The US Vaccine issue is more than just about "The Shots", it's the Totalitarian Tiptoe [Archive] - Page 4

onawah

21st January 2020, 00:35

Are Mandatory Vaccines Coming to Your State?
Feds & Big Pharma Push to Force States to Mandate ALL CDC Recommended Vaccines
by Barbara Loe Fisher
The Vaccine Reaction
1/20/20
https://healthimpactnews.com/2020/are-mandatory-vaccines-coming-to-your-state-feds-big-pharma-push-to-force-states-to-mandate-all-cdc-recommended-vaccines/

"As vaccine-related bills are being introduced into state legislatures this month, a bill (HB1090) has been proposed in the Virginia legislature to require school children to receive every dose of all current and future vaccines added to the recommended childhood vaccine schedule by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) appointed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

It removes legal authority from the state Board of Health to make recommendations to the General Assembly, the Joint Commission on Health Care and the Governor for revision of the list of vaccines required for school children and effectively transfers that authority to an unelected federal advisory committee.

In what is a very transparent power grab by federal government officials that is sure to make pharmaceutical company stockholders smile, this type of proposed legislation could be coming soon to your state, too.

Here is why automatically codifying federal vaccine use recommendations into state law threatens the integrity of representative government in our constitutional republic and is a threat to the public health and civil and human rights.

Violation of Historic Separation of Federal and State Powers.
State legislators voting to enact laws, which automatically codify federal ACIP recommendations into state law, are abdicating responsibility and accountability for exercising power authorized by the U.S. Constitution by handing that power over to unelected members of a federal government advisory committee.

The authors of the U.S. Constitution recognized it was important to balance the powers of the federal and state governments,1 and to include a Bill of Rights guaranteeing individuals natural rights and civil liberties that limit the power of both federal and state governments.2 Anything not defined in the U.S. Constitution as a federal activity defaults to the states.3 4

Historically, the legal authority to create public health laws to control infectious disease transmission among residents living in each state has belonged to state legislatures, health departments and Boards of Health, while the legal authority to protect the U.S. population from infectious diseases brought into the country by people crossing national borders or state borders belongs to the federal government.5 6

In 1905, the US Supreme Court affirmed the constitutional authority of state legislatures to mandate that citizens receive smallpox vaccinations during epidemics. The Court warned states vaccine laws should not be implemented in way that they become “cruel and inhuman to the last degree” for individuals and “lead to injustice, oppression, or an absurd consequence.”7 8

Relinquishing power to the federal government that is reserved to the states and eliminating necessary checks and balances on federal power, betrays democratic principles foundational to the representative government of our constitutional republic.

Cuts Citizens Out of the Law-Making Process
Transferring authority to mandate vaccines from duly elected members of a state legislature to an unelected federal government advisory committee poses a risk to the health and welfare of children and usurps the right of Americans to publicly participate in the law making process through their elected representatives.

CDC appointed members of ACIP, who can have financial ties to vaccine manufacturers, and government health officials engaging in public-private partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry,9 have no legal responsibility or accountability for what happens to the health of a child who is harmed by a state mandated vaccine.10 11 State legislatures, state health departments and Boards of Health are in a more knowledgeable position than the federal government to effectively address public health issues in the states.

Writes Pharma A Blank Check
Giving a federal agency blanket legal authority to automatically mandate every vaccine recommended by the CDC for use by all children attending daycare and school in every state will certainly financially benefit pharmaceutical companies but will not equally benefit citizens.

In 1980, the cost to “fully” vaccinate a child in a private doctor’s office according to CDC recommendations was $17 12 and that cost is now a staggering $3,000.13 There is no limit on future costs to vaccinate a child with every new vaccine licensed by the FDA and recommended for all children by the CDC.

The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) list 264 vaccines in active development by drug companies, including 137 infectious disease vaccines.14 The World Health Organization (WHO), with taxpayer funding by the CDC,15 is fast tracking development of 13 vaccines by multi-national pharmaceutical corporations.16

Most of these vaccines, as well as many others, will be recommended by ACIP for use by all children, including vaccines for HIV/AIDS, TB, Malaria, Influenza, Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), Group A Streptococcus, Group B Streptococcus, Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV), E-coli; Shigella, Gonorrhea, Chikungunya and Salmonella.

The global vaccine market was valued at $28 billion in 2016 and is projected to become between $48 billion and $93 billion by 2025.17 Market forecasters predict North America will dominate the US vaccine market that “is expected to rise at a significant pace” due to “the presence of several key manufacturers in the region” and “favorable government policies for manufacturing and sales of vaccines.”18

Public-private business partnerships between the federal government and the pharmaceutical industry guarantee that most vaccines being developed by drug companies will be licensed and recommended for use by children and adults by the government.19

U.S. vaccine manufacturers Merck & Co. (rotavirus, HPV, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, varicella zoster (chickenpox), MMR, MMRV, pneumococcal vaccines) and Pfizer (pneumococcal, meningococcal B vaccines), as well as the UK pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (rotavirus, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, meningococcal, DTaP, DT, Tdap, HIB; polio vaccines) and France’s Sanofi Pasteur (influenza, meningococcal, DTaP, DT, Tdap, HIB, polio vaccines)20 will reap significant profits if states enact laws automatically mandating that children get every dose of every existing and new vaccine without deliberation by state health departments, Boards of Health or public hearings in the legislature providing input from residents impacted by vaccine mandates.

Creates Unfunded Mandates
Many states are already undergoing significant budget challenges. A law that automatically adds all ACIP recommended vaccinations to school requirements for children creates an unfunded mandate that increases the state’s health care costs at the expense of other programs and services.

Ignores Vaccine Risks and Rewards Liability-Free Vaccine Manufacturers
Vaccines are commercial pharmaceutical products carrying risks that can be greater for some individuals for genetic, epigenetic and other biological or environmental reasons but doctors cannot reliably predict who will be harmed.21

There are long standing vaccine safety knowledge gaps detailed by the Institute of Medicine in more than 20 years of published studies on vaccine safety issues,22 23 including lack of studies scientifically evaluating the safety of the birth to six year old vaccine schedule recommended by the CDC.24 25

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act created a federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) for children injured by CDC-recommended vaccines. The VICP has awarded more than $4 billion to vaccine victims since 1988, although two out of three vaccine injured plaintiffs are turned away without financial support.26

The Act passed in 1986 gave vaccine manufacturers partial liability protection and did not shield doctors or other vaccine administrators from civil liability when vaccines cause harm.

However, subsequent amendments and rule making changes by the federal government between 1987 and 2016 shielded vaccine providers from liability and substantially weakened the Act’s safety and compensation provisions.27

Since 2011 when the U.S. Supreme Court declared that FDA licensed vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe,”28 pharmaceutical corporations have no civil liability for harm caused by vaccines mandated by state governments for children to attend daycare and school.29

Creates an Uncontrolled Scientific Experiment on School Children
The CDC acknowledges that clinical trials of new vaccines conducted by drug companies seeking licenses for new vaccines often contain too few participants followed up for limited time periods, who may not closely represent the U.S. population in terms of demographics, race and ethnicity.30

Some new vaccines licensed by the FDA have been proven to be too reactive and have been withdrawn from the market within a few years of licensure after persistent reports of vaccine-related brain and immune system damage and death.31 32

The true effectiveness of new vaccines following licensure is also not certain for years or even decades. Vaccinated persons can get infected with and transmit infectious diseases, often without showing symptoms or being diagnosed and reported.33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

For example, the Centers for Disease Control acknowledged in 2019 that vaccinated children can still get pertussis (whooping cough) because the B. pertussis microbe has genetically mutated and the current vaccines do not contain all strains. 41

Very few states have mandated that school children get HPV or annual influenza vaccinations, which are recommended for all children by the ACIP.

However, if states codify ACIP recommendations into law, children attending daycare and school would be required to receive the flu shot every year, despite the CDC reporting that the influenza vaccine was effective less than 50% of the time over the last 15 years.42 HPV vaccinations would be required, despite the fact that HPV cannot be transmitted in a school setting.43

Citizens in every state, along with state health departments and Boards of Health, should have an opportunity to review the scientific evidence when considering the benefits and risks of federally recommended vaccines for children and work with duly elected legislators to make informed decisions about whether a particular vaccine should be included in public health laws as a requirement for school attendance.

Endangers Medically Fragile Children
This type of proposed legislation could put more immune compromised and medically fragile students at risk of suffering vaccine reactions or contracting vaccine strain infections if all current and future vaccinations recommended by the federal government for children are automatically mandated for children to attend daycare and school in the states.

The ACIP has eliminated almost all contraindications to vaccination44 and the CDC now directs doctors to give inactivated vaccines and most live virus vaccines to all children, regardless of whether they are severely immune compromised or have suffered previous vaccine reactions.45 46 47

Depending upon the vaccine and an individual’s health at the time of vaccination, children and adults who have recently received live virus vaccines, such as varicella zoster,48 influenza49 and measles,50 shed vaccine strain virus in body fluids for different amounts of time. Immune compromised individuals receiving live virus vaccines often shed vaccine strain virus for longer periods of time.51 52 53

Additionally, vaccine strain infections can be misdiagnosed as wild type infections,54 which can result in mischaracterization of the true nature of reported outbreaks of disease.

For the past several decades, states have had to create more and more special education classrooms to meet the needs of disabled and chronically ill students.55 56

Children already disabled by vaccine reactions and medically fragile children will be at increased risk for vaccine injury. Special education costs could increase significantly in states if every ACIP recommended vaccine is required for every child to attend daycare and school in every state.

Contradicts Supreme Court Decisions on Parental Rights and Violates Human Rights
There is a long-standing principle in U.S. law that parents have a legal right to raise their children without undue adverse interference by the State.

In 1979, the Supreme Court stated that,

deeply rooted in our Nation’s history and tradition, is the belief that the parental role implies a substantial measure of authority over one’s children. Indeed, “constitutional interpretation has consistently recognized that the parents’ claim to authority in their own household to direct the rearing of their children is basic in the structure of our society.”57

The human right to exercise voluntary, informed consent to medical risk taking is central to the ethical practice of medicine and implementation of public health laws.58

Those rights can be protected if citizens are able to work with their elected representatives to ensure they are not stripped for public health laws.

The lucrative public private partnership between multi-national pharmaceutical companies and government health agencies that develop and regulate vaccines and make national vaccine policy are driving the mandatory vaccination lobby to persuade state legislators to give up their constitutional authority and ethical responsibility for creating state public health laws with the consent of those they govern.

State legislatures that transfer constitutional authority to mandate vaccines to unelected members of a federal agency committee are betraying foundational principles of representative government.

Monitoring Proposed Legislation In Your State
Virginia HB1090 is scheduled to be heard in a House health committee on Tuesday, Jan. 21 at 4 pm. For details and updates on that bill and other vaccine-related bills that have been introduced in state legislatures this year, become a user of and access the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal."

Read the full article at TheVaccineReaction.org: https://thevaccinereaction.org/2020/01/is-a-bill-requiring-your-children-to-get-every-cdc-recommended-vaccination-coming-to-your-state/

Comment on this article at VaccineImpact.com.

References
1 U.S. History. The Founders and Federalism.
2 Mariner WK, Annas GJ, Glantz LH. Jacobsen v Massachusetts: It’s Not Your Great Great Grandfather’s Public Health Law. Am J Pub Health 2005; 95(4): 58-590.
3 U.S. Constitution Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute.
4 U.S. History. The Founders and Federalism.
5 Swendiman KS. Mandatory Vaccinations: Precedent and Current Laws. Congressional Research Service Mar. 10, 2011.
6 Parmet W. Gottlieb’s threat of federal vaccine mandates: questionable legality, poor policy.STAT Feb. 28, 2019.
7 Jacobsen v. Massachusetts.197 U.S. 11(1905). Cornell University Law School.
8 Fisher BL. Forced Vaccination: The Tragic Legacy of Jacobson v. Massachusetts. NVIC Nov. 2, 2016.
9 The Vaccine Reaction Staff. Drug Companies Pay FDA and NIH to Fast Track and Market Vaccines. The Vaccine Reaction Sept. 28, 2018.
10 Hess G. Congress hits FDA, CDC on vaccine conflicts of interest. ICIS Aug. 23, 2000.
11 Benjamin M. The Vaccine Conflict. UPI July 21, 2003.
12 Iglehart JK. Compensating Children with Vaccine-related Injuries. E Eng J Med 1987; 316: 1283-1288.
13 CDC. Vaccine Price List. Jan. 1, 2020.
14 PhRMA. New Era of Medicine: Vaccines.
15 Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. The United States Government and the World Health Organization. May 14, 2018.
16 World Health Organization. WHO Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee (PDVAC) meeting. June 26-27, 2018..
17 Fortune Business Insights. Vaccine Market Size, Share & Industry Analysis, By Type, By Route of Administration, By Disease Indication, By Age Group, By Distribution Channel and Region Forecast 2019-2026. December 2019.
18 Transparency Market Research. U.S. Vaccine Market to Expand in Next Few Years, FDA Approval of Several Antigens and Antibodies to Boost Prospects. May 15, 2019.
19 Fisher BL. WHO, Pharma, Gates and Government: Who’s Calling the Shots? NVIC Jan. 27, 2019.
20 CDC. U.S. Vaccine Names. Mar. 26, 2019.
21 Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines. Evaluation of Biologic Mechanisms of Adverse Effects: Increased Susceptibility. Chapter 3 (p. 82). Washington, D.C. The National Academies Press 2012.
22 Institute of Medicine Vaccine Safety Committee. Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines: Evidence Bearing on Causality: Need for Research and Surveillance (p. 305-308). Washington, D.C. National Academy Press 1994.
23 Institute of Medicine Committee to Review Adverse Effects of Vaccines. Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality: Evaluating Biological Mechanisms of Adverse Events (p. 57-102) and Concluding Comments (p. 629-632). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press 2012.
24 Institute of Medicine Committee on the Assessment of Studies of Health Outcomes Related to the Recommended Childhood Immunization Schedule. The Childhood Immunization Schedule and Safety Stakeholder Concerns, Scientific Evidence and Future Studies: Summary: Health Outcomes (p. 5-6) and Conclusions About Scientific Findings (p. 11) and Review of Scientific Findings (p. 75-98). Washington, D.C. The National Academies Press 2013.
25 Fisher, BL. IOM Issues Report on Safety of the Child Vaccine Schedule: When Will the Real Science Begin? NVIC Press Release. Jan. 16, 2013.
26 Health Resources & Services Administration. Data & Statistics. Jan. 2, 2009.
27 NVIC Position Statement National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. NVIC. May 2018.
28 Bruesewitz v. Wyeth LLC, 562 U.S. 223 (2011).
29 NVIC Cites “Betrayal” of Consumers by U.S. Supreme Court Decision Giving Total Liability Shield to Big Pharma. NVIC. Feb. 15, 2011.
30 Miller ER, Suragh T et al. Surveillance for Adverse Events Following Immunization Using the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).
31 CDC. Withdrawal of Rotavirus Vaccine Recommendation. MMWR Weekly. Nov. 5, 1999.
32 Poland G. Vaccines against Lyme Disease: What Happened and What Lessons Can We Learn? Clinical Infectious Diseases 2011; 52(suppl. 3): 253-258
33 Helfand RF, Kim DK et al. Nonclassic measles infections in an immune population exposed to measles during a college bus trip. J Med Virol 1998; 58(4): 337-341.
34 Gibney KB, Attwood LO et al. Emergence of attenuated measles illness among IgG positive/IgM negative measles cases, Victoria, Australia 2008-2017. Clin Infect Dis May 6, 2019.
35 Fisher BL. The Science and Politics of Eradicating Measles. NVIC May 25, 2019.
36 16 Confirmed Mumps Cases in Harvard Community. Cambridge Public Health Department.March 24, 2016.
37 The Lancet. Three-quarters of people with seasonal and pandemic flu have no symptoms. Science Daily Mar. 16, 2014.
38 Leung, J. Broder, KR et al. Severe varicella in persons vaccinated with varicella vaccine (breakthrough varicella): a systematic literature review. Expert Rev. Vaccines. April 16, 2017.
39 Althouse MB, Scarpino SV. Asymptomatic transmission and resurgence of Bordetella pertussis. BMC Med 2015; 13(146)
40 Fisher BL. The Pertussis Vaccine Blame Game. NVIC Sept. 12, 2018.
41 Haller S. Children less protected by whooping cough vaccine than they once were, CDC warns. USA Today Mar. 14, 2019.
42 CDC. Past Seasons Vaccine Effectiveness Estimates. April 5, 2019.
43 NVIC. What is the history of HPV in America and other countries?
44 CDC. Vaccine Recommendations and Guidelines of the ACIP: Contraindications and Precautions. General Principles and Table. 4-1: Contraindications and precautions to commonly used vaccines. Aug. 20, 2019.
45 CDC. Altered Immunocompetence. Aug. 20, 2019.
46 Fisher BL. The Disappearing Medical Exemption to Vaccination. NVIC Sept. 17, 2019.
47 NVIC. Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wall.
48 Galea SA, Sweet A et al. The Safety Profile of Varicella Vaccine: A 10-Year Review. J Infect Dis 2008; 197 (Supplement 2): S165-S169.
49 Pinsky BA, Mix S et al. Long-term Shedding of Influenza A Virus in Stool of Immunocompromised Child. Emerg Infect Dis 2010; 16 (7).
50 Morfin F, Beguin A et al. Detection of measles vaccine in the throat of a vaccinated child.Vaccine 2002; 20(11-12); 1541-1543.
51 Jenkin GA, Chibo D, Kelly HA et al. What is the cause of a rash after measles-mumps-rubella vaccination? Med J Aust 1999; 171(4): 194-195.
52 Berggren KL, Tharp M, Boyer KM. Vaccine-associated “wild-type” measles. Pediatr Dermatol 2005; 22(2): 130-132.
53 Morfin F, Beguin A et al. Detection of measles vaccine in the throat of a vaccinated child. Vaccine 2002; 20(11-12); 1541-1543.
54 Roy F, Felicia L et al. Rapid Identification of Measles Virus Vaccine Genotype by Real-Time PCR. J Clin Microbiol 2016; 55(3): 735-743.
55 Samuels C. Number of U.S. Students in Special Education Ticks Upward. Education Week Apr. 19, 2016.
56 Strikrishnan M. Special Education Costs Are Rising, But Money From State and Feds Isn’t.Voice of San Diego Feb. 1, 2018.
57 Bellotti v. Baird, 443 U.S. 622 (1979) citing Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968).
58 Why Is Informed Consent to Vaccination A Human Right? NVIC. June 28, 2017.

frankstien

21st January 2020, 17:44

Full article and urls here:
https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/crm?page=CiviCRM&q=civicrm%2Fmailing%2Fview&reset=1&id=90

https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/wp-content/uploads/civicrm/persist/contribute/images/VRAN_HorzLogo.jpg

Dear Members & Friends of Vaccine Choice Canada,

In Vaxxed II, THE PEOPLE’S TRUTH, Polly and the team travel over 50,000 miles in the USA and around the world for answers. Interviews of parents and doctors with nothing to gain and everything to lose expose the vaccine injury epidemic and asked the question on every parent’s mind. “Are vaccines really as safe and effective as we’ve been told?"

vH6qQWnnWF0

Follow the Vaxxed Canada Facebook Page for updates.
https://www.facebook.com/VaxxedCanada/
More cities and dates are added regularly! You can also check VCC's Vaxxed II page for updates.

TORONTO – Kingsway Theatre January 24-30 – buy tickets here for the Toronto opening night on Friday Jan. 24 – includes Q&A with Polly Tommey, Brian Burrowes, and Toby Tommey

CALGARY – Plaza Theatre Playing Jan 24, 25, 26 Tickets: http://theplaza.ca/

EDMONTON, AB – Princess Theatre Playing Jan 24, 25, 26 Tickets: http://www.princesstheatre.ca Also see February 1 dates for Edmonton area below.

RED DEER, AB – Carnival Cinemas Playing Jan 24, 25, 26 Tickets: https://www.carnivalcinemas.ca/

To purchase tickets on Facebook for Canadian events below click here.
https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/civicrm/extern/url.php?u=1307&qid=

Full article and urls here:
https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/crm?page=CiviCRM&q=civicrm%2Fmailing%2Fview&reset=1&id=90

onawah

21st January 2020, 20:57

AUTISM: THE NEXT GREAT DEPRESSION
Jan 21, 2020
The HighWire with Del Bigtree
64.6K subscribers

(At the current rate of growth, by 2025 the cost of autism in the US will exceed the entire Defense budget, Rogers says. )

"Political Economist, Toby Rogers, PhD MPP, joins Del in a powerful discussion on the cost of autism on the U.S. economy, a problem he says “will collapse the United States of America.”

To watch this entire episode, click here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzYZwiJNX-0

L7_iRGowP7E

onawah

22nd January 2020, 03:52

When the Blood Boils: Vaccines and Autism
Jan 21 2020
by Jon Rappoport
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/01/21/when-the-blood-boils-vaccines-and-autism/
"Lies passed around like conjured pieces of gold. Medical liars speaking their messages with straight faces, from their pulpits of influence.

We’ve watched them work. We’ve experienced the inner sensation of blood boiling; outrage.

Who are these people? Where did they come from? How did they attain their positions of power? Are they a different species?

And like you, I have watched the passive faces of audiences as they take in these lies, as they know something is wrong, as they refuse to act.

If you control the meaning of words like “evidence,” “cause,” “relationship between,” you own the playing field. You can manipulate outcomes and conclusions, and you can define science itself.

Your power derives from ownership of those simple words.

Suppose a healthy baby with all his faculties intact receives a barrage of vaccines at 15 months. Then, three days later, his temperature soars to 105, he has seizures, he screams, and then he goes silent. He withdraws from the world, from his parents. In the ensuing months, he doesn’t speak. He doesn’t laugh. He shows no interest in life around him. He doesn’t recover from this. He doesn’t regain his former health.

In what sense can it be said that the vaccines caused his condition? That may seem like an absurd question to be asking, but scientists claim it is important. So do judges and government officials. So do drug companies who make and sell vaccines.

They claim it’s very important, because they want to maintain control over the concept of “cause.” It’s their protection in the racket they are running.

Can we track the path, step by step, of these vaccine ingredients as they are injected into a baby and make their way through his system? Can we observe every reaction they produce, in sequence, all the way into and through the recesses of the nervous system and the brain?

Of course not.

By such an impossible standard, everyone falls short.

If perverse officials and scientists suddenly invoke that standard, can anyone fulfill it? No.

But make sure you understand that scientists and bureaucrats judge their own work by far looser principles.

They assert, for example, with psychotic arrogance that the underlying cause of autism is in the genes, although their research has only given them the foggiest of reasons for even beginning to crawl out on that limb—where they crow and lie and ask for more research money.

They say ADHD is created by certain brain abnormalities, even though their scans produce on-again off-again evidence—which, finally, is no evidence at all.

In fact, for every one of the 297 so-called mental disorders that are named and defined and described in the official bible of psychiatric literature, there is not one, not one lucid diagnostic test to back up, biologically, their disease labels and descriptions and definitions.

It’s a game. “We may hold you to an impossible standard. We hold ourselves to no standard at all.”

So you should be aware that, if you choose to enter this game, for whatever reasons, you are playing against a monumentally stacked deck.

The powers-that-be will do everything they can to subvert, deny, and destroy THE STORY OF ONE PARENT ABOUT ONE CHILD.

Why? Because the story is too convincing. It’s too obvious. It’s too real. It’s too DEVASTATING. It’s too dangerous.

“My child was healthy. He was vaccinated. Then he collapsed. He never recovered.”

With that, you are setting dynamite on the rails of the medical princes.

And you are also waking up other parents whose stories are essentially the same. You are igniting a fire in their heads.

Can you imagine what would happen if you said, “Look, my child was hit by a cluster of vaccines delivered when he was fifteen months old, and he was never the same after that, and THAT is what I’m seeking compensation for, and that is ALL I’m seeking compensation for. I don’t care what you call it, what name you give to it.”

And the government said, “Well, all right.”

The ensuing flood would drown them. And would drown the vaccine manufacturers, too.

You must be stopped.

And the way they will stop you is by manipulating the word “cause.” That’s all. That’s their entire policy and program. They execute it on an arcane and pseudo-technical level, employing models and constructs and numbers in their private little universe, while they polish their credentials.

They don’t want YOUR STORY to stand naked in front of the public.

Of course it is obvious that, when health turns to tragedy, the vaccines were at fault, just as when a blow to the head causes memory loss. Of course everyone concerned knows the truth.

But they say: science is not done this way. We must have “evidence of causation.” They occasionally throw a few crumbs to parents whose child was brain-damaged by a vaccine. But in the main, they conjure up a version of pseudo-science and use it to obfuscate the otherwise unpardonable reality of what the vaccine has done.

And how does this conjured and manufactured science work?

It starts with the owned and operated definition of a disease or disorder. In the case of autism, the old behavioral criteria are dragged out. Here they are. I’m sorry for loading the full display on you, but I want you to see it in print:

The following is from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM IV

(I) A total of six (or more) items from (A), (B), and (C), with at least two from (A), and one each from (B) and (C)

(A) qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:

1. marked impairments in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body posture, and gestures to regulate social interaction
2. failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level
3. a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people, (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people)
4. lack of social or emotional reciprocity ( note: in the description, it gives the following as examples: not actively participating in simple social play or games, preferring solitary activities, or involving others in activities only as tools or “mechanical” aids )

(B) qualitative impairments in communication as manifested by at least one of the following:

1. delay in, or total lack of, the development of spoken language (not accompanied by an attempt to compensate through alternative modes of communication such as gesture or mime)
2. in individuals with adequate speech, marked impairment in the ability to initiate or sustain a conversation with others
3. stereotyped and repetitive use of language or idiosyncratic language
4. lack of varied, spontaneous make-believe play or social imitative play appropriate to developmental level

(C) restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests and activities, as manifested by at least two of the following:

1. encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus
2. apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals
3. stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole-body movements)
4. persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

(II) Delays or abnormal functioning in at least one of the following areas, with onset prior to age 3 years:

(A) social interaction
(B) language as used in social communication
(C) symbolic or imaginative play

(III) The disturbance is not better accounted for by Rett’s Disorder or Childhood Disintegrative Disorder

And now you have the full and complete definition of autism from the official manual. There is no other definition. There are no physical tests or blood tests or brain scans. There is only this menu of behaviors.

And there are many so-called related disorders, and each one has its similar complex behavioral definition. These depictions overlap. But no matter. As far as the psychiatrists and pediatricians and medical bureaucrats are concerned, autism is defined. Engraved on tablets.

Does, in the judgment of a doctor, your child fit the definition or doesn’t he? The word is given from on high. The decision is rendered. And we are then one step removed from the reality of the simple and brutal destroying effects of the vaccines. This is good for them. They are now in familiar territory. Protected land.

Now they can say, “Your child, who at fifteen months collapsed, has autism.”

This is the bridge to the next giant step. Which is:

“We have determined that vaccines are not the cause of autism.”

“We know this.”

“We have proved this.”

Therefore, you’re trapped. Your child has been painted with the label “autism”–and perhaps you were actually hoping for that, because you knew something was terribly wrong, and the designation confirms you were correct. But as far as making a link to the vaccines, you’re suddenly at their mercy.

If they decide to compensate you through the federal vaccine compensation system, they will say, “Well, your child actually is suffering from encephalopathy and has autism-like symptoms.” But far more frequently, they will fall back on their pronouncement that vaccines and autism are unconnected, and you will get nothing.

How did these medical experts and their bureaucratic partners determine that vaccines are not the cause of autism?

They examined studies. And the studies “found no link.” In particular, there is the key Verstraeten study, published in two phases. Three HMOs’ records of babies were considered by Verstraeten and his colleagues.

I’m going to quote from the study and then comment:

“Results. In phase I at HMO A, cumulative exposure at 3 months resulted in a significant positive association with tics (relative risk [RR]: 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05–3.38). At HMO B, increased risks of language delay were found for cumulative exposure at 3 months (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01–1.27) and 7 months (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01–1.13). In phase II at HMO C, no significant associations were found. In no analyses were significant increased risks found for autism or attention-deficit disorder.”

“Conclusions. No consistent significant associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Conflicting results were found at different HMOs for certain outcomes. For resolving the conflicting findings, studies with uniform neurodevelopmental assessments of children with a range of cumulative thimerosal exposures are needed.”

First of all, notice how far away we are from that basic fact that vaccines were delivered to your child and your child collapsed and never recovered. We are miles from that. We’re now discussing correlations between vaccines containing mercury (thimerosal) and various indicators and labels: tics, language delay, autism, attention-deficit disorder, neurodevelopmental outcomes.

We now have a complex situation. First of all, in order to conclude that mercury-containing vaccines are correlated with autism or attention-deficit disorder, the researchers would have to have observed, in these children’s medical records, reports detailing all the behavioral criteria THE RESEARCHERS ASSUME add up to a positive diagnosis of these two INVENTED disorders—neither of which even exists on the basis of actual biological or chemical tests of any kind.

So essentially, if we make the translation from psychiatric-speak to basic English, we have this: “There is no convincing correlation between mercury-containing vaccines and those disorders we invented by slicing and dicing human behavior into compartments and giving them disease-labels.”

This is staggering when you think about it.

Continuing: In the first HMO records, Verstraeten and his colleages found a significant correlation between the vaccines and tics. As in facial tics. Why is that important? Because tics can be a sign of motor brain damage. They have a name for that: tardive dyskinesia. But it means brain damage.

However, if you look at the concocted definitions of the concocted disorders called autism and ADD, you’ll find no mention of tics or tardive dyskinesia. Therefore, an increased risk of tics doesn’t bring the researchers any closer to connecting vaccines and autism—simply because autism wasn’t defined that way. It wasn’t invented that way.

Perusing the records at the second HMO, Verstraeten found an increased risk of language delay. The babies didn’t start speaking when normally expected to. This is one of the listed criteria for a diagnosis of autism, but of course it is not enough, by the concocted rules of the game, to rate a placing of the invented label, autism, on any of those children.

At the third HMO, which was investigated as a separate phase 2 of the study, researchers found no significant associations—meaning no tics, no language delay…nothing that would rate a diagnosis of autism or suggest the presence of any of the invented symptoms of autism.

All in all, Verstraeten and his colleagues found no reason to conclude that mercury-containing vaccines were correlated with autism or other signals of neurological problems.

He played off one HMO against another: “In this one, we found X. But in the other one, we didn’t. We found Y instead. And in the third one, we found neither X nor Y.” Why didn’t he simply use all three HMOs as one reservoir? Possibly because he was trying to guard against the possibility of biased records at one HMO. Who knows?

And why didn’t he conclude, “All in all, we discovered some evidence of harm from the vaccines.”

Again, notice how far we are from the actual event of vaccines causing brain damage in a child.

The study decides that there is no increased risk, from vaccines, for autism or ADD. And that’s that. “Further research” is needed.

A child harmed by vaccines could have a tiny brain lesion or severe immune deficiency or a rewired connection somewhere deep in the recesses of the brain—undetected—but none of this matches up to the invented criteria for a diagnosis of autism.

But millions of people actually believe that autism is a distinct entity which was “discovered,” like a pre-set embedded pattern of errant pathways in the brain. And when those people are told, by experts, that vaccines don’t cause it, the PR value is enormous. For doctors who give the vaccines, for drug companies, for public-health agencies.

This is all a ruse. It’s a fabrication, and the studies that follow from it serve to mask the facts of vaccine damage.

They invent define the disorder, they have no definitive diagnostic tests for it, they conclude that vaccines don’t cause it. It’s one fantasy after another.

It’s as if you drew a map of a gold mine that doesn’t exist, and then you passed a law forbidding people from searching for it.

There are various degrees and events of tragic and lasting impact-damage that are laid upon children. The causes are multiple. One significant cause is vaccines. There is no such thing as autism. It is a construct ultimately designed to get certain people off the hook. And to make profit. And to engender money for research.

They will never find a cure for autism, because it doesn’t exist, except as a menu of behaviors wrapped inside their fantasy. Of course, if they were in the world, the world you live in, they would acknowledge that vaccines do cause brain and neurological damage, and they would compensate for that. They would act in a straightforward and honest fashion.

I spoke to one psychiatrist off the record, who said, “A genetic cause for autism? Are you serious? Autism is an artifact to begin with. So how do you find a gene that causes a fairy
tale?” "

Green Futures

22nd January 2020, 21:37

So many great posts, and detailed, serious information about this topic. The quality of the individuals and their knowledge base is impressive. I would like to also reccomend an older YouTube video entitled "Beyond Thimerosal" by Dr. David Ayoub. It lays out the evidence of the links between mercury, and aluminum adjuvants, and the typical health and behavioral problems seen in autistic and ADHD children.
It is a one plus hour lecture to a room full of other doctors at a medical conference. Today many of the adjuvants are proprietary, so you will not even be able to find out what nightmarish new chemical form of toxin they are injecting injecting to your baby's bloodstream.
Again, when you look are this agenda, and the breathtaking level of force behind it, you must ask the question, who/what is ultimately behind it?
I get the money issue, obviously it is huge! And the attacks on nations/people of color, as horrible as that is.
For me, however, neither greed, nor the most violent racism can fully explain what we are seeing. This is an attack on all the children, and therefore every single adult, in all the nations of Europe, North America, Australia, etc., as well.
It does appear to be a soft "takeover," as opposed to a violent one. A control mechanism. A way to overwhelm a people and an economy.
I would like to hear from others here at Avalon as to their perspectives on the ultimate agenda at play, and by whom.
Thanks.

onawah

22nd January 2020, 22:34

Here is the video "Beyond Thimerosal" : Bk_bC0RXAak
Recently I posted some of my thoughts here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109484---Everything-is-Burning---Australian-Inferno-Choking-Off-Access-to-Cities-Across-Country&p=1331989&viewfull=1#post1331989
But I will add to that the perspective of many who have researched ET presence and ET influence on humanity over thousands of years.
Which is that there are many ET civilizations interested in this planet, and their influence, interference and intervention on humanity's affairs should not be under-estimated, though the facts about that are not so easy to come by, and for what we do suspect, many dots have yet to be connected.
So much discernment is needed, and little is known for certain.

There seem to have been wars going on between various of these ET civilizations in this part of space for a long time, and Earth is mostly likely considered by some of them to be a prize worth fighting for, and by others, worth destroying if it gives them an advantage over their enemies.
Humanity may be a resource considered by some to be worth exploiting or a worthless target for elimination, while others may see us as worthy of protection and fostering.
In other words, Earth and humanity may be pawns in intergalactic conflicts and wars, and we may possess less self-determination than we think.

Humanity seems to be related to many different races who have left their DNA here at various times in history, so what we term racial conflicts may have originated off-planet as well, probably long ago, between warring ET races.

The "elite", or Illuminati, are thought by many researchers to be representatives of the interests of various ET factions, just to further complicate things.
Earth has been described as an experiment, an unprecedented kind of planetary "melting pot", and so the likelihood of being able to predict the outcome of this experiment is difficult.
We who are in the melting pot are still not privy to much of what goes on behind the scenes, but my guess is that most of it is orchestrated.
...But not necessarily predictable because there are so many competing factors at play in the "orchestra".

And some of them are probably much less likely to tip their hand than others.

So many great posts, and detailed, serious information about this topic. The quality of the individuals and their knowledge base is impressive. I would like to also reccomend an older YouTube video entitled "Beyond Thimerosal" by Dr. David Ayoub. It lays out the evidence of the links between mercury, and aluminum adjuvants, and the typical health and behavioral problems seen in autistic and ADHD children.
It is a one plus hour lecture to a room full of other doctors at a medical conference. Today many of the adjuvants are proprietary, so you will not even be able to find out what nightmarish new chemical form of toxin they are injecting injecting to your baby's bloodstream.
Again, when you look are this agenda, and the breathtaking level of force behind it, you must ask the question, who/what is ultimately behind it?
I get the money issue, obviously it is huge! And the attacks on nations/people of color, as horrible as that is.
For me, however, neither greed, nor the most violent racism can fully explain what we are seeing. This is an attack on all the children, and therefore every single adult, in all the nations of Europe, North America, Australia, etc., as well.
It does appear to be a soft "takeover," as opposed to a violent one. A control mechanism. A way to overwhelm a people and an economy.
I would like to hear from others here at Avalon as to their perspectives on the ultimate agenda at play, and by whom.
Thanks.

Seabreeze

23rd January 2020, 08:49

Dont want to get much into this. But I like to put a short note here. The Vaccines and what is in there is made to weaking the population and not the opposite, is what I think. WPC

Thiomersal or better call it by the real name Mercury is the most poison, not radioactive element, which does exist on earth.

Even if there are all kind of fake studies which try to make it harmless.

Mercury is a very tricky element which is hard to proof in the human body. It becomes a gas at certain temperatures, it collects other metalls and binds it to it on its way, it easly crosses the brain boarder and often gets stored in the brain, where it causes damage by time.

This is proably why they keep trying to put it here and there all the time...it is hard to detect and almost impossible to reduce any of it out of a human body or brain again.

They found, for example, in the brain of deceased Alzheimer patients amounts of mercury. But officialy the propaganda only talks about aluminium found...if at all.........

There is a huge list of illnesses which is named in connection with this element...Alzheimer, MS, cancer, allergies and many more....but most studies on this are getting supressed and kept away from the public.

It even goes from the mother to the unborn child over.

Since the body can hardly eliminate it, it gets stored somewhere in the human body.

It started with the toothfillings...world war II times....fillings in the teeth (the brain is right above).....and mercury does not stay inside like the official part always says.....

every time you chew or drink something hot the mercury steam comes out of those fillings......

there are still many countries which put this material in human teeth.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AMI9P0hdwI
the smoking tooth....

now it is given to us in the energy light bulbs and the vaccines .....how come?

I think the answer is pretty clear. :silent:

https://secure.i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01876/Energy-saving-ligh_1876870b.jpg

onawah

23rd January 2020, 17:14

“I Am a Vaccine Refuser and Proud of It!”
Sep 29, 2012
NaturalSolutions
(From a Facebook post)

0N31XZKrnbw

"Rima E. Laibow, born September 30, 1943, M.D., is the medical director of the Natural Solutions Foundation. She is a graduate of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine (1970). She passionately believes in choosing a personal health path that is free from government or corporate interference. During her medical training she received a United States Public Health Service Fellowship in Neurology Research.
Dr. Rima E. Laibow's husband was Albert "Bert" Newton Stubblebine III, a retired major general in the United States Army. He was the commanding general of the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Committee from 1981 to 1984, when he retired from the Army. He died on February 6, 2017.
In 2004 the Natural Solutions Foundation (NSF), an international NGO (non-governmental organization), was founded by Maj. Generator Bert Stubblebine (US Army, Ret) and his wife, Dr. Rima E Laibow, MD. NSF is active and registered in several countries and is a non-profit organization in the United States. Its mission is to discover, develop, document, demonstrate and disseminate natural solutions to the problems that threaten our health, food and freedom, achieve and preserve a healthy self, community and world.
In 2002, one of Dr. Rima E. Laibow's patients, a head of state, told her:
"It's almost time for the great culling to begin." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gWmVtn5JsA

_gWmVtn5JsA

More about the history of the NSF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gWmVtn5JsA
Drugs and Vaccines Kill – Toxins Do Not Heal! (4 videos on the site) http://drrimatruthreports.com/5-big-lies-drugs-vaccine/
Dr Rima Laibow Exclusive: "I Believe That Dementia Is In Fact The Late Onset Of Autism!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fh4rehzXsI
AUTISM & ALZHEIMER’S: MAN MADE EPIDEMICS WITH A CURE! DR RIMA LAIBOW ON CAROL ROSIN SHOW 6-2-17 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_-sgP1Jkr0
Dr Rima Laibow Exposes the GcMAF Health Bombshell [video] http://www.starshipearththebigpicture.com/…/dr-rima-laibow…/
http://drrimatruthreports.com
Rima Laibow MD on Cancer, the New World Order and the Depopulation Agenda https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvFbPlM_lOQ
Worth your time! Dr Rima Laibow Codex Alimentarius, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFIpvi5KfLQ
Dr. Rima Laibow Talks Nano Silver, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXhCnAQzZDM
EBOLA CURE? Dr. Laibow suggests Nano Colloidal Silver! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XKPPG-C5Bg

onawah

23rd January 2020, 18:19

Scientists Resume Efforts To Create Deadly Flu Virus, With US Government's Blessing
Mar 4, 2019, by Dr. Steven Salzberg
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2019/03/04/scientists-restart-research-on-creating-deadly-bird-flu-with-nihs-blessing/#5e2db7475edd

(Perhaps the new flu virus is a result of this experiment.)

"For more than a decade now, two scientists–one in the U.S. and one in the Netherlands–have been trying to create a deadly human pathogen from avian influenza. That's right: they are trying to turn "bird flu," which does not normally infect people, into a human flu.

Not surprisingly, many scientists are vehemently opposed to this. In mid-2014, a group of them formed the Cambridge Working Group and issued a statement warning of the dangers of this research. The statement was signed by hundreds of scientists at virtually every major U.S. and European university. (Full disclosure: I am one of the signatories.)

In response to these and other concerns, in October 2014 the U.S. government called for a "pause" in this dangerous research. NIH Director Francis Collins said that his agency would study the risks and benefits before proceeding further.

Well, four years later, the risks and benefits haven't changed, but the NIH has (quietly) just allowed the research to start again, as we learned last week in an exclusive report from Science's Jocelyn Kaiser.

I can't allow this to go unchallenged. This research is so potentially harmful, and offers such little benefit to society, that I fear that NIH is endangering the trust that Congress places in it. And don't misinterpret me: I'm a huge supporter of NIH, and I've argued before that it's one of the best investments the American public can make. But they got this one really, really wrong.

For those who might not know, the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed between 50 and 100 million people worldwide (3% of the entire world population at the time), was caused by a strain of avian influenza that made the jump into humans. The 1918 flu was so deadly that it "killed more American soldiers and sailors during World War I than did enemy weapons."

Not surprisingly, then, when other scientists (including me) learned about the efforts to turn bird flu into a human flu, we asked: why the heck would anyone do that? The answers were and still are unsatisfactory: claims such as "we'll learn more about the pandemic potential of the flu" and "we'll be better prepared for an avian flu pandemic if one occurs." These are hand-waving arguments that may sound reasonable, but they promise only vague benefits while ignoring the dangers of this research. If the research succeeds, and one of the newly-designed, highly virulent flu strains escapes, the damage could be horrific.

One of the deadliest strains of avian flu circulating today is H5N1. This strain has occasionally jumped from birds to humans, with a mortality rate approaching 50%, far more deadly than any human flu. Fortunately, the virus has never gained the ability to be transmitted directly between humans.

That is, it didn't have this ability until two scientists, Ron Fouchier in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka at the University of Wisconsin, engineered it to gain this ability. (Actually, their work showed that the virus could be transmitted between ferrets, not humans, for the obvious reason that you can't ethically test this on humans.)

Well, Fouchier and Kawaoka are back at it again. NIH actually lifted the "pause" in December 2017, and invited scientists to submit proposal for this type of research. Fouchier confidently stated at the time that all he had to do was "find and replace" a few terms in his previous proposal and it would likely sail through peer review. It appears he was correct, although according to the Science article, his study has been approved but not yet actually funded. Kawaoka's project is already under way, as anyone can learn by checking the NIH grants database.

And by the way: why the heck is a U.S. funding agency supporting research in the Netherlands anyway? If Fouchier's work is so great (and it isn't), let the Netherlands fund it.

I've said it before, more than once: engineering the flu to be more virulent is a terrible idea. It appears the review process at NIH simply failed, as multiple scientists stated to Vox last week. This research has the potential to cause millions of deaths.

Fouchier, Kawaoka, and their defenders (usually other flu scientists who also benefit from the same funding) like to claim that their project to engineer a deadlier bird flu will somehow help prevent a future pandemic. This argument is, frankly, nonsense: influenza mutates while circulating among millions of birds, and no one has any idea how to predict or control that process. (I should mention that I know a little bit about the flu, having published multiple papers on it, including this paper in Nature and this paper on H5N1 avian flu.)

Fouchier and Kawaoka have also argued that we can use their work to create stockpiles of vaccines in advance. Yeah, right. We don't even stockpile vaccines for the normal seasonal flu, because it mutates too fast, so we have to produce new vaccines each year. And the notion that anyone can predict a future pandemic strain so precisely that we could design a vaccine based on their prediction is laughable.

I can't quite fathom why NIH seems to be so enraptured with the work of these two labs that, rather than simply deny them funding, it has ignored the warnings of hundreds of scientists and now risks creating a new influenza pandemic. Much as I hate to say this, maybe it's time for Congress to intervene.

Follow me on Twitter. Check out my website.

Steven Salzberg
I'm the Bloomberg Distinguished Professor of Biomedical Engineering, Computer Science, and Biostatistics at Johns Hopkins University. From 2005-2011 I was the Horvitz Professor of Computer Science and Director of the Center for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology at the University of Maryland, College Park. Before joining UMD, I was at The Institute for Genomic Research, where I sequenced the genomes of many bacteria, including those used in the 2001 anthrax attacks. At TIGR I was part of the Human Genome Project and the co-founder of the influenza virus sequencing project (which is when I first learned of the anti-vaccine movement). My research group develops software for DNA sequence analysis, and our (free) software is used by scientific laboratories around the globe. I did my B.A. and M.S. at Yale University, and my Ph.D. at Harvard University, and I have published over 250 scientific papers. Follow me on Facebook or Twitter (@stevensalzberg1), or visit my lab page, http://salzberg-lab.org "

James Newell

24th January 2020, 00:06

The coronavirus is a patented depopulation weapon patented July 23 2015. Patent number 10130701 assigned to the Pirbright Institute. I am sure they will make good money from this. First you patent the virus than the vaccine.

https://www.infowars.com/bill-and-melinda-gates-foundation-others-predicted-up-to-65-million-deaths-via-coronavirus-in-simulation-ran-3-months-ago/

Green Futures

24th January 2020, 01:52

Delight

24th January 2020, 02:31

Green futures, you said "methods, modalities, compounds, chemicals, or remedies that will cure the problem. That is what I am looking for. Something that will repel this force from our world, and assist us in ejecting it from it's human hosts, as well." I agree with you that I more than ANYTHING want to see this force of evil neutralized.

As usual this 2 hours will make your jaw drop to the floor.

YLri0CXoflU

onawah

25th January 2020, 00:39

NY Times Deceives about the Odds of Dying from Measles in the US
by Jeremy R. Hammond
Jan 23, 2020
(This is a long article, but should lay to rest once and for all any controversy surrounding measles. Many more hyperlinks in the article at):
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2020/01/23/ny-times-deceives-about-the-odds-of-dying-from-measles-in-the-us/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Peter+Hotez+Lies+about+Measles+Risks&utm_campaign=Peter+Hotez+Lies+about+Measles+Risks

https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/peter-hotez-619x348.jpg
"On January 9, the New York Times published an article written by Dr. Peter J. Hotez titled “You Are Unvaccinated and Got Sick. These Are Your Odds.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/opinion/vaccine-hesitancy.html
His purpose in writing is to persuade parents to vaccinate their children according to the routine schedule recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). To that end, he purports to compare “the dangerous effects of three diseases with the minimal side effects of their corresponding vaccines.”

“To state it bluntly,” Hotez writes, “being unvaccinated can result in illness or death. Vaccines, in contrast, are extremely unlikely to lead to side effects, even minor ones like fainting.” He laments that “vaccination rates have fallen”, resulting in a resurgence of measles globally. He cites the example of Samoa, where “almost 5,700 measles cases have been recorded since September, resulting in at least 83 deaths. Almost all of those who died were young children.” In the US, he writes, “vaccine hesitancy is contributing to” measles outbreaks.

Hotez presents data ostensibly to enable parents “to compare the risks of becoming ill with measles . . . to the minute chances of experiencing side effects from their corresponding vaccines.” (He also presents risk analyses for the influenza and human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccines, but due to time constraints and the emphasis placed on it by the media, I’m focusing here just on measles). Here is how he graphically presents the data for his risk analysis:

https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/hotez-measles.png
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/hotez-measles.png

Hotez goes on to assert, “Moreover, new research reveals that, even when patients recover, the measles virus can suppress the immune system, rendering children susceptible to serious infections like pneumonia and the flu.”

The reason parents are choosing not to get their children the measles vaccine, he claims, is because they believe “misinformation spread after an article implying a link between measles vaccinations and autism was published in The Lancet in 1998; it was retracted in 2010 over concerns about the validity of the results and the conduct of the study. Nevertheless, the false claim that vaccines can cause autism continued to circulate on the internet and social media. The truth is that we have overwhelming evidence from at least six studies involving more than one million children that measles-mumps-rubella vaccinations do not cause autism.”

The Times presents Hotez as a scientist and pediatrician at the Baylor College of Medicine, and in recent years he’s become a leading go-to “expert” for the mainstream media on the topic of vaccines. Undisclosed by the Times is that he’s also a Hotez goes on to assert, “Moreover, new research reveals that, even when patients recover, the measles virus can suppress the immune system, rendering children susceptible to serious infections like pneumonia and the flu.”

The reason parents are choosing not to get their children the measles vaccine, he claims, is because they believe “misinformation spread after an article implying a link between measles vaccinations and autism was published in The Lancet in 1998; it was retracted in 2010 over concerns about the validity of the results and the conduct of the study. Nevertheless, the false claim that vaccines can cause autism continued to circulate on the internet and social media. The truth is that we have overwhelming evidence from at least six studies involving more than one million children that measles-mumps-rubella vaccinations do not cause autism.”

The Times presents Hotez as a scientist and pediatrician at the Baylor College of Medicine, and in recent years he’s become a leading go-to “expert” for the mainstream media on the topic of vaccines. Undisclosed by the Times is that he’s also a vaccine developer https://www.bcm.edu/people/view/peter-hotez-m-d-ph-d/b1846a47-ffed-11e2-be68-080027880ca6
...who holds several patents https://patents.justia.com/inventor/peter-hotez
... for vaccines against tropical diseases and co-director of the school’s Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development. https://www.bcm.edu/departments/pediatrics/sections-divisions-centers/tropical-medicine/research/vaccine-development
In 2017, the center entered a partnership with the pharmaceutical giant Merck to advance development of vaccines for tropical diseases. Merck is the manufacturer of the measles vaccine used in the US.
The center’s purpose, in his own words, is to “secure funding and advance the development of drugs, vaccines, and other health tools . . . that currently the pharmaceutical companies are unable to invest in due to inabilities to promise shareholder returns.” Since pharmaceutical companies view certain proposed vaccine products as an unprofitable venture, the costs are subsidized through “product development partnerships” like Baylor’s. As Hotez explains, a key source of funds is the government, meaning that the costs of vaccine development are being subsidized by the taxpayers.

“Fueling investor hesitancy”, he explains in a paper in Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics, “are the recent shortcomings and public reactions to newly introduced vaccines for malaria and dengue despite billion-dollar investments from Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) and Sanofi Pasteur, respectively, on top of an accelerating global antivaccine movement.”

He doesn’t illuminate why the public had negative reactions to these vaccines. The reason this was so for GSK’s malaria vaccine was that, while it was shown to be initially effective, the protective effect waned over time and after five years of follow up resulted in children being at an increased risk of infection from malaria parasites. The reason this was so for Sanofi’s dengue vaccine was that, after it was implemented into the childhood schedule the Philippines upon the recommendation of the World Health Organization (WHO) and hundreds of thousands of doses were administered under the pretense of a proven “safe” vaccine, it was likewise shown to increase the risk of serious dengue infection among children who had not already experienced a prior infection. The public outrage was all the more pronounced because it was also learned that Sanofi, Philippines health officials, and the WHO had ignored early warnings that the vaccine might cause precisely that outcome.

It is highly instructive that Hotez views the problem not as the proven untrustworthiness of the pharmaceutical companies and government health agencies, but rather the inability of the industry to fund products that are dangerous and cost ineffective. It’s equally instructive that he mindlessly dismisses public opposition as mere “antivaccine” sentiment attributable to some monolithic “movement” rather than reflecting parents’ legitimate concerns, including anger over entire populations being used essentially as subjects of a mass uncontrolled experiment without informed consent. Relevantly, the decline in vaccination rates in the Philippines was a result of this rightful erosion of public trust, which is attributed with causing a major measles outbreak in 2017.

Superficially, the measles risk analysis Hotez presents to New York Times readers is persuasive. The way he presents his data, it’s a no-brainer that parents in the US should vaccinate their children since the risks from measles so obviously outweigh the risks from the vaccine. But Hotez is preying on people’s ignorance by presenting an invalid risk-benefit analysis that is not serious and does not address parents’ legitimate concerns about vaccinating their children strictly according to the CDC’s schedule. Rather, the article is transparently intended to deceive parents about the risks in order to scare them into compliance.

This can be demonstrated by examining some of the major problems with his presented analysis.

Contents

Problem 1: The Measles Vaccination Rate in the US Has Not Fallen
Problem 2: Ignoring the Low Risk of Getting Measles
Problem 3: Ignoring Non-Vaccine Factors of Risk Reduction
Problem 4: Misinforming about the Fatality Rate of Measles in the US
Problem 5: Misinforming about the Risks of Vaccination
Problem 6: Asserting the Measles “Immune Amnesia” Hypothesis as Proven Fact
Problem 7: Misinforming about the Vaccine-Autism Hypothesis

Conclusion
Problem 1: The Measles Vaccination Rate in the US Has Not Fallen
In the context of his claim that “vaccination rates have fallen”, Hotez adds that “vaccine hesitancy is contributing to” measles outbreaks in the US. However, it’s not true that vaccination rates in the US have fallen. In fact, the trend has been an increase in the national vaccination rate over time, according to CDC data. Here’s what the data looks like graphed over time for the percentage of children aged 19 to 35 months who’ve received one or more doses of the measles vaccine, with a linear trendline:
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/MMR-vax-rate-preschool.png

And here’s what the CDC’s data show for the measles vaccination rate for kindergarten-aged children, again with trendline (this dataset starts at 2009, and no data is available for the 2010-11 school year):
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/MMR-vax-rate-kindergarten.png

Of course, there is variation in vaccination rates year to year, and vaccination rates certainly vary by community, but Hotez’s suggestion that the trend in the US is a general decline in the vaccination rate is false. The vaccination rate for school-aged children has rather remained steady over time between 94 percent and 95 percent, and if anything has trended upward.

Problem 2: Ignoring the Low Risk of Getting Measles
The most fundamental glaring fallacy of Hotez’s risk analysis is that it is based on the assumption that if the child is not vaccinated, the child will get measles. His title says he’s presenting the odds for a child who doesn’t get the vaccine and got sick. But it isn’t a given that an unvaccinated child will get measles. When he says his analysis is “to compare the risks of becoming ill with measles” with the risks of vaccinating, he is being untruthful since his analysis falsely assumes that the unvaccinated child gets measles.

The fundamental problem with this assumption, of course, is that the chances of a child in the US being exposed to measles, much less becoming permanently injured or killed by the virus, is also very low. Hotez’s failure to take this fact into consideration alone completely invalidates his analysis. Parents living in the US today must consider—and intuitively do consider—the fact that the policy of mass vaccination has succeeded in its goal of reducing measles incidence. The idea that they should place their own child at unnecessary risk of harm from the vaccine for some collectivist concept of a “greater good” is obviously repulsive to many parents, and rightly so.

To do what Hotez fails to do and help quantify the risk of getting measles, according to the CDC, from 2010 through 2019, there were 3,237 reported measles cases, which is an average of about 324 cases per year. The US has a population of about 330 million, so that’s about 1 measles case annually per 1 million population. This compares with the annual odds of being struck by lightning, which is 1 in 1.2 million according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Problem 3: Ignoring Non-Vaccine Factors of Risk Reduction
The third glaring problem with Hotez’s analysis is that, in the text of his article, he cites the high death rate in the recent outbreak in Samoa as though it was relevant for the risk-benefit analysis of the New York Times’s predominantly American audience. (While the Times certainly has a global reach, according to traffic data from SimilarWeb, more than 78 percent of its website’s audience are in the US.)

His graphic shows a fatality rate in Samoa of 146 deaths per 10,000 cases (83 deaths out of 5,697 cases). What he doesn’t explicitly inform his American readers is that measles mortality differs by population. While mortality remains tragically high in developing countries, in developed countries like the US, the mortality rate is very low. His graph does show the Samoan fatality rate as a separate figure from the “10 to 30 child deaths” that he says occur for every 10,000 people who get measles (which is untrue, as we’ll come to), but he offers no comment on why the death rate in Samoa is so much higher.

Hotez also does not inform his readers that most of the decline in measles mortality seen in the US during the twentieth century occurred before the introduction of the first measles vaccine in 1963. During the pre-vaccine era in the US, measles was seen as a mostly benign illness that, yes, could and did sometimes cause death, but which most children’s immune systems handled just fine on their own, resulting in the development of a robust lifelong immunity.

https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/measles-mortality.jpg

The obvious question this raises is what factors other than vaccination affect the risk of complications from measles infection. In light of this important question, it’s useful to point out that this dramatic decline in mortality wasn’t true just for measles. In fact, as noted in a paper published in 2000 in Pediatrics, the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), “nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940, when few antibiotics or vaccines were available.” Hence, “vaccination does not account for the impressive declines in mortality seen in the first half of the century.”

The dramatic decline in infectious disease mortality is attributed instead to factors associated with a general increase in the standard of living, including improved nutritional status among children. With measles, for example, Vitamin A deficiency is a known risk factor for potentially deadly complications.

Hotez demonstrates a total lack of curiosity about what the risk factors are for measles complications. This reflects the attitude of public health officials back in the 1960s. Rather than directing resources toward determining the risk factors and developing targeted interventions for children at higher risk, vaccination was selected as a one-size-fits-all solution, and science ever since has been trapped in this myopic and pharmaceutical-centric approach to disease prevention. The narcissistic attitude of public health officials in 1962 in declaring the goal of eradicating measles in the US within a year with just a single dose of the vaccine—despite measles being recognized as a “self-limiting infection of short duration, moderate severity, and low fatality”—was that this should be done because “it can be done.”

Needless to say, the assumptions underlying that policy were wrong.

Problem 4: Misinforming about the Fatality Rate of Measles in the US
As just noted, Hotez claims that the childhood death rate for measles is 10 to 30 deaths per 10,000 cases, implying that this is true for the US population. He does not specify his source for this claim. (He has a note in the article presenting a broad range of sources, but without identifying which sources were used for which data.)

Presumably, he is just relaying the CDC’s claim on its website that “Nearly 1 to 3 of every 1,000 children who become infected with measles will die from respiratory and neurologic complications.” On another page of its website, the CDC states, “For every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die from it.”

But during the pre-vaccine era in the US, according to the CDC’s own data, there were about 500 deaths annually out of an estimated 3 – 4 million cases. That’s not 10 to 30 but 1 to 2 deaths for every 10,000 cases. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) in a 1994 report likewise stated that, in developed countries like the US, “the measles fatality rate is 1 per 10,000 cases”.

The explanation for these contradictory numbers is that the CDC is deceptively using only reported cases in its denominator. Of the estimated 3 – 4 million cases, most were mild infections that did not lead to hospitalization or complications. Only about 500,000 cases were reported annually. The CDC’s statement that one or two children will die for every 1,000 children who get measles either is a bald-faced lie that ignores the fact that most cases weren’t reported or means that the fatality rate today is an order of magnitude higher than it was in the 1950s and early 1960s.

Indeed, mass vaccination has resulted in a shifted risk burden and an increased rate of deaths per reported cases, as we’ll come to. The point for now is that Hotez deceitfully presents a fatality rate for measles at least 10 times greater than that shown by CDC data and accepted by the IOM for the US population in the absence of vaccination.

Problem 5: Misinforming about the Risks of Vaccination
According to Hotez’s graphic, there are only three adverse events associated with the measles vaccine.

He states that only 3 febrile seizures occur for every 10,000 people who get the measles vaccine. He says in a footnote that such seizures “are not associated with long-term effects”. He adds that febrile seizures “also occur overall in 2 percent to 5 percent of all children 6 months to 5 years of age”, but, of course, the US childhood population is highly vaccinated, and Hotez doesn’t provide any data on the rate of febrile seizures among children vaccinated according to the CDC’s schedule compared with the rate among completely unvaccinated children.

Contrary to Hotez’s claim that febrile seizures are not associated with long-term harm, a recent study in JAMA Pediatrics, a journal of the American Medical Association (AMA), found that recurrent febrile seizures are associated with an increased risk of epilepsy and psychiatric disorders and, for children who later developed epilepsy, an increased risk of death.

Another study published last year in JAMA Network Open found febrile seizures to be associated with an increased risk for “sudden unexplained death in childhood (SUDC)”.

A Lancet study published online in 2018 similarly found an association between febrile seizures and an increased risk of psychiatric disorders later in life.

In a study published in 2018 in the journal Brain & Development, Japanese researchers found febrile seizures to be associated with an overall “18.76-fold” increased risk of developing epilepsy, with higher risk for children who were female, had recurring febrile seizures, or had autism.

A paper published in Cell Reports in 2018 stated that “early-life seizures are associated with language deficits and autism that can result from aberrant development of the auditory cortex.”

A study published in Seizure in 2017 concluded that seizures “tend to recur and increase the risk of development of epilepsy in the patient.”

A 2017 study in Pediatric Neurology found febrile seizures and epilepsy to be associated with an increased risk of being clinically examined for early symptoms of neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism.

Another study from earlier in 2017 noted that the measles vaccine increases the risk of potentially seizure-inducing fever and suggested “a possible genetic basis for susceptibility to developing fever due to measles vaccines.”

These more recent studies contradict the finding of a study published in JAMA in 2004 that found no association between febrile seizures and the risk of epilepsy. However, that earlier study also admitted that “little is known about the long-term outcome of febrile seizures following vaccination.”

In other words, the science on this, far from being settled, has just begun. More directly to the point, Peter Hotez’s statement that febrile seizures after vaccination “are not associated with long-term effects” is false.

Hotez’s graphic says that abnormal blood clotting occurs in “1 case per 25,000 to 40,000 doses” of measles vaccine. He doesn’t specify his source, but these are the same numbers provided by a 2009 article in Paediatrics & Child Health that noted an “increasing body of evidence” supporting a link between the measles vaccine and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura. The authors acknowledged that one of the limitations of their estimate was that it was based on data requiring treating physicians to document receipt of any vaccines within the previous month, whereas another study had found that doctors had only inquired about recent vaccination in 15 percent of cases with vaccine-associated thrombocytopenia. Hence, the figures presented are likely to be underestimated.

Hotez’s graphic also says that 1 to 3.5 allergic reactions occur for every 1 million doses of measles vaccine administered. He specifies no source, but this is the same estimate presented in a 2015 study in Clinical and Translational Medicine that compiled data from prior studies looking at the risk of allergic reaction to the measles vaccine, including a 2008 study in Archives of Disease in Childhood that says the best estimate of the incidence of anaphylaxis for the combination measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine in the UK was a study showing a much higher rate of 14 allergic reactions for every 1 million doses administered. Another prior study cited is a 2003 CDC study in Pediatrics looking at data from four health maintenance organizations in the US and estimating 1.1 to 3.5 cases per 1 million doses administered. However, the authors acknowledged this “likely represents an underestimate of the risk”, and for the site “with the most comprehensive data”, the risk for anaphylaxis from the measles vaccine was estimated to be 14.4 cases per 1 million doses. That result was considered an overestimate because of confounding: since children frequently receive multiple vaccines at once, it was impossible for them to know which vaccine caused the allergic reaction (or whether it was the combination itself that caused it). The point is that we really don’t know, and the numbers presented by Hotez are, according to the CDC’s own research, likely underestimated.

Whereas Hotez acknowledges only those three possible adverse reactions to the vaccine, Merck acknowledges numerous others. Under federal regulations, manufacturers are required to warn consumers about “adverse events for which there is some basis to believe there is a causal relationship between the drug and the occurrence of the adverse event.” On its product package insert, Merck lists among the possible side effects of its measles vaccine the following: fever, syncope (fainting), headache, dizziness, vasculitis (a condition in which the immune system mistakenly attacks the blood vessels, causing inflammation that can lead to serious problems, including aneurysms), pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas that occurs when the digestive enzymes it produces begin digesting the pancreas itself), diarrhea, vomiting, parotitis (inflammation of the parotid glands), nausea, diabetes mellitus (diabetes), thrombocytopenia (the disorder Hotez mentions in which there is an abnormally low amount of platelets that help blood to clot), anaphylaxis (the life-threatening allergic reaction that Hotez acknowledges), arthritis (joint inflammation), arthralgia (joint pain), myalgia (muscle pain), encephalitis (inflammation of the brain that can cause permanent brain damage or death), Guillain-Barré syndrome (an autoimmune disorder in which the immune system attacks the peripheral nervous system, which can result in paralysis or death), febrile seizures, afebrile seizures (convulsions without fever), pneumonia, measles-like rash, and death.

This is not to say that the vaccine is known with certainty to cause each of these adverse events. They are just an acknowledgement by Merck of the uncertainty and the biological plausibility that their product might cause any of these outcomes, based on the limited data available from clinical trials and postmarketing surveillance.

This brings us to another fact that parents must take into consideration, which is that the clinical trials used by the manufacturers to obtain licensure from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) consider only short-term adverse reactions. They do not consider long-term detrimental effects. They aren’t designed, for example, to determine whether vaccines administered according to the CDC’s schedule can contribute to the development of neurological disorders, autoimmune diseases, cancers, or other chronic illnesses later in life. This is highly concerning given the epidemic of chronic illness among children. A study published in Academic Pediatrics in 2011 estimated that at least 43 percent of children in the US have one or more chronic health conditions.

Essentially, after obtaining licensure, the population becomes the subject of a mass uncontrolled experiment. Once a vaccine is licensed and recommended for routine use, it’s typically considered “unethical” to conduct randomized, placebo-controlled studies on the grounds that it wouldn’t be right to deny the placebo group the benefits of the vaccine—which is, of course, the fallacy of begging the question.

For vaccines already on the market, there is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), but it’s recognized that this passive surveillance system suffers the problem of severe underreporting of adverse events.

Researchers also conduct observational studies using population data, such as from private health care networks or government registries, but this type of study design has methodological limitations and tends to suffer from the problem of selection bias, such as the common “healthy user” bias.

As an example of this type of selection bias, a 2015 JAMA study found that children with elder autistic siblings are less likely to get the measles vaccine, presumably because their parents have heightened concerns about the vaccine contributing to the development of autism in the younger sibling and so skip the shot.

This suggests that observational studies comparing the risk of autism between children who received the measles vaccine and children who didn’t are prone to a healthy vaccinee bias wherein children at higher risk of developing autism tend to be pooled within the “unvaccinated” cohort. Consequently, the appropriate conclusion to draw is not that children who are vaccinated have no greater risk for autism but that children at greater risk for autism are less likely to be vaccinated.

(Instructively, that study actually found vaccination to be associated with a decreased risk of autism, which is itself evidence of selection bias since the null hypothesis is that there is no association, meaning that the rate of autism should be the same for vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Despite confirming the existence of a healthy vaccinee selection bias, which had also been identified by prior studies, this study was hailed by both its authors and the media as showing that the measles vaccine is not associated with an increased risk of autism even in genetically susceptible children, which is a useful illustration of the institutionalized cognitive dissonance that exists when it comes to the special class of pharmaceutical products known as vaccines.)

In short, observational studies don’t enable scientists to control for innumerable potentially confounding variables as well as the randomized, placebo-controlled trial, which is why the latter is considered the gold standard for safety studies. A found association from observational data doesn’t necessarily mean a causal relationship, and a finding of no association does not mean that no association exists.

Returning to Hotez’s focus on death as an outcome, he offers no estimate of the risk of death from the vaccine, but from 2010 through 2017, there were 40 deaths reported to VAERS following measles vaccination. This is not to say that the vaccine caused those deaths. Perhaps only a small percentage of reported vaccine-associated deaths are caused by the vaccine. However, it might also be that deaths following vaccination are not reported to VAERS. While there is a higher chance of reporting for more serious adverse events, severe underreporting, again, is a known problem with this passive surveillance system.

By comparison, according to CDC data, during the same period, there were only 4 deaths attributed to measles. None of these deaths were in children. All were adults aged 25 or older.

This is significant due to what’s known in the literature as “secondary vaccine failure”, or waning immunity. Whereas adults during the pre-vaccine era were generally protected from measles by the robust natural immunity they’d gained from experiencing infection during childhood as well as the natural boosting effect of repeated exposures from children, adults today are at higher risk in the event of infection due to secondary vaccine failure. (Primary vaccine failure is when the vaccine fails to stimulate a protective level of antibodies in the first place, which is estimated to occur in anywhere from 2 percent to 10 percent of children.)

Infants, too, are at higher risk today in the event of infection due to mass vaccination since their vaccinated mothers are less well able to confer passive maternal immunity to their babies with antibodies transferred prenatally through the placenta and postnatally through breastmilk.

This brings us to a caveat that must be emphasized with respect to using pre-vaccine era data on measles mortality, which is that the ratio of deaths per reported cases has since increased due to mass vaccination having shifted the risk burden away from school-aged children, in whom it is generally a benign illness, and onto those at higher risk of potentially deadly complications.

As already discussed, during the pre-vaccine era, this rate was about 1 death per 1,000 reported cases. (Not to be confused with the accepted fatality rate of 1 death per 10,000 cases.) But as noted by two leading experts in a 1994 paper in Archives of Internal Medicine, by 1990, the death rate had risen “dramatically” to 3.2 deaths per 1,000 reported cases, “reflecting the increased incidence of measles infection in infants and adults relative to children older than 1 year of age.” A 2004 study in the Journal of Infectious Diseases similarly attributed the increased death rate in part to “a higher proportion of cases among preschool-aged children and adults.” Another 2004 study in the same journal likewise attributed the “increased mortality among the younger and older age groups” to “the increased risk and severity” of deadly complications for infants and adults.

According to CDC data, from 1999 through 2017, there were 12 deaths in the US for which the underlying cause was determined to be measles. Two cases were infants under one year of age, two others were children aged one to four, and the remaining two-thirds of cases were adults aged twenty-five or older. During the same period, there were 2,393 reported cases of measles. Hence, more recent data show a still-increasing death rate of about 5 deaths per 1,000 reported cases.

Naturally, Peter Hotez does not inform Times readers that the policy of mass vaccination has resulted in an increased risk of death among infants and adults in the event of infection due to public policy having shifted the risk burden by destroying the natural herd immunity the US population was already well into developing, in which adults were generally protected throughout their lifetimes and infants were protected through strong maternal passive immunity until their immune systems were developed enough to be able to fight off the infection on their own.

Problem 6: Asserting the Measles “Immune Amnesia” Hypothesis as Proven Fact
Whereas Hotez would have his readers believe that the risk of dying as a result of getting the measles vaccine is virtually zero and unquestionably lower than the risk of dying if left unvaccinated, the truth is that we don’t know because clinical trials were never done to determine the vaccine’s effect on overall mortality.

This is a problem with all vaccines. An expert review published in June 2019 expressed the concern that “it is impossible to predict what happens in terms of susceptibility to infections in general, of all types, when the immune system is being stimulated through vaccination”.

There are observational studies that have been done in African countries looking at this question. Studies have found the measles vaccine to be associated with a decreased rate of childhood mortality that cannot be attributed to prevention of measles alone. In fact, this has been observed even in areas with no acute measles mortality.

Hotez alludes to this body of research when he claims that “the measles virus can suppress the immune system, rendering children susceptible to serious infections like pneumonia and the flu.”

He’s referring to the hypothesis of measles “immune amnesia”, which was conceived to try to explain the observation of an association between vaccination and decreased mortality from other diseases. It has been known since the pre-vaccine era that measles can cause a temporary suppression of the immune system that increases the risk of secondary infections. (Hotez’s graphic states that the “most common cause of death” is pneumonia, for example, which in many cases is caused not by the measles virus itself but by some secondary infection.) The “immune amnesia” hypothesis is that measles does not just cause a temporary immunosuppression but a long-term effect that may “wipe out” acquired immunity to other infectious diseases."
continued

onawah

25th January 2020, 00:41

continued from: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?106821-The-US-Vaccine-issue-is-more-than-just-about-the-Shots-it-is-about-totalitarian-tiptoe&p=1332894&viewfull=1#post1332894

"One problem with this hypothesis is that it’s based on the additional observation that measles virus infection results in a depletion of antibodies and the B-cells that make them. In the paradigm of vaccination, this would seem to equate to an elimination of immunity. Indeed, for the purposes of vaccine licensure, the production of antibodies is treated as equivalent to immunity. The problem with this framework is that antibodies are neither always sufficient nor even necessary for the development of immunity.

Measles itself happens to provide a perfect example of that. Children with a disorder rendering their immune system incapable of producing a protective level of antibodies are still protected from measles due to another branch of the immune system known as cell-mediated immunity. Children suffering from deficits in cell-mediated immunity, on the other hand, can still die of measles despite producing levels of antibodies considered “protective”.

A study published in BMJ Open in 2016 emphasized another major problem with the “immune amnesia” hypothesis, which is that “all available studies—including the present one—suggest lower mortality rather than excess mortality among those who survive the acute phase of measles infection.”

To repeat: what studies show is that measles infection is associated with a lower risk of dying from other diseases, not a higher risk as assumed under the “immune amnesia” hypothesis.

In other words, while the live virus vaccine seems to train the immune system in ways that provide “non-specific” benefits, so does infection with the wild virus. This should not be too surprising since the vaccine is intended to cause an immune response similar to that caused by infection. As a 2002 study published in the journal Vaccine observed, in populations where measles is a “mild disease”, which certainly includes the US, “measles infection may be associated with better overall survival than no measles infection.” Studies indicate that “lower post-measles mortality compensates for acute measles mortality and as a consequence, measles infection has a lower than expected overall impact on survival.”

In fact, apart from training the immune system to protect the host from other pathogens, measles infection during childhood has been associated with a decreased risk of numerous other diseases later in life, including degenerative bone disease, certain tumors, Parkinson’s disease, allergic disease, chronic lymphoid leukemia, both non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin lymphoma, and cardiovascular disease.

In another paper published in Expert Review of Vaccines in 2018, top researchers in the field of “non-specific effects” of vaccines once again emphasized that a fundamental problem with the “immune amnesia” hypothesis is that, “in the five published studies which examined whether post-measles infection is associated with long-term excess mortality, there is a trend towards lower subsequent mortality for individuals who survived acute measles infection.”

The authors of that paper also stressed that “vaccines need to be evaluated for their effects on overall health”, which would require a shift from the existing outdated paradigm in which vaccine safety science and the regulatory apparatus of the US government is stuck.

And whereas the live virus measles vaccine seems to train the immune system in beneficial ways similar to measles infection, non-live vaccines have been associated with detrimental non-specific effects. The diphtheria, tetanus, and whole cell pertussis (DTP) vaccine, for instance, which is the most widely used vaccine in the world, has been associated with a significantly increased risk of childhood death. (The DTP vaccine has been replaced in the US with an acellular pertussis vaccine, DTaP, which is also a non-live vaccine.)

In a review published last year, Peter Aaby and Christine Benn, two leading researchers in this field involved in the aforementioned research, once again pointed out that, contrary to the “immune amnesia” hypothesis, studies rather have “suggested that measles infection could have a beneficial effect on survival” and hence have “refuted the hypothesis”.

As Christine Benn has also remarked with respect to that recent review, “No vaccines have been studied for their non-specific effects on overall health, and before we have examined these, we cannot actually determine that the vaccines are safe.”

Problem 7: Misinforming about the Vaccine-Autism Hypothesis
Hotez’s graphic states that there is no risk of autism from the measles vaccine. By his telling, “fears that vaccines can cause autism” originated “in the late 1990s” because of “an article implying a link between measles vaccinations and autism” that was published in The Lancet in 1998 but “retracted in 2010 over concerns about the validity of the results and the conduct of the study.”

But that narrative is demonstrably false. The 1998 Lancet study was not the origin of parental concerns about vaccines causing autism. The claim that the study made “the false claim that vaccines can cause autism” is itself a false claim that’s incessantly circulated by the mainstream media. The truth is that the authors explicitly stated that they did not show a causal relationship between the measles vaccine and autism. Rather, they merely relayed the observation from children’s parents or doctors that developmental regression occurred following vaccination, and they reasonably hypothesized that there might be a link, suggesting that further studies should be done to investigate this possibility.

Apart from routinely lying that the study claimed to have found a causal link, the mainstream media are fond of pointing out that the lead author of the study, Andrew Wakefield, was stripped of his medical license in the United Kingdom for the concerns about the conduct of the study mentioned by Hotez. What the media never inform readers is that one of Wakefield’s coauthors, John Walker-Smith, was also stripped of his license but appealed and was reinstated on the grounds that the accusations against him were spurious and unsupported by the available evidence. The reason Wakefield didn’t also appeal was because, unlike his colleague, his insurance policy wouldn’t cover the costs.

The fact that parental concerns about vaccines causing autism existed long before the 1998 Lancet study is easily demonstrated by the fact that the Institute of Medicine acknowledged this concern in a report published in 1991. Specifically, the IOM found “no evidence” to support a causal relationship between the DTP vaccine, which was unsurprising given the IOM’s observation that no studies had been done to test that hypothesis.

Peter Hotez and the mainstream media in general would have people believe that the only reason parents think that vaccines can cause autism is because they’ve been duped into that belief by a fraudulent study falsely claiming to have found a causal association. The truth is that the belief that vaccines can cause autism originated from parents who witnessed their children developmentally regress after vaccination. This belief existed before the 1998 Lancet study and would persist today had it never been published in the first place.

Hotez also would have his readers believe that studies have since falsified the hypothesis. The CDC itself boldly asserts on its website that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”. To support this claim, the CDC cites several observational studies and a 2004 IOM review that explicitly acknowledged that the hypothesis cannot be excluded by observational studies. In fact, not one of the observational studies reviewed even considered the possibility of genetically susceptible subpopulations.

To say that studies have found no association between vaccines and autism is practically meaningless in light of the fact that no studies have been designed to test the hypothesis that vaccines administered according to the CDC’s routine childhood schedule can contribute to the development of autism in children with a genetic or environmentally caused susceptibility.

As the IOM observed in a 2013 review, “No studies have compared the differences in health outcomes . . . between entirely unimmunized populations of children and fully immunized children”; “existing research has not been designed to test the entire immunization schedule”; “studies designed to examine the long-term effects of the cumulative number of vaccines or other aspects of the immunization schedule have not been conducted”.

Going even further in his denialism, days after his New York Times article was published, Hotez claimed on Twitter that “Vaccines do not injure children.”

Prof Peter Hotez MD PhD
@PeterHotez
Facts: Vaccines do not injure children. Unvaccinated children at risk for serious infections as in NY last yr when #antivax lobby landed 52 in hospital,16 in ICU from #measles. Hundreds more sustained damaged immune systems. Antiscience movements threaten child health in America https://twitter.com/ChildrensHD/status/1216878003663273990 …

Children's Health Defense
@ChildrensHD
Facts: Vaccines injure children. Unvaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children. The science speaks. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/Vaxxed-Unvaxxed-Full-Presentation-Parts-I-VI.pdf … https://twitter.com/PeterHotez/status/1216870349058560001 …

411
6:39 AM - Jan 14, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
335 people are talking about this

Yet the federal government administers a program called the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which awards compensation to children who suffer any of a list of adverse events acknowledged to be caused by vaccines. These outcomes are listed on what’s known as the Vaccine Injury Table. Children suffering from a table injury after vaccination are presumed to have suffered from a vaccine injury absent some other more likely explanation for the outcome. For injuries not listed on the table, the burden of proof is on the petitioner to show that vaccination was the most likely cause of the injury. The government can also settle cases, in which case awarded compensation is not deemed to be an acknowledgment that vaccination caused the injury.

One of the adverse events listed for the measles vaccine on the Vaccine Injury Table is encephalopathy, which encompasses any type of brain damage, disorder, or disease. This includes encephalitis, which is brain inflammation. Whereas Hotez flatly denied that any vaccine causes any injury, even the manufacturer of the measles vaccine, Merck, acknowledges in its world-bestselling medical textbook, The Merck Manual, that “Encephalitis can occur as a secondary immunologic complication of certain viral infections or vaccinations.” (Emphasis added.)

In one famous VICP case, the government acknowledged that vaccines can cause brain damage manifesting as symptoms of autism. The family of a girl named Hannah Poling was awarded compensation for her having suffered a table injury, which was encephalopathy. She regressed into diagnosed autism after receiving nine vaccine doses at once at nineteen months of age. The government conceded that the vaccines she received “significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder.”

The head of the CDC at the time, Julie Gerberding, publicly admitted that, in children “predisposed with a mitochondrial disorder”, vaccines can cause brain damage that manifests as “symptoms that have characteristics of autism.”

Hannah also happened to be a patient of a leading expert on autism, Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, who served as an expert witness in VICP cases on behalf of the government until he informed the government’s lawyers that vaccines can cause autism in children with mitochondrial dysfunction. His services were then deemed no longer required by the government lawyers, who went on to falsely claim, in order to deny compensation in a later case, that it was Zimmerman’s view that vaccines cannot cause autism. (Dr. Zimmerman testified to this in an affidavit last year.)

Even Dr. Frank DeStefano, the director of the CDC’s own Immunization Safety Office and a top researcher whose name appears on a number of the studies the agency cites to support its claim that vaccines don’t cause autism, has acknowledged that “it’s a possibility” that vaccines could cause autism in genetically susceptible children, but that the problem is it’s “hard to predict who those children might be”, and trying to determine the underlying cofactors that might place certain individuals at greater risk of vaccine injury is “very difficult to do”.

This is one of the fundamental problems that public vaccine policy apologists like Peter Hotez refuse to acknowledge: it treats vaccination as a one-size-fits-all solution despite individual variability in risk for the disease a given vaccine is designed to protect against and individual variability in the risk of the vaccine causing serious harm. Hotez joins public policy officials in unscientifically refusing to recognize that the risk-benefit analysis must be done for each vaccine and each individual child.

The idea that government bureaucrats with none of the specialized knowledge of the individual required to conduct a meaningful risk benefit analysis should dictate to parents what’s in their child’s best interest is both ludicrous and tyrannical.

Yet Hotez is a fierce opponent of the right to informed consent when it comes to vaccination and heavily involved in political activism, using his credentials as a scientist to advocate for the elimination of non-medical exemptions to routine childhood vaccinations. The use of government force to compel parents into compliance with government policy goals is incompatible with the right to make an informed choice about any medical intervention free from force, fraud, deceit, or any other form of coercion.

The VICP, by the way, was established under a 1986 law that also granted broad legal immunity to manufacturers of vaccines recommended for routine use in children by the CDC. The purpose and effect of the law is to shift the financial burden for vaccine injuries away from the pharmaceutical industry and onto the taxpaying consumers.

If Hotez were correct that “Vaccines do not injure children”, then obviously there would be no case to be made that the government should continue administering the VICP, and the pharmaceutical companies should have nothing to fear from the revocation of legal immunity.

Conclusion
Peter Hotez’s goal with his New York Times article is to persuade parents that it’s in their best interests to get their children the measles vaccine in compliance with the CDC’s schedule. But to that end, he presents a risk analysis that is fundamentally flawed and deceptive.

His whole analysis depends on the false assumption that to forego vaccination is to accept the risks associated with measles infection, whereas parents living in the US today must also take into consideration the fact that the odds of their child being exposed to measles in the first place—much less being permanently injured or killed by the virus—are very small. He claims vaccination rates have been falling when in fact the trend over time has been an increase in the proportion of children who’ve received the measles vaccine.

Hotez also overstates the risk of death from measles by claiming a fatality rate of 10 to 30 deaths for every 10,000 cases despite the CDC’s own data showing a pre-vaccine era fatality rate in the US of just 1 per 10,000 cases, which is the rate accepted by the authoritative Institute of Medicine. The caveat to this is that the rate of deaths per reported cases has since increased, but this is an unintended albeit foreseeable consequence of having shifted the risk burden away from children and onto infants and adults. Hotez also presents the fatality rate in the recent Samoan outbreak of 146 deaths per 10,000 cases, offering no comment on why the death rate would be so high there compared to the pre-vaccine-era rate in the US and other developed countries of 1 per 10,000—a difference in risk attributable entirely to factors other than vaccination.

Hotez also grossly understates the risks of vaccination, acknowledging only three possible adverse events associated with the measles vaccine and stating on Twitter less than a week after his article was published that “Vaccines do not injure children” despite the government administering the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program to indemnify the pharmaceutical industry against lawsuits for serious adverse events acknowledged to be causally associated with vaccines, despite the measles vaccine’s own manufacturer acknowledging that vaccines can cause encephalitis, and despite the government’s acknowledgment that vaccines can cause brain damage manifesting as symptoms of autism in genetically susceptible children. He falsely claims that vaccine-associated febrile seizures are not associated with long-term harm, which is yet another indication either of his dishonesty or, assuming good faith, that he just hasn’t been keeping up with the science.

Hotez claims that the idea “that vaccines can cause autism” is “misinformation” despite no studies ever having been conducted that were actually designed to test the hypothesis that vaccines administered according to the CDC’s schedule can contribute to the development of autism in genetically susceptible children and despite the admission from even the CDC’s own head of vaccine safety that it’s possible that vaccines might cause autism in genetically susceptible children.

The refusal of public policy apologists like Hotez to address parents’ countless legitimate concerns and the insistence on offhandedly dismissing those concerns as though totally unfounded is precisely why they are finding it so hard to persuade “vaccine hesitant” parents to line up their children to get all the shots in strict compliance with the CDC’s recommendations.

As long as people like Hotez continue to take the alternative approach of using fear, deception, and government coercion to compel parents into compliance, an increasing number of parents will continue to raise reasonable questions, express legitimate concerns, and trust their own judgement as to what’s in their children’s best interest rather than placing their faith in untrustworthy government bureaucrats who have none of the knowledge required to be able to conduct a meaningful risk-benefit analysis for the individual. As long as public policy apologists like Hotez continue to threaten our children’s health by insisting upon vaccination as a one-size-fits-all solution and continue to threaten our liberty by assaulting the parental right to informed consent, the number of parents who not only question public policy but who stand up and speak out against it will continue to grow."

Sarah Rainsong

25th January 2020, 22:06

First, thank you for a very in-depth and reasonable analysis onawah!

continued from: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?106821-The-US-Vaccine-issue-is-more-than-just-about-the-Shots-it-is-about-totalitarian-tiptoe&p=1332894&viewfull=1#post1332894
The refusal of public policy apologists like Hotez to address parents’ countless legitimate concerns and the insistence on offhandedly dismissing those concerns as though totally unfounded is precisely why they are finding it so hard to persuade “vaccine hesitant” parents to line up their children to get all the shots in strict compliance with the CDC’s recommendations.

As long as people like Hotez continue to take the alternative approach of using fear, deception, and government coercion to compel parents into compliance, an increasing number of parents will continue to raise reasonable questions, express legitimate concerns, and trust their own judgement as to what’s in their children’s best interest rather than placing their faith in untrustworthy government bureaucrats who have none of the knowledge required to be able to conduct a meaningful risk-benefit analysis for the individual. As long as public policy apologists like Hotez continue to threaten our children’s health by insisting upon vaccination as a one-size-fits-all solution and continue to threaten our liberty by assaulting the parental right to informed consent, the number of parents who not only question public policy but who stand up and speak out against it will continue to grow."

This has EXACTLY been my experience in talking with other moms about vaccines. Most are clueless to a larger picture. They adamantly oppose anything the might be considered conspiracy theory or a greater agenda. But they have encountered too many doctors "offhandedly dismissing those concerns as though totally unfounded." Don't get me wrong, it's a highly polarizing debate. Many don't want to be labelled "anti-vaxer" (that's practically a slur!!!) but they have concerns and their concerns are not going away. To paraphrase Princess Leia: "the more they tighten their grip, the more people slip through their fingers."

Jenya

25th January 2020, 23:00

While I certainly applaud and encourage anyone who takes the initiative to educate themselves about their health and to make informed choices on a case by case basis... I do find it odd that anyone could be completely opposed to vaccination.

The near-elimination in the West of a plethora of diseases that were killing and maiming thousands as recently as during my parent's childhoods is pretty strong evidence that vaccines are not the enemy.

Any medicine comes with risks. Vaccine "injuries" are no more remarkable than those caused to an unlucky minority by all manner of both allopathic and 'natural' medicines.

I agree that one should not shrug off the risk of life-ruining side effects, work undoubtedly needs to continue to improve and refine vaccine technology.
I also agree that anything mandated by the government should be treated with skepticism and scrutiny. But I do believe that it is genuinely a necessity to make the administration of certain vaccines mandatory. I do think the European vaccine schedule is pretty sensible, but I can understand why people in the USA might balk at the sheer number of shots they are required to get. I don't believe that all of those are either necessary or advisable. The risk vs benefit balance seems quite skewed.

But I would really love to see more of a measured, balanced approach to the issue. It seems that the debate is polarised. All vaccines are not bad, but equally we need to weigh risk vs benefit carefully before deciding to make every available vaccine mandatory just 'because'.

onawah

25th January 2020, 23:51

If you do enough research, as some of us have who post regularly here, you will find that the whole "science" behind vaccines was flawed in the beginning, and the victories that vaccine proponents attribute to vaccines were actually due to better understanding of hygiene, better sewage, cleaner water, refrigeration, etc. The theory used to create vaccines was based on homeopathy, which is safe and effective, but the theory was incredibly wrong. Bypassing the human body's immune system and injecting foreign and toxic agents directly into tissue is stupid and very dangerous.

While I certainly applaud and encourage anyone who takes the initiative to educate themselves about their health and to make informed choices on a case by case basis... I do find it odd that anyone could be completely opposed to vaccination.

The near-elimination in the West of a plethora of diseases that were killing and maiming thousands as recently as during my parent's childhoods is pretty strong evidence that vaccines are not the enemy.

Any medicine comes with risks. Vaccine "injuries" are no more remarkable than those caused to an unlucky minority by all manner of both allopathic and 'natural' medicines.

I agree that one should not shrug off the risk of life-ruining side effects, work undoubtedly needs to continue to improve and refine vaccine technology.
I also agree that anything mandated by the government should be treated with skepticism and scrutiny. But I do believe that it is genuinely a necessity to make the administration of certain vaccines mandatory. I do think the European vaccine schedule is pretty sensible, but I can understand why people in the USA might balk at the sheer number of shots they are required to get. I don't believe that all of those are either necessary or advisable. The risk vs benefit balance seems quite skewed.

But I would really love to see more of a measured, balanced approach to the issue. It seems that the debate is polarised. All vaccines are not bad, but equally we need to weigh risk vs benefit carefully before deciding to make every available vaccine mandatory just 'because'.

Delight

26th January 2020, 00:25

Jenya

26th January 2020, 04:53

As Onawah says, if you do enough research you will realize the truth of what she says. I held conditioned beliefs similar to Jenya, but the more research I did the more my conditioned beliefs broke down. The more I learned and researched, read, and dug into the literature, my beliefs gradually evolved to hold an informed opinion very similar to Onawah. I would encourage anyone on the fence to just keep digging, especially if you are interested in health, and long life, and raising strong healthy children.

Here’s a recommended non-technical book that covers some surprising aspects of vaccine history.
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Marys-Monkey-Cancer-Causing-Assassination/dp/1634240308/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=dr+marys+monkeys&qid=1580001020&sr=8-1

http://doctormarysmonkey.com/images/DMM%202014%20front%20cover.jpg

If you do enough research, as some of us have who post regularly here, you will find that the whole "science" behind vaccines was flawed in the beginning, and the victories that vaccine proponents attribute to vaccines were actually due to better understanding of hygiene, better sewage, cleaner water, refrigeration, etc. The theory used to create vaccines was based on homeopathy, which is safe and effective, but the theory was incredibly wrong. Bypassing the human body's immune system and injecting foreign and toxic agents directly into tissue is stupid and very dangerous.

While I certainly applaud and encourage anyone who takes the initiative to educate themselves about their health and to make informed choices on a case by case basis... I do find it odd that anyone could be completely opposed to vaccination.

The near-elimination in the West of a plethora of diseases that were killing and maiming thousands as recently as during my parent's childhoods is pretty strong evidence that vaccines are not the enemy.

Any medicine comes with risks. Vaccine "injuries" are no more remarkable than those caused to an unlucky minority by all manner of both allopathic and 'natural' medicines.

I agree that one should not shrug off the risk of life-ruining side effects, work undoubtedly needs to continue to improve and refine vaccine technology.
I also agree that anything mandated by the government should be treated with skepticism and scrutiny. But I do believe that it is genuinely a necessity to make the administration of certain vaccines mandatory. I do think the European vaccine schedule is pretty sensible, but I can understand why people in the USA might balk at the sheer number of shots they are required to get. I don't believe that all of those are either necessary or advisable. The risk vs benefit balance seems quite skewed.

But I would really love to see more of a measured, balanced approach to the issue. It seems that the debate is polarised. All vaccines are not bad, but equally we need to weigh risk vs benefit carefully before deciding to make every available vaccine mandatory just 'because'.

