PDA

View Full Version : The poisoning of America: Glyphosate, Statins and Vaccines



Pages : [1] 2

Paul
2nd June 2016, 01:03
As George W. Bush's press secretary Ari Fleischer supposedly said to Bush, in that school room in Florida on the fateful day of Sept 11, 2001, "America is under attack."

Of course, it's not just America. Europe, the Islamic world from North Africa to Indonesia, and various other nations in the world are also under assault. Of course, also, it's not just an attack on the physical well being of America. It's also an attack on our economy, money, liberty and culture.

But my focus in this thread is the attack on the health of Americans, and on the work of Stephanie Seneff. This thread was first and foremost prompted by listening, with delight, once again to Stephanie Seneff. She is a Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, with advanced degrees in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. She has focused for the last eight years on the biology of human health, which was also the area of her undergraduate work.

This is far from the first thread to highlight the work of Stephanie Seneff, and I doubt it will be the last. Seneff is awesome. She combines wide ranging research, impeccable research skills and experience with the abilities to connect dots across multiple disciplines and to make sense of complex topics. She's brave, she sees what others miss, and she's bold.

Recently, Stephanie Seneff has been on rampage (in her own gentle, smiling, but quite focused, determined and energized style) against glyphosate, the primary active ingredient in Monsanto's Round-Up.

While listening to her explain the toxicity of glyphosate, including its interactions with statins and vaccines, it occurred to me that: The health of Americans is being systematically weakened, in multiple, aggressive, ways, not just glyphosate.

This attack on humanity is not the same world-wide, but somewhat nation specific. Other nations are under their various own attacks, of various kinds.

Three key prongs of this attack on the well being of Americans are:

Glyphosate, the most dangerous (but certainly not only) toxin added to our food.
Statins, the most widely prescribed (but certainly not only) toxic medicine prescribed to Americans.
Vaccines, injecting potent toxins directly into our blood.

This slide, from the following talk of Seneff, summarizes the situation well:

http://thepythoniccow.us/Stephanie_Seneff_US_Health_Status.png
Notice that Americans consume one-half of the world's pharmaceutical drugs, and one-quarter of all the world's glyphosate.

Here is the talk that the above slide came from:
qYC6oyBglZI

Seneff makes an outstanding case that Glyphosate should be banned ... it's a "pox on our land", poisoning the soil, plants, animals and humans of many countries world wide.

Glyphosate:

binds with (chelates) essential minerals such as iron, manganese, zinc, and boron, causing critical mineral deficiencies,
mimics a key amino acid, glycine, destroying proteins that mistakenly use glyphosate instead of glycine, and
interrupts the shikimate pathway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shikimic_acid#Shikimate_pathway), in plants and our own gut bacteria, that produces the essential amino acids phenylalanine, tyrosine, and tryptophan.

The above list of the harms caused by glyphosate is no doubt quite incomplete; I lack the fine memory for biochemistry specifics that Seneff has.

Here are two more recent talks, from last week, that Seneff gave at the AutismOne.org conference:

snNRfAfSeUk

kj-hOG1zq_E

Here are her slides from the above two recent talks:
Glyphosate Pretending to be Glycine: Devastating Consequences (pdf) (http://www.autismone.org/sites/default/files/Seneff_Stephanie_052516.pdf)
Zika, Glyphosate, Vaccines, Folic Acid, Neural Tube Defects and Autism (pdf) (https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/2016/Seneff_Stephanie_052716.pdf)


Here is Stephanie Seneff's home page at MIT, where much of her work is available: https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/

===

The systemic breath of the above attack, the aggressive rise in the attack over the last two or three decades, and the attack's variety, including far more vectors such as the following, leads me to conclude that the attack is a deliberate weakening of America.

Other biological attack vectors include:

fluoride in the water
chemtrails (most likely)
illegal drugs
other pharmaceutical drugs
mineral and nutrient deficient food
industrially processed fats and oils


Here's a slide from another talk that Seneff gave (http://slideplayer.com/slide/3820648/), over two years ago, at the Weston Price Institute, summarizing the very point I am making in this thread:

http://thepythoniccow.us/Seneff_Pesticides_Vaccines_Drugs.jpg

Mike
2nd June 2016, 02:52
I'm embarrassed that this just occured to me:

Things like vaccines and statins - sure theyre toxic - but perhaps they alone are not meant to kill or compromise us......its when theyre combined with other other elements in our diet(glyphosate) that does the real damage. This makes their real effects almost impossibe to gauge...and gives plausible deniability to the clowns over at Monsanto.

A-ha.

This lady is good. Maybe too good. Time for a body guard

Paul
2nd June 2016, 03:38
Ah - another "American Special" - from Assault on the Nervous Systems by Anti-Cognitive Chemicals (https://pandemicsurvivor.com/category/sulfur/):

The US is the only country in the world that allows the use of bromine in baking and in cloudy citrus drinks.
Iodine is critical to mental function and to production of various enzymes. The other halogens chlorine (in our public water supplies), fluorine (in fluoride in the water and toothpastes), and bromine (in American baked goods and sodas) compete with iodine. Iodine is the weakest binding of these four halogens, and the only one of the four that we want or need in our diet.

Any chlorine, fluorine or bromine atom will preferentially bind where an iodine atom was needed, and not work as we would like.

Iodine is critical to forming a variety of enzymes in the body, in various glands including the thyroid. This informative article explains more of the issues involved with iodine: IODINE, A CRITICAL NUTRIENT, by Dr. Lawrence Wilson (http://www.drlwilson.com/articles/IODINE.htm).

I find it a bit amazing that the United States is the only nation that uses potassium bromate (with bromine), instead of potassium iodine (with iodine), as a dough conditioner in most commercial baked goods. It's another way in which the poisoning of America is in some ways "special".

There are multiple ways in which iodine has been removed from our diet in the last few decades, and the toxic substitute halogens chlorine (to sanitize our water), fluorine (supposedly to prevent tooth decay) and bromine (to condition our dough) have been added instead.

Once again ... I see evidence of a systemic effort to Poison America.

¤=[Post Update]=¤


Things like vaccines and statins - sure theyre toxic - but perhaps they alone are not meant to kill or compromise us......its when theyre combined with other other elements in our diet(glyphosate) that does the real damage. This makes their real effects almost impossibe to gauge...and gives plausible deniability to the clowns over at Monsanto.
Yes, as Seneff explains, the combinations can be hundreds or even thousands of times more "effective" than the individual ingredients.

Nasu
2nd June 2016, 03:49
We need a real alternative to this. I was brought up on dirt, to purify and immune me, so they said, but it's worked thus far to be fair. A while back I worked with some Amish folk, they told me about their health care system. It was around the time of Obama care kicking in, there was much hope and promise in the air, all of which proved to be unfounded sadly.

Anyway, this is how the Amish do it, I'm shore there are exceptions and deviations, but for the most part, this is their simple plan. First off they don't get sick that much, as a group, all that outdoor living and dirt ill bet. So they don't get sick much. So while the women, after their chores done, contemplate their lives they sow and weave and quilt, until they have loads of quilts and irderdowns, comforters, duvets, etc. It's quite a social event, for women.

So each group, ward, parish, or area would donate said goods and they have a quilt sale to non members or English as they call us, as well as their own. The proceeds go into an account set aside for drs bills. When one of them gets too sick to deal with as a community, the afflicted gets sent to a hospital and gets the best care cash money can buy. Since they make more quilts than they spend, so to speak, they always have surplus..

A simple and elegant solution to health care, don't you think?...x... N

Carmody
2nd June 2016, 04:49
The Nazis and their associates wanted another war machine. A Fourth Reich.

This time they were not going to leave anything to chance. They planned carefully and put in the time and effort.

There's this double speak and double result of the slave doing the work, also paying for it and even desiring it.

Almost none of this is accidental.

But it is designed, from the ground up, some of it many decades ago..to have plausible deniability, for the mentally illiterate and the unaware to lock on to and not understand what is going on.

For example, when some literate aware person or group brings certain things to your attention, the system has time to target them and eliminate the threat of truths being illustrated, due to the 'dump area' of plausible deniability and seeming common sense answers. Once the aware and population informing threat is eliminated, the general populace resets and are back to where they started.

This was very carefully thought out and is very carefully monitored.

However, it is done, in this seemingly complex fashion... as it is vastly more effective than direct confrontation, war, revolution and/or conflict of any sort. In this environment, the system is never stalled and continues to move forward, no matter the level of the given information imparted by informants and the aware.

shaberon
2nd June 2016, 06:13
Fertilizer.

Phosphate fertilizers, used to produce almost everything, jazz you up with radioactivity and lead. Most of the fluoride sent to your drinking water is the toxic by-product of manufacturing this fertilizer, carrying with it more radioactivity and lead, along with the most reactive element in nature: fluoric acid is so strong it will just drip right through your body. This tidy little industrial cycle has only been going on for about 100 years, brought to you by Mr. Bayer and I. G. Farben.

But I doubt they allow it in Germany any more. Here at home, you can sell food until it is proven unsafe, unlike most developed countries, where you have to prove that it is safe. Of course, if you sell cherries as having health benefits without applying for a "new drug" patent, Marshalls will come at you with machine guns.

I agree with Carmody; the Eastern (Soviet) control system was a quick, cheap bullet in the head, but here in the West, it's a slow kill by industries that profit immensely from it. Whereas the Soviet apparatus has been dismantled, we continue spending more than half of the rest of the world on drugs, more than half on the military. As a business model...I suppose it's brilliant, but that's not much of a justification.

Paul
2nd June 2016, 13:30
A while back I worked with some Amish folk
Yesterday I just ordered, again, a big block of raw milk cheddar cheese from the Amish. It's wonderful cheese, from no doubt happy and health cows.

Hervé
2nd June 2016, 15:07
[...]
......its when theyre combined with other other elements in our diet(glyphosate) that does the real damage. This makes their real effects almost impossibe to gauge...and gives plausible deniability to the clowns over at Monsanto.
[...]

Indeed, Mike, it's been researched, tested and implemented: see this post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?26454-Conspiracy-Theory-to-Application&p=273502&viewfull=1#post273502) <--- and this one (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?46819-A-video-they-won-t-want-you-to-see--Galen-Winsor-nuclear-scare-scam-&p=520698&viewfull=1#post520698) <---

onawah
2nd June 2016, 17:19
Harald Kautz-Vella, a scientist/journalist/whistleblower did some excellent research along these lines about how all the toxins and toxic technology work together to dumb us down, until he either went too far and had to go quiet, or something else happened--it was hard to say exactly what was going on, but the info he came out with while he was being vocal was excellent, though somewhat controversial too.
We covered it pretty well on Avalon not too long ago and you can find his info on several threads, including this one:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?83617-Bases-46-Transhumanism-DNA-Technology-Chemtrails-Alien-AI-and-Black-Goo&p=1064725&highlight=harald+kautz-vella#post1064725
and this is a later, better edited version of one of his interviews: QiGwN9F6aNw
( I just checked his Facebook page and he left a long message from late May saying that he and his girlfriend are fine, having finished up with a sort of 9 month spiritual retreat, and he is planning to start communicating with the public again soon. )

conk
2nd June 2016, 17:28
There are no studies on pharmaceuticals being used in conjunction with another (one or more) pharmaceutical. The synergistic effects are simply unknown. Combine their use with fluoride, chlorine, bromides, pesticides, mercury, aluminum, aspartame, and countless other compounds, and its a miracle any of us are alive to complain! Worse, they push and endorse sugars and other non-foods, even subsidizing them.

Crucial information on how to heal or prevent 'disease' is hidden, suppressed, or mocked. This is going to be a long protracted battle and they have bigger weapons that we do, unless more of us come online mentally. We must as a collective expand our awareness and take back responsibility for our well being. "But my doctor said...." :(

Cardillac
2nd June 2016, 19:55
what has me worried here in Germany is mega-company Bayer trying to buy Monsanto; am not sure how this is currently playing out (not surprisingly a news black out since Bayer's plan was first announced in German MSM);

but I'm seriously wondering if this scenario is'nt an Orwellian double-speak of some sort and it's actually Monsanto trying to get its claws into Bayer to finaly allow GMOs into the European Union- complete speculation on my part-

please stay well all-

Larry

Paul
3rd June 2016, 04:53
Dr. Stefanie Seneff's latest interview, yesterday, with Dr. David Perlmutter:
i6j0wIhUr1M

Paul
3rd June 2016, 07:43
If you prefer to read, here's a recent article by Stephanie Seneff explaining the biochemistry of folic acid, glyphosate, various neural defects, vitamin B12, and what to encourage or avoid in one's diet:
Folic Acid and Glyphosate (http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/abcs-of-nutrition/folic-acid-glyphosate/)

Here's the opening of this article:

=========


Synergistic Toxicity

Neural tube defects (NTDs), such as spina bifida, anencephaly and exencephaly, are severe birth defects that result from failure of neural folds closure during embryonic development. While many factors may be involved in disrupting development in this way, it has been known since the 1970s that folate deficiency during the first trimester is a significant risk factor.
As a consequence, the United States and many other countries have introduced laws to require fortification of certain staple foods with folic acid. In the U.S., in particular, a regulatory requirement was introduced in 1998 for wheat-based products to be fortified with folic acid and iron. Pregnant women are also encouraged to take folic acid supplements during the first trimester, which often continue throughout the pregnancy.

At first glance, this seems like a good idea, but the Europeans (aside from the British Isles) have steadfastly refused to adopt this requirement, despite pressures from the U.S. Is there a down side to folic acid supplementation? Do the Europeans know something that the U.S. government does not?

If you were paying attention, you noticed that I said “folate” deficiency and “folic acid” supplementation. Folate and folic acid are the same thing, right? Interchangeable. Wrong! I have seen research papers use these words interchangeably, but they are definitely not the same thing. The folic acid supplement that’s added to flour is a synthetic version of the B vitamin, which is oxidized and missing the methyl group. The active form of the vitamin is technically called methyltetrahydrofolate. Folic acid is much more stable, whereas folate easily breaks down with aging or with heat (as in baking the bread). Folic acid is a (cheaper) synthetic molecule whereas folate is natural.
=========

... and here's the conclusion:

=========


Folate deficiency, together with vitamin B12 deficiency, are widespread in the U.S. population today, despite the fact that most people are not lacking resources for adequate nutritional intake. The problem, I believe, mainly stems from disruption of the gut microbes due to chronic low-dose exposures to glyphosate, a patented anti-microbial agent. Various popular drugs and antibiotic treatments compound the problem. In 1998, the U.S. implemented a plan to fortify wheat-based products with folic acid, in the hopes of decreasing the incidence of spina bifida and other neural tube defects. Unfortunately, folic acid is a synthetic form of folate, and converting it to the active form is costly to the liver. Unconverted folic acid accumulating in the blood can cause unanticipated problems related to cerebral folate deficiency.

Folic acid supplementation during early pregnancy protects from spina bifida and avoids either a spontaneous miscarriage or a severe developmental defect causing early postnatal death, associated with spina bifida, microcephaly or anencephaly. However, continued folic acid supplementation throughout pregnancy can result in an accumulation of unmodified folic acid in the fetal blood, causing fetal cerebral folate deficiency during the second half of gestation. This will disrupt methylation pathways in the brain, and may result in hydrocephaly and enlarged ventricles, and, in the extreme case, exencephaly. Impaired methylation pathways, enlarged ventricles, and disrupted folate homeostasis are all features of autism.

The best way to maintain adequate supplies of folate and cobalamin is to eat a strictly organic diet that is rich in fresh vegetables, seafood, eggs, and grass-fed beef and liver. Particularly good sources of folate include beef liver, spinach, black-eyed peas, asparagus, Brussels sprouts, avocado, broccoli, mustard greens, green peas and kidney beans.
=========

There's plenty of good detail in between, and a few diagrams of the relevant biochemistry pathways and molecules.

peterpam
4th June 2016, 13:03
I find the fact that glyphosate binds aluminum allowing it to remain in body tissues that the body would normally excrete it, and letting it travel to areas that would never allow access. One of the areas, that is particularly affected is the pineal gland!!! So now we have fluoride and aluminum doing damage.

The picture is becoming clearer that it is not just one thing that is causing all of these problems, it is multipronged.


Stephanie Seneff is amazing!! If you haven't listened to her, put her on the top of your list.

bettye198
4th June 2016, 22:51
Thank you for posting all this. I had just finished posting a whole thread on our nutrition blog regarding the bullet points of Dr. Russell L. Blaylock, M.D. on vaccinations and autism. He is retired neurosurgeon with accolades of praises from his cronies but now I believe a whistleblower on modern medicine and their idiotic belief systems when it comes to excessively plummeting the newborn with 23 then 36 combinations of vaccines. I think the most heartwrenching part was his describing the actual vaccination. The child has brain inflammation beyond what anyone can fathom. Yes, the site becomes red and swollen and painful and then the poor Moms cannot console their high pitched screaming, for days. Dr. Blaylock calls that the encephalitic cry of brain inflammation. There is so much more he uncovered. Here is the full report:https://healthimpactnews.com/2015/dr-russell-l-blaylock-m-d-the-danger-of-excessive-vaccination-during-brain-development-link-to-autism/

onawah
7th June 2016, 19:13
New documentary now also banned (like Vaxxed)
YEbOig7MqYo
http://man-made-epidemic.com/
Man Made Epidemic is being released, and has already been pulled from the East End Film festival amid outside pressure.

Filmmaker Natalie Beer sets off on a journey around the world speaking to leading doctors, scientists and families to find out the truth about the autism epidemic and whether or not vaccines have a role to play.

The film explores the common misconception that autism is solely genetic and looks into scientists concerns over recent years about environmental factors such as medication and pesticides which continue to leave our children with physical and neurological damage.

Also: 5me9QZx8GvU

onawah
7th June 2016, 21:33
This is a link to a physician's agreement form that was sent by VAXXED to a local anti-vaccine group:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzSqN5DJUfyGaXA3Q21FbnQxZ2s/view

It would be hard to imagine a physician actually confident enough in the current recommended vaccine policy to sign this. :sad:

peterpam
28th June 2016, 12:41
This is research from Dr. Nancy Mullan, it is really interesting and pertinent to this thread. Thimerosal is found in most vaccines and is used as a preservative.

Thimerosal damages your genes by inhibiting key enzymes in the production pathway of methyl groups, which are central regulators of gene function, and which also repair gene structure.


Thimerosal releases organic mercury into your body. Organic mercury is an old and familiar poison. The Mad Hatter from Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland demonstrates just how long it has been common knowledge that mercury causes neurological degeneration.

The Hatter was mad, out of his mind, because people who made hats were known to use mercury and suffer neurological damage in the process.

Mercury in even nano gram amounts inhibits a key enzyme in the biochemical pathway that makes methyl groups, a one-carbon, three-hydrogen molecule, that is central to the regulation of gene function and the repair of gene structure.

Methyl groups help to turn genes on and turn genes off. Methylation is a regulator of DNA function. It also edits DNA transcription and repairs breaks in the DNA structure.

Methylation silences DNA: it acts to keep viral DNA static, to keep it from reproducing and becoming an infection.

Methylation is the attachment of a methyl group on to another molecule. If you do not have enough methyl groups in your body, inadequate methylation is the result.

You may not have enough methyl groups because of an enzyme problem like MTHFR+, or because you've been exposed to an enzyme poison such as mercury.

Lack of methylation allows DNA that should be silent to be expressed. Viruses can insert their DNA into your own body's DNA. When you do not have enough methylation capacity, that viral DNA can no longer be silenced, and can grow, express itself, and proliferate.

The MMR vaccine is a live virus vaccine. Two out of the three viruses in the MMR are retroviruses. A retrovirus is a kind of virus that can insert itself into your DNA.

Someone with adequate methylation may tolerate this vaccine because the injected and proliferating virus can be kept quiet. Someone without adequate methylation is at risk from any vaccine containing virus.

Number Two Kind of Damage:

Thimerosal is very closely chemically related to a drug that is used to inhibit the growth of DNA.


HIV is a retrovirus so it can insert its DNA into your DNA sequences, both reproducing and living in your cell as a host by doing this.

Many drugs that are used to treat HIV and cancer work by inhibiting the enzymes in key pathways for the synthesis of DNA and RNA bases.

DNA and RNA bases are purines and pyrimidines. They are required for the production of new cells. This drug is used for both aids and cancer, in which diseases you have rapidly growing cells that you want to stop from dividing.

If you inhibit DNA synthesis, the cells can't divide. In the case of HIV or cancer, that's a benefit.

In the case of a child whose body needs to develop, or anyone wanting to have normal gastrointestinal mucosa, healthy wound healing, or good immune function, it works against you.

Looking at the chemical structure of thimerosal in Figure 2, you can see that it is very similar to that of o-mercaptobenzoic acid. Cleavage can occur at the sulfur-mercury bond, and the release of ethyl mercury happens.

Many researchers and clinicians have been primarily concerned about the release of organic mercury from thimerosal. But if you look at what is left behind after mercury is cleaved off, you see a molecule that is very close to the chemical structure of o-mercaptobenzoic acid, a chemical that can inhibit the growth of a retrovirus by acting on its ability to make DNA.

The biochemical pathway that MTHFR+ affects is the same one that makes DNA bases. If you have a problem with MTHFR and someone injects you with thimerosal, you are going to have double trouble trying to make new DNA. In particular, you will not be able to make thymidine because thymidine has to be methylated, and MTHFR+ inhibits your ability to make methyl groups.

Number One Kind of Damage:

Thimerosal conforms to the basic structure of DNA bases and may substitute in the DNA for some bas

The DNA bases are pyrimidines and purines, the structures on the right in the above figure. The chemical structure of thimerosal is very similar to the DNA bases themselves. Look at thimerosal drawn two different ways in Figure 3.

DNA bases are also called nucleotides. It is known that mercurated nucleotides, nucleotides with a mercury molecule deliberately put on it, will incorporate into your DNA.

Thimerosal can form up like a DNA base, incorporate into your DNA and get stuck there. Your DNA is not going to work properly with that foreign molecule there.

When are you going to say enough to thimerosal administration in vaccines, any vaccine?

As a consumer, you have a lot of power. Just as boycott is going to finish GMO foods and accomplish what legislation does not, boycott can wrap it up for thimerosal in vaccines.

Drug companies will not make what people will not buy. You can vote with your feet...

You have got to figure that if thimerosal is so deadly to contaminants in a vaccine, it might be bad for you also...

I hope this helps you understand the many ways in which thimerosal can interfere with your biochemical functioning.

I hope this helps you 'just say no' to vaccines that contain thimerosal, like the flu shot, which is recommended for the young, the sick, the pregnant and the elderly, just the people who are most vulnerable to the problems of this drug.

onawah
28th June 2016, 14:07
Could we have a link for that info, please? Thanks.

This is research from Dr. Nancy Mullen, it is really interesting and pertinent to this thread. Thimerosal is found in most vaccines and is used as a preservative.

norman
28th June 2016, 15:07
It's a relief, in a way, for me, that the Glyphosate issue has now risen up in the public consciousness. I mentioned the use of it in wheat harvesting practices several times in recent years on forums and got either no response at all or a shake of the head.

I spent 6 years as a seasonal tractor driver harvesting wheat and re sowing it on a big farm in northern England. That farmer was spraying Glyphosate on the wheat a week or so before the combine went in.

After each season, I was usually ill. On 2 occasions, very ill. The guy in the cab of the combine was well protected unless he had a blockage or breakdown and actually had to climb out of the cab. I also had the extra exposure of being the one who reworked the soil ( with discs, not a plough ). They say glyphosate breaks down in the soil and quickly becomes harmless. I don't believe that.

In the UK you have to have a spraying license to be able to operate spraying equipment. That sounds good, by implying that there are safe practices being adhered to. Actually, it only makes it less likely that the general public will ever hear the truth of what goes on.

There other nasty organophosphates in farming. Sheep Dip is one that needs looking into.

peterpam
28th June 2016, 15:46
Could we have a link for that info, please? Thanks.

This is research from Dr. Nancy Mullen, it is really interesting and pertinent to this thread. Thimerosal is found in most vaccines and is used as a preservative.






Onawah, this info came to me via an email. Here is a link to her website which should provide you with this information and more.


http://nancymullanmd.com/


Oops, I now realize I spelled her last name wrong in my first post. It is Mullan, not Mullen.

peterpam
28th June 2016, 15:54
It's a relief, in a way, for me, that the Glyphosate issue has now risen up in the public consciousness. I mentioned the use of it in wheat harvesting practices several times in recent years on forums and got either no response at all or a shake of the head.

I spent 6 years as a seasonal tractor driver harvesting wheat and re sowing it on a big farm in northern England. That farmer was spraying Glyphosate on the wheat a week or so before the combine went in.

After each season, I was usually ill. On 2 occasions, very ill. The guy in the cab of the combine was well protected unless he had a blockage or breakdown and actually had to climb out of the cab. I also had the extra exposure of being the one who reworked the soil ( with discs, not a plough ). They say glyphosate breaks down in the soil and quickly becomes harmless. I don't believe that.

In the UK you have to have a spraying license to be able to operate spraying equipment. That sounds good, by implying that there are safe practices being adhered to. Actually, it only makes it less likely that the general public will ever hear the truth of what goes on.

There other nasty organophosphates in farming. Sheep Dip is one that needs looking into.


norman, I want you to know that I have shared your information about glyphosate and wheat. I just shared it at a Master Gardener event on Saturday. Keep sharing your information, you are being heard.

onawah
28th June 2016, 16:11
Thanks. Found it here: http://nancymullanmd.com/tag/hiv/


Could we have a link for that info, please? Thanks.

This is research from Dr. Nancy Mullen, it is really interesting and pertinent to this thread. Thimerosal is found in most vaccines and is used as a preservative.






Onawah, this info came to me via an email. Here is a link to her website which should provide you with this information and more.



http://nancymullanmd.com/


Oops, I now realize I spelled her last name wrong in my first post. It is Mullan, not Mullen.

onawah
1st July 2016, 13:01
Re the lawsuit in CA. re mandatory vaccines:
http://bolenreport.com/federal-court-lawsuit-filed-sb-277-tomorrow-morning/
Long article, worth reading!

Paul
1st July 2016, 16:47
Re the lawsuit in CA. re mandatory vaccines:
http://bolenreport.com/federal-court-lawsuit-filed-sb-277-tomorrow-morning/
Long article, worth reading!

Yes - excellent news and article. I wish the lawsuit much success.

onawah
5th July 2016, 22:08
They interviewed me, then refused to publish the interview 7/5/16
by Jon Rappoport
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/07/05/they-interviewed-me-then-refused-to-publish-the-interview/



They interviewed me, then refused to publish the interview

Zika Fraud

by Jon Rappoport

July 5, 2016

Some months ago, out of the blue, I was contacted by a major press outlet. I’m withholding the name of the outlet to protect my contact. I was asked, would I do an interview about Zika right away? I said yes. I was emailed a list of questions. I answered them.

At length.

The interview was relayed to editors.

Then, nothing.

Then, more nothing.

And then they spiked the interview. Too hot to handle.

They didn’t tell me they weren’t going to publish the interview. I had to ask. Then they said no.

Here are my answers to the interview questions about Zika and related matters. I’m omitting the questions—again, to protect my contact.

Answer One: Let’s start here. What proof is there that the Zika virus is causing birth defects in babies? I’ll tell you: no proof. Zero. So now the world is going to be subjected to a vaccine that protects them from a virus never proven to do harm? That’s utterly ridiculous. All vaccines carry risk and danger. They contain toxic chemicals and a variety of germs. And of course, vaccines can also be seeded with extra-dangerous substances, about which the public is told nothing. We have the case in Africa where a hormone, HCG, was secretly included in a vaccine given to women. The purpose was to cause miscarriages during future pregnancies. Researchers have been working on depopulation vaccines for decades. And now we have what? Governments are telling women not to get pregnant. This is not a coincidence.

Answer Two: The World Health Organization (WHO) has become a global enforcement agency. Its major partner is the US Centers for Disease Control. These agencies dictate to governments all over the world. “You must deliver these vaccines. You must agree ‘this’ virus causes ‘that’ condition (even if it doesn’t). You must cooperate with us when we say a minor outbreak is a worldwide pandemic.” The basic program here is inducing fear and obedience in populations. I have been tracking and investigating so-called epidemics for many years, and they all turn out to be duds. But vaccines are sold and delivered. The authorities and their rabid support groups insist the vaccines are necessary, effective, and safe. That’s a demonstrable lie. They’re toxic. What people who live in poverty and desperation really need is not vaccines. They need the return of stolen land so they can grow their own nutritious food. They need basic sanitation. They need their contaminated water supplies cleaned up. They need their governments to stop giant corporations from using poisonous pesticides and flooding the environment with them. What we are looking at here is a massive operation to weaken, debilitate, sicken, and kill people—and not just poor people. Vaccines, pesticides; this is a form of chemical warfare.

Answer Three: I’ve cited studies that show a connection between microcephaly and Roundup and atrazine, two toxic pesticides in heavy use around the world. The Zika virus is a distraction from the truth. It’s what intelligence agencies would call a cover story. It diverts attention from what is really going on. It protects major corporations.

Answer Four: A January 27th Associated Press article out of Rio spelled it out. The Brazilian researchers went back and rechecked their original findings. So far, they’ve only been able to confirm 270 cases of microcephaly. And of those 270, they were only able to find the Zika virus in six cases! And the world is in a panic about an epidemic? Are you kidding me? And women are being told not to get pregnant? I call this Depopulation by Press Conference. It certainly isn’t science. How crazy can people get? “Well, we couldn’t find the virus except in six cases, but all women are at risk.” It’s a blatant operation aimed at women. [Note: since this interview, the updated Brazilian numbers are: 854 confirmed cases of microcephaly, and only 97 cases have “some relationship” to Zika.]

Answer Five: Oxitec, which has funding from Bill Gates, has released genetically-engineered mosquitoes in Brazil and a few other places. These male insects mate with females who carry dengue fever, and the next generation doesn’t develop past the larval stage. That’s the theory. No human health studies concerning the effects of engineered mosquitoes have been done—which was exactly the case when GMO crops were first introduced. Instead, we just had assurances that everything was all right. Well, it wasn’t and it isn’t. The mosquito program carries great potential health risks. And of course, who of us can say with authority what exactly those engineered mosquitoes are transporting? If you have naïve trust that all is well, I have condos for sale on the moon.

Answer Six: Behind the scenes, there will be pressure on the Brazilian researchers to change their tune and claim there are many more confirmed cases of microcephaly, all carrying the Zika virus. This will be a double lie, but it will be sold. There will be a rush to create a Zika vaccine. The campaign of fear will continue. Pesticide use will continue to be rampant, of course, especially on GMO crops. Many women will choose not to get pregnant. Governments will tell the people that all vaccines are absolutely necessary, and will use Zika as a case in point, driving home more fear. As an aside, during the Olympics, much bad publicity about Brazil will “leak” out—after all, it is one of the BRICS nations, and the Globalists must find a way to fracture and weaken that alliance in any way they can. Let me make one final statement. Everything I’m revealing in this interview would be hotly contested and criticized by representatives of the medical cartel. They, of course, speak down their noses at everyone, as they presume to carry great wisdom and authority. These representatives are professional liars. I don’t mind saying so. In the US, I have documented, from their own studies, that the US medical system kills 225,000 Americans a year. That’s 2.25 million deaths per decade. I’m not making this up. It’s a fact, I can prove it, and I have proved it. My point is, how far would you trust such people?

That was the end of the interview.

The citation on the US medical system killing 225,000 Americans per year is: Journal of the American Medical System, July 26, 2000, Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), “Is US health really the best in the world?”
It’s obvious why the interview was never published.

I received no requests to cut out certain parts or provide documented evidence for my assertions. All I got was silence.

This is why I run my own media operation.

This is why I created nomorefakenews.

This is why I don’t wait for permission to publish.

This is why I’m scornful of major media. This is why I’ve been able to continue my career as a reporter, while many mainstream reporters have gone into selling real estate or cars or shoes.

The medical cartel is routinely destroying lives, and the press is aiding and abetting those crimes. Every day.

Jon Rappoport

onawah
5th July 2016, 22:11
The latest from Autism Action Network

Autism Action Network
VAXXED is going viral. See VAXXED in your area
More Info: http://vaxxedthemovie.com/theatrical-on-demand/

Or bring VAXXED to where you live

BRING VAXXED TO EVEN MORE CITIES!

Following up on the 30 state, 62 city theatrical run, the Vaxxed team has just introduced a theatrical on demand program, (to run in conjunction with their ongoing “traditional” theatrical release) based on the incredible demand for Vaxxed to be seen NOW by YOU!

Find a screening near you and reserve a ticket now:

http://vaxxedthemovie.com/theatrical-on-demand/

Working with GATHR, this program allows Vaxxed Movie Captains to set up one time screening events at multiplex theatre chains during specific dates and times and invite their networks to fill the theatre. A taped Q&A with the filmmakers will be played after each screening.

Once enough people have reserved tickets and the event “tips” it is then “greenlit”. Peoples’ credit cards will not be charged until then.

Gathr screenings are important because it allows the message of Vaxxed (CDC fraud over the mmr-autism study), and the voices of autism families, to be shared in smaller communities across the United States. In addition, the map widget numerically shows how much support Vaxxed has nationwide.

In less than a week, there have already been 300 events scheduled and 10,000 tickets reserved!

Let’s let the help hit the target of 500 registered events. 300 are already underway!

If you don’t see a screening in your community, you can either click the “Notify me” button to be notified when one is reserved or volunteer to be a movie captain by selecting “Gathr It! Request a Screening. (Please only sign up to be a Movie Captain if there are no other screenings within 30 miles of your area AND if you have the time, energy, and passion to spearhead and promote your screening. If you don’t feel you’re up to it (and that’s ok!), it’s likely that someone will request a screening for your area sooner than later!)

And please, join the Vaxxed movement: http://eepurl.com/bQWatj

onawah
6th July 2016, 19:40
Temporary Restraining Order Denied for SB 277 Lawsuit–Plaintiffs Ready to File for a Preliminary Injunction
http://www.edu4allnow.org/media-articles/temporary-restraining-order-denied-sb-277-lawsuit-plaintiffs-ready-file-preliminary-injunction/

SAN DIEGO, CA— California parents filed suit last week to challenge California’s new law, SB 277, which bars tens of thousands of children from attending any public or private school in the State of California. The suit requested a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the implementation of the law. It requested emergency relief because the law is already impacting students, such as students who receive special education services during the summer months. The TRO was denied yesterday in San Diego Federal Court.

Lead attorney Jim Turner stated, “The court did not issue a ruling on its merits but denied the TRO for lack of notice to the State.”

The plaintiffs will file a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, to prevent children from being denied school enrollment starting in this upcoming school year and continuing until this lawsuit is finally decided by the courts.

“The plaintiffs are in this for the long haul,” said Robert T. Moxley, co-counsel. “This is just the beginning. We feel confident that SB 277 will ultimately be found unconstitutional, restoring the right for all children in California to receive a classroom education without discrimination.”


Re the lawsuit in CA. re mandatory vaccines:
http://bolenreport.com/federal-court-lawsuit-filed-sb-277-tomorrow-morning/
Long article, worth reading!

Yes - excellent news and article. I wish the lawsuit much success.

Houman
7th July 2016, 06:11
I once met an EPA scientist who was very aware of the damages done by glyphosate, vaccines, etc... what was really disturbing him is what is coming down the drain with the misuse of the Crispr-Cas9 gene editing... http://www.nature.com/news/crispr-gene-editing-is-just-the-beginning-1.19510

onawah
7th July 2016, 23:34
The Bolen Report: Fed Judge Denies SB 277 TRO – Wants More Info…



Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

This all happened yesterday, but I was traveling…

San Diego Federal Judge Dana M. Sabraw denied the Ex Parte Temporary
Restraining Order (TRO) presented by the Plaintiffs, so far, for two
reasons – BOTH of which attorneys for the Plaintiffs are remedying as fast
as possible.

In essence, Judge Sabraw wants two things: (1) the Defendants’ attorneys
involved in the hearing, and (2) A better, more specific example of why
there is an emergency requiring a TRO in the first place.

No big deal. Happens all of the time. Everything is still right on track,
heading for a Preliminary Injunction Hearing. Everything that the Judge
did was within the range of normal expectation.

To read the entire article, click on:

http://bolenreport.com/fed-judge-denies-sb-277-tro-wants-info/#more-3971


If you wish to SUBSCRIBE to this Newsletter visit http://quackpotwatch.org/list/?p=subscribe

onawah
8th July 2016, 03:54
Moving speech from Del Bigtree re Vaxxed, Santa Monica, 7/4/16, at the 2nd Annual Health Freedom Rally held in Santa Monica in front of City Hall.

R8fWPLX7BEQ

onawah
11th July 2016, 04:30
Judy Zimmerman, the Utah CDC whistleblower, who is exposing that CDC is gaming the autism numbers in their favor, gives her first interview.
From: The Canary Party
https://www.periscope.tv/w/1rmxPpkepkmxN

onawah
12th July 2016, 17:53
CDC Executive Resigns After Being Caught Colluding With Coca-Cola to Salvage Soda Market
This is related in that it has to do with corruption in the CDC
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/07/12/cdc-soda-industry-coca-cola.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20160712Z1&et_cid=DM110831&et_rid=1569699334[/
q1YmS_WiR0U

By Dr. Mercola

I've often written about the collusion between industry and our regulatory agencies, and how industry-funded research tends to simply support and promote the industry agenda rather than shed truthful light on the benefits or risks of any given product.

Recent media reports have now revealed devastating evidence showing a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) executive aided a Coca-Cola representative in efforts to influence World Health Organization (WHO) officials to relax recommendations on sugar limits.1

In March 2015, WHO published a new sugar guideline that specifically targeted sugary beverages, calling them out as a primary cause for childhood obesity around the world, especially in developing nations, where the soda industry is now aggressively expanding its reach.

WHO's recommendation to limit soda consumption was a huge blow to an already beleaguered soda industry, struggling to maintain a declining market share amid mounting evidence identifying sweetened drinks as a primary contributor to the obesity and diabetes epidemics.

The damning email correspondence between Coca-Cola and the CDC was obtained by the nonprofit consumer education group U.S. Right to Know (USRTK).2 According to PhillyVoice:3

"The emails were between Barbara Bowman, Ph.D. director of the CDC's Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention, and Dr. Alex Malaspina, a former Coca-Cola scientific and regulatory affairs leader and the founder of a food industry-funded group, International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI).

They allegedly show Bowman's multiple attempts to aid Malaspina's relationship with WHO leaders whose actions (think soda tax) were hurting the beverage industry.

According to the report, Bowman — whose job is to try to help prevent obesity, diabetes and other health problems — 'appeared happy to help the beverage industry cultivate political sway with the World Health Organization.'"

Soda Politics

This kind of political maneuvering and back scratching is covered at length in Marion Nestle, Ph.D.'s book "Soda Politics." I interviewed Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, last year.In response to the CDC-Coke scandal, she says:4

"[T]he fact that a high-level U.S. health official is communicating in this way with a beverage industry leader appears improper," adding the emails "suggest that ILSI, Coca-Cola and researchers funded by Coca-Cola have an 'in' with a prominent CDC official.

The official appears to be interested in helping these groups organize opposition to 'eat less sugar' and 'disclose industry funding' recommendations.

The invitation to dinner suggests a cozy relationship ... This appearance of conflict of interest is precisely why policies for engagement with industry are needed for federal officials."

Nestle's book reveals the soda industry is well aware of the connection between soda consumption and obesity and obesity-related diseases.

Soda companies are by law required to inform the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) about vulnerabilities, and for the last decade Coca-Cola has been telling the SEC that obesity is the most significant threat to soda industry profits.

In short, Coca-Cola knows that once the truth about soda's influence on obesity becomes fully recognized, their jig is up.

Exposed CDC Official Steps Down

For many years now, health advocates have warned people about the connection between sugary drinks and obesity, and the message has slowly but surely started to take hold.

U.S. soda sales have dropped 25 percent since 1998,5 no doubt due to successful public health advocacy, and this makes the current scandal all the more scandalous, as it's an attempt by a high-level health official to undo all the work that's already been done to protect the public health. According to USRTK:6

"Alex Malaspina was able to ask for and receive regular input and guidance from a top official at the ... CDC on how to address actions by the World Health Organization that were hurting the food and beverage industry.

The emails ... reveal that ... Bowman ... tried to help Malaspina find inroads to influence WHO officials to back off anti-sugar talk. Bowman suggested people and groups for Malaspina to talk to, and solicited his comments on some CDC summaries of reports ... "

Surprisingly, Bowman had the good sense to immediately vacate her post once her betrayal of the public trust was exposed.

According to The Huffington Post,7 Bowman "announced her immediate departure from the agency ... two days after it came to light that she had been offering guidance to a leading Coca-Cola advocate who was seeking to influence world health authorities on sugar and beverage policy matters."

Perfect Example of Why Revolving Door to Industry Needs to Be Shut

While Bowman didn't mention her public disgrace as a factor in her resignation, saying she'd made the decision to retire "late last month," her boss, Ursula Bauer, Ph.D., confirmed Bowman's dealings with Coca-Cola in an internal email to CDC staff.

In it, Bauer states the "perception that some readers may take from the article [revealing Bowman's dealings with Malaspina] is not ideal," adding that the situation "serves as an important reminder of the old adage that if we don't want to see it on the front pages of the newspaper then we shouldn't do it."8

Bowman's connections to Coca-Cola actually dates back decades,9 and it's anyone's guess as to how those ties may have slowed down the path to truth and influenced public health policy. She'd been at the CDC since 1992; she was appointed director of the Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (DHDSP) in February 2013. But earlier in her career, Bowman worked as a senior nutritionist for Coca-Cola.

This just goes to show the power of the corporate and federal regulatory agency revolving door allegiances. Public servants must choose the hard road of doing what is best for the public, not their former bosses and acquaintances.

Few have that kind of integrity, it seems, and this case is a perfect example of why the door between private industry and public health and regulatory agencies needs to be more closely monitored. This is not a new problem and is pervasive in Washington for other industries. Yet the U.S. Congress and Senate continually fail to pass legislation to address this glaring loophole that decimates public health.

Philadelphia Imposes Soda Tax and Other Bad News for Big Soda

This scandal comes on the heels of a number of blows against the soda industry. Aside from WHO Director General Dr. Margaret Chan announcing soda is a key contributor to child obesity and suggesting restrictions on sugary beverages, Philadelphia recently decided to implement a soda tax to cut consumption.

Mexico imposed a soda tax in 2014, and San Francisco requires ads for sugary drinks to include a health warning as of last year. Many cities around the world are also considering similar measures to restrict soda sales. However, the stance against sugar taken by WHO was perhaps considered one of the most serious. In a June 2015 email to Bowman, Malaspina expresses worry about negative publicity related to sugar-rich products and European soda tax plans.

Malaspina says WHO's actions can have "significant negative consequences on a global basis," and that "the threat to our business is serious." He also notes that WHO officials "do not want to work with industry," adding that, "something must be done." In response to Malaspina's request for suggestions on how to get an audience with WHO, Bowman replies that "someone with Gates or 'Bloomberg people' may have close connections that could open a door at WHO," USRTK writes.

"She also suggests he try someone at PEPFAR program, a U.S. government-backed program that makes HIV/AIDS drugs available through the sub-Saharan Africa. She tells him that 'WHO is key to the network.' She writes that she 'will be in touch about getting together.'"

Clearly, the soda industry is struggling to stay alive. But at what cost should they be allowed to promote their business? It's equally clear that the price for their unrestricted success is disease and death of its consumers, which is why these kinds of backdoor dealings are so unpalatable.

Without Conflicts of Interest, Could Junk Food Industry Survive?In 2013, I interviewed Michele Simon, who has practiced public health law for nearly 20 years, fighting corporate tactics that deceive and manipulate you about health. Last year, she released a report that revealed disturbing ties between the American Society for Nutrition (ASN) — considered a premier source of nutritional science — and the primary purveyors of obesity and chronic ill health.

ASN is sponsored by 30 different companies, including Coca-Cola, Kellogg's, Monsanto and the Sugar Association, just to mention a few, each of which pays $10,000 a year in return for "print and online exposure, annual meeting benefits, and first choice to sponsor educational sessions, grants, awards and other opportunities as they arise." As noted by Simon:

"In other words, food, beverage, supplement, biotech and pharmaceutical industry leaders are able to purchase cozy relationships with the nation's top nutrition researchers."

Junk food purveyors gain even more influence by sponsoring educational sessions at various conferences and annual meetings, and featuring speakers that represent the industry. ASN's ties are particularly problematic since they also publish three academic journals, including the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (AJCN).

These ties can "taint scientific objectivity, negatively impact the organization's policy recommendations, and result in industry-friendly research and messaging that is shared with nutrition professionals and the general public alike," according to Simon.

Obesity researcher David Allison, Ph.D. tops the list of those with the most conflicts. Allison serves on the editorial board of the AJCN, ASN's flagship publication, even though he has ties to PepsiCo, the Sugar Association, World Sugar Research Organization, Red Bull, Kellogg, Mars, Campbell Soup and Dr. Pepper Snapple Group.

According to Simon, "having Allison in such a critical gatekeeper role demonstrates how industry can potentially influence even the science that gets published."

'Just Say No' to Soda

"Just Say No" was a slogan created by first lady Nancy Reagan. The "Just Say No" advertising campaign against recreational drug use was prevalent through the 1980s. Today, the same slogan would be appropriate to discourage soda consumption, and a whole lot easier to implement as well.

If you struggle with weight or chronic health issues, replacing soda and other sweet drinks, including fruit juices, with pure water could be one of the best things you could possibly do. Granted, other dietary changes are likely needed as well, but for many, ditching soda can go a long way.

If you crave some flavor, try adding some lime or lemon juice to still or sparkling water. Tea is another option. Just avoid adding sugar, and steer clear of bottled varieties as they're usually loaded with added sugars. Ditto for so-called "designer water" like Vitamin Water.

If you find it difficult to quit, don't be discouraged. Many are indeed addicted to soda. To break free, be sure to address the emotional component of your food cravings using tools such as the Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). A version referred to as Turbo Tapping tends to be particularly useful for eliminating soda addiction in a short amount of time.

If you still have cravings after trying EFT or Turbo Tapping, you may need to make some changes to your diet. My free nutrition plan can help you do this in a step-by-step fashion.

Remember, sweetened beverages, whether sweetened with sugar, high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), naturally occurring fructose or artificial sweeteners are among the worst culprits in the fight against obesity and related health problems, including diabetes and heart disease. Ditching ALL of these types of beverages is a significant first step toward reducing your risk for chronic health problems and weight gain.

onawah
16th July 2016, 03:38
Amended SB 277 Complaint Filed; Preliminary Injunction Hearing August 12
http://www.edu4allnow.org/news-release/130/

SAN DIEGO, CA— Yesterday in federal court, an Amended Complaint was filed against California’s new mandatory vaccination law, SB 277. After E4A’s lawsuit was filed July 1st, dozens of parents came forward to share stories of discrimination and oppression. Eleven additional plaintiffs have joined the suit, and the Amended Complaint pleads sixteen counts — infringement of state and federal constitutional rights, and violations of state and federal law, including statutes that protect disabled children. Sworn testimony of egregious conduct underlies a Preliminary Injunction motion, filed today and scheduled for hearing in federal court on August 12, before children return to school.

The primary focus of the Amended Complaint is disregard for the fundamental right of public education under the California Constitution. The Plaintiffs state,

“The California Constitution requires the State to ensure educational opportunities for every child and vests the State with ultimate responsibility for the public elementary and secondary school system. The State has a non-delegable duty to ensure that no student is denied the opportunity to learn. The California Constitution thus places the responsibility for providing education and educational equality to all of California’s children squarely on the shoulders of the State. While the State may elect to delegate some responsibility to school districts, it is ultimately the State’s responsibility to ensure that all California School children receive a basic education.”

The strongly worded Amended Complaint depicts an irrational, punitive, and unconstitutional scheme. The pleading reveals the rushed and shoddy passage of SB 277 through the Legislature, where children with vaccine personal belief exemptions were scapegoats for the famous Disneyland measles outbreak they did not cause. The Amended Complaint depicts doctors too intimidated to write medical exemptions, despite Governor Brown’s signing statement endorsing their discretion. It reveals the impractical nature and economic hardship of homeschooling for many families, and a lack of guidance from the California Department of Education and Board of Education. It shows how schools are left on their own to decide if disabled students must be vaccinated to receive classroom special education.

Plaintiffs’ attorney Robert Moxley said, “More parents come forward every day. We may be just looking at the tip of the iceberg with these first set of plaintiffs.” He added, “The California Department of Education’s website touts ‘a world-class education for all students, from early childhood to adulthood.’ But there is nothing world class about removing healthy children from school. Maybe that is why we have so many parents coming forward.”

About Education 4 All: The Education 4 All (E4A) Foundation, founded in June 2016, seeks to redeem California’s promise of equal education for all children.

Contribute to the suit HERE http://www.edu4allnow.org/donate/

Or mail gifts to: E4A. 12463 Rancho Bernardo Rd, #525, San Diego, CA 92128-2143

onawah
16th July 2016, 03:57
SB 277 – First Amended Complaint For Declaratory, Injunctive And Other Relief…
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-first-amended-complaint-declaratory-injunctive-relief/

(This is LONG, but it's THRILLING! :clapping:

By Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

The Starting Point…)
[QUOTE]SB 277 – First Amended Complaint For Declaratory, Injunctive And Other Relief…
Keeping Our Healthy Children in School…
By Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

The Starting Point…

On July 1st, 2016 a lawsuit was filed in a San Diego Federal Court asking the court to declare infamous California Senate Bill 277 unconstitutional, and prevent its enforcement. It was an excellent read. Its filing compared, in war terms, to the June 6th, 1944 “D-Day” Invasion of Normandy. The “good guys” were on the beach beginning the counterattack against the forces of evil.

The news traveled across Planet Earth like a soothing spring rain.

Then, yesterday and today, July 14th and 15th, 2016, new filings are appearing starting with what is called, simply enough, a “- FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY, INJUNCTIVE AND OTHER RELIEF.” And, although I liked the first filing VERY MUCH, and said so.

I like these legal filings even more.

Before I show them to you, and explain, in simple terms, what is actually going on there are TWO important points I need to make. They are::

(1) This whole event, these legal actions, and all of the investigations and sorting of material leading to all of this legal action is the work of a giant, secret, army who managed to work quietly, and unobtrusively, gathering and sorting, making new alliances, for the express purposes surrounding the issues so carefully, and powerfully, explained in the legal papers. Look around. There they are. There YOU are…

Here WE are… The doors are open. Come and play.

(2) So MUCH is happening with this First Amended Complaint that I am going to break the explanation of it all into separate parts – so, after this article, there is MUCH MORE good stuff coming. You WILL love this….

What’s New and Different?


(1) Where in the first filing there were ten Plaintiffs, now there twenty-one. I will show you every one of them. You can read, in detail, why each of them are standing up for the rest of humanity. If you see them on the street, look them in the eye, smile at them, say “Thank You,” then hug them.

(2) Where in the first filing there were ten Defendants, there still are…

(3) Where in the first filing there were six Claims, now there are sixteen.

(4) Where in the first filing there was a “Statutory Schemes” section which explained the details of the case, now there is a much-enlarged section called “General Allegations.” Take the time to read it word-for-word.

Why an Amended Complaint?

Happens all of the time. My guess is that, here, the original Complaint generated a tidal wave of interest which, in itself, generated more Plaintiff issues, sources of information, cooperation, and resources for the legal team. From here I can see the groundswell – and I like it very much…

So, Let’s Get Started With Important Details…

Take your time reading what’s going on – for the people that put this together GET the issues…



FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Case No. 3:16-cv-01715-DMS-BGS Plaintiffs complaint of Defendants and allege:

Case Introduction…

(1) More than 45 years ago, the California Supreme Court recognized that education is “the bright hope for entry of the poor and oppressed into the mainstream of American society,” Serrano v. Priest, 5 Cal.3d 584, 609 (1971), and that “society has a compelling interest in affording children an opportunity to attend school.” Id. at 606 (citation omitted).

(2) But today, as a result of the enactment of Senate Bill (“SB”) 277, the State of California denies tens of thousands of children access to its schools and daycares and relegates them to the separate-and-unequal position of learning in isolation, in permanent quarantine.

(3) In the midst of the media frenzy surrounding a measles outbreak at Disneyland, at the intersection of irrational panic and special-interest politics, the California Legislature enacted SB 277 to abolish personal belief exemptions (“PBEs”) from California’s school vaccination requirements.

(4) In the name of public health, SB 277 permanently bars from all public and private schools and daycares any child who, absent a physician-provided medical exemption, is not fully vaccinated with 30 to 38 doses of vaccines for ten different illnesses ranging from generally mild childhood illnesses like measles and chickenpox, to a blood-borne disease like hepatitis B, to a non-communicable infection like tetanus.

(5) The justification for permanently barring children with PBEs from school and daycare has been the desire to keep schools “safe from dangerous contagions.” The unfortunate mischaracterization of children with PBEs as contagious and dangerous vectors of disease has resulted in extreme bias and prejudice against thousands of innocent children who are, in actuality, neither infectious nor contagious. Nor are these children capable of transmitting diseases they do not have. Yet SB 277 forever exiles them from schools and daycares, in a dramatic departure from California’s long-standing history of unwavering protection of every child’s right to a free, equal and public education.

(6) Education is a fundamental right in California, guaranteed to all children by the State Constitution. Cal. Const., art. IX, §§ 1 and 5. Indeed, “education is so important that the state has made it compulsory.” Serrano, 5 Cal.3d at 610 (citation omitted). The California Supreme Court minced no words when it declared that “[i]n light of the public interest in conserving the resource of young minds, [courts] must unsympathetically examine any action of a public body which has the effect of depriving children of the opportunity to obtain an education.” Id. at 607 (citation omitted).

(7) Additionally, both State and federal laws prohibit discrimination against and disparate treatment of children based on suspect classifications such as race, religion, national origin, disability or socioeconomic status. SB 277 is in irreconcilable conflict with the aforementioned State and federal laws. Therefore, to preserve and protect their rights under those laws, Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to, inter alia, 42 U.S.C. §1983; the First, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400, et seq.; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794; the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §12132, et seq.; and Article 9, §§ 1 and 5, Article 1, §§ 7(a) and 15, and Article 4, § 16(a) of the California Constitution, to enjoin, preliminarily and permanently, all enforcement of SB 277 and any other California statutes, regulations, policies or practices that seek to exclude children from school.

Those Incredible Plaintiffs…

(1) Plaintiff Ana Whitlow resides with her husband and minor sons B.A.W. and D.M.F-W. in San Diego, San Diego County. Ms. Whitlow’s children B.A.W. and D.M.F-W. are legally required to attend school. Ms. Whitlow and her husband have chosen to selectively vaccinate B.A.W. and D.M.F-W. in the interest of their health and well-being and to avoid vaccines that offend their religious beliefs by virtue of certain ingredients including aborted fetal cells.

D.M.F-W. is twelve years old and due to advance to the seventh grade in the fall. As a condition for enrollment in the seventh grade, D.M.F-W. is required to show proof of vaccination for pertussis (whooping cough). Pertussis vaccination is not available separately and is given in a single syringe with the diphtheria and tetanus vaccines, called DTaP or Tdap.

To determine whether D.M.F-W. needs the vaccine, Ms. Whitlow requested a blood antibody test to check D.M.F-W.’s antibodies for whooping cough, tetanus and diphtheria. Laboratory testing based on a June 21, 2016 blood draw confirmed that D.M.F-W. has immunity to all three diseases, eliminating the need to vaccinate him. Notwithstanding his demonstrated immunity to all three diseases, D.M.F-W’s school has refused to allow D.M.F-W. to enroll in the seventh grade unless he receives the required vaccine. Ms. Whitlow sees no justification for the school’s demand that D.M.F-W. submit to a vaccination for diseases to which he has lab-confirmed immunity.

Like all medical procedures, vaccines carry risk of adverse reactions and Ms. Whitlow does not wish to subject D.M.F-W. to a medical procedure that will confer no additional benefit to him.

Ms. Whitlow seeks injunctive relief requiring the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California to admit D.M.F-W. into the seventh grade and not deprive him of the opportunity to continue his education. Ms. Whitlow’s son B.A.W. is five years old and eligible to attend kindergarten. Ms. Whitlow observed B.A.W. experience adverse reactions to vaccination, including seizure-like spells, which B.A.W.’s physicians do not attribute to the vaccines, precluding a medical exemption for B.A.W. Ms. Whitlow is concerned that further vaccination will subject B.A.W. to the risk of adverse side effects, including seizures.

Ms. Whitlow also objects to injecting B.A.W. with vaccines derived from aborted fetal cells, including aborted fetal lung fibroblasts. If PBEs were available, Ms. Whitlow would obtain a religious exemption to enroll B.A.W. in kindergarten. Ms. Whitlow’s children do not carry any of the diseases for which vaccination is mandated, yet they are being permanently barred from school. Ms. Whitlow seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission to B.A.W. into Ocean Beach Elementary School, operated by the San Diego Unified School District.

(2) Plaintiff Erik Nicolaisen lives with his wife and minor children A.W.N. (age 5), R.J.N. (age 3) and U.M.N (age 10 months), in Studio City, Los Angeles County. At the age of six, all of Mr. Nicolaisen’s children will be legally required to attend school. Mr. Nicolaisen and his wife attempted to enroll A.W.N. into kindergarten at Carpenter Elementary School, operated by the Los Angeles Unified School District. On June 17, 2016, the principal of Carpenter Elementary School informed Mr. Nicolaisen that A.W.N. cannot enroll in kindergarten without proof of full vaccination which, in A.W.N.’s case would require administration of more than 20 vaccine doses in less than a two-month period.

Mr. Nicolaisen and his wife have chosen to selectively vaccinate A.W.N. in the interest of A.W.N’s health and wellbeing, and in the interest of avoiding certain vaccines, including those produced using aborted fetal tissue such as fetal lung fibroblasts, given that Mr. Nicolaisen’s wife opposes abortion. Without a PBE, A.W.N. cannot attend school, which he is legally required to do when he turns six years old. Similarly, A.W.N.’s younger siblings cannot attend daycare now or school once they reach school age. Without the ability to enroll their children into school, Mr. Nicolaisen and his wife face the options of giving up successful careers and risking loss of income and employer provided health and life insurance, relocation to Oregon, or coerced abandonment of their religious convictions and health-related misgivings about certain vaccines.

Mr. Nicolaisen’s children do not carry any of the diseases for which vaccination is mandated, yet they are being permanently barred from school. Mr. Nicolaisen seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California from denying A.W.N. enrollment into Carpenter Elementary School, operated by the Los Angeles Unified School District or any other school.

(3) Plaintiff Dene Schultze-Alva is a Civil Engineer and Doctor of Chiropractic. She resides with her husband, and minor daughters S.G.A. (age 8) and S.M.A. (age 3) in Sierra Madre, Los Angeles County. Years ago, the day after receiving routine childhood vaccinations, Dr. Schultze-Alva’s stepdaughter suffered convulsions, a high fever, lethargy and seizure-like shaking. This experience and her own chiropractic training have caused Dr. Schultze-Alva to exercise caution in attend school. Mr. Nicolaisen and his wife attempted to enroll A.W.N. into kindergarten at Carpenter Elementary School, operated by the Los Angeles Unified School District.

On June 17, 2016, the principal of Carpenter Elementary School informed Mr. Nicolaisen that A.W.N. cannot enroll in kindergarten without proof of full vaccination which, in A.W.N.’s case would require administration of more than 20 vaccine doses in less than a two-month period. Mr. Nicolaisen and his wife have chosen to selectively vaccinate A.W.N. in the interest of A.W.N’s health and wellbeing, and in the interest of avoiding certain vaccines, including those produced using aborted fetal tissue such as fetal lung fibroblasts, given that Mr. Nicolaisen’s wife opposes abortion.

Without a PBE, A.W.N. cannot attend school, which he is legally required to do when he turns six years old. Similarly, A.W.N.’s younger siblings cannot attend daycare now or school once they reach school age. Without the ability to enroll their children into school, Mr. Nicolaisen and his wife face the options of giving up successful careers and risking loss of income and employer provided health and life insurance, relocation to Oregon, or coerced abandonment of their religious convictions and health-related misgivings about certain vaccines.

Mr. Nicolaisen’s children do not carry any of the diseases for which vaccination is mandated, yet they are being permanently barred from school. Mr. Nicolaisen seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California from denying A.W.N. enrollment into Carpenter Elementary School, operated by the Los Angeles Unified School District or any other school.

(4) Plaintiff Nicole Andrade resides near Loomis, Placer County, with her husband and family, including her minor daughter I.G.A. I.G.A. is due to enter the seventh grade in the fall at Franklin Elementary School operated by the Loomis Union School District. Ms. Andrade has received two notices of school expulsion for I.G.A. for noncompliance with SB 277, even though I.G.A. is legally required to attend school.

Ms. Andrade is religiously opposed to vaccines manufactured from aborted fetal cell lines, having fully vaccinated her oldest child before she became aware that certain vaccines, including the Measles, Mumps, Rubella (“MMR”) vaccine, are manufactured using cells derived from intentionally aborted fetuses. Ms. Andrade has taken up in her prayers the question of whether to vaccinate, and believes that God would want her pro-life family to wait for more pure and safe vaccines, before vaccinating I.G.A. again. I.G.A. enjoys learning in a classroom and wants to continue going to school. I.G.A. does not carry any of the diseases for which vaccination is mandated, yet she is being permanently barred from school. Ms. Andrade seeks an order prohibiting the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California from denying advancement of I.G.A. into the seventh grade at Franklin Elementary School, operated by the Loomis Union School District.

(5) Plaintiff Brianna Owens resides in Petrolia, Humboldt County. She is the parent of four children, two of whom are impacted by SB 277 in the 2016-2017 school year. K.R.O.-R. is currently being denied entry into the seventh grade and J.S.W.S. is currently being denied entry into kindergarten at Mattole Elementary School operated by the Mattole Unified School District.

Ms. Owens has a family history of autoimmune disease, including Guillain-Barré Syndrome. At the age of 26, Ms. Owens suffered convulsions, hallucinations, a fever of 103.4 degrees, vomiting, headache, jaw locking, muscle tightness and loss of consciousness after receiving a vaccine for diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (Tdap). The doctor who administered the vaccine insisted that it was impossible for her to have a reaction to the vaccine. Days later, another physician who treated Ms. Owens confirmed that Ms. Owens’ symptoms had been the result of a severe reaction to the Tdap vaccine and advised Mr. Owens never to take that vaccine again.

Ms. Owens’ reaction is listed in the manufacturer’s product insert as a potential sequelae of the vaccine. Ms. Owens’ daughter K.R.O.-R. had an adverse reaction to the DTaP (whooping cough, tetanus and diphtheria vaccine for pediatric use), which K.R.O.-R.’s pediatrician said was a “normal” response to the vaccine.

Following K.R.O.-R.’s reaction and her own severe adverse reaction to the Tdap vaccination, coupled with her family’s medical history, Ms. Owen became hesitant to continue vaccinating her children. She has requested testing to ensure that her children will not have severe adverse reactions to vaccination but no such testing has been provided by her physicians.

She has also requested medical exemptions for her children based on her own severe adverse vaccine reaction and family medical history, as allowed by SB 277. Her pediatrician declined to write medical exemptions for K.R.O.-R. and J.S.W.S., because he had received a “special class” where he was told that to qualify for a medical exemption her children would have to have a “documented anaphylactic reaction” to a particular vaccine and then may be eligible for an exemption only for that particular vaccine.

Ms. Owens’ children face immediate and imminent harm, as they are facing permanent denial of their right to attend school in the fall of 2016, although they are legally required to attend school. Ms. Owens seeks an order prohibiting the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of her children K.R.O.-R. and J.S.W.S. into the seventh grade and kindergarten, respectively, at Mattole Elementary School operated by the Mattole Unified School District.

(6) Plaintiff Veronica Delgado resides with her family in the City of Madera, Madera County. She is the parent of seven children. Two of Ms. Delgado’s children have special needs and receive special education services pursuant to Individualized Education Programs (“IEPs”). Both of Ms. Delgado’s children with special needs had adverse reactions to vaccines, although Ms. Delgado did not recognize their conditions as vaccine reactions at the time they occurred.

Ms. Delgado followed the SB 277 legislative process and understood that children with IEPs would be exempt from SB 277’s full vaccination requirements. Ms. Delgado’s child A.N.D. attends Howard School, operated by the Madera School District. Despite requiring special education services and having an IEP, A.N.D. is currently being denied enrollment into the seventh grade. Ms. Delgado has had extensive discussions with school personnel regarding A.N.D.’s special education needs under his IEP but the school continues to refuse to allow A.N.D. to enroll, although he is legally required to attend school.

In her discussions with school personnel, Ms. Delgado became aware that other children with IEPs are being denied enrollment into Howard School. A.N.D. has a younger brother with an IEP who is currently enrolling in the sixth grade. When A.N.D.’s younger brother reaches the seventh grade next fall, he will also be excluded from school, even though his special needs are more extensive than A.N.D.’s and his IEP requires the provision of a myriad special education services.

Ms. Delgado cannot homeschool her two boys with special needs, as well as care for her entire family. She will need to first acquire the skills needed to teach her children in the seventh grade and beyond. Ms. Delgado’s son A.N.D. faces imminent harm as he is being denied school enrollment and access to special education services in the fall of 2016. Ms. Delgado seeks an order prohibiting the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of her children into school under SB 277.

(7) Plaintiff Melanie Sunukjian resides with her minor daughter A.L.S. in Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara County. A.L.S. is ready to enter the seventh grade at Providence Junior High School, operated by the Santa Barbara Unified School District. A.L.S. is vaccinated, but is required to have a Tdap (whooping cough, tetanus and diphtheria) vaccine to enroll in the seventh grade. Ms. Sunukjian is concerned for the health of her daughter and has sought to have her daughter medically exempted from the Tdap that SB 277 requires A.L.S. to receive. A.L.S. has numerous diagnosed food sensitivities and allergies and a family history of autoimmune disease.

Despite these medical concerns, which Ms. Sunukjian believes are legitimate justification for a medical exemption, her doctors are unwilling to consider a medical exemption. A.L.S. does not carry pertussis or diphtheria, yet she is being denied enrollment into the seventh grade and will be denied entry into school in the fall, even though she is legally required to attend school. Ms. Sunukjian seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of A.L.S. to any private school and public school in the State of California.

(8) Plaintiff Dawn Saunders is a widow with three children, residing in Placerville, El Dorado County. Ms. Saunders’ daughter K.S. is due to enter the seventh grade in the fall and is legally required to attend school. K.S. has an IEP as a result of a traumatic brain injury she suffered in 2014. Under the IEP, K.S. receives special education services, including speech and cognitive therapy. K.S. is eligible for meals in school.

Despite her disability and her IEP, K.S. is being denied enrollment into the seventh grade. K.S. is also currently being denied her extended school year services, resulting in severe hardship to Ms. Saunders, both personally and financially. Moreover, homeschooling is not meeting K.S. many educational and therapeutic needs. Ms. Saunders cannot continue to homeschool K.S., work the full time job she needs to support her family, and provide K.S. with the special education services she needs.

K.S. is unable to obtain a medical exemption through the MediCal provider network and is prohibited under threat of losing MediCal health benefits from seeking to obtain a medical exemption from another source, which Ms. Saunders cannot afford in any event. Ms. Saunders and K.S. are experiencing severe hardship and imminent harm because of SB 277. K.S. stands to lose her right to an education, her special education services, her school-provided meals, and her right to attend school with her non-disabled peers.

Ms. Saunders faces the cruel illusion of choice between subjecting her already-disabled child to the risks of vaccination or loss of employment and income to homeschool her child. Ms. Saunders seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of her child and refusing classroom instruction under her IEP, in the public and private schools in the State of California.

(9) Plaintiff Holly Crain resides with her husband and two children G.J.C. and B.G.C. in El Cajon, San Diego County. Ms. Crain has elected to follow an alternative vaccination schedule with her son G.J.C., who has previously experienced an adverse reaction to vaccination. Despite G.J.C.’s adverse reaction to vaccination, Ms. Crain has been advised summarily by her children’s pediatrician that her children do not qualify for medical exemptions under California Health & Safety Code section 120370.

Ms. Crain also holds sincere religious beliefs in her objection to the use of aborted fetal cells in the manufacture of certain vaccines. Ms. Crain’s children are healthy, they see their pediatrician regularly for checkups, and they carry no infectious diseases. Yet with the passage of SB 277, her children are barred from preschool and daycare for the 2016-2017 school year.


Ms. Crain is being constructively forced out of work by SB 277, causing hardship to her family. Ms. Crain seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of her children to every private school and public school in the State of California for which they are otherwise eligible.

(10) Plaintiff Tanya Sutton is a single mother residing with her son K.J.S. (age 5) in Chula Vista, San Diego County. K.J.S. currently attends Kindercare Daycare in Chula Vista and is eligible for kindergarten in the fall. Both Ms. Sutton and K.J.S.’s father work full-time jobs. Regular school and afterschool care is necessary to allow Ms. Sutton to continue working at her job to provide for K.J.S.

In March of 2016, Ms. Sutton attempted to enroll K.J.S. into kindergarten for fall, 2016. K.J.S. has a medical exemption from his doctor, stating that his doctor does not feel vaccination is safe for K.J.S. When Ms. Sutton presented K.J.S.’s enrollment package, the school nurse questioned and refused to accept K.J.S.’s medical exemption. After a heated discussion between Ms. Sutton and the school nurse in front of other school personnel and parents, the school nurse said the medical exemption “was fine,” but after extensive follow-up and run-around, Ms. Sutton learned that the school nurse had flagged K.J.S.’s file because of his medical exemption, causing K.J.S. to miss out on placement opportunities at four different schools. K.J.S. is currently not enrolled in any kindergarten program due to the school nurse’s unlawful rejection of the medical exemption provided by K.J.S.’s physician.

Ms. Sutton stands to lose her job and experience severe financial hardship because K.J.S. is being denied enrollment into kindergarten. Ms. Sutton seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from discriminating against K.J.S. on the basis of his medical exemption to vaccination.

(11) Plaintiff Suzette Loy resides with her husband and children in Vita, San Diego County. Ms. Loy has two children K.R.L. (age 4) and J.B.L. K.R.L. is selectively vaccinated and is currently being denied admission to kindergarten because she does not have all of the more than 30 vaccine doses required for kindergarten enrollment. Ms. Loy’s oldest child experienced an adverse reaction to vaccination. Ms. Loy wants all of the recommended vaccines for her other children, but wishes to follow a slow and cautious vaccination schedule in light of her older son’s reaction.

Her children’s pediatricians have denied her an alternative vaccination schedule that would allow her to carefully select the times for vaccine administration, and allow her to carefully monitor her children for potential vaccine injury along the way.

At great hardship to her family, Ms. Loy is forced to homeschool her daughter K.R.L., instead of sending her to kindergarten this year. K.R.L. is healthy and is not infected with and does not carry any of the illnesses for which vaccination is required, yet she is permanently barred from attending school.

Ms. Loy seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of her children to every private school and public school in the State of California for which they are otherwise eligible.

(See the second half of the article in the next post. I am copying the whole thing here on the forum because it's hard to read in the format at the link.)

onawah
16th July 2016, 03:59
Continued: SB 277 – First Amended Complaint For Declaratory, Injunctive And Other Relief…
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-first-amended-complaint-declaratory-injunctive-relief/


(12) Plaintiff Adriane Hoeft lives with her two minor sons, O.C. and F.C. in Roseville, Placer County. O.C. became impacted by Transverse Myelitis, leaving him with flaccid paralysis from the waist down after a round of vaccinations when he was 17 months old. O.C. requires a wheelchair. Ms. Hoeft will never vaccinate O.C. again.

When O.C. suffered his vaccine injury and became paralyzed, Ms. Hoeft believed that vaccine injuries were extremely rare – one in a million. Four months after O.C. became paralyzed from his vaccinations, his younger brother F.C. was born. Ms. Hoeft took F.C. to the doctor for routine vaccinations. Immediately following his two-month vaccines, F.C. became very weak, sick and somber for two days. Fearing a repeat of what happened to O.C. and after beginning to research vaccines, Ms. Hoeft stopped vaccinating F.C. Both O.C. and F.C. are currently in elementary school in the first grade and transitional kindergarten, respectively.

They both have PBEs which will be grandfathered until they reach the seventh grade. At seventh grade, however, both O.C. and F.C. will be permanently expelled from school and denied an education. O.C. has an IEP and, according to Amendment (h) of SB 277, should be exempt from vaccination requirements.

However, the Roseville City School District has announced publicly that regardless of Amendment (h), children with IEPs will not be allowed to attend school with other children. O.C. and F.C. are not infected with and do not carry any of the illnesses for which vaccines are required, yet they will be permanently barred from school and denied their right to an education upon reaching seventh grade.

Ms. Hoeft seeks injunctive relief prohibiting the defendant state actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of her children to every private school and public school in the State of California for which they are otherwise eligible.

(13) Plaintiff Jennifer Kennedy resides with her husband and three children, C.E.K. (age 14); A.G.K. (age 11) and E.L.K. (age 7), in Pasadena, Los Angeles County. Ms. Kennedy’s family history includes adverse reactions to vaccination. A.G.K. and E.L.K. are selectively vaccinated, following a careful risk/benefit analysis. Both A.G.K. and E.L.K. currently have PBEs on file with their schools, which will expire when they reach the seventh grade. A.G.K. is entering the sixth grade at Sierra Madre Middle School. A.G.K. and E.L.K. have not been able to obtain a medical exemption to vaccination from their pediatrician.

Ms. Kennedy objects to the use of aborted fetal cell lines in any vaccines, based on her pro-life religious beliefs. Ms. Kennedy’s children are healthy. They have no infectious diseases and they are not infected with or capable of transmitting any of the illnesses for which vaccination is required under SB 277, yet upon reaching the seventh grade, they will be permanently barred from school even though they are legally required to attend school.

Ms. Kennedy seeks injunctive and declaratory relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of her children to every private school and public school in the State of California for which they are otherwise eligible.

(14) Plaintiff Michelle Veneziano, DO, is a physician in Mill Valley, Marin County. She graduated from Western University of Health Sciences in 2000 and completed her residency in family practice in 2003. In her medical school and postgraduate training, Dr. Veneziano received only cursory instruction about vaccine science and practice and was not educated regarding the potential for adverse events. Dr. Veneziano recalls being taught that adverse reactions to vaccines are extremely rare. She was not trained in recognizing, treating or reporting adverse reactions to vaccines.

Dr. Veneziano is the mother of G.S.V., age 11, entering sixth grade in San Geronimo Valley Middle School in Marin County. G.S.V. is vaccinated with all of the vaccines on California’s school vaccination schedule, except for hepatitis B, a blood-borne illness for which G.S.V. is not at risk. To advance to the seventh grade in the 2017-2018 school year, G.S.V. will need a Tdap vaccine. G.S.V. suffers from eczema, gastrointestinal distress and autoimmune disease. Dr. Veneziano has recently begun reading books and scientific studies about vaccines and has identified G.S.V.’s ailments as likely sequelae to receiving multiple rounds of childhood vaccines.

Dr. Veneziano has only recently learned about vaccine injuries, the existence of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. Like most physicians, Dr. Veneziano’s medical training focused only on the benefits of vaccination, without acknowledgment of any risks.

Based upon her recent research into the scientific literature and books about vaccines and their benefits and risks, including recent studies by the FDA and CDC about the acellular pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine, Dr. Veneziano has determined that she will not give G.S.V. the Tdap vaccine required for G.S.V. to advance to the seventh grade. According to the most current research from the FDA, CDC and various independent researchers, the acellular pertussis vaccine given in the United States does not prevent pertussis infection or transmission and instead merely masks symptoms of the disease, creating asymptomatic carriers which is not only not beneficial, but may be detrimental to public health.

Dr. Veneziano is also concerned about some of the ingredients used in the manufacture of the Tdap vaccine and the risks associated with injection of those ingredients. Dr. Veneziano has decided to forego the Tdap vaccine for G.S.V. both to avoid the risk of worsening G.S.V.’s autoimmune status and to avoid G.S.V. becoming infected with whooping cough asymptomatically and unknowingly infecting a susceptible person with whooping cough. As a medical professional, Dr. Veneziano should be able to make healthcare decisions for G.S.V. without being deprived of the fundamental right for G.S.V. to receive a school-based education.

Dr. Veneziano seeks injunctive and declaratory relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of from denying admission of G.S.V. to every private school and public school in the State of California for which she is otherwise eligible.

(15) Plaintiff Chanda Murray resides with her six children, including her daughter S.R.M. and her son E.D.M., and her common law husband, in Sacramento, Sacramento County. S.R.M. should be entering twelfth grade at the Twin Rivers School but Ms. Murray has received written notice that the school may refuse to honor S.R.M.’s PBE, claiming that she needs DTaP and chicken pox boosters.

Twelfth grade is not a checkpoint year and there is no justification to revoke S.R.M.’s PBE and exclude her from her final year of school with her friends, jeopardizing S.R.M.’s future educational and work prospects.

E.D.M., who also has a PBE, should be a rising seventh grader at Foothill Ranch Middle School but Ms. Murray has been informed that he will not be able to attend school there this fall. Nor can he attend Westside Preparatory Charter School, recommended by his teacher and principal, because he is not fully vaccinated. E.D.M. is an excellent student and athlete. If homeschooled, will be denied the opportunity to participate in the community sports leagues in which he has excelled because the leagues require proof of enrollment in public school.

Ms. Murray’s obtained PBEs for her children, including S.R.M. and E.D.M., because her second son suffered a severe vaccine reaction at the time of his six-month vaccinations. That child suffered an Acute Disseminating Encephalomyelitis (ADEM). He is non-verbal and has significant physical and developmental challenges, including severe brain injury and visual and hearing impairments. Ms. Murray was able to obtain a medical exemption for that child based on his injury.

When SB277 was passed, she tried to obtain medical exemptions for her younger children based on their sibling’s adverse reaction but their physician refused to provide an exemption, telling Ms. Murray that immediate family history of vaccine injury is not a valid reason for exemption. If Ms. Murray has to homeschool her seventh and twelfth graders, she will have to forego employment. Neither S.R.M. nor E.D.M. carries the diseases for which the schools are claiming they need to be vaccinated and they will be denied entry to school in the fall, even though they legally are required to attend school.

Ms. Murray seeks injunctive relief prohibiting defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of S.R.M. and E.D.M. to any private school or public school in the State of California.

(16) Plaintiff Douglas Mackenzie, MD, is a plastic surgeon in Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara County. Dr. Mackenzie graduated from Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in 1989. For 11 years, Dr. Mackenzie served as a lieutenant colonel, flight surgeon in the Air National Guard. He was also Chief of Professional Services for the medical unit (Channel Islands 146th), and in that capacity had oversight of the Immunology Section.

Dr. Mackenzie is the father of two boys, D.C.M. (20 years old) and G.J.M. (2 years old). D.C.M. had all recommended vaccines and has no obvious sequelae from them. Dr. Mackenzie did not know about risks of vaccines when D.C.M. was receiving vaccines and, like most parents, did not know which vaccines D.C.M. had received. Nor did Dr. Mackenzie know how much the CDC recommended schedule on which D.C.M. had been vaccinated differed from the schedule on which G.J.M. was expected to be vaccinated. G.J.M. is selectively vaccinated.

Dr. Mackenzie has decided to stop giving G.J.M. vaccines. G.J.M.’s pediatrician appears supportive of Dr. Mackenzie’s choice. G.J.M. currently attends preschool with a PBE, but will be denied entry into kindergarten if SB 277 remains in effect.

Dr. Mackenzie became interested in vaccines approximately four years after repeatedly observing media vilification of any doctor, politician or layperson who had questions about vaccines. Dr. Mackenzie began researching vaccines. He read books and scientific studies from the CDC, FDA, pharmaceutical companies and independent academic researchers.

What became clear to Dr. Mackenzie in his research was how little he had been taught about vaccines in his medical school and post-graduate training. Dr. Mackenzie’s medical school and residency training taught him simply that vaccines are safe and effective and they are one of the most important public health achievements of the 20th Century. He recalls no discussion about risks from vaccination and how to recognize and treat adverse events. He did not learn about the existence of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program or the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

Dr. Mackenzie also recalls no mention whatsoever of any controversy regarding vaccinations. Dr. Mackenzie’s research into vaccines and vaccine science led him to become concerned about potential side effects of vaccination and he has decided to stop vaccinating G.J.M.

As a medical professional, Dr. Mackenzie is capable of making sound healthcare decisions for G.J.M. without being deprived of the fundamental right for G.J.M. to receive a school-based education.

Dr. Mackenzie seeks injunctive and declaratory relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of G.J.M. to every private and public nursery, elementary and secondary school in the State of California for which he is otherwise eligible.

(17) Plaintiff Victor Nuño, DO, is a physician residing with his wife, also a physician, and their fifteen-month old daughter, Z.E.N. in Vallejo, Solano County. Dr. Nuño has medical offices in the Cities of Vallejo and Redding and is an Assistant Professor at the College of Osteopathic Medicine at Touro University.

In his medical school and post-graduate training, Dr. Nuño learned about the history and benefits of vaccines. Regarding risks, he recalls being taught that serious vaccine reactions were extremely rare and that most reactions to vaccines are mild and self-limited. He was not trained in medical school to recognize, treat or report adverse reactions to vaccines.

In residency, Dr. Nuño worked with a physician who treated patients with adverse reactions to vaccination. This is when Dr. Nuño first began conducting independent research and reading textbooks and scientific studies on vaccines.

Dr. Nuño is troubled by the lack of adequate safety studies on the safety of certain vaccine ingredients and their synergistic effect on children’s health. Dr. Nuño is also troubled by the lack of adequate safety research of the dramatically expanded vaccination schedule according to which children today receive vaccines.

Finally, Dr. Nuño is concerned about the current climate among medical professionals that allows virtually no honest discussion about vaccines or acknowledgement of the indisputable fact that like all pharmaceutical products, vaccines can cause a range of adverse reactions.

While Dr. Nuño and his wife will give Z.E.N. some vaccines on a delayed and selective schedule, they do not believe that Z.E.N. needs all of the doses of all vaccines required for entry into California schools under SB 277. As medical professionals, Dr. Nuño and his wife are capable of and should be able to make healthcare decisions for Z.E.N. without being deprived of the fundamental right for Z.E.N. to receive a school-based education. Z.E.N. does not carry and cannot transmit any of the illnesses for which vaccines are required under SB 277.

Dr. Nuño seeks injunctive and declaratory relief prohibiting the defendant State actors and agencies of the State of California from denying admission of Z.E.N. to every private and public nursery, elementary and secondary school in the State of California for which she is otherwise eligible.

(18) Plaintiff E4A Foundation is a non-profit organization under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business in San Diego, California, whose purpose is to promote and protect equal access to public and private education.

In this lawsuit, E4A Foundation asserts claims on behalf of its members who are impacted by SB 277. E4A Foundation’s members include, but are not limited to: (a) parents whose children will be excluded from kindergarten in fall 2016; (b) parents whose children will be excluded from the seventh grade in fall 2016; (c) parents whose children will be excluded from daycare or nursery school in fall 2016; (d) parents who have moved to California and cannot enroll their children into school; (e) parents with religious objections to vaccination, including objections to using vaccines produced using aborted fetal cells; (f) parents who have concerns about the safety of vaccines and their ingredients; (g) parents of children with disabilities; (h) parents of children with special needs who have IEPs in school districts that are refusing admission to children with IEPs; (i) parents whose children have medical exemptions from vaccination that are being rejected by schools; (j) parents who object to the hepatitis B vaccine; (k) parents of children who are being denied conditional entry into school to enable them to use a delayed catch-up vaccination schedule set by the child’s physician; (l) parents who filed PBEs prior to January 1, 2016 and whose children are being denied reenrollment into the next grade because the school has lost the previously-filed PBE; (m) parents who are not fluent English speakers and, therefore, cannot homeschool; (n) single parents who do not have the financial resources to homeschool; (o) low income parents who do not have the financial means to homeschool; (p) parents whose family members have had adverse vaccine reactions, including those who have been compensated by the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, but who cannot obtain medical exemptions for their children; (q) parents whose children have blood test results indicating sufficient antibody levels for illnesses for which they are required to vaccinate under SB 277; (r) healthcare professionals, including but not limited to physicians, nurses, physician’s assistants and emergency medical technicians who are concerned, among other things, about the safety of vaccines and the current vaccination program, the loss of rights to equal education, parental decision-making and informed consent to medical procedures.

(19) Plaintiff Weston A. Price Foundation is a nonprofit, tax exempt nutrition education foundation whose members follow healthy natural approaches to health and healing. Weston A. Price Foundation has 39 local chapters and 1,836 members in California, many of whom are families with young children who would avail themselves, or may have in the past obtained, a PBE. In this lawsuit, Weston A. Price Foundation asserts claims on behalf of its members who are impacted by SB 277.

(20) Plaintiff Citizens for Health is a nonprofit, 501(c)(4) advocacy organization providing information about natural healing and laws affecting health to approximately 30,000 Californians. In this lawsuit, Citizens for Health asserts claims on behalf of its members who are impacted by SB 277.

(21) Plaintiff Alliance for Natural Health USA (ANH-USA) is a Georgia based nonprofit corporation founded in 1992. The ANH-USA mission is to protect access to natural health options and a toxin free lifestyle, including the ability to decline vaccination or modify the vaccine schedule for one’s children. The ANH – USA consists of over 500,000 members, including 78,000 California residents, many of whom will be harmed by SB 277 because they will not be able to make their own decisions for their school age children based on their beliefs about vaccine-related harms. In this lawsuit, ANH-USA asserts claims on behalf of its members who are impacted by SB 277.



Defendants

The State of California is the legal and political entity with the nondelegable responsibility for educating all of California’s school children by providing a free public education under the California Constitution, Article IX, Section 5 and by assuring that all California children receive their fundamental right to an equal education under the equal protection clauses of the California Constitution, Article I, Sections 7(a) and 16(a).

Defendant Tom Torlakson, sued in his official capacity, is the State Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of California, the Secretary and Executive Officer for the State Board of Education, and the Chief Executive Officer of the California Department of Education. He is obligated to take all necessary steps to ensure that school districts comply with the California Constitution and State laws. Pursuant to the California Education Code, he is the Director of Education in whom all executive and administrative functions of the California Department of Education are vested. He is responsible for ensuring that all children within the State of California receive a free and equal public education.

Defendant California Board of Education is responsible for determining the policies governing California’s schools and for adopting rules and regulations for the supervision and administration of all 1,022 local school districts. Pursuant to California Education Code sections 22020-22032, Defendant State Board of Education is required to supervise local school districts to ensure that they comply with State and federal laws concerning educational services. 35. Defendant California Department of Education is the department of State government responsible for administering and enforcing laws related to education.

Defendant Karen Smith, MD, MPH, sued in her official capacity, is the Director and State Public Health Officer for the California Department of Public Health. She is obligated to take all necessary steps to ensure that the California Department of Public Health and 61 local health departments comply with the State and federal laws in discharging their duties to protect public health and safety.

The California Department of Public Health is a state agency created by California statute, charged with implementing the California Health and Safety Code and regulating the statutes at issue, including, inter alia, Health & Safety Code §§ 120325, 120335, 120338, 120370 and 120375.

Defendants Takashi Wada, MD, and Charity Dean, MD, sued in their official capacities, are the Director and Health Officer, respectively, of the Santa Barbara County Department of Public Health, and are responsible for upholding, implementing and enforcing the laws at issue.

All defendants either are recipients of State and federal funds in support of the operation of schools or health departments or are responsible for and capable of ensuring that State and federal funds are spent by recipients in a nondiscriminatory manner in the State public school system.

Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that all of the Defendants are and were in some manner legally liable for the conduct at issue in this action. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that each Defendant was at all times acting with the implied or express direction, approval and ratification of each of the other Defendants.

Irreparable Injuries..

Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 200. Plaintiffs are now severely and irreparably injured by SB 277 – a state law that violates the Due Process and Equal Protections of the Fourteenth Amendment as well as the California Constitution.

By way of example only, Plaintiffs’ and their children’s injuries as a result of SB 277 include the deprivation of fundamental rights and the severe humiliation, emotional distress, pain, suffering, psychological harm, and stigma caused to Plaintiffs and their children by Plaintiffs’ inability to send their children to school, and the stigma caused by the mischaracterization and marginalization of their children.

Plaintiffs’ injuries will be redressed only if this Court declares SB 277 unconstitutional and enjoins Defendants from enforcing it.

An actual and judicially cognizable controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding whether SB 277 violates the Constitutions of the United States and the State of California. Defendants are presently enforcing this state law to the detriment of Plaintiffs and their minor children.

General Allegations…

I am going to save the explanation of the “General Allegations” for the next article. Why? There is a lot of stuff readers will be thrilled to see.

To Read the entire eighty-nine (89) page Complaint right now, click on: first amended complaint.
http://bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/first-amended-complaint.pdf


Stay tuned…

By Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

onawah
17th July 2016, 14:25
SB 277 First Amended Complaint “General Allegations…”



Examining the Details…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

I make no secret of the fact that I VERY MUCH like the writing and
construction of this lawsuit, both as a legal tool, and as a clear concise,
explanation of the issues that we, the people of Planet Earth, face in
regards to mandatory vaccine programs.

I know there is a lot of reading that needs to be done to comprehend the
magnitude of the problem we face, but..

It’s all right here. Just read it a piece at a time.

The “General Allegations”…

I am going to break this section of the First Amended Complaint in to
sub-sections to make it easier to comprehend where the legal arguments are
going. Yes, there is a lot here to read, but it all makes sense,
especially if you break it up into those sections. So, let’s do that…

To read the entire article, click on:

http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-first-amended-complaint-general-allegations/#more-4064

onawah
19th July 2016, 16:46
Why Are Vaccine Rights Being Removed While Safety Issues Are Increasingly Brought to the Fore?
July 19, 2016
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/07/19/vaccine-rights-risks.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20160719Z1&et_cid=DM111532&et_rid=1579911636
eTRCy1X33Ao

By Dr. Mercola

As noted by Barbara Loe Fisher,1 founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), July Fourth celebrates the American Declaration of Independence, which asserts that "all men are created equal," and are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."

Unwilling to submit to the tyranny of the aristocracy any longer, the Declaration is a pledge, promising that the United States would uphold the "unalienable natural right to life and liberty that belongs to every person."

Yet today, 240 years later, we again find ourselves in a situation where we're increasingly oppressed by an elite "who want the legal right to judge, shame, segregate, discriminate against and punish fellow citizens who do not share their beliefs," Fisher writes, adding:

"Nowhere is this truth more self evident than in the oppressive implementation of one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination laws that fail to respect biodiversity or human rights and crush citizen opposition, in violation of the informed consent ethic and freedom of thought, speech, conscience and religious belief ...

The appropriation of unaccountable authority by medical trade and the militarization of public health in the 21st century should be of concern to every person who values life and liberty."

Vaccines Are 'Unavoidably Unsafe'

Both the U.S. Congress and the Supreme Court have concluded that government licensed vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe,"2 and this is what precipitated the decision to grant drug companies immunity against vaccine injuries and deaths.

If vaccine makers could actually be sued for damages, most would probably go out of business.

This "free pass" means that if the vaccine fails to protect you or your child, or worse, ends up injuring or killing, you cannot sue the vaccine manufacturer or the doctor who administered the vaccine.

As a result of having zero liability for harm arising from the use of their products, vaccine makers have started churning out an ever-growing number of poorly tested vaccines with dubious benefits.

Bill Threatens to Strip Virginia of Religious and Medical Exemptions

At the same time, there's a concerted, nationwide effort to eliminate choice by removing religious and conscientious [sic] vaccine exemptions, which were instituted more than 50 years ago.

"[In] 2015, Vermont lost the conscience exemption and California lost the personal belief exemption protecting both exercise of conscience and religious beliefs. This year, the vaccine machine invaded Virginia," Fisher writes.3

"A proposed law was introduced in the House of Delegates in January 2016 to strip away not just the religious vaccine exemption, but also the medical exemption for all children, whether they are being homeschooled or are enrolled in public or private schools.

An individual physician would no longer exercise professional judgment when granting a child a medical exemption but would become a government agent enforcing the narrow one-size-fits all federal vaccine contraindication guidelines ... which means that 99.99 percent of children would not qualify for the medical vaccine exemption in Virginia."

Fortunately, parents in Virginia rose up and were able to suppress the bill. But it may be only a temporary victory. Similar legislation is expected to be reintroduced next year.

