of April, the Landkraft Verband (this is a regional government agency) recognized what has been clear to the family for a long time: Paula suffers from so-called vaccine damage.

Mother:
The third question the doctors asked us was, “Was she vaccinated?” which we could undoubtedly confirm, and in that moment, it was clear to me that the vaccine and the illness of our daughter which is an autoimmune disease are very closely connected.

Male Voiceover:
Doctors have noticed for years massive side effects in those who received the cervical cancer vaccine: Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, joint pain, seizures, ovarian failure, muscle atrophy, and POTS (Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome) which also affects Paula.

Facts that are known to the Europäische Arztneimittelaufsicht, or EMA for short. The agency is responsible for the approval and monitoring of vaccines. Enrica Alteri heads their safety department. She did not grant us an interview but addressed the afflicted a few weeks ago on Danish TV.

Enrica Alteri:
They are absolutely right to be heard. Is that due to the vaccine? We don’t think so.

Male Voiceover:
Statements on which not just patients but also doctors like Jan Salzmann must rely.

Jan Salzmann:
When the health agency informs us that a vaccine or prescription drug doesn’t currently have any pertinent side effects, we accept that as fact.

Male Voiceover:
What even doctors don’t know is that in internal EMA documents which Westpol obtained, experts doubted the safety of the vaccine as far back as 2013.

The document reads, “Researchers were divided over whether or not the diagnosis of POTS was triggered by the vaccine. (…) it required investigation.”

The agency did not find the need to inform doctors or the public. To the contrary. Independent researchers are outraged that the concerns are no longer part of the official EMA report on the vaccine.

A few days ago, the Forschernetzwerk Cochrane wrote a blistering letter which reads in part, “The official EMA-Report is deceptive. It tries to convey the impression that concerns over the safety of the vaccine are groundless.”

Nina Katzemich from the organization Lobbycontrol has been watching the EMA for a while. She tells us that the pharma industry finances the EMA up to 85%. The controlee pays the controller.

Nina Katzemich:
We have observed that the EMA absolutely sides with the pharma industry when it comes to medication safety and transparency.

Male Voiceover:
And then there is also personnel entanglement. Thomas Lönngren, former longtime director of the EMA, is now a pharma lobbyist. Stefano Marino transformed from pharma lobbyist to director of EMA’s legal department. These are only two of many examples. Because even Enrica Alteri switched sides. She worked until 2012 for the manufacturer of the vaccine. But she does not see a problem with this.

Enrica Alteri:
Our procedures against conflicts of interest are solid and we review it all the time.

Male Voiceover:
We showed Paula’s mother our research. She learns for the first time that the European Medicines Agency concealed warnings from researchers.

Paula’s Mother:
It is outrageous that agencies know but don’t complete further studies, research, anything. These agencies have a responsibility. If we had access to this information back then, we would not have vaccinated.

Male Voiceover:
Paula and her mother wish they would have been given more information about the risks, but the agencies are still recommending the vaccine as safe.

Moderator:
Business is good for the manufacturer of the vaccine. While vaccines against tetanus or the flu range in price between 5 and 10 euro, the rate for a dose of the cervical cancer vaccine is around 300 Euro. So far, the worldwide revenue has been more than 30 billion euro.




Vaccines, an Appraisal by a Practicing Medical Doctor

Those Measles Outbreaks: Thoughts out of Season

by Richard Moskowitz, MD
March 1, 2019
Source

 

Before the current measles hysteria gets even further out of hand, a little common sense could help us think more carefully before rushing to take action that won’t work and will actually do harm. Refusing unwanted medical treatment is a basic human right that all civilized nations have sworn to uphold, with the sole possible exception of a dire and imminent threat to the public health, which a few localized measles outbreaks, numbering no more than a few dozens or hundreds of cases, decidedly are not.

All of these outbreaks are typical of those that have occurred ever since the vaccine was introduced, and others just like them will undoubtedly continue to occur even if the drug industry’s well-funded campaign succeeds in vaccinating everybody. Yet the Washington State Health Department has declared a public health emergency on the basis of them; several other states are considering doing the same; and the news media have enthusiastically joined in, with editorials and Op-Eds in the New York Times,1 the Boston Globe,2 and other major outlets, as well as talk shows on NPR and other radio stations, all well-meaning but repeating the same alarmist fears and exaggerations as if they were settled truths, and citing these modest outbreaks as ample justification for eliminating personal-belief exemptions from the states that still honor them.  A clear violation of the First Amendment, the latest and most ominous example is Congressional pressure on Facebook and other social media to censor postings that dare raise doubts or questions about vaccines or their mandates.

On the other hand, these politicians and journalists have done nothing more than simply taking on faith the information that prominent doctors and public health authorities are  telling them.  Unfortunately, what they’re being told is not only bad ethics, but also bad science, based on assumptions that are flatly contradicted by current research, and violate basic human rights and moral values that we still profess to hold dear.

Often assumed to be self-evident without even having to be stated, much less proved, their bottom-line assumptions are really two postulates that depend on each other to support them — namely, 1) that these small outbreaks of measles and other infectious diseases that we vaccinate against are initiated and propagated by unvaccinated individuals; and 2) that vaccines are not only miraculously safe, but also uniformly effective in rendering people immune to these diseases without having to contract them, so that only the unvaccinated are still susceptible and thus capable of transmitting them to others.

But you can’t have it both ways.  For if these postulates were really true, if the immunity conferred by the measles vaccine were truly comparable to the absolute, lifelong immunity that results from coming down with and recovering from the actual disease, then the unvaccinated would pose no threat to anyone but themselves, based on a free choice of their own making, such that those taking the vaccine would have nothing to worry about. Conversely, if vaccinated individuals are indeed at risk of acquiring the disease from the unvaccinated, then the vaccine is clearly ineffective to that extent, and whatever it does offer cannot be a genuine or reliably effective immunity.

In any case, there’s plenty of good scientific evidence that both of these assumptions are just plain false.  The vast majority of cases of measles, mumps, and other vaccine-preventable diseases in both past and recent outbreaks, typically between 75 and 95%, have been in vaccinated individuals,3 while a recent study of measles in China, where over 99% of the population are vaccinated by the same sort of strict government mandate being advocated here, nevertheless reported over 700 localized outbreaks in a single year, totaling almost 26,000 cases.4  Much the same is true of recent mumps outbreaks in the United States, where typically 95-100% of the cases have been vaccinated.5

So even if all non-medical exemptions were eliminated and virtually everyone were vaccinated, as the proposed new laws would require, similar outbreaks would undoubtedly continue to occur.  In other words, the so-called immunity conferred by vaccines is a trick, a counterfeit of the real thing; and “herd immunity,” the stated goal of the mandates, customarily tied to a vaccination rate of 95% or more in the case of measles, is a chimera of wishful thinking that vaccination simply cannot achieve, in contrast to the natural disease, regarding which public health experts have long known that large-scale outbreaks no longer occur when at least 80% of the population have already contracted and recovered from it.6   That, and only that, is herd immunity: to expect a vaccine to achieve an even higher level, with no outbreaks at all, is pure fantasy, and the polar opposite of hard science.

Moreover, scientists have also demonstrated that individuals receiving vaccines made from live viruses, like measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, rotavirus, oral polio, and some versions of influenza, regularly “shed” them and are thus contagious for many weeks afterward.7  Regarding the resurgence of whooping cough in recent years, for example, numerous studies have shown that the increasingly large and frequent outbreaks of the disease are likewise being spread by vaccinated individuals, even though the bacterium is no longer alive, in part through natural selection for vaccine-resistant strains,8 as has been documented in the case of other non-living vaccines (HiB, pneumococcus, and possibly injectable polio) as well.9  In short, the entire rationale of vaccinating as many people as possible, and the bullying and resentment of parents who choose not to vaccinate that always accompanies it, is not only cruel and misplaced, but helps to create and propagate the very diseases that the vaccines were designed to eradicate.

Rather than simply accepting the fact that vaccines have at best a partial and limited efficacy, we are allowing the CDC and the drug industry to play on our fears to the extent of inflating these small, localized outbreaks of measles into the dreaded semblance of a looming public-health emergency, posing a serious threat to society, justifying forced vaccination of everyone, even against their will if necessary, and thereby nullifying our co-authorship of and continuing allegiance to the Nuremberg Code of Human Rights and the Helsinki Declaration governing Biomedical Research, both of which insist upon the right of every patient and every experimental subject to give informed consent to all medical and surgical procedures, and explicitly forbid administering them by force.10

Although one could imagine a genuine public health emergency that might justify and even require temporarily waiving such rights, such as a large-scale bioterrorist attack or the rapid dissemination of a deadly plague, that is precisely what these small, localized outbreaks of ordinary childhood diseases are not.  The truth is that there is no emergency, that we vaccinate purely as a matter of long-term health policy, and that most of the diseases that we vaccinate against were

1) already rapidly declining, thanks to improvements in sanitation, water
quality, and other aspects of public health (pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus);11

2) ordinary diseases of childhood that most people contracted and recovered
from without complications or sequelae (measles, mumps, rubella, flu,
rotavirus, chickenpox);12

3) or caused by mutant strains of organisms that are part of our normal flora
and only occasionally cause invasive disease (HiB, pneumococcus).13

Measles is indeed a perfect test case of the vaccination concept, as the most highly contagious of them all, with an attack rate approaching 100% in susceptible individuals; and the measles vaccine has in fact reduced the annual incidence of the disease in the United States from about 400,000 cases to less than 10,000, surely a historic achievement, no matter how it was done or why it was thought necessary.  But inasmuch as these small, localized outbreaks are still occurring, and will undoubtedly continue do so in the future, no matter what we do, the CDC surely owes us a more convincing explanation than the impossible dream of “herd immunity” for why they don’t simply declare victory and let it go at that.

So for all of these reasons, contrary to what we’re being told, the science is far from being settled when it comes to vaccine effectiveness.  Even that much would be enough to deflate the myth that vaccine mandates are necessary.  But it’s not the only reason, or even the most important one.  Vaccine safety is even further from being settled, to put it mildly, and for very good reasons.  In the first place, many studies have shown that children who come down with and recover from acute febrile infections like measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, and influenza are much less likely to develop chronic autoimmune diseases and cancer later in life than those merely vaccinated against them.14

Still other studies link the risk of death, hospitalization, and other serious adverse reactions not so much to any particular vaccine or vaccines, but rather to the total number of vaccines given, both simultaneously at the same visit,19 and cumulatively over the patient’s lifetime.20  In other words, these worst outcomes cannot be simply written off as idiosyncratic aberrations of certain hypersensitive individuals, but rather appear to be built into something about the nature of the vaccination process itself.

These findings are already more than sufficient to question if not discredit the almost universal reverence accorded to the concept of vaccination, not to mention the blank check that allows and even incentivizes the drug industry to develop, market, and ultimately mandate more and more vaccines, based on the assumption that vaccines are safe and effective across the board, that they save vast sums of money from not having to care for patients suffering with these diseases, and that it is therefore OK and even desirable to pile on as many doses of as many different vaccines as the traffic will bear, often for no better reason than that we have the technical capacity to make them.

It is the same assumption that allows and even blesses the drug industry to conduct its own safety studies without genuine placebo controls of unvaccinated individuals;15 that limits adverse effects to those appearing within a few hours or days of the shot,16 thus automatically excluding the chronic diseases from consideration; that gives the lead investigator unlimited authority to determine whether a reported adverse reaction is or is not vaccine-related, according to criteria that are never specified;17 and that allows the CDC to insist that vaccines are uniformly safe and effective without conducting independent studies of its own, even though Congress has legislated and the Supreme Court has upheld that they are “unavoidably unsafe,” in order to shield the manufacturers from liability for the deaths and injuries they cause,18 a free ride granted to no other industry.

In short, these assumptions are not science, but merely scientism, a reverent, quasi-religious faith characterized by dogmatism in the name of science, which stifles the critical thinking, questioning, and doubting of allegedly settled truths that real science requires, and helps explain why the news media refrain from reporting deaths or injuries from vaccines without having to be told, and why most physicians offer up their own children for the same vaccinations they administer to their patients.  The late Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics, sums it up admirably:

[In science] we must leave room for doubt, or there is no progress and no learning.

There is no learning without having to pose a question, and a question requires doubt.

Before you begin an experiment, you must not know the answer, [or] there is no need to gather any evidence; and to judge the evidence, you must take all of it, not just the parts you like.  That’s a responsibility that scientists feel toward each other, a kind of morality.21

Which brings me to my final point, that if vaccination and vaccines were indeed safe and effective across the board, then the thousands upon thousands of parents who sincerely believe that their children were maimed or killed by them and must live with that existential reality every day of their lives must be either lying, ignorant, or stupid, and thus perhaps even deserve to have their stories ignored and dismissed out of hand by the medical community, the news media, and the public at large.  Yet their suffering, whatever may have caused it, surely cries out at the very least for caution, restraint, and simple compassion for the viewpoint of those whose lived experience is so tragically different from that of everyone else privileged enough to be ignorant of or somehow unmoved by their loss.

As a family physician who has cared for many of these children over the years, I can say with complete assurance that the vast majority of their parents are by no means ignorant or credulous “anti-vaxxers” or hostile to science.  Quite the contrary, in fact: they are often well-educated, have devoted their lives to unraveling the mystery about what really happened to their kids, and ask no more than that vaccines be made as safe as possible, based on careful investigation by independent scientists unaffiliated with the drug industry. After more than fifty years in the trenches, I can also attest that the instinctive, practical sense of caring parents is often a far more accurate and trustworthy guide to the truth about what caused the specific tragedies that they have had to endure than any preformed, generic pronouncement that pre-empts any need to consider the details of their actual, lived experience.

Finally, the widespread and indeed almost universal reverence accorded to vaccination, based on the catechism that vaccines are not only safe and effective, but also among the  supreme achievements of modern medicine, has impelled me to write with a sense of urgency and foreboding at this critical moment in our history, when the time-honored rights of patients to refuse unwanted medical treatment and to make such decisions on behalf of their children are being challenged as never before.  I will feel well rewarded if my words, my reasoning, and the commingled sadness, fear, and outrage I have long felt about this subject will promote a healthy debate and elicit more of the rigorous scientific work that still remains to be done.

Given the legitimate doubts and fears surrounding their use, the simplest and wisest solution would be to make the vaccines optional, that is, available to all those who want them, once fully apprised of their risks, so that exemptions will no longer be required.  For if vaccines  and vaccination are truly as safe and effective as the CDC and the industry have been insisting, it shouldn’t be that difficult for them to convince the public to the extent of wanting to give them to their children, without needing mandates to impose them by force.

Until that happens, the most pressing issue before us is to preserve the frail remnant of personal liberty embodied in the few remaining exemptions that most citizens in our democracy have long been rightly proud of, and that the influential and well-funded drug industry has always been eager to take away.  My fervent hope and heartfelt plea is that good common sense will prevail and the American people will be sufficiently aroused to not let that happen.

Notes.

1. Editorial, “How to Inoculate against Anti-Vaxxers,” New York Times, January 20, 2019.

2. Editorial, “With Vaccine Rejection Reaching Alarming Levels, the State
Should Act,” Boston Globe, February 10, 2019.

3. Cf. Matson, et al., “Investigation of a Measles Outbreak in a Fully-Vaccinated School Population,” Pediatric Infectious Diseases 12:292, 1993.

4. Ma, et al., “Monitoring Progress toward Elimination of Measles in China,”
Bulletin of the World Health Organization 92:390, 2015.

5. ‘Mumps Outbreak at Harvard,” NBC News, April 2016.

6. Schlenker, et al., “Measles Herd Immunity,” JAMA 267:823, 1992.

7. Cf., for example, Payne, et al., “Sib Transmission of Vaccine-Derived
Rotavirus,” Pediatrics 125:938, 2010; and Murti, “One Case of Vaccine-
Associated Measles 5 Weeks Post-Vaccination,” British Columbia, Canada,
Eurosurveillance 18:12, 2013.

8. Althouse and Scarpino, “Asymptomatic Transmission and the Resurgence of
Bordetella pertussis,BMC Medicine 13:1186, 2015.

9. Cf., for example, Cantekin, Letter, NEJM 344:1719, 2001.

10. World Medical Association, Ethical Principles for Medical Research
      Involving Human Subjects, Helsinki, 1964, amended 2008, par. 24, p. 3.

11. Cf., for example, Dauer, “Reported Whooping Cough Morbidity and Mortality in the United States,” Public Health Report 58:661, 1943.

12. Cf., for example, “Varicella,” American Academy of Pediatrics Brochure, 1996.

13. Vide supra, note 9.

14. Cf., for example,  Kubota, et al., “Association of Measles and Mumps with
Cardiovascular Disease,” Atherosclerosis 241:682, 2015.

15. Dr. Colleen Boyle, Testimony before the House Oversight and Government
Reform Committee, November 29, 2012.

16. “How Are Vaccines Evaluated for Safety?” insidevaccines.com.

17. Cf. vaccine package inserts.

18. Cf. Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, 2011.

19. Goldman and Miller, “Relative Trends in Hospitalizations and Mortality among Infants by the Number of Vaccines and Age, 1990-2010,” Human Experimental Toxicology 30:1420, 2011.

20. Glanz, et al., “A Population-Based Cohort Study of Under-Vaccination in Managed Care Organizations,” JAMA Pediatrics 167:284, 2013.

21. Feynman, The Pleasure of Finding Things Out, Basic, 1999, pp. 103, 108, 111, 112, passim.




Dr. Paul Thomas, M.D.: Vaccines ARE Linked to Autism. We Must Preserve Medical Freedom.

Source: The HighWire with Del Bigtree
Published on Mar 19, 2019

 

AMERICA’S PEDIATRICIAN REVEALS SHOCKING AUTISM DISCOVERY

 

https://youtu.be/Bjvjf4MnFqc

 



Source:  Vaccine Impact

 

Dr. Paul Thomas, M.D. – Preserve Medical Freedom – Vaccines Linked to Autism

March 20, 2019

Dr. Paul Thomas in Oregon, prior to testifying in a committee hearing on proposed bill SB 442 to remove vaccine exemptions for children.

Health Impact News Editor Comments

Dr. Paul Thomas, M.D. was born in Portland Oregon, and grew up in Southern Africa. He has a masters degree in biology, an M.D. from Dartmouth Medical School, and completed his pediatric residency at the University of California, San Diego. He is a board-certified fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and also carries board certifications in Addiction Medicine and Integrative Holistic Medicine. He started the Pediatric After-hours Clinic (now Pediatric ER) at Emanuel Children’s Hospital, where he also taught medical students and residents from 1988-1993.

Dr. Thomas is obviously knowledgeable in the area of immunization, as a practicing pediatrician and currently one of the few actual board-certified fellows of the American Academy of Pediatrics residing in the State of Oregon. He took time out of his busy schedule to appear at the hearing earlier this year before the Oregon Senate Committee on Health Care, regarding Bill SB 442, written by Oregon State Senator and physician Elizabeth Steiner Hayward, which seeks to remove all philosophical and religious exemptions to vaccines in the State of Oregon.

Here is Dr. Paul Thomas’ testimony and comments regarding his concerns about this proposed law:

 

Dr. Paul starts out his comments by mentioning how SB 442 will remove all philosophical and religious exemptions to vaccines, and that the only medical exemptions that would be allowed would be from “certain pre-selected medical providers.”

He states: “This is a travesty.”

Dr. Paul then stated why this bill is such a travesty:

This is powerful. This is important. This is for our children. We need to protect our children and preserve the right for freedom of choice, and the right to give informed consent when your child is about to get a vaccine.

Dr. Paul then begins his testimony by stating that he represents 11,000 patients and that 500 new babies come into his practice each month wanting informed consent about vaccines.

informed-consent-vaccines-dr-paul

He states that it is his responsibility as a physician to point out the risks and benefits of every medical procedure, but that this proposed bill would not allow him to do this for his patients.

Next, Dr. Paul addresses the Hepatitis B vaccine routinely given to newborn babies in hospitals. He states that the amount of aluminum contained in this vaccine is 10 to 15 times the limit allowable for infants.

dr-paul-testimony-aluminum-hepatitis-b-vaccine

He provided handouts for each committee member showing the peer-reviewed studies linking toxic aluminum exposure to brain damage and autism.

dr-paul-aluminum-toxicity-brain-damage-autism

According to Dr. Paul, the only people who need the Hepatitis B vaccine are moms who are positive for Hepatitis B, which is less than 1% in Oregon and the rest of the country:

So we are going to poison the other 99%, and it is going to be mandated by this law, so that we cover that 1%. And our Ob Gyns are doing a masterful job. We know who needs the vaccine and who doesn’t.

Dr. Paul also pointed out a study conducted in Norway that followed 85,000 pregnancies over 6 years which tracked folate intake and autism.

dr-paul-JAMA-link-to-Autism

Norway only had a 1 in 1000 rate of autism, while the U.S. had a rate of 1 out of 100. As Dr. Paul looked for the differences in newborn pediatric care between the U.S. and Norway, he noticed that Norway does not give the Hepatitis B vaccine at birth like the U.S. does.

Dr. Paul then made the stunning statement that in his practice he currently has over 1000 kids at least 3 years old, and there are no new cases of autism, while nationally, his peers in pediatric care are seeing 1 out of 50 children on the autism spectrum. He tells the committee that we can greatly reduce the rate of autism by understanding that increased vaccines are in fact correlated with increased rates of autism. He referenced the 2004 CDC study that supposedly showed no link, but which now is known to show an increased link to autism among African-American boys after the release of all the data sets last year (2014).

dr-paul-hooker-autism-cdc-study

Dr. Paul ends his brief testimony before the committee by stating that the “science is not settled” linking vaccines to autism, and that we need more studies.




‘I Will Never Get Over Feeling I Killed My Son’: Anti-Vaccination Activists Refuse to be ‘Silenced’

Image Credit: © Krystle Cordingley; Reuters / Lindsey Wasson

 

Source: RT

by Igor Ogorodnev
March 17, 2019

 

Vaccination skeptics say the US government has joined with pharmaceutical companies to shut them down, and the veil of silence over the true dangers of inoculation is secretly killing hundreds of children each year.

‘Broken’ 

When she checks on one of her three living children sleeping, Krystle Cordingley will sometimes see not their faces, but the “grey and lifeless” face of her son Corbyn, whom she found dead in his bed 14 hours after a flu vaccination.

That was over five years ago.

“I’m broken. I am not suicidal or unable to function, but my heart will always be shattered. I will forever feel guilty for being the one that took my son in to be vaccinated, and I don’t know if I will ever get over the feeling that I killed him,” says Cordingley, who now dedicates her life to fighting against vaccination.

She recalls October 18, 2013, the last day of her 13 month-old son’s life, in perfect detail.

From the uncomprehending, tearful look he gave her after the flu shot, to the meal she prepared for him before her evening shift at the hospital – which she still keeps in her freezer, unable to throw it away – to how his dad peeked into his room, thought that his son was sleeping peacefully on his stomach and didn’t come closer.

Then, how when she returned home, and was preparing to nurse him, she noticed his chest was not moving, turned over his face, and screamed, aware straight away it was too late. Then, the vainly desperate attempts to revive him.

“Of all my years of emergency response training I never thought the first child I would use my emergency training on would be my own,” says Cordingley. “I still have flashbacks of the medical personnel cracking my child’s sternum to continue a more productive CPR, compressing his chest like he was a rag doll.”

 

Corbyn ©  Krystle Cordingley

 

The official medical cause of death was the deeply unsatisfying “Unknown”.

Assured only that her son did not suffocate, Cordingley, who lives in Ogden, Utah, wanted to know more, and would not let it go. She says that a third-party neuropathologist identified severe damage to Corbyn’s brain stem and hippocampus, and told the mother, that “she sees that much damage from younger SIDS [Sudden Infant Death Syndrome] babies all the time, but never in older children and she is surprised he lived as long as he did.”

Cordingley believes that it is not unrelated that as well as the flu shot, Corbyn received five different vaccines, including MMR, 43 days before his death.

‘Government’s mocking our loss’

Cordingley’s second life as an activist began there and then, though she does not pretend that it in any way compensates for the loss of her first.

As a medical lab scientist in her day job, it is hard to caricature Cordingley as a hippie vaccine refusenik, and her arguments are decidedly post-Wakefield – medical terms abound, she sends references to studies.

‘I will never get over feeling I killed my son’: Anti-vaccination activists refuse to be 'silenced’

 

Cordingley says her quest is not about turning down decades of medical research, but coming to independent conclusions from papers that are out there, and the real ignorance is among those who simply believe what they are told by health professionals.

“I have many parents who reach out to me, asking me what they should do. My response every time is: do your research,” she says. “I am not forcing their hand. They are coming to the conclusion on their own. Never once have I told a parent not to vaccinate.”

The concerns voiced by Cordingley and several other leading vaccination skeptics are varied – from severe side effects, to the impact of preservatives used, to individual biological intolerance, to a lack of effectiveness.

But the overall view of the situation was almost identical: health impacts are systematically under-reported, dissent dismissed, and the government is in the pocket of large medical corporations who create a web of conflicts of interest. Meanwhile, those who have suffered are dismissed as numerically insignificant.

“My son was not one in a million injured as I’ve now become friends with hundreds of individuals claiming their children died or are continuing to suffer side effects,” says Kathleen Berrett, mother of teen Colton, who developed a disabling inflammation of the spine, shortly after being administered an HPV vaccine, and later took his own life.

 

“I feel that the government’s mocking our loss and telling us our children don’t matter – just an acceptable number WE have to sacrifice,” says Cordingley.

The solution: massive fresh research by independent bodies, a return to legal liability for vaccine producers, and more training and encouragement for doctors to report their concerns about side effects. In totality, an attitude change to caution, rather than unquestioning endorsement, or worse than that, forced vaccination.

“The system they have set up is not designed to create ‘safe’ vaccines. It is a system designed to provide substantive monetary incentive, while shielding from any liability for damages caused. This is inherently unsafe,” says Kristen Chevrier, director of the campaign group Your Health Freedom.

Establishment fights back

For the medical establishment, the anti-vaxxers make for an awkward opponent. The optics favor the renegades: passionate grassroots advocates with devastating backstories versus the might of an establishment represented by lecturing affluent doctors and politicians, who may not actually vaccinate their own children either.