I have researched very thoroughly, and my beliefs are as a result of that research. These are not 'conditioned' beliefs. The reason I bothered researching them at all was due to the controversy brought to my attention by discussions such as the one being conducted on this thread. I have found overwhelming evidence against the claim that vaccines are inherently harmful. Mass-refusal to vaccinate is definitely harmful, as has been demonstrated by the resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases in recent years, occurring concurrently with the rise of the anti-vaccination movement. I wonder, if you were bitten by a rabid dog, would you still hold fast to your views?

onawah

26th January 2020, 05:34

It sounds to me like the research you have done was primarily from mainstream, industry-funded sources.
(They can be clever about masking their agenda, and make it appear that they are unbiased. )
You will not find a lot of agreement with your views on this thread, or on the other main threads including:
Do-vaccines-contribute-to-autism-Should-we-vaccinate
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?71330-Do-vaccines-contribute-to-autism-Should-we-vaccinate&highlight=homeopathy
Horus-Ra-as-the-Archontic-Alien-Parasite-A-follow-up-interview-with-Maarit&highlight=vaccines
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?40941-Horus-Ra-as-the-Archontic-Alien-Parasite-A-follow-up-interview-with-Maarit&highlight=vaccines
The-poisoning-of-America-Glyphosate-Statins-and-Vaccines
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?91081-The-poisoning-of-America-Glyphosate-Statins-and-Vaccines&highlight=vaccines
Biggest-Medical-Scandal-In-History-Breaking--UN-Comes-Clean-Admits-Vaccine-Death-Damage-Coverup
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109677-Biggest-Medical-Scandal-In-History-Breaking--UN-Comes-Clean-Admits-Vaccine-Death-Damage-Coverup&highlight=vaccines
Medical-Mafia
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?108585-Medical-Mafia&highlight=vaccines
How-Natural-Medicine--was--Destroyed-in-1910
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?100988-How-Natural-Medicine--was--Destroyed-in-1910&highlight=vaccines
Agenda-21-Vaccines-The-Female-Of-The-Species
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?70016-Agenda-21-Vaccines-The-Female-Of-The-Species&highlight=vaccines
VAXXED-From-Cover-Up-To-Catastrophe-
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?89642-VAXXED-From-Cover-Up-To-Catastrophe--Video-&highlight=vaccines
Vaccinations-Harm-Psychic-Abilities
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?51235-Vaccinations-Harm-Psychic-Abilities&highlight=vaccines
Big-Pharma-as-Organized-Crime
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?97923-Big-Pharma-as-Organized-Crime&highlight=vaccines
Attention-vaccine-fanatics
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?86521-Attention-vaccine-fanatics-..............&highlight=vaccines
etc.
Many of these threads go back years and building them has involved a lot of time and painstaking effort by myself and other long-standing members of this forum.
Research which has also involved a lot of dot-connecting and cross-referencing with information about other kinds of toxins such as GMOs, chemtrails, insecticides, microwaves and other unsafe technologies, and how they all are interacting to make us sick.
The agendas behind all these toxins were not designed for the benefit of mankind, but to satisfy the psychotic urges of the elite.
Some inventions may have started out with benign intentions, but were soon enough subverted to fit the population control agenda.
The chemical industry, however, which is responsible for so many of the present day toxins, was murderous from the start, with its' roots in Nazi Germany when Farben created poisonous gas to kill the victims of concentration camps.

If you want to understand the big picture, you have to have an open mind and be able to entertain very unpleasant and frightening possibilities.
It's not for the faint of heart.

(If you look in the General Discussion forum under Alternative Medicine and Health and Wellness you will find reams of information about natural, safe, and effective remedies which have been ignored or suppressed by Big Pharma, allopathic practitioners and the controlled mainstream media. Particularly this thread: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?43548-The-gut-of-most-disease...-NOT-what-you-think-&highlight=gut+of+most+disease)

The agenda is clear: traditional and natural remedies and prevention cannot be allowed, much less innovative techniques such as healing through frequencies, techniques such as Tesla and Rife were working on to their peril, must only be available to the elite, and must be kept secret at all costs.

Not only is there no profit in them to the corporations which seek total global control, but they would benefit the masses which the elite wish on the whole to eliminate (Read up on the Anglo Saxon Mission and Agendas 21 and 2030).

My intention is not to bully you or disillusion you, but to make you aware that if you are not willing to look further into this issue than you already have, you will probably find that Avalon will not be a very comfortable fit for you, and if you are looking for agreement, you would probably do better to look elsewhere.

As Onawah says, if you do enough research you will realize the truth of what she says. I held conditioned beliefs similar to Jenya, but the more research I did the more my conditioned beliefs broke down. The more I learned and researched, read, and dug into the literature, my beliefs gradually evolved to hold an informed opinion very similar to Onawah. I would encourage anyone on the fence to just keep digging, especially if you are interested in health, and long life, and raising strong healthy children.

Here’s a recommended non-technical book that covers some surprising aspects of vaccine history.
https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Marys-Monkey-Cancer-Causing-Assassination/dp/1634240308/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=dr+marys+monkeys&qid=1580001020&sr=8-1

http://doctormarysmonkey.com/images/DMM%202014%20front%20cover.jpg

If you do enough research, as some of us have who post regularly here, you will find that the whole "science" behind vaccines was flawed in the beginning, and the victories that vaccine proponents attribute to vaccines were actually due to better understanding of hygiene, better sewage, cleaner water, refrigeration, etc. The theory used to create vaccines was based on homeopathy, which is safe and effective, but the theory was incredibly wrong. Bypassing the human body's immune system and injecting foreign and toxic agents directly into tissue is stupid and very dangerous.

While I certainly applaud and encourage anyone who takes the initiative to educate themselves about their health and to make informed choices on a case by case basis... I do find it odd that anyone could be completely opposed to vaccination.

The near-elimination in the West of a plethora of diseases that were killing and maiming thousands as recently as during my parent's childhoods is pretty strong evidence that vaccines are not the enemy.

Any medicine comes with risks. Vaccine "injuries" are no more remarkable than those caused to an unlucky minority by all manner of both allopathic and 'natural' medicines.

I agree that one should not shrug off the risk of life-ruining side effects, work undoubtedly needs to continue to improve and refine vaccine technology.
I also agree that anything mandated by the government should be treated with skepticism and scrutiny. But I do believe that it is genuinely a necessity to make the administration of certain vaccines mandatory. I do think the European vaccine schedule is pretty sensible, but I can understand why people in the USA might balk at the sheer number of shots they are required to get. I don't believe that all of those are either necessary or advisable. The risk vs benefit balance seems quite skewed.

But I would really love to see more of a measured, balanced approach to the issue. It seems that the debate is polarised. All vaccines are not bad, but equally we need to weigh risk vs benefit carefully before deciding to make every available vaccine mandatory just 'because'.

I have researched very thoroughly, and my beliefs are as a result of that research. These are not 'conditioned' beliefs. The reason I bothered researching them at all was due to the controversy brought to my attention by discussions such as the one being conducted on this thread. I have found overwhelming evidence against the claim that vaccines are inherently harmful. Mass-refusal to vaccinate is definitely harmful, as has been demonstrated by the resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases in recent years, occurring concurrently with the rise of the anti-vaccination movement. I wonder, if you were bitten by a rabid dog, would you still hold fast to your views?

Delight

26th January 2020, 18:15

I have researched very thoroughly, and my beliefs are as a result of that research. These are not 'conditioned' beliefs. The reason I bothered researching them at all was due to the controversy brought to my attention by discussions such as the one being conducted on this thread. I have found overwhelming evidence against the claim that vaccines are inherently harmful. Mass-refusal to vaccinate is definitely harmful, as has been demonstrated by the resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases in recent years, occurring concurrently with the rise of the anti-vaccination movement. I wonder, if you were bitten by a rabid dog, would you still hold fast to your views?

"Mass-refusal to vaccinate is definitely harmful, as has been demonstrated by the resurgence of vaccine-preventable diseases in recent years, occurring concurrently with the rise of the anti-vaccination movement." IS conditioned. I will go out on my limb and say, Sorry dear but this is just plain MISSED INFORMATION.

Let's look at measles again. Measles pops up in cycles. Measles was NEVER ERADICATED. That is a lie.

Measles was horrendous in the early 1900s. By the time vaccines were developed it was a MOST LIKELY harmless infection that was usually experienced in early childhood. Mothers who had measles and breast fed passed immunity for infants. Older people had already had measles. Therefore what is called herd immunity was that MOST of the population was protected from early and late infection.

An interesting BENEFIT was that measles stimulated the body to be protected from cancer (for one thing). This is very interesting to me bcause I think it shows a SYMBIOSIS with these viruses. The lie is that we have to kill everything in nature. NO, we need to LIVE WITH nature.

A few people with measles DO go on to develop a life threatening illness:

Children younger than 5 years of age and adults older than 20 years of age are more likely to suffer from complications. Common complications are ear infections and diarrhea. Serious complications include pneumonia and encephalitis.

When the vaccine was first proposed, the promise was that it would eradicate measles. Then NO, need two shots, then NO, more shots and now it is acknowledged that one will always need more boosters. The vaccine is creating a climate where the virus is mutating. The whole plan was a BUST!

Just why you have the settled belief about the necessity for vaccination is clear... BRAIN WASHING we all were subjected to by AUTHORITY. But despite the seeming truth, it is not based on facts. I feel hopeful that none of your lineage is suffering the multiple effects of these vaccines which erode the health of a whole generation, a whole WORLD. But I really doubt you have escaped. You have just accepted chronic disease is a normal life style.

Pam

26th January 2020, 18:20

Caliban

26th January 2020, 19:12

Victory in New Jersey!

This guy, as this thread knows, does not mess around. They WON. Let that sink in.

A_4dO3QTd3o

Seabreeze

28th January 2020, 07:24

Thank you, everyone, for the excellent posts. As an aside, Anthony William, ak 'Medical Medium' states unequivocally that Alzheimer's is caused 100% by Mercury in the brain, and gives natural methods to pull it, and other toxins/heavy metals out of the body. I am using his methods, along with Chinese Herbs, for 'brain fog,' stress, etc., and having excellent results.
As to my question for the Forum, the ultimate force behind the vaccine agenda, my own best guess is that it is a negative ET/Demonic/Archonic consciousness attacking all humans.
I know this is 'out there' for the hard scientists to consider, but after 20 years looking into this, and other issues, it does appear to be the best answer.
Perhaps it is simply human greed, ignorance, and overall wickedness, but ultimately that does not add up, for me, anyway.
I think we humans must find a 'cure' for that negative force. Garlic, anyone? I am kidding, but, whenever one deals with parasites, criminals, or 'possessing entities' there are methods, modalities, compounds, chemicals, or remedies that will cure the problem. That is what I am looking for. Something that will repel this force from our world, and assist us in ejecting it from it's human hosts, as well.

Well, I did not want to get much into this. But sorry I have to correct your statement.

There is NO natural methode to pull mercury completly out of the body again........and defenitlty not out of the brain.....

Do you have any labatory results who show your body is reducing any metalls? I bet not.

If you want to do a correct unpoisoning of metalls you have to check this by labatory, otherwise there is no proof of what your doctor says ......

I know there is a lot of wrong informations written on this. But I also know out of own experiences and contact to someone who did study this all his life..(and his father did also before already)..He did work on war fields also trying to rescue people which got poisend by war chemicals aso.......

It was his education to know all about toxins which could effect a human and how to free effected people from it again.

It is today not possible to eliminate mercury and what is bind to it completly out of a human body again.

There is a lot of BS written about seaweed who could do this. But it is just a big sales propaganda and a big lie. How can people really believe what a plant alive does in the ocean.(..collectin toxins and metalls)..the plant can do they same in a human body after the plant got shreddert and put into a pill???

This is complete nonsense and does not work. It simply can not work. There are done many labatory tests done on this.

In fact you poison yourself even more by eating those seaweeds...because whatever they did collect before in the ocean is still in the plant you swallow. So better think more clearly about this again.

The only stuff which really works partly to reduce mercury out of a human body but only partly or not at all out of the brain is Dimercaptosuccinic acid ......

But as long a person still has silver fillings it is more than dangerous to take any of it.

Sorry, but I had to correct this. People should know the facts......

By the way...Gold is also dangerous for humans to put in the teeth...Gold does bind other metals also. If you have gold fillings, your body can not reduce any metalls out of the body anymore.....

Another thing which is kept hidden from the public......

Sorry for the bad news...but I had to learn this also....:facepalm:

...back to subject...vaccines and thiomersal (mercury).....

.....by the way...I use to have some friends working in the med. field...as far as I been told...there are vaccines without thiomersal...but only for certain people....

I had measles and other children illnesses as a child that was not med. treated then and I am still here .......:blushing:...

but I was forced to take a vaccine in 2018, which is a law to be allowed to stay in a certain country...........:raining:

Here you can see yourself on how dangerous mercury is.......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtFsy0rQsak....
this is a video from 1999

Seabreeze

29th January 2020, 19:27

Last note on this from me :

Dont forget : TODAY Medicine and what is hooked on it..... is :

Big business !!!

:closed:

onawah

4th February 2020, 00:57

Good Health Lawyer Gains TRO in Forced Vaccine Case
FEBRUARY 1, 2020 RALPH FUCETOLA
VACCINE FREEDOM VICTORY!

Medically Fragile NY Child Back In School
WITH NO VACCINES
Thanks to Attorney Patricia Finn!
http://www.opensourcetruth.com/good-health-lawyer-gains-tro-in-forced-vaccine-case/

http://www.opensourcetruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Finn-OSC-TRO-768x942.jpg

"Counsel Patricia Finn, The Good Health Lawyer [1] has saved a medically fragile child from what his pediatrician says is “certain damage” following vaccination, by arguing successfully that New York State does not have the power to substitute a bureaucrat’s decision for a patient’s physician.

Arguing that a physician, as a “learned intermediary,” has the right to issue a medical exemption for a patient and the State has the obligation to honor that exemption, Counsel Finn has scored a major health freedom victory for the moment.

Several well-known and well-funded law firms have not been able to achieve what Counsel Finn succeeded in establishing in this case.

This victory is the first to validate the important principle of the physician as “Learned Intermediary” and to achieve a Temporary Restraining Order overturning the State’s attempt to force vaccination on this child.

In both California and New York, the largest forced-vaccine states, vaccine freedom of choice has been attacked in two ways. First, the state legislatures have abolished long-standing religious and/or conscientious exemptions and second, the bureaucracies in both states have made obtaining a formal Medical Excuse virtually impossible. We believe they have intentionally tried to make it so difficult that they have undercut the protected relationship between doctor and patient. This violates the universal right of Informed Consent by preventing physicians, as Learned Intermediaries, from uttering their true opinions regarding the safety of vaccines for their patients.

The child in this case was certified vaccine-fragile since his doctor said he could expect serious adverse reactions to further vaccination. It is important to note that the child’s doctor believes in vaccination for the general populace, and vaccinates his own children, yet, exercising his best medical judgment, affirmed that this child should not be vaccinated. Under New York’s new rule the physician’s learned opinion was disregarded and the school system, despite the damage that was likely to result for the child, rejected the exemption. In other words, the state wanted a school bureaucrat to overturn the physician’s protection of his patient.

This flies in the face of settled United States law. For over a century US courts have held they have the power to intervene against forced vaccination “…if it be apparent or can be shown with reasonable certainty that he is not at the time a fit subject of vaccination or that vaccination, by reason of his then condition, would seriously impair his health or probably cause his death.” Jacobson v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905)

Counsel Finn’s successful attempt to protect this child with a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) assures this child access to the free public education guaranteed to him by the laws of New York, without surrendering his right to protection from what US and international courts have repeatedly called “unavoidably unsafe” vaccines.

The efforts of States like New York and California to illegally force parents to choose between their objections to vaccination — their universal right of Informed Consent — or the public education guaranteed to their children is an imposition of what the Federal Courts call an “unconstitutional condition.” No state has power to condition a public benefit on the surrender of a right.

In this case New York is learning that important lesson thanks to Counsel Finn and the determined parents willing to protect their child.

All of us have the right of Informed Consent, if and only if we assert it properly. If you do not assert that right it will be “deemed waived.”

To learn more about how to assert that right for yourself and your loved ones, click here: https://tinyurl.com/AVDcard.

Use this link to share this article widely: http://www.opensourcetruth.com/good-health-lawyer-gains-tro-in-forced-vaccine-case/

You just might save some lives."

Sarah Rainsong

4th February 2020, 02:16

What a great victory!

All of us have the right of Informed Consent, if and only if we assert it properly. If you do not assert that right it will be “deemed waived.”

And this really struck a chord with me... so applicable on so many levels!

Tintin

4th February 2020, 16:46

A good idea that we remind ourselves that there is indeed a universal declaration enshrined in international law that recognises the rights of the sovereign individual to be empowered to choose what happens to their body.

-------------------------------------------

Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights

19 October 2005

Source: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=31058&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

Avalon Library: http://avalonlibrary.net/Universal_Declaration_on_Bioethics_and_Human_Rights_2005%20%5bsee_Page%2074%5d/

UNESDOC - (PDF) English - French - Spanish - Russian - Chinese - Arabic
The General Conference,

Conscious of the unique capacity of human beings to reflect upon their own existence and on their environment, to perceive injustice, to avoid danger, to assume responsibility, to seek cooperation and to exhibit the moral sense that gives expression to ethical principles,

Reflecting on the rapid developments in science and technology, which increasingly affect our understanding of life and life itself, resulting in a strong demand for a global response to the ethical implications of such developments,

Recognizing that ethical issues raised by the rapid advances in science and their technological applications should be examined with due respect to the dignity of the human person and universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Resolving that it is necessary and timely for the international community to state universal principles that will provide a foundation for humanity’s response to the ever-increasing dilemmas and controversies that science and technology present for humankind and for the environment,

Recalling the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 11 November 1997 and the International Declaration on Human Genetic Data adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 16 October 2003,

Noting the United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966, the United Nations International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination of 21 December 1965, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women of 18 December 1979, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989, the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity of 5 June 1992, the Standard Rules on the Equalization of Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1993, the UNESCO Recommendation on the Status of Scientific Researchers of 20 November 1974, the UNESCO Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice of 27 November 1978, the UNESCO Declaration on the Responsibilities of the Present Generations Towards Future Generations of 12 November 1997, the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity of 2 November 2001, the ILO Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries of 27 June 1989, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture which was adopted by the FAO Conference on 3 November 2001 and entered into force on 29 June 2004, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) annexed to the Marrakech Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, which entered into force on 1 January 1995, the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health of 14 November 2001 and other relevant international instruments adopted by the United Nations and the specialized agencies of the United Nations system, in particular the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO),

Also noting international and regional instruments in the field of bioethics, including the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine of the Council of Europe, which was adopted in 1997 and entered into force in 1999, together with its Additional Protocols, as well as national legislation and regulations in the field of bioethics and the international and regional codes of conduct and guidelines and other texts in the field of bioethics, such as the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association on Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, adopted in 1964 and amended in 1975, 1983, 1989, 1996 and 2000 and the International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences, adopted in 1982 and amended in 1993 and 2002,

Recognizing that this Declaration is to be understood in a manner consistent with domestic and international law in conformity with human rights law,

Recalling the Constitution of UNESCO adopted on 16 November 1945,

Considering UNESCO’s role in identifying universal principles based on shared ethical values to guide scientific and technological development and social transformation in order to identify emerging challenges in science and technology taking into account the responsibility of the present generations towards future generations, and that questions of bioethics, which necessarily have an international dimension, should be treated as a whole, drawing on the principles already stated in the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights and the International Declaration on Human Genetic Data and taking account not only of the current scientific context but also of future developments,

Aware that human beings are an integral part of the biosphere, with an important role in protecting one another and other forms of life, in particular animals,

Recognizing that, based on the freedom of science and research, scientific and technological developments have been, and can be, of great benefit to humankind in increasing, inter alia, life expectancy and improving the quality of life, and emphasizing that such developments should always seek to promote the welfare of individuals, families, groups or communities and humankind as a whole in the recognition of the dignity of the human person and universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Recognizing that health does not depend solely on scientific and technological research developments but also on psychosocial and cultural factors,

Also recognizing that decisions regarding ethical issues in medicine, life sciences and associated technologies may have an impact on individuals, families, groups or communities and humankind as a whole,

Bearing in mind that cultural diversity, as a source of exchange, innovation and creativity, is necessary to humankind and, in this sense, is the common heritage of humanity, but emphasizing that it may not be invoked at the expense of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Also bearing in mind that a person’s identity includes biological, psychological, social, cultural and spiritual dimensions,

Recognizing that unethical scientific and technological conduct has had a particular impact on indigenous and local communities,

Convinced that moral sensitivity and ethical reflection should be an integral part of the process of scientific and technological developments and that bioethics should play a predominant role in the choices that need to be made concerning issues arising from such developments,

Considering the desirability of developing new approaches to social responsibility to ensure that progress in science and technology contributes to justice, equity and to the interest of humanity,

Recognizing that an important way to evaluate social realities and achieve equity is to pay attention to the position of women,

Stressing the need to reinforce international cooperation in the field of bioethics, taking into account, in particular, the special needs of developing countries, indigenous communities and vulnerable populations,

Considering that all human beings, without distinction, should benefit from the same high ethical standards in medicine and life science research,

Proclaims the principles that follow and adopts the present Declaration.

General provisions

Article 1 – Scope

1. This Declaration addresses ethical issues related to medicine, life sciences and associated technologies as applied to human beings, taking into account their social, legal and environmental dimensions.

2. This Declaration is addressed to States. As appropriate and relevant, it also provides guidance to decisions or practices of individuals, groups, communities, institutions and corporations, public and private.

Article 2 – Aims

The aims of this Declaration are:

(a) to provide a universal framework of principles and procedures to guide States in the formulation of their legislation, policies or other instruments in the field of bioethics;

(b) to guide the actions of individuals, groups, communities, institutions and corporations, public and private;

(c) to promote respect for human dignity and protect human rights, by ensuring respect for the life of human beings, and fundamental freedoms, consistent with international human rights law;

(d) to recognize the importance of freedom of scientific research and the benefits derived from scientific and technological developments, while stressing the need for such research and developments to occur within the framework of ethical principles set out in this Declaration and to respect human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms;

(e) to foster multidisciplinary and pluralistic dialogue about bioethical issues between all stakeholders and within society as a whole;

(f) to promote equitable access to medical, scientific and technological developments as well as the greatest possible flow and the rapid sharing of knowledge concerning those developments and the sharing of benefits, with particular attention to the needs of developing countries;

(g) to safeguard and promote the interests of the present and future generations;

(h) to underline the importance of biodiversity and its conservation as a common concern of humankind.

Principles

Within the scope of this Declaration, in decisions or practices taken or carried out by those to whom it is addressed, the following principles are to be respected.

Article 3 – Human dignity and human rights

1. Human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms are to be fully respected.

2. The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society.

Article 4 – Benefit and harm

In applying and advancing scientific knowledge, medical practice and associated technologies, direct and indirect benefits to patients, research participants and other affected individuals should be maximized and any possible harm to such individuals should be minimized.

Article 5 – Autonomy and individual responsibility

The autonomy of persons to make decisions, while taking responsibility for those decisions and respecting the autonomy of others, is to be respected. For persons who are not capable of exercising autonomy, special measures are to be taken to protect their rights and interests.

Article 6 – Consent

1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.

2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice. Exceptions to this principle should be made only in accordance with ethical and legal standards adopted by States, consistent with the principles and provisions set out in this Declaration, in particular in Article 27, and international human rights law.

3. In appropriate cases of research carried out on a group of persons or a community, additional agreement of the legal representatives of the group or community concerned may be sought. In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent.

Article 7 – Persons without the capacity to consent

In accordance with domestic law, special protection is to be given to persons who do not have the capacity to consent:

(a) authorization for research and medical practice should be obtained in accordance with the best interest of the person concerned and in accordance with domestic law. However, the person concerned should be involved to the greatest extent possible in the decision-making process of consent, as well as that of withdrawing consent;

(b) research should only be carried out for his or her direct health benefit, subject to the authorization and the protective conditions prescribed by law, and if there is no research alternative of comparable effectiveness with research participants able to consent. Research which does not have potential direct health benefit should only be undertaken by way of exception, with the utmost restraint, exposing the person only to a minimal risk and minimal burden and, if the research is expected to contribute to the health benefit of other persons in the same category, subject to the conditions prescribed by law and compatible with the protection of the individual’s human rights. Refusal of such persons to take part in research should be respected.

Article 8 – Respect for human vulnerability and personal integrity

In applying and advancing scientific knowledge, medical practice and associated technologies, human vulnerability should be taken into account. Individuals and groups of special vulnerability should be protected and the personal integrity of such individuals respected.

Article 9 – Privacy and confidentiality

The privacy of the persons concerned and the confidentiality of their personal information should be respected. To the greatest extent possible, such information should not be used or disclosed for purposes other than those for which it was collected or consented to, consistent with international law, in particular international human rights law.

Article 10 – Equality, justice and equity

The fundamental equality of all human beings in dignity and rights is to be respected so that they are treated justly and equitably.

Article 11 – Non-discrimination and non-stigmatization

No individual or group should be discriminated against or stigmatized on any grounds, in violation of human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Article 12 – Respect for cultural diversity and pluralism

The importance of cultural diversity and pluralism should be given due regard. However, such considerations are not to be invoked to infringe upon human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms, nor upon the principles set out in this Declaration, nor to limit their scope.

Article 13 – Solidarity and cooperation

Solidarity among human beings and international cooperation towards that end are to be encouraged.

Article 14 – Social responsibility and health

1. The promotion of health and social development for their people is a central purpose of governments that all sectors of society share.

2. Taking into account that the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition, progress in science and technology should advance:

(a) access to quality health care and essential medicines, especially for the health of women and children, because health is essential to life itself and must be considered to be a social and human good;

(b) access to adequate nutrition and water;

(c) improvement of living conditions and the environment;

(d) elimination of the marginalization and the exclusion of persons on the basis of any grounds;

(e) reduction of poverty and illiteracy.

Article 15 – Sharing of benefits

1. Benefits resulting from any scientific research and its applications should be shared with society as a whole and within the international community, in particular with developing countries. In giving effect to this principle, benefits may take any of the following forms:

(a) special and sustainable assistance to, and acknowledgement of, the persons and groups that have taken part in the research;

(b) access to quality health care;

(c) provision of new diagnostic and therapeutic modalities or products stemming from research;

(d) support for health services;

(e) access to scientific and technological knowledge;

(f) capacity-building facilities for research purposes;

(g) other forms of benefit consistent with the principles set out in this Declaration.

2. Benefits should not constitute improper inducements to participate in research.

Article 16 – Protecting future generations

The impact of life sciences on future generations, including on their genetic constitution, should be given due regard.

Article 17 – Protection of the environment, the biosphere and biodiversity

Due regard is to be given to the interconnection between human beings and other forms of life, to the importance of appropriate access and utilization of biological and genetic resources, to respect for traditional knowledge and to the role of human beings in the protection of the environment, the biosphere and biodiversity.

Application of the principles

Article 18 – Decision-making and addressing bioethical issues

1. Professionalism, honesty, integrity and transparency in decision-making should be promoted, in particular declarations of all conflicts of interest and appropriate sharing of knowledge. Every endeavour should be made to use the best available scientific knowledge and methodology in addressing and periodically reviewing bioethical issues.

2. Persons and professionals concerned and society as a whole should be engaged in dialogue on a regular basis.

3. Opportunities for informed pluralistic public debate, seeking the expression of all relevant opinions, should be promoted.

Article 19 – Ethics committees

Independent, multidisciplinary and pluralist ethics committees should be established, promoted and supported at the appropriate level in order to:

(a) assess the relevant ethical, legal, scientific and social issues related to research projects involving human beings;

(b) provide advice on ethical problems in clinical settings;

(c) assess scientific and technological developments, formulate recommendations and contribute to the preparation of guidelines on issues within the scope of this Declaration;

(d) foster debate, education and public awareness of, and engagement in, bioethics.

Article 20 – Risk assessment and management

Appropriate assessment and adequate management of risk related to medicine, life sciences and associated technologies should be promoted.

Article 21 – Transnational practices

1. States, public and private institutions, and professionals associated with transnational activities should endeavour to ensure that any activity within the scope of this Declaration, undertaken, funded or otherwise pursued in whole or in part in different States, is consistent with the principles set out in this Declaration.

2. When research is undertaken or otherwise pursued in one or more States (the host State(s)) and funded by a source in another State, such research should be the object of an appropriate level of ethical review in the host State(s) and the State in which the funder is located. This review should be based on ethical and legal standards that are consistent with the principles set out in this Declaration.

3. Transnational health research should be responsive to the needs of host countries, and the importance of research contributing to the alleviation of urgent global health problems should be recognized.

4. When negotiating a research agreement, terms for collaboration and agreement on the benefits of research should be established with equal participation by those party to the negotiation.

5. States should take appropriate measures, both at the national and international levels, to combat bioterrorism and illicit traffic in organs, tissues, samples, genetic resources and genetic-related materials.

Promotion of the Declaration

Article 22 – Role of States

1. States should take all appropriate measures, whether of a legislative, administrative or other character, to give effect to the principles set out in this Declaration in accordance with international human rights law. Such measures should be supported by action in the spheres of education, training and public information.

2. States should encourage the establishment of independent, multidisciplinary and pluralist ethics committees, as set out in Article 19.

Article 23 – Bioethics education, training and information

1. In order to promote the principles set out in this Declaration and to achieve a better understanding of the ethical implications of scientific and technological developments, in particular for young people, States should endeavour to foster bioethics education and training at all levels as well as to encourage information and knowledge dissemination programmes about bioethics.

2. States should encourage the participation of international and regional intergovernmental organizations and international, regional and national non governmental organizations in this endeavour.

Article 24 – International cooperation

1. States should foster international dissemination of scientific information and encourage the free flow and sharing of scientific and technological knowledge.

2. Within the framework of international cooperation, States should promote cultural and scientific cooperation and enter into bilateral and multilateral agreements enabling developing countries to build up their capacity to participate in generating and sharing scientific knowledge, the related know-how and the benefits thereof.

3. States should respect and promote solidarity between and among States, as well as individuals, families, groups and communities, with special regard for those rendered vulnerable by disease or disability or other personal, societal or environmental conditions and those with the most limited resources.

Article 25 – Follow-up action by UNESCO

1. UNESCO shall promote and disseminate the principles set out in this Declaration. In doing so, UNESCO should seek the help and assistance of the Intergovernmental Bioethics Committee (IGBC) and the International Bioethics Committee (IBC).

2. UNESCO shall reaffirm its commitment to dealing with bioethics and to promoting collaboration between IGBC and IBC.

Final provisions

Article 26 – Interrelation and complementarity of the principles

This Declaration is to be understood as a whole and the principles are to be understood as complementary and interrelated. Each principle is to be considered in the context of the other principles, as appropriate and relevant in the circumstances.

Article 27 – Limitations on the application of the principles

If the application of the principles of this Declaration is to be limited, it should be by law, including laws in the interests of public safety, for the investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences, for the protection of public health or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Any such law needs to be consistent with international human rights law.

Article 28 – Denial of acts contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any claim to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity.

onawah

6th February 2020, 05:02

Merck’s Vaccine Division President Julie Gerberding Sells $9.1 Million in Shares—Is She Jumping Ship?
FEBRUARY 05, 2020
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CHD Chairman
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/mercks-vaccine-division-president-julie-gerberding-sells-9-1-million-in-shares-is-she-jumping-ship/?utm_source=mailchimp
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/02-05-20-Gerberding_Featured_Image.jpg
"SEC filings reveal that Merck’s Vaccine Division President Julie Gerberding sold over half her Merck shares in January for $9.1 Million. That transaction followed a spate of bad news for Merck’s flagship Gardasil vaccine.

It is still uncertain whether human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents cervical cancer as trials were not designed to detect this outcome.
Last month, Cancer Research UK announced an alarming 54% rise in cervical cancer among 24-29-year-olds, the first generation to receive the HPV jabs. The following day, the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine published a withering critique of Gardasil’s crooked clinical trials, “It is still uncertain whether human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents cervical cancer as trials were not designed to detect this outcome.”

As Gerberding knows, those trials revealed that Gardasil dramatically RAISES (by+44.6%) the risk of cervical cancer among women with a current infection or those previously exposed to HPV. That may explain the cancer explosions in England and other nations with high inoculation rates in young girls up to age 18; Australia, Spain, Sweden and Norway. A 2019 study of Alabama girls found the highest cervical cancer rates in the state’s most heavily vaccinated counties.

… Merck fraudulently concealed serious illnesses affecting half, and autoimmune diseases affecting 1 of every 37 girls in Gardasil’s clinical trials within 6 months of injection
With Merck’s efficacy pretensions circling the drain, a coalition of leading plaintiff’s lawyers are already in discovery in a suit alleging that Merck fraudulently concealed serious illnesses affecting half, and autoimmune diseases affecting 1 of every 37 girls in Gardasil’s clinical trials within 6 months of injection.

As Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Director from 2002-2009, Gerberding helped Merck paper over these efficacy and safety problems. In 2006 she gave Merck the CDC recommendation that made Gardasil a $5 Billion blockbuster. Gerberding did other lucrative favors for Merck; blocking whistleblower Gary Goldman from disclosing that Merck’s chicken pox vaccine was causing a deadly shingles epidemic, silencing and punishing whistleblower Dr. William Thompson when he told her that CDC bigwigs were destroying data linking Merck’s MMR to autism, and allowing the company to illegally reformulate its MMR mumps component. Those courtesies earned her the Merck sinecure and stock options.

Merck is now fighting existential fraud lawsuits on both the MMR and Gardasil vaccines, that threaten licensing for those key products. Fat rats are always the first to jump ship."

onawah

6th February 2020, 16:47

New vaccines will permanently alter your DNA
by Jon Rappoport
February 6, 2020
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/02/06/new-vaccines-permanently-alter-your-dna/

"I repost this story now because, in the rush to develop a vaccine against the China coronavirus in the next 90 days, public health officials are mentioning several experimental technologies—never before released openly for public use. (China coronavirus archive here.)

One of those technologies is: DNA insertion.

The reference is the New York Times, 3/10/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It 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 five 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.

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.

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 unannounced.

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.

What does wall to wall propaganda about an “ominous epidemic” achieve? You have one answer. If it doesn’t immediately pop into your head, read this article again."

Delight

9th February 2020, 04:22

I doubt this helped matters in China.

1226352019436396544

onawah

11th February 2020, 20:31

How the CDC Combats Health Freedom Through Front Groups
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
February 11, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/02/11/naccho.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20200211Z1&et_cid=DM455674&et_rid=808501540

STORY AT-A-GLANCE
"The CDC accepts funding from the drug industry, which may influence its public health recommendations. It also has front groups that lobby for mandatory vaccinations and seek to suppress information about vaccine risks
One of them is the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), which has lobbied heavily for the removal of vaccine exemptions for religious, conscientious and philosophical beliefs in state public health laws
NACCHO policies not only favor mandatory use of vaccines from cradle to grave, but also support the creation of national electronic registries of the vaccination status of all citizens, including adults
Prominent vaccine educators such as Every Child By Two (ECBT), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Immunization Action Coalition (IAC) are acting on behalf of the CDC and the vaccine industry as well. All three receive funding from vaccine manufacturers and the CDC
The CDC and vaccine advocacy nonprofits share a common goal of increasing vaccination rates, and by so doing, the CDC is unlikely to tackle the task of finding out whether the vaccines on the childhood and adult vaccination schedules are in fact safe and necessary
While the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is supposed to be an independent organization watching out for public health, it has repeatedly demonstrated that it is working on behalf of the drug industry.

Not only does the CDC accept funding from the drug industry,1 which in and of itself may influence its public health recommendations, it also has front groups that lobby for mandatory vaccinations and seek to suppress information about vaccine risks.

CDC Front Group Lobbies for Mandatory Vaccinations
One of them is the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO),2 an organization whose mission is “focused on being a leader, partner, catalyst and voice for change for local health departments around the nation.”

While its name and mission statement would make you think it’s a member-funded organization, it actually operates primarily on government grants, and the CDC is a primary source.3 Seven of 11 funding priorities for NACCHO programs also come from the CDC.4 As revealed by Sott.net, membership dues only amount to about 2% of the organization’s annual revenues.5

For example, in July 2011, NACCHO issued a policy statement urging legislators in all states to remove vaccine exemptions for religious, conscientious and philosophical beliefs.6

NACCHO also lobbied heavily for SB1327 in 2013, an Oregon state bill aimed at eliminating the religious belief vaccine exemption. In 2015, the group also lobbied in Oregon for SB442,8 which again sought to eliminate all but medical vaccine exemptions granted by a doctor. In fact, NACCHO was portrayed as a primary supporter of the bill.9

The organization has also put its weight behind eliminating personal belief vaccine exemptions in other states. NACCHO policies not only favor mandatory use of vaccines from cradle to grave, but also promote the creation of national electronic registries that monitor the vaccination status of all children and adults.

It’s worth noting that, in addition to the 69 doses of 16 vaccines on the federally recommended childhood vaccination schedule, the CDC recommends dozens of doses of vaccines for adults between the ages of 19 and 65, which includes an annual flu shot.

CDC Webinar Instructs Doctors on How to Boost Vaccine Uptake
In August 2019, NACCHO provided a CDC webinar10,11 in which doctors were given strategic guidance on how to combat “vaccine misinformation” and deal with vaccine hesitant patients in their practice.

The webinar was based on CDC research with parents and health care professionals, aimed at developing and refining educational messages about vaccines.

As just one example, the CDC found that one of the primary motivations that drive pregnant women to get vaccinated is “the idea of protecting their babies.” They also found that the internet is the primary source of vaccine information during pregnancy.

Parents of infants are primarily motivated by messages mentioning local occurrences of vaccine-preventable diseases, the risk of not vaccinating on schedule, and comparison of risks and benefits of vaccines. Messages that focus on the importance of vaccinating your child in order to avoid making others sick did not have a significant motivating impact, according to the CDC.

Based on the CDC’s findings, NACCHO urged doctors to “Make vaccination decisions before pregnancy, during pregnancy or before the 2-month visit,” as “once parents start vaccinating at 2 months, there is very little change later to delay or refuse” vaccination.

CDC Profits by Undermining Health Freedom
Seeing how NACCHO is primarily funded by the CDC, it seems the CDC is actively undermining vaccine exemptions and civil liberties, including freedom of thought, conscience and religious belief.

This isn’t entirely surprising considering the agency itself, as well as many of its individual employees and committee members, profit financially from mandatory vaccination policies and laws. As reported by Weltchek Mallahan & Weltchek, a Maryland-based law firm specializing in medical malpractice and wrongful death:12

“The CDC Immunization Safety Office is responsible for investigating the safety and effectiveness of all new vaccinations; once an investigation is considered complete, a recommendation is then made to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) who then determines whether the new vaccine will be added to the current vaccination schedule.

Members of the ACIP committee include physicians such as Dr. Paul Offit … Offit and other CDC members own numerous patents associated with vaccinations and regularly receive funding for their research work from the very same pharmaceutical companies who manufacturer vaccinations which are ultimately sold to the public ...

This situation creates an obvious conflict of interest, as members of the ACIP committee benefit financially every time a new vaccination is released to the market.”

CDC Buys HALF of All Vaccines in the US
In the June 2019 article,13 “Close Ties and Financial Entanglements: The CDC-Guaranteed Vaccine Market,” the organization Children’s Health Defense describes how the CDC is an integral part of the vaccine industry, protecting vaccine profits above public safety. As noted by Children’s Health Defense:

“The CDC is a major player in the vaccine marketplace, buying half of all childhood vaccines in the U.S. and then selling them to contracted public health agencies through the Vaccines for Children (VFC) Program, which pushes free and low-cost vaccines on indigent children.

Over the past three decades, the CDC’s vaccine purchases have increased 15-fold as the average cost of fully vaccinating a child to age 18 rose from $100 to $2192 — while vaccine companies have raked in the profits.

The agency’s involvement with vaccine manufacturers also extends to patents, licensing agreements and collaboration on projects to develop new vaccines. In fact, the CDC and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) profit handsomely from their ownership or co-ownership with private sector partners of vaccine-related patents.

An early 2017 analysis of Google Patents results showed that the CDC held 56 patents14 pertaining to various aspects of vaccine development, manufacturing, delivery and adjuvants.

By May 2019, the search terms ‘Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccines’ retrieved 143 results15 in the Google Patents search engine, and a separate legal website displayed 10 screens worth of CDC patents,16 both vaccine- and non-vaccine-related.”

CDC Also Supports Prominent Vaccine Educators
Prominent medical trade and pro-mandatory vaccination organizations, such as Every Child By Two (ECBT), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Immunization Action Coalition (IAC), are acting on behalf of the CDC and the vaccine industry as well.

All three of these organizations, which claim to be independent, receive funding from both vaccine manufacturers and the CDC. (Incidentally, the IAC also provides funding to NACCHO.17)

As noted by Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, in his 2017 article18 “The Unofficial Vaccine Educators: Are CDC Funded Non-Profits Sufficiently Independent?” the ECBT, AAP and IAC “in their advocacy for compulsory vaccination … all have in common a goal that pushes beyond official governmental policy and, in the case of influenza vaccines, the evidence.” Doshi continues:

“Officially, the CDC is neutral on vaccine mandates … But the CDC gives money to non-profits that actively work in this void. Presumably, these activities are funded from non-CDC sources, as U.S. federal law prohibits the use of CDC award money for lobbying, a prohibition that ‘includes grassroots lobbying efforts by award recipients …’ according to CDC policy.”

The question is, is anyone actually ensuring CDC funds are not used for lobbying? Doshi also points out that the IAC’s use of scientific evidence is “questionable,” as they stand by their flu vaccination campaign for health care workers even though “multiple reviews have found insufficient evidence that mandatory influenza vaccination for health care workers has benefits for patients.”

“In broad terms, the CDC and nonprofits share a common goal of increasing vaccination rates,” Doshi writes. And since their primary goals include advocating for mandatory vaccination laws and elimination of vaccine exemptions, that really should not be, considering the CDC is also responsible for ensuring vaccine safety.19

By focusing on increasing vaccination rates, the agency is unlikely to properly tackle the task of finding out whether all of the vaccines on the childhood and adult vaccination schedules are, in fact, necessary, safe and effective, especially when given in combination.

Voices for Vaccines
Yet another front group for the vaccine industry — and the CDC — is Voices for Vaccinedies, which “advocates for on-time vaccination and the reduction of vaccine-preventable disease.”

Its administrators are portrayed as two concerned mothers, who founded the blog Moms Who Vax. In reality, Voices for Vaccines is an “administrative project” of the Task Force for Global Health, the third largest charity in the U.S.,20 which has deep financial ties to the CDC and the pharmaceutical industry. Voices for Vaccines’ scientific advisory board includes:21,22

Merck vaccine developers and mandatory vaccination proponents Paul Offit and Stanley Plotkin.
Former CDC immunization director Dr. Alan Hinman, an Emory University professor and program director of the Center for Vaccine Equity at the Task Force for Global Health.
Vanderbilt professor and medical director for the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases, William Schaffner. In 2018, Schaffner told CNN the influenza vaccine — which had a measly 36% effectiveness rate — was “not perfect,” but that we should “give the vaccine credit for softening the blow” anyway.
Deborah Wexler, director of the IAC, which is funded by pharmaceutical companies through the CDC Foundation.23
A former member with financial ties to the industry was Maurice R. Hilleman, a professor of vaccinology and the developer of Merck’s vaccine program. In an interview included in the 2007 film “In Lies We Trust: The CIA Hollywood and Bioterrorism,”24 Hilleman admitted Merck was responsible for unleashing the cancer-causing monkey virus SV40 via its polio vaccine. Hilleman died in 2005.

In 2014, the online blog VacTruth also detailed the many connections between Voices for Vaccines, the Task Force for Global Health, Emory University, the CDC, vaccine makers and other pro-vaccine organizations and promoters, including Offit.25

All of these connections, and others not included here, point to the existence of a vast, undisclosed yet well-documented pharma-driven network that uses every propaganda tactic in the book to squash freedom of thought and speech about vaccination — all in the name of protecting profits — and the CDC is a key player.

CDC Petitioned to Quit Making False Claims
While the CDC has long fostered the perception of independence through the use of disclaimers stating26 it does not accept funding from special interests, in reality, it accepts millions of dollars each year from commercial interests through its government-chartered foundation, the CDC Foundation, which funnels those contributions to the CDC after deducting a fee.27

Several watchdog groups — including the U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), Public Citizen, Knowledge Ecology International, Liberty Coalition and the Project on Government Oversight — are now petitioning28 the CDC to cease making these false disclaimers.29

According to the petition,30 the CDC accepted $79.6 million from drug companies and commercial manufacturers between 2014 and 2018 alone. As reported by the Lown Institute:31

“Many of these contributions could be seen as conflicts of interest — for example, a $193,000 donation from Roche, the maker of antiviral drug Tamiflu, to fund a CDC flu prevention campaign.

Despite the significant funding the CDC receives from industry via its foundation, few were aware of these conflicts until Jeanne Lenzer called attention to the foundation in The BMJ32 a few years ago.”

In a November 5, 2019, press release, Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group stated:33

“That the CDC accepts millions from corporations directly impacted by the agency’s public health programs is indefensible. So, the CDC instead has adopted the strategy of repeatedly denying that it accepts such payments.”

The petition asks the CDC to stop publishing the false and misleading disclaimers, remove all previously published disclaimers from the CDC website and its publications, and to issue corrections, retroactively disclosing the agency’s financial relationships with industry.

“By issuing these false disclaimers, CDC is misleading health professionals, consumers and others both in the United States and around the world,” the petition states.34

“This deception undermines CDC’s credibility and integrity. But the damage here is not merely to the CDC itself. CDC is a national and global leader on medical and public health matters. It is crucial for the CDC to lead by example on matters of ethics, and, at a minimum, to faithfully and truthfully disclose its conflicts of interest.”

The CDC in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services portrays itself as a public health watchdog. It has tremendous credibility within the medical community, and part of this credibility hinges on the idea that it’s free of industry bias and conflicts of interest. Again and again, investigations have shown that funding plays an enormous role in decision-making and in research outcomes.

As noted by Shannon Brownlee, senior vice president for the Lown Institute, government-chartered foundations “exist at least in part because they allow industries to directly fund and thus control the work of agencies that are either supposed to regulate them, or conduct research that can help or hurt their business.”35

When it comes to vaccines, it’s quite clear that the CDC is anything but impartial. It owns vaccine-related patents and employs and defers to “experts” who have deep ties to vaccine makers. It funds pro-vaccine front groups that lobby for mandatory vaccinations, and it receives funds from vaccine makers.

Aside from the groups already mentioned, the CDC also funds state health programs aimed at implementing “no exceptions” mandatory vaccination policies and laws, including mandatory HPV vaccination programs.36

This, despite the fact the HPV vaccine is one of the most dangerous and unnecessary vaccines ever made. There’s also no evidence it actually helps prevent cervical cancer. As noted by Mark Blaxill, Age of Autism’s editor-at-large:37

“Gardasil is perhaps the leading example of a new form of unconstrained government self-dealing, in arrangements whereby [HHS] can transfer technology to pharmaceutical partners, [and] simultaneously both approve and protect their partners’ technology licenses while also taking a cut of the profits.”

Your Help Is Needed!
To help push for greater transparency, please contact the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services today at scheduling@hhs.gov and let them know that you demand the CDC:

Cease publication of disclaimers that CDC has “no financial interests or other relationships with the manufacturers of commercial products” and that it “does not accept commercial support.”
Remove all such disclaimers from the CDC website, including the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).
Add corrections to all MMWR articles bearing these disclaimers, explaining that the disclaimers were incorrect and have been removed.
Retroactively disclose, in any MMWR article bearing the disclaimers, any corporate contributions to the CDC or CDC Foundation that are relevant to the MMWR article."

onawah

11th February 2020, 21:16

Vaccine Failures, Part 3: Influenza Vaccination
FEBRUARY 11, 2020
By the Children’s Health Defense Team
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/vaccine-failures-part-3-influenza-vaccination/?utm_source=mailchimp

(Many hyperlinks in the article not copied here.)

"[Note: This is the third in a series of articles examining the serious problem of vaccine failure—a problem that, scandalously, remains unacknowledged by the public health officials and politicians promoting draconian vaccine mandates. Previous articles examined measles and pertussis vaccination.]
Each year, U.S. public health officials and their media partners renew the campaign to sell the entire country (including pregnant women, six-month-olds and fragile senior citizens) on the need for and benefits of flu vaccines. Ordinarily, to persuade the public that a given vaccine is beneficial, officials must show that it is effective—in other words, that it is able to “prevent outcomes of interest in the ‘real world.’” However, influenza vaccination’s infamous ineffectiveness makes this talking point a bit tricky. And when vaccination does not “significantly reduce medically attended influenza illness,” it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the vaccine has bombed.

As public health experts are well aware, many factors can lessen influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE), including particular characteristics of vaccine recipients and the vaccines themselves. The scientific literature also points to serious wrinkles that underscore influenza vaccination’s inability to deliver meaningful benefits and its propensity to create new problems. For example, studies show that getting flu vaccines year after year reduces the level of vaccine protection available; flu-vaccinated individuals are also more susceptible to other strains of influenza and severe respiratory infections. Recent studies even suggest that childhood influenza vaccination can lead to larger epidemics and “an overall health loss.” A vaccine expert who recently admitted to knowing less about influenza today than a decade ago lamented, “It’s much more complicated than we thought.”

…in over half (8/15) of the years since 2004, influenza vaccines have failed 60% or more of the time—including 90%, 79%, 81% and 71% in 2004-05, 2005-06, 2014-15 and 2018-19, respectively.
Failure #1: Influenza vaccination has been 40%-90% ineffective over the past 15 years.
Thus far for 2019-2020, the CDC says that it can only speculate about how well the season’s influenza vaccines “might work” [emphasis added]. To compensate for this vagueness, the agency touts VE in past seasons as being “in the range of 40% to 60%” (a range that vaccinologists would consider abysmal for any other vaccine). What the CDC does not mention is that last year (2018-19), overall VE (across all age groups and influenza viruses) was a mere 29%, and for the pesky influenza A(H3N2) viruses that predominated after February 2019, flu vaccines were ineffective 91% of the time. Moreover, VE has attained the CDC’s vaunted upper limit of 60% only once in the past fifteen years; in over half (8/15) of the years since 2004, influenza vaccines have failed 60% or more of the time—including 90%, 79%, 81% and 71% in 2004-05, 2005-06, 2014-15 and 2018-19, respectively.

Failure #2: Influenza vaccine effectiveness is highly inconsistent and ignores immune system complexities.
More so than with other vaccines, researchers view influenza viruses as “dynamic” and influenza VE as a “moving target.” These characteristics have thwarted efforts to develop effective vaccines, with dramatic seasonal fluctuations in VE being the inevitable result. Under such circumstances, influenza vaccines theoretically will be most effective when manufacturers correctly guess which strains of virus to include in a given year’s vaccines. In practice, however, influenza vaccines also “stand out for their variable effectiveness by age group . . . and by recent vaccination status,” suggesting an important role for immune history as well.

Illustrating the “complex host-virus interactions that affect vaccine protection,” some researchers hypothesize that imprinting—how a person’s first influenza infection “shap[es] immune memory . . . over the individual’s lifetime”—may play a key role in subsequent infection risks. Proponents of this hypothesis point to a study showing that vaccination tampered with protective childhood imprinting in a cohort of 35–54-year-olds; vaccinated individuals in that age group had a more than four-fold increased risk of illness from certain circulating influenza viruses compared with same-age unvaccinated individuals.

In another example of how immune factors influence VE, studies show that obese individuals have a decreased response to seasonal flu vaccines compared with non-obese individuals. Researchers explain this by noting that overweight introduces changes in metabolism that alter and age immune system cells; one researcher says that a 30-year-old obese person’s immune cells look “a lot like what you might expect in an 80-year-old individual.”

… flu vaccination programs are predicated on assumptions on top of assumptions.
Failure #3: Influenza vaccine effectiveness dwindles with repeated vaccination.
A 2020 study published by Canadian researchers assesses the impact of repeated influenza vaccination on “current season” VE, furnishing results that will hardly be good news for proponents of annual vaccination. The study included senior citizens with laboratory-confirmed influenza who were at least 65 years old at the time of vaccination, examining the impact of prior vaccination for up to 10 previous flu seasons—the first study to review such a long time period. In seniors who received a vaccine in 2015-16 but none in the preceding decade, VE was an unimpressive 34%, but it was significantly worse when accounting for 10-year vaccination history—26%, 24%, 13% and 7% in those who received 1-3, 4-6, 7-8 or 9-10 vaccines in the prior decade, respectively. A Spanish study of older (> 60 years) influenza patients documented low VE (20% or lower) with just one prior vaccination.

What about at the younger end of the age continuum? The authors of a 2017 meta-analysis point out that, based on average life expectancy and current vaccine recommendations, a child born in 2017 can “expect to receive 70-80 annual influenza vaccinations” over the course of his or her lifetime—but the effects of so many annual vaccines “on individual long-term protection, population immunity, and virus evolution remain largely unknown.” Another researcher—commenting on why influenza vaccines so often fail—remarks that flu vaccination programs are “predicated on assumptions on top of assumptions.”

The authors of the 2017 meta-analysis note that “signals of concern regarding potential negative effects of repeated vaccination” are nothing new, having first been observed in the 1970s and 1980s. In their conclusions, not only do these authors argue that repeated vaccination “blunts” the antibody response—particularly for the H3N2 influenza viruses that caused U.S. vaccine effectiveness to plummet in 2019—but that the long-term immune effects of “blocking natural infection in healthy individuals with a low risk of influenza complications are unknown.” Their take-home message, again, is hardly reassuring:

Our current understanding of repeated vaccination effects is inadequate to inform vaccine policy recommendations.

… children who received a seasonal influenza vaccine (versus placebo) were more susceptible to acute noninfluenza respiratory viruses in the nine months following vaccination …
Failure #4: Influenza vaccines can increase recipients’ susceptibility to non-vaccine influenza viruses and other acute infections.
In the aftermath of the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic, two Canadian researchers reported a more than two-fold increased risk of H1N1 illness in individuals less than 50 years who had received a 2008 seasonal flu vaccine. To explain this finding, one of the investigators theorized that the seasonal vaccine “protected against an H1N1 virus that was related to—but not similar enough to—the pandemic virus,” which “might actually have facilitated infection with the pandemic virus.” Although the Canadians characterized the 2009 pandemic as relatively mild, they observed that “a potential doubling of pandemic infection risk among prior seasonal vaccine recipients could be disastrous in the event of a more severe pandemic involving a higher per-case fatality risk.”

Not long after the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, other investigators reported on the potential for vaccination programs to shift influenza infections in such a way as to produce less favorable outcomes—a scenario rarely considered during pandemic planning. They hypothesized “that vaccinating to prevent a fall pandemic wave might delay it long enough to inadvertently increase influenza infections in winter, when primary influenza infection is more likely to cause severe outcomes [and] potentially cause a net increase in severe outcomes.”

A 2012 study of 6–15-year-olds found that children who received a seasonal influenza vaccine (versus placebo) were more susceptible to acute noninfluenza respiratory viruses in the nine months following vaccination, whether during winter or summer. In an effort to explain this unexpected result, the investigators discussed the phenomenon known as “virus interference” and speculated that vaccination “could increase influenza immunity at the expense of reduced immunity to noninfluenza respiratory viruses, by some unknown biological mechanism.” Interestingly, a 2020 study of virus interference in highly vaccinated U.S. military personnel reported an increased odds of coronavirus and human metapneumovirus (a virus that causes respiratory infections) in personnel who received influenza vaccines, although the findings pointed in the opposite direction for the other noninfluenza viruses examined.

Failure #5: Many influenza vaccine researchers are disingenuous or worse when they report on vaccine effectiveness.
As Children’s Health Defense has enumerated elsewhere, the proponents of flu vaccines—whether public health officials, the media or researchers—are only too willing to provide misleading information. A multicountry study funded by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and authored by GSK employees and shareholders—published in The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal in 2019—furnishes an illustrative example:

The GSK authors report that they evaluated a “total vaccinated cohort” of 12,018 children; however, a companion publication clarifies that only 6,006 actually received the GSK-manufactured influenza vaccine.
The remaining 6,012 children comprised a control group, a group the researchers describe as “unvaccinated”; in fact, these children received one of three “non-influenza control vaccines” (hepatitis A, varicella or pneumococcal conjugate vaccine)—presumably also GSK brands.
The researchers did not start collecting illness information until 14 days after vaccination, precluding any consideration of short-term post-vaccination adverse events. Without information about adverse events in influenza-vaccinated children, it is impossible to assess the risk-benefit context of the authors’ conclusion that 19 children would need to receive the vaccine to prevent one case of influenza or that 6,024 children must get a vaccine to prevent one case of severe influenza.
The researchers admit that they focused exclusively on “pre-specified symptoms,” limiting their ability to capture the “whole clinical picture.”
They report “little difference” in severity scores for influenza-like illness and lower respiratory illness between the two groups but describe a lower rate of fever in the influenza-vaccinated group. However, they make no mention of clinical trial data showing that fever is a “very common” reaction to GSK’s hepatitis A, chickenpox and pneumococcal vaccines.
A Dutch study recently reported that childhood influenza vaccination “is not cost-effective when only outcomes for the children themselves are considered.” Analyzing the risk of undesirable outcomes—such as “a decrease of health or an increase in the number of severe influenza seasons after introduction of the influenza vaccination program for children”—the Dutch researchers produced worrisome models showing that “serious strain on the health care system” or “a net health loss” could result from childhood influenza vaccination. Given the many ambiguities present in the GSK study, one wonders whether it could be masking similarly discouraging findings.
wq55cty1vTA
Failure #6: Flu vaccine hype is just that—hype.
Is the annual flu vaccine sales pitch (evident not just in the U.S. but around the world) working? Given predictions of a 50% increase in the global influenza vaccine market by 2023 (from $5 billion to $7.5 billion), it would seem so. On the other hand, recent estimates of influenza vaccine coverage in U.S. adults show that Americans are growing more, rather than less, skeptical. In 2017-2018, influenza vaccine coverage fell for every adult age group (and all but one racial/ethnic group), reaching the lowest level in eight flu seasons. While influenza researchers may be “hesitant to discuss problems with the vaccine ‘because they’re afraid of being tainted with the antivaccine brush,’” we must hope that members of the public will recognize the importance of reviewing flu vaccine facts very carefully."

For more information, visit the following resources on the Children’s Health Defense website:

Nov. 7, 2019: A generation asleep? Narcolepsy in teens and young adults
Oct. 24, 2019: Flu vaccine facts: what you need to know for 2019-20
Nov. 8, 2018: How the CDC uses fear to increase demand for flu vaccines
Oct. 9, 2018: The CDC’s influenza math doesn’t add up: exaggerating the death toll to sell flu shots
Apr. 10, 2018: The New York Times vs. the science on the flu shot
Feb. 7, 2018: Smokin’ new technology to produce flu vaccines
Jan. 29, 2018: Caveat emptor: Science vs. CDC on scary flu shot promotions
Jan. 1, 2018: Flu vaccine facts: what you need to know for 2018-19
Nov. 3, 2017: Nurses continue to be justified in refusing mandatory flu shots
Sept. 19, 2017: CDC study shows up to 7.7-fold greater odds of miscarriage after influenza vaccine
Dec. 23, 2016: Flu shots during pregnancy & autism: cause for concern
Dec. 20, 2016: Should I get the flu shot? CDC data raise concerns

onawah

13th February 2020, 21:57

The Socio-Economic Impact of the Chronic Illness Epidemic Affecting the World's Children
By Anne Dachel, Media Editor, Age of Autism and LossofBrainTrust.com
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/society-costs/february-2020/
2/13/20

"This is the first of a monthly segment of stories of the special education crisis from around the world, curated by Anne Dachel.

As I look back over the stories I’ve been collecting the past three years, it’s clear that the problem of sick and mentally-challenged children is never ending. There seems to be no plateau to be reached where cost and demand level out.

Everywhere in the English-speaking world, as far as I can see, special education is taking center stage in school budgets talks. And it’s not just cognitive delays—our children are increasingly plagued with chronic health problems never before seen at today’s rates. So how will we pay for all of this?

CHRONIC HEALTH PROBLEMS
Pocohantas (WV) Times: School system increasing medical staff for student safety Staff reporter Suzanne Stewart made it clear that students are coming to school with really serious health issues/learning problems although the reasons for this happening are not addressed.

“… the medical issues of students today have grown to the point that a medical professional is needed full-time.”

“To meet the needs of the students, superintendent of schools Terrence Beam said the Pocahontas County Board of Education is seeking two LPNs to assist school nurse Jenny Friel.”

“Our kids are coming to us with all kinds of emotional and physical issues that – up to this point – we have been unable to provide the assistance that was necessary.”

‘The actual physical condition of the kids is different than it was twenty years ago. We have more diabetic students. We have more kids with major allergies. We have kids with seizure disorders.

“In addition to physical medical concerns, there is also an increase in social and emotional issues.”

“Sometimes we focus a lot on the academics and the athletics in our school systems, but we really need to look at the physical and the mental condition of our kids, because it is difficult.”

Charlottesville (VA) Daily Progress: Bell’s inhaler, EpiPen, bus driver, Scottsville bills advance

A bill in the state legislature would authorize all school nurses to stock Albuterol inhalers for students with asthma.

Leghbridge News (Canada): New severe allergy protocols a welcome sight at Holy Spirit schools

The government of Alberta, as of Jan 1st, “has required all K-12 schools in the province to have at least one epinephrine auto-injector.”

MENTAL HEALTH
Jan 25, Charlotte (NC) Observer: CMS needs hundreds of social workers to meet national standards. Can county afford them?

$5.6M in county funding will be used to hire 25 new social workers for the district. In addition:

“The district is looking to hire 30 additional mental-health professionals, including counselors and psychologists.”

“Staffing deficits at CMS call for recruiting 500 more social workers, as well as 150 counselors and 115 psychologists, according to an analysis provided to the Mecklenburg County commissioners ahead of their annual board retreat next week. …

“In recent years, the number of students screened for suicide risk at CMS has soared.”

WAAY-TV Huntsville, AL: State Department of Education Wants to Add More Funding for Mental Health Services in Schools

Alabama Department of Education is asking for $7.7M in additional funding to address student mental health.

“I think across our state and certainly across our district, we’re seeing an increase of mental health issues at an earlier age for students.”

“The money would also provide more full-time therapists to schools.”

Jan 24, NorthCentralPA,com:

Danville, Pennsylvania school district is shortening the school day and reducing class requirements to help improve student mental health.

Butte (MT) Standard: A social-emotional learning approach transforms an Anaconda school

“So this whole thing here is the sensory hallway, and we added it as a way for kids to calm down themselves,”

“While it helps students with motor skills and provides sensory input, the sensory hallway is part of a larger movement to get Lincoln students to learn how to ‘self-regulate.’”

“‘What’s self-regulate? So think of it like: When you get upset, are you able to calm yourself without assistance?’ explained Barney.”

(UK) Exeter Fe News: How to support students with their mental health

“With one in eight children suffering from some form of mental health issue during their childhood years, it is important that we as parents and teachers are able to understand what this means for our children and how we can support them.”

SPECIAL EDUCATION INCREASES
(UK) Barking and Dagenham Post: Council leader vows to ‘provide right infrastructure’ as demand for Barking and Dagenham school places is expected to soar

“Barking and Dagenham has experienced rapidly increasing numbers of youngsters needing support for special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), councillors heard.”

“A forecast total of 113 primary and 353 secondary SEND pupils is anticipated over the next four years, the majority with autism.”

Trumbull (CT) Times: Trumbull schools face ‘dire’ budget situation

“[Superintendent] Iassogna had told the board the schools were running a deficit projected at up to $2 million and that he had implemented a spending freeze and a hold on overtime and substitute teacher costs”.

“The biggest factor, though, is special education and transportation for students in special education programs.”

“In October 2019, we identified $1.4 million in special education and transportation costs. That number has only grown.”

AZFamily.com: Bill to address Arizona special education funding for first time in nearly 20 years

“With more students having more severe disabilities, there is a growing strain on general classroom spending in Arizona’s public schools.”

“Now, Arizona lawmakers are considering a bill that would help public schools manage the rising cost of special education services.”

“Dr. Kym Marshall, Director of Student Services for Chandler Unified School District says the special education population has exploded and so have the needs.”

“It’s not just about reading writing and math, it’s more about mental health, social emotional.”

“What we do know is that the population keeps growing without any additional funding.”

“Between the 2007 to 20017 school years, the number of Arizona students diagnosed with autism more than doubled.”

“There are just too many children who fall into these classifications that haven’t been true in the past,” said Sen. Allen. “I don’t know all the reasons and I guess it doesn’t matter for this argument. We have the issue now let’s try to help these kids.”

South Portland (ME) Press Herald: Center’s disabilities awareness programs in high demand

“As schools deal with an increasing number of children with disabilities like autism, demand for disabilities awareness and sensitivity programs has increased, meaning Portland-based organization The Cromwell Center currently has a waiting list of 25 schools.”

“She estimates that between 10 and 12 percent of the school’s students have some type of disability and said that while she has not noticed more autism diagnoses in recent years, she said the number of students who are in special education or require an individualized education plan has increased over the last few years.”

North Somerset Times: Overwhelming support for special school expansion

“A special school has received overwhelming support for its expansion ambitions, during a five-week consultation.”

“Baytree School, in Weston, is desperately in need of more space to cope with the growing demand for children with special educational needs.”

Independent (UK): ‘Heartbreaking’: Parents of autistic children face waits of up to three years for diagnosis and support, charity warns

“Around half (46 per cent) of families waited 18 months or longer for a formal diagnosis for their autistic child, according to a survey of nearly 4,000 parents by Ambitious about Autism.”

“Once a diagnosis is made, nearly three in four (70 per cent) parents said they were still not offered adequate support for their child – such as therapies that help with speech and language.”

Texarkana (AR) Gazette: Cost of special education keeps rising

“Over the past decade, greater numbers of Arkansas children have been diagnosed with disabilities that require them to receive education.”

“Consequently, Arkansas public schools are spending greater amounts of money on special education.”

“Last year, there were almost 64,000 students with a diagnosed disability in Arkansas public schools. That is 13.4% of the state’s total student enrollment.”

“The number of students diagnosed with autism has gone up 55% since 2013. The increase is attributable to an increased awareness among educators and others of the characteristics of autism.”

“The growth in children diagnosed with dyslexia has followed a similar trend. In 2014, for example, 957 students received therapy for dyslexia.” “In 2014, only 89 school districts and one charter school reported results from screening for dyslexia.”

Guardian (UK): New Rush Hall school to increase capacity

“A special needs school has welcomed plans to increase its capacity in the face of growing demand.”

“New Rush Hall school, in Fencepiece Road, Fairlop, will be expanded from 64 places to 80 after Redbridge Council gave plans the green light on Tuesday, January 7”.

“The school – rated outstanding by Ofsted in 2016 – is a specialist school for children and young people experiencing significant social, emotional, behavioural and/or mental health difficulties.”

“Executive headteacher, Sam Walters, welcomed the news, saying the demand for places had greatly risen in recent years.”

“There has been a huge increase in the number of young people needing EHC plans, particularly for social and mental health needs, has naturally meant that there are not enough appropriate school place to meet the populaces needs.”

“Since 2014, the number of Redbridge resident pupils with an EHC plan has risen approximately 35 per cent.”

“Council officials estimate the borough’s special educational needs and disability (SEND) pupil population will grow by 16.5 per cent (153 school places) for primary education and 33.7 per cent (248 places) for secondary by 2025.”

NJ Spotlight: Sweeney Looks to Help Districts with Special Education Costs

“Tuition for out-of-district placement of some students often runs well into six figures.”

“The high cost of special education in New Jersey is getting renewed attention, as Senate President Steve Sweeney presses the state to do more to help districts pay for students with severe disabilities.”

“Long an advocate for special education as a parent of a child with special needs, Sweeney said he wants to ease the tension that arises with the high costs of serving these students, and said the state can and should do more.”

“But the rising costs of special education — and specifically those of specialized outside schools where tuition costs can reach six figures — has been a contentious issue for years, if not decades….”

KLFM, Norfolk (UK): More special needs learning places might be created in west Norfolk

“The plan is part of Norfolk County Council’s £120 million [$160M US] transformation of special educational needs”.

“The programme seeks to create 500 extra school places by building up to four new specialist schools and expanding existing SRBs or building new ones.”

“(EpiPen) on-site at all times” in case of a severe allergic reaction.

RESTRAINT AND SECLUSION
Cedar Rapids Gazette: School districts reverse course, won’t provide student seclusion data

“Cedar Rapids elementary school students were held in seclusion rooms or physically restrained 237 times in the first month of this school year — more than 10 times a day and more than four times as much as in the first month of the 2015-2016 school year.”

“School seclusion has been a lightning rod in recent years as more parents learn about 6-by-6 foot rooms with padded walls used to contain overwrought students in schools across Iowa.”

“…most elementary students were put into seclusion for violent behavior that included kicking, biting, hitting and throwing items that could harm others.”

“Teacher and staff injuries that involved students rose 88 percent, from 226 to 425, in the past five years in the Des Moines Public Schools…”

Sunderland Echo: Echo readers back a call for an end to use of isolation booths in schools

“With concern growing that an increasing use of the booths for disruptive students could have serious effects on young people’s mental health, we asked if their use should be stopped."

Seabreeze

14th February 2020, 07:50

This are some parts of a field lawsuit reached in 2008
to the
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
in Den Haag, Netherlands...

.it might explains something to you.....

Mercury is mercury....in silverfillings (also called amalgam fillings), in vaccines, in electric energy bulbs.....aso...

reached in by Dr.med.habil.Dr. med. Max Daunderer ...

He did fight against the use of toxic elements in the med. fields all his life....

Dr. med. Dr. med. habil. Max Daunderer suddenly and unexpectedly died on 07/06/2013.
...........
In spite of more than 20,000 strong, scientific warnings from all over the world, German dentists continue to use pure, highly toxic, liquid mercury blended with the powders of various other toxic metals for dental works. Since mercury turns into a gas at mouth temperature, its vapors are continually released and, of course, reaches the brain quickly.

Mercury, accumulated in the brain, remains stored until premature death; it is the cause for neurological, immune and genetic damages.

Since mercury passes through the mother by way of placenta to the fetus, literally every German suffers from an amalgam-related disease which causes premature death to every other German.

Each year, nearly half a million of Germans die cruelly as a result of the damages, dental amalgam calls forth.These connections were clearly demonstrated in animal experimentation on behalf of the German Federal Government back in 1995. (1)

This Holocaust-style reminding killing has continued undisturbed, on the quiet and obviously on purpose, ever since.

Therefore we demand:

1. The immediate arrest of the perpetrators.
2. Conviction of the perpetrators.
3. Taking possession of the murder weapon (liquid mercury).

Statement of accusation:
1. The German amalgam perpetrators have spread this terror all over the globe; most recently to China and India.

The annual death figures reached the millions by now and are sole results of dental amalgam.This is genocide!(2)

2. The actions of the accused individuals are exclusively based on self-serving interests.
3. Same-in-price alternatives have been available for decades.
4. Counter-arguments have been stubbornly ignored.
5. The deadly amalgam (mercury)-related diseases have been belittled as "mental illnesses" or as"civilization diseases"; autoimmune diseases have been diagnosed as incurable.

6. We know of more than 400 deadly autoimmune diseases caused by amalgam (mercury);among them: Alzheimer ́s, diabetes, various forms of cancer, infarcts, MS.

7. An army of royally-paid experts assist the perpetrators as companions in crime. (3)

8. The German Federal Supreme Court and the European Court have remained in inactivity in regards to our complaints.

Herewith, we urge for acceptance of our complaint.

2008

Dr. med. Dr. med. habil. Max Daunderer
Internist and Environmental Doctor
Habilitation as Clinical Toxicologist
Hugo-Junkersstraße 13
D-82031 Grünwald

Source and full text (page 108) :
http://amalgam.toxcenter.org/artikel/Amalgamverbot-sofortiges-Eilantrag-UN07-m-EGMR.pdf

http://toxcenter.org/artikel/AMALGAM-CAUSES-EVERY-OTHER-CASE-OF-DEATH.php

http://toxcenter.org/artikel/Max-Daunderer-MD-Ph-D-Biography-Chronology.php

onawah

15th February 2020, 05:25

Vaccine revolution in one State of the union
by Jon Rappoport
February 14, 2020

(HALLELUJAH!!:clapping::bigsmile:)

"Well, what do you know? One state in the US is pushing back against mandatory vaccination of children. And not just pushing back—but, standing on Constitutional principle. In the state legislature.

It’s South Dakota.

Last week, House Bill 1235 was introduced. (for full text, click here; for legislative history, click here)

As inforum.com reports: “South Dakota bill introduced to prohibit schools from requiring immunizations,” (Feb 5, 2020):

“House Bill 1235 states that ‘No public or nonpublic post secondary educational institutions may mandate any immunizations for school entry. A public or private post secondary educational institution may request any student to submit medical records. No educational institution may use coercive means to require immunization’.”

“The bill would make it a Class 1 misdemeanor for ‘any educational institution, medical provider, or person to compel another to submit to immunization,’ according to the bill text.”

And then, here is the principle, boldly put in the bill:

“’Every person has the inalienable right to bodily integrity, free from any threat or compulsion that the person accepts any medical intervention, including immunization. No person may be discriminated against for refusal to accept an unwanted medical intervention, including immunization,’ the bill states.”

An idea whose time has come. An idea whose time is centuries old.

As most readers know, the CDC, state health agencies, vaccine manufacturers, tech giant censors, and various other medical/government honchos have been chipping away at the right of the people to refuse medical interventions. The strategy, led by California, has been to go state by state, passing laws that make toxic childhood vaccinations mandatory.

But now, that strategy, in South Dakota, has been turned around. It’s a spark that has to be nurtured, and blown into a flame that will signal other states to follow suit.

For those who have forgotten, the Constitution was originally ratified by the newly created states, through their legislatures. The states were giving up certain enumerated powers to the new federal government. This was not a mere formality. The states were not puppets of central government. In principle, they still aren’t. Those who now want to wipe away states in favor of one great melted cheese glob of a nation know exactly what they’re doing.

They’re trying to eradicate one of the last safeguards against overarching federal power.

In the meantime, they’re using their resources to turn the states into captured entities, which rubber stamp every covert and overt control op dispensed from Above.

“They” go by various names. The deep state. Globalists. Corporate statists. Technocrats. They find it deeply embarrassing that, while they’re trying to turn the WORLD into one vast interlocked corporation, here in the US they’re still dealing with separate states. How can that be?

Why doesn’t every state officially surrender every shred of power to Washington and huddle like abject losers on the steps of federal buildings, openly howling and begging for dollars?

Actually, to an alarming degree, that’s already the case. But in the darkness, there are a few flashlights burning.

It’s still very early in the South Dakota legislative process, for this new bill. The outcome isn’t guaranteed. But something has broken through the layers of federal/corporate mold and fungus—NO ONE CAN FORCE A PERSON TO SUBMIT TO MEDICAL INTERVENTIONS OF ANY KIND.

Yippee-ki-yay, mother*****r.

The game is afoot.

The game is never, ever over."
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/02/14/vaccine-revolution-in-one-state-of-the-union/

Ba-Ba-Ra also posted the above here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109960-One-State-Pushes-Back-on-Mandatory-Vaccinations&p=1336058&viewfull=1#post1336058

onawah

16th February 2020, 20:39

Informed Dissent, Proposed Vaccine Law
South Dakota Vaccine Podcast
Feb 16, 2020
Ben Swann

hL9ImEW6TKE

onawah

17th February 2020, 19:40

INSANE!!New Illinois Bill Would Require 6th Graders in Public, Private, and Religious Schools to Get the Gardasil HPV Vaccine
2/17/20
https://vaccineimpact.com/2020/new-illinois-bill-would-require-6th-graders-in-public-private-and-religious-schools-to-get-the-gardasil-hpv-vaccine/
Health Impact News

(MANY hyperlinks in the article--too many to embed here)

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (WICS/WRSP) – "A new proposed bill would require some Illinois students to get the HPV vaccine.

The bill was filed by Rep. Robyn Gabel, D-Evanston, on Feb. 11.

HB 4870 amends the Communicable Disease Prevention Act.

A synopsis for the bill states, “the Department of Public Health shall adopt a rule requiring students, upon entering the sixth grade of any public, private, or parochial school, to receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and requiring confirmation that the student has completed the series of HPV vaccinations upon entering the ninth grade of any public, private, or parochial school. Provides that the Department shall adopt the rule in time to allow students to receive the vaccination before the start of the school year beginning in 2022. Effective January 1, 2021.”

Source: https://local12.com/news/nation-world/bill-would-require-6th-graders-to-get-hpv-vaccine

https://vaccineimpact.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2020/02/Illinois-bill.png

https://vaccineimpact.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/05/gardasil_collage-3.jpg

More information about Gardasil:
https://vaccineimpact.com/tag/gardasil/

Gardasil Ruined My Life #getversed
14-Year-Old Active Girl in Wisconsin Suffers Over 300 Seizures After Gardasil Vaccine – Doctor Refuses to Consider Gardasil Cause due to Fear of Losing Research Funding
Illinois Teen Dies Three Weeks After Being Injected with HPV Gardasil Vaccine
California Nurse Gives Gardasil Vaccine to Own Daughter who Develops Leukemia and Dies
Infant Accidentally Vaccinated with Gardasil – Mother Blamed for Vaccine Injuries and Baby Medically Kidnapped
The Happy-go-Lucky Girl I had Pre-HPV Vaccine is Gone Forever
Iowa Girl Faces Death: Life Destroyed by Gardasil Vaccine
Gardasil Vaccine Given without Consent and Ruins Life of 14 Year Old Girl
After 3 Years of Suffering 19 Year Old Girl Dies from Gardasil Vaccine Injuries
Gardasil: The Decision We Will Always Regret
15 Year Old French Girl’s “Descent into Hell” After Gardasil Vaccine – Wheelchair Bound and Paralyzed
The Gardasil Vaccine After-Life: My Daughter is a Shadow of Her Former Self
Gardasil: An Experience no Child Should Have to Go Through
I Want my Daughter’s Life Back the Way it was Before Gardasil
Gardasil Vaccine: Destroyed and Abandoned
15-Year-Old Vaccinated by Force with Gardasil now Suffers from Paralysis and Pain
Recovering from my Gardasil Vaccine Nightmare
Gardasil: We Thought It Was The Right Choice
“HPV Vaccine Has Done This to My Child”
13 Year Old World Championship Karate Student Forced to Quit After Gardasil Vaccine
If I Could Turn Back Time, Korey Would not Have Received any Gardasil Shots
What Doctors Don’t Tell You: Our Gardasil Horror Story
Family Fights U.S. Government over Compensation for Gardasil Vaccine Injuries
Gardasil: When Will our Nightmare End?
HPV Vaccine Injuries: “I Cannot Begin to Describe What it is Like to Watch your Daughter Live in Such Agony”
Gardasil: Don’t Let Your Child Become “One Less”
The Gardasil Vaccine Changed Our Definition of “Normal”
Gardasil: I Should Have Researched First
“They’ve Been Robbed of Their Womanhood” – Local Milwaukee Media Covers Gardasil Vaccine Injuries
Gardasil: The Day Our Daughter’s Life Changed
Gardasil: The Decision I will Always Regret
Gardasil Vaccine: One More Girl Dead
Gardasil: A Parent’s Worst Nightmare
After Gardasil: I Simply Want my Healthy Daughter Back
Gardasil: My Family Suffers with Me
Gardasil Changed my Health, my Life, and Family’s Lives Forever
Gardasil: Ashlie’s Near-Death Experience
Gardasil: My Daughter’s Worst Nightmare
My Personal Battle After the Gardasil Vaccine
Gardasil: The Worst Thing That Ever Happened to Me
A Ruined Life from Gardasil
HPV Vaccines: My Journey Through Gardasil Injuries
The Dark Side of Gardasil – A Nightmare that Became Real
Toddler Wrongly Injected with Gardasil Vaccine Develops Rare Form of Leukaemia "

halcyon026

18th February 2020, 18:34

Whooping cough outbreak closes Texas school despite 100-percent vaccination rate:

https://www.foxnews.com/health/whooping-cough-outbreak-texas-catholic-school?fbclid=IwAR0TT8yk25uI0ncTm4P7qktuD-FGq5dogB8M3ryjIs-Qj-ieS2n_YOkkwVA

onawah

19th February 2020, 00:27

Weighing Down Childhood: Are Vaccines and Glyphosate Contributing to Childhood Obesity?
By the Children’s Health Defense Team
FEBRUARY 18, 2020
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/child-health-topics/sick-children/obesity/weighing-down-childhood-are-vaccines-and-glyphosate-contributing-to-childhood-obesity/

"Over the past several decades, the experience of childhood has changed fundamentally for many American children. Impairing their ability to climb trees and run races, over a third are encumbered—at even the youngest ages—with runaway weight and associated sequelae like high blood pressure. As of 2015-16, about 13.7 million U.S. children and adolescents—roughly one in five (18.5%)—were obese, and another 17% were overweight. Even worse, a third of those classified as obese fell into the category of “extreme obesity.”

In the adolescent age group (12- to 19-year-olds), obesity prevalence—at 21%—has quadrupled since the 1980s, generating $14 billion in annual direct health expenses. Researchers are even more concerned, however, by the worsening picture in 2- to 5-year-olds. Studies show that early-onset weight gain has long-term risks; when children start kindergarten overweight, they are four times more likely to become obese by eighth grade as normal-weight kindergartners. In less than a decade (from 2007-08 to 2015-16), the prevalence of obesity and severe obesity in the 2- to 5-year age group rose from 10% to 14%. In the most recent two-year cycle, this sharp increase in preschool-age children—particularly boys, African Americans and Hispanics—prompted researchers to fret about the obesity epidemic having become “endemic.” At a societal level, experts warn that “The obesity epidemic threatens to shorten life expectancy . . . and bankrupt the health care system.”

The dramatic surge in childhood obesity began in earnest in the late 1980s. Given the growing evidence that environmental chemicals are key obesity triggers, it makes sense to consider what exposures may have increased over the same time period. Vaccines and glyphosate are two culprits that readily come to mind—and published evidence supports a link.

The epidemic of obesity in US children has a statistically significant positive correlation with the number of vaccine doses recommended, with similar trends evident for hypertension and metabolic syndrome.
Vaccine-induced immune overload and obesity
In multiple papers published over the last decade and a half, immunologist JB Classen has been making the case that “vaccine induced immune overload”—which he also refers to as “iatrogenic immune stimulation”—is a primary cause of the obesity epidemic and other inflammatory disease epidemics. Arguing that a “huge increase” in inflammation-associated disorders has followed on the heels of the “massive increase” in the childhood vaccine schedule, Classen points out that “The epidemic of obesity in US children has a statistically significant positive correlation with the number of vaccine doses recommended,” with similar trends evident for hypertension and metabolic syndrome.

From Classen’s perspective, a “major problem with vaccines is the one dose fits all approach.” In his papers, he points out the following:

In order to induce protection to infection in the 1% of the population with the weakest immune system, vaccines are over stimulating the immune system of the remaining 99% of the population and this is leading to epidemics of inflammatory diseases.

According to Classen, the theory of vaccine-induced immune overload is far more biologically plausible than competing hypotheses such as (in the case of obesity) “nutrition overload” or lack of exercise. The immunology expert notes that, contrary to popular belief, inflammation precedes (rather than follows) the development of obesity, and it also boosts the activity of natural steroids that can cause obesity. In addition, specific vaccines are known to cause elevations in proinflammatory proteins that are associated with and predictive of overweight and obesity.

Other researchers have linked in utero exposure to mercury to a higher risk of childhood overweight or obesity. The influenza vaccines routinely administered to pregnant women contain the mercury-based preservative thimerosal.

… link glyphosate to three key biological disruptions … all of which can explain the epidemics of obesity as well as numerous other chronic conditions.
Glyphosate and obesity
Increasingly, obesity researchers agree with Classen that excess calories and inadequate exercise are “insufficient to account for the observed changes in [obesity and metabolic syndrome] disease trends.” They propose that in utero and early life exposure to synthetic chemicals such as glyphosate and other pesticides may be playing a major role.

As one of the most widely used chemicals in the world, glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) deserves particular attention. MIT researcher Stephanie Seneff and coauthor Anthony Samsel acknowledge the likely contribution of other environmental toxins but argue that glyphosate is the most significant “because it is pervasive and it is often handled carelessly due to its perceived nontoxicity.” Seneff and Samsel link glyphosate to three key biological disruptions—gut dysbiosis, impaired sulfate transport and suppression of a biologically important family of enzymes—all of which can explain the epidemics of obesity as well as numerous other chronic conditions. Insidiously, glyphosate also disrupts the body’s ability to detoxify other environmental toxins, leading to “synergistic enhancement of toxicity.” In addition, Seneff has pointed out elsewhere that glyphosate “has made its way into several widely used vaccines,” and especially the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine.

One of the key mechanisms whereby glyphosate may carve out a “path to obesity,” say Seneff and Samsel, is through glyphosate’s impairment of tryptophan synthesis. Tryptophan is an essential amino acid that, when depleted, leads to inadequate serotonin and melatonin in the brain. Ordinarily, serotonin regulates appetite, so “it follows that serotonin deficiency would lead to overeating and obesity.”

As with vaccines, temporal trends in glyphosate use correlate with obesity trends, not just in the U.S. but around the world. Seneff and Samsel state:

The obesity epidemic began in the United States in 1975, simultaneous with the introduction of glyphosate into the food chain, and it has steadily escalated in step with increased usage of glyphosate in agriculture. While it is common knowledge that Americans are continuing to grow more and more obese with each passing year, there may be less awareness that obesity aligns with glyphosate usage elsewhere in the world. For example, South Africa arguably has the highest obesity rates in all of Africa, and it is also the African country that has most heavily embraced glyphosate usage since the 1970’s and has freely adopted genetically modified crops with little regulation.

… proposes that vaccine-induced immune overload may lead to different outcomes in different individuals—explaining the many parallel childhood epidemics we are observing.
Pervasive risks, many outcomes
Classen’s numerous publications focus not just on obesity but also on other immune-mediated conditions such as diabetes (types 1 and 2) and metabolic syndrome. As a result of his analyses, he makes the crucial observation that the “clinical manifestation of disease depends on one’s physiologic response to inflammation.” Stated another way, he proposes that vaccine-induced immune overload may lead to different outcomes in different individuals—explaining the many parallel childhood epidemics we are observing.

Seneff and Samsel make a similar point about glyphosate and its influence on a long list of chronic diseases, including “autism, . . . inflammatory bowel disease, chronic diarrhea, colitis and Crohn’s disease, obesity, cardiovascular disease, depression, cancer, cachexia, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, and ALS, among others.” They state, “While genetics surely play a role in susceptibility, genetics may rather influence which of these conditions develops in the context of glyphosate exposure, rather than whether any of these conditions develops.”

Overall, Classen asserts that “vaccines are much more dangerous than the public is lead [sic] to believe,” adding that “The medical industry must take ownership for causing of the epidemics through the inappropriate recommendations and gross over utilization of vaccines.” Seneff and Samsel make a similar critique of glyphosate, postulating that it may be “the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment” and advocating for immediate action to “drastically curtail” its use."

James Newell

19th February 2020, 02:42

Here is a great interview done by Dr Sherri Tenpenny with Alex Jones. She is one of best fighters re vaccines we have. I see with little question that the release of this Coronavirus is a power grab on a world wide scale for enforced vaccinations. She also talks about her upcoming course in a few weeks. I may sign up for it myself just for the data.

https://banned.video/watch?id=5e4c4841af22a6002b86daff

onawah

19th February 2020, 05:24

onawah

20th February 2020, 22:12

The Great HPV Lie Action Alert!
February 20, 2020
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/sars/
(hyperlinks in the ARTICLE)

"Disturbing evidence on HPV from a country where most young women have received the vaccine.
A recent UK study looking at the clinical trials underlying the efficacy of the HPV vaccine found “significant uncertainties undermining claims of efficacy in [the] data.” This is the latest to come out about a vaccine that has been linked with many adverse events and negative health effects. We’ve also learned that, despite the high HPV vaccination rates in the UK, there has been a sharp rise in cervical cancer in the very age groups that first received the vaccine. These data highlight the need for state governments to halt the march towards vaccination mandates and for public health authorities to take the safety issues with this vaccine seriously.

The study authors analyzed twelve published Phase 2 and 3 efficacy trials in relation to the prevention of cervical cancer in women. They found several important problems with these trials. For one, the trial populations did not reflect the younger adolescent populations for which the vaccine is intended. The trials’ methodology also presented concerns. According to the authors, the methodologies used made it “impossible to determine effects on clinically significant outcomes. It is still uncertain whether human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents cervical cancer as trials were not designed to detect this outcome.”

There’s more. Cancer Research UK has reported a striking 54% uptick in cervical cancer in 25-29 year-olds. This is the age group that would have first received the vaccine when the UK government launched its HPV vaccination program in 2008. The program was considered a success for achieving HPV vaccination rates of between 76 and 90 percent.

What explains high cervical cancer rates in a population that received the HPV vaccine? For one, we’ve seen evidence demonstrating that cancer risk increases by 44 percent with HPV vaccination if girls already have the HPV virus. An additional concern is that HPV vaccination seems to reduce HPV screening. HPV is one of the few cancers that can be prevented with regular screening. But Cancer UK notes that women seeking screening has reached a record low, which may be because those who have been vaccinated feel they are not at risk.

This should be the death knell of a vaccine that has already proven dangerous. In the past we covered a study showing that women aged 25-29 who received the HPV vaccine were less likely to get pregnant. Additionally, the US government’s vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) lists a startling 57,287 adverse events from the HPV vaccine, including 419 deaths—far more than any other vaccine. A World Health Organization study demonstrated that the vaccination has a tendency to produce clusters of serious adverse events. The American College of Pediatricians raised concerns that the vaccine could be linked to premature ovarian failure. And let’s not forget the former Merck doctor who said that Gardasil “will become the greatest medical scandal of all time,” that it “serves no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturer,” and, like some other vaccines, that it can cause “Guillain-Barré syndrome, paralysis of the lower limbs, vaccine-induced MS, and vaccine-induced encephalitis.”

It is beyond irresponsible for the government and health authorities to continue to push this vaccine on young girls given the data and reliable alternative methods (such as regular screenings) that prevent cervical cancer.

If you have not already done so, please watch ANH’s full-length documentary on HPV Vaccines:https://vaxinsider.com/hpv/

State-based action alerts! Check to see if your state is below and take action to prevent HPV mandates and other bills that restrict freedom of choice. Please send your message immediately.

Arizona: HB 2050 would in effect eliminate the requirement that parents provide proof of vaccination unless there is an outbreak of a disease that a vaccine is recommended for. The bill states that “a school may not require a pupil to receive the recommended immunizations or refuse to admit or otherwise penalize a pupil because that pupil has not received the recommended immunizations.”

Colorado: SB 163 would restrict the religious and personal belief exemptions to vaccination.

Connecticut: HB 5044 would eliminate the religious belief exemption to vaccination for schools in the state.

Hawaii: HB 1182 would add a conscientious belief exemption to vaccines required for school.

Iowa: HF 206 would eliminate the religious belief exemption to vaccines required for school.

Illinois: SB 1669 and HB 4870 would mandate the HPV vaccine for some school students; SB 3668 removes the religious belief exemption, restricts the medical exemption, and allows minors to consent to vaccination.

Massachusetts: The Massachusetts legislature is considering a set of bills that would eliminate important exemptions to vaccinations (H3999/HD4284), mandate the HPV vaccine (S1264), and put the government in charge of medical exemptions (H4096/S2359).

Minnesota: The Minnesota legislature is considering a bill, SF 1520, that would eliminate the conscientious belief exemption to vaccination.

Missouri: HB 2380 would enact a conscientious belief exemption to vaccine requirements for public schools in Missouri and would remove private, parochial and parish schools from the current state laws governing vaccine requirements in Missouri.

Mississippi: HB 1060 would add a religious belief exemption to schools and daycare facilities in the state.

New Jersey: The New Jersey legislature is considering a set of bills, A1603, S903, and A969/S902 that mandate the HPV vaccine for certain school children and restrict or eliminate the religious belief exemption, respectively.

New York: The legislature is still considering additional bills that further restrict freedom of choice: S298B/A2912A (mandates HPV vaccine); A099 (allows forced vaccination under some circumstances); A2316 (mandates flu vaccine for daycare); A973 (allows HPV and Hep B vaccine without parental consent); S2276 (mandates flu vaccine for school and daycare); and A7838 (requires medical exemptions to be approved by the state health department).

The legislature is also considering S477 and A8676/S7202, which strengthen and expand the medical exemption to vaccination and add a religious belief exemption for school children, respectively.

Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania legislature is considering a set of bills (SB 626, SB 653, and HB 1771) that would restrict or eliminate the religious and philosophical exemptions to vaccination.

South Dakota: HB 1235 would eliminate all vaccine mandates for the State of South Dakota for public and non public schools, early childhood programs and post-secondary educational institutions.

Virginia: The Virginia legislature is considering a bill, HB 1090, that mandates the full ACIP recommended vaccine schedule for school in Virginia. That means the full recommended CDC schedule will be required for school children. Additionally, HB 1489 amends current state vaccine requirements to add HPV vaccines for boys.

Vermont: The legislature is considering a bill, H 238, that would eliminate the religious belief exemption to vaccination.

Washington: The Washington legislature is considering a bill, SB 5841, that would eliminate the personal belief and philosophical exemptions for all mandated vaccines.

Wisconsin: The legislature is considering a bill, A248/SB 262, that would eliminate the personal belief exemption to vaccination. "

onawah

20th February 2020, 22:36

KENNEDY & BIGTREE: THE INTERVIEW
The HighWire with Del Bigtree
2/20/20
70.2K subscribers
(Turns out this is actually from last year, but it's still mind blowing.)
"In an unprecedented interview, Del Bigtree and Robert Kennedy, Jr. sit down with Russian naturopath, Katia Txi, to discuss the global vaccine debate, how it got to this point, and what they plan on doing about it."
Xeqa9Fsf-Lg

onawah

23rd February 2020, 17:07

Dr Larry Palevsky, MD . Testimony Connecticut 2/19/2020
Feb 20, 2020

"Awesome testimony, lots of questions answered."

nT6I864vwbE

More from the hearing as Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai speaks:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/831694823850817/wp/595161294373458/

onawah

25th February 2020, 05:07

"VAXXED II: THE PEOPLE'S TRUTH STREAMING STARTS AT MIDNIGHT TONIGHT

Starting at 12:00 AM Tuesday February 25th, you can stream VAXXED II directly to your TV or Device
There are TWO OPTIONS for Streaming:

1. ROKU - on Peeps TV

if you own a Roku device, make sure you subscribe to Peeps TV channel. As a Peeps TV subscriber, you will be able to RENT or BUY Vaxxed II

2. Vaxxed2.com

if you are not a Roku subscriber, you can still stream Vaxxed II directly from our website."

https://www.vaxxed2.com/so/adN1vp5GJ?cid=b510bb7a-9928-456f-8052-cd080b910ba8#/main

Philippe

25th February 2020, 10:55

That sure does sound like the truth. :tsk: :bump:
I see with little question that the release of this Coronavirus is a power grab on a world wide scale for enforced vaccinations.

https://banned.video/watch?id=5e4c4841af22a6002b86daff

Agreed that this is what the evil controllers want.
But can anyone explain me then why the vaccine against the corona virus is not released yet and for sale ? Or do they first wait till the pandemic is everywhere before doing that next autumn? Usually they are very greedy and in a hurry to have their dirty return on investment.
Something does not add up, maybe it is an accidental escape. Sorry to add more speculation here.

onawah

25th February 2020, 23:21

Cochrane Founder Warns Flu Vaccine Research Is Corrupted
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
February 25, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/02/25/cochrane-collaboration-flu-vaccine.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20200225Z1&et_cid=DM466572&et_rid=817639049

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Professor Peter Gøtzsche is a Danish physician-researcher who co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre. He has been an outspoken critic of conflicts of interest and bias in research
After Gøtzsche co-wrote a scathing review of Cochrane’s 2018 review of HPV vaccine safety, Cochrane’s governing board expelled him and, in a February 9, 2020, tweet, Gøtzsche took aim at Cochrane’s review of influenza vaccine by alleging that a “financially conflicted” individual “rearranged” vaccine trial data to make it appear as though the influenza vaccine reduces mortality, when it doesn’t
In the 15 years prior to Gøtzsche’s expulsion, Cochrane had published several meta-reviews, showing flu vaccinations are ineffective for preventing influenza and influenza-like illness, and have no appreciable effect on hospitalizations and mortality
March 3, 2020, Maine residents will have the opportunity to go to the polls and repeal LD 798 to reinstate religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions by voting YES on ballot referendum Question 1
The “No on 1” ad campaign primarily financed by Big Pharma has already spent $476,000 on misleading television ads to defeat the ballot referendum that would restore vaccine exemptions in Maine. All but $56,000 for the ad campaign has been paid by vaccine manufacturers, which will profit from keeping the state’s “no exceptions” vaccine mandates (LD 798) in place
While the drug industry is quick to claim that anyone questioning its integrity is part of a “war against science,” the evidence of industry malfeasance is simply too great and too disturbing to ignore.

From my perspective, the drug industry itself is to blame for the public’s dwindling confidence in scientific findings. Loss of confidence is a natural result when lie after lie is unearthed, and there’s been no shortage of scientific scandals to shake public confidence in recent years.

One researcher who has helped expose industry bias in research is professor Peter Gøtzsche, a Danish physician-researcher who in 1993 co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre.

Cochrane publishes hundreds of scientific reviews each year, looking at what works and what doesn’t, and was for decades considered the gold standard for independent scientific meta-reviews.

The organization’s reputation remained remarkably unblemished all the way up until 2018, when Gøtzsche and Cochrane-affiliated researchers Lars Jørgensen and Tom Jefferson published a scathing critique of Cochrane’s review of the HPV vaccine,1 pointing out methodological flaws and conflicts of interest.

Gøtzsche was subsequently expelled by the Cochrane governing board (although the board insists his removal from the board was due to “repeated misuse of official letterhead to espouse personal views” and had nothing to do with his criticism of Cochrane’s HPV review2). Four board members (Gerald Gartlehner, David Hammerstein Mintz, Joerg Meerpohl and Nancy Santesso) resigned in protest of Gotzsche’s removal from the Cochrane governing board.3

In a three-page letter4 to the Nordic Cochrane Centre, Gøtzsche addressed his expulsion and questioned the path Cochrane’s leadership has chosen in recent years, noting “the central executive team of Cochrane has failed to activate adequate safeguards … to assure sufficient policies in the fields of epistemology, ethics and morality.”

Cochrane Founder Highlights Corrupted Flu Vaccine Research
In a February 9, 2020, tweet, Gøtzsche wrote:5 “Cochrane corruption. A Cochrane review did not find that flu shots reduce deaths … ‘After invitation from Cochrane,’ a financially conflicted person ‘re-arranged’ the data and vaccines reduced deaths. They don’t …”

This information, he says, is included in his new book, “Vaccines: Truth, Lies and Controversy.” Indeed, in years’ past, Cochrane has repeatedly found flu vaccinations are ineffective and have no appreciable effect on influenza-related hospitalizations and mortality. For example:

Its 2006 systematic review6 of 51 studies involving 263,987 children, which sought to “appraise all comparative studies evaluating the effects of influenza vaccines in healthy children; assess vaccine efficacy (prevention of confirmed influenza) and effectiveness (prevention of influenza-like illness)” found:

“Live vaccines showed an efficacy of 79% and an effectiveness of 33% in children older than two years compared with placebo or no intervention. Inactivated vaccines had a lower efficacy of 59% than live vaccines but similar effectiveness: 36%. In children under two, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine was similar to placebo.”

Cochrane’s 2010 review7 of 50 influenza vaccine studies found that:

“In the relatively uncommon circumstance of vaccine matching the viral circulating strain and high circulation, 4% of unvaccinated people versus 1% of vaccinated people developed influenza symptoms …

Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions … Inactivated vaccines caused local harms and an estimated 1.6 additional cases of Guillain-Barré Syndrome per million vaccinations … There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission.”

This review also included the following notice:

“WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size.

Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.”

Cochrane’s 2010 review8 of 75 studies of vaccines for preventing influenza in the elderly concluded that:

“Due to the general low quality of non-RCTs and the likely presence of biases, which make interpretation of these data difficult and any firm conclusions potentially misleading, we were unable to reach clear conclusions about the effects of the vaccines in the elderly.”

Cochrane’s 2018 review9 of 52 clinical studies on vaccines for preventing influenza in adults, including pregnant women, found only 15% of the studies were well-designed and conducted. Based on 25 studies that looked at inactivated influenza vaccines, Cochrane concluded they have only a minor protective effect against influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI), noting:

“Inactivated influenza vaccines probably reduce influenza in healthy adults from 2.3% without vaccination to 0.9% and they probably reduce ILI from 21.5% to 18.1% … 71 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing influenza, and 29 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing an ILI …

We identified one RCT and one controlled clinical trial assessing the effects of vaccination in pregnant women. The efficacy of inactivated vaccine containing pH1N1 against influenza was 50% in mothers (NNV [number needed to vaccinate] 55), and 49% in infants up to 24 weeks (NNV 56).

No data were available on efficacy against seasonal influenza during pregnancy. Evidence from observational studies showed effectiveness of influenza vaccines against ILI in pregnant women to be 24% (NNV 94), and against influenza in newborns from vaccinated women to be 41%.”

In its 2018 review10 of 41 clinical trials on live and inactivated vaccines for preventing influenza in children, they found:

“Compared with placebo or do nothing, live attenuated influenza vaccines probably reduce the risk of influenza infection in children aged 3 to 16 years from 18% to 4%, and they may reduce ILI by a smaller degree, from 17% to 12% …

Seven children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza, and 20 children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one child experiencing an ILI …

Compared with placebo or no vaccination, inactivated vaccines reduce the risk of influenza in children aged 2 to 16 years from 30% to 11%, and they probably reduce ILI from 28% to 20%.

Five children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza, and 12 children would need to be vaccinated to avoid one case of ILI …

Adverse event data were not well described in the available studies. Standardized approaches to the definition, ascertainment, and reporting of adverse events are needed.”

Two States Rejecting Big Pharma's Vaccine Mandates
In recent years, medical freedom has come under intense attack. In state after state, vaccine makers and their lobbyists have rammed through legislation that implements forced vaccination by eliminating vaccine exemptions. People in California, New York, Washington and Maine all lost vaccine exemptions last year, as detailed in the National Vaccine Information Center’s annual state legislation report “Vaccine Exemptions Under Attack in 2019.”

Although 4 states lost vaccine exemptions last year, exemptions were protected from removal in 22 other states by the active participation of vaccine choice advocates who educated legislators about why it is important to have flexible medical, religious and conscience exemptions in vaccine laws.

In New Jersey, bill S2173 was halted in the Senate, both in December 2019 and again in January 2020, due to persistent public protests against the bill proposing to eliminate the religious belief vaccine exemption.11,12,13

The fact that New Jersey managed to thwart this broad attack on freedom is an encouraging sign. Never underestimate the power of the people! The key is numbers — you have to actually take action by contacting your legislators ahead of time to communicate your concerns about a bill you oppose (or support) and showing up at public hearings and on days when votes are taken in your state Capitol.

Thousands of individuals gathered in hallways and outside the Capitol building in Trenton in protest of S2173 on multiple occasions, and it was undoubtedly the sheer size of the opposition that greatly helped to defeat the bill that many considered to be an attack on religious freedom.

Another ray of light shines brightly in Maine. While the state legislature repealed the religious and philosophical belief vaccine exemptions in May 2019 by passing LD 798, residents rapidly succeeded in collecting more than enough signatures of registered voters to get an opportunity to repeal the new vaccine law, and it is now referendum Question 1 on the March 3 ballot.14

So, March 3, 2020, residents will have the opportunity to go to the polls to repeal LD 798 and reinstate religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions by voting YES on referendum Question 1.15 As noted by RejectBigPharma.com:16

“A YES vote is a vote to:

Reject Big Pharma and government overreach
Restore equal access to education for all Mainers
Defend parental rights
Protect religious freedom
Preserve informed consent and medical freedom”

Why Everyone Needs to Support Maine’s ‘Yes on 1’
It’s important to realize that a victory in Maine would be a victory for all states, as it would set a crucial precedent. The good news is that it’s far easier to win in a state with a small population like Maine because there are fewer people to educate, which means less money is required for advertising.

Maine has an advertising saturation point of about $3 million, meaning if you spend $3 million, you will reach a majority of residents and further advertising will not make a significant difference.

Since Maine will be the first state to put government vaccine mandates and repeal of exemptions to a popular vote, it’s important to support Maine’s Yes On 1 campaign regardless of where in the United States you live. By helping them succeed, they will set a precedent for other states to follow.

As of February 6, 2020, the “Yes on 1 Reject Big Pharma” campaign had raised just over $300,000.17 The campaign needs to raise at least $1 million to stand a chance against the vaccine industry’s deep pockets. Of course, if you’re a registered voter in Maine, you can cast a YES vote on March 3, 2020, to restore vaccine exemptions in your state.

Also remember to register to become a user of the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal, operated by the National Vaccine Information Center, to stay up to date on vaccine-related bills that are moving in your state this year, including bills proposing to take away (or expand) your right to obtain a vaccine exemption for yourself or your child.

The NVIC Advocacy Portal also provides access to bill analyses and talking points that you can use to educate your legislators about what the bills will mean to you and your family.

Pharma-Led Opposition Cranks Out Misleading AdsTo win, it’s crucial we make sure Maine’s Yes on 1 campaign gets the funding it needs. Make no mistake, the opposition has no financial constraints, as it is led and supported by the drug industry itself.

Ironically, the opposition is accusing the “Yes on 1: Reject Big Pharma” campaign of misleading voters, saying the drug industry has nothing to do with the removal of vaccine exemptions, and doesn’t make any money on vaccines.

In reality, vaccines are a primary profit driver for the drug industry.18 Merck, which is just one of several vaccine makers, reported over $6.1 billion in sales of their childhood vaccines during the first three quarters of 2019 alone.19

A January 2020 vaccine market report20 states the global vaccine market was worth $41.7 billion as of 2019, and is estimated to hit $58.4 billion by 2024. One of the factors attributed to this rapid growth is “the rising focus on immunization.” Anyone thinking this focus isn’t manufactured by the drug industry itself is fooling themselves.

What’s more, as reported by Yes on 1 at a February 11, 2020, press conference, “No on 1” has already spent $476,000 on just three weeks’ worth of television ads. Yet the opposition — which claims to be a grassroots organization without any pharma funding or connections — report raising only $56,000 in donations. So, where did the rest of it magically come from? At the press conference, a spokeswoman for the Yes on 1 campaign revealed the obvious truth:

“As reported in the Bangor Daily, Bobby Reynolds, spokesman for the ‘No’ campaign … answered this question when he announced that the massive ad buys were funded by — wait for it — vaccine manufacturers.21 Let that sink in.

After months of denying any connection to Big Pharma, the No on 1 campaign yesterday admitted that they were funded by Big Pharma themselves — the very vaccine manufacturers whose products would be mandated under this law.”

Eliminating Exemptions Is a Big Pharma Business Strategy
Of course, vaccine makers have enormously deep pockets, which is how many of these laws are getting passed in the first place. One of the reasons they have so much money to spend on lobbying for the removal of vaccine exemptions is because they don’t have to pay for the damage their products cause.

As noted by Dr. Meryl Nass in a February 11, 2020, post on CentralMaine.com, in support of referendum Question 1:22

“Pharmaceutical companies face no lawsuits for vaccine injuries, so long as their vaccine has been added to the childhood schedule by CDC. Pharmaceutical companies don’t need to advertise required vaccines, since the government mandates them and 94% of Maine children already receive them.

But the industry wants 100% guaranteed uptake, because it is about to roll out a number of new vaccines. The 21st Century Cures Act, passed in 2016, abbreviated the process for testing, licensing and adding vaccines to the childhood schedule. Over 200 vaccines are currently in development.

How many of those vaccines will be required over the next few years is anybody’s guess. There is a huge financial incentive to having your vaccine placed on the childhood schedule by the CDC: no liability for injuries. The right to choose which vaccines your child receives will disappear unless referendum Question 1 passes.”

No-Liability Industry Has No Right to Influence Policy
At the press conference (see video above), Yes on 1 also clarified the opposition’s deceptive message that Yes on 1 would “repeal Maine’s vaccine law.” This is a wildly inaccurate statement.

Yes on 1 simply repeals LD 798, i.e., the law that removes religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions, thus restoring Maine’s vaccine law to what it was before. In other words, certain vaccines will still be required for school attendance, but you will have the right to opt out by claiming a religious or philosophical exemption to one or more of those vaccines — just as you did before LD 798 was written into law.

“The Yes on 1 campaign is, and always been, about speaking truth to power … The truth is that mandate laws like this one have nothing to do with public health, and everything to do with Big Pharma profit, Big Pharma control, and Big Pharma deception,” Yes on 1 says.23

“While this law [LD 798] masquerades as a public health issue, there’s no evidence it would do anything to improve outbreaks of vaccine targeted disease in schools. Countless cases across the country have shown that these diseases occur in fully vaccinated populations …

Why do we care about Big Pharma’s involvement? Because, a hated industry with no liability, no reason to improve the safety of its products, and an ever growing and aggressive schedule, should not be allowed to influence policy to mandate these very products.”

Donate here: https://www.rejectbigpharma.com/donate
- Sources and References
1 BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine July 27, 2018; 11102
2 STAT News September 28, 2018
3 Cochrane.org September 15, 2018
4 Nordic Cochrane Center September 14, 2018
5 Twitter, Prof. Peter Goetzsche, February 9, 2020
6 Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews 2006 Jan 25;(1):CD004879
7 Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews 2010 Jul 7;(7):CD001269
8 Cochrane Database Systematic Reviews 2010 Feb 17;(2):CD004876
9 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews February 1, 2018, Vaccines for Preventing Influenza in Healthy Adults
10 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews February 1, 2018, Vaccines for Preventing Influenza in Healthy Children
11 NJ S2173
12 PJ Media December 17, 2019
13 New York Times January 13, 2020 (Archived)
14 Ars Technica January 14, 2020
15 RejectBigPharma.com, What is a people’s veto?
16 Ballotpedia.com, Maine Question 1
17 Rejectbigpharma.com
18 News Center Maine Updated February 6, 2020
19 Financial Times April 24, 2016
20, 24 Youtube, Yes on 1 Press Conference February 11, 2020
21 Markets and Markets Research, Vaccines Market January 2020
22 WGME.com February 10, 2020
23 Central Maine Updated February 11, 2020

onawah

25th February 2020, 23:25

Dogs' Rights Now Exceed Human Rights
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
February 25, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/02/25/dogs-rights-now-exceed-human-rights.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art2ReadMore&cid=20200225Z1&et_cid=DM466572&et_rid=817639049

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Delaware is the first state in the U.S. to pass a bill that would allow titers to be given in lieu of rabies vaccines for certain dogs, cats and ferrets
The Delaware bill — Maggie’s Vaccine Protection Act, formally known as House Bill 214 — was initiated by Al Casapulla, a businessman who lost his shih tzu, Maggie, due to over-vaccination
In the case of livestock, discussions are underway into whether or not to vaccinate very young calves, as many factors influence the outcome; looking into individual circumstances is encouraged
Why can state legislators recognize the risks of applying one-size-fits-all vaccine mandates to pets, but overlook the same risks when applying vaccine schedules to humans?
The same commonsense approaches that are sometimes afforded to animals, in terms of evaluating individual circumstances when choosing whether or not to vaccinate, are not typically given to humans
Delaware is the first state in the U.S. to pass a bill that would allow titers to be given in lieu of rabies vaccines for certain dogs, cats and ferrets. An antibody titer measures the concentration of antibodies in the blood produced after an inflammatory response to vaccination. Measuring the number of antibodies present is used to certify that a person or animal is immune to a specific antigen or virus.

If enough antibodies are present after recovering from the natural disease or being previously vaccinated, it can be used as “proof” of immunity to that disease. The Delaware bill — Maggie’s Vaccine Protection Act, formally known as House Bill 214 — was initiated by Al Casapulla, a businessman who lost his shih tzu, Maggie, due to over-vaccination.1

Rabies vaccine requirements vary by state, but many require mandatory vaccinations, regardless of the health status of the pet. Although a few states, such as Illinois, Maine and New Hampshire, allow animals to be exempted from rabies vaccines if it would compromise their health, many other states have no exemptions to vaccinations.2

Once the bill is signed into law, Delaware will become the first state to accept a rabies titer in lieu of the shot. It will allow veterinarians to complete a titer on their pet patients and decide whether or not a rabies vaccination is necessary.

The bill reads, “This Act enables licensed veterinarians to exempt an animal from the mandated rabies vaccination, if the veterinarian determines, based on their professional judgement, that the vaccine would endanger the animal's health and a titer test may be administered to assist in determining the necessity of the vaccine.”3

Pet Vaccine Bills Aims to Protect Dogs From Over-Vaccination
Maggie’s Vaccine Protection Act passed the Delaware General Assembly by a unanimous vote.4 Casapulla told Coastal Point that the bill’s passing is the culmination of years of work aimed at protecting animals from the harms of over-vaccination:5

“I have been working on this bill since she [Maggie] died … My passion to see this through was more than the passion I had when I started my business, because I knew if this gets passed we would be saving the lives of so many innocent animals and allowing vets to use their discretion on making legal, educated exemptions … Maggie will be saving lives long after I am gone.”

The support for the bill was strong among legislators, including state Rep. Ruth Briggs King, who said pet owners and veterinarians should have the ultimate say on whether pets need vaccines, instead of them being forced into it due to the law.

“These are responsible pet owners,” she told Coastal Point, “so we are hopeful this time it’s going to move through. This is the second session for it, on the second legislature it’s been through.”6 Similarly, Sen. Gerald Hocker stated:7

“I feel it’s a good bill. It corrects something I wasn’t aware of. Vaccinations will be based on the health of the dog. Who better than the veterinarian to decide, depending on the health of the dog? Constituent Al Casapulla, who lost his dog, spent several hours working with vets.”

The Irony of Granting Pets Greater Rights Than People
The passage of Delaware’s House Bill 214 is excellent news for frequently over-vaccinated pets — something veterinarian Dr. Karen Becker writes about often — but the irony is glaring. Why can state legislators recognize the risks of applying one-size-fits-all vaccine mandates to pets, but overlook the same risks when applying vaccine schedules to people, especially infants and children?

Today we know, for instance, that some children, like those with mitochondrial disorders, are at increased risk from vaccinations, but efforts aren’t being made to identify these children to prevent unnecessary harm. Further, an individual’s response to a vaccine is influenced by many factors.

Gut microbes may help determine immune response to vaccines, for starters. In one study, infants who responded to the rotavirus vaccine had a higher diversity of microbes in their gut, as well as more microbes from the Proteobacteria group, than infants who did not mount the expected immune response.8,9

Likewise, in a study by Nikolaj Orntoft and colleagues, researchers looked into changes in gene expression after diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP) vaccination in African girls to see which genes might be upregulated or downregulated (basically “turned on” or “turned off”).10 What they found is that there's really no way to predict which genes will be affected.

So, not only will each individual have a unique response to any given vaccine based on their age, current health status and microbial makeup, but each is also epigenetically predisposed to respond differently in terms of the side effects they might develop. You can see, then, how vaccine mandates may turn out to be health disasters for some children and adults, just as they are for some pets.

Combo Vaccines Risk Highest Reactions
Also at odds with human medicine are discussions by veterinarians suggesting that giving pets multiple vaccines at once may be dangerous, especially for smaller animals. Dr. W. Jean Dodds, founder of Hemopet Blood Bank, told Veterinary Practice News all the way back in 2009 that the frequency of vaccinations is heavily debated, with some suggesting that giving core vaccines every three years or every year is outdated.

“Few veterinarians are proactive about discussing the options clients have in protecting their pets against disease,” Dodds said. “The industry promotes more vaccines and veterinarians feel comfortable telling clients they’re necessary. Often, technicians have vaccines prepared before the doctor even examines the animal. Many vets don’t know how to handle titers or don’t want to bother with them.” What’s more, she noted:11

“When vaccines are needed, they shouldn’t be given at the same site or at the same exam. Banfield Animal Health released two papers on this topic saying animals weighing less than 20 pounds and receiving combo vaccines are at the highest risk of vaccine reaction, yet few DVMs arrange separate visits as a precaution.”

In humans, however, multiple vaccinations are regularly given at the same time to infants and children — including multiple combination vaccines in one visit.

The fact is, all vaccines need to be carefully evaluated not only individually for long-term safety, but also for synergistic toxicity when the vaccine is given in combination with other vaccines and given repeatedly over a period of time, as well as given to people of varying ages and sizes — premature infants included.

For instance, among unvaccinated premature infants, no link to neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) was found. However, a significant link between vaccinations and NDD was detected, regardless of whether the child was premature or full-term.

The combination of preterm birth with vaccination was associated with a 660% increased odds of NDD,12 suggesting a synergistic effect and a need to fully research whether it’s safe to vaccinate premature infants.

‘Individual Situations’ Taken Into Account for Livestock
Again in the case of livestock, discussions are underway into whether or not to vaccinate very young calves, as many factors influence the outcome.

An article in Beef magazine, for instance, suggested that age and colostrum intake should be taken into account when deciding when to vaccinate, as calves that get colostrum may have higher levels of maternal antibodies. Chris Chase, Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, South Dakota State University, told the magazine:

“In the 2-week old calf, there are two things you need to be concerned about. One is age, the other is colostrum intake.

Typically, even in a calf that got no colostrum [and no maternal antibodies to interfere with building its own immunity], the response for making antibodies [when vaccinated early] is not great under 3 weeks of age. If they have higher levels of maternal antibodies than the older calves, they also may not respond [to vaccination].”13

Chase went on to explain that when calves were vaccinated at two or three days old, then challenged with disease seven months later, 20% still got sick. But waiting to vaccinate until the calves were three to four weeks of age led to a better outcome, with less than 5% getting sick. Even then, however, age is only one factor, and he stressed the need to look into individual situations:14

“Age at vaccination is a big factor, but it all goes back to individual situations. If someone is having trouble with summer pneumonia, we’d have to say the vaccine at a young age [several weeks old] probably doesn’t hurt them, but how much good it actually does those calves may be minimal.

Then it goes back to colostral intake and whether it was low, and we still have the issue that they are young when you are giving the vaccine. A person can work with their own herd health veterinarian and take a look at what is going on in their particular situation, and figure out what to be most concerned about.”

Why Are Livestock and Pets Treated Better Than People?
Animals deserve to have their health put first when it comes to medical procedures like vaccinations, but people deserve to be able to exercise a more precautionary approach to vaccination as well. Unfortunately, these same commonsense approaches that are sometimes afforded to animals, in terms of evaluating individual risk factors when choosing whether or not to vaccinate, are not typically given to people.

Today, many doctors are not just strongly promoting vaccination, they are threatening to deny medical care to children and adults if all vaccinations recommended by health officials at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) are not given on the federally recommended schedule.

Children may be vaccinated when sick, for instance, or kidney patients on dialysis given vaccinations upon arrival at a hospital, even before a diagnosis had been given or a doctor had approved of the shots.

Dr. Suzanne Humphries, author of “Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History,” is a nephrologist who has raised similar concerns, suggesting that vaccines may not be safe for people with chronic conditions like kidney failure, or for babies, who have reduced kidney function compared to adults.

As Humphries said in a video, "We're very careful as nephrologists when treating babies because the kidney functions of babies isn't the same as adults — it's vastly reduced. But when it comes to vaccines, this reduced kidney function in infants is always left out of the discussion."

It’s no wonder why, in an online survey of more than 2,000 U.S. adults, conducted on behalf of the American Osteopathic Association, 45% said they had doubts about vaccine safety.15 Unfortunately, vaccine exemptions are increasingly under attack.

The ability to make informed, voluntary vaccine choices for yourself and your children must be protected, because vaccines are not a one-size-fits-all-solution, nor is the U.S. public as a whole a one-size-fits-all population. It’s time that this became widely accepted for humans, just as it’s starting to be acknowledged for pets and livestock."

- Sources and References
1, 4, 5, 6, 7 Coastal Point
2 AVMA, State Rabies Laws (PDF)
3 Delaware General Assembly, House Bill 214
8 Scientific American May 19, 2015
9 The Journal of Infectious Diseases, Volume 215, Issue 1, 1 January 2017, Pages 34–41
10 Scandinavian Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Investigation 2013, Volume 73, Issue 4
11 Veterinary Practice News April 17, 2009
12 Journal of Translational Science April 24, 2017, DOI: 10.15761/JTS.1000187 Summary of Findings 6.6-fold
13, 14 Beef Magazine January 26, 2017
15 American Osteopathic Association June 24, 2019

onawah

27th February 2020, 06:48

How can most pediatricians be wrong about vaccines?
Jeremy R. Hammond's Newsletter
www.jeremyrhammond.com
2/26/20

"One popular talking point we see a lot in the mainstream media is that "anti-vaxxers" believe in "conspiracy theories" about vaccines, as though some grand conspiracy was required to explain how basically the entire medical establishment could get it wrong about vaccines.

How could so many pediatricians, for example, be wrong when they tell parents that vaccines are "safe and effective" and necessary for their children? It's not as though all these doctors are in on some conspiracy to deceive their patients!

This fallacious ad hominem argument against critics of public vaccine policy is a lazy and intellectually dishonest means of addressing parents' legitimate concerns.

It's actually not hard at all to answer the question of how most doctors could be wrong. After all, it's not as though the medical establishment hasn't been proven wrong before! On the contrary, the idea that the medical establishment is somehow infallible is downright ludicrous, given its history of being wrong constantly on matters of life-or-death importance.

Furthermore, doctors can hardly practice medicine at all these days as they see fit. They are strictly confined due to government intervention in the market in the "care" they provide to patients.

Anecdotally, I've had my share of less-than-useless doctors who were totally ignorant about advances in medical science and just went on practicing the way they'd been taught in medical school and following "standard of care" regardless of what science actually has to say about it. Even the good doctors who are open-minded and make an effort to keep up with the science are strictly limited.

For example, the one decent primacy care physician I've had retired because, as he told me, he could no longer practice medicine according to his own judgement. He told me about another elderly female patient of his who was on a certain medication that had been on the market a long time and had a good safety record and was effective for her. But he was being dictated to under regulatory red tape so that he could no longer prescribe that drug for her, but must instead prescribe another, newer drug that had no long-term track record of safety and which might not be as effective for her.

There is practically no doctor-patient relationship anymore. Instead, doctors -- certainly including pediatricians -- are dictated to about how to conduct their trade. The dictats come from government as well as trade organizations like the industry-funded American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

In early 2017, the AAP issued a press release claiming that vaccines prevent cancer, that the hypothesis that vaccines can cause autism has been scientifically disproven, and that the claim that vaccines administered according to the CDC's routine childhood schedule is contributing to the ill-health of the childhood population has been scientifically disproven.

So I contacted the organization to request the studies upon which those claims were based.https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2017/03/28/american-academy-of-pediatrics-refuses-to-back-vaccine-claims-with-science/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=How+can+most+pediatricians+be+wrong+about+vaccines%3F&utm_campaign=How+can+most+pediatricians+be+wrong+about+vaccines%3F

The AAP first tried and failed to produce any such studies, and then, when pressed further to support their bold claims with science, they refused.

I documented my correspondence with the AAP in a 2017 article titled "American Academy of Pediatrics Refuses to Back Vaccine Claims with Science". It's among the most popular articles I've ever published on my website. If you've never read it, you'll want to be sure to do so, and if you have, it might be worth revisiting:
Click here to learn how the AAP refuses to back its vaccine claims with science.
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2017/03/28/american-academy-of-pediatrics-refuses-to-back-vaccine-claims-with-science/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=How+can+most+pediatricians+be+wrong+about+vaccines%3F&utm_campaign=How+can+most+pediatricians+be+wrong+about+vaccines%3F

Regards,
Jeremy
P.S. -- Just to update you on where I'm at, I'm currently working on a very important collaborative project with Children's Health Defense (RFK, Jr.'s organization), which I'll certainly be sharing with you upon publication! Then, assuming nothing else comes up requiring a timely response (like my rebuttal to Dr. Peter Hotez's New York Times propaganda or my rebuttal to faux "fact-checkers" misinforming readers by claiming that the WHO's chief scientist didn't lie about vaccine safety), I'll be shifting my focus back to completing a thorough rebuttal to the most recent MMR-autism study out of Denmark, falsely hailed by the media as proving conclusively that there is no association. "

Jeremy R. Hammond
Independent Journalist, Author, and Writing Coach
www.jeremyrhammond.com
Publisher & Editor
www.foreignpolicyjournal.com

onawah

27th February 2020, 22:05

Proposed legislation in 21 states affecting vaccine choice
From Alliance for Natural Health USA
www.anh-usa.org
2/27/20

"Arizona: HB 2050 would in effect eliminate the requirement that parents provide proof of vaccination unless there is an outbreak of a disease that a vaccine is recommended for. The bill states that “a school may not require a pupil to receive the recommended immunizations or refuse to admit or otherwise penalize a pupil because that pupil has not received the recommended immunizations.”

Colorado: SB 163 would restrict the religious and personal belief exemptions to vaccination.

Connecticut: HB 5044 would eliminate the religious belief exemption to vaccination for schools in the state.

Florida: SB 64 would eliminate the religious belief exemption to vaccination and restrict the medical exemption.

Hawaii: HB 1182 would add a conscientious belief exemption to vaccines required for school.

Iowa: HF 206 would eliminate the religious belief exemption to vaccines required for school.

Illinois: HB 4870 would mandate the HPV vaccine for some school students; SB 3668 removes the religious belief exemption, restricts the medical exemption, and allows minors to consent to vaccination.

Maine: there is a vote coming up on March 3; voters will be asked whether they want to reject a law that removes philosophical and religious exemptions to vaccines.

Massachusetts: The Massachusetts legislature is considering a set of bills that would eliminate important exemptions to vaccinations (H3999/HD4284), mandate the HPV vaccine (S1264), and put the government in charge of medical exemptions (H4096/S2359).

Minnesota: The Minnesota legislature is considering a bill, SF 1520, that would eliminate the conscientious belief exemption to vaccination.

Missouri: HB 2380 would enact a conscientious belief exemption to vaccine requirements for public schools in Missouri and would remove private, parochial and parish schools from the current state laws governing vaccine requirements in Missouri.

Mississippi: HB 1060 would add a religious belief exemption to schools and daycare facilities in the state.

New Jersey: The New Jersey legislature is considering a set of bills, A1603, S903, and A969/S902 that mandate the HPV vaccine for certain school children and restrict or eliminate the religious belief exemption, respectively.

New York: The legislature is still considering additional bills that further restrict freedom of choice: S298B/A2912A (mandates HPV vaccine); A099 (allows forced vaccination under some circumstances); A2316 (mandates flu vaccine for daycare); A973 (allows HPV and Hep B vaccine without parental consent); S2276 (mandates flu vaccine for school and daycare); and A7838 (requires medical exemptions to be approved by the state health department).

The legislature is also considering S477 and A8676/S7202, which strengthen and expand the medical exemption to vaccination and add a religious belief exemption for school children, respectively.

Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania legislature is considering a set of bills (SB 626, SB 653, and HB 1771) that would restrict or eliminate the religious and philosophical exemptions to vaccination.

South Dakota: HB 1235 would eliminate all vaccine mandates for the State of South Dakota for public and non public schools, early childhood programs and post-secondary educational institutions.

Virginia: The Virginia legislature is considering a bill, HB 1090, that mandates the full ACIP recommended vaccine schedule for school in Virginia. That means the full recommended CDC schedule will be required for school children. Additionally, HB 1489 amends current state vaccine requirements to add HPV vaccines for boys.

Vermont: The legislature is considering a bill, H 238, that would eliminate the religious belief exemption to vaccination.

Washington: The Washington legislature is considering a bill, SB 5841, that would eliminate the personal belief and philosophical exemptions for all mandated vaccines.

West Virginia: SB 549, HB 4115, HB 4114, SB 220, and HB 2847 would protect patients and parents from being discriminated against or harassed by health care providers or health care facilities for delaying or declining a vaccine, remove private and parochial schools from state compulsory vaccine law, and add a religious and conscientious belief exemption to vaccination in the state.

Wisconsin: The legislature is considering a bill, A248/SB 262, that would eliminate the personal belief exemption to vaccination."

onawah

28th February 2020, 02:00

I saw this on Facebook today; I hope the image shows up.
(If not, I've asked the Mods to fix it.)
If I do vote, I will probably vote for Sanders, though I understand that he is a career politician, and has compromised himself many times, as they all do.
But if any of them have the chance of a snowball in hell of actually doing anything worthwhile, I think he is the most likely one.

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/88133281_10213245434649112_8410497416788180992_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_sid=1480c5&_nc_ohc=_5RXekmP3SIAX8rKYsv&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=f601aad50e42dfda8baf62c1d803d99a&oe=5EB5DEEB

Though I'm not sure that not voting isn't a better choice.
If enough people didn't, that actually might send the stronger message.
As in: https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-what-if-they-gave-a-war-and-nobody-came-carl-sandburg-66-63-03.jpg

Chester

28th February 2020, 02:53

I wonder what folks will do if a COVID-19 vaccine was created?

onawah

28th February 2020, 07:05

The Science is NOT Settled!
By Dr. Alan Palmer, CHD Contributing Writer
From Children's Health Defense's email update today
2/27/20

"We have heard vaccine proponents say that the science is settled on vaccines. What an arrogant and ridiculous statement! First of all, science is never settled on anything because new discoveries are always being made. That is the nature of science. Secondly, when it comes to vaccines, the science that refutes what the public is being told about vaccines is far more plentiful, credible and convincing. That is a bold statement, but one that can easily be defended.

In fact, I spent 2 ½ years and over 2,500 hours to research and compile my 718-page eBook called 1200 Studies – Truth Will Prevail, that not only defends that statement, it goes on the offensive and attacks the pharma talking points about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. This eBook contains excerpts and summaries of now over 1,400 studies, published in reputable journals representing 45 different medical and scientific disciplines and contradicting the industry talking points about vaccines. These are unbiased and objective studies, produced by thousands of researchers and scientists who are not funded by vaccine manufacturers.

Please download a copy for yourself and share the link with your friends, family and community."

DOWNLOAD FOR FREE https://www.wellnessdoc.com/1200studies/
"1200 Studies – Truth Will Prevail
https://www.wellnessdoc.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Truth_Will_Prevail_1200_Studies_350.png
Thousands of Scientists and Researchers Weigh In…
to Shed Light and Truth On One of The Most Hotly Debated Topics of Our Time

This is the most extensive and well documented exposé ever, about one of the most controversial yet important topics of our time. The amount of studies and research on this subject is overwhelming, but I have done all the work for you and found a way to present it, so it will be easy for you to quickly and easily navigate to exactly what you want to read. It’s like getting the cliff notes for a textbook and being given the “hotlinks” that will take you directly to the sections that interest you, and to the studies that are being quoted from. That way it will be easy for you to verify if what you are being told is true!

You are about to have FREE direct access to hundreds of studies and indirect access to thousands of studies through the references in those studies. As you will see these studies differ, and in many cases widely differ from what we are currently being told about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines.

We Face a Crisis of Unprecedented Proportions
We are facing an unprecedented crisis in our nation and the Western world. There has been a meteoric rise in the rates of autism, developmental delays, learning disabilities, allergy, asthma, autoimmune diseases and more in the way of chronic and debilitating diseases. And tragically, we are losing a large portion of the next generation of children to neurological, neurodevelopmental, behavioral and learning disabilities. According to statistics released by the CDC in 2008, 1 in 6 children suffered from either autism or some form of developmental problem! Now 10 years later, given the increasing prevalence and current estimates, that number may be as high as 1 child in 4! And, those statistics show that these developmental delays including behavioral and learning disabilities are continuing to increase at alarming rates. And, all of the learning and behavioral conditions have a prevalence much higher in boys. In addition, all across the spectrum, the rates of allergy, asthma and autoimmunity are nearing epidemic proportions. Autoimmunity is where the body’s immune system attacks certain tissues or organs. There have been over 100 autoimmune diseases identified now, affecting more than 50 million Americans (that is approximately 1 in 6). The prevalence continues to grow at alarming rates. And, autoimmune diseases have a much higher prevalence in females. (All references are provided in the eBook)

Autism Spectrum Disorder (Autism), is just one of those many conditions that are affecting our children. But it is the condition that get most of the press. The incidence of autism is rising sharply and unabated. The 2014 CDC estimates were that 1 in 45 children were autistic (NHIS data), up from 1 in 150 in 2002 (ADDM Network data), just 12 years prior. Compare that to rates of autism estimated at 1 in 10,000 in the 1950s and 1960s, 1 in 5,000 in the 1970s and increasing to 1 in 300 in the 1990s. (references provided in the eBook)

When the 2018 statistics come out in less than 2 years, it is expected that the rate of autism may be as high as 1 in 25 children, with approximately 4 times as many boys than girls being affected. That means that approximately 1 in 5 boys will be on the autism spectrum!! Many experts believe at the current trajectory, somewhere between the years 2025 and 2032, 1 in 2 children will be autistic!! In addition, consider the crippling rates of other intellectual disabilities just mentioned. This is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE! And collectively, we have to do something to change that.

What would this mean for our society? For one thing, this will be an economic disaster. Even at the conservative projected costs of caring just for autistic individuals, these costs will cripple our economy. (outlined on page 2 of the eBook) – In addition to the crippling cost economically, can you imagine the impact on us socially, on militarily readiness and on the affected children and families themselves? What about our intellectual capacity to churn out scientists, inventors and business innovators for the years to come? The clock is ticking. Left unchecked, it is truly a doom and gloom scenario. We must get to the bottom of it and we must do it now! And by sharing this document, you can be a part of the driving force to make this happen.

I Have Made Navigating and Finding Information SO EASY for You
(Even if you’re not a doctor or scientist)
The vaccine debate is fraught with emotion, misinformation, bias and conjecture. But now for the first time, you have access to an enormous amount of credible scientific information (which you won’t have to be a scientist or doctor to understand). It is all organized in such a way to allow you several ways to view the contents, depending on your level of interest and the amount of time you have to read. Even just reading the Table of Contents, will summarize the main take-aways of each section and topic. This alone, will give you insights into the contents and I believe will tantalize your curiosity to know more. From the most hard-core scientific mind to the lay person, this expose will shine light on THE TRUTH about this very controversial topic in a way that persons from all levels of understanding will be able to grasp.

This is an interactive document. The format this document is being presented in, maximizes your ability to search by key word or phrase and jump from Table of Contents directly to items that you want to see with a mouse click. And, it will allow you to access the actual research, the studies and the articles instantly. That way you can immediately check to see if what my document says is true. Books can be tedious to wade through and checking references difficult and time consuming. This e-book changes all of that! It makes it all HYPER-FAST AND EASY in just a click of your mouse.

Why I Did This AND made it FREE
This has been an arduous task to compile all of this information and organize it for ease of use. Even though it has been all consuming for me over two and a half years, it has been a labor of love. After reading this, I believe that you will have a true appreciation for the massive effort involved in assembling this amount of information AND making it so user friendly.

I truly have a passion and a love for helping people. That passion is magnified when it comes to the health and well-being of children. When I see families affected by these developmental conditions including autism, and the devastating personal, relational, occupational, marital and economic challenges they face, it saddens and frustrates me. Many had a healthy, happy, fully developing and functioning child one day, and then lost that child into a shell of their previous selves the next. The rest of their lives have been forever changed, often in an instant. While both sides in this issue fight it out, the affected children and the families are innocent bystanders and are being either ignored or used as pawns to advance an agenda. This is wrong! And, no matter where on the spectrum of opinion you stand with this issue, the health and lives of millions of current and future children and families are hanging in the balance. And this is not just an issue in the USA. It is a world-wide issue. I challenge those with all viewpoints on this topic to read this eBook with an open mind, then decide how you feel afterwards.

I wanted to remove any objections to getting this, so I made it free and am not requiring you to give me your email address or contact information. You can choose to opt in for future updates if you would like, but that is completely up to your discretion. If you want to donate to this effort, your contribution would be greatly appreciated. Both links are near the bottom of this page.

Share This Far and Wide!
If you are so inspired to share this information (and I believe that you will), please take some time to do it. There is a dire need for this conversation to be advanced and the time it must start is NOW. The only way to move the ball on this topic, is to share this information and knowledge as widely as possible. Therefore, it is critical to share this with everyone that you know.

There are several ways to do that.

You can click on your different social media links on this page and immediately share this link to all of your friends and contacts.
You can share it with all of your contacts, by using email share link (next to the social media links) or copy the link in the navigation window at the top and paste it into an email.
Please share this with your elected state and federal representatives (easy instructions and links to find their contact information are found near the end of the book).
Share this with all of the medical doctors and other physicians you know. They need to know the truth and that this science and evidence based information exists.
Tell everyone you know with children or grandchildren to download this FREE eBook. Tell them they can download it from either 1200studies.com or wellnessdoc.com/1200studies
You have my permission to host a download link of this eBook on your website and share it with your visitors if you have the capability to do so. There are only two things I ask. Do not change or alter anything and do not charge anything for it.

Download FREE E-Book HERE:
Trouble Downloading? Click Here!

Once the PDF opens, you can read it from there on your computer or download and save it to your computer. To do that, in the upper right corner of the open PDF document, you will see a downward facing arrow. This is the download button. Click on that symbol and a download window will open. You can choose to open it on your computer or save it to your downloads folder. Make your selection and click OK.

BONUS Download:
Demolishing the 5 Most Common FALSE Measles Narratives
Thank you in advance for helping to get this vital information out.
This project has been a monumental task. But it needed to be done! I am currently involved legislatively and by writing articles, speaking, educating and working behind the scenes with some of the most prominent individuals and groups to turn the tide in this urgent effort. By sharing truth and facts, the science and the stories of vaccine injured children and adults, we will push back against mandates and the stripping of our rights and freedoms over the sovereignty of our bodies and those of our children. If you appreciate the time and effort that it has taken to produce this eBook, or wish to support the continuing fight to expose the lies and offer better ideas and alternatives to the current vaccine paradigm, please consider donating to this cause. Even the amount you would normally pay for a book would be greatly appreciated. Thank you."

mountain_jim

28th February 2020, 12:49

I wonder what folks will do if a COVID-19 vaccine was created?

I had this same wonder (about my own possible future decision) when I read about Israel's possibly-ready-in-weeks vaccine yesterday.

Delight

29th February 2020, 03:58

I wonder what folks will do if a COVID-19 vaccine was created?

I had this same wonder (about my own possible future decision) when I read about Israel's possibly-ready-in-weeks vaccine yesterday.

I certainly feel less hesitant about the oral route but I don't think vaccination is at all what it has always been touted to be and think the immune enhancement is what i want to emphasize. What is really the problem for me is that with everything we have experienced about the LIES and coercion despite the risk/ benefit ratio of the previous vaccines, I have NO TRUST.

I don't know if this is posted already?

At a forum on vaccines in Connecticut, Dr. Palevsky (20 years as neonatologist) discusses the repeal of the religious exemption in NY, and the recent measles outbreaks. (https://vimeo.com/386313325)

onawah

2nd March 2020, 06:33

WHO Experimenting on African Children without Informed Consent
by Jeremy R. Hammond
Mar 1, 2020

From Hammond's email update today: "Well, I hadn't planned on spending my Saturday doing this...

But when I read two articles in The BMJ on Friday explaining how the World Health Organization (WHO) was conducting a malaria vaccine trial in Africa without obtaining informed consent from the parents, I felt compelled.

So I scrapped my original agenda of trying to get caught up on family business and spent over 12 hours writing up a detailed explanation of what's going on, including details about how the vaccine has been associated with serious harms.

Among these harms is an increased risk of death that is particularly pronounced for girls.

The WHO is proceeding full steam ahead with a trial including hundreds of thousands of children despite the data showing that the vaccine might do far more harm than good.

Worse, it's doing so without informing parents about the risks or even that their children are being subjected to experimentation.

I show how the WHO is not serving the public's interests but the financial interests of the pharmaceutical industry -- specifically, in this case, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), the manufacturer of the malaria vaccine."

Following is the article at: https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2020/03/01/who-experimenting-on-african-children-without-informed-consent/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=WHO+Experimenting+on+African+Children+without+Informed+Consent&utm_campaign=WHO+Experimenting+on+African+Children+without+Informed+Consent

WHO Experimenting on African Children without Informed Consent

"The World Health Organization (WHO), a pair of articles recently published in The BMJ have revealed, is sponsoring an experimental study of a controversial malaria vaccine among African children without obtaining informed consent from parents.

Data from prior clinical trials of the vaccine, manufactured by the British multinational pharmaceutical corporation GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), have shown it to be associated with an increased risk of clinical malaria after four years, a tenfold increased risk of meningitis, an increased risk of cerebral malaria (in which the parasitic organisms block the flow of blood to the brain, causing swelling and potential brain damage), and an increased risk of death that was disproportionately higher for female children.

Concerningly, apart from failing to properly inform parents about the risks or even letting parents know that their children are being experimented upon, the WHO intends to make a decision based on this trial about whether to recommend the vaccine for routine use throughout sub-Saharan Africa after just twenty-four months of study, which is not enough time to determine the vaccine’s effect on mortality.

This is especially concerning in light of scientific research showing that other non-live vaccines—such as the diphtheria, tetanus, and whole-cell pertussis (DTP) vaccine—are associated with an increased rate of childhood mortality. The WHO, however, has dismissed this evidence and continues to recommend the DTP vaccine for routine use in children in developing countries.

The behavior of policymakers at the WHO, while highly alarming, is not at all surprising given the organization’s conflicts of interest, including industry funding and members of its vaccine advisory group having financial ties to pharmaceutical companies.

Contents
Waning of Vaccine-Conferred Immunity After Four Years
The Importance of Natural Immunity and Scientific Uncertainty about How It’s Achieved
Increased Risk of Clinical Malaria Among Vaccinated Children After Four Years
Increased Risk of Death Among Children Receiving the Malaria Vaccine
How the WHO Is Threatening Both Children’s Health and the Right to Informed Consent
The WHO’s Conflicts of Interest
The UN, Too, Is Threatening the Right to Informed Consent
Conclusion
References

Waning of Vaccine-Conferred Immunity After Four Years
GSK’s malaria vaccine has long been under development, but while the company and the WHO appear intent on rolling it out across Africa, concerning data from clinical trials has been publicly known for years. In 2013, the results of four years of trial follow-up in Kilifi, Kenya, were published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM).https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1207564
The data showed that, while apparently effective at preventing clinical malaria initially, after four years, the vaccine had negative effectiveness, meaning that children who received the vaccine had an increased risk of symptomatic parasitic infection.

That study involved randomly vaccinating Kenyan children aged five to seventeen months with either the experimental malaria vaccine or a rabies vaccine. Importantly, the clinical endpoint of the trial was malaria incidence, not mortality. Even so, the data showed a vaccine efficacy of only 43.6 percent in the first year, which fell to –0.4 percent in the fourth year. While the negative efficacy was not statistically significant, the study authors acknowledged that the results show that the immunity conferred by the vaccine wanes after just a few years.

While the vaccine was judged to be initially effective in stimulating the production of antibodies against the sporozoite stage of the parasite, which is the form typically introduced into the blood of human hosts by mosquitos, the researchers acknowledged that a high level of anti-sporozoite antibodies doesn’t necessarily equate to immunity and that the immunity conferred by the vaccine differs from that acquired naturally through infection.

While anti-sporozoite antibodies “may mediate protection and were associated with a reduced risk of clinical malaria”, a waning of antibody titers was observed over time in children who received the malaria vaccine.

Additionally, they suggested that because children receiving the malaria vaccine had reduced exposure to later blood-stage parasites, they would have had “delayed acquisition of natural immunity”, which could also help explain the negative efficacy by the fourth year. In other words, the rapidly waning vaccine-conferred immunity was achieved at an opportunity cost of a delayed and superior natural immunity.[1]

The Importance of Natural Immunity and Scientific Uncertainty about How It’s Achieved
The uncertainties about how immunity to malarial parasites is achieved were elucidated in an editorial in the journal Parasitology in 2016. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/parasitology/article/naturally-acquired-immunity-to-malaria/D08C546AF15D381F7370420020F6C41E
Noting that “individuals living in endemic areas naturally acquire immunity to symptomatic malaria”, its authors pointed out that “immune correlates of protection” were not yet understood by scientists. While certain “antigen-specific immune responses associated with protection against malaria infection and disease” have been identified, scientific reviews “highlight the complexity of immunity to malaria and that even after 100 years we still have much to learn.”

“A lack of understanding of the mechanisms by which natural immunity to malaria is achieved and how it is maintained”, they noted, “has long been proclaimed as a major hurdle to the development of a malaria vaccine.”

Highly important to this question is the “variable nature of malaria epidemiology in different endemic areas”, which “underlines the importance of natural exposure in development of immunity”. In areas with lower transmission, population immunity is not achieved, and clinical infections occur frequently “in all age groups”. By contrast, “immunity is acquired through constant exposure to the parasite”, which is especially important for infants, who are at highest risk of dying from malaria.

This is because, in endemic areas, infants are protected from birth to around six months of age through the transfer of antibodies from naturally immune mothers to their babies. (This is known as passive maternal immunity and can occur both prenatally through the placenta and postnatally through breastmilk, though the authors don’t specify the relative importance of each of these mechanisms in the specific case of malaria.)

The authors pointed out that in the absence of mass vaccination campaigns, the number of malaria cases worldwide had halved over the past decade. Somewhat paradoxically, “because immunity is acquired through constant exposure to the parasite, with the decrease in transmission, there are increasing concerns about declining immunity in communities and a shift towards greater susceptibility to symptomatic disease.”

Whereas in endemic areas, natural immunity is generally acquired in childhood, in areas where transmission has been successfully reduced, “rebounds of malaria infections and shifts in cases to older individuals are occurring”.

As this shift continues, the risk could increase to infants born to mothers who have not yet had enough exposure to acquire natural immunity and therefore aren’t able to confer passive immunity to their babies.

While the vaccine is designed to stimulate the production of anti-malaria antibodies, as the authors of the Parasitology paper point out, another branch of the immune system known as cell-mediated immunity also plays an important role.They observed a dearth of science in this area, with most studies having focused on antibody responses and “relatively few” that have “investigated cellular responses to malaria infection.” While they did not comment upon the reasons for this, it is undoubtedly a reflection of the myopic focus within the scientific community on developing vaccines as a one-size-fits all solution for disease prevention, as opposed to first dedicating the resources necessary to understand the risk factors for severe disease and differing individual immune responses and then developing targeted interventions.

Although “there remains much to be learnt about naturally acquired immunity to malaria”, the authors noted that the science is clear that cell-mediated immunity “plays a critical role in determining the outcome of disease and development and maintenance of immunity.”A broad array of cellular responses not involving the production of antibodies are important for the development of immunity, and how these responses might affect the immune responses to a malaria vaccine—or vice versa—remains “unknown.”[2]

This is concerning because non-live vaccines such as GSK’s malaria vaccine generally tend to skew the immune response toward humoral, or antibody, immunity and away from cell-mediated immunity, which is another means by which mass vaccination could potentially cause long-term detriment to population immunity in African communities.

Nevertheless, the journal editors incongruously pointed to the ability of humans to acquire natural immunity as “a strong rationale for the development of a malaria vaccine”—and despite the remaining uncertainties about how the vaccine will affect the immune system and data showing serious potential harms, GSK and the WHO are pushing for implementation of the vaccine in the routine childhood schedules of African countries.

Increased Risk of Clinical Malaria Among Vaccinated Children After Four Years

The four-year follow-up study https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1207564 itself provided evidence that the malaria vaccine achieves humoral immunity at the opportunity cost of lost cell-mediated immunity. Despite the waning of antibody levels over time among children who received the malaria vaccine, even in the fourth year, during which negative efficacy was observed, these children still had significantly higher anti-sporozoite antibody titers than children in the control group. This indicates that mechanisms other than the production of anti-sporozoite antibodies are important for immunity and in the long-term protected children in the control group from malaria.

As the authors reiterated, the observed waning immunity of the vaccine might have been due to a delayed “acquisition of natural immunity to blood-stage parasites” in children who received the malaria vaccine in comparison with those who didn’t.[3]

In 2016, another study was published in the New England Journal of Medicine https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1515257
examining seven years of follow-up data from the clinical trial in Kenya. This time, the results were even more concerning. While the vaccine initially appeared protective against clinical malaria, this ostensible benefit was “more than offset” as the risk to vaccinated children in areas with high exposure increased over time.

Among this subgroup of children in areas of higher transmission, the vaccine had a statistically significant –43.5 percent efficacy. That is, the data showed a negative efficacy, meaning that children who received the malaria vaccine were at a higher risk of clinical malaria than those who didn’t.

The authors acknowledged that one explanation for this result is that, while the vaccine is effective at stimulating the production of anti-sporozoite antibodies, it “does not induce clinical immunity against blood-stage parasites.” Prior research had shown “lower levels of antibodies against blood-stage parasites” in children who received the malaria vaccine compared with children who didn’t.[4]

This refers to a later stage in the cycle of malaria infection. https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/biology/index.html
Upon exposure through mosquito bites, the sporozoite-stage parasites migrate into the liver, where they grow and multiply before moving on and infecting the red cells of the blood. This latter stage is what’s known as the “blood stage” of infection, which is what causes the symptoms of malaria.[5]

As the study authors again reiterated, the increased antibody response to sporozoite-stage malaria may come at an opportunity cost of delayed acquisition of immunity to blood-stage parasites, “leading to an increased in episodes of clinical malaria in later life.”

They also stated that there was no significant difference in adverse events between children receiving the malaria vaccine and controls, but their data did not illuminate the true rate of adverse events following malaria vaccination since the children in the control group had received another vaccine rather than an inert saline placebo.[6]

Increased Risk of Death Among Children Receiving the Malaria Vaccine
Despite that trial’s finding of negative vaccine efficacy after the fourth year of follow up, the WHO has pressed forward with its apparent agenda to roll out GSK’s vaccine in the routine childhood schedules of African countries, and its eagerness to do so is such that it’s evidently unconcerned about violating individuals’ right to informed consent in order to accomplish the goal.

In a 2014 policy document, https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/policies_strategies/consent_note_en.pdf
the WHO described an “implied consent process” for vaccination wherein parents would need to explicitly opt their children out of vaccination rather than explicitly opting them in. Under this practice, the mere attendance of a child at school on a day when vaccinations are being administered is considered implicit consent by the parents for the child to be vaccinated.

“However,” the document incongruously albeit appropriately added, “when children present for vaccination unaccompanied by their parents, it is challenging to determine whether parents indeed provided consent. Therefore, countries are encouraged to adopt procedures that ensure that parents have been informed and agreed to the vaccination.”[7]

Yet, in the case of GSK’s malaria vaccine, the WHO has disregarded its own advice that explicit consent be obtained from parents for their children to be vaccinated.

This situation was elucidated in an analysis published in the BMJ on January 24, 2020, written by Professor Peter Aaby of the Statens Serum Institut in Denmark and coauthors. https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.l6920
They reported that clinical trials of GSK’s malaria vaccine had shown it to be associated with a higher risk of meningitis, cerebral malaria, and death—particularly among females.

The position espoused by the WHO has been that these findings may have been due to chance, but, as Aaby and his coauthors noted, “we should be particularly careful about introducing new vaccines amid unresolved safety concerns”. As an example, they cited the “recent use of a dengue vaccine in the Philippines that led to increased morbidity and mortality from dengue”.[8]

In that case, the Philippines government implemented a dengue vaccine manufactured by Sanofi Pasteur into its routine childhood schedule upon the recommendation of the WHO. Hundreds of thousands of doses were administered under the pretense of a proven “safe” vaccine before its use was halted because it was shown to increase the risk of serious dengue infection among children who had not already experienced a prior infection. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-worlds-first-dengue-vaccination-drive-ended-in-disaster/
The public outrage was all the more pronounced because it was also learned that Sanofi, a French multinational corporation, as well as the WHO had ignored early warnings from clinical trials that the vaccine might cause precisely that outcome.[9]

As Aaby and his coauthors explained, the safety concerns are now being investigated in a pilot implementation study that will include 720,000 children in the African countries of Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi. In April 2019, the WHO’s Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE) approved a framework for policy and a study protocol. Under the protocol, the children are to be randomly allocated to receive the malaria vaccine or no malaria vaccine (with no placebo), and the study is to last four to five years.

Nevertheless, the WHO intends to make a decision on whether to recommend the vaccine for routine use in other African countries after just twenty-four months of follow up based on the prevention of “severe malaria” as a surrogate measure of the vaccine’s effect on overall mortality.

This decision, Aaby and his coauthors remarked, “seems strange” given existing data from clinical trials showing that the case fatality among children hospitalized for severe malaria was doubled for children who received the malaria vaccine compared to those who didn’t. Female children who received the malaria vaccine also had twice the risk of dying from any cause. The observed excess mortality also increased after administration of a booster dose of the vaccine, and this trend “was particularly marked for female children”, for whom the risk of death was more than tripled.

Hence, they reasoned, even though the vaccine “might slightly reduce the risk of severe malaria, recipients might be at higher risk of dying (from malaria and overall).”

The decision by the WHO to make a policy determination after just twenty-four months would bias its determination in favor of the vaccine since it ignores the waning efficacy of the vaccine over time and since “excess mortality might become apparent only after longer follow-up”.

The first reason for the WHO’s decision in this regard is that an increasing resistance of parasites to anti-malarial drugs has heightened the sense of urgency for finding additional control measures. The second reason is that “GlaxoSmithKline might have problems maintaining the production line if the decision is delayed.”

The WHO’s decision is even more puzzling in light of other non-live vaccines that have been associated with increased female mortality, such as the DTP vaccine, which studies had “consistently” shown to be “associated with higher female mortality”.[10]

Indeed, Peter Aaby has pioneered research into what’s been termed in the scientific literature as “non-specific effects” of vaccines. One of his coauthors on the BMJ analysis is Professor Christine Stabell Benn, also of the Statens Serum Insitut, which operates under the auspices of the Danish Ministry of Health and is responsible for the purchase and supply of vaccines to Denmark’s national vaccination programs.

For decades, Aaby and his colleagues have been studying the effects of vaccines on overall mortality, and their findings with respect to the DTP vaccine are highly alarming. As Aaby, Benn, and coauthors bluntly stated in a 2017 research paper published in EBioMedicine, https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2352396417300464
“All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infection.”

A key finding of their research was that “DTP was associated with 5-fold higher mortality than being unvaccinated.”

“Unfortunately,” they added, “DTP is the most widely used vaccine, and the proportion who receives DTP is used globally as an indicator of the performance of national vaccination programs.”

Although due to concerns about an unacceptably high rate of adverse events, developed countries like the United States have long since phased out the use of the DTP vaccine in favor of a vaccine with an acellular pertussis component (DTaP), the WHO continues to recommend the use of DTP vaccine in developing countries.

“It should be of concern,” they relevantly remarked in the 2017 study, “that the effect of routine vaccinations on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials.”[11]

In their recent BMJ article, Aaby and his colleagues noted that, in addition to finding the DTP vaccine to be associated with increased childhood mortality, their research had also “shown that other non-live vaccines—including the hepatitis B vaccine, inactivated polio vaccine, pentavalent vaccine [containing antigens for diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, hepatitis B, and Haemophilus influenzae type b], and H1N1 influenza vaccine—are also associated with higher female mortality.”

As they emphasized in their concluding remarks, “There is no room for wishful thinking. Decision making must be grounded in robust evidence.”[12]

That’s sage advice that scientists and policymakers working for the World Health Organization seem intent on ignoring.

How the WHO Is Threatening Both Children’s Health and the Right to Informed Consent
As if all that wasn’t concerning enough, Aaby and his colleagues in their BMJ article also pointed out that, in the WHO’s pilot study now underway, “Written informed consent is not obtained.” Furthermore, “What participants are told about the outstanding safety concerns is unclear.”[13]

This violation of the right to informed consent was elucidated in a BMJ article written by associate editor Peter Doshi published on February 26, 2020. https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m734
The study already underway in Malawi, Ghana, and Kenya, is intended in part, he reiterated, to evaluate safety concerns about GSK’s malaria vaccine, which is known by the brand name Mosquirix. These include “a rate of meningitis in those receiving Mosquirix 10 times that of those who did not, increased cerebral malaria cases, and a doubling in the risk of death (from any cause) in girls.”

Yet the WHO is not obtaining informed consent from parents to experiment upon their children. Instead, it has judged that “implied consent” is sufficient for entering 720,000 children into the study, as a WHO spokesperson confirmed to the BMJ.

“Recipients of the malaria vaccine”, wrote Doshi, “are not being informed that they are in a study. And the extent to which parents are being given information about the known safety concerns before vaccination is unclear.”

The WHO insisted that information was being “provided to the community and to parents through health talks and community outreach”, among other unspecified methods. But in the information that the WHO sent to the BMJ that it said was being shared with partner countries about the vaccine’s potential risks, while the increased rates of meningitis and cerebral malaria are listed, “the potential for increased risk of death among girls is not mentioned.”

When asked why not, the WHO responded that there is “insufficient evidence to classify gender specific mortality as a known or potential risk.” Of course, this dismissive assertion that there is no potential risk is belied by the scientific data showing otherwise.

When asked whether the WHO’s Research Ethics Review Committee had “waived the requirement for individual informed consent”, the WHO perplexingly answered that the vaccination was being done “in the context of routine vaccinations, where there is no requirement for written individual consent.”[14]

This contrasts starkly with the codification under international law of informed consent as a fundamental and inviolable human right, including the 1947 Nuremberg Code, the 1966 United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the 2005 Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2019/04/27/how-public-vaccine-policy-violates-our-right-to-informed-consent/
Additionally, the International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, which presents guidelines promulgated by the WHO, states that “the voluntary informed consent of the prospective subject” must be obtained. In the case of children too young to meaningfully exercise the right on their own, the consent must be obtained from their parents.[15]

The WHO’s position that informed consent is not required is also directly contradicted in the case of Malawi by the country’s constitution, which, as Doshi observes, explicitly states, “No person shall be subject to medical or scientific experimentation without his or her consent.”

As Charles Weijer, a bioethicist at Western University in Canada, told the BMJ, “implied consent is no consent at all.” He described the failure to acquire informed consent as “a serious breach of international ethical standards”.[16]

The WHO’s Conflicts of Interest
This latest revelation about the WHO’s inexcusable behavior comes on the heels of the revelation that the organization’s chief scientist, Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, was caught blatantly lying about vaccine safety in a WHO video published on YouTube.
https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2020/02/11/fact-check-who-scientist-caught-lying-to-public-about-vaccine-safety/
In the video, published on November 28, 2019, Dr. Swaminathan states that the public’s trust in vaccines “relies on the existence of effective vaccine safety systems.” “Robust vaccine safety systems” exist in countries around the world, she says, that ensure that vaccines are administered to children “without risks”.

Just five days later, on December 3, 2019, at a WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, Dr. Swaminathan told her assembled colleagues that they “cannot overemphasize the fact that we really don’t have very good safety monitoring systems in many countries” and that the risk of serious adverse events being discovered only after a vaccine is already on the market “is always there”.[17]

One possible explanation for the WHO’s behavior are its conflicting interests. http://open.who.int/2018-19/budget-and-financing/flow
It receives funding for its work from numerous pharmaceutical companies, including GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, and Merck.[18] Other contributors include the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the CDC Foundation, a nonprofit organization created by the US Congress “to mobilize philanthropic and private-sector resources to support the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s critical health protection work”. The CDC Foundation in turn receives industry funding, including from GSK and the Merck Foundation.[19]https://www.cdcfoundation.org/FY2019/organizations

The WHO’s conflicts of interest were recently criticized in an expert review of the studies on the DTP vaccine’s effect on childhood mortality by Peter C. Gøtzsche, a widely respected scientist who has led the Nordic Cochrane Center in Denmark and helped found the Cochrane Collaboration, a prestigious international organization specializing in a type of study known as a meta-analysis, or a systematic review of the scientific literature.https://vaccinescience.org/expert-report-effect-of-dtp-vaccines-on-mortality-in-children-in-low-income-countries/

As Gøtzsche noted, the discovery of “non-specific effects” of vaccines on immunity show that “it is impossible to predict what happens in terms of susceptibility to infections in general, of all types, when the immune system is being stimulated through vaccination”.

The WHO, he observed, had been dismissive of studies finding detrimental non-specific effects for the DTP vaccine while accepting studies finding beneficial non-specific effects for the measles vaccine. The WHO is “inconsistent and biased toward positive effects of vaccines. When a result pleases the WHO, it can be accepted, but not when a result does not please the WHO.”

Conflicts of interest within the WHO is another area of concern that potentially helps to explain this obvious bias. Of the fourteen experts tasked by the WHO to examine the evidence with respect to the DTP vaccine’s effect on mortality, eight “had relevant conflicts of interest in relation to companies producing vaccines”. Three “even had ties to GlaxoSmithKline”, one of the manufacturers of DTP vaccines.

While the WHO chose not to see these ties as conflicts of interest, “research has overwhelmingly demonstrated that people become influenced when they have financial ties to drug companies, even when these ties are not directly related to the drugs or vaccines in question.”

Gøtzsche observed the commonsense principle that “expert committees that give advice on immunization programs should not be involved with their re-assessment when research has demonstrated that a vaccine might increase total mortality.”

Additionally, “no one should be allowed to have financial conflicts of interest in relation to the pharmaceutical industry.” However, “This is not the case for WHO committees.”[20]

The UN, Too, Is Threatening the Right to Informed Consent
The WHO is not alone among international governmental organizations in threatening to undermine protections under international law against state violations of the right to informed consent. The UN, too, has acted contrary to its stated purpose in this regard.

On November 14, 2019, the parliament of the Republic of Maldives passed a bill effectively outlawing the exercise of the right to informed consent, making it illegal for parents to decline vaccinates recommended for routine use in children by government policymakers—which include the DTP and hepatitis B vaccines, both shown to be associated with an increased rate of childhood mortality.

Concerningly, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) praised the Maldives legislature for passing the bill on the grounds that, once ratified, it would bring the country into closer compliance with UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2019/11/16/un-praises-maldives-bill-outlawing-informed-consent-for-pharmaceuticals/

On the contrary, however, while the bill did contain provisions that would bring the country into closer compliance with the Convention, outlawing the exercise of informed consent to vaccination certainly violates it.

The Convention recognizes that “the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world”. Its aim is to “promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom”.

The Convention acknowledges the child’s right to “be cared for by his or her parents.” States are obligated to “respect the rights and duties of the parents”, which certainly includes making decisions affecting the child’s health.

The Convention explicitly recognizes that “primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child” belongs not to the state but to the parents. The role of the state, instead, is merely to “render appropriate assistance to parents”, not to make decisions affecting the child on their behalf and without respect for their parental rights.[21]

Timed to coincide with the thirtieth anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the bill outlawing informed consent for vaccinations was signed into law by Maldives President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih on November 20, 2019.[22]https://maldivesindependent.com/society/president-ratifies-landmark-child-protection-laws-149361

On January 29, 2020, the newly appointed Prosecutor General for the Maldives government publicly threatened on Twitter, “In 22 days, we will be prosecuting parents who refuse to vaccinate their children.”[23]https://twitter.com/HuShameem/status/1222464632989741058

The law came into force on February 20, 2020, on which occasion UNICEF saw fit to congratulate the Maldives government for enacting it, once again overlooking the state’s violation of the right to informed consent and the law’s incompatibility with the provisions of the CRC recognizing that the duty to exercise that right on behalf of the child belongs not with government bureaucrats but with the child’s parents or legal guardians.[24]https://www.unicef.org/maldives/press-releases/maldives-ratifies-child-rights-protection-act

Conclusion
It should be of great concern to every free-thinking inhabitant of this planet that the WHO and UN, along with state governments around the world, are pushing for an ever-increasing number of childhood vaccinations while ignoring scientific evidence that doesn’t suit their political and financial agendas and while prejudicing the individual right to informed consent.

The WHO’s experimentation on African children without informed consent is but the latest illustration of how our children’s health and our fundamental human rights are being threatened by powerful people acting not of the public’s interests but in service to the pharmaceutical industry.

This article was originally published at Foreign Policy Journal.https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2020/03/01/who-experimenting-on-african-children-without-informed-consent/

References
[1] Ally Olotu et al., “Four-Year Efficacy of RTS,S/AS01E and Its Interaction with Malaria Exposure”, New England Journal of Medicine, March 21, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1207564.

[2] Alyssa Barry and Diana Hansen, “Naturally acquired immunity to malaria”, Parasitology, January 8, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031182015001778.

[3] Olotu et al., “Four-Year Efficacy”.

[4] Ally Olotu et al., “Seven-Year Efficacy of RTS,S/AS01 Malaria Vaccine among Young African Children”, New England Journal of Medicine, June 30, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1515257.

[5] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “About Malaria: Biology”, CDC.gov, last reviewed November 14, 2018, accessed February 29, 2020, https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/biology/index.html.

[6] Olotu et al., “Seven-Year Efficacy”.

[7] World Health Organization, “Considerations regarding consent in vaccinating children and adolescents between 6 and 17 years old”, WHO.int, 2014, https://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/policies_strategies/consent_note_en.pdf.

[8] Peter Aaby et al., “WHO’s rollout of malaria vaccine in Africa: can safety questions be answered after only 24 months?” BMJ, January 24, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l6920.

[9] Seema Yasmin and Madhuskree Mukerjee, “How the World’s First Dengue Vaccination Drive Ended in Disaster”, Scientific American, April 2019, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-worlds-first-dengue-vaccination-drive-ended-in-disaster/.

[10] Aaby et al.

[11] Søren Wengel Mogensen, “The Introduction of Diphtheria-Tetanus-Pertussis and Oral Polio Vaccine Among Young Infants in an Urban African Community: A Natural Experiment”, EBioMedicine, March 1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.01.041.

[12] Aaby et al.

[13] Aaby et al.

[14] Peter Doshi, “WHO’s malaria vaccine study represents a ‘serious breach of international ethical standards’”, The BMJ, February 26, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m734.

[15] Jeremy R. Hammond, “How Public Vaccine Policy Violates Our Right to Informed Consent”, Foreign Policy Journal, April 27, 2019, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2019/04/27/how-public-vaccine-policy-violates-our-right-to-informed-consent/.

[16] Doshi.

[17] Jeremy R. Hammond, “Fact Check: WHO Scientist Caught Lying to Public about Vaccine Safety”, Foreign Policy Journal, February 11, 2020, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2020/02/11/fact-check-who-scientist-caught-lying-to-public-about-vaccine-safety/.

[18] World Health Organization, “Contributors”, Open.WHO.int, accessed February 29, 2020, http://open.who.int/2018-19/contributors/overview/vcs. The WHO Programme Budget Portal financial flow under its Budget and Financing section shows how funding from private entities is directed: http://open.who.int/2018-19/budget-and-financing/flow. This page shows that Merck & Co., Inc distributed $3.4 million to WHO program areas including neglected tropical diseases, Sanofi-Aventis distributed $1.4 million mostly for neglected tropical diseases, and GSK distributed $1.1 million entirely for work on neglected tropical diseases. These figures are also viewable under the Contributors section, which specifies that the amounts are of funding by contributor for the biennial period of 2018 through the fourth quarter of 2019: http://open.who.int/2018-19/contributors/contributor.

[19] CDC Foundation, “Corporations, Foundations & Organizations: Fiscal Year 2019 Report to Contributors”, CDCFoundation.org, accessed February 29, 2020, https://www.cdcfoundation.org/FY2019/organizations.

[20] Peter C. Gøtzsche, “Expert Report: Effect of DTP Vaccines on Mortality in Children in Low-Income Countries”, Vaccine Science Foundation, August 12, 2019, https://vaccinescience.org/expert-report-effect-of-dtp-vaccines-on-mortality-in-children-in-low-income-countries/.

[21] Jeremy R. Hammond, “UN Praises Maldives Bill Outlawing Informed Consent for Pharmaceuticals”, Foreign Policy Journal, November 16, 2019, https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2019/11/16/un-praises-maldives-bill-outlawing-informed-consent-for-pharmaceuticals/. See the article for further discussion. Sources cited include: UNICEF Maldives, praises passage of Child Rights Protection Bill, Twitter, November 14, 2019, https://twitter.com/UNICEFMaldives/status/1194926669502590979. Ahmedulla Abdul Hadi, “Child Rights Protection Bill passed: Vaccinations mandatory, child marriages outlawed”, Sun Online, November 14, 2019, https://en.sun.mv/56582. “Parliament passes Child Rights Protection Bill, Vaccinations made mandatory”, One Online, November 14, 2019, https://oneonline.mv/en/18082. “New child protection law passed with mandatory vaccination”, Maldives Independent, November 14, 2019, https://maldivesindependent.com/society/new-child-protection-law-passed-with-mandatory-vaccination-149239. United Nations General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of the Child, adopted November 20, 1989, entered into force September 2, 1990, https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/crc.pdf. Republic of Maldives, Immunization Handbook for Health Care Professionals, 2015, http://hpa.gov.mv/DOCS/1451449250.pdf.

[22] Republic of Maldives, “President signs bills on Child Rights Protection and Juvenile Justice into law”, President’s Office, November 20, 2019, https://presidency.gov.mv/Press/Article/22631. “President ratifies landmark child protection laws”, Maldives Independent, November 21, 2019, https://maldivesindependent.com/society/president-ratifies-landmark-child-protection-laws-149361.

[23] Hussain Shameem, threatens to prosecute parents who choose not to comply with Maldives government vaccine policy, Twitter, January 29, 2020, https://twitter.com/HuShameem/status/1222464632989741058.

[24] UN Children’s Fund, “Maldives ratifies Child Rights Protection Act”, Press Release, February 20, 2020, https://www.unicef.org/maldives/press-releases/maldives-ratifies-child-rights-protection-act."

Philippe

2nd March 2020, 08:43

Mandatory vaccinations are law in China since December 2019 ( I posted the law on the Corona virus thread). Here in France the resistance against vaccinations is strong but the government tries again and again. With this crisis the push for forced vaccinations will undoubtedly increase (as planned). They must be stopped at all price because they can not be trusted anymore with the use of nano elements that can be programmed like a chip. Also the known older lifesaving vaccinations ( harmless even if contested as useless) are no more to be trusted because we have seen that today vaccines for multiple purposes are being offered. The challenge is huge. I think that our combined spiritual resistance can make their plans get into trouble, go wrong and expose the whole dirty industry.

I wonder what folks will do if a COVID-19 vaccine was created?

I had this same wonder (about my own possible future decision) when I read about Israel's possibly-ready-in-weeks vaccine yesterday.

I certainly feel less hesitant about the oral route but I don't think vaccination is at all what it has always been touted to be and think the immune enhancement is what i want to emphasize. What is really the problem for me is that with everything we have experienced about the LIES and coercion despite the risk/ benefit ratio of the previous vaccines, I have NO TRUST.

I don't know if this is posted already?

At a forum on vaccines in Connecticut, Dr. Palevsky (20 years as neonatologist) discusses the repeal of the religious exemption in NY, and the recent measles outbreaks. (https://vimeo.com/386313325)

Delight

5th March 2020, 03:15

Larry Cook talks about his thoughts on Q. Larry Cook has some ideas on taking back vaccine mandates.

Cxy6WeTtusw

onawah

7th March 2020, 03:16

Millennials with early-onset Alzheimer's surging, report finds
2/28/20
By Tracy Romero
https://www.phillyvoice.com/millennials-early-onset-dementia-alzheimers/

(Considering that vaccines contain toxic amounts of aluminum, which is a cause of Alzheimer's, this is not surprising...)

"Dementia and Alzheimer's disease traditionally have been considered a concern for older generations. But recent spikes in early onset of these conditions in Americans as young as 30 suggest a different story.

Between 2013 and 2017, early-onset dementia and Alzheimer's diagnoses increased by 83% among commercially insured Americans aged 30 to 44, according to a report released by the health care insurer. https://www.bcbs.com/the-health-of-america/reports/early-onset-dementia-alzheimers-disease-affecting-younger-american-adults
That age group includes the oldest millennials.

Overall, early-onset diagnoses increased by 200% among commercially insured Americans between ages 30 to 64. That included a 50% jump among those 45 to 54 and by 40% for those aged 55 to 64.

The average patient was diagnosed at age 49.

"The results of this report are concerning, especially the increase in early-onset dementia and Alzheimer's disease among younger people," Dr. Richard Snyder, chief medical officer for Independence Blue Cross, said in a statement.

"While the underlying cause is not clear, advances in technology are certainly allowing for earlier and more definitive diagnosis. Regardless, those who develop dementia or Alzheimer's at an early age will likely require caregiving, either from family members or healthcare providers. The time, cost and impact on families can be significant and can require additional support as these diseases progress."

Diagnosis rates were higher in the East, South and parts of the Midwest. Women made up 58% of the diagnoses.

Alzheimer's, the most common type of dementia, begins with mild memory loss, eventually progressing to the point where victims can no longer hold a conversation or respond to their environments. Symptoms generally occur after age 60.

Earlier this year, researchers said a vaccine that both prevents and treats Alzheimer's could be ready for human trials within 18 months.

In 2017, more than 37,000 commercially-insured Americans between the ages 30-64 were diagnosed with Alzheimer's, according to the report. This marked a 131% spike since 2013.

While the consequence of these numbers are wide-ranging, informal caregivers will carry much of the burden. They often struggle with depression, social isolation and financial stress.

Almost 16 million people provide more than 18 billion hours of unpaid care to a family member or friend with Alzheimer's disease in America – an estimated price tag of $221 billion. "

onawah

7th March 2020, 07:52

WHO’s malaria vaccine study represents a “serious breach of international ethical standards”
Published 26 February 2020
Peter Doshi
https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m734.full

The World Health Organization is presently vaccinating 720,000 children with an experimental malaria vaccine, which has shown disturbing side-effects, without securing parental consent.
WHO’s malaria vaccine study represents a “serious breach of international ethical standards
Experts are troubled by the apparent lack of informed consent in a large, cluster randomised study of the malaria vaccine. Peter Doshi reports on a large scale malaria vaccine study led by the World Health Organization…

"A large scale malaria vaccine study led by the World Health Organization has been criticised by a leading bioethicist for committing a “serious breach” of international ethical standards. The cluster randomised study in Africa is already under way in Malawi, Ghana, and Kenya, where 720 000 children will receive the RTS,S vaccine, known as Mosquirix, over the next two years.123

Mosquirix, the world’s first licensed malaria vaccine, was positively reviewed by the European Medicines Agency, but its use is being limited to pilot implementation, in part to evaluate outstanding safety concerns that emerged from previous clinical trials.3 These were a rate of meningitis in those receiving Mosquirix 10 times that of those who did not, increased cerebral malaria cases, and a doubling in the risk of death (from any cause) in girls.2

Charles Weijer, a bioethicist at Western University in Canada, told The BMJ that the failure to obtain informed consent from parents whose children are taking part in the study violates the Ottawa Statement, a consensus statement on the ethics of cluster randomised trials, of which Weijer is the lead author, and the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences’ International Ethical Guidelines. “The failure to require informed consent is a serious breach of international ethical standards."

onawah

7th March 2020, 21:06

CDC Concedes In Federal Court It Does NOT Have Studies to Support Its Claim "Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism"
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/feokx0/cdc_concedes_in_federal_court_it_does_not_have/
March 5th 2020
"In a federal lawsuit filed by the nonprofit Informed Consent Action Network, the Center for Disease Control has conceded it has no scientific studies to back up its long declared assertion that "vaccines given to babies do not cause autism".

The CDC claims on its website that "vaccines do not cause autism".

Despite this claim studies have found between 40 and 70% of parents with an autistic child continue to blame vaccines for their child's autism typically pointing to vaccines given during the first six months of life.

In the summer of 2019 ICAN submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the CDC for all studies relied upon the CDC to claim that the DTaP vaccine does not cause autism. They also submitted the same request for Hep B, Hib, pcv13, and IPV (polio), as well as requesting the CDC provide studies to support that the cumulative exposure to these vaccines do not cause autism.

Despite months of demands, the CDC FAILED to produce a single study in response to these FOIA requests.

ICAN was therefore forced to sue the CDC in federal court, where the CDC finally conceded in a stipulation signed by a federal court judge, that it had no studies to support any of these vaccines do not cause autism.

Why isn't the mainstream media covering this?

News was broken here: gJUjnY_FGNQ
More here:
https://www.docketalarm.com/cases/New_York_Southern_District_Court/1--19-cv-11947/Institute_for_Autism_Science_et_al_v._Centers_for_Disease_Control_and_Prevention/

https://www.icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Stipulation-and-Order-Fully-Executed.pdf "

onawah

7th March 2020, 21:29

How the drug industry got its way on the coronavirus
Companies are fighting off Democrats’ push to include drug-pricing provisions in an emergency spending package.
By SARAH KARLIN-SMITH
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/05/coronavirus-drug-industry-prices-122412
3/05/2020

The drug industry is showing that even in a crisis, it can use its influence in Washington to fight off efforts to cut into its profits.

"Democrats and Republicans have tried and failed in recent months to advance bills that would crack down on costs for prescription drugs.
Industry lobbyists successfully blocked attempts this week to include language in the $8.3 billion emergency coronavirus spending bill that would have threatened intellectual property rights for any vaccines and treatments the government decides are priced unfairly.

Drug companies’ power to dictate terms as Congress struggles to address the growing U.S. outbreak is another sign of the uphill battle that likely awaits any broader bipartisan drug-pricing legislation. Both Democrats and Republicans have tried and failed in recent months to advance bills that would crack down on costs.

The pharmaceutical industry not only killed the intellectual property provision in the coronavirus package, but it got language added into the bill that prevents the government from delaying a medicine’s development over concerns about its affordability.

“The idea that drug companies should have free reign to set prices during an international pandemic is immoral and dangerous,” said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), who led an unsuccessful push to ensure that coronavirus treatments developed with federal emergency funding would be priced fairly and available widely, in a statement to POLITICO.

The provision to bar the government from intervening when affordability concerns arise “blows up” existing legal measures to ensure fair drug pricing, said Jamie Love, executive director at Knowledge Ecology International, which has been lobbying for new drug development and pricing approaches to lower the costs of medicines.

The coronavirus package — which passed the House Wednesday and the Senate Thursday — includes about $3.1 billion to develop drugs and vaccines and expand manufacturing capacity. It would also cover purchases of medical supplies for state and local health departments to beef up the Strategic National Stockpile, the largest national repository of emergency treatments. Another $300 million would help the government buy vaccines and treatments once they are approved. Much of this money would directly benefit the drug industry.

The bill specifies that any products purchased must meet federal acquisition guidance “on fair and reasonable pricing.” It also empowers the HHS secretary to ensure that vaccines, drugs or diagnostic tests developed with the emergency funding “will be affordable in the commercial market,” without specifying how the government would determine a fair price.

But the legislation also says that HHS can’t delay the development of vaccines and treatments in an effort to maintain affordable prices — a win for the drug industry and Republicans, who argue that government constraints on pricing would limit private investment in coronavirus therapies. Republicans also told POLITICO they pushed back on Democratic attempts to add language that would have allowed HHS to set a drug’s price and limit increases to the rate of inflation."

onawah

9th March 2020, 20:34

Vimeo censors my interview, in which Catherine Austin Fitts and I discuss coronavirus and vaccines
Vimeo also removed another Fitts interview with a distinguished attorney, on the subject of mandated vaccines
They’re meddling with you, and deciding for you
by Jon Rappoport
March 9, 2020
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020...-and-vaccines/
Or see:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?109753-The-Wuhan-Coronavirus-COVID-19&p=1339912&viewfull=1#post1339912

onawah

14th March 2020, 20:36

New Adjuvants in the Pipeline = More Profits, Questionable Safety
MARCH 10, 2020
By the Children’s Health Defense Team
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/new-adjuvants-more-profits-questionable-safety/?utm_source=mailchimp

"In December 2019, top-tier members of the global vaccine establishment met at the World Health Organization (WHO) for a now-infamous Global Vaccine Safety Summit. The WHO—the same entity that allows testing of experimental vaccines on children without informed consent—is scrambling to come up with messaging that will convince the public and health professionals to set aside their growing concerns about vaccine safety.

Many people are particularly worried about the safety of vaccine adjuvants—formulations added to vaccines to increase their potency and efficacy. At the December summit, the Coordinator of WHO’s Initiative for Vaccine Research candidly conceded that these concerns are justified, acknowledging adjuvants’ association with systemic adverse events and stating that vaccines without adjuvants are preferable to vaccines with adjuvants. “We do not add adjuvants to vaccines because we want to do so,” this industry insider commented, but because some vaccines will not “work” without them. His conclusion? “If you can avoid using an adjuvant, please do so.”

Flying in the face of the WHO Coordinator’s words, vaccine manufacturers are headed in the opposite direction, with virologists crowing that adjuvants “have really taken off in the last 10 to 15 years.” The overt rationale for the rush to develop and use more adjuvants is that modern synthetic vaccines lack “intrinsic immunostimulatory activity” and need more of a “helping hand” to prod the immune system into action. However, vaccine makers are also giddy at new proprietary adjuvants’ potential to launch highly profitable next-generation vaccines. At the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which is a major sponsor of adjuvant research, an official states that even a “mediocre” vaccine can be “significantly improved by adding the right adjuvant.”

Studies indicate that the large number of aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered to infants (as per the CDC schedule) results in a high degree of chronic aluminum toxicity.
The changing adjuvant landscape
For 70 years, the sole licensed adjuvants were aluminum-based. About 80% of vaccines (including those with a diphtheria, tetanus or pertussis component, hepatitis A and B, Haemophilus influenzae type b, human papillomavirus, meningococcal and pneumococcal) rely on aluminum compounds with variable physical and chemical properties: aluminum phosphate, aluminum hydroxide, potassium aluminum sulfate and Merck’s proprietary amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (AAHS). Studies indicate that the large number of aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines administered to infants (as per the CDC schedule) results in a high degree of chronic aluminum toxicity.

The aluminum compounds funneled into adjuvants beginning in the 1930s initially popped up as contaminants, and researchers discovered only “serendipitiously” that the contaminants could boost the vaccine-induced immune response. Thereafter, a single inappropriately designed experiment in rabbits became the reference study for regulatory approval—and when the FDA reiterated its claims of aluminum adjuvant safety in 2011, its pronouncement hinged on a “crucial math error.” Ironically, NIH officials admit that “Alum would be hard to get licensed nowadays.”

In 2009, the FDA approved the first vaccine (Cervarix) to include a novel adjuvant, AS04, despite published declarations that same year that much remains to be learned about this compound’s mechanism of action.
In 2007, private sector researchers complained about the “crude” formulation of aluminum adjuvants and their lack of specificity. Those problems, in combination with aluminum adjuvants’ acknowledged side effects (including “granulomas, allergenicity, neurotoxicity and stimulation of IgE production”) encouraged a major push to identify new “immune modulators.” In 2009, the FDA approved the first vaccine (Cervarix) to include a novel adjuvant, AS04, despite published declarations that same year that “much remains to be learned about this compound’s mechanism of action.” AS04, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), combines aluminum with something called monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL), a “detoxified form of the endotoxin lipopolysaccharide.” Ordinarily, injected endotoxins are known for their ability to induce shock, fever and a lowered white blood cell count.

Cervarix and AS04 are no longer in use in the U.S., but AS04’s approval paved the way for further efforts to introduce “smart adjuvants” and “smart [adjuvant] components,” primarily in the adult vaccine market. Vaccines available in the U.S. now include the following:

AS01 is another GSK “adjuvant suspension,” containing not one but two “immunostimulants”—MPL and a highly potent saponin/surfactant called QS-21 known for its potential to rupture red blood cells. In the U.S., AS01 is featured in the Shingrix (shingles) vaccine; in Africa, it is part of an experimental GSK malaria vaccine that has elicited “concerns around its safety and durability.”
MF59 is a Novartis-produced, squalene-oil-based emulsion designed to conquer “age-related immune impairment,” used in the Fluad influenza vaccine targeted at senior citizens. A clinical trial in children found that participants reported adverse events more frequently with an MF59-adjuvanted vaccine versus a comparator vaccine.
CpG 1018 is a synthetic form of DNA that mimics bacterial and viral genetic material, present in Dynavax Technologies Corporation’s Heplisav-B (hepatitis B) vaccine. This adjuvant is the first to use a DNA sequence as an adjuvant—and vaccine developers are salivating over the possibilities of tailoring DNA sequences “so that they have different effects on different immune cells.”
“Safety is the major reason for failure of adjuvants.”
Blockbusters versus safety
A recent commentary on vaccine adjuvants observed that GSK “recognised the importance of adjuvants early,” in part because it was the first company to make a genetically engineered vaccine (hepatitis B) that could not function without a strong adjuvant. Later, the development of AS01 was a key factor contributing to Shingrix’s “blockbuster” success. Although “it is impossible to overlook the dominance of GSK,” adjuvant development “is now of interest to big pharma, and smaller biotech, which are trying to catch up with GSK.”