Interestingly, not only does Virginia have one of the lowest vaccine exemption rates in the U.S., Virginia is also "hallowed ground where freedom of thought, conscience and religion [were] first defined as a natural right and [were] codified into American law," Fisher notes.

Virginia's history as a leading defender of religious and personal rights is likely one of the reasons they're now trying to undermine personal and religious freedom in that state with the most restrictive anti-choice law of any state to date.

Lawsuit Filed to Overturn California Vaccine Requirements

Despite overwhelming opposition, California lost the personal belief exemption last year. The new law took effect on July 1.

That same day, a group of parents and the nonprofit Education 4 All filed a lawsuit to overturn the new law, which requires all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public or private school and/or daycare.

Parents who refuse to vaccinate their child according to the mandated schedule have only two options: they can try to get a medical exemption, which is extremely difficult and rarely obtained, or home-school their child.

Any child who previously attended school under a personal belief exemption must be fully vaccinated by kindergarten and seventh grade to be allowed to stay in school.

According to CBS News,4 the lawsuit says "the law violates the children's right to an education as guaranteed under California's constitution, and asks for a judge to suspend the law while the suit plays out."

The plaintiff's attorney, Robert T. Moxley, said the law "has made second class citizens out of children who for very compelling reasons are not vaccinated," adding they hope to be granted an injunction "while the judicial process takes place to see if this law is constitutional, which it most certainly does not seem to be."

Forced Vaccinations Are Unethical and Dangerous

In a recent article for congressional blog The Hill, Gretchen DuBeau, executive director for Alliance for Natural Health USA (ANH-USA), writes:5

"When health officials assure us that almost all children should receive the full schedule of vaccinations, you would think that rigorous safety testing has repeatedly proven vaccines, their ingredients and the CDC schedule to be completely safe.

The sobering truth is, however, that this safety testing has been conspicuously lacking and in many cases simply has not been done. Until these extremely serious safety concerns are adequately addressed, it is unethical — and very possibly dangerous — to force children to be vaccinated.

Take aluminum, for example, which has been added to vaccines since the 1930s to help jolt the body's immune system into action.

Aluminum is a well-documented neurotoxin linked with Alzheimer's disease, epilepsy, asthma, hyperactivity and Down's syndrome. Despite these dangers, adequate clinical research proving aluminum adjuvants to be safe has never been done."

Indeed, it is the lack of evidence of safety that concerns most parents who decide to delay or forgo one or more vaccinations for their children. They're not doing it out of some misplaced desire to rebel against authority.

But rather than conducting the necessary research to settle these uncertainties, the vaccine industry has chosen to simply push for forced vaccinations instead. And why not? Forced vaccination guarantees maximum profits since there are no repercussions should their vaccines turn out to do more harm than good.

Assumptions and Comparing Apples to Oranges Are Not Good Science

DuBeau goes on to talk about how the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) set the limit on the amount of aluminum allowed in vaccines, saying this limit is not based on safety studies but rather on the amount required to boost vaccine effectiveness. The agency is simply assuming the current levels are safe, based on inappropriate data.

The safety level for orally ingested aluminum was set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) based on rat studies. However, while the EPA's minimum risk level is used to justify aluminum adjuvants in vaccines, you really cannot compare orally ingested aluminum and intra-muscularly injected aluminum. These two routes of administration do not produce the same health effects. As noted by DuBeau:

"[I]ngesting aluminum orally, where only about 0.25 percent is absorbed and then filtered by the kidneys, is very different than injecting it directly into muscle, where it may be absorbed at nearly 100 percent efficiency over time and can accumulate in organs, including the brain.

This complete lack of evidence proving the safety of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines is unacceptable and should concern any parent who trusts health authorities with the safety of their children."

Many Scientists Have Raised Concerns About Potential Vaccine Dangers

DuBeau takes a strong stand against California's mandatory vaccination law (SB 277), calling it "ill-advised," as it mandates dosing all school-aged children with a dangerous metal known to have neurological effects. She also points out that the scientific community is nowhere near as unanimous as proponents of SB 277 and other forced vaccination laws would like you to believe.

"Many doctors and researchers have raised serious concerns about vaccine ingredients like aluminum," she writes. "Animal studies, for instance, have demonstrated a link between repeated inoculation with aluminum-containing vaccines and severe neurobehavioral outcomes ... and altered expression of certain genes in the brain.

According to DuBeau, children who get all of the vaccines on the CDC's schedule may receive as much as 4,225 micrograms of aluminum in their first year of life. "To put this in perspective," she says, "the animals mentioned above were given an aluminum dose in a range that is nearly comparable to what children on the CDC schedule receive. This should give us all pause."

Also consider this: the amount of aluminum injected into a newborn baby via the hepatitis B vaccine equates to an adult getting 10 doses of the vaccine in one day, when you consider the difference in weight between the two.

In order for an adult to get the same amount of aluminum per kilo of weight that a child receives at the age of 2 months, the adult would have to get 34 adult doses of the hepatitis B vaccine in one day. Does it really seem reasonable or wise to inject that hefty a dose of aluminum into a baby?

Doctor Highlights Risks and Excessive Cost of HPV Vaccine

One medical doctor raising concerns about vaccine hazards is Gary G. Kohls, who is now retired. In a recent article,6 he responds to a commentary in the News Tribune, "written and endorsed by area board-certified pediatricians, oncologists and obstetricians/gynecologists," who promote "the universal use of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine for pre-teen and teen-age girls."

According to Kohls, "the commentary appeared to be a part of a worldwide, billion-dollar promotion campaign," to encourage women around the world to get vaccinated, and financing this campaign is "one of the most profitable, price-gouging pharmaceutical companies in the world, Merck."

"In 2006, after only three to five years of clinical trials, the FDA approved for marketing the most expensive vaccine in the history of the world, Gardasil, which has been proclaimed as preventative for cancer of the cervix, a claim that was never proved and which has, to date, not prevented a single case of cervical cancer ... mainly because cancer of the cervix takes 20 to 50 years to develop," he writes.

The only thing these short-term industry-funded studies showed was that the vaccine "produced transient anti-HPV immune complexes in most of the young female vaccine recipients." They also found "modest reductions in the development of abnormal Pap smears." However, it's well known that 90 percent of all HPV infections clear up on their own within two years anyway, so that's hardly a medical breakthrough.

Kohls notes that the antigens in Gardasil and GlaxoSmithKline's version of the HPV vaccine, Cervarix, are "genetically engineered proteins that, thanks to the neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant in each dose, can cause serious autoimmune disorders and unknown levels of potentially serious mitochondrial damage."

'Number Needed to Treat' Statistic Reveals Risks and Cost of HPV Vaccine Far Outweigh Alleged Benefit

The HPV vaccines are also exorbitantly priced, costing approximately $140 for three doses, plus office visit charges. According to Kohls, the News Tribune commentary bore all the hallmarks of an industry campaign, including all the standard talking points. Missing entirely was any mention of the potential downsides and risks of the HPV vaccines, and without this information, how can a parent or young woman make a fully informed decision?

Kohls goes on to discuss the statistical measure known as "Number Needed to Treat" (NNT), which is a simple way to relate the effectiveness of any given treatment. A drug's NNT tells you how many people have to receive the drug in order for one person to benefit from it.

"For instance, the NNT for a course of penicillin for penicillin-sensitive streptococcal pharyngitis is one, meaning that one cure occurs for every one course of treatment. If a treatment results in only half of patients benefitting, the NNT is two (the inverse of the fraction 1/2). The smaller the NNT, the more beneficial the treatment," he explains.

"An article published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) ... stated that for Gardasil, the Number Needed to Vaccinate (same principle as the NNT) to prevent four or five cases of cervical cancer for a typical 12-year-old girl would be 9,080, meaning that 9,075 girls would be risking the serious adverse health consequences of Gardasil ... while still not receiving the alleged benefit, the prevention of cervical cancer." [Emphasis mine]

Neither doctors nor patients are informed about NNT statistics, yet this can be a very important treatment consideration. In Kohl's view, the cost of the HPV vaccine, both in terms of dollars and cents and their potential adverse health effects "come nowhere near outweighing the alleged benefit."

It's very unusual for a doctor to come out with such strong views. Most would do so under the threat of potentially losing their medical license. However, Kohl is retired, so he doesn't have to fret about that possibility, which may be why he's able to be so outspoken in the first place.

Complaint Filed Over European HPV Vaccine Assessment

Kohls is not the only one expressing concerns over the way the HPV vaccine is being pushed while risks are overlooked. On May 26, the Nordic Cochrane Center, which is part of Cochrane, an international network considered the gold standard within the evidence-based medical model for assessing the effectiveness of common medical interventions, filed a complaint with the European Medicines Agency (EMA), questioning the EMA's 2015 Assessment Report on the safety of HPV vaccines. In the 19-page letter to the EMA, Cochrane Nordic Center writes:7

"We are concerned about the EMA's handling of this issue as reflected in its official report and ask the EMA to assess:

1. Whether the EMA has been open and accountable to the citizens and has respected their rights to know about the uncertainties related to the safety of the HPV vaccines.

2. Whether the EMA has lived up to the professional and scientific standards that must be expected of the agency to guarantee that the administration enjoys legitimacy when evaluating the science and the data related to the safety of the HPV vaccines.

3. Whether the EMA has treated fairly — in a manner that guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy — a Danish whistleblower, Dr. Louise Brinth, when she raised concerns about possible serious harms of the HPV vaccines.

4. Whether the EMA has treated fairly ... the observations and concerns the Danish Health and Medicines Authorities and the Uppsala Monitoring Centre had raised about possible serious harms of the HPV vaccines.

5. Whether the EMA's procedures for evaluating the safety of medical interventions guarantee that the administration enjoys legitimacy. The EMA asked the manufacturers of the vaccines to assess potential harms of their own products in which they have huge financial interests.

6. Whether the extreme secrecy, with life-long confidentiality agreements, which the EMA imposed on its working group members and scientific experts, is needed; is legitimate; is in the public interest; and guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy.

7. Whether the redactions the EMA imposed on documents it delivered to the citizens according to Freedom of Information requests were needed; were legitimate; are in the public interest; and guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy.

8. Whether the EMA has behaved in a manner that guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy in relation to declaring conflicts of interest. We noticed a Guido Rasi's name associated with patents for inventions and wonder whether this is the same person who is the EMA's director.

If so, we believe Rasi has failed to declare his conflicts of interest. We also believe that the rapporteur for the EMA's report, Julie Williams, has failed to declare her conflicts of interest.

9. Whether the EMA behaves in a manner that guarantees that the administration enjoys legitimacy when the agency use experts with financial ties to the manufacturers, in particular considering that it is always possible to find experts without such conflicts.

10. In the interest of transparency, we urge the EMA to ensure that the names of all the experts consulted are disclosed together with their conflict of interest declarations ... "

Functional Disorders Linked to HPV Vaccine

According to Cochrane Nordic Center, the EMA ignored significant data showing there may be severe adverse events associated with the HPV vaccine, "the prominent symptoms, which are suspected of being caused by the vaccine," bearing strong similarities to functional disorders such as:

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)
Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS)
Chronic regional pain syndrome (CRPS)
According to the complaint, "the hypothetical mechanism is an autoimmune reaction triggered by either the active component of the vaccine or the adjuvant in the vaccine."

Cochrane also claims the EMA's internal 256-page report, which served as the basis for the draft of its 40-page official report, contradicts the final report. "We find that the EMA's comments are unprofessional, misleading, inappropriate and pejorative, and that the EMA's approach involves cherry-picking, which is unscientific," Cochrane writes.

Cochrane also notes that the Uppsala centre compared adverse events reported following HPV vaccination and vaccination with all other vaccines given to women. Based on their findings, it would appear the HPV vaccine carries a FAR higher risk of severe side effects than any other vaccine, yet the EMA claims no conclusions could be drawn from this data:

POTS was reported 82 times for HPV vaccines versus once for other vaccines
CRPS was reported 69 times for HPV vaccines versus 16 for other vaccines
Autonomic nervous system imbalance was reported 77 times versus 16 for others
Fibromyalgia was reported 62 times for HPV versus 39 for other vaccines
FluMist Found to Be Worthless Against Influenza

In related news, The Washington Post8 recently wrote about the "mystery" of why FluMist suddenly stopped working. Until recently, the spray form of the flu vaccine was preferred over the injectable flu vaccine for children between the ages of 2 and 8. FluMIst is a live attenuated vaccine, meaning it contains a live but weakened version of the flu virus.

In June, a CDC advisory panel decided the nasal spray "was so ineffective that it should not be used by anyone during the 2016 to 2017 season," The Washington Post reports. Data from last winter's flu season revealed FluMist was only 3 percent effective among children aged 2 to 17. This is yet another instance where almost everyone who received the vaccine risked their health for what amounts to no potential benefit whatsoever.

According to Dr. David Kimberlin, a professor of pediatrics at The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), the reason for FluMist's failure is still not understood. Researchers at MedImmune, the makers of FluMist, are trying to determine the cause. As noted by The Washington Post:

"In any given flu season, vaccine effectiveness varies. One factor is how well the vaccines match the virus that is actually prevalent. Other factors include the age and general health of the recipient.

In the overall population, the CDC says studies show vaccines can reduce the risk of flu by about 50 to 60 percent when the vaccines are well matched. Now, researchers are trying to find a common factor behind FluMist's recent incidents of poor performance."

One of the questions researchers will attempt to answer include whether the flu vaccine may lose effectiveness when given to a child who has been previously vaccinated against influenza several times.

What does all of this tell you? In my view, it speaks loud and clear to the fact that vaccine makers really don't know as much about their product as they purport to know. Yet despite this lack of knowledge, they insist vaccines are beneficial and worth just about any risk to the individual in order to protect society at large.HINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.

It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations, and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC's free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your smart phone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up-to-date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community.

Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips. So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Share Your Story With the Media and People You Know

If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury, or death, please talk about it. If we don't share information and experiences with one another, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the "other side" of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination, will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination.

The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than "statistically acceptable collateral damage" of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn't be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More

I encourage you to visit the website of the non-profit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries, and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, and school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.
Vaccine Failure Wall: View or post descriptions about vaccines that have failed to work and protect the vaccinated from disease.
Connect With Your Doctor or Find a New One That Will Listen and Care

If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don't want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination. However, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they're starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents.

It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect, and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

onawah
19th July 2016, 18:36
SB 277 Lawsuit – Preliminary Injunction Hearing Date – August 12th, 2016
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-preliminary-injunction-hearing-date-august-12th-2016/#more-4139

What is a Preliminary Injunction Hearing?

The whole purpose of the lawsuit against SB 277 is to stop it, and its spin-off activities, from being activated.

A Motion for Preliminary Injunction is a request to the Court for an Injunction before we begin arguing the lawsuit. There will be an actual Court Hearing for this August 12th, 2016, 1:30PM in Courtroom 13A, Federal Court Building, San Diego, CA. (shown in the photo above).

What is an Injunction?

According to the Cornell School of Law it is:

An injunction is a court order requiring a person to do or cease doing a specific action. Temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions are temporary injunctions. They are issued early in a lawsuit to maintain the status quo by preventing a defendant from becoming insolvent or to stop the defendant from continuing his or her allegedly harmful actions. Choosing whether to grant temporary injunctive relief is a discretionary power of the court. Permanent injunctions are issued as a final judgment in a case. Failure to comply with an injunction may result in being held in contempt of court.

Getting an injunction is NOT an easy process. A US Supreme Court Decision called “Winter vs Natural Resources Defense Council” set the four-factor preliminary injunction standards that are being used today in Federal Courts.

What the court will want to be convinced of is that for the Plaintiffs:

(1) there is a likelihood of irreparable harm with no adequate remedy at law;

(2) the balance of harm favors the movant;

(3) there is a likelihood of success on the merits of the case;

(4) the public interest favors the granting of the injunction.

Now, those of you that read the case, noting how it was organized, can see that each section addressed one of these four factors – and did it very well.

There’s More…

But, then on top of the language in the case there was the “Plaintiff’s Motion For Preliminary Injunction” which has some interesting points of its own. Below is that language. It is short and to the point:



PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

COME NOW the Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, James S. Turner, Betsy E. Lehrfeld, Robert T. Moxley, and Carl M. Lewis, and move this court pursuant to Rule 65 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the issuance of a preliminary injunction, enjoining and restraining the above-named defendants, their agents, employees, subordinates and successors and all persons acting in concert with them, from the following actions:

(A) Denying the enrollment of Plaintiffs’ children into public or private elementary school or secondary schools, child care centers, day nursery facilities, nursery schools, family day care homes, or development centers, for the reason that such children are not “fully immunized” as contemplated by Section 120335 of the California Health and Safety Code as amended by SB 277.

(B) Denying the enrollment of Plaintiffs’ children into public or private elementary school or secondary schools, child care centers, day nursery facilities, nursery schools, family day care homes, or development centers, for the reason that such children have submitted a “medical exemption” to vaccination, which exemption is deemed unacceptable pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 120370(a), as amended by SB 277, or for any other reason.

(C) Denying the enrollment of Plaintiffs’ children into public or private elementary school or secondary schools, child care centers, day nursery facilities, nursery schools, family day care homes, or development centers, when such children would have been eligible for enrollment under a personal belief or religious exemption from one or more vaccinations prior to July 1, 2016.

(D) Enforcing or implementing the provisions of California Statutes in such a manner as to assume the discretion to deny medical exemptions to vaccination, made upon written application as required by Section 120370 (a) of the Health and Safety Code.

(E) Causing, by virtue of any purported exercise of statutory authority, the public schools and other public accommodations to “audit” vaccination status, and/or to deny or threaten to deny services to the Plaintiffs and other similarly situated claimants of religious exemption, personal exemption, or medical opposition to vaccination.

(F) Maintaining that previous holders of personal belief or religious exemptions to vaccination are now not entitled to be enrolled in public or private elementary school or secondary schools, child care centers, day nursery facilities, nursery schools, family day care homes, or development centers.

IN SUPPORT OF THIS MOTION, Plaintiffs state the following:

(1) The individual Plaintiffs and association Plaintiffs have filed a First Amended Complaint for injunctive and declaratory relief, seeking to remedy an ongoing infringement upon their rights under the United States and California Constitutions, and under California law.

(2) The Plaintiffs and all similarly situated parties will suffer irreparable injury, for which they have no adequate remedy at law, unless a preliminary injunction is entered, enjoining the defendants, their agents, subordinates, employees and all persons acting in active concert or in participation with them, from denying enrollment of the children of Plaintiffs and other similarly-situated parties in public or private elementary or secondary schools, child care centers, day nursery facilities, nursery schools, family day care homes, or development centers.

(3) There is a substantial likelihood that Plaintiffs will prevail on the merits of their pending Complaint.

(4) There are sufficiently serious questions going to the merits to make them fair ground for litigation.

(5) The balance of hardships tips decidedly toward the Plaintiffs.

(6) A memorandum of points and authorities in support hereof is filed of even date.

(7) No bond should be required of Plaintiffs because Defendants would incur no additional expense from the relief sought herein of restoring the status quo ante.

(8) Counsel for Plaintiffs has conferred with counsel for Defendant California Department of Public Health and requested that Defendants voluntarily stipulate to a stay of the actions sought to be enjoined herein pending resolution of this matter on the merits and Defendant refused to enter into such stipulated stay. Set. Declaration of James S. Turner, Esq. attached as Exhibit A.

Conversations With the Defendant’s Attorney…

Attorneys for both sides talk to each other. Just below is a record of some of those conversations. I am including it so you can see behind the curtain, so-to-speak. It is this, from lead attorney Jim Turner:

(6) I am lead counsel for the plaintiffs in this action.

(7) On July 1, 2016 I and my co-counsels filed a complaint in this action for injunctive and declaratory relief, a motion for a temporary restraining order, and a memorandum of points and authorities in support of the motion, seeking an immediate stay of the implementation of SB 277.

(8) On that same date I spoke with California Deputy Attorney General Jonathan Rich, who has since noticed his representation of defendant California Department of Public Health and Dr. Karen Smith, its director.

(9) Attorney Rich and I discussed the possibility, and Attorney Rich emphasized that it was only a possibility, of a stipulation in which the state would consider agreeing to limit enforcement of some narrow aspects of SB 277, in order to resolve the issue of the temporary restraining order.

(10) On July 5, Attorney Rich requested by email that plaintiffs enter into a stipulation that his client have until July 15 to file a responsive pleading to plaintiff’s motion and that the parties ask the court to set a hearing date of July 18.

(11) On July 5, the court denied plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order.

(12) On July 7, I sent a letter to Attorney Rich by email, setting forth the plaintiffs’ requests for a stipulation agreeing to a stay of implementation of SB 277 pending a determination of the case on the merits or in the alternative an expedited briefing schedule for a motion for preliminary injunction. A true and correct copy of that letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

(13) On July 11, Attorney Rich denied plaintiffs’ requests for a stipulated stay and expedited briefing schedule.

Memorandum of Points and authorities…

You can read the whole document by clicking on the red button above an to the right labled “SB277 Court Docs.” But for simplicity I am including a few excerpts. See just below:

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

In a few short weeks, all California students will be returning to classrooms, except some students with previously-valid Personal Belief Exemptions (“PBEs”) to California’s school vaccination requirements, and those who would have exercised PBEs. Effective July 1, 2016, Senate Bill (“SB”) 277 permanently bars these children from every public and private school in the State, in a dramatic and unprecedented departure from California’s long-standing history of unwavering protection of every child’s right to an equal education. Without injunctive relief, in SB 277’s first year of implementation alone, approximately 33,000 children, including many with disabilities, are barred from classrooms and deprived of an equal education or, for some children, any education at all. Every day throughout the State, schools are closing their doors to children who want and deserve to go to school, depriving them of fundamental rights and subjecting them to severe humiliation, prejudice, stigma and emotional distress.

How about several thousand people on the Courthouse Steps August 12th?…

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

CLICK HERE - To Read ALL http://bolenreport.com/category/importantlegal/laesuitsb277/

onawah
20th July 2016, 17:12
SB 277 Preliminary Injunction Reason – Health Department Leader Wants to Bite Doctors That Write Vaccine Medical Exemptions…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-preliminary-injunction-reason-health-department-leader-wants-bite-doctors-write-vaccine-medical-exemptions/#more-4154

Another long article (worth reading) about what is going on in California re mandatory vaccines.
August 12th is the date to watch, but lots going on behind the scenes in the meantime.

onawah
21st July 2016, 19:12
Our Children at Risk—Aluminum, Vaccine Schedules, and Stifled Debate
by Gretchen DuBeau,
Published July 15, 2016
http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2016/07/our-children-at-risk-aluminum-vaccine-schedules-and-stifled-debate/

When health officials assure us that almost all children should receive the full schedule of vaccinations, you would think that rigorous safety testing has repeatedly proven vaccines, their ingredients, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) schedule to be completely safe. The sobering truth is, however, that this safety testing has been conspicuously lacking and in many cases simply has not been done.

Until these extremely serious safety concerns are adequately addressed, it is unethical—and very possibly dangerous—to force children to be vaccinated.

Take aluminum, for example, which has been added to vaccines since the 1930’s to help jolt the body’s immune system into action. Aluminum is a well-documented neurotoxin linked with Alzheimer’s disease, epilepsy, asthma, hyperactivity, and Down’s syndrome.

Despite these dangers, adequate clinical research proving aluminum adjuvants to be safe has never been done. Health authorities claim, however, that aluminum levels in vaccines are safe since it has been used for decades and that the metal is abundant in nature.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has set a limit to the amount of aluminum that can be in vaccines, but this number was based on the amount of aluminum required to enhance the effectiveness of the vaccine. The agency has not empirically determined the safest amount of intramuscularly injected aluminum, relying instead on mere belief that current levels are safe.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined a minimum risk level for orally ingested aluminum based on rat studies, which is often what is used to justify aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. The problem is that ingesting aluminum orally, where only about 0.25% is absorbed and then filtered by the kidneys, is very different than injecting it directly into muscle, where it may be absorbed at nearly 100% efficiency over time and can accumulate in organs, including the brain.

This complete lack of evidence proving the safety of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines is unacceptable and should concern any parent who trusts health authorities with the safety of their children.

Yet last summer, California passed SB 277, which eliminated all non-medical exemptions to vaccinations for children attending private or public schools. This ill-advised law and the vaccine schedule it promotes threaten to mandate childhood doses of a dangerous metal.

The rationale offered by the bill’s supporters echoed what we are so often told in the news—that the scientific community is “nearly unanimous” in its determination that vaccines are safe. To question anything vaccine-related has become akin to questioning the roundness of the Earth. This view makes rational debate extremely difficult.

As for the safety of vaccines, the scientific community is far from “nearly unanimous.” Many doctors and researchers have raised serious concerns about vaccine ingredients like aluminum.

Animal studies, for instance, have demonstrated a link between repeated inoculation with aluminum-containing vaccines and severe neurobehavioral outcomes (restlessness, muscle tremors, loss of response to stimuli), the presence of aluminum in central nervous system tissue, and altered expression of certain genes in the brain.

Our independent laboratory tests show that the vaccines for DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, and whooping cough) and hepatitis B contain 366 and 268 micrograms of aluminum per dose, respectively. Children receiving the full CDC schedule of vaccines may be exposed to as much as 4,225 micrograms of aluminum in their first year of life.

To put this in perspective, the animals mentioned above were given an aluminum dose in a range that is nearly comparable to what children on the CDC schedule receive.This should give us all pause.

When we compare childhood doses to adult doses the numbers are even scarier. For an adult to get the same amount of aluminum per kilogram of weight that a newborn gets with just the hepatitis B shot, that adult would need to get 10 standard doses of that vaccine in a single day. Similarly, for an adult to get the same amount of aluminum in microgram per kilogram of weight that a two-month-old infant gets from multiple vaccine injections (a total of 1225 micrograms) scheduled for the two month pediatric visit, that adult would have to receive 34 adult doses of the hepatitis B vaccine.

At best, we are rolling the dice when it comes to our children’s health. How has it come to this? A clue was provided in a recent Congressional audit of the FDA whichconcluded that the agency “cannot fulfill its mission because its scientific base has eroded and its scientific organizational structure is weak.” Our health officials are woefully behind on the science, and it’s our children who are paying the price.

Note: This article was reprinted with the author’s permission. It was originally published in The Hill. Gretchen DuBeau is the executive director of Alliance for Natural Health USA.

onawah
27th July 2016, 23:47
Vaccines: “preventing every bad thing” July 27/16 by Jon Rappoport

By Jon Rappoport
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/07/27/vaccines-preventing-every-bad-thing/
" We begin with this: “Administration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules… ”

In other words, the measles vaccine can create a worse form of measles. This is not the normal form of the illness, from which children routinely recover with the bonus of lifetime immunity. No, this is a severe, atypical, dangerous, synthetic, vaccine-induced disease.

Now read this: “…the window of vulnerability of an infant may be even greater in vaccinated women than in with women with natural measles infection.” (Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 79(5), 2008, pp. 787–792).

Translation: Measles occurring in infants—which is unusual and dangerous—is more likely to occur when the mother has been vaccinated against measles. Why? Because she no longer passes down, to her child, the natural components of immunity to measles.

This stunning finding can apply across the board, for all vaccines and all childhood illnesses.

Vaccinated mothers, who would ordinarily pass down natural immune factors to their babies, often don’t.

The vaccinators are creating a synthetic world of pretended immunity. And they want the global population to live inside that bubble—and suffer the consequences.

Medical experts have spewed a great deal of nonsense promoting how serious childhood diseases are. This is an attempt to refute centuries of evidence showing children recover nicely from these illnesses and thus acquire lifetime immunity.

The “seriousness” of the diseases, when they are serious, results from two factors: vaccinated mothers, and a general weakness of children’s immune systems. And that weakness results from sub-standard nutrition and a lack of nutritious breast-feeding.

Of course, breast feeding isn’t going to be naturally nutritious if the mother has been previously loaded with vaccines. It’s a vicious circle.

And remember this: no amount of vaccines is going to solve tremendously sub-standard childhood nutrition.

Claiming that undernourished children must be vaccinated up to their eyeballs—as “substitute protection” against disease—is an egregious and despicable lie.

The vaccine establishment is fully aware of what I’m discussing here, and it has covered it up.

There is no substitute for natural immunity derived from good nutrition.

Finally, if you revisit the first quote in this article, you’ll see another factor at work. The measles vaccine that paves the way for “severe, atypical” measles in children? The vaccine could be falsely exonerated on the grounds that the symptoms which develop in children don’t add up to measles at all. What these children have doesn’t look like measles—

And therein lies one of the greatest secrets about all vaccines. They appear to wipe out diseases, because, after vaccination, the signs and symptoms ordinarily associated with those diseases often don’t occur.

Instead, the old symptoms are altered or don’t appear at all. Therefore, medical experts can claim that mumps or measles or pertussis or diphtheria have been eliminated from the population—when in fact what is happening is the emergence of vaccine-induced disease with different symptoms.

And those symptoms are given different disease-names.

Polio? Gone. Now we have meningitis. Smallpox? Gone. Now we have “lesions of unknown origin” or Kaposi’s Sarcoma.

Vaccinated children become more ill than they would have, and children die. But it doesn’t matter for the sellers and enforcers of vaccines, because they can say, “Look, vaccines are extraordinarily successful wherever they’re given; they wipe out diseases.”

No they don’t.

They just transfer the pictures of symptoms.

And they cut off the population from natural and powerful immunity, the very same immunity that, along with improved nutrition, better basic sanitation, and a higher standard of living, made many serious diseases into light illnesses.

It’s all a shell game. If the vaccinators confessed, they would say something like this:

“Okay folks, here’s what we do. We give the mother and her baby a shot against Disease A. Disease A is a set of recognizable symptoms. After vaccination, that set of symptoms will occur far less often. Instead, a new set of far more dangerous symptoms will occur. We’ll call those symptoms Disease B. And we’ll say Disease A has been wiped out…”

This shell game is played with human lives sacrificed on the altar of profits, and the creation of more debilitation and death."

We begin with this: “Administration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules… ”

In other words, the measles vaccine can create a worse form of measles. This is not the normal form of the illness, from which children routinely recover with the bonus of lifetime immunity. No, this is a severe, atypical, dangerous, synthetic, vaccine-induced disease.

Now read this: “…the window of vulnerability of an infant may be even greater in vaccinated women than in with women with natural measles infection.” (Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 79(5), 2008, pp. 787–792).

Translation: Measles occurring in infants—which is unusual and dangerous—is more likely to occur when the mother has been vaccinated against measles. Why? Because she no longer passes down, to her child, the natural components of immunity to measles.

This stunning finding can apply across the board, for all vaccines and all childhood illnesses.

Vaccinated mothers, who would ordinarily pass down natural immune factors to their babies, often don’t.

The vaccinators are creating a synthetic world of pretended immunity. And they want the global population to live inside that bubble—and suffer the consequences.

Medical experts have spewed a great deal of nonsense promoting how serious childhood diseases are. This is an attempt to refute centuries of evidence showing children recover nicely from these illnesses and thus acquire lifetime immunity.

The “seriousness” of the diseases, when they are serious, results from two factors: vaccinated mothers, and a general weakness of children’s immune systems. And that weakness results from sub-standard nutrition and a lack of nutritious breast-feeding.

Of course, breast feeding isn’t going to be naturally nutritious if the mother has been previously loaded with vaccines. It’s a vicious circle.

And remember this: no amount of vaccines is going to solve tremendously sub-standard childhood nutrition.

Claiming that undernourished children must be vaccinated up to their eyeballs—as “substitute protection” against disease—is an egregious and despicable lie.

The vaccine establishment is fully aware of what I’m discussing here, and it has covered it up.

There is no substitute for natural immunity derived from good nutrition.

Finally, if you revisit the first quote in this article, you’ll see another factor at work. The measles vaccine that paves the way for “severe, atypical” measles in children? The vaccine could be falsely exonerated on the grounds that the symptoms which develop in children don’t add up to measles at all. What these children have doesn’t look like measles—

And therein lies one of the greatest secrets about all vaccines. They appear to wipe out diseases, because, after vaccination, the signs and symptoms ordinarily associated with those diseases often don’t occur.

Instead, the old symptoms are altered or don’t appear at all. Therefore, medical experts can claim that mumps or measles or pertussis or diphtheria have been eliminated from the population—when in fact what is happening is the emergence of vaccine-induced disease with different symptoms.

And those symptoms are given different disease-names.

Polio? Gone. Now we have meningitis. Smallpox? Gone. Now we have “lesions of unknown origin” or Kaposi’s Sarcoma.

Vaccinated children become more ill than they would have, and children die. But it doesn’t matter for the sellers and enforcers of vaccines, because they can say, “Look, vaccines are extraordinarily successful wherever they’re given; they wipe out diseases.”

No they don’t.

They just transfer the pictures of symptoms.

And they cut off the population from natural and powerful immunity, the very same immunity that, along with improved nutrition, better basic sanitation, and a higher standard of living, made many serious diseases into light illnesses.

It’s all a shell game. If the vaccinators confessed, they would say something like this:

“Okay folks, here’s what we do. We give the mother and her baby a shot against Disease A. Disease A is a set of recognizable symptoms. After vaccination, that set of symptoms will occur far less often. Instead, a new set of far more dangerous symptoms will occur. We’ll call those symptoms Disease B. And we’ll say Disease A has been wiped out…”

This shell game is played with human lives sacrificed on the altar of profits, and the creation of more debilitation and death.

onawah
4th August 2016, 02:34
SB 277 Lawsuit – Charity Dean Responds…. Can you spell “OBFUSCATION?”
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-charity-dean-responds-can-spell-obfuscation/


SB 277 Lawsuit – Charity Dean Responds…. Can you spell “OBFUSCATION?”

The “You can’t Sue Me I’m in Charge” Defense…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

SB277 Court Docs
There is no question, in my mind, what-so-ever, that Santa Barbara County Health Department’s Charity Dean MD started out to create a “Pilot Program” in California where she, Charity Dean (and her “lobbyist” friends?), would examine all Medical Exemptions for vaccines according to a made-up criteria designed by her (and her “lobbyist” friends?).

Then she was going to report HER definition of “suspicious activity,” through a SECRET NETWORK, directly, to Enforcement Officers at the California Medical Board for purposes of prosecution.

However, Charity got caught. Whoops! Paperwork showed up… and the attorneys for the “Good guys” got a hold of it.

So, little Charity got named as a Defendant….

As the SB 277 lawsuit clearly points out…

Little Charity Dean, for whatever motive, exceeded her authority, giving herself the power over REAL doctors who were making REAL TIME decisions, keeping at-risk children safe. Federal Law 42 USC 1983 is the Statute used in the SB 277 lawsuit to combat Charity’s ilk.

Federal Law 42 USC 1983 basically says that “any government employee can be sued for exceeding their authority…” Specific 42 USC 1983 language is just below:

“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable.

What disappoints me about the SB 277 lawsuit is that the attorneys on the side of “Good” in this fight against “Evil,” were, in this instance, too nice. What?

Too nice?

Yes, I think they were. Why? There are two separate references in Federal Law about what are known as “Color of Authority” issues. One of them is, of course, 42 USC 1983 – the CIVIL remedy. Why didn’t our people mention the other reference – the CRIMINAL remedy 18 USC 242?

18 USC 242 is VERY specific. It says:

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Just below is a quote from the US Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding 18 USC 242 activity. DOJ is the investigating and prosecuting entity for 18 USC 242.

Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.

Think about that statement above. Ask “How does this apply to what Charity Dean was doing, and attempting to do?” Good question. Charity Dean claimed to have a “Medical Exemption Criteria” she was going to use to examine submitted “Medical Exemptions.” Where did she get it? From a lobbyist friend? And what authority did Charity Dean have to set herself up as the decider?

What “Medical Exemption” Criteria Would Charity Dean Use?

Why is that question important? Because the State Health Department system, including the counties, are DEPENDENT on the increase of vaccine percentages for income…

Did you want me to repeat that?

In short, to me, the Charity Deans of California only CLAIM to be acting for the health of the populace. In reality, they are the Vaccine Sales Force for the vaccine manufacturers. They have completely abrogated any health responsibility for vaccines and their deadly effects.

Charity Dean, and her ilk, statewide, couldn’t care less if a huge batch of Made-in-China toxic death pus, was shipped here full of anthrax. They’d insist that it be IMMEDIATELY injected in California’s innocent children. They have no system in place to test vaccine batches, nor, I think, do they want one. It would interfere with the implementation of their bonus payment system…

I am not joking…

So, What did Charity’s Lawyers come up with?

Just below was their first statement:

“The law setting forth the required content of a medical exemption has existed since 1961. Plaintiffs’ request to enjoin school officials from scrutinizing and rejecting a medical exemption not meeting statutory requirements is unwarranted. This would prevent school officials from rejecting a medical exemption written by a nurse practitioner rather than a licensed physician, or a medical exemption omitting to state the vaccine from which a child is being exempted. In either instance, the medical exemption would not meet statutory requirements.”

Huh?

Go ahead and snicker… No where does the lawsuit mention any concern about any of this. That isn’t what Charity was looking for, remember? She was talking about “suspicious exemptions…”

There’s more…

The claim that the Plaintiffs lack standing to sue…

“To the extent Plaintiffs’ Motion seeks to enjoin Defendants from rejecting a medical exemption otherwise meeting statutory requirements on grounds that the medical basis for granting it is insufficient, Plaintiffs lack standing to seek a preliminary injunction against the County of Santa Barbara. No Santa Barbara County resident Plaintiff has a medical exemption. Moreover, Plaintiffs’ evidence establishes that the County of Santa Barbara does not review medical exemptions to determine whether or not they are warranted medically. In addition, no Santa Barbara County resident Plaintiff alleges that Santa Barbara County has taken action or intends to take action that threatens any Santa Barbara County parent or child with harm. Finally, Plaintiffs’ suit establishes no grounds to enjoin the County of Santa Barbara from reviewing medical exemptions provided by schools with all personally identifiable information redacted. The Motion should be denied as against County of Santa Barbara.”

And more…

“Santa Barbara County’s Public Health Department (“SBCPHD”) recently initiated its Medical Exemption Pilot Program (“MEPP”). MEPP provides for SBPHD to review MEs filed with Santa Barbara County (“County”) schools to ensure that they contain five required statutory elements. These are: 1) issuance by a Doctor of Medicine or Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine; 2) a statement that the physical condition or medical circumstances of the child are such that the required immunization(s) is not considered safe; 3) identification of the vaccine(s) from which the child is exempted; 4) a statement of whether the medical exemption is permanent or temporary; and 5), if the medical exemption for a vaccine is temporary, a date that the temporary exemption expires. MEPP requires that schools redact all personally identifiable information from MEs prior to transmission to SBCPHD. ARGUMENT I. PLAINTIFFS LACK STANDING TO SUE THE COUNTY. Article III of the United States Constitution limits the judicial power of the United States to the resolution of “Cases” and “Controversies.” Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488, 492 (2009). This fundamental limitation on judicial power is reflected in the doctrine of standing. Id. at 493. To seek injunctive relief, the doctrine of standing requires that a plaintiff “show that he is under threat of suffering ‘injury in fact’ that is concrete and particularized; the threat must be actual and imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; it must be fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendants; and it must be likely that a favorable judicial decision will prevent or redress the injury.” Id. SBCPHD is a County department. Therefore, the only Plaintiffs who could be affected by any SBCPHD action are Ms. Sunukjian and A.L.S. and Dr. Mackenzie and G.J.M. Plaintiffs submitted no declaration from Dr. Mackenzie establishing that he or his son are under any actual or imminent threat of suffering any County caused injury. Dr. Mackenzie’s unsworn allegations in the First Amended Complaint are not evidence and therefore do not support standing at the preliminary injunction stage. Doe v. National Board of Medical Examiners, 199 F.3d 146, 152-153 (3rd Cir. 1999). Plaintiffs did submit Ms. Sunukjian’s declaration. She admits that she has not obtained a medical exemption for her daughter. Sunukjian Decl., ¶ 10. Thus, she cannot have filed an exemption with her daughter’s school; the school cannot have transmitted an exemption to the County.

Of course, Charity got sued BECAUSE the Santa Barbara Health Department has no authority to require any of this…

Interesting times…

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-charity-dean-responds-can-spell-obfuscation/#more-4563

onawah
5th August 2016, 17:38
New Vaccine for Zika right on schedule
http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/miami-sprays-neurotoxic-aerosol-gas-to-fight-zika-27789


"Disaster" capitalism at its
finest!

Miami-Dade County has begun
using aerial spraying of the
highly-toxic Naled insecticide,
which is a serious danger to
pregnant women, as it is highly-
toxic to the nervous system
and has been shown to cause
violent behavior and to the
deterioration of memory and
learning. It is allegedly being
sprayed to control the Aedes
aegypti mosquitoes that carry
the apparently harmless Zika
virus, according to Mayor Carlos
Gimenez, following advice from
the state and the CDC.




The spraying will continue once
a week, over the next 4 weeks
and will include both a larvicide
and a pesticide that targets adult
mosquitoes, even though the
Mayor admits that spraying isn't
effective - and even though
according to Matthew DeGennaro,
an expert on mosquito genetics
at Florida International University
who says, Aedes aegypti
mosquitoes in the Florida Keys,
150 miles south of Miami, have
already developed a resistance to
these insecticide sprays, as will
likely become the case in Miami.

This is happening, despite the
fact that Zika has not been proven
to cause microcephalic babies in
pregnant women. The expected
explosion in microcephaly cases in
Brazil and in other affected areas did
not occur - and it has never occurred
throughout the 69-year history of
human awareness of this very minor,
largely asymptomatic virus - which
happens to be patented and owned
by the Rockefeller Foundation.

This is happening, even though
pesticides and larvicides, which are
derived from petrochemicals HAVE
been proven to cause microcephaly
in fetuses whose mothers were
exposed to these - and are the
most likely cause of the rash of
cases in Northeastern Brazil,
where a larvicide was put in public
drinking water.

Dengue fever, the much more
virulent form of this Flavivirus has
not been known to be sexually
transmissable, such as is the Zika
virus. This has led to rumors that
this new strain of Zika has been
weaponized.

Right on cue, MIT has just
announced the development of a
new vaccine that is capable of
treating ALL of the latest
bogeyman pandemics-that-never-
were, from Ebola, to H1N1 to Zika
- and the team did it in seven
days flat!

This DNA-based vaccine is riskier
than traditional vaccines, because
it has the potential to induce
"insertional mutagenesis" and
alter the host's DNA, potentially
leading to cancer. Still, Emory
University, which is associated
with the CDC, has published a
paper on why this vaccine should
be injected into pregnant women.
The reason being that "We have
a serious threat," which is patently
false, as far as all recent and
exhaustive studies have shown.

"What a glorious time to be free."
- Steely Dan


Video: (under 4 mins):
TiAb9S7D-LY

Miami Sprays Neurotoxic Aerosol Gas to Fight Zika

http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/miami-sprays-neurotoxic-aerosol-gas-to-fight-zika-27789

onawah
10th August 2016, 01:53
The “New” California Health Freedom Movement is in REALLY Bad Shape…

http://bolenreport.com/new-california-health-freedom-movement-really-bad-shape/



Simply Spoken – They Cannot Fight This SB 277 Battle On Their Own – They don’t know how…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

This newsletter post is aimed directly at my “Old” friends and associates in the North American Health Freedom Movement. But, even if you are not one of those, please continue. I’m telling you, right now, that we, the Health Freedom leaders, need to step in even more than we have, providing BASIC TRAINING for activists. I kid you not.

BASIC Training?

The situation is so bad in California that the groups that band together, for the most part, have little or no organizational or planning skills. They have no idea what is valuable and what is not. Worse, they compete to be ”LEADER” having NOTHING to offer as leadership. It really is that bad.

In a way – it is our fault…

They lost the first three anti-SB 277 campaigns using amazingly poor tactics and strategies – if you can call ANYTHING they did a “strategy.” It really is “The Blind Leading the Blind…”

They do really DUMB things, and they don’t want ANY advice… I’ll tell you about one of those situations in a minute.

And, they get irate, and whimpery, when somebody like me says “you didn’t do that very well…”

These people think FaceBook is an organizing tool.

In the words of Kent Heckenlively JD – “Arghh…”

So, let’s start right out.


Jim Turner – You are one of the few still alive Health Freedom Monsters older than me – and not by much. I know you are extremely busy managing the assault with the SB 277 Lawsuit as lead attorney. But I also know you’ve got a smile on your face for this is just the kind of battle you have always liked.

Me too, dude…

But Jim, we need one more thing – that 200,000 strong Citizens For Health Network of yours, that knows how to do stuff. Why? Read the above…

Let’s talk Jim…

Sally Fallon – You’ve got a monstrous organization of people there in the Westin A. Price Foundation who know their stuff. I know you don’t want me to tell any of these people how long we’ve known each other, to give your age away, but Sally, YOU would certainly be better at training “newbies” than I would. You are MUCH nicer. They’d LISTEN to you.

Hunter Lewis – I know how much work your 500,000 member Alliance for Natural Health (ANH) is doing every day, and have been doing for more years than I can remember (Actually, I DO remember) but Hunter, my friend, WE’VE GOT A PROBLEM. The next generation of activists needs to be trained.

Right now… it is URGENT.

We need to talk.

Diane Miller JD – I don’t care how busy you and Jerri are running the Health Freedom Coalition and all that. You guys know how to set up and run effective State Health Freedom coalitions. You guys aren’t getting any younger either. You know what needs to be done…

You need to figure out how to teach it…

Mike Adams – Of course your Natural News offering is terrific. I can’t imagine how hard it is to put out twenty four articles a day, and all of them great. But Mike, as we’ve talked about on many occasions, this newer generation, especially here in California, think that FaceBook is a primary communications tool. They need to learn what real communications networks can do. We need workshops Mike. And you know how to set them up.

Peter McCarthy – These California people have no idea, for the have nothing to compare with, what it would be like to have a Health Freedom Standing Army like your Texas Health Freedom Coalition.. You need to write an article about how you and your friends in Texas would have handled an asshole like Senator Richard Pan putting forth a dumb-assed mandatory vaccine bill in the State of Texas. More, you need to teach SELECTED people HOW to set up, and maintain a California standing army – and use effective tactics.

Rima Laibow MD, General Bert Stubblebine, Ralph Fucetola JD – These people in California have no idea how, or why, your Natural Solutions Foundation (NSF) exists, and what it is capable of doing, what it does, has done, and why. General Bert is a retired head of US Army Intelligence. These people have no concept of how to conduct aggressive campaigns, and play to win. They have NOTHING to compare with. They need to learn not to be shy, and how to strike, and when. In California, they don’t have a clue of how to play to win. But YOU do. You need to teach this stuff.

All the rest of you – you know who you are. We need to get going in California…

The SB 277 Lawsuit fight is pretty much being conducted by all of us old war dogs.

The younger people here, those that ran the earlier campaigns, I think, cannot find their ass cheeks with either hand. They think that “coordination” means you match lipstick color with your toenail polish when you go to see your legislator’s staff. It is really pathetic.

Pathetic…

There isn’t three pounds of youthful campaign organizing skills, much less war tactics, in the whole damn State.

Where are the brutal bastards when you need them? Where are the lionesses of old who could throw money in a parking meter, gut a public agency in an afternoon, wipe the snot off the kids faces, and grab a pizza and ice cream on the way home. I’ll tell you where they are – They’re in Retirement Communities playing shuffleboard or 500 Rummy, waiting to head out in the motorhome once all of those noisy little monsters (other people’s kids) are back in school. I see them in Yosemite, Kings Canyon the coastal Campgrounds, sitting at the picnic table cleaning their Smith and Wessons, Glocks, and Remingtons. The MaryJane is in the freezer. And that look is still in their eyes.

But we didn’t train our children and grandchildren.

Here’s the situation…

Not long ago I suggested that certain activities might be a good idea surrounding the Preliminary Restraining Order hearing on August 12th, 2016 – a gathering. You probably saw it right here in the BolenReport. I said something like “Meet on the Courthouse Steps…” I even contacted some San Diego groups through several different channels to get that done.

In the old days, several people would have nodded their heads and said “I’ll get back to you Friday with a plan” – meaning a detailed plan that covered every eventuality so that our teams would know exact details of the logistics, including where we were going to meet afterwards to drink some wine. EVERYBODY knew how to do that – some people could make a plan on a bar napkin and lay it out before we left our meeting place.

It ain’t like that now… These younger people can’t find their mother’s phone number without an IPhone. And if it’s not on the internet, forget it.

These people in San Diego had almost five weeks notice to find a simple meeting place where a measly five hundred people could comfortably gather to meet each other. What they ended up doing was so incredibly brainless, so non-considerative of REALITY, that I wrote a piece recommending that no one go to it.

Now they’re mad at me, whining about what I said on their FaceBook pages, of course. And insisting they are going anyway… (I’ll bet they paint their toenails to match their lipstick).

What did they do? (Not do)?

Before I tell you that, I’m sure, my friends, that you are beginning to see why I am making it clear that someone other than me has to set up training. Someone who doesn’t verbally, and journalistically, SCORCH them like I’m known for. These young people are tender and sensitive. I’ll bet most of them have never even fired a weapon, much less a machine gun. To them napalm sounds like something they’d plant in their yard over by the fake fountain where their miniature dog pees.

What is needed here is a woman’s touch – and NOT one with Army Ranger training either. This is a job for Sally or Diane, or Gretchen from ANH, etc. No Rima not you – you bomb and scorch as well as I do. And definitely not you Peter – once these young people figure out that those B-52s you drove around at altitude were dropping 500 and 1000 pound bombs on opponents they’d chew off their own lipstick and think about where to get a hot rock massage on the way home.

Here’s what I wrote that got them all upset…

You do realize that you are dealing here, with this (name removed), with one of the San Diego crowd that even with a full five weeks notice, couldn’t get off their dead asses long enough to find a simple place for people to gather other than a downtown five-star hotel. (Insert laughter here).

And, very obviously, none of them went down to the Courthouse to find out when, where, and if, they could gather there. Now, little (name removed) is bitter because she, and her lazy-assed friends, got called out for their lack of consideration for others from out-of-town, and with children in tow..

Let her go down to the Westin and have a Martini on Friday with the other non-producers. They can tell each other how special they are. Then they can call up Ginger Taylor and get a membership in the Canary Party – they just passed the self-centered incompetence initiation test. All they need now is a photo with a Congressman.

See, I’ll bet that Sally, or Gretchen, or Diane would have delivered that “you could have handled this situation much better” message a little differently.

Ya think?

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

onawah
15th August 2016, 21:59
"How to respond to vocal vaccine deniers in public"
The World Health Organization has prepared a manual for dealing with "vaccine deniers."
From the Canary Party

"Rule 1 - The general public is your target audience, not the vocal vaccine denier.
Rule 2 - Aim to correct the content AND unmask the techniques that the vocal vaccine denier is using.
Rule 3 - Make the public audience more resilient against anti-vaccine statements and stories; support the vaccine hesitants in their vaccine acceptance decision."
When talking to public health officials trained by WHO about vaccine injury remember, they don't care that your loved one was harmed, they aren't even talking to you.
See:
http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/315761/Best-practice-guidance-respond-vocal-vaccine-deniers-public.pdf?ua=1

onawah
18th August 2016, 14:24
SB 277 Lawsuit – We’re Just Waiting…
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-just-waiting/

Hopefully, Lunch will Be Along in a Minute…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen


A list of the SB 277 Court Documents in original PDF format – copied from Pacer court file…SB277 Court Docs:
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-court-documents/

Last Friday, August 12th, 2016, SB 277 Lawsuit San Diego Federal Court Judge Dana M. Sabraw, after hearing oral arguments in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing said ”I’ll Give you My Decision in Writing Within Two Weeks”…

Two weeks?

You can bet that Judge Sabraw will be very careful with the writing of this legal decision. He, and his staff, will be spending quite some time on it.

Why? This case is going to the US Supreme Court.

The Options…

The decision to issue, or not issue, a Preliminary Injunction preventing the implementation of SB 277, could be in our hands any minute. Whatever it is we proceed to the next step.

As I’ve said before, whatever happens, the side that loses this hearing will immediately Appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

So, we wait…

But, there are some side issues…

I didn’t just wait five days because I was busy. I am always right on top of what is happening. I knew the Judge’s decision to give himself time within minutes of that action. It was THOSE OTHER THINGS, and my investigation into them, that kept me from acting.

Something strange was going on – in fact, TWO strange things.

Strange thing number one – Apparently there are some people interfering with our attorneys’ ability to manage the case – and it is severe. I received, I think, five separate reports of someone, an aggressive woman (NOT part of the legal team) at the Hearing, who was CONSTANTLY handing notes forward, obviously trying to distract our team’s efforts to answer the Judge’s questions. I HOPE, for our sakes, that that person didn’t upset the Judge against us.

Attorneys prepare days ahead of time for Judge’s questions, discussing answers, and points, with their colleagues, so as to make a smooth presentation. They DO NOT need distraction…

I have been investigating who that person was, and at this point I can say “She was not invited to participate….” I have questioned this person via email, about what she was up to, who she represented, and, so far, have not received an answer.

Don’t worry – I’ll find the answer one way or another.

Strange thing number two – Several hours after the hearing three of the attorneys met with the Plaintiffs and other interested parties to talk about the Hearing events. A video was made, and it aired on Periscope, and invited “comments.” The readily visible “comments” took up most of the left side of the screen, and at 12:47 into the video one of the attorneys was offered a “blow job.” Just a little further the REALLY NASTY COMMENTS started.

So, how did those “comments” appear so fast. The “skeptics” had no notification of the video…

It took a while to get the video taken down.

Rife with rumors – I’ve been getting bits and pieces of a story telling me that there is a group, acting behind the scenes, to disrupt the case, and our attorney’s management of it. That wouldn’t surprise me a bit. If any of you have anything to contribute in that scene, please get a hold of me.

I do have, based on the information I am gathering, a working theorem of what’s happening, and I think, so do the attorneys.

i suspect that some strong language has been, and is being, used, this last week, in attorney communication networks.

We’ll see…

I’m getting hungry. Where’s lunch?

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

onawah
18th August 2016, 16:42
How to pirate Vaxxed…and why you should think twice before doing so


http://bolenreport.com/pirate-vaxxed-think-twice/#comment-2845

How to pirate Vaxxed…and why you should think twice before doing so.

Perspective by Alan Davis – Health Freedom Activist

In the last few days, some pirated copies of Vaxxed have been making the rounds on various activist Facebook groups. I get it, people want to see the film. I personally only got to watch it about a week ago. It took that long for the forces in our life to favorably converge: someone to watch the little one, a little surplus in our budget, and a night my wife and I were both available that coincided with a Vaxxed Screening.

This is not an infomercial. Really…

But I want to increase awareness of two new ways Vaxxed is being distributed.

The screening my wife and I went to was one of the first “Theatrical On Demand” screenings of Vaxxed. Anyone willing to sign up as a Movie Captain can bring Vaxxed to their city or town. When enough tickets are sold, the movie tips, and is on the schedule. If it doesn’t tip, nobody pays a dime. All the nitty gritty details are handled by Gathr Films. All a Movie Captain needs is some enthusiasm and some ways to reach their potential audience.

If you are interested in either becoming a Movie Captain, or finding a screening near you put on by a Movie Captain:
http://vaxxedthemovie.com/theatrical-on-demand/
http://vaxxedthemovie.com/theatrical-demand-confirmed-screenings/

Vaxxed is also available via streaming. For $3.99 you can view it on your computer, device, and on certain TV boxes like Roku or Apple TV. Details here.

Some people know what to do.

A pirated copy of the movie was posted on a forum. The admins saw the error of their ways, after reading a few comments. They did the right thing by taking it down. Why do I think it was the right thing to do? Keep reading and I will answer that question.

And some people can justify the most outrageous nonsense.

Before the copy was removed, a select few of us weighed in with rationalizations and encouragement to anyone to go right ahead and watch the film for free. And to hell with anyone who might try to stop them, because, REASONS!

Here is one such post, suggesting piracy is not the right thing to do:NIC-Vaxxed-Piracy-Post

Along came the swift response:

NIC Vaxxed Piracy

One of them pans the movie, but still gives permission to steal it. The other demonizes Del Bigtree, like he is getting rich off the film.

Let’s think about that for a moment… After creating Vaxxed and going on national tour with the film, Mr. Bigtree will never be invited back to produce and direct the hit TV show “The Doctors”. This man has quite literally limited his career options in order to speak the truth about the CDC Whistleblower.

I read someone else saying only the film’s distributor benefited financially from the streaming rentals. I’d never buy into the idea that any filmmaker would just give all the revenue from a certain market segment to their distributor. Would you?

It truly is the most outrageous sort of nonsense.

Vaxxed’s Distributor

The distributor, Cinema Libre, has created some problems for itself by choosing to distribute this film. Two of their executives were present at our screening. They did a, I’m just going to call it a “different” Q&A, unlike any other Vaxxed screening. Theirs is the story of unsung heroes who did the impossible. They took a major public relations disaster, turned it into an opportunity, and distributed a film three months ahead of schedule. In the process making it perhaps the most successful educational campaign our movement has seen. The entire Vaxxed Team knows how to execute a winning campaign. I’ll vouch for them any day.

The simple reality is…

The Vaxxed Team are tirelessly traveling the country, in the Vaxxed Bus (ok, it’s an RV), talking to anyone who will listen, and listening to anyone who wants to talk. They have documented their travels via non-stop Periscope and Facebook Live Streams. Confronted legislators where they can (and where said legislators aren’t running away whilst urinating). Shared the stories of numerous parents, children, adults, and even some medical professionals. It’s an interactive educational experience, that enables us to collectively tell our truth.

In a “Theatrical on Demand” screening, the Vaxxed core team does their Q&A via a reel, which starts out by asking people with vaccine injured children to stand up. Being present and standing in testimony to how our nephew’s story has changed our lives, while seeing similarly-affected others, all revealing ourselves in public, was extremely powerful. Especially considering some portion of the audience just got a drink from the firehose. We were brought into the storytelling process to make the point to everyone there that, no, this film isn’t bull****.

The simple reality is, this all costs money. Some of which must be coming from ticket sales and streaming rentals.

In closing…

I’ll leave you all with this one question to ponder. Ok, two. Who or I probably should say: “What industry benefits from the Vaxxed Campaign losing money through piracy?”

I know it’s only one question. I wasn’t lying. Question number two is left as an exercise for the reader.

Perspective by Alan Davis – Health Freedom Activist

onawah
18th August 2016, 23:24
Master Manipulator: The Explosive True Story of Fraud, Embezzlement, and Government Betrayal at the CDC
(recommended by the Canary Party)
May 31, 2016
by James Ottar Grundvig (Author), Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (Introduction)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/151070843X/ref=cm_sw_r_fa_dp_c_X0JTxbMVD45JW

The explosive true story of fraud, embezzlement, and government betrayal.

In 2000, the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) carried out a secret mission to bury, skew, and manipulate data in six vaccine safety studies, in a coordinated effort to control the message that “vaccines do not cause autism.” They did so via secret meetings and backtesting health-care data. The CDC invested tens of millions of dollars in a foreign health-care data analytics startup run by Danish scientist Poul Thorsen, a move to ensure that no link ever surfaced. But fate had other ideas. The agency soon learned it couldn’t control Thorsen. In 2011, the US Justice Department indicted him for the theft of more than $1 million of CDC grant money.

Master Manipulator exposes the CDC’s hidden agenda for the cover-up. Influenced by Big Pharma money, future high-paying jobs, and political lobbyists, CDC executives charted a course different than what the findings of earlier vaccine safety studies revealed. The CDC needed an outsider to “flatten” the results of the data, while building an exit strategy: a fall guy in case the secret plan was exposed. Thorsen fit the bill nicely, conducting studies overseas. But the CDC’s plan backfired, as Thorsen took the money to the bank and the power went to his head. It would take years for his fraud scheme—funneling CDC grant money to a Danish university and then back to a CDC bank account he controlled—to play out.

Master Manipulator is a true story of fraud and betrayal, and an insider’s view of what takes place behind the closed doors of agencies and drug companies, and with the people tasked to protect the health of American children. It’s a cautionary tale of the dangers of blind trust in the government and the health-care industry.

onawah
19th August 2016, 16:25
SB 277 Lawsuit – The “Do Not Cross” Line…
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-not-cross-line/#more-4699


This case is a decision point. It will set policy nationwide for a long time to come on two basic issues – “who owns our children,” and “what can be forced on them?”

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

SB277 Court Docs: http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-court-documents/
Attached to this article is a transcript of the Oral Arguments (link above) held in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing August 12th, 2016. You can read every word that was said. But, before you do I am going to give you some background, some definitions, and a roadmap so you can follow what was being said. Why? These are very technical legal arguments I am going to attempt to make simple, and common-sense.

This case is NOT about vaccines – although those ultra-dangerous Made-in-China-death-pus-tubes are the problem the case seems to revolve around.

Some background…

The real point of the case is simple – what are the limits that the State can do claiming “The Greater Good?” If today they can force dangerous vaccines into our children, tomorrow they can drag our nine-year-olds into sexual slavery, or grind them up into food for cattle for that same claim of “The Greater Good.”

I’m not joking.

It gets really scary when you think that a grinning psychopath/sociopath(?) like California Senator Dicky Pan gets to decide what, exactly, defines “The Greater Good” and who it applies to.

What the Plaintiff’s attorneys are saying to the Court is simple “Where’s the line Judge?” Legal precedent says that the State, under a Strict Scrutiny review, must follow specific rules to make laws. Our side is saying that the State of California did not follow the rules with this law.

Before these issues can be argued in court they have to be broken down into legal components. And, that’s where our attorneys are taking the case.

Where we are going…

To the US Supreme Court..

To get where the Plaintiff is going in the argument presented both generally in the SB 277 case, and specifically in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing, we need to have a clear understanding of two legal concepts: “Status Quo Ante” and “Strict Scrutiny, ” and one doctrine called “Hybrid Rights.”

In short, the two concepts, used together say “Your honor we need to stay right where we were before SB 277 (status quo ante) while we carefully scrutinize SB 277’s Constitutionality using the Strict Scrutiny guidelines.…”

What is “status quo ante?” It is a legal term defined as “the previously existing state of affairs.”

What is “Strict Scrutiny?” Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of certain laws. To pass strict scrutiny, the legislature must have passed the law to further a “compelling governmental interest,” and must have narrowly tailored the law to achieve that interest.

What are “hybrid rights“ – A hybrid rights claim involves a challenge that the government is simultaneously violating one’s right to the free exercise of religion and some other “constitutional protection[].” The strength of this other constitutional protection, known as the companion claim, determines whether a hybrid rights claim will be successful.

The Plaintiffs are basically saying “Throw this crappy SB 277 law out the window Judge. It just plain sucks… “

Just below is the exact language used in the court documents..

“Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court grant their Motion and preserve the status quo ante while the parties litigate this case. California’s children deserve better than to be barred from school and subjected to forced permanent quarantine, isolation, humiliation, prejudice, and emotional distress because of an unnecessary, draconian and discriminatory law that flies in the face of the State’s compelling interest in educating children.”

The First Amendment Argument…

I am going to oversimplify what I am about to show you. Whenever I do this my attorney friends cringe a little, but legal things need to be explained to NORMAL people in terms they can relate to.

One of the primary arguments of the case against SB 277 is that, in essence, SB 277 denies First Amendment protected religious exemptions in more than one way. Courts have held that there is little, or no difference between religious and personal belief exemptions, and that States cannot legislate against religion – period. Throughout the Oral Argument, several court case names are used – each of which set a standard of review, in some way, for the issues involved in the SB 277 case.

I won’t go into any detail of those – for we will all, except attorneys, tune out, and start mumbling, as our eyes cross that part of the pages. When you read through the transcript just scan over those references, and get back to the general ideas presented.

What is VERY IMPORTANT to our side is that the Judge agrees to use the concept of “Strict Scrutiny“ rather than “Rational Scrutiny” to examine SB 277 for Constitutionality.

Why do we want that?

Because the State Cannot pass the “Strict Scrutiny“ test…

Not a chance…

Why?

“To pass strict scrutiny, the law or policy must satisfy three tests:

It must be justified by a compelling governmental interest. While the Courts have never brightly defined how to determine if an interest is compelling, the concept generally refers to something necessary or crucial, as opposed to something merely preferred. Examples include national security, preserving the lives of a large number of individuals, and not violating explicit constitutional protections.

The law or policy must be narrowly tailored to achieve that goal or interest. If the government action encompasses too much (overbroad) or fails to address essential aspects of the compelling interest, then the rule is not considered narrowly tailored.

The law or policy must be the least restrictive means for achieving that interest: there must not be a less restrictive way to effectively achieve the compelling government interest. The test will be met even if there is another method that is equally the least restrictive. Some legal scholars consider this “least restrictive means” requirement part of being narrowly tailored, but the Court generally evaluates it separately.

The State simply cannot meet this standard with SB 277.

So, where’s that transcript of the Oral Arguments from August 12th, 2016?

Click here to go read it.
http://bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Mot-for-Prelim-Inj-Transcript-0812162.pdf
Our side’s arguments were, and are SUPERB. Try not to fall asleep through the government’s presentation. Laugh when they say they are punishing parents.

You’ll see…

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

onawah
23rd August 2016, 18:45
The film Vaxxed could be outlawed in California, if this bill passes
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/08/22/the-film-vaxxed-could-be-outlawed-in-california-if-this-bill-passes/

by Jon Rappoport


California bill AB 1671


“Let’s see, Mr. Reporter. You received an undercover recording of a medical researcher confessing his crimes. You posted the recording and wrote about it. You’re the one who is guilty of a crime. Next case!”

“Wait, Your Honor! That recording is vital information for the public. It shows that a vaccine considered to be safe actually causes brain damage in children.”

“No. It shows you violated the law by posting the recording. It was illegally made, and you aided and abetted and forwarded that crime. As I said, next case!”

Buckle up.

The shocking film Vaxxed (trailer) is drawing audiences all over the country. It details the confessions of a CDC researcher, William Thompson, who states that he and his colleagues buried data in a key study on the MMR vaccine.

In the study, the vaccine was given a free pass, with assurances that it didn’t increase the risk of autism in children—when, in fact, the data showed it did increase that risk.

***The key moments in Vaxxed are audio recordings of CDC researcher Thompson confessing his sins.

But wait. Now we have a bill, AB 1671, up before the California legislature. If it passes, it could make it a crime to screen Vaxxed or even write an article about it.

Those recordings of Thompson could be labeled “undercover,” and “illegal,” and therefore make them the target of AB 1671.

Furthermore, AB 1671 specifically seeks to protect “healthcare providers” from “exposure” via “undercover recordings” documenting their crimes. Certainly, by stretching the definitions a bit, the CDC, for whom Thompson works, and Thompson himself, could be considered such healthcare providers. Lawyers could argue that position until the cows come home and hang up a case in various courts for years—while an injunction prohibiting the screening of Vaxxed remains in force.

Nick Cahill, at the Courthouse News Service, reports on AB 1671 (“Abortion Clinic Sting Videos Sprout Free-Speech Battle”, Thursday, August 11, 2016):

“The bill would criminalize publishing undercover video footage of ‘health care providers’ and subject third parties, including journalists, to penalties for reporting and distributing the illegally recorded footage.” [My comment: It appears criminal penalties could be applied to anyone who posts the videos and comments on them, online. Not just reporters. And surely, audio recordings, as well as videos, would be banned.]

Cahill continues: “Under AB 1671, a journalist receiving and posting footage from an anonymous source could be punished by the state as well as be opened up to potential civil lawsuits. Whistleblowers would not be exempt from the proposal either, regardless of how they obtained the illegal footage.”

In the case of Vaxxed, the film makers received or obtained the recordings of CDC researcher Thompson and used them to make their case: Thompson was confessing to crimes he and colleagues committed at the CDC.

But if AB 1671 passes, releasing those recordings and commenting on them, in a film, could be considered a crime, punishable by fine, jail—and the film makers could also be open to lawsuits.

And of course, Vaxxed could be banned from all theaters in California.

As bizarre as it seems, AB 1671 isn’t just targeting people who make the undercover recordings. Its focus is on reporters who receive those recordings and then use them, post them, and write about them.

This lunatic attack on free speech coordinates tightly with the infamous 2015 California law, SB277, which made vaccinating California school children mandatory.

Vaxxed certainly raises ominous questions about that law—and now the government of California is considering the addition of a new law that could ban Vaxxed.

DON’T EVEN REPORT VACCINE CRIMES.

“Your kids must get vaccinated, and don’t report vaccine crimes and vaccine damage, when the knowledge of that damage comes from ‘undercover recordings’.”

That’s quite stunning, when you think about it.

The California Gestapo is trying to expand its reach.

Do you really think all this effort is coming from some genuine concern for “protecting the children?”

If so, you’re badly mistaken. This is about naked suppression of the truth, big profits for vaccine manufacturers, and neurological damage in kids.

If you don’t think so, see Vaxxed.

While you can.

Jon Rappoport

TrumanCash
25th August 2016, 06:29
I just saw the movie Vaxxed. It was very well done! All I can say is watch the movie and tell your friends about it. Everyone needs to see this movie!

http://vaxxedthemovie.com/

onawah
27th August 2016, 04:09
Preliminary Injunction in the challenge to #SB277 is denied.
From the Canary Party's FB page:

"CONCLUSION
State Legislatures have a long history of requiring children to be vaccinated
as a condition to school enrollment, and for as many years, both state and federal courts have upheld those requirements against constitutional challenge. History , in itself, does not compel the result in this case, but the case law makes clear that States may impose mandatory vaccination requirements without providing for religious or conscientious objections. Although the removal of the PBE here affects a great many people, this Court, is not prepared to hold that a minority, residing or remaining in any city or town where [disease] is prevalent, may thus defy the will of its constituted authorities, acting in good faith for all, under the legislative sanction of the State. If such be the privilege of a minority then a like privilege would belong to each individual of the community, and the
spectacle would be presented of the welfare and safety of an entire population being subordinated to the notions of a single individual who
chooses to remain a part of that population.
Jacobson, 197 U.S. at 37-38. Over 100 years ago, the Supreme Court was,
unwilling to hold it to be an element in the liberty secured by the
Constitution of the United States that one person, or a minority of persons, residing in any community and enjoying the benefits of its local
government, should have the power thus to dominate the majority when
supported in their action by the authority of the State.
Id. at 38. In this case, Plaintiffs have not made a showing that they are entitled to the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction. Accordingly, their motion is
respectfully denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED."

Dash
27th August 2016, 13:56
Heres a short summary of 4 people I know who took statins.

1) lady took statins as recommended by doctor, I said to her early on they were a fad and bad for the memory, as the brain is 40% fat and requires fatty acids to help form new cells and is part of the metabolic process. 6 months after, her eye brows fall out (and never come back) and also some of her hair. So... 5 years later I get a call saying maybe she should stop taking them, emm yes really? Anyway, now she also has abnormal cell growths (not cancer not yet) and strange lumps have appeared on her hands and arms. Also, I can tell from the moment she started taking them her memory got worse and she was mentally slower - since stopping them, her memory has come back 80% what it was. And before the statins she had absolutely nothing wrong with her.
2) the boyfriend: took them for only 3 days and got large pains and cramps in all the muscles particularly the arms, he couldn't lift anything up, stopped asap.
3) husband. took a combination of statins+warfarin (for minor heart problem), suffered a massive stroke. Now since the 90's there has been a large rise in people getting strokes who just happen to be taking warfarin(should not be on it for over 6 months). Now what I suggest is the statin has reduced the bodies ability to fight off poisons, eating fat reduces and absorbs toxins but the cholesterol levels are messed with so the combination most likely increased an already likely stroke scenerio - especially if that person takes them on an empty stomach.
4) wife and mother: started statins and after 2 years a black shadow appeared on her lungs, was given steroids to help breathing. The steroids masked the symptoms and reduced the immune system, cancer took advantage of the weakness and appeared 3 months before critical. By the end she was given a whole cocktail of drugs that just kept making her worse, and the 1 single dose of chemo put her straight into a coma then death.(took statins for 6 years)

Why is it that health food and body building shops sell Coenzyme Q10 as a performance enhancer but statins inhbits the body's production of this?
And CoQ10 just happens to generate energy for cells and is a powerful antioxidant that mops up old possibly cancerous cells.
The cell walls and metabolic process of every single cell in the body is altered by medding with the fat levels.

http://www.functionalmedicineuniversity.com/public/883.cfm

''What many people are unaware of is the fact that when CoQ10 is depleted it causes the LDL cholesterol to become oxidized. This in turn sets off a cascade of events making the LDL cholesterol drill holes in the arterial wall causing major inflammation. This inflammation sets you up for an increased risk of getting a heart attack or stroke.''

onawah
27th August 2016, 14:02
What is meant by "Preliminary Injunction in the challenge to #SB277 is denied:
...which is the question I asked on the Canary Party's thread about the case being heard now in California re mandatory vaccines.
Following is that conversation :
So does that mean mandatory vaccines in CA. are a done deal?
It means no injunctive relief during the course of the litigation.
What is "injunctive relief"?
"Injunctive relief" is a court order for the defendant to stop a specified action or behavior - in this case the action of banning children from school.
The court was asked by the plaintiffs to suspend the law temporarily while the case was being heard, but the court refused to do this. This denial of the injunction is not a final decision on the case - the case will move forward; it will be heard in court. But in the meantime, the law is in effect and children are being banned from school if they don't have a medical exemption and haven't received all the required doses of vaccines.


Preliminary Injunction in the challenge to #SB277 is denied.
From the Canary Party's FB page:

"CONCLUSION
State Legislatures have a long history of requiring children to be vaccinated
as a condition to school enrollment, and for as many years, both state and federal courts have upheld those requirements against constitutional challenge. History , in itself, does not compel the result in this case, but the case law makes clear that States may impose mandatory vaccination requirements without providing for religious or conscientious objections. Although the removal of the PBE here affects a great many people, this Court, is not prepared to hold that a minority, residing or remaining in any city or town where [disease] is prevalent, may thus defy the will of its constituted authorities, acting in good faith for all, under the legislative sanction of the State. If such be the privilege of a minority then a like privilege would belong to each individual of the community, and the
spectacle would be presented of the welfare and safety of an entire population being subordinated to the notions of a single individual who
chooses to remain a part of that population.
Jacobson, 197 U.S. at 37-38. Over 100 years ago, the Supreme Court was,
unwilling to hold it to be an element in the liberty secured by the
Constitution of the United States that one person, or a minority of persons, residing in any community and enjoying the benefits of its local
government, should have the power thus to dominate the majority when
supported in their action by the authority of the State.
Id. at 38. In this case, Plaintiffs have not made a showing that they are entitled to the extraordinary remedy of a preliminary injunction. Accordingly, their motion is
respectfully denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED."

onawah
27th August 2016, 14:26
More conversation on this subject on the FB Canary Party page at: https://www.facebook.com/TheCanaryParty/posts/1386223794738328?comment_id=1386421144718593&reply_comment_id=1386486034712104&notif_t=share_reply&notif_id=1472273268795120

onawah
27th August 2016, 20:22
Grotesquely incompetent Judge won’t suspend mandatory vaccination
8/27 by Jon Rappoport
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/grotesquely-incompetent-judge-wont-suspend-mandatory-vaccination/




“Hey, let’s just make up stuff in court, it’s a party.”

I’ll keep this as simple as I can.

The infamous SB277, passed into CA law in 2015, made vaccines mandatory for school children in the state.

Last month, a lawsuit was filed, with the purpose of overturning the law. The lawyers asked Federal Judge Dana Sabraw to keep the law from going into effect while the case moves forward.

Sabraw just said no.

Among the reasons he cited for his decision (LA Times, 8/28): “U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in San Diego wrote that state Legislatures have ‘a long history of requiring children to be vaccinated as a condition to school enrollment, and for as many years, both state and federal courts have upheld those requirements against constitutional challenge’.”

I don’t see how Judge Sabraw’s opinion could be more ridiculous. Or ludicrous. Or incompetent. Or wrong.

Why? Because ‘the long history’ he refers to is quite different.

The states have always upheld exemptions from vaccination on several grounds: medical waiver, religious objection, philosophical objection. THAT’S the tradition.

SB277 goes against the tradition, to say the very least. SB277 breaks new ground in allowing the state to operate as a medical fascist in the area of vaccinations.

Under SB277, a parent’s only option, aside from a hard-to-obtain medical exemption, is to home school her child. And obviously, not all parents can afford to exercise that option, because they have to work to pay the bills.

From what source is Judge Sabraw getting his information about “long history” and tradition? From a CDC PR pamphlet? From a drug company? From aliens on the moon?

His considered opinion in this case is on the order of saying, “Look, all states have always had strict rules about crossing the street on Thursdays. You can’t do it or you’re breaking the law.”

Maybe the Judge just decided to make up his version of history out of thin air.

Actually, it appears he did that in a prior case. The issue there centered on what lawyers can and can’t say during their closing arguments. They can’t go off and say anything. They definitely can’t refer to “facts” that were never presented during the trial. They can’t just make stuff up.

The website, abovethelaw.com, has the story. Joe Patrice colorfully writes:

“The case arose in 2010, when a guy was stopped by border agents and Skippy the Wonder Dog managed to uncover 112 sealed packages weighing 321.33 pounds (or 146.06 kilograms if you’re Canadian or otherwise a Communist) of marijuana. The defendant claimed he was set up. In the government’s rebuttal closing, the prosecutor, Steve Miller, pulled some Hocus Pocus and started telling the jury about a number of reasons why the defendant’s story couldn’t be believed. That would be par for the course, except none of these ‘facts’ were brought out during the trial itself.

“When defense counsel objected, Judge Dana M. Sabraw responded ‘with the admonition that this is counsel’s argument, it is up to the jury to determine the facts.’ Stellar judging. I wish I’d known about the “you can assert whatever you want in closing because it’s ‘up to the jury to determine facts’” rule.”

Yes, let’s just invent the law as we go along. Make up the law out of thin air. Make up tradition and history out of thin air. Make up whatever you need to make up, in order to deny the people of California a fair hearing on a fascist law that forces them to vaccinate their children with the full CDC load of toxic chemicals and germs.

Well, the rabid pro-vaccine forces have their Judge. He’s perfect.

His bias, even before the lawsuit has gotten off the ground, is sufficient reason for him to recuse himself.

“I’m stepping away. I was making up history out of nothing. Let another Judge take over who actually knows a little about the past.”

Get Sabraw out of there. He’s doing fiction.

Bad fiction.

onawah
27th August 2016, 22:14
Mandatory vaccination in CA: let’s school a Federal Judge
8/27/16
by Jon Rappoport
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/08/27/mandatory-vaccination-in-ca-lets-school-a-federal-judge/


Judge Sabraw: here’s something you didn’t know about the DPT shot

I’ll repeat myself a bit here, in case you missed my last article. Then I’ll get into something else, something dangerous that a Federal Judge knows nothing about…

Federal Judge Dana Sabraw is overseeing a lawsuit against mandatory vaccination in California.

So far, Sabraw has denied a petition to suspend mandatory vaccination for school children while the case moves forward.

He believes tradition and history are on the side of forced vaccinations. That’s because he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Or he’s just making it up out of thin air.

As the LA Times reports: ““U.S. District Judge Dana Sabraw in San Diego wrote that state Legislatures have ‘a long history of requiring children to be vaccinated as a condition to school enrollment, and for as many years, both state and federal courts have upheld those requirements against constitutional challenge’.”

I don’t see how Judge Sabraw’s opinion could be more ridiculous.

Why? Because ‘the long history’ he refers to is quite different.

The states have always upheld exemptions from vaccination on several grounds: medical waiver, religious objection, philosophical objection. Hello? THAT’S the tradition.

SB277, the new CA law, goes against the tradition, to say the very least. SB277 breaks new ground in allowing the state to operate as a medical fascist in the area of vaccinations.

So…let’s look at one of the mandatory vaccines that’ll be injected into children in California, whether their parents agree or not. I’m talking about the DTP shot—diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough). Let’s give Judge Sabraw a history lesson. You know: actual history.

Buckle up.

“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” (DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich)

“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more [all signs of acute and very serious neurological reaction].” (Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987)

“A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” (Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987)

“…in 1970/71, there were more than 33,000 cases of pertussis with 41 fatal cases among the very well immunized British child population; whereas in 1974/75, with a declining rate of vaccination, a pertussis epidemic caused only 25,000 cases with 25 fatalities.” (Wolfgang Ehrengut, Lancet, Feb. 18, 1978, p. 370)

“… Barker and Pichichero, in a prospective study of 1232 children in Denver, Colorado, found after DTP that only 7% of those vaccinated were free from untoward reactions, which included pyrexia (53%), acute behavioral changes (82%), prolonged screaming (13%), and listlessness, anorexia and vomiting. 71% of those receiving second injections of DTP experienced two or more of the reactions monitored.” (Lancet, May 28, 1983, p. 1217)

“Publications by the World Health Organization show that diphtheria is steadily declining in most European countries, including those in which there has been no immunization. The decline began long before vaccination was developed. There is certainly no guarantee that vaccination will protect a child against the disease; in fact, over 30,000 cases of diphtheria have been recorded in the United Kingdom in fully immunized children.” (Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 58)

“Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is controversial, as the side effects have received a great deal of publicity. The counter claim is that the effectiveness and protection offered by the procedure far outweigh the possible ill effects… annual deaths, per million children, from this disease over the period from 1900 to the mid-nineteen seventies, shows that from a high point of just under 900 deaths per million children (under age 15) in 1905, the decline has been consistent and dramatic. There had been a lowering of mortality rates of approximately 80% by the time immunization was introduced on a mass scale, in the mid-nineteen fifties. The decline has continued, albeit at a slower rate, ever since. No credit can be given to vaccination for the major part of the decline since it was not in use.” (Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 63)

Again, the DPT shot will be required and mandatory in California for school children.

It helps to know history, especially since major media refuse to touch the truth with a ten-foot pole.

Shoot your child up with the DPT vaccine?

Go along to get along?

Bury your head in the sand?

Share this:

onawah
29th August 2016, 16:42
New Scientific Consensus: Toxins increase risk for autism
From Autism Action Network 8/29/16

Take action: http://capwiz.com/a-champ/issues/alert/?alertid=73225641&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]


A wide-ranging group of leading scientists from dozens of research institutions in the US, federal agencies and associations of medical professionals have released a simple but powerful statement, “Widespread exposures to toxic chemicals in our air, water, food, soil, and consumer products can increase the risks for cognitive, behavioral, or social impairment, as well as specific neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).”

Of course, parents of neurologically-damaged children have been saying this for decades. The report was released on the Friday before the July Fourth weekend, a day guaranteed to provide no media coverage. Consequently, it is up to us to get this information to federal and state legislators. Please click on the Take Action Link above to send to your legislators a message that contains a link to the report.

The full statement was published in the journal Environmental Health Risks. Please read it here: http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/EHP358/

Six toxins were specifically identified: MERCURY, organophophate pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), lead, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) used as flame retardants, and combustion-related air pollutants, which include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter.

The consensus statement provides a powerful challenge to popular theories about the cause of autism and related disorders such as it is primarily determined by genetics, or that it is a normal, naturally occurring difference.

The researchers identify themselves as TENDR, Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risk. Signers include researchers from the MIND Institute at UC Davis, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Johns Hopkins, Columbia, Harvard, UNC, North Carolina State, U of Colorado, Rutgers, Georgetown, George Washington U, Boston U, U of Pennsylvania, UC San Francisco, Simon Fraser U, U of Texas El Paso, U of Vermont, Case Western U, U of Rochester, U of Cincinnati, U of Illinois Champaign-Urbana, Drexel U, Emory U, U Mass Amherst, Icahn School of Medicine, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Child Neurology Society, Endocrine Society, International Neurotoxicology Association, International Society for Children’s Health and the Environment, International Society for Environmental Epidemiology, National Council of Asian Pacific Islander Physicians, National Hispanic Medical Association, National Medical Association, as well as federal agencies and advocacy organizations.

onawah
29th August 2016, 16:51
CDC Concealed Link Between Thimerosal and Autism for Over a Decade, Forced to Release Incriminating Documents
http://wakeup-world.com/2016/06/22/cdc-concealed-link-between-thimerosal-autism-over-decade-forced-release-incriminating-documents/

By Carolanne Wright

Contributing writer for Wake Up World

A long-held debate between pro- and anti-vaccination groups may finally be put to rest over the association between thimerosal — a preservative composed of 49.5% ethyl mercury used in numerous child and flu vaccines — and neurological disorders, particularly autism.

For nearly a decade, biochemist Brian Hooker, Ph.d., has been petitioning documents from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) in relation to the controversial preservative. After more than 100 requests, the documents were eventually released — and clearly showed thimerosal can in fact cause autism and other neurodevelopment disorders. But this isn’t the only study that demonstrates the brain and health harming nature of the compound.


Toxicity of thimerosal no longer in question

A study in the Journal of Toxicology from the Methodist Hospital Department of Neurosurgery in Houston, Texas, establishes thimerosal as a potent mitochondrial toxin in human brain cells. Researchers found thimerosal-derived ethyl mercury not only inhibited mitochondrial function, but also increased the formation of potent brain-damaging oxidants. The authors conclude: “The results of this study suggest that ethyl mercury is a mitochondrial toxin in human astrocytes [cells associated with neurons in the central nervous system]. We believe that this finding is important, particularly since the number of diseases in which mitochondrial dysfunction has been implicated are rapidly increasing.”

Additionally, Sharon E. Jacob, M.D., and Ran Huo, B.S. write:

“The main concern with thimerosal involves its metabolite — ethyl mercury. Hat makers, or “hatters” in the 1800s, were notorious for suffering from dementias due to the mercury nitrate used in felt processing. This mercury-associated dementia in felt workers was the inspiration for the Mad Hatter in Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland and the origin of the phrase “mad as a hatter”. The Mad Hatter’s disease, also known as erythrism, includes a constellation of dementia, stomatitis, muscle spasm, tremor and skin rashes. … Acute or chronic exposure to organic and inorganic mercury can result in renal, neurologic and dermal toxicity.” [source]

According to findings by Dr. Paul King, ethyl mercury (thimerosal) is metabolized by the body into methyl mercury — the most dangerous and deadly form as it’s retained in bodily tissue and poses long-term toxicity issues.

Over 75 documents and studies demonstrate the adverse effects of thimerosal, many of which are related to irregularities in autistic children. As a mercury-containing compound, thimerosal is a recognized human carcinogen, damages the immune system, can cause anaphylactic shock and is a known reproductive and fetal toxin.

Safety issues of thimerosal caught the attention of the U.S. government and, in November 1997, Congress passed the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act, which required an investigation into the mercury content of FDA-approved products. Because of this, previously unrecognized levels of ethyl mercury in vaccines were brought to light.

In July 1999, health officials announced the compound would be phased out of vaccines. The CDC, American Academy of Pediatrics and FDA all claimed the measure was simply a precaution. Vaccine manufacturers were asked to eliminate mercury from vaccines. The request was refused year after year.

Which brings us back to Dr. Hooker’s mission to uncover the truth about thimerosal buried within the CDC.

CDC Concealed Link Thimerosal Autism Decade, Forced Release Incriminating Documents - fb

Officials knew in 2000 that thimerosal is associated with increased risk of autism

Brian Hooker, PhD, PE, is an associate professor at Simpson University and specializes in biology and chemistry. He also has over 15 years of experience in the field of bioengineering. Throughout his career, he has published science and engineering papers extensively in peer-reviewed journals. Dr. Hooker’s son, who is now 19, was developmentally normal until after receiving thimerosal-containing vaccines as a child, where he subsequently regressed into autism. This experience began Dr. Hooker’s search for the truth behind thimerosal in vaccines and decade-long quest to review crucial data from a massive CDC study on the compound.

Once Dr. Hooker obtained the documents in question, the link between autism and thimerosal was undeniable. The data covering over 400,000 infants born between 1991 and 1997 was analyzed by CDC epidemiologist Thomas Verstraeten, MD, “proves unequivocally that in 2000, CDC officials were informed internally of the very high risk of autism, non-organic sleep disorder and speech disorder associated with thimerosal exposure.”

Furthermore, PR Web notes:

“When the results of the Verstraeten study were first reported outside the CDC in 2005, there was no evidence that anyone but Dr. Verstraeten within the CDC had known of the very high 7.6-fold elevated relative risk of autism from exposure to thimerosal during infancy. But now, clear evidence exists. A newly-acquired abstract from 1999 titled, “Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to thimerosal containing vaccine in first month of life” required the approval of top CDC officials prior to its presentation at the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) conference. Thimerosal, which is 50% mercury by weight, was used in most childhood vaccines and in the RhoGAM® shot for pregnant women prior to the early 2000s.”

Congressman Dave Weldon, MD, also expresses concern over the study to Julie Gerberding, Director of the CDC, in the following letter:

Dear Dr. Gerberding:

I am writing to follow up on our conversation about the article (Verstraeten et. al.,) that will be published in the November 2003 issue of Pediatrics. I have reviewed the article and have serious reservations about the four-year evolution and conclusions of this study.

Much of what I observed transpired prior to your appointment a year ago as the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). I am very concerned about activities that have taken place in the National Immunization Program (NIP) in the development of this study, and I believe the issues raised need your personal attention.

I am a strong supporter of childhood vaccinations and know that they have saved us from considerable death and suffering. A key part of our vaccination program is to ensure that we do everything possible to ensure that these vaccines, which are mandatory, are as safe as possible. We must fully disclose adverse events. Anything less than this undermines public confidence.

I have read the upcoming Pediatrics study and several earlier versions of this study dating back to February 2000. I have read various e-mails from Dr. Verstraeten and coauthors. I have reviewed the transcripts of a discussion at Simpsonwood, GA between the author, various CDC employees, and vaccine industry representatives. I found a disturbing pattern which merits a thorough, open, timely, and independent review by researchers outside of the CDC, HHS, the vaccine industry, and others with a conflict of interest in vaccine related issues (including many in University settings who may have conflicts). [Read more]

And yet, the CDC still claims there is “no relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism rates in children,” even though the agency’s own Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) database shows high risk. Numerous public records also support these findings, such as this Congressional Record from 2003.

Dr. Thomas Verstraeten, the scientist who conducted the study in question, left the CDC in 2001 to work for GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a vaccine manufacturer facing liability over thimerosal in their products.

Article sources

“Thimerosal neurotoxicity is associated with glutathione depletion: protection with glutathione precursors,” James SJ1, Slikker W 3rd, Melnyk S, New E, Pogribna M, Jernigan S. Neurotoxicology, 2005 Jan:26(1):1-8.
“Thimerosal-Derived Ethyl mercury Is a Mitochondrial Toxin in Human Astrocytes: Possible Role of Fenton Chemistry in the Oxidation and Breakage of mtDNA,” Martyn A. Sharpe, Andrew D. Livingston,David S. Baskin, Journal of Toxicology, Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 373678, (http://www.hindawi.com/journals/jt/2012/373678/)
“Increased risk of developmental neurologic impairment after high exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccine in first month of life,” Verstraeten Thomas M. MD, NIP, Division o f Epidemiology and Surveillance, Vaccine Safety and Development Branch
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1175560-overview
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2003-05-21/pdf/CREC-2003-05-21-pt1-PgE1011-3.pdf [PDF]
http://www.prweb.com/releases/ASOT/Thimerosal/prweb11598819.htm
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cdc-forced-release-documents-showing-knew-vaccine-preservative-autism/
http://preventdisease.com/news/pdf/Thimerosal_Immune_System_Abnormalities.pdf [PDF]
http://mercuryfreedrugs.org/docs/00mmdd_EISAbstractSubmission_IncreasedRiskOfDevelo pmentalNeurologicImpairmentAfterHighExposureToThim erosal-containingVaccine_.pdf [PDF]

onawah
31st August 2016, 18:17
Bang: Texas prosecutor video: "vaccines cause autism"
by Jon Rappoport
August 31, 2016
The Vaxxed team does it again.

Here is a stunning new interview with fearless San Antonio prosecutor, Nico LaHood, and his wife, Davida. Watch it. Share it.

Polly Tommey of the Vaxxed team handles the interview. Nico LaHood lays it all out. He rips away the curtain and exposes the truth. Vaccines cause autism.

As La Hood talks, the vaccine criminals and liars crumble into dust.
Pi9PNKW7w3Q

onawah
1st September 2016, 02:11
SB 277 Lawsuit – NOT Ready To Go To Appeal…

There are Two Main Arguments Missing…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

http://bolenreport.com/category/importantlegal/laesuitsb277/


Something happened during the actual Preliminary Hearing August 12th, 2016 that made me step back and take a hard look at what was going on behind the scenes in the SB 277 litigation organizational team. I’ve been turning over rocks ever since looking for snakes – and I found some.