Also on rt.com Toxic reaction: Anti-vaxxers may be wrong, but Facebook censoring people for being wrong is worse

With greater access to medical information that anyone can cite, and with campaigners’ ability to self-organize through social media, the size and authority advantages are further eroded for the government. To a lay eye, the links presented by Cordingley look no less imposing than those on the CDC website.

And that’s before taking into account a population naturally apprehensive about actively injecting their healthy child for diseases that are either vanishingly rare, like polio, or mostly trivial, like chicken pox.

But it is a battle that health authorities feel they must win.

The WHO, which officially proclaimed vaccination hesitancy as one of the top global health issues of 2019, says that 2-3 million lives are saved annually by effective vaccinations, and an additional 1.5 million could survive annually if their coverage spreads.

 

 

But tendencies in the West, at least, point in the opposite direction. In the UK, nine out of 12 vaccines had lower uptake than the year before in 2017/8 (though levels are still above those of a decade ago) while in the US popularity has remained static. Between the turn of the millennium and 2015, the number of entirely unvaccinated infants rose fourfold, though still constitutes less than two percent.

While overall, herd immunity is holding up, Europe suffered its worst measles outbreak in a decade with 80,000 cases last year, with Japan reporting similar spikes. The US, which eliminated the disease altogether by 2000, is on pace to suffer its worst measles statistics since 1992, though the absolute numbers of patients remain in the hundreds.

Authorities are trying disparate measures – from playing up the impact of epidemics, to vaccination campaigns, to a lap of honor in Congress for a teenager who asked Reddit how he could get shots, after being denied them as a child by his anti-vaxxer mother, to publicizing stories of unvaccinated children suffering from preventative illnesses that are every bit as devastating as Corbyn’s.

Also on rt.com ‘No vaccine, no school’: Italy starts punishing parents who refuse to immunize their kids

There are also sterner suggestions: from creeping compulsory vaccination, which Italy has just reintroduced, to blaming Russian agents for amplifying debate, to calls from top officials in Washington and healthcare bodies for social networks to shutter anti-vaccination groups.

Turning point

But for Cordingley, all these measures are a sign that they are closer than ever to a flip of public consciousness.

“The smear campaigns, the censoring, and mandating is a huge cry for help by the pharmaceutical companies before they drown in their own deceit. They can only go so far before it backfires and parents see it all on their own,” says Cordingley, who uses social media to spread her message.

 

Vaccination Liberation, an activist group from Idaho, believes that as the battle intensifies, this will become a civil rights issue, particularly as ever more hardline measures are handed down from above.

“The presumed and unconstitutional authority of legislators to mandate vaccines, a form of medical rape, has not abated in the face of two generations of extremely unhealthy children and adults,” says its founder, Ingri Cassel.

And having spent years fighting their cause on the margins, they are not about to stop now.

“They are trying to suppress the wrong group of people. Parents who have lost their children are the last group you want to silence. They will only get louder and fight harder,” says Cordingley.




Vaccine Censorship Backfiring…What To Expect Next

Source: Jefferey Jaxen

by Jefferey Jaxen
March 3, 2019

 

Representatives from government and the corporate media will have you believe that due to an unsensational number of measles cases in the U.S., the fabric of American society must take historically dangerous and authoritarian measures. According to both media and government talking points, in order to combat an ambiguous specter of ‘misinformation,’ America must rapidly sink into a communist-slanting, medical corporatocracy. In the age of information, is censorship really that effective? In 2003 Barbra Streisand attempted to suppress photographs of her residence in Malibu, California. Her efforts had the exact opposite effect by inadvertently drawing further public attention to it. The phenomenon is now coined the Streisand effect whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the internet.Channeling his inner Joseph McCarthy, Rep. Adam Schiff decided to weigh-in on parents sharing dissenting vaccine information online. Rep. Schiff, in a letter to Amazon head Jeff Bezos, employed his own vaccine misinformation to suggest the e-commerce giant censor certain vaccine-centered videos and books on its site. Schiff writes, “There is no evidence to suggest that vaccines cause life-threatening or disabling diseases…” Unfortunately, there are entire books written on the topic of vaccine injury, its biological mechanisms, and the “vaccine court” which has paid out over $4B in compensation awards for injuries and deaths at the hands of vaccination.

Amazon jumped at Schiff’s anti-American suggestion by hiding or demoting dissenting vaccine books and videos on its search engines and removing the streaming options for the documentary and Amazon best seller Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe.

Is the censorship working? Author and co-founder of Generation Rescue J.B. Handley reported that before calls for censorship these past weeks, his book How To End The Autism Epidemichovered around #5,000 on Amazon’s Best Seller list. At the time of this writing his book has raced to #106. Handley’s book is also #1 in the book categories of Immunology, Disability Parenting, and Popular Child Psychology.

Meanwhile, another popular book Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History by Suzanne Humphries MD and Roman Bystrianyk has similarly raced to #33 on Amazon’s Best Seller list in addition to grabbing the #1 slots in the book categories of History of Medicine, History, and Viral Diseases. As for the film documentary Vaxxed, at the time of this writing it is currently ranked #9 in Amazon’s overall ranking of Movies & TV behind such titles as the 7-time Oscar-nominated A Star Is Born and 4-time Oscar-winning Bohemian Rhapsody.

Facebook, Pinterest, and YouTube have also announced internal methods they are now employing to censor vaccine speech on their platforms. Articles and accounts who adhere to the limited and insulting talking points protecting Big Pharma’s vaccine products from proper scrutiny and science will rank higher in people’s Facebook feeds. As Vox writes, “These moves are encouraging for one reason: Misinformation about vaccines is dangerous.” The irony of witnessing a slew of journalists and media outlets promoting and celebrating censorship is not lost.

One place that the educated public and the censorship authoritarians see eye to eye on is that vaccine misinformation is dangerous. However, the lion’s share of such misinformation appears to be created and disseminated by the U.S. government and its regulatory agencies which is then parroted by media and mainstream medical bodies. Vaccine injury denier Rep. Schiff claiming “There is no evidence to suggest that vaccines cause life-threatening or disabling diseases…” came after the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Anthony Fauci’s lie heard around the world. Fauci recently gave testimony in front of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A committee whose pre-hearing memorandum brief written by Rep. Frank Pallone Jr. contained vaccine misinformation which was pointed out to him prior to the hearing by the group Physicians for Informed Consent to no avail.

Under oath and subject to the penalties set forth in title 18, section 1001 of the U.S. Code, Fauci was asked by Rep. Brett Guthrie if the measles vaccine can cause encephalitis. Despite the encephalitis warning being listed on the MMR II’s package insert as well as being on the table of vaccine injuries recognized for compensation in vaccine court by the Health Resources and Services Administration, Fauci said “no.” In short, Fauci lied. If it wasn’t for the slew of parents seated behind Fauci who then loudly voiced their disapproval, there would likely have been no correction. As it were, Fauci felt the pressure and then shouted out “rare” before Rep. DeGette had to bang a gavel to restore order.

Once the hearing concluded, Fauci scrambled to gather his belongings and exit the committee to a overwhelming and constant barrage of parents expressing their discontent for his underhandedness. Martha Stewart, General Michael Flynn, and George Papadopoulos were each charged, under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001, with lying to federal government agents. With sweeping censorship happening and over 100 active vaccine-related bills in 30 states, Fauci’s lie was capable of influencing the decision of the committee to which it was addressed. Will legal action be pursued?

The mad rush to pass legislation at the state level to eliminate all non-medical vaccine exemptions has seen record turnout against the bills. Testimonies across the country are being given by doctors, scientists and parents methodically dissecting every angle of inconvenient truth surrounding the unsettled vaccine science and broken government oversight apparatus. Roughly half of the over 100 active vaccine bills are aimed at expanding and protecting the people’s rights, informed consent, and vaccine exemptions.

The heavy-handed move to censor and demote all dissenting vaccine information running counter to Big Pharma’s limited talking points couldn’t come at a worse time. Untold numbers of families have already had experiences with vaccine injury and have been indiscriminately labeled anti-vaxers for years by media and government agencies when they speak out. In addition, it is now public information that both the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) along with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have long-abdicated their duties to ensure vaccine safety and oversight.

The FDA was legally forced to admit that it granted approval to both the inactivated influenza and TdaP vaccine for use in pregnant women without any clinical trials and safety studies enrolling pregnant women. In addition, HHS was legally forced to admit that it could not produce 30 years of periodic reports showing the agency had fulfilled it Congressional mandate to “promote the development of childhood vaccines that result in fewer and less serious adverse reactions than those vaccines on the market…” and to “make or assure improvements in…the manufacturing, testing, warning, field surveillance, adverse reaction reporting and researching on vaccines in order to reduce the risk of adverse reactions to vaccines.” Furthermore, HHS was also unable to provide sufficient answers and missing scientific proof vaccines are safe, to show pre-licensure vaccine safety testing was done properly, to show improvements in adverse event surveillance, and many other basic tenets of the claimed settled vaccine science.

Hearings in D.C. along with inappropriate public comments by FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb have signaled a possible overarching U.S. government play to trample state’s rights and current active legislation to eliminate all non-medical vaccine exemptions. However, the federal government has no power to mandate vaccines or tell states what to do on the issue. The U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment dictates that all powers not delegated to the federal government are retained by the states or the people. Even the Supreme Court has recognized vaccine mandates as a state issue. ​

As the censorship continues to creep from the government organs, social media giants, and pharmaceutically-influenced media outlets, the public is signaling a growing hunger for the truth about vaccines beyond canned talking points. Unfortunately, the above listed entities have refused to leave the comfort of their limited echo-chamber rhetoric of ‘settled science’ and vaccine injury denial. With all other factors remaining the same, expect an inverse relationship as increases in multilevel vaccine censorship drive greater awakenings and hunger for the newly censored truth about vaccines.




Effects of Heavy Metals in Vaccines (Pharmacogenetics)

Source:  Vaccine Liberation

 

Aside from the known DEPOPULATION trends such social programs to reduce births, abortion legislation, reduced male sperm count via toxic agriculture (50% reduction as early as 1945), the increasing need for in vitro derived pregnancies, iatrogenic deaths, etc, the worldwide establishment is actually “poisoning” all neonates and infants under 3 years old.The Journal of Pediatric Pharmacology and Therapeutics
“Developmental Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Populations”
Hong Lu, PhD and Sara Rosenbaum, PhD

*Ped cyp enzymes  (see graph)  (very important study of the immaturity of cyp 450 superfamilies in infants and children.

Synopsis:  Infants do not have a mature liver or liver enzyme function such as Cytochrome P450 and its various metabolites until the age of three years old. Hence upwards of 36 vaccine doses by 18 months old containing the above excipients are poisoning the world’s emerging humanity. DOWNLOAD STUDY

Detoxification mechanism (Fish Study/Liver)

Effect Metals on Cyp 450PHD_Thesis_Eng(1)

CDC vaccine excipients

Failure of Infants to metabolize due to immature Liver Cyp450 system of enzymes until 3 years old.

The Effect Of Heavy Metal on Hepatic Chromosome P450

The results of our experiments have demonstrated that heavy metal ions react with cytochrome P450 dependent enzyme system of fish species leading to changes in confirmation of protein structure they resolve in inhibition of activity of enzymes involved in biotransformation, decrease in detoxifying enzymes. In conclusion the difference changes in enzyme activity and cytochrome P450 content induce by the various heavy metal treatments may also be explained by the living and feeding habits of individual fish species.

Like with all living organism, the body of the fish has a quite conserve protein systems providing molecular defense to insure metabolism and elimination of the foreign material. The main region of metabolism of pollutants entering into the fish body is the liver. Due to biotransformation processes these substances are converted to other compounds that can be eliminated from the body thereby becoming less toxic. The hepatic detoxifying enzymes, the cytochrome P450 dependent mixed function monooxygenases, have an important role in this process.  P450 enzyme activity in the body is not constant.  Foreign substances, Xenobiotic or some endogenous regulating molecules are able to increase (inducers) or decrease (inhibitors) the activity of cytochrome P450 enzymes.

Aluminum + Cytochrome P450 -Study:

Suppressive effect of accumulated aluminum trichloride on the hepatic microsomal cytochrome P450 enzyme system in rats.

Vaccine Excipients

Which ones need a mature Cyp 450 to metabolize out of the body?

  • aluminum hydroxide
  • aluminum phosphate
  • ammonium sulfate
  • amphotericin B
  • animal tissues: pig blood, horse blood, rabbit brain,
  • dog kidney, monkey kidney,
  • chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg
  • calf (bovine) serum
  • beta propiolactone
  • fetal bovine serum
  • formaldehyde
  • formalin
  • gelatin
  • glycerol
  • human diploid cells (originating from aborted human fetal tissue)
  • hydrolized gelatin
  • mercury thimerosal (thiomersal, Merthiolate®)
  • monosodium glutamate (MSG)
  • neomycin
  • neomycin sulfate
  • phenol red indicator
  • phenoxyethanol
  • potassium diphosphate
  • potassium monophosphate
  • polymyxin B
  • polysorbate 20
  • polysorbate 80
  • porcine (pig) pancreatic hydrolysate of casein
  • residual MRC5 proteins
  • sorbitol
  • squalene
  • sucrose
  • tri(n)butylphosphate,
  • VERO cells, a continuous line of monkey kidney cells, and
  • washed sheep red blood



Vaccine Mandates: Ignoring Human Rights and Informed Consent

Source:  The Vaccine Reaction

 

The U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee held a hearing on Mar. 5, 2019 titled “Vaccines Save Lives: What is Driving Preventable Disease Outbreaks?”

The very title of the hearing tips the committee’s hand. “Vaccines save lives” is a conclusive statement that preemptively answers the question that follows, making it clear there would be no divergent exploration of the question of what is driving preventable disease outbreaks. Even further, while it is true that some vaccines may save some lives, it is also true that vaccines are not studied for their unintended long- and short-term effects on the body, and that many people’s bodies respond to vaccines in ways that prove harmful to them.

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid out more than $4 billion dollars for vaccine injuries since 1988.1 The passive reporting system for vaccine injuries, VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), which captures between one and 10 percent of all adverse reactions,2 receives thousands of reports of injury every year.

If vaccines are saving lives, they are also doing it at the expense of those who are injured or killed by those same vaccines. Where is the “greater good” in that?

Reviewing the testimony of those selected to give testimony in the Senate hearing, they all beat a predictable drum: more mandates for more vaccines to be given to more people. There was a push to curtail parental rights and eliminate vaccine exemptions to those vaccines. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now recommends 69 doses of 16 vaccines be given to children before age 18, with hundreds of vaccines in the pipeline. Many of these vaccines are fast-tracked for approval without adequate safety studies, and each carries both known and unknown risks.

Vaccines are a medical intervention given to healthy people that carry a risk of death and serious or debilitating consequences for some individuals. Because of this risk, there must always be choice!

Who will be allowed to speak in Congress to the issue of human rights, the ethic of medical informed consent, and the right to bodily integrity and autonomy when it comes to vaccine mandates? The United States has confronted and repudiated the ugliness that comes with eugenics, utilitarianism, and medical experimentation in the labs at Tuskegee and the courts of Nuremberg following the horrors of Nazi medical experimentation on human subjects.

Although it is currently in fashion to think otherwise, the science is not settled on vaccines. There is not adequate testing on vaccines to make assurances of safety (new vaccines are usually tested against other vaccines, not inert placebos), and there has never been a true scientifically credible study of those who are vaccinated compared to those who are completely unvaccinated.

It is a violation of human rights to use people as guinea pigs in the great vaccine experiment, and it is immoral for the government to collude with the pharmaceutical companies through the use of vaccine mandates.

There was no one on the panel of witnesses at the Mar. 5 Senate hearing who gave a voice to that point of view. Why was Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), a longtime advocate of vaccine safety and an expert on vaccine policy and informed consent, not called to testify? Why was a high school student who has spoken with friends and done a bit of Google research asked to participate in a hearing of such serious magnitude when parents of vaccine injured children—people who vaccinated their children in good faith and paid a horrible price—have been left out of the conversation?

If we applaud this child’s right to make medical choices, shouldn’t the choice of informed parents who have come to a different conclusion also be included? Are we abandoning the fundamental American value of intelligent dissent in favor of totalitarianism? 

It’s hard not to conclude that this hearing was set up as a one-sided, unfair and incomplete conversation with a pre-determined outcome. Shame. 

I will close with the words of Dr. Christine Stabell Benn, a vaccine researcher and Professor of Global Health at the University of Southern Denmark. Dr. Benn’s opinion was published in The Times of London on Mar. 2, 2019 in response to a previous article about vaccine hesitancy…

As a vaccine researcher, I strongly oppose mandatory vaccination. The vaccines that are in use were only tested for effects on the vaccine-targeted disease and on side effects in relation to the vaccination. However, there is increasing evidence that vaccines also affect the immune system broadly, reducing or enhancing susceptibility to unrelated diseases. Hence, the vaccine skeptics have a right to point out that we do not know the full effects of vaccines on overall health. It should therefore be a human right to weigh pros, cons and unknowns to make one’s own decision.3


References:

1 Health Resources & Services Administration. Vaccine Injury Compensation Data. HRSA.gov.
2 National Vaccine Information Center. Can Measles Vaccine Cause Injury & Death? NVIC.org.
3 Stabell Benn C. Times Letters: Immunisation science and ‘vaccine hesitancy’. The Times Mar. 2, 2019.




Are There “Sleeper” VACCINE-Caused Mutations Which Medicine Deliberately Ignores?

Source: Natural Blaze

Are There “Sleeper” VACCINE-Caused Mutations Cytochrome P450 Genes Produce Which Medicine Deliberately Ignores?

by Catherine Frompovich
March 4, 2019

 

Cytochrome P450 enzymes metabolize external substances, such as medications that are ingested, and internal substances, such as toxins that are formed within cells. … Common variations (polymorphisms) in cytochrome P450 genes can affect the function of the enzymes. [1]

Diseases caused by mutations in cytochrome P450 genes typically involve the buildup of substances in the body that are harmful in large amounts or that prevent other necessary molecules from being produced. [1] [CJF emphasis]

Abstract

The human cytochrome P450 (CYP) superfamily comprises 57 genes. These genes code for enzymes that can have a role in: metabolism of drugs, foreign chemicals, arachidonic acid and eicosanoids; cholesterol metabolism and bile-acid biosynthesis; steroid synthesis and metabolism; vitamin D(3) synthesis and metabolism; retinoic acid hydroxylation; and those of still unknown function. Cytochrome P450 was once believed to be mainly a hepatic drug detoxication system, but is now understood to include a myriad of enzymic reactions implicated in important life processes. Mutations in many CYP genes cause inborn errors of metabolism and contribute to many clinically relevant diseases. [2]

Question: Are metabolism differences in CYP genes the cause of many vaccine adverse reactions, especially brain encephalopathy that precipitates Autism and other clinically relevant diseases in infants, toddlers and even adults? Was that the reasoning why a Vaccine Court Master awarded Hannah Poling’s Autism claim $1.5 million plus ongoing $500,000 per year for life [4]?

The government lawyers mumbled something Orwellian and incoherent about a pre-existing mitochondrial disorder and how vaccines didn’t cause Hannah’s autism — the condition just “resulted” from the vaccines. [4]

Or was it because Hannah’s father is an MD (neurologist) [5], who was astute enough to realize what happened to Hannah, and the CDC/FDA and Vaccine Court wanted to prevent the ultimate of vaccine damage whistleblowers to emerge?


Free radicals are toxic; can damage living cells and tissues in a process known as oxidative stress.

What role, if any, do cytochrome P450 enzymes have in producing oxidative stress?

Reactive oxygen species (ROS) and oxidative stress have been considered in a variety of disease models, and cytochrome P450 (P450) enzymes have been suggested to be a source of ROS.

[….]

The biochemistry of oxidative stress includes several issues. One is the nature of the damage to proteins, DNA, and lipids caused by ROS (8, 9). Another aspect is the nature of the biochemical processes involved in the production of ROS. Several enzyme systems have been considered in the production of ROS, including NADPH oxidase, xanthine oxidase, (uncoupled) mitochondrial electron transport, and P450 (1, 4, 10). [3] [CJF emphasis]

Excipients (ingredients) in vaccines are transformed by Cytochrome P450 enzymes in the human liver, and are metabolized out of the body through the kidneys. However, due to the immaturity of CYP450 in infants and children under 3 years of age, plus the assault of adjuvants in vaccines—Aluminum, in particular—it is well-established in the field of PHARMACOGENOMICS that Aluminum interferes in CYP 450 metabolism in fetuses, infants and children.

The underlying cause of chronic disease is obfuscated and results routinely in misdiagnoses of Autism spectrum as mental illnesses labelled as ADHD, Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, Bipolar, etc. The use of psychiatric drugs to mitigate the symptoms propels the individual deeper into a lifetime of contraindicated drugs, special needs education, depression and a devastatingly health-compromised life.

Interestingly, the detox mechanism of the body, Cytochrome P450, is found in most systems, including the mitochondria and the gut, but not in the bloodstream. Since CYP450 is not fully developed in infants and toddlers, vaccines given during gestation; within 24 hours of birth; and every several months during a toddler’s life up to around 2 years of age contain highly neurotoxic chemicals and other excipients that would take a mature CYP450 system to metabolize, i.e., methylate those poisons out of their less-than thirty pound bodies.

CDC/FDA, vaccine manufacturers and licensed medical doctors ought to know that infants have immature Cytochrome P450 liver enzymes. Plus, every race and ethnicity, i.e., Asian, Black, Caucasian and Hispanic, have a certain percentage of CYP450 non-metabolizers who cannot metabolize chemicals, toxins, and pharmaceuticals, which includes vaccine biologicals.

Images for aluminum adjuvant interferes with CYP450

Furthermore, it is thought that 10% of the Caucasian population falls into a “metabolism affecting cellular mitochondria classification,” which government health agencies really must recognize so as not to subject infants to damaging cellular mitochondria from vaccine excipients that CYP450 metabolism issues cannot methylate.

However, Autism Spectrum Disorder anomalies actually can be prevented if the CDC and FDA were to permit physicians to perform a PCR test (Polymerase chain reaction) prior to administrating any vaccinations and similar to the Apgar test [6] an infant receives immediately after birth. PCR testing could eliminate the mandated problematic Hepatitis-B vaccine given within 24 hours of birth, unless the birth mother had an STD (sexually transmitted disease).

Here’s proof for what is said above:

A mitochondria disorder is a vaccine injury, not a genetic pre-existing condition.

Why? A genetic test of the child’s parents would confirm whether either of the parents have a mitochondrial disorder that was passed down, thereby confirming the disorder to be a genetic pre-disposition, thereby providing for a valid medical exemption to vaccinations.

However, in my opinion, no health directive—mandatory vaccinations—should be enforced to initiate an iatrogenic disease (8) resulting in a life-long disability.

As an aside, the HPV vaccine may have an exceptional capability to involve CYP450 and cell mitochondria damage. Recently emerging research apparently indicates the Human Papilloma Virus vaccine contains human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), the anti-fertility ingredient also found in the Tetanus vaccine given to child-bearing-age females in Kenya, Africa, that was confirmed by independent testing.

Lifelong immature CYP450 enzymes possibly can be responsible for many chronic diseases due to the liver’s inability to metabolize environmental toxins, food chemicals, fluoride in municipal water systems, and the inordinate amount of vaccines given since 1989!

Source

Instead of government health agencies exacerbating the growing number of those children on the Autism Spectrum Disorder, i.e., one in 40 children in the USA [7] have that diagnosis, it ought to be incumbent upon those disciplines dedicated to children’s health and wellbeing to study the real science of what happens at cellular level after vaccination, then take the necessary steps to prevail upon Big Pharma and all involved in disease issues to realize vaccines are not what they are cracked up to be and remember the Hippocratic Oath all doctors take: First, do no harm!

References:

[1] https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/genefamily/cytochromep450
[2] Clinical importance of the cytochromes P450 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12387968
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427356/
[4] https://www.ageofautism.com/2010/09/government-awards-hannah-poling-15-million-in-vaccine-injury-case.html
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Poling
[6] https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=2303
[7] https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/26/health/autism-prevalence-study/index.html
[8] https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-iatrogenic-2615180

Resources:

Many thanks to Eileen Dannemann & Vaccine Liberation Army
Inability of Infants to Metabolize Vaccine Excipients CytochromeP450
http://vaccineliberationarmy.com/2015/05/27/inability-of-infants-to-metabolize-vaccine-excipients-cytochrome-p450/

Pharmacogenetics: Inability of Infants to metabolize Vaccine Excipients – Cytochrome P450
http://vaccineliberationarmy.com/2015/05/27/inability-of-infants-to-metabolize-vaccine-excipients-cytochrome-p450/

Effects of non-ionic surfactants on cytochrome P450-mediated metabolism in vitro.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21220010
Re: Polysorbate 80, a vaccine excipient

Oxidative and reductive metabolism by cytochrome P450 2E1
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.320.1093&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Re: Ethanol and formaldehyde, vaccine excipients

Adverse effects by artificial grapefruit seed extract products in patients on warfarin therapy
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17468864
Re: Benzethonium Chloride, a vaccine excipient

Cytochrome P450 isozymes involved in the metabolism of phenol, a benzene metabolite
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11701230
Re: Phenol, a vaccine excipient

The cytochromes P450 (CYP) response to allergic inflammation of the lung
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003986106003791
Re: Aluminum Hydroxide, a vaccine adjuvant




Amazon Joins Big Tech Assault on Anti-Vaccine Information

Source:  Natural Blaze

by Jason Erickson
March 2, 2019

 

As major media and big tech continue freaking out over 159 measles cases in the U.S., anti-vaccine campaigners are increasingly being likened to terrorists as their ability to share information and earn money is being cut off.

The origin of this latest move against the free flow of information seems to have stemmed from a letter sent by Adam Schiff (D-CA) to the heads of Facebook and Google wherein he lamented the increased viewership of the vaccine debate:

“There is strong evidence to suggest that at least part of the source of this trend is the degree to which medically inaccurate information about vaccines surface on the websites where many Americans get their information,” Schiff wrote in the letter. “The algorithms which power these services are not designed to distinguish quality information from misinformation or misleading information, and the consequences of that are particularly troubling for public health issues.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Facebook was the first to agree with Schiff’s call to action and vowed that they were “exploring additional measures” to fight the appearance of anti-vaccine messaging to the reading public.