The commentary identified several challenges slowing down the entry of new adjuvants into the market, including the unwillingness of large companies such as GSK and Merck to make their proprietary formulations available to outside researchers. However, another recent commentary points to a more bottom-line reason why relatively few of the adjuvant candidates in the pipeline have thus far proceeded to licensure: “Safety is the major reason for failure of adjuvants.” Perhaps that is why WHO officials are bluntly recommending avoiding adjuvants whenever possible."

onawah

15th March 2020, 01:06

How 5G, aluminum (from vaccines), fluoride, glysophate combine to attack our pineal gland, the gateway to higher consciousness.
(Bumping this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idSTyv49urk which has been posted before but which is relevant to many threads.)
Klinghardt cites Dr. Rudolf Steiner's work and his prediction that this would be occurring thanks to the..(fill in choice of label) black hats, Ahriman, TPTB, elites...etc...
Also posted here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?40941-Horus-Ra-as-the-Archontic-Alien-Parasite-A-follow-up-interview-with-Maarit&p=1340893&viewfull=1#post1340893

Delight

16th March 2020, 18:06

I feel so sure this time period is awakening us.

hZJC9-_Y8Pk

onawah

18th March 2020, 21:11

Injured Kids, Society Costs
MARCH 17, 2020
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/society-costs/march-2020/?utm_source=email
By Anne Dachel, CHD Contributing Writer, Age of Autism Editor, LossofBrainTrust.com

"As schools everywhere are spending exponentially more on special education services than in past generations, the physical and mental health of children continue to suffer. Here are the latest news articles chronicling the epidemics that currently claim the health of so many children in the U.S. and around the globe.

CHRONIC HEALTH PROBLEMS
9News, Sydney, Australia: Rise in childhood cancer baffles experts, prompts calls for urgent investigation

“The cancer rate in children is steadily rising, triggering calls for further investigation into the causes of the disease in the young.”

Chicago, IL, Center Square: Illinois bill would mandate allergic reaction training in schools, daycares

“A new proposal in Springfield would create a uniform standard to prepare schools and daycare facilities for handling severe allergic reactions.”

“House Bill 3983, sponsored by Northbrook Democratic state Rep. Jonathan Carroll, would require state officials to establish anaphylactic policies for school districts and daycare centers. They would include procedure and treatment plans, a training course on how to respond to a severe allergic reaction, strategies for reducing exposure to specific foods or other allergens known to cause anaphylactic reactions, and other measures.”

RESTRAINT AND SECLUSION
NBC5 Chicago: Illinois Restricts How Students Are Secluded and Restrained

“The Illinois State Board of Education voted unanimously to adopt permanent rules that ban the use of locked seclusion rooms and prohibit schools from using prone restraint, a move that restricts the state’s rules more than ever.”

“Schools can place students alone in seclusion rooms when they’re “engaging in extreme physical aggression” and it would be unsafe for an adult to be present in the room with them, The Chicago Tribune reported.”

SPECIAL EDUCATION INCREASES
FeNews, Ireland: Special Educational Needs Do Not End at 16

“The reforms to the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) system contained in the 2014 Children and Families Act were a once in a generation systemic change for young people and their families.”

“For the first time, rights and duties were extended from the earliest years to young adulthood, in a new 0-25 system, giving Further Education colleges and providers new statutory obligations.”

“The SEND reforms, combined with the raising of the participation age to the 18th birthday, mean that SEND provision does not end at 16. There are increasingly ‘heavy demands on FE – the number of young people with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) aged 16 to 25 increased from 84,000 to 96,000 between 2018 and 2019.’”

Straits Times, Singapore. Parliament: More school staff hired over last 5 years to help students with socio-emotional and behavioural needs

SINGAPORE – “More support staff will be recruited to help students deal with their socio-emotional needs and behavioural issues.

“The number of such staff has already grown by more than 30 per cent over the past five years,” Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education Low Yen Ling said in Parliament on Friday.”

“She added that to continue to meet student needs, the Ministry of Education (MOE) intends to recruit more school counsellors, student welfare officers and allied educators (learning and behavioural support) in the coming years…”

“Allied educators (learning and behavioural support) work with students in mainstream schools who have special needs such as dyslexia, autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder….”

ED100: Special Education Costs Flood School Budgets

“The rising costs of special education services are overwhelming your school district budget. And we are talking big bucks. Nearly 800,000 students in California receive special education services — about one in every eight students.”

“Autism rates are rising.”

“The cost of providing special education services in California has grown significantly over time. In 2017-18 the total cost was about $13 billion. According to the state Legislative Analyst Office this represented an increase of about 28 percent over a decade earlier, adjusted for inflation. The percentage of students receiving special education services jumped from 11 percent to 13 percent.”

“What happened? About two-thirds of the cost increases reflect the growing number of students with severe disabilities, especially autism. According to the Legislative Analyst Report LAO School District Funding 2020, “The share of students identified with autism has increased from 1 in 600 students in 1997-98 to about 1 in 50 students in 2018-19. Many medical experts expect autism rates to continue increasing, thereby placing continued cost pressure on schools.”

Brainerd (MN) Dispatch: Number of special ed students in Brainerd outpace state average

“Brainerd Public Schools continues to be above the state average in terms of students receiving special education services.”

“In Brainerd, 1,598 students — or 22% — received some sort of special education services in 2019. That includes students who are enrolled solely in special education classes and those who may take only one or two a day. This rate continues to be higher than the state of Minnesota, which reported 16% of students receive services.”

“Brainerd stayed consistent with 22% of students reported to receive special education services in 2018 as well. The district percentage has increased over the last five years, though, from 18.6% in 2015. The state average increased from 14.4% in 2015.”

“In Brainerd, students primarily fall into one of the following disability categories: speech/language, learning disability, emotional/behavioral, other health disabled, autism spectrum disorder and developmental delay. The highest number of students — 360 — are considered to have learning disabilities, with the next highest category being developmental delay at 318, followed by autism spectrum disorder at 237. The developmental delay category had the highest increase from 2015 at 43%.”

“Anderson said that jump is due to a couple factors, including earlier detections of the disability and more referrals from doctors. Superintendent Laine Larson said she expects to see more increases in that category in the coming years as well, so the district will keep that in mind moving forward.”

CalMatters: California must face reality: Autism cases are increasing

“In 1999, the state of California was in shock: baffling even the most seasoned of authorities, autism cases in the developmental services system had spiked from about 4,000 in 1987 to about 13,000 cases in 1998.”

“As it turns out, that was just a hint of what lay ahead: today, the Department of Developmental Services counts nearly 10 times that, more than 122,000 autism cases.”

“Though we hear little about autism data from our public health leaders or media, California’s autism rates continue to surge, with no plateau in sight.”

“Schools can’t keep up with ever-growing demand. Emergency rooms and police departments are reeling from increasingly frequent crisis cases. Families are desperate for support and solutions.”

“While nobody fully understands what is behind the dramatic increase in autism, two things are clear: it’s not vaccines, and it’s not a change in criteria.”

NBC10, Providence, RI. RI families still struggling with special education crisis

“Rhode Island families say their special education students are being left behind by local schools and worry their children are stuck in a broken system…”

“The I-Team took what we found to Susanna Loeb, director of the Annenberg Institute for School Reform and professor of education at Brown University.”

“‘I do think this is a national problem,’ Loeb said. ‘It’s hard for the school, but then it’s very hard for the parents and the kids to get what they really deserve from the education system, and I think this is an issue particularly for small districts, where a few high-cost kids really impact their budget.’”

Isle of Wight County Press (UK): Biggest increase in Isle of Wight children with special needs care plans than anywhere else in the country — but services are improving

“…children with special educational needs (SEND) have previously faced difficulties accessing specialist support on the Island, but improvements have now been made.”

“Peter Shreeve, assistant district secretary at the Isle of Wight branch of the National Education Union, said the number of SEND children with Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans had increased by 65 per cent between 2015 and 2019 — the biggest increase in the country.”

“He said the Island had significantly more high-needs students but substantially less funding, and schools were forced to ‘do more with less.’”

Mount Desert Islander, Trenton, ME: Trenton school budget continues upward trend

“School officials have whittled downs next year’s proposed budget for Trenton Elementary School to $3.35 million, which is about 8 percent higher than the budget for the current year.”

“Because of several factors, including a projected 34 percent reduction in carryover funds from this year to next, the budget would boost the local tax assessment by 12.3 percent. That would increase the tax bill on each $100,000 of property valuation by about $130.”

“The proposed budget includes $1.27 million for regular instruction and $906,296 for special education. That is an increase of $167,815, or 22.2 percent, over the special education budget for the current year.”

“The school expects to have at least two new special needs students next year, which also would require increasing the number of educational technician, or ed tech, positions in special education to seven and a half at a cost of about $48,000…”

North Yorkshire County Council (UK): North Yorkshire strides ahead with SEND changes

“In carrying out its ambition to create more and better local provision and a more inclusive culture for children and young people with SEND, the County Council has created capacity for nearly 100 additional special school places this year alone and in the coming year will provide 72 targeted permanent full time places for children with SEND within mainstream schools.”

“North Yorkshire is facing unprecedented and increasing demand on its special educational needs and disability budget.”

“There are almost 163,000 children and young people aged 0-25 in North Yorkshire and the numbers with Education and Health Care Plans are rising. There are currently more than 3,200 with plans but this is predicted to rise by nearly another 1,000 by 2022, in line with national trends.”

“The figure for those with Social, Emotional and Health needs has increased by almost 38 per cent in the last two years and growing numbers of those with communication and interaction needs (particularly autism) is also contributing to the overall rise.”

YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH/BEHAVIOR
Waterloo (IA) Courier: Iowa lawmakers seek ways to address violence in schools

“Educators welcome changes to deal with violence in K-12 schools, but many speakers at a public meeting Wednesday evening said what is most needed is more funding to bolster staff and lower class sizes.”

“Along with offering specialized spaces in schools with smaller class sizes and more individualized attention, the legislation provides guidelines for actions school employees can take to address violent behavior and funding for training and employee protections from disciplinary action by a school.”

“Also, more than 65% of the association’s members ‘have had room clears in their schools,’” Felderman said. ‘We feel like that is unacceptable.’”

“Melissa Peterson of the Iowa State Education Association, said her members report similar experiences and ‘behavioral issues in the classroom are something that we are dealing with more and more frequently.’”

NBC13, Des Moines, IA: Iowa Senator Introduces Bill to Take on Violent Behavior in Classrooms

“Iowa lawmakers took a big step Monday toward addressing a nationwide problem.”

“For months, Channel 13 has reported on violent, destructive behavior in America’s classrooms and the controversial practice known as the ‘room clear.’ That is when well-behaved students are evacuated while a child is allowed to destroy the classroom. State Senator Amy Sinclair filed a bill in the Iowa Senate to address this problem. It contains five areas that she thinks can improve bad behavior in classrooms.”

“The bill would implement training for teachers on violent student behaviors and how to spot the warning signs before it gets out of control. Sinclair wants to establish guidelines and expectations for appropriate responses to behavior in the classroom that presents an imminent threat of bodily injury to another person. The bill would create protections for teachers who have to deal with violent behavior and establish an easier, more accurate way to report that behavior.”

New York Newsday: Long Island school superintendents seek ways to pay for mental health programs; School superintendents from across Long Island are looking for ways to pay for mental health services for students.

“‘Ten years ago, [mental health] wasn’t even a blip on the radar,’ said Charles Dedrick, executive director of the New York State Council of School Superintendents. ‘One of the messages that we’re carrying around the state is that it’s important to keep in mind that this is not just a school issue — this is a community issue, this is a family issue.’”

“A Journal of the American Medical Association report released last year said there were 47% more suicides among teens ages 15 to 19 in 2017 than there were in 2000, and there were more cases of anxiety, depression, social media use and self-inflicted injuries among adolescents.”

“The main concern for superintendents like Kevin Coster, superintendent for the William Floyd school district, is how to increase the number of school psychologists, social workers and counselors at the district’s 10 schools in the Town of Brookhaven….”

St. Joseph (MO) News-Press: SJSD looking to add behavior, curriculum specialists

“The planned hiring of behavioral interventionists, curriculum advisers and campus supervisors for the St. Joseph School District is receiving enthusiastic response from board members.”

“‘Some of our students struggle with behaviors and emotional needs,’ Van Zyl said. ‘So to bring the opportunity for three additional behavioral interventionists will help support families, students and staff, because not everybody knows how to deal with a child that may have behavioral challenges or doesn’t like to be told, no.’”

“[W]e also have students that it doesn’t matter what you teach, they have something that is creating that issue for them behaviorally, so we have to be able to help teach them skills, work with the staff members,’ Van Zyl said. ‘Society has changed how students and adults interact, how social media plays into it. … But we’ve heard from our staff that they would like some more help and support, so that’s what we’re trying to do is to bring some more help and support to them and to our students.”

Washington Post: Room with an ‘ahh’: Colleges are giving students their own space to decompress

“…Tracy Colena, a first-year student majoring in chemical engineering, comes to the same sensory room when he’s feeling stressed and overwhelmed by university life. The fidget toys are a good distraction and help him return to his day feeling calmer and more in control.”

“For Elyse Samojedny, a senior majoring in psychology, the room’s ‘bubble wall’ remains its main attraction. Her attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder makes it hard for her to focus. But sitting up close to the white noise and constant stream of video bubbles ‘blocks everything out, so I can focus on my breath,’ she said….

“But for some students, normal days are a challenge — let alone high-stress exam periods and the beginning of a new term. That’s why a small but growing number of schools offer special rooms where students with anxiety, autism, ADHD, post-traumatic stress disorder or sensory challenges can go to decompress.”

“There is a clear need for rooms like this for students who are neurodiverse, said Mitchell Nagler, director of the Bridges to Adelphi Program, which includes the nearly two-year-old sensory room.”

Guardian (UK): English schools buying in mental health support has ‘almost doubled’ in three years

“The number of schools in England buying in professional mental health support for pupils has nearly doubled in three years, as prompt access to NHS services for those children most in need continues to be a problem, a new survey has found.”

“In 2016 more than a third (36%) of schools surveyed provided school-based support for students’ emotional and mental wellbeing. By 2019 66% of school leaders said they were commissioning their own professional support for pupils, including school-based counsellors.”

“‘We can see that schools are responding to an increasing need and a lack of capacity in specialist services by commissioning their own support such as counselors. Although to be applauded, this is another area where schools are being forced to use scant resources for urgent provision that is not provided for in their budgets.’”

“Place2Be’s chief executive, Catherine Roche, said: ‘Three children in every classroom now has a mental health issue…’" "

onawah

20th March 2020, 04:00

Vaccine Mandates: CHD’s Brief to the European Court of Human Rights
MARCH 19, 2020
By Mary Holland, CHD General Counsel and Vice Chair, Children's Health Defense
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/chds-brief-to-the-european-court-of-human-rights/?utm_source=mailchimp

"Relatively few Americans realize that lawsuits related to human rights in Europe can ultimately be heard in an international court, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). People must first file cases regarding their individual rights in their home countries, but if they have exhausted domestic remedies and are still dissatisfied, they can sue their country in the ECHR – and sometimes win, often changing policies across the 49 countries subject to the ECHR’s jurisdiction.

The ECHR’s Grand Chamber for especially important cases is now reviewing the issue of compulsory vaccine mandates for school attendance in member countries. The case the Court will decide arises from a vaccine mandate law in the Czech Republic. Families opposed to compulsory vaccination sued, raising several human rights concerns under the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights: Article 8, respect for family life; Article 9, freedom of conscience; and Article 2 of Protocol 1 to the Convention, the right to education. The petitioners also raise the issue of informed consent to a medical intervention, arguing that compulsory vaccination violates the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (the Oviedo Convention).

Children’s Health Defense strongly supports the rights of individuals to make voluntary choices regarding vaccines.
With the assistance of Senta Depuydt and the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance, Children’s Health Defense was able to submit a “friend of the court” brief on this matter. The Grand Chamber is scheduled to have a public hearing on the case on April 30, 2020 in Strasbourg, France, assuming that pandemic measures do not postpone it.

Children’s Health Defense strongly supports the rights of individuals to make voluntary choices regarding vaccines. The CHD brief cites the Nuremberg Code and the 2005 UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. It also touches on the lack of proven safety and efficacy, religious rights, conflicts of interest, discrimination, questionable science, censorship, risk of genomic change, risk of unintended genocide, and liability as critical concerns that strongly weigh against vaccine mandates."

Read CHD’s brief: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/CHD-Submission-to-ECHR-with-Cover.pdf

onawah

21st March 2020, 04:01

Does the Coronavirus Pandemic Serve a Global Agenda?
MARCH 20, 2020
Health Authorities Remain Silent on Efficient Covid-19 Treatment
By Senta Depuydt, Editorial Guest Contributor
Children's Health Defense
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/does-the-coronavirus-pandemic-serve-a-global-agenda/

(As usual, RFKennedy Jr. gets the job done on reporting the truth. Children's Health Defense has also come out against 5G, though no mention of that is made in this article. Bold letters my emphasis)

"For those who follow the global immunization agenda and its implementation on different continents, the announcement of a new pandemic didn’t come as a surprise. “Pandemic preparedness” has been well-funded and a buzz word for a long time before becoming a priority at the last G7 summits, the Davos World Economic Forum and other meetings of global governance. The latest simulation for preparedness was Event 201,[1] a rehearsal of a coronavirus pandemic organized on October 18, 2019 in New York by Johns Hopkins University, the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum.

The Presidential election campaign in the United States and the controversial mandatory measles vaccination law in Germany provided perfect timing. What better than viral terror to influence public opinion and health policies on vaccine battles raging on both sides of the Atlantic?

They agreed on the priority to achieve 90% measles vaccination coverage around the globe and to use arguments of “health emergencies” and “security threats” to bypass informed consent laws and constitutional rights.
To the majority who have never heard about this, one should remember that in 2014, the first Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) meeting [2] was held at the White House, a few months after the whistleblower William Thompson raised the alarm on fraud committed by the CDC in the MMR vaccine safety study. That revelation led to increasing distrust in vaccination and public health institutions. So at the GHSA meeting, the US Health and Human Services Department, the World Health Organization (WHO), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Global Alliance for Vaccination and Immunization (GAVI) and health officials from dozens of countries decided to create a “health security” agenda for the world. Its main goal was to vaccinate the entire population of the planet and drive changes in national legislation to do so. They agreed on the priority to achieve 90% measles vaccination coverage around the globe and to use arguments of “health emergencies” and “security threats” to bypass informed consent laws and constitutional rights.

Soon after that meeting, the big “measles scare” campaign started in Disneyland in December 2014, leading to the removal of vaccine exemption rights in California. Meanwhile, Italy, which had been designated to be the forerunner of this agenda in Europe, set things in motion to mandate eight additional childhood vaccines.

The movie Vaxxed then came out in April 2016, during the Presidential campaign. Many American families voted for Donald Trump, hoping that he would create a commission to investigate vaccine safety, as he seemed to have a particular interest. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, repeated that “the science is clear, the earth is round, the sky is blue and vaccines work” throughout her campaign. A few days before the November 2016 vote,[3] President Obama signed major US funding for the GHSA, together with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Unfortunately, after the election, the vaccine safety commission that was supposed to be led by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. never came to pass. On the contrary, draconian vaccine legislation made its way to several states. California, for example, which had already abolished personal belief exemptions, stripped away almost all medical exemptions in 2019, commencing a medical inquisition against doctors who put their patients first.[4] Many Californians, realizing that their Eldorado had become a gilded cage, moved to freer states for vaccine choice, like Texas or Idaho.[5]

Sadly, informed consent and the Nuremberg Code may now exist only in the museum of democratic values.
A vaccine war
In 2020, vaccines could weigh even more heavily in US elections. In fact, one could almost say that a vaccine war is going on across the US. After California, states like New Jersey, Maine, Connecticut, Virginia, Hawaii, Colorado and many others are trying to adopt harsher vaccine laws. But vaccine freedom advocates are getting more organized, too, putting pressure on elected officials and candidates and even introducing their own legislation. For example, after the New Jersey legislature twice failed to pass a repeal of the religious exemption, even though Speaker Steven Sweeney vowed to “go to war” to get it passed, legislators proposed several vaccine safety bills.[6] The Maryland legislature refused to allow pharmacists to administer vaccines, and in South Dakota, the legislature considered, although rejected, a bill that would have completely prohibited all medical mandates of any kind.[7]

Europe too is undergoing a similar wave of coercive legislation and pushback. In Germany, compulsory measles vaccination has just come into force in early March, even though the country has one of the highest coverage rates — 97% one dose, 93% two doses — and very few cases of illness or death. This vote comes two years after Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that there would be no mandatory vaccinations in Germany,[8] as informed consent had “solid historical reasons.”

Everywhere in Europe — in Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, Romania, Slovenia, from Ukraine to Spain — mandatory vaccination bills are being introduced.
Sadly, informed consent and the Nuremberg Code may now exist only in the museum of democratic values. The new German law is particularly restrictive. There is no option for home schooling, and the measles vaccine obligation applies to adults working in the health and education sectors as well. But German citizens may be ready to fight back. Families and doctors are fighting the mandates in courts,[9] and protests were planned all over the country for March 21, including a major event in Munich with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and activists from all over Europe – until the coronavirus pandemic intervened.[10] Everywhere in Europe — in Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, Romania, Slovenia, from Ukraine to Spain — mandatory vaccination bills are being introduced. Faced with the violation of human rights that their Constitutions guarantee, people have filed complaints with the European Court of Human Rights. The Court, whose jurisdiction covers 49 countries throughout Europe and Eurasia, will hear cases on mandatory vaccination on April 30, 2020 arising from the Czech Republic.

It is undeniable that the coronavirus epidemic has come on the scene at a crucial moment, when people everywhere are in revolt against the power of international financial institutions and multinational pharmaceutical corporations, whose stranglehold on governments is no longer hidden. Many scandals have shaken confidence. The bankruptcy of an aberrant economic system is accelerating, and attempts to start a third world war are multiplying. While it is impossible to know how the “coronavirus pandemic” will influence the redistribution of power, it is certain that many are seeking to have Covid-19 serve the political interests of a global governance project.

Iran
Interestingly, the second largest outbreak started in Iran, a country which, like China, does not bend to the West’s dictates. It is also currently involved with Syria and Russia in a tug-of-war with Turkey, NATO, and its traditional allies. After having refused all outside help in the management of the pandemic, Iran made a complete about-face by inviting the WHO to its rescue. It seems that the virus had contaminated a number of high-ranking government officials, including those close to Ayatollah Khamenei, and the former Iranian ambassador to Syria, who died in the early days of the epidemic. Taking an unusual sanitary measure, the Iranian government released 85,000 “uncontaminated” prisoners to avoid contagion in prisons. At the same time, officials blamed US sanctions, which were reimposed on Tehran after Washington abandoned the Iran 2015 nuclear deal, for “hampering their efforts to fight the coronavirus.” Iran called again for lifting the ban and asked the International Monetary Fund for a $5 billion loan to fight the outbreak.[11]
Italy
In Europe, as luck would have it, the pandemic first affected northern Italy, namely Lombardy and Veneto, which have by far the largest number of vaccine hesitant people in Europe and probably the world. Veneto strongly opposed the expansion of vaccine mandates. Activists demonstrated for months, with rallies of more than 50,000 people. As a result, the regional government appealed to the Council of State, arguing that the law violated constitutional freedoms and demanded autonomy in health matters. Of note, the WHO then decided to move its European headquarters to Venice, the capital of Veneto.

At the beginning of the disease outbreak, the Italian authorities considered it unnecessary to impose a two-week school quarantine on children returning from a trip to China, in order not to “stigmatize” them. (By contrast, unvaccinated children are stigmatized and prohibited from attending school year round.) Officials disagreed on Covid-19 diagnosis and “crisis measures,” reflecting conflicts between regional parties and medical experts. But the WHO soon managed to take control of the situation[12] and appointed a special advisor, Dr. Gualtiero Ricciardi, who had been forced to resign earlier from the Italian HHS due to a long list of undeclared conflicts of interest, to steer the coronavirus crisis.

Since then, panic and alarm have escalated continuously, as have the Veneto region’s accusations of “anti-scientific”[13] management. Although the country has been in a complete lockdown for weeks, cases keep increasing and the estimated number of deaths is now nearing 3,000. This sends a frightening signal, but these numbers need to be seen with caution. First, one of the major reasons why Italy is “overwhelmed,” is because of the crisis its public hospitals were already facing before the epidemic. The number of intensive care units has dropped by half over the last 20 years, dropping from the highest to the lowest number of beds per capita in Europe to around 230 per 100,000 inhabitants. In other words, the situation was already disastrous.

Second, there is a lot of controversy about the number of deaths that can really be ascribed to the epidemic. Testing is not very reliable and suffers many biases. According to Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, who had chaired the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Health Committee that called an emergency debate on the influence of the pharmaceutical industry in the declaration of the H1N1 flu pandemic by WHO in 2009, “the tests are currently not measuring the incidence of coronavirus diseases, but the activity of the specialists searching for them.”[14] Many experts also disagree on the mortality rate of Covid-19. While the WHO gives estimates as high as 3.4%, renowned epidemiologists such as John Ioannidis[15] consider the risk is probably much lower, perhaps 0.125%, for which there are no reasons to take such draconian measures.

France
In France, too, declarations of the Covid-19 pandemic seemed to have a flair for strategic time and place. When Minister of Health Agnes Buzyn suddenly left office to replace a candidate who was running for mayor of Paris (he had to step down after a sex scandal), the coronavirus crisis seemed to be reasonably manageable. But the Covid-19 threat arose again at an opportune time — to ban large protests against a highly unpopular law that slashed pensions and on the eve of local March elections. After the first round of voting, a complete lockdown was announced. The former health minister, who wasn’t elected mayor, expressed her regret for leaving office during the coronavirus crisis, saying that she knew from the start that the epidemic would escalate and soon turn into a major catastrophe…
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/03-20-20-Senta-France.jpg
But a disaster in France is easy to predict, as the situation is very similar to Italy. 1,300 public hospital doctors have been on administrative strike for almost a year. They refused to share the responsibility and decisions of a state that no longer provides minimal funds to run public health services. In the last two decades, the available number of beds has been reduced by 100,000 and the remaining facilities are largely understaffed. Patients who died after waiting endless hours in the emergency room were already frequently reported by the media long before the coronavirus epidemic.

So the former health minister, who had received fierce criticism for her inability to solve this lingering hospital crisis, knew perfectly well that the coronavirus situation would further exacerbate the problem. Recently, when President Macron visited doctors fighting the epidemic to show his support, medical staff took the opportunity to express their anger towards his disastrous health policies in front of the camera.

… [health authorities] replied that there was not enough scientific evidence to prove efficacy and warned against potential side effects of the [Chloroquine or Plaquenil], preferring to focus their efforts to find new molecules and develop a new vaccine, with France’s Sanofi Pasteur included in the coronavirus vaccine competition.
The silent war in the treatment against Covid-19
Finally, the Coronavirus epidemic reveals the huge discrepancy between the WHO health strategies and the reality for scientists and doctors who put patients’ lives first.

The current power struggle in France about coronavirus strategies between health officials and the country’s leading expert is truly eye opening. Professor Didier Raoult, who is one of the world’s top 5 scientists on communicable diseases and leads the high tech research center on infectious diseases, IHU – mediterranée Marseilles, argued that the approach of mass quarantine is both inefficient and outdated and that large scale testing and treatment of suspected cases achieves far better results.

Early on, Dr. Raoult suggested the use of hydroxychloroquine (Chloroquine or Plaquenil), a well-known, simple, and inexpensive drug that has shown efficacy with previous coronaviruses such as SARS. By mid-February, clinical trials at his institute and in China already confirmed that the drug could reduce the viral load and bring spectacular improvement. The Chinese scientists published their first trials on more than 100 patients and announced that the Chinese National Health Commission would recommend Chloroquine in their new guidelines to treat Covid-19.[16]

…last October, the French minister of health suddenly decided to put this long used over-the-counter drug on the list of “controlled substances” and make it a prescription drug.
As a member of a similar French committee, Dr. Raoult immediately shared the great news with health authorities. But they replied that there was not enough scientific evidence to prove efficacy and warned against potential side effects of the drug, preferring to focus their efforts to find new molecules and develop a new vaccine, with France’s Sanofi Pasteur included in the coronavirus vaccine competition.

But Dr. Raoult and 600 members of his institute continued their work and confirmed similar results in a trial of 24 patients that was published March 3, 2020.[17] Dr. Raoult has recorded daily videos[18] to share his research and knowledge, sometimes reaching half a million views in a couple of days. Hospitals and general practitioners started to treat their patients with the drug until it quickly went out of stock.

In fact, for an unknown reason, last October, the French minister of health suddenly decided to put this long used over-the-counter drug on the list of “controlled substances” and make it a prescription drug.

While the WHO has repeatedly praised China and South Korea, for their “efficient response” using draconian quarantine measures, there has been no mention of the fact that those countries are using Chloroquine as an efficient Covid-19 treatment.
Now, a month later, under the growing pressure of doctors and the media, the government has finally decided to “consider more trials” of this protocol, and Sanofi Pasteur has announced that it will offer enough doses to potentially treat 300,000 patients.[19]

Although Chloroquine was cited second on the WHO’s original list of drugs to be evaluated for coronavirus treatment as a drug on its list of “essential medicines,” the WHO has not yet released any information about it and has not even mentioned the four clinical trials that received official European Union approval. While the WHO has repeatedly praised China and South Korea, for their “efficient response” using draconian quarantine measures, there has been no mention of the fact that those countries are using Chloroquine as an efficient Covid-19 treatment. But having used Chloroquine together with quarantine, China is nearing the end of its epidemic.

Interestingly, on February 26, the United Kingdom put Chloroquine on its list[120] of drugs that can no longer be exported outside the country. In the United States, a white paper,[21] published on March 13 by researchers from the National Academy of Science and Stanford Medical School, proposes that “the United States of America and other countries should immediately authorize and indemnify medical doctors for prescribing chloroquine to treat COVID-19.”

[Obviously, there is no real interest in using a generic drug that can provide immediate treatment and prevention for a price around $5.
But so far, the only words we hear from the WHO and Western health officials are “quarantine,” “fast tracking vaccines,” and “the search for new drugs.” Obviously, there is no real interest in using a generic drug that can provide immediate treatment and prevention for a price around $5. As a financial consultant recently asked in an article, “If a Covid-19 Therapy Doesn’t Benefit A Stock, Does It Even Exist?”[22] The answer, sadly, is obviously not.[/B]

It looks as if the WHO and our Western governments have decided to keep fueling the panic and raising the alert level, pushing the “Global Health Security Threat” narrative to the hilt. How much longer will we have to wait for effective treatment? How much longer with this global lockdown last? Officials say “until a new vaccine has been developed,” which will probably be in fast track mode by a well-known philanthropist after most courts in the world have ruled that mandatory vaccination does not violate human rights.

Or perhaps until the economy has completely crashed and can be rebuilt on a “healthy basis”? Here is a clue: the European Central Bank has launched a “Pandemic Emergency Purchase Program”[23] that will last until “the coronavirus Covid-19 crisis phase is over, but in any case not before the end of the year”!

Anything can happen now. No one can know for sure if we will emerge out of the coronavirus crisis as subjects of a techno-communist global government or if a new freedom virus will derail such a program. Certainly the world will not be the same.

* Senta Depuydt is a Belgian freelance journalist with a degree in communications. In 2016, she organized the first European Congress on biomedical treatments in Paris and has hosted debates on the biology of autism and vaccine safety in many French-speaking countries. She arranged for premieres of “Vaxxed” in Brussels, Paris and Cannes and an event at UNESCO. She is a board member of the French League for Free Choice in Vaccination and in the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance. She works with health freedom organizations across Europe.

REFERENCES
www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201.
https://ghsagenda.org/.
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/11/04/executive-order-advancing-global-health-security-agenda-achieve-world.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-09-06/california-vaccine-bill-exemption-rules-gavin-newsom-lawmakers-agreement.
https://www.idahostatesman.com/living/health-fitness/article239068753.html.
https://www.phillytrib.com/news/state_and_region/we-re-ready-to-go-to-war-on-this-n/article_c0b7bca7-85c9-54dc-b659-6ae202046c77.html.
https://www.ageofautism.com/2020/02/south-dakota-considers-first-state-bill-to-outlaw-all-vaccine-and-medical-mandates.html.
https://efvv.eu/content/images/events/2020-01-31-munich-protest/efvv-history-measles-vaccination-germany-FR.pdf.
https://www.individuelle-impfentscheidung.de/impfpflicht/verfassungsbeschwerden-in-karlsruhe-%C3%BCbergeben.html.
https://efvv.eu/content/.
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-iran-frees-85-000-prisoners-to-combat-spread-of-covid-19-11958783.
http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/health-emergencies/coronavirus-covid-19/news/news/2020/2/joint-who-and-ecdc-mission-in-italy-to-support-covid-19-control-and-prevention-efforts.
https://www.fanpage.it/attualita/coronavirus-ricciardi-oms-il-veneto-si-e-comportato-in-maniera-antiscientifica/.
W.Wodarg “Without PCR-Tests There Would Be No Reasons For Special Alarms”, 1.3.20, wodarg.com.
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/.
https://covid19data.com/2020/03/04/expert-consensus-on-comprehensive-treatment-of-coronavirus-disease-in-shanghai-2019/.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920300820?via%3Dihub.
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/.
https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/French-lab-Sanofi-hypothetically-offers-millions-of-doses-of-potential-Covid-19-Plaquenil-anti-malaria-drug.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/872567/medicines_that_cannot_be_parallel_exported_from_the_uk_13_march_2020.csv/preview.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTi-g18ftNZUMRAj2SwRPodtscFio7bJ7GdNgbJAGbdfF67WuRJB3ZsidgpidB2eocFHAVjIL-7deJ7/pub.
https://raymondjames.bluematrix.com/docs/pdf/ca6aa508-123d-4204-bbe3-750026ecf1b6.pdf?pdf.
The Governing Council will terminate net asset purchases under PEPP once it judges that the coronavirus Covid-19 crisis phase is over, but in any case not before the end of the year.

onawah

24th March 2020, 21:04

The National Plan to Vaccinate Every American
Posted: 3/21/2020
https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/March-2020/the-national-plan-to-vaccinate-every-american.aspx?utm_source=The+National+Plan+to+Vaccinate+Every+American&utm_campaign=July+NVIC+Newsletter&utm_medium=email
by Barbara Loe Fisher
ltFJB2kEnug
Podcast Available on SoundCloud https://soundcloud.com/nvicstandup/the-national-plan-to-vaccinate-every-american

"Scientists at the National Institutes of Health are working with a biotech company to quickly start clinical trials of an experimental messenger RNA vaccine and fast track it to licensure. 1 The FDA has not yet licensed messenger RNA vaccines that use part of the RNA of a virus to manipulate the body’s immune system into stimulating a potent immune response. 2 3 It looks like the coronavirus vaccine will be the first genetically engineered messenger RNA vaccine to be fast tracked to licensure, just like Gardasil was the first genetically engineered virus-like particle vaccine to be fast tracked to licensure. 4 5

There likely will be lots of questions about whether the fast tracked coronavirus vaccine was studied long enough to adequately demonstrate safety, especially for people who have trouble resolving strong inflammatory responses in their bodies and may be at greater risk for vaccine reactions.6 7 8 9 10 However, there is no question about what will happen if the Centers for Disease Control’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) 11 12 recommends that all Americans get the newly licensed coronavirus vaccine.

The government has a National Vaccine Plan. It is a Plan designed to make sure you, your child and everyone in America gets every dose of every vaccine that government officials recommend now and in the future.1986-1996: Establishing & Creating The Plan
Established under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act during the Reagan Administration, 13 the Plan didn’t really get traction until Congress funded the Vaccines for Children program in 1993 under the Clinton Administration 14 15 and gave the Department of Health and Human Services authority to fund a network of state-based electronic vaccine tracking registries 16 that can monitor the vaccination histories of children without the informed consent of their parents.

In 1995, then Secretary of Health Donna Shalala used rule-making authority to authorize the Social Security Administration to disclose the social security number of every baby born in the country to state governments without parental consent.17 Federal officials explained that – quote - “public health program uses of the social security numbers would include, but are not limited to, establishing immunization registries” and that new routine use of social security numbers would help the government operate “a national network of coordinated statewide immunization registries.” 18

By 1996, when Congress established a national Electronic Health Records (EHR) system under HIPPA, 19 the stage had been set for a government-operated electronic surveillance system to monitor the personal medical records and vaccination status of all Americans. 20 21 22 23 The justification for this big data grab by the government, which clearly violated the privacy of Americans, was to- quote - “protect the public by reducing disease.”Nationwide Electronic Health Records & Vaccine Tracking Systems
Today, the nationwide federally funded Electronic Health Records system captures the details of every visit you make to a doctor’s office, hospital, pharmacy, laboratory or other medical facility; every medical diagnosis you get; every drug you have been prescribed and every vaccine you accept or refuse. Your Electronic Health Record can be accessed not only by government health agencies like the Social Security Administration, Medicaid and federal and state health and law enforcement agencies, 24 25 but also can be shared with authorized third parties such as doctors, health insurance companies, HMOs and other corporations, hospitals, labs, nursing homes and medical researchers. 26 27 28A new Health Information Exchange 29 30 31 initiative funded by the government will make it even easier for computerized health and vaccine records databases to tag, track down and sanction Americans who do not go along with the National Vaccine Plan in the future. 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

What Happened to the Plan’s Duty to Prevent Adverse Reactions to Vaccines?
Ironically, when Congress directed the Department of Health and Human Services to create a National Vaccine Program in the 1986 Act, federal health officials were told to put together a Plan to – quote - “achieve optimal prevention of human infectious diseases through immunization and to achieve optimal prevention against adverse reactions to vaccines.” 39 The Plan was not supposed to focus solely on vaccine development and promotion but to equally focus on preventing vaccine reactions.

https://www.nvic.org/cmstemplates/nvic/images/tracked.jpg

Yet, in the very first 1994 National Vaccine Plan only four out of 25 “objectives” and only two out of 14 anticipated “outcomes” addressed preventing vaccine reactions. 40 The 2010 version of the Plan 41 also largely ignored the legal duty of HHS to conduct vaccine safety research to fill in long standing knowledge gaps and take steps to make vaccines and vaccine policies less likely to cause harm. 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52

Looking back, it appears Congress was not really committed to funding research and creating substantive initiatives to reduce vaccine risks, regardless of what was stated in the 1986 Act, or there would been congressional oversight and federal agencies would have been directed to follow the law rather than ignore it for more than 30 years. 53

Government’s Vaccine Marketing Plan for the Pharmaceutical Industry
Instead, government agencies have brazenly forged lucrative public private business partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry and the medical establishment to:
develop many new vaccines; 54 55 56 57
increase public demand for vaccines; 58
raise vaccination rates among children to nearly 100 percent; 59
create and expand electronic vaccine tracking registries; 60 61 62 63 64 and
promote global vaccination programs, 65 66 even though the primary purpose of the 1986 Act was to reduce vaccine reactions and protect the U.S. childhood vaccine supply, 67 not fund and expand global vaccination programs.
In fact, federal health officials accurately characterize the U.S. vaccination system in the 21st century as a business. A decade ago they admitted that – quote -“The 2010 National Vaccine Plan provides a vision for the U.S. vaccine and immunization enterprise for the next decade.” 68 That’s because they know the National Vaccine Plan is really a Vaccine Marketing Plan for the pharmaceutical industry. 69 70 71 72So, if you are wondering why many states are trying to pass laws eliminating all vaccine exemptions and mandate every vaccine the pharmaceutical industry produces and the CDC recommends, 73 74 75 76 you don’t have to look any further than the government’s well-financed National Vaccine Plan.

Implementation of The Plan Accelerated in 2011
Implementation of the Plan was accelerated in 2011 after the U.S. Supreme Court declared FDA licensed vaccines to be –quote - “unavoidably unsafe” for the purpose of removing almost all remaining liability from drug companies when vaccines hurt people. 77 78

Since 2011, two powerful CDC-appointed vaccine advisory committees influenced by members associated with the pharmaceutical and medical trade industries – the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) 79 80 81 82 83 and the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC) 84 85 86 – have been busy coming up with new ways to meet strategic goals of the National Vaccine Plan.

When highly publicized cases of measles were reported in California’s Disneyland in 2015 87 and in New York in 2019, 88 89 with military precision pursuit of the Plan was kicked into even high gear. 90 91

During the past five years, California, Vermont, New York, Maine and Hawaii have lost vaccine exemptions, even though tens of thousands of Americans rose up in protest. 92 In 2019, the people managed to hold on to exemptions in states like Oregon, Arizona and New Jersey 93 but this year, bills to force vaccine use are already threatening parental, civil and human rights in Virginia, Massachusetts, Florida, Washington, Pennsylvania and more. 94

Five Main Types of Vaccine Laws Being Proposed in States
These are the five main types of laws being proposed in the states and your state may be one of them:Number One: State laws that eliminate all personal belief vaccine exemptions allowing you to follow your conscience or religious beliefs and make it illegal for physicians to grant a medical exemption unless it strictly conforms to very narrow CDC-approved contraindications to vaccination.

National vaccine coverage rates among school children are at 95 percent for core vaccines like polio, pertussis, measles and chickenpox, yet, government health officials are not satisfied. 95 They have narrowed vaccine contraindications so that almost no medical history or health condition qualifies as a reason for a medical exemption. 96

If you or your child have had previous vaccine reactions, are vaccine injured, have a brother or sister who was injured or died after vaccination, or are suffering with a brain or immune system disorder that the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) does not consider to be a contraindication to vaccination, states like California 97 98 are denying physicians the right to exercise professional judgment and give children a medical exemption to vaccination are threatening human rights. 99

No wonder less than one percent of vaccine reactions are ever reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System 100 and doctors feel free to discriminate against and deny medical care to anyone who is not vaccinated according to CDC schedules. 101

Laws that eliminate medical, religious and conscience exemptions to vaccination and ban citizens from getting a school education – even a college education – do violate civil and human rights and so do vaccine mandates by employers who fire or refuse to hire workers based on their vaccination status. 102 103 104 The two professions being targeted first for workplace vaccine mandates are healthcare 105 106 107 and childcare workers, 108 109 but they certainly will not be the last. 110Number Two: State laws that turn unelected members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices into de facto lawmakers and automatically mandate all current and future federally recommended vaccines without any public discussion or vote by duly elected state legislators.

Under the U.S. Constitution, state legislatures hold the majority of power to pass public health laws, so vaccine laws are state laws. 111 112 If states hand that constitutional authority over to an unelected federal government committee, the people no longer can work through their elected state representatives to make sure laws do not force involuntary medical risk taking and punish citizens exercising civil and human rights. 113

It is clear that Pharma and medical trade lobbyists partnering with government officials to implement the National Vaccine Plan are unhappy they have to spend so much time and money trying to strong arm state legislators into mandating every CDC recommended vaccine. At the same time, some politicians are not happy that a growing number of Americans are showing up in state Capitols to oppose oppressive vaccine mandates.

Today, it costs a staggering $3,000 to give a child every one of the 69 doses of 16 vaccines on the federal government’s schedule. 114 In addition to coronavirus vaccine, there are more than a dozen experimental vaccines being fast tracked to market for TB, influenza, HIV/AIDS, gonorrhea, herpes simplex, strep A and B, e-coli, RSV, salmonella, and malaria, 115 with several hundred more being developed in a global vaccine market estimated to balloon to nearly $100 billion by 2026. 116 117

State laws that automatically mandate all federally recommended vaccines are handing Big Pharma a big blank check and putting an unknown number of vaccine vulnerable children and adults at risk for serious health problems if they are forced to use every one of them. 118 119 120 121 122

Number Three: State laws that allow doctors to declare minor children mentally competent to consent to vaccination so children can be vaccinated without the knowledge of their parents.

There is plenty of scientific evidence that children’s brains are not developed enough before or during teenage years to support rational benefit and risk decision-making, especially if they are subjected to pressure. 123 124 Giving doctors the legal authority to, in effect, go behind parents’ backs and persuade a minor child to get liability free vaccines violates the legal right of parents to consent to medical interventions performed on their children. 125 It also puts vaccine vulnerable children at greater risk for suffering reactions. 126Parents know their child’s personal and family medical history best and if parents are left in the dark, not only are they blocked from preventing vaccine reactions but there is no way for them to monitor a child after vaccination for signs of reactions so they can immediately take their child for treatment. 127

Number Four: State laws requiring schools to publicly post vaccine coverage rates for the purpose of shaming schools that allow students with vaccine exemptions to receive a school education.

Publicly posting school vaccination rates and numbers of students with exemptions creates a hostile community environment by targeting certain schools and families, whose children have vaccine exemptions, for discrimination and abuse. 128 129 130

It is an illusion that some schools are safer based on vaccination rates. For example, even schools with 100 percent vaccination rates and zero exemptions have had outbreaks of pertussis 131 and schools with very high vaccination rates have had outbreaks of measles and mumps. 132 133 That is because vaccinated children and adults can get infected with and transmit infectious diseases but sometimes show few or no symptoms and are never diagnosed or reported. 134 135 136 137 138 139 140

Children and teachers interact with many other vaccinated and unvaccinated people outside of the school setting. It is discriminatory to require public posting of the numbers of healthy students with vaccine exemptions, when schools are not required to publicly post the numbers of students who are infected with transmissible diseases like hepatitis B and C, HIV, streptococcal, mononucleosis, cytomegalovirus, e-coli, Fifths disease, herpes simplex and more.

Number Five: State laws that operate vaccine tracking registries and integrate them into Electronic Health Records systems without the consent of those being tracked.

The National Vaccine Information Center has a two-decade public record of opposing the creation of national or state based electronic surveillance systems that automatically enroll children and adults without their informed consent to monitor their vaccination status and health histories. 141

Not only have there been past security breaches with electronic databases dumping personally identifying information into the public domain, 142 but there is legitimate concern that the government should not be conducting electronic surveillance on citizens while pursuing a National Vaccine Plan that encourages punitive societal sanctions, such as the inability to get a school education or a job, for individuals who refuse to go along with the Plan.

Learn About Federal & State Government Police Powers to Compel Vaccine Use
For more information on the history and types of public health laws that allow the federal government and states to use police powers to compel vaccine use, go to NVIC’s website at NVIC.org. 143 144

To learn more about vaccine legislation pending in your state and talking points you can use to educate your legislators, go to NVIC Advocacy.org and become a user of NVIC’s free online Advocacy Portal. You will be put into direct contact with your own state and federal representatives and sent emails when bills that threaten or expand your freedom to make voluntary vaccine choices are moving in your state so you can make your voice heard, including showing up at scheduled public hearings.

Making Government Work for Us
In America, we are governed by laws that the representatives we elect make, so it is important to vet all candidates for positions on issues you care about before going to the polls. Good laws can be enacted and bad laws can be repealed but only if we wake up, stand up and actively participate to make our representative government work for us.

Already this year, there have been more than 50 good bills introduced in a number of states that defend voluntary vaccine choices. This is a time for positive action.

It’s your health. Your family. Your choice.

Note: This commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers. The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking."

Click to View and Access References:
https://www.nvic.org/NVIC-Vaccine-News/March-2020/the-national-plan-to-vaccinate-every-american.aspx?utm_source=The+National+Plan+to+Vaccinate+Every+American&utm_campaign=July+NVIC+Newsletter&utm_medium=email

onawah

8th April 2020, 05:06

Major Error Found in Vaccine Aluminum Safety Calculation
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
April 07, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/04/07/vaccine-aluminum-safety-calculation-error.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art2ReadMore&cid=20200407Z1&et_cid=DM501456&et_rid=845889102

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
A 2011 paper compared aluminum exposure from vaccines in infants to an Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) safety limit of oral aluminum, concluding the amount used in vaccines is safe
In an erratum published by Physicians for Informed Consent, it’s noted that the study based its calculations on 0.78% of oral aluminum being absorbed into the bloodstream instead of the value of 0.1% used by the ATSDR
The math error led the authors to incorrectly conclude that aluminum exposure from vaccines was well below the safety limit
The CDC and other health organizations have been using the flawed 2011 study as support that aluminum adjuvants in childhood vaccines are “safe”
When evaluating the safety of vaccines, adjuvants must be taken into account. The most commonly used vaccine adjuvant is aluminum,1 a demonstrated neurotoxin that is added to certain vaccines to increase your immune response and, with that, theoretically a higher response of protective antibodies.

Despite aluminum's known health risks, it's widely suggested that aluminum in vaccines is safe, including for newborn babies, but a math error in a key U.S. Food and Drug Administration study2 — revealed by scientists at Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) — raises new safety concerns.

When the aluminum adjuvant was first approved for use in vaccines more than 90 years ago, it was approved based on demonstration of efficacy — safety studies weren't performed. A 2002 document from the FDA even states:3

"Historically, the non-clinical safety assessment for preventive vaccines has often not included toxicity studies in animal models. This is because vaccines have not been viewed as inherently toxic, and vaccines are generally administered in limited dosages over months or even years."

That being said, in 2002, researchers with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) released a study on the effect of medical aluminum exposure on public health in order to estimate the infant body burden of aluminum in infants following a standard vaccination schedule during the first year of life.4

They found that, while the body burden of aluminum from vaccinations exceeded that from dietary sources, it was still below the minimal risk level established by ATSDR. In 2011, FDA scientists updated the 2002 study with a current pediatric vaccination schedule and other updated parameters,5 and that is where PIC found what is described as a "crucial math error."

Error Suggests Aluminum in Childhood Vaccines May Not Be Safe
The 2011 paper compared aluminum exposure from vaccines in infants to the ATSDR safety limit of oral aluminum. They concluded at the time:6

"Using these updated parameters we found that the body burden of aluminum from vaccines and diet throughout an infant's first year of life is significantly less than the corresponding safe body burden of aluminum modeled using the regulatory MRL.

We conclude that episodic exposures to vaccines that contain aluminum adjuvant continue to be extremely low risk to infants and that the benefits of using vaccines containing aluminum adjuvant outweigh any theoretical concerns."

In an erratum published by PIC, however, it's noted that the study based its calculations on 0.78% of oral aluminum being absorbed into the bloodstream instead of the value of 0.1% used by the ATSDR.

"As a result," PIC noted, "the FDA paper assumed that nearly 8 (0.78%/0.1%) times more aluminum can safely enter the bloodstream, and this led the authors to incorrectly conclude that aluminum exposure from vaccines was well below the safety limit."7 Christopher Shaw, a professor at the University of British Columbia who has studied the effects of injected aluminum, explained in a news release:8

"We knew that the [2011] Mitkus et al. paper modeling aluminum clearance had to be inaccurate since it was assuming that injected aluminum kinetics were the same as the kinetics of aluminum acquired through diet.

Now, in addition, we see that they did their modeling based on using the incorrect level of aluminum absorption. What is particularly striking is that despite all these errors, since 2011, Mitkus et al. is used by CDC and other entities as the basis for claiming that aluminum adjuvants are safe."

Serious Concerns Over Aluminum Adjuvants

HVJkzWXG6CQ
Interview Transcript:https://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/ExpertInterviewTranscripts/Interview-LucijaTomljenovic-TheEffectsOfVaccinesAdjuvantsOnYourBrain.pdf

In 2011, Shaw and Canadian scientist Lucija Tomljenovic published a paper in Current Medicinal Chemistry questioning whether aluminum vaccine adjuvants are safe. They cited experimental research that showed aluminum adjuvants may cause serious immunological disorders in humans and pose a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications.

"In our opinion, the possibility that vaccine benefits may have been overrated and the risk of potential adverse effects underestimated, has not been rigorously evaluated in the medical and scientific community," they wrote.9

In one of their studies, mice were injected with aluminum at a dose meant to correlate with that given to U.S. children through vaccines, and they spaced out the injections based on the mice's developmental stages. What they found was that once the mice reached adulthood (which occurs at the age of 6 months), the treated mice had permanent behavioral impairments.

In addition to noting that aluminum adjuvants can persist in the body long-term and penetrate the blood-brain barrier, the adjuvants were found to trigger adverse neurobehavioral outcomes in the mice at vaccine-relevant exposures. "Efforts should be made to reduce Al [aluminum] exposure from vaccines," they concluded.10

In another study, Shaw, Tomljenovic and colleagues suggested that aluminum may induce adverse neurological and immunological effects, and overstimulation of the immune system in early infancy via vaccinations could play a role in neurobehavioral disorders.11 In 2014, Tomljenovic and colleagues wrote:12

"There is now sufficient evidence from both human and animal studies showing that cumulative exposure to aluminium adjuvants is not as benign as previously assumed.

Given that vaccines are the only medical intervention that we attempt to deliver to every living human on earth and that by far the largest target population for vaccination are healthy children, a better appreciation and understanding of vaccine adjuvant risks appears warranted."

Further, in an interview I conducted with Tomljenovic in 2015, she explained:

"There is a huge body of research that shows that if you overstimulate the immune system at the periphery, especially in the critical stage of early development, you are going to influence the brain in a negative way, and by doing so, you can create irreversible damage.

Again, this is research that is rarely discussed, because it really shows that there is reason to question the safety of the burden of vaccines given to infants."

Problems Inherent to Adjuvants
Dr. Suzanne Humphries, author of "Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History," is among those who has raised concerns over the problems with not only aluminum but also adjuvants in general, since they're intended to provoke an inflammatory immune response.

As noted by Humphries, who spoke on the subject of aluminum in vaccines in Tampere, Finland, in November 2015, "babies are programmed to be anti-inflammatory," meaning the placenta and breast milk help "program" the child to maintain a noninflamed state.

In order to make these killed, subunit or toxoid vaccines work, an adjuvant must be used to sufficiently stir or aggravate the immune system into action. By so doing, vaccines "violate the natural programming of the baby's immune system."

Further, even if aluminum is removed from vaccines, the risk of immune system brain disorder remains — even if the new adjuvant is nontoxic. As explained by Tomljenovic in our interview, by overstimulating your immune system, you run the risk of breaking self-tolerance and leading to autoimmunity. Japanese researchers revealed this in a 2009 study on mice, concluding:13

"Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host's immune 'system' by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system's self-organized criticality."

What's more, without aluminum, a large number of vaccines would have to be eliminated since there are no viable alternatives. Perhaps this is why researchers looking into adverse events after immunization with an aluminum-containing vaccine wrote in 2004, "Despite a lack of good-quality evidence we do not recommend that any further research on this topic is undertaken."14

Aluminum Linked to Alzheimer's
In the 2002 ATSDR study, the researchers were clear about aluminum's distribution pattern in the body, including the fact that it "distributes widely to the various body tissues," reaching the kidneys, spleen, liver, heart, lymph and eventually the brain.15 Aluminum has a known ability to cross the blood-brain-barrier, so any aluminum in the blood can be transported into the brain.

Research has found a strong link between aluminum exposure and Alzheimer's disease. Patients with a genetic mutation that predisposes them to early onset of Alzheimer's and more aggressive disease have universally high aluminum content in their brains.16 Aluminum may damage your brain function in a number of ways, including:17

Adversely influencing neuronal function and survival
Potentiating damaging redox activity
Disrupting intracellular calcium signaling that systematically wears down cellular defenses
Worsening the adverse effects of other heavy metals
Influencing gene expression
A 2010 paper also pointed out that aluminum salts "can increase levels of glial activation, inflammatory cytokines and amyloid precursor protein within the brain," and, "Both normal brain aging and to a greater extent, Alzheimer's disease are associated with elevated basal levels of markers for inflammation."18

CDC Vaccine Schedule Leads to Greatest Aluminum Burden
Research published in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology found the CDC's childhood vaccine schedule — when adjusted for bodyweight — exposes children to a level of aluminum that is 15.9 times higher than the recommended "safe" level.19,20

The researchers pointed out that previous efforts to assess the aluminum burden created by vaccines were based on "whole-body clearance rates estimated from a study involving a single human subject."

They also used an aluminum citrate solution that is not used in vaccines, which may affect the excretion rate. Further, infants have immature renal function, which will inhibit their ability to filter and excrete toxins in the first place. The researchers used three models in to estimate the expected acute and long-term whole-body accumulation of aluminum in children as follows:

The CDC's 2019 childhood vaccine schedule
The CDC's vaccine schedule modified to use low dose aluminum DTaP and aluminum-free Hib vaccines
Dr. Paul Thomas' "vaccine-friendly plan,"21 which recommends giving only one aluminum-containing vaccine per visit (max two) and delaying certain vaccinations
The CDC's standard schedule resulted in the greatest expected aluminum burden in all model assumptions, while Thomas' schedule resulted in the lowest.

Further research into these options should be a priority for vaccine research, considering the serious questions about the safety of aluminum in vaccines and the fact that considering aluminum-free vaccines or at least limiting the number of aluminum-containing vaccines received at one time may be prudent.

Increasing research is the goal PIC hopes to reach by publishing the math error in the featured 2011 study as well. In a news release, Dr. Shira Miller, president of PIC, said:

"We posted the Mitkus 2011 erratum … in hopes of bringing it to the attention of scientists and researchers who are interested in the safety of the quantities of injected aluminum found in childhood vaccines and would be in a position to further research the safety concern."22

- Sources and References
1, 9 Curr Med Chem. 2011;18(17):2630-7
2, 5, 6 Vaccine. 2011 Nov 28;29(51):9538-43. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.09.124. Epub 2011 Oct 11
3 Workshop on Non-Clinical Safety Evaluation of Preventive Vaccines: Recent Advances and Regulatory Considerations
4 Vaccine. 2002 May 31;20 Suppl 3:S13-7
7, 8, 22 Physicians for Informed Consent March 6, 2020
10 Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry, November 2013: 128; 237–244
11, 12 OA Autism 2014 Jun 10;2(2):11
13 PLOS One December 31, 2009
14 Lancet Infect Dis. 2004 Feb;4(2):84-90
15 Vaccine. 2002 May 31;20 Suppl 3:S13-7, distribution pattern
16 Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease January 13, 2020 [Epub ahead of print]
17 Frontiers of Neurology October 27, 2014
18 Neurotoxicology. 2010 Sep;31(5):575-81
19 The Highwire December 22, 2019
20 Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology March 2020; 58: 126444
21 Dr. Paul Approved Vaccine Plan (PDF)

onawah

10th April 2020, 00:41

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny on Coast to Coast
"Vaccines do NOT prevent infection but DO cause disease."
Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, AHBIM
Find your local Radio Station on the Coast-to-Coast website for tonight's show at
1am EST / 10pm PST
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgxwHMjqjzrWBVQXKvwNxvWZsxZsw?projector=1

onawah

15th April 2020, 03:09

Read the Fine Print: Vaccine Package Inserts Reveal Hundreds of Medical Conditions Linked to Vaccines
APRIL 14, 2020
By the Children’s Health Defense Team

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/read-the-fine-print-vaccine-package-inserts-reveal-hundreds-of-medical-conditions-linked-to-vaccines/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=55ee6910-139f-4ac7-85a2-0f683b97b10c

(Difficult to read the charts in this copy and paste, but it gives you an idea of how much info there is in the article. Go to the link for easier reading. )

"In March 2015, Dr. Anthony Fauci—the career National Institutes of Health official elevated by the media to the status of COVID-19 Grand Poobah—told PBS’s Frontline with a straight face that risks from vaccines are “almost nonmeasurable.” Fauci then proceeded to downplay every potential vaccine risk proposed by the interviewer, stating that each had “no basis in reality.” Having served at the helm of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984, Fauci surely was aware then, and is aware now, that the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program established in the late 1980s has paid out billions of dollars to the vaccine-injured: $4.3 billion as of April 1, 2020. Did Fauci feel that he could get away with making such dismissive statements because he knew about the Harvard study from 2010 showing that fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events get reported—and what isn’t reported can’t be measured?

All package inserts (made available online by both the FDA and vaccine companies) contain a section on Postmarketing Experience (Section 6.2) that lists adverse events “spontaneously reported in the US and other countries” after the vaccine’s licensure.
Vaccines belong to the class of pharmaceutical products called biologics, products that allergy experts widely recognize for their “potential to cause allergic hypersensitivity reactions,” among other adverse effects. Is Dr. Fauci—director of an institution focused on allergies and immunology—unaware that the package inserts of at least 22 vaccines list allergic hypersensitivity reactions as an adverse event, and that the inserts of at least 31 vaccines list post-vaccine anaphylactic reactions?

The fact is that vaccine package inserts are one of the few available sources of detailed information that consumers can turn to when they want to sidestep official stonewalling and learn about the more than 200 adverse events reported for vaccines given to children and adolescents. All package inserts (made available online by both the FDA and vaccine companies) contain a section on Postmarketing Experience (Section 6.2) that lists adverse events “spontaneously reported in the US and other countries” after the vaccine’s licensure. Manufacturers include adverse events in the list on the basis of severity, frequency of reporting and strength of evidence for a causal relationship to the vaccine. They also include adverse events that may not have been detected during the vaccine’s clinical trials.

… vaccines—promoted for the prevention of 13 illnesses—have yielded postmarketing reports of at least 217 adverse medical outcomes, including death.
Shining a light on the fine print
To facilitate parents’ use of the information buried in small print in the package inserts, Children’s Health Defense has conducted a comprehensive review of the adverse events reported in Section 6.2 for all vaccines currently included in the U.S. childhood and adolescent vaccine schedule. The review includes 38 vaccine brands produced by 8 different manufacturers to protect against diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type b, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, human papillomavirus, influenza, meningococcal infection, pertussis, pneumococcal infection, polio, rotavirus, tetanus and varicella (Table 1). According to the information compiled from the inserts, these vaccines—promoted for the prevention of 13 illnesses—have yielded postmarketing reports of at least 217 adverse medical outcomes, including death (Table 2).

There are several things to note about the information presented in Table 2. First, while we used the verbatim insert terminology for each disorder and also largely stuck to the disease groupings in the package inserts, we added two categories—allergic and autoimmune disorders—that the inserts surprisingly omit. (The package inserts lump allergic reactions in with “immune system disorders.”) Second, there are a number of disorders that fit in more than one category; in those instances, we have included them (with an asterisk*) in both places (while counting them once). Third, the table only includes those adverse events that manufacturers decided to report in the inserts—but other adverse events are not only possible but likely, due to the widespread problem of underreporting. Notably, none of the package inserts include any mention of prevalent, childhood-onset neurodevelopmental disorders like tics or autism that published, peer-reviewed studies have linked to vaccines.

…the Pentacel vaccine (which contains a Hib component) can produce “invasive Hib disease”; the RotaTeq vaccine (for rotavirus) is associated with “transmission of vaccine virus strains to the unvaccinated”; and some influenza vaccines trigger influenza.
Themes
As readers peruse Table 2, they may notice the following themes:

Every single vaccine on the childhood/adolescent vaccine schedule is responsible for at least one adverse event. For example, as already noted, roughly four out of five vaccines (82%) are associated with reports of anaphylactic reactions. The incidence of anaphylaxis has been climbing in the U.S. for several decades. Medications are the top known triggers of anaphylaxis, while another 39% of anaphylaxis cases are idiopathic, meaning that the cause is “unknown.”
Vaccines can cause the very illnesses—or adverse consequences of those illnesses—that they are supposed to prevent. In the era of measles hype and hysteria, it is particularly important to point out that both MMR vaccines—MMR-II and ProQuad—are failing to prevent “atypical measles” (both vaccines), “measles” (ProQuad), “measles-like rash” (MMR-II) and “skin infections” (ProQuad). Likewise, the package inserts report “varicella” and “varicella-like rash” in the aftermath of vaccination with Varivax and ProQuad (which combines varicella with MMR). Equally concerning, the MMR-II and ProQuad vaccines—which have shifted mumps from a noneventful childhood illness to a fertility-endangering condition afflicting adolescents and adults—have produced reports of serious testicular problems (epididymitis and orchitis). Table 2 also shows that the Pentacel vaccine (which contains a Hib component) can produce “invasive Hib disease”; the RotaTeq vaccine (for rotavirus) is associated with “transmission of vaccine virus strains to the unvaccinated”; and some influenza vaccines trigger influenza.
Vaccines can also cause other serious infections. For example, the risky MMR-II, ProQuad and Varivax trio is linked to “pneumonia” and “pulmonary congestion,” the Infanrix and Pediarix vaccines are associated with “respiratory tract infections” and seven different vaccines are associated with various forms of meningitis. Ironically (or perhaps not), pneumonia and meningitis are the targets of the pneumococcal and meningococcal vaccines.
Vaccine adverse events affect numerous body systems, including the immune and nervous systems. Although the longest list of adverse impacts—41—is for effects on the nervous system, the wide-ranging list also shows effects on the blood, connective tissue, ears, eyes, gastrointestinal system, heart, liver, lymph nodes, musculoskeletal system, respiratory system, skin and more.
Dr. Fauci himself might want to take note of the fact that companies like Johnson & Johnson, one of those rushing to develop a coronavirus vaccine, have been censured by the Department of Justice for drug marketing fraud that exposed children and the elderly to serious side effects, including death.
Measurable and often unsafe
All pharmaceutical products come with potential side effects, and vaccines are no exception. For Dr. Fauci to describe the adverse events associated with vaccines as “almost nonmeasurable”—when they are not only described in package inserts but tracked in postmarketing surveillance systems such as the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the European EudraVigilance system and the World Health Organization’s VigiBase system—is not only disingenuous but unethical. Given that Dr. Fauci’s wife is a senior NIH bioethicist, the NIAID director’s ethically murky eagerness to deemphasize the prevalence and significance of vaccine adverse events is surprising.

As the COVID-19 situation has brought Fauci into the limelight as “explainer-in-chief” of the epidemic—and proponent-in-chief of patentable vaccines that will use untested technologies while leapfrogging over ordinary vaccine development protocols—we would do well to query Fauci’s five-year-old throwaway remarks about vaccine safety. Dr. Fauci himself might want to take note of the fact that companies like Johnson & Johnson, one of those rushing to develop a coronavirus vaccine, have been censured by the Department of Justice for drug marketing fraud that exposed children and the elderly to “serious side effects, including death.”

Much has been made of Fauci’s, NIAID’s and the NIH’s cozy entanglements with Bill Gates, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Gates-Foundation-created Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), particularly in light of the massive Gates Foundation and CEPI funding being directed toward coronavirus vaccines that the NIH is also supporting. Gates recently called for digital “certificates” showing who has received an eventual coronavirus vaccine and also made veiled statements that “you don’t want people moving around the world” unless they have received a vaccine. In that context, Fauci’s additional remarks in the 2015 Frontline interview take on somewhat ominous overtones. The good doctor stated that while “there’s never a situation where someone is going to tie you down and vaccinate you . . . you don’t want the respect for autonomy of people to get in the way of a public health mandate.”

Table 1. Vaccine package inserts reviewed
Type of Vaccine Brand Name Manufacturer
Vaccines containing diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis components Adacel (Tdap)
Boostrix (Tdap)
Daptacel (DTaP)
Diphtheria and Tetanus Toxoids Adsorbed (DT)
Infanrix (DTaP)
Kinrix (DTaP-IPV)
Pediarix (DTaP-HepB-IPV)
Pentacel (DTaP-IPV/Hib)
Quadracel (DTaP-IPV)
Tdvax (Td)
Tenivac (Td) Sanofi Pasteur
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)
Sanofi
Sanofi
GSK
GSK
GSK
Sanofi
Sanofi
MassBiologics
Sanofi
Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccines ActHIB (Hib)
Hiberix (Hib)
PedvaxHIB (Hib) Sanofi
GSK
Merck
Hepatitis vaccines Engerix-B (HepB)
Havrix (HepA)
Recombivax HB (HepB)
Twinrix (HepA/HepB)
Vaqta (HepA) GSK
GSK
Merck
GSK
Merck
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines Gardasil
Gardasil 9 Merck
Merck
Influenza vaccines Afluria Quadrivalent
Fluarix
Flublok Quadrivalent (age 18 and older)
Flucelvax
Flulaval Quadrivalent
FluMist
Fluzone Quadrivalent Sequirus
GSK
Protein Sciences Corporation
Sequirus
GSK
AstraZeneca
Sanofi
Meningococcal vaccines Bexero
Trumenba GSK
Pfizer
Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and MMR+varicella vaccines MMR-II (MMR)
Proquad (MMRV) Merck
Merck
Pneumococcal vaccines Prevnar-13
Pneumovax-23 Pfizer
Merck
Inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) IPOL (IPV) Sanofi
Rotavirus vaccines Rotarix
RotaTeq GSK
Merck
Varicella vaccine Varivax Merck
Table 2. Adverse events reported in package inserts, by body system*
[Note: Medical conditions with asterisks appear in more than one category.]
Body System Medical Disorder Vaccines Reporting Disorder
Allergic (5) Allergic reactions/hypersensitivity* ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, FluMist, Fluzone, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix
Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions, including shock* ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Varivax
Angioedema* ActHIB, Adacel, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Twinrix, Varivax
Serum sickness* Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, Pneumovax-23, Recombivax, Twinrix
Urticaria* [hives] ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, Quadracel, Recombivax, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Twinrix
Autoimmune (7) Diabetes mellitus* MMR-II
Guillain-Barré syndrome* Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Vaqta, Varivax
Kawasaki disease* [blood vessel disease] Rotarix, RotaTeq
Lupus-like syndrome* Recombivax
Multiple sclerosis (or MS exacerbation)* Engerix-B, Havrix, Recombivax, Twinrix
Pancreatitis* Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II
Systemic lupus erythematosus* Recombivax
Blood/lymphatic system (10) Anemia, aplasic or hemolytic Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Varivax
Epistaxis [nosebleed] FluMist, ProQuad
Extravasation [blood vessel leakage] ProQuad
Hematochezia [bloody stools] ProQuad, Rotarix, RotaTeq
Increased erythrocyte sedimentation rate Recombivax
Leukocytosis [increased white blood cells] MMR-II, Pneumovax-23
Lymphadenitis [swollen lymph nodes] Boostrix, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad
Lymphadenopathy, including regional Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Tenivac
Thrombocytopenia [low platelets] Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluzone, Havrix, Infanrix, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax
Thrombocytopenic purpura, idiopathic Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Rotarix, Twinrix, Varivax
Cardiac (6) Cyanosis* [bluish discoloration, low oxygen] Daptacel, Hiberix, Infanrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Hypotension Adacel
Myocarditis [heart muscle inflammation] Adacel, Boostrix
Palpitations Engerix-B, Twinrix
Pericarditis [pericardial inflammation] FluMist
Tachycardia [abnormally high heart rate] Engerix-B, Fluarix, Recombivax, Twinrix
Congenital (1) Congenital anomaly Havrix
Death (2) Death Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, Rotarix, RotaTeq
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) Infanrix
Ear/labyrinth (5) Ear pain Engerix-B, Infanrix, ProQuad, Twinrix
Nerve deafness MMR-II, ProQuad
Otitis media MMR-II
Tinnitis Engerix-B, Recombivax, Twinrix
Vertigo Engerix-B, Fluarix
Eye (15) Conjunctivitis Engerix-B, Fluarix, MMR-II, Recombivax, Twinrix
Eye irritation Fluarix, ProQuad
Eye pain Fluarix, Flulaval
Eye redness Fluarix
Eye swelling Bexero, Fluarix
Eyelid swelling Fluarix, ProQuad
Keratitis [corneal inflammation] Engerix-B
Ocular hyperemia [eye inflammation] Fluzone
Ocular palsies* [nerve damage] MMR-II, ProQuad
Optic neuritis/neuropathy, papillitis* [inflammation of optic nerve] Engerix-B, Fluzone, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix
Photophobia [light intolerance] Flulaval
Retinitis, necrotizing [inflammation] MMR-II, ProQuad, Varivax
Retrobulbar neuritis [nerve damage] MMR-II, ProQuad
Uveitis [eye inflammation] Recombivax
Visual disturbances Engerix-B, Recombivax, Twinrix
Gastrointestinal (13) Abdominal pain, discomfort Fluarix, ProQuad
Candidiasis* ProQuad
Constipation Recombivax
Diarrhea Daptacel, FluMist, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel
Dyspepsia [indigestion] Engerix-B, Twinrix
Dysphagia [swallowing difficulties] Flulaval
Gastroenteritis Rotarix, RotaTeq
Intussusception, including recurrent/fatal Rotarix, RotaTeq
Mouth ulcers ProQuad
Nausea Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, FluMist, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, Tdvax
Pancreatitis* Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II
Swelling of mouth, throat or tongue Fluarix
Vomiting Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Tenivac
General and injection site (20) Abnormal gait Flulaval
Apathy ProQuad
Asthenia [fatigue, weakness] Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Infanrix, Pediarix, Tenivac
Body aches Fluarix
Chest pain Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone
Chills Fluarix, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Twinrix
Decreased limb mobility Pneumovax-23
Feeling hot Fluarix
Fever MMR-II, Pneumovax-23
Injected limb—extensive swelling ActHIB, Bexero, Hiberix
Injection site abscess Adacel, Daptacel, Fluarix, Flulaval, PedvaxHIB, Pentacel, Quadracel
Injection site bruising Adacel, Flulaval
Injection site cellulitis Afluria, Daptacel, Fluarix, Flulaval, Pediarix, Quadracel, Tenivac
Injection site reactions (mass, pain, warmth) Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Tdvax, Tenivac, Twinrix
Injection site rash Daptacel, Flulaval, IPOL, Prevnar-13
Listlessness Quadracel
Malaise Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, Tdvax, Twinrix
Peripheral edema ActHIB, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac, Varivax
Pyrexia [fever] Tdvax
Swelling MMR-II, ProQuad
Hepatobiliary/liver (3) Elevation of liver enzymes Recombivax
Hepatitis Havrix, Twinrix
Jaundice Havrix, Twinrix
Immune system (5) Allergic reactions/hypersensitivity* ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, FluMist, Fluzone, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix
Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions, including shock* ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Varivax
Angioedema,* angioneurotic edema ActHIB, Adacel, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Twinrix, Varivax
Edema Adacel
Serum sickness* Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, Pneumovax-23, Recombivax, Twinrix
Infections and infestations (29) Atypical measles MMR-II, ProQuad
Bronchitis Infanrix, ProQuad
Candidiasis* ProQuad
Cellulitis Daptacel, Infanrix, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Tdvax, Varivax
Early-onset Hib disease PedvaxHIB
Herpes simplex ProQuad
Herpes zoster [shingles] Engerix-B, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Infection ProQuad
Influenza, influenza-like illness Afluria, Flulaval, Havrix, ProQuad
Invasive Hib disease Pentacel
Kawasaki disease* [blood vessel disease] Rotarix, RotaTeq
Laryngitis Flulaval
Measles ProQuad
Measles-like rash MMR-II
Meningitis (aseptic, eosinophilic) Engerix-B, FluMist, MMR-II, Pentacel, ProQuad, Twinrix, Varivax
Pharyngitis Fluarix, Varivax
Pneumonia, pneumonitis MMR-II, ProQuad, Varivax
Pulmonary congestion ProQuad
Respiratory tract infection Infanrix, Pediarix, ProQuad
Rhinitis Fluarix, Flulaval, Havrix, MMR-II, Pentacel, ProQuad
Secondary bacterial infections (skin, tissue) Varivax
Sinusitis ProQuad
Skin infection ProQuad
Sore throat MMR-II, ProQuad
Tonsillitis Fluarix
Transmission of vaccine virus strains RotaTeq
Varicella (vaccine strain) ProQuad, Varivax
Varicella-like rash ProQuad
Viral infection Pentacel
Investigations (2) Abnormal liver function tests Engerix-B, Twinrix
Increased serum C-reactive protein Pneumovax-23
Metabolic (3) Decreased appetite Pentacel
Diabetes mellitus* MMR-II
Mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, Leigh syndrom exacerbation [neurometabolic] FluMist
Musculoskeletal/connective tissue (13) Arthralgia [joint pain] Boostrix, Engerix-B, IPOL, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tdvax, Twinrix
Arthritis Engerix-B, Flulaval, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix
Back pain Boostrix
Hypotonia [low muscle tone] Daptacel, Hiberix, Infanrix, Pediarix, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Lupus-like syndrome* Recombivax
Muscle spasm Adacel
Muscle weakness Engerix-B, Flulaval, Recombivax, Twinrix
Musculoskeletal pain ProQuad
Musculoskeletal stiffness Havrix
Myalgia [muscle pain] Boostrix, IPOL, MMR-II, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac
Myositis [muscle inflammation] Adacel
Pain in extremities Fluarix, Fluzone, Pediarix, Recombivax, Tdvax, Tenivac
Systemic lupus erythematosus* Recombivax
Nervous system (41) Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis MMR-II, ProQuad
Ataxia [nervous system dysfunction] MMR-II, ProQuad, Varivax
Bulging fontanelle Pediarix
Cerebellar ataxia Vaqta
Convulsions/seizures ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, IPOL, Kinrix, MMR-II, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tdvax, Twinrix, Varivax
Depressed level of consciousness Boostrix, Pediarix, Pentacel
Dizziness Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac, Varivax
Encephalitis, vaccine-induced encephalitis [brain inflammation] Boostrix, Engerix-B, FluMist, MMR-II, Pediarix, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax
Encephalomyelitis [brain and spinal cord] Afluria, Fluarix, Fluzone
Encephalopathy [brain disease] Afluria, Engerix-B, Flulaval, Havrix, Infanrix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Twinrix
Facial palsy, Bell’s palsy Adacel, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, FluMist, Fluzone, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Facial (or cranial) nerve paralysis Flulaval
Facial paresis [impaired facial movement] Fluarix
Febrile convulsions/seizures Afluria, Daptacel, Fluzone, IPOL, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax
Guillain-Barré syndrome* Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Vaqta, Varivax
Headache DT, Infanrix, IPOL, MMR-II, ProQuad, Tdvax, Twinrix
Hypoesthesia [decreased tactile sensitivity] Adacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, Havrix, Recombivax, Twinrix
Hypokinesia [loss of muscle movement] Flulaval
Hypotonic-hyporesponsive episode to immunization (HHE) Daptacel, Hiberix, Kinrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel
Lethargy Pediarix
Limb paralysis Flulaval
Measles inclusion body encephalitis MMR-II, ProQuad
Migraine Engerix-B, Recombivax
Multiple sclerosis (or MS exacerbation)* Engerix-B, Havrix, Recombivax, Twinrix
Myelitis [spinal cord disease] Adacel, Fluarix, Fluzone, Havrix, Recombivax, Twinrix
Neuralgia [nerve pain] Afluria
Neuritis (including brachial, polyneuritis) Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Fluzone, MMR-II, Twinrix
Neuropathy, polyneuropathy Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix
Ocular palsies* [nerve damage] MMR-II, ProQuad
Optic neuritis/neuropathy, papillitis* [inflammation of optic nerve] Engerix-B, Fluzone, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix
Paralysis Engerix-B, Twinrix
Paresis [partial paralysis] Engerix-B, Twinrix
Paresthesia [abnormal skin sensations] Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, IPOL, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Tenivac, Varivax
Partial seizures, seizures Daptacel, Engerix-B, ProQuad
Presyncope [feeling faint] Flucelvax
Radiculopathy [“pinched nerve” in spine] Pneumovax-23, Recombivax
Somnolence Daptacel, DT, Flulaval, Havrix, Hiberix, IPOL, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel, Recombivax
Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis MMR-II, ProQuad
Syncope, vasovagal syncope [fainting] Adacel, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba
Transverse myelitis Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluzone, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Tremors Flulaval, ProQuad
Psychiatric (8) Agitation IPOL, ProQuad, Recombivax
Crying/unusual crying Pediarix
Hypersomnia ProQuad
Insomnia Flulaval, Pediarix
Irritability MMR-II, Recombivax
Nervousness Pediarix, ProQuad
Restlessness Pediarix
Screaming Daptacel, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal (12) Apnea Engerix-B, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13
Asthma, asthma-like symptoms Engerix-B, Fluarix, Twinrix
Bronchospasm Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Twinrix
Cough Fluarix, Fluzone, Infanrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel
Cyanosis* [bluish discoloration, low oxygen] Daptacel, Hiberix, Infanrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Dyspnea [shortness of breath] Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, Pediarix, Quadracel, Twinrix
Dysphonia [vocal abnormalities] Flulaval
Oropharyngeal pain Fluzone
Respiratory distress Fluarix
Rhinorrhea [runny nose] Fluzone
Stridor [high-pitched wheezing] Fluarix
Throat tightness Flulaval, Fluzone
Wheezing Fluzone, ProQuad
Skin/ subcutaneous tissue (22) Acute hemorrhagic edema of infancy MMR-II, ProQuad
Alopecia [hair loss] Engerix-B, Recombivax, Twinrix
Ecchymoses [subcutaneous bleeding] Engerix-B, Recombivax, Twinrix
Eczema Engerix-B, Recombivax, Twinrix
Erythema [skin redness] Fluarix, Infanrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Tdvax
Erythema multiforme [skin disorder] Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Prevnar-13, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Erythema nodosum [nodules or lumps] Engerix-B, Recombivax, Twinrix
Exanthem [widespread rash] Boostrix
Facial swelling/edema Daptacel, Fluarix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Varivax
Hyperhydrosis [abnormal sweating] Flulaval, Havrix, Twinrix
Impetigo ProQuad, Varivax
Lichen planus [inflammatory skin rash] Engerix-B, Twinrix
Panniculitis [disease of fatty layer of skin] MMR-II, ProQuad
Parotitis [salivary gland inflammation] MMR-II, ProQuad
Pruritus [itchy skin] ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Daptacel, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Infanrix, Kinrix, MMR-II, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac
Purpura [red/purple spots] Engerix-B, MMR-II, ProQuad
Rash ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, Quadracel, Tdvax, Tenivac
Skin discoloration Pentacel
Skin induration MMR-II, ProQuad
Stevens-Johnson syndrome [severe skin reaction] Engerix-B, Fluarix, Fluzone, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Varivax
Urticaria* [hives] ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, Quadracel, Recombivax, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Twinrix
Vesiculation MMR-II
Vascular (8) Cerebrovascular accident ProQuad, Varivax
Flushing Flulaval, Fluzone
Henoch-Schönlein purpura [blood vessel inflammation] Boostrix, Fluarix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Varivax
Pallor DT, Flulaval, Hiberix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Petechiae [bleeding capillaries] Pediarix, Recombivax
Polyarteritis nodosa [damaged arteries] Recombivax
Renal vasculitis Afluria
Vasculitis Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Fluzone, Havrix, MMR-II, Recombivax, Twinrix
Urogenital (2) Epididymitis [testicular inflammation] MMR-II, ProQuad
Orchitis [inflammation of the testes] MMR-II, ProQuad
*There are several things to note about the information presented in Table 2. First, while we used the verbatim insert terminology for each disorder and also largely stuck to the disease groupings in the package inserts, we added two categories—allergic and autoimmune disorders—that the inserts surprisingly omit. (The package inserts lump allergic reactions in with “immune system disorders.”) Second, there are a number of disorders that fit in more than one category; in those instances, we have included them (with an asterisk*) in both places (while counting them once). Third, the table only includes those adverse events that manufacturers decided to report in the inserts—but other adverse events are not only possible but likely, due to the widespread problem of underreporting. Notably, none of the package inserts include any mention of prevalent, childhood-onset neurodevelopmental disorders like tics or autism that published, peer-reviewed studies have linked to vaccines."

onawah

21st April 2020, 18:37

FREE—Truth About Vaccines 2020 Goes "Live" 4/22/20 w/ RFKJr.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. | Exclusive Preview of The Truth About Vaccines 2020
Trailer
"The Truth About Vaccines
29.8K subscribers
Here is an exclusive preview of our upcoming docu-series, The Truth About Vaccines 2020.

Our very good friend & health hero, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., shares his personal story of how he became involved in the medical freedom movement. We hope it inspires you to join us in standing up for our constitutional health rights.

If you haven't signed up for our explosive, 9-part docu-series, you can register for FREE, here. ➡️ https://bit.ly/register-free-TTAV-2020

What you will learn in this educational 9-episode series:

*THE HISTORY OF VACCINES*
Vaccination programs are given credit for eradicating some of the most devastating illnesses of the past, but they’re no longer immune to controversy of their own.

*VACCINE RISKS and SAFETY CONCERNS*
Concerns about vaccine injuries, mercury toxicity, and autism have increased substantially in recent years, and public debate is once again heating up.

*FULL LIST of OPTIONS and ALTERNATIVES*
You don’t have to pro- or anti-vaccine anymore. New options are available to guard against serious illness, based on your unique situation and risk factors.

*MANDATORY/FORCED VACCINATION LEGISLATION*
Our health freedoms are being silently trampled on. We must not allow Big Pharma to take away our constitutional right to choose.

*COVID-19 IMPACT*
Is a Coronavirus vaccine coming? Is it necessary? Can we protect ourselves from it naturally? We will address all of these questions.

*...AND SO MUCH MORE*"

Register NOW to watch all 9 episodes of “The Truth About Vaccines” for FREE starting April 22. ➡️ https://bit.ly/register-free-TTAV-2020
M6kduo2eprA

TomKat

27th April 2020, 23:37

Even before the covid roll-out, anti-vaxxers were identified as a Russian-run national security threat in the event of a pandemic in the US:

https://news.yahoo.com/us-warned-threat-anti-vaxxers-103041986.html

onawah

2nd May 2020, 16:20

“The Truth About Vaccines 2020” this weekend. See the free encore presentation. Register here:
https://go2.thetruthaboutvaccines.com/docuseries/replay/?a_bid=aaeb46d7&chan=replay&a_aid=59c186eff2e34
https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/3H8UYIWCtK4K8gHN_mWQ_CsCcEX4BMPuiPbf-d3fKy_LZfHFhDztFewqlW0QlXp6ZZHSkmBv6Zx7bBkYzLYkvZqa9Q4Nrh2HK4zpVxNrIEoqjWN0BnI9yA=s0-d-e1-ft#https://forbiddenknowledgetv.sendlane.com/images/email/yn7FIqS93k.jpg

The History of Vaccines, Smallpox, Vaccine Safety & the Current CDC Schedule

What’s in a Vaccine? Are Vaccines Effective? ... and ... What About Polio?

In Depth Analysis of the MMR and DTaP Vaccines & Vaccinating for the Greater Good

Examining Influenza, the HIB and Pneumococcal Vaccines & Herd Immunity

Considering the HPV and Hepatitis B Vaccines, SIDS & Shaken Baby Syndrome

A Closer Look at the CDC, Chicken Pox and Rotavirus Vaccines & Retroviruses

Natural Immunization, Homeoprophylaxis & Fundamental Freedom of Choice

Censorship & Suppression

W.H.O.’s Not Telling the Truth?

TTAV2020 "Vaccine Roundtable" (Part 1) - Live at NOON ET on Saturday 5/2!

TTAV2020 "Vaccine Roundtable" (Part 2) - Live at NOON ET on Sunday 5/3!

Delight

5th May 2020, 00:03

Brian rose interviewing RFK (https://londonreal.tv/robert-f-kennedy-jr-my-fight-against-mandatory-vaccinations-big-pharma-and-dr-fauci/)

He talks about how he was not keen to get involved in vaccine issue... BUT HE DID!!!!!!!!!!!!

onawah

15th May 2020, 04:35

RFK Jr, Buttar, Wakefield, Mikovits, Tenpenny, Bollinger, Bigtree--Truth About Vaccines II 2020—
Vaccine Roundtable Part 2, Video and Transcript
MAY 14, 2020
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/inflammatory-syndrome-affecting-children-kawasaki-disease-covid-19-or-something-else/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=0eef7980-ab90-41dd-bd03-333dec1fd1a2
If you don't have time for anything else, tune in to RFK Jrs from 1 hour 19 minutes in. OUTSTANDING!! (Though the whole broadcast is outstanding, that is especially so.)
cV_QPwWxOX8

"Thank you to Anne Dachel and Age of Autism for transcribing this for our readers. Anne wrote:

“This was one of the most informative and empowering talks I’ve ever listened to in all the years I’ve been working as an autism advocate. Every person concerned about what the COVID 19 pandemic will do to our medical freedom needs to hear these speakers and learn the truth about what’s coming. There is no walking away from this threat to our liberties.”

May 3, 2020, Panel discussion the COVID 19 crisis and what a vaccine could mean to the American people.

TRANSCRIPT:

Panelists:

Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Dr. Judy Mikovits, Del Bigtree, Ty and Charlene Bollinger, Robert Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, Dr. Rashid Buttar.

Here are excerpts from the discussion.

Charlene: “…the year 2020 was a big deal. … This is the year, if we don’t help people understand this critical issue we may loss our freedoms, and they may be able to come in and try …to force us into these vaccines. But we did not know what we were getting into….

“I was watching Tucker Carlson [Fox, Tucker Carlson Tonight]. He’s actually had Bobby Kennedy on… We couldn’t believe that mainstream media outlet was covering that. We felt like Tucker’s our friend…

“Last night…on Tucker Carlson Tonight … He had a guest and they talked about Operation Wrap Speed, the COVID vaccination where they’re literally going to pass through the trials that they should be doing. They’re going to skip all that safety measures to get to this vaccine. They’re going to have a hundred million ready to go. …

“The guest talked about this as if it’s a good thing, and Tucker Carlson who has interviewed our good friend Bobby Kennedy, …. I was really letdown by the fact that Tucker Carlson allowed that guest to say that and didn’t dig in. …”

5:42 Kennedy: “There’s now eighty separate vaccine projects. Bill Gates has eight of them. Bill Gates is now the biggest vaccine producer in the world, bigger than any other company.

“One of Gates’ vaccines is the Moderna vaccine, which is the first one out of the gate. The Moderna vaccine is a really dangerous human experiment. It’s shockingly reckless. And to particularly go forward without any kind of animal test at all, they went right to phase one human trials. …

“Tony Fauci has arranged for that company, Moderna, which has never produced a vaccine, …which was on the verge of bankruptcy, 1.5 billion dollars in debt, ….

“And Gates, who has been funding it, and Fauci rescued the company from bankruptcy by giving them the first of these projects. The project is an RNA vaccine, which has never been made before.

“What an RNA vaccine does, unlike most vaccines which are injected with an antigen which is a piece of the target virus, a disabled piece, and an adjuvant which shocks the body to increase the immune response. That’s how every other vaccine works.

“This is an experimental technology that has never been done before in history. What is does, it injects a snippet of the virus that carries a genetic code in its RNA that is designed to alter the DNA, the code in every cell in your body to get your body to naturally start producing those antigens.

“It is a form of genetic engineering. It is genetic engineering. It has been condemned by the Geneva Statement because those genetic changes will survive in your sperm and they will live in your children or in your ovaries.

“They are injecting human being with an untested gene-altering technology designed to change the human genome, without having any proof that it actually works. …

“There’s a problem with COVID vaccines that requires that they have to be tested, and that problem is called paradoxical immune enhancement. …

“Here’s what happened. After the SARS epidemic in 2002, there were three SARS epidemics. The first one was a natural one that began in China. There were two that were lab escapees. And that’s not controversial. People acknowledge that.

“After those epidemics the Chinese and western nations all get together and they said we’ve got to develop a vaccine to treat coronavirus, SARS was a kind of coronavirus.

“They got together and they developed about thirty different vaccines, and they chose the four most promising models. They tested them on ferrets which are the animal that is most analogous to human reaction to upper respiratory infection. They’re very similar to humans. They’re very predictive of what’s going to happen in human beings.

“The ferrets developed to all four vaccines an admiral immune response. The scientists thought they hit the jackpot. …

“Vaccines are never tested in the field. The FDA never gives 2,000 people a vaccine and 2,000 people a placebo and says go out in the world and see what happens. That never happens.

“The way vaccines get a license is the promoter of the vaccine, the company, injects a couple thousand people with the vaccine and then they test their blood to see of they develop an antibody response.

“The ferrets developed a picture perfect antibody response, so they all thought they hit the jackpot. Then something horrible happened.

“When those ferrets were later exposed to the wild virus, they all had body wide inflammation in all their organs, and they died.

“The scientists then remembered something. They remembered that in the 1960s, the FDA and NIH had tested an RSV vaccine which is very similar to corona virus. …They had skipped animal studies and they had gone right to humans. They had tested on 35 kids.

“The kids again developed a sterling antibody response, so they thought they hit the jackpot. But when those children were exposed to the wild virus, instead of protecting them against it, the vaccine actually enhanced the pathways of the virus. Two of those kids died. They all became horrendously sick. It became a scandal and they dropped it and never touched it again. …

“The corona virus does something interesting when it provokes the antibody response. There are two kinds of antibodies. There are neutralizing antibodies which are the kind that defend you from disease. There’s another kind of antibody called a binding antibody that actually helps the virus stick to your receptors and it makes it much, much more dangerous. That’s the kind that is produced by the coronavirus vaccines. That was in 2012 and they completely terminated the program.

“Then in 2014 Tony Fauci had developed a dengue vaccine, and in the clinic trials for the dengue vaccine they saw some of the same signals. That actually the people who got the vaccine and then later were exposed got very sick. They glossed over that.

“They gave it to the Philippines, the Philippines gave it to 100,000 kids. Many, many of those kids, when they finally encountered the wild dengue virus, became horrendously sick and 600 of them died.

“The Philippine government today is criminally prosecuting the Philippine health officials who waved that vaccine through. They should have known that Fauci in the clinical trials had seen these signals previously.