Since we lost the bid for the Preliminary Injunction I have been pushing even harder for an explanation of the loss – a real explanation of what REALLY happened. More, I want to know what is going to happen next.

As everyone knows I am not particularly nice (sometimes) – and I don’t let up, pointing out to those I am asking questions of how many readers, and who those readers are, that rely on me for information.

Yes, I’m a bully when it comes to demanding answers. Why? People depend on me for the truth.

I am getting answers from my inquiries – and you aren’t going to like what I am finding out. I, Tim Bolen, certainly didn’t like what I found.

In short – there are serious problems in the organizational teams. This case could be DOOMED unless we fix the problems immediately. I’ll be blunt – Going forward with an Appeal, at this point, is a BAD idea, and with the loss we could expect, would set up EVERY other State for mandatory vaccines.

There is a huge fight going on behind the scenes. The Canary Party is trying to take over control of the case using their usual “whisper campaign” to try to disparage Jim Turner and Bob Moxley and put their own bird-brained team in charge of the lawsuit. I suspect they are contacting the Plaintiffs directly, right now, trying to get them to sign up with them.

The Canaries want to take over the case immediately and file an Appeal on the arguments in the existing case. Turner and Moxley want to Amend the case back to its original much better Aaron Siri design (see below), and then refile a Motion for a Preliminary Injunction before anything else.

The whisper campaign claims that Turner and Moxley screwed up. They certainly DID NOT. The Canary Party (E4A) nitwits did.

I agree with Turner and Moxley. I’ll show you why just below.

Background…

This case was in the works for a LONG TIME. Attorneys came to meetings in California from all over the US to put together a plan. I kept waiting for something to happen – to develop and get it started.

siri
Aaron Siri from New York
After much deliberation the original lead attorney was supposed to be Aaron Siri from New York, with Bob Moxley from Wyoming backing him up. Three minor attorneys would assist with writing chores. You’ll see their information below.

Both Siri and Moxley (seasoned and successful litigators) were paid, ahead of time, to write up the case and case strategies to guide the lawsuit. They both did.

Siri, for instance, wrote one hundred sixty-six (166) pages – focusing on “the dangers of vaccines“ as the primary reason why mandates could not happen, with “the right of education as a secondary approach.” I have a copy of that.

Siri told the organizers how much money it would take to litigate and those organizers promised they would provide that amount.

A potential “funder‘ was flown to meet with Siri in New York, supposedly bringing a check . The “funder” showed up – but NO check. Siri basically said “no operating money no lead attorney.” Can’t say as I blame him.

So, with only about a month to go before the case HAD TO BE FILED, there was no lead attorney.

Finding a Lead Attorney…

The organizing committee had three members (minor attorneys) that eventually became what I call “the minor cooks in the kitchen.” So, you ask, “why didn’t one of them become lead attorney?” The answer to that is easy – none of them were, or are, qualified to be lead attorney and would certainly not inspire confidence in the Plaintiffs.

Who were they and why couldn’t they make the cut?

The first was Mary Holland from NYC law School. She, to me, had TWO major strikes against her (1) She has NEVER tried a case in any Court, she is, in actuality, a part time law instructor at a City (Community) college, and (2) she is totally connected, joined-at-the-hip as it were, with the Canary Party.

The second was Kim Mack Rosenberg from New York. She, also had two major strikes (1) I couldn’t find where she had ever been lead attorney in any case, anywhere. The New York law firm she had been with had let her go, and (2) she, also, is totally connected, joined-at-the-hip as it were, with the Canary Party. In fact her Linked-In account showed she was CURRENTLY EMPLOYED by the Canary Party.

The third was Janet Nalbandyan from California. This one had even MORE baggage. (1) Although she had changed jobs often in the last several years, she had no apparent experience in this kind of law. She now works for a Detroit based law firm, with an office in Los Angeles, that handles money-type legal affairs for auto manufacturers (2) Worse though, are those stories and videos tying Nalbandyan to the controversial organizing of final California Assembly SB 277 hearings.

Remember the scandal over the microphones being switched off and on for Allison Folmar? Remember that doll faced woman saying “we know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper) to the committee? Yeah, THAT Janet Nalbandyan.

In short, in California these days, everyone remembers how the Canary Party screwed up the campaigns. So, virtually NO ONE is going to follow, or contribute to, something run by the Canaries – a sentiment I share. No wonder these three were hiding in the background. For sure, they had to find somebody to front the organization.

Enter Jim Turner…

A few weeks before the filing absolutely had to be made, one way or another, the organizers contacted Jim Turner to come in as lead attorney.

Jim asked several people, including me, what we thought about him taking over. I told him that the idea of a real lawsuit using Siri and Moxley’s legal concepts was a good one – but that the Canary involvement was fraught with problems – that if Canary was involved at a high level expect to be on the losing side at some critical point – for they always seem to be able to “seize defeat from the jaws of victory…”

My advice – “make certain you, Jim Turner, have control of the case and dilute the Canary influence immediately.”

Jim took the case. To head off the Canaries he brought in three major non-profits with REAL memberships, as Plaintiffs.

The case writings were supposed to be complete, the organizers tell Jim, and all he has to do, at this point, is to get the case started. Who was writing the case words? The three women listed above, and they were SUPPOSED TO BE using Siri and Moxley’s script. .

Fly in the Ointment…

The case, Jim was told, is written around Siri’s and Moxley’s legal briefs. But, as it turns out – it hadn’t been – at least two VERY IMPORTANT (Primary) legal issues had been left out. The case had been adjusted to fit the opinions of the Canary Party.

Siri and Moxely’s original complaint was about “how dangerous vaccines actually were, and are,” – with startling detail. The basic premise was that “you cannot mandate something this dangerous.”

The Canary attorneys, before bringing in Turner, ten days before the deadline, removed ALL references to Moxley and Siri’s brilliant legal arguments and handed Turner a watered down argument based on the secondary argument that “children have right to an education…” ignoring the dangers of vaccines, entirely, as the primary argument.

Turner went forward because, as any attorney knows, you can always add an Amended Complaint, but the important thing was to get started.

The Judge was very explicit in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing that he thought the Canary argument unpersuasive without the facts about vaccines, and denied the Preliminary Injunction.

So, What, and how, did this happen?

I’ll break the problem down into components:

(1) Too many cooks in the kitchen…

(2) Not enough time for the REAL ATTORNEYs to prepare. The case organizers waited too long to bring in Jim Turner.

(3) Not enough time for the REAL ATTORNEYS to take charge of the case and get it on the right track. Turner came in on June 20th, 2016 taking over for a case that had to be filed by July 1st 2016 – in ten days. Turner had to use an already prepared legal argument.

(4) Two MAJOR missing legal arguments.

(5) Constant interference from the minor cooks in the kitchen.

(6) The original case organizers ignored the advice of their primary consultants about the strategies in the case.

(7) People who have no business interfering are VERY MUCH interfering. There is bird **** all over the kitchen.

So, Where Are We?

Behind the scenes the excrement is hitting the fan. Why? Because the Canary Party connivers want to go forward with a useless Appeal of their half-baked “children have right to an education…” legal claim.

The competent and experienced Lead Attorneys are saying “NO – we first need to Amend the case to include the original material, and re-file AGAIN for a Preliminary Injunction.”

Going forward and doing something incredibly stupid without examining consequences is “THE HALLMARK” of the Canary Party. I think it is their Mission Statement (sarcasm intended).

But, I suspect, the Canaries are contacting all of the individual Plaintiffs trying to get them to come with them to Appeal.

Working together?…

I Knew the Canaries were there in the organizational mix before I recommended the case to my readers. Friends of mine said it was time to mend fences and build bridges, that they, the Canaries, should be given a chance…

OK, the Canaries were given a chance – and they reverted to form just like I thought they would, dropping bird ****, as it were, all over the organizational table.

My recommendations to the legal team?

(1) Drop Education 4 All (E4A) from the Plaintiff list completely. There are REAL Education groups in California, with thousands of REAL members, who, unlike the self-serving Canary Party, are REALLY interested in the issues. E4A has only two members we can see.

The Nevada E4A corporation documents show only two people – someone named Christopher J. Jones as President (I can’t find this person) and Rebecca Estepp as Secretary.

Estepp is the one who issues press Releases for E4A. You’ve seen them. She uses, it appears, the Canary Party distribution network for those releases. Notice that EVERY Press Release mentions ONLY Canary Party attorney Kim Mack Rosenberg in those releases – NEVER mentioning the lead attorneys Turner and Moxley.

These people are nothing but trouble.

(2) Amend the Complaint and start over – get the case back to where it was before the bird-brains crapped all over it.

What happened in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing that changed my investigation focus?

After the hearing in San Diego I wrote an article called “SB 277 Lawsuit – We’re just Waiting…” In it I pointed out what looked to me like two incidents of SABOTAGE of the legal team’s efforts. Below, is an excerpt of what I found. After this I kept investigating and I found a snake pit. Let’s look at what I found…

Something strange was going on – in fact, TWO strange things.

Strange thing number one – Apparently there are some people interfering with our attorneys’ ability to manage the case – and it is severe. I received, I think, five separate reports of someone, an aggressive woman (NOT part of the legal team) at the Hearing, who was CONSTANTLY handing notes forward, obviously trying to distract our team’s efforts to answer the Judge’s questions. I HOPE, for our sakes, that that person didn’t upset the Judge against us.

Attorneys prepare days ahead of time for Judge’s questions, discussing answers, and points, with their colleagues, so as to make a smooth presentation. They DO NOT need distraction…

I have been investigating who that person was, and at this point I can say “She was not invited to participate….” I have questioned this person via email, about what she was up to, who she represented, and, so far, have not received an answer.

Don’t worry – I’ll find the answer one way or another.

Well, I DID find out who that person handing out notes was.

Normally, if there is a person in the courtroom interfering with the process, the Federal Police, after a subtle signal from the Judge, grab the offender by the hair and ankles, pound them a few times with a nightstick or truncheon, and drag their now-a-prisoner ass out into the hallway for transportation to the looney-bin office for further assignment.

That person turned out to be Janet Nalbandyan of SB277 legislation hearing fame (infamy?).

“What the hell was SHE doing there?” was my loud and persistent question, and the lead attorneys were reluctant to respond.

But I am persistent, and the largest, most favorable publication of the SB 277 lawsuit. Someone, not one of the attorneys, told me that “Janet thinks she is running the SB 277 case… and she wants to stay in the background…”

Oh, really?

There was an easy way to find out – I sent Janet an email with my concerns. Here it is…

Janet:

After you showed up in the Preliminary Injunction Hearing courtroom last Friday, and as my source tells me, began passing notes to Kim Mack Rosenberg, distracting the attorneys during their presentation to the Judge, you have my full attention. I hope you didn’t damage the case…

So, I’ll be blunt. Who is your client here? Where is all the money you are handing out coming from? What is your motivation?

Who, specifically, is E4A? Every name… Who is Christopher J. Jones? Where do I find him?

I have heard that you got your “seed money” from Mark Blaxill? Is this true?

Your days of hiding in the background, pulling strings, are over Janet. One way or another.

Tim Bolen

Narbandyan did not respond to me DIRECTLY – but, as you can imagine, I started to get calls from others – and my investigation went into high gear. You can see the results of my inquiries all throughout this article.

What happened right after the Preliminary Injunction Hearing that got my attention?

Just below, another excerpt from the “SB 277 Lawsuit – We’re just Waiting…” article is self-explanatory.

Strange thing number two – Several hours after the hearing three of the attorneys met with the Plaintiffs and other interested parties to talk about the Hearing events. A video was made, and it aired on Periscope, and invited “comments.” The readily visible “comments” took up most of the left side of the screen, and at 12:47 into the video one of the attorneys was offered a “blow job.” Just a little further the REALLY NASTY COMMENTS started.

So, how did those “comments” appear so fast. The “skeptics” had no notification of the video…

It took a while to get the video taken down.

Last (almost) but not least…

There was one more excerpt that is important:

Rife with rumors – I’ve been getting bits and pieces of a story telling me that there is a group, acting behind the scenes, to disrupt the case, and our attorney’s management of it. That wouldn’t surprise me a bit. If any of you have anything to contribute in that scene, please get a hold of me.

I do have, based on the information I am gathering, a working theorem of what’s happening, and I think, so do the attorneys.

i suspect that some strong language has been, and is being, used, this last week, in attorney communication networks.

We’ll see…

Yup, that was/is happening.

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
http://bolenreport.com/category/importantlegal/laesuitsb277/

http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-not-ready-go-appeal/#more-4844

onawah
1st September 2016, 17:42
I wanted to see what the Canary Party had to say about the allegations made by Tim Bolen in the preceeding post ( http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91081-The-poisoning-of-America-Glyphosate-Statins-and-Vaccines&p=1094638&viewfull=1#post1094638 ) and since I get the CP's posts on Facebook, I copied Bolen's article and sent it to them with a query as to what they think about it. I got this reply:

Tim Bolen has a long history of attacking our work, and the Canary Party leadership personally. The accuracy of his writing ranges from not knowing what he is talking about, to making up things from thin air.

For example in this piece, he cannot even correctly identify the lawyers he claims to be investigating.

He describes Mary Holland as a part time law instructor at a community college (NYC). In fact she is the head of the NYU Law School Graduate Program, and a member of the Supreme Court Bar. http://its.law.nyu.edu/facultyprofiles/index.cfm... Further, Mary Holland is not a member of The Canary Party.

Other basic factual errors are that Kim Mack Rosenberg has never been employed by the Canary Party, and Janet Nalbandyan did not testify SB277 hearings.

The biggest factual error he makes is that, as The Canary Party is not a part of this suit, we have no idea what is going on with it, other than what the general public knows. There is no "whisper campaign" or attempted takeover. If the Canary Party wanted to bring a lawsuit in California, we would just bring a lawsuit in California. No "takeover" needed.

But we are a political organization, not a legal fim.

Most importantly, Bolen is not a party to the SB277 lawsuit either, so much of what he writes about, he should not even know, as it would be a violation of the confidentiality rights of the parents bringing the lawsuit. So unless someone is breaking the law, which is doubtful, we have to assume that he is just making things up.

A full rebuttal to the things he writes would consume all our time, so a few years back we stopped trying to address every one of his lies and distortions and just focused on the work. But this should be enough to demonstrated that he is not a trustworthy source of information.

As always, we strongly caution against taking Tim Bolen at his word.

Mary Holland - Overview | NYU School of Law
ITS.LAW.NYU.EDU


...which sounded pretty convincing to me. Does anyone know any insider info on Bolen or the Canary Party? Thanks.

onawah
1st September 2016, 21:57
Intelligent Parents are Refusing Vaccinations
Posted by Dr Sircus on September 1, 2016
http://drsircus.com/medicine/intelligent-parents-are-refusing-vaccinations/


Live Science is reporting that more parents are refusing to vaccinate their children now than a decade ago because they simply do not see a need for vaccination. Researchers have found that in 2013, 87 percent of pediatricians surveyed said they encountered vaccine refusals from parents of their patients, up from 75 percent of pediatricians who said the same in 2006.

Intelligent parents who refused to vaccinate their kids understand how unnecessary and dangerous vaccines are and such parents see the payoff, their kids tend to remain healthier with less colds and infections. Vaccine-preventable diseases are rare these days and many of them started to disappear before vaccines where created for each specific disease.

Live Science is biased when it comes to vaccines so it is not surprising that they say that many parents delay vaccination out of the mistaken belief that vaccines may burden children’s immune systems. There is no mistake about it. Vaccines do reduce natural immunity and can clobber the immune system causing death or many chronic diseases.
http://drsircus.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/intel2.png
This T cell (blue), one of the immune system’s principal means of defense.

Dr. Harold E. Buttram wrote years ago about a little-noted letter-to-the editor in the New England Journal of Medicine, in 1984, about an interesting German study. In the study, a significant though temporary drop of T-helper lymphocytes was found in 11 healthy adults following routine tetanus booster vaccinations. “Special concern rests in the fact that, in 4 of the subjects, the T-helper lymphocytes fell to levels seen in active AIDS patients. The implications of this study are enormous. In regards to this German study, if this was the result of a single vaccine in healthy adults, it is sobering to think of the possible consequences of multiple vaccines (18 vaccines within the first six months of life at latest count) given to infants with their immature and vulnerable immune systems,” wrote Buttram.

The New England Journal of Medicine study showed that tetanus vaccines cause T-cell ratios to drop below normal, with the greatest decrease after two weeks. Though the altered ratios were found to be similar to those found in AIDS victims the important information from this study has never seen the light of day. “I consider it one of the most flagrant examples of negligence in the area of safety testing in childhood vaccines, the fact that this study has never been repeated,” wrote Buttram.

Do not Trust the CDC, the FDA and Certainly not Big Pharma

The US federal government is crazy enough to allow pharmaceutical companies to put neurotoxic mercury (Thimerosal) in the flu vaccine and inject that directly into children’s blood streams and babies, starting at six months of age, is reason enough to not put trust in the CDC.

Seasonal flu vaccines contain high levels of neurotoxic mercury and in the third world over half of all vaccines contain this damaging heavy metal. Vials of flu vaccine produced by British pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) were found to contain upwards of 51 parts per million of mercury, or 25,000 times the legal maximum for drinking water established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).”

They have been putting mercury into vaccines since the 1930s and it was an American company, Eli Lilly, who developed thimerosal and sponsored its use. Mercury can compromise the health of anyone—adult or child—being a heavy metal and potent neurotoxin. We are exposed to mercury and aluminum (another metal used in vaccines) from many sources and all of them present a clear and present danger that has only increased as environmental mercury increases. There has never been a more insane idea then injecting mercury-containing fluids directly into our bloodstreams yet your local pediatrician and nurse have no problem doing it.

According to a NY Times essay on flu vaccines several years ago, “As soon as swine flu vaccinations start next month, some people getting them will drop dead of heart attacks or strokes, some children will have seizures and some pregnant women will miscarry. Inevitably, officials say, some of these will happen within hours or days of a flu shot.” The Times essay downplayed the connection but in another report we read, “About a week after getting the swine flu shot, she recalled, “I was so weak I couldn’t push down the toaster button.” This woman spent a month in the hospital, paralyzed from the neck down, before gradually recovering.”

“The flu vaccine poses an immediate risk to your cardiovascular system due to the fact that vaccines provoke an acute inflammatory response in the body that can become chronic in some individuals. The inflammatory response is a MAJOR concern in pregnant women, as stimulating a woman’s immune system during pregnancy can increase health risks for the pregnant woman and some researchers think that it increases risks that the baby will develop neurological dysfunction anywhere from 7 to 14-fold!”

On the 20th of January 2010, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said there had been 36 confirmed reports of seizures that flu season in children ages 6 months through 2 years in the United States. The seizures occurred within one day after they were vaccinated with Fluzone, the only flu shot recommended in America for infants and very young children.

There is little doubt that vaccines are dangerous (American government pays out billions in vaccine damages). Most compensated cases were for flu vaccine damages, especially due to the paralyzing Guillain-Barre syndrome. It should come as no surprise that vaccines kill people because that is what medicine does as a matter of habit. There are constant reports from around the world about vaccines hurting people.

Compassionate people cry out against vaccines and all the harm they are doing to children and people around the globe but we have medical authorities claiming them to offer deliverance when in reality they offer little of anything but further toxic attacks on the body and immune system.
http://drsircus.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/intel3.jpg
http://drsircus.com/free-e-book-the-terror-of-pediatric-medicine/
The title says it all. By the time you reach the final page of my free EBook The Terror of Pediatric Medicine you will understand that pediatric medicine is one of the worst things that ever happened to the world of babies and young children. What is happening in the world of pediatric medicine should send a deep chill through the heart of every parent.

We are so concerned about Islamic terrorism these days but there is a more insidious form of terrorism that comes from doctors and nurses wearing white coats. The fact that we cannot see all the forms of terrorism active in our civilization precludes us from seriously tackling any form of it.

onawah
1st September 2016, 22:54
Merck Admits Shingles Vaccine Can Cause Eye Damage… and Shingles
by Claire Dwoskin | Guest Writer
Published September 1, 2016 | Vaccination, Risk & Failure Reports
http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2016/09/merck-admits-shingles-vaccine-can-cause-eye-damage-and-shingles/


Two important Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved changes to the warning label of Merck Pharmaceutical’s shingles vaccine, Zostavax, have been made since the controversial drug was introduced in 2006. The first was in August 2014, when, in addition to potentially causing chickenpox, another side effect was added: shingles! That’s right. The vaccine that had been—and continues to be—aggressively marketed to prevent seniors from contracting this excruciating condition was found to actually cause shingles in some individuals.

In February of this year, the FDA approved a label change to warn those who prescribe the Zostavax vaccine of another potential side effect: “Eye Disorders: necrotizing retinitis.”

Vision Damage linked to Shingles Vaccine
This disorder, as well as keratitis, causes inflammation and scarring of the eye tissue and can lead to permanent vision loss if not treated quickly. It was reported by WebMD 20 individuals (children and adults) developed keratitis within a month of receiving a chickenpox or shingles vaccine. Keratitis symptoms for adults developed within 24 days of vaccination, while symptoms in children began within 14 days of vaccination.

“Researchers concluded there is a probable relationship between the vaccine and the eye inflammation, though the study wasn’t designed to prove the vaccine actually caused the condition,” according to an article posted by the personal injury law firm of Matthews & Associates.

While researchers don’t know why the shingles shot may cause keratitis, the condition has been linked to autoimmune disorders. The connection between vaccines and autoimmune disease has been widely acknowledged, most recently by medical researchers worldwide in a compilation of studies published in 2015 in the medical textbook, Vaccines & Autoimmunity.

Insignificant Effectiveness of Zostavax
According to the authors of a Health Sciences Institute (HSI) article in January, 2016, “UCLA researchers found that only one in 175 people who get the vaccine will be able to dodge a shingles flare-up.” While Merck claims Zostavax is 50 percent effective, in the placebo group, 3.3 percent of the study participants developed shingles, compared to 1.6 percent in the vaccine group. So, while that is a 50 percent difference, the real, absolute risk reduction is just 1.7 percentage points.

More Shingles Vaccine “Side Effects”
According to its current warning label, Zostavax’s most common side effects are “headache, redness, pain, itching, swelling, hard lump, warmth, or bruising where the shot was given.” However, more serious “side effects” include:

allergic reactions, which may be serious and may include difficulty in breathing or swallowing
chickenpox
fever
hives at the injection site
joint pain
muscle pain
nausea
rash
rash at the injection site
shingles
swollen glands near the injection site (that may last a few days to a few weeks)
Nevertheless, despite its questionable effectiveness at preventing shingles (and the fact that it can cause shingles!) and the serious side effects it can produce, online sites funded by the pharmaceutical industry (e.g., WebMD) and neighborhood pharmacies continue to ominously advise seniors to get the shingles vaccines—at a cost of $150-$300 per injection to insurance companies. Zostavax is clearly effective at something—and there’s nothing “potential” about the revenue it’s generating for its manufacturer, promoters and distributors.

Note: This article was reprinted with the author’s permission. Claire Dwoskin is founder and president of the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute (CMSRI).

onawah
3rd September 2016, 20:42
I have no idea what is actually going on with the lawsuit re mandatory vaccines in California.
There seems to be a dispute about how to proceed between consumer advocate Tim Bolen and the Canary Party, as you can see from my posts here #62 and 63.
But here is the latest from Bolen:

SB 277 Lawsuit – What’s Up Doc? What Happens Now?

Canary Party/Health Choice Thumped. The Big Kids are on the Playground…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

The Canary Party/Health Choice (CP/HC) crap group got out-maneuvered. They have lost control of the anti-SB 277 lawsuit. The Big Kids have taken it over. About time…

Yes, it was a takeover and it was absolutely necessary. Thousands of people had donated money, I’d guess, without having any idea they were being manipulated into funding a watered-down version of a REAL lawsuit.

They ended up with a watered-down lawsuit that, in actuality, corresponds to the CP/HC policy of NEVER, EVER, criticizing vaccines.


In the first anti-SB277 campaign, trying to stop SB 277 passing in the California legislature, the group calling itself California Coalition for Health Choice (CCHC) tightly controlled every aspect of the legislative campaign banning anyone and everyone that deviated from the mantra “We know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper).”

CCHC, I believe was, itself, tightly controlled by the Canary Party/Health Choice crap group. Money poured in from CP/HC sources keeping the useless message in the forefront. Of course SB 277 passed. And the campaigners were exhausted having done one useless thing after another.

In the second campaign, the so-called Referendum, the Sacramento based group actually conducted a campaign to get a SB 277 Referendum on the November 2016 Presidential Election ballot. This was a STUPIDER idea then the “We know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper)” concept.

Had they gotten the 387,000 signatures and gotten the Referendum on the 2016 ballot, Big Pharma would have easily spent 500 million dollars in advertising against the Referendum making “Mandatory Vaccines” etched in granite in California. Merck would have chortled at that, braying out nationwide “See, Mandatory Vaccines are the will of the people!”

It is common knowledge that if you want to win a Referendum you put it on an off-year ballot when the only people that go to the voting booths are those that support the Referendum.

And, the campaigners were exhausted once again – for nothing.

In the third campaign, the so-called Pan Recall, the CP/HC people didn’t even try to hide behind another fake organization name. They just set up a “Pan Recall” apparatus and did virtually NOTHING to make the recall happen.

As you can imagine once I heard there were efforts, statewide, to get an anti-SB 277 lawsuit together I put my observers in place to watch to see if there was a CP/HC presence, and if so, asked the question “how much control did they have, and what were they doing?”

I knew that both Aaron Siri and Bob Moxley were involved in strategy making and I could not imagine either of these two alpha males going along with a strategy where the players coordinated their lipstick color with their toenail polish – the usual MAIN tactic of the CP/HC teams.

With time running out to file a lawsuit, and with SOME money rolling in, the SB 277 lawsuit organizational team was running out of options and were getting a LOT OF PRESSURE from donors to do something. Already, you may have noticed, neither Moxley nor Siri were stepping up to be Lead Attorney.

You should ask, at this point “Why not?” Both of these two alpha male litigators were eminently qualified to handle a leadership role and they had already WRITTEN THE CASE. In fact call, or email, Mary Holland, Kim Mack Rosenberg, and/or Janet Nalbandyan and ask THEM why not. (I am smiling…)

So, why, at the last minute did they turn to Jim Turner? (I am smiling, again). When you see how the case that was filed was watered down from what Moxley and Siri had made, maybe a picture is forming in your mind?

Do you think maybe that neither Moxley nor Siri wanted any part of a watered-down version?

So, the organizers go to Jim Turner who calls some of his friends, including me, to find out what is REALLY going on. Turner, of course, quietly called Moxley and Siri and got the REAL story of what was happening behind the scenes.

Health12
Tim Bolen and Jim Turner at the Health Freedom Congress
So, why, do you think, did they go to Jim Turner? Did they see him as this NICE OLD Guy who could be manipulated?

Jim LOOKS like a nice old guy, and he is pleasant to everyone. But, if the Canaries thought Jim would be a dupe, and take the blame for a failed lawsuit, they had NOT done their homework.

Jim picked up his cell phone and began the case takeover.

How? Simple. He called his friends in the North American Health Freedom Movement and pretty much said “We have an opportunity…”

After Jim brought in the three BIG non-profit Plaintiffs, the ones with REAL and SUBSTANTIAL memberships, who actually run REAL campaigns, including suing government agencies, I think the Canaries began to get attacks of diarrhea.

Then I, Tim Bolen appeared, writing case details with flavor, completely promoting and supporting the lawsuit.

Then Moxley joined Jim Turner on the legal team.

It’s no wonder that the message on the Health Choice conference call was an angry “Jim Turner f**ked us…”

No ****, Sherlock…

deadcanary
Oops….
Now, the Big Kids have the case. No bird-brained, half-baked “We know that vaccines are safe and effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper)” concepts.

As you saw in the Turner/Moxley videos Robert Scott Bell did there is a whole new ballgame.

A whole new ballgame…

So, kiddies, that money you raised WAS NOT WASTED…

More, in the future, if you are asked to do something, it will be for something USEFUL. And FUN. And friendly.

Go look at my earlier article and read who those Non-profits Jim brought in really are and what they are currently involved in, and what they have done.

And these people, although great, are just SOME members of the North American Health Freedom Movement. You are going to meet a lot more over the next few years. (smile here).

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

onawah
4th September 2016, 18:10
More to do with my post #66 above: I received a reply to one of my comments on Tim Bolen's blog as follows:

I’m not involved in the autism community or had any knowledge about the Canary Party prior to SB277. But simple research shows that there is definitely ties between Canary Party and Health Choice. Mark Blaxill is behind both entities. Furthermore, Rebecca Estepp has ties with Canary Party, Health Choice, and E4All. Kim Mack Rosenberg might not have been technically employed by Canary Party, but she is indeed an Executive Leader for Health Choice.

I can’t speak to the behind the scenes drama going on between Tim Bolen and the Canary Party, but there is definitely a connection between the entities and individuals as he claims:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/04/introd.html
http://www.autisminvestigated.com/canary-party-sb277/

onawah
5th September 2016, 17:11
The CDC medical police state: the right to detain anyone

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/09/05/the-cdc-medical-police-state-the-right-to-detain-anyone/

by Jon Rappoport
September 5, 2016

—Understand the implications of new CDC rules, if you want to know where the medical dictatorship is heading.

Arbitrary apprehension of citizens, detainment, forced medical treatment, vaccination.

Let me paint a scenario:

You live in a polluted city, so you have a low-level cough. On your flight to another state, the cough becomes worse because the air in the plane cabin is foul. Unknown to you, a passenger complains to a flight attendant. The passenger is a typical meddler. When you arrive at your destination, a health-agency employee is waiting at the gate for you. He apprehends you and takes you to a room, to decide whether you have a communicable disease. His first standard question—are you up to date on your vaccinations? And things go downhill from there…

It can get worse: the same story as above, except when the detained passenger is injected with a load of vaccines, he then becomes very ill, or even dies. Using plane passenger lists, health authorities search out and detain everyone who was on the flight, claiming the deceased passenger died as a result of a disease—not the vaccinations—and now all the passengers will be detained and “treated,” because they are “infected.”

The CDC is doubling down.

The agency is on the verge of expanding its power to detain and force medical treatment on anyone.

The new proposed CDC regulations are contained in the Federal Register dated August 15, 2016, under the heading, “Control of Communicable Diseases—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.”

Reading between the lines, the stark message is: any person in the US suspected of carrying a serious communicable disease, even if his disease is in an “invisible” stage, can be detained, isolated, quarantined, and medically treated (e.g., forcibly vaccinated). Upon conditional release, the person can be monitored, and this can involve wearing electronic tracking devices.

Those are the broad strokes of the new policy, and, obviously, they’re broad enough to cover anyone.

Tortured linguistic gibberish from the CDC guarantees that any American can be assessed with a disease, justifying arrest. Force yourself to wade through the next paragraph, and you’ll get a feel for the lunatic bureaucratic doublespeak, and the loopholes through which the government can drive a truck:

“…to authorize the quarantine, isolation, or conditional release of an individual traveling interstate, CDC must reasonably believe that the individual is infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage…As defined by the statute, a ‘qualifying stage’ means that the communicable disease is in ‘a precommunicable stage, if the disease would be likely to cause a public health emergency if transmitted to other individuals’ or ‘a communicable stage’…it is necessary to define the precommunicable stage of a communicable disease to adequately inform the public of when quarantine, isolation, or conditional release may be authorized. HHS/CDC defines precommunicable stage to mean the stage beginning upon an individual’s earliest opportunity for exposure to an infectious agent and ending upon the individual entering or reentering the communicable stage of the disease or, if the individual does not enter the communicable stage, the latest date at which the individual could reasonably be expected to have the potential to enter or reenter the communicable stage…”

Is that clear as mud? The “qualifying stage” of a disease? Translation: “we can arrest you whenever we want to, and we can say you have a disease.”

Here’s more garble from the CDC. Notice the absurd Orwellian definition of “agreement”:

“…HHS/CDC believes that it is important to define for the public what is meant by the term ‘apprehension.’ Apprehension means the temporary taking into custody of an individual or group for purposes of determining whether quarantine, isolation, or conditional release is warranted…When an apprehension occurs, the individual is not free to leave or discontinue his/her discussion with an HHS/CDC public health or quarantine officer….In certain circumstances, the individual may remain apprehended pending confirmation that he or she is not infected or not reasonably believed to be infected with a quarantinable communicable disease…Generally, however, HHS/CDC does not expect that the typical public health apprehension will last longer than 72 hours…HHS/CDC is proposing a definition for ‘agreement’ which refers to an agreement entered into between the CDC and an individual expressing agreement between the parties that the individual will observe public health measures authorized under this part, as the CDC considers reasonably necessary to protect the public’s health, including quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination, and treatment.”

Translation: Any person can be arrested, held, and vaccinated, without his consent. That’s what “agreement” means.

And finally: “HHS/CDC has proposed a definition for ‘electronic or internet-based monitoring’ that defines this term as referring to mechanisms or technologies allowing for the temporary public health supervision of an individual under conditional release, including electronic mail, SMS texts, video conference or webcam technologies, integrated voice-response systems, entry of information into a web-based forum, wearable tracking technologies, and other mechanisms or technologies as determined by the Director or supervising health authority.”

Translation: Once released from custody, an individual can be monitored electronically, including by the attachment of tracking devices.

To prepare the public for this version of fascism, the CDC has been promoting a whole series of phony epidemics over decades, using scare tactics. SARS, MERS, bird flu, Swine Flu, West Nile, Ebola, Zika—they’ve all been duds. The CDC has only cared about one thing in this campaign: softening up the public to accept a medical police state.

And as this new document indicates, the CDC is turning the screw several times in that direction.


In 1987, I began warning the public that medical ops are the most dangerous, because they appear to have no political partisan bias. They’re promoted on the basis of “we’re the healers and we only want to protect you.”

Well, what I’ve discussed above is ultimately the kind of protection they’re talking about at the CDC.

And you can bet that a detained adult who hasn’t taken his recommended slew of vaccines would be looked upon as an outlier, a person whose “medical condition” could be leveraged into multiple shots in the arm, before being dumped back out into the street.

If you think I’m exaggerating what the CDC would actually do to you or anyone else, keep two things in mind. One, this is a step-by-step long-term op. A nibble on your freedom today, another nibble tomorrow. And then, a few years from now, you’ll look back and see how far they’ve come.

And two, as an illustration, how many people believed, ten years ago, that the state of California would push through a bill (SB277) mandating the full CDC toxic load of vaccines for every child attending public or private school? How many people believed the state would wipe out the religious and personal-belief exemptions, or relegate the concept of informed consent to the dustbin of history?

The enemies of freedom are writing the future at this moment and erasing the past.

Jon Rappoport

onawah
6th September 2016, 21:34
RETIRED VACCINE RESEARCHER SAYS "IF I HAD A CHILD NOW, THE LAST THING I WOULD ALLOW IS VACCINATION"

http://birthofanewearth.blogspot.com/2014/12/retired-vaccine-researcher-says-if-i.html
This article from Jon Rappaport is from 2014, but is still excellent and timely.


http://educate-yourself.org/cn/rappoportinterviewvaccineresearcherjan2002.shtml
[Editor's Note: This interview was posted by Jon Rappoport in early January 2002. You will discover by reading it that the very issues we now face of FORCED vaccination of a laboratory-created vaccine to "protect" us against a laboratory-created "disease" (Swine Flu, Bird flu, etc.) was set into motion a long time ago. The vaccine researcher quoted here flat out says that the World Homicide Organization, WHO, is driven by a DEPOPULATION agenda, and that many African leaders know full well that the explosive spread of HIV and AIDS in Africa was caused by WHO-sponsored vaccinations of the 1970s. This former pharmaceutical insider also debunks the widespread ASSUMPTIONS of vaccine "safety" promoted by orthodox medicine, the CDC, the National Institute of Health, state health departments, and their compliant media propagandists who are all parroting SUPERSTITIONS, rather than FACTS. ..Ken Adachi]

From Jon Rappoport (www.nomorefakenews.com)
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/rappoportinterviewvaccineresearcherjan2002.shtml
January 2002

Retired Vaccine Researcher to Jon Rappoport: "If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination." (Aug. 6, 2009)

Jon Rappoport (Q) Interviews a Retired Vaccine Researcher (A) (given the pseudonym of "Dr. Mark Randall")

Q: You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.

A: Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won't say which ones.

Q: Why not?

A: I want to preserve my privacy.

Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?

A: I believe I could lose my pension.

Q: On what grounds?

A: The grounds don't matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of the Club. I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.

Q: Harassed by whom?

A: The FBI.

Q: Really?

A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.

Q: So much for free speech.

A: I was "part of the inner circle." If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.

Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?

A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall "brilliance" of modern medicine.

Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?

A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It's one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.

Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.

A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.

Q: Why?

A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.

Q: And then?

A: I did my own investigation.

Q: What conclusions did you come to?

A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.

Q: What conditions?

A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don't contract the diseases as easily.

Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?

A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.

Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?

A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I'm concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.

Q: Why?

A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.

Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?

A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases -- say, meningitis -- that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.

Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.

A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture.

Q: Which is?

A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.

Q: So you're saying that we have been treated to a false history.

A: Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective.

Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.

A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.

Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.

A: Well yes, that happened. But that's not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I'm talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. SV40, which was later found in cancer tumors -- that was what I would call a structural problem. It was an accepted part of the manufacturing process. If you use monkey kidneys, you open the door to germs which you don't know are in those kidneys.

Q: Okay, but let's ignore that distinction between different types of contaminants for a moment. What contaminants did you find in your many years of work with vaccines?

A: All right. I'll give you some of what I came across, and I'll also give you what colleagues of mine found. Here's a partial list. In the Rimavex measles vaccine, we found various chicken viruses. In polio vaccine, we found acanthamoeba, which is a so-called "brain-eating" amoeba.

Simian cytomegalovirus in polio vaccine. Simian foamy virus in the rotavirus vaccine. Bird-cancer viruses in the MMR vaccine. Various micro-organisms in the anthrax vaccine. I've found potentially dangerous enzyme inhibitors in several vaccines. Duck, dog, and rabbit viruses in the rubella vaccine. Avian leucosis virus in the flu vaccine. Pestivirus in the MMR vaccine.

Q: Let me get this straight. These are all contaminants which don't belong in the vaccines.

A: That's right. And if you try to calculate what damage these contaminants can cause, well, we don't really know, because no testing has been done, or very little testing. It's a game of roulette. You take your chances. Also, most people don't know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue. I have found what I believed were bacterial fragments and poliovirus in these vaccines from time to time -- which may have come from that fetal tissue. When you look for contaminants in vaccines, you can come up with material that IS puzzling. You know it shouldn't be there, but you don't know exactly what you've got. I have found what I believed was a very small "fragment" of human hair and also human mucus. I have found what can only be called "foreign protein," which could mean almost anything. It could mean protein from viruses.

Q: Alarm bells are ringing all over the place.

A: How do you think I felt? Remember, this material is going into the bloodstream without passing through some of the ordinary immune defenses.

Q: How were your findings received?

A: Basically, it was, don't worry, this can't be helped. In making vaccines, you use various animals' tissue, and that's where this kind of contamination enters in. Of course, I'm not even mentioning the standard chemicals like formaldehyde, mercury, and aluminum which are purposely put into vaccines.

Q: This information is pretty staggering.

A: Yes. And I'm just mentioning some of the biological contaminants. Who knows how many others there are? Others we don't find because we don't think to look for them. If tissue from, say, a bird is used to make a vaccine, how many possible germs can be in that tissue? We have no idea. We have no idea what they might be, or what effects they could have on humans.

Q: And beyond the purity issue?

A: You are dealing with the basic faulty premise about vaccines. That they intricately stimulate the immune system to create the conditions for immunity from disease. That is the bad premise. It doesn't work that way. A vaccine is supposed to "create" antibodies which, indirectly, offer protection against disease. However, the immune system is much larger and more involved than antibodies and their related "killer cells."

Q: The immune system is?

A: The entire body, really. Plus the mind. It's all immune system, you might say. That is why you can have, in the middle of an epidemic, those individuals who remain healthy.

Q: So the level of general health is important.

A: More than important. Vital.

Q: How are vaccine statistics falsely presented?

A: There are many ways. For example, suppose that 25 people who have received the hepatitis B vaccine come down with hepatitis. Well, hep B is a liver disease. But you can call liver disease many things. You can change the diagnosis. Then, you've concealed the root cause of the problem.

Q: And that happens?

A: All the time. It HAS to happen, if the doctors automatically assume that people who get vaccines DO NOT come down with the diseases they are now supposed to be protected from. And that is exactly what doctors assume. You see, it's circular reasoning. It's a closed system. It admits no fault. No possible fault. If a person who gets a vaccine against hepatitis gets hepatitis, or gets some other disease, the automatic assumption is, this had nothing to do with the disease.

Q: In your years working in the vaccine establishment, how many doctors did you encounter who admitted that vaccines were a problem?

A: None. There were a few who privately questioned what they were doing. But they would never go public, even within their companies.

Q: What was the turning point for you?

A: I had a friend whose baby died after a DPT shot.

Q: Did you investigate?

A: Yes, informally. I found that this baby was completely healthy before the vaccination. There was no reason for his death, except the vaccine. That started my doubts. Of course, I wanted to believe that the baby had gotten a bad shot from a bad lot. But as I looked into this further, I found that was not the case in this instance. I was being drawn into a spiral of doubt that increased over time. I continued to investigate. I found that, contrary to what I thought, vaccines are not tested in a scientific way.

Q: What do you mean?

A: For example, no long-term studies are done on any vaccines. Long-term follow-up is not done in any careful way. Why? Because, again, the assumption is made that vaccines do not cause problems. So why should anyone check? On top of that, a vaccine reaction is defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the shot is given. But that does not make sense.

Q: Why doesn't it make sense?

A: Because the vaccine obviously acts in the body for a long period of time after it is given. A reaction can be gradual. Deterioration can be gradual. Neurological problems can develop over time. They do in various conditions, even according to a conventional analysis. So why couldn't that be the case with vaccines? If chemical poisoning can occur gradually, why couldn't that be the case with a vaccine which contains mercury?

Q: And that is what you found?

A: Yes. You are dealing with correlations, most of the time.Correlations are not perfect. But if you get 500 parents whose children have suffered neurological damage during a one-year period after having a vaccine, this should be sufficient to spark off an intense investigation.

Q: Has it been enough?

A: No. Never. This tells you something right away.

Q: Which is?

A: The people doing the investigation are not really interested in looking at the facts. They assume that the vaccines are safe. So, when they do investigate, they invariably come up with exonerations of the vaccines. They say, "This vaccine is safe." But what do they base those judgments on? They base them on definitions and ideas which automatically rule out a condemnation of the vaccine.

Q: There are numerous cases where a vaccine campaign has failed. Where people have come down with the disease against which they were vaccinated.

A: Yes, there are many such instances. And there the evidence is simply ignored. It's discounted. The experts say, if they say anything at all, that this is just an isolated situation, but overall the vaccine has been shown to be safe. But if you add up all the vaccine campaigns where damage and disease have occurred, you realize that these are NOT isolated situations.

Q: Did you ever discuss what we are talking about here with colleagues, when you were still working in the vaccine establishment?

A: Yes I did.

Q: What happened?

A: Several times I was told to keep quiet. It was made clear that I should go back to work and forget my misgivings. On a few occasions, I encountered fear. Colleagues tried to avoid me. They felt they could be labeled with "guilt by association." All in all, though, I behaved myself.I made sure I didn't create problems for myself.

Q: If vaccines actually do harm, why are they given?

A: First of all, there is no "if." They do harm. It becomes a more difficult question to decide whether they do harm in those people who seem to show no harm. Then you are dealing with the kind of research which should be done, but isn't. Researchers should be probing to discover a kind of map, or flow chart, which shows exactly what vaccines do in the body from the moment they enter. This research has not been done. As to why they are given, we could sit here for two days and discuss all the reasons. As you've said many times, at different layers of the system people have their motives. Money, fear of losing a job, the desire to win brownie points, prestige, awards, promotion, misguided idealism, unthinking habit, and so on. But, at the highest levels of the medical cartel, vaccines are a top priority because they cause a weakening of the immune system. I know that may be hard to accept, but it's true. The medical cartel, at the highest level, is not out to help people, it is out to harm them, to weaken them. To kill them. At one point in my career, I had a long conversation with a man who occupied a high government position in an African nation. He told me that he was well aware of this. He told me that WHO is a front for these depopulation interests. There is an underground, shall we say, in Africa, made up of various officials who are earnestly trying to change the lot of the poor. This network of people knows what is going on. They know that vaccines have been used, and are being used, to destroy their countries, to make them ripe for takeover by globalist powers. I have had the opportunity to speak with several of these people from this network.

Q: Is Thabo Mbeki, the president of South Africa, aware of the situation?

A: I would say he is partially aware. Perhaps he is not utterly convinced, but he is on the way to realizing the whole truth. He already knows that HIV is a hoax. He knows that the AIDS drugs are poisons which destroy the immune system. He also knows that if he speaks out, in any way, about the vaccine issue, he will be branded a lunatic. He has enough trouble after his stand on the AIDS issue.

Q: This network you speak of.

A: It has accumulated a huge amount of information about vaccines. The question is, how is a successful strategy going to be mounted? For these people, that is a difficult issue.

Q: And in the industrialized nations?

A: The medical cartel has a stranglehold, but it is diminishing. Mainly because people have the freedom to question medicines. However, if the choice issue [the right to take or reject any medicine] does not gather steam, these coming mandates about vaccines against biowarefare germs are going to win out. This is an important time.

Q: The furor over the hepatits B vaccine seems one good avenue.

A: I think so, yes. To say that babies must have the vaccine-and then in the next breath, admitting that a person gets hep B from sexual contacts and shared needles -- is a ridiculous juxtaposition. Medical authorities try to cover themselves by saying that 20,000 or so children in the US get hep B every year from "unknown causes," and that's why every baby must have the vaccine. I dispute that 20,00 figure and the so-called studies that back it up.

Q: Andrew Wakefield, the British MD who uncovered the link between the MMR vaccine and autism, has just been fired from his job in a London hospital.

A: Yes. Wakefield performed a great service. His correlations between the vaccine and autism are stunning. Perhaps you know that Tony Blair's wife is involved with alternative health. There is the possibility that their child has not been given the MMR. Blair recently side-stepped the question in press interviews, and made it seem that he was simply objecting to invasive questioning of his "personal and family life." In any event, I believe his wife has been muzzled. I think, if given the chance, she would at least say she is sympathetic to all the families who have come forward and stated that their children were severely damaged by the MMR.

Q: British reporters should try to get through to her.

A: They have been trying. But I think she has made a deal with her husband to keep quiet, no matter what. She could do a great deal of good if she breaks her promise. I have been told she is under pressure, and not just from her husband. At the level she occupies, MI6 and British health authorities get into the act. It is thought of as a matter of national security.

Q: Well, it is national security, once you understand the medical cartel.

A: It is global security. The cartel operates in every nation. It zealously guards the sanctity of vaccines. Questioning these vaccines is on the same level as a Vatican bishop questioning the sanctity of the sacrament of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.

Q: I know that a Hollywood celebrity stating publicly that he will not take a vaccine is committing career suicide.

A: Hollywood is linked very powerfully to the medical cartel. There are several reasons, but one of them is simply that an actor who is famous can draw a huge amount of publicity if he says ANYTHING. In 1992, I was present at your demonstration against the FDA in downtown Los Angeles. One or two actors spoke against the FDA. Since that time, you would be hard pressed to find an actor who has spoken out in any way against the medical cartel.

Q: Within the National Institutes of Health, what is the mood, what is the basic frame of mind?

A: People are competing for research monies. The last thing they think about is challenging the status quo. They are already in an intramural war for that money. They don't need more trouble. This is a very insulated system. It depends on the idea that, by and large, modern medicine is very successful on every frontier. To admit systemic problems in any area is to cast doubt on the whole enterprise. You might therefore think that NIH is the last place one should think about holding demonstrations. But just the reverse is true. If five thousand people showed up there demanding an accounting of the actual benefits of that research system, demanding to know what real health benefits have been conferred on the public from the billions of wasted dollars funneled to that facility, something might start. A spark might go off. You might get, with further demonstrations, all sorts of fall-out. Researchers -- a few -- might start leaking information.

Q: A good idea.

A: People in suits standing as close to the buildings as the police will allow. People in business suits, in jogging suits, mothers and babies. Well-off people. Poor people. All sorts of people.

Q: What about the combined destructive power of a number of vaccines given to babies these days?

A: It is a travesty and a crime. There are no real studies of any depth which have been done on that. Again, the assumption is made that vaccines are safe, and therefore any number of vaccines given together are safe as well. But the truth is, vaccines are not safe. Therefore the potential damage increases when you give many of them in a short time period.

Q: Then we have the fall flu season.

A: Yes. As if only in the autumn do these germs float in to the US from Asia. The public swallows that premise. If it happens in April, it is a bad cold. If it happens in October, it is the flu.

Q: Do you regret having worked all those years in the vaccine field?

A: Yes. But after this interview, I'll regret it a little less. And I work in other ways. I give out information to certain people, when I think they will use it well.

Q: What is one thing you want the public to understand?

A: That the burden of proof in establishing the safety and efficacy of vaccines is on the people who manufacture and license them for public use. Just that. The burden of proof is not on you or me. And for proof you need well-designed long-term studies. You need extensive follow-up. You need to interview mothers and pay attention to what mothers say about their babies and what happens to them after vaccination. You need all these things. The things that are not there.

Q: The things that are not there.

A: Yes.

Q: To avoid any confusion, I'd like you to review, once more, the disease problems that vaccines can cause. Which diseases, how that happens.

A: We are basically talking about two potential harmful outcomes. One, the person gets the disease from the vaccine. He gets the disease which the vaccine is supposed to protect him from. Because, some version of the disease is in the vaccine to begin with. Or two, he doesn't get THAT disease, but at some later time, maybe right away, maybe not, he develops another condition which is caused by the vaccine. That condition could be autism, what's called autism, or it could be some other disease like meningitis. He could become mentally disabled.

Q: Is there any way to compare the relative frequency of these different outcomes?

A: No. Because the follow-up is poor. We can only guess. If you ask, out of a population of a hundred thousand children who get a measles vaccine, how many get the measles, and how many develop other problems from the vaccine, there is a no reliable answer. That is what I'm saying. Vaccines are superstitions. And with superstitions, you don't get facts you can use. You only get stories, most of which are designed to enforce the superstition. But, from many vaccine campaigns, we can piece together a narrative that does reveal some very disturbing things. People have been harmed. The harm is real, and it can be deep and it can mean death. The harm is NOT limited to a few cases, as we have been led to believe.In the US, there are groups of mothers who are testifying about autism and childhood vaccines. They are coming forward and standing up at meetings.They are essentially trying to fill in the gap that has been created by the researchers and doctors who turn their backs on the whole thing.

Q: Let me ask you this. If you took a child in, say, Boston and you raised that child with good nutritious food and he exercised every day and he was loved by his parents, and he didn't get the measles vaccine, what would be his health status compared with the average child in Boston who eats poorly and watches five hours of TV a day and gets the measles vaccine?

A: Of course there are many factors involved, but I would bet on the better health status for the first child. If he gets measles, if he gets it when he is nine, the chances are it will be much lighter than the measles the second child might get. I would bet on the first child every time.

Q: How long did you work with vaccines?

A: A long time. Longer than ten years.

Q: Looking back now, can you recall any good reason to say that vaccines are successful?

A: No, I can't. If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination. I would move out of the state if I had to. I would change the family name. I would disappear. With my family. I'm not saying it would come to that. There are ways to sidestep the system with grace, if you know how to act. There are exemptions you can declare, in every state, based on religious and/or philosophic views. But if push came to shove, I would go on the move.

Q: And yet there are children everywhere who do get vaccines and appear to be healthy.

A: The operative word is "appear." What about all the children who can't focus on their studies? What about the children who have tantrums from time to time? What about the children who are not quite in possession of all their mental faculties? I know there are many causes for these things, but vaccines are one cause. I would not take the chance. I see no reason to take the chance. And frankly, I see no reason to allow the government to have the last word. Government medicine is, from my experience, often a contradiction in terms. You get one or the other, but not both.

Q: So we come to the level playing field.

A: Yes. Allow those who want the vaccines to take them. Allow the dissidents to decline to take them. But, as I said earlier, there is no level playing field if the field is strewn with lies. And when babies are involved, you have parents making all the decisions. Those parents need a heavy dose of truth. What about the child I spoke of who died from the DPT shot? What information did his parents act on? I can tell you it was heavily weighted. It was not real information.

Q: Medical PR people, in concert with the press, scare the hell out of parents with dire scenarios about what will happen if their kids don't get shots.

A: They make it seem a crime to refuse the vaccine. They equate it with bad parenting. You fight that with better information. It is always a challenge to buck the authorities. And only you can decide whether to do it. It is every person's responsibility to make up his mind. The medical cartel likes that bet. It is betting that the fear will win.

Paul
8th September 2016, 04:16
RETIRED VACCINE RESEARCHER SAYS "IF I HAD A CHILD NOW, THE LAST THING I WOULD ALLOW IS VACCINATION"

http://birthofanewearth.blogspot.com/2014/12/retired-vaccine-researcher-says-if-i.html
This article from Jon Rappaport is from 2014, but is still excellent and timely.
Yes - excellent - thanks.

Here's yet another well done attack on vaccines, from another one of my favorite health commentators, John Bergman:
i6TXDSGJYXM

peterpam
8th September 2016, 15:49
Half of All Children Will Be Autistic by 2025, Warns Senior Research Scientist at MIT
44
By anh-usa on December 23, 2014 GMO News

Why? Evidence points to glyphosate toxicity from the overuse of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide on our food.

For over three decades, Stephanie Seneff, PhD, has researched biology and technology, over the years publishing over 170 scholarly peer-reviewed articles. In recent years she has concentrated on the relationship between nutrition and health, tackling such topics as Alzheimer’s, autism, and cardiovascular diseases, as well as the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.

At a conference last Thursday, in a special panel discussion about GMOs, she took the audience by surprise when she declared, “At today’s rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic.” She noted that the side effects of autism closely mimic those of glyphosate toxicity, and presented data showing a remarkably consistent correlation between the use of Roundup on crops (and the creation of Roundup-ready GMO crop seeds) with rising rates of autism. Children with autism have biomarkers indicative of excessive glyphosate, including zinc and iron deficiency, low serum sulfate, seizures, and mitochondrial disorder.

A fellow panelist reported that after Dr. Seneff’s presentation, “All of the 70 or so people in attendance were squirming, likely because they now had serious misgivings about serving their kids, or themselves, anything with corn or soy, which are nearly all genetically modified and thus tainted with Roundup and its glyphosate.”

Dr. Seneff noted the ubiquity of glyphosate’s use. Because it is used on corn and soy, all soft drinks and candies sweetened with corn syrup and all chips and cereals that contain soy fillers have small amounts of glyphosate in them, as do our beef and poultry since cattle and chicken are fed GMO corn or soy. Wheat is often sprayed with Roundup just prior to being harvested, which means that all non-organic bread and wheat products would also be sources of glyphosate toxicity. The amount of glyphosate in each product may not be large, but the cumulative effect (especially with as much processed food as Americans eat) could be devastating. A recent study shows that pregnant women living near farms where pesticides are applied have a 60% increased risk of children having an autism spectrum disorder.

Other toxic substances may also be autism-inducing. You may recall our story on the CDC whistleblower who revealed the government’s deliberate concealment of the link between the MMR vaccine (for measles, mumps, and rubella) and a sharply increased risk of autism, particularly in African American boys. Other studies now show a link between children’s exposure to pesticides and autism. Children who live in homes with vinyl floors, which can emit phthalate chemicals, are more likely to have autism. Children whose mothers smoked were also twice as likely to have autism. Research now acknowledges that environmental contaminants such as PCBs, PBDEs, and mercury can alter brain neuron functioning even before a child is born.

This month, the USDA released a study finding that although there were detectable levels of pesticide residue in more than half of food tested by the agency, 99% of samples taken were found to be within levels the government deems safe, and 40% were found to have no detectable trace of pesticides at all. The USDA added, however, that due to “cost concerns,” it did not test for residues of glyphosate. Let’s repeat that: they never tested for the active ingredient in the most widely used herbicide in the world. “Cost concerns”? How absurd—unless they mean it will cost them too much in terms of the special relationship between the USDA and Monsanto. You may recall the revolving door between Monsanto and the federal government, with agency officials becoming high-paying executives—and vice versa! Money, power, prestige: it’s all there. Monsanto and the USDA love to scratch each others’ backs. Clearly this omission was purposeful.

In addition, as we have previously reported, the number of adverse reactions from vaccines can be correlated as well with autism, though Seneff says it doesn’t correlate quite as closely as with Roundup. The same correlations between applications of glyphosate and autism show up in deaths from senility.

Of course, autism is a complex problem with many potential causes. Dr. Seneff’s data, however, is particularly important considering how close the correlation is—and because it is coming from a scientist with impeccable credentials. Earlier this year, she spoke at the Autism One conference and presented many of the same facts; that presentation is available on YouTube.

Monsanto claims that Roundup is harmless to humans. Bacteria, fungi, algae, parasites, and plants use a seven-step metabolic route known as the shikimate pathway for the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids; glyphosate inhibits this pathway, causing the plant to die, which is why it’s so effective as an herbicide. Monsanto says humans don’t have this shikimate pathway, so it’s perfectly safe.

Dr. Seneff points out, however, that our gut bacteria do have this pathway, and that’s crucial because these bacteria supply our body with crucial amino acids. Roundup thus kills beneficial gut bacteria, allowing pathogens to grow; interferes with the synthesis of amino acids including methionine, which leads to shortages in critical neurotransmitters and folate; chelates (removes) important minerals like iron, cobalt and manganese; and much more.

Even worse, she notes, additional chemicals in Roundup are untested because they’re classified as“inert,” yet according to a 2014 study in BioMed Research International, these chemicals are capable of amplifying the toxic effects of Roundup hundreds of times over.

Glyphosate is present in unusually high quantities in the breast milk of American mothers, at anywhere from 760 to 1,600 times the allowable limits in European drinking water. Urine testing shows Americans have ten times the glyphosate accumulation as Europeans.

“In my view, the situation is almost beyond repair,” Dr. Seneff said after her presentation. “We need to do something drastic.”


http://www.anh-usa.org/half-of-all-children-will-be-autistic-by-2025-warns-senior-research-scientist-at-mit/

onawah
9th September 2016, 03:38
Warning: CDC wants to quarantine and force vaccinate Americans for suspicion of infectious disease
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/cdc-quarantine-1963.html


(NaturalHealth365) On August 15, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) within the Health and Human Services Department published an NPRM – a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – with the title “Rules for the Control of Communicable Diseases.” This matter-of-fact, sensible-sounding title gives little clue to the bombshell hidden inside: a radical expansion of HHS and CDC powers into frightening new realms.
Under the proposed rules, these agencies could detain, force vaccinate and quarantine American citizens – indefinitely – all without due process. The NPRM provides for the apprehension and examination of any individual that the CDC reasonably believes to be “infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage.” The agency also must believe the individual is moving or about to move between states, or constitutes a probable source of infection to others who may be moving between states.
On closer inspection: The proposed CDC rules are even more alarming
For example: the “qualifying” stage can now include something called the “pre-communicable stage,” defined as “the beginning upon an individual’s earliest opportunity for exposure to an infectious agent.” Confusing and unwieldy language aside, what this really means is that the CDC can forcibly apprehend healthy people – people not showing symptoms, people who have not yet been medically examined – and detain them, meaning: take them into custody.
And they can do this with no process of appeal – an outrageous breach of liberty.
What it also means is that the HHS and CDC can issue federal orders to apprehend and examine individuals or groups moving between states – or who may come in contact with individuals planning to move between states. Because almost any action taken could be construed as somehow affecting interstate travel, the HHS has crafted an extremely wide net with which to harass citizens.
And the ultimate purpose of these enforced apprehensions and examinations? To determine whether the process should move to the next link in the chain; in other words, to determine whether quarantine, isolation or conditional release is warranted.
You can read the entire “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” document here.
This unprecedented expansion of CDC powers carries vast potential for abuse
Due to vague and unclear wording, the NPPM’s regulations seem disturbingly open to varying interpretations. Without clearer definitions and limits, many natural health and personal freedom advocates fear the proposed rules could allow for the return of McCarthy-era persecution – in other words, witch hunts – this time with a medical twist.
Instead of using the old-fashioned bugaboos of treason, conspiracy and Communism – or the contemporary accusation of terrorism – the government could simply round up and detain troublesome or unpopular individuals – those with views contrary to the government’s, for instance. And, they could do it legally, on the grounds that these individuals are a threat to public health.
The eye-opening CDC list of quarantinable diseases
According to the HHS, the proposed rules were drafted in response to the largest Ebola outbreak in history, as well as the emergence of MERS – Middle East Respiratory Syndrome – in South Korea, along with repeated outbreaks of measles in the United States. “New or re-emerging communicable diseases” are also mentioned as a reason for this new power grab.
As examples of quarantinable communicable diseases, the NPRM lists cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague, smallpox, yellow fever and viral hemorrhagic fevers such as Ebola and Lassa.
Hidden in that rogue’s gallery of frightening-sounding diseases is this phrase: severe acute respiratory syndromes. Could the CDC really be considering quarantining citizens suffering from the common cold?
Also on the list: influenza caused by novel or emerging viruses with the potential to cause a pandemic. Could exposure to the Zika virus, the dangers of which have already been grossly exaggerated by the CDC and the World Health Organization, also be used as a reason for quarantine?
Is the following scenario really that much of a stretch?
You – or your whole street, neighborhood or city – have officially been declared “pre-communicable,” in spite of showing no symptoms, and in spite of not having been medically examined. It is enough for someone to say that they suspect you, or your neighbors, had an opportunity for exposure to a quarantinable disease. You are then apprehended and detained – to eventually be given an order of isolation, an order of quarantine, or a conditional release.
The CDC claims that due process will be maintained: that the reasons for the order must be explained, that an administrative process for appealing it must be in place, and that there must be a mandatory reassessment of the order.
What’s the catch? The appeal process doesn’t come in until the third step – the quarantine, isolation or conditional release phase.
Therefore, you can be detained indefinitely.
In a clumsy attempt to build trust, the agencies may ask that you sign a “voluntary agreement,” requiring that you consent to a wide menu of possible abuses, including quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination and treatment. But if you break the voluntary agreement, you could be subject to criminal prosecution – so how “voluntary” is it?
Coming soon to a computer near you: electronic surveillance of disease “suspects”
Even being offered a “conditional release” can carry an onerous burden, and involve outrageous violations of privacy and autonomy.
It turns out that a conditional release involves being kept under surveillance. The proposed regulations authorize radically expanded forms of public health monitoring through invasive electronic and internet-based means. Texts, video conferencing, emails, and webcams can all be utilized. The agencies could even resort to electronic tracking devices – ankle bracelet, anyone?
Let the CDC know how you feel about these egregious violations of liberty and privacy
The HHS and CDC say they are seeking public comment on the NPRM. Up until October 14, you can speak out about the dangers of the proposed regulations. Click the link here to submit your comments. (Many people have already expressed their outrage to this proposal)
The website’s tagline is: “Your voice in federal decision-making.” This is your chance to make sure they hear you loud and clear. The American public needs to see what our government is planning.

onawah
9th September 2016, 03:52
How to say ‘NO’ to vaccinations and smart meters
Posted by: Jonathan Landsman September 6, 2016
(I have no idea how accurate this information might be, but it may be worth looking into): http://www.naturalhealth365.com/vaccinations-smart-meters-1961.html


(NaturalHealth365) Vaccinations and smart meters – this pair of health threats seems to become more powerful, intrusive and ever-present by the moment. Now is the time to arm yourself with vital knowledge that can help you fight back.Jerry Day, television / film producer and personal rights crusader, wants you to know the empowering truth – there are specific actions you can take to protect yourself against the invasive technology of smart meters and vaccinations. (watch the video – below)
What are the dangers of smart meters?
Smart meters, also called digital meters, are currently being installed on homes worldwide. Not only are these devices blasting humans, animals and the environment with dangerous amounts of cancer-causing radiation, but they function as actual surveillance devices – recording activities undertaken in the privacy of your home and transmitting a wireless signal directly to corporate institutions, including your power company. Simply put, the widespread installation of smart meters may be the most outrageous violation of personal privacy to date.
And the harm doesn’t stop with this obvious example of spying. The electromagnetic pollution resulting from these toxic devices causes oxidative damage to cells, and has been linked to conditions such as cancer, Attention Deficit Disorder, migraine headaches, insomnia, and Parkinson’s disease – to name a few.
Making matters worse, heavy metals in our body from our food supply and vaccines can cause us to react even more intensely to electromagnetic vibrations. These toxic heavy metals act like mini-antennas to conduct and amplify the already-harmful electromagnetic frequencies arising from an ever-growing network of cell phones, cell towers, WiFi networks, cordless phones, and – of course – smart meters.
Scientists reveal: The CDC is hiding the link between vaccinations and autism
Despite many parents declaring that they witnessed their children showing signs of autism after MMR vaccination, the CDC Immunization Safety Office continues to insist the vaccines are safe and effective. The reality, say natural health experts, is that millions have been injured or killed by our current vaccination program.
Brian Hooker, Ph.D., biomechanical engineer and autism activist, says the CDC campaign to reassure the public of the safety of the MMR vaccine includes “reworked” data intended to twist and distort the truth. He also makes the explosive allegation that original whistleblower Dr. William Thompson has now been “handled” – bought off with a major cash awardfor maintaining his employment with the CDC. Autism research pioneer Dr. Andrew Wakefield concurs, calling the vaccination cover-up “the most serious fraud in medical history.”
Why vaccines pose a high risk to the health of our young children
Because of children’s proportionately smaller size and still-developing tissues and organs, vaccinations pose a serious threat to their health. On top of that, a family history of chronic illness, a tendency to get sick easily, frequent antibiotic use for illnesses, a history of food allergies, a history of eczema, frequent ear infections, seizures or developmental delays can make a child even more susceptible to illness.
A solution to this madness: Put the ball back in the corporations’ court with conditional acceptance contracts.
Making the situation even more frustrating is the fact that refusing to agree to digital utility meters and vaccinations can carry consequences. The power company can threaten to cut off your electricity, or you could be threatened with your child being refused medical services or taken out of school.
According to Jerry Day, the solution lies in knowing that you have a legal Right of Contract, which protects you from being coerced or pressured into signing any agreement. Even more importantly: wherever there is risk, you have the right to refuse a dangerous proposal unless the company agrees to insure you against the risk.
So, when asked to sign a contract for dangerous and unethical smart meters or vaccinations, you can fight back by simply asking that the company agree to insure you against any risk – and immediately presenting them with a conditional acceptance contract to that effect.
To repeat: before you accept, they must sign a promise to insure you against all negative consequences.
Due to the obvious potential for liability for adverse consequences, Day says the company offering the dangerous proposal is not likely to agree. Then, Day says, you are within your rights to refuse the invasive smart meters or risky vaccinations.
You can watch Jerry Day’s powerful video – which explains everything
ZIELtYIsbD4
To get the downloadable documents – which include instructions and a printable template – visit: FreedomTaker.com
Warning: “Opting out” contracts are not an option for you
One final caveat: you may be asked to sign an “opt out” contract stating that you are refusing the service. The fact is: by your simple refusal to sign, you have automatically “opted out,” and no contract stating this fact should ever be needed – or signed by you. Day likens this type of contract to a “Trojan horse,” adding that signing one may cause you to then have to pay a cash penalty or give up some rights.
Don’t allow yourself to be pressured. Instead, remember your Right of Contract, and offer a conditional acceptance contract. In this way, you can join the growing number of those who “just say no” to the unethical, unsafe and illegal health threats being foisted on the public by unscrupulous corporate giants.
jonathan landsmanAbout the author: Jonathan Landsman is the host of NaturalHealth365.com, the NaturalHealth365 Talk Hour – a free, weekly health show – and the NaturalHealth365 INNER CIRCLE, a monthly subscription to the brightest minds in natural health and healing.
Reaching hundreds of thousands of people, worldwide, as a personal health consultant, writer and radio talk show host, Jonathan has been educating the public on the health benefits of an organic, non-GMO diet along with high-quality supplementation and healthy lifestyle habits, including exercise and meditation.
References:
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/mmr-vaccine-autism-cdc-1838.html
http://www.vaccineworldsummit.com

onawah
13th September 2016, 17:22
Vaccines: Elimination Mandatory!
http://www.ageofautism.com/2016/09/vaccines-elimination-mandatory.html#more
Age ofAutism Editorial Opinion
Great article and I included one excellent comment from a host of others.

Vaccines: Elimination Mandatory!
:We encourage you to share your thoughts on Laura's point of view in the comments and to write your own opinion piece and submit it to us for review. Do you think no one should ever be allowed to vaccinate, or that everyone should always vaccinate, or do you fall somewhere in between? Send to Olmsted.Dan@gmail.com.

By Laura Hayes

Why are vaccines a legally permitted medical option? They shouldn’t be.

In a country whose citizens pay trillions of dollars annually to fund government regulatory agencies charged with protecting the public and policing multiple industries, including the pharmaceutical industry, vaccines should be long gone. It is past time to mandate their demise.

Vaccines are medical procedures that never should have been approved. Here’s why:

Not one vaccine has ever been tested according to the scientific gold standard, that of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Yes, you read that correctly, not one.

The myriad combinations in which vaccines are administered have never been tested, either. For an infant at a “catch up” appointment, meaning they missed a “well-baby” appointment at which vaccines would have been administered, that can mean receiving up to 13 vaccines containing 13 different diseases, at once, injected via 8 separate needles. That is the equivalent of taking up to 13 medications at once whose interactions have never been studied. To make matters even more serious, the number 13 does not include the many other ingredients that accompany and worsen the effects of being injected with 13 diseases, such as mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde, anti-freeze, phenol, MSG, polysorbate 80, Triton X-100 detergent, food proteins, animal viruses and retroviruses, fetal tissue from aborted human babies, and more. The number 13 also does not include ingredients that are not required to be listed on the label, but which are permitted under the cover of “trade secrets”. Undisclosed ingredients being injected into our children? Unacceptable, unethical, and terribly dangerous. Ask yourself, would you want your baby contracting multiple illnesses, up to 13, at once? Would you want your baby contracting multiple illnesses at once while also being poisoned at the same time? If you are following the CDC’s recommended schedule, you are allowing that.

Many vaccines contain mercury in the form of thimerosal. Thimerosal was patented in 1928, and has been used ever since, despite it being tested on humans only once, in 1929…a test in which all 22 subjects died within 2 days of receiving thimerosal. Mercury is a known toxin and neurotoxin, with no safe amount for a human. It can kill when applied externally. With vaccines, it is injected internally. Claims that mercury has been removed from vaccines given to children are false.
Many vaccines contain ingredients that have never been clinically approved by the FDA. Defying common sense and violating basic safety and ethics standards, the FDA approves vaccines that contain never-proven-safe and known-to-be-dangerous ingredients. For example, there are two forms of aluminum adjuvants used in vaccines, aluminum hydroxyphosphate salt and aluminum oxyhydroxide salt. Neither has been clinically approved by the FDA, both are known toxins and neurotoxins, yet both are in vaccines approved by the FDA. These are but two examples, there are more.

Aluminum is an undisputed toxin and neurotoxin. Its toxicity has been known for some 90 years. The two aluminum adjuvants mentioned above are used in vaccines for the express purpose of inducing toxicity. Permitting the use of aluminum in vaccines is akin to permitting lead paint in government approved toys and teething rings.

Aluminum adjuvants (not clinically approved and used to induce toxicity), vaccines (improperly approved and containing unapproved ingredients, including those used to induce toxicity, and containing ingredients known to be toxic and neurotoxic), or a combination thereof are used as the controls in vaccine safety trials. A control is supposed to be a placebo, an inert substance which doesn’t cause harm or therapeutic effect. Neither an aluminum adjuvant nor a vaccine qualifies as a placebo, therefore, no valid safety claims can be made for any vaccine.

Vaccine making pharmaceutical companies are permitted by the FDA to do their own safety testing, with no oversight and no verification from a financially independent entity. As mentioned in the point above, they do not use placebos for controls. Nevertheless, when they say that the trial vaccine proved to be no more dangerous or deadly than the aluminum adjuvant or other vaccine against which it was tested, they declare it safe. Is that how you want medical procedures for your children being declared safe? The FDA and CDC accept this current method of testing. They also accept that vaccines are not tested for carcinogenicity, mutagenicity, or impairment of fertility.

And the real kicker…there has never been a comparison study of the unvaccinated versus the vaccinated. That is because the vaccine profiteers know that the health, development, fertility, and longevity of the completely unvaccinated are far superior to that of the vaccinated. As a result of that knowledge, they have managed to keep that study from being done for more than seven decades. Without such a comparison study, absolutely no safety, efficacy, or necessity claims can be made.
Let all that sink in for a minute if you will. Read through that list one more time so you can fully digest and comprehend that our nation’s vaccine program is built on a deceptive and fraudulent house of cards that has nothing to do with scientifically valid truths or the health and well being of our children.

Yet, these medical procedures, not properly tested, improperly declared safe, known to contain toxic and neurotoxic ingredients, and barbaric as they are, have not only been approved, they have been mandated. That is corruption and insanity at its worst. It is evil, and it is destroying the majority of our citizenry.

For those people who say they just want “choice”…for those people who think it’s okay to have to formally exempt out of vaccination versus simply saying, “No thank you”, and who are willing to beg, plead, and pay in an attempt to avoid or refuse vaccination via exemption…for those people who just want “greener” vaccines, as though it’s ever a healthful or wise idea to purposefully invade, tamper with, and taint our God-given immune systems…for those who just want the mercury removed, as though it is the only problematic ingredient…for those who say we just need genetic pre-screening beforehand, as though any human is designed to have their inner systems and brain assaulted in such a way by so many toxic, neurotoxic, and foreign substances…and for those people who say we just need more “informed consent”, which is not even possible given the unscientific vaccine studies rife with fraud and deception…I contend that those stances are not sufficient or ethical.

In the past, I have called for an immediate ban on vaccine mandates in all 50 states. In reality, however, even that is not acceptable or enough, given the facts of the situation and the complete and utter failure of our government regulatory agencies.

Since our government regulators have failed to require or ensure vaccine safety, it must be assumed, and can be shown, that not one single vaccine is safe or advisable. Therefore:

What is required is an immediate moratorium on all vaccinations, for all people.

That is what should have happened in 1986, versus Congress passing an Act indemnifying all who make and administer vaccines, at a point in time when vaccines were maiming and killing thousands.

Not demanding an immediate moratorium on vaccinations is no different than accepting any of the following:

We know that a particular brand of car has a history of blowing up, harming and killing people, but government regulators say it can stay on the market…and our Congress will indemnify the makers and sellers of that car so victims cannot sue.

We know that a particular brand of crib is causing thousands of babies to become trapped between the bars, leading to serious injuries and death, but government regulators say it can stay on the market…and our Congress will indemnify the makers and sellers of that crib so parents cannot sue.

We know that a particular brand of canola oil is making people violently ill, causing permanent brain damage, causing immune and nervous system damage, causing severe GI issues, and in some cases killing people, but government regulators say it can stay on the market…and our Congress will indemnify the makers and sellers of that canola oil so that those who consume it cannot sue.

We know that a particular medication has a history of inducing heart attacks, strokes, and aneurysms, resulting in disability, mental incapacitation, paralysis, and death, but government regulators say it can stay on the the market…and our Congress will indemnify those who make and administer that medication so that its recipients cannot sue.
Do you see a pattern of absurdity here? Well, that same pattern applies to vaccines. Government regulators, who regulate many industries including the pharmaceutical industry, should not permit the continued use of vaccine products which they openly admit cause brain damage, immune system damage, nervous system damage, seizures, anaphylaxis, blood disorders, gastrointestinal system damage, paralysis, and death…to name but a few of the health disasters and fatalities that are known and admitted. Yet, these products are approved, recommended, and increasingly mandated for…newborns, within hours of taking their first breath, including those born prematurely…infants…toddlers…young children…teenagers…college students…daycare workers…parent volunteers…hospital workers and those whose business takes them into hospitals…the elderly…everyone…including recommendations for pregnant women. No one now escapes the recommendation of, and for many, the mandate of, these dangerous, potentially-fatal medical procedures.

We need public outrage and criminal proceedings for incompetent, negligent, and corrupt government regulators, and for pharmaceutical company executives who are destroying the health and well being of our children as they rake in billions from their toxic, destructive, and deadly vaccine products. We need steadfast refusal to vaccinate, boycotting of those who administer vaccines, which is in complete and inexcusable violation of their oath to "First, do no harm", and rebellion against vaccine mandates and those who legislate, require, and enforce them.

Are people so “busy” and otherwise preoccupied that the poisoning of all humanity via vaccination is something they are willing to turn a blind eye to, and will mindlessly agree to accept?

Are our government regulators all so corrupt or cowardly that they are not going to put a stop to that which is causing epidemic after epidemic in our country? And I am not talking about measles, mumps, or chicken pox. I am talking about encephalopathy (i.e. permanent brain damage, the actual and accurate name for vaccine-induced “Autism”), Type 1 diabetes, seizure disorders, asthma, paralysis, SIDS, speech and language delays, OCD, Tourette’s syndrome, attention and behavior issues, life-threatening peanut allergies, food allergies galore, and children who can’t talk, an ever-increasing and tragic phenomenon which originated in the late 1980s in lockstep with the tripling of the vaccine schedule. There is no end to the list of vaccine-induced horrors now plaguing our children and grandchildren, and people of all ages.

Are school board members and school district personnel, including school nurses, who are well aware of the increasing numbers of chronically ill and developmentally delayed students, not to mention the challenges and costs of educating them, going to continue to remain silent? Silence in the face of such obvious student decline is unacceptable and hard to explain. They must acknowledge and publicize this change in the student population in the past 25 years, demand that legislators act on parent reports of vaccine-induced health and development problems, and vaccine-induced death, and refuse to enforce dangerous and tyrannical vaccine mandates.

Are legislators going to continue to set aside upright morals, ethical behavior, and the preservation of liberty as they put their campaign coffers and pharma perks above the health of those they represent and above the well-being and sustainability of our country?

The solution is simple:

To stop the Vaccine Holocaust, we need to stop vaccinating.

That means an immediate moratorium on all vaccinations for all people.

Vaccines can no longer be a choice on the menu of medical procedures. Humanity already faces an extreme uphill battle to try to recover from the horrendous damage done by them to date.

Written by Laura Hayes, mother of vaccine-injured children, including one severely and permanently disabled by vaccine-induced encephalopathy. She prays this vaccine madness will end on a dime, today…which is not a moment too soon.

Posted by Age of Autism on September 05, 2016 at 06:01 AM in Current Affairs, Vaccine Safety | Permalink | Comments (122)



Comments
Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Angela Coral Eisenhauer
Birgit Calhoun et al. You are correct, mothers vaccinated with Dtap do not have real antibodies to pass on to their babies in breastmilk, and maternal antibodies. IF however, they have had the vaccine say within an average of 3 years, they can be a symptomless carrier, and actually infect their own infant without even knowing.
Yes, acellular pertussis vaccine is the biggest fraud. It was known in 2010, in Albany Western Australia, that the vaccine was failing, ie 5 jabs in 5 years, add an average 3 years, it fails. By 2011, with 98.5% vaccination rate, our whooping cough rate had gone from 340 a year (1991) to 40,000 a year, and it hasn't stopped. All fully vaccinated, all vaccine failures, all aged 6-12.
In 2010, the WA Health Department tested the younger vaccinated kids, yes they also all had whooping cough bacteria, in their throats, just no symptoms, YES< in Australia now we have around 1 in 8 fully vaccinated kids, per year, spreading whooping cough, most like 75% of these, doont have any physical symptoms, the working aP vaccine, just allows them to be carriers, NOT JUST ONCE< over, and over again for 6-12 years. To HIDE this truth, instead of BANNING this vaccine (or switching back to DTP< which worked, well they didn't constantly spread whooping cough for 6-12 years??) they decided to vaccinate babies, before birth, with a vaccine that kills them if given at birth. Brazil, was the first controlled experiment, and the outcome wasn't good. Every pregnant woman got Tdap from May 2015, from 20 weeks, and 20 weeks later, 5,000 vaccine damaged babies, got blamed on FOUR also having zika.
USA rates of microcephaly: 2004 400 cases
2006-10 800 -4,800 cases per year

Flu vaccines in pregnancy? from 2010, Tdap in pregnancy from 2011. By 2012, the rate of microcephalic babies in USA is 25,000 a year........................................ and not zika in sight.
I think CDC, are desperately trying to blame zika, despite, their own CDC zika page, clearly showing stats, that actually prove ZIKA infection in pregnancy, REDUCES THE RISK of birth defects, while still sending 20 million to mates in Japan, to develop a vaccine? Blatant outright fraud...............

CDC have yet to acknowledge the 25,000 microcephalic births a year, elsewhere in the support groups in USA< quoted as 2.3% of all births, worried about autism? Well since 2012, MORE THAN 1 in 50 babies, ARE BORN MICROCEPHALIC.

WAKE UP WORLD! TIME THE FRAUDS GOT CHARGED WITH MURDER.

Posted by: Angela Coral Eisenhauer | September 13, 2016 at 05:07 AM

lake
13th September 2016, 18:21
Just to put it here for anyone who hasn’t seen it....while its still online

Vaxxed

Full film here:

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v109341549TCWdSkCk

for the moment....probably not for long!

onawah
15th September 2016, 23:31
SB277's "poster boy: for execution

SB 277 – Medical Exemptions – The California Medical Board is Going to Take
Bob Sears MD’s Medical License Away From Him…

He’s Going to Be the “Poster Boy” For Execution…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen


Is the California Medical Board (CMB) REALLY Going to take Bob Sears’s
medical license? Yup, and his support network will whine, whimper,
scream, shout, pout, dress-alike, kick-their-feet, and ruminate, all to no
affect. They’ll make a lot of noise on FaceBook. There will be photos
with Congressmen. But, there will be NO ACTIVITY to actually do something
to really help Bob, or themselves.

Why? Because his support network has NO IDEA what the real problems are,
much less have any ideas on how to solve those problems. Why? They NEVER
do any background research – they just EMOTE for a day or two, or a week,
then move on to the next FaceBook tidbit.

Is it possible to save Bob’s license? Yup. I already see the way – it
just took a little research. Below, I’ll outline it for you.

Who is Bob’s support network? The Canary Party/Health Choice (CP/HC)
nitwits. Bob was right there during those bungled attempts to stop SB 277
legislation singing in the choir the “We know that vaccines are safe and
effective (sniff, sniff) we just want personal choice (whimper, whimper)”
song.

Over the next few weeks you’ll see what looks like mobilization for Bob.
But, like the first four campaigns, it will look good on the outside, but
will have no substance, and will accomplish absolutely NOTHING.

Poor Bob…

A lifetime of helping others, and he’s going to go down the drain.

Maybe Not…

To read the entire article, click on:

http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-medical-exemptions-california-medical-board-going-take-bob-sears-mds-medical-license-away/#more-5042


The Dr. Sears allegations explained
SEPTEMBER 9, 2016 ~ LEVI QUACKENBOSS

Two and a half years ago a mother brought her two-year-old son to see Dr. Bob Sears at his office for the first time, where she described to Dr. Sears that her child’s renal and digestive systems went into shock after his first round of vaccines at two months old, and that the baby was limp as a ragdoll for 24 hours after his next round one month later. We don’t know what records she shared with Dr. Sears then or later, but we know that Dr. Sears wrote a letter of exemption from vaccination for the boy. As almost all general practitioner doctor records are, the notes in this case were brief and didn’t include a detailed narrative.

The boy was seen four more times in the next year for severe constipation and severe ear infections, and we all know what that sounds like. At some point the mother brought the child in two weeks after his father allegedly hit his son on the head with a hammer, so I’m guessing either the father is a piece of trash that beats up on a kid, or the mom is a piece of trash who makes up allegations against a spouse she doesn’t like. By my reading of the complaint, Dr. Sears did make a Child Protective Services referral that was closed. Clearly, there was some drama up in these parents’ lives.

Flying in the face of their own testimony on SB 277, on September 2nd the California Medical Board filed an accusation against Dr. Sears regarding this child he’d written a vaccine exemption for. Click that link to download the complaint.

The board’s first allegation wraps up by saying that Dr. Sears screwed up by not getting a history of the vaccines the boy had in the past, as well as the reactions that occurred from those vaccines. We don’t know whether the mother brought in a shot card that wasn’t copied into the Sears file, and we don’t know if her previous doctor refused to document the vaccine reactions, as we all know happens all the time.

The second allegation says that Dr. Sears failed to conduct a neurological test on the boy two weeks after his father allegedly hit him with a hammer, in the incident that CPS closed . Does this mean Dr. Sears failed to see if the kids’ eyes tracked equally? How could they possibly know he didn’t do that?

The third allegation says that Dr. Sears failed to keep accurate medical records. Not just because there wasn’t a copy of the exemption letter on file, but because he didn’t document what exam he performed on the kid two weeks after being hit with a hammer.

People, I invite you right now to request your kids general pediatrician medical records and you will be shocked by what they don’t say. If Dr. Pan is your doctor, pul-eeze do this and report back. The records hardly say anything at all. “Kid fell out of tree. Mother reports no change in behavior.” That’s the kind of riveting notes you’ll read. Dr. Sears is no different.

Before you think I’m the world’s biggest Dr. Sears fanboy rushing to his defense, know that I’m not. I don’t agree with his final recommendations in any version of his vaccine book and I think his book requires a good bit of reading between the lines that most people are not capable of doing. I think he’s said some stupid things (sorry Bob, you’ve shared my writing in the past and I appreciate that, and I do still recommend your book all the time to new parents), like talking about herd immunity as it pertains to the pertussis vaccine, despite the fact that you can’t protect another person from pertussis by vaccinating yourself.

I think he has researched some things very well, like the intravenous limit for aluminum or the fascinating history of the hepatitis B vaccine mandate. On the other hand, he prescribed the sickly toddler in this case both Miralax and Tamiflu at different points in time, which is far more heinous than the accusations against him, considering that Miralax is not approved for children and can worsen autism symptoms, and Tamiflu depresses brain activity, can cause hallucinations, psychosis, and suicidal thoughts, and was banned from being to given kids in Japan in 2007.

That said, Dr. Sears is no “anti-vaxxer.” As far as I know, his own kids are vaccinated. But he’s been putting his career on the line by vocally sticking up for all our kids for the past year and a half as one of the most well known critics of SB 277.

So that’s all they’ve got? That’s the whole charge? A two-year old case of loose record keeping? Clearly this is trumped up bull**** about a kid I’m guessing Dr. Sears could see was on his way to being on the spectrum and he wanted to lessen the severity of that diagnosis.

The Medical Board doesn’t know what testimony the mom gave to Dr. Sears, and they don’t know if Dr. Sears looked up his shot records in the California Immunization Registry. The Medical Board doesn’t know if Dr. Sears thought the hammer incident was fabricated, even though CPS obviously did, not that their opinion means anything. And what’s going on with the parents now? Are they divorced and the dad is going after the mom to vaccinate the boy, as we’ve seen hundreds of times in our circle? We’re supposed to believe that a mother who brought her son in for 5 sick child visits in 13 months waited two weeks for medical care after what the board thinks was a serious head injury? If the kid has got neurological damage now, my money is on it being caused by the vaccines, not the hammer.

Feel free to watch a few key points of the June 9, 2015, SB 277 testimony where several issues were raised over and over again.
D5zzzaLXv-8
At 1:33 Dr. Pan invited families whose doctors will not write exemptions based on sibling reactions to have their physician send a letter to Dr. Pan’s office if they feel there is some pressure or other influence aside from their professional judgment at play. He also says that the Medical Board has never investigated or removed the license of a physician for giving a medical exemption.

At 2:06 Pan says for doctors to use their professional judgment– subject to review by the Medical Board, which he stresses repeatedly has never investigated or removed the license of a physician who writes medical exemptions. He says that the department of health does not review exemptions, which we already know is a lie. He stresses that the CDC contraindications to vaccination are only guidelines, and there is not a requirement that a doctor apply only the CDC guidelines.

At 2:14 Dr. Jay Gordon makes it clear that doctors would be way out of line from the CDC’s guidelines if they wrote these exemptions under the protection of SB 277.

At 2:36 an Assemblyperson asks if there have been any physicians in California disciplined or even investigated for providing a medical exemption?

Jennifer Simoes,the Medical Board’s Chief of Legislation responds, “To my knowledge, no.”

At 3:03 Pan says, “There is no cloud over these physicians. There is no legal barrier to writing medical exemptions. They look to their own expertise and knowledge.”

At 3:07, right at the end, before going to public comment, Ms. Simoes from the Medical Board says that, “A doctor would use their clinical judgment. We don’t track medical exemptions, we would have to receive a complaint.”

And I guess this is where we are today. The Medical Board received a weak, watered down complaint– the point of which I cannot even discern– and the witch hunt has begun.

We are standing by to see what we can do to support Dr. Sears during this episode of being Wakefielded, but in the meantime, please go follow his Facebook page right this moment as a sign of your solidarity with doctors doing the right thing for our kids.
https://leviquackenboss.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/the-dr-sears-allegations-explained/

onawah
16th September 2016, 22:42
Did your doctor fail to warn you about possible vaccine injury?
From Autism Action Network 9/16/16


Did your doctor fail to warn you about possible vaccine injury?
http://capwiz.com/a-champ/issues/alert/?alertid=73919626&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]
If you or your child have been injured by a vaccine and your pediatrician or physician failed to warn you about the potential for injury please contact Aaron Siri, Esq. at (212) 532-1091. He may be able to bring legal action on your behalf on a no-fee basis. Siri is the attorney who won a permanent injunction to stop mandated flu shots for preschoolers in New York City.

onawah
18th September 2016, 17:13
Lab testing confirms: Vaccines are contaminated with glyphosate
Posted by: Jonathan Landsman Natural Health 365 September 17, 2016
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/vaccines-glyphosate-1973.html

The proof is here: vaccines are contaminated with glyphosate. Scientists Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff, who recently published their fifth peer-reviewed paper on the herbicide glyphosate’s contributions to various diseases, are on the verge of publishing a sixth – which promises to be even more explosive than their prior works.
Backed by strong supporting data from multiple labs, Samsel and Seneff say that many popular vaccines are contaminated with glyphosate used in the weed-killer Roundup, and could initiate a disastrous “cascade of disease” when injected. The World Health Organization admits that glyphosate is ‘probably carcinogenic in humans’ and many scientists (and holistic health experts) say that glyphosate is already linked with diseases such as autism, inflammatory bowel disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma – to name only a few.
Why are vaccines loaded with glyphosate?
Vaccine manufacturers use animal byproducts – such as egg protein, casein or gelatin – as a substrate to grow the vaccine, and in some cases these animal products are used as a stabilizer in the actual vaccine. If the animals are sourced from factory farms, the odds are good that they have been consuming feed that not only contains GMOs but has been sprayed with glyphosate – resulting in injections of the toxin directly into people’s bodies, or into the bodies of animals they will consume.
In addition, Samsel points out that gelatin is already an ingredient in many popular consumer products, including vitamins, protein powders, beer, wine and other items. In addition, Samsel notes that he thought his chances of finding glyphosate in some vaccines were “pretty good,” but even he seems shocked at the extent of the contamination.
All the popular vaccines and all the major players are involved
Samsel reports that to guarantee accuracy, he used multiple samples of the same vaccines, multiple varieties of vaccines, and multiple laboratories. Vaccines tested include those for shingles, measles/mumps/rubella, diptheria/tetanus/pertussis, chicken pox, influenza, pneumonia and hepatitis B.
What he found was frightening: Zostavax, a shingles vaccine made by Merck, contains .42 ppb (parts per billion) of glyphosate, while MMR-II, for measles, mumps and rubella, clocks in at 2.90 ppb. A different sample of MMR-II was found to contain a whopping 3.740 ppb.
Not just Merck, but other pharmaceutical giants have contaminated vaccines as well. The Novartis flu vaccine Fluviran contained from 1.70 to. 227 ppb, depending on the lab. Sanofi Pasteur’s DPT vaccine contained 1.09 ppb glyphosate, while Glaxo Smith Kline’s Hepatitis B vaccine scored between .33 and .337 at two different labs.
Only one vaccine, Merck’s Pneumovax 23, appeared to be free of glyphosate. But, because the labs had a cutoff of .15-.75 ppb, this absence of glyphosate should not be particularly comforting – and maybe not reflective of reality.
Remember, 3 parts per billion may not seem like a high concentration. But Samsel points out that there are trillions of molecules involved, amplifying the amounts.
You can watch the video of Samsel reporting his findings here:k33iFXHlOnY
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/samsel-lab-image-1.jpg
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/samsel-lab-image-2.jpg
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/samsel-lab-image-3.jpg
So, here’s a simple question: Does it make any sense to be injecting people with a probable carcinogenic and toxic herbicide – under the guise of keeping them healthy? (Politicians, are you listening?!)
Natural health advocates fight back
Advocates are calling for a grassroots movement demanding postponement of all mass vaccinations until vaccine manufacturers agree to use animals that have consumed only organic feed, and been tested to make sure they are glyphosate free.
Dr. David Brownstein, an internationally-recognized family physician and holistic health expert, points out that known neurotoxins – such as mercury and aluminum; and known carcinogens – such as formaldehyde have no place in vaccines; the addition of glyphosate worsens the situation further.
Dr. Brownstein is calling for a Congressional investigation into vaccines.
So far, no response from health or government agencies
Samsel has contacted his United States Senator in New Hampshire, along with the CDC, FDA and WHO. He also sent a letter to Congress, which he says has been so far ignored.
Yes, send an important message about contaminated vaccines that are given daily to children and adults, and you hear….crickets!
Read Samsel’s courageous letter – below:
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/samsel-vaccine-letter.jpg
Share this letter with family and friends, or anyone you think doesn’t want glyphosate as a vaccine ingredient. Even better, write to your local representatives and national medical agencies, and ask that they investigate this new finding concerning glyphosate contamination of popular vaccines.
We’ve got to put an end to this insanity and, together, we will succeed!

onawah
19th September 2016, 14:37
Peer review on vaccines
Provides a cogent and compelling argument that vaccines are responsible for an epidemic of disease and disorder in the human system using only published, accepted peer review from 100s of authors representing many dozens of specialties and from across the globe. The PDF is free, there is no print version.
http://www.modernherbaleducation.com/downloads/2016/Vaccine-Peer-Review-1000.pdf

onawah
19th September 2016, 14:52
SB 277 Fight – We Are Winning. Increase the Pressure…
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen 9/19/16
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-fight-winning-increase-pressure/#more-5161



How do I know we are winning? Easy? Reactions to our efforts are getting more strident. Near panic reigns…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen



Current Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) leadership is in desperation mode, running from the crumbling precipice, probably from being notified by their Big Pharma Masters that those twice-the-pay Pharma jobs they are promised are going to disappear if they don’t do something, anything, everything, to stop the burgeoning, hugely successful, anti-vaccination movement.