But it was YouTube (Google) that appears to have taken the swiftest measures against anti-vaccine proponents by announcing that their two-pronged approach would include demonitizing videos with “dangerous and harmful” content, plus adding a stern warning from the World Health Organization that being anti-vaccine is “one of the top ten global health threats of 2019.”

In the true spirit of competition for which big tech company can foster the most censorship and destroy the key values of democracy, Amazon has followed suit by burning the digital books (videos) of those who have made it their life’s work to educate the public and spur debate.  And, again, it seems that the public comments made by a single rep – Adam Schiff – have been enough to alter company policy which affects millions of people.

The move came days after a CNN Business report highlighted the anti-vaccine comment available on the site, and hours after Rep. Adam Schiff wrote an open letter to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, saying he is concerned “that Amazon is surfacing and recommending” anti-vaccination books and movies.

Anti-vaccine movies that were previously available free for Prime subscribers, like “We Don’t Vaccinate!,” “Shoot ‘Em Up: The Truth About Vaccines,” and “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” are now “currently unavailable.” (Source: Fox2now)

As the Fox report referenced above highlights, while some items have fully disappeared from “recommended” areas of the site, others do remain.  Fox specifically cites one of the more egregious offenders still in front of the delicate eyes of viewers: “Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers.” Because why should anyone be encouraged to read primary research into the efficacy of something being injected into their own body and the bodies of their loved ones — it almost sounds like informed consent.  It’s also a sign that Amazon holds its own core system of peer-to-peer reviews and recommendations in contempt as it resorts to algorithmic adjustments to hide the realities of real-world discussion.

Perhaps most troubling here is that this tactic, as well as the rhetoric being used, is straight out of the anti-terrorism lingo that we hear from the government and their revolving-door corporations like Facebook, Google, Amazon, et al.  It’s the same strategy that has resulted in cutting off the funding of people from all walks of independent media for all types of different and “dangerous” thoughts that could “radicalize” the unsuspecting public.

Some still continue to argue that these are private companies with private policies that can do what they wish with their own businesses. That sounds true until a single U.S. representative sends a letter that changes the policies of multiple companies virtually overnight. And it sounds OK until an entire country revokes the visa of David Icke for his brand of “dangerous” information, which was assumed to include anti-vax and global warming questions, as Activist Post recently reported.

The virus-spreading anti-vaxxers — if that is what one chooses to believe — are no match for the infection that has spread like wildfire across our formerly free and open Internet. Perhaps we have given too much of ourselves to the middlemen of big tech and have forgotten the value of direct communication.  Now is the time to remember how to communicate without the contrived structures of “social” systems of media, and without their approval.




Dr. Fauci Gives False Information to Congress About Vaccine Reactions

Source: The Vaccine Reaction

Dr. Fauci, It’s Not Nice to Fool Congress About Vaccine Reactions

by Barbara Loe Fisher
February 28, 2019

 

On Feb. 27, 2019, the U.S. House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a public hearing on “Confronting a Growing Public Health Threat: Measles Outbreaks in the U.S” that was also broadcast live on C-span. Parents across the nation watched and heard the renowned Anthony Fauci, MD, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID),1 either tell a bald faced lie or show his ignorance when he testified, under oath, that MMR vaccine does not cause encephalitis. This large dose of disinformation drew gasps of protest from parents attending the Capitol Hill hearing and prompted Committee Chair Diana DeGette (D-CO) to bang the gavel and warn that “manifestations of approval or disapproval of the proceedings is in violation of the rules of the House and this Committee.”

It is really hard to watch a distinguished physician like Dr. Fauci mislead legislators by blatantly denying the damage that serious vaccine reactions like brain inflammation can do to children’s brains. It is also hard to watch legislators believe everything they are told by government employees just because they have MD or PhD written after their names.

At 53:05 in the 95 minute House public hearing (42:05 on C-Span), Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY) asked this question: “I want to look at some of the concerns. I’ve heard some parents claim that measles vaccine can cause brain inflammation, known as encephalitis. Is that true? Is that true?”

Looking like he was buying time, Dr. Fauci answered, “Brain inflammation…encephalitis…”

Rep. Guthrie persisted, “Can measles vaccine cause encephalitis? The vaccine…”

Dr. Fauci without blinking took a Pinocchio turn and answered, “The vaccine? No.”

When the audience broke out in audible disbelief and as the Chair brought the gavel down, Fauci knew he was busted and quickly murmured, “…rare.”

Then Nancy Messonnier, MD, Director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases,2 jumped in to help Fauci out. She stated authoritatively, “In healthy children MMR vaccine does not cause brain swelling and encephalitis.”

Rep. Guthrie appeared concerned and continued to pursue the line of questioning, “So if a child was unhealthy when they got the vaccine, would it…?”

Messonnier replied, “There are rare instances in children with certain very specific underlying problems with their immune system in whom the vaccine is contraindicated. One of the reasons it’s contraindicated is, in that very specific group of children, there is a rare risk of brain swelling.”

Rep. Guthrie followed up with a logical and very important question, “But would a parent know their child was in that category before…”

And then Dr. Messonnier proceeded to tell a whopper of her own, quickly reassuring the congressman that parents would know if their child’s brain was going to swell before getting MMR vaccine because doctors would tell them so. She answered without hesitation, “Certainly. And that’s why parents should talk to their doctor.”

Let’s more closely examine the disinformation (false information intended to deceive or mislead3) dished out to legislators on Capitol Hill by two of the highest-ranking public health officials in the U.S.

DISINFORMATION: MMR vaccine does not cause encephalitis (brain inflammation).

THE TRUTH: MMR vaccine can cause encephalitis and acute and chronic encephalopathy (brain dysfunction).

Here is THE EVIDENCE:

MMR Vaccine Manufacturer Package Insert

The MMR product manufacturer package insert published by Merck & Co., the manufacturer of MMR vaccine, states: “Encephalitis and encephalopathy have been reported approximately once for every 3 million doses of M-M-R II or measles-, mumps-, and rubella-containing vaccine administered since licensure of these vaccines. The risk of serious neurological disorders following live measles virus vaccine administration remains less than the risk of encephalitis and encephalopathy following infection with wild-type measles (1 per 1000 reported cases).” Warnings include: “Due caution should be employed in administration of M-M-R II to persons with a history of cerebral injury, individual or family histories of convulsions, or any other condition in which stress due to fever should be avoided.” The same warnings are included for Merck’s MMRV vaccine.

CDC’s Vaccine Information Statement (VIS)

Under the informing, recording and reporting safety provisions of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986,4 doctors are required by law to give the VIS to parents before children receive a CDC recommended vaccine. The VIS handouts for MMR and MMRV vaccine state that “severe” adverse events may include “deafness; long-term seizures, coma, lowered consciousness; and brain damage.”  The VIS for MMRV vaccine states that one of the “moderate” adverse events that can occur is “Infection of the lungs (pneumonia) or the brain and spinal cord coverings (encephalitis, meningitis).”

Medical Literature Reports

There is additional evidence in the medical literature that MMR vaccine can cause encephalitis and encephalopathy, including the following references.

The large prospective case controlled National Childhood Encephalopathy Study (NCES) conducted in Britain, which investigated all causes of encephalitis, encephalopathy and chronic neurological dysfunction in children, was published in 1981. Researchers concluded that, “The risk of a serious neurological disorder within 14 days after measles vaccine in previously normal children irrespective of eventual clinical outcome is 1 in 87,000 immunizations.”5

In 1998, federal public health officials published a report in Pediatrics reviewing the medical records of children who had filed claims in the federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) and had suffered “acute encephalopathy followed by permanent brain injury or death” following receipt of live attenuated measles vaccine alone or in combination with rubella and mumps vaccines (MR, MMR). They stated, “Eight children died, and the remainder had mental regression and retardation, chronic seizures, motor and sensory deficits, and movement disorders. The onset of neurologic signs or symptoms occurred with a nonrandom, statistically significant distribution of cases on days 8 and 9. No cases were identified after the administration of monovalent mumps or rubella vaccine. This clustering suggests that a causal relationship between measles vaccine and encephalopathy may exist as a rare complication of measles immunization.”6

A report, “Inflammatory/Post-Infectious Encephalomyelitis,” was published in 2004. The authors stated, “The non-neural measles, mumps, and rubella vaccinations are most commonly associated with post–vaccination encephalomyelitis. The incidence is 1-2 per million for live measles vaccinations.”7

In 2007, another prospective study conducted in Britain investigating the risk of serious neurologic disease after vaccination in early childhood (2-36 months old) was published in Pediatrics. The researchers concluded, “There was no evidence of a raised relative incidence of serious neurologic disease in any of the specified risk periods with the exception of a raised relative incidence of 5.68 in the 6–11 days after measles, mumps, rubella vaccine.”8

In 2013, a study was published in 2013 in PLOS One that evaluated cases of post vaccine acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) reported to the U.S. vaccine adverse events reporting system (VAERS) and the EudraVigilance post-authorisation module (EVPM) of the European Union.9 Researchers described ADEM as “an immune mediated inflammatory disorder of the central nervous system (CNS) that commonly occurs within one month from antigenic challenge.”

When looking at ADEM reports in the VAERS database related to a specific age group, they stated, “We observed that vaccines against measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) and FLU were those most commonly involved in the 0-5 years age group (13%), followed by pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) (11%) and DTaP (9%).”

Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Vaccine Injury Table

According to the March 21, 2017 Vaccine Injury Table in the VICP, “encephalopathy or encephalitis” occurring within 5 to 15 days of receipt of vaccines containing measles, mumps, and rubella virus or any of its components (e.g. MMR, MM, MMRV) is a compensable illness, disability or injury.10

DISINFORMATION: Parents know whether their child will suffer encephalitis or encephalopathy after MMR or MMRV vaccination because doctors identify those children and do not vaccinate them.

THE TRUTH: There are very few CDC approved contraindications to vaccination, and doctors cannot reliably predict which children will be harmed by MMR vaccine or any other vaccine before they are vaccinated.

Here is THE EVIDENCE:

Few Vaccine Contraindications or Medical Exemptions

According to CDC guidelines, almost no health condition qualifies for a contraindication and a medical exemption to vaccination, including for measles containing vaccines.11 Children with HIV and cancer and those who have suffered convulsions after vaccination and other serious vaccine reactions are routinely vaccinated.12

Doctors Cannot Reliably Predict Who Will Be Harmed by Vaccines

The Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, published a report Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality in 2012 and noted that, although there is individual susceptibility to vaccine reactions, doctors are unable to reliably identify those who are genetically and otherwise more susceptible:

“Both epidemiologic and mechanistic research suggest that most individuals who experience an adverse reaction to vaccines have a pre-existing susceptibility. These predispositions can exist for a number of reasons – genetic variants (in human or microbiome DNA), environmental exposures, behaviors, illness or developmental stage, to name just a few, all of which can interact. Some of these adverse reactions are specific to the particular vaccines, while others may not be. Some of these predispositions may be detectable prior to the administration of vaccine; others, at least with current technology and practice, are not.”13

Limited Scientific Evidence About Children Susceptible to Vaccine Harm

In 2013, the Institute of Medicine published a report examining the safety of the CDC’s recommended early childhood vaccine schedule (0 to 6 years old), The Childhood Immunization Schedule and Safety, and reiterated that there is limited scientific knowledge about how to identify children at higher risk for suffering vaccine reactions:

“The committee found that evidence assessing outcomes in subpopulations of children, who may be potentially susceptible to adverse reactions to vaccines (such as children with a family history of autoimmune disease or allergies or children born prematurely) is limited and is characterized by uncertainty about the definition of populations of interest and definition of exposures or outcomes.”14

$4 Billion Government Payout to Vaccine Victims

If individuals more susceptible to being harmed by vaccines are being identified by doctors before vaccination takes place, if children are not suffering encephalitis, encephalopathy and other crippling vaccine reactions that end with a lifetime of chronic illness and disability or even death, then why has the government paid out $4 billion in compensation to vaccine victims, including to those who have been harmed by measles containing vaccines like MMR?

If FDA licensed, CDC recommended and state mandated vaccines like MMR vaccine do not cause brain inflammation and permanent brain damage, why did Congress give the vaccine industry a partial liability shield in 1986 and the U.S. Supreme Court declare vaccines to be “unavoidably unsafe” and hand the vaccine industry complete immunity from vaccine injury lawsuits in 2011?15

Disinformation About Vaccine Reactions Betrays the Public Trust

Parents, who trusted and did what they were told to do when they took their healthy children into a doctor’s office to be vaccinated and then watched their children suffer brain inflammation and regress into chronic poor health, learn that it is not a good idea to believe everything that doctors say about vaccines. People who were healthy, got vaccinated and were never healthy again, quickly learn how to tell the difference between a doctor telling the truth about vaccine safety and one who is not, because their lives depend upon it.

If public health officials can go before Congress and provide demonstrably false statements about MMR vaccine reactions, what else are they fooling the public about?

Federal Health Officials Influence State Vaccine Laws

On Jan. 30, 2019, Dr. Fauci gave an interview to CBS and said, “These [measles] outbreaks are due to the anti-vaccine movement.” He also said that scientific studies show claims about vaccine risks are “based purely on fabrication” and that, “There’s a category called philosophical reasons not to get vaccinated and that particular category has been abused. So I’m in favor of states or cities making regulations that require a more strict interpretation of the exemptions that one has to not get vaccinated.”16

As noted in a press release issued by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) on Feb. 25, 2019, state legislatures have the constitutional authority to make vaccine laws and the federal government should not be interfering in state rights. Although federal health officials make vaccine use recommendations and state health officials use that information to encourage state legislators to turn those recommendations into state vaccine mandates, state legislatures have the power to decide which vaccines to mandate and what kind of exemptions to allow.

Right now, the NVIC Advocacy Portal reports that 140 bills are pending in 31 states that propose to restrict, eliminate or expand medical, religious and conscientious belief vaccine exemptions. Thousands of parents have already lined up to attend public hearings in state legislatures to defend the legal right to exercise parental and informed consent rights and make voluntary decisions about vaccination for their children without being punished for the decision made.

Federal Officials Should Be Held Accountable

There are more than a dozen new vaccines being developed that likely will be federally recommended and states will be encouraged to mandate in the future.17 Decisions are being made in state legislatures and in Congress right now that will affect the health and lives of this generation and generations of Americans to come. For the health of our nation, Congress should take the blinders off and hold federal officials accountable for the false statements they make about vaccine safety.

 


References:

1 Anthony S. Fauci, MD. Biography. Oct. 9, 2018.
2 Nancy Messonnier, MD. Biography. Mar. 28, 2016.
3 The Free Dictionary. Definition of Disinformation.
4 National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.
5 Alderslade R, Bellman MH, Rawson NSB, Ross EM, Miller DL. The National Childhood Encephalopathy Study: A Report on 1000 Cases of Serious Neurological Disorders in Infants and Young Children from the NCES Research Team. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office 1981.
6 Weibel RE, Casserta V, Benor DE et al. Acute Encephalopathy Followed by Permanent Brain Injury or Death Associated with Further Attenuated Measles Vaccine: A Review of Claims Submitted to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Pediatrics 1998; 101(3): 383-387.
7 Bennetto L, Scolding N. Inflammation/Post Infectious Encephalomyelitis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004; 75 (Suppl 1): 122-128.
8 Ward KN, Bryan NJ, Andrew NJ et al. Risk of Serious Neurologic Disease After Immunization of Young Children in Britain and Ireland. Pediatrics 2007; 120(2): 314-321.
9 Pellegrino P, Carnovale C, Perrone V et al. Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis Onset: Evaluation Based on Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting SystemPLOS One Oct. 18, 2013.
10 HRSA. Encephalopathy, Encephalitis, Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis. Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Vaccine Injury Table. Mar. 21, 2017.
11 CDC. Recommendations and Guidelines of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP): Contraindications and Precautions. Table 4-2. Conditions incorrectly perceived as contraindications or precautions to vaccination (i.e., vaccines may be given under these conditions). Jan. 10, 2019.
12 Rubin LG, Levin MJ, Lyungman P et al. 2013 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Clinical Practice Guideline for Vaccination of the Immunocompromised Host. Clin Infect Dis Dec. 4, 2013; 58(3).
13 Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines. Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality.(Evaluating Biological Mechanisms for Adverse Events: Increased Susceptibility). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 2012. Chap. 4 (103-238)
14 Institute of Medicine Committee on the Assessment of Studies of Health Outcomes Related to the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule. Summary: Health Outcomes (p. 5-6) and Conclusions About Scientific Findings (p. 11) and Review of Scientific Findings (p. 75-98). The Childhood Immunization Schedule and Safety Stakeholder Concerns, Scientific Evidence and Future Studies; Washington, D.C. The National Academies Press 2013.
15 NVIC. National Vaccine Information Center Cites “Betrayal” of Consumers by U.S. Supreme Court Giving Total Liability Shield to Big PharmaNVIC Press Release Feb. 23, 2011.
16 CBS News. Measles Outbreak Fueled by Anti-Vaccination Movement, Infectious Disease Expert Says. Jan. 30, 2019.
17 World Health Organization. WHO Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee (PDVAC) meeting. June 26-27, 2018.




Sudden Cardiac Deaths in Young People

Source:  Children’s Health Defense

by the Children’s Health Defense Team
February 28, 2019

 

The death of a child is always a shocking event, but perhaps even more so when a young person dies abruptly and unexpectedly. When a previously healthy child dies because their heart suddenly stops, parents are bound to have questions about “why.”

The federal government defines sudden cardiac death as follows: “The heart suddenly and unexpectedly stops beating and blood stops flowing to the brain and other vital organs.” Medical websites make a distinction between sudden cardiac deaths and heart attacks, characterizing the former as an electrical “short-circuit” rather than a problem with circulation. Just what is causing the “short-circuits” has stumped many researchers, who say that identifying the “elusive” causes of sudden cardiac arrest or death in young people is like looking for a needle in a haystack. Ohio doctors who studied the nonfatal occurrence of heart spasms in male adolescents professed that they remained “uncertain” of the cause after finding that none had a family history of heart problems or any other cardiac risk factors.

In some instances, experts have placed the blame on preexisting health conditions such as epilepsy or asthma, or on an underlying cardiovascular or genetic weakness. Other probable culprits include pervasive exposure to microwave electromagnetic fields, which have been documented to provoke cardiac changes that include accelerated or irregular heart rate (tachycardia and arrhythmia) and sudden cardiac death; and environmental factors such as fine particulate matter air pollution (a well-known contributor to cardiovascular disease in susceptible older adults that is now recognized as a risk factor for healthy young individuals as well). Some medical professionals have occasionally noted the potential for sudden cardiac death to result from substance use—whether illicit stimulants or prescription medications (such as ADHD drugs and antipsychotics). All of these factors and more may be at play, but there is one other plausible contributor that most experts studiously ignore—and that is childhood vaccines, many of which clearly list the potential for adverse cardiac effects in their package inserts.

As of 2013, Sudden Unexpected Infant Death (SUID) accounted for about one in seven infant deaths (about 3,700 annually), with about 20% thought to be related to cardiac vulnerabilities activated by exogenous stressors.

Piecemeal reporting of cardiac deaths in the young

Children born in the U.S. are 76% more likely to die before their first birthday than infants born in 19 other wealthy nations, and sudden infant deaths are one of the top five causes. Since 2009, these deaths have been monitored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Sudden Unexpected Infant Death (SUID) Registry, which operates in 22 states and jurisdictions. As of 2013, SUID accounted for about one in seven infant deaths (about 3,700 annually), with about 20% thought to be related to cardiac vulnerabilities activated by “exogenous stressors.”

Until 2013, reporting of sudden cardiac deaths in young people over age one was haphazard. In that year, the CDC joined forces with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to establish a Sudden Death in the Young Case Registry (SDY-CR) in 10 states and jurisdictions. The SDY-CR surveillance system now collects comprehensive information on sudden cardiac deaths (as well as sudden epilepsy-related deaths) in youth under 20 years of age—but the registry has yet to produce any significant reports.

Prior to either registry, in the early 2000s, reports began surfacing of an increase in sudden cardiac deaths in adolescents and young adults. CDC researchers reported a 10% increase in deaths from cardiac arrest in 15-34-year-olds over the seven-year period from 1989 to 1996—a finding reiterated in 2012 by the American Academy of Pediatrics. The increase translated into about 3,000 deaths annually by the mid-1990s. Although more recent numbers are harder to come by, in 2015, the American Heart Association reported over 6,300 “out-of-hospital cardiac arrests” in American youth less than 18 years of age, citing survival rates ranging from about 10% to 31%. A single state (Michigan) reported an average of 35 sudden cardiac deaths a year in children and teens under age 20 as of 2009.

Cardiac problems described in vaccine package inserts

Many vaccine package inserts list cardiac-related adverse events that have occurred either during clinical trials or during postmarketing. For example:

  • Recombivax hepatitis B vaccine: hypotension, tachycardia
  • Engerix hepatitis B vaccine: hypotension, tachycardia, heart palpitations
  • Infanrix (diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis) vaccine: sudden infant death syndrome
  • Boostrix and Adacel (tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis) vaccines: myocarditis
  • Flulaval and Fluzone (influenza) vaccines: chest pain

Death (listed as a “general disorder”) is one of the adverse experiences reported after approval and marketing of the Gardasil and Gardasil-9 human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. In an intriguing article in Autoimmunity Reviews just published by leading autoimmunity expert Yehuda Schoenfeld and an international team of colleagues, the authors propose that an autoimmune mechanism—namely, vaccine-induced autoantibodies against cardiac proteins—may be related to cardiac-related adverse reactions to HPV vaccination, including sudden cardiac death.

Another factor potentially linking vaccines and sudden cardiac death is thimerosal, the ethylmercury-based preservative. Thimerosal is still present in significant quantities in influenza vaccines and as a “trace amount” in the tetanus-diphtheria (Td) vaccine. Mercury has been shown to damage the cardiovascular system even at low levels of exposure.

…studies have highlighted a positive correlation between number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates, and case studies have described compelling temporal associations between vaccination and death.

Finally, where sudden infant deaths are concerned (some of which are cardiac in nature), there is abundant evidence that vaccines may be contributing in several ways. Epidemiological studies have highlighted a positive correlation between number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates, and case studies have described compelling temporal associations between vaccination and death.

A toxic world

Children today live in a toxic world. There is little doubt that multiple factors are interacting synergistically to stress the heart’s exquisitely fine-tuned electrical system. In addition to the powerful influences already mentioned—microwave electromagnetic radiation, fine particulate air pollution, pharmaceuticals and vaccines—media reports continue to identify other toxic exposures besetting our youth, with some of the latest dangers cropping up in personal care products and energy drinks. We owe it to children to protect them as much as possible from these external stressors so that they can use their hearts for what really matters.




Who is Beating the ‘We MUST Vaccinate’ Drum?

by Adam Abraham
February 23, 2019
Source

 

 

“If 100% of the population were vaccinated, there would be no disease. ”That appears to be the implied and I’ll say baseless motivation behind the legislative efforts to induce or coerce people to think that they should give up their option to refuse vaccine administration to their children. Of course it’s not baseless. They are beating the ‘We Must Vaccinate’ drum like there’s no tomorrow. Except that there is, and will always be one.

 

 

Such is the subtext that is unfolding in the state of Washington after a late-January measles outbreak in Portland led to several cases in Vancouver (Clark County), across the Columbia River to the north, to which Gov. Jay Inslee declared a public health emergency for reasons of “vaccine hesitancy”.

 

Del Bigtree, producer of the film “Vaxxed” covers talking points with local TV reporter.

 

Interesting term, “vaccine hesitancy”. I’d use the words legitimate reason, common sense, overwhelming evidence that something is not as it should be.

Not only are legislators maintaining a blind eye to the ample evidence, and dismissing a parent’s natural instinct to protect their children, they (or those who are urging them on) are systematically attempting to establish their authority to dictate to the public what is or is not permissible to disagree on.

As of February 21, almost one month after the outbreak, 63 people in Clark and King County had contracted measles (44 under 10 years of age with one 50 years of age). This group represents less than 0.03% of a population of roughly 231,200 people, the response for which is estimated to be over $1 million.

 

 

My question is why?

Since the large majority ~ not all ~ of the cases were “unvaccinated” children, state law conjurers have elected to make this the reason to attempt to take away parents’ options to use “philosophical grounds” as a reason to refuse to allow vaccinations on their children.

 

Standing behind “science” is a weak attempt to marginalize this fundamental truth.

 

While a parent’s power of non-consent is inalienable and inviolate, there remains a very clear effort to have the public believe that the state has some power or right to force them to do something that is against, not only their conscience and will, but their own personal knowledge, whether “science” acknowledges or admits it, or not.

 

 

Unvaccinated children that get measles don’t get it a second time. Having had measles in my youth, I can say that it was no big deal. It came, then it left. Yet, it appears that getting an MMR vaccination was not enough to ensure that a child won’t still get measles, and getting it one time is no guarantee that they won’t get it again.

However, chances are increased that vaccinated child will have to deal with one or more of a much wider list of chronic and degenerative conditions that are all on the rise.

 

The 25 healthiest countries (shaded in gold), according to Bloomberg Health Index.

 

‘Leading’ to Health Ignominy

America has become a “leader” of far too many dubious distinctions. To be “the land of the free,” more Americans are in prison, by a wide margin, than any country on Earth.

However, there are prisons, and there are prisons. The social, psychological,and metabolic fallout from the unmitigated push to force unnatural chemical agents into human biological systems, hints at an agenda that appears to be about more than money. The absence of objectivity from the medical/professional sector, the blindly obsessive push to raise vaccine rates up (already over 90%), reveals a complete disregard for the trail of trampled and obliterated hopes and dreams, and the utter bewilderment when what would be a common sense response by any rational human being ~ i.e., dial vaccine schedules back, or even stop them altogether to see if the sudden injuries stop ~ are ignored.

The general health trend in the United States is down. An undeclared state of emergency sparks a new wave of dubious American leadership with the continuing advance in frequency of conditions known variously as ADHD, Asperger syndrome, autism or ASD (which in 2014 had reached a frequency of 1 in 59 children), asthma (affecing 25 million people including 7 million children), diabetes (100 million people affected according to CDC), and many more. including childhood cancers.

And “science” sees no connection between its standard policies and practices, and shattered lives.

In fact, Commissioner Scott Gottlieb of the FDA (an un-elected official who is not fettered with concern over being re-elected) told CNN that some states with “lax” vaccine requirement laws may eventually “force the hand of the federal health agencies.” (See U.S. News article.)