“So today, all the people on this panel …the people who’ve been our loudest critics: Peter Hotez, Paul Offit, Ian Lipkin, all of them are vaccine developers, all of them are bullhorns for the vaccine industry, the generals in the mercenary army that has been fighting us for years—All of them are saying IT IS INSANELY DANGEROUS FOR TONY FAUCI TO GO AHEAD WITH THESE TRIALS to inject human beings.

“He started on March 12th injecting human beings in Seattle, Washington, volunteers who I’m sure had no idea that their genes were being permanently altered for generations. There’s no informed consent because I guarantee you Tony Fauci didn’t tell them that.

“He’s testing his vaccine that he put almost a half a billion dollars into, authorized our taxpayer funds going into that, which gives him control of the patent, of half the patent, and Bill Gates’ vaccine. To fast track this very, very dangerous vaccine without animal studies is reckless and I would say is criminal.

14:35 Dr. Tenpenny: “During the period of time that they were doing those dengue vaccine trials, I was following that pretty closely. The thing that is even more scary than what you said, …and you from your legal perspective, I would like you to add to this, is we are now acting underneath the 2005 Prep Act ..that stand for Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act that was tacked onto the tail end of a defense appropriation bill at 11:20 at night on Friday night December 17th after everybody in the House had already signed off and gone home. The Senate never read it. They passed it. Even your uncle Ted Kennedy said afterwards, ‘We judge how well the pharmaceutical company usually wins around here, and they usually get big wins, but they’ve never gotten a win this big.’

“And you can’t find any of those documents now. I wrote my book Fowl…about the bird flu, and all of that is in my book. I’ve captured that, and if you try to go find that stuff on the Internet now, …all of it has been scrubbed.

“What does the Prep Act actually do? It gives liability immunity for any covered countermeasure that’s made while it’s in place. You can’t sue them. The only way you can sue them if a bunch of people get injured or killed is that you have to go to the U.S. Attorney General and prove willful misconduct, that they were going to intentionally going to create a product intentionally to harm you or kill you. Good luck with that.

“Alex Azar, our great HHS Secretary, instituted the Prep Act on February 4th, he put it in there, and he put it into the Federal Register on March 17th, so we are operating under that now. …”

16:43 Kennedy: “Bill Gates said from the beginning he was not going to allow any of his vaccines to be used unless he got full immunity from all from all the governments in all the countries that use his vaccine because he knows he’s going to kill a lot of people. He himself said this vaccine is only going to be tested on at most only a thousand people.”

“What if there’s an injury rate of one in 10,000? You won’t see that if you test a thousand people. You will never see it.

“Let’s say it’s a death rate of one in 10,000. Very, very possible, and you will never see it. If you give that vaccine to seven billion people, which is what he’s intending, that means the 700,000 people are going to die from it.

“Ultimately you will get to a level where with other injuries etc. that you’re causing more problems than you’re averting. It’s very, very possible.

“If you don’t test it on animals, you go right to humans and you test a thousand humans, plus there’s no placebo, but they don’t care. They’re under the Prep Act, complete, blanket immunity from liability.

“They could end up killing every person they give this to in Seattle. What do they care? It’s a gamble for them because if that Moderna vaccine works Gates is going to make a billion dollars. And if it doesn’t work, he’s got eight others in the pipeline. He’ll just say that was a bad experiment.

“The reason they’re going forward so quickly with that is because there’s no biological material. You don’t have to manufacture anything. With other vaccines you have to start a factory, you have to grow the vaccine… It’s a long process, but with the Moderna vaccine your body becomes the factory because you’re altering the human DNA so that it will produce the antibody.

“They don’t have to build any factory. They just have to take little snippets of the RNA and inject them into human beings and let you do all the work. They can fast track it overnight. They can literally get it to market within months, and that’s what they did. Within weeks, all they needed was that genetic code from the Chinese and they can make this RNA virus.

“It’s never proven in any model, and the company that’s making it has never brought a product to market. They’ve never been through phrase three trials and they were on the edge of bankruptcy.

“It is really, really, really crazy. How willing they are to play God. …Gates…believes is up there and he can experiment with lesser human beings. If there’s collateral damage, then so be it. He’s well-intentioned, and he’s going to save the world….”

20:48 Dr. Buttar:”When you introduce RNA into the body, the implications aren’t something that will be necessarily seen in a week or in a month. It could be a year or two years and then the generational component, because now it’s actually changing the genetic code, and it’s going to be something that’s going to stay consistent and continue to propagate generation to generation. …”

21:18 Bigtree; “One of the studies we were looking at, I believe it was the Moderna study, they are forbidding sexual intercourse without full protection, meaning they are so concerned. There can be no pregnancy allowed by anybody involved in this study, meaning they are so concerned that they may have a generational problem…

“I think one of my biggest concerns when I talk about this, I think Bobby, you put it perfectly, I believe this is the God vaccine. We’re talking about no longer letting the body react… We’re talking about messaging RNA. We’re talking about putting in manmade messages that go to all of your cells to make the cell think it’s getting information from the DNA…

“ Here’s my biggest concern. We do know that they are all focused on this antibody immune enhancement issue that you very well described. The animals all died in the trials and now we’re going on to human beings.

“This is what Hotez sat before Congress and talked about. Even Tony Fauci said on television there is a concern that this vaccine could make people more sick. We don’t want to do that. But the most troubling thing about it that most people don’t understand is how little these virologists know about how a vaccine works, and even more so, what Dr. Peter Hotez said. We don’t know why antibody immune enhancement happens. We don’t know what’s causing it.

“So my concern is that in these small test groups that they’re doing… what happens if let’s say … one of these vaccines gets to one of these small trials and for some reason antibody immune enhancement doesn’t happen. What I want to say is that since the beginning of mankind there’s never been a bacteria or a virus outbreak that took out the species.

“There’s something about nature and our relationship to it that we survive. We even get stronger as we go along. We’re talking about a vaccine that’s being discussed by world leaders, being driven by Bill Gates saying everyone in the world is going to get this vaccine.

“Can you imagine a vaccine that gets to the trials, looks like it’s safe…? Their dream is to vaccinate everyone in the world. And then all of a sudden, maybe the strain that they design the vaccine around avoid that problem, but all of a sudden there’s a mutation …gets out and starts triggering antibody immune enhancement.

“Now all of a sudden, we’re not watching .1 percent of the people die, .3 percent or 10 percent. You could talk about a scenario with 30 percent of those coming in contact with what would have been a cold, like those ferrets, their bodies are over reacting to this and they’re having complete organ failure and shutdown.

“You could honestly be looking at a vaccine for the first time that has the potential to eradicate our species. That is how dangerous this vaccine is.

“…I’ve been interviewed like crazy. I say of all the times we have never put two of the most dangerous words together known to man, RUSHED and SCIENCE, in the same sentence, is the most dangerous statement that could ever be made. And we’re allowing that statement to be made on one of the most dangerous approaches to vaccines there has ever been.

“This is the message that everyone really needs to share with everyone they know. This is not a joke. …This thing is coming for us. I can’t imagine anything more ridiculous than a life-threatening vaccine that has an issue that they don’t even understand why it happens for an illness that kills .1 to .3 percent of the world.”

25:43 Kennedy: “CNN did a really interesting article that appeared this morning about Moderna. …In the last couple of paragraphs they interviewed two of the former officials, people that worked at Moderna till 2018 and one of them was, I think, the CEO of the company.

“He said, I was shocked when I read that the federal government had given that company $438 million. I was shocked.

“The other guy, and he said, I don’t know what they were thinking of. That’s what he said. This is a guy who worked at the company.

“The other guy was their chief chemist, the head of all their chemistry department, …He said, there is nothing what could make me put that vaccine in my body.”

27:00 Dr. Wakefield: “There’s an extraordinary interview by Peter Aaby . Peter Aaby I’ve known for many years, a very, very good vaccinologist, works for a vaccine maker… He’s worked in West Africa for most of his professional life. He said in that interview, we think we know what our vaccines are doing, we don’t.

“He’s a very, very honest man and he went up against the system and then demonstrated looking at the non-specific effects of vaccines. The DTP vaccine had killed more children in West Africa than it had saved from the target diseases… And that is the most widely used vaccine historically in the world.

“An astonishing admission and it was completely ignored. The only response from authorities was to remove his funding. We really live in an era when we know so little and we assume so much.

“The same happened with pertussis. I remember that Salzberg [Forbes] wrote an article blaming anti-vaxxers for the outbreaks of whooping cough. There was an admission by Christopher Gill from Boston University [Dept of Global Health] saying that we’ve made assumptions upon assumptions. We didn’t understand how pertussis interacted with the human immune system. We’re in the embarrassing position of having to admit that we may have made some serious mistakes.

“That’s the truth. It’s not the anti-vaxxers. It’s the hubris as someone pointed out of the pharmaceutical industry and the vaccinologists. The idea that you can exert dominion, you can mutate, you can adapt, you can change these things… You can assume dominion over organisms…. They mutate at an extraordinary rate because they are destined to survive. They will survive….”

29:30 Dr. Tenpenny: “Andy, years ago at a conference…you said, ‘The human race has evolved because of its relationship with microbes, not in spite of it.’

“That has resonated with me and I’ve used that a lot, and I’ve always given you credit. … It’s so true. …

“Suddenly we’ve got mandatory vaccination right here in people’s faces that first of all never even heard of it, and second of all never gave it any thought. Perhaps this is going to give some clarity and some eye-opening to the whole concept of the germ theory too. That it’s really about the terrain, and vaccinating me doesn’t keep you from getting sick. So maybe there will even be some changes in that. … Maybe people will start to understand our relationship with microbes, and it’s not all bad.”

30: 50 Dr. Wakefield: “I think that the people who have been telling that story from whatever part of the spectrum of biology that they come from… Those who have been telling that story as the truth emerges are the ones that in the future are going to be trusted by the people. …”

31:42: Dr. Buttar: “What everybody is talking about, I think the most crucial component is that…it’s now being censored. …That’s the question we should be asking, why is this being censored. It was after your uncle was assassinated, Bobby, that term ‘conspiracy theory’ was coined to throw people off from asking those key questions.

“One of the questions we should be asking …is why is information regarding this and a certain type of technology being censored. That in itself sheds light on what’s going on. …To me one of the most important is, why is information being censored?…”

35:40 Dr. Wakefield: “Del gave an outstanding interview in the new movie on this issue of censorship, and it’s something that’s really perplexed us in terms of releasing the movie. …

“As all these traditional platforms are disappearing for the kind of story we’re telling, even those two doctors from mainstream medicine in southern California talking about the facts of COVID the other day, now censored, extraordinary level of censorship, is that we are going out on a new platform, a censorship free platform, SPHIR.IO which provides a specific platform for this very conversation, this growing community.

“I would strongly recommend to people that we focus on a platform such as this to regroup …to have a censorship free environment in which people can disseminate this kind of information. …

36:36 Charlene: “The biggest lobby… is not oil, it’s actually the pharmaceutical companies. They spend more money buying off our lawmakers, our politicians, than any other lobby in D.C. …

“I think that people are finding us and they’re learning how to find us. …They took us off Pinterest completely because we told the truth about vaccines and we had a pretty big presence there.

“We have close to 2,000,000 collectively on Facebook. They’ve told us we cannot even run a sponsored ad to reach new people with the opportunity to learn the truth about vaccines because what we talk about does not marry into their talking points that vaccines are safe and effective….

“We’re all having issues reaching the people of the world in the conventional ways that we have done. Google took us completely down. …”

42:50 Dr. Tenpenny: “The pro vaccine people, if they really believed what they’re talking about and they really have faith in what they’re doing and they trust their science, they’re missing a great opportunity to put all of us on the stage together somewhere.

“Wouldn’t Peter Hotez and Paul Offit just love to put the heel of their boot on the throat of Sherri Tenpenny and just crush her publicly in front of everybody?…

“Wouldn’t they love to have the opportunity to publicly embarrass us and shame us because they’re so right and we’re so wrong? It should speak volumes to people who hear that.”

43:35 Dr. Buttar: “In 2006 or 7 I was in Verona, Italy. I was invited by the government of Italy… I was one of the keynote speakers. I had the second to the last lecture as a keynote and the other person… it was Offit.

“What happened, it was beautiful actually because he started showing some of my slides and half-truths to the point that I got agitated. There were three doctors that had to come and hold me back. I was so livid. It was going to be a physical altercation.

“Some woman stood up in the audience and started yelling in Italian. …She’s screaming and Offit had this look on his face. …She was screaming at him.

“The bottom line was one of the neurologist there had started using our protocol for their child who was 12 years old at the time. After six months the child had started to speak and no longer had to wear diapers.

“She was cursing Offit and he didn’t know what was being said. He had a smile on his face until he put on headphones, …people started clapping and I realized that the truth will be known. …

“I realized they don’t want the opportunity to debate us one-on-one. …

“Vaccines are designed by the way our bodies work, to create immunity. Great concept. …But now you’ve got to start introducing things into the body under the pretense of public safety that suppressing the immune system and giving additional things that are immuno-suppressive and are irritating the immune system …it defies all logic.

“Why are we doing this? I’m not against vaccinations, if you can make something that’s not going to hurt a person. But to make something that’s going to hurt a person more than the original disease that they’re worried about? It’s just madness.”

49:24 Kennedy: “I’m all for vaccines if they can make them safe and effective. I’ve never seen it happen before. …

“Part of my job is to try and bring in people into this movement who are not part of the choir. …

“You don’t build a movement starting from a position, I hate all vaccines; all vaccines are bad. I always start by telling audiences I’m for vaccines, never for mandatory vaccines.

“If there’s a vaccine that’s good for me, it has no bad side effects, and does everything that it’s advertised to do. …I would of course take that vaccine. I just haven’t seen it happen.

“One of the primary tools of our opponents is to characterize us all as anti-vax. The mainstream of our country and of the world believes all the propaganda about vaccines.

“If the New York Times and CNN can convince someone that you’re anti-vax, they then have a license to shut you up and to marginalize you and to discredit you and to not listen to what you are saying.

“I try to open up all the opportunities and possibilities for people to listen to me. ..

“I’m against bad science. I’m for good science. I’m for robust science and for honest regulators. We don’t have any of those things.

“I’m all for good vaccines that are effective and safe, if they can ever be made. The problem is nobody’s ever done it yet.”

52:02 Bigtree: “… One of our biggest complaints is that the pro vaxxers keep saying the science is settled. …That’s the least scientific statement you can possibly make. That’s why I don’t say I’m anti vaccine. That’s the same as saying my science is settled, nothing will ever happen in the future that could change my mind. That makes you an idiot, and that makes you unscientific.

“…I’m not anti-science. I’m pro science… I think it’s perfectly noble to protect people who are at acute risk from COVID 19 with a vaccine. Here’s my problem. My problem is the vaccine should be designed for people that need it. …

“Ninety-five percent of the people will have no issue with this illness whatsoever. They’re going to have a robust immune reaction …

“Make the product for those that need it. What we cannot allow any longer is this idea that science only knows how to make a product that ninety-five percent of healthy people can take but not the immune suppressed, not those that are in danger. That is such an obvious advertising marketing scheme, you’ve got to hand it to them. …They want the rest of us …to take a product we don’t need….

“Go ahead, make the vaccine. You are capable. I am so sure that the scientists of the world and all the funding coming from Bill Gates, you are completely capable of making a product for that tiny percentage of people that really do need it….”

55:46 Dr Buttar: “I want to say one thing and that is I have publicly stated that I will go anywhere on the planet, no matter how rampant the issue is. I will shake their hand, I will hug them, and if she’s good-looking enough, I’ll even kiss her. I have no problem getting that exposure. …”

55:50 Charlene: “That’s the point of our discussion right now. We want to learn the truth about vaccines, the truth about COVID. What’s really going on. In a free society we ought to be afforded the right to speak and to be heard, to dialogue back and forth. There are talking points that keep people triggered from even listening to us because the term anti vax is somewhat like the term conspiracy theorist. …”

Next the panelists each updated what they’re currently doing.

58:49 Dr. Wakefield: “…The new film comes out in a few weeks time. …It’s called 1986 The Act, and it goes right to the core of the very problems we’ve been discussing. How did this come to pass? What was the catalyst that really drove this pro vaccine agenda worldwide and the push for mandates?

“It was in large part the 1986 act signed into law by Ronald Reagan which gave liability protection to the vaccine makers for damage done by their vaccines. At the time it was a limited liability. It since has become liability for all damage done by all vaccines. …

“What it did was give the pharmaceutical industry the perfect business model of a mandatory market and no liability and that was a profit machine. That profit machine allowed them to buy the politicians, the media, to buy public opinion, and to buy the medical profession. That has made them extremely powerful.

“What circumvents the 1986 Act is fraud. If they can be shown to have committed fraud, they deliberately put people in harm’s way, if they knew they could make vaccines safer and they chose not to and hid that fact, then they’re liable. One way of bringing this act to its knees and forcing revision or repeal is to expose that fraud.

“In my opinion, what the film reveals is premeditated, first degree murder. …

“I urge people to watch it.”

1:01:50 Dr. Mikovits: “You can find us promoting Plague of Corruption, which is what COVID 19 is and what the data in that book support, …

“The subtitle is called Restoring Faith in the Promise of Science. There is promise in science, and if we can show that many, many, many good doctors, good scientists, and it’s only the old boys’ corrupt network that has perpetrated this COVID 19, the largest fraud that is small amount that need to go.

“We can reorganize, shut down, start over again with true public health agencies to protect public health.

“We’ll be at Autism One, which this year is virtual…

Dr. Mikovits also talked about what she had gone through being a whistleblower.

“…How bad our scientific community is, not only with censorship, but with propaganda masquerading as science as they misinterpret data in order to cover up from this ‘plague of corruption.’ …

“Never again will something like William Thompson and the data burning party happen. We’ve got all the data, and the Attorney General has had it on a hard drive since 2015. So we know the FBI, the Attorney General are fully complicit. They know exactly what happened They’re part and parcel to COVID 19 and this plague of corruption. …”

1:12:15 Del Bigtree: “First of all, you can always find me at the Highwire.com of course. I’m doing a weekly talk show, my third year now. I’ve done over 160 episodes of The Highwire with Del Bigtree…

“Of course my nonprofit website is ICanDecide.org, if you want to read about the lawsuits. …I really believe that this is a time of hope. I think we really need to look at this a different way. …Fear is what they’re trying to sell us. … Know that we are powerful. Our bodies are beating this, whether it’s a manmade virus or it’s a virus out of Wuhan, it doesn’t matter. We are amazingly designed….

“The Highwire has grown 25 times, our viewership has increased in eight weeks. We’ve gone from hundreds of thousands of views to millions of views with every form of censorship taking place on our show. …“It’s one person handing it and sharing it to the next person. …

“We all have to do our part. It’s time to come together and take back the world. …”

1:19:20 Kennedy: “I want to share my gratitude …this is such an extraordinary group. I’m so glad I got to sit here with you guys because these people are my friends…

“Children’s Health Defense now is focusing on information, …getting the information, weaponizing it and handing it to our followers in a form that they can use to change the pharmaceutical paradigm.

“The pharmaceutical companies have subverted our democracy. They are victimizing our children They have captured the agencies that are supposed to protect American citizens from powerful industries. They have corrupted the political process. They have subverted the press.

“They are using this pandemic, some people call it a ‘plandemic’ because it feels so much like there was a plan behind it, to tighten the noose on us and to turn America into a surveillance state where people, because they’re scared of a virus, will accept these intrusions on their liberties, on their civil rights. …

“They’re turning us into production units and consuming entities. They can monitor us anytime. …

“5G is not about bringing you quicker downloads for your video games or for your movies. It’s about surveillance and control. It’s about taking all the data from your devices …so they know what you’re doing, what you’re buying, everything about you. That data is the new oil rush of the 21st century. …

“Gates has a chip that will turn on and off a woman’s menstrual process so she can and cannot have babies. …Every part of our lives is now going to be subject to control.

“This disease [COVID] is about engineering compliance. It’s about training us to do what we’re told, to not go to the beach unless we’re told, to not kiss our girlfriend unless we’re given permission.

“The other day in Malibu police were out on the beach giving thousand dollar tickets to surfers for using the ocean, and people are putting up with this. And when they get this 5G system in place you won’t even see that because they’ll know when you are at the beach by looking at your cell phone, by looking at your GPS, … and they’ll just withdraw one thousand dollars from your payroll account with cryto currency.

“They’re trying to get rid of all the money. That’s one of Gates’ things, to get rid of the cash economy. That way they can monitor and scrutinize every transaction that you make, and if they don’t like you, if you displease them, they can shut it all off.

“We need to understand that is what’s happening here. They are going to rob us not only of our democracy, our liberties, but they’re going to rob us of our souls.

“They’re going to inject us with the medicines that they want and they’re going to charge us for the diseases that they give us.

“They’re going to control our populations, they’re going to control our movements, control every part of our lives. If you are not part of this battle, then you are lost.

“We are the only things that are left for all the things that we value in our lives, all of the things that our country stood for. This is it. And what we’re doing at CHD is we’re suing them. We’re using the last instruments of our democracy that are left.

“…The courts are one of the few places that are left where we can still make a difference, where we can still change policy. They’ve neutralized and co-opted and infiltrated all of the other institutions of our democracy that are supposed to stand between a vulnerable little child and a greedy corporation. They’re gone …

“We have a very, very important job which is to inform our public, to organize our public to strategize with each other… and I’m so grateful that the people that I’m working with …are all the major leaders here…

“We are in the last battle. This is the apocalypse. We are fighting for the salvation of humanity. We all knew this was coming at some point. I never believed it would come in my lifetime, but here it is. We are the happy few, the band of brothers and sisters. We know what our job is in this life. We know that we’re part of this battle. We have to fight and we have to die with our boots on if necessary. Everybody here, I’m confident, knows what their duty is and is going to do that duty, and I’m going to be beside you when you do it. I know all of you are going to be beside me.”

1:31:42 Dr. Tenpenny: “When you look at this whole situation and this whole shutdown, maybe God put the entire world on stop for right now and we can take advantage of that time. …

“And thirdly and most importantly get your spiritual house in order. We’ve got some pretty big battles coming up. We can be as optimistic or as pessimistic as we want to be about what we think the next three to six years is.

“Most of us that are Christians kind of know what the end game is. We know what the end of the story is, and in between now and then, whether it’s six months, six years, sixteen years, however long it is, get your spiritual house in order. God put you in full stop so that you can get your spiritual house in order. What does that means to you? How does that really resonate with you? If you’ve never taken the time to pray, you haven’t had time to do it, now you’ve got the time….

“If people want to find out more about me personally…you can go to drtenpenny.com … and vaxxter.com …

“I’ve been doing this for twenty years and more than 40,000 hours, and I’m one of the physicians on the team that has been able to stand up and say not only no, but hell no, we’re not doing this….

1:41:48 Dr. Buttar: “Fear is an illusion. It exists only in our mind and this is one of the places where they’re trying to take humanity down is from this fear aspect. Fear is not real. Danger is real, but fear is not. …

“What they are painting now is that this COVID 19, the coronavirus is the danger and they’re trying to make you fearful of it whereas in fact the danger is not the coronavirus. The danger is exactly what Bobby talked about, what Del talked about, what Andy talked about… That’s the danger, taking away our rights, our fundamental autonomy over our own bodies, over our own children.

“It is a fight for humanity…if I don’t fight, the rest of us don’t fight, my children will not have children. That’s what motivates me. …

“I believe that we are writing history here and we will be remembered. …

“If you go to AskDrButtar.com/ttav …follow the links, you will get to the part where you can access the dashboard and you’ll be able to see all these videos and you can download them. …It’s not going to cost you a single dime. …

“The most important thing we can do is empower people with knowledge because once you’ve been empowered, nobody can victimize you. Then it doesn’t make any difference what they try to do because now you know what the facts are, you know where the real danger is, and you won’t be fearful anymore.” "

onawah

15th May 2020, 04:49

Fifty Years: An M.D.’s Insights on Childhood Epidemics
MAY 14, 2020
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/fifty-years-an-m-d-s-insights-on-childhood-epidemics/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=0eef7980-ab90-41dd-bd03-333dec1fd1a2

Guest Editorial by Michael Godfrey M.D., B.S. Tauranga, New Zealand

"I am a semi-retired 82-year-old MD having graduated at London University, England in 1963. After 7 years working in British hospitals, I took up a family medical practice in New Zealand where I met many new patients for the first time. I first began to observe a difference between the elderly and their then middle-aged children. The elderly had far fewer chronic illnesses until arthritis and cardio-vascular problems developed in their later years. Contrasting this, the next generation tended to develop chronic illnesses in their 40s. Notably, many of those elderly had had full dentures from early adulthood due to the poverty and poor nutrition in the 1920-30 decades. However, their children were exposed to the State-funded school dentistry in the 50-70 decades with extensive dental amalgam fillings. A 1968 Health Department survey indeed confirmed that at that time 21-year-olds had an average of 16 fillings with 15-year-old teenagers having 13. Remarkably, this dropped to an average of 8 within a year following a directive to dental nurses in 1976 to essentially only drill teeth showing actual decay.

Over the following 20 years, I correctly confirmed underlying chronic mercury toxicity in over 800 patients. This was subsequently confirmed by an independent randomized investigation published in 1999. I co-authored a dental mercury association with senile dementia (J. Alz. Dis. 2003).

In association with a colleague I provided a health questionnaire to several hundred mothers and confirmed a significant difference in tonsillitis, glue ear, allergies, asthma and even neurological problems between vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Over the first 15 years of family medicine I also became disillusioned in the established methods of general practice. I was just fixing symptoms without doing much to prevent illness. This was most noticeable in children. I discovered the immediate benefits of homeopathy using a home kit supplied by a local manufacturer. These tended to be more effective than antibiotics for the common upper respiratory infections and discharging ears. I also started to realize by the late 1980s that these problems frequently developed within weeks of vaccinations. In association with a colleague I provided a health questionnaire to several hundred mothers and confirmed a significant difference in tonsillitis, glue ear, allergies, asthma and even neurological problems between vaccinated and unvaccinated children. By this time, I was also being approached by parents concerned at the risks of vaccination. They tended to either have seen a permanent serious adverse reaction in their first child or seen it in a friend’s child. Autistic children suddenly started to appear in the 1990s and a pediatric colleague at the Cleveland Clinic commented after he had retired 10 years ago, that he never saw a single autistic child in the 1960s but by the late 1980s he was devastated by seeing them on a daily basis.

My daughters were given the standard DPT vaccines in the 70s but following my observations, both mothers decided not to vaccinate their 5 children preferring to help them through the usual childhood infections with vitamin C and homeopathy. They had few problems, all survived and are healthy. One of my Grand-daughters now has a 5-year and a 2-year-old daughter with both appearing remarkably healthy and a joy to their Grandparents. Neither have been vaccinated.

It has been my observation that whilst we have generally been exposed to some increased microwave and other pollution, there has only been one obvious change in children’s environments during the past 40 years that could medically explain the real pandemic of their chronic multi-faceted ill-health. This has to be the inordinate increase in vaccines together with previously excessive mercury and a now aluminum adjuvants at levels that far exceed normally permitted levels."

Bo Atkinson

15th May 2020, 10:42

Freedom from unusual punishment (covdiot test jabs).

South Dakota Considers First State Bill To Outlaw All Vaccine AND Medical Mandates
South Dakota Migration
Will there be a medical refugee migration to South Dakota?
by Ginger Taylor

Who owns your body?

A growing number of legislators in South Dakota believe you do.

They have introduced a bill to not only end vaccine mandates in the state, but all future medical mandates that my be introduced in generations to come.

One hundred and fifteen years ago this month, the US Supreme Court made a decision that because there was a deadly smallpox epidemic, the City of Cambridge, Massachusetts was allowed to charge a pastor five dollars to opt out of a city wide vaccine mandate. The law didn't apply to children.

That precedent has been the basis for the mandate of dozens of now liability-free vaccines for children and adults, where no epidemic (or even one case) exists, at the costs of thousands, or even hundred of thousands, per year to opt out. It is even the basis on which the Supreme Court ruled that women can be force sterilized, for the good of themselves and society, of course.

Bad precedent, plus a century, has resulted in the legalization of actual war crimes.

The current vaccine mandate enforcement drive by Merck and Friends has driven our community, and those who never questioned vaccines before now, back to a basic question at hand here.

WHO OWNS YOUR BODY?

The knee jerk reaction , and normal human response for Americans is, "I do."

But that is not what most governments believes. Even under our Constitution of individual liberties, governments strive to control even your medical choices, and if they can't, they will find a reason to justify it, and the means to carry out their will.

In 21st century America, there are no deadly epidemics of communicable disease, despite the fact that we are subject to constant fear campaigns that one is coming. In fact no such event has happened in my lifetime. If the fear mongers want to scare you into fearing deadly epidemics, they have to go back more than a hundred years. So the circumstances for the justification of the government's actions in Jacobson v. Massachusetts exist only in the history books.

So in this age of medical tech, including vaccines, that most people want, why do mandates still exist? And if Jacobson can justify the sexual mutilation of women, then what else can it justify as medical technology progresses over the next century and beyond?

What new medical interventions and body tech will The Gates Foundation invent and convince (bribe) governments and NGOs to force people into utilizing? And where will the battle to end coerced "medical care" begin.

I submit to you that it has begun in South Dakota. Today.

South Dakota House Majority Leader, Representative Lee Qualm (R), has introduced HB 1235 An Act to Revise Provisions Regarding Immunizations.

The bill repeals ALL vaccine mandates in the State.

South Dakota would be the first US state to have no vaccine mandates at all, joining other governments like the UK, Japan and Canada, in uncoerced vaccine decision making.

But the bill goes even further. IT ENDS MEDICAL MANDATES ALL TOGETHER. It adds new law that reads:

"Section 5. That a NEW SECTION be added:

334-22-6.1. Discrimination-Immunization

Every person has the inalienable right to bodily integrity, free from any threat or compulsion that the person accepts any medical intervention, including immunization. No person may be discriminated against for refusal to accept an unwanted medical intervention, including immunization."

The State of South Dakota would function under the truth that YOU OWN YOUR BODY, and codifies into law that YOU make our own medical decisions. And no one can coerce your choices or discriminate against you because of them.

This is the real conversation that we should be having now. Begging the government not to take away our right to bodily integrity, or trying to claw back religious and philosophical exemptions that give us "loopholes" that "allow" us to make our own decisions about our own bodies is becoming an outdated conversation that is based on a lie. The lie that we have no right to bodily integrity in the first place, and government is doing us a favor by giving us even a medical exemption.

Cambridge, and the turn of the 20th century courts didn't care that Pastor Jacobson protested the violation of his body (and his bank account) based on his arguments that vaccines were not safe, that both he and his son had previous vaccine reactions (Jacobson himself was injured in childhood) and they violated his religious conscience. SCOTUS didn't care that Carrie Buck was a woman of sound mind who wanted to retain her ability to have children after she was raped and impregnated by a family member.

They declared her intellectually disabled, an "imbecile," even though there was never any evidence that she had any disability. They then forced her to be sterilized.

"Carrie Buck 'is the probable potential parent of socially inadequate offspring, likewise afflicted, that she may be sexually sterilized without detriment to her general health and that her welfare and that of society will be promoted by her sterilization"

The state did, of course, have a stated compelling interest, as they always do, when they seek to violate the civil rights of Americans. This was it:

"in order to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 , 25 S. Ct. 358, 3 Ann. Cas. 765. Three generations of imbeciles are enough."

And that justification was based on the existence of vaccine mandates.

This is dead thinking. It is unconscionable in the 21st century that such logic is allowed to stand in the law books, but Buck v. Bell is still law, as Jacobson is still law.

South Dakota will now consider the rejection of the lie that you do not own your body, the laws that can allow the state to do what it wants with your body.

It is time for America to decide who owns a person's medical choices. Is it the state, or the person in the body who must live (or die) with the consequences of those medical choices?

I urge you to change the conversation in your state. Take the SD bill to your legislators, tell them about Henning Jacobson and Carrie Buck, and ask them who they think owns your medical choices.

Because if governments have the right to coerce vaccination for Henning Jacobson, they also have the right to remove Carrie Buck's reproductive organs. And yours.

Who owns your body?

https://www.ageofautism.com/2020/02/south-dakota-considers-first-state-bill-to-outlaw-all-vaccine-and-medical-mandates.html?fbclid=IwAR3obVTcq925NiMk7td9COaQU8PTaF0f23MgLAxfabvo-SWSOGD8Pw8LfP0

norman

24th May 2020, 14:48

Jacobson v Massachusetts

The tip toe snuck this one under the radar a very long time ago . . . . . .

Recently Jason goodman of Crowd Source The Truth interviewed Alan Dershowitz and Dershowitz made some very bold controversial statements…

Dershowitz, a high profile lawyer who has formerly represented president President Trump, OJ Simpson and even Jeffery Epstein amongst other high profile clients, stated you have no constitutional protectuon against being forcibly vaccinated for an infectious disease.

ivejYqnmJvg

onawah

24th May 2020, 16:35

Also see 3 posts starting here: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?40941-Horus-Ra-as-the-Archontic-Alien-Parasite-A-follow-up-interview-with-Maarit&p=1357567&viewfull=1#post1357567 re Dershowitz interview with Del Bigtree

Jacobson v Massachusetts

The tip toe snuck this one under the radar a very long time ago . . . . . .

Recently Jason goodman of Crowd Source The Truth interviewed Alan Dershowitz and Dershowitz made some very bold controversial statements…

Dershowitz, a high profile lawyer who has formerly represented president President Trump, OJ Simpson and even Jeffery Epstein amongst other high profile clients, stated you have no constitutional protectuon against being forcibly vaccinated for an infectious disease.

[

Ernie Nemeth

24th May 2020, 16:55

No problem with that. As soon as they have a safe and effective vaccine, that does not require a death panel to adjudicate the ethical arguments for advocating the use of force with the expectancy of 1 in 10,000 dying from it.

No one can force another to take a chance on their health for the benefit of another, especially when that chance includes death - the thing you are trying to prevent - remember? You are trying to prevent death by trading off another death - totaly not cool since the one forced to take the chance has almost nothing to fear from the illness because they are healthy.

So let's get it straight. What they are advocating is, the healthy should risk their health for the benefit of the unhealthy. Does this make the human family more resilient and healthy? Or less?

onawah

24th May 2020, 19:44

What about Polio?
23,717 views•Premiered May 20, 2020
The Truth About Vaccines
61.2K subscribers
Was the polio vaccine EFFECTIVE at eradicating polio? And what exactly is POLIO? Is it POSSIBLE that many cases of “POLIO” were actually DDT poisoning? Is it POSSIBLE that the decrease in DDT was a contributing factor in the reduction of polio cases? Or are there other factors as well? Is it possible that it only APPEARED that polio was eradicated because they changed the criteria for diagnosing polio? Learn the TRUTH in this eye-opening video!
aNw5SD3txBU

onawah

30th May 2020, 18:39

Not Just Another Petition – Let Your Voice Be Heard Now!
From: Stand for Health Freedom <advocates@standforhealthfreedom.com
5/30/20
https://standforhealthfreedom.com/action/say-no-forced-coronavirus-vaccine/

"Are you ready to give up everything over a virus?
Immense fear of the coronavirus, along with sweeping government-imposed shutdowns and stay-at-home orders, have crippled entire populations. Authorities now say the only way out is a vaccine for all along with 24/7 tracking and surveillance. Bill Gates, a tech billionaire who uses his wealth and status to influence policy, has gone on record saying that life will not return to normal until we can vaccinate the entire global population against COVID-19. Gates has also suggested that the coronavirus vaccine might become part of routine newborn immunizations. To that end, he is pushing for disease surveillance and a vaccine tracking system that might involve embedding vaccination records into our bodies through quantum dot technology.
According to Gates, “normal” may never return to those who refuse vaccination, as the digital vaccination certificate he is pushing for might ultimately be required to participate in society. This includes such things as finding or maintaining employment, renewing a driver’s license, obtaining social services, or traveling domestically or abroad. Immunity certificates, microchipping, forced vaccination and the removal of children from their homes are just a few of the draconian measures being threatened in the wake of COVID-19.

In April, the Rockefeller Foundation released a white paper, “National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan — Strategic Steps to Reopen Our Workplaces and Our Communities,” which calls for testing and tracing all Americans using a national database connected to other health records. The plan sets aside privacy concerns while requiring your immune status to be validated before entering schools, office buildings, places of work, airports, concerts, sport venues and much more. It also suggests that weekly immunity testing should be required as a requisite for entering society.

Mandatory medicine is bad policy, as it removes the right of individuals to opt out of vaccination and other medical interventions should they determine that those interventions are not in their (or their child’s) best interest. Mandating liability-free products, including the impending coronavirus vaccine that will be developed and distributed at “warp speed,” is not only bad policy, it’s reckless. Congress acknowledges that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” in the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. Moreover, a fast-tracked coronavirus vaccine without any long-term safety data renders the men, women and children who receive the vaccine as a part of a mass human experiment, with the only real safety trials coming via the post-marketing surveillance of adverse effects; this goes against medical ethical principles and further demonstrates the need for full informed consent prior to vaccination. That’s the only protocol that will enable people to decide whether they want to submit to an experimental vaccine with an unknown risk profile in order to avoid a virus with an estimated 99% or higher survival rate.

As we get closer to the potential rollout of one of the dozen-plus coronavirus vaccines in development, the big question is will the vaccine that has emphasized “speed over safety” be mandatory? Moreover, will opting out restrict how you can financially provide for your family, where your children can attend school, if you can renew your driver’s license, or if you’re allowed to cross state lines to visit family?

The United States is a country that was built on principles of freedom of choice and personal responsibility: freedom of economy, freedom of education, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to own property and freedom to vote, among other freedoms. There’s no freedom more important than the freedom to choose how you care for yourself and for your children in a manner that aligns with your personal beliefs. The ultimate authority to choose or reject any medical procedure, free from threats or compulsion, lies with the individual. Medical bullying and medical coercion have no place in a free country. The right to decline a medical intervention that can kill or injure you is a basic human right, and that right must be upheld.

As such, the government should not impose medical mandates to seek compliance. Medical mandates perpetuate the idea that individuals lack the moral or intellectual capacity to make sound decisions for themselves and their children, so the state needs to do it for them. Individuals are capable of making responsible health decisions, and those decisions must take a person’s whole health into account. The health of the individual cannot be forsaken in the name of containing a virus. After all, we can only have a healthy society when that society is made up of healthy individuals. Health is a personal right and responsibility. It is not something that we should look to the government to bestow on us or guarantee.

In addition to protecting public safety, elected officials have an obligation to uphold the civil liberties and constitutional rights of their constituents. One cannot be sacrificed or exchanged for the other. Sound public health policy is centered on (1) empowering individuals to take responsibility for their health (2) laying a foundation to make that possible through clean drinking water, clean air, a nutrient-dense food supply and health education programs and (3) ensuring that one person’s health is not sacrificed for others. No one should ever have to be collateral damage in a war against infectious disease.

We are committed to STANDING together to change history by supporting public policies that simultaneously promote individual health, public health and health freedom. Do your part to halt the rise of tyranny and stand for what is and always will be yours — governance over your body and your children."

Sign the petition: https://standforhealthfreedom.com/action/say-no-forced-coronavirus-vaccine/

greybeard

30th May 2020, 19:00

I signed this -- it accepts signatures outwith USA.
Ive @ it on to friends and family.
I got a response immediately.
Thanks onawah
Chris

onawah

3rd June 2020, 20:08

Dangerous nano-particles contaminating many vaccines: groundbreaking study
by Jon Rappoport
June 3, 2020
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/06/03/dangerous-nano-particles-contaminating-many-vaccines/

"“The Lung,” Second Edition, 2014: “Nanoparticles [are] comparable in size to subcellular structures…enabling their ready incorporation into biological systems.”

A 2017 study of 44 types of 15 traditional vaccines, manufactured by leading global companies, has uncovered a very troubling and previously unreported fact:

The vaccines are heavily contaminated with a variety of nanoparticles.

Many of the particles are metals.

We’re talking about traditional vaccines, such as HPV, flu, Swine Flu, Hepatitis B, MMR, DPT, tetanus, etc.

To begin to understand some of the destructive effects of contaminating nanoparticles in vaccines, here is the groundbreaking 2017 study:

International Journal of Vaccines & Vaccination
Volume 4 Issue 1
January 23 2017
New Quality-Control Investigations on Vaccines:
Micro- and Nanocontamination
Antonietta M Gatti and Stefano Montanari

https://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/new-quality-control-investigations-on-vaccines-micro–and-nanocontamination.html

“The analyses carried out show that in all samples checked vaccines contain non biocompatible and bio-persistent foreign bodies which are not declared by the Producers, against which the body reacts in any case. This new investigation represents a new quality control that can be adopted to assess the safety of a vaccine. Our hypothesis is that this contamination is unintentional, since it is probably due to polluted components or procedures of industrial processes (e.g. filtrations) used to produce vaccines…”

Are the study authors leaving the door open to the possibility that the contamination is intentional?

“The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. The inorganic particles identified are neither biocompatible nor biodegradable, that means that they are biopersistent and can induce effects that can become evident either immediately close to injection time or after a certain time from administration. It is important to remember that particles (crystals and not molecules) are bodies foreign to the organism and they behave as such. More in particular, their toxicity is in some respects different from that of the chemical elements composing them, adding to that toxicity…they induce an inflammatory reaction.”

“After being injected, those microparticles, nanoparticles and aggregates can stay around the injection site forming swellings and granulomas…But they can also be carried by the blood circulation, escaping any attempt to guess what will be their final destination…As happens with all foreign bodies, particularly that small, they induce an inflammatory reaction that is chronic because most of those particles cannot be degraded. Furthermore, the protein-corona effect…due to a nano-bio-interaction…can produce organic/inorganic composite particles capable of stimulating the immune system in an undesirable way…It is impossible not to add that particles the size often observed in vaccines can enter cell nuclei and interact with the DNA…”

“In some cases, e.g. as occurs with Iron and some Iron alloys, they can corrode and the corrosion products exert a toxicity affecting the tissues…”

“Given the contaminations we observed in all samples of human-use vaccines, adverse effects after the injection of those vaccines are possible and credible and have the character of randomness, since they depend on where the contaminants are carried by the blood circulation. It is only obvious that similar quantities of these foreign bodies can have a more serious impact on very small organisms like those of children. Their presence in the muscles…could heavily impair the muscle functionality…”

“We come across particles with chemical compositions, similar to those found in the vaccines we analyzed, when we study cases of environmental contamination caused by different pollution sources. In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd as they have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring, for example, when waste is burnt. In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable medicament, let alone in vaccines, more in particular those meant for infants.”

This 2017 study opens up a whole new field: the investigation of nanoparticles in vaccines where none were expected.

Such particles are not medicine in any sense of the word.

Many legal and scientific “experts” assert the State has a right to mandate vaccines and force them on the population. But these contaminating nanoparticles are not vaccines or medicines. Only a lunatic would defend the right of the State to inject them.

Here is another section from the 2017 study. Trade names of vaccines, and compositions of the nanoparticle contaminants are indicated. Take a deep breath and buckle up:

“…further presence of micro-, sub-micro- and nanosized, inorganic, foreign bodies (ranging from 100nm to about ten microns) was identified in all cases [all 44 vaccines], whose presence was not declared in the leaflets delivered in the package of the product…”

“…single particles, cluster of micro- and nanoparticles (less than 100nm) and aggregates…debris of Aluminum, Silicon, Magnesium and Titanium; of Iron, Chromium, Silicon and Calcium particles…arranged in a cluster, and Aluminum-Copper debris…in an aggregate.”

“…the particles are surrounded and embedded in a biological substrate. In all the samples analyzed, we identified particles containing: Lead (Typhym, Cervarix, Agrippal S1, Meningitec, Gardasil) or stainless steel (Mencevax, Infarix Hexa, Cervarix. Anatetall, Focetria, Agrippal S1, Menveo, Prevenar 13, Meningitec, Vaxigrip, Stamaril Pasteur, Repevax and MMRvaxPro).”

“…particles of Tungsten identified in drops of Prevenar and Infarix (Aluminum, Tungsten, Calcium chloride).”

“…singular debris found in Repevax (Silicon, Gold, Silver) and Gardasil (Zirconium).”

“Some metallic particles made of Tungsten or stainless steel were also identified. Other particles containing Zirconium, Hafnium, Strontium and Aluminum (Vivotif, Meningetec); Tungsten, Nickel, Iron (Priorix, Meningetec); Antimony (Menjugate kit); Chromium (Meningetec); Gold or Gold, Zinc (Infarix Hexa, Repevax), or Platinum, Silver, Bismuth, Iron, Chromium (MMRvaxPro) or Lead,Bismuth (Gardasil) or Cerium (Agrippal S1) were also found. The only Tungsten appears in 8/44 vaccines, while Chromium (alone or in alloy with Iron and Nickel) in 25/44. The investigations revealed that some particles are embedded in a biological substrate, probably proteins, endo-toxins and residues of bacteria. As soon as a particle comes in contact with proteic fluids, a nano-bio-interaction…occurs and a ‘protein corona’ is formed…The nano-bio-interaction generates a bigger-sized compound that is not biodegradable and can induce adverse effects, since it is not recognized as self by the body.”

“…examples of these nano-bio-interactions. Aggregates can be seen (stable composite entities) containing particles of Lead in Meningitec… of stainless steel (Iron, Chromium and Nickel…) and of Copper, Zinc and Lead in Cervarix…Similar aggregates, though in different situations (patients suffering from leukemia or cryoglobulinemia), have already been described in literature.”

I’m sure you’ve read official assurances that vaccine-manufacturing problems are “rare.” You can file those pronouncements along with other medical lies.

“I’d like the heavy metal sandwich on rye, please. And instead of serving it on a plate, can you inject it?”

Several vital questions demanding answers spring from the findings of this 2017 study:

Are some of these nanoparticles intentionally placed in vaccines?

Does the standard manufacturing process for traditional vaccines INEVITABLY lead to dangerous and destructive nano-contamination?

New nano-technology is already being employed to create several vaccines—supposedly “improving effectiveness.” In fact, the coming COVID-19 vaccine may be a nano-type. Does this manufacturing process carry with it the unavoidable effect of unleashing a hurricane of nanoparticle contaminants?

How many cases of childhood brain damage and autism can be laid at the door of nanoparticle contamination?

And finally, where are these contaminated vaccines manufactured? The above study did not attempt to discover this. It was outside the scope of the research. It’s common knowledge that, for example, in the case of the US, vaccines or their components, are, in many instances, not produced domestically. Where does this put control of safety? In, say, China, where there have been numerous pharmaceutical scandals connected to contamination of products?

The vaccine establishment does not show the slightest interest in answering any of these questions. They are busy pretending the questions don’t exist.

Trusting the establishment would be suicidal."

onawah

15th June 2020, 06:12

Dr. Meryl Nass: Why Is Protecting COVID-19's Origin so Important?
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
June 14, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/06/14/how-did-coronavirus-originate.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art2ReadMore&cid=20200614Z1&et_cid=DM567259&et_rid=893976435
8p0XZLOJYuc
Transcript: https://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/ExpertInterviewTranscripts/Interview-MerylNass-WhyAreInfluentialVirologistsInsistingontheNaturalOriginofSARSCoV2.pdf

(Many hyperlinks in the article)
"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
The manufactured anthrax crisis of 2001 initiated the PATRIOT Act, one of the most severe compromises of our personal freedoms up to that point. Now, the COVID-19 pandemic is being used to take away even more freedoms
It appears influential virologists are protecting the narrative that SARS-CoV-2 arose naturally, and did not originate from a lab in China or elsewhere, even though their scientific justification for that conclusion is faulty
Strong evidence suggests SARS-CoV-2 cannot be the result of a natural mutation
The National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), under Dr. Anthony Fauci’s leadership, has funded gain-of-function research on coronaviruses for about two decades
Efforts to develop coronavirus vaccines have failed for two decades, as the vaccines tend to cause paradoxical immune enhancement resulting in damaging and lethal cytokine storms

Dr. Meryl Nass is a physician in Ellsworth, Maine, who in previous interviews has helped us understand the unforeseen consequences of mass vaccination — consequences that could end up impacting public health in a very negative way. Here, she discusses what she's been working on for decades, and how it relates to this current pandemic.

An outspoken supporter of health freedom, Nass provided scientifically referenced testimony to the Massachusetts legislature, December 3, 2019, when it was considering legislation to eliminate the religious vaccine exemption. This is now more relevant than ever, considering there is talk, worldwide, about implementing more or less mandatory vaccination against COVID-19. In her December 2019 testimony, Nass pointed out that:1

“There is no crisis (no epidemic of deaths or disabilities) from infectious diseases caused by lack of vaccinations … The elephant in the auditorium today is Pharma profits …

The pharmaceutical industry has undertaken a very ambitious campaign to legislate away vaccine exemptions in the United States and Canada. France, Italy and Germany have rescinded vaccine exemptions too, suggesting the campaign is worldwide …

It has been claimed that vaccines are, by nature, extremely safe. Yet vaccines are usually injected, bypassing all the body’s natural barriers. Even minute contamination or inadequate microbial inactivation can maim or kill … Vaccines have caused many autoimmune disorders, from Guillain-Barre syndrome to narcolepsy …

Vaccines appear safe because the immediate side effects are usually mild and temporary. Serious vaccine side effects often take weeks or months to surface, and by then it is difficult to know what caused them ...

A 2009 European swine flu vaccine (GSK’s Pandemrix) caused over 1,300 cases of severe narcolepsy, mostly in adolescents. This vaccine was linked to narcolepsy because 15 times the usual number of narcolepsy cases suddenly appeared in clinics ...

It should be apparent, but isn’t: Government waivers of vaccine liability discourage manufacturers from ensuring that the vaccines they sell are as safe and effective as possible.

The removal of vaccine exemptions, combined with liability waivers for vaccine side effects and recently loosened standards for licensing vaccines, create a highly toxic mix.”

Nass goes on to cite statistics showing why the claim that draconian laws are required to control the “crisis” of vaccine-preventable diseases is false. She also points out that:

“The bedrock expectation of medical ethics is that patients must give informed consent2 for all medical procedures, including vaccines. Informed consent means that patients must be informed about the procedure, have the right to refuse, and may not be coerced to accept it.

Isn’t withholding an education an extreme form of coercion? Without any discussion of its moral or ethical dimensions by media, medical societies or government officials, the requirement for informed consent for medical procedures, including vaccinations, vanishes in the blink of an eye when patients are not allowed the right to refuse.”Anthrax
In 1992, Nass published a paper3 identifying the 1978-1980 Zimbabwe anthrax outbreak as a case of biological warfare. In 2011, I also interviewed her about the 2001 false flag anthrax attack in the U.S., on the heels of 9/11, and the dangers of the anthrax vaccine.

That manufactured crisis initiated the PATRIOT Act, one of the most severe compromises of our personal freedoms up to that point. Now, it appears they’re using the COVID-19 pandemic to take away even more freedoms.

There's strong evidence that this is precisely what's going on. Early in the interview, Nass summarizes our earlier discussion about the anthrax attack, so for a refresher, listen to the interview or read through the transcript. That attack, however, is also what allowed government funds to be allocated toward even more biological warfare research. She explains:

“Congress appropriated a lot of money for bio-terrorism, which is conjoined with pandemic planning. So, the same pot of money that goes into pandemics goes into Biological Defense. Much of it is duly used for research performed in high containment, BSL-3 and BSL-4 labs.

We don't call it biological warfare, but when you're designing pathogens to be more virulent than the originals in nature … essentially biological warfare research gets done. Things are called biological warfare if the intent is to create a weapon. It’s called biological defense if the intent is to design a bad bug so you can come up with defenses against that bug.

What has happened is that a lot of money was spent to develop new high containment labs — many, many more high containment labs … about $6.5 billion a year since 2001 has been designated for this biodefense. So, what we wound up with is hundreds of biodefense labs that have to be used and thousands, possibly 15,000, newly trained bio-defense researchers.

So, now we have cadres of people who are experts in coronaviruses or avian flu viruses, Ebola, Lassa, et cetera. And what most of that money … has been spent on, has been researching these pathogens. Even though the money was supposed to be spent on developing countermeasures and stockpiling countermeasures, to a great extent that did not happen …

As a result, we know a lot about highly virulent coronaviruses that have been created in labs around the world as well as in the U.S. and China, and we have absolutely no countermeasures that have been developed for coronavirus.”

Where Did SARS-CoV-2 Originate?
“Like everybody else, I wondered whether this was a natural jump from a bat or some other animal to humans and scratched my head about it,” Nass says. While she’s not a virologist, she does have a three-decade background in biological warfare and is aware of what’s been created in the past, what it takes, where they may be made, and how it has been done.

“So, I remained curious. Then on February 19 online, and in the March 7 print edition, a group of scientists had a "Correspondence" published in The Lancet, and it was a very curious piece to me. It didn't make sense.

And these were very prominent signatories, including the former head of the National Science Foundation, one of the former top people at CDC, the director of the Wellcome Trust, coronavirus researchers and funders, and other prominent people.

What they said is, ‘We need to quash the rumors that this came from a lab. That is a conspiracy theory and we need to get rid of it. They wrote:

‘The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.’ 4

So, what this group was doing, in a very short, less than a page-long letter, was calling the possibility that SARS-2 might have come from a lab a conspiracy theory, and conflating any consideration of this possibility with threatening "transparent sharing of data" with China. And we couldn't interfere with that because we need to work with China to fight the coronavirus …

A couple of weeks later, an article came out in Nature Medicine, which said, ‘Here we have the scientific proof that this did not come from a lab’ …

And this second paper talked about the two things that have been identified by others as the most problematic new genetic segments on SARS-CoV-2 — two sites on the spike RNA, which seem to enhance the tropism and the binding/entry, so it makes it easier for the virus to get into human cells and expands the range of cell types the virus can enter.

And the Nature Medicine authors took these two regions and said: ‘Look, these mutations that are found in the new CoV-2 virus, which are not seen in any of the other coronaviruses anywhere near it genetically, must have come from the wild because these weren't created in the ways that we virologists would have chosen to create them.'

They said, 'We already have ways to create these mutations that would leave a lab signature, but there is no lab signature. And furthermore, we decided that based on computer modeling, the receptor binding domain did not use the ideal formulation we predicted. If a geneticist, a virologist, was doing this, they would have used our computer model. They didn't, and therefore this must have come from the wild.’

Well, that was a really odd argument because it didn't make any scientific sense. The authors did a lot of hand-waving, but failed to consider that other techniques could have been used to create this virus. Nor did the authors explain how such a virus, so ideally adapted to humans, could have developed in wildlife.

We should understand that those were two highly virulent and surprising mutations that could well have been added to a preexisting coronavirus, by a variety of techniques, including the old passage technique, still used today, which is what Louis Pasteur used to create the first live, attenuated rabies vaccine in 1885.

If you passage a virus through multiple human tissue cultures, or mice that contain, for example, humanized lung tissue, you force the virus to develop mutations that adapt it better and better to the new tissue. If the current coronavirus, as claimed by some scientists and seems borne out clinically, is better adapted to binding to the human ACE-2 receptor than to all known animal ACE-2 receptors, then it either:

1) mutated that way by jumping from wildlife to humans long ago, subsequently optimizing its ACE-2 receptor for humans over a prolonged period of time, or

2) was genetically engineered in a lab to do so, or

3) was passaged through cells with human ACE-2 receptors in order to accumulate the mutations that made it most virulent to humans.

I believe the same argument holds for the second unique coronavirus mutation, the addition of four amino acids to form a furin (polybasic) cleavage site. This site takes advantage of the human furin enzyme present intra- and extracellularly, which enhances viral entry into human cells and might convey other advantages to the virus.

There is absolutely no evidence to support the first hypothesis, that this virus has been circulating in humans for years. Thus, we are left with hypotheses 2 and 3: Each requires the human hand, only differing by the technique used. In my opinion, it is likely that both techniques (genetic engineering and serial passage) were used to produce the SARS-2 coronavirus, or its laboratory progenitors.”

We Absolutely Have the Know-How to Create SARS-CoV-2
Nass countered Nature Medicine’s narrative in a March 26, 2020, blog post,5 and again in an April 2, 2020, post, in which she wrote:6

“Why are some of the U.S.’ top scientists making a specious argument about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2? … Prior to genetic engineering techniques being developed (1973) and widely used (since late 1970s), more ‘primitive’ means of causing mutations, with the intention of developing biological weapons, were employed …

They resulted in biological weapons that were tested, well-described, and in some cases, used … These methods can result in biowarfare agents that lack the identifiable signature of a microbial agent constructed in a lab from known RNA or DNA sequences.

In fact, it would be desirable to produce such agents, since it would be difficult to prove they were deliberately constructed in a lab. Here are just a few possibilities for how one might create new, virulent mutants:

Exposing microorganisms to chemical or radiological agents that cause high mutation rates and selecting for desired characteristics
Passaging virus through a number of lab animals or tissue cultures
Mixing viruses together and seeking recombinants with a new mix of virulence factors”
Why Is Protecting the Narrative so Important?
Nass believes the old technique of passage is a likely candidate here. According to Nass, if you take viruses that are ill adapted to the human ACE-2 receptor but are adapted to another animal’s ACE-2 inhibitor, and then passage them in human tissue culture with the human ACE-2 receptor, over time, the viruses will develop improved receptor binding.

“It’s a likely way that this coronavirus might have been produced,” she says. “Anyway, I read that article and I said, ‘This is complete nonsense. I can't believe Nature Medicine published it.’ And the two groups of authors, the group from The Lancet and the group from Nature Medicine, have consistently referred to each other as they've been interviewed since.

Science Magazine did a short piece on The Lancet article. USA Today did a piece on the Nature of Medicine article. And then the head of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis Collins, Tony Fauci's boss, wrote a blog post (or somebody wrote it for him) about the spurious Nature Medicine article.

He stated, ‘Now we have the scientific answer. This article in Nature Medicine has put to rest any thoughts that this could be a lab construct. That's a conspiracy theory. We have no room for conspiracy theories. This is the end of the discussion’ …

Now, the first thing I thought about the Nature Medicine article was, ‘Did these authors actually write it?’ Because it's such a piece of scientific nonsense than any real scientist reading it, if you can read the language, would not accept it, would dismiss it out of hand. Many other scientists have said exactly this, subsequently.

So, were the Nature Medicine authors asked to place their names on a piece of junk science in order to get it into a high impact journal and create this smoke screen — that "the science proves" (but only to the scientifically illiterate) this is a naturally occurring coronavirus?

There were five authors. I know of a couple of them. One was a virologist named Robert Garry, who I have had some interactions with over the last 22 years, another one was Ian Lipkin. Garry and coauthor Kristian Andersen both worked in Sierra Leone during the Ebola epidemic.

Garry was principal investigator for a project in Kenema, Sierra Leone before the outbreak started. Ian Lipkin's group at Columbia University claimed, just last year, to have finally found a bat in west Africa carrying Ebola virus; in other words, this Nature Medicine coauthor's group produced the long-sought evidence for a natural origin of west Africa's Ebola epidemic.7

I happened to show the Nature Medicine article to a friend of mine, Ed Hooper, who wrote a well-known book called, ‘The River,’ about the origin of AIDS: How did AIDS jump from monkeys into the human population?

Although many claim that it's due to Africans eating bush meat (from monkeys), Ed makes a very strong case that HIV made the species jump via oral polio vaccines that were prepared locally, in the Belgian Congo, from the kidneys of various types of monkeys that were locally caught. The vaccine was designed by Hilary Koprowski in the U.S., and given to millions of Africans.

Ed Hooper has put out additional evidence in the intervening 20-plus years since he wrote ‘The River,’ that it's much more likely that the jump into humans occurred because the oral polio vaccine grown on monkey kidneys was contaminated by monkey viruses, and that those monkey kidneys probably contained the precursor to HIV.

Interestingly, three of these Nature Medicine authors had challenged him on his AIDS origin theory about two decades ago, and now they're challenging the coronavirus origin theory, which made me wonder, ‘Are these five Nature Medicine authors … repeatedly trotted out by the political medical establishment to try to push false narratives that are politically desirable?"

Compelling Evidence SARS-CoV-2 Is a Lab Creation
May 19, 2020, I reviewed evidence presented in a Medium article8 written by Yuri Deigin, as well as a video presentation of this evidence done by Chris Martenson, Ph.D. If you missed “The Smoking Gun Proving SARS-CoV-2 Is an Engineered Virus,” you may want to review it after you’re done with Nass’ interview.

Both sources go into great scientific depth, explaining why SARS-CoV-2 cannot be the result of a natural mutation. Deigin doesn’t actually suggest that it is manmade, but provides strong evidence that one needs to consider before coming to the conclusion that it’s of natural origin. Nass comments on Deigin’s work:

“[Deigin] did his own research and published a massive discussion of all the coronavirus research that has gone on since 1999 that is relevant to SARS-CoV-2, and he particularly discusses these two mutations: One, the furin cleavage site and the other is the receptor binding area.

He talks about all the research that's been done on coronaviruses, the different ways you can make these changes, and how changes like what we're seeing now have in fact been created by coronavirus researchers over the past 20 years. And he analyzes everything very, very finely. It's like Ed Hooper's book. He goes in and out and around and discusses every aspect.

When you finish reading that article, you are convinced that it's almost certain that these two mutations were put there deliberately.

Whether they were done by passage, whether they were done by CRISPR or whether another method was used, scientists did know the implications, in terms of increasing virulence, of both of these mutations. So, I invite you to read that piece.”

Many Nations Funded 'Gain of Function' Coronavirus Research
We now know that the National Institutes of Health, under Fauci’s leadership, funded gain-of-function research, or research on how to increase the virulence of pathogens, with coronaviruses for about two decades.

When the White House temporarily suspended U.S. government funding for that kind of research for MERS, SARS and avian flu in 2014, some work may have shifted over to the Wuhan Virology Institute in China and continued anyway. Other similar research, such as Ralph Baric's at UNC, was given special permission to continue despite the temporary suspension. The funding ban was lifted in 2017. Nass weighs in:

“Coronavirus research, including gain-of-function research over the last 20 years, has been done in many countries in Europe, in many labs in the U.S., in Japan, Singapore, China, Australia and probably other places. And it has often been funded by multiple countries.

So, funders have included the Australian government, different branches of NIH, but primarily Fauci's NIAID, the National Science Foundation and USAID — surprising because you would think USAID is an aid agency.

There have also been organizations like the EcoHealth Alliance, which have served as pass-throughs for the funding. The NIAID or USAID would give money to the EcoHealth Alliance and then EcoHealth Alliance would dole it out to the BSL-4 lab in Wuhan and other places and would participate with them in research.

Most of the most prominent researchers have worked in multiple countries' labs, along with foreign colleagues. It's very complicated. There's a lot of back and forth. Europe has funded this research too.

So, Dr. Zhengli Shi has worked in the United States and our researchers have worked in China. Nature Medicine coauthor Ian Lipkin has a post in China, and he was an expert who advised the Saudis on MERS, which is a cousin of SARS, and advised the Chinese on the 2003 SARS. He is affiliated with EcoHealth Alliance too.

He was over in China at the beginning of this SARS-2 pandemic. Ed Holmes, a coauthor of the Nature Medicine article, is an evolutionary biologist at Sydney University who also holds a position in China. So, these people work together, and … the Chinese, the Australians, the Europeans and the Americans fund all this work … Some of this research is funded by five different institutes from three or four different countries.

Gain-of-function research has been controversial since it started being openly discussed. In 2014, in the United States, there was a pause on U.S. government funding of gain-of-function research, but only for three organisms: MERS, SARS and avian flu.

Probably this occurred because researchers announced success in creating lethal avian flu viruses that had gained the ability to spread via aerosol. And because, at the same time, there was widespread media reporting on lab accidents in the U.S., especially at CDC's, NIH's and the Army's high containment labs. These accidents had exposed workers at CDC and over 100 other labs to live anthrax spores and live avian flu.

There was a lot of controversy in the scientific literature over gain-of-function. However, even though about 20 research projects were initially paused in 2014, seven were given special permission to continue. Here is what U.S. government scientists wrote about this in 2015:

‘The recent safety lapses at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the NIH that could have resulted in exposure to anthrax and smallpox, respectively, have diminished public confidence in the ability of even high-containment laboratories to mitigate the risk of accidental release of pathogens of potential harm ... public tolerance of that risk may be the ultimate determinant of what types of research are allowed to proceed.

… ‘As recent lapses at high profile laboratories have illustrated, there remains the potential that bacterial and viral strains can escape even the most secure environments.’9

At the end of 2017, the pause was removed, new guidelines were issued but not made mandatory, and everybody was allowed to go back and do whatever gain-of-function research they wanted.”

Nass on Mikovits Retrovirus Hypothesis
I recently interviewed Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., a cellular and molecular biologist who suspects SARS-CoV-2 isn’t the actual or sole cause of COVID-19. Rather, she believes the illness is a coinfection of SARS-CoV-2 with a preexisting XMRV gamma retrovirus infection.

One possibility she has raised is that SARS-CoV-2 activates this underlying, latent infection. She supports this thesis with the fact that the cytokine storm signature of COVID-19 is inconsistent with coronavirus, but very consistent with the gamma retrovirus infections she studied.

“What she says is very interesting,” Nass says. “Some of it I think is incorrect and some of it is correct, and there's so much of it that it's very hard to separate … Even though she says coronaviruses don't do X, Y and Z, this is a very new coronavirus. It has some unique features.

What we've talked about so far is only relevant to the spike protein, which is only 13% of the genome. We haven't even begun to explore changes that may have occurred in the rest of the genome. So, I don't think we have the evidence yet to say that this coronavirus alone can't do what it seems to be doing …

Some people are saying there are two, three or four small, six to 10 amino acid segments that look like bits of HIV, and they're inserted in different places. They may have effects on the immune response. I don't know. I think that information will gradually appear … I think I've got to read her book [‘Plague of Corruption’] … and see what the data show …

In my own research, I have found Anthony Fauci to be a hypocritical fraud, who pretends he knows nothing about coronaviruses, [yet] he's funded over $100 million of coronavirus research out of NIAID. He looks so gentle and he doesn't give you any details about anything, but he knows a lot of details. So, I hope she confirms my suspicions about Fauci.”

Potential COVID-19 Vaccine Dangers
As discussed in “Fast-Tracked COVID-19 Vaccine — What Could Go Wrong?” COVID-19 vaccines are being fast-tracked, eliminating animal trials and going straight to human trials.

Speaking of Fauci, Moderna was granted a fast-track designation for its mRNA-1273 vaccine by the FDA on May 12, 2020.10,11 This vaccine is sponsored by Fauci’s NIAID, who, echoing Bill Gates’ edicts, has been calling for social distancing and other lockdown measures until a vaccine becomes available. Moderna is currently preparing to enter Phase 2 trials. No results from Phase 1 have been published as of this writing.

“They're doing human trials of at least two vaccines in the U.S. now. So, I'll tell you what I know. First of all, the Moderna is an mRNA vaccine. We haven't had an mRNA vaccine before, so we don't know what that's going to do in people.

Therefore, it seems unconscionable to give it to people before you test it in animals, so that you can at least have some idea what the side effects might be …

There [have also been] many [experimental coronavirus vaccines in the past], not just the trials at Galveston with Peter Hotez, where four different types of vaccines against coronaviruses all failed. There have been other vaccine platforms attempted for coronaviruses that also failed.”

In one such study, discussed in my recent interview above with Robert Kennedy Jr., ferrets showed an extraordinary good serological antibody response to the vaccine, but when the animals were then exposed to the wild virus, they were overtaken by a cytokine storm response, now known as “paradoxical immune enhancement.” In at least one trial, all the ferrets died.

“Hotez [has stated that] in their animal experiments, the vaccinated animals fared worse when they were exposed to the disease than if they had not gotten the vaccine,” Nass says.

“[In] experiments done in the 1960s, an RSV (respiratory syncytial virus) vaccine [Editor’s note: RSV is similar to coronavirus] … was given to children. Several of the children died — again, with this same cytokine storm problem arising. So, I think this is a vaccine you should tread very lightly with, and it should never have been given to people before it was given to animals.”

COVID-19 Vaccine — Global Experiment Without Precedent
Nass also addresses the issue of how human trials are done, and warns people about joining them without being fully informed about the potential risks. This is particularly pertinent for COVID-19 vaccine trials, considering the lethal failures of such vaccines in the past.

You also need to understand that when you participate in a trial, you are not eligible to receive compensation for any injuries you sustain. As for taking the vaccine once it becomes publicly available, Nass says:

“I'll just point out that Ralph Baric, the top coronavirus researcher in the United States, at the University of North Carolina, said himself in an interview a couple months ago that vaccines aren't going to work in the older population for which this disease is most risky …

Having dealt with many people who've died or developed chronic illnesses, all sorts of terrible complications from anthrax vaccine and smallpox vaccine, and sometimes other vaccines, I try to do a careful risk-benefit analysis before recommending a vaccine to any patient.

Sometimes I think it makes sense for people to be vaccinated, but their own situation, where they live, their age group, who they're exposed to, where they're traveling to are all important factors that would help you to formulate that risk-benefit assessment. And I don't think vaccines should be looked on as risk-free. They're clearly not risk-free. Medical interventions should be done thoughtfully …

Another problem … on the FDA website,12,13 there is a page that talks about the problem of growing vaccines in cells14 that may have oncogenes or cancer causing viruses in them, and what research FDA is trying to do to deal with this. So, the FDA acknowledges this serious potential risk from some vaccines… on the FDA website.”

Level 3 and 4 Biosafety Labs Pose Severe Risk to Human Health
The map below was published in the journal Science15 in 2007 and reprinted in Asia Times16 April 6, 2020, showing the proliferation of high-containment labs in the U.S. A USA Today investigation published in 2015 put the number of BSL 3 and 4 labs in the U.S. around 200,17 and Boyle estimates there are about 400 worldwide.18

https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/public/2020/May/us-biodefense-program.jpg

In closing, Nass points out there have been many accidental leaks from BSL 3 and 4 labs, causing many deaths. Improperly inactivated vaccines have also claimed many lives.

“Thirty years ago when I was writing papers about the potential risks of biological defense research we had a lot less biological defense research going on. And the risks were significant. Everybody agrees that these labs leak.

I told you there were maybe 600 or more BSL-3s in the United States19 and hundreds of others around the world. There are about 200 reports of lab accidents, mostly exposures of lab personnel to pathogens, in the high-containment labs in the U.S., yearly.20

So, let me actually give you a few examples from a paper by Martin Furmanski, a physician who wrote about lab escapes.21

He pointed out a lab in England. There were several smallpox escapes from that lab to a room below. Two people died. After the second escape happened, I think it was around 1980, the lab director killed himself.

There were huge outbreaks of Venezuelan equine encephalitis. Thousands and thousands of animals and people [were affected] in Latin America, and it turned out to be due to improperly inactivated vaccines. So, the disease they were vaccinating all these livestock for was actually giving them the disease and giving it to humans also. You don't hear about that.

He points out that the worldwide 1977 H1N1 outbreak … started in China or Russia, probably from long-frozen virus that had been thawed, because that particular strain, H1N1, had not circulated in the world for 21 years, and genetically it looked almost identical to the strains that were around in the late '40s and 1950s, early '50s. So that worldwide 1977 flu pandemic was due to a lab escape.

And Furmanski postulates that the reason the virus was thawed was to do vaccine research because of the fear, in the U.S. in 1976-77, that a deadly swine influenza pandemic might occur … leading to a self-fulfilling prophecy. But fortunately, the virus that circulated was much less deadly than the feared 1918 strain.

[The U.S. government] began a swine flu vaccine program in 1976 after one soldier died at Fort Dix in 1976 of a unique swine flu strain. Frightened that a scenario like the 1918 flu pandemic might emerge, the United States public health agencies got together with the U.S. vaccine manufacturers to create, very rapidly, a swine flu vaccine to save the United States. It was an abysmal failure.

As things progressed, the manufacturers refused to produce vaccine unless the government gave them a waiver of liability for possible vaccine injuries. This they received.

First of all, there was no outbreak. The virus had stopped circulating and disappeared. Had the people at the CDC and HHS been honest with the American public, they would have told them, ‘Hey, there's no outbreak. We're just going to cancel the vaccine program. We don't need it.’ But the vaccine program had developed a life of its own.

Harvey Fineberg co-authored a wonderful book [‘The Swine Flu Affair: Decision-Making on a Slippery Slope’22,23] about the vaccine program, for the National Academy of Sciences, which the subsequent DHHS (then HEW) Secretary, Joseph Califano, had requested.

I recommend it. It’s a fabulous read because Fineberg was working under the Secretary of Health and Human Services, so he was able to interview everybody involved in government who had been part of the program.

He tells you the inside story of what went on during that year. All the infighting, all the different reasons why a vaccine was made for a disease that didn't exist. And then, [after the vaccine was] given to 45 million Americans, [it was] found to cause Guillain-Barre syndrome, about 30 people died and 4,000 people applied for damages from the federal government.

This was the first time the government gave a liability waiver to vaccine manufacturers. And I think it was what gave them the idea that in the future they could get liability waivers for all their vaccines.” "

You can download a free PDF copy of “The Swine Flu Affair” on The National Academies of Sciences website.24 You can also learn more about the failed 1977 swine flu vaccination campaign in “How Does COVID-19 Compare to Spanish Flu?"Sources and References
1 Health Impact News January 17, 2020
2 Medline Plus, Informed Consent
3 Anthrax Epizootic in Zimbabwe, 1978-1980: Due to Deliberate Spread? Meryl Nass, MD (PDF)
4 The Lancet March 7, 2020; 395(10226): E42-E43
5 Anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com March 26, 2020
6 Anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com April 2, 2020
7 Washington Post January 24, 2019
8 Medium April 22, 2020
9 The Journal of Infectious Diseases May 1, 2016; 213(9): 1364-1369
10 Moderna Press Release May 12, 2020
11 MedCityNews May 12, 2020
12 FDA.gov Investigating Viruses in Cells Used to Make Vaccines
13 FDA.gov Investigating Viruses in Cells Used to Make Vaccines (Archived)
14 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2010, Guidance for Industry
15 Science September 28, 2007; 317(5846): 1852-1854
16 Asia Times April 6, 2020
17 USA Today May 28, 2015
18 Scoop February 26, 2020
19 Biosecur Bioterror. 2014 Feb 1; 12(1): 1–7
20 CDC, 2018 Annual Report of the Federal Select Agent Program
21 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists March 31, 2014
22 Amazon, The Swine Flu Affair
23, 24 The National Academies of Sciences Engineering Medicine, The Swine Flu Affair (Free PDF Download)

onawah

20th June 2020, 22:40

Forced covid 19 shots- We're not gonna take it-new video
From Autism Action Network's email update
6/18/20

x3wac_tlezM

Mandatory Covid Vaccines - Protest and Rally. Albany NY - June 13, 2020
2,171 views•Jun 17, 2020
FAIR Autism Media
142 subscribers
On June 13, 2020 advocates and dozens of organizations held a rally and protested the position of New York States largest legal organization, the New York State Bar Association, and their position supporting mandatory covid vaccines, regardless of objections. Advocates and organizations included constitutional and medical freedom organizations, religoius leaders, scientists and medical doctors. Advocates started at the New York State Bar Association and marched past the New York State Court of Appeals, Albany City Hall, Vaccine maker Merck and arrived at the Governors Mansion and home of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.

"Early on in the covid 19 follies New York Governor, and Presidential wannabe, Andrew Cuomo volunteered the population of New York as guinea pigs for any vaccine slapped together by the power-that-be. He wants to force the whole population to get it. But like all autocrats, he wants the law on his side, so his buddies at the New York State Bar Association cooked up a report that claims the Governor has the legal authority to order everybody in the state to undergo an experimental medical procedure.

And many Governor's across the US will try the exact same thing in your state. They have received their marching orders and they are expected to deliver.

But the people of New York wouldn't have it. We fought. We called. We protested in front of the Bar Association headquarters, and they backed off.

Michael Smith of FAIR Autism Media made a video of our protest last Saturday that you can see here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3wac_tlezM

Get ready, this is coming your way.

With Kevin Barry, Rev. David Camp, Jr., Cara Castronuova, Jina Gentry, John Gilmore, Mary Holland, Rev. Dr. Aaron Lewis, Brooke Jordan, Rita Palma, Dr. Larry Palevsky, Dr. Greg Wollen.

Please share this message with friends and family, and share on social media while we still can."

onawah

21st June 2020, 18:55

SETTING THE BAR ON MANDATORY VACCINATION
Jun 21, 2020
The HighWire with Del Bigtree
185K subscribers

"Last month the NY State Bar Association released a report which included a recommendation to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine for all New Yorkers. Last weekend, delegates from NYSBA held a meeting to vote on endorsing the report that would help Gov. Cuomo push a mandate on a vaccine that isn’t even on the market yet. Hundreds of New Yorkers, including many doctors & lawyers, took to the streets and rallied from the Governor's mansion to the Bar Association. The HighWire was there."

g7eABaXrSMM

onawah

23rd June 2020, 18:19

Let’s fact-check Reuters: they say DNA vaccines don’t change your genetic makeup—true or false?
by Jon Rappoport
June 23, 2020
(UNDERLINED TEXT MY EMPHASIS)
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/06/23/fact-check-reuters-dna-vaccines-dont-change-your-genes/

"As my readers know, I’ve been reporting on new types of technology that could be used in a coming COVID-19 vaccine—and warning about the consequences.

One such technology is: DNA vaccines. They would alter recipients’ genetic makeup permanently.

But Reuters has seen fit to claim: “A future COVID-19 [DNA] vaccine will not genetically modify humans.” This comes from their “fact-check team” — May 18, 2020: “False claim: A COVID-19 vaccine will genetically modify humans.”

To reach this conclusion, Reuters cites two people: “Mark Lynas, a visiting fellow at Cornell University’s Alliance for Science group”, and “Dr. Paul McCray, Professor of Pediatrics, Microbiology, and Internal Medicine at the University of Iowa.”

I have cited the New York Times, March 10, 2015, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” Here are quotes from the Times article:

“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 five 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 punch line] “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.”

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.”

So it’s a battle of the experts. The two men Reuters cited, versus the Times’ David Baltimore.

I don’t hold up the scientific work of any of these men for great acclaim. I’m only interested in which man knows whether a DNA vaccine would permanently alter the genetic makeup of every recipient’s DNA.

David Baltimore is a Nobel Laureate (1975, in Physiology/Medicine), and the past president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1997-2006). He’s one of the most famous scientists in the world.

I’m betting Reuters would happily trade their unknown experts for Baltimore, if he would side with their claim. Perhaps they’ll now approach him, and perhaps he’ll change his mind. But the NY Times has him on the record, in 2015, admitting that DNA vaccines do alter genetic makeup.

World famous mainstream experts don’t readily admit this sort of thing out in the open, unless they’re stating the obvious.

The verdict on the Reuters fact-check team? Fact-checkers checked the wrong box.

Final point for the moment: Researchers are fond of saying their genetic technologies are quite safe. This a bald-faced lie. Claiming, for example, that a DNA COVID vaccine would alter humans’ genetic makeup in entirely predictable and harmless ways is like saying a car without brakes, doing a hundred miles an hour, set loose on a highway during rush hour, would create no damage whatsoever.

SOURCES:

reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-covid-19-vaccine-modify/false-claim-a-covid-19-vaccine-will-genetically-modify-humans-idUSKBN22U2BZ

nytimes.com/2015/03/10/health/protection-without-a-vaccine.html

blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/dna/ "

onawah

26th June 2020, 05:09

The Injection Fraud – It’s Not a Vaccine
6/25/20
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/editorial/the-injection-fraud-its-not-a-vaccine/
Guest Commentary by Catherine Austin Fitts, Solari Report

(MANY HYPERLINKS IN THIS AWESOME ARTICLE FROM C.A. FITTS. ALSO POSTED HERE: http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?101087-Catherine-Austin-Fitts-all-things-Fitts&p=1362842&viewfull=1#post1362842 )

"I am not a scientist. I am not a doctor. I am not a biotech engineer. I am not an attorney. However, I read, listen, appreciate, and try to understand those who are.

I was an investment banker until politics made it impossible to continue to practice my art. I was trained as a portfolio strategist—so I map my world by watching the financial flows and allocation of resources. I was also trained as a conspiracy generator and foot soldier—conspiracies being the fundamental organizing principle of how things get done in our world. It was not until I left the establishment that I learned that those not in the club had been trained to disparage and avoid conspiracies—a clever trick that sabotages their efforts to gather power.

My response to living at war with agencies of the U.S. government for a time was to answer the questions of people who were sufficiently courageous and curious to solicit my opinion. Over many years, that response transformed into two businesses. One was The Solari Report, which continues to grow as a global intelligence network—we seek to help each other understand and navigate what is happening and contribute to positive outcomes. The other was serving as an investment advisor to individuals and families through Solari Investment Advisory Services. After ten years, I converted that business to doing an ESG screen. What those who use it want—that is not otherwise readily available in the retail market—is a screen that reflects knowledge of financial and political corruption. Tracking the metastasizing corruption is an art, not a science.

Many of my clients and their children had been devastated and drained by health care failures and corruption—and the most common catalyst for this devastation was vaccine death and injury.
When you help a family with their finances, it is imperative to understand all their risk issues. Their financial success depends on successful mitigation of all the risks—whether financial or non-financial—that they encounter in their daily lives. Non-financial risks can have a major impact on the allocation of family resources, including attention, time, assets, and money.

Many of my clients and their children had been devastated and drained by health care failures and corruption—and the most common catalyst for this devastation was vaccine death and injury. After their lengthy and horrendous experiences with the health care establishment, they would invariably ask, “If the corruption is this bad in medicine, food, and health, what is going on in the financial world?” Chilled by the thought, they would search out a financial professional who was schooled in U.S. government and financial corruption. And they would find me.

The result of this flow of bright, educated people blessed with the resources to pay for my time was that, for ten years, I got quite an education about the disabilities and death inflicted on our children by what I now call “the great poisoning.” I had the opportunity to repeatedly price out the human damage to all concerned—not just the affected children but their parents, siblings, and future generations—mapping the financial costs of vaccine injury again and again and again. These cases were not as unusual as you might expect. Studies indicate that 54% of American children have one or more chronic diseases. Doctors who I trust tell me that number is actually much higher, as many children and their families cannot afford the care and testing necessary to properly diagnose what ails them.

One of the mothers featured in VAXXED—a must-watch documentary for any awake citizen, as is its sequel VAXXED II: The People’s Truth—estimated that a heavily autistic child would cost present value $5MM to raise and care for over a lifetime. When my clients who were grandparents insisted that they would not interfere with their children’s vaccine choices because it was “none of their business,” I would say, “Really? Who has the $5MM? You or your kids? When your kids need the $5MM to raise their vaccine-injured child, are you going to refuse them? You are the banker, and it is your money that is at risk here, so it is your business. Do you want to spend that $5MM on growing a strong family through the generations or on managing a disabled child who did not have to be disabled?” Often, that $5MM in expenditures also translates into divorce, depression, and lost opportunities for siblings.

My clients helped me find the best resources—books, documentaries, articles—on vaccines. You will find many of them linked or reviewed at The Solari Report, including in our Library.

Why . . .
Of all the questions that I had, the one that I spent the most time researching and thinking about was why. Why was the medical establishment intentionally poisoning generations of children? Many of the writers who researched and wrote about vaccine injury and death assumed it was an aberration—resulting from the orthodoxy of a medical establishment that could not face or deal with its mistakes and liabilities. That never made sense to me. Writings by Forrest Maready, Jon Rappoport, Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Arthur Firstenberg have helped me understand the role of vaccines in the con man trick of saving money for insurance companies and the legally liable.

Here is one example of how the trick may play out. A toxin creates a disease. The toxin might be pesticides or industrial pollution or wireless technology radiation. The toxin damages millions of people and their communities. Companies or their insurance provider may be liable for civil or criminal violations. Then a virus is blamed. A “cure” is found in a “vaccine.” The pesticide or other toxic exposure is halted just as the vaccine is introduced, and presto, the sickness goes away. The vaccine is declared a success, and the inventor is declared a hero. A potential financial catastrophe has been converted to a profit, including for investors and pension funds. As a portfolio strategist, I admit it has been a brilliant trick and likely has protected the insurance industry from the bankrupting losses it would experience if it had to fairly compensate the people and families destroyed.

Thanks to the work of Robert Kennedy and Mary Holland of Children’s Health Defense, I now understand the enormous profits generated by so-called “vaccines” subsequent to the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the creation of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program—a federal no-fault mechanism for compensating vaccine-related injuries or deaths by establishing a claim procedure involving the United States Court of Federal Claims and special masters. Call a drug or biotech cocktail a “vaccine,” and pharmaceutical and biotech companies are free from any liabilities—the taxpayer pays. Unfortunately, this system has become an open invitation to make billions from “injectibles,” particularly where government regulations and laws can be used to create a guaranteed market through mandates. As government agencies and legislators as well as the corporate media have developed various schemes to participate in the billions of profits, significant conflicts of interest have resulted.

The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREPA or the PREP Act) became law in 2005, adding to corporate freedoms from liability. The Act “is a controversial tort liability shield intended to protect vaccine manufacturers from financial risk in the event of a declared public health emergency. The act specifically affords to drug makers immunity from potential financial liability for clinical trials of . . . vaccine at the discretion of the Executive branch of government. PREPA strengthens and consolidates the oversight of litigation against pharmaceutical companies under the purview of the secretary of Health and Human Services.” (~ Wikipedia)

The engineering of epidemics
Over time, this has evolved to the engineering of epidemics—the medical version of false flags. In theory, these can be “psyops” or events engineered with chemical warfare, biowarfare, or wireless technology. If this sounds strange, dive into all the writings of the “Targeted Individuals.”

I learned about this first-hand when I was litigating with the Department of Justice and was experiencing significant physical harassment. I tried to hire several security firms; they would check my references and then decline the work, saying it was too dangerous. The last one took pity and warned me not to worry about electronic weaponry, letting me know that my main problem would be low-grade biowarfare. This biowarfare expert predicted that the opposing team would drill holes in the wall of my house and inject the “invisible enemy.” Sure enough, that is exactly what happened. I sold my house and left town. That journey began a long process of learning how poisoning and nonlethal weapons are used—whether to move people out of rent-controlled apartments, sicken the elderly to move them to more expensive government-subsidized housing, gangstalk political or business targets, or weaken or kill litigants—and the list goes on. Poisoning turned out to be a much more common tactic in the game of political and economic warfare in America than I had previously understood.

Americans increasingly looked like a people struggling with high loads of heavy metals toxicity.
After I finished my litigation, I spent several years detoxing from heavy metal toxicity—including from lead, arsenic, and aluminum. As I drove around America, I realized it was not just me. Americans increasingly looked like a people struggling with high loads of heavy metals toxicity. In the process of significantly decreasing my unusually high levels of heavy metals, I learned what a difference the toxic load had made to my outlook, my energy, and my ability to handle complex information.

This brings me to the question of what exactly a vaccine is and what exactly is in the concoctions being injected into people today as well as the witches’ brews currently under development.

Aborted fetal tissue, animal tissue, aluminum, mercury, genetically altered materials—and what else?
What, exactly, is a vaccine?
In 2017, Italian researchers reviewed the ingredients of 44 types of so-called “vaccines.” They discovered heavy metal debris and biological contamination in every human vaccine they tested. The researchers stated, “The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us.” They then drew the obvious conclusion, namely, that because the micro- and nanocontaminants were “neither biocompatible nor biodegradable,” they were “biopersistent” and could cause inflammatory effects right away—or later.

Aborted fetal tissue, animal tissue, aluminum, mercury, genetically altered materials—and what else?

Whatever the ingredients of vaccines have been to date, nothing is more bizarre and unsettling than the proposals of what might be included in them in the future. Strategies—already well-funded and well on the way—include brain-machine interface nanotechnology, digital identity tracking devices, and technology with an expiration date that can be managed and turned off remotely. One report indicates that the Danish government and U.S. Navy had been paying a tech company in Denmark to make an injectible chip that would be compatible with one of the leading cryptocurrencies.

I was recently reading Mary Holland’s excellent 2012 review of U.S. vaccine court decisions (“Compulsory vaccination, the Constitution, and the hepatitis B mandate for infants and young children,” Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics) and I froze and thought, “Why are we calling the injectibles that Bill Gates and his colleagues are promoting ‘vaccines’? Are they really vaccines?”

Surveillance capitalism is underway
Most people are familiar with how Bill Gates made and kept his fortune. He acquired an operating system that was loaded into your computer. It was widely rumored that the U.S. intelligence agencies had a back door. The simultaneous and sudden explosion of computer viruses then made it necessary to regularly update your operating system, allowing Gates and his associates to regularly add whatever they wanted into your software. One of my more knowledgeable software developers once said to me in the 1990s—when Microsoft really took off—”Microsoft makes really sh***y software.” But of course, the software was not really their business. Their business was accessing and aggregating all of your data. Surveillance capitalism was underway.

The Department of Justice launched an antitrust case against Microsoft in 1998, just as the $21 trillion started to disappear from the U.S. government—no doubt with the help of specially designed software and IT systems. During the settlement negotiations that permitted Gates to keep his fortune, he started the Gates Foundation and his new philanthropy career. I laughed the other day when my tweet of one of Robert Kennedy Jr.’s articles from Children’s Health Defense—describing the gruesome technology Gates is hoping to roll out through “injectibles”—inspired a response: “Well, I guess he is finally fulfilling his side of his antitrust settlement.”

If you look at what is being created and proposed in the way of injectibles, it looks to me like these technological developments are organized around several potential goals.

The first and most important goal is the replacement of the existing U.S. dollar currency system used by the general population with a digital transaction system that can be combined with digital identification and tracking. The goal is to end currencies as we know them and replace them with an embedded credit card system that can be integrated with various forms of control, potentially including mind control. “De-dollarization” is threatening the dollar global reserve system. The M1 and M2 money supply have increased in the double digits over the last year as a result of a new round of quantitative easing by the Fed. The reason we have not entered into hyperinflation is because of the dramatic drop in money velocity occasioned by converting Covid-19 into an engineered shutdown of significant economic activity and the bankrupting of millions of small and medium-sized businesses. The managers of the dollar system are under urgent pressure to use new technology to centralize economic flows and preserve their control of the financial system.

Just as Gates installed an operating system in our computers, now the vision is to install an operating system in our bodies and use “viruses” to mandate an initial installation followed by regular updates.

A colleague once told me how Webster’s Dictionary came about. Webster said that the way the evildoers would change the Constitution was not by amending it but by changing the definitions.
A legal sneak attack
Now I appreciate why Gates and his colleagues want to call these technologies “vaccines.” If they can persuade the body politic that injectible credit cards or injectible surveillance trackers or injectable brain-machine interface nanotechnologies are “vaccines,” then they can enjoy the protection of a century or more of legal decisions and laws that support their efforts to mandate what they want to do. As well, they can insist that U.S. taxpayers fund, through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, the damages for which they would otherwise be liable as a result of their experiments—and violations of the Nuremberg Code and numerous civil and criminal laws—on the general population. The scheme is quite clever. Get the general population to go along with defining their new injectible high-tech concoctions as “vaccines,” and they can slip them right into the vaccine pipeline. No need to worry about the disease and death that will result from something this unnatural delivered this quickly. The freedom from liability guaranteed by the PREP Act through the declaration of an emergency—and the ability to keep the emergency going through contact tracing—can protect them from liability for thousands if not millions of deaths and disabilities likely to follow such human experimentation. Ideally, they can just blame the deaths on a virus.

A colleague once told me how Webster’s Dictionary came about. Webster said that the way the evildoers would change the Constitution was not by amending it but by changing the definitions—a legal sneak attack.

I believe that Gates and the pharma and biotech industries are literally reaching to create a global control grid by installing digital interface components and hooking us up to Microsoft’s new $10 billion JEDI cloud at the Department of Defense as well as Amazon’s multibillion cloud contract for the CIA that is shared with all U.S. intelligence agencies. Why do you think President Trump has the military organizing to stockpile syringes for vaccines? It is likely because the military is installing the roaming operating system for integration into their cloud. Remember—the winner in the AI superpower race is the AI system with access to the most data. Accessing your body and my body on a 24/7 basis generates a lot of data. If the Chinese do it, the Americans will want to do it, too. In fact, the rollout of human “operating systems” may be one of the reasons why the competition around Huawei and 5G telecommunications has become so fractious. As Frank Clegg, former President of Microsoft Canada has warned us, 5G was developed by the Israelis for crowd control.

In the face of global “de-dollarization,” this is how the dollar syndicate can assert the central control it needs to maintain and extend its global reserve currency financial power. This includes protecting its leadership from the civil and criminal liability related to explosive levels of financial and health care fraud in recent decades.

We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.
Which brings me back to you and me. Why are we calling these formulations “vaccines”? If I understand the history of case law, vaccines, in legal terms, are medicine. Intentional heavy metal poisoning is not medicine. Injectible surveillance components are not medicine. Injectible credit cards are not medicine. An injectible brain-machine interface is not a medicine. Legal and financial immunity for insurance companies does not create human immunity from disease.

We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.

The perpetrators of this fraud are trying a very neat trick—one that will help them go much faster and cancel out a lot of risk—at our expense. I understand why they are doing it.