Americans are becoming more and more aware that vaccines are, in reality, Made-in-China death pus tubes that are neither safe nor effective, but in fact, literally horrible.

So, what does CDC leadership do to save their big payoffs? Or, should I say, TRY to save their big payoffs? They come out with a proposed rule change which, in essence, converts the government of the United States from a Constitutional Republic to a Totalitarian Dictatorship by so declaring.

Or, so they hope…


Talk about government overreach…

A lot of people are VERY concerned about what is being called “CDC Moves to Amend the Public Health Service Act.” Our NVIC friend Barbara Loe Fisher writes on Joe Mercola MD’s site about those dangers quite well. If you haven’t read that piece go read it now. You WILL be alarmed. Below is an important excerpt:

“During the last days of summer, while we were vacationing, shopping for school supplies or, in the case of Virginia families, while we were busy pleading with legislators to protect the medical and religious vaccine exemptions in state vaccine law.

Public health officials at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were quietly publishing a very long Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the August 15, 2016, Federal Register to amend federal public health law.

The part of the Public Health Service Act they want to strengthen is the part that gives them power under the U.S. Constitution6,7 to restrict the freedom of a person entering the U.S. or traveling between states if they believe the person is infected or could become infected with certain kinds of communicable diseases.

You only have until October 14, 2016, to make a public comment to the CDC and contact your legislators in Congress, so please take this seriously because what the CDC is proposing applies to all Americans who travel outside the country or between states, especially on commercial airlines.

In the future, it could extend to any form of transportation when you cross state lines, including by bus, train or car.

More that should frighten you …

More from Barbara’s article:

After You Are Taken Into Custody

After you are taken into government custody, it appears you can be held for 72 hours without the right to contact an attorney or anyone else to appeal your detention. You will be asked to sign a contract with the CDC that you consent to the “public health measures” being applied to you or your minor child, which may include “quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination and treatment.”

But even if you don’t voluntarily agree to sign that contract, public health officials can still do whatever they want to do to you because “the individual’s consent shall not be considered a prerequisite to any exercise of any authority” by the CDC. And if government officials do release you from detention, you can be electronically tracked and monitored, including by electronic tracking devices you have to wear or by email, cell phone texts, video conferencing and voicemail.

It will be easy for the CDC to electronically track and monitor your movements after they release you. Since the early 1990s, when Congress passed the phony HIPPA “privacy” legislation, federal health officials have been using your tax dollars to create and operate electronic medical records and vaccine tracking systems that use health care identifiers to keep tabs on how healthy or sick you are, what kind of drugs you take and which vaccines you have gotten.

Health maintenance organizations (HMOs) are hooked in, so your medical information, including your vaccination status, can be shared with government researchers, pharmaceutical companies and law enforcement officials.

You Can Be Fined and Jailed for Disobeying CDC Orders

And if the CDC finds you guilty of disobeying their orders and they believe you transmitted an infection to someone else, you can be fined “$100,000 if the violation does not result in a death, or one year in jail, or both, or a fine of no more than $250,000 if the violation results in a death, or one year in jail or both.”

Plus, they have added this curious language without explanation: “Violations by organizations are subject to a fine of no more than $200,000 per event if the violation does not result in a death, or $500,000 per event it the violation results in a death.”

Right now, measles is not officially on the “detain and quarantine list.” But measles easily could be put on that “isolate and quarantine” list if CDC officials convince the president to issue an Executive Order if or when the NPRM becomes law after October 14, 2016.

See what I mean?

Total takeover: Roadblocks, FEMA death camps, older people ripped out of their vehicles or bludgeoned at Senior centers because they don’t have evidence with them of the ninety-two vaccines the CDC wants adults to have. Children “disappearing” out of school because the so-called “school nurse” thinks they might have a sniffle. You get the picture…

But there is a serious mistake in Barbara, and others, articles about this cancellation of American’s rights. They are wrong about one important thing. What’s that?

The CDC Can Do No Wrong…

What? What do I mean “The CDC Can Do No Wrong?” That sounds crazy – “what about the…”

Back in August 19th, 2003 I wrote an article called “I Own the FDA…” In that piece I explained that “We The People” put public agencies in place to each do a specific thing for us. If that mission is NOT being done it is NOT the fault of the agency but that of the employees hired by us, to complete that mission. Here is an excerpt that explains:

“Don’t Sue Yourself…”

The first people that introduced me to this simple legal philosophy meant that it was a mistake to sue a government agency that we, the people, own. It’s like your right hand suing your left hand. That agency, no matter what it is, and has become, belongs to us. We set it up. We gave it it’s mission. We monitor it. Or do we?

So the theory is, if an agency isn’t doing what we want it to do, what we set it up to do, what we expect from it, then what’s the problem? It can’t be the agency – because that’s us, “we the people.” We own it. So what’s wrong?

It must be rogue employees. Rogue employees within the agency we set up, abusing the power we gave them – to promote their own agenda.

Go After the “Rogue Employees,” Not the Agency…

Got the idea?”

So, Let’s Ask the Obvious Question…

Who, exactly, at the CDC is responsible for this proposed new rule? Let’s find them and ask them some questions.. about their personal agenda. Let’s mention the word TREASON right up front.

Treason? Let’s look at this definition just below

1. the offense of acting to overthrow one’s government or toharm or kill its sovereign.

2. a violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or to one’s state.

3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith;treachery.
Isn’t what they are proposing a “violent overthrow” of what we know as a government?
Questions? What Questions?

The CDC Mission Statement is clear and concise. Click here for the whole write up. An excerpt:

“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) serves as the national focus for developing and applying disease prevention and control, environmental health, and health promotion and health education activities designed to improve the health of the people of the United States.

To accomplish its mission, CDC identifies and defines preventable health problems and maintains active surveillance of diseases through epidemiologic and laboratory investigations and data collection, analysis, and distribution; serves as the PHS lead agency in developing and implementing operational programs relating to environmental health problems, and conducts operational research aimed at developing and testing effective disease prevention, control, and health promotion programs; administers a national program to develop recommended occupational safety and health standards and to conduct research, training, and technical assistance to assure safe and healthful working conditions for every working person; develops and implements a program to sustain a strong national workforce in disease prevention and control; and conducts a national program for improving the performance of clinical laboratories.

I don’t think they are doing much of this at all. They are just focused on peddling vaccines for their paymasters. They don’t care a bit how dangerous and ineffective vaccines are.

i think we are going about questioning the CDC all wrong… We need to target the employees making the decisions.

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

onawah
19th September 2016, 15:33
Deadly Mycoplasma in Vaccines - Garth Nicolson_ microbiologist
7W4tu5qgaWA
This isn't new, but updated, and worth reviewing

Uploaded on Jan 8, 2011
(UPDATED)
This is an excerpt from the Snowshoe Documentary film: Mycoplasma - Dr. Garth Nicolson-microbiologist, this film is available in it's entirety at the You Tube link below:
1QJo3XuYp-M
Biological Warfare - Experiments on the American People
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QJo3...

More information on this subject in further in-depth detail is available and at:

HIDDEN PANDEMIC
https://sites.google.com/site/conflag...

Consumerhealth.org
http://www.consumerhealth.org/article...


United States Patent 5,242,820
Pathogenic Mycoplasma
http://members.iconn.net/~marlae/lyme...

Online text source, United States Patent and Trademark Office Website:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Pa...

onawah
20th September 2016, 16:34
Private Citizens Taking a Stand To End Corruption In California State Government Over SB277…
http://bolenreport.com/private-citizens-taking-stand-end-corruption-california-state-government-sb277/
http://i1.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/candyc7.jpg?resize=756%2C1024



By Candyce Estavecandyc7

On July 15, 2016, Thirty Six (36) plaintiffs, all California residents, filed a “Private Attorney General” law suit against Senator Richard Pan, Governor Brown, their spouses, and the other Democrats who voted to force kids to be fully vaccinated to go to school.

What they voted for was Senate Bill SB277. It passed through all but the Commerce Committee, who didn’t have a voice. This committee was skipped.

There are 50 defendants.

On September 14, 2016, the Defendants were served…

Well most of them anyway. I am one of the Plaintiffs.

Before SB277 became law, I was invited to a “Bought” documentary screening and asked to speak on a panel after the viewing, to talk about my child’s vaccine injury. We pondered what could be done to end the corruption and how we could stop the proposed Senate Bill.

Out of the audience came a man who said he knew what could be done. Travis Middleton suggested we could sue these representatives for violating our Federal Constitution as well as our California Constitution. He is leading us in this fight.

Travis is not an attorney. He is a paralegal and a law researcher.

Travis is an African-American who is fully aware of our government’s war on African-Americans, Native American Indians, and the history of little regard for the lives of the minority.

We (the plaintiffs), are acting as Private Attorney General, which is in our right as private citizens. This is a multi-plaintiff suit under The Racketeering and Corrupt Organizations Act also known as R.I.C.O.. It is a civil action, not criminal. We are suing them in both private and professional capacity.


Here’s a peek at just how much money Pan and others received in campaign contributions from pharmaceutical companies.

TOP DRUG MAKER RECIPIENTS

Sen. Richard Pan*- D-Sacramento $95,150
Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins- D-San Diego $90,250
Sen. Ed Hernandez*- D-Azusa $67,750
Sen. Holly Mitchell*- D-Los Angeles $60,107
Assemblyman Brian Maienschein*- R-San Diego $59,879
Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León- D-Los Angeles $56,648
Sen. Isadore Hall- D-Compton $52,400
Sen. Jerry Hill- D-San Mateo $50,209
Assemblyman Henry Perea- D-Fresno $49,550
Assemblywoman Shirley Weber- D-San Diego $47,000
Assemblyman Mike Gatto- D-Los Angeles $46,491
Assemblywoman Susan A. Bonilla*- D-Concord $45,600
Sen. Andy Vidak- R-Hanford $42,800
Assemblyman Tom Daly- D-Anaheim $40,300
Assemblyman Kevin Mullin- D-South San Francisco $38,400
Assemblyman Adam Gray- D-Merced $37,000
Assemblyman Rob Bonta*- D-Alameda $36,750
Assemblyman Anthony Rendon- D-Lakewood $36,200
Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez*- D-Los Angeles $33,850
Assemblyman Richard Gordon- D-Menlo Park $33,100
*Member of the Assembly or Senate health committees

This information came from the Sacramento Bee.

California Senator Richard Pan…

This photo came from our team. The Sacramento Bee totals are included in the brief.

http://i0.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/candyc6.jpg?resize=768%2C909

Senator Pan is a Pediatrician. He also introduced AB2109, the bill that would make it law to receive counseling to opt out of vaccines, just a year before introducing SB277.

At that time Pan indicated that parents should receive accurate information about
vaccines before choosing to opt out. I received 3 pieces of inaccurate information from my child’s pediatrician. Pan also, indicated that parents wouldn’t be stripped of their right to choose, and he wants kids to go to school.

See this short video proving his double speak, compliments of Josh Coleman.
caiCn57RNFc

At the time that SB277 was in Senate Hearings, Pan knew that Dr. William Thompson, senior scientist at the CDC had come forward, and said the CDC had committed fraud by manipulating data, throwing out data, about the safety and efficacy of the MMR. They know that the vaccine is not safe. If they lied about that, who knows what other studies they lied about.

We know that Merck is already in court, as a result of 2 other whistle blowers coming forward about their manipulation of the data on the mumps portion of the MMR. These are vaccines we are forced to give our children. Our lawsuit targets the toxic ingredients in the vaccines.

In the link below take a look at this research that our friends, The Refusers, wrote about.

https://therefusers.com/secret-cdc-front-group-is-behind-national-vaccineexemption-battle/

This Refusers article demonstrates how our County Health
Departments have conspired.

candyc8And then notice Charity Dean’s behavior, as Santa Barbara County’s Health Officer, in Sacramento!
http://i1.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/candyc8.jpg?resize=300%2C300

At any rate, a RICO suit, I felt was an opportunity to stop the corruption and assault on our children and our own rights.

Our California law makers have gone way beyond the boundaries of integrity. They have used their official positions to bow down to pharmaceutical companies and take large sums of money to throw parents and children under the bus.

I feel it is my duty to take any action possible to spare all children from toxic vaccines. I consider the administration of vaccines a deliberate poisoning.

In fact I can’t hardly believe that vaccines are legal to begin with.

None have been held to the gold standard, double-blind placebo safety study. There hasn’t ever been a long term health outcome vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study. The cumulative effects of toxic ingredients in combination have never been studied.

Vaccines have never been studied for Carcinogens, mutagenesis and have not been studied for sterility. To mandate vaccines on kids to go to school is absolutely ludicrous and needs to end now.

We want discovery! I want all vaccines outlawed now!! We can’t wait. 54% of our children are chronically ill and average IQ’s are dropping. This assault on our children is unforgivable, and mandates for you are coming next! Here’s a road map of the plan!

www.TinyURL.com/HealthyPeople2020

www.TinyURL.com/Healthy2020

www.TinyURL.com/OneInTwo

Here are the charges. We have 16 charges that constitute RICO violations.

“131. At all relevant times herein, all Defendants and the Co-conspirators were “persons” within the meaning of RICO, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961(3) and 1964(4).

132. At all relevant times herein, Defendants and Co-conspirators formed an association-in-fact for the specific purpose of extorting the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs, their school-age offspring and those similarly situated as such rights are guaranteed and secured by the First Amendment (right of deeply held spiritual beliefs in rejecting having certain animal and or human tissues or poisonous chemicals forced into their offspring’s bodies; the rights of parents to choose a particular medical procedure with respect to their offspring whether born or unborn; the right to informed consent over a medical procedure regarding their offspring); and, by the Fourth Amendment (the right of privacy and to be let alone by government, or anyone or any agency acting on government’s behalf); and, by the Fifth Amendment (the right not to be assaulted, maimed or killed with a needle filled with poisonous substances without due process of law, or the right not to lose their life, health, well-being or liberty without due process of law); and, by the Ninth Amendment (the fundamental and common law right of life, liberty, and right to protect the life, health, well-being and liberty of their offspring); and, by the Fourteenth Amendment (the right of due process of law before any rights may be taken away, and the equal protection of ALL laws state and federal including but not limited to the right to opt out of any tyrannical governmental medical experiment or treatment.

133. This association-in-fact was an “enterprise” within the meaning of RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4).

134. At all relevant times herein, this “law” making enterprise was engaged in, and its activities affected interstate and foreign commerce, within the meaning of RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (Sec.1951).

135. At all relevant times herein, all Defendants and other Co-conspirators associated with this enterprise conducted or participated directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the enterprise’s affairs through a “pattern of racketeering activity” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (Sec. 1952), in violation of RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1961 & 1962(C) and as alleged in paragraphs 98 through 134 above.

136. 18 U.S.C. § 1961 provides in pertinent parts: (1). “racketeering activity” means (A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance
or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1344 (relating to financial institution fraud), section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1512 (relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering), 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire), sections 175–178 (relating to biological weapons), sections 229–229F (relating to chemical weapons).

137. Specifically, at all relevant times herein, Defendant legislators and other Co-conspirators engaged in “racketeering activity” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1) by engaging in Obstruction of Justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503 by corruptly influencing the outcome of the house and senate hearings to pass bill SB277; and, Perjury of their Oaths to the California and U.S. Constitutions resulting in treason and Seditious Conspiracy to overthrow the state and federal Constitutions; and further engaged in a Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion; and, further engaged in a Conspiracy to Racketeer in violation of section 1951 of section 1961 and 1962(d).

138. Extortion of Plaintiffs’ Liberty- A conviction for extortion within the meaning of the Hobbs Act requires that the Defendants obtained “property” or “liberty” from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, or fear, or under color of official right. 18 U.S.C. § 1503.

139. In furtherance of their racketeering and extortion scheme, the Defendants have used their offices, positions, influence, affiliates and sub agencies including but not limited to the Superintendent of Schools, the County Health Departments, local law enforcement, Child Protective Services and health care providers to threaten, intimidate, coerce and or incarcerate Plaintiffs (the parents of unvaccinated or partially vaccinated offspring) for bogus criminal charges including, Parental Negligence, Child Endangerment, Truancy, etc. should they fail to comply with Defendants’ unconstitutional bill.

140. The acts set forth above constitute a violation of one or more of the prohibited overt acts under 18 U.S.C. §1961 and 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). All the Defendants and the other Co-conspirators each committed and/or aided and abetted the commission of two or more of these acts of racketeering activity.

141. The acts of racketeering activity referred to in the previous paragraphs constituted a “pattern of racketeering activity” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(5). The acts alleged were related to each other by virtue of common participates (all named efendants), a common victim (Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ offspring and others similarly situated), a common method of commission (closed door meetings and perjury of their oaths), and the common purpose and common result of extorting the constitutional rights of Plaintiffs and others similarly situated depriving said Plaintiffs or class of persons of equal protection of the laws or equal privileges and immunities under the law. The Defendant legislators and other Co-conspirators did commit the overt acts as alleged in this complaint in furtherance of conspiracy to the injury of Plaintiffs’ person or property and deprived Plaintiffs of Plaintiffs’ rights and or privileges as citizens of the united States America.

142. The Obstruction of Justice and Extortion of Rights scheme being committed by the Defendants have continued for over two years and threatens to continue despite the institution of this Complaint.

143. As a result of Defendants and the other Co-conspirators’ violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1961 & 1962(c), Plaintiffs have lost a substantial amount of their time, money, labor and constitutional freedoms as a result of the racketeering activities conducted in the fraudulent bill passing scheme and as part of the prohibited activities herein alleged.

144. As a result of their racketeering enterprise, Defendants are liable to the Plaintiffs for their losses in an amount to be determined at trial.

145. Pursuant to RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), Plaintiffs are entitled to recover threefold their damages plus costs from Defendants. The Defendants’ acquisition, control and interest in this RICO enterprise were the proximate cause of damages and injury to Plaintiffs.”

You can view the entire lawsuit as a .pdf file here.

Our Representatives have been served.

They asked for a 30 day extension before responding. It was granted. Now they need to step up to the plate and defend themselves.

By Candyce Estave

RELATED
SB 277 Lawsuit - The Response to the Response... It Just Gets Better...
August 8, 2016
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-lawsuit-response-response-just-gets-better/

In "California SB277 Fight"
The Battle of Bull Run... The Second American Civil War Has Begun... And It Started Over Vaccines...
April 21, 2015
http://bolenreport.com/the-battle-of-bull-run-the-second-american-civil-war-has-begun-and-it-started-over-vaccines/

In "California SB277 Fight"
SB 277 - First Amended Complaint For Declaratory, Injunctive And Other Relief...
July 15, 2016
In "Autism - Vaccine Damage"
http://bolenreport.com/sb-277-first-amended-complaint-declaratory-injunctive-relief/

onawah
30th September 2016, 14:48
MUST READ: MANDATORY California Childhood Vaccines REALLY ARE Made in China – And There Is NO Quality Control What-So-Ever…


http://bolenreport.com/mandatory-california-childhood-vaccines-really-made-china-no-quality-control-ever/#more-5329
There Are No Manufacturing Inspections, No Lot Testing, Nothing…
The Chinese Manufacturing Facilities ARE PRE-APPROVED By the World Health Organization (WHO)…
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
Most, if not all, of the seventy-two (72) Childhood Vaccines FORCED on California children in order to go to school are made in any of the twenty-eight (28) Chinese vaccine manufacturing facilities.
China DOES NOT have a good reputation as a trustworthy manufacturer.
(1) There are no product inspections of any kind performed at the Chinese manufacturing facilities.
(2) There are NONE of the testing requirements the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires of US manufacturers. NONE.
(3) The US government gives China a free pass bringing whatever-is-in-those-vaccine-tubes into the United States. US government agencies provide no testing, what-so-ever, of so-called vaccines brought in from China.
(4) The US government gives China a free pass – not checking, at all, to see if those vaccines(?) have been transported under refrigerated, sterile, conditions to the US.
(5) The US government makes NO EFFORT, what-so-ever, to protect US children from potential harm from Chinese manufacturers.
(6) The State of California Department of Health is both complicit, and equally guilty, along with the Feds, of endangering California’s children – and I don’t think they care.
This Situation is Preposterous. China has the WORST record of tainted products on Planet Earth…
Where do I start? (1) Let’s start with a short 50 second video…
M0q9Dufvc9c
6LZWNyxhHMI
(3) Remember the Heparin scare?
From Wikipedia – In March 2008, major recalls of heparin, a substance widely used as an injectable anticoagulant, were announced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) due to contamination of the raw heparin stock imported from China.
The raw material for the recalled heparin batches was processed in China from pig’s intestines by the American pharmaceutical firm Scientific Protein Laboratories.[3][4][5] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration was quoted as stating that at least 81 deaths were believed to be linked to a raw heparin ingredient imported from the People’s Republic of China, and that they had also received 785 reports of serious injuries associated with the drug’s use.[6]
(4) A Decade of Dangerous food Imports From China
Although supermarket labels may not always indicate it, a growing portion of the American diet is now made in China. In 2009 alone, 70 percent of the apple juice, 43 percent of the processed mushrooms, 22 percent of the frozen spinach and 78 percent of the tilapia Americans consumed came from China. But despite a well-documented pattern of chemical adulteration and unsafe drug residues, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has done little to address the growing tide of food imports from the nation. The FDA inspects less than 2 percent of imported food and rarely visits Chinese food manufacturers. Between 2009 and 2010, the FDA conducted only 13 food inspections in China.
fake bar codes on white background
You should have ZERO confidence in Chinese made vaccines, or ANY food or medicinal products – for good reason.
U.S. food safety inspectors have been overwhelmed by the surging food imports from China since the country joined the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. These international business deals allow trade to trump food safety and encourage U.S. agribusinesses and food manufacturers to source food ingredients from China where environmental, food safety and labor laws are weaker and regulatory oversight is lax.
The shortcomings in China’s food safety system were brought to light when ingredients tainted with the chemical melamine entered the global food supply — including products from well-known brands such as Mars, Heinz and Cadbury.
I Could Go On With these Truthful Stories About Chinese Manufacturing For the Rest of the Year, and ALL of Next Year…
But, I am sure you get the idea…
Up in the article sub-title I said “The Chinese Manufacturing Facilities ARE PRE-APPROVED By the World Health Organization (WHO)…” Does that fact give you confidence?
It shouldn’t for a number of reasons.
(1) The Roman Catholic Church Council of Bishops in the African country of Kenya last year pointed out the WHO laced millions of vaccines headed for child-bearing age Kenyan women with a sterilizing agent. I wrote about that here. Below is an excerpt:
“Let’s first mention what happened in the Czech Republic in 2009, where scientists there were horrified to discover that millions of Flu Shots provided to them, for national distribution, by the US company Baxter, were found to be laced with the deadly avian flu virus. Read about that here.
But, what happened in Kenya, uncovered by 27 Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, is, to me, the signpost for “The Plan.” There, in Kenya, just three months ago, vaccines were used to permanently, and without their knowledge or permission, sterilize forty-two million (42 million) young Kenyan women. The World Health Organization (WHO), and UNICEF, were caught, by the Catholic Church leadership, lacing what they described as “Tetanus Vaccine” with Beta-HCG, a hormone that, when combined with the ingredients in the Tetanus vaccine, leads to sterility. As the Catholic Church says “Once a mother develops antibodies against HCG, she rejects any pregnancy as soon as it starts growing in her womb thus causing repeated abortions and subsequent sterility.”
According to the Catholic Church, it is not the first time. They have evidence that WHO has done this at least twice before in Mexico and the Philippines.
A copy of the article from the Catholic website www.lifenews.com which led me to the Kenyan Bishop’s letter can be accessed here.
Then let’s hear from Dr. Dale Brown on how WHO REALLY handles Vaccines – those deaths in Southern Mexico. WxR6Nc4i0uo
To Summarize – Dicky Pan knows all of this and he did it to California children anyway…
And, the California legislature, with NO research into the realities of vaccines, made them MANDATORY…
The State of California Health Department employees know all of this. But, the new 2017 Audi, BMW, and Lexus models are almost out…
Am I painting THE REAL PICTURE of what’s going on, for you?
More to come. Stay tuned…
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

Sierra
30th September 2016, 15:45
Of course. It benefits the U.S. to have China take the responsibility to further the NWO plan of genocide.

Anyone think the one world government is not here yet?

Sierra, a native Californian grinding her teeth in fury

onawah
6th October 2016, 15:00
Aluminum and vaccines: What the research reveals
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/aluminum-vaccines-1993.html

(NaturalHealth365) According to the CDC’s own statistics, more than 10 million vaccines are given every year to infants. Not so well publicized, however, is the fact that aluminum — a known neurotoxin — is routinely used as an additive in many common vaccines to increase their long-term effects.
In fact, children today receive a staggering 17 shots that contain aluminum – a huge increase over the four they would have received in the 1970’s and mid-1980’s.
Why are they poisoning our children with a known neurotoxic agent? On the next NaturalHealth 365 Talk Hour, Jonathan Landsman and Christopher Exley, PhD – a professor of bioinorganic chemistry and leading authority on aluminum toxicity – talk about the dangers of aluminum, along with natural solutions and techniques for preventing and reversing neurological damage.
Experts sound the alarm about the dangers of neurotoxic aluminum in vaccines
Aluminum is the third most abundant element of the Earth’s crust. But, the mining and processing of aluminum ores, as well as the widespread production of aluminum products, are causing a wide variety of health issues – never seen in human history.
According to Dr. Exley, we are now living in the “aluminum age,” with this unwanted element found in a dizzying variety of foods, drugs and cosmetics – including baking powder, antacids, sunscreen, deodorant and baby formula, to name just a few. Yet, there is absolutely no (good) reason for aluminum to be put on or inside the human body.
Even more disturbing than the presence of aluminum in common products, however, may be its use in vaccines. Due to the ever-increasing vaccination schedule promoted by government health agencies, aluminum is being injected directly into our children on a daily basis – in such common vaccines as DTap (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis) and the Hepatitis B vaccine, which is routinely given to newborns.
Do you know if you or your child suffers from aluminum toxicity?

Aluminum is being linked to autism and Alzheimer’s disease
It would be a double tragedy if aluminum – which threatens the health of our children, when injected into infants – is also shown to cause neurological impairments in our senior years – but this is the picture that is beginning to emerge.
The brain is a “target for aluminum,” Dr. Exley warns that a lifetime’s accumulation of aluminum in the brain can finally reach a “toxic threshold” – and set the stage for neurodegenerative and autoimmune diseases. Dr. Exley reports that aluminum toxicity can cause Alzheimer’s disease to develop earlier in life, as well as causing a more aggressive and rapid progression.
In fact, injected aluminum – in animal studies – have been shown to cause behavioral changes and cognitive deficits, including increased anxiety, reduced attention to tasks, increased aggression, and memory loss – mimicking a phenomenon that some scientists and psychologists say is being seen more and more frequently in modern human behavior. We’re talking about the kind of damage to motor neurons in the brain and nervous system that can trigger Lou Gehrig’s disease, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease.
Join us on the next NaturalHealth365 Talk Hour to discover how you can prevent or reduce your exposure to aluminum, along with natural, safe ways to detoxify the body.
This week’s guest: Christopher Exley, PhD – biologist and internationally-recognized expert on aluminum toxicity
Discover the suppressed truth about aluminum and the best ways to detoxify the body – Sun. Oct. 9
Christopher Exley, PhD, a biologist and professor of bioinorganic chemistry in the Aluminum and Silicon Research Group of Birchall Centre at Keele University, received his Ph.D. on the ecotoxicology of aluminum from the University of Stirling, and is one of the world’s leading authorities on aluminum exposure and toxicity.
His articles have been published in dozens of peer-reviewed publications, including Frontiers in Neurology, The Lancet, and the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry. He is also the editor of “Aluminum and Alzheimer’s Disease: The Science that Describes the Link.”

onawah
9th October 2016, 03:12
Hillary Clinton “One-Worlders” In a Panic Over Hard-Charging, Heroic, Anti-Vaxxer Movement…
http://bolenreport.com/hillary-clinton-one-worlders-panic-hard-charging-heroic-anti-vaxxer-movement/#more-5395


The US Mandatory Vaccine Program Has Nothing to Do With Preventing Disease.
It is Just a Vehicle For a GMO Delivery System…

New Vaccines in the Approval Pipeline Are Designed to Genetically Modify Children…
But Anti-Vaxxers Are Mangling the Grand Plan…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

Genetic Manipulation? Yup. You don’t have to look very far to find the world of genetic engineering in vaccines. It is right here in front of us.

Everyone in the autism world knows about the “Autism Research Funds” scandal. Congress allocated 1.6 billion dollars to find the causes of autism – twice. But NONE of the money was EVER spent on Autism research. It all went into studying genetics.

Huh? How did that happen? Good questions…
The Reality…
The intent, I believe, of the Childhood Vaccine Mandates has NOTHING to do with eradicating infectious diseases.

We know that that “vaccines are saving humanity” story is false, for ALL of those infectious diseases were wiped out in the US, long before vaccines came around – with improved sanitation, better food, and more of it. Public health records show the truth.

The Childhood Vaccine Program, in the US, I believe, is a DNA and Population Control Program where health officials will be able to decide whether YOUR family name survives the cut – meaning “Will YOUR children be allowed to reproduce?”

I think this program is the next generation combination of (1) A “Hitler’s Super Race” operation (on steroids), and (2) The establishment of the means to create a “Delta” society similar to what Aldous Huxley wrote about in “Brave New World.” From Schmoop:

“Like Greek life on college campuses around the country, the society in Brave New World is split into five castes: Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons, with a few minor distinctions in between.

Because of the technology wielded by the World State’s leaders, caste is pre-determined and humans are grown in a manner appropriate to their status; the lower the caste, the dumber and uglier the individual is created to be.

As adults, the upper two castes interact socially with each other but never with the lesser groups—that would totally be social suicide.

Class is yet another mechanism for stability and control on the part of the government. It’s also a big part of the reason that personal identity goes by the wayside in this novel—Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons are simply faceless drones in color-coded outfits who exist to serve the more intelligent Alphas and Betas.”

Can Vaccines Actually Do That?

Yup. They sure can. And they are. Just look at all of those little eleven year old girls whose parents were too stupid to block them from getting the “**** vaccine.” Have ANY of those little girls survived that without damage? Probably not. Those parents need not worry about having grandchildren – they are going to be too busy, anyway, taking care of that now eleven year old, when she is fifty-five and still slobbering…

Vaccines to Change Your DNA? Your Child’s DNA?
Oh yeah…
Several years ago a Crisis Management client of mine in the world of natural anti-aging medicine asked us to come up with a reason why they, and their whole anti-aging industry, were under attack. I found the answer – and it surprised me at the time. Read, just below, what was happening behind the scene – and who was responsible.

What is Anti-Aging medicine? BolenReport Author Bill Faloon writes on his Life Extension Foundation website:

“When Saul Kent and I established the Life Extension Foundation in 1980, we had no idea what we were in for. As young men, our objective was to raise public awareness about the fact that pathological aging need not be an inevitable consequence of human maturation. We were convinced that if the public could be enlightened about the importance of anti-aging research, greater resources would be devoted to finding ways to significantly extend the healthy human life span.

Few people in 1980 thought that intervention into biological aging was possible, and many questioned why we would want to interfere with nature. We argued that aging was the greatest scourge afflicting humanity and that if people had the opportunity to live longer, many of society’s problems would disappear.Back in 1980, few scientists believed that anything could be done to prevent the degenerative effects inflicted by aging. To counter this misconception, Saul and I pointed to then-current scientific studies showing that it was possible to prevent some age-related diseases and to slow the aging process itself, at least in animals. We argued that if enough funds were committed to research, therapies to retard human aging could be developed that would result in the greatest revolution in medical history.

We based our philosophical arguments on theories that people with limited life spans are not particularly motivated to protect society’s long-term interests, since they themselves have only a relatively short time to live. Longer life spans, we asserted, would result in people behaving in a manner that would make the world a better place, since they themselves would have to exist in the environment they create.

Costs of Challenging Conventional Wisdom

Being controversial carries a heavy price. The news media viciously attacked our position and had no problem finding academic scientists to denigrate us in every way possible. The federal government raided our facilities twice, initiated an 11-year criminal investigation, and threw us in jail in 1991.

We retaliated by filing multiple lawsuits against the federal government, which resulted in the return of all the property it had seized from us. We rallied health freedom activists to keep the FDA from turning vitamins into drugs. We enlightened Americans about the availability of lower-cost prescription drugs in other countries. And we eventually convinced the US Attorneys’ Office to dismiss the criminal indictments brought against us by the FDA.”

So, Who Was Behind the Attacks On Anti-Aging?

The usual suspects…. In the beginning, just those with INFLUENCE, for various reasons, at the FDA.

But then, when “genetic research” reared its ugly head, a couple people popped up screamingly criticizing natural anti-aging therapies. What we found was that two of these guys were involved in a funded research project to create an “anti-aging vaccine” that, according to the information on the research grant, would, if injected in a mid-thirties human, change their DNA immediately, so that when they got into their sixties and seventies, they WOULD not get Alzheimer’s, etc…

Yup – they were making GMO Humans…

Fortunately, in that research project case, the vaccine failed… But, believe me, there are a lot more of those in the pipeline.

I think that the intent of California’s infamous SB 277 (Mandatory Childhood Vaccines) had NOTHING to do with improving California’s ability to fight off infectious diseases, and everything to do with creating an unquestioned system to manufacture “Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons” as described in Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World.”

Why else would Hillary Clinton set up a vaccine system with no product testing after Chinese manufacturing?

I’ve already answered that question in an earlier article. I said:

(1) The Roman Catholic Church Council of Bishops in the African country of Kenya last year pointed out the WHO laced millions of vaccines headed for child-bearing age Kenyan women with a sterilizing agent. I wrote about that here. Below is an excerpt:

“Let’s first mention what happened in the Czech Republic in 2009, where scientists there were horrified to discover that millions of Flu Shots provided to them, for national distribution, by the US company Baxter, were found to be laced with the deadly avian flu virus. Read about that here.

But, what happened in Kenya, uncovered by 27 Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, is, to me, the signpost for “The Plan.” There, in Kenya, just three months ago, vaccines were used to permanently, and without their knowledge or permission, sterilize forty-two million (42 million) young Kenyan women. The World Health Organization (WHO), and UNICEF, were caught, by the Catholic Church leadership, lacing what they described as “Tetanus Vaccine” with Beta-HCG, a hormone that, when combined with the ingredients in the Tetanus vaccine, leads to sterility.

It is NO Secret What the WHO Vaccine Program is Being Used For…

Why would anyone think that it couldn’t happen in America? Of course it is happening. California’s Mandatory Vaccine legislation SB 277 was/is the test case.

Many other State’s innocent children are under vaccine assault.

But Then, Along Came the Anti-Vaxxer Rebellion…

In spades.

Hillary Clinton-like Liberal/Progressive Democrats across the country went into spastic orbit when REAL PEOPLE began to, en-masse, call the US Vaccine Program BULL****. How dare NORMAL people voice an opinion different than “Big Government?”

Didn’t people understand that Empress Hillary, and her friends, were here to do our thinking for us? (sarcasm intended).

And the panic began…

What panic?

Vox.com is one of those arrogant, “I’m better than you, so you need to listen to what I tell you, and think the way I tell you,” Liberal/Progressive internet publications. A great case could be made that Vox.com is the poster boy for Liberal/Progressive thinking. So, when they came out with the article titled:

“Hillary Clinton is now the only candidate not pandering to the anti-vaccine movement”

I had to read it. And now you can too. Why? Because the Liberal/Progressives are IN SHOCK about how badly Americans are beating them up over vaccines. We have made vaccines a presidential campaign issue…

“The small blow-up put attention on yet another bizarre element of the 2016 election: Out of the four big presidential candidates, only Hillary Clinton seems to be fully pro-vaccine, meaning she’s the only one aligned with the scientific consensus on this issue. Republican Donald Trump is a straight-up anti-vaxxer, and the other two candidates — Stein and Libertarian Gary Johnson — have mixed views on the issue.”

In Short, My Friends, Keep it Up…

Increase the pressure…

Start imagining what kind of prisons we want pro-vaxxers to end up in. We have only just begun.

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

onawah
10th October 2016, 16:31
Pick a Hearing, Any Hearing…

Sighing, Laughing, and Groaning at the Remarks of Senator Richard Pan during the California SB 277 Hearings…

By Celina Trevino, D.O.M.T.P (Can), C.M.T.
http://bolenreport.com/pick-hearing-hearing/
http://i0.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ISS_8351_00281-e1476045324776.jpg?resize=825%2C439


For anyone who was at the 2015 California SB 277 hearings, sitting, standing, lying in the hallways, waiting HOURS for their turn to oppose the bill, many of those moments were spent sighing, laughing, and groaning at the remarks of Senator Richard Pan.

The comment that stuck with me the most from the hearings was Senator (Doctor) Pan at the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 28, 2015.

“So, so, so, the term vaccine injured is one used heard used by the opposition. It’s not a technical term that we use in the medical field.”

Want to hear him say it? See the 2:30:45 mark here:
4r2ZZ0N5HC4
Errrrrrrrrrrr, WHAT???????

Did he just try to convince the legislators that vaccine injury is not real? It sure sounded like it to me.

Then, right after that, on the same video, Pan says…

“So, uh, so, in terms of the use of that term, uh that is not a term that is a uh a term that’s used within uh, sort of the medical public health field, it is used by the opposition. Uh, and so it’s not always clear what that really means. There are as I said, uh, vaccines like anything else are not, you know, there, there’s always a, a, a small risk uh that’s associated uh and in fact, uh, uh, and I said, the magnitude of the risk is much, much smaller than the disease that we’re trying to prevent. And so that’s why uh, vaccines are declared to be safe and efficacious.” Hmmm….

Let’s take a look at where vaccine injury IS USED as a “real term”.

(1) The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 – (An Act that protects vaccine producing pharmaceutical companies and health providers from liability for vaccine injury.)

(2) The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program – (A no-fault court system created under The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act to compensate the vaccine injured.)

(3) The Vaccine Injury Table – “A table of vaccines, the injuries, disabilities, illnesses, conditions, and deaths resulting from the administration of such vaccines, and the time period in which the first symptom or manifestation of onset or of the significant aggravation of such injuries, disabilities, illnesses, conditions, and deaths is to occur after vaccine administration for purposes of receiving compensation under the Program.”

(4) ICD Codes – ICD stands for International Classification of Diseases. These are the codes a Physician, like Senator Pan, uses in their paperwork to describe the diagnosis they have given a patient.

The ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code for poisoning by, adverse effect of and underdosing of diuretics and other and unspecified drugs, medicaments and biological substances (vaccine injury) falls under section T50.

Vaccines are classified as “Biological Products”, not drugs.

Version 10 is the latest set of ICD codes currently being used by physicians.

Let’s look at ICD-10 Code T50.B95A – Adverse effect of other viral vaccines, initial encounter.

2016 2017 Billable/Specific CodeT50.B95A is a billable/specific ICD-10-CM code that can be used to indicate a diagnosis for reimbursement due to flu vaccine, or any of these listed below:

Adverse effect due to flu vaccine

Adverse effect of haemophilus influenzae type B vaccine

Adverse effect of hepatitis A vaccine

Adverse effect of hepatitis B vaccine

Adverse effect of human papillomavirus vaccine

Adverse effect of influenza vaccine

Adverse effect of measles, mumps and rubella vaccine

Adverse effect of polio vaccine

Adverse effect of rotavirus vaccine

Adverse effect of varicella vaccine

Adverse effect of viral vaccine

Adverse effect of zoster vaccine

Adverse reaction of human papillomavirus vaccine

Adverse reaction of rotavirus vaccine

Adverse reaction of varicella vaccine

Adverse reaction of zoster vaccine

Adverse reaction to viral vaccines

Haemophilus influenzae Type B vaccine adverse reaction

Hepatitis A vaccine adverse reaction

Hepatitis B vaccine adverse reaction

Influenza virus vaccine adverse reaction

Measles/mumps/rubella vaccine adverse reaction

Poliomyelitis vaccine adverse reaction

It Gets Better…

ICD Code T50.B95S – Adverse effect of other viral vaccines, sequela. – Sequela: A pathological condition resulting from a prior disease, injury, or attack. As for example, a sequela of polio.

Let’s look at an example of ICD-9 Codes, which were in effect until September 30, 2015:

E 949: Other vaccines and biological substances causing adverse effects in therapeutic use.

E949.4 – Measles vaccine causing adverse effects in therapeutic use.

Adverse Events…

Do you know what an adverse event is?

“In pharmacology, any unexpected or dangerous reaction to a drug or vaccine.”

Adverse events are the possible side effects you may have read about in a package insert if you’ve ever bought an over the counter drug or received a prescribed drug from the pharmacy.

VAERS…

The United States has a surveillance system to track such events caused by vaccines, called VAERS: The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

This is a system that physicians are required to report vaccine adverse events to, under The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Protection Act of 1986.

And Pan Never Heard of Any of This?

Let’s say Dr. Pan really has never heard of the term “vaccine injury”. It would be hard to believe considering he is a pediatrician, (the kind of physician that would administer vaccines).

If he has never heard the term vaccine injury, he is thankfully bringing to light the very real fact that medical doctors and osteopathic physicians learn almost nothing in medical school about vaccines.

They are not taught about the adverse events or the vaccine injuries that could occur due to vaccination, nor how to treat them.

Doctors will usually tell you they spent from zero to one hour learning about vaccines, which consisted of vaccines’ miracle qualities, to administer the CDC schedule and how adverse events are extremely rare. That’s it.

If you don’t believe me, please, I implore you, interview every doctor you know and find out for yourself. Here about some bonus questions to ask:

“Do you know what The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Protection Act of 1986 is?”

“Do you know what VAERS is?”

“Do you know what The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is?”

“Have you read the vaccine package inserts?”

But surely every physician knows what adverse events are, even if they don’t know “vaccine injuries” are a result of adverse events.

Please excuse the term “vaccine injury” used by the parents opposed to California SB 277, whose children were supposed to be protected by The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, who may or may not have been compensated by The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program because their children suffered adverse events from vaccines outlined in The Vaccine Injury Table. Pardon us all for not using a “real term”.

Pick a hearing, any hearing. You’ll find a treasure trove of gems like the ones above from Senator (Doctor) Pan.

SB 277 Senate Health Committee:
Wh4C2NCcpb8
California SB277 Forced Vaccination Education Committee. Click “show more” and then click on timestamps to jump forward to preferred segment. 1:27 – Hearing …

SB 277 Senate Judiciary Committee:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r2ZZ0N5HC4

15:13 Chair Jackson Opening statements 22:50 Allen presents bill amendments 24:18 Technical amendments 25:10 Allen speaks on court cases 26:55 Pan presents 3…

SB 277 Assembly Health Committee:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5zzzaLXv-8

57:37 – Barbara Loe Fisher, NVIC in opposition 1:03:21 – Jay Gordon, MD, FAAP in opposition 1:09:28 – George Fatheree, Attorney in opposition 1:16:46 – Melissa Floyd …

By Celina Trevino, D.O.M.T.P (Can), C.M.T.

onawah
16th October 2016, 18:38
California “Condoms in Porn,” Proposition 60, is a Stealth Vaccine Initiative…

by: KP Stoller, MDiss

www.incurable-me.com
http://bolenreport.com/california-condoms-porn-proposition-60-stealth-vaccine-initiative/


Proposition 60, the “Condoms in Pornographic Films” Initiative, will be on the November 8, 2016, ballot in California as an Initiated State statute.

A “yes” vote would be a vote in favor of requiring the use of condoms, and other protective measures, during the filming of pornographic films, as well as requiring pornography producers to pay for certain health requirements, and checkups.

One of those health requirements is STD or STI vaccines…

The language is clever. It does not say Porn actors must be vaxxed with Gardasil and Hep B. It says Porn producers “must pay for STI vaccines, and keep records showing they complied.”

While one could argue that requiring the vaccines, and paying for them, are two different things, in practical terms…. they are not… This is smoke and mirror language that would require Porn producers to pay for “work-related STI prevention vaccines,” that is another way of saying the vaccines will be required because the producers are required to pay for them. Not paying for them is not an option, and if they are paid for they will be given, for there must be records, or else the producers will face fines and other legal liabilities.


The initiative is opposed by all political parties; nevertheless, support for this Prop 60 is at about 55%:

Those opposing Prop 60:isss

California Democratic Party
California Republican Party
California Libertarian Party
Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club
Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club
San Francisco Democratic Party
Los Angeles County Democratic Party
San Mateo County Democrats
San Francisco Young Democrats
Los Angeles County Young Democrats
Organizations

Free Speech Coalition
Valley Industry & Commerce Association (VICA)
Courage Campaign
Equality California
Transgender Law Center
AIDS Project Los Angeles
Los Angeles LGBT Center
San Francisco AIDS Foundation
The Wall Las Memorias Project
San Francisco Medical Society
Adult Performer Advocacy Committee (APAC)
Friends Committee on National Legislation
Espler Project, Inc.
St. James Infirmary
SWOP USA
Desiree Alliance
Woodhull Freedom Foundation
Not so Subtle Vaccine Escalation…

It is like turning up the heat on a frog in a pot of water….

First the school children or no school – and who cares about children other than their parents, who want them in school, and most of those parents do not know what they are consenting to because Informed Consent was done away with SB277.

Then the porn actors are next… no STI vaccines, no work.

Who will be next… no vaccines no air travel?

No vaccines no Social Security check?

When there is coercion there is no Informed Consent no matter how much information you have been given.

We must never lose the right to say no to a medical procedure, especially one that the Supreme Court has determined to be unavoidably unsafe.

Dr. Stoller’s new book Incurable Me can be ordered from Amazon.

onawah
18th October 2016, 22:48
MUST SEE!!!!!!!The Shocking Truth About Mandatory Vaccines Revealed
Published on Oct 17, 2015

Council for Vaccine Safety founder, Brandy Vaughn, joins the show to discuss what's really behind the push for mandatory vaccinations. The pharmaceutical industry is set to make billions off of mandatory childhood vaccinations, and now both boys and girls will be pressured to take the highly controversial gardasil shot.

If you haven't seen VAXXED yet, this will also inform you and in only 20 minutes.
VAXXED is now available from Netflix, and highly recommended.
I just watched it and am loaning it to friends with children.
zZ8qA6iu8DE

Houman
20th October 2016, 05:34
https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13413141_10205369539911501_1734789899401939127_n.j pg?oh=7d6d434447e4b2346b9e3c398363532a&oe=58971B77

Flash
20th October 2016, 05:45
https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13413141_10205369539911501_1734789899401939127_n.j pg?oh=7d6d434447e4b2346b9e3c398363532a&oe=58971B77

this is standard for pretty much all medecines, not only vaccines. It had nothing to do with the vaccines themselves, it has to do with the improbable case that a batch would have been wrong or contaminated, you split the batches to make sure it is not something else in the local environment that plays havoc. By splitting the batches, you will find problems in many places for which there is no environmental, ethnic, food, etc commonalities, therefore the problem can only arise from the vials,nothing else.

It is standard procedure for all medications.

I do not like vaccines given in hyper amounts to young children, with adjuvants that are truly terrible for the brain development. But i think that this "proof" you bring is not a proof at all, in fact, it detracts from the real proofs from which we could have court cases if needed. You see.

Houman
20th October 2016, 06:41
https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13413141_10205369539911501_1734789899401939127_n.j pg?oh=7d6d434447e4b2346b9e3c398363532a&oe=58971B77

this is standard for pretty much all medecines, not only vaccines. It had nothing to do with the vaccines themselves, it has to do with the improbable case that a batch would have been wrong or contaminated, you split the batches to make sure it is not something else in the local environment that plays havoc. By splitting the batches, you will find problems in many places for which there is no environmental, ethnic, food, etc commonalities, therefore the problem can only arise from the vials,nothing else.

It is standard procedure for all medications.

I do not like vaccines given in hyper amounts to young children, with adjuvants that are truly terrible for the brain development. But i think that this "proof" you bring is not a proof at all, in fact, it detracts from the real proofs from which we could have court cases if needed. You see.

This is the story behind it
http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/08/by-dan-olmsted.html
it was first brought up in the 1985 book "Why the P in the DPT vaccination may be hazardous to your child's health."

Flash
20th October 2016, 06:52
that is a very good article Houman, worth a read.

I am pretty sure there is lots of strategies that are now normal procedures but started for hiding something, like adverse vaccine effects in children. In fact, the article you mention is about autism and the hidden pharmaceutical findings by the suppliers of vaccines that are hidden.

I must say, in all consciousness, that those same pharmacists making the vaccines would never inject themselves (never did for the H1N1), so it tells a lot.

However, I was with a group of pharmacists working for a pharmaceutical company, and they were telling me of a case for medication patches sent to a woman. The patch would not work, it would not stick to her skin.

The researchers did not know if it was due to her skin not able to sustan the glue from the patch, which happens, or a faulty batch (lot). All they knew is that if she would not have her medication within 4 days, her life was at stake. So they sent her another box of patches, free, from presumably another batch (lot). But the distribution guys did not follow the researchers demands and sent a box from the same lot (batch). Once again, she could not have the medecine because the patch did not stick. Only after verification at the distribution center did they realise their workmanship was far from efficient. They finally sent her some patch from another lot, by plane and very special delivery. This is when they told me about standard distribution procedures of medical products and why it was that way.




https://scontent-sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13413141_10205369539911501_1734789899401939127_n.j pg?oh=7d6d434447e4b2346b9e3c398363532a&oe=58971B77

this is standard for pretty much all medecines, not only vaccines. It had nothing to do with the vaccines themselves, it has to do with the improbable case that a batch would have been wrong or contaminated, you split the batches to make sure it is not something else in the local environment that plays havoc. By splitting the batches, you will find problems in many places for which there is no environmental, ethnic, food, etc commonalities, therefore the problem can only arise from the vials,nothing else.

It is standard procedure for all medications.

I do not like vaccines given in hyper amounts to young children, with adjuvants that are truly terrible for the brain development. But i think that this "proof" you bring is not a proof at all, in fact, it detracts from the real proofs from which we could have court cases if needed. You see.

This is the story behind it
http://www.ageofautism.com/2008/08/by-dan-olmsted.html
it was first brought up in the 1985 book "Why the P in the DPT vaccination may be hazardous to your child's health."

onawah
23rd October 2016, 20:12
CDC vaccine whistleblower: the silence that kills

by Jon Rappoport

October 21, 2016
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/10/21/cdc-vaccine-whistleblower-and-the-silence-that-kills/


My previous article, “CDC commits new vaccine-autism crime,” details the CDC’s refusal to allow its own researcher and chief whistleblower, William Thompson, to testify in a court case involving a boy who was severely damaged by vaccinations.
Therefore, it’s time to remember William Thompson—again. Here are excerpts from two articles I wrote before the stunning film Vaxxed was released. Vaxxed is all about Thompson’s revelations and their implications.
(August 2015)…William Thompson, long-time CDC researcher, publicly admitted he hid evidence that indicted the MMR vaccine for its connection to autism.
It’s been a year since Thompson publicly accused his colleagues at the CDC of doing the same thing. Two of those colleagues, Frank DeStefano and Collen Boyle, are high-ranking CDC executives in the area of vaccine safety.
During this past year, mainstream reporters and defenders of the realm have taken two approaches: silence; and vague claims that Thompson’s statements are false.
Both of these approaches are slimy and disingenuous, because the man we want to hear from is Thompson himself. And we have not.
We want to hear from him in a public setting, in front of a hearing where he can speak at length, where he can fill in details, where he can air all his claims without censorship.
At the moment, the possibility of such a hearing is remote, because the US Congress is bought and sold.
Short of a hearing, we want Thompson to sit down with a reporter and speak on camera, extensively, and submit himself to questions.
He has said he will not do this. He and his lawyer, Rick Morgan, know there are a number of reporters who will do a proper interview, without edits. I could easily name a dozen reporters who would conduct an in-depth interview, live, online, for the whole world to see.
What if there never is a full-blooded open Congressional hearing? What then? Will Thompson maintain silence for the rest of his life?
More is at stake here than the danger of the MMR vaccine. The CDC has done hundreds of key studies on vaccine safety. They are all thrown into doubt by Thompson’s assertion— recently quoted by Congressman Bill Posey on the floor of the Congress—that Thompson and his colleagues brought a garbage can into a CDC office and threw out documents that would have shown the MMR connection to autism.
This speaks of a massive indifference to human life and safety.
Thompson should also know, and certainly does know, that Congressional hearings have a way of soft-pedaling accusations against government agencies. There is no guarantee that, in such a setting, he would be able to air his confession and his grievances in full.
Whereas, in an interview with independent investigators/reporters, he would have complete latitude. Time constraints would not apply. He would be asked for many, many details. The full story, from his point of view, would emerge.
It is my conclusion that Thompson entered into an arrangement with his bosses at the CDC. After his public confession of a year ago, it was too late to put the genie back in the bottle and cork it. But damage control could be undertaken.
Thompson could say (and he did) that he was willing (and only willing) to work with Congress to present the truth. His CDC bosses were confident they could, with the help of powerful friends in government and in the pharmaceutical industry, prevent Congressional investigation and exposure.
And if Thompson maintained silence otherwise, refusing to talk to reporters, he would be off the hook.
The CDC assured Thompson that he could continue to work for them and retire and receive his full pension.
That’s my conclusion. If I’m in error, let Thompson or his lawyer, Rick Morgan, correct me.
Beyond Thompson’s public confession, there are taped phone calls between him and Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield. In these fragments, Thompson expresses his outrage about the use of mercury in vaccines. He makes other damning statements about vaccines.
These statements should also be the springboard for an in-depth interview with Thompson, on camera.
Then there is the matter of a 2004 letter Thompson wrote to the head of the CDC, Julie Gerberding. He informed Gerberding that he had data about the MMR vaccine that was very sensitive and troubling. He was surely referring to the suppressed truth about the MMR-autism connection. Thompson was about to present these data at a major CDC vaccine conference
Apparently, Gerberding never answered the letter and instead stonewalled Thompson. His presentation was cancelled. But some five years later, when she left the CDC, Gerberding went to work for Merck as the president of their vaccine division…
And Merck does, in fact, manufacture the MMR vaccine.
What are the odds that this potential stick of dynamite would be permitted to explode during an open Congressional hearing, with Gerberding on the stand under oath?
The likelihood is on the level of the full moon turning into a cowboy on a horse in full view of the whole world.
So we have the silence of the Congress, the silence of the major media, and the silence of Thompson himself.
I have no doubt he fears for his life. On the other hand, can he maintain invisibility forever?
At stake is the severe neurological damage caused by the MMR and other vaccines.
The pretense of major media in all this is preposterous. After 30 years of working as a reporter, I know what makes a story. I know that a major researcher (which Thompson is) at a major government agency (the CDC), admitting to gross fraud in an area as charged as vaccines, is, without further ado or parsing, a blockbuster, a page-one headline. There is absolutely no doubt about it.
We aren’t talking about somebody coming in from the outside and claiming the CDC is cooking their research books. No, this is a house man, a valued member of the research club, blowing the whistle on himself and his highly placed colleagues, at considerable risk to himself.
This is already a huge story, without taking another step.
To achieve the stunning media silence, there was active repression and widespread collusion and pressure, and lies told and excuses made.
In retrospect, we can understand why a major push for mandatory vaccination has been launched. Thompson was cutting close to the bone with his revelations. Alternative news sites were bristling with stories exposing the dangers of vaccines. The powers-that-be decided it was time to double down.
It was time to overwhelm the noise and go all-out. It was time to pass new laws eliminating vaccine exemptions, and it was time to hurl waves of vicious accusations against truth tellers.
The Thompson case remains in limbo. Will he ever speak out and spill all the secrets? Will he emerge from the shadows?
This isn’t over. It’s far from over.
—here is my follow-up article about Thompson—
Bombshell: CDC destroyed vaccine documents, Congressman reveals; CDC whistleblower case is back (July 2015)
“…the [CDC] co-authors scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the [MMR vaccine-autism] 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.” (William Thompson, CDC researcher)
On July 29, US Congressman Bill Posey made his last stand on the floor of the House. Granted five minutes to speak, he laid bare the lying of the CDC in a now-famous 2004 study that exonerated the MMR vaccine and claimed it had no connection to autism.
“No connection to autism” was the lie.
Congressman Posey read a statement from long-time CDC researcher William Thompson, one of the authors of the 2004 Pediatrics study designed to determine, once and for all, whether the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine could cause autism.
Thompson saw and participated in violating the protocol of the study. He helped his co-authors destroy documents that would have shown an MMR-autism link.
Of note: two of the CDC researchers on the infamous 2004 study, who according to Thompson, destroyed vital documents, are Coleen Boyle and Frank DeStephano. They are both high-ranking executives at the CDC in the area of vaccine safety.
This calls into question every single CDC study, under their tenure, that claims vaccines are safe.
CDC whistleblower Thompson’s statement, which Posey read on the House floor, includes this bombshell: “However, because I [Thompson] assumed it [destroying the documents] was illegal and would violate both FOIA and DOJ requests, I kept hard copies of all documents in my office and I retained all associated computer files. I believe we intentionally withheld controversial findings from the final draft of the Pediatrics paper.”
Thompson has the smoking-gun documents. So does Congressman Posey. I believe others do as well.
There are lawsuits to be filed. Eleven years have passed since the CDC committed its crime of concealing the MMR vaccine-autism connection. How many parents, never informed of the truth, have permitted their children to receive this vaccine? How many children have been struck down by the vaccine?
The lawsuits should be filed against the CDC and the individual authors of the 2004 study. Lawyers must depose every CDC employee who had knowledge of the crime.
And what about the fact that the MMR vaccine is one of the shots that has been mandated, by law, in California, in other states, and in Australia? Mandating neurological destruction of children is a crime that must be investigated and punished. If these states (and other countries) insist on keeping the MMR on their schedules, they are guilty parties.
Understand what we are dealing with here, in terms of public exposure: the author of a peer-reviewed and published study; the author who has worked for many years at the CDC; the author who participated in destruction of vital documents; the author has come forward and admitted his crime and the crime of his colleagues. This kind of confession never happens.
But it did happen.
And this story and what it means must not die, no matter how major media outlets try to spin it or ignore it.
Parents who are, in ignorance, allowing their children to receive the MMR vaccine, must be informed. They must know what is going on. They must know the danger to their children.
Australia, Canada, England, New Zealand, Germany, France, India, China, South Africa…wherever the MMR vaccine is given…parents must be made aware they’re gambling with their children’s lives.
Government officials anywhere in the world who make this continuing crime possible are liable.
So are manufacturers of the MMR.
—end of article—
My final comments for now: William Thompson retained the services of a well-known whistleblower attorney, Rick Morgan, in 2014. Because Thompson admitted to a crime then, and also accused several of his colleagues of the same crime (gross fraud), he was blowing a whistle. But notice that his lawyer hasn’t filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the government. Why not?
Usually, those suits are filed when an employee of a corporation receiving a federal contract observes cheating, lying, falsification in the work of his company, and alerts the government that its money is being wasted.
But here we have a government employee, Thompson, accusing his own government agency of a crime. A suit could be filed, but the chances of it moving forward are very slim, because the Dept. of Justice, without giving a reason, can simply decide to let the matter drop. Then it’s dead in the water.
Thompson knows this. So does Rick Morgan, his lawyer. The “whistleblowing” situation here is all about protecting Thompson from government retaliation, in the form of firing, possible penalties for violating non-disclosure agreements, and cancellation of his pension.
From available evidence, no lawsuit against the government is planned. Thompson has said he would work with Congress, if an investigation and hearing were launched. But that’s it. Other than that, he states he will remain silent. Presumably, he believes that Congress could give him protection from government retaliation.
More likely, as I’ve stated above, Thompson believes he will never have to break his silence again, because a Congressional investigation will never get off the ground.
Guilt-ridden in 2014, and realizing his confessional phone conversations with Brian Hooker and Andrew Wakefield had been taped, he stepped out into the light for a brief moment, and then retreated into the shadows.
That’s where he stays; a self-confessed felon, having accused his colleagues of the same felony, isolated, still working at CDC (now in the HIV/AIDS unit), miles away from anything having to do with vaccine safety.
Unless a federal judge in a case involving vaccine damage orders him to testify to what he knows, Thompson will make no public appearances. Even if a judge does issue that order, the CDC will do everything possible to deny Thompson a day in court. The ensuing inter-branch wrangle could go on for years.
This is why the film, Vaxxed, is so important. It does what Thompson would do, if he threw caution to the winds. The film lays out the case for intense corruption at the CDC vaccine section. In the process, it exposes sick government manipulations on behalf of the medical cartel that mark our time.
Jon Rappoport

onawah
24th October 2016, 19:26
CDC vaccine science covers up giant conflict of interest

by Jon Rappoport

October 24, 2016
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/10/24/cdc-vaccine-science-covers-up-giant-conflict-of-interest/


If you wanted to buy a product, and the main source of research on the product was the company selling it, would you automatically assume the product was safe and effective?

But you see, that’s the just the beginning of the problem. Suppose the company’s research was cited thousands of times in the press, as the authoritative standard of proof—and anyone who disputed that research was labeled a conspiracy theorist and a quack and a danger to the community and an anti-science lunatic.

Would you begin to suspect the company had some awesome media connections? Would you suspect some very powerful people were backing the company?

This is exactly the situation with the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Read these two quotes:

The government’s Vaccine for Children Program (a CDC organization) purchases vaccines for about 50 percent of children in the U.S.” (The Atlantic, February 10, 2015)

“The CDC currently spends over $4 billion purchasing vaccines [annually] from drug makers…” (Health Impact News, October 24, 2016)

However, the CDC is also the gold standard for research on the safety and efficacy of vaccines. It turns out an unending stream of studies on these subjects. And the results of those studies are dutifully reported in the mainstream press.

Do you think, under any circumstances, the CDC would publish data showing vaccines are ineffective and dangerous? They’d be cutting their own throats.

“Well, we spend $4 billion a year buying vaccines from drug companies, but guess what? These vaccines are often dangerous…”

Every time you read about a CDC study on vaccines, keep this obvious conflict of interest in mind.

When, in 2014, William Thompson, a long-time CDC researcher, publicly admitted he and his colleagues had buried data that would have shown the MMR vaccine increases the risk of autism, he was throwing a stick of dynamite into the whole CDC operation. He was also saying, in recorded phone conversations, that the CDC was lying about vaccine safety in other studies.

This is why major media refused to cover or investigate Thompson’s claims. This is why they spread a blanket of silence over his revelations.

Thompson was threatening a $ 4-billion-a-year enterprise.

The CDC is both a PR agency for, and a buyer from, Big Pharma.

Speaking of PR, would you like to see an example of how the CDC promotes the yearly flu vaccine by lying egregiously about flu deaths in the United States?

In December of 2005, the British Medical Journal (online) published a shocking report by Peter Doshi, which created tremors through the halls of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), where “the experts” used to tell the press that 36,000 people in the US die every year from the flu.

Here is a quote from Doshi’s report, “Are US flu death figures more PR than science?” (BMJ 2005; 331:1412):

“[According to CDC statistics], ‘influenza and pneumonia’ took 62,034 lives in 2001—61,777 of which were attributable to pneumonia and 257 to flu, and in only 18 cases was the flu virus positively identified.”

Boom.

You see, the CDC has created one overall category that combines both flu and pneumonia deaths. Why do they do this? Because they disingenuously assume that the pneumonia deaths are complications stemming from the flu.

This is an absurd assumption. Pneumonia has a number of causes.

But even worse, in all the flu and pneumonia deaths, only 18 revealed the presence of an influenza virus.

Therefore, the CDC could not say, with assurance, that more than 18 people died of influenza in 2001. Not 36,000 deaths. 18 deaths.

Doshi continued his assessment of published CDC flu-death statistics: “Between 1979 and 2001, [CDC] data show an average of 1348 [flu] deaths per year (range 257 to 3006).” These figures refer to flu separated out from pneumonia.

This death toll is obviously far lower than the parroted 36,000 figure.

However, when you add the sensible condition that lab tests have to actually find the flu virus in patients, the numbers of flu deaths plummet even further.

In other words, it’s all promotion and hype.

“Well, uh, we say that 36,000 people die from the flu every year in the US. But actually, it’s closer to 20. However, we can’t admit that, because if we did, we’d be exposing our gigantic psyop. The whole campaign to scare people into getting a flu shot would have about the same effect as warning people to carry iron umbrellas, in case toasters fall out of upper-story windows…and, by the way, we’d be put in prison for fraud.”

The CDC must turn out a steady stream of outrageous lies about the need for vaccines. If they didn’t, they’d have no way to justify the billions of dollars they spend every year buying the vaccines from drug companies.

Since the sold-out major media won’t connect these dots, I and others need to.

Jon Rappoport

onawah
27th October 2016, 22:18
New SB 277 Lawsuit Is Coming
http://bolenreport.com/yes-yes-new-sb-277-lawsuit-coming-good-reasons-delays/

Yes, Yes, the New SB 277 Lawsuit Is Coming… There Are VERY Good Reasons For the Delays…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

I know, I know, it is hard to be patient.

But, the making of a good lawsuit, and everything that transpires with it, is difficult – especially if it is done right…

I’m not supposed to give out sensitive information, BUT…

I can give you a glimpse of some of the problems the legal and strategy teams are facing:


(1) There are over five hundred (500) individual applicants to be Plaintiffs. Every one has to be screened…

(2) After the Dismissal of the earlier weak case, lots of very important people, from all over the US, wanted to be part of the new solution process – the lawsuit and accompanying strategies, and tactics.

(3) It became obvious, during the processing of the earlier Dismissed SB 277 lawsuit, that although SB 277 was enacted in California, this was a national issue – and that the new case would have to reflect that. Hours, and hours, of conferences with nationally oriented attorneys, and activists.

(4) This case would, eventually, go all the way to the US Supreme Court. So, it makes a difference who gets elected as President – for that person will appoint the new Justices. We would be far better off with ANY Trump nominee. And, at this point, we just don’t know if there are enough stupid people, dead people that still vote, illegal immigrants bussed around to the polls, to elect Hillary Clinton – or will the election be rigged at the polling booths. So they cannot design the case accordingly. In short, the final decisions on case strategy will not be made until after the election.

(5) There might be more than one lawsuit – as there are some issues which could, and should, be separated out.

(6) There are new published court decisions that have to be taken into consideration.

(7) The completely transparent fund-raising apparatus has to in place for a two-to-three–year fight… And, it is now, ready to go.

(8) Whole new teams had to be assembled, as the earlier California groups would not work together.

But, be assured, that the new case is going to be as anti-vaccine as anyone can get…

Why? Vaccines, and the vaccine delivery systems, are crap.

Stay tuned…

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

Flash
1st November 2016, 16:59
Worth posting here as well (for those doing future research or getting information), info about glyphosate and its effect on human health.

This was posted by William R Sandford on the bee thread, but I think it pertains to two other threads as well.

Very informative on new research on the topic of glyphosate.

Thanks William.


http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62676-Calling-all-light-warriors-the-Bees-need-you-&p=1109387&viewfull=1#post1109387



New PAN report warns of global contamination of health damaging glyphosate

Friday, October 28, 2016 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer



(NaturalNews) The popular herbicide glyphosate, also known as Roundup, is far more toxic to humans than the chemical industry claims it is, a new report has found. The Pesticide Action Network (PAN) in a 96-page document entitled Glyphosate, reveals how people all around the world are being systemically poisoned by glyphosate, and many of them are even dying.

Aerial sprayings of the chemical across crop fields are said to be safe for humans, because the so-called "shikimate" pathway upon which the herbicide acts exists only in plants, and not in animals or humans. But the report highlights the fact that, regardless of the supposed nonexistence of this pathway in humans, glyphosate is sill wreaking havoc on human health.

Some of the acute health effects of glyphosate exposure include gastrointestinal and skin infections, headaches, blistering on the skin, rapid heartbeat, elevated blood pressure, dizziness, numbness, insomnia, blurred vision, abdominal pain, chest pains, problems breathing, respiratory problems, sore throat and strange tastes in the mouth.

Other lesser-reported symptoms include problems staying balanced, cognitive abnormalities, impaired senses, muscle paralysis, peripheral neuropathy, decreased motor skills, chronic fatigue and abnormal body temperature. And none of this even touches on the long-term health effects of glyphosate exposure, which are significantly more problematic.

According to the report, glyphosate directly interferes with "numerous mammalian organs and biochemical pathways, including inhibition of numerous enzymes, metabolic disturbances and oxidative stress leading to excessive membrane lipid peroxidation, and cell and tissue damage." Furthermore, the report highlights "genotoxicity and endocrine disruption" that lead to "chronic health and developmental effects."

South American doctors confirm that glyphosate spraying is causing infertility, cancer
Though U.S. doctors and health experts appear reluctant to report on their observances with glyphosate, their counterparts in South America have a lot to say on the subject. Doctors in Argentina, for instance, are reporting what's being described as a "dramatic upsurge" in long-term health effects where glyphosate is being sprayed on genetically-modified soybean crops.

Included in the list of effects are infertility, pregnancy problems, birth defects, respiratory disease and various forms of cancer. Epidemiological studies have established a link between glyphosate exposure and non-Hodgkin lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, multiple myeloma and DNA damage. Even at very low concentrations, glyphosate has been shown to damage vital organs like the liver and kidney, as well as skin cells.

Not only is glyphosate sprayed all over food crops during the growing season to kill weeds, but it's also used as a pre-harvest desiccant to speed up the growing and harvesting process. According to the report, this process is used on wheat, cotton, various cereal grains, peas, and beans, as well as other crops.

It's bad for the people who end up eating these food crops, but great for farmers and the chemical companies like Monsanto that they support when they purchase all that extra glyphosate. And the repercussions are startling. Glyphosate residues are now being found in women's breast milk, as well as in blood and urine. Even vaccines are starting to turn up as glyphosate-contaminated, which means developing babies are now being injected with this lethal poison.

"The PAN Report is extremely comprehensive and really needs to be mainstreamed so that food growers, in particular, can understand the harm they are doing to crops, the soil, the environment, wildlife, pollinators, water resources and humans," writes Catherine J. Frompovich for Natural Blaze.

"However, it will be up to consumers and farmers ... to make their concerns and priorities known about saving the planet and humankind from toxic chemicals in food, water and the air, if we are to survive toxic chemicals and their currently unavoidable poisonings."

The full PAN report is available for free online here.

Sources for this article include:

NaturalBlaze.com

PAN-International.org[PDF]

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/055803_glyphosate_PAN_report_toxicity.html#ixzz4Oa 9moOvo

http://www.naturalnews.com/055803_glyphosate_PAN_report_toxicity.html

onawah
3rd November 2016, 19:45
CDC senior scientists lodge ethics complaint against CDC
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/cdc-mmr-vaccine-2023.html

(NaturalHealth365) Manipulating data. Suppressing information. Engaging in questionable corporate alliances. Even committing scientific fraud. The CDC, already under siege for accusations it manipulated data regarding a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, has been hit with explosive new allegations — lodged by its own employees.
CDC scientists cry “foul” over shady practices
In an anonymous August 29th letter to the CDC Chief of Staff, over a dozen senior scientists lodged an ethics complaint, stating their fear that the CDC’s mission is being “influenced and shaped by rogue parties and outside interests” – and that taxpayers are being cheated.
In the letter, signed by CDC SPIDER – or Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research – the group claimed that Congress’ intent for the CDC is being circumvented by its own leaders, and that unethical practices threaten to undermine the integrity and credibility of the federal agency.
Unholy alliances: Are CDC officials “in bed” with corporate giants?
Specifically, the scientists are troubled by the close three-way ties between Coca-Cola Co., the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) – a non-profit interest group Coca-Cola supports – and a pair of highly-placed CDC officials, Dr. Barbara Bowman and Dr. Michael Pratt.
Bowman, former director of the CDC’s Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention, retired from the CDC in June after emails revealed that she offered guidance to a leading Coca-Cola advocate in an attempt to sway world health authorities regarding sugar and beverage policy matters.
Also involved is Dr. Michael Pratt, who works closely with ILSI – which advocates on behalf of food and beverage industries. Emails suggested that Pratt has a pattern of promoting and helping to lead Coca-Cola-funded research, even co-authoring research papers at least partly funded by the soft drink giant.
Pratt has also accepted a position at University of California-San Diego, while employed by the CDC – a truly troubling situation, and one which has already drawn the attention of national news outlets, including The Hill and The Huffington Post.
This is a clear-cut, scientific conflict of interest
The CDC is an agency intended to protect and preserve public health – yet some its key officials are advancing the interests of the food and beverage industry, and the sugar-laden drinks it merchandises to the American people. As the CDC’s own statistics attest, rates of obesity are soaring; 36.5 percent of Americans are obese, with an average cost estimated in 2008 as $147 billion dollars.
CDC “cooks the books” of multi-million-dollar project
The scientists accuse the CDC of covering up the poor performance of a women’s health program, misrepresenting data given to Congress and inflating numbers to make it appear that the program is reaching more women than it is.
The whistleblowers also allege that an internal review of the program, a multi-million-dollar project called Well-Integrated Screening and Evaluation for Women Across the Nation, or WISEWOMAN, was suppressed in order to keep the information from Congress – and the media.
Allegations are newest chapter in the ongoing saga of CDC corruption
In 2014, a senior scientist with the CDC, Dr. William Thompson, blew the whistle on the CDC – which suppressed data confirming the link between the MMR vaccine and autism. (Of course, the CDC denies these truths – to this day)
According to research published by Dr. Brian Hooker in Translational Neurodegeneration, the CDC has manipulated data in order to hide the fact that African-American boys who were given the MMR vaccine before they reached the age of three were 3.4 times more likely to develop autism.
Hooker and Thompson alleged that the CDC has known of the link since 2003, but continues to suppress the information – casting doubt on the integrity of the agency and on the credibility of other findings.
The CDC response – so far, nonexistent
CDC spokeswoman Kathy Harben has refused to discuss the CDC’s response – if indeed there has been any – to the SPIDER complaint. Maintaining that the CDC utilizes a “full range of federal ethics statutes, regulations and policies that apply to all federal employees,” Harben said that the CDC takes its responsibility to comply with ethics rules “seriously.”
Plainly, the employees who are pointing out the CDC’s unethical practices take it more seriously than those officials at the top. You can read their letter here.
References:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carey-gillam/spider-bites-cdc-ethics-c_b_12525012.html
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/mmr-vaccine-fraid-cdc-whistleblower-1125-html

onawah
13th November 2016, 17:10
Trump Meets Dr. Wakefield
http://bolenreport.com/trump-meets-dr-wakefield/

Even though you see the headline, and the photo, you don’t believe it, do you?

By Kent Heckenlively, J.D.
http://i0.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/trump-1-e1479000189936.jpg?w=711
Could the new President-Elect of our country, Donald J. Trump, have really met with Dr. Andrew Wakefield? You’ve probably heard the rumors, maybe you’ve even seen the video of Wakefield saying that Trump understands our concerns and will never allow mandatory vaccinations. He goes onto say that he believes Trump will investigate the problems at the CDC, including the allegations of Dr. William Thompson.

It’s all true…

How do I know?

Because I interviewed two people who were at that meeting. Do you want facts? It took place on August 11, 2016 in Kissimmee, Florida and lasting a little under an hour from four to five in the afternoon.

And it’s all in my new book, INOCULATED: How Science Lost its Soul in Autism, available right now on Amazon. Here’s a little bit of a tease for you:

CHAPTER THIRTEEN – Trump Meets Dr. Wakefield

Trump. Wakefield. In a face to face meeting. August 11, 2016 in Kissimmee, Florida. What would the media have said if they’d known? And an embarrassing email from Wiki-Leaks about the Hillary Clinton campaign on autism and vaccines.

Dr. Gary Kompothecras didn’t know what would happen when he was seated next to Donald Trump and his wife, Melania. He was attending the Statesman of the Year dinner put on by the Sarasota Republican Party on August 26, 2012 at the Ritz Carlton in Sarasota, Florida.[i]

dr-gary_
Dr. Gary Kompothecras
Kompothecras, a Chiropractor by training, had become wealthy by opening an attorney and medical referral service for people injured in car accidents. He sought to bring together a team of medical professionals who would address all the needs of his patients as they moved through the recovery process.

His clinics often include M.D.’s, orthopedic surgeons, osteopaths, neurosurgeons, radiologists, physician’s assistants, chiropractors, nurse practitioners, and massage therapists.[ii] A successful marketing campaign on radio and television with the tag-line, “Ask Gary” became well-known to Florida residents, as well as a 1-800 line that people could call to receive advice on what to do next.

Kompothecras has two vaccine-injured children, a son who is severely affected, and a daughter who has a more mild case, but will still need care for life. He got involved in politics with the Charlie Crist campaign for Florida governor in 2005-2006 and Trump was a supporter of Crist. Gary attended several meetings with Trump and Crist at Mar-A-Lago, Trump’s fabulous historic mansion on the Florida coast. As Gary recalled, “I read ‘The Art of the Deal’ when it came out and was always impressed with him. He’s a hardline guy and he’s very successful. He lost it all and made it all back. A similar situation happened to me. He’s a New Yorker, he’s from my home town, and we share a lot of common friends. So I always had an affinity for what he was doing and kept tabs on him.”[iii]

Aside from their shared New York background and similar turbulent business histories, there was another reason Kompothecras was impressed with Trump. “I heard him give a speech one time about when Baron was born. All his other kids went slow and steady with their vaccines. He thought it was crazy. He used to grab a water bottle and he’d say they stick a needle the size of these bottles inside these little kids. And he had a passion that I saw in his eyes that it wasn’t right. I don’t know if he knew about autism or anything else. But he knew it was a foolish thing to do to a little child.”[iv]

Gary tried to use his financial influence to get politicians in Florida to pay attention, but to little avail. “I tried everywhere, with the governors of Florida, both Crist and Scott [Rick Scott], with legislators. You can’t do anything with them because they’ve got the game wrapped up between owning the media and the politicians. I tried to pass a bill to take the mercury, just the poison, the preservative, out of the vaccines. And I was shot down. It was like five hundred lobbyists came down from Washington.”[v]

Florida State Senator Bill Posey, who would later become a Washington Congressman, and take control of the Thompson documents, was one of Kompothrecas’ few reliable allies in the Florida legislature. Gary also worked with Congressman Darryl Issa, who had previously headed the House Government Oversight and Reform Committee. Issa held one hearing on autism, and promised another, but was unable to keep that promise before his term ended.

Kompothecras recalled that he and his wife were placed at the head table with Donald Trump and his wife Melania at the Statesman’s Dinner in 2012, on the night before Mitt Romney accepted the Republican Party nomination for President. “Melania is a very wonderful person, talking with my wife, and the four of us talked about vaccines and he was very concerned. And I told him my story. I gave him a chart which showed the amount of vaccines people got, like 10 in the past, versus the 40-60 they get now. And actually tweeted that chart out and thousands of people downloaded it. It was very successful.”[vi]

Trump’s tweet of August 23, 2012 supports Gary’s recollection as it reads, “Massive combined inoculations to small children is the cause for the big increase in autism . . .”[vii] The care with which Trump and his wife listened to Gary’s story, and his willingness to comment publicly on the issue deeply impressed Gary. “It was the first time that a major personality came out and said he was with us. Anybody who said anything about vaccines was chastised, but Trump was able to get away with it.”[viii]

Others were impressed with Trump’s willingness to take on the vaccine-autism issue, and were making their own plans to discuss the issue with him.


There you have it, my friends – the first few pages of my chapter regarding Donald Trump and Dr. Wakefield.

Just when I thought things couldn’t get any stranger, Julian Assange released some Clinton emails, one of which concerned the vaccine issue. Just to be politically inclusive, the email makes it pretty clear that the Democratic and Republican parties were equally gutless on the issue. Both sides made soothing sounds on the issue in 2008, only to later act as if they considered us all crazy. I’ve included that email for your amusement as well.

Only one political candidate wouldn’t let himself be bullied on this issue. His name is Donald Trump. And now he is our new President.

So, there we have it…

I want people to buy my book and read it because it will empower you. I don’t want to leave anything to chance. Yes, it’s nice that Trump has met with us and pledged his support. I mean to hold him to it now.

My book is not only an expose of the terrible harm that has been done to our community, but provides a political and scientific roadmap to victory on this issue. Yes, I said it. I think we can have a scientific victory in autism, and that means a treatment or cure. We’re actually very close, but the right people need to be FUNDED and PROTECTED. That’s in my book as well.

The election is over, but this is not the time to rest. We need to train and prepare, because when Trump takes office I want our army of hope to be ready. Maybe he will follow through and be the man I believe him to be. Maybe he will waver. I want to prevent that. If you share this information as widely as possible, and drive this book onto the bestseller list, when Trump takes office he will see our mighty army in the field. He will have to make a decision. Will he welcome us or fight us? I want us to be prepared for either outcome.

INOCULATED Has its own Website…

www.inoculated.org

For a media interview with Kent Heckenlively please contact:

Jackie Lapin – Conscious Media Relations, (818) 707-1473, jackie@consciousmediarelations.com



By Kent Heckenlively, J.D.


Click Here For More BolenReport Articles By Kent Heckenlively JD
Bibliography:

[i] Alex Leary, “Sarasota GOP to Honor Donald Trump as ‘Statesman of the Year,’” Tampa Bay Times, July 9, 2012.

[ii] “About Us,” 1800 Ask Gary Website, www.1800askgary.com/about-us/, accessed September 20, 2016.

[iii] Telephone Interview with Gary Kompothecras by Kent Heckenlively, September 11, 2016.

[iv] Telephone Interview with Gary Kompothecras by Kent Heckenlively, September 11, 2016.

[v] Telephone Interview with Gary Kompothecras by Kent Heckenlively, September 11, 2016.

[vi] Telephone Interview with Gary Kompothecras by Kent Heckenlively, September 11, 2016.

[vii] Twitter Feed of Donald J. Trump, August 23, 2012, 12:22 p.m.

[viii] Telephone Interview with Gary Kompothecras by Kent Heckenlively, September 11, 2016.

onawah
14th November 2016, 00:27
Freedom of Thought and Religious Beliefs Are Under Attack
November 13, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09oFEtJVC7A

Visit the Mercola Video Library
By Dr. Mercola

Your freedom of thought, conscience and religious beliefs are under attack, so it is really vital that you listen to the information presented by Barbara Loe Fisher in this interview with me.

Fisher co-founded the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) in 1982 and she has been a leading health rights advocate defending the human right to informed consent to medical risk taking, including the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices — a right that has been severely eroded in the U.S. over the past three decades.

“If we don’t have the right in this country to make health care choices, including vaccine choices, that impact our bodies and the bodies of our children, we’re really not free in any sense of the word,” she says.

“I’ve seen this evolve over almost 35 years now. It became clear several decades ago that the goal of public health officials and the medical trade organizations and industry was to have everyone in the country … have to get every single government-recommended vaccine … That is what I saw happening, but I didn’t know how long it was going to take.”

Unprecedented Attack on Personal Beliefs in 2015

In 2015, the American media went berserk reporting an outbreak of measles at Disneyland.

By the time the media hysteria hyping irrational fear of measles and demonizing parents with unvaccinated school children was over, there had been 131 cases of measles reported in California and only 189 cases of measles reported nationally for the whole year.

What was interesting about the 2015 measles outbreak that started all the fear mongering, was that when you looked at the California cases with vaccine records, it became clear the outbreak was not about unvaccinated school children at all:

Fifty percent of the reported measles cases were adults and only 18 percent were in school-aged children. Yet that measles outbreak in 2015 was used by industry and medical trade lobbyists to fuel an all-out assault on personal belief exemptions in state vaccine laws.

It was an assault that specifically targeted the non-medical exemptions for religious, conscientious or philosophical beliefs filed by parents so their children can attend school. As noted by Fisher:

“What happened in 2015 was unprecedented in terms of the numbers of bills that were introduced in the states to take away non-medical vaccine exemptions. There were over 100 bills introduced. There was an assault in at least 11 states to take away the exemptions.

[P]eople signed up for our [NVIC] Advocacy Portal online and we helped them to preserve the exemption in nine states. But we lost California, which was a huge loss because that’s the biggest state.

The personal belief exemption was eliminated and it took out both the religious and the philosophical exemption in one fell swoop …

We have a 94 to 97 percent, sometimes almost 100 percent, vaccine coverage rate with federally recommended vaccines in the United States … [Yet] in 2015 we saw the most vicious assault I have ever seen on parents who take exemptions or who don’t give their children all of the vaccines.

There were calls for these parents to be charged with child medical neglect, for them to be publicly identified and humiliated online, for them to be sued, and for them to be jailed.

At the same time, we saw an assault on doctors; doctors who were critical of vaccine safety, doctors who were giving children medical vaccine exemptions, doctors who were taking care of children who were not fully vaccinated. The rhetoric was over the top in terms of viciousness in 2015.

Again, how many measles cases did we see in America? One hundred wighty-nine cases of measles. Not one death, not one injury, that I’ve seen, was reported.”

Your Involvement Protected Health Rights in 2016

This year, yet another 100 vaccine related bills were introduced and most tried to either add more vaccines to state mandates or restrict or eliminate vaccine exemptions.

The NVIC opposed about 70 percent of them. Fortunately, only eight of those bills were actually passed this year, and none of the bills to eliminate vaccine exemptions passed.

The reason for this, Fisher says, is because people saw what happened in 2015 and started to get much more involved in the political process in 2016.

Whenever NVIC put out an Action Alert through the online NVIC Advocacy Portal, more parents, grandparents, health care professionals and other concerned citizens personally contacted their state legislators and showed up for committee meetings and public hearings to make their concerns known.

It is so important for you to know that you can make a difference when you take action to protect your freedom and, together, we are making a difference. This can be seen from the fact that many bad vaccine bills were defeated this year because people stood up for their rights.

I want to express my deep appreciation and gratitude to all you who worked with NVIC and participated in the legislative process in your states this year. Yes, some battles were still lost, but it is through persistence that we can collectively make a huge difference.

“It’s the only reason we didn’t get the medical and religious [vaccine] exemption taken away in Virginia this year,” Fisher says. “The only reason was because people got energized and showed up.”

Public Health Officials Militarize Vaccine System Through Rule Making

Unfortunately, because we’ve been successful in stopping these state bills trying to take away your freedom, public health officials are now starting to invoke rulemaking authority to bypass the democratic process altogether.

Rulemaking authority is given by Congress to federal legislators, and given by state legislators to the people who operate government and government employees.

On August 15, 2016, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) in the Federal Register to amend the Public Health Service Act, which governs public health law. We warned you about this several months ago in this newsletter.

What the CDC wants to do is expand the use of police power to detain and involuntarily quarantine you if you are traveling by airplane into the U.S. If you have a cough, rash, low-grade fever or other minor symptoms of illness, they want to enlist airline personnel to report you to the CDC.

Then, if public health officials think you might be infected with or could get infected with measles or another communicable disease, they want the legal authority to apprehend and:

Detain you for 72 hours without access to an attorney to appeal the detention
Evaluate you medically
Offer you a contract to sign that will allow them to treat you, such as vaccinate you, as a condition of being released
Electronically monitor you after your release
Disease Eradication Efforts Historically Turn Into Militarized Efforts

The same would apply if you travel between states, especially if you’re travelling on an airline or by ship, bus or train. NVIC is vehemently opposed to this and submitted a public comment on Oct. 14, 2016, calling on the CDC to withdraw the NPRM.1 The CDC has not implemented this rule yet but they have the authority to do so, even though CDC officials received more than 15,500 public comments by Oct. 14 — most of them opposing the NPRM.

“In 2005, they [CDC officials] tried this. They got enough public pushback that they didn’t implement. The thing I’m worried about is that we have a President who’s on his way out. He can issue executive orders. We do not know what is going to happen between the elections and when he leaves,” Fisher says.

“We don’t know if measles is going to be put on that isolation and quarantine list … They’ve just declared measles eradicated in the Americas. If you take a look at the last two years, you’ll see this progression. Clearly it has all been to set up this idea that measles must be eradicated from the earth.

What happens when they say “Let’s eradicate?” Well, we know what happens. There was a militarization of the public health infrastructure to eradicate smallpox and polio. This means just what it sounds like: It means detention, isolation, quarantine and vaccination.

I am concerned that even if we are successful in protecting state exemptions, if you have a federal law that allows the militarization of the public health infrastructure, we’re going to be in a very difficult situation here. What can we do? We have to become involved in government. We cannot take government for granted and our freedoms for granted. If we don’t hold our elected officials accountable, then we are going to have laws passed that are going to be oppressive.”

Vaccine Roulette Before Pharma Blackmailed Congress

A major problem today is that major profit-making industries, and the drug industry in particular, wield tremendous influence over our federal government agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and CDC. Their money, presence and political influence can be clearly seen on Capitol Hill and just about everywhere.

A perfect example is the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. Fisher was a young parent of a DPT vaccine injured child when the television documentary “DPT: Vaccine Roulette” was aired in the spring of 1982. It was the first time American parents had been informed that a vaccine recommended and mandated by the government could brain injure and kill children.

That ground breaking investigative report was the catalyst for the formation of the non-profit charity known today as the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) that Fisher co-founded with other parents of vaccine injured children.

Within months, drug companies declared they would stop producing childhood vaccines recommended and mandated by government unless Congress indemnified them from liability. Congress jumped into action and proposed legislation to restrict vaccine lawsuits.

“We were contacted because we were this new group. There had never been a group like this,” Fisher says. “They said to us, ‘We are going to pass legislation to protect the vaccine supply in this country. You can either come to the table and argue for what you think the families should get or you cannot come to the table. But we’re going to pass this with or without you.’”

NVIC Helped Put Safety Provisions Into Law

Communication at that time was telephones and snail mail. Messages could get out via TV or radio, but there was no world wide web and few parents had personal computers.

Parents of vaccine injured children had no political power, but NVIC’s co-founders networked with families and fought as hard as they could to protect the rights of children and families. They preserved the legal right of parents to sue vaccine manufacturers when there was evidence the company could have made the vaccine less toxic, and they got vaccine safety informing, recording and reporting provisions into the 1986 law — even though the safety provisions have never been enforced.