 

SOURCE: US NEWS

 

Sounds like a less than veiled threat, which may also be why the big hullabaloo about “the outbreak”. See if the elected officials can snark their illogical and baseless proposition pass the people, and whether the people will be distracted or incoherent enough to let it happen.

It’s not really about the “philosophical” reasoning. It is whether you continue to allow these people to convince you to give them your authority.

No Matter How Many Times ‘Scientists’ Say Otherwise, Baseless is Baseless

By sticking to a narrow and implausible assertion that there is no scientific link to the MMR vaccine and autism, proponents of vaccinations dodge calling attention to the far greater evidence that the institutionalized use of various delivery modalities of unnatural chemicals is, in fact, connected to all of the maladies that could go under the umbrella of “vaccine damage”.

Whether causal or not, vaccines significantly contribute to the pathogenesis of a myriad of ailments that eventually become chronic and degenerative. Virtually all of which are met by an apparently puzzled research body that professes to feverishly look for “cures”.

This is the psychological morass that is life n America today. Freedoms are being assaulted right at home, by people who would convince us that we need a wall, but deny the damage to health that they are supporting by not halting , or even questioning, their “marching orders.”

I wonder who is beating their drum?




One More Precious Baby Dies After Vaccination

Source:  The Vaccine Reaction

 

A Baby Died After Vaccination

 

I watched every mother’s nightmare unfold yesterday in a conversation on a local online mom’s group.  It began when the baby’s aunt asked frantically for prayers for her nephew, who had gotten his four-month shots that day and was found unresponsive in the evening.  Then we learned the baby had apparently bled from every orifice and had swelling of the brain. The aunt shared that they kept the baby “alive” to give family time to arrive at the hospital.  And then, the baby died.

The aunt told us the probable diagnosis was SIDS. When the family questioned the doctor about whether the vaccines (pneumococcal, H. influenza (HIB), rotavirus, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus (DTaP) and polio, and perhaps hepatitis B if he had not yet received that at birth) administered just hours before could have caused this massive organ failure and death, the doctor denied the possibility of any causal relationship between the baby’s death and the vaccinations he was given. The doctor justified that conclusion on the basis of the infant not reacting poorly to the series of shots given at two months.

So a healthy baby goes in for a well child check with a minor cold, receives multiple vaccines and is dead within hours but there is no possibility the vaccinations played any role in the infant’s sudden death?

It is always tragic when an infant dies. As a family physician responsible for the care of many children, my distress is felt at a professional as well as a personal level when a child dies. Why did this child die and what could have been done to prevent this baby’s death and saved these parents from the lifetime of grief that results from such a loss?

I reached out privately to my colleagues for support.  Some responded with sincere sadness and worry. One physician friend recalled a night on call as a resident when a two-month-old died following a hepatitis B vaccination given earlier that day. The attending physicians wouldn’t let my friend report the death to VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) because they deemed the death after the hepatitis B vaccination to be “a coincidence.” My story brought back those memories for her and she felt awful and conflicted.

Another physician friend told me “It’s sad when babies die,” and went on to admit concerns about vaccines, but ended by saying, “But of course the benefits outweigh the risks.” In response to my concern about the temporal relationship between a healthy child receiving vaccines and that child dying within hours, a common theme among these doctors seemed to be, “correlation does not equal causation,” and “they may harm some but overall they’re more beneficial to the majority.” No one seemed interested in exploring the deadly correlation in this case or in learning more about how injecting not just disease antigens but many other chemicals, adjuvants and foreign DNA into infants might affect them.

As a physician, stories like this one make me ask some difficult questions. Since nothing in our medical training has prepared us to recognize or respond to treat vaccine reactions, and we don’t seem to be able to recognize death as an adverse reaction when it happens within 24 hours of receiving a vaccine, how in the world are we going to recognize any of the other milder warning signs of vaccine adverse events that could harm a child’s health? Is it possible that this baby had symptoms that his body wasn’t handling his earlier shots, and due to adherence to the prevailing one-size-fits-all mindset, those signs went unnoticed?

A colleague of mine stumbled upon a book called Every Second Child by Archie Kalokerinos, MD. Dr. Kalokerinos found that many babies who presented similarly to the baby in my town turned out to have vitamin C deficiency (scurvy). He found old studies supporting the use of high dose vitamin C, and began using that treatment. Dr. Kalokerinos won the Australian Medal of Merit in 1978 for lowering the infant mortality rate from 50 percent to almost none. He felt so strongly about sharing his findings that he gave his book away rather than selling it.1

If we care about protecting the “greater good” then why is it so politically incorrect to care about the individual casualties of what is presumed to be a “good” medical intervention? If we are so smart and have so much science behind our decisions, why would we not look at those who die after vaccination to find commonalities for the purpose of finding ways to prevent a vaccine-related death or injury?

We should not be afraid to explore the relationship between vitamin levels, electrolytes, genetics, family history, breastfed versus formula fed status, method of birth, prenatal history and antibiotic use, and the specific and nonspecific negative effects of vaccines. It seems unethical for physicians to demand the full cooperation of parents in vaccinating their children with every one of the 50 doses of 14 vaccines currently recommended by the CDC starting on the day of birth through age six, only to be abandoned with a shrug and “it’s for the greater good” when their child is injured or dies after receiving those vaccines.2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

I want to know why the lives of those who might die from “vaccine preventable diseases” matter more than those who die from vaccines? If we don’t know why a four-month-old baby in our community died, don’t we owe it to that child and his family to at least be curious?


References:

1 Kalokerinos A. Every Second Child. Sept. 1, 1981.
2 Buttram HE. Shaken Baby Syndrome or Vaccine-Induced Encephalitis? Hacienda Publishing Fall 2001.
3 Innis MD. Autoimmune Tissue Scurvy Misdiagnosed as Child AbuseClinical Medicine Research Nov. 10, 2013 (6); 154-157
4 Ward  Iwasa S, Ishida S, Akama K. Swelling of the brain in mice caused by pertussis vaccine: its quantitative determination and the responsible factors in the vaccine. Jpn J Med Sci Biol April 1985; 38(2): 53-65.
5 Beckenhauer WH, Gill MA. Immunosuppression with combined vaccines. J Am Vet Med Assn 1983; 183(4): 389-390.
6 Munoz JJ, Bernard CC, Mackay IR. Elicitation of experimental encephalomyelitis in mice with the aid of pertussigen. Cell Immunol January 1984; 83(1): 92-100.
7 Behan PO, Moore MJ, Lamarche JB. Acute necrotizing hemorrhagic encephalopathy. Postgraduate Medicine 1973; 54(4): 154-160.
8 Flexner S. Post-vaccinal encephalitis and allied conditions. JAMA Feb. 1, 1930; 94: 305-311.
9 Karlsson L, Scheibner V. Association between non-specific stress syndrome, DPT injections and cot death. Presented at Second Immunization Conference, Canberra, May 27-29, 1991.

 




NVIC’s “No Forced Vaccination” Message Back Up in Times Square as Americans Fight for Human Rights

Source:  The Vaccine Reaction

 

There have been 101 cases of measles that have been reported in 10 states since the beginning of 2019,1 hardly a public health emergency in a U.S. population of more than 320 million people where 94 percent of school children have received two doses of MMR vaccine and only two percent of children have a vaccine exemption for any reason.2 In what looks like a repeat of the “measles in Disneyland” media feeding frenzy that stampeded California state legislators into eliminating the personal belief vaccine exemption in 2015,3 4 the tiny minority of parents who have made a conscious choice not to give their children every one of the dozens of doses of federally recommended and state mandated vaccines are being once again relentlessly stereotyped, demonized and bullied.5 6 7 8

In what appears to be another well-orchestrated campaign to pressure state legislatures to remove all personal belief vaccine exemptions in the U.S. and further restrict already narrow medical exemptions to vaccination,9 10 11 12 13 forced vaccination proponents are whipping up irrational fear to justify attacking human rights, including freedom of thought, speech, religious belief and conscience.14 15 16 17 18 It is a spectacle unworthy of a nation where human rights19 and civil liberties have been valued since the ratification of the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution in 178920 and the informed consent principle became the anchor for medical ethics after World War II.21 22 23

During this time of discrimination and oppression, the nonprofit educational charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), is back up in Times Square with NVIC’s “Vaccinations: Know the Risks and Failures” and “No Forced Vaccination” animated digital message. Displayed on a giant 56 foot by 29 foot electronic screen in the heart of New York City’s Times Square Plaza at 1500 Broadway (where the ball drops on New Year’s Eve), NVIC’s 10-second spot celebrating the human right to freedom of thought and conscience will be broadcast a minimum of three times per hour for 20 hours per day from 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. through April 2019. More than one million people pass through Times Square daily. View the digital ad on NVIC’s referenced Vaccinations: Know the Risks and Failures page on NVIC’s website here.

During the past decade, NVIC has sponsored national vaccine education campaigns to encourage well-informed, voluntary vaccine decisionmaking. In 2011, NVIC sponsored a digital vaccine education billboard in New York City’s Times Square on New Year’s Eve24 and produced a flu prevention video for Delta Airline’s in-flight programming.25 In 2013, NVIC launched a national vaccine education billboard and ad campaign that featured billboards on highways and buses New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Illinois, Texas, Georgia and Colorado, Vermont and other states.26 In 2015 and 2016, NVIC’s message advocating for vaccine education and choice was up in Times Square, as well.27 28

Founded by parents of DPT vaccine injured children in 1982 to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education, NVIC has steadfastly defended respect for the informed consent principle and its protection in vaccine policies and laws because vaccines are pharmaceutical products that carry a risk of injury or death. More than $4 billion has been paid by the government since 1988 to children and adults who have been harmed by FDA licensed and CDC recommended vaccines under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.29 Some people are biologically more susceptible to suffering vaccine reactions but doctors are unable to reliability predict who will be harmed before vaccination.30 This fact makes protection of personal belief vaccine exemptions  even more important, as does the fact that Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have shielded vaccine companies and vaccine administrators from liability for vaccine injuries and deaths.31 32

In a population of more than 320 million people, a few hundred cases of measles is not a public health emergency and should not be used to justify eliminating the legal right to exercise informed consent to vaccination, which is protected by the inclusion of flexible medical, religious and conscientious belief vaccine exemptions in public health laws.33

The human right to freedom of thought, speech, religious belief, conscience and informed consent will be preserved if Americans stand up for human rights that protect against tyranny. Only if we elect and support lawmakers who protect human rights will human rights be protected in government policy and law.

Whether it is in the states, on Capitol Hill or in Times Square, our mission continues: No forced vaccination. Not in America.


References:

 1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Measles Cases in 2019. Feb. 1, 2019.
2 CDC. Vaccination Coverage for Selected Vaccines and Exemption Rates Among Children in Kindergarten — United States, 2017–18 School Year. MMWR Oct. 12, 2018; 67(4)): 1115-1122.
3 Fisher BL. The Vaccine Culture War in America: Are You Ready? National Vaccine Information Center Mar. 8, 2015.
4 Richardson D. Fallout from California SB277: What Happens Next? NVIC Newsletter Aug. 5, 2015.
5 Editorial Board. How to Inoculate Against Anti-Vaxxers. New York Times Jan. 11, 2019.
6 Cohen E, Bonifield J. Some states allow parents to get out of vaccinations. Then this happens. CNN Jan. 29, 2019.
7 Keneally M. Parents who don’t vaccinate kids tend to be affluent, better educated, experts say. ABC News Jan. 29, 2019.
8 Cáceres M. Media Takes Low Road by Pitting Children Against Their Parents To Promote Vaccines. The Vaccine Reaction Feb. 13, 2019.
9 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Advocacy Portal: 2019 State Legislative Session Vaccine-Related Bills.
10 CBS. Hundreds rally to preserve right not to vaccinate children amid measles outbreak. Feb. 8, 2019.
11 Douglass J. Oregon lawmaker wants to end non-medical exemptions to school vaccine requirements. KATU2 Feb. 11, 2019.
12 MacReady N. Questionable Medical Exemptions for Vaccines Up After New Law in California. Emedicine health Oct. 29, 2018.
13 CDC. Recommendations and Guidelines of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP): Contraindications and Precautions. Table 4-2. Conditions incorrectly perceived as contraindications or precautions to vaccination (i.e., vaccines may be given under these conditions). Jan. 10, 2019.
14 Fisher BL. The New Internet Police Protecting You From Freedom of Thought and Speech. NVIC Newsletter Dec. 3, 2018.
15 Ad Age. Google, Facebook Queried on Anti-Vaccine Information by Democrat. Feb. 14, 2019.
16 Najera RF. Measles Epidemic Continues and Grows in Washington State, New Cases in Houston, Texas. History of Vaccines Feb. 6, 2019.
17 Newsday. End the religious exemption for vaccines in New York. Editorial Feb 8, 2019.
18 Fisher BL. Forced Vaccination: The Tragic Legacy of Jacobson v. Massachusetts. National Vaccine Information Center Nov. 2, 2016.
19 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations General Assembly Dec. 10, 1948.
20 National Archives. America’s Founding Documents: The Bill of Rights.
21 Annas GJ, Grodin MA. The Nazi Doctors and the Nuremberg CodeOxford University Press 1992.
22 U.S. Library of Medicine. Informed Consent – Adults. Medline Plus Jan. 28, 2019.
23 Fisher BL. Why Is Informed Consent to Vaccination a Human Right? National Vaccine Information Center June 28, 2017.
24 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Educates One Million Plus in Times Square on New Year’s Eve.  NVIC Newsletter Dec. 26, 2011.
25 National Vaccine Information Center. Flu Prevention Video. November 2011.
26 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Launches National “Know the Risks” Billboard Vaccine Education Campaign. Mar. 12, 2013.
27 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC’s “No Forced Vaccination” Message in Times Square, Philadelphia and New Jersey. Apr. 13, 2015.
28 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Back in Times Square for Christmas and New Year’s Eve. Dec. 17, 2015.
29 DHHS. National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Vaccine Injury Compensation Data. Health Resources Services Administration (HRSA) Feb. 1, 2019.
30 Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines. Evaluation of Biologic Mechanisms of Adverse Effects: Increased Susceptibility. Chapter 3 (p. 82). Washington, D.C. The National Academies Press 2012.
31 NVIC. National Vaccine Information Center Cites “Betrayal” of Consumers by U.S. Supreme Court Giving Total Liability Shield to Big Pharma. NVIC Press Release Feb. 23, 2011.
32 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Position Statement on National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. May 2018.
33 Fisher BL. Guide to Reforming Vaccine Policy and Law. National Vaccine Information Center 2014, Revised 2017.




Nurses Speak Out Against Circumcision

Nurses Against Circumcision

 

Childbirth is miraculous, beautiful, traumatic, and overwhelming, all at the same time, for both the baby and the mother. But for many children born today, squeezing through the birth canal is the easy part. Soon after birth, males born to North American women routinely face amputation of a fully functioning, healthy organ – the foreskin.

Circumcision is so commonplace in North America, it has long been considered the norm. The World Health Organization estimates the male circumcision rate in the U.S. to be 76% to 92%, while the rates in most of the Western European countries are less than 20%. Globally, more than 80% of the world’s men are left intact. An intact penis is not rare – an intact penis is the norm.

Medical professionals tell parents that circumcision is relatively painless, just a snip and it is over. Nothing could be further from the truth. Aside from the rare but possible complications, which include mutilation of the penis or death, the practice of circumcision is painful and traumatic.

The following nurses have come forward to share their knowledge and experience, to tell the truth about this practice.

Related: Circumcision Linked to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome

 

Nicole, A Former Nursing Student

A few years ago, I began an OB/GYN hospital clinical as a student nurse. One day, I was enlisted to attend a ‘routine circumcision.

… I did not anticipate the lurching sensation that gripped my heart as I looked upon that baby. He was laying strapped down to a table, so small and new – pure and innocent – trusting – all alone – no defenses.

I walked toward the baby and wanted to take him off the table and shelter him – to tell him that it would be okay, that nobody would hurt him on my watch.

Then in walked the doctor. Loud. Obnoxious. Joking with his assistant. As if he was about to perform a 10-minute oil change.

Not once did he talk to this little baby. I am not sure he even looked at him – really looked at him.

Rather, he reached for his cold metal instruments and then reached out for his object of mutilation: this sweet newborn’s perfect, unharmed, intact penis.

I recall this little baby boy’s screams of pain and terror – his small lungs barely able to keep up with his cries and gasps for breath.

I turned in horror as I saw the doctor forcefully rip and pull the baby’s foreskin up and around a metal object.

Then out came the knife. Cut. Cut. Cut. Screaming. Blood.

I stood next to the baby and said, “You’re almost done sweetie. Almost done. There, done.”

Then came the words from the doctor, as that son-of-a-b***h dangled this little baby’s foreskin in midair and playfully asked, “Anybody care to go fishing?”

My tongue lodged in my throat.

I felt like I was about to vomit.

I restrained myself. It was now my duty to take the infant back to the nursery for “observation.”

… Back in the newborn nursery, rather than observing, I cradled the infant. I held him and whispered comforting words as if he were my own. I’ll never forget those new little eyes watch me amid his haze. He knew I cared about him. He knew he was safe in my arms. He knew that I was going to take him to his mommy. But, deep in his little heart, at some level, I know he wondered where his mommy was. While he lay there mutilated in a level of agony that we cannot imagine, in what was supposed to be a safe and welcoming environment after his birth, where was his mommy?

Related: Religious Reasons Not To Circumcise

 

Betty, RN

We are saying what is happening, because the male myth is, “Well, I was circumcised and I am fine, and my son was circumcised and he’s fine.”

But we’re saying, “Maybe you were circumcised, but it wasn’t fine, because we were there, and we saw what happened. It’s the same thing with your baby. We were there, and we saw it. It was not fine.”

… That is the next step, for the grown men to come forward. It’s happening now. There is a powerful coalition forming. We women are coming out as mothers and as witnesses to this brutal sexual assault. Women who have been circumcised in Africa are coming forward, too. We’re all saying this isn’t okay.

 

Mary, RN

We just wanted people to stop hurting babies. In 1992, we started a petition. Before that, I think we all had the sense that something was wrong, but we had never communicated about it. Everything I’d read said circumcision isn’t a necessary thing to do, from a medical or health standpoint. So why are we doing it? You take a newborn baby, strap him down to a board, and cut on him. It’s obviously painful!

Circumcision became so intolerable that five of us wrote a letter saying that ethically we could no longer assist. When we were getting ready to present the letter, other nurses came out of the woodwork and asked to sign it. Out of about 50 nurses, 24 signed it.

Now we’re conscientious objectors, but it’s still going on. We can still hear it.

… Behind closed doors, you can hear the baby screaming. You know exactly what part of the operation is happening by how the screams are.

 

Mary-Rose, RN

My dreams were about taking the babies and strapping them down, participating in the whole thing, and having the babies say to me, “Why are you doing this? You were just welcoming me, and now you’re torturing me. Why, why, why?”

I’ve watched doctors taking more foreskin than they should. When there’s too much bleeding, they burn the wound with silver nitrate so that the penis looks like it’s been burned with a cigarette. Then the doctor will tell us to go tell the mother that this is what it’s supposed to look like.

Related: Celebrities Against Circumcision

 

Chris, RN

I worked with countless intact men, mostly European immigrants in Chicago: Poles, Serbs, Lithuanians, etc. Younger men and older men. Men who could walk to the bathroom and men who constantly soiled themselves. Men who had indwelling Foley catheters and men who didn’t. Men who were impeccably clean and men who were homeless. Men who were healthy and men who were critically ill and severely immunocompromised. Never once did I encounter an adult male patient who had ever had a medical problem due to being intact.

… In fact, female patients are far more prone to fungal and bacterial genitourinary infections than male patients are—yeast infections, urinary tract infections, abscesses, etc. And we know that this is largely due not only to their shorter urethra, but also to their labial folds—their “excess” skin. Why don’t we cut that off? Why isn’t female circumcision considered for infection prophylaxis? That’s how we think of male circumcision. Except the reality is that, as with male patients, the “benefit” of circumcision would be negligible, because the number of serious complications with women staying “uncircumcised” is extremely minor.

So as it stands, we have two sons who are intact. One is almost five years old and the other is nearly three. They’ve never had a problem. During diapering they required less care and bother than our daughters did. And now, during bathing, we don’t retract or mess with their prepuce (foreskin).

They’re clean. They’re fine.

I suspect that someday they’ll be like my patients were: ninety years old and intact—with no regrets.

Related: Circumcision, the Primal Cut – A Human Rights Violation

 

Patricia, RN

I am a neonatal nurse practitioner with over 42 years of experience in maternal newborn health. I have seen many circumcisions, and I have been appalled at the pain that they have caused.

… In my experience as a neonatal nurse, I know that circumcisions are painful, that little boys will cry for days after the procedure. They need to be medicated with Tylenol. They need to have injections at the penile nerve to try to prevent the pain, but it doesn’t completely eliminate it. I have seen excessive bleeding after the procedure. I’ve seen disfigurement. I believe that little boys are made the way they are because it’s absolutely fine to be intact. If there was a problem with foreskin, nature would not have put it there. So let little boys decide when and if they want to be circumcised. But parents, please spare your child the pain and unnecessary surgery that is not without risk. Just think about it.

I have seen, not loss of the entire penis but definitely disfigurement, and definitely excessive bleeding that has required intervention by GU specialists, suturing. Complications occur frequently.

…When babies are born, one of the first developmental tasks is to learn to trust the world, which means being in the comforting arms of their mother and father. To subject them in the first couple of days after birth to this terribly painful procedure just seems like the wrong way to start life. But the bottom line is: it is not necessary.

 

Jacqueline Maire, RN

I am a retired nurse in France as well as in British Columbia, a mother, a grandmother, and today I really want to speak specifically to female circumcisers, those who cut the penis of little boys. I have questions. What is your excuse? Were you at one point molested by a male in your youth that makes you now take revenge on any penis whatsoever and whatever the age of the victim, in this case, a defenseless little boy? Did you ever have an orgasm? And I’m not talking while you’re making love, I’m just talking about sex. Never had an orgasm with an intact male and discovered the wonders and the perfection of the act? Well. I feel sorry for you, but this is not an excuse to take revenge on defenseless children, baby boys mostly and I don’t understand how you can do that without being ashamed of yourself. Well, it’s just excuses, or medical excuses, or plain and simple fallacies. I feel sorry for you, but I also feel ashamed in the name of womanhood. You don’t respect your Hippocratic oath if you even know what it’s all about. Well, I’ll remind you it’s first “do no harm.” You’re just plain bitches, and I’m not insulting the female dog there. You are very mean, and I’m disgusted.

Related: 10 Circumcision Myths – Let’s Get the Facts Straight 

 

Dolores Sangiuliano, RN

I’m a registered nurse, and we have an ethical code, the AMA Code of Ethics for Nurses, and it states very clearly that we are charged with the duty to protect our vulnerable patients. If we’re not protecting our vulnerable patients, then our license isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. If anybody is vulnerable, it’s a newborn baby. You know, a child with no voice, and that’s why I carry this sign: “I will not do anything evil or malicious and I will not knowingly… assist in malpractice”.

Infant circumcision is maleficence and malpractice. It’s totally unethical. Proxy consent is only valid for a procedure. In other words, parents can give consent for a procedure for their child. That’s proxy consent in a case of treatment or diagnosis, and circumcision is neither. You’re not treating a disease, and you’re not trying to diagnose an illness. So it just flies in the face of everything we know to be ethical, right, and moral. And I believe that forced genital cutting, all forced genital cutting, is always wrong. It should be consented to, fully informed consent, and that fully informed consent needs to include what you’re cutting off the penis, the value of the foreskin, and the consequences of changing the structure from a mobile, fluid unit to this dowel like structure, and that needs to be included. Ethical nurses educate their patients. Ethical nurses teach intact care, and ethical nurses don’t participate in forced genital cutting ever.

A woman from Egypt came up to us and she said,” I totally agree with you. Female circumcision happens in our country all the time, and it’s illegal but it still goes on. And it’s our cultural shame.” And she said, “I totally understand you having your cultural shame for doing this and it is the same thing.” And we just had a total agreement conversation about, and it doesn’t matter the varying degrees. We don’t need to compare the varying degrees of harm. Because a lot of people say female circumcision is much worse. But right out of her mouth she said, “But no, it’s the same. To the person having it done, it’s the same.” That was really good.

A Danish woman came and said, during her college days, she came to the United States and had a little bit of fun one season and she had sex with an American man. She was horrified because she didn’t know what had happened to him. She thought he had been in some sort of industrial accident. She didn’t know how to ask him or how to approach it. So that was an interesting tale, and I really appreciated the term industrial accident in a new way cause this is an industry, the medical industry. It’s not so accidental. Although their intention is to say that they’ve improved our males, they, perhaps by accident, devastated us and devastated so many men sexually and in their souls.

 

Kira Antinuk RN

Feminism, at its best, encourages me to think broadly and critically about the potentially harmful effects of gender constructions on all people. To me, feminism should be more than a narrow interest group of women who care only about women’s issues or women’s rights. My feminism is bigger than that. I believe that feminism can help us to identify and challenge discourses and practices that engender all of us.

… Upon review in 2009, scholars Marie Fox and Michael Thompson found that most feminists’ considerations of female genital cutting either omit to consider male genital cutting altogether or deem it a matter of little ethical or legal concern. Why might this be? So biomedical ethicist Dena Davis observed that the very use of the term “circumcision” carries vaguely medical connotations and serves to normalize the practice of male genital cutting.

Conversely, it’s worth noting, how the term female circumcision was essentially erased from academic, legal, and to some extent popular discourse following the World Health Organization’s re-designation of the practice as FGM or female genital mutilation in 1990. The WHO’s justification was that the new terminology carried stronger moral weight. So, terminology then, as well as the differential constructions of the practices themselves seems to protect male genital cutting from the critical scrutiny that other practices like female genital cutting attract.

Now it seems pretty clear to me, that this asymmetry extends to the very different understandings of genitalia and human tissue that we all have. Here in the West, for example, we’re heavily invested in the clitoris to the extent, that its excision results in what Canadian anthropologist Janice Body referred to as “serious personal diminishment.” Janice Body went on to say, “We customarily amputate babies’ foreskins, not with some controversy, but little alarm. Yet global censure of these practices is scarcely comparable to that level of female circumcision. Is it because these excisions are performed on boys and only girls and women figure as victims in our cultural lexicon?”