What I don’t understand is why we are helping them. Why are we acquiescing in calling these bizarre and deeply dangerous concoctions “vaccines”? Whatever they are, they are not medicine.

So, what shall our naming convention be? What name shall we give to the relevant poisons, neurologically damaging metals, and digital shackles?

Whatever we call them, I know one thing. THEY ARE NOT MEDICINE, WHICH MEANS THEY SURE ARE NOT VACCINES."

Solari Report Interviews:
Central Bank Stimulus: Quantitative Easing 5.0 with John Titus
Deep State Tactics 101 Part III

Solari Special Reports:
VAXXED II: The People’s Truth with Polly Tommey
Special Solari Report: Vaccine Mandates with Mary Holland, J.D

Solari Book Reviews:
The Autism Vaccine by Forrest Maready
unvaccinated by Forrest Maready
Crooked: Man-Made Disease Explained by Forrest Maready

Great Articles & Videos:
Childrens Health Defense: COVID-19: The Spearpoint for Rolling Out a “New Era” of High-Risk, Genetically Engineered Vaccines
Compulsory Vaccination, the Constitution, and the Hepatitis B Mandate for Infants and Young Children by Mary Holland
Hero of the Week: March 12, 2020 – Former President Of Microsoft Canada, Frank Clegg
Corbett Report: Bill Gates x 5
Collection Cup: Building a List of Best Sources on Vaccine Risks

Related reading:
Children’s Health Defense
VAXXED
VAXXED II: The People’s Truth
Jon Rappoport at nomorefakenews.com

onawah

9th July 2020, 04:13

1986: The Act premiers today
Children's Health Defense Announcing the movie you won’t want to miss!
<team@childrenshealthdefense.org> via salsalabs.org
Children's Health Defense <team@childrenshealthdefense.org>
!https://ci5.googleusercontent.com/proxy/z30qnRreu2tHXpUx8xzahTL6x0UpC_ihkOhTdtSbQhKqfaU1E6M1YF-4KaJuAugJPG2ZxeOqoEYpYYKAzACh9IeCVHKQlUoJIPgfokCLQjUlg4Il4QXguzYCTiFWgQZ90jsT7fHO1NxIVKZ1CChJAM_ltog E-adAJ9JPd-fZ=s0-d-e1-ft#https://default.salsalabs.org/a1270632-2016-42d1-bbe9-184677460144/881aaaad-521f-4b13-8b57-8756365e9be7.jpg

"For thousands of parents with vaccine-injured children, the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) conjures up sadness, betrayal of trust, disappointment and anger. But what does the rest of the public think? Most people don’t even realize the NCVIA exists! They are still under the rosy misconception that vaccines are safe and effective and that our legislators and public health officials would never do anything that would knowingly hurt America’s children.

We need to educate them. That is where 1986: The Act comes in.

Dr. Andy Wakefield, the filmmaker who brought us Vaxxed, now brings us 1986: The Act, a story of how the powerful force of a mother's intuition leads down the rabbit hole of lies and corruption surrounding the NCVIA. 1986: The Act forges head on into the important conversation and controversy surrounding this one-sided health policy that gave vaccine makers a multi-billion-dollar gift (so far) and immunity from prosecution.

Viewers will learn how “The Act” turned fairness and the US court system on its head. Touted at the time as a helpful, non-adversarial alternative to long, protracted court battles, it actually turned into anything but; where the vaccine- injured linger without help, parents rack up medical bills and wait years for monetary relief which seldom comes, and government lawyers take home fat paychecks for their efforts against families. This corrupt system ensures that consumers pay the tab and vaccine manufacturers laugh all the way to the bank.

If you are vaccine-injured, share the film with your friends and family.
If you have a vaccine-injured child, share it with other young parents who don’t know the dire, unintended consequences of vaccination.
If you care about humanity and justice, share it with your local, state and federal representatives, many of whom, incredibly enough, don’t know about “The Act” either and will be shocked to find out!
As advocates, we find ourselves at a crucial time for health freedom. We must use all the tools we have to educate others in our communities, including our lawmakers. The change starts with us.

Watch 1986: The Act now! Buy tickets and share with those you love. The film is available to stream on demand. http://1986theact.com/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=a1270632-2016-42d1-bbe9-184677460144

Sincerely,

The Children’s Health Defense Team"

P.S. Don’t miss today’s Instagram interview as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. talks with Dr. Andy Wakefield about his new film. https://www.instagram.com/robertfkennedyjr/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=a1270632-2016-42d1-bbe9-184677460144"

Trailer here: https://7thchakrafilms.com/watch-soon

onawah

12th July 2020, 18:20

Del Bigtree giving all the relevant facts about the relation of the US rate of declining health to vaccines, which have never been tested or proven safe, in a nutshell.
(Not sure where this is taking place, but I will post it if I find out.) 10216176336379219/?t=2
https://www.facebook.com/jamie.m.juarez/videos/10216176336379219/?t=9

onawah

18th July 2020, 07:38

Another Doctor Exposed Bill Gates Wicked Agenda On Depopulation of the World
262,919 views•Jul 16, 2020
Viable Tv

(This doctor from Atlanta gets very passionate and enthused about news from Del Bigtree, RFKennedy Jr. and Dr. Andrew Wakefield and their case against the WHO and Bill Gates Fdn.)

Ka5wWJwIJ10

onawah

23rd July 2020, 05:17

Kennedy & Dershowitz—Great Vaccine Debate
(Watch the debate premiere on Valuetainment Thursday 7/23/2020 at 7:45am CT / 8:45am ET. Go to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfnJi7yLKgE&feature=youtu.be&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=0f6f6ff4-5289-415b-ab5d-047f49637f01 to register)

"Don’t miss this historic debate between Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz.

With the current COVID crisis dominating headlines at national and local levels, the topic of vaccines is now front and center. The two attorneys will debate a range of issues including:

Vaccine mandates;
The PREP Act;
The lack of vaccine safety studies;
Jacobson vs. Massachusetts;
HHS’s failure to act on provisions of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act;
Are compulsory vaccines even legal?
Should any government be able to force medical procedures on families?
Tune in tomorrow July 23, 2020 8:45 a.m. EST / 7:45 a.m. CST / 5:45 a.m. PST for insightful discussions on these questions and more."

IfnJi7yLKgE

Valuetainment
2.43M subscribers

Heated vaccine debate between Robert Kennedy Jr. and Alan Dershowitz moderated by Patrick Bet-David. Watch the debate premiere on Valuetainment Thursday 7/23/2020 at 7:45am CT / 8:45am ET.

About the Guests:

(Anti Vaccine) Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. serves as President of Waterkeeper Alliance, as well as Founder, Chairman of the Board, and Chief Legal Counsel for Children’s Health Defense, and of counsel to Morgan & Morgan, a nationwide personal injury practice.

Mr. Kennedy is an esteemed author, with a long list of published books including the New York Times’ bestseller, “Crimes Against Nature.” Mr. Kennedy was named one of Time magazine’s “Heroes for the Planet” for his success helping Riverkeeper lead the fight to restore the Hudson River. His reputation as a resolute defender of the environment and children’s health stems from a litany of successful legal actions. He received recognition for his role in the landmark victory against Monsanto last year, as well as in the DuPont Case that inspired the movie "Dark Waters" (2019).

Order his latest book: American Values https://amzn.to/3f9fdL7
- - - - -
(Pro Vaccine) Professor Alan M. Dershowitz is Brooklyn native who has been called “the nation’s most peripatetic civil liberties lawyer” and one of its “most distinguished defenders of individual rights,” “the best-known criminal lawyer in the world,” “the top lawyer of last resort,” “America’s most public Jewish defender” and “Israel’s single most visible defender – the Jewish state’s lead attorney in the court of public opinion.” He is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. Dershowitz, a graduate of Brooklyn College and Yale Law School, joined the Harvard Law School faculty at age 25 after clerking for Judge David Bazelon and Justice Arthur Goldberg.

Order his Latest Book: Guilt by Accusation https://amzn.to/2ZNAUKX
- - - - -
(Moderator) Patrick Bet-David - During the Iranian Revolution of 1978, Patrick's family had to escape to survive and ended up living at a refugee camp in Erlangen, Germany. At 12 years old Patrick found himself collecting cans & beer bottles to raise money that could help his family and get him a Nintendo. These childhood experiences had a major impact on his perspective of freedom, hard work and entrepreneurship. Today, he is CEO of PHP Agency, Inc. a financial services company with over 15,000 agents in 49 states and Puerto Rico and an active YouTube creator commonly known for his investigative journalistic approach to interviews and unorthodox business teachings.
- - - -
(Channel) Valuetainment is an emerging media network for entrepreneurs and people from all walks of life created by Serial Entrepreneur, Patrick Bet-David. Valuetainment is referred to as the best channel for entrepreneurs with weekly How To's, Motivation, current events and interviews consisting of unique individuals from all walks of life.

Subscribe to the channel for weekly videos" http://bit.ly/2aPEwD4

greybeard

23rd July 2020, 08:14

onawah I forward quite a few of your posts on to friends and relatives.
The bold print helps me to read these.
Many thanks
Chris

Delight

10th August 2020, 04:44

"What I don’t understand is why we are helping them. Why are we acquiescing in calling these bizarre and deeply dangerous concoctions “vaccines”? Whatever they are, they are not medicine.

So, what shall our naming convention be? What name shall we give to the relevant poisons, neurological damaging metals and digital shackles?"
Catherine Austin Fitts

The Injection Fraud – It’s Not a Vaccine
Catherine Austin Fitts, The Injection Fraud – It’s Not a Vaccine
July 29, 2020 (https://lightonconspiracies.com/the-injection-fraud-its-not-a-vaccine/)

I am not a scientist. I am not a doctor. I am not a biotech engineer. I am not an attorney. However, I read, listen, appreciate and try to understand those who are.

I was an investment banker until politics made it impossible to continue to practice my art. I was trained as a portfolio strategist—so I map my world by watching the financial flows and allocation of resources. I was also trained as a conspiracy generator and foot soldier—conspiracies being the fundamental organizing principle of how things get done in our world. It was not until I left the establishment that I learned that those not in the club had been trained to disparage and avoid conspiracies—a clever trick that sabotages their efforts to gather power.

My response to living at war with agencies of the U.S. government for a time was to answer the questions of people who were sufficiently courageous and curious to solicit my opinion. Over many years, that response transformed into two businesses. One was The Solari Report, which continues to grow as a global intelligence network – we seek to help each other understand what is happening, to navigate and contribute to positive outcomes. The other was serving as an investment advisor to individuals and families through Solari Investment Advisory Services. After ten years, I converted that business to doing an ESG screen. What those who use it want—that is not otherwise readily available in the retail market—is a screen that reflects knowledge of financial and political corruption. Tracking the metastasizing corruption, it’s an art, not a science.

When you help a family with their finances, it is imperative to understand all their risk issues. Their financial success depends on successful mitigation of all risk – whether financial or non-financial – they encounter in their daily lives. All non-financial risks impact the allocation of family resources – attention, time, assets and money.

Many of my clients and their children had been devastated and drained by health care failures and corruption–and the most common catalyst for this devastation was vaccine death and injury. After their lengthy and horrendous experiences with the health care establishment, they would invariably ask, “If the corruption is this bad in medicine, food and health, what is going on in the financial world?” Chilled by the thought, they would search out a financial professional who was schooled in U.S. government and financial corruption. And they would find me.

The result of this flow of bright, educated people blessed with the resources to pay for my time was that, for ten years, I got quite an education about the disabilities and death inflicted on our children by what I now call “the great poisoning.” As a result, I had the opportunity to repeatedly price out the human damage to all concerned–not just the affected children but their parents, siblings and future generations—mapping the financial costs of vaccine injury again and again and again. These cases were not as unusual as you might expect. Currently 54% of American children have one or more chronic diseases. Doctors that I trust assure me the number is much higher as many children and their families can not afford the care and testing necessary to properly diagnose what ails them.

One of the mothers featured in VAXXED—a must-watch documentary for any awake citizen, as is its sequel VAXXED II: The People’s Truth—estimated that a heavily autistic child would cost present value $5MM to raise and care for over a lifetime. When my clients who were grandparents insisted that they would not interfere with their children’s vaccine choices because it was “none of their business,” I would say, “Really? Who has the $5MM? You or your kids? When your kids need the $5MM to raise their vaccine-injured child, are you going to refuse them? You are the banker, and it is your money that is at risk here, so it is your business. Do you want to spend that $5MM on growing a strong family through the generations or on managing a disabled child who did not have to be disabled?” Often, that $5MM in expenditures also translates into divorce, depression and lost opportunities for siblings.

My clients helped me find the best resources—books, documentaries, articles—on vaccines. You will find many of them linked or reviewed at The Solari Report, including in our Library.

Of all the questions that I had, the one that I spent the most time researching and thinking about was why. Why was the medical establishment intentionally poisoning generations of children? Many of the writers who researched and wrote about vaccine injury and death assumed it was a mistake—resulting from the orthodoxy of a medical establishment that could not face or deal with its mistakes and liabilities. That never made sense to me. Writings by Forrest Maready, Jon Rappoport, Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Arthur Firstenberg have helped me understand the role of vaccines in the con man trick of saving money for insurance companies and the legally liable.

Here is one example of how the trick may play out. A toxin creates a disease. The toxin might be pesticides or industrial pollution or wireless technology radiation. The toxin damages millions of people and their communities. Companies or their insurance provider may be liable for civil or criminal violations. A virus is blamed. A “cure” is found in a “vaccine.” The pesticide or other toxic exposure is halted just as the vaccine is introduced, and presto, the sickness goes away. The vaccine is declared a success, and the inventor is declared a hero. A potential financial catastrophe has been converted to a profit, including for investors and pension funds. As a portfolio strategist, I admit it has been a brilliant trick and likely has protected the insurance industry from the bankrupting losses it would experience if it had to fairly compensate the people and families destroyed.

Thanks to the work of Robert Kennedy and Mary Holland of Childrens Health Defense, I now understand the enormous profits generated by so-called “vaccines” subsequent to the passage of The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the creation of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program – a federal no-fault mechanism for compensating vaccine-related injuries or death by establishing a claim procedure involving the United States Court of Federal Claims and special masters. Call a drug or biotech cocktail a “vaccine” and pharmecutical and biotech companies are free from any liabilities – the taxpayer pays. Unfortunately, this system has become an open invitation to make billions from “injectibles” particularly where government regulations and laws can be used to create a market through mandates. Unfortunately, various schemes have developed for government agencies and legislators as well as corporate media to participate in the billions of profits – resulting in significant conflicts of interest.

Facts Vs. Fake. A Worldwide Lockdown of Everything
The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act became law in 2005, adding to corporate freedoms from liability. The Act “is a controversial tort liability shield intended to protect vaccine manufacturers from financial risk in the event of a declared public health emergency. The act specifically affords to drug makers immunity from potential financial liability for clinical trials of avian influenza vaccine at the discretion of the Executive branch of government. PREPA strengthens and consolidates the oversight of litigation against pharmaceutical companies under the purview of the secretary of Health and Human Services (~ Wikipedia.)”

Over time, this has evolved to the engineering of epidemics—the medical version of false flags. In theory, these can be “psyops” or events engineered with chemical warfare, biowarfare, or wireless technology. If this sounds bizarre, dive into all the writings of the “Targeted Individuals.”

I learned about this first-hand when I was litigating with the Department of Justice and was experiencing significant physical harassment. I tried to hire several security firms; they would check my references and then decline the work, saying it was too dangerous. The last one took pity and warned me not to worry about electronic weaponry, letting me know that my main problem would be low-grade biowarfare. This biowarfare expert predicted that the opposing team would drill holes in the wall of my house and inject the “invisible enemy.” Sure enough, that is exactly what happened. I sold my house and left town. That journey began a long process of learning how poisoning and nonlethal weapons are used—whether to move people out of rent-controlled apartments, sicken the elderly to move them to more expensive government subsidized housing, gangstalk political or business targets, or weaken or kill litigants—and the list goes on. Poisoning turned out to be a much more common tactic in the game of political and economic warfare in America than I had previously understood.

After I finished my litigation, I spent several years detoxing from heavy metal toxicity – including of lead, arsenic, and aluminum. As I drove around America, I realized it was not just me. Americans increasingly looked like a people struggling with high loads of heavy metals toxicity. In the process of significantly decreasing my unusually high levels of heavy metals, I learned what a difference the toxic load had made to my outlook, my energy, and my ability to handle complex information.

This brings me to the question of what exactly a vaccine is and what exactly is in the concoctions being injected into people today as well as the witches brews currently under development.

In 2017, Italian researchers reviewed the ingredients of 44 types of so-called “vaccines.” They discovered heavy metal debris and biological contamination in every human vaccine they tested. The researchers stated, “The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us.” They then drew the obvious conclusion, namely, that because the micro- and nanocontaminants were “neither biocompatible nor biodegradable,” they were “biopersistent” and could cause inflammatory effects right away—or later (see this)

Aborted fetal tissue, animal tissue, aluminum, mercury, genetically altered materials—and what else?

Whatever the ingredients of vaccines have been to date, nothing is more bizarre than the proposals of what might be included in them in the future. Strategies—already well-funded and well on the way—include brain-machine interface nanotechnology, digital identity tracking devices, and technology with an expiration date that can be managed and turned off remotely. One report indicated that the Danish government and US Navy had been paying one tech company in Denmark to make an injectible chip that would be compatible with one of the leading cryptocurrencies.

I was recently reading Mary Holland’s excellent 2012 review of U.S. vaccine court decisions (”Compulsory vaccination, the Constitution, and the hepatitis B mandate for infants and young children,” Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics) and I froze and thought, “Why are we calling the injectibles that Bill Gates and his colleagues are promoting ‘vaccines’? Are they really vaccines?”

Most people are familiar with how Bill Gates made and kept his fortune. He acquired an operating system that was loaded into your computer. It was widely rumored that the U.S. intelligence agencies had a back door. The simultaneous and sudden explosion of computer viruses then made it necessary to regularly update your operating system, allowing Gates and his associates to regularly add whatever they wanted into your software. One of my more knowledgeable software developers once said to me in the 1990s—when Microsoft really took off—”Microsoft makes really sh***y software.” But of course, the software was not really their business. Their business was accessing and aggregating all of your data. Surveillance capitalism was underway.

The Department of Justice launched an antitrust case against Microsoft in 1998, just as the $21 trillion started to disappear from the U.S. government—no doubt with the help of specially designed software and IT systems. During the settlement negotiations that permitted Gates to keep his fortune, he started the Gates Foundation and his new philanthropy career. I laughed the other day when my tweet of one of Robert Kennedy Jr.’s articles from Children’s Health Defense—describing the gruesome technology Gates is hoping to roll out through “injectibles” –inspired a response: “Well, I guess he is finally fulfilling his side of his antitrust settlement.”

If you look at what is being created and proposed in the way of injectibles, it looks to me like these technological developments are organized around several potential goals.

The first and most important goal is the replacement of the existing U.S. dollar currency system used by the general population with a digital transaction system that can be combined with digital identification and tracking. The goal is to end currencies as we know them and replace them with an embedded credit card system that can be integrated with various forms of control, potentially including mind control. “De-dollarization” is threating the dollar global reserve system. The M1 and M2 money supply have increased in the double digits over the last year as a result of a new round of quantitative easing by the Fed. The reason we have not entered into hyper-inflation is because of the dramatic drop in money velocity occasioned by converting Covid-19 into an engineered shut down of significant economic activity and the banruptcy of millions of small and medium sized businesses. The managers of the dollar system are under urgent pressure to use new technology to centralize economic flows and preserve their control of the financial system.

Just as Gates installed an operating system in our computers, now the vision is to install an operating system in our bodies and use “viruses” to mandate an initial installation followed by regular updates.

Now I appreciate why Gates and his colleagues want to call these technologies “vaccines.” If they can persuade the body politic that injectible credit cards or injectible surveillance trackers or injectable brain-macine interface nanotechnologies are “vaccines,” then they can enjoy the protection of a century or more of legal decisions and laws that support their efforts to mandate what they want to do. As well, they can insist that U.S. taxpayers fund—through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program–the damages for which they would otherwise be liable as a result of their experiments – and violations of the Nuremberg Code and numerous civil and criminal laws – on the general population. The scheme is quite clever. Get the general population to go along with defining their new injectible high-tech concoctions as “vaccines” and they can slip them right into the vaccine pipeline. No need to worry about the disease and death that results from something this unnatural delivered quickly. The notion of an emergency along with contact tracing and freedom from liability can protect you from the millions of likely deaths from such human experimentation. Ideally, you can blame the deaths on a virus.

A colleague once told me how Websters Dictionary came about. Webster said that the way the evildoers would change the Constitution was not by amending it but by changing the definitions—a legal sneak attack.

I believe that Gates and the pharma and biotech industries are literally reaching to create a global control grid by installing digital interface components and hooking us up to Microsoft’s new $10 billion JEDI cloud at the Department of Defense as well as Amazon’s multi-billion cloud contract for the CIA that is shared with all US intelligence agencies. Why do you think President Trump has the military organizing to stockpile syringes for vaccines? It is likely because the military is installing the roaming operating system for integration into their cloud. Remember—the winner in the AI superpower race is the AI system with access to the most data. Accessing your body and my body on a 24/7 basis generates a lot of data. If the Chinese do it, the Americans will want to do it too. The role out of human “operating systems” may be one of the reasons why the competition of Huawei and 5G telecommunications has become so fractious. As Frank Clegg, former President of Microsoft Canada has warned us, 5G was developed by the Israelis for crowd control.

In the face of global “de-dollarization,” this is how the dollar syndicate can assert the central control it needs to maintain and extend its global reserve currency financial power. This includes protecting its leadership from the civil and criminal liabiility related to explosive levels of financial and health care fraud in recent decades.

Which brings me back to you and me. Why are we calling these formulations “vaccines”? If I understand the history of case law, vaccines, in legal terms, are medicine. Intentional heavy metal poisoning is not medicine. Injectible surveillance components are not medicine. Injectible credit cards are not medicine. Injectible brain-machine interface is not a medicine. Immunity for insurance companies is not the creation of human immunity.

We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.

The perpetrators of this fraud are trying a very neat trick–one that will help them go much faster and cancel out a lot of risk at our death, disease and expense. I understand why they are doing it.

What I don’t understand is why we are helping them. Why are we acquiescing in calling these bizarre and deeply dangerous concoctions “vaccines”? Whatever they are, they are not medicine.

So, what shall our naming convention be? What name shall we give to the relevant poisons, neurological damaging metals and digital shackles?

Whatever we call them, I know one thing. THEY ARE NOT MEDICINE, WHICH MEANS THEY SURE ARE NOT VACCINES.

East Sun

11th August 2020, 00:33

Thank you onawa.

I'm passing this along to my friend who will appreciate it immensely...

onawah

14th August 2020, 22:55

'Do Not Trust The Medical Or The National Security Establishment!' With Guest Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
19,090 views•Aug 14, 2020
RonPaulLibertyReport
239K subscribers

"Nephew of President John F. Kennedy, son of Robert F. Kennedy, and tireless crusader against the tyranny of the mainstream medical establishment, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. joins today's Liberty Report to discuss his startling discoveries about who really killed his father and uncle...and why. Plus, Mr. Kennedy, an environmental lawyer, has been among the most vocal and most successful opponents of the mainstream medical establishment, driven by big Pharma to inoculate and medicate everything that moves. He tells the Liberty Report how he very reluctantly decided to dedicate his career to fighting the mandatory vaccines that have resulted in so many documented injuries to the recipients. "

Mr. Kennedy's Children's Health Defense can be found at http://www.childrenshealthdefense.org
He can also be found on Instagram: @robertfkennedyjr

_kJdOtnBUcw

onawah

15th August 2020, 02:12

Read the Fine Print, Part Two—Nearly 400 Adverse Reactions Listed in Vaccine Package Inserts
AUGUST 14, 2020
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/read-the-fine-print-part-two-nearly-400-adverse-reactions-listed-in-vaccine-package-inserts/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=3dc3da13-6652-4e93-bbb9-2d6ae56cb8dc
By the Children’s Health Defense Team

(Go to the link for easier viewing of the charts, which are copied here just to give an idea of how extensive they are)

"Package inserts are available online for all vaccines licensed in the U.S. In addition to containing bits of practical information for the clinicians who administer the vaccines, the inserts provide members of the public with one of their only opportunities to learn about a vaccine’s contraindications, warnings, precautions and—perhaps most importantly—potential adverse reactions.

The inserts communicate the information about adverse reactions in two distinct sections: “Clinical trials experience” (Section 6.1) and “Data from postmarketing experience” from the U.S. or other countries (Section 6.2). In April, 2020, Children’s Health Defense summarized the postmarketing data for over three dozen vaccines given routinely to American infants, children and adolescents. That tally showed that vaccines touted for the prevention of 13 illnesses (Table 1) have been linked to at least 217 adverse medical outcomes reported post-licensure, including serious infections, autoimmune conditions, life-threatening allergies and death.

As noted in April, the postmarketing list is far from exhaustive, because manufacturers have the latitude to decide which outcomes to list in the inserts—using loose criteria determined by severity, frequency of reporting and “strength of evidence for a causal relationship.” In addition, vaccine adverse events are notoriously underreported, not least because medical schools do not teach doctors to recognize vaccine injuries. But what would the picture look like if the adverse reactions observed during clinical trials were also added to the list?

This combination of clinical trial and postmarketing data presents a dramatic picture, with almost double the total number of undesirable post-vaccination outcomes …
Double trouble
Children’s Health Defense can now answer that question. The revised chart (Table 2) includes the adverse reactions reported in the clinical trial sections of 41 vaccine brands covering diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type b, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, human papillomavirus, influenza, meningococcal infection, pertussis, pneumococcal infection, polio, rotavirus, tetanus and varicella. This combination of clinical trial and postmarketing data presents a dramatic picture, with almost double the total number of undesirable post-vaccination outcomes—397 different types of reactions reported pre- and post-licensure.

Although roughly 400 adverse events is a sobering number, again, it is probably an underestimate. This is because most clinical trials follow participants for an absurdly short period of time—three days here, seven days there—and do not capture problems that arise beyond that brief window, even though clinicians recognize (and the scientific literature confirms) that vaccine reactions are not always immediate or acute. Moreover, even for those few days of monitoring, the inserts are often short on details, citing only a smattering of adverse events collected from a predetermined list of “solicited” reactions and only sometimes accepting “unsolicited” feedback. In addition, the fact that vaccine clinical trials typically compare vaccine against vaccine rather than vaccine against inert placebo makes it easy to divert attention from specific adverse reactions by simply citing “similar rates” of adverse reactions in both groups.

… and that vaccines can cause the very illnesses—or adverse consequences of those illnesses—that they are supposed to prevent.
Clinical trial themes
The April discussion of postmarketing adverse events noted several themes, including the facts that all vaccines are capable of producing adverse reactions (though Gardasil and Gardasil 9 are macabre standouts) and that vaccines can cause the very illnesses—or adverse consequences of those illnesses—that they are supposed to prevent. The clinical trial data reinforce these points and also highlight some new themes:

The adverse reactions reported following clinical trials do not necessarily match up to the adverse reactions reported post-licensure. This is particularly the case for vaccine-associated deaths; whereas the April postmarketing-only list included just two categories of death associated with six vaccines, the addition of clinical trial data brings the total up to 40 types of death associated with 13 vaccines.
Sizeable proportions of participants in vaccine clinical trials experience unpleasant reactions, including fever, chills, pain, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, headache, rash, loss of appetite and irritability. For example, in clinical trials for the five-pronged Pentacel vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, Haemophilus influenzae type b and polio)—given as a four-dose series beginning at six weeks of age—almost half of the young children (48%) experienced injection-site “tenderness” after the first dose (defined as “whimpering” or crying when the arm or leg was touched or moved); about the same percentage (46%) experienced “lethargy,” 59% cried “inconsolably” and 77% were “fussy” or “irritable.” In adolescents, the Adacel vaccine given as a booster for tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) produced injection-site pain in almost eight in ten teens (78%), and one in five (20%) study participants experienced pain rated as “moderate to severe.” More than two-fifths (44%) suffered from headaches.
Clinical trials also document more serious reactions with the potential to cause longer-term problems. Adverse reactions of particular concern—especially in the young—include asthma, seizures, heart problems, sleep problems and joint and muscle pain. Nine vaccines list anorexia as a clinical trial reaction. Surprisingly, while numerous package inserts mention serious and potentially lifelong conditions like transverse myelitis (11 vaccines) and Guillain-Barré syndrome (20 vaccines) in their postmarketing section, only a few list them as a clinical trial outcome despite hundreds of published studies pointing to post-vaccination onset.
Intentional and unintentional injuries are more prominent in the clinical trial data than in the postmarketing reports, particularly in association with Gardasil and certain meningococcal vaccines (abbreviated as MenACWY). These events include alcohol intoxication and drug overdose; suicidal thoughts or attempts; head and limb injuries; and falls resulting in injuries. Noting that syncope (fainting) is a common post-vaccination reaction in adolescents and young adults, the CDC states, “In 2005, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) began detecting a trend of increasing syncope reports that coincided with the licensure of 3 vaccines for adolescents: human papillomavirus (HPV), MenACWY, and Tdap. Of particular concern among adolescents has been the risk for serious secondary injuries, including skull fracture and cerebral hemorrhage.” (One of the robustly healthy volunteers in the current clinical trials for the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine illustrated this very point, narrowly escaping injury when his girlfriend caught him in the midst of a fainting episode.)
Illustrating how vaccines can cause what they are supposed to prevent, the clinical trials for the ProQuad measles-mumps-rubella-varicella vaccine—intended to prevent infections associated with rashes—highlighted an astounding array of rashes. The ProQuad insert lists seven different types of rash-related adverse reactions: “rash,” “injection-site rash,” “measles-like rash,” “rubella-like rash,” “varicella-like rash,” “vesicular rash” and “viral exanthema” (an eruptive rash associated with viral infections). Across both the clinical trial and postmarketing data, ProQuad injection also appears to precede numerous infections, including “atypical measles” and measles, varicella (chickenpox), bronchitis, cellulitis and other skin infections, herpes simplex (cold sores), herpes zoster (shingles), influenza or “influenza-like illness,” meningitis, pneumonia, respiratory tract infections, sinusitis, sore throats and other viral infections.
Researchers interested in solutions rather than convenient coronavirus cover stories would do well to review the information contained in vaccine package inserts.
Mysteries explained?
One of the autoimmune conditions encountered during the clinical trials for meningococcal and rotavirus vaccines (and also reported post-licensure) is a condition called Kawasaki disease (KD). Diagnosed solely on the basis of symptoms (high fever plus symptoms such as rash, redness and lymph node swelling), KD came out of nowhere in the 1960s and 1970s when childhood vaccine programs were starting to gear up. The published literature confirms Bexero meningococcal B and rotavirus vaccination as likely triggers for KD and, in addition, points to numerous other vaccines as possible culprits, including those for hepatitis A, hepatitis B, influenza, Prevnar-13 and multiple vaccines administered in a single health care visit. Canadian researchers have identified KD as a “condition of interest” for pediatric vaccine safety surveillance.

Ordinarily fairly obscure, KD made headlines this year when researchers started speculating that it might be one of the apparently myriad faces of SARS-CoV-2. In the UK—the first country in the world to start administering (in 2015) three doses of Bexero to infants—researchers were also the first to suggest that KD might be Covid-19-related. This week, a different group of researchers raised the same question about another low-profile autoimmune condition, myasthenia gravis, asking whether it, too, could be connected to SARS-CoV-2. Researchers interested in solutions rather than convenient coronavirus cover stories would do well to review the information contained in vaccine package inserts. This information clearly points the way to a different set of questions and answers, pertaining not only to autoimmunity but also to the many other health problems besieging American children.

Table 1. Vaccine package inserts reviewed

Type
of Vaccine
Brand Name
Manufacturer
Vaccines containing
diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis components Adacel (Tdap) Sanofi Pasteur
Boostrix (Tdap) GlaxoSmithKline
(GSK)
Daptacel (DTaP) Sanofi
Diphtheria
and Tetanus Toxoids Adsorbed (DT) Sanofi
Infanrix (DTaP) GSK
Kinrix (DTaP-IPV) GSK
Pediarix (DTaP-HepB-IPV) GSK
Pentacel (DTaP-IPV/Hib) Sanofi
Quadracel (DTaP-IPV) Sanofi
Tdvax (Td) MassBiologics
Tenivac (Td) Sanofi
Haemophilus
influenzae type b (Hib) ActHIB Sanofi
Hiberix GSK
PedvaxHIB Merck
Hepatitis A and/or B Engerix-B (HepB) GSK
Havrix (HepA) GSK
Recombivax HB (HepB) Merck
Twinrix (HepA/HepB) GSK
Vaqta (HepA) Merck
Human papillomavirus (HPV) Gardasil Merck
Gardasil 9 Merck
Influenza Afluria Quadrivalent Sequirus
Fluarix GSK
Flublok
Quadrivalent (age 18 and older) Protein Sciences
Corporation
Flucelvax Sequirus
Flulaval Quadrivalent GSK
FluMist AstraZeneca
Fluzone Quadrivalent Sanofi
Meningococcal A, C, W and/or Y Menactra Sanofi
Menomune Sanofi
Menveo GSK
Meningococcal B Bexero GSK
Trumenba Pfizer
Measles-mumps-rubella
(MMR) and MMR+varicella (MMRV) MMR-II Merck
Proquad Merck
Pneumococcal Prevnar-13 Pfizer
Pneumovax-23 Merck
Inactivated polio (IPV) IPOL Sanofi
Rotavirus vaccines Rotarix GSK
RotaTeq Merck
Varicella Varivax Merck

Table 2. Clinical trial and post-marketing adverse events reported in vaccine package inserts, by body system
Body System
Medical Disorder
Reported in Clinical
Trials
Reported Post-marketing
Allergic (6) Allergic reactions/
hypersensitivity Varivax ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menveo, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix
Allergy to vaccine Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Anaphylaxis and
anaphylactoid reactions, including shock Bexero, Fluarix, MMR-II ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, Menveo, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Varivax
Angioedema,
angioneurotic edema Menveo, MMR-II, Recombivax ActHIB, Adacel, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune, MMR-II, Pediarix, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Twinrix, Varivax
Serum sickness Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, Pneumovax-23, Recombivax, Twinrix
Urticaria [hives] Engerix-B, Havrix,
MMR-II, PedVaxHIB, Prevnar-13, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, Quadracel, Recombivax, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Twinrix
Autoimmune (15) Autoimmune diseases Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Autoimmune thyroiditis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Celiac disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Cutaneous lupus
erythematosus Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Diabetes mellitus
(insulin-dependent) Boostrix,
Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Pediarix, Pneumovax-23 MMR-II
Graves’/Basedow’s
disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Guillain-Barré syndrome
(GBS) IPOL, MMR-II, PedVaxHIB Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menactra, Menomune, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Vaqta, Varivax
Kawasaki disease Menveo, Rotarix,
RotaTeq Rotarix, RotaTeq
Lupus-like syndrome Recombivax
Multiple sclerosis (or
exacerbation) Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Engerix-B, Havrix,
Recombivax, Twinrix
Pancreatitis MMR-II, Pneumovax-23 Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II
Rheumatoid arthritis/juvenile
rheumatoid arthritis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Scleroderma Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Systemic lupus
erythematosus Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Recombivax
Thrombocytopenia/idiopathic
thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) [low platelets] Daptacel, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, PedVaxHIB Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Infanrix, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Rotarix, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax
Blood/lymphatic system
(11) Anemia (aplasic or
hemolytic) Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Varivax
Epistaxis [nosebleed] FluMist, ProQuad
Extravasation [blood
vessel leakage] ProQuad
Hematochezia [bloody
stools] RotaTeq ProQuad, Rotarix,
RotaTeq
Hemorrhage Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Increased erythrocyte
sedimentation rate Recombivax
Leukocytosis [increased
white blood cells] MMR-II MMR-II, Pneumovax-23
Lymphadenitis/swollen
lymph nodes Adacel Boostrix, Pneumovax-23,
ProQuad
Lymphadenopathy,
including regional Engerix-B, Havrix, MMR-II, Recombivax, Varivax Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, Menveo, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Tenivac
Neutropenia, chronic Pediarix
Thrombocytopenia/idiopathic
thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) [low platelets]* Daptacel,
Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, PedVaxHIB Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Infanrix, Kinrix, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Rotarix, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax
Cardiac (10) Angina pectoris Pneumovax-23, Tenivac
Cyanosis* [bluish,
low oxygen] Daptacel, Hiberix, Infanrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Heart failure Pneumovax-23
Hypotension Engerix-B, Recombivax Adacel, Menactra
Myocardial infarction Pneumovax-23
Myocarditis [heart
muscle inflammation] Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Adacel, Boostrix
Palpitations Engerix-B, Twinrix
Pericarditis [pericardial
inflammation] FluMist
Pleuropericarditis Flublok (> age 50)
Tachycardia [abnormally
high heart rate] Engerix-B, Fluarix,
Recombivax, Twinrix
Congenital (1) Congenital anomaly Havrix
Death, by cause (40) Unspecified Flublok, IPOL,
Prevnar-13, Tenivac Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Acute lymphocytic
leukemia Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Acute renal failure Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Arrhythmia Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Asphyxia Pentacel
Aspiration Daptacel
Autoimmune disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Breast cancer Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Cardiopulmonary arrest Tenivac
Cardiovascular Prevnar-13,
Pneumovax-23
Cerebral hemorrhage Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Cerebrovascular
accident Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Congenital
immunodeficiency and sepsis Pediarix
Convulsive disorder Pediarix
Drug overdose Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Fetal MMR-II
Gunshot wound Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Head trauma Pentacel
Homicide Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Hyperthyroidism Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Hypovolemic septic
shock Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Infectious disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Intussusception RotaTeq Rotarix, RotaTeq
Motor vehicle accident Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Myocardial infarction Tenivac
Nasopharyngeal cancer Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Neoplasm Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
Prevnar-13
Neuroblastoma Pediarix, Pentacel
Pancreatic cancer Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Peritonitis Prevnar-13
Pneumonia Rotarix
Pulmonary embolism Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Pulmonary infection Prevnar-13
Pulmonary tuberculosis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Sepsis, septic shock Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
Menveo, Prevnar-13
Stomach adenocarcinoma Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Sudden infant death
syndrome (SIDS) Menveo, Pediarix,
Pentacel, Prevnar-13, RotaTeq Infanrix
Suicide Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Traumatic brain
injury/cardiac arrest Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Unexplained sudden
death Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Ear/labyrinth (8) Earache Recombivax
Ear pain Engerix-B, Infanrix,
Menveo, ProQuad, Twinrix
Hearing impaired Menveo
Nerve deafness MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Otitis media/ear
infection Afluria, Fluarix,
PedVaxHIB, RotaTeq, Vaqta, Varivax MMR-II
Tinnitis Engerix-B, Recombivax,
Twinrix
Vertigo Havrix, Recombivax,
Twinrix Engerix-B, Fluarix,
Menveo
Vestibular/balance
disorder Menveo
Endocrine (6) Cushing’s syndrome Menveo
Goiter Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Hyperthyroidism Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Hypothyroidism Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Thyroiditis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Toxic nodular goiter Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Eye (17) Conjunctivitis Vaqta
Eye complaints Varivax
Eye irritation/itching Vaqta
Eye pain Fluarix, Flulaval
Eye redness Fluarix
Eye swelling Bexero, Fluarix
Eyelid ptosis [drooping] Menveo
Eyelid swelling Fluarix, ProQuad
Keratitis [corneal
inflammation] Engerix-B
Ocular hyperemia [eye
inflammation] Fluzone
Ocular palsies [nerve
damage] MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Optic
neuritis/neuropathy, papillitis [optic nerve inflammation] Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
MMR-II Engerix-B, Fluzone,
MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix
Photophobia [light
intolerance] Havrix Flulaval
Retinitis, necrotizing
[inflammation] MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad,
Varivax
Retrobulbar neuritis [nerve
damage] MMR-II, ProQuad
Uveitis [eye
inflammation] Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Recombivax
Visual disturbances Engerix-B, Recombivax,
Twinrix
Gastrointestinal (21) Abdominal pain,
discomfort Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menomune, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Fluarix, ProQuad
Candidiasis ProQuad
Colonic polyp Tenivac
Constipation Engerix-B, Infanrix,
Vaqta, Varivax Recombivax
Crohn’s disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Diarrhea Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Hiberix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, PedVaxHIB, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Recombivax, Rotarix, RotaTeq, Trumenba, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Daptacel, FluMist, Menomune,
MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel
Dysgeusia [altered
sense of taste] Havrix
Dyspepsia [indigestion] Pneumovax-23,
Recombivax Engerix-B, Twinrix
Dysphagia [swallowing
difficulties] Flulaval
Gastroenteritis Flulaval, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Kinrix, Menveo, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Rotarix, RotaTeq, Vaqta Rotarix, RotaTeq
Gastrointestinal
infection FluMist
Inflammatory bowel
disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Inguinal hernia Menactra
Intussusception,
including recurrent Rotarix, RotaTeq Rotarix, RotaTeq
Mouth ulcers ProQuad
Nausea Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flulaval, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menveo, MMR-II, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, FluMist, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Menomune, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, Tdvax
Swelling of mouth,
throat or tongue Fluarix
Teething Afluria, Vaqta, Varivax
Ulcerative colitis Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
Pneumovax-23
Vitello-intestinal duct
remnant Menveo
Vomiting ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Hiberix, IPOL, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, PedVaxHIB, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Recombivax, Rotarix, RotaTeq,
Trumenba, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Menomune, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23,
Tenivac
General and injection
site (35) Abnormal gait Flulaval
Apathy ProQuad
Asthenia [fatigue,
weakness] Hiberix, Pneumovax-23,
Vaqta Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Infanrix, Menomune, Pediarix, Tenivac
Body aches Adacel, Recombivax Fluarix
Chest pain Pneumovax-23, Tenivac Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone
Chills/shivering Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Menactra, , Menveo, Prevnar-13, Recombivax, Trumenba, Vaqta, Varivax Fluarix, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menomune, Twinrix
Decreased limb mobility Pneumovax-23
Dehydration Kinrix, Menveo,
Pentacel, Rotarix, Vaqta
Drowsiness/sleepiness ActHIB, Daptacel, Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, Pediarix, PedvaxHIB
Ecchymosis [bruising] Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta Engerix-B, Recombivax,
Twinrix
Edema Vaqta Adacel
Fatigue Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Havrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Prevnar-13, Recombivax, Trumenba, Twinrix, Varivax Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Menomune, Menveo
Feeling hot Fluarix
Fever/pyrexia ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Pediarix, PedVaxHIB, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, Rotarix, RotaTeq, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, Tdvax
Hematoma Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Varivax
Hypernatremia [excess
sodium] Kinrix
Increased arm
circumference Adacel, Boostrix, Daptacel, Infanrix, Kinrix, Pentacel, Quadracel
Increased thigh
circumference Infanrix
Injected limb—extensive
swelling Boostrix, Daptacel, Infanrix, Quadracel ActHIB, Bexero, Hiberix, Menactra, Menveo
Injection-site abscess Adacel, Daptacel, Fluarix, Flulaval, PedvaxHIB, Pentacel, Quadracel
Injection-site bruising Afluria, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, ProQuad, Vaqta Adacel, Flulaval
Injection-site
cellulitis Afluria, Daptacel, Fluarix, Flulaval, Menveo, Pediarix, Quadracel, Tenivac
Injection-site pain and
other reactions (induration, warmth) ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, Pediarix, PedvaxHIB, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Tdvax, Tenivac, Twinrix
Injection-site rash ProQuad, Vaqta, Varivax Daptacel, Flulaval,
IPOL, Prevnar-13
Interference with normal
activity of arm Daptacel, DT,
Prevnar-13
Itching Afluria, Varivax
Lightheadedness Recombivax
Listlessness Quadracel
Malaise Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tenivac, Varivax Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, Tdvax, Twinrix
Medical attention
sought Pediarix
Pain in extremity Fluarix
Peripheral edema ActHIB, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac, Varivax
Severe pain Bexero
Swelling Afluria, Adacel, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Fluzone, Infanrix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune, Pediarix, PedVaxHIB, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Menveo, MMR-II, ProQuad
Tiredness Adacel, FluMist, IPOL
Hepatobiliary/liver (3) Elevation of liver
enzymes Recombivax
Hepatitis Menveo Havrix, Twinrix
Jaundice Havrix, Twinrix
Infections and
infestations (51) Appendicitis Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
Menveo
Atypical measles MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Bronchiolitis Daptacel, Pediarix,
Pentacel, Prevnar-13, RotaTeq
Bronchitis Flulaval Infanrix, ProQuad
Cellulitis Daptacel, Infanrix,
Tenivac, Vaqta Daptacel, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Infanrix, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Tdvax, Varivax
Cellulitis-like
reaction Afluria
Chlamydia Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Cholecystitis Tenivac
Croup Afluria, Fluzone, Vaqta
Early-onset Hib disease PedVaxHIB PedvaxHIB
Glomerulonephritis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Herpes simplex/cold
sore Varivax ProQuad
Herpes zoster [shingles] ProQuad, Menactra Engerix-B, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Infection ProQuad
Influenza,
influenza-like illness Engerix-B, Fluarix, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Recombivax, Twinrix Afluria, Flulaval,Havrix, ProQuad
Invasive Hib disease Pentacel
Laryngitis Menveo Flulaval
Laryngotracheo-bronchitis Vaqta
Localized infection Tenivac
Measles ProQuad
Measles-like rash MMR-II, ProQuad, Vaqta MMR-II
Meningitis (aseptic,
eosinophilic) Daptacel Engerix-B, FluMist, MMR-II, Pentacel, ProQuad, Twinrix, Varivax
Nasal congestion Afluria, Fluarix,
Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Vaqta
Pelvic inflammatory
disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
Menveo
Pharyngitis/
nasopharyngitis Afluria, Bexero, Fluarix, Flulaval, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax,
RotaTeq, Vaqta Fluarix, Varivax
Pharyngitis
streptococcal Vaqta
Pharyngolaryngeal pain Fluarix
Pneumonia, pneumonitis,
lobar pneumonia, bilateral pneumonia Daptacel, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Hiberix, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, RotaTeq, Varivax MMR-II, ProQuad,
Varivax
Pulmonary congestion ProQuad
Pulmonary embolism Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Nephritis/pyelonephritis
[kidney infection] Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Pertussis Daptacel
Respiratory congestion Fluarix, Vaqta
Respiratory tract
infection (upper or lower) Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, PedVaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Infanrix, Pediarix, ProQuad
Rhinitis Fluarix, Flucelvax,
MMR-II, Recombivax, Vaqta Fluarix, Flulaval,
Havrix, MMR-II, Pentacel, ProQuad
Roseola Vaqta
Rubella-like rash ProQuad, Vaqta
Secondary bacterial
infection (skin, tissue) Varivax
Sepsis Daptacel, Pediarix
Sinusitis FluMist ProQuad
Skin infection ProQuad
Sore throat FluMist, MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Sneezing FluMist
Staph infection Menveo
Tonsillitis Fluarix
Tracheitis PedVaxHIB
Transmission of vaccine
virus strains RotaTeq
Varicella Flulaval, Menveo
Varicella (vaccine
strain) ProQuad, Varivax
Varicella-like rash ProQuad, Vaqta, Varivax ProQuad
Viral infection ProQuad, Vaqta Pentacel
Injury (intentional
and unintentional) (10) Accidental drug ingestion Hiberix
Alcohol intoxication Pneumovax-23
Fall Menactra Menveo
Falling with injury Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Head injury Menveo
Intentional
multiple-drug overdose Menveo
Limb injury Menveo
Road accident Menveo
Suicidal depression Menveo
Suicide attempt Menveo
Investigations (6) Abnormal liver function
tests Engerix-B, Twinrix
Alanine
aminotransferase increased Menveo
Body temperature
increased Menveo
Creatine phosphokinase
increased Havrix
Diagnostic studies Pediarix
Increased serum
C-reactive protein Pneumovax-23
Metabolic (3) Change in eating habits Menveo
Loss of appetite,
decreased appetite Afluria, DT, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, Menactra, Pediarix, Prevnar-13, Recombivax, Rotarix, Varivax Pentacel
Mitochondrial
encephalomyopathy, Leigh syndrome exacerbation [neurometabolic] FluMist
Musculoskeletal and
connective tissue (24) Ankylosing spondylitis
[rare arthritis] Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Arm pain Engerix-B, Vaqta
Arthralgia [joint
pain] Adacel, Bexero, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, MMR-II, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, Prevnar-13, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Varivax Boostrix, Engerix-B, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, IPOL, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tdvax, Twinrix
Arthritis Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
MMR-II Engerix-B, Flulaval,
MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix
Arthropathy Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Back pain Engerix-B, Fluarix, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Pneumovax-23, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta Boostrix
Bone pain Menveo
Cramps Engerix-B, Recombivax
Hip and wrist fracture Tenivac
Hypotonia [low
muscle tone] Pentacel Daptacel, Hiberix,
Infanrix, Pediarix, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Invertebral disc
protrusion Menactra
Muscle spasm Adacel
Muscle
weakness/weakness Adacel, Engerix-B, Recombivax, Tenivac, Twinrix Engerix-B, Flulaval, Recombivax, Twinrix
Musculoskeletal pain Fluarix ProQuad
Musculoskeletal
stiffness Havrix
Myalgia [muscle pain] Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Daptacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menactra, Menveo, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, Quadracel, Recombivax, Trumenba, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax Boostrix, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, IPOL, Menactra, Menomune, MMR-II, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac
Myositis [muscle
inflammation] Adacel
Neck pain Engerix-B, Fluarix,
Pneumovax-23, Recombivax
Pain in extremities Fluarix, Fluzone,
Pediarix, Recombivax, Tdvax, Tenivac
Psoriatic arthropathy Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Reactive arthritis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Shoulder pain Engerix-B, Recombivax
Stiff neck Recombivax, Varivax
Stiffness Pneumovax-23, Vaqta,
Varivax
Nervous system (45) Acute disseminated
encephalomyelitis (ADEM) Menveo, MMR-II Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
Menactra, MMR-II, ProQuad
Ataxia [nervous
system dysfunction] MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad,
Varivax
Bulging fontanelle Pediarix
Cerebellar ataxia Vaqta
Convulsions/seizures ActHIB, Daptacel, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, Pediarix, PedVaxHIB, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, RotaTeq ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Hiberix, IPOL, Kinrix, Menactra, MMR-II, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tdvax, Twinrix, Varivax
Depressed level of
consciousness Boostrix, Pediarix,
Pentacel
Dizziness Engerix-B,
Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, Recombivax, Twinrix Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac, Varivax
Encephalitis,
vaccine-induced encephalitis [brain inflammation] MMR-II Boostrix, Engerix-B, FluMist, MMR-II, Pediarix, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax
Encephalomyelitis [brain
and spinal cord] Afluria, Fluarix,
Fluzone
Encephalopathy [brain
disease] MMR-II, Pentacel Afluria, Engerix-B, Flulaval, Havrix, Infanrix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Twinrix
Facial palsy, Bell’s
palsy Adacel, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, FluMist, Fluzone, Menactra, Menveo, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Facial (or cranial)
nerve paralysis Adacel Flulaval
Facial paresis [impaired
facial movement] Fluarix, Menveo
Febrile
convulsions/seizures Afluria, Daptacel, Fluzone, Infanrix, Hiberix, Menveo, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, RotaTeq, Vaqta, Varivax Afluria, Daptacel, Fluzone, IPOL, MMR-II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax
Headache Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flublok, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax DT, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Infanrix, IPOL, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, ProQuad, Tdvax, Twinrix
Hypoesthesia [decreased
tactile sensitivity] Adacel, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, Havrix, Recombivax, Twinrix
Hypokinesia [loss of
muscle movement] Flulaval
Hypotonic-hyporesponsive
episode (HHE) Daptacel, Infanrix, Prevnar-13 Daptacel, Hiberix,
Kinrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel
Hypertonia Havrix
Infantile spasms Daptacel, Pediarix
Lethargy ActHIB, Daptacel,
FluMist, Pentacel Pediarix
Limb paralysis Flulaval
Measles inclusion body
encephalitis (MIBE) MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Migraine Adacel, Fluarix,
Twinrix Engerix-B, Recombivax
Motor neuron disease Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Myelitis [spinal
cord disease] Adacel, Fluarix,
Fluzone, Havrix, Recombivax, Twinrix
Nerve compression Adacel
Neuralgia [nerve
pain] Afluria
Neuritis (including
brachial, polyneuritis) MMR-II Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Fluzone, MMR-II, Twinrix
Neuropathy,
polyneuropathy MMR-II Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix
Numbness Varivax
Paralysis Engerix-B,
Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Twinrix
Paresis [partial
paralysis] Engerix-B, Twinrix
Paresthesia [abnormal
skin sensations] MMR-II, Recombivax,
Twinrix Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, IPOL, Menactra, Menomune, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Tenivac, Varivax
Partial seizures,
seizures Menveo Daptacel, Engerix-B,
ProQuad
Presyncope [feeling
faint] Flucelvax
Radiculopathy [“pinched
nerve” in spine] Pneumovax-23 Pneumovax-23, Recombivax
Somnolence Engerix-B, ProQuad,
Twinrix Daptacel, DT, Flulaval,
Havrix, Hiberix, IPOL, Pediarix, Pentacel, Quadracel, Recombivax
Subacute sclerosing
panencephalitis (SSPE) MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Syncope, vasovagal
syncope [fainting] Flublok, MMR-II,
Twinrix Adacel, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune,
Menveo, MMR-II, Pediarix, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Trumenba
Tingling Engerix-B
Tonic convulsions Menveo Menveo
Transverse myelitis MMR-II Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Menactra, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Tremors Pneumovax-23 Flulaval, ProQuad
Unresponsiveness Daptacel
Psychiatric (15) Agitation Engerix-B, Twinrix IPOL, ProQuad,
Recombivax
Anorexia ActHIB, Daptacel,
Havrix, Engerix-B, IPOL, Menactra, Menomune, Twinrix, Vaqta
Crying (abnormal,
unusual, persistent or inconsolable) ActHIB, Daptacel, DT, Flulaval, Fluzone, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Menactra, Menveo, PedVaxHIB, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Vaqta Pediarix
Decreased sleep Prevnar-13
Depression Pneumovax-23
Disturbed sleep Recombivax, Varivax
Fretfulness Daptacel
Fussiness ActHIB, Daptacel,
Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Pediarix, Pentacel
Hypersomnia ProQuad
Increased sleep Prevnar-13
Insomnia Engerix-B, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Havrix, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta Flulaval, Pediarix
Irritability ActHIB, Afluria, , Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Havrix, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, Pediarix, PedVaxHIB, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Recombivax, Rotarix, RotaTeq, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax MMR-II, Recombivax
Nervousness Varivax Pediarix, ProQuad
Restlessness Hiberix Pediarix
Screaming Daptacel, Pediarix,
Pentacel, Quadracel
Reproductive (2) Dysmenorrhea Fluarix
Menstruation disorders Vaqta
Respiratory, thoracic
and mediastinal (19) Apnea ActHIB, Daptacel Engerix-B, Hiberix, Infanrix, Kinrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13
Asthma, asthma-like
symptoms Daptacel, FluMist, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, Pediarix, Pentacel, Tenivac, Vaqta Engerix-B, Fluarix,
Twinrix
Asthmatic crisis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Bronchial constriction Vaqta
Bronchial
hyperreactivity Havrix
Bronchospasm, bronchial
spasm Daptacel,
Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, Prevnar-13, RotaTeq Engerix-B, Fluarix, Flulaval, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Tenivac, Twinrix
Cough Afluria, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Gardasil/Gardasil 9, FluMist, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Rotarix, Vaqta, Varivax Fluarix, Fluzone,
Infanrix, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel
Cyanosis* [bluish
discoloration, low oxygen] Daptacel, Hiberix,
Infanrix, Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Difficulty breathing Menactra
Dyspnea [shortness
of breath] Prevnar-13 Fluarix, Flulaval, Fluzone, Havrix, Menomune, Pediarix, Quadracel, Twinrix
Dysphonia [vocal
abnormalities] Flulaval
Hypoxia Daptacel, FluMist
Oropharyngeal pain Afluria, Flucelvax,
Flulaval, Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Fluzone, Menveo
Respiratory distress Havrix Fluarix
Rhinorrhea [runny
nose] Afluria, Fluarix, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, HepB, MMR-II, ProQuad, Rotarix, Vaqta, Varivax Fluzone
Stridor [high-pitched
wheezing] Fluarix
Throat tightness Flulaval, Fluzone
Upper airway swelling Menactra
Wheezing FluMist, Menveo, Vaqta Fluzone, Menactra,
ProQuad
Skin/ subcutaneous
tissue (33) Acute hemorrhagic edema
of infancy MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Alopecia [hair loss] Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Engerix-B, Recombivax, Twinrix
Contact rash Varivax
Dermatitis Vaqta, Varivax
Diaper rash Varivax
Dry skin Varivax
Eczema Varivax Engerix-B, Recombivax,
Twinrix
Erythema [skin
redness] ActHIB, Adacel,Afluria, Bexero, Engerix-B, Flucelvax, Fluzone, IPOL, Menactra, Menveo, PedVaxHIB, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Quadracel, Recombivax, Twinrix,
Vaqta, Varivax Fluarix, Infanrix, Menactra, Menveo, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Tdvax
Erythema multiforme [skin
disorder] Flucelvax, MMR-II, Prevnar-13 Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Prevnar-13, Recombivax, Twinrix, Varivax
Erythema nodosum [nodules
or lumps] Gardasil/Gardasil 9 Engerix-B, Recombivax,
Twinrix
Exanthem/viral
exanthema [widespread rash] ProQuad, Vaqta Boostrix
Facial swelling/edema Prevnar-13 Daptacel, Fluarix, MMR-II, ProQuad, Varivax
Heat rash Varivax
Hyperhydrosis [abnormal
sweating] Flulaval, Havrix, Twinrix
Impetigo ProQuad, Varivax
Lichen planus [inflammatory
skin rash] Engerix-B, Twinrix
Panniculitis [disease
of fatty layer of skin] MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Parotitis [salivary
gland inflammation] MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Pigmentation disorder Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Pruritus [itchy skin] Afluria, Engerix-B, Fluarix, Havrix, MMR-II, Pneumovax-23, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Boostrix, Daptacel, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, Fluzone, Infanrix, Kinrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Tdvax, Tenivac
Psoriasis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Purpura [red/purple
spots] MMR-II Engerix-B, MMR-II,
ProQuad
Pustular psoriasis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Rash Adacel, Afluria, Engerix-B, Flublok, Flulaval, Havrix, Menactra, Menomune, Menveo, MMR-II, PedVaxHIB, Prevnar-13, ProQuad, Recombivax, Twinrix, Vaqta, Varivax ActHIB, Adacel, Afluria, Bexero, Boostrix, Daptacel, DT, Fluarix, Flucelvax, Flulaval, FluMist, Fluzone, Hiberix, Infanrix, IPOL, Menomune, MMR-II, Pediarix, Pentacel, Pneumovax-23, Prevnar-13, Quadracel, Tdvax, Tenivac
Rash morbilliform Vaqta
Rash vesicular ProQuad, Vaqta
Skin discoloration Pentacel
Skin exfoliation Menveo
Skin induration MMR-II, ProQuad
Stevens-Johnson
syndrome [severe skin reaction] Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
MMR-II Engerix-B, Fluarix, Fluzone, MMR-II, ProQuad, Recombivax, Varivax
Sweating Engerix-B, Fluarix,
Flucelvax, Pneumovax-23, Recombivax, Twinrix
Vesiculation MMR-II
Vitiligo Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Vascular (10) Cerebrovascular
accident Kinrix, Pneumovax-23,
Tenivac ProQuad, Varivax
Deep venous thrombosis Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Flushing Engerix-B, Recombivax,
Twinrix Flulaval, Fluzone
Henoch-Schönlein
purpura [blood vessel inflammation] MMR-II Boostrix, Fluarix,
MMR-II, ProQuad, Varivax
Pallor DT, Flulaval, Hiberix,
Pediarix, Pentacel, Prevnar-13, Quadracel
Petechiae [bleeding
capillaries] Engerix-B, Twinrix Pediarix, Recombivax
Polyarteritis nodosa [damaged
arteries] Recombivax
Raynaud’s phenomenon Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Renal vasculitis Afluria
Vasculitis MMR-II Afluria, Engerix-B,
Fluarix, Fluzone, Havrix, MMR-II, Recombivax, Twinrix
Urogenital (6) Dysuria [difficult
urination] Recombivax
Epididymitis [testicular
inflammation] MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Orchitis [inflammation
of the testes] MMR-II MMR-II, ProQuad
Proteinuria Gardasil/Gardasil 9
Urinary retention Pneumovax-23
Urinary tract infection Gardasil/Gardasil 9,
RotaTeq "

Delight

17th August 2020, 22:13

As those who follow this thread know.... despite the lies told barefaced by people like Dr. Hotez, a vaccine does not just contain a bit of a germ in saline. A vaccine uses adjuvants to trigger an immune response. These adjuvants are considered to be capable of harm even by the WHO but "necessary evils" for the choir of the church which considers vaccination a sacrament.

1295264786012409856

Gwin Ru

20th August 2020, 14:15

Gates' Vaccine will Create GMO Humans (https://www.henrymakow.com/2020/08/gates-vaccine-gmo-humans.html)

August 19, 2020

https://www.henrymakow.com/upload_images/gmo.png

A retired attorney considers the legality of mandatory vaccines which change our DNA

Do they seriously expect the public to accept vaccines from manufacturers who are protected from liability? You trust Bill Gates, don't you?

IMPENDING COVID-19 VACCINATIONS: A BRIEF ON SAFETY AND CHOICE

By Andrew
henrymakow.com

The impending arrival of many different COVID-19 vaccine offerings raises two extremely important questions:
(1) Will one of these new vaccines be safe enough to warrant the risk of being vaccinated?

(2) Given our government's current mandated lockdown mentality, might you be forced to take one of these vaccines?
On the subject of all things coronavirus, unfortunately, both conservative and liberal MSM have agreed to hype the need for an immediate vaccination as the way back to a productive, normal America. Likewise, most all of our politicians, including President Trump, are touting the need for immediate vaccinations - though their only real expertise seems to be how to get elected.

Consumers seem to naively think taking a new vaccine is no riskier than experimenting with Beta software. Fortunately, there are some who begun to speak out on the possible issues of a rushed vaccine ...One of the most prominent of those who question vaccines is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a serious and thoughtful activist in many areas, including health and the environment.

https://www.henrymakow.com/upload_images/tomato.png

He writes: (https://www.marktaliano.net/almost-no-one-understands-whats-at-stake-commentary-by-robert-f-kennedy-jr/)

"Almost no one understands what's at stake: Pharma has 80 COVID vaccines in development, but Gates & Fauci pushed Moderna's "Frankenstein jab" (https://www.streetwisereports.com/article/2020/08/19/momenta-pharmaceuticals-shares-rise-69-on-6-5-billion-johnson-johnson-takeover-bid.html?utm_source=delivra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tlsr%208-19-20&utm_id=40030991) to the front of the line. Scientists & ethicists are sounding alarms. The vaccine uses a new, untested, and very controversial experimental RNA technology that Gates has backed for over a decade. Instead of injecting an antigen & adjuvant as with traditional vaccines, Moderna plugs a small piece of coronavirus genetic code into human cells, altering DNA throughout the human body and reprograming our cells to produce antibodies to fight the virus. MRNA vaccines are a form of genetic engineering called 'germline gene editing.' Moderna's genetic alterations are passed down to future generations."
Dr Suhab Siddiqi, Moderna's Ex-Director of Chemistry, told CNN, "I would not let the [vaccine] be injected in my body. I would demand: Where is the toxicity data?"

Former NIH Scientist Dr. Judy Mikovits says its criminal to test MRNA vaccines on humans. "MRNA can cause cancers and other dire harms that don't surface for years."

"UNINTENDED" CONSEQUENCES FROM FAULTY VACCINES
(A) What can result from unintended consequences of an ill-conceived vaccination campaign?

The following failed vaccination campaign was developed in an election year. Sound familiar?
"Some of the American public's hesitance to embrace vaccines -- the flu vaccine in particular -- 'can be attributed to the long-lasting effects of a failed 1976 campaign to mass-vaccinate the public against a strain of the swine flu virus,' writes Rebecca Kreston for Discover.

"This government-led campaign was widely viewed as a debacle and put an irreparable dent in future public health initiative, as well as negatively influenced the public's perception of both the flu and the flu shot in this country. To avoid an epidemic, the CDC believed, at least 80 percent of the United States population would need to be vaccinated. When they asked Congress for the money to do it, politicians jumped on the potential good press of saving their constituents from the plague."

https://www.henrymakow.com/upload_images/Flu_shot_GBS.png

"The real victims of this pandemic were likely the 450-odd people who came down with Guillain-Barre syndrome, a rare neurological disorder, after getting the 1976 flu shot. On its website, the CDC notes that people who got the vaccination did have an increased risk of approximately one additional case of GBS for every 100,000 people who got the swine flu vaccine."

I personally know the Guillain-Barre side effect to be true because of a very close family friend was one of those who were so affected. Unlike many, he was fortunate enough to fully recover.

(B) In the U.S., some infants developed intussusception-a rare type of bowel obstruction-soon after RotaShield® was licensed in August 1998.

At first, it was not clear if the vaccine or some other factor was causing the bowel obstructions. The U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) voted on October 22, 1999, to no longer recommend the use of the RotaShield® vaccine for infants because of an association between the vaccine and intussusception (bowel folding). https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/rotavirus/vac-rotashield-historical.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/rotavirus/vac-rotashield-historical.htm)

(C) The date was 23 November 2009 and thousands of NHS staff were vaccinated with Pandemrix, a vaccine made by pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).
Dozens of NHS workers are fighting for compensation after developing narcolepsy from a swine flu vaccine that was rushed into service without the usual testing when the disease spread across the globe in 2009. They say it has destroyed their careers and their health. https://www.buzzfeed.com/shaunlintern/these-nhs-staff-were-told-the-swine-flu-vaccine-was-safe

LEGISLATIVE CONCERNS
(A) Can the state force its citizens to take a vaccine? While one may be tempted to disregard a 115-year-old SCOTUS decision, don't be surprised if this decision allows some states to impose mandatory vacations on its citizens.

Not convinced? Remember that General Flynn was first investigated for possible violations of the 1799 Logan Act.

Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case (https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/) in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that individual liberty is not absolute and is subject to the police power of the state.

(B) Whether forced to take a vaccination or not, an October 2010 SCOTUS ruling reinforces 1986 law preventing injured parties or surviving families from having reasonable remedies due to the negative effects of vaccinations.
The United States Supreme Court reached a decision recently, concluding that federal law protects vaccine makers from product-liability lawsuits that are filed in state courts and seek damages for injuries or death attributed to a vaccine.

The Supreme Court explained that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 preempts all design-defect claims against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for injury or death caused by a vaccine's side effects. The Court reasoned that "a vaccine side effect could always have been avoidable by use of a different vaccine not containing the harmful element. The language of the act suggests the design is not subject to question in a tort action.

The statute establishes as a complete defense must be unavoidability (https://www.policymed.com/2011/03/supreme-court-rules-in-favor-of-protecting-vaccine-makers-from-statelawsuits.html) (given safe manufacture and warning) with respect to the particular design.

CONCLUSION
This brings us to the present. Rightly or wrongly, the nation is in a panic over what the establishment has been calling the most dangerous pandemic since the Spanish Flu of 1918.

Smarting from the effects of lockdowns, the media, politicians, bureaucrats, and doctors all are looking for the silver bullet ... and we, the people, want it now!

The success that politicians have had with our lockdown compliance might give them the courage to look to the old law in order to make a coronavirus vaccine mandatory.

On the other hand, many believe this whole pandemic has been planned. The push for vaccines that promise huge profits is a part of a darker initiative. I will dive into this subject in Part II.

In closing, I hope you will think about a vaccination that employs a technique that will affect future generations ... that's right, the future generations of your family. What might these consequences, planned or unintended, be?

If nothing else, consider the plight of the juicy, tasty tomato ... a tomato too perishable to effectively transport to the market. After years of genetic engineering to cure the perishability during shipment, tomatoes now travel well.

The unintended consequence is a GMO tomato that could now double as a reddish-pink handball.

Considering the unknowns, I've made my decision. I don't want the coming generations of my family or me to be GMO humans.

What will you decide?

----

Related - Must watch Plandemic I Interview with Judy Mikovits (https://plandemicseries.com/) (Bottom left)

Note- In order to see the complexities of getting a vaccine to market, please follow the links to two tables.

Table 1: Vaccine Life Cycle (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/history/index.html)
shows the CDC's take on the intricate steps of a vaccine's life cycle.
(https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/30/opinion/coronavirus-covid-vaccine.html)
Table 2: Timelines and (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/30/opinion/coronavirus-covid-vaccine.html) Competitors" (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/30/opinion/coronavirus-covid-vaccine.html)
compares the typical timeline for bringing a vaccine to market to an impossibly quick solution demanded by the media and promised by the government. In addition, Table 2 shows the variety of companies racing to come up with a vaccine solution.

First Comment from Tony B
Unfortunately, articles like this, common in the "alternative" media, give the Satanists weaponry they may have overlooked and lead the average, non-truth-seeker further down the road to despair and helplessness.

Added to such warning revelations must be some of the possible actions by the people themselves as no government can stand against a massive refusal to obey an unjust statute. Especially one which is obviously unconstitutional (read "unlawful") to begin with. When the government becomes a criminal cabal, like that of the U.S. has been at the top for at least more than a century, it must be held to pay for that criminality by the people themselves, using whatever means necessary. The choice is that or abject slavery for all.

O Donna

21st August 2020, 05:42

Couldn't help myself

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EWxCb5hWkAASRWB.jpg

onawah

3rd September 2020, 01:51

"Vaccines Revealed" new 9 part Docu-Series
9/2/20
(From non-profit GMOs Revealed email update today: support@gmosrevealed.com )

"Right now, as I write this, there is a fierce battle going on that the public doesn’t even know about…

And if Big Pharma and Big Media have their way, information will be deleted, decisions will be made, and laws will be passed without your knowledge or consent.

We’ll lose the right to speak up, the right to choose what’s best for ourselves and for our children.

We need advocates, and we need them today…

You helped raise the alarm about GMOs, and Monsanto finally had to face its victims in court.

We can do it again… with your help!

Make sure you are registered to watch the exclusive screening of the docu-series, “V-Revealed,” FREE and online HERE for VIP access viewing.

For decades, Big Pharma has controlled and manipulated the media to keep certain truths hidden.

For example:

-Robert Kennedy Jr. released a book about mercury and “the shots we require all kids to get,” all science-based.

He’s dear friends with Arianna Huffington and many in the media and still….he can’t get anyone to promote it.

-An actual whistleblower within the CDC came out less than a year ago and said he was “ordered to doctor” the results of the 2004 study that said autism wasn’t related to the MMR vaccine.

It’s been covered up!

And…

The media won’t cover the story.

Enough is enough.

What do you do?

Watch and share the FREE online docu-series, “V-Revealed” with a new episode every day for 9 days:
https://www.vrevealed.com/trailer/?cookieUUID=e3710dff-2056-4de4-a74b-e95ad6d15ad0&cookieUUID=743bd416-5f23-4cfe-b9a1-c4ee40e2c3ae&affiliate=3450

Real change only comes if we band together as concerned parents, health advocates, and everyday heroes who are committed to exposing the truth and spreading the word.

We traveled the world with an award-winning documentary team and put together a magnificent Hollywood-quality documentary series that will blow your socks off!

You don’t want to miss a single riveting episode."

Register HERE Now! (It’s FREE):
https://www.vrevealed.com/trailer/?cookieUUID=a742aad9-8a99-4b52-854c-b1e30c2c670e&cookieUUID=0aff0e5e-a2b1-4992-a2a8-9c21fd814e15&affiliate=3450

Sincerely,
The GMOs Revealed Team

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgt_B4twCg4

onawah

9th September 2020, 02:53

VACCINES REVEALED new documtary 1st episode free online for 24 hours starting tonight
See post #861 above for more details
https://www.vrevealed.com/referral/

onawah

9th September 2020, 05:29

New interview with RFKennedy Jr,. on "Vaccines Revealed"
https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/q_8nch3_7Vvw3ozKF5O_A6TJCwDUJA9oS8PVKnqd3wQHS3x3Jsox9SRYsdpUH14PzkW5pOCFCyMBUZfYeaQ9iy37qr35OPOCRi6x e2SXr4ePK1nQeEYVXdGnjr0EDRJL32vQg9f_YvQkF2ivuizXedsXJ_dwkPSqzu0FkF0W=s0-d-e1-ft#https://default.salsalabs.org/3c1e5ff0-d5bf-4d1e-ac41-e527d3448ea2/85c5e60e-6701-4e4b-bbd1-d6abb9fc02f3.jpg
https://childrenshealthdefense.salsalabs.org/kennedynewsviewspressingatespocketgovttestscovid?wvpId=6e43f36e-0dfe-4224-991b-cf84941660dc
Register here: https://vrevealed.com/trailer/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=3c1e5ff0-d5bf-4d1e-ac41-e527d3448ea2&cookieUUID=9048d072-40ca-4140-8d58-32ba837569f3&cookieUUID=fce0e61c-770e-4645-81b8-c92427fd942e&affiliate=3566
"For decades, Big Pharma has controlled and manipulated the media to keep certain truths hidden, but enough is enough.

We traveled the world with an award-winning documentary team, got exclusive access to whistleblowers, former drug reps, and university scientists and put together a magnificent Hollywood-quality documentary series that will blow your socks off!

Beginning Tuesday, September 8th, Vaccines Revealed 2020 reveal facts about:

• Drug and vaccine companies blatantly falsifying documents
• Whistleblowers getting completely BURIED
• Our Government looking the other way
• Bribery

With an all-new interview with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., you won’t want to miss a single riveting episode of Vaccines Revealed 2020!"

onawah

10th September 2020, 04:47

RFKennedy Jr. in "Vaccines Revealed" brand new 2 part interview, Part 1 showing free online now
I watched it and here are some of my notes:

ON MASKS: Children's Health Defense (RFKJr's team) did a research project and they found that of the 80 studies on Pub Med, almost all said masks don't work. They work for bacterial infections, but viruses are too small and they pass right through masks.
They are unhealthy because bacteria grows on them and they prevent the flow of oxygen.

HCQ: Fauci's team published a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine and Lancet on HCQ saying it doesn't work for Covid. One week later it was withdrawn for FRAUD.

The Moderna vaccine trial: It was conducted on 45 people who were in such robust health Kennedy said they were like "The Avengers". Of the high dose group, 3 people (20%) got seriously ill. Of the low dose group 1 person (6%) named Ian Haydon had to be hospitalized after bouts of chills, uncontrollable trembling, sweating, vomiting, and finally losing consciousness. He said it was the sickest he had ever been.

Ian Haydon: Was then guest on Sanje Gupts's TV show. Before the show, Gupta asked him how he did in the trial, and when Ian told him, Gupta urged him not to talk about how sick he got. Haydon complied (no reason was given) and said on the show that he did fine in the trial. But he later told the truth on Facebook and Twitter.

The Vaccine: Fauci admitted recently that the vaccine might only produce antibodies for 3 months, in which case to work "as advertised", it would have to be repeated every 3 moths. Kennedy pointed out that with no testing on animals, there is no way to know what short or long term damages it could cause, and that inasmuch as the flu shot actually makes the recipients contagious, it's likely the Covid vaccine would do the same. Because it will change the RNA, an entirely new and untested feature, there is no knowing what kind of unprecedented side effects it might cause. .

Fauci: Has only ever supported patented medicines from which pharmaceutical companies can make big profits. Never vitamins or drugs like HCQ, even though they are effective. From his position of great power, he awarded Moderna (with which he has had a long association) nearly half a billion dollars to develop the vaccine (even though they have never produced a vaccine before.

And more...
See more details about the documentary and sign up for all the upcoming free episodes here: https://vrevealed.com/trailer/ Each one will be shown free online for 24 hours.

onawah

10th September 2020, 19:06

Episode 2 now online free for about 6 more hours. See post above for more details. Episode 2 features Dr. Suzanne Humphries, Sayer Ji, Mary Holland.

onawah

11th September 2020, 02:11

Episode 3 available free for registrants for 22 more hours this one featuring part 2 of the interview RFK Jr., (EXPLOSIVE REVEAL by RFK !!), & Scott & Melissa Miller, filmmakers of "Vaccine Syndrome" and part of the film "Vaxxed". Register here: https://vrevealed.com/trailer/?eType...affiliate=3566
This direct link might work:

bXbmff7LnsY

greybeard

11th September 2020, 18:31

I watched this all the way through.(Episode 3)
I suspect that anyone who watches this will perhaps have thoughts about how Autism came about resolved.
Its not in the genes and not contagious.
RFKJnr very articulate --focused --he is not Anti vax he had vaccines himself and his kids were vaccinated.
Its full of facts about vaccine companies and mercury in injections.
An amazing interview and more to come.
Chris

onawah

11th September 2020, 21:32

Anyone who missed that youtube in post #865 that was first posted and is no longer available, there's another one now that should be good for awhile at least. Posted there now and here as well, it's a ground-breaking new interview with RFK Jr. that is going to be a minefield for vaccine proponents.
bXbmff7LnsY
Good for about 3 hours 15 minutes from the time this was posted.
Actually, Chris, RFK Jr. has said elsewhere that he is not anti-vaccine, he's in favor of vaccines that are safe and actually do what they are supposed to do, but none of them do or ever have.
His recounting of the number of vacccines he got as a child as opposed to how many his children got was meant to demonstrate the huge increase in the number of vaccines given now especially to children, and he goes on to explain why that is so dangerous and is putting the health of today's children at severe risk.

I watched this all the way through.(Episode 3)
I suspect that anyone who watches this will perhaps have thoughts about how Autism came about resolved.
Its not in the genes and not contagious.
RFKJnr very articulate --focused --he is not Anti vax he had vaccines himself and his kids were vaccinated.
Its full of facts about vaccine companies and mercury in injections.
An amazing interview and more to come.
Chris

onawah

11th September 2020, 22:25

From RFK Jr's Children's Health Defense Update today
9/11/20

COVID-19 Vaccine Participant Develops Neurological Symptoms, AstraZeneca Pauses Trial
By Jeremy Loffredo
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/covid-19-vaccine-participant-develops-neurological-symptoms-astrazeneca-pauses-trial/?_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106

"On Tuesday, AstraZeneca announced a pause on its experimental COVID-19 vaccine trial after a woman in the UK developed a “suspected serious reaction.” The company is also conducting trials in the U.S., South Africa and Brazil, with enrollment in all these countries on hold for now.

AstraZeneca is partnering with researchers at Oxford University to develop this vaccine, and is testing it on children as young as 5 years old. The World Health Organization’s Chief Scientist Soumya Swaminathan called the project a COVID-19 vaccine race “frontrunner” earlier this year.

The company asserts that a panel of independent experts will review the adverse reaction and decide whether or not AstraZeneca should lift the pause.

While AstraZeneca says the woman has not been officially diagnosed, an anonymous source told the New York Times that the woman’s symptoms were consistent with transverse myelitis (TM).

TM is a neurological disorder characterized by inflammation of the spinal cord, a major element of the central nervous system. It often results in weakness of the limbs, problems emptying the bladder and paralysis. Patients can become severely disabled and there is currently no effective cure.

Concerns over associations between TM and vaccines are well known. A review of published case studies in 2009 documented 37 cases of transverse myelitis associated with vaccines, including Hepatitis B, measles-mumps-rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus and others in infants, children and adults. The researchers in Israel noted “the associations of different vaccines with a single autoimmune phenomenon allude to the idea that a common denominator of these vaccines, such as an adjuvant, might trigger this syndrome.” Even the New York Times piece on the recent AstraZeneca trial pause notes past “speculation” that vaccines might be able to trigger TM.

Perhaps the most infamous example of this phenomenon is the case of Colton Berrett. Berrett received Merck’s HPV vaccine at age 13 after doctors advised his mother it would help prevent cervical cancer in his hypothetical wife down the line. After the vaccine, doctors diagnosed Berrett with TM, and the boy became increasingly paralyzed as his spine became increasingly inflamed. Doctors said he’d eventually lose the ability to breathe and the family chose to intubate him. After years of living with this disability, and needing someone to carry a breathing apparatus for him at all times, Berrett took his own life.

Even if AstraZeneca’s vaccine is found responsible for the trial participant’s TM symptoms, that may not become the official conclusion. In July, another participant developed symptoms of TM, and the vaccine trial was paused. But an “independent panel” concluded the illness was unrelated to the vaccine, and the trial continued.

As Nikolai Petrovsky from Flinders University told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, these panels are “typically made up of doctors, a biostatistician and a medical representative of the sponsor company running the trial.”

As Nikolai Petrovsky from Flinders University told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, these panels are “typically made up of doctors, a biostatistician and a medical representative of the sponsor company running the trial.”

It’s unclear if the panel that reviewed the first case of TM will be the same group of experts to decide if the second case of TM was caused by the vaccine, but the Oxford team seems to be laying the groundwork for another such conclusion.

“This may be due to an issue related to the vaccine. It also may not,” a spokesperson from Oxford University told ABC News Thursday.

Also of significance is the fact that researchers have yet to produce a safe and effective vaccine against any coronavirus. When researchers were experimenting on vaccines against SARS (similar to COVID-19 in that it infects the lungs), trials were halted completely, after the vaccinated animals developed even more severe (and sometimes fatal) versions of SARS than the unvaccinated animals.

But while AstraZeneca informs volunteers about the results of animal trials with experimental SARS and MERS vaccines, it leaves out the results of its own animal trials, which suggest ineffectiveness at stopping the spread of the virus.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/insert.jpg

Screenshot from information sheet given to AstraZeneca’s vaccine trial volunteers.

As Forbes reported in May, all six monkeys injected with AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine became infected with COVID-19 after being inoculated. Then, all the monkeys were put to death, meaning the public won’t know if other issues were to have developed.

Adding obscurity to the AstraZeneca trial results is the fact that control groups are given Pfizer’s Nimenrix, a meningitis and pneumonia vaccine.

In a tweet, Oxford University’s Oxford Vaccine Group explained the decision, while seemingly indicating that it doesn’t expect its own vaccine to be safe at all since adverse reactions to Nimenrix and the new COVID-19 vaccine are expected.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chief legal counsel and chairman of Children’s Health Defense, explains, “Since none of these companies have ever had to test their products for safety against a true inert placebo, they have always been able to dismiss these sort of tragic outcomes as sad ‘coincidence.'”

Furthermore, AstraZeneca is no stranger to hiding negative trial data from the public eye. DrugWatch.com has documented this pattern at length. For example, the company knowingly and systematically hid results showing that its antipsychotic drug Seroquel was either ineffective or harmful, which is revealed in company emails. (AstraZeneca had to pay $520 million to the U.S. Department of Justice and $647 million in settlements after covering up Seroquel’s side effects.)

Not to mention, in March 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a declaration under the PREP Act (retroactive to February), providing liability immunity “against any claim of loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures,” including vaccines. This means that AstraZeneca is indemnified against lawsuits, regardless of whether or not its new vaccine produces harmful effects.

AstraZeneca calls its recent decision to halt the trial a “routine action,” and some experts have chimed in with similar takes. Cambridge University lecturer Dr. Charlotte Summers contends the pause is a sign of the “rigorousness of the safety monitoring regime,” while Florian Krammer, a Virologist at the Icahn School of Medicine, similarly argues the move to pause proves that “only safe and effective therapies make it to the market.”

But, as Kennedy points out, this move to investigate adverse reactions is anything but routine. “The vaccine industry is unaccustomed to this level of scrutiny,” he says. He suggests that most vaccine approval processes are not subject to such investigation by the global public eye, and that “if the 72 doses now mandated for children [such as measles-mumps-rubella] had endured critical appraisal by so many eyeballs, not one of them could have gotten close to an FDA license.”
"
Tech Titans and Censorship—The Same People Profiting From The Quarantine Are Censoring Criticisms of It
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman, Children’s Health Defense
https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/1Q-SebraWmXBYxEL-YMKx1aHytYJSfWr-ZyqSAp6NnbwX_KT1GlLOCMA3c_h0uuYMOxcw901sG0ftfSe6U19pg5mm3x-e9qVyMcpTMBGrFQyQaNprntx2v8NpPqoGpD41wmEPwD7Ra8Gr54VouGwS_E9atmwvYlfQMfP9Oli=s0-d-e1-ft#https://default.salsalabs.org/362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106/2f5e4add-e822-4fcb-af30-638cdcab2e61.jpg
"The same bloated Tech/Data and Telecom Titans now gorging themselves on the corpses of our obliterated middle class are rapidly transforming America’s once proud democracy into a censorship and surveillance police state. As Naomi Klein chronicled in her classic, Disaster Capitalism, totalitarian elements and ruling elites have, throughout history, reflexively used crisis as opportunities to shift wealth upward. “You never,” Rahm Emmanuel counseled, “want a serious crisis to go to waste.” The tread worn strategy is to inflame public fears to justify the imposition of authoritarian controls and censorship thereby allowing oligarchs to silence protest against their power-grabs and their wholesale privatization of the commons.

Permanently bankrupted over 100,000 small businesses including 41,000 Black-owned businesses some of which took three generations of investment to build.
Led by Bill Gates, Silicon Valley applauded from the sidelines as medical charlatans fanned pandemic panic, confined the world population under house arrest, and shattered the global economy. Silicon Valley fattened as masked and isolated families turned to social media and Amazon. In five months, their quarantine put 58 million Americans out of work, permanently bankrupted over 100,000 small businesses including 41,000 Black-owned businesses some of which took three generations of investment to build. These policies have also set into motion the inevitable dismantling of the social safety net that nurtured middle-class prosperity. Government officials have already begun liquidating the 100-year legacies of the New Deal, New Frontier, the Great Society, and Obamacare to pay the accumulated quarantine debts. Say goodbye to school lunches, healthcare, WICS, Medicaid, Medicare, University scholarships, etc., etc., etc.

The Tech Barons used the lockdown to accelerate construction of their 5G network of satellites, antennae, biometric facial recognition, and “track and trace” infrastructure that they will use to compel obedience, suppress dissent, and to manage the rage when Americans finally wake up to the fact that they have stolen our democracy, our civil rights, our country, and way of life while we huddled in orchestrated fear from a flu-like illness."

COVID-19 an Early Warning for Vaccine Mandates
https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/BclTji-nC-hQYttsFRGpHkps5rezeCrV-3lMzr56u4ayr_rM8iHVoh_4i2ibXFSOHeJ9No7gvZx78KKdEoZ_GS70bK1DzWzAAUzQ3vELYfGUHVP2tsDAdKx6hQ5nnNern4XOC Qt2V_bpMhhUrWBiS0Xyshz9xd9NHVofk6Ar=s0-d-e1-ft#https://default.salsalabs.org/362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106/4e58e8bc-58c4-4681-ba6d-240e384fd1f8.jpg

By Davis Taylor, Tenth Amendment Center
https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2020/09/covid-19-an-early-warning-for-vaccine-mandates/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106

"The history of totalitarian regimes has shown that those who voice dissent early on are often viewed as loons or trouble makers and that, generally, it’s not until the regimes are at their worst that those early dissenters enjoy some restoration of their reputations. It’s ironic, of course, that it takes “things getting bad” for the mocking and loathing of those early dissenters to stop—with increased oppression serving as a silver lining of sorts for them.

A scenario along these lines is unfolding for those in the informed consent movement, who oppose vaccine mandates. For years, they’ve endured their share of mocking and loathing. However, recently, their concerns are receiving greater consideration by the public. This is happening because “things are getting bad” with regard to rights being stripped under the pretext of protecting us from infectious disease. Meanwhile, the path society has been on with regard to childhood vaccine mandates has taken a wider and deeper turn.

That turn was the arrival of COVID-19 along with the scientific shenanigans and repression of rights that have accompanied it. Below are three ways that the informed consent movement’s warnings are being validated by the manner in which “the powers that be” are responding to COVID-19.

1. The risks from COVID-19 are being exaggerated, like those of other infectious diseases.

Opponents of vaccine mandates have argued for years that the risks posed by many infectious diseases have been exaggerated in order to garner support for mandates. This argument has fallen on mostly disinterested ears.

This is because, for the most part, people can’t be reasoned out of beliefs they weren’t reasoned into. The beliefs held by most Americans about the risks posed by infectious diseases, and the track record of vaccines, were not reached through reason or research. They were drilled into them as purported historical fact while school children and the beliefs are deeply ingrained. The narrative is that the diseases the U.S. vaccinates against pose grave danger to us and that they were only controlled through the use of vaccines. (Contrary to popular belief, death rates from infectious diseases plummeted in the U.S. before the widespread use of vaccines.) The public has had very little interest in learning information that conflicts with this narrative.

However, Big Pharma and the powers that be have a big problem with regard to COVID-19. The COVID-19 story is unfolding live, not pre-recorded, before the public. It’s not being delivered to us as school children, as a fully honed tale. And, the story is not one likely to instill confidence in the state’s decision-making ability regarding infectious disease.

Almost every aspect of “the official response” to COVID-19 has been the subject of reversal and inconsistency. Examples of this are the shifting official positions regarding mask-wearing, and the reversals regarding reliance upon two disastrously wrong disease models (Imperial College and the IHME). Another example is the confusion in statements regarding whether asymptomatic carriers can spread COVID-19.

The scientific twists and turns, contradictions and inconsistencies, and overall uncertainty lying beneath the official COVID-19 risk narrative have made for a very messy story. The public is seeing the shaky, fragile pillars upon which the narrative rests. And yet, in the midst of this scientific uncertainty, the public is witnessing the state forging ahead with mandates (e.g., lockdowns, mask requirements, and the likely imminent vaccine requirement).

This has presented the public with a striking example, occurring right before its eyes, of the state imposing infectious disease mandates in the clear absence of a well-researched body of science showing that they’re necessary, safe, or effective. This blows wide open the myth that the state only imposes mandates based upon a solid bedrock of settled science.

In fact, even the issue of whether COVID-19 constitutes a new virus is unsettled. Some well-credentialled members of the scientific community have questioned this. For example, Dr. Beda M. Stadler, a Swiss biologist, emeritus professor, and former director of the Institute of Immunology at the University of Bern wrote in June of 2020 that it was wrong to claim that COVID-19 is a novel virus.

Witnessing the uncertain, circus-like atmosphere in which bureaucrats have imposed COVID-19 mandates may make the more inquisitive among us question what scientific record actually lies beneath the vaccine mandates already in place for children. (Links to resources on that subject are located at the end of this article.)

Further, even the least intellectually curious among us, who never stray from the mainstream media, have surely picked up on the fact that information is being gathered and presented in a manner to exaggerate the risks from COVID-19.

60 Minutes recently reported that flawed COVID-19 tests have been widely used, resulting in many false positives. And, even the CDC has acknowledged that a positive result from the antibody test, which is one of two types of tests available for the virus that purportedly causes COVID-19, may be an indication of having had an infection caused by another coronavirus. Also, it’s been reported that multiple labs have submitted only positive results and that there have been instances where multiple positive test results from the same person have been recorded as multiple cases. Reports of overcounting of cases are common. (Recent examples are here and here.) Additionally, the media has routinely conflated having a positive test result with having the COVID-19 illness when in fact, testing positive does not equate to having the illness. Perhaps most troubling of all is the fact that deaths of those who died with COVID-19, but not from it, are being included in the COVID-19 death count.

This COVID-19 landscape gives the vaccine freedom movement an excellent, recent point of comparison to use when discussing the exaggerated risk levels of other infectious diseases, including measles.

The CDC now recommends approximately 70 doses of 16 vaccines for children by age 18. This schedule has rapidly expanded since liability was removed for the manufacturers of most vaccines in the 1980s. Most informed consent advocates oppose the mandating of any vaccines. However, because Big Pharma has especially pushed the narrative that vaccination is necessary with regard to measles, the mandate debate has particularly focused on that virus.

Like COVID-19, the mortality rate from the measles virus has been exaggerated. Prior to the use of vaccines, the risk of death from measles in the U.S. was low, at approximately 1 in 10,000 of those infected. Of course, not every American was infected with measles each year, so the overall annual mortality rate among the entire U.S. population from the virus was far lower than that. Big Pharma, the state and the media often provide an estimate of the U.S. pre-vaccine era annual measles death rate which is an order of magnitude higher than cited above, i.e., 1 in 1,000. This calculation is generally based upon the use of reported cases as the denominator rather than overall cases. This method is deceptive because measles was generally viewed as a benign childhood illness in the pre-vaccine era and most measles cases were not reported back then.

The measles virus is just one of many infectious diseases for which the public holds an erroneous, inflated perception of risk. Prior to COVID-19, it was nearly impossible to interest the public in the issue of Big Pharma and its cronies exaggerating the risks from infectious diseases. However, now, informed consent advocates can start the conversation with, “Did you know that the risks posed by measles has been exaggerated, like the risks from COVID-19?”

In light of the recent, widely-known puffery regarding the risks from COVID-19, this opening is likely to pique interest.