Five Years Ago US Supreme Court Banned Vaccine Injury Lawsuits

Then, in 2011, the Supreme Court heard the case of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. Vaccine manufacturers, medical trade organizations and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services declared that all vaccine injury lawsuits should be banned.

“The Supreme Court said, ‘Any FDA-licensed vaccine is unavoidably unsafe and there shall be no more lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers.’ Done. Not even if you could show a vaccine could have been made safer,” Fisher says.

“On that same day, the Supreme Court said that seatbelt manufacturers, car manufacturers, are liable for defective seatbelts, but vaccine manufacturers are not liable for defective or unsafe vaccines. So here we are, with the medical trade associations all saying ‘no more non-medical exemptions,’ after they have narrowed the medical exemptions so that no medical condition qualifies for medical exemption.”

Intimidation Tactics Are Being Used Against Doctors

During the measles outbreak of 2015, doctors criticizing vaccine safety and mandatory vaccination laws or giving children medical vaccine exemptions were publicly attacked. This year, the state Medical Board charged California pediatrician Dr. Bob Sears with “gross negligence” for “improperly exempting” a 2-year old boy from vaccination.2

Dr. Sears gives vaccines in his practice but allows parents to make the choice about whether or not to vaccinate their children. He has been an outspoken supporter of flexible exemptions in mandatory vaccination laws and now his medical license may be on the line simply because he wrote a medical vaccine exemption after a child had an adverse reaction to a previous vaccination.

As noted by Fisher, the medical contraindications that CDC officials consider an official reason to grant a child a medical vaccine exemption have become so incredibly narrow that about 99 percent of all children, including those who have had previous vaccine reactions, do not qualify for a medical exemption. What’s happening to Sears is sheer harassment and nothing else, designed to make other doctors think twice before they suggest a child might be at high risk for suffering a vaccine reaction. Fisher asks:

“How can you mandate a product that can cause injury or death that some people are more susceptible to having a reaction to, basically removing the medical exemptions so nothing qualifies [and then] remove the personal belief exemption so you can’t exercise freedom of conscience and religious belief, and penalize you if you don’t obey the law that literally could take your life or your child’s life?

This is insanity. It’s cruel. It is inhuman. You [Dr. Mercola] opened up this interview with the statement that freedom of thought, conscience and religious belief is under attack. Absolutely, our bodies are under attack by laws that are punitive, particularly for those of us who have genetic or biological reasons for having a greater susceptibility [for vaccine injury].”

Vaccine Injuries Are More Common Than You’re Led to Believe

Vaccine injuries are real. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database, which was created as part of the Vaccine Compensation Act, shows that about 71,000 reactions and nearly 350 deaths have been reported following receipt of the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine alone since 1990.

Studies have shown that doctors and other vaccine providers are massively underreporting injuries and deaths that follow vaccination, perhaps fewer than 1 to 10 percent of serious adverse events are ever reported to VAERS, so the real number may be around 35,000.

Adding insult to injury, the government is not doing a good job on finding out how many people are actually suffering serious health problems after vaccination. Even when reactions are reported to VAERS, health officials rarely follow up on vaccine reaction reports.

NVIC’s Video Vaccine Reaction Reporting on Memorial for Vaccine Victims

This month, NVIC has expanded its online International Memorial for Vaccine Victims by adding a video vaccine reaction reporting feature called Protect Life: Witness A Vaccine Reaction at NVIC.org. You can post a video description of a vaccine reaction that you, your child or someone you love has experienced, where it will be archived permanently and accessible to millions of people who visit NVIC.org.

“One of the things that we feel strongly about at the NVIC is that people who have had vaccine reactions, whose loved ones have suffered vaccine injury and death, need to publicly witness. NVIC has had, for more than a decade, the International Memorial for Vaccine Victims. We were one of the first websites to really formalize the public reporting of vaccine reactions. We have a vaccine reaction registry that is 35 years old.

Most people know somebody who was healthy, got vaccinated, and was never healthy again. This is what people across the country need to understand. It can be you. It can be your child, your mother, your sister, your friend. Everybody is a candidate …

I encourage everyone who has had an experience with a vaccine reaction to participate because when you publicly share your vaccine reaction story with others, it can turn the terrible tragedies that have occurred from vaccine injuries into saving lives by making others aware that vaccines can cause serious harm.

You can take your story, record it on your cell phone or computer and post it on NVIC’s Memorial for Vaccine Victims. You could save 100, 1,000, 10,000, 1 million people’s lives because they were so inspired by your story that they understood the truth, finally. If more people do this, the more compelling the evidence becomes.StzrnEwj-oY
Help Support Vaccine Awareness Week

From November 13 to 20, we launch Vaccine Awareness Week 2016 in partnership with the non-profit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). With aggressive efforts by pharmaceutical companies, medical trade groups and government to restrict or eliminate all vaccine exemptions, it’s critical for you to act now to protect your legal right to make informed, voluntary vaccine choices.

Thankfully we have experienced organizations such as NVIC providing accurate information about vaccine issues and working to secure informed consent protections in public health laws. NVIC’s mission is to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and to defend the human right to exercise informed consent to medical risk taking, which includes access to flexible medical, religious and conscientious belief vaccine exemptions.

Resources Where You Can Learn More

NVIC Advocacy Portal: Become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your state and defend your legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices for yourself and your children.
Ask 8 Vaccine Information Kiosk: Download brochures on vaccines and infectious diseases and how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms (in English and Spanish), as well as special reports, posters and web badges, to help you educate your family and friends when you advocate for vaccine freedom of choice.
Vaccine Ingredients Calculator: If you have made the choice to vaccinate, create a customized plan after evaluating vaccine ingredients.
State Law & Vaccine Requirements: You can easily access your state’s vaccine policies and laws here.
Protect Life: Witness A Vaccine Reaction. Post a video or photo and description of a vaccine reaction, injury or death on the International Memorial for Vaccine Victims and search the database or view the video collection.
Let’s Help NVIC Get the Funding They Deserve

This charitable educational organization has been working since 1982 to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths through public education and to provide information and counseling to those reporting adverse responses to vaccination. Please consider donating to NVIC to help support their life-saving mission and join the vaccine awareness and choice movement today.

Houman
14th November 2016, 02:49
United States Congressman Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is investigating the CDC for committing fraud regarding vaccine safety...
Uozk0EXKzMg

seleka
14th November 2016, 09:05
I saw an ad banner on the wunderground email I receive daily that said "Should Hillary go to jail". I answered the poll with yes and then it went into this movie. The whole time it sounded like she wanted to sell me something, and I think there is a book offered, but she tells so many important pieces of information in this video, its more like a documentary. I find it divine intervention that this thread then popped up and people were talking about statin drugs and so was this video. Here is a link to a study of one of the cures she talks about. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11708574/ I will also include the link that makes the movie start because it is about the very thing this thread is about. http://hsionlineorders.net/Behind_Bars/?pco=LHSIS651&efo=HSI160415A

I paid the $74 and got two books in the mail which were like click bait, but in print. I asked for and got a refund. The movie is still very informative though with facts about clinton foundations ties to pharma

onawah
15th November 2016, 21:12
UPDATE: Contact U.S. Legislators to STOP CDC Proposed Rule
for Forced Detention, Isolation, Vaccination and Quarantine


Dear NVIC Advocacy Team Members,
We recently asked you to contact your legislators in Washington D.C. and the officials at the CDC to demand the withdrawal of the dangerous CDC proposal rule granting unprecedented and expanded police powers to forcibly detain, isolate, vaccinate and quarantine us while we travel right here in the United States.
We want to thank the organizations and individuals who came out loud and strong registering legitimate serious concerns. However, there is still work to be done requesting help from our US Senators and Congressional Representatives to stop this attack on the very civil liberties which make us grateful to live in the United States of America.
There were over 15,000 public comments posted on the Notice of Public Rulemaking (NPRM) to the CDC that are now part of the public record (https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=CDC-2016-0068). We’ve highlighted links to our comments and to those from some of our friends so you can see for yourself exactly how serious this is.
National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC)
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2016-0068-14884

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2016-0068-13863
The Great Lakes Justice Center
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2016-0068-14908
National Health Freedom Action
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2016-0068-12489
While the comment period to the CDC has ended, it is imperative that everyone continues to contact their two US Senators and their US Congressional Representative asking them to demand that the CDC rescind its proposed rule.
While some legislators will end their terms in January, many will still be there and staff tends to stick around. Enough noise now can help end this dangerous rule for good!
Make sure your voice is heard. One of our supporters forwarded a personal reply message from her US Senator stating, “I've taken the liberty of contacting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on your behalf asking that they review your concerns and get back to me with a detailed and appropriate response.” We need to see many responses like this!
Don’t let their office get away with not responding or sending a lame form letter back to you that doesn’t relate to this issue specifically. Keep calling and sending in comments until they respond appropriately!
ACTION NEEDED:
1) Contact your U.S. Congressional Representative and both of your U.S. Senators Representatives and ask them to stop this outrageous federal overreach and unnecessary expansion of police powers by demanding the CDC withdraw the proposed rule.

Send your letter (sample below) by email, fax or regular mail.

It is very important that you follow-up with a personal phone call expressing your concerns as well because some offices aren't as thorough with reading letters as others.

You should be contacting all three of your U.S. legislators.

To find who represents you in the U.S. Congress and U.S. Senate:

a. Register/login to the NVIC Advocacy Portal

b. Click on the “national” tab on the top of your home page

c. Look for the names of your personal U.S. Congressional Representative and your two U.S. Senators listed on the right hand side

d. Click on their names to be linked to all of their contact information

2) Share this alert with family and friends by forwarding this email or sending them to http://NVICAdvocacy.org on our National page or to our note on National Vaccine Information Center Facebook.

3) Register with the NVIC Advocacy Portal to view and receive updates.

SAMPLE LETTER TO U.S. LEGISLATORS:
November 15, 2016
The Honorable FIRSTNAME LASTNAME
STREET ADDRESS
Washington, D.C. 20515
CDC and HHS Proposed Rule Concerning Quarantine

CDC Docket No. CDC-2016-0068



Dear Representative or Senator LASTNAME,
As a constituent of yours, I am writing to you for your assistance. I have serious concerns about an overreaching proposed HHS/CDC Rule that would expand police powers to forcibly detain, isolate, vaccinate and quarantine citizens. This Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) was published in the Federal Register on 8/15/16 and the CDC has received overwhelming public comment opposing this rule. https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=CDC-2016-0068
I am asking you to demand that the CDC withdraw this proposed rule for the following reasons:
· The proposed rule is a violation of civil liberties. U.S. health officials could hold a person in custody for 72 hours without the right to contact an attorney to appeal the detention. Detainees could be asked to sign a contract with the CDC that gives consent to the “public health measures” being applied to the adult or a minor child, which may include “quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination, and treatment.” The proposed rule states that “the individual’s consent shall not be considered a prerequisite to any exercise of any authority” by the CDC. After release, the person can be electronically tracked and monitored, including by electronic tracking devices attached to the body. (see page 54253, column 3, Agreements and column 1, Persons: Isolation and surveillance of the NPRM)

· The federal government will have the authority to punish individuals. Those violating the “public health agreement” the individual signed in order to be released from government custody. These punishments include being jailed for six months to a year and paying fines of $100,000 to $250,000 or, in the case of “violations by organizations,” which are not explained in the NPRM, a fine of $250,000 to $500,000. (see page 54249, column 2. Penalties of the NPRM)

· The proposed rule is a clear case of federal government overreach. Federal and state laws are already in place to address the control of outbreaks of serious communicable diseases. When similar rules have been proposed in the past they have been withdrawn over concerns of civil rights violations and the cost to implement. However, the NPRM states (see page 54308, column 1, Federalism of the NPRM and page 6 of NVIC’s comments).

· The proposed rule has very subjective and unreasonably broad definitions of illness. The proposed rule defines a potentially “ill” person deserving of special government scrutiny to be someone with “areas of the skin with multiple red bumps, red, flat spots or blister like bumps filled with fluid or pus that are intact or partially crusted over,” warning ominously that “the presence of skin rash, along with fever, may indicate that the traveler has measles, rubella (German measles), varicella (chickenpox) meningococcal disease or smallpox.” These definitions (on pages 54239-40) are very subjective and will open the door for travelers to be detained for something as simple as a skin rash while suffering from a bad sunburn, acne, rosacea, eczema, psoriasis, the hives, or severe allergies and a mild fever that could be due to an old fashioned cold. Measles is not Ebola and chickenpox is not smallpox. (see pages 54239 and 54240 of the NPRM )

Sincerely,
YOUR NAME
YOUR STREET ADDRESS
YOUR CITY, STATE, ZIP
YOUR EMAIL
YOUR PHONE
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
There are several things Congress can do including:
· Under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (also known as the Congressional Review Act), new final rules must be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability Office for review before they can take effect.
· If the House and Senate pass a resolution of disapproval and the President signs it (or if both houses override a presidential veto), the rule becomes void and cannot be republished by an agency in the same form without Congressional approval. Since 1996, when this process started, Congress has disapproved only one rule.
· Congress may also exercise its oversight in other ways, by holding hearings and posing questions to agency heads, by enacting new legislation, or by imposing funding restrictions.
There are several things that could happen next with this proposed rule, including but not limited to:
· An agency may extend or re‐open a comment period when it is not satisfied that it has enough high quality comments or when the public comments make a good case for adding more time.
· Similarly, an agency may find that people have raised new issues in their comments that were not discussed in the initial proposed rule. As new issues or additional complexity arises, the agency may publish a series of proposed rules in the Federal Register.
· After the comment period closes, an agency may establish a second period for reply comments (comments that respond to prior comments). A reply period is not required by law. The reply comment period enables people to respond to comments that agencies received at the end of comment period, creating more of a public dialog.
· If the rulemaking record contains persuasive new data or policy arguments, or poses difficult questions or criticisms, the agency may decide to terminate the rulemaking. Or, the agency may decide to continue the rulemaking but change aspects of the rule to reflect these new issues. If the changes are major, the agency may publish a supplemental proposed rule. If the changes are minor, or a logical outgrowth of the issues and solutions discussed in the proposed rules, the agency may proceed with a final rule.
For more information on the Federal Rule Making Process read this guide -https://www.federalregister.gov/uploads/2011/01/the_rulemaking_process.pdf
Sincerely,
NVIC Advocacy Team
National Vaccine Information Center
http://NVIC.org and http://NVICAdvocacy.org
https://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Members/ContactUs.aspx
The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) works diligently to prepare and disseminate our legislative advocacy action alerts and supporting materials. We request that organizations and members of the public forward our alerts in their original form to assure consistent and accurate messaging and effective action. Please acknowledge NVIC as originators of this work when forwarding to members of the public and like-minded organizations. To receive alerts immediately, register at http://NVICAdvocacy.org, a website dedicated to this sole purpose and provided as a free public service by NVIC.

onawah
22nd November 2016, 18:23
Nice guy, huh? (NOT!!)
Autism Action Network
11/22/2016
NYC protests forced vaccination panel

Yesterday hundreds of people gathered on a bitterly cold, windswept First Avenue in Manhattan to protest an event at the New York University Langone Medical Center called "Conronting Vaccine Resistance" which featured some of the the leading proponents for forced vaccination in the United States. The demonstrators were joined by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Gary Null and VAXXED producers Del Bigtree and Polly Tommey along with the VAXXED bus.
Joshua Coleman, a member of the VAXXED crew attempted to interview Paul Offit, a vaccine entrepreneur and advocate of seizing children who are not fully compliant with the federal vaccine schedule, who was there to speak at the meeting. Here is a link to the results which succinctly states Offit's position (trigger warning: contains profanity.) This brief video is worth viewing.
cRAJdyPNWnA
Inside the closed-to-the-public meeting NYU Langone personnel heard from a panel including Offitt, State Senator Richard Pan, a pediatrician and the author of SB 277, the California bill that eliminatated personal belief exemptions, and Dorit Reiss, ostensible a faculty member at Hastings Law School in California but best known as an exceedingly active internet commenter promoting forced vaccination.
The vaccine industry is trying to repeal laws across the United States that allow exemptions from vaccine mandates based on personal belief. A bill to repeal New York's religious exemption was introduced last year and we expect it to return when the new legislature convenes in January.

Hervé
24th February 2017, 13:47
Link between Glyphosate and Autism (http://anonhq.com/the-link-between-glyphosate-and-autism/)

AnonWatcher AnonHQ.com. (http://anonhq.com/the-link-between-glyphosate-and-autism/)
Wed, 22 Feb 2017 16:28 UTC



https://www.sott.net/image/s18/379833/large/MIT_Doctor_696x413.jpg (https://www.sott.net/image/s18/379833/full/MIT_Doctor_696x413.jpg)


After the World Health Organization declared Monsanto's Roundup active ingredient glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic," Monsanto have actively chased lawsuits for defamation. Now, a new study has demonstrated damming correlations between the increased use of the herbicide and the increase of autism in the same decades.

Whether from vaccines laced with mercury or from diet or pesticide use, autism today is vastly on the rise in children. Disturbing figures attributed one in 68 children (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/autism-rates-rise-30-percent-in-two-year-span-cdc/) as having an autism spectrum disorder, according to the CDC in 2014. In 2008 it was 1 in 88 (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/03/29/ss6103.ebook.pdf), and in 2000, the figure was 1 in 150 (https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html) for those born in 1992.

The CDC still maintains a 2014 figure as current statistics, placing one percent of the population as having autism spectrum disorder, however, publications suggest the figure is now 1 in 50 (http://www.uniteforsight.org/conference/ppt-2014/sseneff.pdf).

Last year, a study (http://www.nhs.uk/news/Pages/Newsglossary.aspx#peerreview) conducted in Sweden concluded those with an autism spectrum disorder have a life span (http://www.nhs.uk/news/2016/03March/Pages/People-with-autism-are-dying-younger-warns-study.aspx) of "54 years, compared with 70 for matched controls." Those with ASD tend to also suffer depression, suicidal tendencies and/or seizures ranging from very mild to debilitating.


http://anonhq.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Screenshot-91.png

The statistics point to our children today as sicker than they were comparatively a generation ago, noted a Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) report (http://www.uniteforsight.org/conference/ppt-2014/sseneff.pdf) in 2012.
"Children today are sicker than they were a generation ago. From childhood cancers to autism, birth defects and asthma, a wide range of childhood diseases and disorders are on the rise. Our assessment of the latest science leaves little room for doubt; pesticides are one key driver of this sobering trend."
The worrying trend of our children becoming sicker highlights the need to find the cause, particularly if it is environmental. Research suggests autism goes far beyond genetics, but rather, encompasses multiple factors of toxins and pharmaceuticals.

One likely candidate for the rise in autism is the agricultural use of pesticides over the last few decades. Dr. Stephanie Seneff, (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a52vAx9HaCI) a senior researcher from The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), stated recently "At today's rate, by 2025, one in two children will be autistic."

In other words, in less than 10 years, every second child born will have some form of autism.


a52vAx9HaCI

Dr. Seneff has also published a paper outlining different disorders such as endocrine disruption, cancer, dementia as well as autism as being linked to the use of Monsanto's glyphosate, the "probably carcinogenic" herbicide according to the WHO (http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Glyphosate_Probably_Carcinogenic_to_Humans.php).

Dr. Seneff asks the important question when considering associated conditions with autism, such as serotonin and melatonin deficiencies, disrupted gut bacteria and impaired sulfur metabolism, saying these are the "bio-markers of autism." She asks:
"Is there a toxic environmental substance that has been on the rise since 1980 and that could account for these comorbidities?"
The answer is: Yes. The second answer according to the MIT researcher is glyphosate.

Glyphosate use, according to Dr. Seneff, "rose 1500% from 1994 to 2005" when the spike in autism diagnosis was documented.

A damning graph shows the specific correlation between glyphosate use and autism diagnosis from 1990 through to 2010.

Main toxic effects also point to the comorbidities of autism and glyphosate (http://www.uniteforsight.org/conference/ppt-2014/sseneff.pdf) side effects, including the killing off of gut bacteria; melatonin and serotonin deficiency; low sulfate; vitamin D deficiency and impaired immune function, and low-grade inflammation of the brain.

As per the report Dr. Seneff has authored, senile dementia is also documented as rising in correlation with the use of Monsanto's glyphosate.

Despite the evidence, Monsanto continues to claim that glyphosate is safe (http://www.monsanto.com/glyphosate/pages/is-glyphosate-safe.aspx). Although the correlations that Dr. Seneff have demonstrated are not indicative of glyphosate being the one and only cause, the statistics are damning.

According to one 2014 study (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3955666/):

"It is commonly believed that Roundup is among the safest pesticides. This idea is spread by manufacturers, mostly in the reviews they promote, which are often cited in toxicological evaluations of glyphosate-based herbicides. However, Roundup was found in this experiment to be 125 times more toxic than glyphosate. Moreover, despite its reputation, Roundup was by far the most toxic among the herbicides and insecticides tested. This inconsistency between scientific fact and industrial claim may be attributed to huge economic interests, which have been found to falsify health risk assessments and delay health policy decisions." Comprehensive scientific research is conducted routinely on the consequences of glyphosate use in agriculture, autism and the environment (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/autism-rise-driven-by-environment/).

While our children continue to get sicker, Monsanto continues their stranglehold on agriculture. Minuscule amounts of solid evidence, as scientists say we have, should be enough to shelve Monsanto's roundup until facts establish otherwise.

The chance of having half of the children born in 2025 onwards as having autism should be enough of a warning to do so.

onawah
12th March 2017, 01:10
Monsanto Isn’t Feeding the World—It’s Killing Our Children
March 9, 2017
Organic Consumers Association
by Katherine Paul
https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/monsanto-isn%E2%80%99t-feeding-world%E2%80%94it%E2%80%99s-killing-our-children


“How could we have ever believed that it is a good idea to grow our food with poisons?” – Dr. Jane Goodall

Two new reports published in recent weeks add to the already large and convincing body of evidence, accumulated over more than half a century, that agricultural pesticides and other toxic chemicals are poisoning us.

Both reports issue scathing indictments of U.S. and global regulatory systems that collude with chemical companies to hide the truth from the public, while they fill their coffers with ill-gotten profits.

According to the World Health Organization, whose report focused on a range of environmental risks, the cost of a polluted environment adds up to the deaths of 1.7 million children every year.

A report by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, presented to the United Nations Human Rights Council, focused more narrowly on agricultural chemicals. The UN report states unequivocally that the storyline perpetuated by companies like Monsanto—the one that says we need pesticides to feed the world—is a myth. And a catastrophic one at that.

The fact that both these reports made headlines, in mainstream outlets like the Washington Post and the Guardian, is on one hand, good news. On the other, it's a sad and discouraging commentary on our inability to control corporate greed.

Ever since Rachel Carson, in her book “Silent Spring,” so eloquently outlined the insanity of poisoning our environment, rational thinkers have warned that at the least, we ought to follow the precautionary principle when it comes to allowing the widespread use of poisons to be unleashed into the environment.

And yet, here we are, in 2017, facing the prospect, in what is unfolding as the most corporate-friendly administration in history, of dismantling what little remains of the government’s ability to stop the rampant poisoning of our soils, food, water and air—the very resources upon which all life depends.

In his book, “Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA,” published in 2014, E. G. Vallianatos, who worked for the EPA for 25 years, wrote:

"It is simply not possible to understand why the EPA behaves the way it does without appreciating the enormous power of American’s industrial farmers and their allies in the chemical pesticide industries, which currently do about $40 billion per in year business. For decades, industry lobbyists have preached the gospel of unregulated capitalism, and Americans have bought it. Today, it seems the entire government is at the service of the private interests of America’s corporate class.”

That was three years ago. And yet, as public opinion shifts toward condemnation of the widespread use of toxic chemicals on our food, here in the U.S., government officials entrusted with public health and safety appear more determined than ever to uphold the “rights” of corporations to poison everything in sight—including our children.

‘UN experts denounce 'myth' pesticides are necessary to feed the world’

The headline in the Guardian’s story on the report delivered this week to the UN Human Rights Council said it all.

From the Guardian:

A new report, being presented to the UN human rights council on Wednesday, is severely critical of the global corporations that manufacture pesticides, accusing them of the “systematic denial of harms”, “aggressive, unethical marketing tactics” and heavy lobbying of governments which has “obstructed reforms and paralysed global pesticide restrictions.”

The report says pesticides have “catastrophic impacts on the environment, human health and society as a whole”, including an estimated 200,000 deaths a year from acute poisoning. Its authors said: “It is time to create a global process to transition toward safer and healthier food and agricultural production.”

The UN report was authored by Hilal Elver, special rapporteur on the right to food, and Baskut Tuncak, special rapporteur on toxics. The report stated that chronic exposure to pesticides has been linked to cancer, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases, hormone disruption, developmental disorders and sterility. It said the populations most at risk are farmers and agricultural workers, communities living near plantations, indigenous communities and pregnant women and children, who are especially vulnerable to pesticide exposure and require special protections.

The Crop Protection Association, a lobbying group representing the $50-billion agri-chemical industry, fired back at the report with its standard false claim that pesticides “play a key role in ensuring we have access to a healthy, safe, affordable and reliable food supply.” But Elver told the Guardian:

“It is a myth. Using more pesticides is nothing to do with getting rid of hunger. According to the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), we are able to feed 9 billion people today. Production is definitely increasing, but the problem is poverty, inequality and distribution.”

Sustainable Pulse also reported on the story, noting that the report warns that some pesticides can persist in the environment for decades:

The excessive use of pesticides contaminates soil and water sources, causing loss of biodiversity, destroying the natural enemies of pests, and reducing the nutritional value of food. The impact of such overuse also imposes staggering costs on national economies around the world.

The UN report, which mentioned (page 15, no 68) the efforts of the Monsanto Tribunal to raise global awareness about the dangers of pesticides, included a long list of recommendations for moving away from chemical-based agriculture. At the top of the list was a call out to the international community to work on a comprehensive, binding treaty to regulate hazardous pesticides throughout their life cycle, taking into account human rights principles. Such a treaty should:

• Aim to remove existing double standards among countries that are particularly detrimental to countries with weaker regulatory systems

• Generate policies to reduce pesticide use worldwide and develop a framework for the banning and phasing-out of highly hazardous pesticides

• Promote agroecology

• Place strict liability on pesticide producers.

‘Exposure to pollution kills millions of children, WHO reports find’

In a March 5 story, the Washington Post reported on two World Health Organization (WHO) reports how exposure to polluted environments is linked to more than one in four deaths among children under the age of five.

Worldwide, 1.7 million children's deaths are attributable to environmental hazards, such as exposure to contaminated water, indoor and outdoor pollution, and other unsanitary conditions, the reports found.

Weaker immune systems make children's health more vulnerable to harmful effects of polluted environments, the report says.

According to the WHO reports, which focused on a wide range of chemicals, including those found in food, electronics, contaminated water supplies, second-hand tobacco smoke, and others, one-fourth of all children’s deaths and diseases in 2012 could have been prevented by reducing environmental risks. From the WHO press release:

Children are also exposed to harmful chemicals through food, water, air and products around them. Chemicals, such as fluoride, lead and mercury pesticides, persistent organic pollutants, and others in manufactured goods, eventually find their way into the food chain. And, while leaded petrol has been phased out almost entirely in all countries, lead is still widespread in paints, affecting brain development.

Authors of the WHO report recommended:

• Housing: Ensure clean fuel for heating and cooking, no mould or pests, and remove unsafe building materials and lead paint.
• Schools: Provide safe sanitation and hygiene, free of noise, pollution, and promote good nutrition.
• Health facilities: Ensure safe water, sanitation and hygiene, and reliable electricity.
• Urban planning: Create more green spaces, safe walking and cycling paths.
• Transport: Reduce emissions and increase public transport.
• Agriculture: Reduce the use of hazardous pesticides and no child labour.
• Industry: Manage hazardous waste and reduce the use of harmful chemicals.
• Health sector: Monitor health outcomes and educate about environmental health effects and prevention.

What will it take?

If you find yourself unsurprised by the findings of these reports, or the recommendations that follow, it’s no wonder. Many organizations, including ours, have for decades been calling for reforms.

But we can’t let our lack of surprise translate into complacency. In an op-ed published this week in The Hill, Devra Lee Davis, president of the Environmental Health Trust, and author of “The Secret History of the War on Cancer,” draws the parallel between our failure to regulate the tobacco industry with our failure to regulate the chemicals that today are largely responsible for two sad statistics: 1) one in two of us will be diagnosed with cancer in our lifetimes; and 2) the rate of childhood cancer has increased by 50 percent since President Nixon declared a war on cancer, 40 years ago.

Davis, who says we’re fixated on “the wrong enemies, with the wrong weapons,” says we should ask ourselves this:

Why did we wait until nearly forty years after tobacco was understood to cause cancer and other diseases before mounting a major effort to curtail its production and use? What took us so long to reduce the amount of benzene in gasoline or toxic flame retardants in our waters, food, furniture, bedding, fabrics and breastmilk?

Unfortunately, we know why—corporate control of our regulatory system. Perhaps the better question is, having failed to rein in Congress’ loyalty to a handful of ruthless, emboldened corporations, can we elect new people, at every level of our government, who will work for us? More critically, can we do it in time to save ourselves?

Katherine Paul is associate director of the Organic Consumers Association.

onawah
21st March 2017, 15:45
Monsanto undercover funding has led the attack on organic foods
Posted by: Lori Alton, March 20, 2017
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/monsanto-organic-food-2175.html

(NaturalHealth365) In April of 2014, Academics Review released its organic marketing report – and proceeded to blast the organic foods industry. The report, which received extensive coverage by the mainstream media, accused the industry of creating false and misleading perceptions and indulging in intentionally deceptive marketing. (Wait, until you see what Monsanto is doing – keep reading)
The report was billed as “the findings of independent researchers,” while the Academics Review itself is described as “an association of academic professors, researchers, teachers and credentialed authors from around the world who are committed to the unsurpassed value of the peer review in establishing sound science.”
It all sounds pretty lofty, right? Until you consider that one of the groups helping Academics Review to obtain corporate funding was none other than the most hated corporation in the world, the multinational biotech company – Monsanto. (Of course, they really don’t want you to know that)
Monsanto-related emails reveal a shocking truth about “independent research”
In emails obtained by US Right to Know, a non-profit organization working for transparency in the nation’s food system, it is abundantly clear that executives for Monsanto engaged in fundraising for Academics Review.
The emails, which were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal communications between Academics Review co-founder Bruce Chassy ,Ph.D. – a professor emeritus at University of Illinois – and assorted PR operatives, Monsanto employees, and bigwigs in the biotech industry.
As Carey Gillam, researcher director of US Right to Know, asserts: “Industry players cloaked pro-GMO messaging within a veil of independent expertise.”
Self-described “independent expert” blatantly looking for cash
A March 11, 2010 email exchange between Chassy and Jay Byrne, a former head of communications at Monsanto who now helms his own PR firm, puts fundraising front and center.
“Well, I suggest we work on the money (for all of us) first and quickly!” Byrne writes.
Eric Sachs, a senior public relations officer for Monsanto, was also in communication with Chassy, and even offered his help in getting trade groups on board.
“I can help motivate CLI (Crop Life International) /BIO (Biotechnology Innovation Organization) /Council for Biotechnology Information to support….”
Later in the email, Sachs brainstorms, “The problem is one of expert engagement, and that could be solved by paying experts to provide responses.” And – probably the most revealing sentence – “The key will be keeping Monsanto in the background so as not to harm the credibility of the information.”
Truth exposed: Professor Chassy is on the Monsanto payroll
According to an investigation by Chicago TV station WBEZ News, Professor Chassy was paid more than $57,000 over 23 months to “take his show on the road” – traveling, writing and speaking about GMOs.
In fact, Professor Chassy has collaborated on several projects with Monsanto to allay public concerns about GMOs – while masquerading as an independent academic. According to WEBZ News, Monsanto eventually funneled at least $5.1 million in undisclosed money through the University of Illinois Foundation to university employees and programs between 2005 and 2015. As per requests by Chassy and the university, Monsanto deposited the payments through the University of Illinois Foundation, which is protected from public scrutiny.
Although Chassy was given the opportunity to disclose his financial ties to Monsanto on state and university forms aimed at detecting potential conflicts of interest, he did not.
Incidentally, Professor Chassy is featured as an “independent expert” on the GMO Answers website. The website, funded by a half-dozen agrichemical companies, generally trumpets the merits of GMO foods. Academics Review co-founder David Tribe, Ph.D. – a lecturer at University of Melbourne – also appears on GMO Answers.
Report cited in articles demonizing the organic food industry
Articles in trade publications, including Food Navigator and Food Safety News and Hoard’s Dairyman, utilized splashy headlines to accuse the organic food industry of disinformation, deception, and scare tactics.
In a quasi-humorous article for the New York Post, Naomi Schaffer Riley decried the “tyranny of the organic mommy mafia,” and demeaned the parents who choose organic food for their children as snobbish, arrogant, overly controlling and engaging in “an outgrowth of helicopter parenting.”
Henry I. Miller, a Hoover Institute fellow and vocal supporter of corporate interests, used the AR report as source material to attack organic farming in such high-profile publications as Newsweek, the National Review and the Wall Street Journal.
As for Professor Chassy, he describes the publishing of his emails under the FOIA as an assault on his 40 years of science, research and teaching. He defends the financial support as “appropriate, commonplace and needed to further the public interest,” and insists that Academics Review “only accepts unrestricted donations from non-corporate sources, and does not solicit or accept funds from any source for specific research.”
Unfortunately, the emails tell a different story.
References:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stacy-malkan/monsanto-fingerprints-fou_b_10757524.html
http://nypost.com/2014/04/19/the-tyranny-of-the-organic-mommy-mafia

onawah
24th March 2017, 17:00
MONSANTO DEFEATED IN CALIFORNIA ROUNDUP CASE
( Let's hope this sticks! )
MONDAY, MARCH 13, 2017
http://uspirg.org/news/usp/victory-public-health-monsanto-defeated-california-roundup-case


Fresno, Calif. — A district court judge last week dismissed Monsanto’s lawsuit against the California Environmental Protection Agency. Based on the ruling, consumers will soon be informed of the health risks of Roundup and other products containing glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup.

“This decision is an important victory for public health in California,” says Kara Cook-Schultz, National Director of U.S. PIRG's campaign to Ban Roundup Now, “New evidence keeps coming to light showing that Roundup is a risk to our health. California absolutely should be able to warn its citizens that Roundup has the potential to cause cancer.”

The lawsuit started in 2016 when the California EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment announced it would list glyphosate as a carcinogen under Proposition 65. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Roundup. Once listed as a carcinogen, businesses have to provide a warning label about the carcinogenic potential of the product to consumers using labels, signs, and/or notices. Further, a listed chemical cannot be discharged into drinking water.

Faced with these restrictions on Roundup, Monsanto filed a lawsuit to prevent glyphosate from being added to California’s Proposition 65 list. The judge dismissed Monsanto’s arguments last week.

Roundup is the most-used weed killer in the country. Nearly 300 million pounds of Roundup are applied in the U.S. every year. Recent studies have found glyphosate in infant formula, beer, wine, and breast milk.

U.S. PIRG's Ban Roundup Now campaign has been fighting to get the EPA to ban Roundup, and is working with local communities in California and across the country to limit the use of Roundup.

“The more we know, the more it’s clear that the health risks far outweigh the convenience of killing weeds with Roundup,” said Cook-Schultz. “California’s decision to list glyphosate and this court ruling are important steps toward weeding out the use of this chemical.”

onawah
24th March 2017, 17:57
Zika vaccine: watch out—it will alter your DNA
March 24 2017
by Jon Rappoport
Explosive details
by Jon Rappoport
March 24, 2017
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/03/24/zika-vaccine-watch-out-it-will-alter-your-dna/

First, I’ll lay out a little background—

In many previous articles, I’ve established there is no convincing evidence the Zika virus causes the birth defect called microcephaly. (Zika archive here)

Basically, Brazilian researchers, in the heart of the purported “microcephaly epidemic,” decided to stop their own investigation and simply assert Zika was the culprit. At that point, they claimed that, out of 854 cases of microcephaly, only 97 showed “some relationship” to Zika.

You need to understand that these figures actually show evidence AGAINST Zika. When researchers are trying to find the cause of a condition, they should be able to establish, as a first step, that the cause is present in all cases (or certainly an overwhelming percentage).

This never happened. The correlation between the presence of Zika and microcephaly was very, very weak.

As a second vital step, researchers should be able to show that the causative virus is, in every case, present in large amounts in the body. Otherwise, there is not enough of it to create harm. MERE PRESENCE OF THE VIRUS IS NOT ENOUGH. With Zika, proof it was present in microcephaly-babies in large amounts has never been shown.

But researchers pressed on. A touted study in the New England Journal of Medicine claimed Zika infected brain cells in the lab. IRRELEVANT. Cells in labs are not human beings. The study also stated that Zika infected baby mice. IRRELEVANT. Mice are not humans. And these mice in the lab had been specially altered or bred to be “vulnerable to Zika.” USELESS AND IRRELEVANT.

All this fraud set the stage for the Zika DNA vaccine. Yes, it is under development. It is, in fact, an example of the next generation of vaccines. And this is why you should watch out.

Here is an excerpt from a US National Institutes of Health press release (8/3/16) (here, here, and, the booster to the DNA vaccine here):

“The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health [NIH], has launched a clinical trial of a vaccine candidate intended to prevent Zika virus infection.”

“Scientists at NIAID’s Vaccine Research Center (VRC) developed the investigational vaccine — called the NIAID Zika virus investigational DNA vaccine — earlier this year.”

“The investigational Zika vaccine includes a small, circular piece of DNA — called a plasmid — that scientists engineered to contain genes that code for proteins of the Zika virus. When the vaccine is injected into the arm muscle, cells [in the person’s body] read the genes and make Zika virus proteins, which self-assemble into virus-like particles. The body mounts an immune response to these particles, including neutralizing antibodies and T cells. DNA vaccines do not contain infectious material — so they cannot cause a vaccinated individual to become infected with Zika — and have been shown to be safe in previous clinical trials for other diseases.”

SYNTHESIZED GENES ARE INJECTED INTO THE BODY.

That’s why it’s called a DNA vaccine.

Beginning to wonder what this is all about?

It’s about PERMANENTLY ALTERING YOUR DNA.

It’s about altering the DNA of every person on the planet who is vaccinated.

New York Times, 3/9/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” The article describes the frontier of research. Here are key quotes that illustrate the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was nearly two years ago.]

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Here is the punchline: “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.”

Alteration of the human genetic makeup.

Not just a “visit.” Permanent residence. And once a person’s DNA is changed, doesn’t it follow that he/she will pass on that change to the next generation of children, and so on, down the line?

The Times article taps Nobel laureate Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:

“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”

By now you should be seeing the larger picture. A virus (Zika)…

Never proved to cause anything…

Becomes the occasion for developing and injecting a vaccine…

That is actually a group of synthetic genes…

Which will alter your DNA.

onawah
24th March 2017, 18:09
A Revolution For Vaccine Truth--Action Alert

By: Elissa Meininger – Health Policy Analysthttp://bolenreport.com/revolution-vaccine-truth-washington-dc/




The anti-vaccination movement is growing so fast it is almost impossible to keep track of everything that is happening. Social media is NOT the friend of social activists in most ways, but what it DOES provide is the ability to spread information quickly, and thoroughly, no matter how hard FaceBook tries to suppress it – and it does try to do that.

But, no matter how many barriers FaceBook puts up, social activists have figured out how to move right around them, ignoring the brainless advertising, and propaganda delivery, proceeding toward important information delivery.

One of the important activities social activists involved in the anti-vaccine movement have achieved is the outright elimination of racial strife.

And how was THAT done, you ask?

Los Angeles area resident Michelle Maher Ford, one day, ignoring years of socially perceived racial strife between blacks, whites, etc., picked up the phone and started calling activists in the black community trying to bring attention to the findings of the CDC whistleblower William Thompson, and what he explained to Brian Hooker about how little black boys were three times as likely to be injured by vaccines as other children. Fearless in her endeavor, Michelle reached EVEN into what some white people see as “the most angry of black activist groups, the Nation of Islam,” ultimately having a cordial meeting of minds with Minister Louis Farrakhan himself in his home.

And she struck gold…


Their multiple meetings – which developed into a unified campaign between people more interested in joining forces to protect the future of all our children, than in arguing about skin color and past history.

That alliance is flourishing – and represents an integral part of the anti-vaccine movement. One of their organized activities is happening in Washington DC starting March 30th, 2017. You need to take a hard look at what is developing. Why?

Because it is the new America.

IF you recognize that the corporate, mainstream media withholds the truth and no longer provides oversight to investigate government corruption…

IF you believe the health of Americans has been adversely affected by the media’s failure to publicize the truth about various toxins entering our air, water, food supplies and medicines… ​​

IF you believe the press has failed the people by becoming nothing more than an instrument of government directed propaganda…

Join us on March 30, 2017, For “National Call-In Day” to promote vaccine safety and reform.

Join the https://worldmercuryproject.org/ foir the call in project and/or

Join us in Washington, DC, on ​March 31, 2017 with http://www.revolutionfortruth.org/

As you can see, big things are about to happen in the Washington Swamp at the end of March.

YOU can be part of this clean up effort and be able to tell your grandchildren you were there….either in DC or on the home front to support this Revolution. Yes, this is a Revolution in the making.

President Trump needs our help. He promised to clean out the swamp in Washington, and, even before the inauguration, he asked Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., for help to clean up the scientific fraud and other scandals at the CDC regarding vaccines. It’s a big job. Trump campaigned on the belief that vaccines cause autism and wants to make sure he and all of us feel confident that vaccines are safe and effective as advertized.

Kennedy’s first public action was to hold a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington to show the highpoints of the CDC’s scientific fraud and corruption. Of course, the mainstream press didn’t cover it. So, here it is, one hour of riveting information about the issue of vaccines the press didn’t want you to know. Why? Because Big Pharma’s advertising dollars represent 70% of media news departments’ budgets. You might want to rummage through the rest of the site to see why Trump called upon Bobby. And, while you are at it, you might want to read Bobby’s “infamous” article about a massive scientific cover up at the CDC, Deadly Immunity, he wrote in 2005. It’s definitely not for the fainthearted.

Then there is the 2011 article Bobby wrote about a related scandal where CDC researcher, Poul Thorsen, absconded with a million dollars. Since this article was published, Thorsen has been indicted on 22 counts of money laundering, wire fraud and embezzlement. He remains on the loose in Denmark awaiting extradition. Lots of people want somebody to review all his scientific studies because it is believed his job was to massage the data to make the data fit the CDC’s political formula.

If you haven’t seen VAXXED: From Coverup to Catastrophe, this might be the time to do it so you know where Trump and Kennedy are coming from. Trump met with the VAXXED movie people during the campaign so he knows all the gory details. Yes, you may have to pay four bucks to stream it, but this money goes toward distributing the video to members of Congress and members of legislatures in 30 states that now have legislation trying to take vaccination exemptions away, in some cases, even medical ones.

If you are not familiar with the depth of cover up in regards the damage done by vaccines, its not just about kids. Vaccine Syndrome is the story about how even the Department of Defense refuses to acknowledge the damage done to our military personnel thanks to the anthrax vaccine. You might also take the time to view Trace Amounts which includes a vivid example about how civilian adults can also be damaged by vaccines.

And then there’s President Trump…

Just in case you missed it, during the recent presidential election campaign, Donald Trump uttered one of the most politically incorrect statements anyone can say in public. “I believe vaccines cause autism.” Nobody ever gets away with saying that, even if they are doctors, and if it happens to slip out in the public airwaves, some media hall monitor quickly points out that the person must be mistaken. According to 100% of the media, everyone knows the science is settled and that vaccines are perfectly safe and 100% effective. I’m sure you would like to know, even Dr. Ben Carson and Dr. Rand Paul have been properly corrected and all they said during the campaign was they have concerns about the vaccine schedule.

The point of the VAXXED movie is to show how a whistleblower was ordered to destroy evidence showing that vaccines DID CAUSE DAMAGE and for some reason, little black boys were damaged three times as much as the other kids. In that case, all they needed to do was delay vaccinating this little boys for a few months, but, oh, no, that would have meant that there WAS a problem with the vaccines. Many years of damage continued to be done JUST because of that political decision. How many thousands of little boys are now autistic and unable to function normally just because of that decision?!

Why is this important?

If you think your participation in this massive campaign doesn’t matter, think again. In the 1990s, the FDA wanted to remove dietary supplements from the marketplace because they represented “a disincentive for drug research”. Back then, all we had were telephones, public fax machines and leaflets we could pass out at health food stores. Despite those limitations, we managed to send 3,000,000 handwritten letters to Congress to support passage of the Dietary Supplement Health & Education of 1994. (DSHEA). This grassroots citizen action generated more letters to Congress than any other issue at that time.

Because we now have the internet and a multitude of social media outlets, we have the capacity to overwhelm Congress and the White House with so many contacts from ordinary citizens, this will give President Trump and Congress the leverage they need to face down the corporations (read Big Pharma) and their cronies who now run our government from the cloakroom.

I’ve been in grassroots activism since the DSHEA campaign and I’ve never seen a more well-organized campaign or a more worthy mission. This is about the health of ALL our children. Thanks to the VAXXED movie we have the CDC dead to rights and from there, other evidence will emerge to expose the FDA and all the other health agencies that have been running roughshod over our health for decades!

Please join The Revolution For Truth

A national call-in day for vaccine safety and reform has been announced by Revolution For Truth, in partnership with the World Mercury Project and other organizations seeking to protect the lives of children.

Natural News is encouraging everyone to join the call-in efforts on March 30th (see call-in numbers below) or join the live march in Washington D.C. (click here for the rally schedule).

Speakers at the event include Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Del Bigtree, Dr. Brian Hooker, Minister Tony Muhammad, Barbara Loe Fisher, Dr. Judy Mikovits, Zen Honeycutt and many more.

Natural News will be covering the event editorially, posting photos and video footage as the event unfolds. (Mike Adams will not be present at the event but will be covering it from his news desk.)

March 30th is the day we all bypass the lying mainstream media and demand action to reform vaccines! It’s time to outlaw toxic ingredients like mercury and aluminum while holding vaccine manufacturers accountable for the damage caused by their defective products.

Here’s the full announcement with call-in instructions, courtesy of Catherine J. Frompovich via Activist Post.

Revolution for Truth, Washington, DC
The National Call-in-Day in Support of Vaccine Safety and Reform on March 30 and 31, 2017.

PLEASE FOLLOW THROUGH ON THE SUGGESTIONS LISTED BELOW.

IT’S NOW OR NEVER, SINCE BIG PHARMA AND VESTED INTERESTS WANT US TO TAKE ALMOST 300 MORE NEW VACCINES THEY ARE SCHEDULED TO PUT INTO THE MARKET PLACE SOON.

National Call-in Day in Support of Vaccine Safety and Reform

On March 30th, please do the following:

Contact President Trump and say “Vaccine injuries are real and devastating. One in 68 children now has autism. Autism should be declared a national emergency and a higher priority. I support an independent vaccine safety commission.”
Contact your Senators and member of Congress (see below for contact information) and say “I want Congress to subpoena CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson and I support a vaccine safety commission.”
Lastly, sign the petition to President Trump asking him to implement comprehensive reforms of vaccine safety policies. (Please note that after you sign you will receive an email asking you to confirm your signature. Please confirm your signature or your signature will not be added.) March 31st is the last day to sign this petition and we must reach 100,000 signatures for the petition to reach President Trump.
To call the President:

Comments: (202)-456-1111
Switchboard: (202)-456-1414
TTY/TTD Comments: (202)-456-6213

To reach your Senators and Congressman/woman:

Call (202)-224-3121. You will need to call this number three times, twice to ask for each of your senators and once to reach your congressman/woman. The operator will ask you who you would like to be connected to. To find out, first visit https://www.callmycongress.com and enter your address. It will tell you the names of your two senators and your member of congress. (BONUS: This site also includes social media contact information.)

The hearing impaired can reach congress by calling (202)-225-1904.

Sample Script

If you are calling a Representative’s office, you can say: “Hello. My name is ________ and I’m calling to ask Representative _________ to subpoena CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson. It has been more than two years since Dr. Thompson came forward and acknowledged that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) threw away scientific results that showed a connection between vaccines and autism. By colluding with the pharmaceutical industry, thousands, if not millions, of children have developed autism. One in 68 children now has autism. It is time for Dr. William Thompson to speak to the American people and for the leaders of the CDC to be prosecuted. Autism should be declared a national emergency and a higher priority.”

**If you’re leaving a message on an answering machine, provide your phone number or email address so that the office can get back to you.

**Don’t be disappointed if you do not reach your member of congress directly. You will most likely talk to a receptionist or be asked to leave a voicemail. That is okay. All calls from constituents are tallied. The fact that you are their constituent and are taking the time to call is what it’s all about.

**Once you’ve made your calls, we’d love to hear how it went, so please drop us a note at info@revolution4truth.org.

Want to do more? Here are some other ways to take action on March 30th.

Tweet Your Support

President Trump loves Twitter so let’s cause a twitter storm in support of a vaccine safety commission. Tweet @realDonaldTrump & @POTUS and use the hashtags #RFKCommission & #Revolution4TRUTH.

Most congress members are now on Twitter and actively monitor feedback sent their way. Visit https://twitter.com/verified/us- congress/members to search for your congressional Twitter handles. Include the 2 hashtags. Insert the Twitter handle for your own Senators and Representative and the abbreviation for your own state in place of the example provided here:

#RFKCommission #Revolution4TRUTH@MyRepresentative (State) Subpoena Dr. William Thompson aka #cdcWHISTLEBLOWER

How to send a Tweet:

From your Twitter account (mobile or web), send a tweet beginning with the ‘hashtag’ the one with the # symbol, then the Twitter ‘handle’ the one with the @ symbol, include the URL www.revolutionfortruth.org.

Make sure to search #RFKCommission & #Revolution4TRUTH to see who else is tweeting/posting their support. Don’t forget to RETWEET!!

Sample Tweet

#RFKcommission #Revolution4TRUTH @JasonInTheHouse TIME 2 ACT > subpoena #CDCwhistleblower www.Revolution4TRUTH.org

Spread the Word on Facebook

Post your support on Facebook with a link to www.revolutionfortruth.org. Use the same hastags #RFKCommission & #Revolution4TRUTH throughout Facebook and include the messaging in support of President Trump’s Vaccine Safety Commission.

Also, search the hashtags and SHARE & LIKE posts from other activists!!

Let us know you’re helping spread the word by sending an email to >> info@revolution4truth.org

Have an idea on how to promote support for the Vaccine Safety Commission and the subpoena of CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson? Please share them with us by emailing us info@revolution4truth.org.

By: Elissa Meininger – Health Policy Analyst

onawah
12th May 2017, 02:42
Soon to Be Unleashed: A Major GMO Brainwashing Campaign, Paid for by You
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/05/17/taxpayer-money-corporate-propaganda.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=artTest_A3&utm_campaign=20170511Z1_UCM&et_cid=DM142899&et_rid=2002926409

Story at-a-glance -

The 2017 spending bill allocates $3 million for consumer education and outreach by the FDA and USDA to "promote understanding and acceptance of" biotechnology
Thirty-nine percent of Americans believe GMOs are worse for health than conventionally-grown foods; 55 percent believe organics are healthier than conventional; and 40 percent report eating mostly or some organic foods
Plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Monsanto say the company hired shills to steer online conversations about Roundup — the chemical most commonly used on GE crops — thereby manipulating public knowledge about its dangers
By Dr. Mercola

Did you know that the 2017 spending bill1,2,3 includes a rider allocating $3 million for consumer education and outreach by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to "promote understanding and acceptance of" biotechnology?

The deal was recently passed by the Senate, 79 to 18, “under a bipartisan agreement to keep the government funded through the end of September,” The Washington Post reports.4 In other words, if you are American, you are paying for Monsanto to spread their pernicious propaganda. The fact that they can get away with this and slip it in to avoid government shutdown is dystopian, to say the least.

Not only have the government and the food and chemical technology industries fought to prevent the labeling of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), your tax dollars are now to be spent on efforts to “assure” you that genetically engineered (GE) foods are of no concern.

FDA and USDA to Promote Biotech and Chemical Technologies
To quote The Washington Post, “The money is to be used to tout ‘the environmental, nutritional, food safety, economic and humanitarian impacts’ of biotech crops and their derivative food products.” This joint effort by the FDA and USDA is an outrage. As noted by Rep. Nita M. Lowey, D-N.Y., who unsuccessfully fought to get the rider struck from the bill:5

“It is not the responsibility of the FDA to mount a government-controlled propaganda campaign to convince the American public that genetically modified foods are safe. The FDA has to regulate the safety of our food supply and medical devices. They are not, nor should they be, in the pro-industry advertising business.”

A Pew Research Center study6 published last year found 39 percent of Americans believe GMO foods are worse for health than conventionally-grown foods; 55 percent believe organics are healthier than conventional; and 40 percent report eating mostly or some organic foods.

Still, nearly half of all Americans (48 percent) believe GMOs are no different from non-GMO foods and 10 percent believe GMOs are actually better for health than non-GMOs. Clearly, the chemical technology industry wants to prevent growth of anti-GMO sentiment, but using tax dollars for indoctrination purposes simply should not be permitted.

Army of Shills Steer Online Discussions
In related news, plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Monsanto say the company hired an army of shills via third parties to steer online conversations about Roundup — the chemical most commonly used on GE crops — to counter any and all negative comments with corporate propaganda, thereby manipulating and stifling public knowledge about its dangers.7 As reported by Reuters:8

“The plaintiffs alleged that Monsanto targeted all online materials and even social media comments that indicate potential dangers of its products … ‘Monsanto even started the aptly-named ‘Let Nothing Go’ program to leave nothing, not even Facebook comments, unanswered …

[T]hrough a series of third parties, it employs individuals who appear to have no connection to the industry, who in turn post positive comments on news articles and Facebook posts, defending Monsanto, its chemicals and GMOs,’ the document reads.

On a larger scale, Monsanto allegedly ‘quietly funnels money to ‘think tanks’ such as the ‘Genetic Literacy Project’ and the ‘American Council on Science and Health’ — organizations intended to shame scientists and highlight information helpful to Monsanto and other chemical producers,’ according to the plaintiffs.

The accusations are backed by a batch of emails, used in court as evidence … [Ph.D] William Moar … reportedly said at a conference in January 2015 that the company had ‘an entire department,’ dedicated to ‘debunking’ science which disagreed with the agrochemical giant’s own research.”

EPA Official Colluded With Chemical Giant on Public’s Dime
Documents entered into evidence in the lawsuits against Monsanto also strongly suggest at least one Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official has been working on Monsanto’s behalf — another breach of public trust and misuse of public funds. After the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) declared glyphosate a probable human carcinogen9,10 in 2015, Monsanto has relied on the EPA’s 2016 determination that glyphosate is “not likely to be carcinogenic” to humans.11

However, evidence suggests Jess Rowland, former associate director of the EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), conspired with Monsanto to protect the company’s interests by manipulating and preventing toxicological investigations. Rowland was a key author of the EPA’s controversial glyphosate report, and correspondence between EPA toxicologist Marion Copley and Rowland suggests Rowland colluded with Monsanto to find glyphosate non-carcinogenic.12,13

Documents also reveal Rowland warned Monsanto of the IARC’s determination months before it was made public,14 giving the company time to plan its defense, which included a vicious, coordinated attack on the IARC,15 going so far as to calling on the U.S. government to defund the organization, despite its reputation for being the global gold-standard for carcinogenicity studies.16

In January 2017, the American Chemistry Council formed a front group called Campaign for Accuracy in Public Health Research17 (CAPHR), the express purpose of which is to discredit the IARC18 and seek to reform the IARC Monographs Program, which evaluates and determines the carcinogenicity of chemicals.

The day CAPHR launched, the organization took to Twitter with a #glyphosateisvital campaign, proclaiming the weed killer is essential to “maintain the production of safe, affordable food.” All of this goes to show you simply cannot trust the information you get from social media. Many industry defenders are nothing more than sock puppets paid to spread corporate propaganda while posing as independent experts and/or well-informed regular Joes.

Corporate Ghostwriters May Have Influenced US and European Regulators
Court documents also suggest Monsanto employees ghostwrote parts of two scientific reports — one in 2000 and another in 2013 — which the EPA then relied on to conclude glyphosate is non-carcinogenic.19

This, we are expected to believe, is better science than that of the IARC — a world-renowned, global, independent research organization. These ghostwritten reports may also have influenced the European Union’s (EU) decision that Roundup was safe. According to Euro Observer:20

“A Monsanto employee admits in one of the emails that the company wrote a study on glyphosate and later attributed the work to academics. Another study on glyphosate was 'redesigned' with help of company scientists in order to create a more [favorable] outcome, the internal emails suggest.

EUobserver and OneWorld have discovered that both of the studies were relied on by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) when it evaluated the safety of glyphosate in 2015 as part of the EU [license] renewal process.”

Correspondence also shows Rowland helped stop an investigation into glyphosate by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry on Monsanto’s behalf. According to the email, Rowland said he should “deserve a medal,” were he to pull it off.21,22,23 As it turns out, the review was in fact canceled, suggesting Rowland’s value to the company.

Indeed, emails suggest Monsanto was planning to lean on Rowland’s significant influence for their glyphosate defense after his retirement from the EPA,24 and Rowland’s post-EPA work indeed includes consulting for three chemical companies that are close associates of Monsanto.25,26

Dow Chemical Pulls Strings to Void Government Pesticide Findings

Monsanto clearly isn’t the only multinational company pulling strings within the U.S. government. During the Obama administration, the EPA concluded chlorpyrifos, a nerve gas-cum-pesticide made by Dow Chemical, which is widely used on citrus, apples, cherries and other crops, could pose health risks to consumers.

Even tiny doses were found to impact brain development in infants. A ban of the chemical’s use on food had been proposed, but the Trump-installed EPA chief, Scott Pruitt,27 recently denied the petition.28,29

Earth Justice called the decision "unconscionable," vowing to fight the decision in court. A major problem with this chemical is that it’s become a common water contaminant, and the EPA’s own evaluation found it poses serious risks to 1,778 of the 1,835 endangered plants and animals assessed.

Despite this damning evidence, a legal team representing Dow Chemical and two other organophosphate manufacturers sent letters30 to the agencies responsible for joint enforcement of the Endangered Species Act,31,32,33 asking them to ignore the EPAs findings, saying the agency’s scientific basis was unreliable.

It’s interesting how on the one hand, Monsanto claims the EPA is the best judge of toxic chemicals when it suits them, while other industry giants accuse EPA scientists of not knowing what they’re doing when the evidence impacts their bottom line.

Bloomberg recently reported Dow Chemical’s first-quarter lobbying expenditures for 2017 are nearly eight times greater than its 2008 expenditures,34 and financial filings reveal the company hired a lobbying firm to meet with Congressmen in the weeks before the USDA’s and EPA’s deadline to take action on chlorpyrifos.

Trump also appointed Dow CEO Andrew Liveris to head a White House manufacturing council. All of that considered, is it any surprise that chlorpyrifos gets a free pass? With conflicts of interest such as these running the show, the health of Americans is in serious jeopardy. You simply cannot depend on government agencies to protect your best interests anymore.

International Reports Call for Global Phase Out of Pesticides
When you consider the volume of evidence against pesticides, it’s easy to understand why the chemical technology industry is so keen on having government promote their propaganda. They are losing the information war, so they’re upping the ante. Several heavy-hitting, international reports have surfaced in recent years, highlighting the serious impact agricultural chemicals are having on human health, including but not limited to the following:

• According to a recent United Nations (UN) report,35 pesticides are responsible for 200,000 acute poisoning deaths each year, and chronic exposure has been linked to cancer, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease, hormone disruption, developmental disorders and sterility.36

The latest USDA report on pesticide residues in food reveals only 15 percent of all the food samples tested in 2015 were free from pesticide residues, compared to 41 percent the previous year.37 This goes to show just how quickly our food is being poisoned, and how significant a source food is when it comes to chemical exposures.

According to Dr. Joseph E. Pizzorno,38 founding president of the internationally recognized Bastyr University, toxins in the modern food supply are “a major contributor to, and in some cases the cause of, virtually all chronic diseases.”

The answer, the UN report says, is reducing or eliminating pesticides around the world. It proposes a global treaty to phase out toxic pesticides and transition to a more sustainable agricultural system. Contrary to industry PR, many studies have confirmed pesticide use can be significantly reduced without impacting production:39

• A World Health Organization (WHO) report warns environmental pollution — which includes but is not limited to pesticides — kills 1.7 million children annually. To address this problem, the authors recommend reducing or phasing out agricultural chemicals

• A report by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics40 warns that chemical exposures, which includes pesticides, now represent a major threat to human health and reproduction41,42

• An Endocrine Society task force has also issued a scientific statement43,44 on endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs, i.e., chemicals that alter the normal function of your hormones), noting that the health effects are such that everyone needs to take proactive steps to avoid them.

On the list of known EDCs are organophosphate pesticides and DDE, a breakdown product of DDT. Since it lingers in the environment, exposure still occurs via food even though DDT is no longer in use.

Exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals costs the European Union (EU) €157 billion ($172 billion) annually in women’s health care costs, infertility and male reproductive dysfunctions, birth defects, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and neurobehavioral disorders45,46,47

• One in 5 cancers are thought to be due to environmental chemicals and, according to recent studies, not only can miniscule amounts of chemicals amplify each other’s adverse effects when combined,48 this even applies to chemicals deemed “safe” on their own.

Basically, the analysis49 found that the cumulative effects of non-carcinogenic chemicals can act in concert to synergistically produce carcinogenic activity — a finding that overturns and more or less nullifies conventional testing for carcinogens

Could Your Health Be at Risk From Glyphosate-Contaminated Food?
Glyphosate-contaminated food may pose serious health risks, and this is perhaps one of the greatest selling points of organic foods. Tests by the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) show 93 percent of Americans have glyphosate in their urine,50 and food is the biggest source unless you live in an agricultural area or dispense glyphosate-based chemicals at work or at home.

Contaminated drinking water is another. Disturbingly, a recent animal study51 found Roundup causes fatty liver disease at 0.1 parts per billion (ppb) in drinking water, which is 14,000 times lower than the concentration permitted in U.S. drinking water (700 ppb). According to Health Research Institute Laboratories, the average level of glyphosate in the U.S. population is 3.3 ppb52 — 33 times higher than the level at which rats developed fatty liver.

The OCA's urine testing also suggests Americans have a daily intake of glyphosate that is about 1,000-fold higher than the level found to cause fatty liver disease in animals. Another recent study found Roundup adversely affects the development of female rats' uteruses, increasing the risk for both infertility and uterine cancer.53 So why is no action taken to protect human health?

It really boils down to the fact that without glyphosate-based herbicides the GE seed business would collapse, and chemical technology companies, with their vast resources and revolving doors into government regulatory agencies, have managed to deceive people into thinking there's no problem.

How to Get Tested for Glyphosate
The USDA promised to begin testing food for residues of glyphosate as of April 1, but then canceled the plan,54 further delaying the truth about glyphosate contamination55 from emerging.

According to Health Research Institute Laboratories, desiccated crops such as non-GMO oats, wheat, garbanzo beans and lentils can contain glyphosate levels exceeding 1,000 ppb. I recently used this test for glyphosate and had no detectable levels — likely because I eat organic foods and rarely eat at restaurants.

The Health Research Institute has developed a glyphosate test kit for public use. I've recently gained access to a limited number of these kits, and no profit is made on their sale. I provide both a glyphosate water test kit and an environmental exposure test kit in my online store for those who want to assess their exposure.

onawah
14th May 2017, 17:14
AN ORGANIC FARM UNDER THREAT
14 hours ago
http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/an-organic-farm-under-threat/
There is a video at the link which I can't embed, but this youtube video explains the situation:
K3Y8Wn9gkXY

A total outrage of patently evil, sickening government overreach is currently underway in Sherman County, Oregon.
Azure Farms is a working, Certified Organic farm located in Moro, Central Oregon, in Sherman County. It has been Certified Organic for about 18 years. The farm produces almost all the organic wheat, field peas, barley, Einkorn, and beef for Azure Standard.

Sherman County is changing the interpretation of its statutory code from controlling noxious weeds to eradicating noxious weeds. These weeds include Morning Glory, Canada Thistle, and Whitetop, all of which have been on the farm for many years, but that only toxic chemicals will eradicate. Organic farming methods – at least as far as we know today – can only control noxious weeds — it is very difficult to eradicate them.

Sherman County may issue a Court Order on May 22, 2017, to quarantine Azure Farms and possibly to spray the whole farm with poisonous herbicides, contaminating them with Milestone, Escort and Roundup herbicides. Roundup contains glyphosate, a component of the Vietnam War era chemical weapon, Agent Orange, the use of which resulted in thousands of cancer deaths.

This outrageously intrusive action by Sherman County will destroy all the efforts Azure Farms has made for years to produce the very cleanest and healthiest food humanly possible. About 2,000 organic acres would be impacted; that is about 2.8 times the size of the City of London, England that could be sprayed with noxious, toxic, polluting herbicides.

To add insult to injury, the County intends to put a lien on the farm after poisoning it, to pay for the expense of the labor and chemicals used. This proposed action is completely unreasonable and would destroy an organic farm and pollute a massive area.

Frankly, this seems to me more like a case of fraudulent asset seizure than anything else. What if this were your land and your business, which your local county was attempting to not only destroy but also to take ownership of same until the costs of their destructive actions could be recouped. The evil of this case boggles the mind!

Take Action Now!

If you are concerned about where your food comes from, enjoy Organic and non-GMO food grown in the United States, and support organic farmers, contact Sherman County Court before May 22, 2017 (and preferably before May 17 when the next court discussion will be held).

Contact info:

Via email at lhernandez@co.sherman.or.us or
Call Lauren at 541-565-3416.
Raise your voice and speak up for yourself, your families and communities.

If enough voices that benefit from organic produce speak up, the County will understand that there are people who care about their food NOT containing toxic chemicals. And if the supporters of healthy food can have a louder voice than the supporters of toxic chemicals, every politician will listen. PLEASE take action today and share this message. Overwhelm the Sherman County representatives with your voice.

Take Action Today!

Email or call Sherman County via email at lhernandez@co.sherman.or.us or call Lauren at 541-565-3416.

Thank you for all your support.

Above all, please take action directly today or if by phone, on Monday.

Alexandra Bruce

onawah
16th May 2017, 14:29
This is SERIOUS and will set a very dangerous precedent if not stopped--please take action ( see the post directly above for links). Thanks.
Huge organic farm under threat; County will invade and spray Roundup May 15
by Jon Rappoport
Huge organic farm under threat: County will invade and spray Roundup if not stopped
What?? A county government is going to destroy a massive organic farm?
by Jon Rappoport
May 15, 2017
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/05/15/huge-organic-farm-under-threat-county-will-invade-and-spray-roundup/


“I have a great idea. We’re the Sherman County government. We have power. Let’s claim Azure Farms can’t control their weeds. Let’s come in and invade them with Roundup and other toxic chemicals. Let’s destroy their organic farm. We know the spraying won’t wipe out the weeds—it’ll make the situation worse. But who cares? Let’s open up ourselves to massive lawsuits. I’m sure Monsanto will give us some legal help. We can set a fantastic precedent. No organic farm is safe. No organic farmer has the right to protect his land from the government. Isn’t that a terrific idea?”

Government trespass, invasion?

So far, I have seen no coverage of this issue in Oregon newspapers. Why not? Also, I find nothing on the Sherman County, Oregon, government website about a massive spraying program.

A local government is going to decimate a huge organic farm with herbicide?

Azure Farms, a 2000-acre organic farm in Oregon, states it is under threat from the local Sherman County government. Why? Because Sherman County officials are re-interpreting a law concerning the “control of noxious weeds,” so it means “eradication.”

These weeds can be controlled on an organic farm, but the only way they can be eliminated (according to conventional “science”) is by spraying. And that means Roundup and other toxic chemicals. That would decimate the organic nature of the farm. That would decertify it as an organic farm.

Further, according to Azure, Sherman County plans to put a lien on the farm, forcing it to pay for the spraying.

The deadline for expressing opposition is May 22. A better deadline is May 17.

Here is the complete press release from Azure Farms and the ways to register your concern:

Azure Farms is a working, certified organic farm located in Moro, central Oregon, in Sherman County. It has been certified organic for about 18 years. The farm produces almost all the organic wheat, field peas, barley, Einkorn, and beef for Azure Standard.

Sherman County is changing the interpretation of its statutory code from controlling noxious weeds to eradicating noxious weeds. These weeds include Morning Glory, Canada Thistle, and Whitetop, all of which have been on the farm for many years, but that only toxic chemicals will eradicate.

Organic farming methods – at least as far as we know today – can only control noxious weeds—it is very difficult to eradicate them.

Sherman County may be issuing a Court Order on May 22, 2017 to quarantine Azure Farms and possibly to spray the whole farm with poisonous herbicides, contaminating them with Milestone, Escort and Roundup herbicides.

This will destroy all the efforts Azure Farms has made for years to produce the very cleanest and healthiest food humanly possible. About 2,000 organic acres would be impacted; that is about 1.5 times the size of the city center of Philadelphia that is about to be sprayed with noxious, toxic, polluting herbicides.

The county would then put a lien on the farm to pay for the expense of the labor and chemicals used.

Contact Sherman County Court before May 17 when the next court discussion will be held.
Contact info:
1. Via email at lhernandez@co.sherman.or.us or
2. Call Lauren at 541-565-3416.

Show Sherman County that people care about their food NOT containing toxic chemicals.

Overwhelm the Sherman County representatives with your voices!

—end of Azure Farms statement—

Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor to jonathanturley.org, has been covering this story. He reached out and obtained a devastating letter from agricultural scientist, Charles Benbrook. Benbrook has his critics within the conventional pesticide and GMO research community. Here is Smith’s piece and Dr. Benbrook’s letter:

Yesterday I fielded an article concerning a rather distressing mandate by an Oregon county weed control agency seeking to force the application of hazardous herbicides onto a 2,000 acre organic farm owned by Azure Farms. Sherman County Oregon maintains this scorched earth policy is necessary to abate, or more specifically “eradicate”, weeds listed by state statute as noxious.

Now, the scientific community is responding to this overreaching government action by acting in the interests of health and responsible environmental stewardship through advocacy in the hopes that officials in Sherman County will reconsider their mandate.

Dr. Charles Benbrook is a highly credentialed research professor and expert serving on several boards of directors for agribusiness and natural resources organizations. Having read news of Sherman County’s actions, he penned an authoritative response I believe will make informative reading for those concerned by present and future implications in the forced use of herbicides under the rubric of noxious weed eradication, and the damage to organic farming generally arising from such mandates.

Charles Benbrook has a PhD in agricultural economics from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and an undergraduate degree from Harvard University. He currently is a Visiting Professor at Newcastle University in the UK…

He was a Research Professor at Washington State University from 2012-2015, and served as the Chief Scientist of The Organic Center from 2006-2012. He was the Executive Director of the Board on Agriculture in the National Academy of Sciences from 1984-1990. He was the staff director of the Subcommittee on Department [USDA] Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture of the House Committee on Agriculture (1981-1983). He worked as an agricultural and natural resources policy expert in the Council for Environmental Quality in the last 1.5 years of the Carter Administration. He began Benbrook Consulting Services (BCS) in 1990, and continues to carry out projects with a wide range of clients via BCS

He coauthors an informative website Hygeia-Analytics.com.

I reached out to Dr. Benbrook and received permission to reprint his letter in the hope that with more attention, including that from the scientific community, we can arrive at a reasonable solution to the county’s concerns. Here is Dr. Benbrook’s letter:…

Tom McCoy
Joe Dabulskis
Sherman County Commissioners
Lauren Hernandez
Administrative Assistant
Sherman County, Oregon
Rod Asher
Sherman Country Weed District Supervisor
Moro, Oregon
Alexis Taylor
Director
Oregon Department of Agriculture

Dear Ms. Hernandez el al:

I live in Wallowa County. I learned today of the recent, dramatic change in the Sherman County noxious weed control program and the plan to forcibly spray a 2,000-acre organic farm in the county.

Over a long career, I have studied herbicide use and efficacy, public and private weed control efforts, the linkages between herbicide use and the emergence and spread of resistant weeds, and the public health and environmental impacts of herbicide use and other weed management strategies.

I served for six years, along with fellow Oregonian Barry Bushue, past-president of the Oregon Farm Bureau, on the USDA’s AC 21 Agricultural Biotechnology Advisory Committee. Issues arising from herbicide use were a frequent topic of discussion during our Committee’s deliberations.

I have published multiple scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals on glyphosate, its human health risks, and the impact of genetically engineered crops on overall herbicide use and the spread of resistant weeds. In a separate email, I will forward you copies of my published research relevant to the use of herbicides, and glyphosate in particular.

The notion that Sherman County can eradicate noxious weeds by blanket herbicide spraying is deeply misguided. I cannot imagine a single, reputable university weed scientist in the State supporting the idea that an herbicide-based noxious weed eradication program would work (i.e., eradicate the target weeds) in Oregon, or any other state. To hear another opinion from one of the State’s most widely known and respected weed scientists, I urge the County to consult with Dr. Carol Mallory-Smith, Oregon State University.

I also doubt any corporate official working for Monsanto, the manufacturer of glyphosate (Roundup), would agree or endorse the notion that any long-established weed in Sherman County, noxious or otherwise, could be eradicated via blanket spraying with Roundup, or for that matter any combination of herbicides.

Before proceeding with any county-mandated herbicide use justified by the goal of eradication, I urge the County to seek concurrence from the herbicide manufacturer that they believe use of their product will likely eradicate your named, target, noxious weeds.

Given that almost no one with experience in weed management believes that any long-established weed, noxious or otherwise, can be eradicated with herbicides, one wonders why the County has adopted such a draconian change in its noxious weed control program. I can think of two plausible motivations – a desire by companies and individuals involved in noxious weed control activities, via selling or applying herbicides, to increase business volume and profits; or, an effort to reduce or eliminate acreage in the Country that is certified organic.

Weeds are classified as noxious when they prone to spread, are difficult to control, and pose a public health or economic threat to citizens, public lands, and/or farming and ranching operations. Ironically, by far the fastest growing and mostly economically damaging noxious weeds in the U.S. are both noxious and spreading because they have developed resistance to commonly applied herbicides, and especially glyphosate.

There is near-universal agreement in the weed science community nationwide, and surely as well in the PNW, that over-reliance on glyphosate (Roundup) over the last two decades has created multiple, new noxious weeds posing serious economic, environmental, and public health threats.

In fact, over 120 million acres of cultivated cropland in the U.S. is now infested with one or more glyphosate-resistant weed (for details, see http://cehn-healthykids.org/herbicide-use/resistant-weeds/.

The majority of glyphosate-resistant weeds are in the Southeast and Midwest, where routine, year-after-year planting of Roundup Ready crops has led to heavy and continuous selection pressure on weed populations, pressure that over three-to-six years typically leads to the evolution of genetically resistant weed phenotypes, that can then take off, spreading across tens of millions of acres in just a few years.

Ask any farmer in Georgia, or Iowa, or Arkansas whether they would call “noxious” the glyphosate-resistant kochia, Palmer amaranth, Johnson grass, marestail, or any of a dozen other glyphosate-resistant weeds in their fields.

It is virtually certain that an herbicide-based attempt to eradicate noxious weeds in Sherman County would fail. It would also be extremely costly, and would pose hard-to-predict collateral damage on non-target plants from drift, and on human health and the environment. But even worse, it would also, almost certainly, accelerate the emergence and spread of a host of weeds resistant to the herbicides used in the program.

This would, in turn, leave the county, and the county’s farmers with not just their existing suite of noxious weeds to deal with, but a new generation of them resistant to glyphosate, or whatever other herbicides are widely used.

Sherman County’s proposal, while perhaps well meaning, will simply push the herbicide use-resistant weed treadmill into high gear. Just as farmers in other parts of the county have learned over the last 20 years, excessive reliance on glyphosate, or herbicides over-all, accomplishes only one thing reliably – it accelerates the emergence and spread of resistant weeds, requiring applications of more, and often more toxic herbicides, and so on before some one, or something breaks this vicious cycle.

I urge you to take into account two other consequences if the County pursues this deeply flawed strategy. Certified organic food products grown and processed in Oregon, and distributed by Oregon-based companies like Azure and the Organically Grown Company, are highly regarded throughout the U.S. for exceptional quality, consistency, and value.

Plus, export demand is growing rapidly across several Pacific Rim nations for high-value, certified organic foods and wine from Oregon. Triggering a high-profile fight over government-mandated herbicide spraying on certified organic fields in Sherman County will come as a shock to many people, who are under the impression that all Oregonians, farmers and consumers alike, are committed to a vibrant, growing, and profitable organic food industry.

Does Sherman County really want to erode this halo benefiting the marketing of not just organic products, but all food and beverages from Oregon?

Second, if Sherman County is serious about weed eradication, it will have to mandate widespread spraying countywide, and not just on organic farms, and not just for one year. The public reaction will be swift, strong, and build in ferocity. It will likely lead to civil actions of the sort that can trigger substantial, unforeseen costs and consequences. I am surely not the only citizen of the State that recalls the tragic events last year in Malheur County.

Plus, I guarantee you that the County, the herbicide applicators, and the manufacturers of the herbicides applied, under force of law on organic or other farms, will face a torrent of litigation seeking compensatory damages for loss of reputation, health risks, and the loss of premium markets and prices.

I have followed litigation of this sort for decades, and have served as an expert witness in several herbicide-related cases. While it is obviously premature to start contemplating the precise legal theories and statutes that will form the crux of future litigation, the County should develop a realistic estimate of the legal costs likely to arise in the wake of this strategy, if acted upon, so that the County Commissioners can alert the public upfront regarding how they will raise the funds needed to deal with the costs of near-inevitable litigation.

—end of Dr. Benbrook’s letter—

Yesterday, Sunday, I emailed the Sherman County government asking them whether they really intend to pursue this lunatic program. If and when I receive an answer, I’ll post it.

I also emailed Azure Farms, asking why they believe there is no coverage of this issue in Oregon newspapers. If I get an answer, I’ll post that, too.

Ordinarily, local papers will print a stories about contentious issues, however one-sided they may be. In this case, I find nothing.

Is it possible the threat of herbicide spraying has been overstated? Why would Azure issue a release claiming the spraying is imminent if it weren’t true? Why would Azure risk getting into a wrangle with the County government if the threat weren’t real? Why isn’t there any mention of the spraying program on the Sherman County website? Does the County actually think they can keep their intentions under wraps?

“I have a great idea. Let’s claim Azure Farms can’t control their weeds. Let’s come in and invade them with Roundup and other toxic chemicals. Let’s destroy their organic farm. We know the spraying won’t wipe out the weeds—it’ll make the situation worse. But who cares? Let’s open up ourselves to massive lawsuits. I’m sure Monsanto will give us some legal help. We can set a fantastic precedent. No organic farm is safe. No organic farmer has the right to protect his land from the government. Isn’t that a terrific idea?”

Ewan
16th May 2017, 16:14
I've mailed my protestation, here's hoping.

onawah
16th May 2017, 18:02
FORCED vaccines: New bill H.R. 1313 could demand you get a vaccination or lose your job
Posted by: Dena Schmidt, staff writer in Vaccine Dangers May 15, 2017
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/vaccination-legislation-2239.html


(NaturalHealth365) Republican congresswoman Virginia Foxx has introduced new legislation with an intention of forcing employers to require all workers to submit to a mandatory vaccination program or risk losing their job. House Resolution bill H.R. 1313 is called the “Preserving Employee Wellness Programs Act,” and its aim is to require employees to receive genetic screenings and mandatory vaccines – whether they like it or not. http://www.naturalhealth365.com/American-Medical-Association-vaccinations-1470.html
The stated reason of forced or mandatory vaccines is “wellness” and disease prevention in the workplace. If workers refuse the vaccination, they could be subject to being refused employment, losing their jobs (for existing employees), higher health insurance premiums, being ostracized within the workplace and other penalties.
Legislation opens door to mandatory vaccines without alternatives
Instead of clarifying specific vaccines or treatments to be made mandatory, the legislation has open-ended language that paves the way for employers to be able to force workers to accept whatever they deem “important to wellness” in the workplace. Those in opposition to the legislation cite fears about mandatory vaccines imposed by the government or its agencies.
While the legislation allows workers to petition for a “reasonable alternative standard” to the health measures established, the nebulous nature of the bill and its language leaves plenty of room for employers to choose the alternatives – or not allow alternatives at all to certain provisions like vaccination.
The full text of H.R. 1313 can be read at Congress.gov by clicking this link. https://www.congress.gov/member/virginia-foxx/F000450
While Republican congresswoman Virginia Foxx is the main sponsor of H.R. 1313, she is not the originator of the legislation. It is actually part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare.
Obamacare already threatens to assess penalties, surcharges and higher health insurance premiums to businesses and workers who refuse vaccinations – which the healthcare legislation refers to as “disease prevention.”
The text of H.R. 1313 outlines how companies and employees who abide by the appointed “wellness guidelines” including compulsory vaccinations can save up to half on their insurance premiums. This means those who don’t comply will be paying double for refusing vaccination and other designated “health measures.”
Speak up and oppose H.R. 1313 and the FORCED vaccination agenda
The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) calls the H.R. 1313 bill a threat to both businesses and the people employed by them. Instead of allowing for free choice in health and wellness decisions, the legislation would attempt to implement a “carrot and stick” method for “strongly compelling” businesses and workers to accept the agendas of big pharma and its paid-off government officials.
The National Vaccine Information Center is urging concerned citizens to contact their own representatives and senators to express their views about H.R. 1313. When doing so, please remember to express your opinions intelligently and respectfully – you are far more likely to be heard if you are firm but polite when explaining your point of view.
Visit this NVIC link for guidance on how to contact your state’s representatives. https://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Home.aspx
References:
http://healthimpactnews.com/2017/h-r-1313-bill-would-require-medical-procedures-like-vaccines-as-requirement-for-employment/
http://naturalnews.com/2017-04-30-vaccine-industry-goes-nuclear-in-push-law-that-would-deny-you-your-job-if-you-arent-vaccinated.html
https://www.congress.gov/member/virginia-foxx/F000450
https://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Home.aspx

onawah
19th May 2017, 00:34
Yet another documentary about the dangers of vaccines upcoming.
K2ADsKn79X4
This email from Alliance for Natural Health today:

Did you know?
These are just some of the common ingredients currently used in vaccines suggested for all children by the CDC:

Formaldehyde (used in embalming fluid)

Aluminum (a known neurotoxin)

MSG

Monkey and chicken liver tissue

Compounds used to disinfect medical-grade equipment

No testing has ever been conducted to prove the safety of injecting the combination of these adjuvants into a living body.

ANH-USA is one of the most vocal advocates in the fight for your right to make your own decisions about vaccinations. We alert members to bad vaccine bills, conduct independent research on vaccine ingredients, and are now producing an original documentary about the greed and corruption behind the dangerous HPV vaccine.
HPV vaccines are touted as a cure for problems associated with cervical cancer, but the evidence tells a different story. Register for our newsletter and you are automatically registered for an early screening of our new documentary, Manufactured Crisis: HPV, Hype & Horror.
http://www.anh-usa.org/support-our-hpv-documentary/

onawah
21st May 2017, 14:42
Following viral post, Sherman Co. won't spray chemicals on organic farm
http://www.kgw.com/news/local/green/following-viral-post-sherman-co-wont-spray-chemicals-on-organic-farm/440701576


MORO, Ore. -- A fight pitting organic against commercial farms in the Columbia River Gorge is gaining national attention.

At the center of the fight is Azure Standard, a 2,000-acre wheat farm in Moro. CEO David Stelzer, posted a now-viral message on Azure’s Facebook page saying Sherman County officials would spray Azure Standard with chemicals. A move he said would kill the farm’s certified organic status.
"It’s important that we're not poisoning our soils and certainly that we give people the choice," said Stelzer. "Because of our organic status, a certain amount of weeds end up going to seed or growing in our fields because we don't use toxic herbicides to kill them."
Neighbors said the problem with that was those weeds have been traveling to their property.
"It's gotten out of hand," said neighboring farmer Bryan Cranston.
Cranston said he’s been patient as multiple noxious weeds have come onto his property from Azure. Now, he said, the weeds are threatening his livelihood.
"I grow certified seed wheat and if it keeps going like it is, I'm going to lose my certification for my seed wheat."
The plight drew hundreds to Sherman County Court Wednesday evening, which was held in a high school gym. Many wanted to see the county uphold an ordinance in place for weed violations like those leveled on Azure Standard. An ordinance that would allow for weeds to be chemically treated.

"It does say that the county has the right to [spray]," said Sherman County Commissioner, Joe Dabulskis. "Do we want to? No. Do we plan to? No."
Instead, Dabulskis said they're going to give Azure Standard another chance. He said they've worked on a plan with Azure to get rid of the weeds organically and will have the state review it and seek expert advice from Oregon State University.

"Nobody here cares if there's weeds on Azure farm," said Dabulskis. "Just don't let them blow across to the road onto the neighbors."

Stelzer said he's grateful to avoid the chemicals.

"It's going to take three years after that to re-certify organic," said Stelzer. "By that time, all my markets are gone."

© 2017 KGW-TV

onawah
9th June 2017, 22:38
That face when...
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/27/8a/59/278a59a5ad4cbf3adca32ecf4bbfcb32.jpg

onawah
12th June 2017, 00:10
Shocking New Low in Vaccine Debate — Boston Herald Calls for Violence Against Those Who Question Vaccine Safety
May 30, 2017
By Dr. Mercola
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/05/30/boston-herald-calls-for-violence-against-vaccine-safety.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=mc1&utm_campaign=20170611Z1_UCM&et_cid=DM147488&et_rid=2039570529


Story at-a-glance

Measles outbreak in Minnesota is being blamed on the largely unvaccinated Somali community. Of the 51 documented cases, 47 were unvaccinated; 46 were Somali
Only 42 percent of the Somali population in Minnesota received the MMR vaccine in 2014. Many Somalis have rejected the MMR vaccine suspecting the community’s higher than average autism rate is related to vaccine damage
Boston Herald’s report on the measles outbreak concluded with a statement calling for those spreading “lies” about vaccines causing autism to be hanged
Eat More Yogurt and Avoid Osteoporosis
Roundup Gave Us Cancer
By Dr. Mercola

The vaccine industry, public health organizations and many media outlets parroting the pre-established talking points insist that the science on vaccines is settled: Vaccines are safe and the childhood vaccination schedule is scientifically sound. End of story. According to some, the matter is so settled that anyone questioning the data or pointing out inconsistencies and/or research showing harm should be executed as punishment for “lying.”

This despicable call for violence came from editorial staff at the Boston Herald. The whole nasty mess started with a measles outbreak in Minnesota, the blame for which has been placed on a large Somali community where vaccination rates have declined in recent years due to parents’ concerns about vaccine safety.

Measles Outbreak Blamed on Unvaccinated Somalis
According to reports, of the 51 documented measles cases in Minnesota, 47 were unvaccinated; 46 were Somali. In all, only 42 percent of the Somali population in Minnesota received the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine in 2014, down from 87 percent in 2005 and 2006.

The reason for the decline in MMR vaccination is easy enough to understand. Research has demonstrated that Americans of Somali descent have nearly double the rate of autism than the general public, and personal experiences with their children’s health deteriorating after vaccination have raised serious questions and suspicions in the Somali community that the MMR vaccine might play a role. As reported by Inquisitr:1

“In 2013, a report from the University of Minnesota estimated that about [1] in 32 Somali children ages [7] through [9] … had been diagnosed with autism in 2010 …

The lack of vaccination in the Somali community in Minnesota led to a report in [The] Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine.2 That paper indicated that most parents in the Somali community refused vaccines because they believed that vaccines caused autism.

When asked why they felt that vaccines cause autism, every single one of the parents reported that they feel that vaccines cause autism ‘because they knew a child who received the MMR vaccine and then got autism.’ One-fifth of the Somali Minnesotan parents had researched the topic themselves ‘and believed that science supports the connection’ between autism and vaccines.”

Boston Herald Takes Cyberbullying to a Whole New Level
In what has been called a “scalding anti-anti-vax op-ed,”3 the Boston Herald’s May 8 report on the Minnesota measles outbreak concluded with the following statement:4

“These are the facts: Vaccines don’t cause autism. Measles can kill. And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.”

This obnoxious paragraph led to hundreds of angry comments, at least one of which pointed out the hanging threat was an open violation of Massachusetts’ 2014 law against cyberbullying.5,6 Others rightfully suggested that if lying to the public about health was a hanging offense, then many high-ranking health officials, researchers and drug manufacturers would earn a place at the front of the line.7

As extreme as the Boston Herald’s comment is, it’s not the first time mandatory vaccination proponents have made callous calls for violent action against those questioning vaccine safety. As noted by The Vaccine Reaction, published by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):8

“In March … Scientific American published an article by Peter Hotez, M.D,. of Texas Children’s Hospital, also inciting violence against people who do not agree with current government vaccine policies. Dr. Hotez stated: ‘An American antivaccine movement is building and we need to take steps now to snuff it out.’

In 2015, USA Today published a column by Alex Berezow advocating that ‘anti-vax’ parents should be imprisoned. At the time, that seemed to be a draconian proposal, but certainly less so compared to today’s calls for execution.”

Claims of Coincidence No Longer Hold Water
Vaccine injuries are becoming like cancer — the prevalence is so high, most people know someone who has suffered a serious side effect from a vaccine. And, as vaccine injuries multiply, claims of "coincidence" are getting increasingly harder to swallow.

This is precisely what we’re seeing among Minnesota’s Somali community, where many now reject the MMR vaccine based on the community’s firsthand experiences. Another example is Mississippi. It has one of the highest vaccination rates in the U.S. It also has one of the highest autism rates.9 Another coincidence?

In the absence of firm proof either way, many parents call for the legal right to make voluntary decisions about which vaccines their child should receive and if or when they should be given. Indeed, being able to exercise informed consent to medical risk-taking, including making voluntary decisions about vaccination, is one of the most basic human rights we have.

The numbers of children suffering with chronic illness and disability, including autism spectrum disorders, are increasing. Of this there is no doubt. The numbers of children and adults who have experienced serious vaccine reactions are also increasing. Of this there is no doubt either.

Boston Herald, Retract Your Hate Speech
To simply turn a blind eye to these phenomena would be foolish in the extreme. Threatening violence in an effort to scare people away from looking at the possible links, if anything, should be deemed a criminal offense. Barbara Loe Fisher, president and co-founder of the NVIC, has warned for many years:

“If the State can tag, track down and force individuals to be injected with biologicals of known and unknown toxicity today, then there will be no limit on which individual freedoms the state can take away in the name of the greater good tomorrow.”

Considering we’re now seeing rhetoric calling for the killing of anyone advocating for safer vaccines, more humane vaccine policies and informed consent protections, it seems reasonable to say we’ve entered some very frightening territory. If leading news outlets are allowed to call for lethal action against people accused of “lying” about vaccines when they are more likely simply reporting facts and raising concerns that contradict the official rhetoric, then what comes next?

Most states don’t even allow capital punishment for mass murderers, yet Boston Herald editors want to hang people for bringing up the possibility that vaccines might do harm?! I join neurodevelopment disorder researcher James Lyons-Weiler,10 author of “The Environmental and Genetic Causes of Autism,” in calling for the Herald to retract the editorial and issue an apology for its inflammatory comments. This kind of hate speech cannot be tolerated.

Fact on Legal Record: Vaccines Are Unavoidably Unsafe
In 1986, Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, a law that includes provisions shielding vaccine manufacturers and doctors from liability when a vaccine causes a permanent disability or death.11

The reason drug makers and doctors were granted wholesale immunity against liability was because Congress and the Supreme Court concluded that government licensed vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe,”12 and vaccine makers therefore should not be held liable for vaccine injuries and deaths resulting from government mandated vaccines.

Remember that Supreme Court ruling whenever drug industry bobbleheads insist that the science is settled and vaccines are “safe.” Government licensed vaccines have been declared unavoidably unsafe, and that’s a matter of legal record.13,14 More importantly, the science is still wide-open with regard to whether or not vaccines cause autism.

Recent Research Reopens Vaccine-Autism Question
A paper15 published in the peer-reviewed, open-access Journal of Translational Science on April 24, 2017, is a cross-sectional study of 6- to 12-year-olds exploring the association between preterm birth, vaccination and neurodevelopmental disorders, using data from both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations.