 

Sophia Murdock, RN

After we had taken the newborn back to the “circ room” in the nursery, I watched the nurse gather the necessary supplies, place him on a plastic board [a circumstraint], and secure his arms and legs with Velcro straps. He started crying as his tiny and delicate body was positioned onto the board, and I instantly felt uncomfortable and disturbed seeing this helpless newborn with his limbs extended in such an unnatural position, against his will. My instincts wanted to unstrap him, pick him up, and comfort and protect him. I felt an intense sensation of apprehension and dread about what would be done to him. When the doctor entered the room, my body froze, my stomach dropped, and my chest tightened.

This precious baby was an actual person. He was a 2-day-old boy named Landon, but the doctor barely acknowledged him before administering an injection of lidocaine into his penis.

Instantly, Landon began to let out a horrifying cry. It was a sound that is not normally ever heard in nature because this trauma is so far outside of the normal range of experiences and expectations for a newborn.

The doctor, perhaps sensing how horrified I was, tried to assure me that the baby was crying because he didn’t like being strapped onto the board. He began the circumcision procedure right away, barely giving the anesthetic any time to take effect.

Landon’s cries became even more intense, something I hadn’t imagined was possible. It seemed as if his lungs were unable to keep up with his screams and desperate attempts to maintain his respirations.

Seeing how nonchalant everyone in the room was about Landon’s obvious distress was one of the most chilling and harrowing things I had ever witnessed. I honestly don’t remember the actual procedure, even though the doctor was explaining it to me. I can’t recall a word he said during or after because I wasn’t able to focus on anything but Landon’s screams and why no one seemed to care. I only remember that the nurse attempted to give him a pacifier with glucose/fructose at some point.

Landon was “sleeping” by the end of the circumcision, but I knew it was from exhaustion and defeat. I had watched as his fragile, desperate, and immobilized body struggled and resisted until it couldn’t do so anymore and gave up.

Seeing this happen made me feel completely sick to my stomach, and I told myself that I would absolutely refuse to watch another circumcision if the opportunity presented itself again. I was unable to stop thinking about what I saw and heard…

The sounds that I heard come from Landon as he screamed and cried out still haunt me to this day.

 

Darlene Owen, RN

The truth about circumcision is that it is not medically necessary. It is not cleaner. Studies have proven again and again that it has no direct relation on cancer etc. as was once thought. It is also a very painful procedure. The baby does feel it, experience it.

There have been studies that demonstrate actual MRI changes within an infant’s brain after a circumcision has been performed.

As for those who claim “it looks better”, my response is, “Really? Based on whose decision?” A penis with a foreskin is how the penis is supposed to look. The foreskin has a function. It provides protection of the very sensitive glans (head) of the penis, and it provides ease during intercourse. During intercourse, the penis moves within its foreskin, preventing rubbing or friction of the vagina, which makes intercourse far more pleasurable for both the man and woman.

Many people will respond in outrage over female circumcision, yet still consider circumcision of males “the norm.”

Many parents aren’t properly informed of the procedure. It IS a very serious procedure with very many real risks involved. In my experience as a post-partum nurse, many parents who were led to believe it was a “minor” procedure and observed their sons’ circumcision, were sickened just as I was at the actual pain and distress it caused their infant. I have had many patients who, after witnessing their first son’s circumcision, decided immediately that they would not get any other boys they may have circumcised. Many parents told me that they wished they had known just how painful it would be for their son, that they would not have even considered it if they had known what is actually involved.

As for the argument that many men want their son to look like them, my answer is, “Why?” It is a stupid argument. Why can’t parents simply teach their son that their son’s penis is “normal and healthy”, that “Daddy had his normal, healthy functioning skin of his penis removed surgically, unnecessarily.” I also always say to those people, “Really? Well, watch an actual circumcision, and see if you still feel that way afterwards.” I have yet to see any parent watch a video, or view an actual circumcision procedure, who is not completely against the idea afterwards.

An uncircumcised penis is very easy to keep clean. There is no special care required. The saying goes, “Clean only what is seen.”

As for worrying about the son’s foreskin not retracting, and needing a circumcision later in life, that actually only occurs in a very, very small number of males. However, even if the male does need the surgery later in life, he will be put to sleep for the procedure and will not feel it. He will also be managed comfortably with pain medication. A newborn doesn’t have any of those benefits. A newborn is awake for it, will feel it, and doesn’t receive any pain medication.

Ask any grown male if he’d get his penis circumcised while awake, with no freezing, and I guarantee you’d hear a very loud resounding “NO!” Yet, many men will put their newborn son through it. Doesn’t make much sense does it?

I realize that at one time it was considered the norm. Now, however, with all of the education about it, I cannot understand why parents still proceed to put their tiny little newborn son through such a horrific experience.

I am proud to say that I am an intactivist and the proud mom of two gorgeous, healthy, intact boys.

Related: Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

 

Andrew, RN

I am a registered nurse. I work at a DC hospital. It’s not part of my current job, but when I was in nursing school, I witnessed several circumcisions as part of my rotation, and I was interested in it because personally, I had developed an opposition to circumcision.

As an adult, I never had to be part of that decision not having a child. But I knew that if I did, it was one that I would want to make. And when I had the opportunity, I asked a doctor whom I watched perform it if he thought it was medically necessary because in my education, it is no longer stated, there is no longer a valid medical claim being made in the literature including in my nursing textbooks and so how can you justify it? And he said that he doesn’t personally justify it. He just knows that for the time being, it will continue to be done and he wants it done humanely and as well as possible. And he said “And I do it well” And indeed, he seemed to be proficient in it. I then asked him if he had noticed that the husband of the couple who had just had it done had seemed like he had his doubts and he said, “Yeah, I noticed that too”. “Do you think someone should have discussed it further with him because he clearly didn’t support the decision.” And then he said that that happens all the time, that one of the two of the couple want that decision made and the other go along with it.

My nurse’s perspective is that part of our job as an educator is to give more information, and so that would have been a great opportunity for someone to give that couple more information about whatever concerns the mother had that made her think that circumcision was the best decision. She seemed actually like she had some ill-conceived notions about the difficulty of keeping it clean, things that I knew that medically were not actually accurate. I actually thought at that time that I saw an opportunity for nurses to step in and educate her, to help and not tell the couple what they should do, but make sure they had the best information possible to make a decision, that again, is no longer being promoted clearly on the literature as medically necessary, including in my textbooks, and this was just last year.

 

Carole Alley, RN

And after the strap down and tie, they’re still screaming. The screaming lasts the entire time. And I don’t know if you’ve ever heard a baby scream like that. It’s not a regular cry. It’s not a cry of hunger or a cry of wanting to be hugged or a cry of having a wet diaper. This is a cry of incredible pain. I mean, it goes right through your body. Every cell in your body responds. And then the child is circumcised. You know, there are two different ways of doing it. Sometimes anesthesia local will be used but for the most part, I’ve never seen babies stop crying, even if that’s given. A lot of the time, it’s not used. More often than not, it’s not used. And then the clamp goes over the baby’s penis and the foreskin is cut off.

 

Patricia Worth, RN

In my opinion, this is an abuse. There is not enough information out there to convince me that this is medically necessary. And just as I can read through the Old Testament of the Bible, and stoning women to death because they committed adultery, I see as abusive, this “ancient covenant,” I look at it as a well, the human race has done all kinds of things and thought was the best thing at the time, and in retrospect, we can look back and go, blood sacrifice of human beings? This is not right. This is not morally right. This is not ethical. And especially when you’re taking someone who has not consented. Parents can consent all they want. This does not mean the child has consented to this.

 

Marilyn Milos, RN The Mother of the Intactivist Movement

While working as a nurse in a hospital, she learned about circumcision by assisting doctors during the procedure. The obvious pain and distress felt by the infant prompted Marilyn to research circumcision. Afterwards, she was able to provide parents with all of the facts.

By offering true informed consent, she dramatically cut into her hospitals’ cutting business. She was fired. Undaunted, she went to work saving our sons. She founded a non-profit known as NOCIRC, demonstrating that one person can still make a difference.

Here are her words:

The more we understand what was taken, the more we understand the harm of circumcision, that it is a primal wound, that it does interfere with the maternal-infant bond, that it disturbs breastfeeding and normal sleep patterns. Most importantly, that it undermines the first developmental task, which is to establish trust. And how can that male ever trust again? And I think that’s very hard for a lot of men and why men need to have control and be in control, and their reactions to make themselves more safe.

It was so amazing to me when I worked in a hospital, and my first question would be, “I see—I see that you’re gonna have the baby circumcised, and may I ask why you’ve chosen circumcision for your baby?” And they would say, “Oh, because I’m a Christian.” And I said, “Do you know that there’s 120 references to circumcision in the New Testament, that circumcision is of no value? If you’re a Christian you don’t live by outward signs. You live by faith expressed through love. Christ shed the last—was the last to shed the blood. He was the ultimate blood sacrifice for everybody. We don’t need to do this again.”

 

Conclusion

The hardest moral dilemmas seem to lie at the crossroads of two or more moral principles. In this instance, the right to religious freedom and the right to bodily integrity are in conflict for some parents. But if we are to uphold the right to bodily integrity for girls regardless of religion (Muslims often circumcise girls), shouldn’t we allow the same protection for boys?

Although religion is a factor, many parents choose circumcision simply because it is considered the norm. Myths about disease and cleanliness add to the confusion. When parents are not given all the facts, they cannot make an informed decision. On average, nurses are poorly equipped to answer their questions about circumcision. They do not educate parents, explaining the 16 functions of the foreskin or teach parents how to care for an intact child. (Nothing! Do not retract the foreskin. It cleans itself!)

Our sons’ genitals are carved apart in the name of healthcare when in actuality the practice is a profit-making enterprise. Circumcisions generate a lot of money for hospitals, while intact penises bring in no money at all. So while it is ethical for a nurse to provide parents with informed consent, it is wholly unprofitable for them to do so.

The truth will win. Circumcision is a profound violation of human rights. This conclusion is inescapable once we begin to think critically about the practice.

 

Author’s Note:

Male genital mutilation is still legal in all 50 states, and although Marilyn Milos hasn’t yet completely changed the world, she changed mine.

I am the second born of two sons. My older brother was circumcised. I was not.

Before my birth, my mother met a neighbor who had been given literature from NOCIRC. The sharing of this information about the benefits of the foreskin and the dangers and drawbacks of circumcision is the reason I was left intact.

Marilyn Milos bet on the idea that when given all the facts, more parents would make the right decision, and in my case she was spot on. I am intact, my sons are intact, and my nephews are intact.

Marilyn, I can never thank you enough for what you’ve done for me and for my family. You are an inspiration to us all.

Sources

 


Joel Edwards is a senior at Kennesaw State University, an anthropology major with a broad interest in the humanities and an organic lifestyle.




Vaccines Cause Brain Damage: The Mothers Know

Source: No More Fake News

February 15, 2019

 

I’ve spent many pages laying out how the medical cartel plays semantic games, in order to “prove” vaccines don’t cause “autism.” (See here, here and here.)

There’s a simpler conclusion.

The mothers know.

They know what happened to their children. They don’t need sophisticated analyses. They don’t need disease or disorder labels. They don’t need the very doctors who administered the vaccines turning around and lying to them.

And the lying is vicious. It’s coming out of the mouths of physicians who are indifferent to human life.

Doctors, underneath their layers and layers of hostile fakery, know the truth, too.

So does the CDC. That agency spends billions defending the indefensible.

William Thompson, the CDC whistleblower who admitted to gross fraud and lying, in order to exonerate the toxic MMR vaccine…he knows, too.

He knows the fraud is rampant inside the CDC. He knows it isn’t just a matter of one subset of data that was omitted in one study.

The vaccine manufacturers know, too. Long ago, they consummated a deal with the US government to forbid citizens from filing lawsuits as a result of vaccine damage. That was the whole point: vaccines inflict damage; let the federal government and the taxpayer carry the burden of financial compensation.

And the labyrinthine system through which a parent must pass, when filing a petition for compensation, is an affront to human dignity.

In that “court,” the full semantic shell game is on view.

“You say your child was severely damaged by a vaccine? First, you must prove the child developed a recognized and labeled neurological disorder. Then you must prove that a vaccine can and did cause that specific disorder. We have erected all sorts of roadblocks to keep you stymied…”

This is a grotesquery. The people who run this system should be in prison for the rest of their lives.

But regardless, the mothers know. They know when and how and why their child withdrew from the world, and was, afterward, never the same.

It was a vaccine.

An empire can be built, and has been built, to avoid that stark truth.

The CDC is the Orwellian Ministry of Truth of the empire. It lies about case numbers of diseases—inflating them—in order to sell vaccines.

It holds meetings to discuss how to frighten the public into getting vaccines.

It beats the drum every hour of every day to assure us that vaccines are the wonder of modern science. Safe and effective. Safe and effective.

The CDC’s propaganda allies and their chosen experts attack the “anti-vaccine people” as close cousins to terrorists.

At the center of this storm stand the mothers.

They know.

They live with their knowledge. They care for their children, who have been driven out of the futures they would have had by poison.

Nothing can shake the mothers’ knowledge.

Not the doctors, not the fake experts, not the government-compensation overseers, not the CDC, not smooth-talking television anchors, not teachers, not school counselors, not school administrators, not city “officials”, not neighbors, not friends, not family.

The mothers know.

And if by some great effort, against odds, as they continue to care for their vaccine-damaged children, they organize and rise up, you who are lying to them and passing them off as inconsequential will know they are coming.

You’ll feel the nightmare you’re perpetuating turn around and engulf you.

And somewhere inside you, you’ll recognize this is what justice is.




Maine’s Vaccine Exemption Removal Bill Has Been Released, and It Is the Most Draconian Bill Filed In the USA Yet

Source: Age of Autism

 

by Ginger Taylor, MS
February 12, 2019

 

LD 798, An Act To Protect Maine Children and Students from Preventable Diseases by Repealing Certain Exemptions from the Laws Governing Immunization Requirements

The Bill simply removes all religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions, for anyone, from anywhere in the Maine Department of Education and the Maine Health and Human Services law.

“SUMMARY
Current law allows exemptions from immunization requirements based on religious or philosophical beliefs for students in elementary and secondary schools and schools and health care facilities. This bill removes those exemptions. The bill also directs the Department of Education and the Department of Health and Human Services to remove any immunization exemptions based on religious or philosophical beliefs from their rules and requires the Department of Education to adopt rules allowing a student who is covered by an individualized education plan and has elected a philosophical or religious exemption from immunization requirements to continue to attend school under the existing exemption as long as an appropriate medical professional provides a statement that the medical professional has provided information on the risks and benefits associated with the choice to immunize.”

“School” means any public or private, post-secondary school in the State including, but not limited to colleges, universities, community colleges and schools for the health professions.”

This is daycare, preschool, k-12, colleges, nursing schools, medical schools… ALL SCHOOLS, public and private, IEP or not, 504 or not.

Medical exemptions will remain restricted, the most narrow in the country and are next to impossible to get in Maine.
Read here.

There is a carve out to grandfather current IEP kids until they graduate, but next year, kindergartners with IEPs will be denied FAPE. Even children with cancer will not get a legal medical exemption from DTaP or TDaP.

It also extends to staff of medical facilities, and even declarations of state emergencies.

Maine can also add required vaccines to the schedule by fiat, without passing a law, and without public hearings. So in June you may leave school, only to come back in September to find that Gardasil has been mandated for school and you cannot opt out.

To sum up, it completely removes religious and philosophical exemptions in Maine.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, all religious sects and all people of conscience will be forced to inject WI-38, MRC-5, RA237 and other morally objectionable material into their own bodies and the bodies of their own children.

We will be forced to buy and use Stanley Plotkins products.

We urge Mainers to Call your legislator today and demand that he or she oppose this bill.

We urge you to call all the Mainers you know and tell them to get to Augusta, as often as possible, to walk the halls and talk to legislators.

This bill has to be defeated.  For all states’ sake.




The Facts About Measles

 

Articles in the media aimed at drumming up fear and whipping the public into a frenzy about nothing is happening with greater frequency. Such is the case with the latest “measles epidemic” in WA state. Headlines include dire warnings about the “deadly” measles with the solution being more vaccination. One shot for your child and he/she is saved! What could be easier?

…vaccine injuries can and do happen.

While instilling fear, rarely do any of these mainstream media announcements alert parents to the downsides of vaccination. And, should something go horribly wrong with the vaccination of their child, they are on their own as vaccine manufacturers are liability free due to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). It is a disservice because the fact is vaccine injuries can and do happen. To date, this program has paid out in excess of $4 billion dollars injuries.

According to a Medalerts search of the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database as of 2/5/19, the cumulative raw count of adverse events from measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines alone was: 93,929 adverse events, 1,810 disabilities, 6,902 hospitalizations, and 463 deaths. What is even more disturbing about these numbers is that VAERS is a voluntary and passive reporting system that has been found to only capture 1% of adverse events.

Several studies have found significant risks of serious conditions following the MMR-II vaccine. These studies have revealed an elevated risk of seizures, Type 1 diabetes, and thrombocytopenia (a serious autoimmune bleeding disorder) following MMR-II or MMRV vaccination. One study reported that infants who received the combination measles, mumps, rubella and varicella vaccine (MMRV) had an even a higher risk of seizures following the vaccination and recommended that providers who recommend MMRV should communicate to parents that it increases the risk of fever and seizure over that already associated with measles-containing vaccines.

The manufacturer’s package insert lists all of these conditions as potential adverse reactions to the MMR-II vaccine.  These serious and sometimes deadly adverse events should not be taken lightly by parents or the media.

A person is 100 times more likely to die by lightening strike than to die by measles.

In an effort to add perspective to what the risk is of contracting the measles we pulled together a list of reported annual deaths in the U.S. A person is 100 times more likely to die by lightning strike than to die of measles. And that is one that is closest to the risk of measles death.

More Facts and Resources

Here are a few CHD articles and research that help to build understanding about measles, risks of vaccination, herd immunity, and the benefits of natural vs. artificial immunity:

When it comes to any medical intervention, parents deserve the truth. They deserve to know the risks vs. benefits. And they deserve the right to refuse any vaccination for themselves or their child. Mandated vaccines are in direct opposition to informed consent, the number one tenet of the Nuremberg Code:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

It is wrong for the media, CDC and other public health officials to misrepresent the facts when it comes to measles or any other “epidemic.”




Vaccine-Induced Disease Now a Top Global Health Threat for 2019 and Beyond

Source:  NewsTarget

by S.D. Wells
January 31, 2019

 

Contrary to what the propaganda-spreading World Health Organization (WHO) purports, modern day vaccines are responsible for more deaths than the diseases they are intended to create immunity against. This is a fact based on sound science. Let’s review some examples, and then we’ll discuss shedding – the common way infectious diseases are spread by children and teens during the first two weeks after they are injected with multiple strains of diseases, when their own immune systems are severely compromised, as are the other vaccinated children around them.

First off, there have been 127 deaths caused by the measles vaccine in the past 15 years, but only 2 deaths caused by the measles disease itself. Secondly, just take a look at GlaxoSmithKline’s (GSK) 6-in-1 jab called “Infanrix Hexa” (meaning six diseases are injected into a baby’s muscle tissue all at once – a science phenomena no studies have ever shown to be safe).

That toxic GSK hexa-jab has killed three dozen infants already, and over 2,000 reports have flooded in regarding adverse reactions (of which 500 were termed “serious”). This immunization combo is deadly, but the mass media has buried these reports, as usual, so hardly a soul knows to avoid this shot like the modern-day plague.

Then there’s the most toxic and deadly vaccine of all – the influenza vaccine, a.k.a. the flu shot. Damage from the flu shot is responsible for the majority of the secretive vaccine court’s payouts in settlements that have breached a mind-blowing (pun intended) $4 billion (the number increased vastly since 2016). Yes, you read that right.

Recently, a Las Vegas man became paralyzed and blind the day after he got the flu jab. Could it be because many flu shots still contain up to 50 parts per million (ppm) of mercury, listed as “thimerosal?” The guy was perfectly healthy before he got the vaccine. Now he can’t breathe, speak, or walk on his own anymore. Is the vaccine worth the risk? Most people with even a partially functional immune system can beat the flu in a few days.

No doubt the flu vaccine itself is a global health threat, especially since the CDC recommends it for pregnant women. Is there a coupon in the vaccine insert for Planned Parenthood that comes with that jab? If so, New York State will be the first to offer that deal.

The shedding pandemic exposed

Folks, “safety in numbers” is a myth. You think it’s safe for your babies to sit and wait with you in a doctor’s office waiting room, playing with germ-laden toys, while everyone around you is contaminated with the flu, hepatitis B, and other viruses they’re shedding from the vaccines they recently got jabbed into their muscle tissue?

All vaccine proponents always blame unvaccinated children or teens when a disease starts spreading around a school, theme park, or college. Why? That’s what they hear on TV, read in the MSM lying newspapers, or heard from their doctor or nurse, who got the script straight from Big Pharma.

It’s all fear-based propaganda to sell more toxic vaccines. Now the World Health Organization is spreading hyper-propaganda about the unvaccinated people of the world being one of the greatest health threats to society, when actually the opposite is the case.

Watch this short video and learn why you should fear vaccines and the vaccinated children much more than you should ever worry about the people who avoid getting those toxic jabs:

https://youtu.be/VKSeiAs_A4w

 

Failed theory of “herd safety” exposed

Stop putting your trust in a medical society that profits greatly from you and your family’s sicknesses, and makes zero money from your good health. It’s just common sense. Are you the sheeple in the herd that’s spreading the diseases you’re so afraid to get – the very ones that are swimming in your blood and shedding from your mucus and saliva right now?

The most dangerous time for spreading infectious disease is the first 14 days after a person is injected with that immunization that contains genetically modified versions of the virus, often mixed in dangerous, experimental, untested combinations. The viruses are NOT dead, they are just hibernating inside a formaldehyde formula, waiting to be fed.

The polio vaccine (injected or given as nasal spray) causes new polio cases, including spreading it to the siblings of those vaccinated. The same happens after the measles and flu shots – the disease is shed and spread. History has proven a huge spike in crippled children (47,000 cases reported in India alone in 2011) right after receiving the oral polio vaccine. This means polio vaccines are the leading cause of polio paralysis. Do you really want to wander around in that sickened flock? So much for safety in numbers, huh?

Want to build your immunity (or your children’s) to infectious diseases, pathogens, parasites, viruses, and bacteria, instead of weakening your immunity while spreading all of those infections? Look into natural remedies like elderberry (great for the flu), Vitamin D, Vitamin C, oil of oregano, garlic, cinnamon, licorice root, blackberry seed oil, and of course, colloidal silver. Check out Vaccines.news for more updates on immune system killers that the WHO does NOT want you to know about. This has been a public service announcement from Natural News.

Sources for this article include:

NaturalNews.com

Vaccines.news

News3LV.com

NaturalNews.com

NCBI.nlm.nih.gov




Court Hears Gardasil Science and Moves Forward

Source: Children’s Health Defense

by Lyn Redwood, R.N, M.S.N., President, Children’s Health Defense
January 29, 2019

 

On Wednesday January 9th, I attended Science Day Presentations in the Jennifer Robi vs. Merck and Kaiser Permanente case in Los Angeles Superior Court. I want to report to our community on the outcome of this important event and provide some personal commentary.

It is difficult to describe the feelings of elation and frustration that I experienced during the full day of furious arguments that began at 9:30 am before Judge Maren Nelson. Due to the restrictions of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, my son and thousands of children like him, have never been able to have their injuries acknowledged in a court of law.  This day gave families around the globe whose children’s health was permanently harmed by the HPV vaccine a glimmer of hope that their injuries and suffering would finally be acknowledged. The frustration I felt came from the obvious fact that the science relied on by our federal agencies to approve the HPV vaccine was criminally inadequate and that Jennifer’s injuries and those of the thousands of others like her could have been prevented.

Prior to Science Day, plaintiffs’ attorneys worried that because Judge Nelson threw out a $472 million 2017 jury verdict against Johnson & Johnson for causing ovarian cancer in women exposed to its asbestos-containing baby powders, the Court might not be very receptive to their arguments here. However, Judge Nelson gave scrupulous attention to the science presentations by both sides and clearly seemed to be approaching the Robi case with an open mind.

A red-letter day

After 20 years of advocating for vaccine safety, this was the first time that I’ve watched vaccine science issues adjudicated in a true court of law.  It was truly a red-letter day. Jennifer’s lawyers brilliantly laid bare Merck’s anemic case for Gardasil, dissecting the science in withering presentations challenging both the efficacy and safety of the Gardasil vaccine, and then chronicling the horrifying agency and corporate corruption that lead to its approval.

Jennifer Robi is a 24-year-old former athlete and scholar who has been confined to a wheelchair since receiving her third Gardasil vaccines at age sixteen. She suffers continual uncontrolled neuro/muscular contractions (jerking) and postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) and many other symptoms of systemic autoimmune dysregulation.

Jennifer’s attorney, Sol Ajalat, initially brought her case in Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and then, following a judgment in the program, elected to proceed in civil court. Since VICA (the Vaccine Injury Compensation Act) forbids recoveries for product defect or negligence, Ajalat brought Jennifer’s civil case under the theories that Merck committed fraud during its clinical trials and then failed to warn Jennifer (and, by implication, other injured girls) about the high risks and meager benefits of the vaccine.

In order to support Sol Ajalat and his sons Greg, Larry, and Steve, who compose the Los Angeles firm Ajalat & Ajalat, a blue ribbon A-Team of the nation’s leading plaintiffs’ law firms have joined Jennifer’s trial team. These include the firms most feared by Pharma: Weitz & Luxenberg (countless major pieces of litigation over 30 years), Morgan & Morgan (Vioxx, Phenphen, Breast Implants, Tobacco), Baum Hedlund, (Monsanto $289 million verdict 2018 and the $54 million 2000 verdict against Bayer in Haemophiliac/AIDS case) as well as Children’s Health Defense’s own Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Kim Mack Rosenberg (a co-author of The HPV Vaccine on Trial). The plaintiff’s bar has steered clear of vaccine lawsuits since the 2008 Thimerosal fiasco which nearly bankrupted several big firms. Now, Merck, through its reckless overreaching with Gardasil—a public health flimflam currently emerging as the most dangerous vaccine in history—has brought the nation’s leading trial lawyers back to the brawl.