2. Vaccines safety testing is inadequate.

Those opposed to vaccine mandates would love nothing more than a public interested in learning about vaccine safety testing. We believe that, upon full investigation, the public will find it to be shockingly lax. However, until recently, most Americans seemed to assume that they’d learned all they’ll ever need to know about this topic in 8th grade. Strategically speaking, Big Pharma and its state allies should probably have left well enough alone and avoided any steps that would stir up interest in the topic of vaccine safety. But, they didn’t. Instead, they’ve handed the public “Operation Warp Speed” to ponder.

Operation Warp Speed will allow for the accelerated development, testing and licensure of experimental COVID-19 vaccines. Researchers will be permitted to deviate from normal animal study procedures. This is despite the fact that some animal studies conducted in connection with vaccines under development for other coronaviruses (which were never licensed) have had concerning safety results. (Episode 177 of the HighWire, beginning at 25 minutes, features discussion of “immune enhancement,” a dangerous condition that’s been found during these animal studies.) Some of the COVID-19 vaccines being fast-tracked will use entirely new technologies (e.g., manufacturing methods using mRNA, DNA and nanoparticle genetic engineering technology; a delivery method using a microneedle array equipped with fluorescent quantum dot tags, rather than a conventional injection). Further, there are concerns that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines may alter human RNA and DNA.

To date, vaccine manufacturers have received billions from the state for the development of a COVID-19 vaccine. The manufacturers of such vaccines, like the manufacturers of most vaccines, will have no liability.

In light of the skipped steps, minimal time spent researching adverse reactions and lack of manufacturers’ liability, members of the public who learn the details of Operation Warp Speed likely will not conclude that their safety is at the forefront of the minds of those racing to develop a vaccine. It will be unfortunate for the vaccine industry if this prompts the public to look into the safety testing of the other vaccines licensed pre-COVID-19. Below is just some of what they’ll find.

Lack of inert, placebo-controlled studies. The FDA classifies vaccines as “biologics” rather than “drugs,” thereby allowing vaccine manufacturers to forego the multi-year, double-blind, inert placebo-controlled studies required for drug approval. Almost all vaccine safety studies are conducted without a control group of unvaccinated individuals receiving nothing but an inert placebo. Generally, if a “control group” is used during a vaccine safety study, the group receives a substance which is not inert, such as another vaccine or an adjuvant such as aluminum (e.g., when Merck conducted clinical studies for the Gardasil 9 vaccine, it used the original Gardasil vaccine as the “placebo” in the control groups, and both vaccines contain an aluminum adjuvant).
Lack of studies comparing children vaccinated in accordance with the CDC schedule with those who are unvaccinated. In a July 29, 2020 response to a FOIA request, the CDC acknowledged that it lacked any documents comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated children with those who have never been vaccinated. In its response, it stated, in part, that “The CDC has not conducted a study of health outcomes of vaccinated v unvaccinated populations.”
Very short periods of monitoring for adverse events. Most vaccines are subject to very short periods of monitoring for adverse reactions, often of 14 days or less.
Vaccine manufacturers design and conduct safety studies. Vaccine safety trials are generally designed and conducted by the vaccine manufacturers themselves, causing concerns over conflicts of interest.
Lack of studies showing that vaccines do not play a role in the development of autism. The CDC has presented no studies showing that vaccines do not play a role in the development of autism. In fact, in early 2020, after litigation arising in connection with a FOIA request asking the CDC to identify all studies it has relied upon to claim that the vaccines it recommends for the first six months of life do not, alone or cumulatively, cause autism, the CDC entered into a stipulation responding to the request. In its response, the CDC identified studies, but, none of them demonstrated that the aforesaid vaccines, alone or cumulatively, do not cause autism. Contrary to the assertions of the mainstream media, the science is not settled regarding the issue of whether vaccines play a role in the development of autism.
3. Adult vaccine mandates will be ushered in, as well as surveillance, tracking and other forms of repression.

It’s common to hear the expression that people “don’t dream big enough.” COVID-19 has taught those in the informed consent movement that we didn’t have nightmares big enough. Below is a list of repressive measures that the informed consent movement warned were coming prior to COVID-19, and the manner in which those warnings have been met (and in some instances exceeded) since its arrival.

Adult vaccine mandates are arriving. Vaccine freedom advocates have warned of impending adult mandates. The CDC has both a childhood vaccine schedule along with an adult schedule. A person receiving all of the doses on both schedules will receive nearly 150 lifetime doses. The goal of vaccinating members of the population throughout their entire lives is set forth in the National Vaccine Plan, the National Adult Immunization Plan and the Global Vaccine Action Plan. In December of 2018, Argentina enacted a law mandating its entire vaccine schedule for both children and adults. Many pointed to this as a bellwether for what is coming for other countries. In March of 2020, Denmark passed legislation (in effect through March of 2021) authorizing forced vaccination against COVID-19. On August 21, 2020, Virginia’s Health Commissioner Dr. Norman Oliver stated that he plans to mandate a coronavirus vaccine for all Virginians once one is publicly available. On July 31, 2020, the President of the University of California issued an executive order requiring all students, faculty and staff who will be present on campus to receive influenza immunizations before Nov. 1, 2020. This is despite the fact that some research indicates that those receiving an annual influenza vaccine may be at increased risk of infection from coronaviruses.
The tracking that was warned about is coming to fruition. Prior to COVID-19, members of the informed consent movement warned that mass tracking and restrictions on movement would be imposed as purported protection from infectious diseases. The technology for these measures is quickly being implemented. CoviPass, a downloadable application which contains the users’ COVID-19 test histories and other health information, and uses surveillance technology to trace people, is one example. It’s reportedly being rolled out in fifteen countries and it’s anticipated that it will serve the basis for immunity passports required to travel and move about. Further, there is at least one recent example of a U.S. college requiring its students to submit to contract-tracing. Albion College, located in Michigan, is reportedly requiring students for the fall semester to download an application that will constantly track their locations and label them based upon COVID-19 test results. The college has also reportedly asked students to remain on campus throughout the semester, with revocation of the right to access campus as a possible penalty for not doing so.
Lockdowns and mask orders have exceeded even the vaccine freedom movement’s predictions. Simply put, the lockdowns and mask mandates have exceeded the nightmares of most in the informed consent movement. This author didn’t see those coming. Hopefully, at this point, most of the public is aware that significant scientific concerns exist in connection with both of these mandates. Some of those concerns are discussed here.
Below are resources for those who are interested in more information about infectious diseases and vaccines."

Children’s Health Defense
The HighWire with Del Bigtree
Informed Consent Action Network
National Vaccine Information Center
Vaxxter
The website of author/journalist Jeremy R. Hammond
The website of author/journalist Bretigne Shaffer
Article Central Planning of Your Immune System is Dangerous by Davis Taylor
Book Miller’s Review of Critical Vaccine Studies: 400 Important Scientific Papers Summarized for Parents and Researchersby Neil Z. Miller
Book Vaccines – A Reappraisal by Dr. Richard Moskowitz
Book How to End the Autism Epidemic by J.B. Handley
Book Dissolving Illusions – Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History by Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Roman Bystrianyk
Book Vaccines, Autoimmunity, and the Changing Nature of Childhood Illnesses by Dr. Thomas Cowan

continued

onawah

11th September 2020, 22:40

Take Action Now—Tell Congress to Urge FDA to Take Action on Improperly Tested Hepatitis B Vaccines!
By Children's Health Defense Team

Attorneys for Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) have filed a petition with the FDA demanding that the licensure for Hepatitis B vaccines be revoked or suspended until legally required safety is proven in a “properly designed clinical trial of sufficient duration.” In the clinical trials of the two Hepatitis B vaccines available for use in the U.S., Engerix-B and Recombivax HB, subjects were followed up for four days and five days respectively. According to the FDA, clinical trials typically take between one and four years to complete.

Children’s Health Defense suggests sending a letter to your lawmakers to urge them to contact the FDA in support of ICAN’s petition to the agency. You can do so easily using our click-to-action system!
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/advocacy-center/tell-congress-to-urge-fda-to-take-action-on-improperly-tested-hepatitis-b-vaccines/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106

A Dangerous Inactive Ingredient
Editorial by Harold R. Gielow, LtCol USMC (Ret.)
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/a-dangerous-inactive-ingredient/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106

"Consumers often have the need to check a product’s ingredients and this is especially true for those with allergies to certain substances. Such access to product information is essential for individuals to protect themselves from harm by exposure to ingredients to which they have known sensitivities. For the most part, such labeling is sufficient for those impacted; however, when the vast majority of the population has a preexisting immune response to an ingredient classified as biologically inert/inactive by our government, that should raise concerns. This is because an immune response or allergic reaction is a major cause of adverse medical events, some of which can be life-threatening (such as in the case of anaphylactic shock).

When this same substance is a key component of a vaccine (a potentially mandated vaccine to combat a worldwide pandemic) our concern should be commensurately raised. When the vast majority of those who have an immune response to the substance do not realize what they are allergic to and therefore cannot reasonably be expected to avoid it, we have the potential for a medical crisis within a medical crisis.

Scientific studies to quantify the seriousness of the problem estimate that approximately 72% of the US population has acquired anti PEG antibodies.
Just what is this dangerous inactive ingredient?
Polyethylene Glycol, otherwise known as PEG, Macrogol, Carbowax and many other names when combined with other substances, is not a household word unless your house holds biochemists. It is classified as biologically inert by our FDA. It is the “Gold Standard” for use in many medications to increase the blood clearance time, or in other words, the time it remains in one’s system, thereby enhancing drug effect. It is also used in drug manufacturing as an excipient for long term stabilization, bulking, and other therapeutic enhancements. It is used as a coating to prevent bacterial adhesion on orthopedic screws and sutures. In addition to medical uses, PEG is also used in cosmetics, foods, industrial applications, and other health and beauty products such as soaps, shampoos, toothpastes. It is also used as an e-cigarette liquid. PEG is everywhere in our environment, which is what many have surmised has led to a high percentage of the US population developing anti-PEG antibodies. This, of course, presents a significant challenge to those who rely on this substance in their manufacturing.

Scientific studies to quantify the seriousness of the problem estimate that approximately 72% of the US population has acquired anti PEG antibodies. The referenced study used blood samples taken from 1990-1999 and earlier, showing a steady increase over time in the percentage of those with antibodies to PEG, making it conservative to estimate, after two decades, that the incidence is closer to 80% today. This circumstance has concerned the medical and pharmaceutical communities as an equally effective alternative has escaped identification, although several have been suggested, and because the great cost of shifting to such an alternative.

Not only is PEG a “stealth” medicinal additive, delaying blood clearance due to its properties, but it is a stealth allergen, the vast majority of the population never having heard of it and many in the healthcare industry being unaware of its antigenic properties. A physician survey found:

“Although 91% of respondents were aware of antidrug antibodies in general, only 22% were aware of APA (Anti-PEG Antibody) responses. Further, there was limited awareness (35%) of PEG’s inclusion in prescribed PEGylated therapeutics.”

The lack of awareness of this issue in the general population and in the health care provider population present unique challenges, one of which we are facing with today’s Covid-19 pandemic.

PEG and Covid-19 Vaccines
There are at least three fast-tracked vaccines being produced and tested at this time, obviously meant for widespread use, some even arguing mandatory use, which contain PEG: Moderna’s mRNA1273, and BioNTech/Pfizer’s BNT162b1 and b2. These mRNA vaccines trick your cells into producing Covid-19 proteins—pieces of the virus which are non-infectious. These proteins then elicit an immune response to fight the real virus. They use a pegylated Lipid Nanoparticle (LNP) as the delivery mechanism for the mRNA. Think of the LNP as a miniscule (less than 100 billionth of a meter) bubble containing the mRNA. This “bubble” is coated with PEG (DSPE MPEG2000 in Moderna’s case) to stabilize the carrier and assist it in getting to and into the target cells. PEG assists with the “getting to” portion of the journey by preventing the bubble from breaking down before it reaches its target. That is what some call PEG’s stealth properties—its ability to mask and protect the carrier from the body’s normal defenses against foreign substances.

Safety and Efficacy
Two obvious issues are presented by the high percentage of our population having pre-existing antibodies to PEG: safety and efficacy. While it is true that not everyone with pre-existing PEG antibodies will have a severe reaction to a vaccine containing PEG, there is a significant danger that many will. Ideally, the safety and efficacy effects on those with pre-existing antibodies to PEG would be determined in the clinical trials. However, as Moderna’s trial is not pre-screening participants for anti-PEG antibodies they cannot, therefore, characterize the risk. They are flying blind.

Multiple previous studies regarding the prevalence of anti-PEG antibodies in the population have stated that prescreening for these antibodies should be done prior to administration of any PEG containing medication. This is obvious for safety reasons. It is especially important in the case of a desire to vaccinate as many people as possible with a vaccine containing a substance to which the vast majority of the population may unknowingly have antibodies. Also important in this regard, is that it matters, in terms of immunogenicity, what PEG is bound to, the manner in which it is applied to the carrier, its concentration, its molecular weight, etc. Not characterizing trial participants adverse reactions in relation to Anti-PEG Antibody presence and levels forfeits gaining insight into these factors. After all, since taxpayers have paid almost one billion dollars to assist Moderna in getting this vaccine tested and produced the glaring safety risks should at least be evaluated.

As Moderna has stated the proven fact that a high percentage of the population having anti PEG antibodies is “hypothetical,” and they are not screening for it …
Efficacy is also at stake. Accounting for different levels of preexisting anti-PEG antibodies should influence trial procedures. Safety considerations are obvious, but efficacy could be enhanced by slightly altering the protocols for participants with anti-PEG antibodies. The main efficacy concern is accelerated blood clearance due to the body’s defenses recognizing the PEG antigen. It would be helpful to quantify at what titers, or levels, of Anti-PEG Antibody accelerated blood clearance becomes a problem. As Moderna has stated the proven fact that a high percentage of the population having anti PEG antibodies is “hypothetical,” and they are not screening for it, this is another missed opportunity. It was certainly taken into account during the trial of another vaccine that used an Adenovirus as the carrier, so such trial procedures are not unusual.

I am not anti-vaccine. I am pro safe, effective vaccines. It seems some basic safety and efficacy risk mitigation procedures are being ignored. This oversight appears to be intentional as Moderna’s own scientists have made note of the problem. I have a severe anaphylactic response to PEG. Luckily, I identified it and had it confirmed by Johns Hopkins. I am forewarned. But the vast majority of potentially billions of citizens fated to receive the Moderna vaccine are not forewarned. How many will be injured because Moderna failed to investigate a dangerous “inactive” ingredient?"

Despite numerous scientific studies, Moderna has stated the high percentage of the population having anti PEG antibodies is “hypothetical,” and they are not screening for it. How many will be injured because Moderna failed to investigate a dangerous “inactive” ingredient in their COVID-19 vaccine?

Zuckerberg says Facebook won't remove anti-vaccine posts amid coronavirus pandemic
By Alexandra Kelley, The Hill

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/515844-mark-zuckerberg-says-facebook-wont-remove-anti?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/515844-mark-zuckerberg-says-facebook-wont-remove-anti?jwsource=cl

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/515844-mark-zuckerberg-says-facebook-wont-remove-anti?jwsource=cl
https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/515844-mark-zuckerberg-says-facebook-wont-remove-anti?jwsource=cl
https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/515844-mark-zuckerberg-says-facebook-wont-remove-anti?jwsource=cl

"Story at a glance

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that the online platform will not censor anti-vaccination posts or content.
This follows a lawsuit filed against the social media titan by the Children’s Health Defense, a leading anti-vaccination group.
Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg says in a new interview that the social media giant has no intention of removing anti-vaccination posts.

Zuckerberg's remarks come as several companies, such as Moderna, AstraZeneca and Pfizer, are in the late stages of clinical trials for their COVID-19 vaccine candidates.

Social media platforms like Facebook have worked to limit the spread of misinformation about COVID-19, though critics warn that inaccurate information spread about a potential future coronavirus vaccine could undermine efforts to build immunity against the disease.

“We work with the [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] and we work with the [World Health Organization] and trusted health organizations to remove clear misinformation about health-related issues that could cause an imminent risk of harm,” Zuckerberg said in an interview on "Axios on HBO."

"If someone is pointing out a case where a vaccine caused harm or that they're worried about it — you know, that's a difficult thing to say from my perspective that you shouldn't be allowed to express at all," he added later.

Facebook has been under fire recently for its content policies, especially among lawmakers who advocate better content regulation on the site during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The company has also faced scrutiny over its handling of political ads with false information, with Facebook recently announcing it will ban new political ads related to the presidential election within seven days of the Nov. 3 vote to reduce the spread of misinformation.

“During a global pandemic, Facebook is looking the other way while disinformation about the coronavirus goes viral on its platform — a direct threat to the health and safety of millions of people," Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said to The Hill. "No company should be too big to be held accountable for distorting facts and spreading falsehoods, especially during a public health crisis.”

In August, a leading anti-vaccination advocacy group called the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) sued Facebook and its fact-checking network, alleging that Facebook illegally suppressed and censored its content by implementing warning labels that work to flag disinformation on CHD’s official Facebook page. The plaintiff says that these actions are in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. constitution that guarantees the freedom of speech.

Zuckerberg has defended the use of fact-checking companies, like Politifact and Science Feedback, as mitigating third parties to evaluate the potential spread of misinformation on the platform.

“What we try to say is if people are overgeneralizing things, if they're spreading misinformation and we can defer to a third party fact checker or an organization like the CDC or WHO on kind of clear health guidelines on things that could lead to imminent harm, if people don't follow them, then we will we will try to take action against those,” he told Axios."

continued

onawah

11th September 2020, 22:49

What Really Happened in Berlin? CHD’s Senta Depuydt Was There
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/advocacy-policy/what-really-happened-in-berlin-chds-senta-depuydt-was-there/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106

"By Senta Depuydt, President, Children’s Health Defense Europe

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/IMG_0806-800x417.jpg

The German media are reporting 38,000 people in attendance on August 29 in Berlin while YouTubers claim one million or more. Not a word is being mentioned about Robert Kennedy’s presence at the event on official networks even as the historic speech of the former U.S. president’s nephew floods social media. Never has the gap between the institutional press and the alternative media been so wide. What really happened on August 29th in Berlin?

Germany experienced one of the biggest demonstrations in its history on August 29, despite repeated attempts by the Berlin authorities to ban the event. The announcement of the participation of attorney Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. as a last-minute guest reinforced the public’s mobilization and determination to turn out and defend their freedoms being threatened by the health agendas related to the response to the “pandemic.”

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/email-berlin-freedom-rally-img_6129.jpg

"The will to express oneself
Caught between the imperatives of international strategy and the growing discontent within the population, the German government seems to be losing its footing since the demonstration on August 1st, which brought together more than 800,000 people, many chanting “Angela, dein Volk ist da,” which translates, “your people are there.” Indeed, in the face of the “deaf ear” of politics, many members of the movement are now calling for the establishment of a new national assembly to guarantee the rights of the constitution. Inspired in part by yellow vests in France, workshops were born throughout Germany, witnessing the emergence of a popular will in search of sovereignty.

It is not surprising that the government sought to downplay the success of the first demonstration on1 August 1st, stating figures of 17,000 participants, while the images of the large rally in the main aisle “Unter den Linden’ clearly showed hundreds of thousands. It is also not surprising that the media sought to tarnish the reputations of the organizers who were accused of being Nazis.

Legal battles
As expected, the Berlin authorities tried to ban the August 29 demonstration just before the event. However, as Germany has been scarcely affected by the epidemic, it is becoming increasingly difficult to impose a general health emergency. Unable to “ban” any demonstration, they withdrew the specific authorization for that event. The response from the organizers was swift. Always anxious to respect the rule of law, they asked their members to make new requests for demonstrations individually. Within hours, more than 6,000 people filled out and submitted the necessary documents. Police stations were flooded with requests from the legal team, while YouTubers relayed the maneuver live to hundreds of thousands of amused spectators. At the same time, the movement was appealing the decision to a federal court. Excitement was high when an influencer dropped the scoop of Kennedy’s arrival on social media. The next morning, it was announced that the federal court had ruled in favour of the protesters and that the event would move forward.

The magic of circumstances

Children’s Health Defense Europe Inaugural Meeting
In reality, Kennedy’s presence at the protest had not been scheduled. Kennedy, the board chair of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), a nonprofit organization in the U.S dedicated to the protection of children’s health, was scheduled to attend the inaugural meeting of the CHD European branch, Children’s Health Defense Europe. It was a bit of a coincidence of the calendar that led to his participation in the event as he was travelling to Europe anyway to meet with the Board of Directors to discuss different strategic directions for the new chapter. The message from the organizers then reached him, with a video showing a public invitation at the August 1st demonstration. The travel of members of an international organization to attend a joint meeting is not subject to COVID travel restrictions, so Kennedy’s visit to Berlin was perfectly legitimate. A speech by the famous lawyer was obviously a perfect opportunity to both announce the launch of the association and to convey a strong message of freedom and democracy to the German public.

Querdenken: a movement to defend democracy
Querdenken or “think differently” is the name of the organization behind the protest. It’s a non-partisan movement that brings together citizens shocked by the deprivations of freedoms imposed on German citizens with the onset of the coronavirus crisis. The movement challenges the legitimacy of containment and the imposition of mask-wearing, as well as the testing or tracking measures associated with the pandemic agenda, believing that these are disproportionate and do not justify the infringement of individual freedoms. It also contests the way in which these regulations are made, their lack of transparency, the lack of respect for the debate, and the absence of a vote.

Markus Hainz, a lawyer firmly committed to defending the rule of the law
Created on the initiative of Michael Ballweg, a computer scientist from Stuttgart, the Querdenken initiative quickly spread to many cities, leading to the development of a resistance network across Germany, with demonstrations in several major cities. The association was organized in a partnership between some fifty lawyers, several hundred doctors led by Dr. Heiko Schoning and the network “ACU2020,” which demands independence from the medical and scientific communities and independent media and influencers of social networks. Coming from all social and political backgrounds, their common goal is to provide a strong, reasoned, but also resolutely peaceful and democratic response by using all legitimate means under the law, which they feel is threatened.

An innumerable crowd

Hundreds of Polish protesters had to sit for hours on the same street.
As soon as Berlin’s ban on the demonstration was announced, the media attempted to dissuade the public from reaching the capital. Many buses planned from abroad cancelled scheduled trips. But the announcement of Kennedy’s arrival reinforced more than ever the will of the German public to join an event that promised to be historic. Protesters poured in early in the day and more than 3,000 police were deployed in the city. They carried out numerous roadblocks and pushed back several dozen buses arriving in the city to prevent the various processions from making it to the protest. In several streets, protesters were surrounded and “confined” for hours without being allowed to move.

Fortunately, things remained peaceful, and many attendees, including some of Ghandi’s followers, began to sing ‘Liebe polizei macht die strasse frei’ or “dear policemen free the street,” and some began to meditate while patiently accepting the situation.

The crowd in the ‘Unter den Linden’ alley…and well beyond
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/09-10-20-The-crowd-in-the-%E2%80%98Unter-den-Linden%E2%80%99-alley%E2%80%A6and-well-beyond.jpg

How many people were actually there? According to the official press, 38,000. But everyone who was in Berlin that day knows that hundreds of thousands of people populated the capital to take part in the event. As the police prevented some of the processions from joining the crowd at the victory column, the participants couldn’t be counted as a single, compact mass. But the journey of the crowd gathered around forty podiums and rebroadcast screens, as well as in dozens of alleys and nearby streets suggests that there were certainly more than a million people in Berlin that day.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. the new ‘Berliner’
Could one find a stronger symbol than the presence of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to defend fundamental freedoms in the face of a new totalitarian agenda? In June 1963, two years after the construction of the Berlin Wall, Kennedy’s uncle, President John F. Kennedy, had come to reaffirm American support in response to the Communist threat. In his very memorable speech, he said, “There are many people in the world who do not understand or claim to not understand what is the great difference between the free world and the Communist world. Let them come to Berlin!” The President concluded his speech with these words: “All free men, wherever they live, are citizens of Berlin and therefore, as a free man, I am proud to utter these words ‘Ich bin ein Berliner.”

Decades later, we could almost have repeated the same discourse. Although Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. did not use the term “communism,” it was an authoritarian, totalitarian and Orwellian society that he condemned. Corruption, censorship, oppression, collusion, deprivation of liberty—he did not mince his words in describing the international agenda that is being put in place in response to the pandemic, evoking mandatory vaccination, the establishment of 5G, and the transition to a digital currency and surveillance society.

The crowd was enthusiastic and appreciative of this historic moment. For those in Berlin and for millions of Internet users around the world, Kennedy raised awareness and uttered the words of courage and hope that millions of people had been waiting to hear.

Media attacks

Love, peace, freedom. The hundreds of invisible ‘extremists’ emblems.
Dream or reality? None of this has appeared in the German or international mainstream media! One is simply stunned by the fact that the media and the authorities dared to put forward a figure as ridiculous as 38,000 people in attendance, while there are millions sharing images testifying to the gigantic scale of this gathering. It is even more so, when we see that they have tried to make a peaceful crowd of a million people look like “extremists” and “opponents of democracy.” Daily Kos, an American web newspaper, one of the few to mention Kennedy’s presence, even headlined “The anti-vaccine Robert Kennedy, Jr. joined the neo-Nazis in Berlin,” claiming that he had joined an event organized by far-right organizations and anti-Semitic groups.

Kennedy immediately reacted with a letter demanding a retraction of the article and a public apology for the damages incurred. The letter reminds us that you only have to listen to his speech and look at the images of the crowd with portraits of Ghandi, flags for peace, love and democracy to know that the protest was quite the opposite of the publication’s portrayal.

A staged assault
Government officials and mainstream media revelled in an “unacceptable incident” described as a violent assault on the Reichstag (parliament). It shows only a few dozen activists rushing up the steps of the building and waving flags, but the images show no form of violence. And keen observers have detailed the incident which appears to have been set up to obtain “scandalous” images in order to harshly condemn the protesters.

What actually happened? Some witnesses reported seeing teams of journalists coming straight out of police stations, while acolytes placed on nearby rooftops orchestrated the maneuver. A few minutes earlier, several sovereignist activists had excited the crowd and urged the public to occupy the steps of parliament by shouting in megaphones phrases including: “Trump is here!” “He has just signed an end-of-occupation treaty.” “The police took off their helmets, they stopped guarding the parliament.” “Let’s sit on the steps of parliament to celebrate and show Trump that our people are finally free.” This false news then provoked a brief crowd movement on the steps of the Reichstag, which reflected a demonstration of joy (unjustified), not an attack from neo-Nazi groups.

Trump was not in Berlin that day and the incident was pure invention. To understand the context of this scene, which may seem surreal, it is necessary to know that Germany is officially still under the control of the Allies, and especially the Americans, and that many German citizens feel that it is time to get rid of this arrangement. According to them, the German constitution would not be legitimate, since it is not the result of the will of the people, but the result of an external authority, that of the Allies. This reflection, which is not only symbolic, arises in particular in the context of a legal controversy between Germany and Europe over the role of central banks and the independence of nations in the European institutional framework.

Unfortunately, this claim, which seems legitimate to a non-partisan popular citizen movement, is also echoed by far-right parties. Therefore, it is understandable that the organizers of these events start each by clearly distinguishing themselves from any political movement, any form of extremism or any racist ideology. This is why the government and the international alliance that supports it are all the more determined to make citizens’ movements look like those of Nazis.

Investigating the staging of Reichstag assault
Unfortunately, images are enough to embroider a scenario that serves the interests of the political class and diverts the public’s attention from the fact that one million people came to protest against the liberticidal measures of the pandemic. The only thing being reported on all the television channels is that “the demonstration ended in violence and the security forces had to intervene to disperse the extremists who stormed the Reichstag.” Who knows, this umpteenth betrayal of the media may end up opening the eyes of many people.

Protection or repression?
While the organizers took the trouble to publicly thank the police services with whom they had painstakingly prepared a security plan, much of the public refused to applaud them. It later became known that numerous police violence incidents took place against peaceful men and women who had shown no aggression or resistance. Filmed by the crowd, more than a dozen videos show similar scenes where three to four GIGN-style robocops pushed people to the ground and some people were beaten as well. These images, which also evoke police violence against yellow vests in France and around the world, were a shock to many German citizens and some of the police. More and more, military and police officers are choosing to publicly express their disagreement with the policies being imposed by authorities.

History has given Berliners the ability to distinguish truth from propaganda and freedom from dictatorship. All the people we met expressed their suffering at growing up with the weight of the shame of Nazism and the fear of Communism. Accepting freedom-killing measures again and the imposition of a totalitarian regime, whatever the reason, are simply not conceivable. Millions of Germans want to defend their rights and freedoms peacefully and in accordance with democratic rules. The Berlin demonstration could be a key moment, a moment of awakening consciences around the world. Berliners put forth a strong message: The time has come to show that it is possible to abandon governance based on fear, control and discrimination, and that we can all move forward together in a free and open world, a world that is above all, human."

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/09-10-20-Summary-of-the-event-by-the-media.jpg
continued

onawah

11th September 2020, 22:54

The Pharma Loaded U.S. Soldier Part 1: Taking Inventory of Risks
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/the-pharma-loaded-u-s-soldier-part-1-taking-inventory-of-risks/?htm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/09-10-20_Pharma-Loaded-Soldier_AS_285437390_Featured_Image-800x417.jpg

By Pam Long

"Since 2001, the modern combatant has endured numerous deployments overseas to Afghanistan and Iraq after a decade of relative peace following the Persian Gulf War in 1990. Across all services, members have engaged in traumatic combat situations with enemy, friendly, and civilian casualties resulting in 13% of veterans diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). [Citations referenced in this article are contained in the full report.]

Military personnel have returned from dangerous deployments to face both public scrutiny about disputed wars and personal struggles with recollections of harrowing ordeals. Military encounter barriers to therapeutic interventions, with a priority given to drug therapy. US military members are routinely taking up to 19 prescription medications to enhance performance and reduce stress.The collateral damage is that, when current active duty, reserve members, and the National Guard are included, 20 veterans die by suicide every day in the US.

Suicide Stats
The 2018 Department of Defense Suicide Report (DoDSER 2018) details 325 active duty suicides with an additional 1,375 suicide attempts by 1,219 unique individuals. The reserve component reported 81 suicides and the National Guard reported 135 suicides. The 2019 National Veterans Suicide Prevention Annual Report summarizes 6,139 veteran suicides in 2019. Veteran suicides have been increasing annually since 2006. The number of veteran suicides has exceeded 6,000 annually from 2008 to 2017. Military members and veterans have a higher risk of suicide than their civilian counterparts. Veterans ages 18-34 having the highest suicide rate among all military subgroups with an increase of 76% from 2005 to 2017.

The two aforementioned reports have detailed the frequency, demographics, event characteristics, basic health information, contextual factors or stressors with each military suicide. These reports are intended for surveillance only and do not provide any analysis of causation.

Table 1. Population by Rate of Suicide
Population Rate of Suicide
US Active Duty Military 24.8 per 100,000 (2018)
US Reserve Military 22.9 per 100,000 (2018)
US National Guard 30.6 per 100,000 (2018)
US Civilians age 17-59 18.2 per 100,000 (2018)
US Veterans 27.7 per 100,000 (2017)
US Veterans age 18-34 44.5 per 100,000 (2017)
Behind the Numbers
Surprisingly, DoDSER 2018 reports that 47% of active duty suicides had zero deployments. The 2019 Veterans Suicide Prevention Annual Report indicates that 919 suicides were from never federally activated reserve units and National Guard. Hazardous duty is a co-factor in PTSD and suicides, but this high rate of military members who have never deployed indicates other potentially non-trauma factors are contributing to the suicide rate. What else is going on behind the numbers?

The goal, a participant in crafting the policy said, was to give SSRIs a ‘green light’ without saying so.
Age Risk & Suspect SSRIs
Veterans age 18-34 have the highest suicide rates at 45 per 100,000, while veterans age 55-74 had the lowest suicide rate at 27 per 100,000. Because younger veterans have a greater risk, other exposures should be investigated that older veterans do not have. One possibility is the increasing trend of military suicides in the US began in 2006 and is temporally correlated with the Pentagon’s 2006 policy that permitted and encouraged SSRI medications, discussed in America’s Medicated Army:

It wasn’t until November 2006 that the Pentagon set a uniform policy for all the services. But the curious thing about it was that it didn’t mention the new antidepressants. Instead, it simply barred troops from taking older drugs, including ‘lithium, anticonvulsants and antipsychotics.’ The goal, a participant in crafting the policy said, was to give SSRIs a ‘green light’ without saying so. Last July, a paper published by three military psychiatrists in Military Medicine, the independent journal of the Association of Military Surgeons of the United States, urged military doctors headed for Afghanistan and Iraq to ‘request a considerable quantity of the SSRI they are most comfortable prescribing’ for the ‘treatment of new-onset depressive disorders’ once in the war zones. The medications, the doctors concluded, help to ‘conserve the fighting strength,’ the motto of the Army Medical Corps.

Total Load of Prescription Drugs
A Veteran Affairs study of 157 veterans with PTSD reported an average use of 6.4 ± 3.8 prescribed drugs with a maximum of 19 prescribed drugs. These drugs were from the following 17 categories: anti-depressants, anti-psychotics, anxiolytics, hypnotics, mood stabilizers, stimulants, anti-cholinergics, anti-convulsants, anti-hypertensives, diuretics, cardiovascular drugs, diabetes drugs, dyslipidemia drugs, analgesics, anti-inflammatory drugs, gastrointestinal drugs, and narcotics.

Military members are at risk of cascading prescriptions due to treatment from numerous doctors over their careers. They are not likely to have one primary doctor reviewing their medical file for drug interaction or cumulative effect. Veterans are especially at risk of cascading prescriptions because as people get older, they become more sensitive to drugs. This is because medications stay in the body longer due to less muscle tissue and the liver and kidney do not process medications as effectively so medications become more concentrated.

Our findings suggest that stimulants may be a contributing factor for incident PTSD.
Risks of Stimulants in PTSD
Prescription Stimulants and PTSD Among U.S. Military Service Members reported the risk of PTSD was significantly higher in military personnel who were prescribed stimulants than those who did not. The risk of PTSD was significantly higher as the number of prescription stimulants increased and the cumulative days of use increased. Among 25,971 military personnel, with ‘incident PTSD’ defined as those who did not have a history of PTSD at baseline and developed new-onset PTSD, stimulants contribute to new-onset PTSD:

We found an association between prescription stimulant use and incident PTSD. Even though only a small percentage of our sample were prescribed stimulants, our findings suggest that stimulants may be a contributing factor for incident PTSD. The use of stimulants is known to increase norepinephrine levels in the brain and previous research has demonstrated that increased noradrenergic levels at the time of a traumatic event create more vivid, long-lasting memories and fear of the event, which increase the risk of developing PTSD (Debiec et al., 2011).

Mulitiple Meds & Suicide Risks
Blanchfield Army Community Hospital (BACH) Polypharmacy Clinic reports: “The increased use of central nervous system depressants (CNSD) and psychotropics are one of the many factors that contribute to suicidal behavior in soldiers.” Fort Campbell reported polypharmacy (chronic use of 5 or more drugs) ranged from 2.2% to 7.6% of soldiers for each brigade, after screening out soldiers using polypharmacy short-term for surgery medications:

A pharmacy-led team established the Polypharmacy Clinic (PC) at Blanchfield Army Community Hospital. Of the 3,999 soldiers assigned, 540 (13.5%) met the initial screening criteria. Success of the pilot program led to the mandatory screening of all other Fort Campbell, Kentucky, brigades. During the first 12 months, 895 soldiers were seen by a clinical pharmacist, and 1,574 interventions were documented. Significant interventions included medication added (121), medication changed (258), medication stopped (164), lab monitoring recommended (172), adverse reaction mitigated (41), therapeutic duplication prevented (61), and drug-drug interaction identified (93). Additionally, 55 soldiers were recommended for temporary duty profiles based on their adverse drug effects. Ten soldiers were recommended for enhanced controlled substance monitoring.

895 soldiers were potentially saved from polypharmacy adverse reactions. Despite the Office of the Surgeon General directing this unprecedented polypharmacy screening pilot program at Fort Campbell, the extent to which this successful program was adopted by all military duty stations or continued beyond 2013 is unknown. The 2018 VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Guidebook does not list polypharmacy screening as an intervention. The VA only targets one prescription drug, opioids, in the Substance Abuse Disorder program. The VA assisted 10,500 veterans in 2017 with opioid substitution.

Pain Meds & PTSD Risk
The Army’s Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, and Suicide Prevention Report (2010) reports that 14% of the force is taking an opiate medication, often in addition to prescriptions for depression and anxiety. Research of pain medication and PTSD has found “Those with PTSD had significantly higher use of analgesic medication (both opiate and non-opiate), as compared with non-PTSD patients. PTSD symptoms, as measured by the Posttraumatic Symptom Scale, were significantly higher in subjects who were prescribed analgesics.” Among veterans, suicide rates were highest in VHA patients diagnosed with opioid use disorder.

Physical Health as a Signal
48% of active duty soldiers had visited a Medical Treatment Facility in the 90 days prior to death for general health, not mental health and not substance abuse. Physical health deteriorates with PTSD and should be included as a signal for suicide risk screening. [Link to PDF -See the full report for research details.]

In conclusion, Military personnel are routinely prescribed numerous medications with Black Box warnings for suicidal ideation, mania, psychosis, violent behavior, delusions, hallucinations, and psychotic behaviors. Many of these drugs are addictive and prescribed without a plan to wean off dependency. Instead the needed therapeutic dose will increase over time. New soldiers anecdotally report being prescribed medications for the expected stress of Basic Training, which will begin the cascading prescriptions for deployment induced trauma and pain from injuries, and will cumulate with additional prescriptions later, for deteriorating physical health associated with unresolved PTSD symptoms. The total pharmaceutical load on the modern US soldier will continue to result in over 6,000 veteran suicides per year until polypharmacy screening and mitigation is implemented and prioritized at every Veterans Health Administration program."

[CHD Note: In Part 2 of this series, Pam Long will detail various treatments for PTSD, both how current treatments are working and risks of service inherent in the current medication-heavy approach. View the full report with citations and research details.]

Pam Long is a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, a US Army Veteran of the Medical Service Corps, and a Board Certified Behavior Analyst.

continued

onawah

11th September 2020, 23:03

Landmark FDA Paper On Aluminum Safety In Vaccines Found To Have A Critical Math Error
By Arjun Walia
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/09/09/landmark-fda-paper-on-aluminum-safety-in-vaccines-found-to-have-a-critical-math-error/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=362cc1c6-4ad0-472f-9cd5-3ff16de1f106

"The Facts:A group of scientists and physicians known as The Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) have discovered a crucial math error in a FDA paper regarding the safety of aluminum in vaccines.
Reflect On:Why have there been no studies by regulatory agencies in conjunction with independent scientists to see where vaccine ingredients travel to in the body after the are injected? Why no appropriate safety testing for the aluminum vaccine adjuvant?
What Happened: The Physicians For Informed Consent (PIC) outline that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), which is a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have already raised concerns about the negative effects of aluminum exposure in humans.

They state the following:
Because some vaccines contain aluminum, the FDA published a paper in 2011 (Mitkus et al.) to address concerns about aluminum exposure from vaccines in infants. The paper compared the aluminum exposure from vaccines in infants to a safety limit of oral aluminum determined by the ATSDR. However, this study incorrectly based its calculations on 0.78% of oral aluminum being absorbed into the bloodstream rather than the value of 0.1% used by the ATSDR in its computations. As a result, the FDA paper assumed that nearly 8 (0.78%/0.1%) times more aluminum can safely enter the bloodstream, and this led the authors to incorrectly conclude that aluminum exposure from vaccines was well below the safety limit.

You can read their “Erratum in “Updated aluminum pharmacokinetics following infant exposures through diet and vaccination” here: https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/mitkus-2011-erratum/

The Physicians for Informed Consent (PIC) are a group of doctors and scientists from around the world who have come together to support informed consent when it comes to mandatory vaccine measures. Their information is based on science. Their mission is to deliver data on infectious diseases and vaccines, and to unite doctors, scientists, healthcare professionals, attorneys, and families who support voluntary vaccinations. Their vision is that doctors and the public are able to evaluate the data on infectious diseases and vaccines objectively and voluntarily engage in informed decision-making about vaccination.

According to Dr, Christopher Shaw, a member of PIC and a professor at the University of British Columbia who has performed numerous studies on the effects of injected aluminum,“We knew that the Mitkus et al. paper modeling aluminum clearance had to be inaccurate since it was assuming that injected aluminum kinetics were the same as the kinetics of aluminum acquired through diet. Now, in addition, we see that they did their modeling based on using the incorrect level of aluminum absorption. What is particularly striking is that despite all these errors, since 2011, Mitkus et al. is used by CDC and other entities as the basis for claiming that aluminum adjuvants are safe.”

Dr. Shira Miller, president of PIC, said, “We posted the Mitkus 2011 erratum on ResearchGate in hopes of bringing it to the attention of scientists and researchers who are interested in the safety of the quantities of injected aluminum found in childhood vaccines and would be in a position to further research the safety concern.”

When you inject aluminum, it goes into a different compartment of your body. It doesn’t come into that same mechanism of excretion. So, and of course it can’t because that’s the whole idea of aluminum adjuvants, aluminum adjuvants are meant to stick around and allow that antigen to be presented over and over and over again persistently, otherwise you wouldn’t put an adjuvant in in the first place. It can’t be inert, because if it were inert it couldn’t do the things it does. It can’t be excreted because again it couldn’t provide that prolonged exposure of the antigen to your immune system.- Shaw

The PIC has released a PDF called Aluminum Vaccine Risk Statement with a lot more information. You can access it here:
https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/PIC-Aluminum-VRS.pdf

Why This Is Important: The idea that it’s safe to inject children with aluminum containing vaccines is based on presumption. No appropriate safety studies exist to show this is the case, which is why A group of scientists from multiple countries recently published a paper in the Journal of Trace Elements in Medicine and Biology titled “The role of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines raises issues that deserve independent, rigorous and honest science” state the following,

“The safety of aluminium-based vaccine adjuvants, like that of any environmental factor presenting a risk of neurotoxicity and to which the young child is exposed, must be seriously evaluated without further delay, particularly at a time when the CDC is announcing a still increasing prevalence of autism spectrum disorders, of 1 child in 54 in the USA.”

The publication goes on to address concerns it has with another paper that was published a year prior, emphasizing that the authors of that specific publication, JP Goullé & L Grangeot-Keros,

Described general knowledge on aluminum (Al) exposure, kinetics and toxicity but made very little effort to delineate the scientific questions specifically related to Al adjuvants in vaccines. Instead of representing the bulk of their review, the subject of Al adjuvants covered no more than one third of the 3 page-text. Numerous important papers on the topic were omitted, i.e. 20 years of scientific publications in clinical, post-mortem, in vitro and in vivo experimental studies published by independent research teams, worldwide experts in this topic, were simply omitted.

In 2018, shaw published a paper in the Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry that found almost 100 percent of the intramuscularly injected aluminum in mice as vaccine adjuvants was absorbed into the systemic circulation and traveled to different sites in the body such as the brain, the joints, and the spleen where it accumulated and was retained for years post-vaccination. (source)

A study published in BioMed Central (also cited in the study above) in 2013 found more cause for concern:

Intramuscular injection of alum-containing vaccine was associated with the appearance of aluminum deposits in distant organs, such as spleen and brain where they were still detected one year after injection. Both fluorescent materials injected into muscle translocated to draining lymph nodes (DLNs) and thereafter were detected associated with phagocytes in blood and spleen. Particles linearly accumulated in the brain up to the six-month endpoint; they were first found in perivascular CD11b+ cells and then in microglia and other neural cells. DLN ablation dramatically reduced the biodistribution. Cerebral translocation was not observed after direct intravenous injection, but significantly increased in mice with chronically altered blood-brain-barrier. Loss/gain-of-function experiments consistently implicated CCL2 in systemic diffusion of Al-Rho particles captured by monocyte-lineage cells and in their subsequent neurodelivery. Stereotactic particle injection pointed out brain retention as a factor of progressive particle accumulation…

The study went on to conclude that “continuously escalating doses of this poorly biodegradable adjuvant in the population may become insidiously unsafe.”

These authors followed up and published a study in 2015 that emphasized:

Evidence that aluminum-coated particles phagocytozed in the injected muscle and its draining lymph nodes can disseminate within phagocytes throughout the body and slowly accumulate in the brain further suggests that alum safety should be evaluated in the long term.

A paper published in 2018 discovered high amounts of aluminum in the brain tissue of people with autism. That particular paper has now been downloaded more than 1 million times.

The particular paper cited above was published by Dr. Christopher Exley.

Exley was also one of the authors on the main paper cited at the beginning of this article. Here is a very interesting interview with him if you’re interested. He’s considered to be one of the world’s leading experts in aluminum toxicology, if not the world’s leading expert. You can find out more about his research and what he’s up to by visiting his Instagram page.

The point is, this topic is hot right now, as it should be, and it seems that our federal health regulatory agencies continue to ignore the concerns being made and the studies being published.

Here is an important clip from Dr. Larry Palevsky, a board-certified Paediatrician currently practicing in New York talking about aluminum and how it differs in adjuvant form.

According to a study published as far back as 2011 in Current Medical Chemistry

Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. Despite almost 90 years of widespread use of aluminum adjuvants, medical science’s understanding about their mechanisms of action is still remarkably poor. There is also a concerning scarcity of data on toxicology and pharmacokinetics of these compounds. In spite of this, the notion that aluminum in vaccines is safe appears to be widely accepted. Experimental research, however, clearly shows that aluminum adjuvants have a potential to induce serious immunological disorders in humans. (source)

The Takeaway: When it comes to vaccine safety, why does mainstream media constantly point fingers and call those who have concerns “anti-vax conspiracy theorists?” Why don’t they ever address the science and concerns being raised that paint vaccines in a light that they’ve never been painted in? What’s going on here? Why are the safety concerns addressed by many scientists and doctors always ignored and never addressed/countered? Would more rigorous safety testing of our vaccines not be in the best interests of everybody? Who would ever oppose that and why?"

Delight

11th September 2020, 23:05

Adult vaccine mandates are arriving.

Vaccine freedom advocates have warned of impending adult mandates.

The CDC has both a childhood vaccine schedule along with an adult schedule.

A person receiving all of the doses on both schedules will receive nearly 150 lifetime doses.

The goal of vaccinating members of the population throughout their entire lives is set forth in the National Vaccine Plan, the National Adult Immunization Plan and the Global Vaccine Action Plan.

In December of 2018, Argentina enacted a law mandating its entire vaccine schedule for both children and adults. Many pointed to this as a bellwether for what is coming for other countries.

In March of 2020, Denmark passed legislation (in effect through March of 2021) authorizing forced vaccination against COVID-19. On August 21, 2020, Virginia’s Health Commissioner Dr. Norman Oliver stated that he plans to mandate a coronavirus vaccine for all Virginians once one is publicly available.

On July 31, 2020, the President of the University of California issued an executive order requiring all students, faculty and staff who will be present on campus to receive influenza immunizations before Nov. 1, 2020. This is despite the fact that some research indicates that those receiving an annual influenza vaccine may be at increased risk of infection from coronaviruses.

The tracking that was warned about is coming to fruition. Prior to COVID-19, members of the informed consent movement warned that mass tracking and restrictions on movement would be imposed as purported protection from infectious diseases. The technology for these measures is quickly being implemented. CoviPass, a downloadable application which contains the users’ COVID-19 test histories and other health information, and uses surveillance technology to trace people, is one example.

It’s reportedly being rolled out in fifteen countries and it’s anticipated that it will serve the basis for immunity passports required to travel and move about. Further, there is at least one recent example of a U.S. college requiring its students to submit to contract-tracing. Albion College, located in Michigan, is reportedly requiring students for the fall semester to download an application that will constantly track their locations and label them based upon COVID-19 test results.

The college has also reportedly asked students to remain on campus throughout the semester, with revocation of the right to access campus as a possible penalty for not doing so.

Lockdowns and mask orders have exceeded even the vaccine freedom movement’s predictions. Simply put, the lockdowns and mask mandates have exceeded the nightmares of most in the informed consent movement. This author didn’t see those coming.

Hopefully, at this point, most of the public is aware that significant scientific concerns exist in connection with both of these mandates. Some of those concerns are discussed here.

I started this thread and the concerns I had, along with quite a few, HAVE seemed to be more than REALISTIC. It looks pretty scary "out there"

It helps to reiterate what we want to self program. I intend to self program power, self authority, resilient body and FAITH that there is a larger purpose of GOOD in all earthly trials.

YES, those beginning their journies into (a possibly painful) AH HA about the intentions of our leaders will find just about every conceivable resource on PA, including this thread.

I think it is time to become active, vocal, local, physical and assertive. I am not sure what will happen but I feel guided and beloved and have every intention of supporting the channels that want us to thrive.

I support The Highwire, Children's Health Defense and others. I spend vacation money there and will spend more. They have legal expertise and IMO we benefit from legal intervention most at the moment.

onawah

12th September 2020, 00:50

Vaccines Revealed, Episode 4 Free online to view for the next 23 hours.
(Here's the NEWEST link for that amazing RFK JR. PART 2! - current pandemic info.
NOT to be missed! It looks like they are keeping this one online, hopfully during the entire docuseries.
See post #861 above for more details about this series.
wQ-6GgJiuvA

HERE'S YOUR LINK TO EPISODE 4
*******************************************
N2hdSaiNGHQ
Tonight we expose the lies…

Meet Brian Hooker:
He’s a Ph.D. in biochemical engineering and has been conducting biotechnology research for over 25 years, and teaches biology at Simpson University.
Prior to that...

He worked in environmental restoration and plant genetic engineering (while a senior research scientist at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory).

And MOST IMPORTANT….

Brian is the father of an 18-year-old autistic son who was damaged by his infant “**Health Shots.” (**we can’t use the “v” word here or our emails will be blocked)

Meet Dawn Loughborough:

She was an Executive Senior Consultant with Price Waterhouse, and she obtained her master’s degree in Law from the University of Baltimore.

AND….

Dawn is the mother of a child who was damaged by her MMR Shot at 15 months of age.

Meet Sarah Bridges:

She’s a Ph.D. Neuropsychologist.

Was a Senior Executive for a $1.7 billion fortune 1000 company, and an innovator in the psychology and organizational consulting field.

And….

Sarah is Porter’s mom.

Porter’s diagnosis is “Brain Injury from the Pertussis **Shot” (**another “v” word)

Your views on this whole issue will transform in a single night.
… In fact; YOU will be transformed when you hear their stories in tonight’s informative and touching episode of V-Revealed.

Enjoy and watch it all you want for the next 24 hours"

Sincerely,
Patrick Gentempo

amor

13th September 2020, 04:51

All the revelations above are wonderful. The CDC, pharmaceutical manufacturers, and their Rockefeller genocidal plotters, along with their agricultural contingent, need to be closed and their agents imprisoned or worse. Three hundred and thirty five million humans are being commanded to ingest death because the above are using the power of money and greed to bring about our demise. At the head of this snake also is the Nazi contingent, plotting to empty Earth and occupy it solely. Don't laugh, keep connecting the dots while you read widely.

onawah

13th September 2020, 05:46

"Vaccines Revealed" episode 5 starting with Dr. Rashid Buttar and 5 other speakers including Stephanie Seneff, a Ph.D. Senior Scientist at MIT who says, “It’s very disturbing where we are headed right now, and I see no end in sight.”
Also Sayer Ji; Gary Goldman, PhD former CDC research scientist; James Chestnut, D.C., B.E.D.M, M.S.C., C.C.W.P. and Kelly Brogan, M.D. Psychiatrist.
Available for 19 more hours from the time of this posting.
rc0F-J8efBw

(Dr. Buttar says that there IS still thimerosol mercury in vaccines today, even though they are labeled "thimerosal-free". The head of the FDA testified that now thimerosal is used in the manufacturing of vaccines, though it is not added to the vial once the vaccine is made, and so they don't have to label it as containing thimerosal, according to FDA rules. That was in 2004, and is the Congressional Record.
Buttar goes on to say there is NOTHING in vaccines that is good for us. )

spade

13th September 2020, 17:15

Having success with friend's kid with autism at this very moment, taking pure gum spirits in small doses (according tobody weight) aids the body in getting rid of mercury and parasites. Huge improvements in cognitive function. There was a video out there awhile back where doctors in Mexico were using it successfully. It was still up on bitchute before the plandemic. Its now completely missing - what's left is generally an attack on pure gum spirits because it could potentially fight the plandemic as well.

Maia Gabrial

13th September 2020, 20:31

The threat of Vaccines is coming .... And it's not going to be just for the children...

t1RPTzFyDbg

onawah

14th September 2020, 07:24

"Vaccines Revealed" episode 6 will be free online for the next 17 &1/2 hours from the time of this posting.
From the email update today:

"The weight on his shoulders was immense….
… That’s Brian Hooker. — see part 2 tonight.
What would you do?
You see…
He had PROOF that 5 scientists at the CDC knew that there was a link between the MMR [Shot] and Autism.
… And they colluded to cover up the results of the tests, while children continued to be injured.
Watch the details unfold
cA8fGSjk5Z0

Worldwide Premier of VACCINE SYNDROME
When I watched this for the first time, I was stunned to silence. Our soldiers... facing an order determined both illegal and immoral.
Witness the horror of human experimentation, all the while repeating; “This Shot [“V”] is Safe” and
“If we ignore this, perhaps we are all guilty of terrorism”
HERE IS YOUR LINK TO EPISODE 6 AND VACCCINE SYNDROME! "
lJN_hQ405D8

onawah

15th September 2020, 01:26

"Vaccines Revealed" Episode 7 free online for 23 &1/2 hours from the time of this post.
"In today’s “pandemic” world, will you be able to make a choice about what happens to YOUR body (or your child’s body)
Or…
Are you going to be forced against your will?
And... what if you do it unwittingly because the true side-effects are not disclosed?
This is about personal space - this is about Human Rights.
This is about some of the most fundamental issues that affect human beings.
To compel shots against one’s will is against individual rights and your health freedom.

“I believe in individual rights.”

-Dr. Patrick Gentempo

TONIGHT:
Front and center: Current, up-to-the-minute interview with Dr. Zach Bush.

vyQXhaivwt0

Zach is one of the very few Triple Board Certified doctors in the United States.
What he knows about viruses, the immune system, and how that all fits into our current 2020 “pandemic” is life-changing.
*************
“I began looking into Vaccine safety when I realized that my two daughters were injured by these shots”
-Gayle Delong Ph.D.
I looked and realized that every time they got one of “these shots” it got worse...
*******************
“If you asked your doctor, ‘Name 3 ingredients in that syringe,’ most doctors wouldn’t be able to tell you.”

-Sherri Tenpenny, D.O.
Both here in this interview with Dr. Toni Bark, plus an interview with Patrick Gentempo:
Ji-xSDyLNVo

This is a must-see night.
Patrick Gentempo"

onawah

16th September 2020, 00:30

Wow, does the following ever belong in this thread!
Did the Federal Government Just Secretly Take Over Vaccine Policy Usurping the Authority of the States?
9/15/20
https://vaccineimpact.com/2020/did-the-federal-government-just-secretly-take-over-vaccine-policy-usurping-the-authority-of-the-states/

Connecting the Dots
by Wayne Rohde
Health Impact News

"Over the course of the last several months there have been a few developments, when looked at individually, that do not create much of a response or concern to the masses.

Yet when you zoom out a bit, these events, scattered about and seemingly not connected, start to fit together into a pattern.

Chaos theory can be defined as “within the apparent randomness of chaotic complex systems, there are underlying patterns, interconnectedness, constant feedback loops, repetition, self-similarity, fractals, and self-organization.”

The events I refer to are:

1) The enactment of The PREP Act by the Secretary of HHS.

2) The Secretary of HHS actions to remove shoulder injury and syncope from the NVICP.

3) The Secretary of HHS amending the PREP Act to allow pharmacists to administer childhood vaccines to our kids ages 3-18.

4) The Secretary of HHS issuing guidance allowing pharmacists to administer an approved COVID vaccine to kids ages 3-18.

First big dot to connect
The enactment of The PREP Act (Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness 2005) was declared by the Secretary of HHS on March 10, 2020.

This allowed our nation to address the COVID “pandemic” by extending legal protections to manufacturers of medical supplies and equipment, plus allowing our federal government to harness the resources necessary to combat this virus.

This also extended to the states for them to enact Emergency Powers that restricted businesses, social gatherings, focusing medical responses to COVID only.

At the same time, the Secretary of HHS forwarded his intentions via a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to remove shoulder injury (SIRVA) and syncope (fainting) from the NVICP, thus any claims for injuries resulting in shoulder injuries or the result of injured incurred after falling because of fainting.

Shoulder injury is the #1 claim for injury in the Vaccine Court. By far outdistancing GBS, yet combined, nearly 64% of all petitions filed in the NVICP allege these two injury types.

Outside of those who follow the NVICP closely or attorneys who practice in the Program, there was not as much interest from the general public.

The advisory committee to the Secretary of HHS for these matters voted unanimously to keep shoulder injury and syncope as a stated injury. The committee sent a letter to the Secretary to inform him of their action.

That did not stop the Secretary. Later in the summer, the Secretary moved “all in” with a new NPRM.

Several theories started to emerge as to why the Secretary is pushing so aggressively and what will happen when those injuries are removed from the Program.

Most of these claims for shoulder injuries are derived from poor administration of a vaccine at a retail pharmacy. Going forward after the removal of SIRVA, can pharmacists be sued for negligence because of poor administration?

The answer is yes. But that is not the end of this story.

Just another dot to connect
In August of this year, the Secretary of HHS issued declaration to amend the PREP Act to allow pharmacists to administer vaccines approved for the schedule to children ages 3-18. With so many adults having problems from vaccinations at retail pharmacies, why allow children? Read my recent article about all the details:

PREP Act Secretly Amended this Week to Allow Pharmacists to Vaccinate Children Ages 3-18
Another dot
Then on Sept 3, 2020, the Secretary of HHS issued guidance to allow pharmacists to administer the COVID vaccine (yet to be approved) to children as young as three years of age.

Keep in mind, clinical trials are ongoing and no children are included in the trials this young. This action preempts any state law or statute regarding the administration of a COVID vaccine.

And another dot to connect
Buried in the recent guidance announcement by the Secretary is the statement that pharmacists now will be considered “covered persons” under the PREP Act. They will not incur any liability for their licensed actions to administer vaccinations.

This removes any liability to sue for an injury and goes against the NPRM issued back in March by removing these injuries and asserts that such claims should be filed in civil court.

Yet another dot to connect
During my sophomore year in college, my statistics professor talked about chaos theory by illustrating the use of jumping jacks, throwing them up in the air, watching them fall to the ground, and the pattern they left after they settled.

To me, it looked like a mess that someone would have to clean up. But after looking at the floor, stepping back a bit, I could see a pattern emerge.

So what do we make of all this mess of The PREP Act, and the Secretary of HHS’ actions?

Let’s connect the dots
If you look at this from a distance, you will notice a pattern appearing.

And it hit me like a ton of bricks.

By connecting the actions of the Secretary of HHS and those dots (actions), it does give the appearance of:

A complete federalization of our nation’s vaccine policy traditionally conducted and carried out by the states.

Using the PREP Act, without consultation by Congress, circumventing state legislatures, our federal government is now creating vaccine standards and policy.

So what is next for the Secretary of HHS?

Exemptions perhaps.

Or maybe closing down the NVICP and rolling whatever is left of very limited vaccine injury into the CounterMeasures Injury Compensation Program.

Wayne Rohde is the author of The Vaccine Court. He has an upcoming Podcast of NVICP, The PREP Act, CounterMeasures Injury Comp Program and COVID vaccine legal issues starting Mid-October."

onawah

16th September 2020, 05:02

"Vaccines Revealed" [Ep. #8] Premiere of "Trace Amounts" (the entire movie
9/16/20
"Trace Amounts" Free online for the next 20 hours from the time of this posting
AND:
More from Dr. Zach Bush
_R7xFogWDG8

“The more I researched, the more I couldn’t believe my eyes, and the more I knew there was no way I could just sit back and not do anything about this.

I quit my career, moved into an RV, hired a production crew, and hit the road for years attending Autism conferences, filming Autism rallies, performing experiments with scientists, interviewing everyone and anyone who would talk to us, and so much more.

When the tour was over, I spent the next two years sifting through almost 300 hours of video footage, thousands of leaked documents, closed-door meeting transcripts, and countless scientific studies.

It then took me another 3 years working with my post-production team to piece everything together into what has become the feature documentary film you’re about to see.”

Filmmaker: Eric Gladen

This movie is the true story of the mercury poisoning of Eric Gladen - and his painful journey.

Follow his quest for the scientific truth about the role of mercury poisoning in the current Autism Epidemic

Mercury is a known toxin that causes debilitating neurological and physical damage…

So why and how did it end up in our childhood shots?

Click here to enjoy tonight’s Worldwide Free Premiere of TRACE AMOUNTS.

AND...

Part 3 of our shocking interview with Brian Hooker. - This one’s a head shaker.

He tells of his encounters with Dr. Thompson.

Thompson’s study showed a significant statistical correlation between thimerosal/mercury in these shots and neurological tics in boys.

And instead of investigating this, a chief CDC official came down on Thompson and said “You will not publish this result…”

“The CDC site states that thimerosal is safe and exposure has no risk.

… Nothing could be further from the truth”

Wow,

Patrick Gentempo "

onawah

16th September 2020, 16:20

Unfortunately, the video containing the premiere of "Trace Amounts" couldn't be embedded here.
You would have to register for the free showing of the "Vaccines Revealed" documentary in order to see it.
But it will only be showing for 8 hours, 40 minutes from the time of this posting.
Certainly worth seeing if you want to know more about autism and vaccines!

onawah

17th September 2020, 01:36

"Vaccines Revealed" Episode 9
Free online for the next 23 hours from the time of this posting.

From the email update:

"HE* got death threats

We have a hot-off-the-press 2020 exclusive interview with a well-known doctor.

His name is so controversial, we can’t even type it out, or our emails are flagged and will not get delivered.

Here’s a hint:

He noticed something in his patients after their routine “shots”

And…
...Simply raised the question about the connection between MMR and autism.

This updated interview is mind-blowing.

You will not hear this anywhere else, and we have had to work some serious loopholes to even bring it to you.

** if it’s not playing, hang tight, we have several backups in place and will have it back up and running within 30 minutes.

Then…

Make sure and catch what Sayer Ji says about “hazmat suits” in doctors offices in the first 5 minutes.

And…

What about the most controversial shot of all time… Gardasil.

You’ll be appalled when you hear what Brian Hooker (quickly becoming a watcher favorite) has to say about that @ 22:32 in this episode

And tonight - what a treat: I have the honor of introducing you to Dr. Heather Wolfson. And boy, will she reel you in!

Interestingly, Heather is married to Dr. Jack Wolfson - a Board-Certified Cardiologist.

And just wait until you hear how Dr. Jack Wolfson was vilified for his atypical views on medicine @ 49:14

As a parent, you’ll connect with the message.

AND FINALLY..

… What you’ve been overwhelmingly longing for...

I can’t even count the number of messages, emails and reaching out with this singular question:

Dr. Gentempo - “So what do I do now?”

Well, you are in for a real treat. Dr. Dan Pompa - a Cellular Detox Expert will be talking expressly about this issue - for those of you who’ve had those questions.

You’ll find yourself leaning in for this one.

With purpose,

Dr. Patrick Gentempo"

Kg1gseLZwSg

gXJKQgj5pNk

Satori

17th September 2020, 18:50

Gemma13

18th September 2020, 09:34

A United States District Court Judge in Pennsylvania declared certain "Covid-19" restrictions unconstitutional. The 66 page opinion is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FL3Y1kDPricSINHlym0lVIw9hdsvmZmx/view

Wow Satori - so what happens now?

P.S. Thanks to onawah and other posters. I haven't had a chance to look at this thread yet so after a quick browse and watching just a small portion of the "episodes" there is some solid information here that is great for referring people to.

spade

18th September 2020, 12:30

those in the US who do attend those trump rallies need to chant "NO VACCINES NO VACCINES NO VACCINES" in succession. So that trump will get the message.

onawah

19th September 2020, 04:48

"Vaccines Revealed" replaying free 48 hours--last time.
I just got this email update at 9pm tonight from:
Jeff Hays info@jeffhaysfilms.com

"We’re working up to hitting 2-Million views of this crucially timed series
RECORD SETTING!
Mandatory V@((!N@T!0N$ are coming. (We can’t even type the “v” word, or our emails get censored)
We put many many backups in place to make sure there was uninterrupted viewing of every jaw-dropping interview.
But… there were a few “fails” when we didn’t move quite fast enough and censorship caught up with us.
So… We are opening up all 9 episodes…
INCLUDING…
All 5 exclusive 2020 interviews talking about all of your current concerns.
Will “they” be mandatory?
What’s the truth about the medical reports?
What does the future for my family really look like?
But…
Once the next 48 hours are over, we have to take them down.
Make sure you take advantage of this series before it’s gone.
Because once the clock strikes midnight on Sunday, they’re gone.
And I’m warning you right now, there will not be a replay.

CLICK HERE to access all episodes now: https://www.vrevealed.com/trailer/?cookieUUID=13f45768-e083-4b33-b461-ae753f232c96&cookieUUID=c0b40e56-f6eb-429c-a7ae-3c89398f1c38&affiliate=3448

Enjoy!
Jeff Hays
Jeff Hays Films
'Movies that Make Movements'
P.S. Congratulations on being part of an exclusive group of people who get to peek behind the curtain! You’re going to be stunned to see what’s really going on…
If you want a chance to review this forbidden content… You need to watch now. Because once it’s gone… It’s gone."

(Usually they wait for a while before playing these kinds of docuseries online free after the first showing, but I don't recall one ever not being shown again, so it may be that the information shared in this series was too explosive, and will not be permitted to run again online for free, though TPTB can't stop them from selling it. (At least, not yet!)
HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!!
As far as I know, these links will only last through this weekend:
q8hifU6WKl4
JiJVcXSdpIU
5TG3gd1qRko
ZpDl0ohW3I8
bXbmff7LnsY
wQ-6GgJiuvA
N2hdSaiNGHQ
rc0F-J8efBw
qwlysr4BmU0
continued

A United States District Court Judge in Pennsylvania declared certain "Covid-19" restrictions unconstitutional. The 66 page opinion is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1FL3Y1kDPricSINHlym0lVIw9hdsvmZmx/view

Wow Satori - so what happens now?

P.S. Thanks to onawah and other posters. I haven't had a chance to look at this thread yet so after a quick browse and watching just a small portion of the "episodes" there is some solid information here that is great for referring people to.

¤=[Post Update]=¤

lJN_hQ405D8
cA8fGSjk5Z0
vyQXhaivwt0
Ji-xSDyLNVo
_R7xFogWDG8
Kg1gseLZwSg
The last episode is a premiere showing of "Trace Amounts" --no video url to copy here for that--you have to register for the series to see it.

Patient

19th September 2020, 05:50

Onawah, I wanted to thank you for all of your effort in helping people to learn about vaccines. I would think that your efforts might be fueled by someone close to you who has been themselves injured by vaccines. If true, I send my support to you.

Like many things in life, unless they are experienced first hand people do not understand the harm that is being caused.

The real unfortunate thing is that more and more people are learning about the adverse effects of vaccines, but many are leaning after the damage has been done.

It makes me sic to my stomache when I think about the damage to people that might occur if they push this covid vaccine. There have been some bad results from the human tests - so maybe they should just stop, right? I wish.

I have twin boys who are on the autism spectrum from.vaccines. I have been reading and researching about it ever since.

One thing that I haven't seen spoken of..."vitamin K" shot that they give to babies at the hospital a day or two after birth. They did this to our other son without our consent. One of the side affects is eczema. My poor son is covered head to toe in eczema all the time. Watching your son have issues sleeping due to the itching is heart wrenching. They are many other problems, but enough said already.

Yes there are creams, etc.

But the bottom line is - vitamin k shot is unnecessary. People - do your best to keep your children from getting these vaccines. If you do not, you will watch a lifetime of unnecessary pain and frustration.

onawah

19th September 2020, 06:30

So sorry for your suffering and your childrens'. I was injured by the SV40 polio vaccine when I was 6 years old. I knew there was something very wrong with it immediately and tried to tell my teacher, mother, school nurse, etc. but of course, no one would listen.
I was so traumatized I finally had to make a conscious decision to suppress it all, and the memory didn't re-emerge until I was in my 30s.
But there was still no info out about the SV40 then, so I I had to wait until I was 50 years old and had a good doctor who did blood work, found mycoplasma diagnosed me with fibromyalgia as a result, and told me I probably had received the SV40.
I was able to go online and find public records showing where and when it was given, so I finally knew.
The people responsible for this tragedy are going to be paying in terms of the terrible karma they've created for a long time to come.
Unfortunately, generations of innocents are paying for it now too, most undeservedly, and will be until it's finally stopped, which can't be soon enough.

Onawah, I wanted to thank you for all of your effort in helping people to learn about vaccines. I would think that your efforts might be fueled by someone close to you who has been themselves injured by vaccines. If true, I send my support to you.

onawah

20th September 2020, 07:22

Vaccine Awareness Week Update 2020
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
September 20, 2020
j5t6HDHc9Dg

(Many hyperlinks in the article that are not embedded here)

STORY AT-A-GLANCE
So far, this year, NVIC has issued positions and tracked 232 vaccine related bills in 39 states — the highest number of bills ever to have been introduced in state legislatures in a single year
Thirteen bills in 10 States sought to eliminate vaccine exemptions. None passed. Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed
Of 10 bills filed across eight states to restrict vaccine exemptions, only one passed (Colorado) requiring a vaccine provider signature or completion of an online education module for religious or conscientious exemptions
NVIC supported 99 bills that sought to expand vaccine exemptions, the right to make vaccine choices, and offering protection against vaccine tracking systems. That’s up from just 19 good bills NVIC supported in 2015
The Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination: “Protecting Health & Autonomy in the 21st Century,” sponsored by NVIC, will be held online October 16 to 18, 2020

"This week, we celebrate our 10th anniversary of Vaccine Awareness Week. In this video, Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), summarizes the high and low points we’ve experienced over the past year, and shares the details about NVIC’s international public conference on vaccination.1

Due to fluctuating social distancing rules and COVID-19-related travel bans, for the first time, this three-day conference will be held entirely online, October 16 through 18, 2020. The theme of this conference will be “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century.” I invite you to attend by registering now. Since the conference is virtual, you now have the rare opportunity to attend no matter where you live.

“I was so excited to see how many credentialed scientists and physicians, state senators, authors, human rights activists — how many people agreed to participate,” Fisher says.

“We have more than 40 high-caliber speakers who are going to be presenting at this three-day conference. It also features two films ... We have kept the ticket price really low to try to allow families around the world to be able to see this conference … [It’s just] $80 for three days and three nights of knowledge.”

Register here: https://app.glueup.com/event/20563/register/

Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century
The conference is divided into four primary themes:

U.S. and International Vaccine Choice Advocacy
“Show Us the Science”
The Paradigm Shift Toward Health and Liberty
Growing Grassroots Vaccine Awareness
Following are the scheduled speakers and the topics of their presentations:

Chris Exley, Ph.D. — Aluminum Toxicity and Human Health

Jacob Puliyel, M.D. — Redefining Vaccine Reactions to Erase Evidence of Harm

Dennis Rancourt, Ph.D. — From Masking to Mortality Rates: COVID-19 and What the Science Tells Us

Vicky Pebsworth, Ph.D., R.N. — Novel Technologies Driving the Creation of COVID-19 Vaccines

Alan Kassel — Consensus Science Is Not Science Because Science Is Never Settled

Malcolm Kendrick, M.D.— Manipulating Science to Endorse Policy and Market Products

Meryl Nass, M.D. — From Anthrax to COVID-19: What You Need to Know About One Company Making a Coronavirus Vaccine

Sin Hang Lee, Ph.D. — Risks and Failures of HPV Vaccines for Cervical Cancer Prevention

Theresa Deisher, Ph.D. — Ethical Vaccines and The Use of Human Fetal Cells to Make Vaccines

Rodney Deitert, Ph.D. — Why the Microbiome Matters

Richard Deth, Ph.D. — Inflammation, Epigenetics, Autism and Lessons for COVID-19 Vaccines

Dawn Richardson — U.S. Vaccine Mandates in State Legislatures Since 2010

Ted Kuntz and Rocco Galati, J.D. — The Lobby to Remove Vaccine Choices in Canada

Kris Gaublomme, M.D. — The European Experience with Mandatory Vaccination

Michael Farris, J.D. — Why Homeschooling Is Under Attack and What You Can Do About It

Rabbi Michoel Green — Ethical Questions on Mandatory Vaccination: Respecting Life and Guarding Your Soul

Bishop Joseph Strickland — Rejecting the Culture of Death to Embrace the Sanctity of Life

Eric Metaxas — The Role of Freedom of Conscience for Martin Luther and the Protestant Religion

Stephanie Christner, D.O. — The Shrinking Medical Vaccine Exemption Handcuffing Doctors and Increasing Vaccine Risks

Alvin Moss, M.D. — Why and How Vaccine Mandates Violate the Ethical and Legal Right to Informed Consent

Larry Palevsky, M.D. — The Physician's Duty to First Do No Harm

Bob Sears, M.D. — When Public Policy Invalidates Professional Judgment: A Pediatrician's Experience

David Brownstein, M.D. — Since When Did It Become a Crime to Support the Immune System?

Eric Plasker, D.C. — Raising Healthy Families the 100-year Lifestyle Way

State Sen. Scott Jensen, M.D. — Censoring Freedom of Speech: If It Can Happen to Me, It Can Happen to Anyone

Ronnie Cummins — Grassroots Rising

Joseph Mercola, DO — How To Take Back Control of Your Health

Barbara Loe Fisher — Defending Life and Liberty in the Vaccine Culture War

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., J.D. — Pharmaceutical Companies Must Be Held Legally Accountable for Vaccine Injuries and Deaths

Odette Suter, D.V.M. — What Veterinary Science Tells Us About Pet Vaccines

Steven Rubin, Ph.D. — What Has Happened to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System?

Twila Brase, RN, PHN — Electronic Health Care Records Tracking You from Birth to Death

Marco Cáceres — Tyranny of the Experts: Who's Fact Checking the Fact Checkers?

Sherri Tenpenny, D.O. — Mandatory Vaccination: Adults are Next

Kevin Jenkins — Knowledge is Power

State Sen. Heidi Sampson — Under the Influence: The Vaccine Mandate Lobby Influencing State Legislatures

Andrew Wakefield — Past is Prologue: What the History of the 1986 Act Reveals

Sheila Ealey — When Mothers are Silenced, Children Suffer

Andrew Kaufman, M.D. — Psychological Warfare in the COVID-19 Era

Vera Sharav — Doctors Guilty of Medical Atrocities: From Auschwitz to Tuskegee, Willowbrook and Beyond

Del Bigtree — Walking the Highwire: You Never Walk Alone

Click here to read more
People Are Losing Faith in Vaccine System
Obviously, the biggest event over the past 12 months has been the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ultra-rapid development of a pandemic coronavirus vaccine which may or may not become mandatory around the world. Fisher has put together a special report on COVID-19, which she continues to update.

“Certainly, the polling is confirming — not just in the United States, but around the world — that people are losing faith in the vaccine system; they are losing faith in vaccine safety and effectiveness. A lot of it has to do with what has happened this year,” she says.

"This has been a public relations disaster, in my opinion, for the public health profession. They are the ones that have advised politicians around the world, lawmakers, to institute these draconian restrictions, the social distancing, isolation, deprivation — restrictions on people for an infection that at this point has a mortality [rate] of less than 1%.

It doesn't even compare to some of the infectious diseases that have plagued humans in the past, most notably Ebola, which has a 50% mortality rate, smallpox 30%, diphtheria 10% to 20%.

It's just so outsized [and[ out of balance what they've done, and caused a lot of protests all around the world, and a lack of trust in the system. So, it's their own fault for making people more skeptical.”

Communicating With Your Legislators Is Key
Through it all, the NVIC has continued to monitor legislation in the U.S. Many state legislatures have been working remotely, not allowing people to come into the state capital buildings. As a result, many more Americans are now using the free online NVIC advocacy portal to email and to call their legislators — which is what it’s there for.

“We also have been encouraging people to meet one on one with their legislators, which is the most effective way that you can talk with people and convince them that they need to take a look at these vaccine laws that don't allow exemptions,” Fisher notes.

"What I learned when I worked on Capitol Hill was the people who really run the place are the legislative aides. They're the ones [who] really create the legislation. They're the ones [who] recommend to the member what they should do. I think a lot of people don't realize the power that people have who work for congressmen and senators at the federal and state level.

So, if you're not able to meet with your actual member, don't be upset. You need to meet with the people who are advising him or her and make sure that you are clear about where you stand, and, of course, a legislator wants to get reelected. So, you have to make your voice heard.”

Best and Worst of 2020
So far, this year, and we’re only in September, NVIC has issued positions and tracked 232 vaccine related bills in 39 states. That's the highest number of vaccine-related bills ever to have been introduced in state legislatures in one year. There were 13 bills in 10 States that sought to eliminate vaccine exemptions. None passed.

Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed. That's a remarkable statistic. It is absolutely a tribute to the people who are using the NVIC advocacy portal. ~ Barbara Loe Fisher
Of 10 bills filed across eight states to restrict vaccine exemptions, only one passed (Colorado) requiring a vaccine provider signature or completion of an online education module for religious or conscientious exemptions.

In total, there were 99 bills that NVIC supported — bills expanding vaccine exemptions, the right to make vaccine choices, and offering protection against vaccine tracking systems and a few of these good bills did pass. Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed.

“That's a remarkable statistic,” Fisher says. “It is absolutely a tribute to the people who are using the NVIC advocacy portal. They are taking the guidelines and the analyses that we publish, they're looking at the information, they're getting their facts straight, and they're contacting their legislators. This is true grassroots advocacy …

In 2015, there were only 19 bills that NVIC supported. So, in five years, we've gone from 19 bills that were good in 2015 to 99 good bills in 2020. That also shows you the power of really encouraging people to stand up for their rights and to communicate with their legislators …

There was a very bad vaccine bill [that] passed in Virginia, one of the worst that has ever been passed. That is a bill that would codify into law the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ (ACIP) recommendations without public hearings, without input really to the legislators, without a vote by the legislator.

Whenever the ACIP makes a recommendation that children should use a certain vaccine, in Virginia it will automatically be put onto the state mandated list [of vaccines] for children to attend school.

The Board of Health will do a review, but the Board of Health is politically appointed. So, basically, what Virginia did is they cut the people out of the process. No longer will there be a vote. So, all the advocacy work that we're encouraging, that's how they're going to try to cut it off.

I predict they're going to try to go state by state with this legislation they passed in Virginia and make every state that way, cutting the people out of the legislative process, which is a direct threat to democracy.”

COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Expected
Fisher is convinced any COVID-19 vaccine, which makes it through licensing approval by the FDA and is eventually recommended by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, will eventually be mandated by state governments for all children. Clearly, the COVID-19 pandemic is unquestionably one of the greatest threats to freedom and liberty we’ve ever faced in modern history.

“The way that they will do that is [through] social sanctions. They will try to get businesses to make it a requirement that you have to have a COVID-19 vaccine in order to work in an office. They will make it mandatory for anyone entering a public space. That's what their goal is. Whether they achieve that or not is up to us. It's up to the people ...

What they have done is unprecedented. This has never occurred in the history of the world and what is so remarkable is that, when you take a step back and look at it, you see that it is highly orchestrated.

How in the world did all the governments, including the U.S. government, decide to shut down their societies — causing widespread, catastrophic, global economic ruin, unemployment at unprecedented levels, small businesses being destroyed?

They [small businesses] will never come back, or it's going to take a long time to come back. Mental health issues and suicides are up, anxiety and depression rates are up, child abuse and spousal abuse rates are up. Hotlines are not able to manage all of the callers because people are in a state of shock and they're suffering — for what?

Yes, you can die and you can be injured by this COVID-19 infection, just like any other infectious disease. But the fear and anxiety that has been created, the pathological fear of being near anybody, ‘Don't touch anybody. Don't be near anybody.’ You would think it was Ebola and people were literally bleeding out in the streets.

This is like influenza or other respiratory infections. But look at Sweden’s per million death rate. They did not lock down. Their chief epidemiologist said, ‘We need to allow controlled herd immunity to take effect. This is an infection. It's going to go through the population. You cannot stop it. You have to manage it, but let's get herd immunity.’2

They [in Sweden] have a lower per million death rate than the United States where we tried to lock everything down. So, the science is not all in and, yet, they're rushing to bring these vaccines out using messenger RNA and DNA technology that has never been licensed for humans. There are all these calls to mandate, to make sure that every man, woman, child takes this vaccine.

This is a coronavirus, it's in the family of coronaviruses that cause the common cold. There are studies showing that it looks as if you can have a mild case of COVID-19 and still get T-cell memory helper cells that are resisting the COVID-19 infection … They also know that you can have a mild case, and it looks as if you can get immunity without even having high antibody levels.3 To me, this is a game changer.

They are having clinical trials and the standard, the measurement they're using to measure proof of immunity, is antibody titers, when the truth is — for this virus — you can have T-cell immunity and no antibodies, but still be immune!4

The other issue is, we could have herd immunity already in the U.S. A lot of asymptomatic people won't be counted as being COVID-19, so you could have herd immunity in this country already, or getting close to it, but they simply aren't measuring for it.”

Lessons From Previous Mass Vaccination Campaigns

TpLF5UwUDoo

There’s no shortage of historical precedents when it comes to devastating pandemic vaccine campaigns. Aside from the 2009 pandemic swine flu vaccine campaign, which led to thousands of children and teens developing narcolepsy5 in Europe6 caused by the Pandemrix vaccine, there’s also the 1976 swine flu fiasco, detailed in this 1979 “60 Minutes” episode.

Fearing a repeat of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, all Americans were told to get vaccinated. According to “60 Minutes,” 46 million Americans were vaccinated against the swine flu at that time. Over the next few years, thousands of Americans filed vaccine damage claims with the federal government,7 severely marring the public’s perception of flu shots.8

According to a 1981 report9 by the U.S. General Accounting Office, as of October 2, 1980, 3,965 claims and 1,384 lawsuits had been filed. Of the 3,965 claims filed, 316 claims were settled for $12.3 million. Considering the COVID-19 vaccine is using novel RNA and DNA technology, it seems foolish not to assume there will be significant adverse consequences.

“We don't know what's going to happen when you give a vaccine to someone who has already recovered from COVID-19. We don't know how the immune system is going to react to rechallenge. We don't know what's going to happen to people who have underlying medical conditions, people who have severe allergies, autoimmune disease. Everybody's different,” Fisher says.

"This one size fits all approach has always been dangerous. And the ignoring of vaccine reactions, writing them off as coincidences, this has become a pattern in vaccine clinical trials. Whenever a serious event happens, or a death event happens, the investigators write it off as not associated.

What's that about? It's not being truthful. They don't know if it's related or not. But who makes that decision and why are they making those decisions? That skews the way the vaccine safety profile is being presented to the public.

You really have to look at the data. You have to look at the studies and understand the methodology they used, before coming to a conclusion about whether they've proved to safety and effectiveness. That's what we try to do at NVIC, and put it out in lay terms so that people understand it.”

Resources Where You Can Learn More
NVIC Advocacy Portal — Become a registered user of this unique free online communications network that electronically connects you directly with your own legislators and emails you action alerts with talking points so you can be an effective vaccine choice advocate in your state.
You can use it to inform your legislators about why it is necessary to protect vaccine exemptions and your legal right to make voluntary vaccine decisions for yourself and your children.

Ask 8 Vaccine Information Kiosk — Download brochures and reports on vaccination and how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms, as well as posters and web badges that you can share with your family and friends. Access the illustrated and fully referenced Guide to Reforming Vaccine Policy & Law to educate your legislator when you advocate for vaccine informed consent rights.
State Law & Vaccine Requirements — You can easily obtain your state’s current vaccine policies and laws here.
Vaccine Reaction and Harassment Reporting — Search for and read descriptions of vaccine reaction reports made to the federal vaccine adverse events reporting system (VAERS). On NVIC’s website, read about or publicly report a vaccine reaction or describe an experience of being bullied and sanctioned for attempting to exercise informed consent to vaccination for yourself or your child.
Guide to Flu & Flu Vaccines — This Mini Guide to influenza & Flu Vaccines is a brief summary of facts about influenza and influenza vaccines.

Sources and References
1, 10 NVIC International Public Conference on Vaccination 2020
2 Sandbrook D. No lockdown, no masks, no hysteria…NO PROBLEM: Sweden didn’t go into a corona coma – and it’s living in glorious normality.
3 Robust T-cell immunity in convalescent individuals with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19. Cell Aug. 14, 2020.
4 Leslie M. T cells found on COVID-19 patients ‘bode well’ for long-term immunity. Science May 14, 2020.
5 Eurosurveillance June 30, 2011; 16(26)
6 EBioMedicine. 2019 Feb; 40: 595–604
7, 9 GAO.gov, Report to US Senator Durkin, January 14, 1981 (PDF)
8 Smithsonian Magazine February 6, 2017

onawah

22nd September 2020, 04:20

Free bonus online 48 hours Episode 10 of "Vaccines Revealed"
20 hours 45 minutes from the time of this post 9/21/20
From the update today: support@vrevealed.com

"Again….
No catch here. Nothing to buy.
Just a BONUS EPISODE for you to enjoy!
Unreleased, Bonus Episode 10
It’s BRAND NEW FOOTAGE.
Including…
More conversation with the guest so controversial we cannot even type his name.
Overwhelmingly… you asked for more from this guy:
https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/60yfJPS1GCC1Xlh0gJa4J1IVasdHtNgmPdSXTdcZalO933WJPElGGggGCkfa-tZdzzklq4I4u5zSuMDc45CU4lgg-KDcrsh0EeU06olnwBf84FIvsiQUYZrQqeTEwgLo=s0-d-e1-ft#https://cdn-m4m.chd01.com/pro/uploads/account_1389/893/AW-ep10-screenshot.jpg

CLICK HERE to watch the exclusive, limited-time screening of Episode 10 NOW because it will only be up for the next 48 hours

4qATRfDl7wM

You asked for more.
More information on some specific topics - so we went to work and put together the longest, most complete episode in the series (3+ hours!) full of the MOST REQUESTED topics:
The Gardasil shot
The status of “non-v@xx&r$” and herd immunity
The “Virus of Fear”
The National “V” Information Center & “Informed Consent”
What a Professor of Medicine discovered about the immune system
The unintended experiment caused by v@((!ne$
Creating v@((!ne$ for diseases that are NOT fatal, but merely inconvenient
The importance of Motherly Instinct - and ”V” exemptions
Your Legal rights, due process, and the human rights issue
NOW- here’s easily the most controversial shot out there -

The Gardasil v@((!ne.
Meet Diane Harper - Lead Investigator for the HPV Clinical Trials for the Gardasil Shot:
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/rnqrzDaFYoPCtyFWcAQtLRi8J7qfc17oYeKPa4zXrQNF6dEoZJcMK1f4ztWCktXQAt4shj-CoMc3_arx2gW14fmJbRXWmCZwvcauEyW-OblepfmNqIlcHg6f2K4gkL7Irax6ruA

Did you know that the manufacturer didn’t even have to PROVE that Gardasil prevents cancer in order to market it that way?
Discover how it’s putting women at a higher risk for missed cancers!
CLICK HERE NOW to watch the exclusive, limited-time screening of Episode 10...

fZPsC7c5ncc

NOW because it will only be up for 48 hours
Enjoy this very special Bonus Episode 10!
Our gift to you"

Dr. Patrick Gentempo

P.S.

Thank you all so much for your support and for your outpouring of gratitude, backing, and encouragement.
We sincerely THANK YOU for your involvement and willingness to share and support our message.
We’re giving back by keeping bonus Episode 10 up for 48 hours… so make sure and SHARE this with anyone you think might benefit from it.

onawah

22nd September 2020, 04:27

United States for Medical Freedom
From their FB page:
9/21/20
(Lawsuits are coming)

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/120039894_10220674156656944_2123069109852180467_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_sid=ca434c&_nc_ohc=8IFowObEVqYAX8nIMSh&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=73c557f05e79e9cb39801e8d6f79768c&oe=5F8D5967

"I'm currently litigating against the four companies that make all 72 vaccines currently mandated for American children via CDC recommendations. All four of these companies are convicted felons who have paid $35 billion since 2009 for lying to and defrauding regulators and doctors in order to promote their pharmaceutical products. Our trial team coalition includes the country's largest plaintiffs firms- all of them veterans of the Monsanto litigation. These firms have won the largest pharmaceutical cases in history. It's not surprising that we have uncovered proof that the four Vaccine makers' fraudulent and reckless conduct with their other pharmaceutical products pales in comparison to their crimes in testing, manufacturing, and marketing vaccines, since, in this arena alone, they are immune from liability. We can now show with scientific certainty that certain vaccines- DTap, DTP, Hep B- are killing and injuring far more children than were ever harmed by the diseases they are marketed to prevent. This information will soon be public. It would be good for you to see it before you mandate these shots for children. I'm happy to share it in person with you and your staff and whatever experts you choose to include."

Sincerely Robert F Kennedy jr.

onawah

23rd September 2020, 05:07

Bonus "Vaccines Revealed" Episode 10 until 9PM tomorrow
Update from support@vrevealed.com
9/23/20

4qATRfDl7wM

"Until tomorrow night at 9 pm EST / 6 pm PST you have full access to Episode 10, and all the vital information it contains:
The Gardasil Shot
The status of “non-v@*c!n@tors” and herd immunity
The “Virus of Fear”
The National V- Information Center & “Informed Consent”
What a Professor of Medicine discovered about the immune system
The unintended experiment caused by v@((!n*$
Creating shots for diseases that are NOT fatal, but merely inconvenient
The importance of Motherly Instinct - and v@((!n* exemptions
Your Legal rights, due process, and the human rights issue

Plus…
The shocking PART 2 interview with “A.W.,” the doctor whose research set off a raging debate that’s made his name too controversial to use in this email.
Tomorrow @ 9 pm EST / 6 pm PST it will be taken down for good.

CHECK THIS OUT:

In addition to the doctor with a name so controversial that it gets censored every time we type it out. (His initials are A.W. - some just call him Andy)

fZPsC7c5ncc

Sayer Ji talks about the “Virus of Fear”

- Do I own my body -

or is my body property of the state?

Barbara Loe Fisher and the

National V@CC!n& Information Center

This organization is founded by parents of children who were either injured or had died from v’s

Terry Wahls M.D is a Professor of Medicine.

Learn why irritating toxic compounds are used in these shots.

“Now, how I see disease and health is fundamentally changed. And I see that creating health is the most powerful medication that I have.”

Meet the Check Family - Dina, Olivia, and Mary.

“I went against my motherly instinct.”

Meet Patricia Finn

Civil Rights Attorney

The bulk of her practice is around the V@CC!n& Injured, and parents who don’t want to V@CC!n@te.

Did you know in some states - you cannot opt out of V-Shots for your children?

“Our kids are getting sick, and we have a right to refuse. This is the United States and we don’t experiment on our children!”"

Sincerely,
Dr. Patrick Gentempo

Delight

30th September 2020, 02:23

1311124332689657856

Delight

30th September 2020, 02:55

Think this goes here. Latest from David Martin. The use of "State of Emergency" allows all kinds of abuse.

RqLS4kuVfz8

onawah

2nd October 2020, 02:39

From "Vaccines Revealed" email update today
support@vrevealed.com
10/1/20

“Dr. Gentempo;
I have two adorable grandchildren 1 and 3 years old. Their parents feel guilty for already vaccinating them, and are wondering what they can do now… after the fact?”
My heart sank.
And then…
… I got angry.
How many more times are parents going to feel guilty for doing “what the doctor ordered”?
The most devastating feeling in the world is to watch your children hurt - to see them in pain - to have to witness their suffering.
Look…
..We live in a world where there are far too many people who believe vaccines are perfectly safe. That injecting detergents, foreign DNA, live and mutated viruses, mercury and aluminum is totally harmless.
It’s these same people that seem to think that natural medicine (which has been around since the beginning of time) and the body's ability to heal itself is bunk.
This is the reason I choose to do what I do - why we created V@((!ne$ Revealed.
And, I created THIS program to help make sure that your kids (and you) are as healthy as possible.
https://vrevealed.com/healing-from-vaccines/
After all…In these “pandemic” times, your immune system is priceless.
Look, these “shots” are inflammatory - they are meant to be inflammatory and cause a response in the body.
- That’s how they work.
Let me explain:
One of the primary ingredients is an “adjuvant”.
An adjuvant is a substance whose role is to enhance the body’s immune response. This immune response is hard on the body and causes inflammation.
The next problem is that the thimerosal (mercury) and aluminum used as preservatives and adjuvants are toxic and accumulate in the body.
So - If you have a child who has gotten all their “shots”, suffered an adverse reaction, has a chronic health condition…
Or if you want to prevent one that could occur in the future as a result of the past …
The very best medicine is prevention - and next best is to decrease or stop the cumulative effects of the toxins on their bodies.
You may want to consider taking steps to detox.
Accumulated toxins contribute to health conditions and that’s why we address the burden vaccines placed on your child and the toxins stored in their body.
It’s really quite simple: In natural medicine, “dis-ease” has one of two underlying causes: toxicity and nutritional deficiency.
Detoxing attempts to restore balance by supporting the body’s elimination channels and by binding to metals, chemicals, and toxins so they can be safely removed from the body. Va((!n@t!on$ are certainly toxic.
First of all…

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!