Preemies receive the same vaccines and number of doses recommended by the federal childhood vaccination schedule as full-term babies, and on the same time schedule, and the impact of vaccines on preemies has never been evaluated. Premature birth is a well-known risk factor for neurodevelopmental problems. However, here they found that when premature infants were not vaccinated, the association between preterm birth and neurodevelopmental disorders was nonexistent. They also found that:

Term birth with vaccination was associated with a 2.7-fold increase in the odds of neurodevelopmental disorders compared to unvaccinated full-term babies
Preterm birth with vaccination was associated with a 5.4-fold increase in the odds of neurodevelopmental disorders compared to the odds of neurodevelopmental disorders given term birth and vaccination
Preterm birth with vaccination was associated with a 12.3-fold increased odds of neurodevelopmental disorders compared to preterm birth without vaccination
So, is the science truly settled when one of the first studies of its kind — one that actually compares vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations — finds vaccination increases a child’s odds of a neurodevelopmental disorder such as autism by 270 percent?

I’m not saying “vaccines cause autism.” I’m saying it’s unscientific to say “vaccines don’t cause autism.” Overwhelmingly, the evidence tells us that scientists still do not know for sure either way — which is why we so desperately need more and better quality research. In the meantime, death threats for reporting on and investigating these controversies are what really needs to be “snuffed out.”

More Research Questioning Vaccine Efficacy
I recently interviewed Neil Miller, medical research journalist, on his outstanding book “Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers.” His book has two studies that he personally published that document serious concerns about vaccines.

Our fascinating interview will be posted later this year but in the meantime, I wanted to share the highlights of the interview by mentioning the two studies Miller published.

The U.S. requires infants to receive 26 vaccine doses, the most in the world, yet 33 nations have better infant mortality rates. His first study, published in 2011,16 analyzed the vaccination schedules of 34 developed nations and found a significant correlation between infant mortality rates and the number of vaccine doses infants receive.

Nations that require the most vaccines tend to have the worst infant mortality rates. The study found that developed nations that require the least number of infant vaccines tend to have the best infant mortality rates.

His second study, published in 2012,17 analyzed 38,801 reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) of infants who had adverse events after receiving vaccinations. Infants who received the most vaccines concurrently were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die, compared to infants who received fewer vaccines concurrently.

This study was designed to determine: a) whether infants who receive several vaccines simultaneously rather than fewer are more likely to be hospitalized or die, and b) whether younger infants are more likely than older infants to be hospitalized or die after receiving vaccines.

Not Knowing Whether Vaccines Cause Autism Is Not the Same as Being Sure They Don’t
In 2013, a physician committee at the Institute of Medicine (IOM), National Academy of Sciences, concluded that the current federally recommended childhood vaccine schedule for infants and children from birth to age 6 had not been adequately studied for safety,18 and that studies are needed to examine the:

Long-term cumulative effects of vaccines
Timing of vaccination in relation to the age and health of the child
Effects of the total load or number of vaccines given at one time
Effect of vaccine ingredients in relation to health outcomes
Biological mechanisms of vaccine-associated injury
More specifically, the IOM committee concluded there was insufficient scientific evidence to determine whether or not the numbers of doses and timing of federally recommended vaccines children receive in the first six years of life are associated with the development of chronic brain and immune system disorders that affect a child’s intellectual development, learning, attention, communication and behavior, such as ADD/ADHD, learning disabilities and autism.

There’s Not Enough Evidence to Confirm or Deny Causation
Before that, the IOM’s vaccine safety review, “Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality,”19 published in 2011, which looked at eight specific vaccines, including the MMR, concluded there was insufficient evidence to either confirm or deny causation for most reported poor health outcomes — including autism — following receipt of these vaccines.

In other words, based on the scientific evidence, WE DO NOT KNOW whether vaccines cause autism. So again, when one-size-fits-all vaccine proponents claim to know the score and that “vaccines don’t cause autism,” they’re not telling the whole truth. Should they hang by the neck for that? Importantly, the IOM’s 2011 report also highlighted the fact that:

Some people are more vulnerable to suffering vaccine reactions and injury for biological, genetic and environmental reasons
In most cases physicians do not know what those individual susceptibilities are
It’s virtually impossible to predict ahead of time who will be harmed by vaccination
First Do No Harm
What this tells us is that we need to apply the precautionary principle of “first do no harm.” Insisting on a one-size-fits-all vaccine schedule guarantees that a certain number of people will be harmed, although we do not know exactly who or how many, since we still don’t know exactly why and to what extent some people are more susceptible to vaccine damage than others.

The issue of vaccine safety is truly one of epic proportions, because the side effects, when they occur, are typically lifelong or lethal. We cannot afford to abandon the conversation about vaccine safety out of fear of harassment (or the threat of hanging), because the issue of forced vaccinations is cropping up everywhere you turn these days.

For example, a recent bill before the Texas House of Representatives to reform the state's foster care system included a sneaky provision requiring foster children to get prompt medical exams.20

Suspecting the provision had the aim of forcing vaccinations, retired medical consultant Bill Zedler, R-District 96, introduced an amendment to prevent doctors from vaccinating foster children during these legally required medical exams, upholding parents’ rights to make vaccination decisions.

Public Health Measures to Prevent Disease Must Include Safeguards for All
We must continue pushing for greater safety for all children and adults, not just for those lucky enough to be free of individual susceptibility to vaccine damage. Human sacrifice is no longer a permissible religious practice. Why should it be permissible in medical practice? As noted in The Vaccine Reaction:21

“[E]ach of us has the basic human right to be informed about any medical intervention a doctor proposes to perform on us or our minor children, and we have the right to consent or not to consent to that intervention … According to Barbara Loe Fisher … informed consent is an ‘overarching ethical principle in the practice of medicine for which vaccination should be no exception’ …

‘We maintain this is a responsible and ethically justifiable position to take in light of the fact that vaccination is a medical intervention performed on a healthy person that has the inherent ability to result in the injury or death of that healthy person.’”

onawah
13th June 2017, 23:14
Millennials Are Vaccine Brain-Damaged – We Can Help…
http://bolenreport.com/__trashed-4/
https://i2.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/vax-book.jpg?resize=476%2C510
(red lettering my emphasis)

History Tells It All…

by Elissa Meininger – Health Policy Analyst

Very early in life I realized the value of studying the history of things. In the 1980s, when I was so ill with mercury poisoning, mostly from my dental fillings on top of earlier vaccine injury, fate introduced me to Harris Coulter, PhD, who is considered one of the great historians specializing in the evolution of Western medicine from ancient times to the present day. I am blessed with having known him and I want to bring the work he has done related to the dangers of vaccinations to a new audience.
https://i2.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/harris-coulter.jpg?resize=167%2C187

Harris Coulter, PhD
Dr. Coulter is considered a major expert on the subject of vaccines having written three books on the subject. He co-wrote, with Barbara Loe Fisher, DPT – A Shot in the Dark. This book was the first book published about the problems with vaccines and was published prior to the passage of National Childhood Vaccination Compensation Law in 1986. The vaccine court that was created by the law was supposed to compensate victims of vaccine damage and let the drug industry off the hook.

https://i2.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/images.jpg?resize=202%2C300

A point to ponder, when DPT A Shot in the Dark was published in 1985, on the eve of the passage of the National Childhood Vaccination Compensation Law, Dr. Coulter and Fisher estimated that at least 1000 babies died and 12,000 were damaged per year just by the DPT (diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus) shot.

Fisher went on to found the National Vaccine Information Center which is the principle consumer watchdog group regarding the dangers of vaccines. According to her now:

The $3.6 billion dollars in federal vaccine injury compensation that has been awarded to more than 5,000 vaccine victims since 1988 doesn’t begin to pay for the damage done, not when two out of three claims are denied, 50 and not when drug companies have no incentive to make vaccines less harmful because all Americans are legally required to purchase and use their liability free vaccine products.

Every promise that Congress made to parents in 1986 was a lie. And 30 years is long enough for parents to wait for that failed experiment in tort reform to work.

Meanwhile, Dr. Coulter testified at various hearings in Washington since then and he was also the one who made the connection that it was the Thimerisol (mercury) in the vaccines that was the cause of autism.

In 1990, Dr. Coulter published his book, Vaccination Social Violence and Criminality – The Medical Assault on the American Brain. The great thing about studying the history of something is that history is clear cut. Either it happened or it didn’t and usually the stuff you find out is a matter of public record not as likely to be altered in later publications for political purposes as we have found is the case with current corrupt scientific studies about vaccines. Better yet, with the distance of time, one can see patterns emerge that give clarity to events, which, at the time, made no sense.

With President Trump’s directive to Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to get to the bottom of all the vaccine science corruption, Dr. Coulter’s work in this particular book is critically important because it traces the decline in brain function (like IQ, ability to study, make reasoned decisions and take aptitude tests) of several generations of children thanks to the damage done by America’s ever-growing vaccine schedule. It also traces the dramatic rise in the crime rate during the same period of time. These trends are alarming, particularly because this book came out before so many vaccines were added to the schedule in the 1990s and beyond.

In the simplest terms, by tracing trends in crime, behavior and intellectual performance, Dr. Coulter provides a frightening future for American civilization if all our vaccination policy is doing is creating more and more dysfunctional people.

An Overview Of Escalating Mental Disorders…

Back in the 1980s, the American Psychiatric Association, in its official guide to mental illnesses in the US, devoted 70 pages to “Disorders Usually First Evident in Infancy, Childhood, or Adolescence”. Dr. Coulter pointed out that in an earlier edition published in 1968, only had 3 1/2 pages and the first edition, published in 1952, did not mention them at all.

Encephalitis is the culprit…

On page xiv, Dr. Coulter stated:

The following pages show that “developmental disabilities” are nearly always generated by encephalitis. And the primary cause of encephalitis in the United States and other industrialized countries is the childhood vaccination program.

To be specific, a large portion of the millions of U.S. children and adults suffering from autism, seizures, mental retardation, hyperactivity, dyslexia, and other shoots and branches of the hydra-headed entity called “developmental disabilities,” owe their disorders to one or another of the vaccines against childhood diseases.

The so-called “sociopathic personality,” which is at the root of the enormous increase in crime of the past two decades, is also largely rooted in vaccine damage.

Thus the nation’s vaccination program has served to undermine the American school system–which is in collapse through inability to cope with the one-fifth or one-quarter of students who will never be able either to read or to perform simple arithmetical calculations.

And it has contributed to the wave of violent crime which is turning our cities into jungles where the strong and the vicious prey upon the weak and unprotected.

The effects of vaccination have altered the very tone and atmosphere of modern society. Because the changes are so insidious and widespread, and because we lack perspective, they have been largely overlooked. It is not easy to discern the outlines of the incubus which the vaccination program as loosed upon us.

Every day this program continues, hundreds of normal healthy babies are turned into defective goods: mentally retarded, blind, deaf, autistic, epileptic, learning-disabled, emotionally unstable, future juvenile delinquents, and career criminals.

Why Johnny Can’t Read Or Do Much Else, Either…

Dr. Coulter reported that, in 1963, the U.S. Health Service listed nearly 100 signs and symptoms associated with hyperactivity and changed the name to “minimal brain dysfunction.” It is also called “minimum brain damage.” (MBD) By the 1970s, minimal brain damage was a major challenge to the American school system, as well as the most common diagnosis at child guidance clinics and the most time consuming problem to child psychiatry as well.

By the time 1984 rolled around, 13% of the children in some school districts were in special education classes, a figure that some believed were significantly under detected.

Minimally Brain Damaged children also have a high incidence of seizure disorders: epilepsy, tics, tremors, choreiform (twisting) movements, facial grimaces, infantile spasms, and others. Those with minimal MBD are disproportionately left-handed or ambidextrous also known as “poorly defined unilateral dominance”. A 1987 Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 16 percent of Americans under 30 were left handed or ambidextrous while only 12 percent of people over 60 were. Another poll found that 13 percent of 20 year olds were left handed compared to 5 percent of those over 50.

Dr. Coulter noted that since 1945, an epidemic of vaccine-induced sub-clinical encephalitis actually generated a disproportionate incidence of left-handedness and ambidexterity in the under-forty or under-thirty age groups.

Among the other characteristics of dyslexia include the inability to perform arithmetic or spell words. Some dyslexics are unable to write cursively and can only print. Delayed speech and other language issues are also common along with memory issues including inability to retain certain kinds of information.

Tracking of IQ test scores and Scholastic Aptitude Tests have seen a steady decline as well. SAT verbal scores dropped from 478 in 1963 to 424 in 1980 while math scores went from 502 to 466. By the time Dr. Coulter published this book in 1990, these scores were the lowest they’d been in the 66 year history of the tests. It’s important to note the IQ test scores have become easier so this decline is even more alarming. Similar declines were found in the American College Testing (ACT) Program.

Just so you know, in 1977, a Blue Ribbon Panel was convened in an effort to figure out why IQs were dropping so rapidly. They examined 79 hypotheses none of which panned out.

Because vaccinations are such a sacred cow, no one discussed the possibility that all this mental decline was a sign of vaccine damage. Now, 40 years later, doctors and scientists who question virtues of vaccines are automatically condemned.

Violent Crime And General Criminal Behavior On The Rise…

With the assassination of President John F. Kennedy by Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963, Dr. Coulter pointed out this was the beginning of a more violent America. A point to note, Oswald was both a dyslexic and otherwise neurologically defective.

The murder rate doubled between 1960 and 1980 from four to eight per 100,000. The largest increase occurred between 1960 and 1970 and by 1990, murder was the leading cause of death for black males aged 15 to 34. Assaults were estimated to be more than 100 per each case of murder or as much as 2,500,000. The total actually reported in 1980, for people over the age of 12 was 1,600,000.

FBI statistics showed a fifty percent increase in crimes of all categories.

Dr. Coulter pointed out (p.254):

The pertussis vaccination program was only sporadic in the 1920s and 1930s, becoming widespread during and after World War II. The appearance of autism and learning disabilities reflects the concomitant growth of this vaccination program.

Autism is diagnosed in the first years of life; so vaccinations yielded the first autistics in the early 1940s. Learning disabilities emerged eight or ten years later, when the children of this same generation were seen to have chronic difficulties in school. The learning-disabled children of the early 1950s were the brothers and sisters of the autistics of the early 1940s.

But these children, of course, kept growing into adolescence and adulthood. The generation born in 1945, and thus exposed for the first time to widespread vaccination, came of age in 1963.

Brain Damage Behavior That First Showed Up In The Radical 1960s..

(P.254) Any analysis of the 1960s radicalism at once discloses the themes which have already figured in our discussion of the sociopaths, post-encephalitic syndrome. For example, “Roots of Radicalism”, by Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter, touches upon: ego weakness, feelings of worthlessness, childish egotism, impulsive violence, impatience, narcissism, the need to be in control. megalomania, alienation, lack of meaning, rage, paranoia, ambivalent hostility to authority, unfocussed aggression, the search for experience and sensation, inability to form intimate relations combined with sexual licentiousness, anxiety, depression, pyromania (“Burn, baby burn!!), sociopathy, alcoholism, and drug abuse.

Explaining The Vaccine Crisis In Ordinary People Terms…

Dr. Coulter, in the role of statistician, collected an array of data, only some of which I have provided here, which shows just how destructive vaccinations can be in destroying the ability for someone to function normally.

Just so you know, it was only after I read this book years ago that I realized that my various learning difficulties had a name…..dyslexia. As a first grader, my parents were told I was retarded but, since I was basically very alert, my parents didn’t buy that diagnosis and did a wonderful job of raising me with a very enriched and ego-supported childhood all the while I was suffering my way through public school. No one had any idea that my left handedness (also ambidextrous skills), my inability to write legibly, my inability to do arithmetic, my memory problems, and my inability to read with any proficiency were all clues to a pattern of brain damage.

The prep school I was sent to in the 8th grade was an unique place because they thought all children had special needs and in that way, the faculty had no difficulty shoring up my weaknesses at the same time encouraging my strengths to soar. I had no difficulty getting into several excellent colleges. It wasn’t until a year or so ago, I took what is called the ANAM test that I was reminded I am one the millions of walking wounded, robbed of a fully-functioning brain and not counted in any statistic.

The ANAM test, developed here in Oklahoma to test brain function, was available to me when I was helping out at the Patriot Clinics project I wrote about in an earlier article. The clinic specialized in healing Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). TBI is not just a whack in the head or a sudden change in air pressure, it can also be caused by toxicities of all kinds. The test is a computerized test where you look at a screen on the PC, then go to the next screen and answer questions related to the contents of the previous screen. I FLUNKED royally as did a surprising number of others who were volunteering at the clinic. I was consistently unable to recall most of what was on that earlier screen.

What piqued my interest in re-reading Dr. Coulter’s book was the knowledge that when a person has PTSD or TBI, they can be helped through hyperbaric oxygen treatments and various detox methods. As a victim of major mercury poisoning, thanks to my dental amalgam fillings, I also know that detox is possible and over time, one can potentially clean up the whole mess. Also, mostly unstudied by scientists, academics or statisticians, are the millions of us in the health freedom movement who have been living out our lives trying everything we can find at the health food store to help us sharpen our brain power. We are people with Minimal Brain Damage only nobody bothered to tell us we had it.

Also in our great debate over the issue of vaccines and autism, we are ignoring millions of others in the health freedom movement who have other diagnoses, or no disease name at all, for their ailments, that should also be included in the vaccine victims list.

And, just so you know, current tracking of children with Minimal Brain Damage who end up in special education and who have low impulse control often end up in the juvenile justice system because society simply isn’t equipped to really help them.

HOW CAN ANYONE IN HIS/HER RIGHT MIND THINK THAT SHOOTING ALL THIS STUFF INTO LITTLE KIDS IS A GOOD THING?

Bovine cow serum: Extracted from cow skin. When injected causes connective tissue disorders, arthritis and lupus; also shortness of breath, low blood pressure, chest pain and skin reactions.
Sorbitol: Synthetic sweetener [that] aggravates IBS and gastrointestinal issues.
Gelatin: … from the collagen inside animals’ skin and bones. Injecting gelatin poses the risk of infection from synthetic growth hormones and [mad cow disease].
Sodium chloride: Raises blood pressure and inhibits muscle contraction and growth.
Egg protein: … May contain growth hormones, antibiotics, and salmonella bacteria.
Thimerosal: A neurotoxic mercury which causes autism …
Human albumin: The protein portion of blood from pooled human venous plasma; when injected causes fever, chills, hives, rash, headache, nausea, breathing difficulty, and rapid heart rate. … [And] can result in a loss of body cell mass and cause immunodeficiency virus infection, or contain SV40, AIDS, cancer or Hepatitis B from drug addicts.
Formaldehyde: Highly carcinogenic fluid used to embalm corpses. Ranked one of the most hazardous compounds to human health; can cause liver damage, gastrointestinal issues, reproductive deformation, respiratory distress and cancer.
Phenoxyethanol: A glycol ether/chemical; highly toxic to the nervous system, kidneys, and liver. The FDA warns “can cause shut down of the central nervous system (CNS) …
Aluminum phosphate: Greatly increases toxicity of mercury…
MSG (monosodium glutamate): When injected becomes a neurotoxin, causing CNS disorders and brain damage…
And that’s just a partial list……For a more thorough list and discussion click here.

Why Are Millenials So Different From The Rest Of Us?

Much of the behavior of the Millenials who are now in college demanding safe spaces and claiming ideas they don’t like upset them, or chanting in the streets that Black Lives Matter to re-assert segregationist sentiments, has never been seen before.

Even more puzzling is the array of sexual “choices” the Millenials believe they have, from moment to moment. The demand for transgender bathrooms, for example, is an issue which was not even on the minds of most Americans just a few years ago.

Then there is the undergraduate doctoral student at the University of Arizona who identifies sexually as a hippopotamus and is teaching all about it. Does this seem like normal behavior to you????

This video provides some basic information about the 71 gender choices in the transgender community. (Hey, I didn’t make this up. That’s what Facebook says.) Promotion of a drag queen lifestyle is now targeting children in public libraries. And, then there was the male PTA president who dressed up in a see-through dress and danced provocatively in front of a school full of grammar school children.

Feminism, which used to be about voting rights and equal pay, is now about denying basic mothering functions and hate-filled speeches in public places.

Colleges are now stuck with students making demands to silence anything they don’t like to think about. The Evergreen College uprising aftermath is particularly illustrative. Social Justice Warriors, who manage to debut endless social issues for the purpose of creating chaos, seems to be widespread. Meanwhile, the general information that high school and college students should be learning seems to be missing.

And let’s not forget the extreme emotional behavior over the election of Donald Trump. How does one make sense with this behavior. So what you may not like the guy.

Just as we saw radical behavior pop up out of nowhere in the 1960s, which Dr. Coulter showed was related to the vaccine program started in 1945, we now see the results of the dramatic rise in downright bizarre behavior 20 years after the boatload of new mandatory vaccines added in the 1990s.

Right now, our children are being subjected to 69 shots before they are 18 with more on the way…

Keeping in mind that your brain is a very complex mechanism, you can certainly see that if any part of it ended up damaged by a vaccine, all kinds of problems can occur. Here is a detailed booklet you can download to show you how your brain works so you can see how easy it would be to get messed up from the fallout from vaccinations.
https://www.mayfieldclinic.com/PDF/PE-AnatBrain.pdf

Since Dr. Coulter is no longer with us, here are Barbara Loe Fisher’s current thoughts on the matter:

Barbara Loe Fisher
We want government officials to explain to us why our country, which spends the most on health care 19 20 and has one of the highest child vaccination rates in the world, 21 is crippled by a chronic disease and disability epidemic that costs more than two trillion dollars a year 22 and has created the sickest child and young adult population in America’s history:

1 child in 6 learning disabled; 23
1 in 9 with asthma; 24
1 in 10 diagnosed with a mental disorder; 25
1 in 13 severely allergic to food; 26
1 in 20 epileptic; 27
1 in 50 developing autism; 28
1 in 400 with diabetes 29
and millions more struggling with other kinds of brain and immune system damage marked by chronic inflammation in the body.

There is no price tag high enough to put on the costs that will bankrupt our nation as these children grow up and many face a lifetime of health care and housing needs. 30

What kind of jobs will they hold? Where are they going to live? What happens when their parents die? 31

We will not be silent as the biological integrity of another generation of children is destroyed in this bitter harvest that can only continue if we allow it to continue.

She raises the stakes to include an area of other medical issues she now believes are vaccine-related as well. She is not alone in this belief and Dr. Coulter would certainly approve of her public statement on the issue.

These are legitimate scientific and ethical questions that should not be ridiculed by government, medical organizations and members of the mainstream media demonizing a growing number of people who are wondering why they either have a child, or know a child, who was born healthy and then suddenly regressed physically, mentally and emotionally and joined the ranks of the walking wounded. The people do not understand why government refuses to fund or conduct methodologically sound scientific studies to find out why the bodies of so many highly vaccinated children and adults are on fire, riddled with chronic inflammation that is common to most brain and immune system dysfunction 77 78 79doctors diagnose as:

ADHD; 80 81 82
epilepsy; 83
allergies; 84
autism; 85 86 87 88
inflammatory bowel, 89 90 thyroid 91 and metabolic disease; 92
rheumatoid arthritis; 93
obesity; 94
cancer; 95 96 97
schizophrenia, 98 99 and
depression 100
Getting Real About Cleaning Up This Mess…

Folks, the subject of vaccinations has long been a sacred cow. Any discussion of it in the media is completely verboten. Medical schools do not teach doctors about vaccines , doctors are afraid to step forward to tell the truth, in research labs where scientists are afraid to suggest something is wrong and parents are bullied by schools when they say “no” to vaccinating their children.

Cleaning up this mess will take massive public action. We need to thank President Trump for asking Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to get to the bottom of the corruption at the CDC and Kennedy’s website is now posting important discussions about all aspects of the vaccine issue, no holds barred!

As a nation, we need to push for the following:

Conduct official studies on totally unvaccinated children. We are confident that the results will show unvaccinated children are healthier. Congress has been talking about such studies for several years so we need to let our public servants know, these studies MUST be done ASAP.

Check out other ways of dealing with infectious diseases such as homeopathy, which is now very successful in Cuba. Tedd Koren, DC., has just joined our team of writers here at the Bolen Report, so be sure to read his stuff. As a chiropractor and a longtime anti-vaxxer, he can provide a perspective that needs to be part of the conversation. Chiropractors don’t believe in the germ theory and neither to homeopaths. Dr. Koren and Dr. Coulter were colleagues and you can read a great discussion between them about why Dr. Coulter wrote Vaccination, Social Violence and Criminality. You can download a copy of the book here.
http://www.ebooksdownloads.xyz/search/vaccination-social-violence-and-criminality

You can also get a copy of Dr. Coulter’s Divided Legacy Volume 4: Twentieth Century Medicine – The Bacterial Era… This book gives lavishly footnoted details on the major debates about infectious disease which are the foundation not only of allopathy but also of homeopathy, osteopathy, naturopathy, and chiropractic. It covers the whole history of the fights in the 1800s in the development of vaccines even though homeopathy was known to be superior even then.
https://i2.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/DV-V4-a.jpg?resize=300%2C300

We live in a whole new 21st Century world, folks. As Dr. Koren said, vaccines are an obsolete 18th Century science that is based on ideas only allopaths believe. The future of medicine lies in the direction that Cambridge biologist, Rupert Sheldrake, is talking about in his book, Science Set Free.
https://i0.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Science-Set-Free.jpg?resize=195%2C300

The bottom line here, folks, is that with the advent of quantum physics, a non-material science, Dr. Sheldrake says:

Contemporary science is based on the claim that all reality is material or physical. There is no reality but material reality. Consciousness is a by-product of the physical activity of the brain. Matter is unconscious. Evolution is purposeless. God exists only as an idea in human minds, and hence in human heads.

These beliefs are powerful, not because most scientists think about them critically but because they don’t. the facts of science are real enough; so are the techniques that scientists use, and the technologies based on them. But the belief system that governs conventional scientific thinking is an act of faith, grounded in a nineteenth-century ideology.

ISN’T IT TIME TO UPDATE OUR THINKING ABOUT VACCINES AND HOW TO DEAL WITH INFECTIOUS DISEASES?

NOT TO MENTION FIXING UP THOSE OF US WHO HAVE BEEN SCREWED UP BY VACCINES.

onawah
15th June 2017, 22:53
Monsanto's Mess--Four Signs Consumers Are Winning
https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/monsantos-mess-four-signs-consumers-are-winning

When the colours turn grey and the lights all fade
To black again
We’re in over our heads
But somehow we make it back again – lyrics from “Beautiful Mess”

Next month will mark one year since Congress obliterated Vermont’s GMO labeling law and replaced it with its own faux-labeling measure. The DARK Act was an outright attack on consumer and states’ rights. Still, then-President Obama refused to veto it.

We lost the right to labels on GMO foods. But we never lost our determination to expose Monsanto’s corrupt manipulation of government agencies, or the truth about just how harmful Roundup herbicide is to humans and the environment.

Fast forward to today. Monsanto is facing down scores of lawsuits by people, or their families, who were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma after being exposed to Roundup. Those lawsuits have led to revelations about possible collusion between Monsanto employees and former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials to bury evidence of Roundup’s carcinogenicity.

Meanwhile the EPA, perhaps fearing consumer backlash, refuses to rule on whether to renew the license for glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup), even though we’re now nearly two years past the deadline.

Food companies are being sued, too, when product testing reveals that brands labeled “100% Natural” contain glyphosate residues. And the Food & Drug Administration recently announced it will resume testing of consumer foods for glyphosate.

Farmers are growing fewer GMO crops. Other countries are banning GMOs and glyphosate.

It’s no wonder Monsanto can’t wait to hand over the keys to Bayer. Things are getting messy. For consumers and environmentalists, it’s a beautiful mess.

Here are four signs we’re winning the battle against Monsanto.

1. Court battles pull back the curtain on Monsanto’s corrupt activities. The fact that over 1,000 plaintiffs are involved in dozens of lawsuits alleging that exposure to Roundup caused them or their families to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma (a potentially deadly cancer) is compelling enough. Especially when a mainstream media outlet like CNN, often silent when it comes to challenging the corporate establishment, takes notice. That in itself is a win for consumers.

But the bigger win may be what those lawsuits are doing to shed light on Monsanto’s sustained campaign to bury the truth about its deadly products.

In March, the New York Times, citing court documents, reported on possible collusion between former EPA officials and Monsanto employees to hide the facts about the health risks of glyphosate:

The court documents included Monsanto’s internal emails and email traffic between the company and federal regulators. The records suggested that Monsanto had ghostwritten research that was later attributed to academics and indicated that a senior official at the Environmental Protection Agency had worked to quash a review of Roundup’s main ingredient, glyphosate, that was to have been conducted by the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

The revelations confirmed consumer suspicions that Roundup isn’t “safe,” and validated the opinions of scientists who question its safety. They’ve triggered calls in Europe for further investigation.

Reporters continue to scrutinize the MDL (multi-district lawsuits) documents unsealed so far (the judge in the case has since refused to unseal any further documents). US Right to Know’s Carey Gillam, who has been following the court documents closely, recently reported on her on a decades-old study, “A Chronic Feeding Study of Glyphosate (Roundup Technical) in Mice,” uncovered during litigation but until now hidden from public view, that suggests Roundup causes cancer:

The two-year study ran from 1980-1982 and involved 400 mice divided into groups of 50 males and 50 females that were administered three different doses of the weed killer or received no glyphosate at all for observation as a control group. The study was conducted for Monsanto to submit to regulators. But unfortunately for Monsanto, some mice exposed to glyphosate developed tumors at statistically significant rates, with no tumors at all in non-dosed mice.

2. EPA forced to investigate Monsanto corruption. Thanks to the work of reporters studying court documents, the EPA has stepped in. On May 31, the agency’s inspector general responded to Rep. Ted Lieu’s (D-Calif.) call for an investigation into possible collusion between Monsanto and EPA officials. (Organic Consumers Association also called for an investigation. We haven’t heard back).

The EPA may just be going through the formalities to appease Lieu and his constituents. But even if that’s true, it’s still a sign that consumers are getting through to an agency that has historically been aggressively pro-Monsanto.

3. Consumers are fighting back through the courts, too. Monsanto and Big Food have long been allies in the campaign to hide GMOs, and the pesticides used to grow them, from consumers. Will the Junk Food Giants reconsider their position, if they, too, get dragged through the courts?

The Organic Consumers Association, along with other groups, have been testing food products for glyphosate, and taking companies to court for falsely marketing their products as “natural” and “100% Natural.” Pending cases include the one against General Mills’ Nature Valley granola bars, and another against Sioux Honey. Both products contain glyphosate. (A recent study from Canada revealed glyphosate in 30 percent of the food products tested).

And lest we forget, Roundup isn’t just sprayed on agricultural products—it’s a best-selling consumer product, too. Labels on Roundup sold in stores like Walmart, Costco, Home Depot, and online at Amazon, claim the product is safe for humans and pets. That’s not true—so we’ve sued Monsanto directly for false labeling.

4. FDA resumes testing food for glyphosate. As the lawsuits flow, and more evidence comes to light about the toxic impact of glyphosate on human health (including bad outcomes for pregnant moms and their babies), the FDA has been shamed into testing foods for glyphosate residues—a project it had previously abandoned:

The FDA, the nation’s chief food safety regulator, launched what it calls a “special assignment” last year to analyze certain foods for glyphosate residues after the agency was criticized by the U.S. Government Accountability Office for failing to include glyphosate in annual testing programs that look for many less-used pesticides in foods. But the agency scuttled the testing after only a few months amid disagreement and difficulties with establishing a standard methodology to use across the agency’s multiple U.S. laboratories, according to FDA sources.

The testing reportedly resumed in early June. It remains to be seen if the FDA will share, much less publicize, its findings—and whether the agency will continue to claim, as it has in the past, that glyphosate residues are “safe.” Stay tuned.

Katherine Paul is associate director of the Organic Consumers Association.

onawah
21st June 2017, 19:25
California Proposes Safe Level for Roundup More Than 100 Times Lower Than EPA Limit
Olga V. Naidenko, Ph.D., Senior Science Advisor for Children's Environmental Health
Wednesday, June 21, 2017
http://www.ewg.org/research/california-proposes-safe-level-roundup-more-100-times-lower-epa-limit?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=GlyphCancernews&utm_medium=email


In a landmark rule with global repercussions, California state scientists are preparing to issue the world's first health guideline for Monsanto's glyphosate herbicide based on its cancer risk. The state’s proposed safe level is more than 100 times lower than the the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s legal allowance for the average-sized American​.

Glyphosate is the key ingredient in Roundup, the most heavily applied weed killer in the history of chemical agriculture. Use of glyphosate has exploded in the last 15 years, as Monsanto has promoted genetically modified Roundup Ready seeds to grow crops that aren't harmed by the herbicide. In the U.S. alone, more than 200 million pounds of Roundup are sprayed each year, mostly on soybeans and corn.

In March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer – part of the World Health Organization, with no regulatory authority – reviewed human cancer studies and determined that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic” to people. Based on that finding, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, or OEHHA, announced its intention to add glyphosate to the state's Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer.

By itself, that listing would be a big blow to Monsanto, because it would require cancer warning labels on containers of Roundup and on foods that have high residues of glyphosate. Monsanto is appealing the decision in state court, but in the meantime the OEHHA has moved forward in setting a so-called No Significant Risk Level of the amount of glyphosate people could safely consume each day.

onawah
28th June 2017, 17:43
Glyphosate linked to Autism
Published on Jun 24, 2017
This video used images copyrighted by Monsanto, and some from Dr. Seneff's presentations.

Dr. Stephanie Seneff is a senior research scientist at MIT (CSAIL)
Her personal page: https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/
Interview was recorded by phone on June 23, 2017, from 10:00 - 10:35 AM eastern time USA
OTF2018: http://www.observatoryproject.com
http://www.Suspicious0bservers.org
uDum7GGuOTA

This is an important interview by Suspicious0bservers with Stephanie Seneff, a Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. Since 2011, she has published over two dozen papers in various medical and health-related journals on topics such as modern day diseases (e.g., Alzheimer, autism, cardiovascular diseases), analysis and search of databases of drug side effects using Natural Language Processing techniques, and the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health. Her impressive Bio can be seen here.

She goes into great detail here into how glyphosate, the primary ingredient of Monsanto’s top-selling herbicide, RoundUp is her prime suspect as the underlying cause of autism and many other modern diseases which plague us today.

Exposure to this probable carcinogen has become virtually unavoidable, as it’s embedded throughout the food chain. The US Geological Survey has found RoundUp in the air, rain, streams and surface water. Reuters reports that it’s in honey, soy sauce, flour and breast milk, to name a few. Consumer Reports has said that if we don’t know what other foods are contaminated or how much glyphosate we carry in our bodies, it is simply because we haven’t looked for it yet.

onawah
29th June 2017, 22:04
Why Is Informed Consent to Vaccination A Human Right?
Posted: 6/28/2017 10:49:23 AM http://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/June-2017/why-informed-consent-to-vaccination-a-human-right.aspx

Civil liberties.

They include the legal right to exercise freedom of thought, speech, conscience and religious belief. 1 2

mom with child and doctor
Autonomy.

Protection of autonomy and bodily integrity includes the human right to exercise informed consent to medical risk taking. 3 4 5

What is informed consent?
Informed consent means you have the legal right to be fully and accurately informed about the benefits and risks of a medical intervention, including a pharmaceutical product, and are free to make a voluntary decision about whether to accept the risk for yourself or your minor child without being coerced or punished for the decision you make. 6 7

Informed consent has guided the ethical practice of medicine since the Doctor’s Trial at Nuremberg after World War II, where the informed consent principle was internationally acknowledged as a human right for individuals participating in scientific research. 8 9 Today, informed consent to medical risk taking also means you have the legal right to be fully and accurately informed by a doctor or medical facility about the benefits and risks of a lab test, surgical procedure, prescription drug or other medical intervention performed on you or your minor child and give your voluntary permission. 10 11

Why is informed consent to vaccine risk taking a human right?
Vaccines are biological products manufactured by pharmaceutical corporations. Like other pharmaceutical products, vaccines carry a risk of injury or death, which can be greater for some people than others, and often doctors cannot predict who will be harmed. 12 13

mom with child and doctor
One-size-fits-all vaccine policies and laws, which force you to risk your health or your child’s health without your voluntary, informed consent and with the threat of punishment for declining a vaccine, violate human rights. 14 15

It is important to protect civil liberties, including the freedom to exercise voluntary, informed consent to medical risk taking. Without the legal right to protect autonomy and bodily integrity, without the legal right to freedom of thought, speech, conscience and religious belief, we are no longer free. 16 17

Within NVIC.org, learn more about vaccines, diseases and the human right to informed consent to medical risk taking.

Empower yourself today with well-referenced information that can help you make educated decisions about vaccination.

It’s your health. Your family. Your choice.

onawah
2nd July 2017, 21:04
Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Parents and Pediatricians Need To Be Aware Of
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/07/02/critical-vaccine-studies.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20170702Z1&et_cid=DM149580&et_rid=2064522537
7/2/2017
_5mHK1IqKmQ

Story at-a-glance

Comparing vaccination rates in 34 developed nations revealed a significant correlation between infant mortality rates and the number of vaccine doses infants receive. The U.S. requires the most vaccines and has the highest infant mortality
Research shows the more vaccines an infant receives simultaneously, the greater their risk of being hospitalized or dying compared to those receiving fewer vaccines
The earlier in infancy a child is vaccinated, the greater their risk of being hospitalized or dying compared to children receiving the same vaccines at a later time
Here's What Happens When You Quit Smoking
Tickle Your Taste Buds With This Guilt-Free, Good-for-You Green Dip Recipe
By Dr. Mercola

Vaccines: Are they safe? Are they effective? To help answer those questions is Neil Z. Miller,1 a medical research journalist and director of the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute.

Miller has investigated vaccines for three decades and written several books on the subject, including "Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective?," "Vaccine Safety Manual for Concerned Families and Health Practitioners" and, most recently, "Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers."

"Miller's Review," published in 2016, is a magnificent piece of work. In it, he reviews the concern about vaccine safety and efficacy raised by 400 peer-reviewed published studies. The book doesn't review studies that support vaccination (almost all of which are funded by the industry and the government, by the way) as those studies are available on the CDC website.

"I got started when my own children were born … over 30 years ago … When my wife was pregnant, I felt I had to do due diligence about vaccines. I have to be honest, though. Before I even started to research vaccines, my wife and I pretty much knew intuitively that we were not going to inject our children with vaccines.

When I give lectures, I often tell people, 'How can you expect to achieve health by injecting healthy children with toxic substances?' I intuitively knew that … but still felt an obligation to do my due diligence and to do the research," Miller says.

"The thing is that when I do things, I do them pretty thoroughly … I was doing my research at medical libraries. I was gathering everything and I started to collate it and coordinate it … People started to find out about the information I had organized. They were asking me about vaccines even way back then. I organized it into a booklet. I started to share that with people. Everything snowballed from that first booklet."

Don't Believe the 'There's No Evidence' Argument
"Miller's Review" was created in response to the common refrain that "there are no studies showing vaccines are unsafe or ineffective."

"I hear this often," Miller says. "Parents come to me all the time, saying, 'My doctor told me that vaccines are safe and there are no studies that prove [otherwise].' I've been doing the research for 30 years. I know of literally thousands of studies that document [concerns]. My books all document [those] studies."

"Miller's Review" is unique in that it summarizes 400 studies in bullet points with direct quotes from the study — with one study per page — plus citations so that you can find and read the study in full should you decide to do so. All of the studies are published in peer-reviewed journals and indexed by the National Library of Medicine.

"These are valid studies by valid researchers in many journals that people have heard about — The Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, all the mainstream journals (and some of the smaller journals, but they're still valid peer-reviewed studies) that show there are problems with vaccines: There are safety problems, there are efficacy problems.

They're all in one place so that people, like doctors, can get this information all in one convenient place. This book has been very effective with medical doctors. When medical doctors who are on the fence, or who are pro-vaccine, get this book and read it, I hear back from parents that their doctor is no longer pressuring them to get the vaccines.

Their doctor is now respecting their decisions to not vaccinate or to go to some sort of alternative vaccine schedule if that's the choice these parents make …

I am all about having uncensored, unfettered access to all of the available information out there about vaccines. Not just what your medical doctor wants you to know. Not just what the pharmaceutical companies want you to know and not just what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is telling doctors to share with their patients.

I want [parents] to be absolutely free to make a decision whether or not they want to vaccinate their children … It's really a human rights issue. It's really about the mandatory aspect of vaccines. I think all vaccines are problematic. I think this not just based on my own feelings, but based on the evidence I've researched over the years."

Uninformed Decision-Making Is Part of the Problem
Ultimately, every parent will make a decision about whether or not to vaccinate. The problem is, most of the time, it's an uninformed decision. An issue brought up in some of his earlier books is that there's been a deliberate misinformation campaign aimed at making you believe vaccines are far more effective than they actually are.

For example, disease incidence data is used to suggest vaccines have dramatically reduced the incidence of a given disease, when in fact the disease rate had already declined by 90 percent, or more in some cases, before a vaccine was ever available. Measles has been problematic in developing nations, mostly because of malnutrition, vitamin A deficiency, lack of clean water, sanitation and quick access to medical care. As these measures are addressed, the mortality from measles declines on its own.

Vitamin A appears particularly important, and studies sponsored by the World Health Organization (WHO) have confirmed that high doses of vitamin A supplementation protect children against complications and death associated with the disease.

"By the time the measles vaccine was introduced in the United States in 1963, by the late 1950s, the mortality rate from measles had drastically dropped. This was due to the [fact] that the population had gained protection against the more dangerous ravages of the disease. This happens with a lot of different diseases.

In my book, I've got many different types of graphs and illustrations to help the reader understand the main points I'm making … [M]any of these graphs show that these diseases were declining significantly on their own, well before vaccines were introduced.

For example, scarlet fever. Where did scarlet fever go? Why don't we see cases of scarlet fever when we didn't have mass vaccinations with a scarlet fever vaccine? That's an important point to be made."

Many Childhood Diseases Are Protective Against Cancer
Another significant point is there are dozens of studies demonstrating that contracting certain childhood diseases actually protects you against various types of cancer later in life — everything from melanoma to leukemia.

It's important to realize that when you have a naturally-acquired infection, you're really exercising your immune system quite profoundly, developing authentic, lifelong immunity in the process, which is radically different from the type of artificial and temporary immunity you get from a vaccine.

One of the reasons for this is because vaccines stimulate a completely different part of your immune system than does fighting off a naturally-acquired infection. There's even evidence suggesting childhood diseases help protect against future heart disease.

"[A] Japanese study … looked at over 100,000 men and women of elderly age. They looked back at their history of catching these common childhood illnesses. Did they catch chickenpox, rubella, measles and mumps? What they found was it's actually protective against heart disease.

You're protected against heart attacks and various types of arteriosclerotic disease of the artery systems. It's protecting the arterial system so that you are protected not only — when you catch these diseases — from cancers, but from heart disease, heart attacks and strokes as well … There are different theories on why that takes place. But the important thing is that study after study confirms that it takes place."

Vaccines Create Problematic Mutations
Another vaccine-related problem that many are completely unaware of is the fact that vaccines cause mutations in the disease-bearing microorganisms, much in the same way antibiotics cause bacteria to mutate. The diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis vaccine (DTaP), for example, has caused the pertussis microorganism, Bordetella pertussis, to mutate and evade the vaccine. The same thing happened with the pneumococcal vaccine and the Haemophilus influenzae type B vaccine.

"They're finding, for example, when you've got a vaccine that targets only certain strains of disease where multiple strains are actually causing the disease, the vaccine is pretty effective at reducing the incidence of disease from that particular strain. But what happens is the other strains come and take their place … They come back even stronger.

That's what [happened] with Prevnar, a vaccine for pneumococcus, pneumococcal disease. All infants that receive vaccines according to the CDC's standard immunization schedule receive a pneumococcal vaccine at 2, 4 and 6 months of age. That vaccine only targeted seven strains. Pneumococcal has 90 different strains capable of causing pneumococcal disease.

They were pretty effective at reducing the amount of disease caused by the pneumococcal strains targeted by the vaccine. But what happened within just a few short years, the other strains became more prevalent … taking the place of the original strains [and] they became more virulent.

They came out with a new vaccine in 2010 … to deal with the vaccine losing its efficacy because of what I just explained. The new vaccine included the original seven strains plus six additional strains, the ones that were causing most of the pneumococcal disease now. Within two years of the new upgraded, updated pneumococcal vaccine, the strains had already mutated … "

Tragically, parents are being blamed and harassed for many of these vaccine failures. Parents are being told that if you don't vaccinate your kids, you are responsible for spreading the disease. That's the idea the CDC, the medical industry and the pharmaceutical industry are promoting.

However, if you actually read the studies, you'll find what the scientists know —the real problem is evolutionary adaptation. Dr. Meryl Nass expounded on this issue in a 2013 interview. The microorganisms adapt. "What's happened with pertussis [is] the pertussis microorganism has changed. It's now not only become more virulent; it's become more prevalent," Miller explains. "It's evaded the actual vaccine."

Herd Immunity Cannot Be Achieved Through Immunizations
Another core argument for mass vaccinations is achieving herd immunity. Miller believes, and I agree with this belief that herd immunity may never be achieved through vaccination because high vaccination rates encourage the evolution of more severe disease-causing agents. In a vaccinated population, the virulence increases due to selective pressure, as the pathogen is strengthened and adapts in its fight for survival against the vaccine.

Meanwhile, in an unvaccinated population, the environment actually promotes lowered virulence, as the pathogen does not want to kill its host. A wise pathogen is one that's able to infect many hosts without killing them, because when the host dies, the pathogen loses the environment upon which its own survival depends.

However, once the disease organism mutates and becomes more virulent within the vaccinated population, it raises the stakes not only among the vaccinated but also among the unvaccinated, who are now faced with a far more virulent foe than normal.

"In terms of herd immunity, you not only have … this selective pressure that's keeping you from being able to achieve herd immunity (because the microorganisms are always attempting to evade the vaccine), but pertussis vaccine is only 60 percent effective. That's with the best estimates. And that's only for a couple of years.

Studies show that even after three, four or five years, you're back to almost no efficacy whatsoever, almost back to the pre-vaccine period.

How can you expect to achieve herd immunity with a vaccine that is only 60 percent effective? You can vaccinate 100 percent of the population and you cannot achieve herd immunity with a vaccine that is only 60 percent effective. Influenza vaccines — many years, these vaccines are not good matches for the circulating virus — so you have zero percent efficacy. In the best years, you only have 30, 40 or 50 percent efficacy."

Studies Show Vaccinations Increase Infant Mortality
One of the tenets of conventional medicine is that if you vaccinate a population, everyone is going to be healthier. There will be less disease. But when you compare vaccination rates and health statistics, you find the converse is actually true. This is some of the most compelling information Miller shares in his book.

For example, when comparing vaccination rates in 34 developed nations, they found a significant correlation between infant mortality rates and the number of vaccine doses infants received. Developed nations like the United States that require the most vaccines tend to have the highest infant mortality. You can read this study here.2

"I'm the lead author on that study, actually. My co-author was Gary Goldman [Ph.D., who] worked for the CDC for seven years. He quit when he found that the CDC was not allowing anything detrimental [to get out]. Goldman found problems with the chickenpox vaccine and wanted to publish that data. The CDC said, 'We're not going to allow you to do that.' That's when Goldman quit …

Goldman and I did two peer-reviewed studies … The children in the United States are required — if they follow the CDC's immunization schedule — to receive the most vaccines in the developed world, actually throughout the world. Globally. Twenty-six vaccines. Other developed nations require less.

Some nations only require 12 vaccines — Switzerland, Sweden, Iceland and other European nations — yet they have better infant mortality rates. That's what our study looked at. [V]accines are promoted as being lifesaving. They're given to children to protect them against dying from infectious diseases.

We gathered all the immunization schedules from the 34 nations [and found] the United States had the 34th worst infant mortality rate ... It had the worst. Thirty-three nations in the developed world had better infant mortality rates. We did the study and we found what many people would find to be a counterintuitive relationship.

We found a statistically significant relationship. There was a direct correlation between the number of vaccines that a nation required for their infants and the infant mortality rate. The more vaccines that a nation required, the worse the infant mortality rate."

Why Is This Not Front-Page News?
Many naïvely believe that if all of this is true, if vaccines truly were doing more harm than good, it would be front-page news. The reason you rarely if ever hear anything about studies such as this one is because the vaccine industry has an iron grip on the information being publicly disseminated. Collusion between federal regulatory agencies, the government and the industry is just one of several hurdles preventing this kind of information from being widely known.

You have individuals like Dr. Julie Gerberding, who headed up the CDC and was in charge of infectious disease recommendations for seven years before moving on to become president of Merck Vaccines, one of the largest vaccine manufacturers in the world. That's just one of many dozens of examples of this revolving door, which in turn has led to the breakdown of true science-based medicine.

"We have a serious problem where top scientists admit that they drop data points from studies that they've been influenced by the people who are funding their studies to sometimes not publish the study because it didn't come up with the results they wanted, and so on," Miller says.

"We have a serious problem with the pharmaceutical industry controlling which studies get published. Also, there's a serious problem because the pharmaceutical companies are controlling the advertising dollars that go out to the major media.

Mainstream media makes approximately 70 percent of its income from pharmaceutical ads. They do not want to publish or promote anything, even in their newscasts that would be critical of vaccines because it could compromise their potential to keep bringing in these millions of dollars they make every year from the pharmaceutical companies."

The greatest, most serious problem we currently face is the concerted push to mandate vaccines and eliminate personal belief exemptions. For example, to go to school in California, you now have to be fully vaccinated. No exemptions are allowed, which is really a violation of human rights.

Giving Multiple Simultaneous Vaccines Is Extremely Risky, Study Shows
The second study3 Miller and Goldman published analyzed nearly 40,000 reports of infants who suffered adverse reactions after vaccines. Here, they found that infants given the most vaccines were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die compared to those who received fewer vaccines.

It's worth noting that this data was obtained from the vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) database, a passive reporting system, and that research has confirmed passive reporting systems underreport by 50 to 1.

What this means is that when you find one report in VAERS, you have to multiply that by 50 to get closer to reality because, on average, only 1 in 50 adverse events are ever reported. Doctors have a legal obligation to report side effects to VAERS, but they don't, and there are no ramifications for failure to make a report. Parents can also make a report to the database, and I encourage all parents to do so, should your child experience a vaccine reaction.

At present, VAERS has over 500,000 reports of adverse reactions to vaccines, and every year, more than 30,000 new reports are added to it. Miller and Goldman downloaded this database and created a program to extract all the reports involving infants. In all, they extracted the reports of 38,000 infants who experienced an adverse reaction following the receipt of one or more vaccines.

They then created a program that was able to determine the number of vaccines each infant had received before suffering an adverse reaction, and stratified the reports by the number of vaccines (anywhere from one to eight) the infants had received simultaneously before the reaction took place. They specifically honed in on serious adverse reactions requiring hospitalization or that led to death. Here's what they found:

Infants who received three vaccines simultaneously were statistically and significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die after receiving their vaccines than children who received two vaccines at the same time
Infants who received four vaccines simultaneously were statistically and significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die than children who received three or two vaccines, and so on all the way up to eight vaccines
Children who received eight vaccines simultaneously were "off-the-charts" statistically and significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die after receiving those vaccines
Children who received vaccines at an earlier age were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die than children who receive those vaccines at a later age
Childhood Vaccination Schedule Is Based on Convenience, Not Science or Safety
As noted by Miller:

"The industry, the CDC and Dr. Paul Offit tell us that you can take multiple vaccines. Offit said you could theoretically take 10,000 vaccines at one time; that an infant can be exposed to that many pathogens simultaneously without hurting the child. The CDC's immunization schedule requires that children receive eight vaccines at 2 months of age, eight vaccines at 4 months of age and eight vaccines at 6 months of age.

I ask parents, 'When did you ever take eight drugs at the same time? … If you did take eight drugs at the same time, would you think it was more likely that you would or would not have an adverse reaction?' Because toxicologists know that the more drugs you take at the same time, the more potential for some kind of a synergistic or additive toxicity … What this study confirms is that it's a dangerous practice to give multiple vaccines simultaneously.

The CDC has put together a schedule based on convenience. They say '[G]ive eight vaccines at 2 months, give eight more vaccines at 4 months and give eight more booster shots at 6 months' because it's convenient. They're afraid that parents will not come to the pediatrician again and again and again if they have to keep coming back for more vaccines, so they get multiple [shots all at once].

They said, 'We're going to make this schedule based on convenience.' Not based on evidence. Not based on science. There's nothing scientific about the CDC's recommended immunization schedule. We've shown it with our study …

We also showed that children who received vaccines at an earlier age are statistically significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die than children who receive it at a later age. We divided it up to children who receive their vaccines in the first 6 months of age versus children who receive their vaccines in the last six months of infancy.

Again, off-the-charts statistically significant, it's much more dangerous to give younger infants multiple vaccines than to give older infants multiple vaccines. This makes sense because they're giving the same dose to a newborn or a baby that might be 8, 9, 10, 11 or 12 pounds at 2 months of age versus a child who might be 15 or 17 pounds … at a later age."

More Information
You can find "Miller's Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchers" on ThinkTwice.com. This book is an invaluable resource for parents who want to do their due diligence before making up their mind about whether or not to vaccinate their children. On his website, you will also find his other books, along with studies and publications relating to vaccine safety and efficacy concerns.

Another resource is the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC). NVIC is leading the charge when it comes to educating the public about efforts to impose mandatory vaccinations, and how to preserve our health freedoms on the local, state and federal levels.

Ultimately, everyone will have to make a choice about vaccinations. They key is to make it an informed one — to understand and weigh the potential risks and benefits. To do that, you need access to both sides of the debate, and Miller has done us all a great favor by making the largely hidden side of the equation more readily accessible.

onawah
5th July 2017, 18:17
More important to use ineffective and contaminated cancer-causing vaccines than take them off the market, says doctor
Posted by: Dena Schmidt, staff writer in Vaccine Dangers July 1, 2017
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/cancer-vaccines-2294.html
yfaAtdTgBGk



(NaturalHealth365) As far back as the early 1960s there was evidence of vaccines being pushed upon the public without full disclosure of their potential risks. Several vaccines in widespread use were found to be contaminated with cancer causing compounds like SV-40.
However, as shocking as this may be to read, they continued to be administered a full three years after the cancer evidence was detected. In fact, government health agencies did everything they could to suppress the truth and keep the public in the dark about the dangers.
The following video includes several disturbing news items from the 1960s and 70s. They describe how vaccines like the flu shot, adenovirus inoculation in soldiers and widespread polio vaccines could have caused cancer in millions of Americans.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfaAtdTgBGk
In 1971, the Federal Communicable Disease Center admitted that the flu vaccine was ineffective at recommended doses, and potentially harmful at higher doses.
Four scientists who helped to create the flu shot in the 1960s also said that these vaccines were ineffective and even refused to give them to their own family members. These scientists were either reassigned or left their positions. Their negative assessments of the flu shot never received public attention.
Some may have received a double dose of cancer causing compounds in vaccines
The adenovirus vaccine given to soldiers to fight upper respiratory issues was found to contain a cancer-causing contaminant. It was eventually taken off the market – but not until three years after the division’s own scientists had pointed out the danger.
Dr. Frederick Murray of the Division of Biologic Standard defended the delay in taking a cancer causing vaccine off the market. He said it took three years to complete the testing, and that during this time it was “more important to offer the vaccines than to take them off the market and remove the (cancer causing) agent.”
Other vaccines such as the polio shot were also linked with cancer. It was determined that in 1961 numerous batches of the polio vaccine were contaminated with SV-40, a harmful compound linked with cancer in both laboratory animals and humans.
Research also showed lab animals that received both the contaminated polio immunization and the flu shot were at a much higher risk for cancer. It’s likely that many people received this double dose of cancer causing contaminant during the 1960s and 70s.
Cover-ups related to vaccine side effects, cancer and other conditions continue today
This tendency of government agencies and big pharma companies to suppress information about vaccines has not changed. Dr. Judy Mikovits is a molecular biologist and biochemist and with over three decades of esteemed experience in the vaccine research field. Dr. Mikovits knows first-hand how government health agencies actively work to keep the public uninformed about the dangers of vaccines.
Dr. Mikovits has studied cancer, HIV, autism and chronic fatigue syndrome with over 50 peer-reviewed articles published. In 2011, Dr. Mikovits discovered that an alarming 30 percent or more of vaccines are contaminated with gammaretroviruses, which can contribute to autism, chronic fatigue syndrome, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease. Yet, most of her work is actively being suppressed to this day.
When will vaccine makers start treating consumers with respect, compassion and “The Golden Rule”?
Dr. Andrew Wakefield warned Dr. Mikovits that coming forward with these results would make her a target, just as he’d been. After facing threats, being fired and facing false charges and a gag order for four years, she is now sharing what she’s learned about the grave threats some vaccines hold.
The technology now exists to clean up contaminated vaccines. Dr. Mikovits continues to fight for safer vaccines that are free of neurotoxins and gammaretroviruses. She also advocates the cessation of vaccinating newborns and infants, and a more sensible approach to vaccine use overall.
Editor’s note: Click here to gain FREE access to the Vaccine World Summit – the world’s first online summit dedicated to vaccine safety news, infectious disease solutions and the latest advances in immune protective protocols.
References:
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2011/02/18/60-lab-studies-now-confirm-cancer-link-to-a-vaccine-you-probably-had-as-a-child

( I'm officially on sabbatical, but am taking today to tie up loose ends and tomorrow will go on sabbatical in earnest. )

onawah
17th July 2017, 14:21
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. RESPONSE TO JOHN OLIVER
July 13, 2017
7ViZRj4V1VM

The Neo-Liberal propaganda-
comedy of John Oliver, Stephen
Colbert and Trevor Noah
demonstrates the stranglehold that
the Corporatist-Fascist agenda now
has on pop culture. An example of
this is shown here of John Oliver
sniping at Robert F Kennedy Jr
over his very valid concerns about
the mercury-based preservative
used in many vaccines, Thimerosal.

Kennedy recently appeared on Tucker
Carlson's show to rebut the savaging
that he'd received by Oliver. Although
otherwise healthy, Kennedy suffers
from spasmodic dysphonia (aka
laryngeal dystonia), a rare neurological
disorder that causes involuntary spasms
of the vocal cords, so I am transcribing
their conversation here.

The segment opens with the abysmal
John Oliver clip, followed by a clip of
Kennedy giving a speech, in which he
says, "For 33 years, I've been working to
get mercury out of fish. Nobody as ever
called me 'anti-fish' and because I want
mercury out of vaccines, I should not be
called 'anti-vaccines.'"

Carlson, conservative pundit and father
of four children then asks, "As someone
whose bonafides as a Democrat and a
Liberal are unimpeachable, and yet, they
piled on you - why? Why is raising
questions about the safety of vaccines
a no-go zone on the Left?"

Kennedy responds, "It's not consistent
with the traditional Liberal posture of
skepticism towards large corporate
power and particularly the pharmaceutical
industry and government agencies. The
CDC has been characterized in at least 4
Federal studies as a cesspool of corruption
because of its pervasive interactions -
entanglements, I should say - with the
vaccine industry...

"The CDC vaccine branch...is really a
subsidiary of the vaccine industry. It
sells $4.1 billion worth of vaccines a
year. It spends about $4.6 billion,
about half of its budget promoting
vaccines and it only spends $20 million
testing vaccines (!)...I've been meeting
recently with the heads of various
Federal agencies and one of the
shocking things about vaccines is that
there's very little safety testing.

"If you have a normal drug, let's say
Vioxx or Viagra, if you want to bring that
to market, typically, FDA requires you to
do double-blind placebo studies, so you
take 9,000 people, give them a pill and
9,000 people and give them a pill that's
identical except it's sugar and you watch
them, typically for 5 years and you see if
there's harm. But with vaccines, all of
those requirements are waived."

When Carlson asks Kennedy if he is getting
paid for his advocacy, Kennedy responds,
"I'm not. In fact, I'm getting unpaid for
this! It's been probably the worst
career move I've ever made! But it's
deeply concerning to me. If you look at the
vaccine schedule, [it] was expanded
dramatically in 1989. In 1987, Congress
passed a law giving blanket immunity from
liability to vaccine manufacturers. So,
suddenly, vaccines became pay dirt. It
was a gold rush to put vaccines on the
schedule.

"I got 3 vaccines when I was a kid and I
was fully compliant. My children got 69
vaccines. Today, children get 74 vaccines.
74 shots of 16 vaccines. And nobody has
ever tested what all of those vaccines do
together. And in fact, many of the vaccines
have not been tested, at all for the illnesses
that are associated with them."

Carlson then says, "I don't know what the
answer is but I know what the questions
ought to be and you always have a place
on this show to ask them," to which
Kennedy responds, "That is very kind
and courageous of you because, as you
know, most television hosts will not let
you on to talk about this issue. On the
evening news, typically 17 out of 24
advertisements are pharmaceutical
advertisements and most hosts are
frightened of that. So, I'm very grateful
to you for your willingness [to have
me on]."
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/robert-f-kennedy-jr-my-response-to-john-oliver/

onawah
17th July 2017, 15:24
Owen Shroyer and Jon Rappoport oF Infowars: America’s Children Need Your Help!
By Kent Heckenlively, JD
http://bolenreport.com/owen-shroyer-jon-rappoport-infowars-americas-children-need-help/
https://i0.wp.com/bolenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/shroyer.jpg?resize=825%2C510


Last week I put out a plea to twenty-five leading individuals with knowledge of vaccine injury to help with my White House petition for a FIVE YEAR MORATORIUM ON CHILDHOOD VACCINES.

At the top of my list were Owen Shroyer and Jon Rappoport of Infowars. I did this for a very specific reason, combining a relatively young truth seeker, with a more experienced veteran.

About Owen Shroyer…

For Shroyer, who is one of the leading lights of Infowars, you might be surprised to learn he has taken the “red pill“ (Matrix reference), relatively recently, in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon bombing. In listening to Shroyer, it is clear he understands what is at stake in the vaccine issue.

As something of a veteran in this fight I have to say I am pleased at what I see as an emerging libertarian streak in this generation. I especially like the libertarian philosophy as it allows one an ideological basis to attack the lies of the left and right. As an attorney, this comes naturally to me. We are taught to follow principles, not personalities.

There is a reason all dictators throughout history have wanted to “first, kill all the lawyers.” We are trained to follow the law, without fear or favor. Tyrants of all persuasions fear lawyers.

About Jon Rappaport…


By contrast, Jon Rappoport (also a contributor to The Bolen Report), is a more seasoned hand.

In 1982, the LA Weekly submitted his name for a Pulitzer prize, for his interview with the president of El Salvador University, where the military had taken over the campus. He has also run for Congress and started “The Great Boycott” against eight corporate chemical giants: Monsanto, Dow, Du Pont, Bayer, and others, which continues to this day. He is a prolific writer and commentator, although since 2000 he has largely operated away from the mainstream media, because as he says, “My research was not friendly to the conventional media.” I have also heard him speak about vaccines on Infowars and he knows the very fate of humanity is at stake in this issue.

Here is my petition on the White House web-site:

FIVE YEAR MORATORIUM ON CHILDHOOD VACCINES…

American children are in crisis with an explosion of once-rare neurological problems like autism and seizures.

Recent scientific evidence has shown massive contamination of vaccines with unsuspected chemical and biological agents. Other evidence shows dramatic differences in in health outcomes between vaccinated and un-vaccinated children. In order to remedy this we ask the White House to:

ONE: Impose a five year moratorium on all childhood vaccines from birth to age eighteen.

TWO: Repeal the 1986 National Childhood vaccine injury Act and return vaccines to the traditional civil justice system.

THREE: Perform large scale studies of vaccinated and un-vaccinated children.

FOUR: Ban direct pharmaceutical advertising to consumers and allow such advertising only to medical professionals.

I need 100,000 signatures by August 2, 2017. I am ready to fly out to Texas to appear live on your show or appear remotely through Skype.

I estimate that this measure will save at least 250,000 children from developing autism and 15,000 babies from dying of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. And when the world sees these dramatic improvements in children’s health, there will be NO GOING BACK. BIG PHARMA will forever be changed into little pharma.

Here is the link:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/five-year-moratorium-childhood-vaccines

Thanks to Tami Canal of March Against Monsanto for being the first on my list to publicize this effort. For the rest of you, I’m still waiting for a response. Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, where are you on this?

By Kent Heckenlively, JD

Kent Heckenlively is the author of INOCULATED: How Science Lost its Soul in Autism, available on Amazon and at Barnes&Noble.com

onawah
21st July 2017, 22:40
Monsanto's Army of Online Bullies
(Today's newsletter from Institute for Responsible Technology)
by Jeffrey Smith
7/21/17

There are hundreds, possibly thousands of them—paid to bully, shame, and endlessly argue with anyone posting a comment deriding GMOs or pesticides. And when a high-profile person stands up to Monsanto’s technology, watch out. The trolls swarm in and gang up.

Take Marion Nestle, for example. When a GMO propaganda film called Food Evolution purposely quoted her out of context, she demanded that her 10-second clip be removed. Nestle’s blog was then ambushed with 870 comments by Monsanto’s minions, forcing her to block all comments from her site, Food Politics.

The presence of a troll army was revealed during the on-going lawsuit against Monsanto over the cancer-causing properties of their herbicide Roundup. The lawyers wrote:

“Monsanto even started the aptly-named “Let Nothing Go” program to leave nothing, not even Facebook comments, unanswered; through a series of third parties, it employs individuals who appear to have no connection to the industry, who in turn post positive comments on news articles and Facebook posts, defending Monsanto, its chemicals, and GMOs.”

Scientists Attacked

The legal brief also points out that, “Monsanto quietly funnels money to ‘think tanks’ such as the ‘Genetic Literacy Project’ and the ‘American Council on Science and Health,’ organizations intended to shame scientists . . .”

As a frequent target of these groups, I know well their unethical bullying tactics. And so too do the scientists who discover evidence that GMOs are harmful.

World renowned biologist Arpad Pusztai, for example, was pummeled by the biotech machinery when he accidentally discovered that GMOs caused massive damage to rats in just 10 days. In the late 1990s. he led a team that was designing test protocols to be used by European authorities to evaluate GMO safety. His research, however, revealed that the generic process of creating a GMO caused dangerous and unpredictable side-effects that might already be eroding the health of consumers. Because his shocking discovery could have destroyed the entire GMO industry, they came after Pusztai with far more than just a shaming campaign. Within days, his employer of 35 years terminated his contract. Pusztai’s 20-member team was dismantled. He was silenced with threats of a lawsuit. And the biotech industry and pro-GMO UK government unleashed a campaign to destroy his reputation.

Although Pusztai was the first scientist to undergo this type of industry battering, many others have since been targeted. One told me that these types of attacks have deterred hundreds of other scientists from doing research on GMOs.

The online bullies have a similar intimidating effect. Their well-chosen words are sharp and condescending, designed to scare away others from making comments—lest they become the next target.

The folks at the International Fitness Profesionals Association learned this the hard way. After posting what they considered to be a balanced article on GMOs, a troll got wind of it, posted a negative comment on the Pro-GMO FB site “We Love GMOs and Vaccines,” and asked his comrades to also make comments. The trolls swarmed.

They not only challenged the GMO article, they attacked the integrity and reputation of the organization. And of course, the trolls avoided commenting on details about GMOs, since they would quickly lose that argument with anyone familiar with the science. Facts are not their strong point. They prey on emotions.

Standing up to the Bully

Bullying and shaming can traumatize. In schools, online, at work, they have damaged and destroyed lives. It works. That’s why the biotech industry uses them.

Before discussing what to do, the first step is how to feel. The answer: INVINCIBLE!

After reporting for years about Monsanto’s strong-arm tactics, I finally became their target about eight years ago. Rather than feeling hurt or depressed, I felt uplifted. I viewed their baseless attacks as a badge of honor. I was now such a threat to their business dealings around the world, they invested a significant amount of money trying to distort my work and discredit me.

I considered whether I should spend time countering their spin to set the record straight, but soon realized that it was a black hole that would suck up my life. After all, why would I want to write posts to correct the views of the handful of people who wander onto their site, when I could reach millions of others with real information.

And so I smile, shake my head, and don’t even bother to read their posts about me. We’re winning the battle against GMOs and soon these bounty hunters will be hired by the next toxic industry.

That’s right, I said we are TOTALLY WINNING. Mainstream food companies in the US are falling over themselves to remove genetically engineered ingredients in order to boast a Non-GMO label. With 57% of surveyed Americans saying that they are concerned about the health impacts of GMOs, we are now the majority. We have the average American on the right side of this issue.

And that’s why Monsanto has unleashed its online army. It’s a last-ditch attempt to turn the tide.

So, if you get a troll on your case or see one doing their dark dance on someone else’s post, feel GREAT! Let it remind you that our collective work sharing the truth about GMO dangers has been so successful, we are seeing the dying embers of a desperate and failing industry.

And have absolutely no anxiety or concern about any details of their accusations. They will portray themselves as mainstream, pretending to have logic and science on their side. They will appear absolutely sure of themselves. And their colleagues will give them support.

It’s their game. It’s just a game. It means nothing. And by the way, we have become the mainstream in this argument (finally).

So What Do We Do? Strike Back!

Arguing with a professional GMO huckster is hopeless. Forget about it. (Or as my NY colleagues say: fugedabowdit.)

If you are in charge of the website or account, just delete their comments. Don’t waste the time or damage the emotions of your readers. Replace their mindless ramble with a statement like:

We just found a Monsanto troll! That’s right. Monsanto hired and trained an online army to attack anyone who dares to reveal the dangers of GMOs and pesticides like Roundup. Their campaign is called “Let Nothing Go.” So we deleted a post that had all the markings of a troll: It was emotionally bullying or shaming. It used talking points made popular by Monsanto’s PR companies, including myths like GMOs feed the world, increase yield, reduce pesticide use, or are proven safe. And it was clearly uninformed. So it was either posted by a paid troll, or worse yet, some poor person who actually believes and emulates them. Read more about the GMO trolls and GMO dangers in general.

If you can’t delete the offending post, here’s a similar type of statement you can post in response:

Looks like we’ve found a Monsanto troll! If you haven’t heard, Monsanto hired and trained an online army to attack anyone who dares to reveal the problems with GMOs and pesticides like Roundup. Their campaign is called “Let Nothing Go.” You can decide for yourself if this is one of Monsanto’s minions. The tone of the trolls are typically emotionally bullying or shaming. They claim the high ground, pretending that science is on their side. They often roll out one of the many talking point myths made popular by Monsanto’s PR companies, pretending that GMOs feed the world, increase yield, reduce pesticide use, and are proven safe, etc. And they are clearly uninformed. So either this is a troll, or worse yet, some poor person who actually believes and emulates them. Read more about the GMO trolls and GMO dangers in general.

If they engage you in an online argument (and if they’re a troll, they or their friends will) you can ignore the baseless claims and just use the opportunity to post links to one of the many informative articles that shreds Monsanto’s myths. Find lots of stuff to post at ResponsibleTechnology.org or on our Facebook page. Please subscribe to our newsletter and like our page so we can get you more ammunition—and stories of success.

This is a time to celebrate our victories, but we can’t let up. Let’s nail the coffin shut on this dangerous and irresponsible use of genetic engineering and protect future generations. With life itself at stake, we can withstand the buzzing of a few online gnats.

Safe eating and posting.

Jeffrey Smith

onawah
24th July 2017, 18:28
Glyphosate warning: Unfavorable birth outcomes for moms exposed to Roundup
Posted by: Dena Schmidt, staff writer July 24, 2017
(NaturalHealth365)
http://www.naturalhealth365.com/glyphosate-roundup-2323.html

New data was recently presented at a children’s health conference warning the public about the grave dangers of glyphosate, the active ingredient in weed killers like Roundup and similar herbicides.
When glyphosate gets into the systems of expectant mothers, the risk of a number of adverse outcomes rises. These include lower birth weight, shorter gestation times and additional risks to the health of both the child and the mother.
Babies exposed to glyphosate at increased risk for neurodevelopmental issues
The recent study looked at 69 expectant mothers receiving prenatal care at an Indiana obstetric practice. Glyphosate was detected in the urine of 63 of the 69 pregnant women – a stunning 91 percent. It was also found that the presence of glyphosate made it far more likely that they would have unfavorable birth outcomes.
The women were tracked over two years and it was determined that high amounts of glyphosate were linked with much shorter pregnancies as well as babies with low birth weights. These factors are known to give children a more difficult start in life and raise the risk of neurodevelopmental issues and other health problems going forward, even into their adult years.
The research is part of an ongoing project overseen by the Children’s Environmental Health Network (CEHN). This group has been studying the impact of herbicides on reproductive health as well as newborns and young children.
A growing mountain of evidence about the dangers of glyphosate in Roundup and other herbicides
It was also determined that women who resided in rural areas tended to have higher glyphosate levels than those who lived in urban or suburban neighborhoods. It’s no surprise that living close to areas where soybeans and corn are grown and treated with herbicides containing glyphosate dramatically increases the risk of exposure to these chemicals.
Based on their findings, the researchers call the effects of glyphosate exposure a “huge issue.” This is the first study of its kind to assess the effects of herbicides like Roundup on the health of expectant mothers and their children.
In 2015, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) named glyphosate a “probable human carcinogen.” Past studies have also connected glyphosate with cases of multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. In addition, chronic glyphosate exposure – even at low doses – has been linked to kidney and liver problems.
Monsanto and the EPA continue to downplay glyphosate dangers
Exposure to the weed killer, sold under the brand name Roundup, can cause DNA adducts – an alteration in the genes that’s linked with an increased cancer risk. Monsanto, maker of the Roundup product, has since tried to discredit these findings despite strong evidence of the health risks. In fact, the New York Times reported on the collusion between Monsanto and the EPA to suppress findings linking glyphosate to a higher cancer risk.
No doubt, the dangers of glyphosate keep piling up. The government and Monsanto need to stop undermining testing efforts and start taking action that’s in the interest of public safety. For now, you can minimize your glyphosate exposure by always eating organic and staying clear of farms where these toxic substances are sprayed.
Sources for this article include:
BeyondPesticides.org
NIH.gov
EWG.org
Alternet.org
NYTimes.com

onawah
7th August 2017, 16:57
Bill calling for first ever federal vax/un-vaxxed study
Autism Action Network
8/7/16
US Take Action: Bill calling for first ever federal vax/un-vaxxed study
Basic questions never asked and never answered

Believe it or not a study comparing the overall health of a vaccinated population and an unvaccinated population has never been done in the United States. US Representative Bill Posey just introduced H.R. 3615 a bill which directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services "to conduct or support a comprehensive study comparing total health outcomes, including risk of autism, in vaccinated populations in the United States with such outcomes in unvaccinated populations in the United States, and for other purposes." We believe such a study is long overdue and you have to wonder why such a study was never done.

http://capwiz.com/a-champ/issues/alert/?alertid=78402626&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]

Please click on the Take Action above to send a message to your member of the House of Representatives asking him or her to co-sponsor Rep. Posey's H.R. 3615. A message will also be sent to your two US Senators from your state asking them to introduce a similar bill in the US Senate.

The number of vaccines given to American children has quintupled since 1986 when doctors and vaccine companies were given complete legal immunity from any injury caused by a vaccine. Since then we have seen an explosion in the prevalence of a wide range of pediatric disorders associated with immune system dysfunction including diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, allergies, asthma, ADHD, as well as autism. Yet the US has never taken a hard look at the health outcomes with a vaccinated and unvaccinated population.

Here is a video of Rep. Posey trying to extract confirmation from Dr. Colleen Boyle, Director of the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, that these studies have never been done at a hearing of the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee on November 29, 2012.
uNWTOmEi_6A[/QUOTE]

onawah
7th August 2017, 20:03
My interview with CBS investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson: not fake news
8/7/17
by Jon Rappoport
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/08/07/my-interview-with-cbs-investigative-reporter-sharyl-attkisson-not-fake-news/

I’m reprinting an excerpt from an interview I did, several years ago, with former CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson.

It’s a reminder about the difference between fake and real news, and about who the major purveyors of fake news are.

It also reveals a familiar strategy major news outlets deploy, when they happen to publish a true story and then realize its explosive implications: they shut down all further investigation. They close the book.

Here is the piece in full:

Unless you’ve been living in a cave, you’re aware that a film, Vaxxed, has been showing in theaters across America and overseas—and audiences are stunned by its revelations.

Vaxxed exposes a huge scandal at the CDC, where a long-time researcher, William Thompson, confessed (2014) that he and colleagues committed gross fraud in a study of the MMR vaccine.

Thompson admitted the evidence showed the vaccine led to a higher risk of autism in children—but that finding was intentionally buried, and the vaccine was given a free pass.

Of course, mainstream reporters have been mercilessly attacking Vaxxed, and a segment of the population finds it impossible to believe that the CDC would ever commit this kind of fraud.

So, as a mind-changer, let me take you back to the late summer of 2009, and the Swine Flu epidemic, which was hyped to the sky by the CDC. The Agency was calling for all Americans to take the Swine Flu vaccine. Remember?

The problem was, the CDC was concealing another scandal.

At the time, star CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, was working on a Swine Flu story. She discovered that the CDC had secretly stopped counting cases of the illness—while, of course, continuing to warn Americans about its unchecked spread.

Understand that the CDC’s main job is counting cases and reporting the numbers.

What was the Agency up to?

Here is an excerpt from my 2014 interview with Sharyl Attkisson:

Rappoport: In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, [secretly] stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?

Attkisson: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was “the most original story” he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others pushed to stop it [after it was published on the CBS News website] and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.

—end of interview excerpt—

It was routine for doctors all over America to send blood samples from patients they’d diagnosed with Swine Flu, or the “most likely” Swine Flu patients, to labs for testing. And overwhelmingly, those samples were coming back with the result: not Swine Flu, not any kind of flu.

That was the big secret. That’s what the CDC was hiding. That’s why they stopped reporting Swine Flu case numbers. That’s what Attkisson had discovered. That’s why she was shut down.

But it gets even worse.

Because about three weeks after Attkisson’s findings were published on the CBS News website, the CDC, obviously in a panic, decided to double down. If one lie is exposed, tell an even bigger one. A much bigger one.

Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon).

Are your eyeballs popping? They should be.

In the summer of 2009, the CDC secretly stops counting Swine Flu cases in America, because the overwhelming percentage of lab tests from likely Swine Flu patients shows no sign of Swine Flu or any other kind of flu.

There is no Swine Flu epidemic.

Then, the CDC estimates there are 22 MILLION cases of Swine Flu in the US.

So…the premise that the CDC would never lie about important matters like, oh, a vaccine increasing the risk of autism…you can lay that one to rest.

The CDC will lie about anything it wants to. It will boldly go where no person interested in real science will go.

It will completely ignore its mandate to care about human health, and it will get away with it.

And CBS will conveniently forget how it aided and abetted the CDC, by censoring real news, and instead opted for egregious and titanic fake news.

onawah
10th August 2017, 20:31
Register to see 7 part documentary Truth About Vaccines free online 8/17
https://go.thetruthaboutvaccines.com/?a_aid=5649e537e5ebd&a_bid=9dd5b084

We brought together 60 of the world’s top health experts to bring you…
“The Truth About Vaccines”
Register NOW and you’ll be first in line to see the entire 7-part series – for free – series begins August 17th!

onawah
11th August 2017, 18:27
ITALY PASSES MANDATORY VACCINATION LAW

by The Vaccine Reaction Staff
Published August 9, 2017
http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2017/08/italy-passes-mandatory-vaccination-law/

"The mandates were first proposed following a measles outbreak that prompted a travel warning by the U.S. and amid a public scandal involving a nurse who had claimed to be vaccinating children for years but had not."

Following a hotly contested public debate, the Italian parliament has given final approval to a law mandating full compliance with government-sanctioned vaccines for all school children in Italy up to 16 years of age.

Under the new ruling, small children without the proper documentation will be denied access to preschool, and parents of children legally required to attend school could face fines of up to €500 (about $590).1 Before the law was passed, there were reports the fines could reach approximately €7,094 ($8,380) and that repeat offenders may face the possibility of losing custody of their children.2

The vaccine mandates, which were signed into law on July 28, 2017 by a vote of 296 to 92, include requirements for vaccination against measles, rubella, chickenpox, tetanus, diphtheria, polio, and hepatitis B and are expected to be implemented beginning in September 2017.3 The original list included 12 vaccines, but meningococcal B and meningococcal C were dropped from the final law.4

According to Italian government reports, the ruling is meant to offset what it calls “misinformation about vaccines,” which government sources say has led to a decline in Italy’s vaccination rate in the 20 years since the repeal of school vaccination mandates. The current vaccine mandates were first proposed following a measles outbreak that prompted a travel warning by the U.S. and amid a public scandal involving a nurse who had claimed to be vaccinating children for years but had not.5

Many people in Italy strongly disagree with the new law and an intense public debate has ensued, with tens of thousands of Italians taking to the streets in cities throughout the country to protest what they believe is government overreach and a violation of their informed consent rights.6
References:
1 Associated Press. Italy to Make all Childhood Vaccinations Mandatory. Business Insider July 28, 2017.
2 Livesay C. Amid Measles Outbreak, Italy Makes Childhood Vaccinations Mandatory. NPR June 19, 2017.
3 AP. Children in Italy Have to Be Vaccinated or They Can’t Go to School: Government. Global News July 28, 2017.
4 Barry C (AP). Italy Approves Hotly Contested Mandatory Vaccine Program. U.S. News & World Report July 28, 2017.
5 Italy Makes 12 Vaccines Mandatory for School-Age Children. U.S. News and Special Reports. May 19, 2017.
6 Fisher BL. Vaccine Freedom Marches Across Italy Highlight Global Vaccination Agenda. The Vaccine Reaction June 20, 2017.

onawah
21st December 2017, 16:02
EPA Allowing Widespread Use of Unapproved Pesticides, Study Finds
December 12, 2017
ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION
https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/epa-allowing-widespread-use-unapproved-pesticides-study-finds#close

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has routinely been allowing use of unapproved pesticides under the pretext of an "emergency" when no actual emergency exists, according to an analysis released Monday by the Center for Biological Diversity.

The abuse of the emergency provision has created a loophole allowing the widespread use of unapproved pesticides, year after year, across millions of acres in ways that are either known to be harmful to wildlife or haven't been tested to be safe.

In one case the EPA has granted 78 "emergency" exceptions over the past six years for a well-known, bee-killing pesticide called sulfoxaflor, allowing its use on more than 17.5 million acres of U.S. farmland.

"It's disgusting to see the EPA's broken pesticide program bending over backward to appease the pesticide industry," said Stephanie Parent, a senior attorney in the Center for Biological Diversity's environmental health program. "These exemptions put people and wildlife at tremendous risk because they allow poisons to be applied in ways that would otherwise be illegal."

The EPA has the authority to OK temporary emergency use of unapproved pesticides if the agency determines the pesticide is needed to prevent the spread of an unexpected outbreak of crop-damaging insects, for example.

But the Center for Biological Diversity's analysis shows the EPA's routine use of the emergency provision has allowed pesticide manufacturers to bypass the typical pesticide approval process, resulting in poisons with either known or undetermined risks being applied across millions of acres of crops.

The 78 emergency exceptions for sulfoxaflor are notable because previous approval for its use on cotton was cancelled by a federal judge in 2015 due to sulfoxaflor's potential harm to pollinators, and it has never been approved for use on sorghum, which is attractive to bees. Yet the EPA granted every single requested emergency exemption for the pesticide's use on sorghum and cotton. The EPA has not released any information regarding bee die-offs or pollinator impacts as a result of these widespread exemptions.

onawah
4th January 2018, 00:40
Bill Gates, are vaccines a “miracle” over disease and a “fantastic investment”… — or a disaster for child health that may break the bank?
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/bill-gates-are-vaccines-a-miracle-over-disease-and-a-fantastic-investment/
JANUARY 03, 2018


By World Mercury Project Team
Bill Gates is fond of using his bully pulpit to talk about “miracles” and “magic.” Gates has featured one or both words in nearly all of his annual wrap-up letters for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2016 and 2017), most often in reference to the Gates Foundation’s outsized financial and ideological support for global vaccine programs. As Gates says, “In the same way that during my Microsoft career I talked about the magic of software, I now spend my time talking about the magic of vaccines.”

Gates’s words give us an immediate clue that he is engaging in his own brand of magical thinking—which social scientists define as “illogical causal reasoning.” How else to explain his simplistic endorsement of vaccines as a miraculous intervention with unmitigated benefits and no down side? The Gates Foundation’s global spreadsheet appears to have no room to tally the massive flood of vaccine injuries afflicting children worldwide, despite abundant evidence that this damage is standing the vaccine risk-benefit calculus on its head and turning childhood into an extended round of Russian roulette.

Let’s report history accurately
In a widely cited 2014 blog post on the “miracle of vaccines,” Gates expressed enthusiasm about the “inspiring” data on vaccines and the “fantastic” and “phenomenal” progress being made to expand vaccine coverage. There is one major problem with Gates’ professed reliance on “data,” which is that the philanthropist ignores fundamental historical facts governing infectious disease and vaccine timelines.

There is one major problem with Gates’ professed reliance on “data,” which is that the philanthropist ignores fundamental historical facts governing infectious disease and vaccine timelines.
Vital statistics data reveal that in the U.S. and elsewhere, fatalities from diseases such as scarlet fever—in the absence of any vaccine—had become quite rare by the mid-20th century. Mortality from infectious diseases such as measles and whooping cough (pertussis) also had declined rapidly, well before the introduction of the corresponding vaccines (see Figure 1). A meticulous review of U.S. mortality data from 1900–1973 concluded:

“Medical measures [such as vaccines] contributed little to the overall decline in mortality in the United States since about 1900—having in many instances been introduced several decades after a marked decline had already set in.”

The same researchers, in another article, chastised the medical establishment for its misplaced confidence in “magic bullets” (there is that word “magic” again!). Instead, if the decline in infectious disease incidence and mortality in the last century represented any kind of “miracle,” the phenomenon was, by all honest accounts, attributable to classic and long-term public health measures such as better sanitation and, especially, improved nutrition. A study of 20th-century mortality trends in Italy found a significant association between increased caloric intake and declining mortality, reflecting “progress in average nutritional status, lifestyle quality, socioeconomic level and hygienic conditions.” Moreover, mortality dropped most sharply in Italy’s youngest age groups—who were “probably the most sensible to the changes in nutrition and wellness.” Even early 20th-century epidemiologists who were inclined to give some credit to vaccines recognized that other factors were at play, including changes in “human resistance and bacterial quality” as well as factors yet to be determined.

Figure 1. U.S. mortality rates, 1900–1963Source: Data compiled from the National Office of Statistics.
https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/01-03-Vaccines-Miracle-or-Disaster-1.jpg

Oh miracle, where art thou?
Even if one leaves 20th-century vital statistics behind, there is a glaring piece of evidence that gives the lie to Bill Gates’ disingenuous assertions about vaccine miracles: vaccines are not actually making or keeping children healthy. Instead, in the U.S. (where children are the most highly vaccinated in the world), over half of all young people have a chronic illness—a trend that coincides with the expansion of the nation’s vaccine schedule. Similar patterns of chronic illness are emerging worldwide, including for potentially life-threatening conditions such as food allergies and asthma.

…there is a glaring piece of evidence that gives the lie to Bill Gates’ disingenuous assertions about vaccine miracles: vaccines are not actually making or keeping children healthy.
The World Mercury Project’s Campaign to Restore Child Health has been documenting parents’ first-hand accounts of serious adverse outcomes experienced by their children following vaccination. These testimonials, which represent the tip of the iceberg, cover a panoply of disorders that were rare or even unheard of a few decades ago:

Thirteen percent of U.S. children are in special education.
One in six American children has a developmental disorder such as autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects nearly 11% of American children.
One in 20 children under the age of five has epilepsy.
Peanut allergies are the most common cause of food-related death.
Women who receive flu and Tdap vaccines during pregnancy are at greater risk of miscarriages and other problems.
Pediatric autoimmune neuropsychiatric disorders associated with streptococcal or other infections (PANDAS or PANS) may affect as many as 1 in 200 children in the U.S., including up to 25% of children diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and tic disorders.
Sensory processing disorder (SPD) often co-occurs with ADHD and ASD.
In the U.S., the infant mortality rate, including from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), is double the rate in many other high-income countries. In Africa, a comparative study in Guinea-Bissau found that infant mortality was at least twice as high (10%-11%) in children who received the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) and polio vaccines as in children who did not receive the vaccines (4%-5%).
…large foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation exert influence not just through their “enormous resources” but also “by shaping development concepts and policies.”
Cui bono?
A recent German report on global philanthropy observes that modern philanthropy has its roots, first and foremost, in business tycoons’ self-interested desire to shield income from taxation while “garner[ing] prestige and influence in the U.S. and world affairs.” The report’s authors note that large foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation exert influence not just through their “enormous resources” but also “by shaping development concepts and policies.” The Gates Foundation—established in 2000 with an initial endowment of $42.9 billion and amplified by an additional $30 billion from Warren Buffet in 2006—has become the world’s leading global health player as well as the largest non-state funder of the World Health Organization (WHO). As a result of the Gates Foundation’s “tremendous agenda-setting power,” the global health community designated 2010–2020 as the Decade of Vaccines; developed a Global Vaccine Action Plan; and created the public-private Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI Alliance), which receives almost one-fourth of its funding from the Gates Foundation.

While Gates has rhapsodized that vaccines are a fantastic investment, the vaccine industry, in fact, is a primary beneficiary of Gates Foundation largesse. According to the German analysts, for example, the Gates Foundation’s support of the GAVI Alliance has incentivized manufacturers to increase production of specific vaccines. These incentives have resulted in payments of over $1 billion to Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). Some reporters have described this arrangement as “a leg-up for pharmaceutical companies ‘seeking to expand into faster-growing, lower-income countries.’” However, as the German report notes, the non-governmental organization Doctors without Borders (MSF) has questioned the GAVI Alliance’s overall impact on vaccine affordability, stating that “the cost to fully immunize a child was 68 times more expensive in 2014 than it was in 2001.”

The German analysts and others have outlined key features of the Gates Foundation’s close partnership with the pharmaceutical industry, including the revolving door between the staff of the Foundation and pharmaceutical companies such as Merck and GSK…
The German analysts and others have outlined key features of the Gates Foundation’s close partnership with the pharmaceutical industry, including the revolving door between the staff of the Foundation and pharmaceutical companies such as Merck and GSK; the preponderant focus of the Foundation’s largest global health awards (20/50 or 40%) on research and development of new vaccines and drugs; and the Foundation’s $52 million equity stake in CureVac (a German pharmaceutical company) to speed up development of mRNA-vaccines. The Gates Foundation also has increased its direct support for the biotechnology industry, which is of considerable relevance to the vaccine industry due to the rapidly increasing use of biotech in modern vaccine manufacturing. Recent articles have pointed out, moreover, that the Gates Foundation routinely pays public relations firms to manipulate scientific decision-making in favor of the risky genetic engineering technologies that the Foundation supports.

What these observations make apparent is that Bill Gates’s vaccine philanthropy indeed represents a “miracle”—but the miracle’s beneficiaries are the corporations and stockholders who are laughing all the way to the bank, and certainly not the children and adults around the world who are bearing the brunt of unsafe vaccines. Dr. Arata Kochi, the WHO’s former director of malaria research, chose to call a spade a spade in 2008 when he described the Gates Foundation as a cartel that suppresses diversity of scientific opinion and is “accountable to no one other than itself.”

Sign up https://worldmercuryproject.org/ for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the World Mercury Project. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

East Sun
4th January 2018, 02:08
IMO,

Gates = Reptilian mind.

Check out David Icke's work.

I highly recommend his latest book,
especially if you have not read any
of his previous books.

onawah
6th February 2018, 21:20
Not so Surprising Reason for Toxic Water Crisis--it's glysophate, of course!
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2018/02/06/toxic-water-crisis.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art2&utm_campaign=20180206Z1_dnl_v2_06&et_cid=DM184761&et_rid=206284650

Story at-a-glance
Phosphorus is a known driver of toxic blue-green algae, or cyanobacteria, as they use it readily for fuel
Glyphosate is a synthetic phosphonate herbicide and cyanobacteria can utilize the phosphonate portion of the glyphosate molecule for “food”
Toxic algae may be thriving, in part, due to increasing usage of glyphosate, which was found to be likely to stimulate algal blooms
Glyphosate is also capable of releasing phosphorus from the soil and spikes in dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) runoff have increased with increased use of glyphosate
By Dr. Mercola

If you live near a lake in the U.S., you may have noticed signs warning of toxic blue-green algae, or cyanobacteria. Such warnings, advising swimmers and boaters to stay out of the water, and keep pets away as well, are becoming increasingly common as the thick, green muck appears on once-pristine waterways. Blue-green algae make up a portion of the phytoplankton in many bodies of water,1 and they're not inherently dangerous or even altogether unusual.