The three Merck attorneys who made presentations were Dino Sangiamo, Sally Bryan, and Christina Gaarder. Jo Lyn Valoff represented Kaiser.

Among vaccinologists, it’s axiomatic that the duration of immunity correlates directly to the toxicity of the adjuvant; the more toxic the adjuvant, the longer the duration of immunity.

Gardasil’s super-powered aluminum adjuvant

Plaintiffs began the day with a 2.5 hour presentation. Sol Ajalat first introduced Paul Pennock of Weitz & Luxenberg. Pennock ran through a riveting 50-minute slide show demonstrating how Gardasil’s super-powered Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate (AAHS) adjuvant over-stimulated the immune systems of vaccine recipients tipping them into autoimmune conditions in which their redlining immune defenses begin attacking their bodies’ own organs. This “autoimmune process” causes a cascade of illnesses that, in Jennifer Robi’s case, resulted in damage and deterioration in diverse organ systems throughout her body.

Victims like Jennifer are left exhausted as the body fights off disease on multiple fronts.  Pennock explained that vaccine makers add aluminum adjuvants (to weak antigens and a long list of other potentially toxic ingredients) to elicit an immune response, hoping to extend the short-term immunity otherwise provided by most vaccines. Among vaccinologists, it’s axiomatic that the duration of immunity correlates directly to the toxicity of the adjuvant; the more toxic the adjuvant, the longer the duration of immunity. Most vaccines provide immunity for only 5-10 years. Gardasil’s promoters were promising lifelong protection, and needed a super toxic adjuvant that would provide this unprecedented level of protection. After all, Merck was promising regulators, pediatricians and the public that inoculations given to 9-12-year-old girls would provide immunity against a relatively rare cancer that typically doesn’t kill until age 58!

Pennock explained that Merck has refused to disclose the contents of AAHS or to provide samples to independent and university scientists for testing.  AAHS, astonishingly, has never been safety tested by government regulators or by Merck. Studies on animals conducted by world renowned independent scientists like Dr. Chris Exley, Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld, Dr. Chris Shaw and others have found that mice and sheep exposed to aluminum adjuvants, at concentrations comparable to those found in vaccines, develop strange behavioral patterns and illnesses resembling autoimmune diseases.

Using a poisonous placebo in the control group allowed Merck to mask the cascade of injuries suffered by girls in the Gardasil group during the clinical trials.

A parade of deceptive canards

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. next gave the court an explosive 50-minute presentation of 112 disturbing slides describing the parade of deceptive canards that composed Merck’s clinical trials. Kennedy described a series of fraudulent gimmicks employed by Merck to deceive regulators during the clinical trials including the use of a “spiked” extremely toxic AAHS placebo rather than a true inert placebo that is standard for control groups in blue ribbon safety studies for other pharmaceutical products. Using a poisonous placebo in the control group allowed Merck to mask the cascade of injuries suffered by girls in the Gardasil group during the clinical trials.  Half the girls in the Gardasil group and half the girls in the spiked placebo group suffered serious injuries, including several deaths, in the first seven months of the clinical trials, yet Merck was able to claim that reactions in the study group “were similar to the reactions in the placebo group,” and that, therefore, the vaccine was safe. Merck reported most of these serious injuries as “new medical conditions” not adverse events, dismissing any connection to the vaccine by fiat. Information about this parade of grave injuries appears nowhere in the Gardasil package insert.

Merck committed its boldest fraud in its key clinical trial, Protocol 18.  Merck told FDA that Protocol 18 was the single study in which its researchers gave the control group a true inert placebo.  For this reason, FDA declared Protocol 18 “of special interest.”  However, in reality, Merck appears to have taken the precaution of removing half the aluminum from the vaccines administered to this study group. Plus, The Company laced the “placebo” with a witches’ brew of other toxic chemicals. This study, the only “controlled” study that included children in the target cohort of 9-12-year olds, may not have in fact tested the vaccine that Merck went on to inject into millions of young children around the world. Kennedy told the judge that this is not just scientific malpractice, it is outright fraud!

… Merck’s control groups did not reflect the target population for its drug.

Another tactic utilized by Merck was to purge the study group of anyone with the slightest vulnerabilities to the vaccine or its ingredients despite the fact that the vaccine would ultimately be marketed to girls with the very vulnerabilities excluded during the clinical trials.  This precaution allowed the company to mask effects that occur only in vulnerable subgroups.  Mr. Kennedy drew laughter from the large court room audience when he described how Merck had prescreened the study subjects to exclude people with allergies, immunological or nervous disorders, more than 4 lifetime sexual partners, genetic vulnerabilities to cancer or to any other medical condition, or with any hint of general infection, a history of alcohol or drug abuse, or a serious or chronic illnesses, and so forth. Finally, Merck told its researchers to exclude any individual with “any condition which in the opinion of the researchers might interfere with the study objective.” The remaining participants were an elite club of super healthy individuals. “You couldn’t get into the clinical trials unless you were a superhero,” Kennedy told Judge Nelson. “You had to be eligible for the Avengers.” The problem, of course, is that none of the people receiving the vaccine under CDC’s mandate are screened for these vulnerabilities. In other words, Merck’s control groups did not reflect the target population for its drug.

The mayhem caused by Gardasil

Even these flimflams could not conceal the mayhem caused by Gardasil.  Kennedy showed the court data from Merck’s own package insert showing that 2.3 % of the girls receiving the vaccine complained of symptoms of autoimmune disease within 7 months. Since cervical cancer kills only 1.5 Americans in every 100,000, he noted, “Merck’s own data show that the chances of getting an autoimmune disease from this vaccine are 1000 times the risk of dying from cervical cancer.”

Merck’s own data showed that administering the Gardasil vaccine to girls who had previous exposure to HPV actually raised their risk of developing precancerous lesions (or worse) by almost 45%.

Not only did a heartbreaking 50% of the subjects in both the study group and the spiked placebo group experience a serious adverse event within the seven months of the trial, death rates among girls in the study were double background rates. In fact, the rate for girls during the clinical trials (85/100,000) was 37 times the death rate from cervical cancer!  Birth defects among children conceived during the study period were 5x those of the control group and miscarriages were doubled over background rates. Reproductive problems among vaccinated girls were 10x background rates. Finally, Merck’s own data showed that administering the Gardasil vaccine to girls who had previous exposure to HPV actually raised their risk of developing precancerous lesions (or worse) by almost 45%. This revelation is particularly frightening since sexual behavior is only one of many vectors for acquiring HPV. Many children are exposed in the birth canal. Kennedy cited numerous studies showing many very young children are exposed to HPV, including one in which upwards of 34% of girls had exposure to HPV prior to age 10.

Kennedy closed his powerful presentation by chronicling the parade of corrupt conflicts that caused HHS officials to turn a blind eye to the rife fraud that characterized the clinical trials. Merck loaded the two FDA and CDC panels that approved Gardasil, with paid toadies. He showed that the pharmaceutical industry actually pays 45% of FDA’s annual budget and that NIH and its officials own part of the patents to the Gardasil vaccine and collect royalties on every vaccine sold.  NIH collects tens of millions of dollars annually from Gardasil sales.  Finally, 45% of CDC’s budget goes to promoting and purchasing vaccines.  Merck exerts control over the CDC with millions of dollars in contributions to the CDC foundation, which allows funding for pet projects.  This level of support gives Merck the power to also punish the CDC by withholding funding if displeased by the agency.

Jennifer’s illness due to Gardasil

Nicole Maldonado of Baum Hedlund next described the onset of Jennifer’s illness which worsened with each stage of the three vaccine series and how her symptoms were identical to the symptoms seen among hundreds of injured women during the clinical trials around the world, in places as diverse as Japan, Australia, Colombia, and Denmark (where special clinics have been set up to treat Gardasil’s victims), as well as among many girls here in the United States. These symptoms included menstrual irregularities, gastrointestinal dysfunction, musculoskeletal pain, neurological conditions and even death.

One courtroom observer, a concerned mother identifying herself as Rachel Harris said she felt sick to her stomach at the revelations. Jennifer Robi’s mom told me that she felt elated that Mr. Kennedy had mastered the facts so completely and that their family’s story was finally being told.

…Merck’s AAHS adjuvant was safe because of the small quantities of this known neurotoxin in each vaccine.  She told the judge that ‘the dose makes the poison,’ and that even water in large enough doses can be toxic.

The rebuttal

The Defendants’ three-hour rebuttal was mainly toothless. Sangiamo doggedly described six studies, that he claimed were relied upon by the plaintiff, that had been retracted. However, only one of those studies was even mentioned on the plaintiff’s lengthy exhibit list (Plaintiff’s attorneys never referred to it in their briefs) and that study was republished elsewhere after the original journal retracted it under pressure from its pharmaceutical advertisers.

Sangiamo argued that the plaintiff had relied on case studies rather than large scale epidemiological studies of the kind largely funded by industry or the NIH which owns the Gardasil patent and profits on every injection sold.  He cited five of those NIH and industry-authored epidemiological studies that found no causal relationship between Gardasil and autoimmune diseases.  All are plagued by fatal defects such as only looking for a very limited number of potential injuries for a short period of time following exposure to the vaccine, despite the fact that autoimmune diseases can take months or years to manifest.  The authors of these studies had financial ties to Merck.

Finally, Merck’s Sally Bryan rose to the podium to explain to Judge Nelson that Merck’s AAHS adjuvant was safe because of the small quantities of this known neurotoxin in each vaccine.  She told the judge that “the dose makes the poison,” and that even water in large enough doses can be toxic. She pointed out that there are only 225 micrograms of aluminum in each vaccine. To illustrate how small this is, she asked Judge Nelson to imagine a dollar bill – which weighs one gram – cut into 1 million tiny pieces. She pointed out that only 225 of these pieces would be in any Gardasil vaccine, far too little to cause any adverse outcome. So in one breath, Merck was telling Judge Nelson that the amount of aluminum in Gardasil was substantial enough to permanently alter a person’s immune system to prevent cancer for the next half century and, at the same time, small enough to cause no harm.

The path forward

At the end of a long day, Judge Nelson ordered both sides to work out a discovery schedule and to reappear in court on February 7 to resolve any differences.

In Merck’s zealous promotion of the Gardasil vaccine, the company and its allies have shamed parents into vaccinating their children, through a series of misleading ad campaigns which play on parental instincts to protect their children from harm, especially from a disease as frightening as cancer. One commercial depicts young girl and boy actors recounting how they developed cancer from HPV and asking their parents if they knew this could have been prevented. “Did you know – Mom and Dad?”  Jennifer Robi has had the courage to tell a real-life story that the public rarely hears – about the risks of the Gardasil vaccine itself.

Watch RFK, Jr. describe his plan to take this issue to the courts

 

https://youtu.be/w9y-OTaJPOQ

RFK, Jr. (from the video):

“We’re going to fight this battle for you. We’re going to take it to the streets. We’re going to take it to Congress. We’re going to take it to the regulatory agencies. We’re going to force the press to start covering this issue honestly for the first time, and allowing this debate to take place. And above all, we’re going to take it to the court room, and we’re going to win these cases. We’re going to find justice for you, for your families and for our country at last. If we’re going to do this effectively, we need your support.”

www.childrenshealthdefense.org/donate




Shocker: The Dangers of Ultrasound

by Jon Rappoport
January 22, 2019

A book by the great researcher Jim West

 

Every time Jim West (also here) releases a new finding, it is a revelation.

Some years ago, I wrote this about Jim:

“I always find it riveting to come across an independent investigator who is breaking new ground, against all odds. Jim West is such a person. His meticulous analysis of West Nile Disease [in fact caused by toxic pollution, not a virus] has turned the establishment on its head. We should all thank him for his work. If I were the king of Pulitzers, I would give him a dozen. He is what truly deep reporting is all about. In a sane world, his revelations would bring about the firing of scores of so-called medical journalists and disease researchers, and he would be sitting at the top of the heap — not in order to exercise arbitrary power, but simply because he has trumped the lazy and the incompetent and the lying professionals who are supposed to tell us what is going on.”

There are many other things I could say in praise of Jim’s work. Instead, I’ll present an excerpt from the notice of his new book. It’s a book you should have and read: “50 Human Studies, in Utero, Conducted in Modern China, Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography”.

It’s a book that should receive wide notice. It’s a book that should change standard medical practice. It’s a book that can save many lives.


Press Release: May 2015

Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography of Human Studies Conducted in Modern China

“50 Human Studies, in Utero, Conducted in Modern China, Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography”

Jim West has released his unprecedented Bibliography of critical ultrasound research, as a book, available at Amazon.com.

Ultrasound is a highly controversial topic. It can now be said, without hyperbole, that an understanding of its mysteries are essential to the well-being of the individual and the human species.

The word “ultrasound” commonly refers to diagnostic ultrasound, an acoustic technology utilized to view images of the fetus in real time, its position within the mother, and to view the mother’s reproductive organs. It is an economic boon to medical practitioners who advocate its routine use.

Diagnostic ultrasound is widely declared to be “harmless” to the fetus (*), despite some mothers describing via online forums such as The Thinking Mother’s Revolution, vaginal bleeding and pain, and others describing every detail related to ultrasound and pharmaceutical or vaccine associated damage to their child. Ultrasound is now being applied to most of the entire world population during its fetal stage. The health implications are vast in terms of physical and psychological health for the individual and society.

(*) See: “Fetal Ultrasound”, John Hopkins Medicine Health Library.

Ultrasound appears to have set the human specie on a tragic path, due to the subtle and not-so-subtle effects of ultrasound exposure. Critics argue, for example, that the exponential rise in autism incidence is a product of fetal exposure to ultrasound. If they are correct, then it may take many generations to recover from this misguided application of medical technology.

Technical History:

Ultrasound imaging technology for diagnostic examinations evolved from a type of echo-imaging, originally developed as SONAR, a technology invented to detect submarines by pinging sound waves off the submarine hull and electronically measuring the echo, the duration required to reflect ultrasound from the submarine hull back to the source of the ultrasound.

In the medical field, ultrasound has been in use for many decades, employed to generate “echo images” of the fetus. Ultrasound is not ordinary sound, however.

It is a highly unusual form of sound when used for the purpose of prenatal or obstetric diagnostic examinations. Humans ordinarily are capable of hearing sounds in the range of 20 to 20,000 cycles per second (hertz). Ultrasound for fetal examination carries a frequency in the range of 3 to 9 megahertz, millions of cycles per second, above the EMF frequencies of the AM radio band.

Ultrasound imaging technology has supplanted, to an extent, the earlier imaging technology, X-rays. That older technology is now known publicly to be hazardous, to be carcinogenic, however, it took decades for this knowledge to become public. The history of medical X-ray imaging may be a parallel for ultrasound history. X-rays were previously known to be a risk though continuously advocated as harmless by the medical profession.

Hazards Unconfirmed:

Ultrasound is known to have the potential to produce harmful biological effects in the fetus. This has been found via animal and cell studies. However, these hazards have supposedly not been confirmed by human studies. Funding for ultrasound studies has virtually disappeared since the late 1980s. despite the FDA raising ultrasound intensity limits in 1991.

Cibull et al (2013) provides definitive assurance.

“Although laboratory studies have shown that diagnostic levels of ultrasound can produce physical effects in tissue, there is no evidence from human studies of a causal relationship between diagnostic ultrasound exposure during pregnancy and adverse biological effects to the fetus.” — Sarah L. Cibull, BS, Gerald R. Harris, PhD, and Diane M. Nell, PhD. “Trends in Diagnostic Ultrasound Acoustic Output From Data Reported to the US Food and Drug Administration for Device Indications That Include Fetal Applications.” J Ultrasound Med 32 (2013): 1921–32.

Confirmed in China:

Unknown to Western scientists, the hazards of ultrasound have been confirmed in China since the late 1980s, where thousands of women, volunteering for abortion, thousands of maternal-fetal pairs, were exposed to carefully controlled diagnostic ultrasound and the abortive matter then analyzed via laboratory techniques.

From these human studies, Professor Ruo Feng, of Nanjing University, published guidelines in 2000:

“Commercial or educational fetal ultrasound imaging should be strictly eliminated. Ultrasound for the identification of fetal sex and fetal entertainment imaging should be strictly eliminated. For the best early pregnancy, avoid ultrasound.”

Feng is very clear. He is also gentle. He could have written bluntly, “For a lesser quality pregnancy, use ultrasound.” He could have written “fetus” or “child” instead of “pregnancy”.



A New Bibliography:

An unprecedented Bibliography of Chinese ultrasound studies by Jim West, is now available, published as a book with commentary, illustrative graphs and tables. This is a presentation of arcana, i.e., vitally important but unknown scientific studies. The title is, 50 Human Studies Indicate Extreme Risk for Prenatal Ultrasound: A New Bibliography”.

This is the most important bibliography and commentary ever compiled for the field of ultrasound criticism, though for legal reasons, its conclusions and implications should be suspended, pending trustworthy authoritative review.

The book presents human studies conducted in modern China, which examine the results of in utero fetal exposure to diagnostic ultrasound. They far exceed Western science in terms of technical sophistication, era relevancy, volume of work, and number of subjects. They bring empirical evidence for ultrasound hazards.

These studies involve the exposure of over 2,700 maternal-fetal pairs to diagnostic ultrasound. The number of scientists involved are approximately 100. Pregnant women were carefully selected and then exposed to controlled ultrasound sessions. Ethical concerns were carefully observed. Abortive matter was examined via state-of-the-art technology, e.g., electron microscopy, flow cytometry, and various biochemical analysis (immuno- and histo-). The results were compared against the results of sham-exposed pregnant women (exposed at zero intensity).

Chinese scientists measured damage to the brain, kidney, cornea, chorionic villi, and the immune system. They determined the amount of ultrasound exposure required to produce damage to the human fetus, and that amount was found to be very low. Ultrasound hazards to the human fetus were confirmed without doubt.

Western scientists had previously found hazards via animal and cell studies, however, their findings were deemed inconclusive because they were not confirmed by human studies.

Human studies can be of two types: 1) epidemiological studies, i.e., population reviews, and, 2) in utero exposure studies, where abortive matter is evaluated in a laboratory following diagnostic ultrasound exposure to the fetus in the mother.

Western scientists have conducted only a few epidemiological studies, and virtually no human exposure studies. Epidemiological studies are complex, have many statistical variables, and are thus highly vulnerable to biased interpretation. They are often published as moot or statistically insignificant, despite finding patterns of ultrasound damage.

Due to abortion ethics, in utero exposure studies were virtually banned in the Western realm. Within the entire world population, the medical industry has not reported one case of human damage. Thereby, without certain proof, authorities continued on with the assumption that humans were resistant to ultrasound toxicity.

The Chinese studies were unknown in the Western realm and little known even in the East. These represent 23 years of critical research, from 1988 to 2011. Unfortunately, these studies were overwhelmed by a tremendous flood of studies that promote medical and therapeutic innovations for ultrasound.

The Chinese studies have remained disconnected from the Western realm, beyond discussion outside of China, being the casualty of cultural and language gaps, and lacking a benefit for industry.

These studies are not generally available through global search engines or medical databases. Even if a researcher knew the titles, the studies would not be found, however, they are available through internal links within the Chinese databases.

The Research Path:

As of 2013, Jim West began his research out of frustration. He had experienced the impossibilities of discussion whenever the topic of ultrasound hazards was attempted, even with his nearest friends. He always brought eloquent documentation, though to no avail. He was met with reflexive blocks. These were passive and aggressive, apparently out of fear of the birth process and a belief that ultrasound would provide assurance.

Realizing that people require authoritative statements, Jim searched for a simple statement of empirical evidence that could not be denied.

After several months of intensive research within the Western scientific realm, he, like others, realized there was little definitive evidence that would satisfy the strict industrial requirements, that is, there were few human studies of any kind. Human studies had been deemed by authorities to be essential for confirmation of hazards. He was aware of the hundreds of animal and cell studies, but they were known to be ill-designed and inconclusive. Excellent critical studies were contradicted by competing studies that declared ultrasound safe. Jim did find a few very strong animal studies that had not been contradicted, but they were ignored or rejected by mere authoritative assertion.

Electrophoresis:

As a working research theory, Jim hypothesized that the ideal modern ultrasound study would utilize a very sensitive type of chromatography, called “electrophoresis”, to detect cell damage caused by ultrasound exposure. Electrophoresis is a simple technology, the moving of electric current through a sample of biological matter in order to draw its various components through a gel-covered plate. The various components separate out through the gel, creating visual patterns for analysis. Electrophoresis is used to analyze biological complexes such as nucleic acid (DNA or RNA). It is employed, for example, in DNA fingerprinting, to identify people, their DNA, to detect their prior presence at a location, by examining samples of blood, hair, or tissue and matching those analytical results with suspects who had been similarly analyzed.

Jim’s focus on electrophoresis lead to a Chinese electrophoresis study of ultrasound causation for DNA fragmentation in abortive matter. The study is published in pristine scientific format and published in English. The study’s references lead to an expanding tree of studies located in Chinese online databases such as CNKI. Though these studies are primarily in Chinese language, many contained an Abstract, translated into English manually or by machine software.

Many studies were reviewed by professor Ruo Feng, of the Acoustic Institute at Nanjing University. He determined guidelines from the studies, stipulating that routine ultrasound be avoided. Only if there were exceptional medical indications should ultrasound be allowed, and at minimum intensity. Sessions should be very brief, no more than 3 minutes, 5 minutes at most. Multiple sessions should be avoided because hazards are cumulative. Sensitive organs were found damaged at 1 minute exposure.

The Chinese studies echo and confirm the earlier, ignored and rejected, 1984 “Consensus Statement”, written and published by the National Institute of Health and signed by the preeminent American scientists of that era. (See: NIH, “Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging in Pregnancy: NIH Consensus Development Conference Statement” (February 6, 1984))

Currently, the medical industry loudly claims that ultrasound is “harmless” while it advocates routine ultrasound for pregnant women and even prepubescent girls. It is not uncommon for ultrasound sessions to use intensities and durations far above those used in the Chinese studies.

Jim has done the math and graphically illustrates the evidence, for example, this comparison of Western critical studies and Chinese studies in terms of durations to damage, when subjected to the average device intensity for a common diagnostic ultrasound session in B-mode. These durations are approximated extrapolations.

Jim’s ultrasound causation model is fully compatible with the vaccine model, because it includes the concept of toxic synergy, and ultrasound is an effective synergist. Ultrasound is theoretically capable of initiating fetal vulnerabilities to subsequent toxic exposure. Thus the risk of subsequent exposure to vaccines, birth drugs, antibiotics and other environmental stressors would be raised by prenatal ultrasound, not in addition, but as a multiplier. (Emphasis added)




CDC Expert Vaccine Court Witness Now Claims Vaccines Cause Autism

Source:  VAXXTER

 

A pro-vaccine medical expert who has been utilized by the federal government to help defend liability cases in vaccine court caused controversy last week when he suggested that vaccines might cause autism.

Pediatric neurologist Dr. Andrew Zimmerman has served as an expert medical witness for the government on many occasions. He has a history of sworn testimony citing that vaccines do not cause autism. But in a new sworn affidavit, Dr. Zimmerman seems to take a 180 turn on his prior admissions.

He now claims that during a group of 5,000 vaccine-autism heard in court on June 15, 2007, he says he told DOJ lawyers during a side-bar that there are “exceptions in which vaccinations could cause autism.”

“I explained that in a subset of children, vaccine-induced fever and immune stimulation did cause regressive brain disease with features of autism spectrum disorder,” Dr. Zimmerman now states.

Dr. Zimmerman claims that DOJ lawyers quickly fired him when they realized his position supported even a remote possibility of a connection. This firing helped to conceal the exchange between Dr. Zimmerman and DOJ lawyers to the public at large. Additionally, it appears that the DOJ intentionally misrepresented Dr. Zimmerman’s opinions in future litigations.

According to TheHill, records show that on June 18, 2007, a DOJ attorney to whom Dr. Zimmerman spoke told the vaccine court: “We know [Dr. Zimmerman’s] views on the issue. … There is no scientific basis for a connection” between vaccines and autism.

Dr. Zimmerman says the DOJ’s position is “highly misleading.”

Rolf Hazlehurst is the parent of one autistic child whom Dr. Zimmerman states got autism from vaccination. Hazlehurst is a criminal prosecutor who told congressional staffers in 2013 that “if I did to a criminal in a court of law what the United States Department of Justice did to vaccine-injured children, I would be disbarred and I would be facing criminal charges. I think that scared the hell out of them.”




Attkisson Report Reveals Threats Against Congressmen Investigating Autism-Vaccine Link

Source: The Vaccine Reaction

by Barbara Loe Fisher
Published January 9, 2019

 

A Jan. 6, 2018 news report produced by investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson for Sinclair Broadcast Group revealed that retired congressmen Dan Burton (R-IN) and Dr. Dave Weldon (R-FL) and current Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL) were pressured by colleagues or threatened by PhRMA lobbyists to back away from examining vaccine safety issues, including the reported link between vaccines and autism.1 The report also revealed that, in 2007, federal government officials suppressed and then misrepresented the expert opinion of pediatric neurologist Dr. Andrew Zimmerman that vaccines can cause autism during U.S. Federal Court of Claims hearings evaluating vaccine-related autism claims filed in the federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP).2

“You really need to… back off on this”

The “Vaccination Debate” report was featured on “Full Measure,” Sinclair’s investigative news show anchored by Attkisson, who said, “We spoke to 11 current and former members of Congress and staff who claim they faced pressure, bullying or threats when they raised vaccine safety questions.” Physician and former Rep. Dave Weldon commented, “It would typically be in a hallway or the street and people would come up to you and say, “You know, you really need to, you know, back off on this. It could be, it could be bad for the community or bad for the country or bad for you.”

Attkisson also interviewed Rolf Hazelhurst, whose now 18-year old son, Yates, suffered severe vaccine reactions as a child and regressed into chronic poor health that was eventually diagnosed as autism. Hazelhurst, a criminal prosecuting attorney, said, “And at first, I didn’t believe it. I did not think that, I did not believe that vaccines could cause autism. I didn’t believe it.”