According to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), fossil evidence suggests blue-green algae have been around for millions of years, with algal blooms dating back to the 12th century. However, the agency notes, "[I]t is possible that the frequency and duration of blooms are increasing in some Wisconsin waters as a result of increased nutrient concentrations."2

The problem of increasing algal blooms is not unique to Wisconsin — it's happening all over the U.S., particularly in agricultural areas where the use of phosphorus-based fertilizers is prolific.

Phosphorus is a known driver of blue-green algae, as they use it readily for fuel. Researchers have uncovered another, relatively surprising, source of phosphorus that also appears to be driving the toxic algae growth to unprecedented levels — glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup herbicide.

Glyphosate May Be Driving Up Rates of Toxic Algae
Glyphosate is a synthetic phosphonate herbicide and is the most heavily used agricultural chemical of all time. In the U.S., over 1.6 billion kilograms of the chemical have been applied since 1974.3 It was long believed that plankton could not access phosphonates like glyphosate as a fuel source, but in 2009 R. Michael McKay and George Bullerjahn of Bowling Green State University in Ohio showed that this is not the case.

Instead, they found that cyanobacteria can utilize the phosphonate portion of the glyphosate molecule.4 In a report released by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — the Ohio Lake Erie Phosphorus Task Force Final Report — it's stated, "The researchers estimate that as much as 1,000 metric tons [about 2.2 million pounds] of Roundup is applied to Lake Erie's watershed per year, and it is being detected in adjacent waterways particularly in the spring."5 Bullerjahn further stated in an Ohio State University news release:6

"It turns out that many cyanobacteria present in Lake Erie have the genes allowing the uptake of phosphonates, and these cyanobacteria can grow using glyphosate and other phosphonates as a sole source of phosphorus."

Lake Erie has been struggling with algae blooms due to manure, sewage and fertilizer runoff, as well as runoffs from glyphosate applications, leading to contaminated drinking water and fish die-offs for decades. Algae-triggered "dead zones" in the lake are now larger than they've been since the '80s and cover 25 percent of the entire lake.7 Further, in 2017 the lake's algal blooms were recorded as the third-largest on record.8

Spikes in Phosphorus in Lake Erie Watershed Linked to Planting of GE Crops
Adding to the evidence that glyphosate could be playing a role is research by Ohio Northern University chemist Christopher Spiese and colleagues, who suggested that spikes in dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) runoff that have increased since the mid-1990s coincided with an increased use of glyphosate.

At the 2016 Conservation Tillage and Technology Conference, Spiese shared the results of his study, which found a significant correlation between DRP loads and the number of acres planted with herbicide-tolerant genetically engineered (GE) crops (which are heavily sprayed with Roundup). "For every acre of Roundup Ready soybeans and corn that you plant, it works out to be about one-third of a pound of P coming down the Maumee [watershed and into Lake Erie]," Spiese told Sustainable Pulse.9

Spiese also found that glyphosate is capable of releasing phosphorus from the soil and conducted studies to see what happens when soil samples were applied with phosphorus and then sprayed with glyphosate. Some of the samples showed significant phosphorus release, with "hot spots" likely contributing a significant amount of DRP. Sustainable Pulse reported:10

"Based on the average two glyphosate applications growers make every year, Spiese estimates that overall, 20-25% of the DRP runoff is caused by glyphosate. But depending on the location within the watershed, that percentage could be much lower or much greater."

In February 2016, the U.S. and Canada announced plans to reduce the amount of phosphorus entering Lake Erie by 40 percent by 2025,11 but it's seeming increasingly clear that reaching this goal must take into account not only fertilizer runoff but also glyphosate applications. The problem has gotten so bad in the area that even drinking water has been affected.

In 2014, citizens in Toledo, Ohio, were warned not to drink their tap water as it was found to contain significantly elevated levels of microcystins, caused by algae blooms in Lake Erie.12 Microsystins are nerve toxins produced by some blue-green algae that can cause fever, headaches, vomiting and seizures.

The city and surrounding areas became the first to report drinking water-associated outbreaks caused by harmful algal blooms, as highlighted in the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) November 2017 surveillance for waterborne disease outbreaks report.13

"The cyanobacterial toxin microcystin caused the largest reported toxin contamination of community drinking water in August 2013 and September 2014 and was responsible for extensive community and water disruptions," the CDC noted.14 The agency is now tracking harmful algal blooms (HABs) via its One Health Harmful Algal Bloom System (OHHABS), calling them an "emerging public health issue."15

Toxic Algae Using Toxic Roundup for Food
In short, it appears that toxic algae are thriving, in part, due to increasing usage of glyphosate. In another report by Bullerjahn and colleagues, it's noted that, "Glyphosate is a phosphonate that can be used by cyanobacteria as a source of phosphorus" and is 'likely to stimulate algal blooms."16

Interestingly, separate research published in 2016 also revealed that glyphosate has an effect on phytoplankton — in some cases leading to its growth and in other cases proving to be toxic or having no effect. Writing in PLOS One, the researchers explained:17

"[G]lyphosate could be used as P-source by some species while is toxic to some other species and yet has no effects on others. The observed differential effects suggest that the continued use of glyphosate and increasing concentration of this herbicide in the coastal waters will likely exert significant impact on coastal marine phytoplankton community structure."

Unfortunately, glyphosate is but one agricultural chemical that is wreaking havoc on lakes, streams and other bodies of water. Runoff from synthetic chemical fertilizers as well as the excessive amounts of manure from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) that's often sprayed onto farm fields are also highly problematic. In fact, an AP investigation revealed alarming trends, including that levels of nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizer runoff are getting higher in lakes and streams.

Further, despite government agencies spending billions of dollars to help farmers prevent fertilizer runoff and circumvent the problem, algae blooms are getting worse instead of better.18 Overall, the EPA states that about 15,000 water bodies have been identified that have "nutrient-related problems,"19 and many more probably have yet to be identified.

Outside the U.S., meanwhile, algal blooms spanning thousands of miles have been recorded in China and Australia, while microcystin has been detected in more than 240 bodies of water in Canada. In Greece, Italy and Spain, algal blooms are also a problem and estimated to cost the economy $355 million annually.20

The Problem With Toxic Algae
Blue-green algae is smelly and can lead to discolored, foul-tasting water, but that's just the start. One way blue-green algae become toxic is by virtue of its thick density, which blocks light and can deplete oxygen in the water, leading to dead zones. Wisconsin DNR explained:21

"[W]hen blue-green algae reach bloom densities, they can actually reduce light penetration, which can adversely affect other aquatic organisms both directly (e.g., other phytoplankton and aquatic plants) and indirectly (e.g., zooplankton and fish that depend on phytoplankton and plants) … When a blue-green algae bloom dies off, the blue-green algae cells sink and are broken down by microbes.

This breakdown process requires oxygen and can create a biological oxygen demand. Increases in biological oxygen demand result in decreases in oxygen concentration in the water, and this can adversely affect fish and other aquatic life, and can even result in fish kills."

The other major problem stems from toxic chemical compounds that are naturally produced by some types of blue-green algae. Harmful to humans, pets and marine life, the toxins may lead to skin rashes and respiratory issues, and, should they get into an open wound, may even lead to a staph infection.22 A type of cyanobacteria called microcystis are nerve toxins that may lead to nausea, vomiting, headaches, seizures and long-term liver disease if ingested in drinking water.23

Researchers are also looking into whether another toxin, BMAA (Beta-N-Methylamino-L-alanine), in blue-green algae may be linked to neurological diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease).24

You can be exposed to algae toxins via direct contact with the water or algae, breathing in the toxins in the air or even by eating fish or shellfish that have eaten toxic algae.25 What makes toxic algae even more troubling is that you can't tell which types are toxic by looking at them. Wisconsin DNR continued:26

"These [toxic] chemicals are not produced all of the time and there is no easy way to tell when blue-green algae are producing them and when they are not. When the cells are broken open, the toxins may be released. Sometimes this occurs when the cells die off naturally and they break open as they sink and decay in a lake or pond.

Cells may also be broken open when the water is treated with chemicals meant to kill algae, and when cells are swallowed and mixed with digestive acids in the stomachs of people or animals. The only way to be sure if the toxins are present is to have water samples analyzed in a laboratory using sophisticated equipment."

Changes in Agriculture Are Necessary to Stop the 'Green Plague'
Many of the world's lakes are at risk due to agricultural chemicals feeding harmful blue-green algae. The answer, according to the researchers, is better land-use management that addresses fertilizer runoff. Dramatic reductions in synthetic fertilizer use are also recommended, and hopefully it won't be long until a similar recommendation is made for glyphosate as well.

The effects of agricultural runoff on water quality are finally starting to be addressed in some areas, where farmers are trying new conservation methods to ward off toxic runoff and protect water quality. This includes strategies such as building "artificial wetlands and underground 'bioreactors' to capture nutrients in drainage systems," according to The Christian Science Monitor.27 Others have started using cover crops and no-till methods to slow fertilizer and pesticide runoff.

On an individual level, you can help by buying food from organic farmers who are not using glyphosate and instead rely on natural methods and soil-regenerative techniques, such as no till, cover crops, composting and livestock integration. This will naturally help you to eat better too, since typically only real whole foods are grown this way (while most processed foods are the product of destructive industrial nitrogen fertilizer-laden and glyphosate-heavy agriculture).

It's important to note that if you see signs warning of harmful algae blooms, stay out of the water and keep your pets out too. Even if there are no signs present, avoid entering water that smells bad, looks discolored or has foam, scum or algae mats on the surface.28 If you suspect there could be a problem, you're better off safe than sorry, and be aware that algae toxins can be present in the water even if there's no visible algae on the surface.

In addition, avoid consuming any water that could be contaminated with algae toxins, even if the water has been boiled. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), "Boiling water does not remove algal toxins and can increase the amount of toxin in the water by concentrating it,"29 so you'll need to find an alternative source of water if an advisory is issued in your area.

Rebecca
1st March 2018, 09:44
Wow, I didn't know that glyphosate was the most toxic additive in our food supply. I knew it was something to avoid, yet I would often forget about it when consuming conventional oat products and other foods contaminated by glyphosate.

onawah
11th March 2018, 19:57
The deeper reason for drug ads on television
March 11, 2018
by Jon Rappoport
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/03/11/the-deeper-reason-for-drug-ads-on-television/

Television viewers are inundated with drug ads from Big Pharma. It’s a flood.

Have you ever heard of these drugs? Otezla, Xeljanz, Namzaric, Keytruda, Breo, Cosentyz? Not likely. If you have, do you know what conditions they treat? Highly unlikely. But there they are, splashed in commercials.

Why? Who is going to remember to ask their doctor whether these and other obscure meds are right for them?

What’s going on here?

The answer is: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHAT DRUGS ARE BEING ADVERTISED.

If Pharma can pay enough TOTAL money for ads, for ALL drugs, and dominate the allotted TV time for commercials, it can control the news—and that is exactly what it wants to do.

Pharmaceutical scandals are everywhere. Reporting on them, wall to wall, isn’t good for the drug business. However, as an industry ponying up billions of dollars for TV ads, Pharma can limit exposure and negative publicity. It can (and does) say to television networks: If you give us a hard time on the news, we’ll take our ad money and go somewhere else. Boom. End of problem.

Face it, the billions of dollars Pharma is paying for TV ads are a drop in the bucket, compared with its profits gained from selling the drugs. The ads are a good investment. As a bribe.

Control the news.

There is another reason for the insane flood of TV drug ads:

By their sheer number, they convince viewers that medical drugs (no matter what they are) are absolutely necessary.

Hour by hour, viewers numbly watch drug commercial after commercial. The overall message is: To keep illness from your door, to cure illness, to alleviate illness, you must take these medicines. THIS IS LIFE IN THE 21ST CENTURY. You’re all sick, and you need help, and this is the ONLY kind of help there is.

The drug companies could invent names of fake drugs that don’t even exist, advertise them in a cascade on television, with the same intent. DRUGS ARE AS VITAL TO LIFE AS WATER OR AIR.

But what about all those dire warnings of side effects from the drugs? By law, the companies must include them in their commercials. Well, the companies have calculated that, on balance, the stark, front-line, unending message of DRUGS, DRUGS, AND MORE DRUGS will outweigh the warnings in viewers’ minds.

If the television audience is nailed with the idea that they can’t escape; that their health always hangs in the balance; that dire illnesses are always waiting in the shadows to strike; that the slightest ache or pain could be a precursor to a crippling or fatal disease; and drugs are the only solution and protection—they’re going to overlook the warnings about side effects.

ALL IN ALL, DRUG ADS ARE NEWS.

That’s the approach. Pharma is blasting out 24/7 news asserting modern medicine’s central and commanding role in the life of every human.

It’s a gigantic and stupendous piece of mind control, but when did that ever stop tyrants from inventing reality for the masses?

Implicit in “ask your doctor if drug X is right for you,” is the message: “go to your doctor.” That’s the key. If the ads can put a viewer into the system, he will be diagnosed with something, and he’ll be given a drug for it.

So the drug ads are also promotions for doctors, who are the arbiters and the decision makers. Some kind of medical need (drugs) always exists—and the doctor will tell you what it is. And all patients should OBEY. Even if, in the process, they go broke.

Take the case of Opdivo, a drug that treats squamous non-small cell lung cancer. Cost? $12,500 a month. Patients on Medicare will pay $2500 a month out of their own pockets. And the result?

Wall St, Journal: “In the clinical study on which the Opdivo ad bases its claims, the drug extended median patient survival to 9.2 months from the start of treatment…”

The cancer patient pays $22,500 for nine months of survival, during which the suffering continues, and then he dies.

The ad isn’t mentioning THAT.

The ad relies on the doctor to convince the patient to go along with this lunatic program.

Franny
12th March 2018, 07:01
William Engdahl is one of the best researchers and writers on a variety of topics that are relevant today. Many excellent articles on his site and a new book is out:

Manifest Destiny: Democracy as Cognitive Dissonance

George Orwell’s famous novel, 1984, is a masterful fictional account of a state which imposes cognitive dissonance on its citizens to control their perception of reality. It is summed up in the statement, “War is Peace; Freedom is slavery; Ignorance is strength.” The story of this book, Manifest Destiny, is an account of how agencies of US intelligence including the CIA and State Department, in collaboration with private “democracy” NGOs, developed and refined techniques of Orwellian doublethink or cognitive dissonance to create a series of regime changes around the world that sounded noble, democratic, but in reality were not...

http://williamengdahl.com/englishNEO9Nov2017.php

Now, on to the article...

Killing Us Softly—Glyphosate Herbicide or Genocide?
By F. William Engdahl
9 Novemberr 2017

One of the more bizarre actions in terms of the health and safety of EU citizens is the saga of Monsanto and its toxic herbicide or weed-killer, Roundup, the most widely used weed-killer on the planet. On October 25, 2017 the European Union Commission again announced that it lacked the necessary member state votes to approve a ten year license extension for weed-killer glyphosate. They will try again. Behind this seeming routine announcement is one of the hottest battles over food and human health the world has seen since the 1972 USA decision to ban spraying of deadly DDT pesticides on crops. This time the stakes go far beyond the ban on glyphosate. It affects the future of human fertility or lack of it. .

In June 2016 the EU Commission made a rotten compromise to allow an 18 month extension of use in EU of glyphosate-based weed killers, during which time more scientific studies would supposedly clarify whether glyphosate was a carcinogen. It was the same member- states deadlock over whether to grant the toxic glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto Roundup herbicide, a license renewal as we saw this October.

In March 2017 the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) of the EU, issued a report stating that “available scientific evidence did not meet the criteria in the CLP Regulation to classify glyphosate for specific target organ toxicity, or as a carcinogen, as a mutagen or for reproductive toxicity.” The ECHA, based in Hensinki is a body created only in 2007 and established to monitor safe use of chemicals and to make information available rather than conduct its own tests on safety of chemicals. It made no independent study or tests to determine if glyphosate is or is not a probable carcinogen, a fact which Brussels and the pesticide industry slickly glosses over.

In March 2015, the WHO’s Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which has such research competence, classified glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen.”

In October 2015 before the license expiry deadline, some 47 environmental, health and cancer organizations, scientists and doctors wrote an open letter to EU Health Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis calling on the Commission to ban glyphosate pending a full scientific assessment. The assessment that the EU Commission was using was provided by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), and was based on industry safety studies given to BfR by Monsanto and other industry sources.

EU Corruption and human health

The determination of “non-carcinogenity” for glyphosate by using the ECHA was an apparent political ploy by the corrupt EU commission to get another “yes” body to back their pro-glyphosate stance, a stance that benefits only Monsanto and other agro-chemical producers at the expense of human life and health.

The source for both the EU’s European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) and the European Chemicals Agency statements that glyphosate was non-carcinogenic, in contradiction to the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), is the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) responsible within the EU for the evaluation of glyphosate for the EU.

According to stated EU regulations, a substance is to be considered carcinogenic if two independently conducted animal studies show an increased tumor incidence. In the case of glyphosate, at least seven out of twelve such long-term studies found an increased tumor incidence.

A report by German toxicologist Dr Peter Clausing found that the EU bodies and the German body designated by the EU to evaluate the safety of glyphosate, the German BfR ignored those relevant studies. Clausing states, “BfR failed to recognize numerous significant tumor incidences, due to its failure to apply the appropriate statistical tests stipulated by the OECD and ECHA. BfR had instead relied on statistical tests applied by industry…” And the German BfR report was the basis for the later rubber-stamp determinations of EFSA and now of ECHA, the EU bodies entrusted with protecting the population from dangerous chemical toxins. Someone is being played for fools by Brussels, but the stakes involve far more in terms of human health and even human reproduction itself.

Sperm disruptor?

The dimensions of the human and animal exposure to the enormous quantities of glyphosate-based weed-killers in the world food chain are only dimly beginning to be appreciated. The reason is the enormous clout of the agro-chemical industry lobby around companies such as Monsanto, Syngenta and Bayer AG, soon to be the owner of Monsanto. They have so far managed to use their financial resources and their legal resources to distort test results and to win regulatory approval from the demonstrably corrupt Monsanto-influenced Washington Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration.

From there it has spread to the EU Commission and relevant agencies such as EFSA and European Chemicals Agency, this despite the overwhelming popular rejection of GMO crops.

A recent study published by the Journal of Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology–a study given no visibility in mainstream media–sounds the alarm over the effects of long-term human exposure to glyphosate for the healthy production of human sperm, an issue that is beginning to be cause of great alarm across the western countries where chemical herbicides and pesticides are used in massive doses by agro-industry producers.

The study, which definitely warrants major follow-up studies, found effects of a glyphosate-based herbicide after an 8-day exposure of adult rats, including

“a significant and differential expression of aromatase in testis.” Aromatase is an enzyme responsible for a key step in the biosynthesis of estrogens according to Wikipedia, found among other locations of the body in the brain and in the gonads, and is an important factor in sexual development. The authors concluded that, “The repetition of exposures of this herbicide could alter the mammalian reproduction.”

Ample tests now exist, independent of Monsanto and other corrupt industry sources demonstrating to an alarming degree that the exposure of human and animal species to glyphosate-based herbicides or weed-killers can cause cancer tumors but can also be damaging to human sexual reproduction, that is, as in the future of the human species.

Other tests have revealed presence of significant amounts of glyphosate from spraying of weed-killers in major portions of the population in the United States where Monsanto Roundup and other glyphosate-based weed-killers are used in massive doses in agriculture as well as in home gardens. A study of urine samples of willing volunteers seeking to know if they had glyphosate exposure by the University of California at San Francisco found glyphosate in 93% of the urine samples tested at an average level of 3.096 parts per billion (PPB). Children had the highest levels with an average of 3.586 PPB. The highest levels of glyphosate were found in the American West and Midwest, the heart of US agribusiness farming. The US-based Detox Project which published the study notes that “Glyphosate has never been studied by regulators or the chemical industry at levels that the human population in the U.S. is being exposed to–under 3 mg/kg body weight/day. This is a huge hole in the risk assessment process for glyphosate, as evidence suggests that low levels of the chemical may hack hormones even more than high levels…many toxic chemicals have as much or even more of an influence on our health at low doses– these chemicals are known as hormone hackers or endocrine disruptors. “

Isn’t that what eugenics advocates such as Bill Gates, George Soros, Warren Buffett, the Rockefeller family and more recently Britain’s Prince William are cheering for? Culling of the human herd so that the wealthy have more wildlife species?

Frederick Osborn, first President of John D. Rockefeller III’s Population Council, and a founding member of the American Eugenics Society, formulated the problem the eugenics advocates around Rockefeller, people who financed Nazi eugenics research in Berlin, faced after the horrors of the Nazi extermination camps was uncovered and their inhuman experiments in eugenics of killing off inferior human beings as defined by the Third Reich.

In a 1956 article in the Rockefeller-financed Eugenics Review, “The very word eugenics is in disrepute in some quarters…. We must ask ourselves, what have we done wrong? We have all but killed the eugenic movement.” Osborn had a ready answer: people for some reason refused to accept that they were “second rate” compared to Osborn, Rockefeller, Sanger and their “superior class.” As Osborn put it, “We have failed to take into account a trait which is almost universal and is very deep in human nature. People are simply not willing to accept the idea that the genetic base on which their character was formed is inferior and should not be repeated in the next generation…. They won’t accept the idea that they are in general second rate….”

The refusal of Monsanto, a company founded in World War I as part of the Rockefeller network of war chemicals makers, and which numbered a Rockefeller on its board until recently, to remove glyphosate-based Roundup, or even to allow independent testing of its “trade secret” adjuvants that by some estimates make the glyphosate 2000% more toxic, has more to do with that long-standing Rockefeller eugenics agenda of killing off or “culling” the human herd than with corporate profit. Prince William’s grandfather, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh in an interview in 1988 with a German press agency declared, “In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation.” Hmmmmm…





F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

Hervé
12th March 2018, 15:19
The many ways glyphosate (active ingredient of the infamous Roundup (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate) herbicide) affects the general health of all living organisms on this planet...

Listen to this MP3 interview of Dr. Stephanie Seneff whose studies traces many chronic illnesses and weird "epidemics" of diseases (beside autism) to glyphosate:


https://media.sott.net/srn/20180309hws-interview-with-brilliant-researcher-dr-stephanie-seneff.mp3
(right-click to download and "Save as...)


and watch this video as well for a layman summary of these studies:


qYC6oyBglZI

Hervé
29th March 2018, 17:18
It's gone beyond "America"... it's now a generalized poisoning of the planet:

German Beer Industry in Shock Over Monsanto Glyphosate Contamination

By Sustainable Pulse (https://www.globalresearch.ca/author/sustainable-pulse)
Global Research, March 28, 2018

Sustainable Pulse (https://sustainablepulse.com/2016/02/25/german-beer-industry-in-shock-over-probable-carcinogen-glyphosate-contamination/#.WruJ2Hpua00) 25 February 2016


https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/glyphosate-beer-400x225.jpg


The Munich Environmental Institute (Umweltinstitut München) has released shocking results (February) of laboratory testing it has completed on 14 of the most sold beers in Germany. The probable carcinogen and World’s most used herbicide – glyphosate – was found in all of the 14 beers tested.
German Beer – Glyphosate Testing Results:
Hasseröder Pils – 29,74 μg/l (ppb)
Jever Pils – 23,04 μg/l
Warsteiner Pils – 20,73 μg/l
Radeberger Pilsner – 12,01 μg/l
Veltins Pilsener – 5,78 μg/l
Oettinger Pils – 3,86 μg/l
König Pilsener – 3,35 μg/l
Krombacher Pils – 2,99 μg/l
Erdinger Weißbier – 2,92 μg/l
Paulaner Weißbier – 0,66 μg/l
Bitburger Pils – 0,55 μg/l
Beck’s Pils – 0,50 μg/l
Franziskaner Weißbier – 0,49 μg/l
Augustiner Helles – 0,46 μg/l
In 2015 the World Health Organization’s cancer agency IARC declared that glyphosate is a probable human carcinogen (http://detoxproject.org/monsanto-weed-killer-can-probably-cause-cancer-world-health-organization/).

The German Brewers’ Association, reacted by calling the study by the Munich Environmental Institute “not credible”, but admitted that low residues of the probable human carcinogen glyphosate could not be prevented, because “the herbicide is now found virtually everywhere after decades of use in agriculture”.

Sustainable Pulse Director Henry Rowlands stated Thursday:
“Stone-Age industry funded science suggested that the higher the dose of a chemical the more dangerous it was, however modern independent science has discovered that many toxic chemicals have as much or more of an influence on our health at low doses (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22419778)– these chemicals are known as hormone hackers (endocrine disruptors (http://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/event/documentset/120614l-p07.pdf)).

“A study from March 2015 stated that the health costs to the European Union of hormone hacking chemicals is over $ 150 Billion per year (http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/06/health-costs-hormone-disrupting-chemicals-150bn-a-year-europe-says-study)! The study stated that lower IQ, adult obesity and 5% or more of autism cases are all linked to exposure to endocrine disruptors.

“Glyphosate is likely to be one of these hormone hacking chemicals according to independent science. Find more information on this here (http://detoxproject.org/glyphosate/hormone-hacking/).”
The original source of this article is Sustainable Pulse (https://sustainablepulse.com/2016/02/25/german-beer-industry-in-shock-over-probable-carcinogen-glyphosate-contamination/#.WruJ2Hpua00)
Copyright © Sustainable Pulse (https://www.globalresearch.ca/author/sustainable-pulse), Sustainable Pulse (https://sustainablepulse.com/2016/02/25/german-beer-industry-in-shock-over-probable-carcinogen-glyphosate-contamination/#.WruJ2Hpua00), 2018

Ewan
8th May 2018, 18:34
This post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62676-Calling-all-light-warriors-the-Bees-need-you-&p=1223701&viewfull=1#post1223701) by William R Sanford72 deserves some attention.

Please visit for further links.


After more than 40 years of widespread use, new scientific tests show formulated weedkillers have higher rates of toxicity to human cells

US government researchers have uncovered evidence that some popular weedkilling products, like Monsanto’s widely-used Roundup, are potentially more toxic to human cells than their active ingredient is by itself.

These “formulated” weedkillers are commonly used in agriculture, leaving residues in food and water, as well as public spaces such as golf courses, parks and children’s playgrounds.

The tests are part of the US National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) first-ever examination of herbicide formulations made with the active ingredient glyphosate, but that also include other chemicals. While regulators have previously required extensive testing of glyphosate in isolation, government scientists have not fully examined the toxicity of the more complex products sold to consumers, farmers and others.

Monsanto introduced its glyphosate-based Roundup brand in 1974. But it is only now, after more than 40 years of widespread use, that the government is investigating the toxicity of “glyphosate-based herbicides” on human cells.

onawah
10th May 2018, 14:52
Good News! Judge Rules Non-Profits Can Sue Monsanto for Misleading Labeling of Popular Herbicide Roundup
May 6, 2018
https://www.organicconsumers.org/press/judge-rules-non-profits-can-sue-monsanto-misleading-labeling-popular-herbicide-roundup

Washington, DC- Beyond Pesticides (BP) and The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) today responded to a federal judge’s ruling against Monsanto Co.’s motion to dismiss the groups’ lawsuit, filed in April, 2017.

Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, the lead plaintiff in the case, said:

“In the face of EPA’s poor regulation of pesticides, misleading pesticide product labeling cannot be left unchecked. The court’s decision to allow our case to move forward, in denying Monsanto’s motion to dismiss, is critical to showing that the company is deceiving the public with a safety claim on its Roundup (glyphosate) label. Its advertising and labeling claim that Roundup ‘targets an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets’ is false, given the devastating harm that glyphosate has on beneficial bacteria in the gut biome. The disruption of the gut biome is associated with a host of 21st century diseases, including asthma, autism, bacterial vaginosis, cardiovascular disease, cancer, Crohn’s disease, depression, inflammatory bowel disease, leaky gut syndrome, multiple sclerosis, obesity, Type 1 and 2 diabetes, and Parkinson’s.

“The science on the hazards of Roundup (glyphosate) are clear and Monsanto officials know it. With this case, we seek to ensure that the public is not misled by false advertising and product labeling in the marketplace. It is a critical step toward ensuring that people are fully informed before purchasing toxic products that can poison them, their families, and the communities where they live.”

OCA International Director, Ronnie Cummins said:

“Monsanto aggressively markets Roundup as ‘safe’ for humans and animals, despite newer studies indicating that glyphosate may be carcinogenic and its use may affect human and animal cardiovascular, endocrine, nervous and reproductive systems. No reasonable consumer seeing the claim on this product that glyphosate targets an enzyme not found ‘in people or pets’ would expect that Roundup actually targets an important bacterial enzyme found in humans and animals, affecting the health of their immune system.

“Survey after survey shows that consumers rely on labels to guide their purchases and keep them and their families safe. When corporations mislead on the issue of a product’s effect on consumers and their families, they put everyone, but especially young children—in this case, playing in yards and parks—at risk, leaving the public no other recourse than to use the legal system to seek the removal of this misleading information.”

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, ruled that OCA and BP presented enough evidence to support that Monsanto’s labeling of its flagship weedkiller, Roundup, misleads consumers.

Through their attorneys, Richman Law Group, OCA and BP sued Monsanto on behalf of the general public, in Washington D.C., under the District of Columbia’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act, for misleading the public by labeling its popular weedkiller Roundup as “target[ing] an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets.” The nonprofits allege that this statement is false, deceptive and misleading, because the enzyme targeted by glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, is, in fact, found in people and pets.

Beyond Pesticides is a national grassroots non-profit organization headquartered in the District of Columbia that works with allies in protecting public health and the environment to lead the transition to a world free of toxic pesticides. For more information, visit www.beyondpesticides.org.

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots non-profit 501(c)3 public interest organization campaigning for health, justice, and sustainability. For more information, visit: www.organicconsumers.org.

Richman Law Group (RLG) is a boutique law firm specializing in consumer protection and civil rights. RLG is dedicated to serving the greater good by holding large corporations accountable for actions that harm consumers, the environment, and the general public. For more information, visit: www.richmanlawgroup.com.

Also See:

Toxic Truth: New Evidence for Banning Monsanto's Roundup Weedkiller
https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/toxic-truth-new-evidence-banning-monsantos-roundup-weedkiller
May 10, 2018



Organic Consumers Association
by Katherine Paul

Monsanto’s Roundup weedkiller may be even worse for human health than we thought.

As reported this week in the Guardian, new tests show that when Roundup’s key active ingredient, glyphosate, is combined with other chemicals to create the final product, the herbicide is more toxic to human cells than glyphosate alone.

As if glyphosate alone weren’t toxic enough.

01’s Carey Gillam reported on the first-ever testing, conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP), of glyphosate-based formulations. Previous testing focused exclusively on glyphosate in isolation.

NTP’s acting chief of the National Toxicology Program Laboratory, Mike DeVito, told the Guardian the agency’s work is ongoing but its early findings are clear on one key point. “We see the formulations are much more toxic. The formulations were killing the cells. The glyphosate really didn’t do it,” DeVito said.

Labels mislead, Monsanto pleads ‘proprietary’

That’s bad for farmers who spray Roundup, for people who eat Roundup-contaminated food, or for the millions of humans and their pets who are exposed to Roundup because it runs off into our waterways or is sprayed on parks, playgrounds and neighborhood lawns. According to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) latest figures, $9 billion worth of glyphosate-based herbicides were sold in the U.S. in 2012.

Monsanto continues to claim that its product is safe, including the formulation it sells direct to consumers for their lawns and gardens. Beyond Pesticides (BP) and the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) sued Monsanto for misleading consumers about the safety of its flagship herbicide. Monsanto tried to get the lawsuit dismissed, but a federal judge recently ruled in favor of BP and OCA.

The consumer case revolves around glyphosate, not the whole formulation, and Monsanto’s claim on Roundup containers that the product is safe because it “target[s] an enzyme found in plants but not in people or pets.” The lawsuit alleges this statement is false, deceptive and misleading, because the enzyme targeted by glyphosate is, in fact, found in people and pets.

Besides providing new information about glyphosate-based herbicides, the NTP testing also highlights what the public (and interested scientists) don’t know about these herbicides, even though they’ve been on the market for 40 years, because Monsanto won’t tell us.

“We don’t know what the formulation is,” Devito told the Guardian.” That is confidential business information.” According to the Guardian, for testing purposes, scientists sourced some samples from store shelves, picking up products the EPA told them were the top sellers, he said.

Testing the full formulation—why it matters

According to André Leu, international director of Regeneration International and author of "The Myth of Safe Pesticides," the overwhelming majority of registered pesticide products used in agriculture as insecticides, herbicides and fungicides are formulations of several chemicals. They are mixtures composed of one or more chemicals that are defined as the active ingredient(s) or active principle, and are combined with other mostly toxic chemicals, such as solvents, adjuvants and surfactants—otherwise known as “inerts.”

The active ingredient is the primary chemical that acts as the pesticide and is the only chemical tested, Leu told us. The other chemicals in the mixture are called inerts because they have a secondary role in the formulation.

“The name ‘inert’ is misleading as most of these other compounds are chemically active in their functions in the pesticide formulations. They help to make the active ingredient work more effectively. According to the United States President's Cancer panel report, many of these ‘inert’ ingredients are toxic; however, they are not tested for their potential to cause health problems.

Many of the solvents, fillers and other chemicals listed as inert ingredients on pesticide labels also are toxic, but are not required to be tested for their potential to cause chronic diseases such as cancer.”

Leu said it should be of “great concern” to everyone that the vast majority of the nearly 1,400 registered pesticide and veterinary products used in the U.S. for the production of food have had no testing for numerous health and environmental problems linked to the exposure to cocktails of chemicals.

“These are the toxicities that cause other health issues such as cancers, cell mutations, endocrine disruption, birth defects, organ and tissue damage, nervous system damage, behavior changes, epigenetic damage, and immune system damage,” Leu said.

In the only study where nine formulated pesticides were tested on human cells at levels well below agricultural dilutions, the research scientists found that eight of the nine formulations were several hundred times more toxic than their respective active ingredients. The researchers stated:

Adjuvants in pesticides are generally declared as inerts, and for this reason they are not tested in long-term regulatory experiments. It is thus very surprising that they amplify up to 1000 times the toxicity of their AP [active ingredient] in 100% of the cases where they are indicated to be present by the manufacturer.”

The only peer-reviewed, lifetime comparison feeding study of a formulated pesticide, in this case Roundup, found that rats fed a diet that contains minute residues of Roundup had significantly higher rates of kidney disease, liver damage, tumors and other negative health effects including endocrine disruption.

Katherine Paul is associate director of the Organic Consumers Association. To keep up with OCA’s news and alerts, sign up here. http://action.organicconsumers.org/o/50865/p/salsa/web/common/public/signup?signup_page_KEY=10633

onawah
17th May 2018, 17:15
Pilot Study Shows Consumers Should Be Concerned About So-Called 'Safe' Levels of Glyphosate-Based Weedkillers
May 14, 2018 Organic Consumers Association
https://www.organicconsumers.org/press/pilot-study-shows-consumers-should-be-concerned-about-so-called-safe-levels-glyphosate-based

FINLAND, Minnesota – The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) today issued the following statement on the announcement by the Global Glyphosate Study that preliminary test results of a single-dose study on glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) in rats, using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) guidelines for "safe levels" produced adverse health effects in rats.

International Director Ronnie Cummins said:

“For years, the U.S. EPA has dismissed consumer concerns about glyphosate-based weedkillers in their drinking water and in their food, claiming that exposure to the chemical at low levels is harmless. This new pilot study confirms what many responsible scientists have been saying all along: There is no such thing as ‘safe’ levels when it comes to glyphosate, especially when it comes to children.

“In fact, the EPA established what it calls ‘safe’ levels without having any scientific evidence to back up its claim because, until now, have been no comprehensive publicly available peer-reviewed studies of the potential health impact of glyphosate exposure at or lower than the EPA’s guidelines.

“This new study confirms that consumers should be alarmed when products such as Ben & Jerry’s ice cream test positive for glyphosate at any level—despite corporations’ claims that these levels are ‘harmless.’

“OCA looks forward to the completion of the full Global Glyphosate Study and will continue to test food products for glyphosate and warn consumers when food products test positive for this toxic chemical, no matter how small the amount.”

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots non-profit 501(c)3 public interest organization campaigning for health, justice, and sustainability. The Organic Consumers Fund is a 501(c)4 allied organization of the Organic Consumers Association, focused on grassroots lobbying and legislative action. Visit: https://www.organicconsumers.org/


From Organic Consumers Assoc. newsletter today:

Now a new pilot study, soon to be published in the prestigious scientific journal Environmental Health, suggests that EPA “safe” levels aren’t safe at all—especially for kids.

The Global Glyphosate Study pilot experimental phase, the first study of its kind, suggests that exposure to glyphosate at levels the EPA wants us to believe are “safe” can in fact lead to “certain important biological parameters, mainly relating to sexual development, genotoxicity and the alteration of the intestinal microbiome.”

Has the EPA known all along that its guidelines were bogus? This wouldn't be the first time the agency charged with protecting consumers has been accused of colluding behind the scenes with Monsanto to keep consumers in the dark.

The Study:

Global Glyphosate Study Pilot Phase Shows Adverse Health Effects at ‘Safe’ Doses
The Ramazzini Institute / May 16, 2018
https://glyphosatestudy.org/press-release/global-glyphosate-study-pilot-phase-shows-adverse-health-effects-at-safe-doses/

May 16th 2018

Three peer-reviewed accepted manuscripts from the pilot phase of the Global Glyphosate Study are available online today (May 16th). The papers will be published in the prestigious scientific journal Environmental Health later in May.
The pilot study was a single-dose study on glyphosate based herbicides (GBHs) in rats, using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s acceptable daily dietary exposure level of glyphosate (cRfD) (1) – 1.75 mg/kg/day. (a single-dose study means that the same concentration was given to the rats daily over a 3 month period).
The study was focused on the newborn, infancy and adolescence phases of life.
The results reveal that glyphosate based herbicides (GBHs) were able to alter certain important biological parameters, mainly relating to sexual development, genotoxicity and the alteration of the intestinal microbiome.
The pilot study involved the participation of multiple Institutions and Universities in Europe and the U.S.
The € 300,000 pilot study was funded by 30,000 members of the public in Italy, who are associates of the Ramazzini Institute cooperative.
A crowd-funding campaign (2) has been launched to help support a long-term comprehensive Global Glyphosate Study, which following these results is now urgently required.
Background:
Glyphosate is the most used herbicide in human history. 18.9 Billion pounds (8.6 Billion Kilograms) of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) have been sprayed worldwide since 1974. Glyphosate use has also increased 15-fold since genetically modified crops were introduced in 1996 (3).

In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen” (4). The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), following the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) evaluation, has since stated that glyphosate is “unlikely to pose a carcinogenic hazard to humans” (5) and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) stated that “the available scientific evidence did not meet the criteria to classify glyphosate as a carcinogen, as a mutagen or as toxic for reproduction” (6). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) still has a new evaluation of glyphosate pending (7).

The scientific uncertainty surrounding glyphosate and GBHs has also led to political uncertainty, with a shortened 5-year re-approval for glyphosate having been granted by European Union Member States in November 2017.

The Ramazzini Institute and their partners have walked into this unclear situation so as to supply valuable and independent data to enable regulators, governments and the general public of every country to answer the question: Are glyphosate and GBHs safe at real-world levels of exposure?

Pilot Study:
The Global Glyphosate Study pilot experimental phase was carried out at the Ramazzini Institute in Bentivoglio, Bologna starting in 2016. The € 300,000 pilot study was funded by 30,000 members of the public in Italy, who are associates of the Ramazzini Institute.

To set the study in motion the Ramazzini Institute built up a network of authoritative partners including the University of Bologna (Faculty of Agriculture, Veterinary Science and Biostatistics) the Genoa Hospital San Martino, the Italian National Institute of Health, the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York and the George Washington University.

The pilot study, which is vital for the long-term comprehensive study, aimed to obtain general information as to whether GBHs are toxic at various stages of early life (newborn, infancy and adolescence), and to identify early markers of exposure and effect. Glyphosate and one of its formulates (Roundup Bioflow, MON 52276) were both tested in Sprague Dawley rats, starting from prenatal life until 13 weeks after weaning, exposed to a dose of glyphosate in drinking water corresponding to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s acceptable daily dietary exposure (1), referred to in the U.S. as the chronic reference dose (cRfD) – 1.75 mg/kg/day.

The results show that GBHs – even at doses deemed safe and over a relatively short exposure time (which in human-equivalent terms correspond from embryo life to 18 years of age) – are able to alter certain important biological parameters, markers chiefly relating to sexual development, genotoxicity and alteration of the intestinal microbiome. In particular, the results showed an alteration in some sexual development parameters in rats treated with GBHs, especially in females. Moreover, rats treated with GBHs presented statistically significant changes of the intestinal microbiome in particular during development. Concerning genotoxicity, a statistically significant increase was observed in micronuclei in rats treated with GBHs, especially in the first part of life.

Rats treated with pure glyphosate or its formulation presented similar levels in urine of glyphosate and its principal metabolite (AMPA), thus showing no significant difference in the absorption and excretion of glyphosate among the two treatment groups, but suggesting a bioaccumulation effect of glyphosate that was proportional to the length of treatment.

The peer-reviewed accepted manuscripts for the data on microbiome effects and biomarkers of exposure will be published later in May in the prestigious scientific journal Environmental Health in open access format (8, 9, 10). The data on reproductive parameters and genotoxicity is currently in peer review and is soon to be published.

Global Glyphosate Study: Crowdfunding
The Ramazzini Institute, with the support of other independent Institutes and Universities in Europe and the United States, has now launched a crowdfunding campaign for the most comprehensive long-term study ever on GBHs. In fact, a long-term study is now necessary to extend and confirm the initial evidences emerged in the pilot study and provide definitive answers to the many health concerns on the chronic effects of GBHs, including its carcinogenic effects.

The total budget for this study is € 5 Million and it is already receiving support from the public, politicians and NGOs around the world.

The Ramazzini Institute, in over 40 years of activity, has studied more than 200 compounds from the general and occupational environment and many of its results have provided a solid scientific base for regulating and limiting the exposure of a number of substances. Examples include: Vinyl Chloride, Benzene, Formaldehyde, Trichloroethylene and Mancozeb.

Quotes from Scientists:
Prof. Philip J. Landrigan, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai:

“By its very nature and purpose, the pilot study does not resolve the uncertainties puzzling the various Agencies (IARC, EFSA, ECHA) as to whether glyphosate and Glyphosate Based Herbicides (GBHs) are carcinogenic or not, but it does highlight health effects that are equally as serious, that might manifest as long-term oncological pathology, and that might affect a huge number of people, given the planet-wide use of the GBHs. These early warnings must be further investigated in a comprehensive long-term study”.

Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi, Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, Ramazzini Institute

“Whatever the outcome of the Ramazzini Institute study, the findings will provide regulatory agencies and policy-makers with solid independent results obtained by a shared research project on which they can confidently base their risk assessments and their evaluations, including the upcoming decision for the reauthorization for glyphosate use in Europe in 2022”.

Prof. Jia Chen, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City

“Glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) are of significant public health concern because of their widespread and sharply increased usage. As an herbicide, glyphosate exerts its herbicidal action by inhibiting the Shikimate pathway which exists not only in plants but also exist in some bacteria and fungi and other microbes. However, there are no studies on the potential effects of GBHs on the gut microbiome in the human population. Our study provides initial evidence that exposures to commonly used GBHs, at doses considered safe, are capable of modifying the gut microbiota in early development, particularly before the onset of puberty. Further long-term investigations are necessary to elucidate if the shift in the microbiota induced by GBHs exposure is contributing to the other health effects downstream. Nevertheless, understanding the microbiota changes during this critical window of susceptibility could be of great importance for disease prevention”.

Prof. Giovanni Dinelli, Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences, University of Bologna

“The Ramazzini Institute’s global study is a valuable approach for trying to understand the potential negative health effects of glyphosate, one of the most controversial active ingredients used worldwide in agriculture. The main aim is not only to define the “per se” effects of this specific herbicide, but also to define and propose a new approach for the determination of toxicological side effects of pesticides: the new paradigm is to provide policy makers with reliable data from an independent research Institution. This is not only a new paradigm, but also the only way to avoid uncertainties and doubts in relation to the agricultural use of pesticides”.

Dr. Alberto Mantovani, Italian National Institute of Health

“An interesting feature is the time-related increase of unchanged glyphosate in the urine. This finding might indicate that glyphosate bioavailability increases with a longer duration of exposure; increased bioavalability, in its turn, might flag an increased internal exposure of target organs and tissues”

Prof. Rossella Miglio, Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Bologna

“It has been interesting to participate in this project that I consider important for public health. Although this pilot study shows some statistically significant results it is important to stress that further solid scientific evidence could derive from experiments with increased dimension. Particularly, this will allow us to evaluate relevant outcomes that cannot be considered in a reduced sized experimental design”.

Prof. Melissa J Perry, George Washington University:

“Although glyphosate has been around for decades, it has not been well studied, and we know surprisingly little about its human health effects. This study was designed to use doses that compare to what humans are exposed to in their everyday environments including from the food they eat. This study will provide valuable information to more clearly assess the health risks to humans”.

Prof. Marcella Spinaci and Prof. Giovanna Galeati, Department of Veterinary Medical Sciences, University of Bologna

“We think that the work is of great value. Even if preliminary results on some sperm parameters (daily sperm production, sperm count and morphology) using the Ramazzini Institute in vivo rat model did not show any significant effect, further research is needed in order to deeply investigate the possible role of glyphosate and GBHs as endocrine disruptors on other reproductive parameters in both males and females”.

Media Contacts:
Dr. Vincenzo Branà – glyphosate@ramazzini.it

Notes:
(1) US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Glyphosate: Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment for the Section 3 Registration Action. 2006.: https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/cleared_reviews/csr_PC-103601_8-May-06_a.pdf
(2) Global Glyphosate Study: https://glyphosatestudy.org/
(3) Benbrook CM. Trends in glyphosate herbicide use in the United States and globally. Environ Sci Eur. 2016;28:3. https://enveurope.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s12302-016-0070-0
(4) IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). Some Organophosphate Insecticides and Herbicides. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, Volume 112 (2017).
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol112/
(5) EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance glyphosate. EFSA Journal 2015;13(11):4302, 107 pp. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4302.
https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4302
(6) European Chemical Agency (ECHA). Glyphosate not classified as a carcinogen by ECHA. ECHA/PR/17/06, 15 March 2017.
https://echa.europa.eu/-/glyphosate-not-classified-as-a-carcinogen-by-echa
(7) US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Draft Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessments for Glyphosate. Accessed May 9th, 2018.
https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/draft-human-health-and-ecological-risk-assessments-glyphosate
(8) Philip J Landrigan, Fiorella Belpoggi.The Need For Independent Research On The Health Effects Of Glyphosate-Based Herbicides. Environmental Health, 2018. https://glyphosatestudy.org/global-glyphosate-study-pilot-phase/
(9) Simona Panzacchi, Daniele Mandrioli, Fabiana Manservisi, Luciano C Bua, Laura Falcioni, Marcella Spinaci, Giovanna Galeati, Giovanni Dinelli, Rossella Miglio, Alberto Mantovani, Stefano Lorenzetti, Jianzhong Hu, Jia Chen, Melissa Perry, Philip J Landrigan, Fiorella Belpoggi. The Ramazzini Institute 13-Week Study On Glyphosate-Based Herbicides At Human-Equivalent Dose In Sprague Dawley Rats: Study Design And First In-Life Endpoints Evaluation. Environmental Health, 2018. https://glyphosatestudy.org/global-glyphosate-study-pilot-phase/
(10) Qixing Mao, Fabiana Manservisi, Simona Panzacchi, Daniele Mandrioli, Ilaria Menghetti, Andrea Vornoli, Luciano C Bua, Laura Falcioni, Corina Lesseur, Jia Chen, Fiorella Belpoggi, Jianzhong Hu.
The Ramazzini Institute 13-Week Pilot Study On Glyphosate And Roundup Administered At Human-Equivalent Dose To Sprague Dawley Rats: Effects On The Microbiome. Environmental Health, 2018. https://glyphosatestudy.org/global-glyphosate-study-pilot-phase/

onawah
24th May 2018, 00:27
Latest Update on Toxicity of Popular Weed Killer and Proposed Rule for Labeling of GMOs
May 23, 2018
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2018/05/23/popular-weed-killer-toxicity-proposed-gmo-labeling-rules-updates.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20180523Z1_UCM_B&et_cid=DM214409&et_rid=313300736

Story at-a-glance
Government researchers warn the Roundup formula is far more toxic than glyphosate in isolation, due to synergistic interactions between various chemicals
Testing by the U.S. National Toxicology Program reveals glyphosate formulations such as Roundup “significantly altered” the viability of human cells by disrupting the functionality of cell membranes
The Ramazzini Institute in Italy is raising public funds to perform a comprehensive, independent, global glyphosate study. Stage 1 will investigate the chemical’s carcinogenicity and chronic toxicity potential
Monsanto’s plan to release a new crop of Bt soybeans for the U.S. market has been shelved. Entomologists believe the decision may have been triggered by the fact that insects are rapidly developing resistance to the pesticide-producing plants
May 3, the USDA released its highly problematic proposal for the labeling of foods containing GMOs. Call to action: Leave your public comment for the USDA before July 3
By Dr. Mercola

In recent years, concerns over the health effects of glyphosate — the active ingredient in Roundup and other weed killer formulations — has risen exponentially. Researchers have discovered it not only may be carcinogenic,1 but may also affect your body’s ability to produce fully functioning proteins, inhibit the shikimate pathway (found in gut bacteria) and interfere with the function of cytochrome P450 enzymes (required for activation of vitamin D and the creation of nitric oxide and cholesterol sulfate).

Glyphosate also chelates important minerals, disrupts sulfate synthesis and transport, interferes with the synthesis of aromatic amino acids and methionine, resulting in folate and neurotransmitter shortages, disrupts your microbiome by acting as an antibiotic, impairs methylation pathways, and inhibits pituitary release of thyroid stimulating hormone, which can lead to hypothyroidism.2,3

Now, government researchers warn the Roundup formula is far more toxic than glyphosate alone. As reported by investigative journalist Carey Gillam:4

“The tests5 are part of the U.S. National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) first-ever examination of herbicide formulations made with the active ingredient glyphosate, but that also include other chemicals. While regulators have previously required extensive testing of glyphosate in isolation, government scientists have not fully examined the toxicity of the more complex products sold to consumers, farmers and others.”

Toxicology Testing Long Overdue
The NTP testing was done by request from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) following the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reclassification of glyphosate as a Class 2A probable carcinogen three years ago.6 At the time, the IARC noted concerns about glyphosate formulations possibly having increased toxicity due to synergistic interactions.

As it turns out, that’s exactly what the NTP testing found. According to the NTP’s summary of the results, glyphosate formulations “significantly altered” the viability of human cells by disrupting the functionality of cell membranes. Mike DeVito, acting chief of the NTP Laboratory, told Gillam, “We see the formulations are much more toxic. The formulations were killing the cells. The glyphosate really didn’t do it.”

While first-phase results do not indicate that weed killers like Roundup are carcinogenic, it does show that the formulations are more toxic than glyphosate in isolation (for which evidence of carcinogenic potential does exist), and that they have the ability to kill human cells.

Jennifer Sass, who works as a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council, added, “This testing is important, because the EPA has only been looking at the active ingredient. But it’s the formulations that people are exposed to on their lawns and gardens, where they play and in their food.”

Despite public assurances that Roundup is harmless, internal documents from Monsanto, obtained through previous Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, reveal the company itself is unclear about the toxicity of Roundup as it has not been thoroughly studied. Internal discussions also reveal Monsanto employees have not been convinced the product is harmless. For example, in a 2002 email, Monsanto executive William Heydens said, “Glyphosate is OK but the formulated product … does the damage.”7

A 2003 company email8 from Monsanto toxicologist Donna Farmer, Ph.D., states, “You cannot say that Roundup is not a carcinogen … we have not done the necessary testing on the formulation to make that statement. The testing on the formulations are not anywhere near the level of the active ingredient.”

Farmer also adds that, “We cannot support the statement about ‘no adverse effects whatsoever on flora, or fauna or on the human body.’ Adverse effects are seen on flora (glyphosate is meant to kill vegetation), adverse effects on fauna — in studies with laboratory animals — even death is seen (LDS0 studies for example) …” Yet another company email sent in 2010 said,9 “With regards to the carcinogenicity of our formulations we don’t have such testing on them directly.”

Despite such internal discussions and doubts, in its “Benefits and Safety of Glyphosate” report published last year,10 Monsanto continues to claim that “Glyphosate-based herbicides are supported by one of the most extensive worldwide human health and environmental effects databases ever compiled for a pesticide product. Comprehensive toxicological and environmental fate studies conducted over the last 40 years have time and again demonstrated the strong safety profile of this widely used herbicide.”

Ramazzini Institute Seeking Donations for Global Safety Study
The highly respected Ramazzini Institute in Italy — which recently confirmed the link between cellphone radiation and Schwann cell tumors found by NTP researchers11,12,13 — is now raising funds14 to perform a comprehensive, global glyphosate study. Stage 1 would investigate the chemical’s carcinogenicity and chronic toxicity potential. The Institute explains its decision to look for public funding:

“Aiming to produce independent and solid scientific evidence, the Ramazzini Institute has decided not to accept any funding for the study from the industry that produces glyphosate-based herbicides or from the organic farming or food industry — to avoid all conflicts of interest.

Do you want to know if glyphosate is safe for you and your family? If you do, you can now help fund a study that you can trust. This is the most comprehensive independent study ever on the World’s most used herbicide, the study that you and your family deserve!”

Bt Soybean Plan Scrapped
In related news, Monsanto’s plan to release a new crop of Bt soybeans for the U.S. market has been scrapped. While the company claims plans were shelved due to low demand, entomologists have proposed it’s more likely due to the reality that insects are rapidly developing resistance to the pesticide-producing plants.

The first generation of Bt soybeans, Intacta RR2 PRO, contain a single Bt protein called Cry1Ac. The second-generation of this product, Intacta 2 Xtend, adds two other Bt proteins — Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab2 — plus dicamba tolerance. While Intacta 2 Xtend is still planned for release in South America in 2021, it will not be released in the U.S. According to a report by DTN/Progressive Farmer:15

“[T]he Bt proteins in Intacta 2 — Cry1Ac, Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab2 — have already been compromised by insect resistance in the U.S., where they are used extensively in Bt cotton and Bt corn. Texas A&M entomologist David Kerns and his colleagues have identified bollworm populations across the South with resistance to Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab.

Resistance to Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab2 has also been found in corn earworm populations in Maryland. Moreover, Cry1A.105’s similar mode of action to other Cry1 proteins on the U.S. landscape spells trouble for the trait, Kerns noted.

‘It’s a vector stack — they’ve taken the active part of the toxin from several different Cry proteins — Cry1Ab, Cry1F and Cry1Ac — and put them into one … So cross resistance would be highly likely, and there is already established resistance to Cry1F in all bollworm populations. So I would suspect Cry1A.105 would not have much activity on our Helicoverpa zea [bollworm] populations.’”

Vaccines for Plants Are Next
As if genetically tinkering with plants to make them produce pesticide internally isn’t odd or unnatural enough, scientists are now working on plant vaccines. As explained by Regeneration International, RNA interference (RNAi) technology is being used “to develop biodegradable ‘vaccines’ intended to protect crops from pathogens.” The rationale for developing plant vaccines is to minimize the use of chemical pesticides.

While we certainly need to eliminate agrochemicals from food production, RNAi technology is risky business and could produce any number of unforeseen consequences. In a letter to the editors of Yale Environmental 360 in response to its April 18 article, “Can ‘Vaccines’ for Crops Help Cut Pesticide Use and Improve Yields?”17 Regeneration International founding member Judith Schwartz writes, in part:18

“As a journalist covering land management, I am extremely disappointed in the lack of skepticism demonstrated in this reporting. Any distinction between this and ‘chemical pesticides,’ or for that matter, ‘genetic engineering,’ is merely semantic; if gene editing is not considered genetic engineering that’s only because the companies say so. As we do not know if this technology is safe, how can we be sure that non-targeted genes are not deactivated? …

This could dangerously impact insect, plant and/or mammal species and ecological stabilities … There are a growing number of farmers who are working with nature by means of no-till, cover-cropping and other ecological practices, who are finding that the best means of managing problem insects is biodiversity: the other insects that prey on them.

Such farmers have been able to grow healthy crops while markedly reducing and often eliminating herbicides and pesticides. Independent research19 has shown that pesticide-treated croplands often have far more pests and impacts than untreated cropland. Aren’t problem pests a symptom of an out-of-balance ecology? Could not this RNAi experiment throw the ecology even further out of balance?

How would this address the underlying problem, rather than merely boost the sale of pesticides? … [W]e can already produce enough food to feed 10 billion people; the challenge is in distribution, nutrient density and affordability. Nor is this the job of industrial agriculture. More than 70 percent of the world’s food is grown by small-holder farmers in the developing world …

Given the limited research on RNAi technology that is not funded by entities that would benefit from its use, isn’t more critical analysis required? I would encourage your editorial staff to run an objective piece that goes into more details on the implications of RNAi technology and considers pest management alternatives.”

Proposed GMO Labeling Rules Likely to Confuse and Mislead Consumers
Another piece of related news: As recently reported by the Sierra Club20 and Modern Farmer,21 the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released its proposal22 for the labeling of foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) May 3, and it’s pretty bizarre, or to use the word of Sierra Club, “Orwellian.” There are a number of problems with the USDA’s proposed GMO labeling rule:

1. Perhaps most problematic is the fact that it’s not clear whether “highly refined foods” will be included in the labeling standard. Not only are a majority of foods sold in grocery stores highly refined, or contain highly refined ingredients, but these foods are also the most likely to contain GMOs. If highly refined foods will not require GMO labeling, the labeling requirement will be essentially useless, as very few whole foods are genetically engineered.

2. The phrases “genetically modified” or “genetically engineered” are not included anywhere on the label. Nor are any versions thereof, or the now well-recognized household word, “GMO.” Instead of calling it what it is, and what people now are most likely to understand, the USDA is using the word “bioengineered” — a rather misleading phrase for the simple fact that it sounds far more natural than it is; closer to biodynamic than genetically modified.

3. The proposal also does not address whether foods produced using newer forms of genetic engineering, such as gene editing, CRISPR technology and synthetic biology, will need to be labeled, and/or whether they would require another type of label to distinguish them from in-vitro DNA techniques.

4. The logo itself: The word “be,” short for bioengineered, inside a yellow and green smiley-face sun. Again, this smacks of biotech promotion and misdirection. As stated by George Kimbrell, legal director for the Center for Food Safety, “We would support a little circle that said ‘GE’ or ‘GMO’ — something neutral that’s not pro-biotech propaganda.”
https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/public/2018/May/bioengineered.jpg
5. Lack of standardized icon. Rather than mandating an easily recognizable icon or logo, companies would have the option of the smiley sun logo (above), two other “be” logos (see the proposed rule document23), simply adding a sentence along the lines of “Contains a bioengineered food ingredient,” or a simply including a QR code directing you to the company’s website for more information about the ingredients, the latter of which will require you to have a smartphone and reliable connection inside the store.

As noted by Kimbrell, “USDA’s own study found that QR codes are inherently discriminatory against the one-third of Americans who do not own smartphones, and even more so against rural, low-income, and elderly populations, or those without access to the internet.”24

Take Action — Public Comments Open Until July 3
Sophia Kruszewski, senior policy specialist with the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition told Sierra Club, “I think there’s a question as to why … USDA is choosing to consider new terms, other than GMO or GE, and other forms of labeling. Especially since … many companies have responded to consumer desire for transparency and started voluntarily labeling their products. [GMO disclosure] doesn’t seem to pose an enormous challenge.”

Indeed, it seems the USDA is unnecessarily complicating matters, and the only reason I can come up with for this is they’re trying to help the biotech industry by making the labeling as obscure as possible. Considering the time it has taken to raise awareness about GMOs and GE food, suddenly calling GMOs “bioengineered” seems like a very deliberate attempt to mislead people who have now grown accustomed to looking for “non-GMO” labels.

The USDA is accepting public comments on its proposal through July 3, 2018. The final rule is expected to be delivered July 29. You can read through the proposed rulemaking for the national bioengineered food disclosure standard here. If you agree that it largely fails to label GMOs in any meaningful and easy-to-understand way, please take a moment to submitting your comment on the federal eRulemaking portal.

Comments may also be mailed to: Docket Clerk, 1400 Independence Ave., SW, Room 4543-South, Washington, DC 20250, or faxed to 202-690-0338. Make sure you properly identify the docket ID for your comment if sending by mail or fax, which in this case would be AMS-TM-17-0050 (The Agricultural Marketing Service Proposed Rule for the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard).
https://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=AMS-TM-17-0050-0004
Biotech Companies Are Gaining Power by Taking Over the Government
Monsanto and their industry allies will not willingly surrender their stranglehold on the food supply. They must be resisted and rolled back at every turn. There is no doubt in my mind that GMOs and the chemical-intensive agricultural model of which they are part and parcel, pose a serious threat to the environment and our health. Yet, government agencies not only turn a blind eye to the damage they are inflicting on the planet, but actively work to further the interests of the biotech giants.

This is not surprising. It is well-known that there is a revolving door between regulatory agencies and private corporations. This has allowed companies such as Monsanto to manipulate science, defang regulations and even control the free press, all from their commanding position within the halls of government.

Consider for a moment that on paper, the U.S. may have the strictest safety regulations in the world governing new food additives, but has repeatedly allowed GMOs and their accompanying pesticides such as Roundup to circumvent these laws.

In fact, the only legal basis for allowing GE foods to be marketed in the U.S. is the FDA’s tenuous claim that these foods are inherently safe, a claim which is demonstrably false. Documents released as a result of a lawsuit against the FDA reveal that the agency's own scientists warned their superiors about the detrimental risks of GE foods. But their warnings fell on deaf ears.

Don’t Be Duped by Industry Shills!
In a further effort to deceive the public, Monsanto and its cohorts spoon-feed scientists, academics and journalists a diet of questionable studies that depict them in a positive light. By hiring “third-party experts,” biotech companies are able to take information of dubious validity, and present it as independent and authoritative.

Industry front groups also abound. The Genetic Literacy Project and the American Council for Science and Health are both Monsanto-funded. Even WebMD, a website that is often presented as a trustworthy source of "independent and objective" health information, is heavily reliant on advertising dollars. It is no coincidence that they promote corporate-backed health strategies and products.

There’s No Better Time to Act Than NOW — Here’s What You Can Do
The biotech giants have deep pocketbooks and political influence, and are fighting to maintain their position of dominance. It is only because of educated consumers and groups like the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) that their failed GMO experiment is on the ropes. We thank all of the donors who helped OCA achieve their fundraising goal. I made a commitment to triple match all donations to OCA during awareness week. It is with great pleasure to present a check to this fantastic organization for $250,000.
At the end of the day, we must shatter Monsanto’s grip on the agricultural sector. There is no way to recall GMOs once they have been released into the environment. The stakes could not be higher. Will you continue supporting the corrupt, toxic and unsustainable food system that Monsanto and its industry allies are working so hard to protect?

For more and more people, the answer is no. Consumers are rejecting genetically engineered and pesticide laden foods. Another positive trend is that there has been strong growth in the global organic and grass fed sectors. This just proves one thing: We can make a difference if we steadily work toward the same goal.

One of the best things you can do is to buy your foods from a local farmer who runs a small business and uses diverse methods that promote regenerative agriculture. You can also join a community-supported agriculture (CSA) program, where you can buy a “share” of the vegetables produced by the farm, so that you get a regular supply of fresh food. I believe that joining a CSA is a powerful investment not only in your own health, but in that of your local community and economy as well.

In addition, you should also adopt preventive strategies that can help reduce the toxic chemical pollution that assaults your body. I recommend visiting these trustworthy sites for non-GMO food resources in your country as well:

Organic Food Directory (Australia) Eat Wild (Canada)
Organic Explorer (New Zealand) Eat Well Guide (United States and Canada)
Farm Match (United States) Local Harvest (United States)
Weston A. Price Foundation (United States) The Cornucopia Institute
Monsanto and its allies want you to think that they control everything, but they are on the wrong side of history. It’s you, the informed and empowered, who hold the future in your hands. Let’s all work together to topple the biotech industry’s house of cards. Remember — it all starts with shopping smart and making the best food purchases for you and your family.

onawah
7th June 2018, 20:26
Whole Foods Fails Consumers Again, 'Delays' GMO Labeling
https://www.organicconsumers.org/blog/whole-foods-fails-consumers-again-delays-gmo-labeling
June 4, 2018
Organic Consumers Association
by Katherine Paul


Five years ago, under mounting pressure from consumers, Whole Foods Market (WFM) announced that by the end of 2018, the then-largest retailer of organic foods would require all of its suppliers to clearly label GMO ingredients and foods.

Last week, the company reneged on that commitment, or at least the timeline part of it.

This time, there was no flashy press release, no media fanfare. Instead, the news was circulated quietly in an email to the company’s suppliers.

In the email, WFM Chief Operations Officer A.C. Gallo claimed the company, now owned by Amazon, is merely “pausing” the plan, until the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) finalizes labeling requirements under the federal mandatory labeling law passed in July 2016—a law that (intentionally) has no teeth.

WFM claims it doesn’t want to burden suppliers by making them follow one set of labeling requirements for WFM, and another to satisfy the federal law. That statement suggests that the company will simply go along with the federal labeling requirements—a far weaker plan than what WFM originally promised consumers—and drop its own plan.

If there were ever any doubt about WFM’s intentions, those intentions are clear now: The company’s GMO labeling promise, too little too late from the get-go, was always more about saving face and scamming consumers than it was about real transparency and forcing Big Food to change its ways.

Dragged kicking and screaming into the GMO labeling battle

In 2011, the Chicago Tribune reported on a protest organized by Organic Consumers Association against WFM. At issue? The retailer’s intentionally misleading statements about its commitment to carrying only healthy, “natural,” organic foods—when in fact the store’s shelves were full of products containing unlabeled GMO ingredients.

A year later, as public sentiment around GMO labeling heated up after California citizens launched a mandatory GMO labeling ballot initiative (Proposition 37), WFM market became a target for critics, OCA included, who accused the retailer of “sitting out” the fight for labels.

Under pressure, WFM did eventually officially endorse California’s Proposition 37. But the endorsement was tainted by then-CEO John Mackey’s claim that the “jury is still out” on the health and safety of GMOs.

To make matters worse, WFM didn’t contribute a dime to the pro-labeling campaign, even though other organic retailers, including Dr. Bronner’s, Mercola.com and Nature’s Path, pitched in millions. The retail chain wouldn’t even allow signature-gathering outside its stores.

Labeling promise—an act of marketing desperation?

After Prop 37 was (narrowly) defeated, WFM tried to win back disgruntled consumers by announcing that it would become the first major retailer to require labels on GMO foods or ingredients sold in its stores. "We are putting a stake in the ground on GMO labeling to support the consumer's right to know," Walter Robb, then-CEO said during his March 14 [2013] presentation at the Natural Products Expo West in Anaheim, California.

Was it a genuine commitment? Or just PR stunt to help diffuse some of the bad press resulting from its lack of support for California’s labeling initiative?

We tried to give the company the benefit of the doubt, though we questioned the five-year goal. If WFM in the UK was already labeling GMOs, why wait five years to provide U.S. consumers with the same level of transparency?

Still, we thought, if WFM, one of the largest buyers of organic products in the U.S., required suppliers to label GMOs, this would be a giant win for consumers.

But any glimmer of hope that WFM might do the right thing was extinguished when CEO Robb threw his support behind the DARK Act—the federal GMO labeling law that effectively ended the fight for meaningful GMO labeling by including a raft of exclusions and allowing companies to use electronic barcodes and other obfuscatory means of “disclosing” GMO ingredients. (The USDA is now considering using these silly images to “warn” consumers about GMOs).

Where does that leave consumers? Without labels, for sure. But today’s increasingly savvy consumers aren’t without options. Many will turn to more reliable, and more loyal, retailers and brands as they seek out organic and regenerative products, many of them from local (and reliable) sources.

WFM may have only recently sold out to Amazon. But it sold out consumers long ago.

Want to give WFM a piece of your mind? Take action here.https://action.organicconsumers.org/o/50865/p/dia/action4/common/public/?action_KEY=21799

Katherine Paul is associate director of the Organic Consumers Association.

onawah
12th June 2018, 06:29
Questionable Tactics Used in Vaccine ‘Safety’ Testing
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2018/06/12/vaccine-safety-testing.aspx?utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20180612Z1_UCM&et_cid=DM213769&et_rid=334769496
6/12/18 by Dr. Mercola

Story at-a-glance
An eight-month investigation revealed shocking flaws in Merck’s clinical trial design, which effectively prevented assessment of safety. Serious adverse events arising outside of a two-week period post-vaccination were simply marked down as “medical history”
A systematic review of pre- and post-licensure trials of the HPV vaccine concluded its effectiveness is both overstated and unproven. Merck’s own research reveals you increase your risk of precancerous lesions if you’ve been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior to vaccination
Reported side effects of Gardasil vaccination include immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way, sometimes fatally
One Gardasil 9 trial reported nearly 10 percent of subjects experienced “severe systemic adverse events” affecting multiple system organ classes, and over 3 percent suffered “severe vaccine-related adverse events”
HPV infection is spread through sexual contact and research has demonstrated that using condoms can reduce risk of HPV infection by 70 percent, which is far more effective than the HPV vaccine
In December 2017, Slate magazine published an astonishing article about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil, revealing how the safety trials for this controversial vaccine actually "weren't designed to properly assess safety."1 Gardasil is supposed to prevent infection by certain strains of HPV virus, which in rare cases may cause cervical cancer if left untreated.

However, trial data from Merck shows that Gardasil vaccinations may actually increase your risk of cervical cancer by 44.6 percent if you have been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior to vaccination.2 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has made this document inaccessible, but we've saved a copy of it. In his Slate article, investigative journalist Frederik Joelving recounts the story of Kesia Lyng, a 30-year-old Danish woman who, at the age of 19, participated in a clinical trial for Merck's Gardasil vaccine

"Lyng's grandmother had died of cervical cancer the year before, so when a letter arrived offering her $500 to take part in a crucial international test of Gardasil, the decision was easy," Joelving writes. "She got her first shot of the vaccine at Hvidovre Hospital in Copenhagen on September 19, 2002. The symptoms snuck up on her shortly after her second shot on November 14.

They never abated. It wasn't until 2016 that she received her diagnosis — chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) … In recent years, Lyng has become suspicious that there is a connection between her disease and her Gardasil immunization. Her ailments evoke descriptions found in hundreds of news stories from women who also received the vaccine, as well as several medical case reports from around the world."

HPV Vaccine Linked to Serious Side Effects, Including Death
Reported side effects of Gardasil vaccination include immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way, sometimes fatally.3,4 The dangers of high immunogenicity was addressed in my 2015 interview with Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D., a research scientist at the University of British Columbia. In it, she explains that by triggering an exaggerated inflammatory immune response, vaccine adjuvants end up affecting brain function.

In collaboration with a team led by professor Yehuda Shoenfeld, a world expert in autoimmune diseases who heads the Zabludowicz Autoimmunity Research Centre at the Sheba Hospital in Israel, Tomljenovic has demonstrated how the HPV vaccine can cause brain autoimmune disorders. It was these findings that prompted the Japanese government to remove the HPV vaccine from its list of recommended vaccines.5 The vaccine injury law firm Sadaka Associates also claims that:6

"Medical researchers have accused drug regulators and manufacturers of concealing the real dangers of the HPV vaccine. Many girls have suffered life-threatening injuries as the result of the vaccine. The HPV vaccine has also caused death … The drug regulators have also been accused of adding aluminum to the placebo in order to manipulate scientific data. Even though aluminum was used in the placebo, scientists have confirmed that the HPV vaccine has been linked to death.

There was a study done that involved 2,881 girls who receive the vaccine. Fourteen of the girls who received the vaccine died. Three of the girls who received the placebo died. There was a team of researchers at the National Institute of Cardiology that also found that there is a link between HPV vaccine and life-threatening reactions.

They looked at 28 studies that involved girls who had been given the HPV vaccine. They also looked at 16 randomized trials. They found that girls were given a placebo with aluminum in 14 of the randomized trials.

If aluminum is placed in a placebo, then a person is more likely to have an adverse reaction. Spanish researchers found that girls who receive the HPV vaccine are 10 times more likely to react to it. Canadian scientists found that 10 percent of the girls who were vaccinated had to be hospitalized due to a reaction. These girls had to be hospitalized within 42 days of receiving the vaccination."

Overstated and Unproven Effectiveness
A 2012 systematic review7 of pre- and post-licensure trials of the HPV vaccine also concluded that the vaccine's effectiveness is both overstated and unproven. According to the authors, the review revealed:

"… evidence of selective reporting of results from clinical trials (i.e., exclusion of vaccine efficacy figures related to study subgroups in which efficacy might be lower or even negative from peer-reviewed publications). Given this, the widespread optimism regarding HPV vaccines long-term benefits appears to rest on a number of unproven assumptions (or such which are at odd with factual evidence) and significant misinterpretation of available data.

For example, the claim that HPV vaccination will result in approximately 70 percent reduction of cervical cancers is made despite the fact that the clinical trials data have not demonstrated to date that the vaccines have actually prevented a single case of cervical cancer (let alone cervical cancer death), nor that the current overly optimistic surrogate marker-based extrapolations are justified.

Likewise, the notion that HPV vaccines have an impressive safety profile is only supported by highly flawed design of safety trials and is contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports which continue to link HPV vaccination to serious adverse outcomes (including death and permanent disabilities)."

Gardasil Safety Trials Were Not Designed to Detect Safety Problems
It's precisely these kinds of design flaws that are highlighted in the December 17, 2017, Slate article.8 Joelving reports that Merck has repeatedly "issued reassurances about the thorough randomized trials the vaccines were subjected to before approval."

The public was told that the three HPV vaccines marketed in the U.S. were tested on tens of thousands of individuals around the world, without any compelling evidence of serious side effects having emerged. While that reads well on paper, the shocking truth appears to be that these trials were never designed to detect and evaluate serious side effects in the first place. According to Joelving:

"An eight-month investigation by Slate found the major Gardasil trials were flawed from the outset … and that regulators allowed unreliable methods to be used to test the vaccine's safety. Drug regulators tend to look much more seriously at potential side effects that surface during a pre-licensure study, which is what Lyng participated in, rather than after a product has already been found to be safe and been put on the market.

But regulators never learned of Lyng's plight. In fact, her repeated complaints of debilitating symptoms were not even registered in the study as potential side effects … Lyng's experience was not unique. Interviews with five study participants and more than 2,300 pages of documents obtained through freedom-of-information requests from hospitals and health authorities suggest inadequacies built into Merck's major clinical tests of Gardasil."

Joelving describes these inadequacies in great detail, showing how Merck made the vaccine appear far safer than it actually is by using "a convoluted method that made objective evaluation and reporting of potential side effects impossible during all but a few weeks of its yearslong trials." Serious adverse events were only recorded during a two-week period post-vaccination.

Moreover, during this narrow window of time, trial investigators "used their personal judgment to decide whether or not to report any medical problem as an adverse event."

Side Effects Simply Marked Down as Medical History
Importantly, and shockingly, most of the health problems that arose after vaccination were simply marked down as "medical history" rather than potential side effects — a tactic that basically ensured that most side effects would be overlooked. No record was made of symptom severity, duration or outcome.

Even with this gross reporting flaw, at least one Gardasil trial of the new nine-valent vaccine reported nearly 10 percent of subjects experienced "severe systemic adverse events" affecting multiple system organ classes, and over 3 percent suffered "severe vaccine-related adverse events."9 The 2012 systematic review10 of Gardasil pre- and post-licensure trials mentioned earlier isn't the only report out there that has offered up severe criticism of Merck's trial tactics. Joelving writes:

"In an internal 2014 EMA report11 about Gardasil 9 obtained through a freedom-of-information request, senior experts called the company's approach 'unconventional and suboptimal' and said it left some 'uncertainty' about the safety results. EMA trial inspectors made similar observations in another report, noting that Merck's procedure was 'not an optimal method of collecting safety data, especially not systemic side effects that could appear long after the vaccinations were given.'"

Study Subjects Betrayed
In other words, when Merck says Gardasil has been extensively studied for safety, it's referring to studies set up in such a way that data on potential side effects were actually excluded. If side effects are not included in the data collection, how can you rightfully claim that no significant problems exist? Sadly, shoddy and incomplete documentation of adverse events, and follow-up periods that are too short to detect problems, can have tragic ramifications, and this is what appears to have happened with the release of Gardasil.

Joelving's investigation reveals at least five other Danish women went on to develop debilitating health problems during the Gardasil trial. One developed severe fatigue, persistent flu-like symptoms, and had to be admitted to the hospital for a serious infection shortly after one of her vaccinations. All of her symptoms were marked down as "medical history" and were not processed as adverse events.

A year after her vaccination, she developed such debilitating pain she had to use a wheelchair. To this day, she still sometimes has to use crutches, and has been given a tentative diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis. Another young woman also developed severe fatigue and headaches. She told Joelving she reported it to study personnel, yet there's no mention of these problems anywhere in her file. Joelving writes:

"'If I were a research subject, I would feel betrayed,' Trudo Lemmens, a bioethicist and professor of health law and policy at the University of Toronto, told me. 'If the purpose of a clinical trial is to establish the safety and efficacy of a new product, whether it's a vaccine or something else, I would expect that they gathered all relevant data, including whether it had side effects or not.'"

Imprecision Medicine
Vaccines are often riskier than oral drugs, since they're injected into your body and contain a number of toxic adjuvants. When there's risk, you'd expect the benefit to be worth it, but research shows many drugs provide shockingly little benefit for a majority of people, and one wonders whether the same does not hold true for vaccines as well.

The following graphic is from a Nature article published April 29, 2015.12 It shows the effectiveness of the top 10 highest-grossing drugs in the U.S. Nexium, for example, commonly prescribed for heartburn, is beneficial for just 1 out of every 25 patients.

Advair, prescribed for asthma, helps 1 in 20; Cymbalta eases symptoms of depression in 1 out of 9 patients; Crestor, prescribed for high cholesterol, benefits 1 in 20. While not included in the graphic below, the article13 also cites research14 suggesting statins may benefit as few as 1 in 50.

Truly, when you're talking about a benefit rate of 5 percent or less, can you really say that the drug in question is an effective one? Yet they're certainly marketed as such. Meanwhile, all of these drugs have side effects, which means all those who gain no benefit from the drug are risking their health for no good reason whatsoever.

As noted in Nature, a wide variety of factors play into how you might respond to any given medication, including your gender, age, ethnicity and genetics giving rise to differences in absorption, metabolism, excretion and more.

"The drug vemurafenib, for instance, was approved in the United States to treat late-stage melanoma in people whose tumors carry the BRAF(V600E) mutation. But some tumor cells develop other anomalies that make them resistant to the drug. Thus clinicians considering whether to prescribe vemurafenib may need to take into account a whole slew of biomarkers," the article states.

In December 2017, Slate magazine published an astonishing article about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil, revealing how the safety trials for this controversial vaccine actually "weren't designed to properly assess safety."1 Gardasil is supposed to prevent infection by certain strains of HPV virus, which in rare cases may cause cervical cancer if left untreated.

However, trial data from Merck shows that Gardasil vaccinations may actually increase your risk of cervical cancer by 44.6 percent if you have been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior to vaccination.2 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has made this document inaccessible, but we've saved a copy of it. In his Slate article, investigative journalist Frederik Joelving recounts the story of Kesia Lyng, a 30-year-old Danish woman who, at the age of 19, participated in a clinical trial for Merck's Gardasil vaccine

"Lyng's grandmother had died of cervical cancer the year before, so when a letter arrived offering her $500 to take part in a crucial international test of Gardasil, the decision was easy," Joelving writes. "She got her first shot of the vaccine at Hvidovre Hospital in Copenhagen on September 19, 2002. The symptoms snuck up on her shortly after her second shot on November 14.

They never abated. It wasn't until 2016 that she received her diagnosis — chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) … In recent years, Lyng has become suspicious that there is a connection between her disease and her Gardasil immunization. Her ailments evoke descriptions found in hundreds of news stories from women who also received the vaccine, as well as several medical case reports from around the world."

HPV Vaccine Linked to Serious Side Effects, Including Death
Reported side effects of Gardasil vaccination include immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way, sometimes fatally.3,4 The dangers of high immunogenicity was addressed in my 2015 interview with Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D., a research scientist at the University of British Columbia. In it, she explains that by triggering an exaggerated inflammatory immune response, vaccine adjuvants end up affecting brain function.

In collaboration with a team led by professor Yehuda Shoenfeld, a world expert in autoimmune diseases who heads the Zabludowicz Autoimmunity Research Centre at the Sheba Hospital in Israel, Tomljenovic has demonstrated how the HPV vaccine can cause brain autoimmune disorders. It was these findings that prompted the Japanese government to remove the HPV vaccine from its list of recommended vaccines.5 The vaccine injury law firm Sadaka Associates also claims that:6

"Medical researchers have accused drug regulators and manufacturers of concealing the real dangers of the HPV vaccine. Many girls have suffered life-threatening injuries as the result of the vaccine. The HPV vaccine has also caused death … The drug regulators have also been accused of adding aluminum to the placebo in order to manipulate scientific data. Even though aluminum was used in the placebo, scientists have confirmed that the HPV vaccine has been linked to death.

There was a study done that involved 2,881 girls who receive the vaccine. Fourteen of the girls who received the vaccine died. Three of the girls who received the placebo died. There was a team of researchers at the National Institute of Cardiology that also found that there is a link between HPV vaccine and life-threatening reactions.

They looked at 28 studies that involved girls who had been given the HPV vaccine. They also looked at 16 randomized trials. They found that girls were given a placebo with aluminum in 14 of the randomized trials.

If aluminum is placed in a placebo, then a person is more likely to have an adverse reaction. Spanish researchers found that girls who receive the HPV vaccine are 10 times more likely to react to it. Canadian scientists found that 10 percent of the girls who were vaccinated had to be hospitalized due to a reaction. These girls had to be hospitalized within 42 days of receiving the vaccination."

Overstated and Unproven Effectiveness
A 2012 systematic review7 of pre- and post-licensure trials of the HPV vaccine also concluded that the vaccine's effectiveness is both overstated and unproven. According to the authors, the review revealed:

"… evidence of selective reporting of results from clinical trials (i.e., exclusion of vaccine efficacy figures related to study subgroups in which efficacy might be lower or even negative from peer-reviewed publications). Given this, the widespread optimism regarding HPV vaccines long-term benefits appears to rest on a number of unproven assumptions (or such which are at odd with factual evidence) and significant misinterpretation of available data.

For example, the claim that HPV vaccination will result in approximately 70 percent reduction of cervical cancers is made despite the fact that the clinical trials data have not demonstrated to date that the vaccines have actually prevented a single case of cervical cancer (let alone cervical cancer death), nor that the current overly optimistic surrogate marker-based extrapolations are justified.

Likewise, the notion that HPV vaccines have an impressive safety profile is only supported by highly flawed design of safety trials and is contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports which continue to link HPV vaccination to serious adverse outcomes (including death and permanent disabilities)."

Gardasil Safety Trials Were Not Designed to Detect Safety Problems
It's precisely these kinds of design flaws that are highlighted in the December 17, 2017, Slate article.8 Joelving reports that Merck has repeatedly "issued reassurances about the thorough randomized trials the vaccines were subjected to before approval."

The public was told that the three HPV vaccines marketed in the U.S. were tested on tens of thousands of individuals around the world, without any compelling evidence of serious side effects having emerged. While that reads well on paper, the shocking truth appears to be that these trials were never designed to detect and evaluate serious side effects in the first place. According to Joelving:

"An eight-month investigation by Slate found the major Gardasil trials were flawed from the outset … and that regulators allowed unreliable methods to be used to test the vaccine's safety. Drug regulators tend to look much more seriously at potential side effects that surface during a pre-licensure study, which is what Lyng participated in, rather than after a product has already been found to be safe and been put on the market.

But regulators never learned of Lyng's plight. In fact, her repeated complaints of debilitating symptoms were not even registered in the study as potential side effects … Lyng's experience was not unique. Interviews with five study participants and more than 2,300 pages of documents obtained through freedom-of-information requests from hospitals and health authorities suggest inadequacies built into Merck's major clinical tests of Gardasil."

Joelving describes these inadequacies in great detail, showing how Merck made the vaccine appear far safer than it actually is by using "a convoluted method that made objective evaluation and reporting of potential side effects impossible during all but a few weeks of its yearslong trials." Serious adverse events were only recorded during a two-week period post-vaccination.

Moreover, during this narrow window of time, trial investigators "used their personal judgment to decide whether or not to report any medical problem as an adverse event."

Side Effects Simply Marked Down as Medical History
Importantly, and shockingly, most of the health problems that arose after vaccination were simply marked down as "medical history" rather than potential side effects — a tactic that basically ensured that most side effects would be overlooked. No record was made of symptom severity, duration or outcome.

Even with this gross reporting flaw, at least one Gardasil trial of the new nine-valent vaccine reported nearly 10 percent of subjects experienced "severe systemic adverse events" affecting multiple system organ classes, and over 3 percent suffered "severe vaccine-related adverse events."9 The 2012 systematic review10 of Gardasil pre- and post-licensure trials mentioned earlier isn't the only report out there that has offered up severe criticism of Merck's trial tactics. Joelving writes:

"In an internal 2014 EMA report11 about Gardasil 9 obtained through a freedom-of-information request, senior experts called the company's approach 'unconventional and suboptimal' and said it left some 'uncertainty' about the safety results. EMA trial inspectors made similar observations in another report, noting that Merck's procedure was 'not an optimal method of collecting safety data, especially not systemic side effects that could appear long after the vaccinations were given.'"

Study Subjects Betrayed
In other words, when Merck says Gardasil has been extensively studied for safety, it's referring to studies set up in such a way that data on potential side effects were actually excluded. If side effects are not included in the data collection, how can you rightfully claim that no significant problems exist? Sadly, shoddy and incomplete documentation of adverse events, and follow-up periods that are too short to detect problems, can have tragic ramifications, and this is what appears to have happened with the release of Gardasil.

Joelving's investigation reveals at least five other Danish women went on to develop debilitating health problems during the Gardasil trial. One developed severe fatigue, persistent flu-like symptoms, and had to be admitted to the hospital for a serious infection shortly after one of her vaccinations. All of her symptoms were marked down as "medical history" and were not processed as adverse events.

A year after her vaccination, she developed such debilitating pain she had to use a wheelchair. To this day, she still sometimes has to use crutches, and has been given a tentative diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis. Another young woman also developed severe fatigue and headaches. She told Joelving she reported it to study personnel, yet there's no mention of these problems anywhere in her file. Joelving writes:

"'If I were a research subject, I would feel betrayed,' Trudo Lemmens, a bioethicist and professor of health law and policy at the University of Toronto, told me. 'If the purpose of a clinical trial is to establish the safety and efficacy of a new product, whether it's a vaccine or something else, I would expect that they gathered all relevant data, including whether it had side effects or not.'"

Imprecision Medicine
Vaccines are often riskier than oral drugs, since they're injected into your body and contain a number of toxic adjuvants. When there's risk, you'd expect the benefit to be worth it, but research shows many drugs provide shockingly little benefit for a majority of people, and one wonders whether the same does not hold true for vaccines as well.

The following graphic is from a Nature article published April 29, 2015.12 It shows the effectiveness of the top 10 highest-grossing drugs in the U.S. Nexium, for example, commonly prescribed for heartburn, is beneficial for just 1 out of every 25 patients.

Advair, prescribed for asthma, helps 1 in 20; Cymbalta eases symptoms of depression in 1 out of 9 patients; Crestor, prescribed for high cholesterol, benefits 1 in 20. While not included in the graphic below, the article13 also cites research14 suggesting statins may benefit as few as 1 in 50.

Truly, when you're talking about a benefit rate of 5 percent or less, can you really say that the drug in question is an effective one? Yet they're certainly marketed as such. Meanwhile, all of these drugs have side effects, which means all those who gain no benefit from the drug are risking their health for no good reason whatsoever.

As noted in Nature, a wide variety of factors play into how you might respond to any given medication, including your gender, age, ethnicity and genetics giving rise to differences in absorption, metabolism, excretion and more.

"The drug vemurafenib, for instance, was approved in the United States to treat late-stage melanoma in people whose tumors carry the BRAF(V600E) mutation. But some tumor cells develop other anomalies that make them resistant to the drug. Thus clinicians considering whether to prescribe vemurafenib may need to take into account a whole slew of biomarkers," the article states.
https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/public/2018/June/imprecision-medicine.jpg
Pregnant Women To Be Included in Experimental Drug Trials
Historically, pregnant women have been discouraged from taking drugs and vaccines during pregnancy, as there's very little data on their safety for the growing fetus. Pregnant women have thus far not been included in clinical drug and vaccine trials. The reason for this should be obvious.

A pregnant woman is not only putting her own health on the line, but also that of her unborn child. Now, that's all about to change. In April 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued draft guidance15 for industry on when and how they may include pregnant women in clinical trials for drugs and therapies. As reported by Science News:16

"It addresses considerations such as the effect pregnancy has on the absorption of drugs, nonclinical studies that should be conducted, and appropriate data collection and safety monitoring. The key concern with pregnant women participating in clinical trials is safety of the fetus.

The terrible birth defects that resulted from the wide use of the sedative thalidomide in the 1950s and '60s weighed heavily on the eventual decision to largely exclude pregnant women from trials that test drugs. But that tragedy didn't happen because pregnant women were studied, [obstetrician Anne] Lyerly says — it was because they weren't studied.

'If you don't study a drug in a highly-controlled research setting,' Lyerly says, 'it's not like the risk that would be imposed on those individuals goes away.' Instead, the risk gets shifted to women who need the drug or women who get pregnant while on the drug.'"

According to research17 published in 2011, 94 percent of pregnant women in the study had taken one or more over-the-counter or prescription medications during their pregnancy; 70 percent used at least one prescription drug. The average number of drugs used during pregnancy has also nearly doubled in recent decades, from 2.5 in 1976/1978 to 4.2 in 2006/2008. The researchers also concluded there was insufficient data to determine the risks to the baby for 98 percent of these drugs.

While the inclusion of pregnant women in drug trials may be justifiable, as Lyerly tries to claim above, what guarantee do we have that drug companies will design studies to actually FIND side effects, opposed to doctoring studies in such a way that side effects are simply obscured?

The fact is, there are no guarantees whatsoever, as these studies will be a) done by the same companies mass-marketing drugs that are effective for 5 percent of patients or less, and b) regulated by the same government agencies that let drug companies get away with doing safety studies that don't actually record side effects.

Safety Is a Hindrance to Profits
Getting back to the HPV vaccine, research18 shows Merck played a distinct role in state HPV vaccination policy, promoting school-entry mandates19,20,21 "by serving as an information resource, lobbying legislators, drafting legislation, mobilizing female legislators and physician organizations, conducting consumer marketing campaigns and filling gaps in access to the vaccine."

It also found that most stakeholders thought the company "had acted too aggressively and nontransparently" to achieve their aim. Again, Merck designed their safety studies so as not to find side effects, and then aggressively lobbied to maximize vaccine uptake. So, in essence, children and teens were sacrificed in these studies just to allow the company to say they had studied the vaccine and found it safe and effective (even though it has NEVER been proven to have prevented a single case of HPV and/or cervical cancer).

And now we're going to allow Merck and others to include pregnant women in their studies as well? What could possibly go wrong? Again and again, we see a pattern suggesting safety is not allowed to get in the way of profits and policy. History also reveals a pattern of marketing drugs and vaccines by playing on people's fears. Most recently, Bill Gates stated he believes a global pandemic that could kill 30 million in six months is on its way, and we're completely unprepared for it.22,23

His comments were made during an "Epidemics Going Viral, Innovation Vs. Nature" speaker series on April 27, 2018, sponsored by Massachusetts Medical Society and The New England Journal of Medicine. According to Gates, the next pandemic killer might well be a disease we've never encountered before.

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has a history of supporting questionable vaccination agendas with their millions, so it makes sense, I guess, that Gates would be anxious to create a need for some costly remedy by amping up the fear factor. In the past decade, there's been a string of attempts to rile up the masses and increase demand for pandemic vaccines.

The predicted pandemics all fell flat, and no mass casualties ever occurred, yet the fearmongering strategy is not easily abandoned. In the case of the HPV vaccine, it's promoted as an anticancer vaccine, even though no proof exists that it actually prevents cancer. As mentioned earlier, Merck's own research revealed an increased risk of cervical cancer with the vaccine under certain circumstances.

The Dangers of HPV Are Overhyped — Understand What You're Vaccinating Against and What the Alternatives Are
It may be worth remembering the basics when pondering the decision of whether or not to vaccinate your child against HPV:

• There are over 200 viral strains of HPV. Gardasil 9, licensed in 2015, contains the original Gardasil HPV types 16, 18, 6 and 11, plus types 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58, which are associated with cervical, vulvar, vaginal and anal cancers. Cervical cancer accounts for less than 1 percent of all cancer deaths in the U.S. and anal cancer kills approximately 300 Americans each year. So, HPV vaccine is not targeting a major public health threat, no matter which way you look at it.

• Most HPV cases are in fact harmless, and your immune system is typically able to fight and clear out the infection naturally, even without treatment. In 90 percent of cases, HPV resolves within two years or less; 70 percent clear within one year. In a small percentage of individuals, HPV can persist for years, and may cause symptoms to appear, particularly when the immune system weakens. High-risk HPV strains may also cause lesions that sometimes can evolve into cervical cancer if left untreated.

• To avoid contracting HPV, use condoms during sexual activity. Research24 has demonstrated that using condoms can reduce the risk of HPV infection by 70 percent, which is far more effective than the HPV vaccine. If you have children nearing sexual maturation, teach them about the importance of safe sex — not just for the avoidance of HPV, but also to avoid other sexually transmitted diseases, many of which are now resistant to antibiotics and exceptionally difficult to treat.

• Get regular Pap smears once sexually active, and get treatment if testing positive for HPV infection. Remember, it's the long-term, untreated infections that can trigger cancer. According to research published in 2014, shiitake mushroom extract can speed up the elimination of HPV infection in women by boosting immune function.

Routine Pap smear testing is a far more rational, less expensive, and less dangerous strategy for cervical cancer prevention, as it can identify chronic HPV infection and may provide greater protection against development of cervical cancer than blind faith in an unproven HPV vaccine.
Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions
With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it's critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educating the leaders in your community.

NVIC Advocacy poster

THINK GLOBALLY, ACT LOCALLY.

National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.

It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations, and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC's free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your smart phone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up-to-date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community.

Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call to action items you need at your fingertips. So please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

Share Your Story With the Media and People You Know
If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury, or death, please talk about it. If we don't share information and experiences with one another, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is only presenting one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you; you have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the "other side" of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination, will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination.

The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than "statistically acceptable collateral damage" of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn't be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More
I encourage you to visit the website of the non-profit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:
https://nvicadvocacy.org/members/Home.aspx
NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims: View descriptions and photos of children and adults, who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries, and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions: Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
Vaccine Freedom Wall: View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers, and school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.
Vaccine Failure Wall: View or post descriptions about vaccines that have failed to work and protect the vaccinated from disease.
Connect With Your Doctor or Find a New One That Will Listen and Care
If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don't want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, intimidation, and refusal of medical care is becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination. However, there is hope.

At least 15 percent of young doctors recently polled admit that they're starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents.

It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors, who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day or continuing to provide medical care for those families, who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So take the time to locate a doctor, who treats you with compassion and respect, and is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

onawah
13th June 2018, 03:59
The Ongoing Thimerosal Travesty Needs to End
JUNE 12, 2018
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/the-ongoing-thimerosal-travesty-needs-to-end/?utm_source=mailchimp

By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

World Mercury Project Team Note:

The lessons learned from the ongoing saga of thimerosal are significant to all who care about vaccine safety, want justice for the injured, and to prevent future harm. The government has said they corrected the thimerosal issue and want us to believe the case is closed. But has the public been fooled with swapping one heavy metal toxicity for another? While thimerosal is still in some flu shots and is especially harmful to pregnant women, infants and children, there are increasing amounts of aluminum exposures from vaccines as more shots are added to the schedule. Like early reports about mercury, now children’s toxic profiles show alarming amounts of aluminum. And the problems don’t end with heavy metals. There are other vaccine contaminants that can cause harm, like retroviruses, formaldehyde, and aborted human fetal tissue. In short, we are in desperate need of an agency that can protect our citizens, especially children, from vaccine injuries. How can the controversy and handling of thimerosal-containing vaccines instruct us as we move forward for real reform?

Thimerosal is the infamous mercury-containing preservative in use, to this day, in some vaccines and also in dozens of other pharmaceutical products approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).1-3 Public health agencies, government regulators and medical trade groups have repeatedly declared thimerosal to be safe,4,5 but the published peer-reviewed science argues that nothing could be further from the truth. For anyone who bothers to investigate thimerosal’s appalling record, there is a vast, still accumulating and compelling body of research that contradicts the public health establishment’s deceptive safety claims.

Thimerosal is almost 50 percent ethylmercury by weight. Ethylmercury is an organic mercury compound with toxicity mechanisms similar to methylmercury6 (the hazardous type of mercury in seafood). The danger posed by both types of mercury was evident in earlier eras when fungicides containing either ethyl- or methylmercury poisoned farmers, sometimes on a large scale, from the 1950s through the 1970s.7,8 Of the two compounds, the ethylmercury in vaccines is far more toxic to and persistent in the brain, where it has a propensity to accumulate as inorganic mercury,9,10 with an estimated half-life of as long as twenty-seven years.11

HISTORY OF THIMEROSAL
Before the invention of modern antibiotics and antiseptics, physicians experimented with mercury-containing compounds to try to stave off microbial pathogens. Thimerosal was born of those efforts. Dr. Morris Kharasch, a university chemist and Eli Lilly fellow, developed thimerosal and filed for a patent in June, 1929, describing thimerosal as an “alkyl mercuric sulfur compound” with antibacterial properties. Eli Lilly and Company registered thimerosal under the trade name Merthiolate later that year.

…they did not consider the possibility of mercury-induced brain damage.
Eli Lilly researchers reported in 1931 that animals seemed to tolerate high doses of thimerosal. However, many of those animals died of evident mercury poisoning just days after the study ended. Also noteworthy is the fact that in early animal toxicity studies and many later research efforts, researchers did not assess socialization behaviors or perform cognition tests. In other words, they did not consider the possibility of mercury-induced brain damage.

During this same time period, the Eli Lilly researchers reported on the first injections of thimerosal into humans. The unlucky recipients of large doses of Merthiolate were twenty-two patients hospitalized during a 1929 epidemic of meningococcal meningitis in Indianapolis. The thimerosal had no apparent therapeutic benefit, and all twenty-two patients died—seven of them within one day of thimerosal administration. The researchers nevertheless described the experiment as a success, and a published paper stated that “these large doses did not produce any anaphylactoid or shock symptoms” (neither of which is associated with toxic mercury exposure). However, the clinician who treated the meningitis patients apparently was not convinced of thimerosal’s efficacy, stating, “Beneficial effects of the drug were not definitely proven.” Moreover, any short-term neurological or other deleterious effects of the thimerosal would likely have been masked by or attributed to the patients’ meningitis infections.

For decades, Eli Lilly promoted its confident version of the Indianapolis results as evidence of thimerosal’s safety, paving the way for thimerosal’s inclusion in various antiseptic products, including nasal sprays, eyewashes, vaginal spermicides and diaper rash treatments. This escalation of thimerosal use in consumer products occurred despite numerous studies from the 1930s showing that thimerosal was not, in fact, “highly germicidal” and actually was more effective at destroying human cells than killing pathogens. Thimerosal never measured up to its supposed raison d’être of safely preventing microbial contamination, and studies continued to chalk up clear and unequivocal evidence that thimerosal was deadly to human cells.

THIMEROSAL IN VACCINES
Nonetheless, starting in the 1930s, pharmaceutical companies began to use thimerosal in multidose vials of vaccine to extend shelf life and lessen the risk of bacterial and fungal contamination that arises when several doses are drawn from the same vial. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines allow health providers to administer extra doses from multidose vials up until the printed expiration date “if the vial has been stored correctly and the vaccine is not visibly contaminated.”12 (The CDC does not say what to do about contamination that may not be “visible.”)

Through the 1970s and 1980s, children in the U.S. generally received eight injections of three types of vaccines—oral polio, measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) vaccine—in their first eighteen months. The DTP vaccine contained fifty micrograms of thimerosal per shot, translating into one hundred micrograms of mercury exposure by eighteen months. In 1986, after more and more people began suing vaccine manufacturers for serious vaccine injuries primarily related to the DTP vaccine, Congress took the unprecedented step of granting vaccine manufacturers full immunity from lawsuits. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 established a compensation program “as an alternative remedy to judicial action for specified vaccine-related injuries.”13 By making it impossible for vaccine-injured plaintiffs to sue pharmaceutical companies, the result—whether intended or unintended—was to eliminate any financial incentive to make vaccine safety a priority.

By making it impossible for vaccine-injured plaintiffs to sue pharmaceutical companies, the result—whether intended or unintended—was to eliminate any financial incentive to make vaccine safety a priority.
Beginning in 1989, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) began steadily increasing the types and total number of vaccines required for school attendance, including thimerosal-containing vaccines. By 1999, the expanded vaccine schedule called for children to receive nineteen vaccine injections by age two, eleven of which contained thimerosal. Children born in the 1990s could be injected, therefore, with up to 237.5 micrograms of mercury by their second birthday, and as much as 62.5 micrograms at a single doctor’s visit.

In my book, Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak,14 I quote school nurse Patti White, who noticed, early on, the vaccine-induced mercury overload in young children. In 1999, White testified before Congress about the thimerosal-containing hepatitis B vaccine administered to newborns:

The elementary grades are overwhelmed with children who have symptoms of neurological and/or immune system damage: epilepsy, seizure disorders, various kinds of palsies, autism, mental retardation, learning disabilities, juvenile-onset diabetes, asthma, vision/hearing loss, and a multitude of new conduct/behavior disorders. We [school nurses] have come to believe the hepatitis B vaccine is an assault on a newborn’s developing neurological and immune system. Vaccines are supposed to be making us healthier. However, in twenty-five years of nursing I have never seen so many damaged, sick kids. Something very, very wrong is happening to our children.

School nurses were not the only ones to call attention to the mounting evidence that thimerosal-containing vaccines were having neurotoxic effects. In response to pressure from Congress and the public, the FDA conducted a review in the late 1990s that found that the amount of mercury in the childhood vaccine schedule surpassed some federal safety guidelines. Accordingly, the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a lukewarm statement in 1999 about thimerosal’s potential risks. The statement’s authors called for the phase-out of thimerosal-containing vaccines “as expeditiously as possible,“ while still avowing that “the large risks of not vaccinating children far outweigh the unknown and probably much smaller risk, if any, of cumulative exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines over the first 6 months of life.”15

THE SIMPSONWOOD CABAL
A year later (June 7-8, 2000), the CDC convened a secret scientific review panel of over fifty experts who began backpedaling from the AAP-USPHS pronouncement.16 The group that met at the Simpsonwood Retreat Center near Atlanta included high-ranking CDC and FDA representatives, state and international public health officials, vaccine company representatives and others. At the outset, the meeting’s chair, immunologist Richard Johnston, expressed regret that the group had not met to consider the data sooner, “in advance of…the public health decisions [to phase out thimerosal] that were made last summer.” Further betraying his preconceptions, Johnston stated that there was “no evidence of a problem, only a theoretical concern that young infants’ developing brains were being exposed to an organomercurial.”

Despite these apparent attempts to make the association “go away,” Verstraeten was obligated to present the troublesome finding of linear and statistically significant dose-related relationships between thimerosal exposure and neurodevelopmental disorders to the group assembled at Simpsonwood.
The group then heard a presentation by Thomas Verstraeten, a research fellow at CDC who subsequently went on to a decade-long career at GlaxoSmithKline. Verstraeten had been working up a study using data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink (established by the CDC in 1990 to study rare and serious vaccine adverse events), scrutinizing data from roughly one hundred and ten thousand children born between 1992 and 1997 and enrolled at U.S. health maintenance organizations. The study sought to assess the relationship between thimerosal exposure (at one, two, three and six months of age) and neurological damage. After the initial findings showed a possible causal link, Verstraeten reworked the study design and analyses several times prior to Simpsonwood. Despite these apparent attempts to make the association “go away,” Verstraeten was obligated to present the troublesome finding of linear and statistically significant dose-related relationships between thimerosal exposure and neurodevelopmental disorders to the group assembled at Simpsonwood.

Although differing viewpoints emerged, many of the Simpsonwood attendees were less than persuaded by Verstraeten’s results. Some, such as John Clements of the World Health Organization’s Expanded Program on Immunization, focused more on the public relations implications. Clements stated:

I hear the majority of the consultants say…that they are not convinced there is a causality direct link between Thimerosal and various neurological outcomes. …The research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association…through freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group. […] My mandate…is to make sure…that 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with Thimerosal-containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe. […] How will it be presented to a public and a media that is hungry for selecting the information they want to use for whatever means they have in store for them? …I wonder how on earth you are going to handle it from here.

Despite the clear association between thimerosal exposure and neurodevelopmental disorders demonstrated by the Verstraeten study, many of the industry and public health scientists present tried to minimize the implications by voting them away. When polled at the end of the day’s discussion, most of them voted to rate the link between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders as “weak.” In his summary comments as meeting rapporteur, Paul Stehr-Green described Verstraeten’s results as being only weakly indicative of a safety signal—defined as “information on a new or known adverse event that may be caused by a medicine.”17 While acknowledging that the signal “deserved further investigation and…raised some perhaps disquieting possibilities,” Stehr-Green concluded that “there was not anything close to sufficient evidence to support a finding of a causal relationship.”

Pediatrician William Weil observed that “the number of kids getting help in special education is growing nationally and state by state at a rate we have not seen before.”
Attendee William Weil (a pediatrician representing the AAP) noted that even accepting Stehr-Green’s assertion that Verstraeten hadn’t proven a link to neurodevelopmental disorders, it was alarming that he hadn’t disproven it, and there was insufficient evidence, he pointed out, to reject a possible causal relationship. He stated that “the possibility that the associations could be causal has major significance for public and professional acceptance of thimerosal-containing vaccines.” Weil also observed that “the number of kids getting help in special education is growing nationally and state by state at a rate we have not seen before.” Another of his observations was that thimerosal in vaccines represented “repeated acute exposures” and that “the earlier you work with the central nervous system, the more likely you are to run into a sensitive period for one of these [neurodevelopmental] effects.” Finally, Weil pointed out the limitations of epidemiological studies, calling for further indepth animal and developmental neurotoxicity studies and stating: “Some of the really gutsy questions from a person who is very concerned about neurodevelopment cannot be answered out of this.” At the same time, Weil cautioned others not to overly minimize or “play with” the VSD data. Weil was the only reviewer present to rate the association between thimerosal and the neurodevelopmental outcomes as strong, giving it a four on a scale of one to six (where one was weakest).

…CDC moved aggressively to hastily gin up five poorly designed epidemiological studies to disprove the link between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders.
The groupthink on display at Simpsonwood primarily illustrates that most public health and medical experts were itching to exonerate thimerosal, regardless of the science, and continue with business as usual. Following the Simpsonwood meeting, CDC moved aggressively to hastily gin up five poorly designed epidemiological studies18-22 to disprove the link between thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders. Written by industry scientists, the published studies focused solely on one injury (autism), and four out of the five were done on foreign populations with minimal exposure to thimerosal. Three of the five studies were published in a compromised journal, Pediatrics, which receives a significant portion of its revenue from vaccine-makers. In 2002, the AAP dutifully “retired” its 1999 joint statement on thimerosal.23 In January 2013, the AAP went even further in several articles in Pediatrics, going on record in favor of exempting thimerosal from an international treaty on the elimination of avoidable mercury exposures.24

The notion that “trace amounts” of a substance as highly toxic as mercury might be benign is exceedingly misleading.
THE FALLACY OF TRACE AMOUNTS
Even when vaccines do not contain thimerosal as a preservative, manufacturers use it in some single-dose and multidose vaccines to impede bacterial growth during the manufacturing process.5 The CDC states that “when thimerosal is used this way, it is removed later in the process” and only “trace amounts” remain (no more than one microgram per dose).25

The notion that “trace amounts” of a substance as highly toxic as mercury might be benign is exceedingly misleading. In a seminal 2014 publication in the prestigious journal Lancet Neurology, toxicology experts Philippe Grandjean and Philip Landrigan observed that the developing human brain is uniquely vulnerable to mercury and other neurotoxins, often “at much lower exposure levels than had previously been thought to be safe.”26

Discussing methylmercury, the Lancet authors also noted that developmental neurotoxicity occurs at far lower exposure levels than “the concentrations that affect adult brain function.” Other investigators have argued that there may be no meaningful safety threshold for methylmercury.27 Given the body of research indicating that ethylmercury is more toxic than methylmercury and that both have comparable mechanisms of toxicity, it stands to reason that warnings about the risks of lower exposure levels would also apply to ethylmercury.

A 2012 Italian study showed that ethylmercury-containing thimerosal diminished the viability of human cells in the lab at a concentration one-fiftieth that of methylmercury.28 Although thimerosal’s apologists like to state that ethylmercury disappears from the bloodstream more quickly than methylmercury, this is no evidence that it has cleared the body. Ethylmercury migrates more rapidly to and then lingers in the organs.29

A study that analyzed hair samples from babies’ first haircuts found that children with autism who had received thimerosal-preserved vaccines excreted lower levels of mercury into their hair as infants compared with normal, same-aged children also receiving these vaccines, suggesting that the mercury had lodged in the autistic children’s brains and was hindering neurological development.30

OPEN SEASON ON PREGNANT WOMEN
Thimerosal passes more easily from a mother’s bloodstream through the placenta than does methylmercury.31 Fetal cord blood mercury levels are typically about double the mother’s mercury blood levels.32 This is cause for concern for developing babies in light of the CDC’s 2004 recommendation that all pregnant women in any trimester get flu shots. By 2012–2013, uptake of flu shots during pregnancy had steadily increased to approximately 50 percent.33 Manufacturers still preserve millions of flu shots with massive bolus doses of thimerosal (about thirty-six million flu shots containing twenty-five micrograms of mercury in the 2017-2018 flu season),34 meaning that children born since 2004 have been increasingly likely to be exposed to thimerosal in utero.

A 2017 CDC study reviewing data from the 2010–11 and 2011–2012 flu seasons linked spontaneous abortions to flu vaccines, finding that women vaccinated with the inactivated influenza vaccine had 3.7-fold greater odds of spontaneous abortion within twenty-three days than women not receiving the vaccine.35 For women who received the H1N1 vaccine in both seasons covered in the study, the odds of spontaneous abortion in the month after receiving a flu vaccine were 7.7 times greater. The vast majority of flu vaccines available during the seasons studied were multidose formulations containing twenty-five micrograms of mercury.

THIMEROSAL WORLDWIDE
While the thimerosal debate has carried on in the United States, children around the world have never stopped receiving thimerosal-containing vaccines. The mindset revealed by Simpsonwood attendee John Clements of the WHO—who described a “mandate” to vaccinate one hundred million children “this year, next year and for many years to come” with thimerosal-containing vaccines—has not changed. In fact, the medical community continues to argue that the benefits of keeping thimerosal in vaccines outweigh the risks and that thimerosal is “critical” for low-resource countries that rely on multidose vials as the most affordable option.36 One of the AAP’s former presidents has asserted that, for the good of the global community, the Academy’s pro-thimerosal position is a “no-brainer.”37 The WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety states that “no additional studies of the safety of [thimerosal] in vaccines are warranted.”38

The global health authorities making cavalier and single-minded pronouncements on “life-saving vaccines” should consider the bigger health picture. For example, exposure to toxic metals such as mercury can contribute to malnutrition and, conversely, malnutrition may also increase susceptibility to mercury toxicity.39,40 Mercury is also a potent immunosuppressant, which has implications in low-resource settings where children already face numerous other health challenges and environmental pollutants.41

THE TIME IS NOW
The medical establishment’s defense of thimerosal’s safety has proven highly successful in tamping down deeper investigation into thimerosal and the vaccine industry. Perhaps because major pharmaceutical companies (the makers of vaccines) are among the biggest advertisers in the U.S., the mainstream press has accepted these government orthodoxies and ignored the ample evidence showing that thimerosal is toxic. In fact, the thimerosal saga illustrates the aggressive, knee-jerk rejection by the press, the medical community and allied financial interests of any scientific information suggesting that established medical practices are harming public health. Nevertheless, continuing to wait for more research is not a reasonable public policy option. Thimerosal is dangerous to human health and should immediately be removed from all vaccines (as well as other pharmaceutical and cosmetic products), both in the U.S. and globally.



REFERENCES
1. Geier DA, Sykes LK, Geier MR. A review of thimerosal (Merthiolate) and its ethylmercury breakdown product: specific historical considerations regarding safety and effectiveness. J Toxicol Environ Health B 2007;10:575-596.
2. Food and Drug Administration. “Mercury in drug and biologic products.” https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/MercuryinDrugsandBiologicsFDAupdated_2009.pdf.
3. World Mercury Project. “Mercury in medicine.” https://worldmercuryproject.org/mercury-facts/mercury-in-medicine/.
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Thimerosal in vaccines.” https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/index.html.
5. Food and Drug Administration. “Thimerosal and vaccines.” Last updated Jan. 5, 2018. https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228.
6. Risher JF, Tucker P. Alkyl mercury-induced toxicity: multiple mechanisms of action. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 2017;240:105-149.
7. Al-Tikriti K, Al-Mufti AW. An outbreak of organomercury poisoning among Iraqi farmers. Bull World Health Organ 1976;53(Suppl):15-21.
8. Hilmy MI, Rahim SA, Abbas AH. Normal and lethal mercury levels in human beings. Toxicol 1976;6:155-159.
9. Burbacher TM, Shen DD, Liberato N, Grant KS, Cernichiari E, Clarkson T. Comparison of blood and brain mercury levels in infant monkeys exposed to methymercury or vaccines containing thimerosal. Environ Health Perspect 2005;113(8):1015-1021.
10. Dórea JG. Integrating experimental (in vitro and in vivo) neurotoxicity studies of low-dose thimerosal relevant to vaccines. Neurochem Res 2011;36(6):927-938.
11. Rooney JP. The retention time of inorganic mercury in the brain—a systematic review of the evidence. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2014;274(3):425-435.
12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. General recommendations on immunization: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 2011;60(2).
13. National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. https://www.congress.gov/bill/99th-congress/house-bill/5546.
14. Kennedy, RF Jr. Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak. New York, NY: Skyhorse Publishing; 2015.
15. Joint statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the United States Public Health Service (USPHS). Pediatrics 1999;104(3).
16. Scientific review of Vaccine Safety Datalink information. Simpsonwood Retreat Center, Norcross, GA; June 7-8, 2000. Available at: https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/The-Simpsonwood-Documents.pdf.
17. European Medicines Agency. “Signal management.” http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/general/general_content_000587.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac0580727d1b.
18. Verstraeten T, Davis RL, DeStefano F et al. Safety of thimerosal-containing vaccines: a two-phased study of computerized health maintenance organization databases. Pediatrics 2003;112:1039-1048.
19. Stehr-Green P, Tull P, Stellfeld M, Mortenson PB, Simpson D. Autism and thimerosal-containing vaccines: lack of consistent evidence for an association. Am J Prev Med 2003;25:101-106.
20. Hviid A, Stellfeld M, Wohlfahrt J, Melbye M. Association between thimerosal-containing vaccine and autism. JAMA 2003;290:1763-1766.
21. Madsen KM, Lauritsen MB, Pedersen CB et al. Thimerosal and the occurrence of autism: negative ecological evidence from Danish population-based data. Pediatrics 2003;112:604-606.
22. Andrews N, Miller E, Grant A, Stowe J, Osborne V, Taylor B. Thimerosal exposure in infants and developmental disorders: a retrospective cohort study in the United Kingdom does not support a causal association. Pediatrics 2004;114:584-591.
23. Orenstein WA, Paulson JA, Brady MT, Cooper LZ, Seib K. Global vaccination recommendations and thimerosal. Pediatrics 2013;131(1).
24. Cooper LZ, Katz SL. Ban on thimerosal in draft treaty on mercury: why the AAP’s position in 2012 is so important. Pediatrics 2013;131(1).
25. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Understanding thimerosal, mercury, and vaccine safety.” Last reviewed Feb. 2013. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/patient-ed/conversations/downloads/vacsafe-thimerosal-color-office.pdf.
26. Grandjean P, Landrigan PJ. Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity. Lancet Neurol 2014;13: 330-338.
27. Rice DC. The U.S. EPA reference dose for methylmercury: sources of uncertainty. Environ Res 2004;95:406-413.
28. Guzzi G, Pigatto PD, Spadari F, La Porta CA. Effect of thimerosal, methylmercury, and mercuric chloride in Jurkat T Cell Line. Interdiscip Toxicol 2012;5(3):159-161.
29. Harry GJ, Harris MW, Burka LT. Mercury concentrations in brain and kidney following ethylmercury, methylmercury, and Thimerosal administration to neonatal mice. Toxicol Lett 2004;154(3):183-189.
30. Holmes AS, Blaxill MF, Haley BE. Reduced levels of mercury in first baby haircuts of autistic children. Int J Toxicol 2003;22(4):277-285.
31. Leonard A, Jacquet P, Lauwerys RR. Mutagenicity and teratogenicity of mercury compounds. Mutat Res 1983;114(1):1-18.
32. Stern AH, Smith AE. An assessment of the cord blood: maternal blood methylmercury ratio: implications for risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 2003;111(12):1465-1470.
33. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Influenza vaccination coverage among pregnant women—United States, 2012-13 influenza season. MMWR 2013;62(38):787-792.
34. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Seasonal influenza vaccine supply for the U.S. 2017-2018 influenza season. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaxsupply.htm.
35. Donahue JG, Kieke BA, King JP, et al. Association of spontaneous abortion with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine containing H1N1pdm09 in 2010-11 and 2011-12. Vaccine 2017;35(40):5314-5322.
36. Sifferlin A. Experts argue to keep thimerosal in some vaccines. TIME, Dec. 27, 2012.
37. Tavernise S. Vaccine rule is said to hurt health efforts. The New York Times, Dec. 17, 2012.
38. World Health Organization. “Thiomersal in vaccines.” http://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/committee/topics/thiomersal/Jun_2012/en/.
39. Anetor GO. Waste dumps in local communities in developing countries and hidden danger to health. Perspect Public Health 2016;136(4):245-251.
40. Chakrabarti SK, Bai C. Effects of protein-deficient nutrition during rat pregnancy and development on developmental hindlimb crossing due to methylmercury intoxication. Arch Toxicol 2000;74(4-5):196-202.
41. Tsai MS, Chen MH, Lin CC, et al. Children’s environmental health based on birth cohort studies of Asia. Sci Total Environ 2017;609:396-409.

This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly magazine of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Spring 2018.

Paul
13th June 2018, 06:16
One of my favorite medical commentators, John Bergman, comments on vaccines this week:
oUgJR0Obk5Q

onawah
13th June 2018, 18:31
That's a really excellent, easy-to-understand explanation of the most important issues surrounding the "science' of vaccines. :bump:
One of my favorite medical commentators, John Bergman, comments on vaccines this week:
oUgJR0Obk5Q

onawah
15th June 2018, 20:32
Senate Committee Moves to Force Release of Water Contamination Study Blocked by Scott Pruitt, White House
by Alex Formuzis Environmental Working Group
THURSDAY, JUNE 14, 2018
This is about PFAS chemicals in drinking water, but hopefully will fit into this thread well enough.
https://www.ewg.org/release/senate-panel-passes-bill-force-release-water-contamination-study-blocked-scott-pruitt-white#.WyQR3adKgdU

WASHINGTON – The Senate Appropriations Committee passed a spending bill today that includes report language requiring the Trump administration to release a key scientific study it buried. The study proposed safe levels for fluorinated, or PFAS, chemicals in drinking water at levels up to ten times lower than those the Environmental Protection Agency recommends.

The amendment to the committee report, authored by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H. and approved in the Interior-Environmental spending bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services to publish the study within two weeks of the bill becoming law.

Internal emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request and reported by Politico revealed that the top aides to EPA head Scott Pruitt, as well as Department of Defense and White House officials, sought to block the study’s release, fearing a “public relations nightmare” that could follow.

“Scott Pruitt and the White House clearly will do anything to hide information from the public on any number of issues, including the poisoned drinking water of 100 million Americans,” said EWG Senior Vice President for Government Affairs Scott Faber. “But lawmakers from both sides of the aisle understand full well how important clean drinking water is for their constituents and all Americans.”

onawah
15th June 2018, 20:46
Chair of Senate Environment Panel to Call Scott Pruitt to Testify on Scandals
by Alex Formuzis Environmental Working Group

THURSDAY, JUNE 14, 2018https://www.ewg.org/release/chair-senate-environment-panel-call-scott-pruitt-testify-scandals#.WyQkvadKgdU

WASHINGTON – The Republican chairman of the Senate committee with oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency plans to call the agency’s embattled chief Scott Pruitt to testify, specifically in response to multiple scandals and investigations surrounding the administrator.

Through a spokesperson, Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., informed Reuters of his decision to compel Pruitt to come before the Environment and Public Works Committee to answer questions about his alleged abuse of his office.

Barrasso also formally requested Senate appropriators provide the EPA’s inspector general with “sufficient funding” to carry out ongoing investigations into Pruitt’s behavior.

“Scott Pruitt’s low-rent grifting has finally become an albatross for those who have supported and defended him even as the scandals and investigations mounted,” said EWG President Ken Cook. “It’s one thing when Pruitt’s swamp stench lingers over only him, but it appears to be infiltrating the airspace around Republicans in Congress and President Trump.”

Sen. Barrasso is the latest Republican senator to demonstrate growing impatience with Pruitt. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., and close friend and political mentor to Pruitt, blasted the administrator during an appearance on Fox News pundit Laura Ingraham’s radio show and in an interview with The Washington Post this week.

Ingraham called on President Trump to fire Pruitt after learning he tasked an aide with reaching out to conservative donors for help getting his wife a job.

In her Tweet, Ingraham blasted Pruitt for damaging Trump.

And the same day, the conservative magazine National Review published an editorial calling for Pruitt’s dismissal.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/scott-pruitt-should-resign/

onawah
21st June 2018, 22:20
Dept. of Justice Report: U.S. Government Continues to Pay Millions in Vaccine Injuries and Death Settlements
June 21, 2018
http://healthimpactnews.com/2018/u-s-government-continues-to-pay-millions-in-vaccine-injuries-and-death-settlements/
http://healthimpactnews.com/2018/u-s-government-continues-to-pay-millions-in-vaccine-injuries-and-death-settlements/

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

The federal government Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines (ACCV) under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services just concluded their second meeting of 2018 on June 15th.

These quarterly meetings include a report from the Department of Justice (DOJ) on cases settled for vaccine injuries and deaths as mandated by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP).

The NVICP was started as a result of a law passed in 1986 that gave pharmaceutical companies total legal immunity from being sued due to injuries and deaths resulting from vaccines.

Drug manufacturers in the vaccine market can now create as many new vaccines as they desire, with no risk of being sued if their product causes injury or death.

This has resulted in a huge increase of vaccines entering the market, and the U.S. government, through the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), is the largest purchaser of these vaccines, spending in excess of $4 billion taxpayer dollars each year to purchase these vaccines.

If you or a family member is injured or dies from vaccines, you must sue the federal government in this special vaccine court. Many cases are litigated for years before a settlement is reached.

As far as we know, Health Impact News is the only media source that publishes these reports each quarter. Past reports can be found here.

The June 15, 2018 report states that 263 petitions were filed during the 3-month time period between 2/16/18 – 5/15/18, with 147 cases being adjudicated and 113 cases compensated.

But for some reason, the DOJ report only lists 68 of the settlements, leading one to wonder why only these particular cases were listed.

These 68 cases (see below), specify the vaccine, the injury, and the amount of time the case was pending before settlement.

53 of the 68 cases were for injuries (and one death) due to the flu vaccine, making the annual flu shot the most dangerous vaccine in the U.S., by far.

The most common flu vaccine injuries are SIRVA (“Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration”) and GBS (“Guillain-Barré Syndrome“), which leads to paralysis.

While “shoulder injury related to vaccine administration” may not sound serious, it can lead to very serious complications, including chronic pain.

SIRVA can lead to intense, prolonged pain, limited range of motion, and shoulder-related injuries such as Adhesive Capsulitis or Frozen Shoulder Syndrome. (Source.)

Read the story of how one man entered a hospital because of shoulder pain, and was dead six weeks later:

http://medicalkidnap.com/2017/12/17/56-year-old-man-enters-hospital-with-shoulder-pain-dies-6-weeks-later-after-developing-infection-in-hospital/
https://vaccineimpact.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/06/doj-vaccine-injuries-deaths-litigated-june-2018-page-1.jpg
Read the full report: http://vaccineimpact.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2018/06/DOJ-June-2018.pdf
Vaccine Injuries are Seldom Reported
http://http://vaccineimpact.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2014/12/the-vaccine-court.jpg
In November of 2014, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) issued the first report on America’s “Vaccine Court,” known as the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), in almost 15 years.

As I noted above, Congress gave the pharmaceutical companies immunity against lawsuits for injuries or deaths resulting in vaccines in 1986. Prior to this time, there were so many lawsuits pending against pharmaceutical companies for injuries and deaths due to vaccines, that the pharmaceutical industry basically blackmailed congress and told them that if they did not grant them legal immunity against the liabilities of vaccines, that they would quit making them. These vaccine products cannot survive in a free market, they are so bad.

The November 2014 GAO report criticized the government for not making the public more aware that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program exists, and that there are funds available for vaccine injuries. Therefore, the settlements represented by vaccine injuries and deaths included in the DOJ report probably represent a small fraction of the actual vaccine injuries and deaths occurring in America today.

The U.S. government keeps a database of reports documenting vaccine injuries and deaths called The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The problem is that very few medical officials ever report vaccine injuries or deaths, either because they are not trained to recognize them, or due to pressure within their profession to not report them. To admit that vaccines do cause harm is professional suicide for most doctors and medical professionals.

Hence, the quarterly DOJ report on vaccine cases only represents a tiny fraction of the actual cases that exist.

One place we can get a glimpse of the amount of vaccine harm that is being caused in the U.S. today is to look at emergency room visits. As one can see in the report above, with most of the settlements being cases of harm caused by the flu vaccine, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) is the most common injury suffered from the flu shot. GBS is a debilitating disease that attacks a person’s own immune system and damages their nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. It is very similar to the symptoms one may see with polio.

If you are taken to the emergency room with signs of GBS during flu season, chances are one of the first questions the doctors will ask you is if you have received the flu shot recently. GBS is also listed as a side effect of the flu shot in the package insert.

An emergency room nurse published his experience in dealing with the volume of vaccine injuries he was seeing, and how reluctant other medical personnel were in reporting these injuries:

As an E.R. nurse, I have seen the cover up. Where do you think kids go when they have a vaccine reaction?

They go to the E.R.

They come to me.

I cannot even begin to guess how many times over the years I have seen vaccine reactions come through my E.R. Without any exaggeration, it has to be counted in the hundreds.

Sometimes it seemed like it was one or two cases in a single shift, every shift, for weeks. Then I would get a lull, and I wouldn’t catch one for a week or two, then I’d catch another case per night for a couple weeks. This was common.

Once, I was training a nursing student, about to graduate, on their E.R. experience rotation in nursing school. This student and I floated up to triage to cover the triage nurse for a break. I was quizzing them on what to ask and look for as a triage nurse on pediatric kids that came through. I made a point about asking about immunizations right out the gates. The student was puzzled, and asked why, and I told the student because we see vaccine reactions every day and it’s their job to catch it, alert the doctor and the parents, and report it to VAERS.

Some higher power apparently smiled on my attempt to open the eyes of another nurse I guess, because not even ten minutes later, a woman brought her child up to the counter. Sudden onset super high fever and lethargy. I asked if the child was up to date on vaccination.

The mother replied he had them just a few hours ago.

I glanced at the student, who looked shocked and looked back at me in disbelief. I nodded, told them to remember this, and then took the mom and her child to finish the triage in back. When I was done I came back and sat down with the student, and asked what he learned that night so far.

The first response: “What I was told about vaccines wasn’t true”.

I couldn’t have said it better. That student is going to go on to be like me, advocating for his patients with his eyes wide open.

The cases almost always presented similarly, and often no one else connected it. The child comes in with either a fever approaching 105, or seizures, or lethargy/can’t wake up, or sudden overwhelming sickness, screaming that won’t stop, spasms, GI inclusion, etc.

And one of the first questions I would ask as triage nurse, was, are they current on their vaccinations? It’s a safe question that nobody sees coming, and nobody understands the true impact of. Parents (and co-workers) usually just think I’m trying to rule out the vaccine preventable diseases, when in fact, I am looking to see how recently they were vaccinated to determine if this is a vaccine reaction.

Too often I heard a parent say something akin to “Yes they are current, the pediatrician caught up their vaccines this morning during their check up, and the pediatrician said they were in perfect health!”

If I had a dollar for every time I’d heard that, I could fly to Europe for free.

But here’s the more disturbing part.

For all the cases I’ve seen, I have NEVER seen any medical provider report them to VAERS. I have filed VAERS reports. But I am the ONLY nurse I have EVER met that files VAERS reports.

Mind you, I have served in multiple hospitals across multiple states, alongside probably well over a hundred doctors and probably 300-400+ nurses.

I’ve worked in big hospitals (San Francisco Bay Area Metro 40 bed ER, Las Vegas NV Metro 44 bed ER) and small hospitals (Rural access 2 bed ER, remote community 4 bed ER) and everything in between.

When I say NEVER, I mean NEVER.

I have even made a point of sitting in the most prominent spot at the nurses station filling out a VAERS report to make sure as many people saw me doing it as possible to generate the expected “what are you doing” responses to get that dialog going with people.

And in every case, if a nurse approached me, their response was “I’ve never done that” or “I didn’t know we could do that” or, worse “What is VAERS?” which was actually the most common response.

The response from doctors? Silence. Absolute total refusal to engage in discussion or to even acknowledge what I was doing or what VAERS was.

The big take away from that?

VAERS is WOEFULLY under reported.

I am PROOF of that. (Read the full blog post here.)

Autism Vaccine Injuries Not Allowed: Too Many
One indication that the problem is more widespread than what the public is being told is the increasing rate of autism among children.

The U.S. government vaccine court will no longer hear cases of vaccines causing autism. When the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund was set up in 1988, autism was the most prevalent vaccine injury brought before the vaccine court, mostly from the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine.

It soon became apparent that the trust fund, funded through taxes the public pays on vaccines, would not be sufficient to litigate all the claims for autism as a vaccine injury. By March 1, 2010, 13,330 cases had been filed in the special vaccine court, with 5,617 representing autism cases. Of those 13,330 cases filed up to March 1, 2010, only 2,409 were compensated. The rest were dismissed, but there were 5,933 cases still pending, and most of those were claims for vaccine-induced autism, mostly due to either the MMR vaccine, or vaccines containing thimerosal (mercury).

So how did the federal government and the vaccine court handle this?

Simple. They took 3 “test cases” that they said represented all of them and litigated against those claims. Their own appointed judges then ruled in each case that vaccines were not the cause of their autism. Then they told everyone else that their autism could not have been caused by vaccines, and that they would pay no damages for all those hundreds of thousands of children suffering with autism.

This was all part of what is called The Omnibus Autism Proceeding.

So if you have a child today injured by vaccines and suffering with autism, you cannot sue the federal government in vaccine court, as their official position is that vaccines do not cause autism.

More at: http://healthimpactnews.com/2018/u-s-government-continues-to-pay-millions-in-vaccine-injuries-and-death-settlements/

onawah
22nd June 2018, 06:34
“Herd Immunity”? A dishonest marketing gimmick
JUNE 21, 2018
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/herd-immunity-a-dishonest-marketing-gimmick/?utm_source=mailchimp

By J.B. Handley, Vice-Chairman, Board of Directors, World Mercury Project

As a country and a society, we’ve never been anywhere close to “herd immunity” through vaccination, but where are all the epidemics? That doesn’t keep vaccine makers from using herd immunity as a weapon to guilt and scare parents. Why are we allowing “mythology to trump science”?

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Hiding in a nondescript office building in Washington, D.C., Every Child By Two (“ECBT”) poses as a nonprofit organization with a seemingly noble goal: getting as many children vaccinated as possible. Of course, a quick Google search or perusal of the nonprofit’s 990 forms reveals a different truth: ECBT is a front group for vaccine makers, the primary source of their funding. Don’t take my word for it, the prestigious British Medical Journal ran an expose of many groups like Every Child By Two titled, “The unofficial vaccine educators: are CDC funded non-profits sufficiently independent?” The BMJ was pretty unsparing:IAC, ECBT, and AAP have a few things in common. They are all non-profit organizations with large online presences that promote themselves as sources of reliable information on vaccines. They also receive funding from both vaccine manufacturers and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And, in their advocacy for compulsory vaccination, they all have in common a goal that pushes beyond official governmental policy and, in the case of influenza vaccines, the evidence.Amy Pisani, ECBT’s director, maintains a twitter account for the organization where she recently encouraged parents to do their part in maintaining “community immunity” through an infographic that was part gentle reminder, part guilt-induced obligation, and 100% founded on nonsense.
https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/06-21-Community-Immunity.jpg
What, exactly, is “Community Immunity”?
“Community Immunity” is the term du jour and an apparently more palatable synonym for the oft-invoked concept of Herd Immunity, the idea that unless enough people are vaccinated against a certain disease, everyone is at risk. Find the right doctor to come on TV, and they’ll be happy to explain the magic of vaccine-derived Herd Immunity, and what a scientific process it really is, according to them. Fall below Ms. Pisani’s 95% vaccination rate number in her infographic? We return to the Dark Ages!

There’s just one problem with the Community/Herd Immunity math and the shaming and pressure that goes along with it: we’ve never come close to achieving “Herd Immunity” through vaccination, and we never will. In order for Herd Immunity to be a real thing, you need two things to be true (and neither have ever been):

1. Adult vaccination rates would also have to be very high, just like rates for children

Ms. Pisani’s infographic above mentions the 95% threshold needed to achieve herd immunity for measles, but she fails to mention one thing: the vaccination rate of all the adults. According to the CDC, adult vaccination rates have been, and remain, woefully low, as the CDC’s 2016 survey–Vaccination Coverage Among Adults in the United States, National Health Interview Survey— explained:

“Many adults in the United States have not received recommended vaccinations…”

How low are adult vaccination rates? Well, the CDC study included a chart of adult vaccination rates for at least some vaccines over time:
https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/06-21-Adult-Vaccination-Rates.pngDo you see what I’m seeing? According to the CDC, it appears that adult vaccination rates for most vaccines ARE BELOW 50%. But, wait a minute, how do we achieve “community immunity” if less than half the adults are playing along? We don’t, as some simple 8th grade math can show you.

Let’s make some assumptions. Let’s assume the child (18 and under) vaccination rate is 100%. It’s not, so this is a conservative assumption. Also, let’s assume the overall adult vaccination rate is 60%. It’s not that high, so this is also a conservative figure. If we blend those two numbers, what do we get? Well, children 18 and under represent 24% of the US. Population, so here you go:

(24% x 100%) + (76% x 60%) = 69.6%
So, the actual “community” vaccination rate in this example is 69.6% (the children’s rate plus the adult rate equals the total rate), and this is probably a high figure, so the real number in the United States right now is probably somewhere around 65%. Nowhere near Herd Immunity thresholds.

But, it’s actually worse, you also need to believe that:

2. Vaccinations provide lifetime protection

The mid-60 percent “community” vaccination rate above is enough to mathematically disprove that we’ve ever attained herd immunity all by itself, but it’s actually way worse than that. You see, vaccinations don’t confer lifetime immunity. In fact, many vaccines “wane” (meaning you lose the protection they provided you with) in under ten years. An eighteen year-old who received their last Hepatitis B vaccine at 4 years old? They probably have no more “protection” from the Hepatitis B vaccine. The “real” rate of vaccine protection in our society? Because of vaccine waning, it’s certainly well below 50%, just look at the “Duration of Protection” provided by some routine vaccines:

https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/06-21-Duration-of-Protection.jpg

The last vaccine I received was my senior year of college, in 1991. That was twenty-six years ago. And, I NEVER received many of the new vaccines on the childhood schedule that have all been introduced in the past 10-15 years. It’s safe to say that I have no vaccine-derived immunity from any disease right now, which raises an obvious question:

If it’s mathematically true that we have never achieved herd immunity through vaccination because of adult vaccination rates and the fact that vaccines wane over time, where are all the epidemics?

I’m not the first person to ask this question. It gets asked all the time by educated people who understand this topic and bristle at the ongoing discussions about herd immunity that take place in the mainstream media. One of the better articles I have read on this topic was in the The Hill, the daily newspaper of the U.S. Congress:

https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/06-21-The-Hill.jpg

Written by Gretchen DuBeau, the Executive Director of the Alliance for Natural Health, Ms. DuBeau destroys the myth of herd immunity in one short editorial, here’s just an excerpt:

Vaccines may have a place in our medical arsenal, but they are not the silver bullet they’re portrayed to be. Year after year the pharmaceutical industry, looking for lucrative new profit centers, churns out new vaccines. They use pseudo-science to convince the public that these products are safe and effective, and they use public shaming to convince the citizenry that non-compliance is a public health threat. This entire racket completely falls apart with a close examination of the herd immunity myth. Until we are honest in our assessment of both the safety and efficacy of vaccines, kids will continue to be hurt, rights will continue to be trampled, and mythology will continue to trump science.

Ms. DuBeau’s article quotes a doctor, Russell Blaylock, M.D., who has also been an outspoken critic of the herd immunity mythology, he writes:

That vaccine-induced herd immunity is mostly myth can be proven quite simply. When I was in medical school, we were taught that all of the childhood vaccines lasted a lifetime. This thinking existed for over 70 years. It was not until relatively recently that it was discovered that most of these vaccines lost their effectiveness 2 to 10 years after being given. What this means is that at least half the population, that is the baby boomers, have had no vaccine-induced immunity against any of these diseases for which they had been vaccinated very early in life. In essence, at least 50% or more of the population was unprotected for decades. If we listen to present-day wisdom, we are all at risk of resurgent massive epidemics should the vaccination rate fall below 95%. Yet, we have all lived for at least 30 to 40 years with 50% or less of the population having vaccine protection. That is, herd immunity has not existed in this country for many decades and no resurgent epidemics have occurred. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.

The school-specific vaccination rate argument is really absurd
I live in Oregon. Like many states, our state publishes vaccination rates by school. If your child attends a school with “low” vaccination rates, the message is that it’s a time bomb waiting to explode! But, wait a minute.

What’s the vaccination rates of the teachers in that school? No one knows. What’s the vaccination rate of the administrators? No one knows. What’s the vaccination rate of the parent volunteers, the janitors, the delivery people, and the parents who walk inside the school every day to pick up their children? That’s right: no one knows. And yet, we’re encouraged by the media to panic.

History
Perhaps you’re still confused. Yes, my math seems pretty airtight and direct. Ms. DuBeau’s article seems to support my argument, as does Dr. Blaylock. But could all these people screaming about the importance of herd immunity really be that far off base? What if I told you that banging the table about the importance of herd immunity is actually a very recent development, and one instigated by vaccine makers? What if our own history of vaccines and vaccination rates disproved the herd immunity myth all by itself? Let’s go back to the 1980s right here in the U.S. and see what the data says.

Vaccination Rates: 1985
No one can believe this chart when they first see it. They demand to see my data source. I got it from the CDC, here’s the link.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/G/coverage.pdf

https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/06-21-Vaccination-Rates.jpg

These are vaccination rates for children in the United States in 1985. Does anything stand out to you? Yes, nine of the vaccinations we routinely give to children today didn’t exist in 1985. Yes, vaccination rates for the three vaccines we did give were dramatically below the “herd immunity” threshold that experts today like Ms. Pisani (who is funded by vaccine makers) tells us we need to hit. Well…where were all the epidemics? Feel free to Google “polio epidemic, United States, 1985.” I was alive in 1985. I was a sophomore in High School. No one was having a panic attack. No one was screaming herd immunity, or community immunity. Do I need to keep going?

Final thoughts
I’ve kept the arguments here very simple. I’ve just done some simple math and showed you some data from the mid-1980s. Herd immunity is an interesting theory, but it’s a myth that we’ve ever achieved it through vaccination. I could have gone down a few more levels. I could have asked why anyone should worry about vaccination rates if they themselves have been vaccinated? In turns out, the failure rate is probably way higher for vaccines than we think, way higher than even the numbers I quoted you above. Dr. Blaylock addresses this:

In the original description of herd immunity, the protection to the population at large occurred only if people contracted the infections naturally. The reason for this is that naturally-acquired immunity lasts for a lifetime. The vaccine proponents quickly latched onto this concept and applied it to vaccine-induced immunity. But, there was one major problem – vaccine-induced immunity lasted for only a relatively short period, from 2 to 10 years at most, and then this applies only to humoral immunity. This is why they began, silently, to suggest boosters for most vaccines, even the common childhood infections such as chickenpox, measles, mumps, and rubella.

It actually gets even more confusing. As one simple example, it turns out the pertussis vaccine (whooping cough) doesn’t keep you from carrying and spreading the disease. Why do we always read about whooping cough outbreaks? Boston University researchers explain:

https://worldmercuryproject.org/wp-content/uploads/06-21-Whooping-Cough.jpg

“This disease is back because we didn’t really understand how our immune defenses against whooping cough worked, and did not understand how the vaccines needed to work to prevent it,” said Christopher J. Gill, associate professor of global health and lead author of the article. “Instead we layered assumptions upon assumptions, and now find ourselves in the uncomfortable position of admitting that we may made some crucial errors. This is definitely not where we thought we’d be in 2017.”

Like I said, the story is quite a bit uglier than just basic math. Did you know there are employees of one vaccine maker–Merck–who filed a whistleblower lawsuit arguing that the company hid data that showed the mumps vaccine was losing efficacy:

The suit charges that Merck knew its measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine was less effective than the purported 95% level, and it alleges that senior management was aware and also oversaw testing that concealed the actual effectiveness. According to the lawsuit, Merck began a sham testing program in the late 1990’s to hide the declining efficacy of the vaccine. The objective of the fraudulent trials was to “report efficacy of 95% or higher regardless of the vaccine’s true efficacy.”

I could also share with you some other data from the CDC, some data that destroys the myth that vaccines saved us all from infectious disease. I could quote CDC scientists from a study published in Pediatrics in 2000 who said this:

“Thus vaccination does not account for the impressive declines in mortality seen in the first half of the century…nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940, when few antibiotics or vaccines were available.”

I could keep going, but I won’t. Herd immunity is a myth. It’s a bully club planted in the media by vaccine makers to scare parents into vaccinating in order to “protect” others. The math doesn’t add up, and never has. The next time you hear someone invoke the importance of herd immunity, send them this article and ask them to refute it! And, ask yourself a question: “If they’re lying about herd immunity, what else might they be lying about?”



Appendix: Other resources

Can’t get enough information about the myth of herd immunity? Here’s some other articles and links.

Do high rates of vaccination make us safe? Let’s talk about herd immunity. TruthSnitch

Community Immunity? (From Informed Choice WA)

Herd Immunity: Fact or Fiction? By Dr. Kelly Brogan

HERD IMMUNITY: CAN MASS VACCINATION ACHIEVE IT? By Tetyana Obukhanych, PhD

There is no Herd Immunity By The Outliers

Let’s talk about herd immunity By Levi Quakenboss

Immunologist Tetyana Obukhanych: Unvaccinated Children Pose “No Extra Danger to the Public”

Great video from Dr. Suzanne Humphries (only 6 minutes long):
8GDQwYFZnCk

onawah
23rd June 2018, 18:49
STATE BAR SUES LEADING VACCINE RIGHTS ATTORNEY IN CLASSIC WITCH HUNT
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/breaking-news-state-bar-sues-leading-vaccine-rights-attorney-classic-witch-hunt
June 21st 2018

The North Carolina State Bar, the agency that licenses NC attorneys, has taken the unprecedented step of filing a lawsuit against the nation’s leading vaccine rights attorney, Alan Phillips, J.D., to force Phillips to hand over years of his clients’ files or risk being jailed for civil contempt…

Attorney Phillips is the nation’s leading Vaccine Rights attorney, the only attorney whose practice is focused solely on vaccine exemptions and vaccine legislative activism, and who works with clients, attorneys, legislators and activists nationally in virtually every possible U.S. exemption setting.[1] North Carolina is known as “Vaccine Central” for its award-winning vaccine companies.[2] So, it’s not surprising that the NC State Bar is going after Phillips, with what Phillips claims are invented facts and law in a series of steps that appear to have been designed from the start to disbar Phillips, for helping people legally avoid vaccines. This is not just a personal attack against Phillips, it’s an attack on the entire vaccine awareness movement, given Phillips’ unique role in helping clients nationally with exemptions and legislative activism! So, please 1) share this story far and wide, 2) sign the petition linked below, 3) donate to support Phillips’ legal defense fund, and 4) stay tuned for updates to this story! (links below)

BASELESS ATTACK

The NC Bar’s lawsuit and underlying investigation are both unlawful for several reasons, according to Phillips. First, the Bar lacks the legally-required “allegation of misconduct.” That’s right, they are not even claiming Phillips actually did anything wrong, in which case (or should we say, “witch case”?) there is no legal basis for the investigation or lawsuit! There is also a blatant conflict of interest, Phillips points out, as he filed a good-faith complaint against State Bar attorneys for their fabrication of facts and law in a
February 2017 “Letter of Warning” to Phillips. NC Bar attorneys can’t lawfully investigate Phillips while Phillips has an unresolved complaint open against Bar attorneys; both matters must be addressed by outside, independent people to avoid the obvious conflicts of interest. But the NC Bar is ignoring that conflict; it is suppressing Phillips’ complaint against Bar attorneys, and aggressively pursuing Phillips.

Phillips is not alone in his claim that NC Bar attorneys have engaged in serious misconduct. His complaint against NC Bar attorneys is supported by two independent legal experts, and Phillips’ own preliminary investigation has turned up other witnesses to NC Bar officials fabricating facts, and other attorneys who claim they were disbarred based on facts invented by NC Bar attorneys. So, there appears to be a very serious problem at the NC State Bar!

And Phillips isn’t the only one who has filed a complaint against NC Bar attorneys! Several organizations around the country have also filed complaints in recent months, based on contradictions between a NC Bar letter and other information posted on the Internet. NC Bar officials are suppressing these complaints as well—again, avoiding scrutiny of their own actions. Yet, they continue to pass judgment on other NC attorneys. More than just a little ironic…

Finally, according to Phillips, the NC State Bar’s demand for years of Phillips’ clients’ files amounts to an unlawful “fishing expedition.” That’s a legal term for digging around in private information or documents to see if you can find something wrong, without a legitimate basis for having access to the information in the first place. It violates Constitutional due process. And this “expedition” would be particularly egregious, as it would violate hundreds of Phillips’ clients’ privacy rights based on the most sacred of legal tenets, the attorney-client privilege.

Phillips fears the court may rubber-stamp the Bar’s unlawful demand, as courts sometimes do with government entities and powerful private persons. But Phillips also believes there is an out-of-the-box solution to the problem that involves putting a public spotlight on the matter, to expose publicly the NC Bar’s misdeeds, on the theory that “even a bad person will do the right thing when there’s a spotlight on them…” For example, Phillips founded a new non-profit, Bar Watch, Inc., to put a light on the NC Bar attorneys’ misconduct, and to garner support for a proper investigation of the NC Bar. But your help is needed to power that light!

A summary and detailed description of the NC State Bar saga are available at the new Bar Watch, Inc. website: https://BarWatchOnline.org.

HOW YOU CAN HELP!

1. Please sign one of these petitions:

(a) Petition for Attorneys:

https://www.change.org/p/investigate-the-nc-ba

(b) Petition for Non-Attorneys:

https://www.change.org/p/no-attorney-is-above-the-law

2. Please share this article throughout the vaccine awareness community!

3. Please Donate to:

(a) Bar Watch, Inc.: A NC non-profit corporation to document and expose publicly the NC State Bar’s misconduct regarding Phillips and other NC attorney-victims: https://www.patreon.com/BarWatchInc
(b) Vaccine Rights Attorney Legal Defense Fund: Help Phillips pay for his legal defense. Phillips has spent over two decades donating most of his time to the vaccine controversy with frequent radio shows, legislative activism, conferences, information by phone and email—and never asked for donations. But now he needs our help: https://www.gofundme.com/vax-rights-atty-legal-defense-fund short url: gf.me/u/jcjjwi
(c) Personal donations: PayPal to alan@vaccinerights.com
References

[1] Phillips is the nation’s only attorney who works with clients, attorneys, legislators and activists nationally concerning vaccines required at birth; for daycare, school and college enrollment; as a condition of employment; for military members and families; for immigrants, including foreign-adopted children and refugees; for children of parents in child custody disputes; and a variety of sub-divisions of these categories. See www.vaccinerights.com

[2] https://www.ncbiotech.org/news/four-nc-vaccine-companies-win-awards

onawah
24th June 2018, 06:21
BIG PHARMA CAUGHT RED-HANDED!

BIG PHARMA CAUGHT RED-HANDED: Watch Del tear apart this Big Pharma advertisement and explain how the Whooping Cough Vaccine actually makes YOU a threat to babies. (Back by popular demand from Episode 63)
8qR8evyK5RA

Paul
24th June 2018, 20:02
BIG PHARMA CAUGHT RED-HANDED!

BIG PHARMA CAUGHT RED-HANDED: Watch Del tear apart this Big Pharma advertisement and explain how the Whooping Cough Vaccine actually makes YOU a threat to babies. (Back by popular demand from Episode 63)

Each cough a gift... :)

onawah
26th June 2018, 04:20
Dr. Andrew Wakefield
AutismOne Conference 2018
AutismOne Media
Published on May 30, 2018
4F9emoUsLmY


Who is the man behind the most highly controversial, intensely debated topics in modern medicine? In THE PATHOLOGICAL OPTIMIST, director Miranda Bailey brings us a character study of Dr. Andrew Wakefield, one of 13 co-authors of a notorious 1998 paper in the UK medical Journal The Lancet, but who became the very public face of what has come to be known as “The Anti-Vax Movement.” An expat from Britain who currently resides in Austin, Texas, Wakefield allowed Bailey and her team to follow him and his family for five years beginning in 2011 as he fought a defamation battle in the courts against the British Medical Journal and journalist Brian Deer. The results of that case – and the self-reflection, pronouncements, and observations of Wakefield, his legal team, wife, and his children – create a complex and incisive look at one of our era’s most fear-provoking and continuously provocative figures. THE PATHOLOGICAL OPTIMIST takes no sides, instead letting Wakefield and the battles he fought speak for themselves.

onawah
27th June 2018, 04:31
Altering human genetics through vaccination
by Jon Rappoport
June 26, 2018
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/06/26/altering-human-genetics-through-vaccination/


"The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) has launched efforts to create a vaccine that would protect people from most flu strains, all at once, with a single shot.

Over the years, I’ve written many articles refuting claims that vaccines are safe and effective, but we’ll put all that aside for the moment and follow the bouncing ball.

Massachusetts Senator and big spender, Ed Markey, has introduced a bill that would shovel no less than a billion dollars toward the universal flu-vaccine project.

Here is a sentence from an NIAID press release that mentions one of several research approaches:

“NIAID Vaccine Research Center scientists have initiated Phase 1/2 studies of a universal flu vaccine strategy that includes an investigational DNA-based vaccine (called a DNA ‘prime’)…”

This is quite troubling, if you know what the phrase “DNA vaccine” means. It refers to what the experts are touting as the next generation of immunizations.

Instead of injecting a piece of a virus into a person, in order to stimulate the immune system, synthesized genes would be shot into the body. This isn’t traditional vaccination anymore. It’s gene therapy.

In any such method, where genes are edited, deleted, added, no matter what the pros say, there are always “unintended consequences,” to use their polite phrase. The ripple effects scramble the genetic structure in numerous unknown ways.

Here is the inconvenient truth about DNA vaccines—

They will permanently alter your DNA

The reference is the New York Times, 3/15/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research—the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was three years ago.]

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Here is the punchline: “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.”

Alteration of the human genetic makeup.

Not just a “visit.” Permanent residence. And once a person’s DNA is changed, he will live with that change—and all the ripple effects in his genetic makeup—for the rest of his life.

The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:

“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”

Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.

This is genetic roulette with a loaded gun. Anyone and everyone on Earth injected with a DNA vaccine will undergo permanent and unknown genetic changes…

And the further implications are clear. Vaccines can be used as a cover for the injections of any and all genes, whose actual purpose is re-engineering humans in far-reaching ways.

The emergence of this Frankenstein technology is paralleled by a shrill push to mandate vaccines, across the board, for both children and adults. The pressure and propaganda are planet-wide.

The freedom and the right to refuse vaccines has always been vital. It is more vital than ever now.

It means the right to preserve your inherent DNA."

onawah
29th June 2018, 22:16
Flu-Vaccine Mandate for NYC Children Reinstated
June 28, 2018 JOSH RUSSELL https://www.courthousenews.com/flu-vaccine-mandate-for-nyc-children-reinstated/
(THIS IS BAD!! :tsk:)

"The state’s highest court backed New York City health agencies on Thursday for mandating that children who attend city-regulated or school-based programs get a flu shot.

The requirement, which goes into effect immediately, covers all children between the ages of 6 months and 59 months who are enrolled in preschools and day care centers licensed by the city.

New York City’s Board of Health first passed the rule in December 2013, but a challenge by five parents led a Manhattan judge to issue an injunction against it. The board appealed to New York’s highest court after another panel of judges agreed in 2016 that the city did not have the authority to mandate vaccinations.

Thursday’s reversal by the New York Court of Appeals was unanimous.

“The board’s promulgation of the flu vaccine rules falls squarely within the powers specifically delegated to the department in New York City Administrative Code § 17-109, and the board’s actions did not violate the separation of powers doctrine,” Judge Leslie Stein wrote for the court.

“Further, the flu vaccine rules are not preempted by state law.”

Chief Judge Janet DiFiore joined in the 25-page opinion, as did Judges Jenny Rivera, Eugene Fahey, Michael Garcia, Rowan Wilson and Paul Feinman.

Richard Dearing, who heads the NYC Law Department’s Appeals Division, celebrated the decision. “We are pleased with this unanimous decision, which recognizes the ‘very direct connection’ between the board’s flu vaccine rule and ‘the preservation of health and safety,’ and agreed that the rule is ‘squarely within’ with the board’s delegated powers and consistent with state law,” Dearing said.

In a statement Thursday, New York City Health Commissioner Mary Bassett said: “This decision will help us protect more than 150,000 children in city-regulated day cares and preschools across the city.”

When they filed suit in 2015, the five parents called the flu-shot mandate a “bold and gross violation of the separation of powers.”

Denying that they are anti-vaxxers opposed to the science of vaccination, the parents insisted that they “provide and continue to intend to provide their children with all vaccines required by New York state law.”

The city’s board has mandated smallpox vaccinations of minors since 1866 and has required other vaccines for children enrolled in city-regulated day care centers since at least as early as 1948, when it directed that children be immunized against diphtheria prior to admission.

Aaron Siri, an attorney for the families with the Manhattan firm Siri & Glimstad, did not respond to request for comment Thursday afternoon."

onawah
29th June 2018, 23:11
Pharmaceutical and Medical Horrors
Published on June 28, 2018
http://drsircus.com/general/pharmaceutical-and-medical-horrors/?utm_source=Dr+Sircus+Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter_29_06_18&inf_contact_key=a5e27216c0ee3b28d965653d775f548dfc ed7870dbf258774b086ea49517c6c8

"Leslie Kenton ( https://lesliekenton.com/health/into-the-bliss/medical-terrorism/ )
concludes, 'It’s little wonder that people are confused about where to go and what to do when they get ill. I personally hear all about this, because I mentor hundreds of men and women throughout the world. They become overwhelmed by the media propaganda and aggressive advertisements they see on television. Our medical industrial complex has turned into a bizarre conglomeration of misinformation, lies and deceptions designed to further the corporate agendas of Big Pharma, government regulatory bodies and mainstream medicine, with little regard for human wellbeing.'

Where did all the madness (pharmaceutical terrorism) come from. Well we can go back to the beginning, and now see in the end 'Bayer-Monsanto, soon to be just Bayer, which owns 60% of proprietary seeds and 70% of agrochemicals in the world. There are a lot of industries that wreck havoc on our world. One just has to think of the biggest global banks and oil companies. Think plastics and now think of telecommunication companies that are lusting to bombard us with even more microwave frequencies via their rollout of G5. But there is one field that is much worse than all others: agro-chemicals. At some point, not that long ago, the largest chemical producers, who until then had kept themselves busy producing Agent Orange, nerve agents and chemicals used in concentration camp showers, got the idea to use their products in food production,' writes the Automictic Earth.

Everywhere we go in modern medicine there are dangers that can ruin your life. Even safe procedures are dangerous. For example, 'When a doctor orders an MRI, it’s usually is to help detect or rule out something potentially life-threatening, or at the very least, something that could make you seriously ill. But, it’s recently come to light that this rather routine diagnostic test, meant to help you, can have devastating effects on your health.'

Why are MRIs dangerous? It is not the frequencies MRI employs, it is the contrast agent that they often use. Gadolinium is a metallic element with magnetic properties. It is injected into about one third of patients getting an MRI, in order to enhance imaging. If your doctor has ever ordered an MRI with “contrast” for you, you were exposed to gadolinium. But most likely you had no idea you were being injected with a known neurotoxin, capable of inhibiting mitochondrial function (energy production) and causing oxidative stress.

Bayer experimental drugs were tested on Auschwitz prisoners. One of the SS doctors at Auschwitz, Dr. Helmut Vetter, a long-time Bayer employee, was involved in the testing of Bayer experimental vaccines and medicines on inmates. He was later executed for giving inmates fatal injections. 'I have thrown myself into my work wholeheartedly,' he wrote to his bosses at Bayer headquarters. 'Especially as I have the opportunity to test our new preparations. I feel like I am in paradise.'

When John D. Rockefeller interlocked his American-based international empire with that of I.G. Farben in 1928 'there was created the largest and most powerful cartel the world has ever known.' Not only has that cartel survived through the years, it has grown and prospered.

Heroin, originally created by I.G. Farben, was outlawed in 1924 as a prescription drug in the United States."

onawah
1st July 2018, 20:40
Well-regarded medical journal removes new study re greater cervical cancer risk linked to HPV vaccination
by Lori Alton June 30, 2018
https://www.naturalhealth365.com/cervical-cancer-HPV-vaccine-2613.html
"Human papillomavirus, the most common sexually transmitted disease, usually resolves on its own. In rare cases, however, HPV leads to cervical cancer. HPV vaccines, such as Gardasil, are touted by many mainstream medical authorities as a way to prevent cervical cancer. But, could the vaccination actually be having the opposite effect?

A new study raising just this possibility was recently published in a well-regarded medical journal. Soon after, it was officially retracted by the journal’s editors – because the author, fearing repercussions from those opposed to any questioning of vaccines, used a pseudonym.

Age-standardized incidence of cervical cancer in Sweden increased by 20 percent during 2014 and 2015
In an article published April 30, 2018 in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics (IJME), the author (who identified himself as Lars Andersson, of the Department of Physiology and Pharmacology at the prestigious Karolinska Institute in Sweden) pointed out that the Centre for Cervical Cancer Prevention in Sweden had noted in its annual report that there had been a substantial increase in incidence of invasive cervical cancer – especially during 2014 and 2015.

The increase was shown to be most prominent among women aged 20 to 49 years, who were of an age to have received the HPV vaccinations.

HPV vaccines were approved in Sweden in 2006 and 2007. Andersson notes that about 80 percent of the 12-year-old girls in Sweden were vaccinated in 2010, while 59 percent of 13- to 18-year-old girls were vaccinated through a “catch-up” program.

In addition to suggesting that increased HPV vaccination rates were associated with an increase in cervical cancer, Andersson maintained that a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) analysis of Gardasil in 2006 showed a higher risk of “premalignant cell changes” from the vaccine in certain groups that had been exposed to some HPV strains.

After the article’s publication, however, there followed a somewhat whiplash-inducing chain of events.

Journal editors confirm: Author faced possible repercussions
A week after publication, the IJME editors removed any mention of the Karolinska Institute from Andersson’s article.

In a published comment, the editors stated that they had made the deletion after being informed by the Institute that no one by the name of “Lars Andersson” worked there.

At this point, the author had proceeded to make his real name known to the editors – under the premise of confidentiality.

The editors stated that they had confirmed that the author had the “necessary qualifications, expertise and research experience” required for the article. They also confirmed that the author did, indeed, face a “credible threat of harm.”

In addition, they reconfirmed the article’s conclusion – that there was “a possible association of the HPV vaccine with increased incidence of carcinoma cervix.” They also agreed with the author that more research is needed.

The editors decided to retain the article.

At this point, the entire editorial board – and other interested parties – began to second-guess the decision and questioned the wisdom of allowing the article to stand.

Ultimately, the editors decided against tolerating the authorial deception – although they still assess the article as correct. On May 8, 2018, the IJME retracted the article, while continuing to call for more exploration on the article’s subject.

Undeniable truth: Cervical cancer prevention vaccines are linked to harm
Natural health experts say that human papillomavirus vaccines such as Gardasil and Gardasil 9 have been linked with a variety of adverse and potentially devastating effects, including premature menopause, severe ulcers, infertility, chronic pain and paralysis.

Even the manufacturers acknowledge that Gardasil can cause redness, swelling and pain at the injection site, along with nausea and vomiting.

Moreover, Gardasil and Gardasil 9 both contain aluminum as an adjuvant, or additional ingredient intended to make the vaccine more effective. Aluminum is a proven neurotoxin, with more than 1,600 peer-reviewed scientific documents attesting to its hazards.

As if this weren’t alarming enough, HPV vaccines also contain polysorbate 80 – which is known to cause encephalitis, anaphylactic reactions and multiple sclerosis.

Vaccine proponents say that there is ‘solid evidence’ that the HPV vaccine reduces the risk of precancerous and cancerous lesions in women. On the other side of the debate, critics point to adverse effects and possible increased cancer risk.

So, while the controversy continues to rage, educating yourself as to the possible risks and benefits of vaccination clearly remains the best policy. In addition, no doubt, a trusted and knowledgeable integrative doctor can help you make an informed decision.

Sources for this article include:

IJME.in https://ijme.in/articles/increased-incidence-of-cervical-cancer-in-sweden-possible-link-with-hpv-vaccination/
ActivistPost.com https://www.activistpost.com/2018/05/cervical-cancer-increases-since-hpv-vaccines-per-swedish-study.html
NaturalHealth365.com https://www.naturalhealth365.com/hpv-vaccine-gardasil-2467.html "

onawah
2nd July 2018, 17:43
Zero Tolerance Vaccine Laws in America: Will You Defend Vaccine Freedom?
Posted: 7/1/2018 National Vaccine Information Center
https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/July-2018/zero-tolerance-vaccine-laws-in-america.aspx?utm_source=Zero+Tolerance+Vaccine+Law s+in+America%3A++Will+You+Defend+Vaccine+Freedom%3 F&utm_campaign=July+NVIC+Newsletter&utm_medium=email
fRIX-782u_I
"Every July Americans celebrate the day in 1776 when we declared our independence from a monarchy and began to create a Constitutional Democratic Republic to secure liberty and justice for all. 1
Today, we are witnessing the erosion of core values that our constitutional democracy was founded upon. One example is a public campaign led by the medical establishment to demonize and discriminate against anyone opposing zero tolerance vaccine laws that violate human rights in the name of public health. 2

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was historic acknowledgement by the US government that government licensed and mandated childhood vaccines can and do cause injury and death. 3 Four billion dollars in federal compensation has been paid to thousands of vaccine victims over the past three decades. 4

The 1905 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Jacobson v Massachusetts affirmed the authority of states to require healthy citizens to undergo smallpox vaccination during outbreaks of that deadly, high communicable disease. However, the Court also warned that vaccine mandates should not be implemented in a way that is “cruel and inhuman to the last degree.” 5 6

Public Confidence in Vaccine Safety Declines, Public Debate Is Censored
Today, all children in America are being required to get dozens of doses of vaccines, 7 whether or not the disease is deadly or high communicable, whether or not there is a disease outbreak, and whether or not a child is biologically at higher risk for being harmed by vaccination. 8 9 This is an inconvenient truth that nobody developing, licensing, recommending, administering or voting to mandate a growing list of vaccines wants to talk about. So, as more Americans have become aware of vaccine risks and failures, the government, industry and medical trade have enlisted the cooperation of mainstream media to censor the public conversation. 10 11 12

It hasn’t worked. Recent surveys reveal that 20 percent of Americans think vaccines may be unsafe and 45 percent are not sure. There has been almost a 10 percent decline in public confidence in vaccine safety over the past decade. 13

doctor1.jpg
Medical Doctors Attack Anyone Questioning Vaccine Safety and Laws
Now the conversation about vaccination has taken an ugly turn. 14 Prominent medical doctors and professors at leading universities are publishing articles in academic journals and are being quoted in media reports attacking the intelligence, emotional and psychological stability, and moral values of anyone who dares to question vaccine safety or vaccine laws. 15 16 17 18 19

Men and women who become doctors are no more equal than anyone else in society and, yet, they are being given a free pass to track, profile, marginalize, coerce and call for segregation and criminal prosecution of fellow, citizens who disagree with them about vaccination. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

Constitutional Democracy Values Individual Life and LIberty
A constitutional democracy recognizes that the ultimate source of government authority is consent of the governed and that, although the majority rules, the natural rights of minorities are protected. 28 A constitutional democracy highly values the dignity and life of each individual. This core moral value is affirmed by laws that protect privacy, and freedom of thought, conscience and expression, and allow unsanctioned association between individuals without government coercion, which is the legal foundation for a civil and open society built on respect, tolerance and inclusion.

values.jpg
A constitutional democracy promotes fair and equal justice for all. So the authors of the Declaration of Independence rejected rule by an elitist ruling class of citizens who are considered to be more important and qualified to govern without the consent of those being governed. 29 The Bill of Rights in the US Constitution makes it clear that respect for the natural rights of individuals limits the power of the state. As Thomas Jefferson put it: “the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression.” 30

Why, then, are we allowing an elite aristocracy of doctors and professors to bully people who disagree with them about laws that disempower parents and place an unequal vaccine risk burden on vulnerable children in the name of the public health? 31

Two Laws in America Require Citizens to Risk Their Lives
There are only two laws that require American citizens to risk their lives. The first is a federal law, the military draft, which requires all healthy male adults to risk their lives in a war declared by the government to protect national security. Adults objecting to a war for religious beliefs or conscience can obtain a conscientious objection exemption without being punished.32

gavel.jpg
The second is a state law requiring all healthy children to risk their lives in a war that doctors declared on microbes two centuries ago. However, unlike adults who are not punished for following their conscience and refusing to fight in a war to protect national security, parents can be punished for following their conscience and refusing to risk their children’s lives in a war to theoretically protect the public health. 33 34 State sanctions include segregation and loss of the unvaccinated child’s right to a school education or permitting pediatricians to deny medical care to children if their parents refuse one or more government recommended vaccinations. 35

Two different laws that require healthy Americans to risk injury or death: one conscripting adults in what government clearly defines as an emergency military action; and the other conscripting children in a mandatory vaccination program that is not defined as an emergency military action but is operated like one.

Vaccine Risks Not Being Shared Equally By All
How many Americans understand that when legislators vote for no exceptions vaccine laws like the one adopted in California in 2015, 36 they vote to enlist children as soldiers in a war in which vaccine risks are not being shared equally by all?

No two children are alike. Some children are genetically, biologically or environmentally more susceptible to being injured or killed by vaccines without warning. 37 38 To sweep this inconvenient truth under the rug so doctors don’t have to think about their moral duty to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths, the Centers for Disease Control and American Academy of Pediatrics have narrowed medical contraindications to vaccination so that now almost no health condition qualifies as a reason to grant a child a medical exemption. 39 40

Since Congress gave doctors a broad liability shield in 1987 similar to the one they gave to vaccine manufacturers in 1986 to protect them from most vaccine injury lawsuits, 41 doctors no longer have to worry about getting sued for being militant enforcers of vaccine policies and laws that punish children for the genes they were born with and leave too many of them disabled and chronically ill for the rest of their lives.

War On Microbes Conducted Like A Military Campaign
The medical establishment’s war on microbes, which has no end in sight, has always been conducted like a military campaign. The Commissioned Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) traces its history back to the US Marine Hospital Service, whose doctors had the power to segregate by quarantine and prevent immigrants sick with infectious diseases from disembarking from ships entering U.S. ports. 42

doctor2.jpg
Today, doctors employed by the U.S. Public Health Service wear military style uniforms, are expected to follow orders, and are promoted through a rank system similar to that of the U.S. Navy. 43 Supervised by a Surgeon General, who is technically a three star Admiral reporting to a four star Assistant Secretary of Health, the US Public Health Service is described as “an elite team of more than 6,700 full time, well trained, highly qualified public health professionals.” These health soldiers, along with other federal and state government health officials, work to maintain the public health.

Zero Tolerance Vaccine Laws Lead to Tyranny
But there should be limits placed on the authority that public health officials and their physician colleagues exercise in a constitutional democracy. They should not be given unchecked power to order parents to play vaccine roulette with their children’s lives and punish them for refusing to obey the order. 44

My father was a decorated World War II veteran, a career Army officer and military historian. History teaches us, he said, that military campaigns should only be used in true emergencies to protect national security because militarization of civilian institutions inevitably leads to an authoritarian government and tyranny.

liberty.jpg
So when I see doctors aggressively lobby for enforcement of zero tolerance, no mercy vaccine laws that fail to respect biodiversity and force parents to risk their children’s lives in a war they cannot refuse to fight without being punished, I remember what he said. I think about how there is no human right more fundamental than the freedom to think rationally and follow our conscience when making a decision about whether or not to risk our life or the life of our child for any reason.

Forced Vaccination Lobby Doubling Down in 2019
The forced vaccination lobby backed by industry and medical trade is already making plans to double down and target multiple states in 2019 for removal of religious and conscientious belief exemptions, while also placing further restrictions on medical exemptions to vaccination. 45

Will you stand up and defend vaccine freedom in America?

I hope you will. I hope you will join with the tens of thousands of Americans who are registered users of the NVIC Advocacy Portal, which is an online communications network at NVICAdvocacy.org. We monitor, analyze and report on vaccine legislation pending in every state and make it easy for you to stay electronically connected with your own legislators so you can make your voice heard.

Become a vaccine freedom advocate in your state and stand shoulder to shoulder with other Americans who care about protecting the core moral values and civil liberties defined in the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution.

It’s your health. Your family. Your choice."

More here:
https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/July-2018/zero-tolerance-vaccine-laws-in-america.aspx?utm_source=Zero+Tolerance+Vaccine+Law s+in+America%3A++Will+You+Defend+Vaccine+Freedom%3 F&utm_campaign=July+NVIC+Newsletter&utm_medium=email
References
1 National Archives. America’s Founding Documents: Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights.

2 Fisher BL. The Vaccine Culture War in America: Are You Ready? National Vaccine Information Center Mar. 8, 2015.

3 Public Law 99-660. Title III – National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. 42 USC 300aa. Nov. 14, 1986.

4 Health Resource Services Administration (HRSA). Vaccine Injury Compensation Data. June 4, 2018.

5 Jacobson v. Massachusetts. 197 U.S. 11(1905). Cornell University Law School.

6 Fisher BL. Forced Vaccination: The Tragic Legacy of Jacobson v. Massachusetts. National Vaccine Information Center Nov. 2, 2016.

7 NVIC. State Law and Vaccine Requirements. National Vaccine Information Center. 2018.

8 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Recommended Immunization Schedules for Persons Aged 0 Through 18 Years, United States, 2018.

9 Fisher BL. Blackmail and the Medical Vaccine Exemption. National Vaccine Information Center May 18, 2015.

10 Carroll AE. Not Up for Debate: The Science Behind Vaccination. New York Times Sept. 17, 2015.

11 Hodge JG, Campos-Outcalt D. Legally Limiting Lies About Vaccines. Jurist (University of Pittsburgh) Nov. 17, 2015.

12 Caplan A. Revoke the license of any doctor who opposes vaccination. Washington Post Feb. 6, 2015.

13 TVR Staff. Nearly 20 Percent of Americans Think Vaccines May Be Unsafe, 45 Percent Are Not Sure. The Vaccine Reaction June 18, 2018.

14 Fisher BL. Class and Race Profiling in the Vaccine Culture War. National Vaccine Information Center July 17, 2017.

15 Poland GA, Jacobson RM. The age-old struggle against the antivaccinationists. N Engl J Med 2011; 364(2): 97-99.

16 American Psychological Association. Belief in Conspiracy Theories Associated with Vaccine Skepticism. APA Press Release Feb. 1, 2018.

17 Hornsey MJ, Harris EA, Fielding KS. The Psychological Roots of Anti-Vaccine Attitudes: A 24-Nation Investigation. Health Psychology 2018; 37(4): 307-315.

18 Hendrix KS, Sturm LA et al. Ethics and Childhood Vaccination Policy in the United States. Am J Public Health 2016; 106(2): 273-278.

19 Fentiman LC. When it comes to vaccines, rich parents get away with child neglect. Washington Post May 10, 2017.

20 Fisher BL. Parents Deserve To Know More Than School Vaccination Rates. National Vaccine Information Center Sept. 8, 2015.

21 Smith PJ, Chu SY, Barker LE. Children Who Have Received No Vaccines: Who Are They and Where Do They Live? Pediatrics 2004; 114(1): 187-195.

22 Fagone J. Will this Doctor Hurt Your Baby? Philadelphia Magazine June 2009.

23 Bakalar N. Rich, White and Refusing Vaccinations. New York Times Dec. 24, 2015.

24 Danziger PD, Diamond R. The Vaccination Double Standard. Slate July 25, 2016.

25 Lipinski J. Endangering the Herd: The Case for Suing Parents Who Don’t Vaccinate Their Kids or Criminally Charging Them. Slate Aug. 13, 2013.

26 Berezow A. Jail 'anti-vax" parents. USA Today Jan. 28, 2015.

27 Karlamangla S. California doctor critical of vaccines is punished for exempting 2-year-old boy from all childhood immunizations. Los Angeles Times June 29, 2018.

28 Center for Civic Education. Constitutional Democracy.

29 National Archives. America’s Founding Documents: Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights.

30 Jefferson T. Excerpt from First Presidential Inaugural Address (Mar. 4, 1801). Thomas Jefferson Foundation (Monticello).

31 Fisher BL. Baylor’s Doc Hotez Bullies Parents of Vaccine Injured Children. National Vaccine Information Center May 10, 2018

32 The National Peace Museum of Conscientious Objection and Anti-War Activism. The History of Conscientious Objection. 2006.

33 Fisher BL. The Moral Right to Conscientious, Philosophical and Personal Belief Exemption to Vaccination. National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Oral Presentation May 2, 1997.

34 National Vaccine Information Center. Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wall.

35 NVIC. State Vaccine Legislation in America 2015-2017. National Vaccine Information Center Oct. 25, 2017.

36 Richardson D. The Fallout from SB277: What Happens Next? National Vaccine Information Center Aug. 5, 2015.

37 Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines. Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality. Evaluation of Biologic Mechanisms of Adverse Effects: Increased Susceptibility (p. 82). Washington, D.C. The National Academies Press 2012.

38 Health Resource Services Administration (HRSA). Vaccine Injury Compensation Data. June 4, 2018.

39 CDC. Vaccine Recommendations of the ACIP: Contraindications and Precautions. May 9, 2018.

40 American Academy of Pediatrics. Medical Versus Nonmedical Exemptions for Child Care and School Attendance. Pediatrics August 2016.

41 National Vaccine Information Center. NVIC Position Statement on the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. May 2018.

42 DHHS. History of the Commissioned Corps of the U.S. Public Health Service.

43 Collins C. The Public Health Service Commissioned Corps: Two Centuries and Counting. Defense Media Network Oct. 10, 2016.

44 Fisher BL. From Nuremberg to California: Why Informed Consent Matters in the 21st Century. National Vaccine Information Center Oct. 24, 2017.

45 Scutti S. Opting out of vaccines leaves these US ‘hot spots’ most vulnerable to outbreaks. CNN June 15, 2018.

onawah
2nd July 2018, 21:23
Secrets of the vaccine cult
Global vaccine cartel wreaks destruction: the evidence
By Jon Rappoport
7/2/18
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/07/02/vaccine-cartel-destroys-lives-evidence/

"Put these two public-health agency statements up against each other:

DON'T GIVE THIS VACCINE TO PEOPLE WHOSE IMMUNE SYSTEMS ARE WEAK, BECAUSE DIRE CONSEQUENCES WOULD FOLLOW.

WE GAVE THIS VACCINE TO 100 MILLION PEOPLE, MILLIONS OF WHOM HAD WEAK IMMUNE SYSTEMS, AND IT WAS A GLORIOUS SUCCESS, ONE OF THE GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS IN THE HISTORY OF MODERN MEDICINE.

Doesn't add up, does it? Across a population of 100 million people, widespread harm and death would have occurred.

Read on, and follow the inexorable logic.

The FDA released a statement (8/28/17), about its crackdown on a California company pushing an unapproved treatment for cancer patients: stem cells mixed with a smallpox vaccine.

But that's not the big story. The big story is buried in the FDA press release. Here is the Agency's statement:

"Serious health problems, including those that are life-threatening, can also occur in...people who...have problems with their heart or immune system if they become infected with the [smallpox] vaccine virus, either by being vaccinated or by being in close contact with a person who was vaccinated."

Get it? The FDA is admitting that those with certain prior health conditions who pick up the smallpox virus, as a result of vaccination, are at exceptionally high risk. AMONG THOSE PRIOR HEALTH CONDITIONS IS: "IMMUNE SYSTEM PROBLEMS."

That simply means: weak and compromised immune systems.

And yet...during the years 1966-1980, a massive smallpox eradication campaign was carried out in Africa, under the auspices of the World Health Organization. Roughly 100 million doses of the smallpox vaccine were given to Africans, MILLIONS OF WHOM ALREADY HAD SEVERELY COMPROMISED IMMUNE SYSTEMS.

Their immune systems were compromised by hunger, protein-calorie malnutrition, starvation, contaminated water supplies, lack of basic sanitation---all the conditions that are part of generation to generation poverty.

How much devastation was wrought by this smallpox vaccination campaign?

The World Health Organization, in 1980, celebrated the eradication of smallpox on the African continent---but was that what really happened?

Or was it this? The visible signs of smallpox receded, but people with already-compromised immune systems began dying in large numbers. (Is THAT what would soon be called AIDS?)

The FDA, in the statement I quoted above, unwittingly implied what researchers have known for decades: the so-called smallpox eradication campaign in Africa was one of the most dangerous medical interventions in history.

In the late 1980s, a respected biologist with close knowledge of the Africa eradication campaign, told me, off the record, that after the World Health Organization celebrated their "victory" in Africa, they held a very secret meeting in Geneva.

At this meeting, it was decided that the smallpox vaccine they deployed in Africa would never be used again.

I asked him why.

Because it caused cases of smallpox, he said.

So the African eradication campaign had a double effect. In some people, the vaccine caused smallpox, which it was supposed to prevent. In others, it wrought extreme devastation and death without giving the appearance of smallpox.

More lies, more widespread destruction from the vaccine establishment.

Need further proof? In 2001, out of nowhere, the US federal government announced there was a potential bio-terror threat: the use of the smallpox virus as a weapon. Therefore, vaccination clinics would be set up all over America, and "everyone" should show up and receive the smallpox vaccine. As encouragement, President Bush got his shot on national television.

But then, even mainstream doctors and researchers began contacting reporters and telling them there was a serious problem: the dangerous vaccine could injure and kill people.

The program was quietly allowed to fade out. The massive number of vaccination clinics never materialized. About a year after US Secretary of Health and Human Services, Tommy Thompson, had warned the country about the threat of a smallpox bioterror attack, he showed up to say he was recommending that cabinet members should NOT get the shot. And that was that. End of story.

A national vaccine program canceled. Retracted. Buried. When do you see that happen? Virtually never.

However, the smallpox vaccine was too dangerous.

---The same vaccine that was shot into the bodies of 100 million Africans."

Paul
3rd July 2018, 00:43
[B]Secrets of the vaccine cult
Global vaccine cartel wreaks destruction: the evidence
By Jon Rappoport
7/2/18
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2018/07/02/vaccine-cartel-destroys-lives-evidence/

"Put these two public-health agency statements up against each other:

DON'T GIVE THIS VACCINE TO PEOPLE WHOSE IMMUNE SYSTEMS ARE WEAK, BECAUSE DIRE CONSEQUENCES WOULD FOLLOW.

WE GAVE THIS VACCINE TO 100 MILLION PEOPLE, MILLIONS OF WHOM HAD WEAK IMMUNE SYSTEMS, AND IT WAS A GLORIOUS SUCCESS, ONE OF THE GREATEST ACHIEVEMENTS IN THE HISTORY OF MODERN MEDICINE.

Doesn't add up, does it? Across a population of 100 million people, widespread harm and death would have occurred.

Read on, and follow the inexorable logic.
Aha - you beat me to it. I came to this thread to post this fine article by Jon Rappoport, only to find it's already here. Excellent !

East Sun
3rd July 2018, 11:13
I've been told that STATINS are safer today than they were in the recent past.

Is that true? Or is this just 'Pharma.' saying this?

Appreciate any info.

ES

onawah
3rd July 2018, 23:48
I wouldn't believe that for a moment, especially if it was told to you by your doctor or someone who benefits financially from pharmaceuticals. If you read even a little of this thread, you will find there are a million good reasons whey they should not be trusted.

I've been told that STATINS are safer today than they were in the recent past.

Is that true? Or is this just 'Pharma.' saying this?

Appreciate any info.

ES

onawah
3rd July 2018, 23:58
The Boys Are Not Alright
JULY 03, 2018
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/the-boys-are-not-alright/

By the World Mercury Project team

"Over the past decade or so, the term “gender gap” has taken on a new and heretofore unimaginable usage. Instead of signaling pay gaps or gender differentials in voting patterns, “gender gap” now seems to be shorthand for male decline and weakness in domains as varied as education, employment and health. Referring to the novel Atlas Shrugged and its focus on “the motor of the world,” physician-author Leonard Sax suggests that “we may be living in…a time when the motor that drives the world is running down or stuck in neutral—but only for boys.”

As children’s exposure to potent environmental toxicants has increased, boys appear to be shouldering a disproportionate share of the consequences.
Boys incur excess risks, suggests a UCLA biobehavioralist, for a bevy of “psychoneurobiological” reasons, including differences in sex hormones and slower maturation of the “stress-regulating circuits of the male brain…in the prenatal, perinatal, and postnatal critical periods.” Boys also are more susceptible than girls to many toxins—and for a longer period of time. As children’s exposure to potent environmental toxicants has increased, boys appear to be shouldering a disproportionate share of the consequences.

Falling behind from the start
The press and bookstores are full of accounts of boys’ lacunae in education settings. In the U.S., boys have lower grades and lower grade point averages than girls, and male youth disproportionately fill the ranks of high school dropouts. In the U.K., a 2016 BBC report described the current generation of boys as “generation failed,” noting that the gender disparities start at the youngest ages, with boys “falling behind before they even get to school.” Young men who reach college age are significantly underrepresented on many university campuses compared to young women, to the point where upscale publications such as The Economist have reported a widespread perception that colleges are “relaxing” their admissions criteria to entice more male applicants.

…about half of prime age men who are not in the labor force…may have a serious [physical, mental or emotional] health condition that is a barrier to work.
Underperformance in the educational domain may be contributing to a historically unprecedented and “alarming” drop in labor force participation among prime age workers over age 25 that is particularly pronounced for men. Poor health is another factor. According to a 2017 Princeton University report, “about half of prime age men who are not in the labor force…may have a serious [physical, mental or emotional] health condition that is a barrier to work.” A national survey cited by the Princeton researchers found that 43% of prime age out-of-work men perceived their health as “fair” or “poor,” compared to only 12%