US Government Suppresses Pediatric Neurologist’s Expert Opinion on Autism-Vaccine Link

After Rolf Hazelhurst learned that Dr. Zimmerman’s expert opinion was discounted and misrepresented by federal government officials for the purpose of denying federal vaccine injury compensation to his son3 and thousands of other children with vaccine related autism,4 Hazelhurst told congressional staffers at a 2013 briefing, “If I did to a criminal in a court of law what the United States Department of Justice did to vaccine injured children, I would be disbarred and I would be facing criminal charges.” He and environmental activist attorney Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. have filed a fraud complaint with the Justice Department Inspector General about the withholding of Zimmerman’s expert opinion on vaccine-induced autism in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims proceedings.

The “Vaccine Court” and the Class Action Omnibus Autism Proceeding

The Secretary of Health and Human Services is legally represented by Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (“Vaccine Court”) when federal health officials contest vaccine injury compensation claims filed under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, a law that was passed by Congress in 1986 and substantively altered by congressional amendments between 1987 and 2016.5 The 1986 Act gave partial liability protection to vaccine manufacturers but protected a vaccine injured person’s right to file a vaccine injury lawsuit in civil court if federal compensation was denied or was inadequate to provide for lifetime needs or if it could be proven that the vaccine manufacturer could have made a vaccine safer (design defect). In a split decision in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court effectively barred all vaccine injury lawsuits, including for manufacturer design defect.6 7

Under the 1986 Act, special masters are appointed by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims to adjudicate federal vaccine injury compensation claims. The “Vaccine Court” oversaw a seven-year class action type Omnibus Autism proceeding that concluded in 2009 and threw out more than 5,500 vaccine injury claims for children with vaccine-related autism.8 The Court rejected the argument made by plaintiff’s lawyers that vaccine-related autism is caused by mercury preservatives in vaccines and/or MMR vaccine or a combination of both.9

The gutting of the 1986 Act’s safety and compensation provisions by congressional amendments, the Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Supreme Court has been strongly criticized by the National Vaccine Information Center for many years.10 11 12 The Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report in 2014 analyzing the VICP’s operation and was critical of how long it took for compensation claims to be resolved, primarily because most vaccine injury claims are contested by DHHS.13

Sharyl Attkisson: The Reporter Who Goes Where No One Else Will

A CBS correspondent for more than 20 years, Sharyl Attkisson is a five-time Emmy Award winner and recipient of the Edward R. Murrow award for investigative reporting and Pillar Human Rights Journalism Award for “Fearless Reporting in the Face of Government Retaliation.” From 1996-2001, she hosted a half-hour weekly medical news magazine on PBS entitled “Health Week.” She is the best-selling author of the books Stonewalled (2014) and The Smear (2017). After leaving CBS in 2014, Attkisson joined Sinclair to head up the investigative journalism team staffing “Full Measure” to explore government waste, national security and whistleblower reports on government and corporate abuse.14
For more than a decade, Attkisson has authored and produced reports on a number of vaccine safety issues, including these:

She presented a Ted Talk on “Is Fake News Real?” in February 2018.15 Currently, she has a lawsuit pending against the DOJ and FBI based on First and Fourth Amendment rights alleging improper government surveillance of a private citizen journalist, including electronic surveillance of her computer, cyber stalking and cyber attacks.16

View the “Full Measure” report on The Vaccination Debate here




Video Shows What Mercury Does to a Brain Neuron in Just 20 Minutes

by
January 9, 2019
Source

 

In Brief

  • The Facts:Mercury is present in our environment everywhere, and one of the main sources is vaccines. It’s extremely toxic and wreaks havoc on biology, in any amount, as shown by the video below which illustrates the effects it can have on brain neurons.
  • Reflect On:Despite the fact that heavy metal contamination is one of the biggest medical problems today, why does the medical industry continue to ignore it? Is it because multiple industries, services and products would lose profits, namely Big Pharma?

Mercury is one of the most toxic substances known to the human race, and any scientist or doctor would agree. That being said, there is a dangerous scientific theory that plagues the medial industry: That it’s somehow ok to be exposed to ‘trace amounts’ of mercury. This makes absolutely no sense, because when it comes to the toxicity of substances like mercury, any amount can have a detrimental effect on human biology. Sure, you may not die, but mercury poisoning is very real and can have significant long-term health effects. And how big is a ‘trace’ amount of mercury compared to the size of a neuron or a neuronal pathway, anyways?

What’s really concerning is that mercury is still added to many vaccines, including some flu shots as well as some vaccines that are administered to the elderly and those in third world countries. The bioaccumulation of these substances, including after being given a vaccine, has never been studied. Heavy metal contamination is one of the biggest problems today, yet the medical industry completely ignores it, thus there is very little awareness surrounding this issue.

In nature, toxic metals generally are bound with other elements rather than being present in their pure form. However, with the advent of large-scale industrial processes to extract metals from naturally occurring compounds, humans let the genie out of the bottle, contributing significantly to the distribution of mercury, aluminum and other heavy metals in the environment. When released from nature’s semi-protective hold, these “invariably toxic” metals wreak havoc on living systems, including humans, animals and plants alike.

Modern-day scientists have been amassing evidence of mercury’s toxicity for decades, with a growing focus in recent years on the metal’s association with neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism spectrum disorder (ASD). A new review article in the multidisciplinary journal Environmental Research pulls together a wide body of literature with the aim of summing up current research and emerging trends in mercury toxicology. Geir Bjørklund, the study’s lead author, is the founder of Norway’s non-profit Council for Nutritional and Environmental Medicine and has published prolifically on topics related to heavy metals, autoimmune disorders and ASD. – Robert F Kennedy Jr.

Mercury is present everywhere in our environment, and exposure to mercurial compounds is now widespread, despite feeble attempts to ban some uses. Bjørklund et al.’s review covers all three categories of mercury: elemental, organic and inorganic. Exposure to volatile elemental mercury can come about as a result of occupational contact or vapor from dental amalgam fillings. Organic mercury—the most frequent form of exposure, according to Bjørklund and colleagues—exists as methylmercury (in fish) and ethylmercury (in the vaccine preservative thimerosal). Coal-fired power plants send inorganic mercury into the environment, where the toxic metal works its way up the marine food chain. Mercury plays no constructive metabolic role whatsoever, and humans have not evolved effective mechanisms to excrete it. Children with ASD have a particularly hard time detoxifying and excreting mercury.

Below is a video  from the University of Calgary, in which researchers look at a neuron isolated from snail brain tissue. In the video, it’s displaying normal, linear growth. Growth “cones” in all species have identical structure and behavioural characteristics. So, regardless of the species, this is what mercury does to the body.

 

 

The Vaccine Issue

Mercury has been used in vaccines for decades, and what’s worse is that there have been no appropriate safety tests, it’s simply presumed to be safe. Here is a quote from Dr. Jose G. Dores, a professor at the University of Brasilia’s Department of Nutritional Sciences who recently published a study in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health which further emphasizes my point. In the study, he offers the following observation:

“Despite their long use as active agents of medicines and fungicides, the safety levels of these substances have never been determined, either for animals or for adult humans—much less for fetuses, newborns, infants, and children. ”

A couple of years ago, Robert F. Kennedy Junior and Robert DiNero actually offered a $100,000 reward for any scientist, journalist or doctor who could present one paper or proof that mercury is safe to inject into children. At that conference, they brought more than 100 peer-reviewed studies showing how it isn’t.

A fairly recent Meta-Analysis published in the Journal Bio Med Research International points out what all of these other studies did as well:

“The studies upon which the CDC relies and over which it exerted some level of control report that there is no increased risk of autism from exposure to organic Hg in vaccines, and some of these studies even reported that exposure to Thimerosal appeared to decrease the risk of autism. These six studies are in sharp contrast to research conducted by independent researchers over the past 75+ years that have consistently found Thimerosal to be harmful. As mentioned in the Introduction section, many studies conducted by independent investigators have found Thimerosal to be associated with neurodevelopmental disorders. Considering that there are many studies conducted by independent researchers which show a relationship between Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders, the results of the six studies examined in this review, particularly those showing the protective effects of Thimerosal, should bring into question the validity of the methodology used in the studies.” (source)

Do Injected Metals Stay In The Body?

Scientists recently discovered that injected aluminum from vaccines gets carried by macrophages (a type of white blood cell) and transported into various organs throughout the body, eventually accumulating in the brain, where it can still be detected one year after injection (as found in animal models). This study was the first of it’s kind, as pharmaceutical studies have never actually looked to see where the aluminum goes.

After this, the scientists opened the brains of multiple autistic people and found the highest brain-aluminum content ever measured in brain tissue. If you inject your child with a vaccine that contains aluminum, it does not exit the body. This implicates aluminum in a variety of neurodevelopment disorders early and later on in life. It also makes you wonder about the bioaccumulation of all of the other ingredients often found in vaccines such as mercury, aborted human fetal cells, serum from aborted calf fetus blood, cells from army worms, cells from monkey kidneys, cells from dog kidneys, mouse brain, chicken embryos, gelatine, Formaldehyde, MSG, egg protein, antibiotics, nanoparticles that pollute almost all vaccines, and more. Keep in mind that all vaccines have different ingredients within them, so these would only be found in some vaccines, not all.

You can read more about aluminum and access those studies in the article linked below:

Brain Imaging Shows Autistic Brains Contain High Amounts of Aluminum

The Takeaway & The Solutions

The takeaway here is to recognize that it’s ok if you choose to not vaccinate your child. There are multiple reasons more and more parents are doing this.

The idea that vaccines aren’t entirely safe gained a lot of attention when one of the lead authors of a 2004 study came forward. His name is Dr. William Thompson, a senior researcher at the CDC who co-authored one of the most widely cited studies to debunk any link between the MMR vaccine and autism. The study allegedly found:

“The evidence is now convincing that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine does not cause autism or any particular subtypes of autism spectrum disorder.”(source)

10 years later, he countered the original study, arguing:

“The [CDC] co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the [MMR vaccine] study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room and reviewed and went through all the hard copy documents that we had thought we should discard and put them in a huge garbage can.” (source)

So, it’s not only the science, but the corruption involved too.

If you have been vaccinated or you have chosen to vaccinate your children, it’s important to note that you can use cilantro, spirulina, and other natural substances to detox heavy metals from the body. It simply takes a little research on your part, but it’s not hard to find.

At the end of the day, more and more parents are choosing to not vaccinate their children. The idea that unvaccinated children pose a threat to vaccinated children is completely false, because that’s not how herd immunity works. Nevertheless, the concept of herd immunity is often used to coerce parents into vaccinating their children.

It’s wonderful to see more health conscious parents, and I do hope this trend continues to grow. We must address heavy metal contamination in our environment and create awareness around this subject, especially as the medical industry and Big Pharma continue to ignore it.




Vaccine Contaminants, Nanotechnology, and Cancer

Source: VAXXTER

by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, ABIHM

 

Over the last 17 years, I’ve read hundreds of medical journal articles on the problems associated with vaccines. I have written and spoken about vaccine contaminants – stray viruses, aluminum, mercury, polysorbate 80, animal cells, and so on. I have often wondered “What else is coming through that needle?”

This article, “New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines: Micro and Nano-contamination”published on January 23, 2017, in the peer-reviewed journal, the International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination absolutely blew me away.

Here is a snapshot from this must-read, full-text article:

A team of scientists in Italy decided to examine batches of vaccines, looking for contaminants not listed as ingredients. 44 types of vaccines manufactured in Italy and France were analyzed using an Environmental Electron Scanning Microscope. This method was chosen because the matter can be separated into either organic debris (called aggregates) or inorganic debris (called clusters). The identified particles were counted three times by three different operators, with an error rate of less than 10%. They found inorganic contaminants in every single one. 

The presence of micro- and nanosized particulate matter, composed of inorganic chemicals, metals and combination elements whose presence is inexplicable. 

The particles are foreign bodies, and can produce a chronic inflammatory reaction because the particles cannot be degraded. The tiny nanoparticles can enter the cell nuclei and interact with cellular DNA.

The inorganic particles are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means they are biopersistent. They can induce immediate effects or the effects may be delayed for a long time after administration. 

Indentifying Aluminum and NaCl is obvious because they are commonly used in vaccines and they are declared components, but the other materials are not supposed to be in vaccines or in any other injectable drug.

In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd. They have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like form randomly, for example, when waste is burnt. In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable, let alone in vaccines given to infants. 

Wow.

While the entire article was disturbing, I found this little paragraph to be the most eye-popping of all:

  • Feligen, the only veterinary vaccine tested, proved to be the only sample free from inorganic contamination, while Allergoid generates a layer of inorganic salts [aluminum] so thick that it does not allow to detect other particulate contaminants.

Why would a shot used for allergies (Allergoid) be loaded with aluminum, which is known to cause allergies?

Why would a cat vaccine have no contaminants, while vaccines destined for humans are loaded with toxic particulate matter?

If these vaccine contaminants are due to sloppy manufacturing, the animal vaccine should be contaminated with the same elements, which includes titanium, tungsten, stainless steel, chromium, nickel, aluminum, iron and a very long list of combination formulated compounds such as SiAlSBaFe (silicon + aluminum + sulfur + barium + iron), a particle found in the European flu shot, Agrippal, and AlSiMgTiMnCrFe (aluminum + silicon +magnesium + titanium + manganese + chromium + iron) a particle found in Repevax, one of many European DTaP vaccines.

On a side note, Repevax is one nasty vaccine. In addition to the large particle named above, the vaccine contains diphtheria and tetanus toxoid, 4-in-1 pertussis antigens, and three polio viruses. The vaccine is produced in VERO cells from African monkeys. It has residual formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, streptomycin, neomycin, polymyxin B and bovine serum, all used during the manufacturing process. For good measure, 1.5mg of aluminum phosphate is used as an adjuvant and polysorbate 80 and phenoxyethanol are present as excipients. It is approved for use in children 3yrs of age and over, adolescents and adults. Would you want this injected into your body, or the body of your child?

 

Table 1. Summary of types of nanoparticles found in 44 tested vaccines

What about these metals?

According the article, “Toxicity and Carcinogenicity of Essential and Non-Essential Metals,” the metal particulates identified in these vaccines could be causing serious harm. Here are three:

  • Nickel:
    • In vitro cell transformation studies have provided fairly conclusive evidence that nickel can be carcinogenic in humans and animals. (p. 34)
    • a potent inducer of DNA lesions, sites of damage in the base-pairing or structure of DNA. (p. 35)
  • Chromium
    • the carcinogenic and mutagenic effects of chromium are without question (p. 15)
  • Lead
    • Children can develop CNS problems when exposed to inorganic lead
    • Lead does not penetrate the CNS of adults as readily as it does children, but the peripheral nervous system of adults is affected by lead, leading to peripheral motor neuropathies (p. 16)

I have long believed that the chemicals or viruses – or something else – in vaccines contributed to the spectrum of brain injuries seen in both children and adults. The frontal lobe of the brain, the area behind the forehead, is where empathy is expressed. If this area is damaged, a personality disorder can emerge where a person can no longer appreciate or comprehend the emotions of another. Without compassion, they can intentionally harm others without regret.

Are we seeing this today in our society, in many of our young people? Vaccination at birth with the hepatitis B vaccine begain in 1991…26 years ago. The ramp up of the vaccine schedule started then and today, children are subjected to 50 doses of 14 vaccines before age 6, and 69 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18. Across the US, the number of college students taking antidepressants skyrocketed between the 1990s and 2005. Estimates vary, but it has been estimated that up to 50% of all students seen at student health centers are given a prescription. The violence on college campuses has grown exponentially. One in 5 women and one in 16 men are sexually assaulted on a campus. Rape is the most under-reported crime; 63% of sexual assaults are not reported to police.

Are the inorganic contaminants in vaccines delivering a knock-out punch, leading to brain injury specifically in the frontal lobe?

Could vaccines finally be proven to be the smoking gun in both bad health and bad behavior?

The next step is testing all approved vaccines being used in the US. Until that can be done, a complete moratorium on all vaccination should be ordered to save the next – and current – generation of children.




Robert F. Kennedy, Jr: Vaccine Big Pharma Has Total Legal Immunity

Source: Giza Death Star

by Joseph P. Farrell
January 3, 2019

There is no doubt that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had a good year last year. Indeed, the son of the infamously murdered Senator and former U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy Sr., has for some reason been emboldened to remark last year that he did not believe the official story of his father’s untimely murder shortly after winning the hotly-contested 1968 California Democratic Primary. Indeed, who does believe that story. It has more magic bullets flying around inside the pantry of the Ambassador Hotel than the murder of his uncle, former president John F. Kennedy.

RFK Jr also won a stunning victory in a lawsuit against Monsanto, and yet another stunning legal victory against the vaccine industry, opening up many documents that demonstrated an astonishing degree of malfeasance and inept, if not deliberately bad, science.

More recently, Mr. Kennedy spoke to Fox Network’s Tucker Carlson on the legal protections afforded to Big Pharma and the vaccine industry, and it’s a stunner(thanks to Mr. V.T for sharing this article):

Robert F. Kennedy Jr Drops Vaccine Truth Bomb Live On TV

It’s worth noting what he said to Carlson:

“The pharmaceutical industry is so powerful,” he explained. “They give $5.4 billion a year to the media. They’ve gotten rid of the lawyers, so there is no legal interest in those cases. They have really been able to control the debate and silence people like me.“

Asked how things could get this bad, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explained that Congress granted Big Pharma “blanket legal immunity” when it comes to vaccines.

Big Pharma became a law unto themselves. They can put toxic ingredients in your vaccines, they can seriously injure your child – but you cannot sue them.

“What you have to understand is that the vaccine regimen changed dramatically around 1989.

Hmmmn…. 1989, wouldn’t that be during the administration of G.H.W. “Poppy” and “New World Order” Bush? But I digress… back to Mr. Kennedy:

The reason it changed, Tucker, is that Congress, drowning in pharmaceutical industry money, did something they have never done for any other industry – they gave blanket legal immunity to all the vaccine companies.

And who had to sign any such legislation? Why, the same guy whose administration also gave use the “substantial equivalence” opening the floodgates for GMOs to be introduced into the food supply. But I digress again…

“So that no matter how sloppy the line protocols, no matter how absent the quality control, no matter how toxic the ingredients, or egregious the injury to your child, you cannot sue them.

“So there’s no depositions, there’s no discovery, there’s no class action suits. All of a sudden vaccines became enormously profitable.”

The enormous profits in the unregulated industry meant Big Pharma companies raced each other to produce new and unnecessary vaccines to pump into newborn children – often dozens at a time.

Now, all of this raises a question in my mind, and it occurred to Catherine Austin Fitts in our recent Solari-year-end-wrap-up conversation (which we hope will soon be available on Solari.com and in the members’ area of this website): What has emboldened Mr. Kennedy to make such statements now, not only about big pharma, but about his murdered father? As he stated on the Carlson interview, it is only the second time he has been invited on a major television network to talk about the vaccine industry and vaccine safety. But why, also, invite further ire by only recently talking about his personal thoughts about his father’s murder, and his disbelief in the official narrative that it was the “lone nut-Manchurian patsy” Sirhan Sirhan?

To put the point a bit differently, why does he feel confident enough to speak about any of these things? To do so, particularly if one is a Kennedy, is – I venture to say – a risky business. After all, all of the “brothers” – JFK, RFK Sr., Teddy – are gone. His cousin, JFK Jr., perished in highly suspicious circumstances aboard his private aircraft along with his wife, after apparently making it clear to a few friends that he either planned to investigate, or was investigating, his father’s assassination, and had aspirations for political office.

One can, of course, take the view that Mr. Kennedy is aware of the risks but nonetheless speaking out courageously in spite of them. In doing so, he would certainly be following precedents established by his father and his assassinated presidential uncle.

But perhaps there are circumstances emboldening him as well. Times have changed since those assassinations. Three – and only three – television/radio networks no longer control the flow of information. The deep state playbook is now so transparently obvious that almost every story and government-corporate narrative is questioned almost as soon as it arises. Too many suspicious doctor deaths have raised awareness of the machinations of big pharma and big agribusiness to new levels of cynicism and skepticism.

And there is, I suggest, possibly something else going on: the deep factions are at war. Mr Kennedy alluded to this by calling Big Pharma a “mafia”, and mafia bosses tend to sip brandy and smoke cigars at the table, while their soldiers are shooting at each other on the streets. In short, perhaps it was a subtle signal that the former “truces” are no longer in effect, and that some formerly allied factions are now going after other factions, with whom they were once allied. Perhaps, just perhaps, there are some within “the elite” who are genuinely alarmed at the technocratic, transhumanist, total-absence-of-morality-and-law direction that some globaloneyists want to take things.

Perhaps, but there are, after all, contra-indications. Emanuel-there’s-no-such-thing-as-French-culture-and-please-protest-in-the-traditional-peaceful-French-way-Macron for example. Or Angela-Globaloney-Mad-Madam-Merkel’s recent pronouncement that governments would have to give up their national sovereignty for the glorious sake of the New World Order, and her express statement that government would simply have to ignore their civilian populations and voters to do so. Who better to state the principles of tyranny than a German chancellor(in), huh?

In the meantime, though, kuddos, Mr. Kennedy, for stating with such clarity, the obvious truth that no one wants to confront.

See you on the flip side…




Scientists Conclude Pertussis Vaccine Causes Permanent Brain Damage

Source: The Vaccine Reaction

by Barbara Loe Fisher
Published December 27, 2018

 

BACK TO THE FUTURE: Following is an article from TVR’s historical archives published in the Spring 1990 print edition on a scientific conference sponsored by the National Vaccine Information Center in 1989 evaluating serious complications of pertussis infection and whole cell pertussis vaccine in DPT. 

On September 28-October 1, 1989, the National Vaccine Information Center sponsored an international Workshop on the Neurological Complications of Pertussis and the Pertussis Vaccine. The scientists attending the multidisciplinary workshop concluded that both whooping cough and the current whole cell pertussis vaccine can cause permanent brain damage.

During the three-day workshop, the scientists agreed that toxins within the B. pertussis bacterium, which cause whooping cough and are in the pertussis vaccine, can cause a spectrum of permanent brain damage ranging from learning disabilities to severe retardation and seizure disorders. According to UCLA Professor of Pediatrics and Neurology John Menkes, MD, who coordinated the workshop, it was the consensus of opinion that the neurologic complications of the disease and vaccination are in part caused by the interaction of pertussis toxin and endotoxin present in B. pertussis bacteria.

DPT Convulsions Due to Effects of Toxins

The scientists also concluded that the convulsions which accompany severe cases of whooping cough and which follow vaccination are not solely caused by fever but are likely to be due to the combined effects of pertussis toxin and endotoxin. They also agreed that, although the vaccine may accelerate neurologic signs in some children with an underlying neurologic disorder, in many others no pre-existing brain abnormality exists. The scientists supported replacement of the current whole cell vaccine with less toxic acellular or genetically engineered pertussis vaccines.

Scientists from America and Abroad Attend

The workshop was international in scope and among the 19 scientists who came from Europe and Japan were: British epidemiologist Martin Bellman, MD, who co-authored Britain’s National Childhood Encephalopathy Study (NCES); Swedish epidemiologist Jann Storsaeter, MD, who coordinated the Swedish clinical trials of Japanese acellular vaccine; neuroimmunologist P.O. Behan, MD, of Scotland’s Institute of Neurological Sciences; molecular biologist Toshiaki Katada, PhD, of the Tokyo Institute of Technology; Canadian bacteriologist John Cameron, MD, of the University of Quebec; and French neurologist Jean Aicardi, MD of Hopital des Engants Malades. Also attending was Reno Rappuoli, MD, who represented SCLAVO, an Italian vaccine manufacturer conducting clinical trials in Italy of a genetically engineered pertussis vaccine.

American scientists included pediatric infectious disease specialist James Bass, MD, of Tripler Army Medical Center in Hawaii; bacteriologist Robert Bond, MD, of University of South Carolina; neurologist Anthony Campagnoni, MD, of UCLA; neuropathologist Pasquale Cancilla, MD, of UCLA; statistician David Lane, PhD, of University of Minnesota; behavioral neurologist Marcel Kinsbourne, MD, of Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center; epidemiologist Donald Peterson, of University of Washington; epidemiologist Edward Mortimer, MD, of Case Western Reserve University; neurologist William Oldendorf, MD, of Brentwood VA Hospital; and neurologist Soloman Moshe, MD, of Albert Einstein School of Medicine.

The workshop was held on the grounds of Airlie Foundation located in the Virginia countryside near Washington, D.C. NVIC’s Executive Vice President Barbara Loe Fisher, who assisted Dr. Menkes in coordinating the workshop, emphasized that conclusions reached by the scientists help to clarify the question of whether the pertussis vaccine causes brain damage.

“This workshop brought together 19 of the finest basic science researchers and medical specialists in the world. Their unanimous agreement that toxins in the B. pertussis bacteria definitely have the capability of causing permanent brain damage both during the course of the disease and after vaccination is validation of what parents in our organization have been maintaining for eight years. Health officials in the government and the American Academy of Pediatrics, who maintain the vaccine does not cause permanent brain damage, are deliberately ignoring the evidence.”

A formal summary of the conclusions reached at the workshop will be published in a medical journal.1


References:

1 Menkes JH, Kinsbourne M. Workshop on Neurologic Complications of Pertussis and Pertussis VaccinationNeuropediatrics 1990; 21(4): 171-176.




Scientific Voices Speak Out Unequivocally About Vaccines and Their Dangers

Source:  News Target

by Ethan Huff
December 18, 2018

 

Now that it’s been exposed that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has been lying about the connection between vaccines and autism for at least 14 years, many prominent doctors and health practitioners are now coming forward to corroborate the fact that vaccines are, in fact, harming children.

Dr. Kenneth Aitken, M.D., a child psychologist from Great Britain, recently told The Telegraph that he’s seen autism rates increase in conjunction with the MMR vaccine for measles, mumps, and rubella.

“When I was in training, one in 2,500 (children were autistic),” Dr. Aitken told the U.K. paper. “Now, it is one in 250. At the moment, the only logical explanation is MMR.”

Dr. Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and professor of clinical medicine at the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, has expressed similar feelings on the subject.

“There has been a frightening increase in cases of autism that has not been explained,” she contends. “There are a number of anecdotal reports from parents that symptoms of autism have appeared close to the time of the (MMR) vaccine.”

Beyond just autism, childhood illnesses in general are on the rise. And according to Dr. Harris Coulter, Ph.D., a prominent homeopathic medicine historian and lecturer, vaccines are the most likely culprit.

“Probably 20 percent of American children … suffer from development disability … a large proportion of the millions of U.S. children and adults suffering from autism, seizures, mental retardation, hyperactivity, dyslexia and other … development disabilities owe their disorders to one or another of the vaccines against childhood diseases,” he says.

Even the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons itself says that MMR, along with the hepatitis B vaccine, are far more of a threat than the diseases they supposedly prevent.

Having children simply endure such diseases naturally as they used to do, the group says, would prevent having “10 percent of a generation afflicted with learning disability and/or uncontrolled aggressive behavior because of an impassioned crusade for universal vaccination.”

Many vaccines linked to autism, SIDS, and other childhood illnesses, doctors warn

It’s not just the MMR vaccine that’s causing autism and other learning disabilities, either. The DPT vaccine for diphtheria and pertussis is similarly questionable, according to Dr. Jerome Murphy, M.D., the former head of Pediatric Neurology at Milwaukee Children’s Hospital, who warns that DTP is strongly correlated with causing childhood seizures.

“There is just overwhelming data that there’s an association,” he says.

“Sometimes, the most damning indictment can come right from the conventional medical authorities themselves. According to both the CDC and Merck, manufacturer of the MMR vaccines, adverse reactions from vaccines can include ‘fever, rash, fainting … pancreatitis, diarrhea … vomiting, nausea, coma and permanent brain damage.”

Vaccines are also associated with a deadly childhood disease referred to as “crib death,” or sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Though mainstream health authorities often blame SIDS on unknown factors, studies show that vaccines are more than likely involved.

A paper published by researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles that was sponsored by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that the DPT vaccine is strongly linked to SIDS.

“My suspicion, which is shared by others in my profession, is that the nearly 10,000 SIDS deaths that occur in the U.S. each year are related to one or more of the vaccines that are routinely given to children,” says Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, M.D.

William C. Torch, Director of Child Neurology within the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Nevada, Reno School of Medicine, even went so far as to say that the risks associated with vaccines far outweigh any potential benefits.

“… DPT vaccinations may be a generally unrecognized major cause of sudden infant and early childhood death, and … the risks of immunization may outweigh its potential benefits,” he says.

For more related news, be sure to check out Vaccines.news.

Sources for this article include:

NaturalNews.com

NaturalHealth365.com




Why Doctors (and Newspaper Columnists) Rarely Dare to Question Vaccine Safety

Source: Orthomolecular.org

by Ken Walker, M.D. (Syndicated as W. Gifford-Jones, M.D.)
December 18, 2018

 

(OMNS Dec 18 2018) Do you need excitement in your life? If so, just write a column on the rewards and risks of vaccination. Then find a safe, secure hideout. Pour yourself a drink and wait for those who want to boil you in oil. This scenario happened to me when an editor pulled my syndicated article, balanced I thought, after it was published, due to criticism. https://canadafreepress.com/article/what-you-may-not-know-about-vaccines

Some readers thought I’d been fired.

A professor of medicine in Calgary writes, “I was horrified that you would publish these remarks for unsophisticated readers.” This implies newspaper readers are stupid! Another reader wrote, “Your recent piece is a threat to public health. You should be ashamed for spreading lies and fear.” These are damning comments that must be challenged.

I also received an overwhelming positive response from readers. The general reaction was “Thank God a doctor has finally had the courage to speak out about this matter.” A few predicted I’d be fired. Another wondered why I wasn’t stoned at my front door!

WD from Toronto replied, “I cannot believe your column on vaccines was removed. What is happening in this world? Big pharma has its teeth in everything and people blindly follow. Your column simply advised people to look at both sides of the coin. We are living in a sad time.”

From the Prairie Provinces: “You are one of the brave. All mothers out in the trenches are celebrating your article.” Another reader in Massachusetts claimed that “Dropping the column was an attack on free speech.”

MG writes, “With my first and only flu shot I developed Guillain-Barre disease and became paralyzed. I’ve regained the ability to walk, but have permanent nerve damage. It’s so frustrating to hear that flu shots are safe as one nearly killed me. Thanks for speaking up.”

From Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario: “I’m a registered nurse who worked in Toronto and never took a flu shot. Like you, I take a lot of vitamin C, and also bee pollen to increase immunity.”

A doctor from Mexico says, “I wasn’t taught about immunology and I was impressed and shocked to read about the dangers of vaccines in your column.”

What have critics missed in denouncing this column? Investigators always counsel, “Follow the money to find the answer.” This means following 3.6 billion dollars, awarded to families due to the complications of vaccines. It’s a huge pay out if nothing wrong ever happened.

Critics also make the error in ignoring the fact that no therapy in this world is 100 percent safe. I could never guarantee that my surgical patients would have an uncomplicated recovery. Every day people die of blood clots after surgery and prescription medication. Vaccines are no exception.

Some things like apple pie, motherhood and vaccines have become sacrosanct. And if doctors analyze them they’re immediately damned.

Some critics claim that substantial amounts of mercury are no longer used in vaccines. But mercury even in small quantities is dangerous. Common sense tells us that something in the vaccine triggers occasional complications. To date, we regrettably do not have a utopian 100 percent safe vaccine.

I am a moderate, actually. I’ve previously written that vaccines have thankfully saved countless lives from infectious disease. I have never counseled anyone to refuse vaccines. Rather, the decision should always be made by the patient and his/her doctor. Informed consent should include the possibility of an unexpected, minor or serious complication.

One thing I do know. I’m not related to the Almighty. I therefore can’t be infallible. I also know that readers often request that my column be discontinued when I write about controversial social and medical issues.

In view of what happened should I have bypassed a column on vaccines? I hate hypocrisy, so I’d be the world’s worst hypocrite if I followed the non-controversial path. Medicine is made up of many controversies.

An editor 45 years ago counseled me, “It’s the job of a journalist to make people think.” This has left me with scars. But if I get fired for writing what I believe should be said, it’s time to stop. After all, the motto of the Harvard Medical School is one word, Truth. I will live or die by it.

(And he means it. Dr. Ken Walker, 94, is a Harvard-trained surgeon and outspoken advocate of nutritional medicine. Last we checked, he’s still writing his column, still read by millions. The doctor’s website is www.docgiff.com and his email for comments is info@docgiff.com .)

Nutritional Medicine is Orthomolecular Medicine

Orthomolecular medicine uses safe, effective nutritional therapy to fight illness. For more information: http://www.orthomolecular.org

Find a Doctor

To locate an orthomolecular physician near you: http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v06n09.shtml

The peer-reviewed Orthomolecular Medicine News Service is a non-profit and non-commercial informational resource.

Editorial Review Board:

Ilyès Baghli, M.D. (Algeria)
Ian Brighthope, M.D. (Australia)
Prof. Gilbert Henri Crussol (Spain)
Carolyn Dean, M.D., N.D. (USA)
Damien Downing, M.D. (United Kingdom)
Michael Ellis, M.D. (Australia)
Martin P. Gallagher, M.D., D.C. (USA)
Michael J. Gonzalez, N.M.D., D.Sc., Ph.D. (Puerto Rico)
William B. Grant, Ph.D. (USA)
Tonya S. Heyman, M.D. (USA)
Suzanne Humphries, M.D. (USA)
Ron Hunninghake, M.D. (USA)
Michael Janson, M.D. (USA)
Robert E. Jenkins, D.C. (USA)
Bo H. Jonsson, M.D., Ph.D. (Sweden)
Jeffrey J. Kotulski, D.O. (USA)
Peter H. Lauda, M.D. (Austria)
Thomas Levy, M.D., J.D. (USA)
Homer Lim, M.D. (Philippines)
Stuart Lindsey, Pharm.D. (USA)
Victor A. Marcial-Vega, M.D. (Puerto Rico)
Charles C. Mary, Jr., M.D. (USA)
Mignonne Mary, M.D. (USA)
Jun Matsuyama, M.D., Ph.D. (Japan)
Dave McCarthy, M.D. (USA)
Joseph Mercola, D.O. (USA)
Jorge R. Miranda-Massari, Pharm.D. (Puerto Rico)
Karin Munsterhjelm-Ahumada, M.D. (Finland)
Tahar Naili, M.D. (Algeria)
W. Todd Penberthy, Ph.D. (USA)
Dag Viljen Poleszynski, Ph.D. (Norway)
Jeffrey A. Ruterbusch, D.O. (USA)
Gert E. Schuitemaker, Ph.D. (Netherlands)
Thomas L. Taxman, M.D. (USA)
Jagan Nathan Vamanan, M.D. (India)
Garry Vickar, MD (USA)
Ken Walker, M.D. (Canada)
Anne Zauderer, D.C. (USA)

Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D. (USA), Editor-In-Chief
Editor, Japanese Edition: Atsuo Yanagisawa, M.D., Ph.D. (Japan)
Robert G. Smith, Ph.D. (USA), Associate Editor
Helen Saul Case, M.S. (USA), Assistant Editor
Ralph K. Campbell, M.D. (USA), Contributing Editor
Michael S. Stewart, B.Sc.C.S. (USA), Technology Editor
Jason M. Saul, JD (USA), Legal Consultant


This article may be reprinted free of charge provided 1) that there is clear attribution to the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, and 2) that both the OMNS free subscription link http://orthomolecular.org/subscribe.html and also the OMNS archive linkhttp://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/index.shtml are included.




Infanrix Hexa – 65 Toxins Found. All Risk. No Benefit.

Source:  VAXXTER

by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, ABIHM
December 16, 2018

 

I’ve been saying for YEARS that we need to raise $50k to have every vaccine tested to see what is REALLY coming through that needle. This clearly came into focus for me in 2009, with the H1N1 “Swine flu” fiasco. So many people were injured and there a big spike in miscarriages and stillbirths was reported. I started asking loudly: “What’s IN that stuff? We should test those vials”  

Well, it’s finally happening.

With the onset of government vaccine mandates, which suddenly required Italian children to be injected with 11 vaccines to attend school, the Italians are fighting back. First, they voted out the government that pushed for the mandates calling their movement #GovenmentofChange. Then on December 4, the new Italian health minister kicked out all 30 members of the health policy advisory board.

On December 13, Corvelva, a scientific research group, announced it had received €10,000 (US$11,350) from the Italian National Order of Biologists with plans to use the money to test the contents of every vaccine currently on the market. The result of their first test was released on December 16, and the report is a doozie.

You certainly won’t hear this in the MSM.

The first vaccine they thoroughly tested was Infanrix Hexa – a six-in-one vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) that is *supposed* to contain the following antigens: tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis toxoids; inactivated poliomyelitis viral strains 1-2-3; and hepatitis B surface antigen. Shockingly, Corvelva found NONE of these antigens in the vaccine, meaning, that NO antibodies to the intended antigens will be created.

And it gets worse. In addition to no vaccine antigens, they found the following:

  • traces of 65 chemical cross-contaminants from other manufacturing lines;
  • chemical toxins;
  • unrecognizable macromolecules;
  • various free bacterial peptides that are potential allergens and are capable of inducing autoimmune reactions.

These findings could bring justice to parents who lost their children in 2009 when 36 children died and more than 1,700 were injured in a “clinical trial” – the nice name for human experimentation.

I suspect that as they continue to test each of the vaccines in the childhood schedule. they will find metallic compounds, nanotechnology and a long list of chemical contaminants. At some point, the work previously published by the Gattis’ will be vindicated. I wrote about their shocking findings in a previous article that you can find here.

Infanrix Hexa is used widely in the international market. The vaccine is all risk and literally no benefit. It’s use should be stopped immediately, pending future investigation. If there testing continues to reveal ever more inconsistencies, GSK could be in serious legal problems for inappropriate labeling, poor manufacturing processes and perhaps even charged with murder.




Argentina Creates Mandatory Vaccination Law For Passport, ID, Driver’s License, School & More

Source:  Health Impact News

December 17, 2018

 

This article is GOOGLE TRANSLATED from LA NACION

In order to renew the DNI, passport and registration, the complete vaccination card must be presented.

The Senate approved on Wednesday a law that establishes the obligatory nature and free of vaccination against preventable diseases for all the inhabitants of the country, and stipulates that the complete vaccination card will be required at the time of processing the DNI, passport and driving record , among others.

The project was promoted by the Tucuman deputy Pablo Yedlin (Front Justicialista by Tucumán), and will replace the law 22,909, which is in force since 1983. So far, the mandatory vaccination applies only to children and the new project will be made extensive also to adults. The gratuity of the vaccines, in as much, happened in fact, but from now on it will be protected by law.

According to the text itself, it will be the Executive, through the Ministry of Health of the Nation, which must regulate in a term of 120 days the fine print of the norm for its specific application.

“It’s a law of much consensus, not only was it unanimous in both houses, but it had the support of all the scientific societies, and it puts Argentina at the height of its vaccination schedule, which is very generous,” Yedlin said. dialogue with LA NACION.

Requirement for the DNI

The legislator also explained one of the points of the project that generated more controversy. Until now, proof of vaccination was a requirement to enroll in schools. But Article 9 of the new law states that “the certification of compliance with the National Vaccination Calendar must be required” also at the time of processing the ID, passport or driver’s license.

“It will not interrupt the processing of any document,” said Yedlin and explained that in case of not presenting the full schedule of vaccinations, the person will be “notified” as well as the local health authority, to get in contact and “offer the necessary vaccines”.

“They are control points,” the Tucuman insisted. “It’s not that you will not be able to sign up for the faculty if you do not have the Hepatitis B vaccine, but the university has the right to send you to vaccinate because it’s mandatory that you have it.”

from LA NACION

Comment on this article at VaccineImpact.com




Weaponizing Frequencies: The Coming Tidal Wave

Source:  Natural Blaze

by Rosanne Lindsay, ND

 

Psychotronic millimeter wave weaponry is coming to a street near you, with the potential to unleash disease on a mass scale. Welcome to the new fifth generation of wi-fi called 5G, where the speed to send full-length, high definition movies to your iPad is ten times faster.

The Consequences

The need for speed has the consequence of going from moderate to severe health effects in record time. Note that 4G operates at 2.5 GHz or oscillates about 2.5 billion times per second. This frequency mimics water molecules in your body, and was chosen specifically for broadcasting services and equipment under government license. This means that all company products must meet this frequency or be deemed illegal. For what purpose is matching the human body’s frequency, you may ask, other than for weaponization? Good question.

The higher frequencies of 5G – 100 GHz and beyond – will use small-scale wireless refrigerator-sized boxes, placed in front of every 2-10 homes on every street, in every city. As you watch the latest Hollywood flick, you will bask, unaware, in microwave emissions that oscillate at the same rate as your blood and oxygen molecules. These frequencies can cause burning sensations on your skin, impact fertility, as well as alter the electrochemical waves of your brain to affect consciousness.


Awaiting Installation of 5G

Secret testing of 5G emissions made its debut during the 2018 Olympics, and then again at the 2018 Super Bowl where over 67,000 people were part of a stress-test without their consent. Soon, the 5G antennae networks will be beta tested in nineteen U.S. cities including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Jacksonville, and San Jose. High frequency 5G signals travel shorter distances and are easily blocked by buildings and trees. What is the point? Why create new technology that takes humanity in reverse?  No time for answers. It’s full steam ahead to remove the obstacles that block the signals.

First the trees.



Directed Fires And Poisoned Trees

Many people in California report that the extensive “weird fires”  are destroying trees and leaving homes untouched. Everything does not burn.  At other times, the metal of cars and rails burned with the leaves on trees, leaving tree trunks and kindling. Could these unusual fires be the result of lasers from Directed Energy Weapons?  Whole forests have been devastated down straight lines, obeying fence lines. Add to that, the sanctioned poisoning of hardwood trees by timber companies that has led to over one million dead trees to create a fire hazard.

Are the trees being destroyed merely to unblock hazardous signals? Is this treason/tree-son on multiple levels? These same millimeter waves have been used by the U.S. Army as a crowd control dispersal weapon called Active Denial Systems. Firefighters in Sacramento have reported memory problems and confusion following the installation of new towers outside the city fire station. Some cities, including Santa Rosa, have halted their 5G plans while health concerns are addressed.

 

Tree Towers

The power of trees keep us calm by acting on our autonomic nervous system, as well as our spirit. Numerous studies show a dose-response relationship between urban tree cover density and self-reported stress recoveryStudies show reduced physiological markers of stress in subjects simply looking at images of nature.

Unless we can stand up, speak up, collaborate and network, we risk being victims of the attack coming at us unseen, as millimeter waves are directed at our bodies and minds. If we feel powerless and isolated now, imagine what it will feel like once the new networks are installed and operational. Imagine what it will be like when the trees are replaced with towers that look like trees. We only feel isolated when we work alone and isolate ourselves. Like a forest, there is strength in numbers.

Camilla Reese of Electromagnetichealth.org says we are facing actions at the federal and FCC levels that will create a dense network of high-intensity 4G and 5G microwave radiating cellular antennas in front of homes across America. Moreover, federal legislation, S 3157, would severely reduce local revenues, shorten review times for applications and curtail local control over siting of cell towers.  Camilla says the movement to stop this rollout is necessary for health but is also about getting corporate money out of politics and building an independent media not dependent on toxic polluters and the corruption driving it. 


Health Effects of 5G

Because 5G frequencies affect oxygen molecules, they affect all biological systems, including DNA, circadian rhythm, heart function, hormonal regulation, and immune system. Hundreds of scientists have expressed concern that humans may experience serious health risks including increases in blindness, cataracts, retinal degeneration, hearing loss, male infertility, cancers, peripheral nervous system damage, impacts on immune cells, red blood cells leading to low cellular oxygen, and impaired transport of nutrients into cells. Impacts on birds and plants may be more severe than the impacts on humans.

Beyond direct effects to health, harmful frequencies threaten society as a whole by ignoring the human right to informed-consent to high levels of radiation. All life on the planet has a right to health and a healthy life. By accepting the 5G rollout without a discussion, as happened with the airport scanners, we give up sovereignty over our bodies and accelerate our demise. These frequencies ionize metals being sprayed into the atmosphere under military “geo-engineering” programs to charge the atmosphere, along with our bodies. These programs further block the healing frequencies of the sun required by all life.

S 3157 has bipartisan support and currently faces little opposition. It could slip through the Senate via unanimous consent, appear in the House briefly and get attached to a spending bill — without any debate or roll-call votes specific to S 3157. This would wipe out nearly all the protective ordinances already passed by forward-looking cities.

On September 26, 2018, the FCC is scheduled to vote through its Wireless Infrastructure Order (dockets 17-79 and 17-84). This order attempts to preempt local control of the public rights-of-way. Wireless companies could then more easily install — in front homes — cell towers that would irradiate those nearby with intense, pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) — 24/7. 


Some Solutions

  • Voice the power of NO to all new generation wi-fi systems without proven safety.
  • Hardwire all electrical connections or unplug wi-fi before sleeping.
  • Use aluminum screens on windows to block EMF signals.
  • Use RF-shielding paint to block EMF signals.
  • Consume Carbon60, a powerful antioxidant, metal absorber, and carrier of metals out of the body.
  • Unsubscribe to the genetically-modified corporate food system.
  • Eat an organic diet to strengthen and maintain your immune system.
  • Come together in small communities to maintain simple wi-fi for the benefit and balance of the group.
  • Grow your own food. Plant a garden. Grow herbs and fruit trees.
  • Stop using aluminum cookware, antiperspirants, baking powder, vaccines.
  • Remove the outdoor refrigerators from your sightline.

In usual form, attacks to human health and the health of the planet are coming from new technologies that are unproven,  untested, and amoral. Though government attempts to divide humanity, we are all Earthlings united at the level of our cells and our microbes. Do we slow down and preserve our smallest inhabitants? Or do we accept the coming tidal wave? Speed for the sake of speed is the ideology of a cancer cell.

 


Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopath, writer, earth keeper, health freedom advocate and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally.

Rosanne Lindsay is available for consultation through Turtle Island Network.  Subscribe to her blog at natureofhealing.org.

 




New Flu Vaccine Made with Armyworms and Insects

Source: The Vaccine Reaction

Armyworm larvae vary in color from dark greenish-brown to black. This varacious feeder is an agricultrue pest.

Flublok is considered by researchers to be “highly pure” because it is manufactured without preservatives, antibiotics, etc.; however, its purity is questionable given that it is produced using insect and armyworm cell proteins.

 

Armyworms Used to Make Flublok Influenza Vaccine

by Rishma Parpia
The Vaccine Reaction

 

There are three different influenza vaccine production technologies approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in the United States: the egg-based flu vaccine, the cell-based flu vaccine and the most recent recombinant flu vaccine. [1] In January 2013, the FDA approved the first influenza vaccine produced with the help of an insect virus and recombinant DNA technology. [2]

Recombinant DNA technology involves artificially constructing DNA by combining gene sequences from two or more different organisms. [3] The FDA claims that this approach assists in speeding up the production of the flu vaccine in the event of a flu pandemic because it does not rely on a chicken egg supply. [1]

Currently, there is one influenza vaccine produced using recombinant technology that is approved by the FDA, Flublok. In 2013, Flublok, a trivalent (three component) vaccine developed by Protein Sciences Corporation of Meriden, CT, was approved for use in adults between the ages of 18 to 49 years old. [4] In 2016, the FDA further approved the quadrivalent (four component) vaccine for use in anyone over the age of 18. [4]

Flublok: How Is It Made?

Unlike other flu vaccines, Flublok does not use the influenza virus or eggs in its production. [5] The vaccine is produced using hemagglutinin (HA), which is the part of the influenza virus that is essential for entry of the virus into cells in the human body. [5]

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC):

This production method does not require an egg-grown vaccine virus and does not use chicken eggs at all in the production process. Instead, manufacturers isolate a certain protein from a naturally occurring (“wild type”) recommended vaccine virus (the HA protein, which induces an immune response in people). These proteins are then combined with portions of another virus that grows well in insect cells. This “recombinant” vaccine virus is then mixed with insect cells and allowed to replicate. The flu HA protein is then harvested from these cells and purified. The purified protein is packaged while waiting for FDA testing and approval to release lots. [4]

One of the advantages of Flublok, as stated on the vaccine’s website, is that it is manufactured using the genetic information derived from the wild-type influenza virus and is not subject to the mutations sometimes introduced into vaccines during the process of egg adaptation. This reduces the possibility of decreased effectiveness due to a mismatch between the wild-type virus and an egg-adapted vaccine.” [5]

Furthermore, the website states that Flublok is “highly pure” because it is manufactured without eggs, preservatives like thimerosal, latex, formaldehyde, gelatin, antibiotics and a live or inactivated virus. [4]

Is Flublok Really “Pure”?

On the package insert for the Flublok’s quadrivalent vaccine, it states:

A single 0.5 mL dose of Flublok Quadrivalent contains sodium chloride (4.4 mg), monobasic sodium phosphate (0.195 mcg), dibasic sodium phosphate (1.3 mg), and polysorbate 20 (Tween®20) (27.5 mcg). Each 0.5 mL dose of Flublok Quadrivalent may also contain residual amounts of baculovirus and Spodoptera frugiperda cell proteins (≤ 19 mcg), baculovirus and cellular DNA (≤ 10 ng), and Triton X-100 (≤ 100 mcg) [6]

What are baculovirus and Spodoptera frugiperda cell proteins?

Baculoviruses are a large group of DNA viruses (pathogens) that infect insects [7] and Spodoptera frugiperda are commonly known as armyworms, also regarded as pests. [8] So while the vaccine manufacturer and public health agencies boast that Flublok does not contain thimerosal, formaldehyde, antibiotics or other reactive substances, can this vaccine be considered pure given that insect viruses and armyworm cell proteins are used as ingredients?

In 2009, NVIC President Barbara Loe Fisher offered public comment at the FDA Vaccines and Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting, where the development of influenza vaccines using armyworms was discussed. She said:

In the current effort to fast track the use of a new technology which clones hemagglutinin genes from three influenza viruses—which may be of human as well as mammal and bird origin—and splice them into baculoviruses, which are then used to infect caterpillar cells to produce the hemagglutinin contained in the new recombinant protein based influenza vaccine, there is always the possibility that adventitious agents contaminating insect cells could end up in the vaccines. In fact, a 2005 World Health Organization document on regulation of candidate human vaccines states that “Most insect cells may have viruses in them and infection can be hard to detect and difficult to eliminate…steps should be taken to eliminate them. [9]

Fisher also pointed out that the small clinical trials of insect cell based influenza vaccines were too small to detect the ability of the insect-based recombinant protein influenza vaccines to cause immune mediated brain and immune system problems. She said:

FluBlok contains three times as much protein as other influenza vaccines. There is always the potential for increased cross-reactive autoimmune responses in individuals who are genetically predisposed to autoimmunity and immune mediated neurological dysfunction. I am thinking of the Bell’s Palsy case in these trials that may or may not have been triggered or exacerbated by FluBlok vaccination. The relatively small numbers of individuals in these clinical trials may not reveal the rarer but very serious complications involving demyelination of the brain and autoimmune disorders that have been reported following receipt of recombinant protein vaccines such as hepatitis B and HPV vaccines, including GBS, CNS vasculitis, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus and multiple sclerosis. [9]

The fact that the Flublok manufacturer package insert acknowledges insect virus and DNA adventitious agent contamination is revealing. Substituting toxic vaccine ingredients with other potentially toxic ingredients does not make vaccines safer. Flublok is not a “pure” vaccine and only time will tell what the real risks are to human health from its widespread use.

Read the full article at TVR.org.

References

1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. How Influenza (Flu) Vaccines Are Made. National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Nov. 7, 2016.
2 Roos R. FDA approves first flu vaccine grown in insect cells. Center for Infectious Disease and Policy Jan. 17, 2013.
3 Smith Y. What is Recombinant DNA? News Medical May 4, 2015.
4 CDC. Flublok Seasonal Influenza (Flu) Vaccine. National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases Dec. 13, 2016.
5 Protein Sciences Corporation. A Pharmacist’s Guide to the Flublok Influenza Vaccine. Flublok.com 2015.
6 Food and Drug Administration. Protein Sciences Corporation Package Insert Flublok Quadrivalent. FDA.gov Mar. 2017.
7 Clem R, Passarelli L. Baculoviruses: Sophisticated Pathogens of InsectsPLOS Pathogens 2013; 9(11).
8 Fall Armyworm. Wikipedia.
9 Fisher BL. Public Comment on Use of Insect Cells for Influenza Vaccine Production. FDA Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Nov. 19, 2009.