There’s a misconception that detoxing is harsh or can only be done via chelating and fasting.
With children, it is extremely important that detoxing be done in a slow, gentle manner, and in the safest way possible.

To Your Health,
Patrick Gentempo

P.S. Get detailed info on EXACTLY HOW to detox HERE in “Healing From V@((!ne$”Dr. Patrick Gentempo https://vrevealed.com/healing-from-vaccines/"

onawah

2nd October 2020, 22:00

UofCA.Retreats, Revises Executive Order
University of California Retreats on Mandatory Flu Vaccine After Lawsuit Filed
By Richard Jaffe, Esq.
Children’s Health Defense
10/2/20
https://vaccineimpact.com/2020/university-of-california-retreats-on-mandatory-flu-vaccine-after-lawsuit-filed/

"As you may know, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and I (with the able assistance of Children’s Health Defense chief legal guru Mary Holland, Physicians for Informed Consent’s human vaccine encyclopedia aka Greg Glaser and San Diego ace litigator Ray Flores) filed an injunction lawsuit to stop the University of California’s (UC) executive order requiring all students, faculty and other employees to get the flu shot by Nov. 1 or face not being able to work or register for class.

We filed on Aug. 27, the executive order having been published on Aug. 7.

On Sept. 17, we filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the executive order. The most outrageous part of the executive order, and the part that befits the constitutional phrase of something which “shocks the conscience,” was the fact that students were treated differently from faculty and staff in two important respects.

First, unlike staff and faculty, students did not have a “religious accommodation” (more about that later).

Second, while faculty could remote teach and staff could remote work and not have to take the shot, remote learning students still had to get the stick.

That seemed to me to be a textbook equal protection and First Amendment violation. Whatever idiot UC lawyer came up with that should have to take some con law CLE (continuing legal education).

Well, it seems like the UC has finally opened its con law books (and with all its law school libraries, it’s about time).

The UC filed its response to our motion (and there are a lot of papers, but more about that later) AND GUESS WHAT? TWO DAYS AGO, THE UC (apparently secretly so far) ISSUED A NEW EXECUTIVE ORDER REVISING THE MANDATE!

And, guess what it doesn’t have in it? Correct, students are now treated the same as faculty and staff, well sort of.

Bottom line, students attending all classes online who do not live on campus do not have to get the flu shot. That is very good news for those students. Of course, if you live on campus, you still have to get the shot, at least unless and until the judge grants our preliminary injunction motion.

For perspective, this is just the opening skirmish (ok, maybe a tad bit more than that; the UC backed down probably after reviewing our fourth cause of action for equal protection violations on behalf of the students). This was a just tactical retreat for the UC. They gave up something to protect the core mandate requiring the flu vaccine for everyone who comes to the campuses.

Two other breaking news points in this case

First, the UC is setting up in effect religious inquisition courts, but with no published court procedures. That’s right, and it is just as insane as the now eliminated equal protection violations.

The UC has apparently hired outside consultants to function as judges deciding on the bona fides of people seeking a religious accommodation to the flu shot. Really, you have to appeal before some consultant to make the case that your religious beliefs are the right kind, or you have the sufficient fervor to justify the UC bestowing on you whatever it has in mind as a religious accommodation?

So what are the standards these consultant judges use? I don’t think anyone knows so far. It must be some secret set of criteria. So, maybe the UC should go back to its libraries and look up the First Amendment and something called due process and do something it hasn’t done yet. Think about what you’re doing and the path you’re going down, because as stated, this is just as crazy as the discrimination against students, only it affects the entire UC community.

If anyone has gone through or is planning to appear at these religious inquisition courts, please shoot me an email, because I think the judge is really going to want to hear from you, and I don’t think he’s going to like it one bit. Second, we now know (sort of) how this flu mandate came about and who was in charge.

One of the many declarations filed in response to our motion was from the UC head of the COVID tracing and tracking committee from which the mandate emanated. Her name is Dr. Carrie Byington. She is an executive vice president at UC Health and professor of Pediatric Infectious Disease at UC San Francisco. She has a very impressive resume and a long career in infectious disease. Here is her declaration. If anyone reading this post has any information about how this whole thing came about, and the statements contained in Dr. Byington’s declaration, please email me with details. To anyone with such knowledge, you’ll know what I am referring to. To all else, stay tuned.

Rick Jaffe is a guest contributor and the lead attorney in Kiel v. U of C case that Children’s Health Defense is supporting."

onawah

4th October 2020, 06:47

Vaccine Awareness Week Update 2020
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
October 04, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/10/04/vaccine-awareness-week-2020.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art2ReadMore&cid=20201004Z1&mid=DM673261&rid=979641772
j5t6HDHc9Dg
Transcript: https://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/ExpertInterviewTranscripts/Interview-BarbaraLoeFisher-10thVaccineAwarenessWeek.pdf

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
So far, this year, NVIC has issued positions and tracked 232 vaccine related bills in 39 states — the highest number of bills ever to have been introduced in state legislatures in a single year
Thirteen bills in 10 States sought to eliminate vaccine exemptions. None passed. Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed
Of 10 bills filed across eight states to restrict vaccine exemptions, only one passed (Colorado) requiring a vaccine provider signature or completion of an online education module for religious or conscientious exemptions
NVIC supported 99 bills that sought to expand vaccine exemptions, the right to make vaccine choices, and offering protection against vaccine tracking systems. That’s up from just 19 good bills NVIC supported in 2015
The Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination: “Protecting Health & Autonomy in the 21st Century,” sponsored by NVIC, will be held online October 16 to 18, 2020

This week, we celebrate our 10th anniversary of Vaccine Awareness Week. In this video, Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), summarizes the high and low points we’ve experienced over the past year, and shares the details about NVIC’s international public conference on vaccination.1

Due to fluctuating social distancing rules and COVID-19-related travel bans, for the first time, this three-day conference will be held entirely online, October 16 through 18, 2020. The theme of this conference will be “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century.” I invite you to attend by registering now. Since the conference is virtual, you now have the rare opportunity to attend no matter where you live.

“I was so excited to see how many credentialed scientists and physicians, state senators, authors, human rights activists — how many people agreed to participate,” Fisher says.

“We have more than 40 high-caliber speakers who are going to be presenting at this three-day conference. It also features two films ... We have kept the ticket price really low to try to allow families around the world to be able to see this conference … [It’s just] $80 for three days and three nights of knowledge.”

Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century
The conference is divided into four primary themes:

U.S. and International Vaccine Choice Advocacy
“Show Us the Science”
The Paradigm Shift Toward Health and Liberty
Growing Grassroots Vaccine Awareness
Following are the scheduled speakers and the topics of their presentations:

Chris Exley, Ph.D. — Aluminum Toxicity and Human Health

Jacob Puliyel, M.D. — Redefining Vaccine Reactions to Erase Evidence of Harm

Dennis Rancourt, Ph.D. — From Masking to Mortality Rates: COVID-19 and What the Science Tells Us

Vicky Pebsworth, Ph.D., R.N. — Novel Technologies Driving the Creation of COVID-19 Vaccines

Alan Kassel — Consensus Science Is Not Science Because Science Is Never Settled

Malcolm Kendrick, M.D.— Manipulating Science to Endorse Policy and Market Products

Meryl Nass, M.D. — From Anthrax to COVID-19: What You Need to Know About One Company Making a Coronavirus Vaccine

Sin Hang Lee, Ph.D. — Risks and Failures of HPV Vaccines for Cervical Cancer Prevention

Theresa Deisher, Ph.D. — Ethical Vaccines and The Use of Human Fetal Cells to Make Vaccines

Rodney Deitert, Ph.D. — Why the Microbiome Matters

Richard Deth, Ph.D. — Inflammation, Epigenetics, Autism and Lessons for COVID-19 Vaccines

Dawn Richardson — U.S. Vaccine Mandates in State Legislatures Since 2010

Ted Kuntz and Rocco Galati, J.D. — The Lobby to Remove Vaccine Choices in Canada

Kris Gaublomme, M.D. — The European Experience with Mandatory Vaccination

Michael Farris, J.D. — Why Homeschooling Is Under Attack and What You Can Do About It

Rabbi Michoel Green — Ethical Questions on Mandatory Vaccination: Respecting Life and Guarding Your Soul

Bishop Joseph Strickland — Rejecting the Culture of Death to Embrace the Sanctity of Life

Eric Metaxas — The Role of Freedom of Conscience for Martin Luther and the Protestant Religion

Stephanie Christner, D.O. — The Shrinking Medical Vaccine Exemption Handcuffing Doctors and Increasing Vaccine Risks

Alvin Moss, M.D. — Why and How Vaccine Mandates Violate the Ethical and Legal Right to Informed Consent

Larry Palevsky, M.D. — The Physician's Duty to First Do No Harm

Bob Sears, M.D. — When Public Policy Invalidates Professional Judgment: A Pediatrician's Experience

David Brownstein, M.D. — Since When Did It Become a Crime to Support the Immune System?

Eric Plasker, D.C. — Raising Healthy Families the 100-year Lifestyle Way

State Sen. Scott Jensen, M.D. — Censoring Freedom of Speech: If It Can Happen to Me, It Can Happen to Anyone

Ronnie Cummins — Grassroots Rising

Joseph Mercola, DO — How To Take Back Control of Your Health

Barbara Loe Fisher — Defending Life and Liberty in the Vaccine Culture War

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., J.D. — Pharmaceutical Companies Must Be Held Legally Accountable for Vaccine Injuries and Deaths

Odette Suter, D.V.M. — What Veterinary Science Tells Us About Pet Vaccines

Steven Rubin, Ph.D. — What Has Happened to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System?

Twila Brase, RN, PHN — Electronic Health Care Records Tracking You from Birth to Death

Marco Cáceres — Tyranny of the Experts: Who's Fact Checking the Fact Checkers?

Sherri Tenpenny, D.O. — Mandatory Vaccination: Adults are Next

Kevin Jenkins — Knowledge is Power

State Sen. Heidi Sampson — Under the Influence: The Vaccine Mandate Lobby Influencing State Legislatures

Andrew Wakefield — Past is Prologue: What the History of the 1986 Act Reveals

Sheila Ealey — When Mothers are Silenced, Children Suffer

Andrew Kaufman, M.D. — Psychological Warfare in the COVID-19 Era

Vera Sharav — Doctors Guilty of Medical Atrocities: From Auschwitz to Tuskegee, Willowbrook and Beyond

Del Bigtree — Walking the Highwire: You Never Walk AlonePeople Are Losing Faith in Vaccine System
Obviously, the biggest event over the past 12 months has been the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ultra-rapid development of a pandemic coronavirus vaccine which may or may not become mandatory around the world. Fisher has put together a special report on COVID-19, which she continues to update.

“Certainly, the polling is confirming — not just in the United States, but around the world — that people are losing faith in the vaccine system; they are losing faith in vaccine safety and effectiveness. A lot of it has to do with what has happened this year,” she says.

"This has been a public relations disaster, in my opinion, for the public health profession. They are the ones that have advised politicians around the world, lawmakers, to institute these draconian restrictions, the social distancing, isolation, deprivation — restrictions on people for an infection that at this point has a mortality [rate] of less than 1%.

It doesn't even compare to some of the infectious diseases that have plagued humans in the past, most notably Ebola, which has a 50% mortality rate, smallpox 30%, diphtheria 10% to 20%.

It's just so outsized [and[ out of balance what they've done, and caused a lot of protests all around the world, and a lack of trust in the system. So, it's their own fault for making people more skeptical.”

Communicating With Your Legislators Is Key
Through it all, the NVIC has continued to monitor legislation in the U.S. Many state legislatures have been working remotely, not allowing people to come into the state capital buildings. As a result, many more Americans are now using the free online NVIC advocacy portal to email and to call their legislators — which is what it’s there for.

“We also have been encouraging people to meet one on one with their legislators, which is the most effective way that you can talk with people and convince them that they need to take a look at these vaccine laws that don't allow exemptions,” Fisher notes.

"What I learned when I worked on Capitol Hill was the people who really run the place are the legislative aides. They're the ones [who] really create the legislation. They're the ones [who] recommend to the member what they should do. I think a lot of people don't realize the power that people have who work for congressmen and senators at the federal and state level.

So, if you're not able to meet with your actual member, don't be upset. You need to meet with the people who are advising him or her and make sure that you are clear about where you stand, and, of course, a legislator wants to get reelected. So, you have to make your voice heard.”

Best and Worst of 2020
So far, this year, and we’re only in September, NVIC has issued positions and tracked 232 vaccine related bills in 39 states. That's the highest number of vaccine-related bills ever to have been introduced in state legislatures in one year. There were 13 bills in 10 States that sought to eliminate vaccine exemptions. None passed.

Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed. That's a remarkable statistic. It is absolutely a tribute to the people who are using the NVIC advocacy portal. ~ Barbara Loe Fisher
Of 10 bills filed across eight states to restrict vaccine exemptions, only one passed (Colorado) requiring a vaccine provider signature or completion of an online education module for religious or conscientious exemptions.

In total, there were 99 bills that NVIC supported — bills expanding vaccine exemptions, the right to make vaccine choices, and offering protection against vaccine tracking systems and a few of these good bills did pass. Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed.

“That's a remarkable statistic,” Fisher says. “It is absolutely a tribute to the people who are using the NVIC advocacy portal. They are taking the guidelines and the analyses that we publish, they're looking at the information, they're getting their facts straight, and they're contacting their legislators. This is true grassroots advocacy …

In 2015, there were only 19 bills that NVIC supported. So, in five years, we've gone from 19 bills that were good in 2015 to 99 good bills in 2020. That also shows you the power of really encouraging people to stand up for their rights and to communicate with their legislators …

There was a very bad vaccine bill [that] passed in Virginia, one of the worst that has ever been passed. That is a bill that would codify into law the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ (ACIP) recommendations without public hearings, without input really to the legislators, without a vote by the legislator.

Whenever the ACIP makes a recommendation that children should use a certain vaccine, in Virginia it will automatically be put onto the state mandated list [of vaccines] for children to attend school.

The Board of Health will do a review, but the Board of Health is politically appointed. So, basically, what Virginia did is they cut the people out of the process. No longer will there be a vote. So, all the advocacy work that we're encouraging, that's how they're going to try to cut it off.

I predict they're going to try to go state by state with this legislation they passed in Virginia and make every state that way, cutting the people out of the legislative process, which is a direct threat to democracy.”

COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Expected
Fisher is convinced any COVID-19 vaccine, which makes it through licensing approval by the FDA and is eventually recommended by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, will eventually be mandated by state governments for all children. Clearly, the COVID-19 pandemic is unquestionably one of the greatest threats to freedom and liberty we’ve ever faced in modern history.

“The way that they will do that is [through] social sanctions. They will try to get businesses to make it a requirement that you have to have a COVID-19 vaccine in order to work in an office. They will make it mandatory for anyone entering a public space. That's what their goal is. Whether they achieve that or not is up to us. It's up to the people ...

What they have done is unprecedented. This has never occurred in the history of the world and what is so remarkable is that, when you take a step back and look at it, you see that it is highly orchestrated.

How in the world did all the governments, including the U.S. government, decide to shut down their societies — causing widespread, catastrophic, global economic ruin, unemployment at unprecedented levels, small businesses being destroyed?

They [small businesses] will never come back, or it's going to take a long time to come back. Mental health issues and suicides are up, anxiety and depression rates are up, child abuse and spousal abuse rates are up. Hotlines are not able to manage all of the callers because people are in a state of shock and they're suffering — for what?

Yes, you can die and you can be injured by this COVID-19 infection, just like any other infectious disease. But the fear and anxiety that has been created, the pathological fear of being near anybody, ‘Don't touch anybody. Don't be near anybody.’ You would think it was Ebola and people were literally bleeding out in the streets.

This is like influenza or other respiratory infections. But look at Sweden’s per million death rate. They did not lock down. Their chief epidemiologist said, ‘We need to allow controlled herd immunity to take effect. This is an infection. It's going to go through the population. You cannot stop it. You have to manage it, but let's get herd immunity.’2

They [in Sweden] have a lower per million death rate than the United States where we tried to lock everything down. So, the science is not all in and, yet, they're rushing to bring these vaccines out using messenger RNA and DNA technology that has never been licensed for humans. There are all these calls to mandate, to make sure that every man, woman, child takes this vaccine.

This is a coronavirus, it's in the family of coronaviruses that cause the common cold. There are studies showing that it looks as if you can have a mild case of COVID-19 and still get T-cell memory helper cells that are resisting the COVID-19 infection … They also know that you can have a mild case, and it looks as if you can get immunity without even having high antibody levels.3 To me, this is a game changer.

They are having clinical trials and the standard, the measurement they're using to measure proof of immunity, is antibody titers, when the truth is — for this virus — you can have T-cell immunity and no antibodies, but still be immune!4

The other issue is, we could have herd immunity already in the U.S. A lot of asymptomatic people won't be counted as being COVID-19, so you could have herd immunity in this country already, or getting close to it, but they simply aren't measuring for it.”

Lessons From Previous Mass Vaccination Campaigns
People Are Losing Faith in Vaccine System
Obviously, the biggest event over the past 12 months has been the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ultra-rapid development of a pandemic coronavirus vaccine which may or may not become mandatory around the world. Fisher has put together a special report on COVID-19, which she continues to update.

“Certainly, the polling is confirming — not just in the United States, but around the world — that people are losing faith in the vaccine system; they are losing faith in vaccine safety and effectiveness. A lot of it has to do with what has happened this year,” she says.

"This has been a public relations disaster, in my opinion, for the public health profession. They are the ones that have advised politicians around the world, lawmakers, to institute these draconian restrictions, the social distancing, isolation, deprivation — restrictions on people for an infection that at this point has a mortality [rate] of less than 1%.

It doesn't even compare to some of the infectious diseases that have plagued humans in the past, most notably Ebola, which has a 50% mortality rate, smallpox 30%, diphtheria 10% to 20%.

It's just so outsized [and[ out of balance what they've done, and caused a lot of protests all around the world, and a lack of trust in the system. So, it's their own fault for making people more skeptical.”

Communicating With Your Legislators Is Key
Through it all, the NVIC has continued to monitor legislation in the U.S. Many state legislatures have been working remotely, not allowing people to come into the state capital buildings. As a result, many more Americans are now using the free online NVIC advocacy portal to email and to call their legislators — which is what it’s there for.

“We also have been encouraging people to meet one on one with their legislators, which is the most effective way that you can talk with people and convince them that they need to take a look at these vaccine laws that don't allow exemptions,” Fisher notes.

"What I learned when I worked on Capitol Hill was the people who really run the place are the legislative aides. They're the ones [who] really create the legislation. They're the ones [who] recommend to the member what they should do. I think a lot of people don't realize the power that people have who work for congressmen and senators at the federal and state level.

So, if you're not able to meet with your actual member, don't be upset. You need to meet with the people who are advising him or her and make sure that you are clear about where you stand, and, of course, a legislator wants to get reelected. So, you have to make your voice heard.”

Best and Worst of 2020
So far, this year, and we’re only in September, NVIC has issued positions and tracked 232 vaccine related bills in 39 states. That's the highest number of vaccine-related bills ever to have been introduced in state legislatures in one year. There were 13 bills in 10 States that sought to eliminate vaccine exemptions. None passed.

Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed. That's a remarkable statistic. It is absolutely a tribute to the people who are using the NVIC advocacy portal. ~ Barbara Loe Fisher
Of 10 bills filed across eight states to restrict vaccine exemptions, only one passed (Colorado) requiring a vaccine provider signature or completion of an online education module for religious or conscientious exemptions.

In total, there were 99 bills that NVIC supported — bills expanding vaccine exemptions, the right to make vaccine choices, and offering protection against vaccine tracking systems and a few of these good bills did pass. Of the 123 vaccine bills NVIC opposed, only eight bad vaccine bills passed.

“That's a remarkable statistic,” Fisher says. “It is absolutely a tribute to the people who are using the NVIC advocacy portal. They are taking the guidelines and the analyses that we publish, they're looking at the information, they're getting their facts straight, and they're contacting their legislators. This is true grassroots advocacy …

In 2015, there were only 19 bills that NVIC supported. So, in five years, we've gone from 19 bills that were good in 2015 to 99 good bills in 2020. That also shows you the power of really encouraging people to stand up for their rights and to communicate with their legislators …

There was a very bad vaccine bill [that] passed in Virginia, one of the worst that has ever been passed. That is a bill that would codify into law the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ (ACIP) recommendations without public hearings, without input really to the legislators, without a vote by the legislator.

Whenever the ACIP makes a recommendation that children should use a certain vaccine, in Virginia it will automatically be put onto the state mandated list [of vaccines] for children to attend school.

The Board of Health will do a review, but the Board of Health is politically appointed. So, basically, what Virginia did is they cut the people out of the process. No longer will there be a vote. So, all the advocacy work that we're encouraging, that's how they're going to try to cut it off.

I predict they're going to try to go state by state with this legislation they passed in Virginia and make every state that way, cutting the people out of the legislative process, which is a direct threat to democracy.”

COVID-19 Vaccine Mandates Are Expected
Fisher is convinced any COVID-19 vaccine, which makes it through licensing approval by the FDA and is eventually recommended by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, will eventually be mandated by state governments for all children. Clearly, the COVID-19 pandemic is unquestionably one of the greatest threats to freedom and liberty we’ve ever faced in modern history.

“The way that they will do that is [through] social sanctions. They will try to get businesses to make it a requirement that you have to have a COVID-19 vaccine in order to work in an office. They will make it mandatory for anyone entering a public space. That's what their goal is. Whether they achieve that or not is up to us. It's up to the people ...

What they have done is unprecedented. This has never occurred in the history of the world and what is so remarkable is that, when you take a step back and look at it, you see that it is highly orchestrated.

How in the world did all the governments, including the U.S. government, decide to shut down their societies — causing widespread, catastrophic, global economic ruin, unemployment at unprecedented levels, small businesses being destroyed?

They [small businesses] will never come back, or it's going to take a long time to come back. Mental health issues and suicides are up, anxiety and depression rates are up, child abuse and spousal abuse rates are up. Hotlines are not able to manage all of the callers because people are in a state of shock and they're suffering — for what?

Yes, you can die and you can be injured by this COVID-19 infection, just like any other infectious disease. But the fear and anxiety that has been created, the pathological fear of being near anybody, ‘Don't touch anybody. Don't be near anybody.’ You would think it was Ebola and people were literally bleeding out in the streets.

This is like influenza or other respiratory infections. But look at Sweden’s per million death rate. They did not lock down. Their chief epidemiologist said, ‘We need to allow controlled herd immunity to take effect. This is an infection. It's going to go through the population. You cannot stop it. You have to manage it, but let's get herd immunity.’2

They [in Sweden] have a lower per million death rate than the United States where we tried to lock everything down. So, the science is not all in and, yet, they're rushing to bring these vaccines out using messenger RNA and DNA technology that has never been licensed for humans. There are all these calls to mandate, to make sure that every man, woman, child takes this vaccine.

This is a coronavirus, it's in the family of coronaviruses that cause the common cold. There are studies showing that it looks as if you can have a mild case of COVID-19 and still get T-cell memory helper cells that are resisting the COVID-19 infection … They also know that you can have a mild case, and it looks as if you can get immunity without even having high antibody levels.3 To me, this is a game changer.

They are having clinical trials and the standard, the measurement they're using to measure proof of immunity, is antibody titers, when the truth is — for this virus — you can have T-cell immunity and no antibodies, but still be immune!4

The other issue is, we could have herd immunity already in the U.S. A lot of asymptomatic people won't be counted as being COVID-19, so you could have herd immunity in this country already, or getting close to it, but they simply aren't measuring for it.”

Lessons From Previous Mass Vaccination CampaignsThere’s no shortage of historical precedents when it comes to devastating pandemic vaccine campaigns. Aside from the 2009 pandemic swine flu vaccine campaign, which led to thousands of children and teens developing narcolepsy5 in Europe6 caused by the Pandemrix vaccine, there’s also the 1976 swine flu fiasco, detailed in this 1979 “60 Minutes” episode.

Fearing a repeat of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, all Americans were told to get vaccinated. According to “60 Minutes,” 46 million Americans were vaccinated against the swine flu at that time. Over the next few years, thousands of Americans filed vaccine damage claims with the federal government,7 severely marring the public’s perception of flu shots.8

According to a 1981 report9 by the U.S. General Accounting Office, as of October 2, 1980, 3,965 claims and 1,384 lawsuits had been filed. Of the 3,965 claims filed, 316 claims were settled for $12.3 million. Considering the COVID-19 vaccine is using novel RNA and DNA technology, it seems foolish not to assume there will be significant adverse consequences.

“We don't know what's going to happen when you give a vaccine to someone who has already recovered from COVID-19. We don't know how the immune system is going to react to rechallenge. We don't know what's going to happen to people who have underlying medical conditions, people who have severe allergies, autoimmune disease. Everybody's different,” Fisher says.

"This one size fits all approach has always been dangerous. And the ignoring of vaccine reactions, writing them off as coincidences, this has become a pattern in vaccine clinical trials. Whenever a serious event happens, or a death event happens, the investigators write it off as not associated.

What's that about? It's not being truthful. They don't know if it's related or not. But who makes that decision and why are they making those decisions? That skews the way the vaccine safety profile is being presented to the public.

You really have to look at the data. You have to look at the studies and understand the methodology they used, before coming to a conclusion about whether they've proved to safety and effectiveness. That's what we try to do at NVIC, and put it out in lay terms so that people understand it.”
- Sources and References
1, 10 NVIC International Public Conference on Vaccination 2020
2 Sandbrook D. No lockdown, no masks, no hysteria…NO PROBLEM: Sweden didn’t go into a corona coma – and it’s living in glorious normality.
3 Robust T-cell immunity in convalescent individuals with asymptomatic or mild COVID-19. Cell Aug. 14, 2020.
4 Leslie M. T cells found on COVID-19 patients ‘bode well’ for long-term immunity. Science May 14, 2020.
5 Eurosurveillance June 30, 2011; 16(26)
6 EBioMedicine. 2019 Feb; 40: 595–604
7, 9 GAO.gov, Report to US Senator Durkin, January 14, 1981 (PDF)
8 Smithsonian Magazine February 6, 2017

"

Delight

6th October 2020, 15:59

This is from 2018 and worth a review. The "flu shot" has been notoriously ineffective and is now being made mandatory.

Worse Than Nothing: How Ineffective Vaccines Enhance Disease
Focus for Health
March 16, 2018 Updated: April 1, 2018 (https://www.theepochtimes.com/worse-than-nothing-how-ineffective-vaccines-enhance-disease_2468260.html)

In the current debate over whether to legislate the removal of individual vaccine exemptions, the quality of the vaccines themselves gets little attention.

However, it’s clear that some vaccines don’t work as well as advertised. And yet, instead of first making a vaccine with better effectiveness, the solution is to use the force of law to make everyone get more shots of the failing vaccine.

For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says that mumps outbreaks are on the rise despite the fact that 94.6 percent of children in the United States have had two doses of MMR vaccine. To combat the situation, the CDC is considering adding a third dose of MMR to the recommended vaccine schedule.

In 2010, California experienced the largest pertussis epidemic since 1958. According to the CDC, the United States has experienced increased pertussis disease despite high levels of vaccine coverage. Researchers studying the pertussis outbreaks determined that vaccine effectiveness dropped to less than 9 percent by four years, and that the quality of immunization waned so rapidly that little protection remained two to three years after vaccination.

Influenza vaccination has had no beneficial effect on flu mortality. The CDC indicates vaccine effectiveness has oscillated between 10 percent and 60 percent from 2005 to 2017, while systematic reviews show little to no benefit from inactivated influenza vaccines on flu morbidity.

Even when significant vaccine failure rates are acknowledged, the legislative solution remains fully supported. Concerns over the need for more effective vaccines are dismissed by apologetics pointing out that the current vaccines are better than nothing.

The assumption is implicit: Low immunity is better than no immunity. So, until a better vaccine comes along, accept the current shot at whatever level of immunity it provides.

But the notion that any amount of antibodies is preferable to no antibodies at all is dangerously wrong. The same exact antibodies that prevent disease at higher concentrations can enhance the disease at lower concentrations.

Instead of preventing infection, the antibodies permit a more invasive spread of the virus into different cell types, enhancing the disease and making it worse than if the child had never been vaccinated. This phenomenon is called antibody-dependent enhancement of disease, and it is a potential problem for vaccines that induce low levels of antibodies.

This is not just a theoretical concern. It has happened. Vaccine-induced disease enhancement occurred with a measles vaccine that produced low levels of immunity.

The following points are from a 2006 paper by researchers then affiliated with the Mayo Clinic. The paper looked at the mechanism that allowed severe cases of measles to occur after vaccination.

An unexpectedly severe form of measles (atypical measles) was observed in immunized persons in the mid-1960s.
Three doses of measles vaccine induced a short-lasting humoral immune response, followed several months or years later by susceptibility to atypical measles.
Antibodies recognizing measles virus can increase the efficiency of virus entry into cells of the monocytic lineage.
Antibody-mediated enhancement of infection may also contribute to cytokine alteration and modulation of the innate immune mechanisms during measles.
The results point to an additional pathogenic mechanism that may be in play during measles virus infections and that may have particular relevance to the pathogenesis of the atypical measles that is seen after immunization.
The effect of vaccine-induced disease enhancement has also been seen in clinical trials for a since-abandoned HIV vaccine.

A paper published in the journal Vaccine in 2009 reported the following:
Certain experimental vaccines have proven to be counterproductive: They rendered vaccinated subjects more susceptible to infection rather than protecting them.
For candidate HIV vaccines, a number of phase III trials have been conducted in seronegative volunteers at high risk for HIV infection. The outcome of these trials was far from encouraging, with very limited induction of HIV neutralizing antibodies, and no evidence for protection.
In one clinical trial, a significant trend toward increased HIV-1 infection was observed.
Antibody-dependent enhancement of infection remains a significant concern in the development of safe and effective vaccines.
There may well be a delicate balance between the induction of protective immunity on the one hand and the induction of enhanced susceptibility on the other.
The HPV vaccine exhibited the capacity to enhance HPV infections during clinical trials. Women who tested positive for vaccine HPV serotypes by PCR analysis, and were then given the vaccine, were more likely to develop high-grade cervical lesions than the nonvaccinated control group. These observations have persisted beyond clinical trials, and antibody-dependent enhancement has been raised as a possible explanation.

A paper published in The Lancet in 2009 reported the following:
Vaccination of women with previous HPV 16 or 18 infection might actually increase their risk of high-grade cervical disease.
This observation is strikingly consistent with reports on the quadrivalent HPV vaccine.
Although each trial’s finding was attributed to imbalances in the baseline characteristics of the vaccine and placebo groups, the biological phenomenon of antibody-dependent enhancement of disease should be considered.
Perhaps HPV testing should precede vaccination and be contraindicated for women and girls previously infected.
It’s been known for decades that non-neutralizing influenza antibodies can augment the uptake of influenza A virus strains, but it wasn’t until recently that the phenomenon of disease enhancement for influenza vaccination was observationally proven. In 2009, seasonal influenza vaccination increased the risk of pandemic influenza illness in those who received the vaccine. This result was confirmed in four observational studies. Antibody-dependent enhancement of disease has been proposed as the potentiating mechanism.

Vaccines sometimes do nothing—they cause no harm as they fail to protect the vaccine recipient from disease. Sometimes vaccines do worse than nothing—they cause more cases, and more severe cases, of disease in those who opt to be vaccinated.

Low levels of antibodies cannot be viewed as less of a good thing. Ineffective vaccines are a bad thing. They stimulate low-level immune responses that sometimes potentiate the exact diseases they were intended to prevent.

Legislation that would force the use of an ineffective vaccine must be abandoned. But that’s not enough. The ineffective product itself must be abandoned.
Legislation that would force the use of an ineffective vaccine must be abandoned. But that’s not enough. The ineffective product itself must be abandoned. According to the FDA, vaccine policy that mandates the use of an ineffective vaccine leads to disease outbreaks in older age groups that are more likely to suffer complications from disease.

Vaccine policy aimed at preventing outbreaks and eradicating disease can only succeed when there is high vaccine uptake of an effective vaccine. If one is missing, there is no point in having the other.

New vaccines are required. The continued use of some of the current, poorly performing vaccines moots any perceived necessity to legislate forced uptake, because no amount of vaccine uptake will prevent disease outbreaks. Even with 100 percent compliance, outbreaks would still occur because the vaccines are not effective enough to provide population level immunity sufficient to prevent epidemics.

Furthermore, outbreaks will continue to occur in older age groups, which more commonly experience complications from disease, and mothers will have little to no immunity to provide to their newborns during those early critical months of life.

Individuals should have the legal right to exempt themselves and their children from using the current products. For practical and ethical reasons, the conversation to mandate the use of vaccines shouldn’t even be considered until more effective products are available.

Focus for Health is a World Mercury Project Partner. Visit WorldMercuryProject.org for more information.

T Smith

19th October 2020, 02:55

So if Biden wins the election, this is really happening?

Trump Says COVID-19 Vaccine Won’t Be Mandatory, Biden Says It Should Be (https://www.collective-evolution.com/2020/10/18/trump-says-covid-19-vaccine-wont-be-mandatory-biden-says-it-should-be/)

onawah

8th November 2020, 20:37

Most Suppressed Murder Case in history -Dr. Mary's Monkey, JFK truth, Cancer in Vaccines, Lee Oswald
Dr. Mary's Monkey: How the Unsolved Murder of a Doctor, a Secret Laboratory in New Orleans and Cancer-Causing Monkey Viruses are Linked to Lee Harvey Oswald, The JFK Assassination and Emerging Global Epidemics.
41 views•Premiered Oct 31, 2020
Mike G
1.13K subscribers
"Edward T. Haslam’s book about Dr. Mary Sherman’s murder on July 21, 1964 is still officially “unsolved,” but he believes that he knows the truth.
These are some of the biggest questions you didn’t know to ask:
• What does an unsolved murder half a century old have to do with the CIA’s involvement in JFK’s assassination?
• How have cancer experiments on mice and monkeys in the 1960’s been linked to the AIDS epidemic and the polio vaccine as well as the dramatic increase in soft-tissue cancers since the 1980’s?
• How is our health today impacted by dangerous, secret laboratories in New Orleans 50 years ago?
• What role does Lee Harvey Oswald in research on cancer as a biological weapon?

4r79VG_hTw4

( There is updated info in this video about this case which goes back a ways, as more evidence has been uncovered, and it is too bizarre to be fiction... I got that SV40 polio vaccine when I was a child, and knew immediately there was something terribly wrong with it, though it wasn't until I was in my 50s that I found out what it was. I've sent this info to Dark Journalist, who may very well incorporate it into his research into the JFK assassination. )

Kryztian

9th November 2020, 18:48

How Dr. Alton Ochsner Killed His Grandson With A Vaccine
https://vaccineharm.wordpress.com/2019/10/04/dr-alton-ochsner/

In 1955, Jonas Salk developed a polio vaccine, and immediately five laboratories started making the vaccine.

Shortly before the vaccine was due to be released to the public, it was sent to Dr. Bernice Eddy at NIH to safe-test. Her finding was shocking; she found that the vaccine itself could cause paralysis. She warned of an upcoming tragedy with that vaccine, yet the pro-vaxxers insisted on barreling ahead.

One of the those who barreled ahead with this vaccine was the famous Dr. Alton Ochsner from New Orleans. He had holdings in one of the laboratories producing the vaccine and refused to believe that the vaccine was dangerous. In 1955 Ochsner assured a group of physicians at Tulane Medical School that the Salk vaccine was safe. Ochsner said he wouldn’t ask them to support something he wasn’t willing to use on his own family and that he was going to give his two grandchildren the Salk vaccine right there in front of them. Which he did.

A few days later, his 30-month-old grandson was dead; and his granddaughter had polio. An attending physician to the grandson also contracted polio and was crippled.

greybeard

16th November 2020, 14:12

UK Column News - 16th November 2020

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MTuA9-aqCs

onawah

24th November 2020, 23:42

SV40 and Vaccine Contamination
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
November 24, 2020https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/11/24/sv40-and-vaccine-contamination.aspx?ui=8d3c7e22a03f5300d2e3338a0f080d2da3add85bca35e09236649153e4675f72&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art2ReadMore&cid=20201124&mid=DM728359&rid=1018815864
YZ4syUfvf9A

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
From 1955 to 1963, hundreds of millions of people worldwide — in North and South America, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa — received inactivated and live oral polio vaccines that may have been contaminated with simian virus 40 (SV40), a monkey virus
During the 1950s, the inactivated polio vaccine created by Dr. Jonas Salk was made using rhesus monkeys that were infected with SV40; the original seed stocks of the oral polio vaccine created by Dr. Albert Sabin were also contaminated with infectious SV40
The late Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, conducted a study in 1959, injecting hamsters with the rhesus monkey kidney substrate used to make the vaccines; the majority of them developed cancerous tumors
In animal studies, SV40 has been linked to a number of cancers, including mesotheliomas, lymphomas, brain and bone tumors and sarcomas; such tumors in humans have also been found to contain SV40 DNA and proteins
Research from 1992 revealed that half the choroid plexus tumors and most of the ependymomas studied — both forms of rare brain cancers in children — contained a segment of T-antigen gene related to SV40
The controversy highlights the serious consequences that can occur from vaccine contamination using animal cell substrates to create vaccines — consequences that may not be realized until many years later

As the world races to fast-track a COVID-19 vaccine, bringing an experimental shot to market faster than has ever occurred in history, the potential risks of medical procedures like vaccination must be carefully weighed. Unintended harms can and do occur following vaccination, and the inactivated and live polio vaccines are prime examples.

From 1955 to 1963, hundreds of millions of people worldwide — in North and South America, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa — received polio vaccines that may have been contaminated with simian virus 40 (SV40), a monkey virus.1 The video above is a decade old, but it succinctly summarizes the serious consequences that can occur from vaccine contamination — consequences that may not be realized until many years later.

In the video, Dr. John Bergsagel, then a pediatric oncologist, looks at laboratory slides of tumors taken from children who died of extremely rare brain cancers. When SV40-like DNA sequences were detected in them, he said, “I almost fell out of my chair. I was very surprised.”

The finding, published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 1992, revealed that half the choroid plexus tumors and most of the ependymomas studied contained a segment of T-antigen gene related to SV40.

“These results suggest that SV40 or a closely related virus may have an etiologic role in the development of these neoplasms during childhood,” they wrote2 — and this was only the beginning of findings linking monkey virus-contaminated polio vaccines to cancer.

How a Monkey Virus Ended up in Polio Vaccines
During the 1950s, the inactivated polio vaccine created by Jonas Salk was made using rhesus monkeys that were infected with SV40. As explained in a 2004 perspective published in The Lancet:3

“When Salk developed his vaccine, instead of using human tissues, as did the scientists who won a Nobel Prize for first growing poliovirus in tissue culture, he used minced-up rhesus macaque monkey kidneys, which were remarkably efficient poliovirus factories.

Those who sought to supplant Salk's formaldehyde-inactivated vaccine with live, attenuated oral vaccine also used monkey kidney cultures. Despite a manufacturing problem that, at best, left six children who received the vaccine paralyzed in the arm, and despite concerns about wild simian viruses, Salk's shots were declared safe and effective after 1954 field trials.

The next year, after grudging approval by skeptical government regulators, free Salk shots were made available throughout the USA. By 1960, scientists and vaccine manufacturers knew that monkey kidneys were sewers of simian viruses.”

The late Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, conducted a study in 1959, injecting hamsters with the rhesus monkey kidney substrate used to make the vaccines. The majority of them developed tumors.4

“Eddy's superiors tried to keep the discovery quiet, but Eddy presented her data at a cancer conference in New York. She was eventually demoted, and lost her laboratory,” The Atlantic reported,5 but soon after researchers with Merck pharmaceutical company identified the cancer-causing virus in rhesus monkey kidney cells, naming it SV406 because it was the 40th monkey virus discovered.

According to Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), in a presentation before the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003:7

“Sadly, the American people were not told the truth about this in 1960. The SV40 contaminated stocks of Salk polio vaccine were never withdrawn from the market but continued to be given to American children until early 1963 with full knowledge of federal health agencies.

Between 1955 and early 1963, nearly 100 million American children had been given polio vaccine contaminated with the monkey virus, SV40.”

SV40’s Cancer Link
In animal studies, SV40 has been linked to a number of cancers, including mesotheliomas, lymphomas, brain and bone tumors and sarcomas.8 Such tumors in humans have also been found to contain SV40 DNA and proteins. Brain tumors and mesotheliomas appear to be the most common tumors associated with SV40, with some studies showing a positivity rate of up to 60%.

While there wasn’t an “epidemic” of cancers that followed the widespread administration of vaccines contaminated with SV40, which suggests the virus alone may not be causing the cancers, researchers noted, “it seems possible that SV40 may act as a cofactor in the pathogenesis of some tumors.”9

As further reported in Oncogene, at least three independent scientific panels agreed “there is compelling evidence that SV40 is present in some human cancers and that SV40 could contribute to the pathogenesis of some of them.”10

It was also revealed that, in Finland where no SV40-contaminated polio vaccine was used, researchers did not find any SV40-like DNA in frozen tumor tissues from Finnish mesothelioma patients.

The results suggest that the SV40-like DNA sequences detected in other mesothelioma tissue did come from contaminated polio vaccines, though, “It is a matter of speculation whether the absence of SV40 infection has contributed to the relatively low incidence of mesothelioma in Finland.”11

In 2002, meanwhile, The Lancet published evidence showing SV40 is significantly associated with some types of Non-Hodgkin lymphoma after detecting it in 42% of Non-Hodgkin lymphomas tested.12 And in a 2004 review of the then-available evidence, it’s noted:13

“Persuasive evidence now indicates that SV40 is causing infections in humans today and represents an emerging pathogen.

A meta-analysis of molecular, pathological, and clinical data from 1,793 cancer patients indicates that there is a significant excess risk of SV40 associated with human primary brain cancers, primary bone cancers, malignant mesothelioma, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.”

It’s often claimed via the media and even by some prominent health organizations that the link between SV40 from vaccines and cancer has been debunked as a myth, but in 2002 the Institute of Medicine released a report that found "evidence is inadequate to accept or reject a causal relationship between SV40-containing polio vaccines and cancer,” adding:14

"… biological evidence is of moderate strength that SV40 exposure could lead to cancer in humans under natural conditions … biological evidence is of moderate strength that SV40 exposure from the polio vaccine is related to SV40 infection in humans."

Is SV40 Spreading Through Human Populations?
Controversy still remains over the SV40-contamianted vaccines, including whether the monkey virus is still spreading among humans. There is evidence, for starters, that SV40-contaminated live oral polio vaccines (OPV) continued to be used for many years after SV40 contamination was discovered, including until 1978 in the former USSR and until 1999 in Italy.15

In fact, in 2005 researchers with Loyola University in Chicago conducted a study to test for SV40 in OPV prepared after 1961. They tested vaccine samples from 13 countries, revealing that OPV from “a major eastern European manufacturer” produced from the early 1960s to about 1978 contained infectious SV40:16

“Our findings underscore the potential risks of using primary monkey cells for preparing poliovirus vaccines, because of the possible contamination with SV40 or other monkey viruses, and emphasize the importance of using well-characterized cell substrates that are free from adventitious agents.

Moreover, our results indicate possible geographic differences in SV40 exposure and offer a possible explanation for the different percentage of SV40-positive tumors detected in some laboratories.”

Once exposed to the SV40 virus via a contaminated vaccine, it’s also possible that it has spread among humans via other methods. The monkey virus was found to spread for weeks in children’s stools following vaccination with SV40-contaminated vaccines, for instance,17 which suggests SV40 may replicate in gastrointestinal cells and could be spread via a fecal-oral route.

DNA sequences from SV40 have been found in a wide range of tissues among those vaccinated with SV40-contaminated vaccine, including pituitary tissues and leukocytes from organ and blood donors, as well as blood samples. “These data cumulatively demonstrate that SV40 is circulating in the human population,” researchers wrote in Frontiers in Oncology.18

Viruses Found in Other Vaccines
While it’s often believed that only Salk’s inactivated polio vaccines were infected with SV40, the original seed stocks of the oral polio vaccine created by Sabin were also contaminated with SV40. While this isn’t something that’s widely talked about, especially by public health officials, the 2005 Loyola University study revealed that SV40-contaminated vaccines were produced until about 1978 and were used worldwide.19

The inactivated and live oral polio vaccines were the primary ones contaminated by SV40, but they weren’t the only ones. The monkey virus was also found in the respiratory syncytial virus vaccine.20

In another vaccine contamination scandal involving use of animal cell substrates, in 2010 GlaxoSmithKline’s Rotarix vaccine was found to be contaminated with “a substantial amount” of DNA from a pig virus known as porcine circovirus (PCV).21 That same year, Merck’s rotavirus vaccine Rotateq was also found to contain PCV.22

Disturbingly, it’s not entirely uncommon to find unexpected viruses lurking in vaccines. In her commentary on the Rotarix contamination issue, Fisher added:23

“The surprising discovery reportedly was made after the independent lab used new technology to evaluate the purity of eight live virus vaccines for polio, rubella, measles, yellow fever, human herpes 3 (varicella or chicken pox), rotavirus (Rotarix and RotaTeq) and MMR.

In addition to pig viral DNA found in Rotarix vaccine, low levels of DNA fragments from avian (bird) leukosis virus (a retrovirus) was found in measles vaccine and DNA fragments of a virus similar to simian (monkey) retrovirus was found in RotaTeq vaccine.”

Viruses and other contaminants may be common in the cell cultures from which vaccines are made. Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., a virologist, researcher and founding research director of the Whittemore Peterson Institute, is among those who has detected infectious human retroviruses in cell cultures used to make vaccines.

In her book, "Plague: One Scientist's Intrepid Search for the Truth About Human Retroviruses and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS), Autism and Other Diseases,” she details how infectious retroviruses are still likely infecting many biological solutions used clinically today, including vaccines and other therapies.

While some biologicals, like the blood supply, may be decontaminated for retroviruses others, like vaccines, are not likely to be, Mikovits said in our 2018 interview, in part because there’s no requirement to do so and vaccine makers are not liable for any vaccine-induced harm.

So while the SV40 polio vaccine contamination occurred decades ago, the controversy continues, as does the potential for present-day vaccines to be contaminated. Many types of cells continue to be used as growth mediums during vaccine production, including animal cell strains24 from chickens, dogs, monkeys, hamsters25 and insects,26 as well as cells from bacteria or yeast.

With more vaccines in development and some being fast-tracked to market, it’s more important than ever that scientists, manufacturers and regulators take a step back to ensure that the means of prevention or treatment doesn’t end up being worse than the disease.One of the Most Powerful Videos I've Ever Seen
The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen. I am hopeful that watching this video will inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence.

There is a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that results in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues. If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve. Please take a few minutes to watch this video.

xEcYQydhY9E

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 educate the leaders in your community.

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 smartphone 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 will 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.

JOIN 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 presenting only 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 nonprofit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

Vaccine Requirements and Exemptions by State — Vaccine laws vary from one U.S. state to another. By knowing the specific policies where you live, you’ll learn how you can get exemptions and better protect your right to make informed vaccine choices.
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."

Sources and References
1, 17, 18, 20 Front Oncol. 2019; 9: 670, Epidemiology of SV40 Infections in Human Populations
2 N Engl J Med. 1992 Apr 9;326(15):988-93. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199204093261504
3, 4, 6 The Lancet July 31, 2004
5 The Atlantic February 2000
7 NVIC September 10, 2003
8, 9 Expert Rev Respir Med. 2011 Oct; 5(5): 683–697
10 Oncogene. 2003 Aug 11;22(33):5173-80. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1206552
11 Mol Carcinog. 1999 Oct;26(2):93-9
12 The Lancet March 9, 2002
13 Clinical Microbiology Reviews 2004 Jul; 17(3): 495–508
14 Research on SV40 … Statement of James Goedert
15 Front Oncol. 2019; 9: 670
16, 19 Cancer Res. 2005 Nov 15;65(22):10273-9. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-2028
21 CNN March 22, 2010
22 University of Minnesota, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy May 7, 2010
23 NVIC April 7, 2010
24 Vaccine Ingredients
25 FDA.com Shingrix (PDF)
26 Medpage Today December 22, 2017

onawah

25th November 2020, 00:01

Global Vaccine Passport Will Be Required for Travel
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
November 24, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/11/24/commonpass.aspx?ui=8d3c7e22a03f5300d2e3338a0f080d2da3add85bca35e09236649153e4675f72&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20201124&mid=DM728359&rid=1018815864
hvHxMA1kA-g

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Forced vaccination is part and parcel of the plan to “reset” the global economic system, forever altering life as we know it. Now, global vaccine passports are being introduced, and it’s only a matter of time before vaccination status will be a prerequisite for travel
CommonPass is a digital “health passport” framework initiated by The Commons Project, the World Economic Forum and The Rockefeller Foundation
When you get your test result or vaccine, that data is uploaded to an app on your cellphone. The app generates a barcode that is then scanned at the airport, at hotel check-in and wherever else vaccine status verification is deemed necessary
The CommonPass digital clearance system is currently being tested by United Airlines on flights between London and Newark, and Cathay Pacific on flights between Hong Kong and Singapore
In an April 2020 white paper, The Rockefeller Foundation laid out a strategic framework clearly intended to become part of a permanent surveillance and social control structure that severely limits personal liberty and freedom of choice
Around the world, there’s considerable resistance against mandatory COVID-19 vaccination, but even if the vaccine ends up being “voluntary,” refusing to take it will have severe implications for people who enjoy their freedom.

For months, the writing has been on the wall: Forced vaccination is part and parcel of the plan to “reset” the global economic system, forever altering life as we know it along the way. Now, global vaccine passports are in fact being introduced, and it’s only a matter of time before vaccination status will be a prerequisite for travel.

Just how voluntary is it if you have to have the COVID-19 vaccine if you ever want to leave the country — or perhaps even state — in which you live, at any point during the rest of your life?

CommonPass
CommonPass1 is a digital “health passport” framework initiated by The Commons Project, the World Economic Forum and The Rockefeller Foundation, which during the first week of July 2020 convened more than 350 leaders from the public and private sectors in 52 countries to design a common framework “for safe border reopening” around the world. The proposed framework involves the following:

Every nation must publish their health screening criteria for entry into the country using a standard format on a common framework
Each country must register trusted facilities that conduct COVID-19 lab testing for foreign travel and administer vaccines listed in the CommonPass registry
Each country will accept health screening status from foreign visitors through apps and services built on the CommonPass framework
Patient identification is to be collected at the time of sample collection and/or vaccination using an international standard
The CommonPass framework will be integrated into flight and hotel reservation and check-in processes
Eventually, the CommonPass framework will be integrated with already existing personal health apps such as Apple Health and CommonHealth. If you want to travel, your personal health record will be evaluated and compared to a country’s entry requirements, and if you don’t meet them, you’ll be directed to an approved testing and vaccination location.

A screen grab from the video illustrates the general idea of how this will all work. When you get your test result or vaccine, that data is uploaded to an app on your cellphone. The app generates a barcode that is then scanned at the airport, at hotel check-in and wherever else vaccine status verification is deemed necessary.

https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/public/2020/November/commonpass.jpg

That the Rockefeller Foundation is one of the three founders of CommonPass should surprise no one, considering they basically laid the groundwork for it in their April 21, 2020, white paper2 “National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan — Strategic Steps to Reopen Our Workplaces and Our Communities.”

That white paper laid out a strategic framework that is clearly intended to become part of a permanent surveillance and social control structure that severely limits personal liberty and freedom of choice.

It also warns that elimination of privacy will be required, stating that “Some privacy concerns must be set aside for an infectious agent as virulent as COVID-19 …” The tracking system proposed by The Rockefeller Foundation also demands access to other medical data, which tells us the system will have any number of other uses besides tracking COVID-19 cases.

Worldwide Tracking Begins
This digital clearance system is currently being tested by United Airlines3 on flights between London and Newark, and Cathay Pacific on flights between Hong Kong and Singapore.4 As reported by Tott News, November 15, 2020:5

“Volunteer travelers landing at Newark Liberty International Airport on United Airlines Flight 15 from London Heathrow used the CommonPass health pass on their mobile phone to document their COVID-19 status and share it with airline staff upon disembarking.

Officials from U.S. Customs and Border Protection and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) observed the CommonPass demonstration in Newark … The transatlantic trial followed a successful trial of CommonPass on a Cathay Pacific flight from Hong Kong to Singapore on October 6.

Paul Meyer, CEO of The Commons Project, says it is anticipated that following initial trials, CommonPass will be rolled out on other routes, including international travel to and from Australia …

We are now seeing the beginning phases of a worldwide tracking system that will be linked to the health status of each and every individual … This has always been the agenda. Track and trace; identify the undesirables through deception.”

CommonPass Is a Cog in The Great Reset Wheel
As explained in “What You Need to Know About ‘the Great Reset’,” the current pandemic is being used as a justification for why we need to reset the global economy and shift away from capitalism and free enterprise into a new system of technocracy.

The word “technocracy” is never used by actual technocrats, mind you. Instead, they talk about the Great Reset and the fourth industrial revolution, the nuts and bolts of which boil down to transhumanism. In years past, this plan was referred to as a “new world order” or “one world order.” All of these terms, however, refer to an agenda that has the same ultimate goal.

CommonPass is a cog in this Great Reset plan. It’s the beginning stage of mass tracking and tracing, under the guise of keeping everyone safe from infectious disease. Rest assured, it will not be limited to COVID-19. The pandemic is just the justification for ushering in this radical new way of life.
It’s a plan that is decades in the making. Ultimately, the goal is to monitor and control the world through technological surveillance. It’s a world government run by self-appointed elitists; hence, it calls for the total dismantling of the political system, which includes the U.S. Constitution. National borders are also destined to be erased.

Sustainable Digital Finance
Technocracy is a resource-based economic system, which is why the World Economic Forum talks about the creation of “sustainable digital finance,”6 a carbon-based economy and carbon credit trading.7 As explained on its website:8

“Digital finance refers to the integration of big data, artificial intelligence (AI), mobile platforms, blockchain and the Internet of things (IoT) in the provision of financial services. Sustainable finance refers to financial services integrating environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria into the business or investment decisions.

When combined, sustainable digital finance can take advantage of emerging technologies to analyze data, power investment decisions and grow jobs in sectors supporting a transition to a low-carbon economy.”

These rather innocuous-sounding definitions hide a true intent that would shock people to their core, were they to see the complete picture. Professor Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, has stated that the fourth industrial revolution will “lead to a fusion of our physical, digital and biological identity,” complete with implantable microchips capable of reading your thoughts.9

This no longer sounds so far-fetched when you consider that technocracy requires social engineering to work. It requires total surveillance. It requires each person to be tied to the digital matrix — physically, mentally and financially — such that they cannot rebel.

To learn more about the history and intent behind technocracy, consider reading Patrick Wood’s books, “Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation”10 and “Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order.”11

The Plan to Dehumanize Humanity
When world leaders now talk about “building back better” and spin tales about a utopia in which humanity no longer has a negative impact on the environment, what they’re really talking about is the transition to a world in which mankind is no longer free to do any of the things we’ve previously engaged in and typically enjoyed.

CommonPass is a cog in this Great Reset plan. It’s the beginning stage of mass tracking and tracing, under the guise of keeping everyone safe from infectious disease. Rest assured, it will not be limited to COVID-19. The pandemic is just the justification for ushering in this radical new way of life.

The global lockdowns are part and parcel of this plan too. You may have seen articles musing about how waterways and air cleared up while everyone kept indoors for weeks on end. Who knows, in the future, we may well have rolling lockdowns to look forward to — periodic house arrests for the sake of the environment, if not to prevent the latest outbreak.

Meanwhile, social distancing and mask wearing separates us from our fellow man, demoralizes and dehumanizes us and makes us alone, fearful and anxious, which in turn prevents us from thinking logically and from coordinating resistance efforts with others. Add to that a grossly biased media and draconian censorship, where the Big Tech overlords decide what opinions and even facts are allowable and which are not.

When you multiply it all together, it starts looking like the biggest psyop in the history of mankind, which in turn begs the question: If the direction they want us to go will actually lead to utopia, would this kind of social engineering effort really be necessary?

Welcome to 2030
November 10, 2016, the World Economic Forum published an article12 in Forbes titled, “Welcome to 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy and Life Has Never Been Better.” Let’s read beyond the creepy headline and see what this is all about, shall we?

“Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city — or should I say, ‘our city.’ I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes.

It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much …

In our city we don't pay any rent, because someone else is using our free space whenever we do not need it. My living room is used for business meetings when I am not there. Once in a while, I will choose to cook for myself. It is easy — the necessary kitchen equipment is delivered at my door within minutes …

Shopping? I can't really remember what that is. For most of us, it has been turned into choosing things to use. Sometimes I find this fun, and sometimes I just want the algorithm to do it for me. It knows my taste better than I do by now.

When AI and robots took over so much of our work, we suddenly had time to eat well, sleep well and spend time with other people ... The work that we do can be done at any time. I don't really know if I would call it work anymore. It is more like thinking-time, creation-time and development-time …

Once in a while I get annoyed about the fact that I have no real privacy. Nowhere I can go and not be registered. I know that, somewhere, everything I do, think and dream of is recorded. I just hope that nobody will use it against me. All in all, it is a good life.”

Techno-Tyranny Steps Into Broad Daylight
As noted in The Last American Vagabond’s article13 “Techno-Tyranny: How the U.S. National Security State Is Using Coronavirus to Fulfill an Orwellian Vision,” the U.S. is rapidly adopting an artificial intelligence-driven mass surveillance system rivaling that of China, and legal and structural obstacles are being swept away “under the guise of combating the coronavirus crisis.”

Again, technocracy requires social engineering to work, the effectiveness of which in turn requires mass surveillance and automation. In the first half of the 20th century, George Orwell wrote a dystopian novel, “Nineteen Eighty-Four,” in which the government controlled every aspect of a person’s life, including their very thoughts.

Today, scientists seem intent on turning Orwell’s nightmarish vision into reality, using the COVID-19 pandemic, national security and public health as their justification for doing so. Don’t expect them to admit this, however. Instead, be prepared for variations of the Forbes article above. It’s basically a world in which everyone has been stripped of purpose.

Artificial intelligence algorithms make decisions for you, and if you disobey or start thinking fancy thoughts all on your own, you can expect to be financially and socially disenfranchised. Effectively eliminating an individual from society will be as easy as pressing a button and putting a freeze on your digital wallet and identification.

Already, many truth-tellers that were purged from YouTube and other social media platforms simultaneously lost their PayPal and other digital payment accounts. No advance warning, and no justification given. Imagine if all your finances were tied together in a digital finance system and everything was shut down all at once. That, I’m sure, would discourage most everyone from expressing any contradictory views.

If you think this kind of technology is still in its cradle, check out Spiro Skouras video below, in which he discusses the rollout of the United Nations’ biometric digital wallet. This, undoubtedly, brings the UN one step closer to becoming the world’s de facto leadership hub.

4HDzQhbOgpA
Artificial Intelligence Is Further Along Than Most Can Imagine
Indeed, artificial intelligence is a key component of effective surveillance and social engineering. Data is useless unless you can interpret it and make decisions based on it. As noted by The Last American Vagabond:14

“[In 2019], a U.S. government body dedicated to examining how artificial intelligence can ‘address the national security and defense needs of the United States’ discussed in detail the ‘structural’ changes that the American economy and society must undergo in order to ensure a technological advantage over China, according to a recent document15 acquired through a FOIA request.

This document suggests that the U.S. follow China’s lead and even surpass them in many aspects related to AI-driven technologies, particularly their use of mass surveillance.

This perspective clearly clashes with the public rhetoric of prominent U.S. government officials and politicians on China, who have labeled the Chinese government’s technology investments and export of its surveillance systems and other technologies as a major ‘threat’ to Americans’ ‘way of life.’16”

The document17 the article refers to was produced by the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI), a government organization created by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2018.

Its purpose is “to consider the methods and means necessary to advance the development of artificial intelligence, machine learning and associated technologies to comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States,” and ensure the U.S. maintains a technological advantage.

To that end, the NSCAI is pushing for an overhaul of the American way of life and economy in order to usher in a more comprehensive AI-driven surveillance apparatus. In other words, a Great Reset.

How to Resist the Great Reset
Ironically, while the real plan is to usher in a tech-driven globalist-run dystopia free of democratic controls, technocrats speak of this plan as a way to bring us back into harmony with Nature.

As I discuss in “The Global Takeover Is Underway,” the medical tyranny and censorship of anti-groupthink that has emerged during this pandemic are an unavoidable element of the Great Reset, and if you think it’s bad now, just wait until the whole system is brought fully online.

The mere idea of dissent will become a thought of the past, because your life — your health, educational and work opportunities, your finances and your very identity — will be so meshed with the automated technological infrastructure that any attempt to break free will result in you being locked out or erased from the system, leaving you with no ability to learn, work, travel or purchase anything.

It sounds far-fetched, I know, but when you follow the technocratic plan to its inevitable end, that’s basically what you end up with. The warning signs are all around us, if we’re willing to see them for what they actually are. The only question now is whether enough people are willing to resist it to make a difference.

Along those lines, let us carefully reflect on one of the United States’ founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, in his warning and caution with respect to losing our liberty. I frequently reflect on them when I consider potential options in this new contrived crisis challenges we are confronted with:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ~ Benjamin Franklin
If you are open for some practical strategies on how you can respond in light of all the tyrannical interventions that have been imposed on us you can watch James Corbett’s interview with Howard Lichtman below.

Artificial Intelligence Is Further Along Than Most Can Imagine
Indeed, artificial intelligence is a key component of effective surveillance and social engineering. Data is useless unless you can interpret it and make decisions based on it. As noted by The Last American Vagabond:14

“[In 2019], a U.S. government body dedicated to examining how artificial intelligence can ‘address the national security and defense needs of the United States’ discussed in detail the ‘structural’ changes that the American economy and society must undergo in order to ensure a technological advantage over China, according to a recent document15 acquired through a FOIA request.

This document suggests that the U.S. follow China’s lead and even surpass them in many aspects related to AI-driven technologies, particularly their use of mass surveillance.

This perspective clearly clashes with the public rhetoric of prominent U.S. government officials and politicians on China, who have labeled the Chinese government’s technology investments and export of its surveillance systems and other technologies as a major ‘threat’ to Americans’ ‘way of life.’16”

The document17 the article refers to was produced by the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI), a government organization created by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2018.

Its purpose is “to consider the methods and means necessary to advance the development of artificial intelligence, machine learning and associated technologies to comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States,” and ensure the U.S. maintains a technological advantage.

To that end, the NSCAI is pushing for an overhaul of the American way of life and economy in order to usher in a more comprehensive AI-driven surveillance apparatus. In other words, a Great Reset.

How to Resist the Great Reset
Ironically, while the real plan is to usher in a tech-driven globalist-run dystopia free of democratic controls, technocrats speak of this plan as a way to bring us back into harmony with Nature.

As I discuss in “The Global Takeover Is Underway,” the medical tyranny and censorship of anti-groupthink that has emerged during this pandemic are an unavoidable element of the Great Reset, and if you think it’s bad now, just wait until the whole system is brought fully online.

The mere idea of dissent will become a thought of the past, because your life — your health, educational and work opportunities, your finances and your very identity — will be so meshed with the automated technological infrastructure that any attempt to break free will result in you being locked out or erased from the system, leaving you with no ability to learn, work, travel or purchase anything.

It sounds far-fetched, I know, but when you follow the technocratic plan to its inevitable end, that’s basically what you end up with. The warning signs are all around us, if we’re willing to see them for what they actually are. The only question now is whether enough people are willing to resist it to make a difference.

Along those lines, let us carefully reflect on one of the United States’ founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, in his warning and caution with respect to losing our liberty. I frequently reflect on them when I consider potential options in this new contrived crisis challenges we are confronted with:

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ~ Benjamin Franklin
If you are open for some practical strategies on how you can respond in light of all the tyrannical interventions that have been imposed on us you can watch James Corbett’s interview with Howard Lichtman.
[youtube]dJqNQ0Nu_44
One of the Most Powerful Videos I've Ever Seen
The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen. I am hopeful that watching this video will inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence.

There is a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that results in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues. If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve. Please take a few minutes to watch this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEcYQydhY9E&feature=emb_logo
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 educate the leaders in your community.

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 smartphone 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 will 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.

JOIN 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 presenting only 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 nonprofit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

Vaccine Requirements and Exemptions by State — Vaccine laws vary from one U.S. state to another. By knowing the specific policies where you live, you’ll learn how you can get exemptions and better protect your right to make informed vaccine choices.
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."
- Sources and References
1 World Economic Forum, CommonPass
2 The Rockefeller Foundation, National COVID-19 Testing Action Plan — Strategic Steps to Reopen Our Workplaces and Our Communities, April 21, 2020 (PDF)
3 Consumer Affairs October 21, 2020
4 The Burning Platform November 2, 2020
5 Tott News November 15, 2020
6, 8 World Economic Forum, Sustainable Digital Finance Can Unlock a Low-Carbon Economy
7 World Economic Forum, What Is a Carbon Credit?
9 ZeroHedge November 17, 2020
10 Patrick Wood, Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation
11 Patrick Wood, Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order
12 Forbes November 10, 2016
13, 14 The Last American Vagabond April 20, 2020
15, 17 Chinese Tech Landscape Overview, NSCAI Presentation May 2019 (PDF)
16 Washington Examiner July 20, 2020
Weekly Health Quiz: Salmon, Vaccines and the Great Reset
SV40 and Vaccine Contamination

Delight

21st February 2021, 23:21

Paul Thomas MD wrote a book The Vaccine-Friendly Plan : Dr. Paul's Safe and Effective Approach to Immunity and Health-From Pregnancy Through Your Child's Teen Years. In his practice he had many patients who had experienced vaccine injuries. He offered vaccines and many families were using vaccination. Some of the families did not use vaccines. He was one of the rare MDs who did not force vaccination on the children.

He has been in practice long enough to have the ability to study the difference in health between the vaccinated and unvaccinated children. The results of a scientific study PROVED that unvaccinated children ARE healthier. This is the crime he committed. He has been censored and unable at this time to practice medicine. Sad and guess who loses MOST? Of course it is his patients and by extension, we all lose. I am so sad about the axis of EVIL: BIG MEDIA, PHARMA, TECH, AND POLITICS.
But everyone who accepts a vaccine must be seen as complicit. What really, really hurts is the unwillingness of people to accept the bare faced truth....and they accept being poisoned and poison those in their care. This is human race altering and probably human race ending unless people understand the threat.

Will people change their minds and live? I feel doubt because supposedly intelligent people I know are under the spell.

The only way I can bear what is happening is to stay in prayer because I am horrified.

The Backfiring Attempted Takedown of Dr. Paul Thomas
written by davis taylorsunday february 21, 2021
(http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/february/21/the-backfiring-attempted-takedown-of-dr-paul-thomas/)

A coordinated effort is underway to silence and discredit those putting forth any information that conflicts with the mantra that “vaccines are safe, necessary and effective” (the mantra). Big Pharma and its cronies in the state and media are at the helm of the effort. Of course, the mantra is merely a Big Pharma marketing slogan, and it’s preposterous to believe that it scientifically buttons-up the highly complex topic of vaccines and their associated diseases.

Those paying attention while this plays out are accustomed to stories of doctors and scientists whose livelihoods have been crushed after stating anything deemed to be in conflict with the mantra. Andrew Wakefield’s story is perhaps the most well-known of these but, at this point, there are too many “Wakefields” to count.

This article is about Dr. Paul Thomas and it has the familiar storyline of a doctor suffering professionally after expressing vaccine safety concerns. However, it also has another storyline which is heartening and ironic–about how two rounds volleyed against Dr. Thomas have backfired badly, arguably harming Big Pharma’s beloved mantra far more than Dr. Thomas.

Round 1 – Dr. Thomas’ belief that he was targeted by the Oregon Medical Board (OMB) triggered his landmark study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated children with those of unvaccinated children, which showed significantly better outcomes in the unvaccinated children.

This article provides a broad overview of Dr. Thomas’ story. A more detailed discussions of it, in Dr. Thomas’ own words, can be found in two interviews conducted with him in December of 2020, one by Bretigne Shaffer (Shaffer interview) and one by Del Bigtree of The HighWire (Episode 193 of The HighWire 1:19:25-1:56:13) (HW interview). However, before delving into Dr. Thomas’ story, it’s helpful to review the general backdrop that existed with regard to vaccines while it transpired.

In the US, the manufacturers of many vaccines have been afforded highly unusual liability protections. Claims of harm pertaining to the vaccines recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for routine use in children must proceed under a special system called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP). Under this system, the vaccine manufacturers are shielded from liability, and taxpayers, rather than vaccine manufacturers, fund any award of damages through payment of an excise tax. The CDC recommends some of these childhood vaccines for use in adults and, for those vaccines, the manufacturers’ shield from liability also extends to adult use. The manufacturers of COVID-19 vaccines have also been afforded liability protections, although claims of harm from COVID-19 vaccines will proceed through the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program rather than through the NVICP.

In 1983, the CDC recommended 24 doses of 7 childhood vaccines. That was prior to the aforementioned removal of liability, which began in 1986. The CDC now recommends approximately 70 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18. A person receiving all of the doses on the CDC’s current childhood and adult schedules would receive nearly 150 lifetime doses. Further, the number of vaccines on the schedules is expected to continue rising. For example, Bill Gates, who strongly influences vaccine policy, has reportedly stated that a COVID-19 vaccine will likely become part of the newborn vaccine schedule. In recent years, a battle has taken place regarding vaccine mandates and several states have rolled back childhood vaccine exemptions.

Dr. Thomas has been a strong voice for the right to informed consent and vaccine choice. He has an impressive background, including that he received his M.D. from Dartmouth Medical School and that he’s board-certified in pediatrics, addiction medicine, and integrative and holistic medicine. He opened his current practice in Portland, Oregon in 2008 and it’s served over eleven thousand patients.

It was within the context of the rapidly growing CDC schedule and a battle over vaccine mandates that Dr. Thomas co-authored a book, The Vaccine Friendly Plan, published in 2016. The book discusses his recommended plan, which was designed to limit exposure to aluminum-containing vaccines and allows for the delay or cessation of vaccinations if any of the tell-tale signs of vaccine injury appear. The plan affords parents the right to informed consent, providing them with a thorough explanation of the risks and benefits of each vaccine on the CDC schedule and the right to choose which, if any vaccines their children receive. Dr. Thomas describes his approach as individualizing the vaccine plan to the patient, instead of a one-size-fits-all approach (Shaffer interview 24:30-24:47). The parental choice afforded by Dr. Thomas’ plan does not violate Oregon vaccination law.

In Dr. Thomas’ interview with Shaffer, he indicated that he believes the 2016 publication of his book put a target on him with the OMB because his troubles with the board began in 2018, after the book’s publication (Shaffer interview 6:08-11:00). He explained that the OMB repeatedly requested information from his practice, in what he described as a “fishing expedition,” but that it didn’t issue any order against his license until its December 3, 2020 order of emergency suspension, which was issued within a handful of days after the publication of his landmark study, discussed below (Shaffer interview 24:49-27:21). Dr. Thomas also discussed the issuance of the order in his interview with Bigtree (HW interview 1:40:13-1:54:55).

This article does not attempt to address all of the allegations contained in the order and Dr. Thomas didn’t attempt to do so in his interviews with Shaffer or Bigtree. He noted that he intends to oppose the suspension through legal means. However, the information he provided in response to questions about one of the cases cited in the order is quite eyebrow-raising. Section 3.3.3 of the order refers to an unvaccinated boy who developed a very serious case of tetanus following a scalp laceration, which required a lengthy hospitalization. Dr. Thomas explained that he didn’t meet the child or his parents (who had committed to not vaccinating long before Dr. Thomas met them) until after the incident and after the boy’s release from the hospital, when Dr. Thomas agreed to take him on as a patient for follow up. According to the order, that follow up visit occurred in November of 2017 (several years prior to the December 3, 2020 “emergency” suspension of Dr. Thomas’ license) and the allegations set forth in the order include that Dr. Thomas didn’t document an informed consent discussion he gave during the visit. Dr. Thomas explained to Shaffer that, although he did provide the discussion in the visit, he didn’t document it because the visit was not a “well-child visit,” and that he subsequently gave the discussion again to the boy and his parents during a well-child visit and documented it then, in accordance with his office’s procedure (Shaffer interview 27:21-32:18). Dr. Thomas noted that, during the boy’s lengthy hospital stay, his parents were not persuaded by any provider at the hospital to vaccinate him.

If the allegations concerning the tetanus case are any indication of the overall strength of the OMB’s case against Dr. Thomas, it’s reasonable to wonder whether his suspension will be legally upheld, or perhaps more importantly, whether it will be upheld in the court of public opinion.

Dr. Thomas explained to Bigtree that in January of 2019, due to the OMB’s focus on his practice, he decided to have a study conducted comparing (based upon vaccination level) the health of the children born into his practice (HW interview 1:29-1:31, 1:34:40-1:39:30). Vaccine safety advocates have long requested that the CDC conduct a “vaccinated versus unvaccinated” health outcome study, and also a safety study of the entire CDC schedule. Such testing has not been conducted by the CDC or any federal agency.

Dr. Thomas and Bigtree discussed this lack of safety testing during the Bigtree interview. They noted that it’s illogical to conclude that not vaccinating at all, or only partially vaccinating, is less safe than vaccinating in accordance with the full CDC schedule, in light of that fact that the safety of the schedule itself has not been proven and it has not been proven that vaccinated children are healthier than unvaccinated ones (HW interview 1:24:23-1:25:50).

Fortunately, Dr. Thomas, along with James Lyons-Weiler, PhD, did conduct a study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated and unvaccinated children. The results of their study are astounding and very problematic for Big Pharma. They’re set forth in a peer-reviewed paper published in late 2020. (A correction of errors in two figures, which had not affected the study’s scientific conclusions, was published in January of 2021.) The study was a retrospective analysis of the health records of the approximately 3,300 children born into Dr. Thomas’ practice, covering a period of approximately ten years, comparing the health outcomes of the children (vaccinated to varying extents v. unvaccinated).

The study concluded that the vaccinated children in the practice appeared to be significantly less healthy than the unvaccinated ones. It found that the vaccinated children saw a doctor markedly more often than their unvaccinated counterparts for a broad range of conditions. For example, compared to their unvaccinated counterparts, the vaccinated children were three to six times more likely to seek treatment related to anemia, asthma, allergies and sinusitis. Charts reflecting the study results are striking, such as one labelled Figure 5 which Dr. Thomas discussed with both Shaffer and Bigtree (Shaffer interview 32:15-33:52,36:13-39:15, HW interview 1:34:40-1:39:30).

Perhaps the most ironic aspect of Dr. Thomas’ story is that, rather than pressure from the OMB causing him to toe the line and begin administering only the full CDC vaccine schedule, it instead caused him to have a study conducted which has yielded findings which are highly damaging to that schedule–a study that may never have been conducted in the absence of the OMB pressure. Any thought that Dr. Thomas would capitulate to the pressure was clearly misguided.

Round 2 – The suspension of Dr. Thomas’ license has propelled him to launch a show which will provide exposure to the very medical and scientific professionals, and scientific information, that Big Pharma wants suppressed.

If the suspension of Dr. Thomas’ license was in any way intended to derail his efforts to promote vaccine safety and choice, it was also misguided. Not working as a doctor has freed up his time and he’s clearly not using that newfound time to rest. Rather, he’s launched a new bi-weekly show called Against the Wind: Doctors and Science Under Fire which, according to the show’s website, will stand for medical freedom and informed consent by interviewing patients who have experienced vaccine injury and professionals who are “under fire” (doctors, scientists and authors). It will also focus on scientific studies ignored by the press and provide information about legal actions related to medical freedom.

Dr. Thomas likely has the connections necessary to land interviews of many of the highly credentialled doctors and scientists currently questioning vaccine safety–the very voices that Big Pharma most wants suppressed. He was recently back on the widely-watched The HighWire where he discussed the launch of his show (Episode 201 of The HighWire 58:10-1:21:05). He also has the support of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., which the latter recently declared in an article posted on his popular website, Children’s Health Defense.

Perhaps Dr. Thomas’ story will enlighten those attempting to suppress voices questioning vaccine safety to the fact that professional hits and pressure tactics may only spur those voices on, drawing even more attention to the scientific evidence that conflicts with Big Pharma’s “safe, necessary and effective” mantra.

Delight

27th March 2021, 02:09

Paul Thomas is NOT an antivaxxer. He dared to allow his patient's parents to alter the CDC schedule for their children. He had some parents who did not want to vaccinate at all. Some parents wanted the CDC schedule and he accommodated them. The worst crime was that he had thousands of clients who were from birth unvaccinated in his practice. He was able to show scientifically that the unvaccinated children in his practice were much healthier. This is a very long article. Posting part. Please read it in honor of a real doctor.

Oregon Medical Board Suspends Dr. Paul Thomas for Practicing Informed Consent
by Jeremy R. Hammond Mar 26, 2021 (https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2021/03/26/oregon-medical-board-suspends-dr-paul-thomas-for-practicing-informed-consent/)

On December 3, 2020, the Oregon Medical Board issued an emergency suspension order to prevent renowned pediatrician Paul Thomas, MD, from seeing his patients by stripping him of his license.

The ostensible reason given by the board for this action against Thomas, who is affectionately known as “Dr. Paul” by his patients and peers, is that his “continued practice constitutes an immediate danger to public health”.

Thomas is perhaps most well known as coauthor, along with Dr. Jennifer Margulis, of the book The Vaccine-Friendly Plan, which provides guidance to parents who want to protect their children from infectious diseases but have concerns about vaccines. The book is a bestseller currently showing a five-star rating from over 1,800 customer reviews at Amazon.com.

Since 2008, Thomas has practiced pediatrics out of his clinic, Integrative Pediatrics, which is in Beaverton, Oregon, within the metropolitan area of Portland.

The main accusation leveled at Thomas by the state medical board is that he has “breached the standard of care” in his practice by having many patients who are not vaccinated strictly according to the routine childhood schedule recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The true story is that parents have flocked to Integrative Pediatrics precisely because they’ve been bullied, with the state’s approval, by pediatricians in other practices who choose to dutifully serve the bureaucrats in government by compelling parents to strictly comply with the CDC’s schedule.
The story the medical board tells one of a reckless and “bullying” doctor who coerces his pediatric patients’ parents not to follow the CDC’s recommendations and whose gross negligence in this regard has caused harm to children and negatively impacted the health of the community.[1]

But that’s not the true story.

The true story is that parents have flocked to Integrative Pediatrics precisely because they’ve been bullied, with the state’s approval, by pediatricians in other practices who choose to dutifully serve the bureaucrats in government by compelling parents to strictly comply with the CDC’s schedule.

Parents who did comply and then witnessed their children suffer harm as a result are mocked and derisively labeled “anti-vaxxers” for learning hard lessons from their firstborn children that they then apply to younger siblings by making different parenting choices. (Often, such parents respond to the derogatory label by insisting on being described as “ex-vaxxers”, but government officials and the major media institutions refuse to hear them.)

Parents who do vaccinate their children, but not strictly according to the CDC’s schedule, are also lumped into the group monolithically labeled “the anti-vaccine movement” by apologists for the one-size-fits-all approach of public vaccine policy.

These parents have all been told a million times that vaccines are “safe and effective”. They are well aware of the arguments in favor of vaccinations that we all hear incessantly from government officials, medical professionals, and the mainstream media.

They are also perfectly familiar with the tale of how, in 1998, public enemy number one, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, published a fraudulent study in The Lancet, later retracted, claiming to have found an association between the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism.[2] These parents know that numerous studies have since been published that failed to find an association.

They know that, by choosing to dissent from or criticize public vaccine policy, they are placing a target on their back. They know they will be met with disapproval by other members of their own family, accused of being irresponsible parents, scolded, and scorned. They know that they will be viciously attacked by government officials and policy advocates masquerading as journalists, as well as by doctors and other members of their community.[3]

And yet, despite the bullying and intimidation, they remain unmoved. There is one simple reason for this: they see it as their duty as responsible parents to act in their children’s best interest no matter what societal pressures are placed on them to conform with expected behavior. Consequently, they do their own research, think for themselves, draw their own conclusions, and take a stand to protect their children.

In many cases in Portland, parents who face the scornful intimidation of a routine well-child visit at their pediatrician’s office and still insist on exercising their right to make an informed choice not to vaccinate are told that they must either comply with the CDC’s recommendations or find another pediatrician.[4]

And, so, they go to Dr. Paul.

With respect to the medical board’s suspension order, Paul Thomas says that he knew the moment The Vaccine-Friendly Plan was published that this day was coming. He knew at the time that, because he was challenging the CDC’s schedule and therefore the “standard of care” of the medical establishment, he would be placing a target on his back and risking his career.

But he did it anyway.

Why?

The Oregon Medical Board wants us to believe it’s because he’s a villain who demonstrates reckless disregard and poses a danger to public health. The media have run with that story.

But what the results of the study do demonstrate to a reasonable degree of certainty is that his unvaccinated patients are healthier than vaccinated children and place less of a burden on the health care system.
However, what neither the board’s order nor the media have disclosed is that the board’s suspension order was issued just eleven days after Thomas published a study in a peer-reviewed medical journal showing that, among the children born into his practice, those who remained completely unvaccinated were diagnosed at significantly lower rates than vaccinated children for a broad range of chronic health conditions and developmental disorders.

The difference in health outcomes was even more dramatic when Thomas and his coauthor, research scientist Dr. James Lyons-Weiler, looked at cumulative incidence of office visits for given diagnoses rather than incidence of diagnoses alone. This result strongly suggests that his vaccinated patients not only suffer from a higher rate of chronic health conditions, but also that their conditions are more severe, therefore requiring more frequent visits to his clinic.

The study is titled “Relative Incidence of Office Visits and Cumulative Rates of Billed Diagnoses Along the Axis of Vaccination”. It was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health on November 22, 2020.

As Thomas and Lyons-Weiler emphasize in the study, they do not show that vaccinations are the cause of the evidently worse health outcomes among vaccinated children. But what the results of the study do demonstrate to a reasonable degree of certainty is that his unvaccinated patients are healthier than vaccinated children and place less of a burden on the health care system.[5]

Importantly, this was data that the medical board had asked Thomas to produce to support his practice of vaccinating patients according to the principles of his “Vaccine-Friendly Plan”.

Yet, when Thomas surmounted this challenge by obtaining Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval and publishing the deidentified data comparing health outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated children, the board’s emergent response was to suspend his license until further notice “while this case remains under investigation”—and on grounds that are completely belied by the publicly available evidence.[6]

The real story here isn’t one of a rogue doctor dismissing science and recklessly endangering his pediatric patients by bullying their parents into accepting “alternative” care. The real story is one of a rogue medical board dismissing science and recklessly endangering public health by encouraging pediatricians to bully their parents into strict compliance with the CDC’s schedule and selecting Paul Thomas, MD, to set an example to other physicians of what their punishment will be if they instead choose to respect parents’ right to informed consent.

But that story doesn’t begin in December of 2020. To tell the true story and fully appreciate its significance, we need to go back and review the sequence of events that led Paul Thomas to this pivotal moment in his life’s journey.

A Young “Revolutionary” in Africa
Paul Thomas as a boy in Africa
Paul Thomas grew up in the former British territory of Rhodesia, located in southern Africa where Zimbabwe is today. (Photo courtesy of Paul Thomas)

Paul Thomas was born in Portland, Oregon, on March 27, 1957, but he spent most of his childhood growing up in southern Africa. In 1961, his family moved to what was then the British territory of Rhodesia, which was located where Zimbabwe exists today on the northern border of South Africa.

One of four children of missionary parents, they were the only white people living in the village of Arnoldine, where there was no running water or electricity. Paul and his sister Mary were the only white kids in the village school. While living in Africa, his parents also adopted five children.

At school, eleven-year-old Paul was expected to do the same in keeping with his duty as Head Boy. Considering the new government to be an unlawful regime, he courageously refused.
In 1964, an opposition party named the Rhodesian Front declared independence, and its white leader, Ian Smith, was put in place as Prime Minister, which position he held until 1979. The Republic of Zimbabwe was established in the place of Rhodesia in 1980. Smith was born in Rhodesia, but his party opposed any transition to democratic rule, which would mean the end of rule by a white minority. The regime he led was never internationally recognized.

In 1966, when it was discovered that Paul Thomas, who was nine years old, was attending the village school, he was removed to an all-white school in keeping with a policy of apartheid-like segregation. He developed two separate groups of friends: the white kids at the school and the black kids at home. At school, he excelled in academics and sports and was eventually selected as “Head Boy”, an honor given to the top male student of the oldest grade.

In 1968, the breakaway regime held a ceremony to lower the Union Jack and raise the new Rhodesian flag in its place. At school, eleven-year-old Paul was expected to do the same in keeping with his duty as Head Boy. Considering the new government to be an unlawful regime, he courageously refused.

Two years later, Paul began attending high school at Waterford Kamhlaba in Swaziland, which had been established in 1963 as the first multiracial school in southern Africa. Among his schoolmates were daughters of Nelson Mandela, an anti-apartheid revolutionary who would go on to serve as President of South Africa from 1994 to 1999.

Although still a child, Paul Thomas, like Nelson Mandela, was deemed a threat by the powers-that-be. In 1973, at age fifteen, he was arrested by the Rhodesian government for distributing educational materials considered “revolutionary”.

The Path of a Pro-Vaccine Pediatrician
Dartmouth College Campus Library Building (Photo by David Mark, Licensed under Pixabay License)
Dartmouth College Campus Library Building (Photo by David Mark, Licensed under Pixabay License)

In January of 1974, Paul Thomas moved to Merced, California, to live with his aunt and uncle. He describes having experienced culture shock upon his return to the United States.

He took a job working as an orderly in a hospital until the fall of that year, when he entered his freshman year at Kalamazoo College in Michigan, where he studied pre-medicine. In 1975, he went back to California to study at the University of the Pacific, obtaining his Bachelor of Arts degree in biology in 1979. He continued his studies there and was a teaching assistant until 1981, when he obtained his Master of Science degree in biology.

From 1981 to 1985, he attended Dartmouth Medical School, an Ivy League institution in Hanover, New Hampshire, where he earned his degree as a Doctor of Medicine. From 1985 to 1987, Thomas completed the rigorous first two years of internship and pediatric residency at the Fresno location of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF Fresno).

In 1986, Thomas adopted his first child, Natalie, at birth. His second child, Noah, was born the following year. From 1987 to 1988, Thomas continued his pediatrics residency at the University of California, San Diego (UC San Diego). In 1988, he moved back to Portland, Oregon, and worked as an attending physician at Emanuel Children’s Hospital, where he also taught residents and medical students. In 1991, he married his current wife, Maiya, and in 1993, his third child, Tucker, was born.

That same year, Thomas joined Westside Pediatrics in Portland, a private group practice where he practiced alongside four other pediatricians.

In 1996, Thomas’s fourth child and youngest son, Luke, was born. In 2000, they became guardians of Aja, a girl the same age as Noah. Three years later, tragedy struck when his African sister Tsitsi died of congestive heart failure at the age of 43. She had moved to New Hampshire after the death of her husband and was the mother of four children: Zanele, an eleven-year-old girl; Themba and Tare, two boys aged twelve and fifteen, respectively; and Rufaro, who had reached the age of adulthood and was attending college in another state. Paul and his wife took them in, bringing the number of children in the family to nine: three biological and six adopted.

“My kids are fully vaccinated, by the way,” Dr. Thomas said in an interview. “So, I was still unaware of vaccine risk. This was back—you know, my youngest was born in 1996, and I just hadn’t woken up yet.”

“I come from a background of not being aware of vaccine risk,” he explained. “I come from a background of being very well trained that vaccines are ‘safe and effective’. I believed it.”

Parents are told to listen to doctors and trust their ostensibly superior knowledge about vaccines, but doctors don’t actually get much education about vaccines in medical school.

As Thomas related, “When you’re in training in pediatrics, you don’t get any training on vaccines while you’re in school other than the diseases for which you vaccinate and how horrible they are and how wonderful it was that we had a vaccine. Alright, that’s the extent of the education that we got in medical school.”

And when you get into residency, he added, “you definitely don’t have the time to research things” in depth on your own. “What you’re learning at that point is learning what to do. You learn protocols, and so when it comes to how to vaccinate, you learn what the Academy of Pediatrics and the CDC want you to do—and that’s what you do.”

“I come from a background of being very well trained that vaccines are ‘safe and effective’. I believed it.”
He was referring to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the trade organization that plays an important role in establishing the CDC’s recommendations as “standard of care” in pediatric practices across the country.

“And honestly,” Thomas continued, “for a long time—and I know most pediatricians still do this—you have the idea in your mind that, ‘How could I, a lowly pediatrician who’s just in training or just out of training—how could I know more than the CDC and the Academy of Pediatrics?’ I mean, these are the best of the best who’ve risen to the top to give us this guidance, right? That’s what we think. Well, that’s what I thought.”

That was before he became aware of the endemic corruption and conflicts of interest that exist within the medical establishment, of which government agencies like the CDC and FDA are an integral part.

That was before he started deeply researching the scientific literature for himself, in keeping with the advice of Dave Sackett, “the father of evidence-based medicine” who once quipped, “Half of what you’ll learn in medical school will be shown to be either dead wrong or out of date within five years of your graduation; the trouble is that nobody can tell you which half—so the most important thing to learn is how to learn on your own.”[7]

The Proven Untrustworthiness of Public Health Officials
Entrance to the headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Daniel Mayer/CC BY-SA 3.0)

When it comes to the subject of vaccines, parents across the country are incessantly bombarded with the message that they should not do their own research or think for themselves but instead simply trust public health authorities to determine what is in their child’s best interests.

Parents are told to trust “the science”, which is treated synonymously with whatever it is that public health officials proclaim. The trouble is that what government officials and the mainstream media say science says and what the science actually tells us about vaccines are two completely different things.

This is the reality those who do their own research are well aware of, but it’s a demonstrable truth that remains completely unacknowledged within the mainstream discourse.

The trouble is that what government officials and the mainstream media say science says and what the science actually tells us about vaccines are two completely different things.
Sometimes the cognitive dissonance within the medical establishment manifests itself glaringly. For instance, while government officials insist on one hand that vaccines are “safe and effective”, it administrates a program designed to effectively shift the financial burden for vaccine injuries away from the pharmaceutical industry and onto the taxpaying consumers.

This came about in the 1980s, while Thomas was attending medical school. Vaccine injury lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies were piling up, particularly for the diphtheria, tetanus, and whole-cell pertussis (DTP) vaccine and, to a lesser extent, the oral polio vaccine (OPV), which was responsible for causing every domestic case of paralytic polio in the US after 1979.[8]

Even though the risk of getting polio from the vaccine had become greater than the risk from the wild virus, and even though an alternative inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) was available, the FDA in 1984 declared that “any possible doubts, whether or not well founded, about the safety of the vaccine cannot be allowed to exist in view of the need to assure that the vaccine will continue to be used to the maximum extent consistent with the nation’s public health objectives.”[9] (Emphasis added.)

That neatly illustrates the attitude of public health officials today with regard to the risks of vaccination: when the policy goal of achieving high vaccination rates conflicts with individuals’ personal best interests and public health, it is the policy goal that takes precedence.

The way the New York Times tells the story, “anti-vaccination” groups began appearing in the country because parents saw a documentary aired by NBC in 1982 called DPT: Vaccine Roulette, which was “dangerously inaccurate” and falsely “purported” an association between the vaccine—variably abbreviated DTP, DPT, or DTwP—and “seizures”. Due to the irrational and misinformed fears of parents who rejected the science, companies “stopped making vaccines” because it wasn’t worth “the corporate headache.”[10]

The reality is that parents who were concerned about the safety of the DTP vaccine were not the parents who were ignoring the science but the ones paying attention to it.

Far from their concerns being ungrounded and stories of vaccine injuries being mere “anecdotes”, research was showing that the DTP vaccine was indeed associated with serious harms. The year prior to the release of that documentary, for example, a major study was published in the British Medical Journal (now The BMJ) that found a statistically significant association between the vaccine and “serious neurological illness” such as seizures and encephalopathy.[11]

Parents who had vaccinated their children because they were told it was “safe and effective” only to witness their children suffer serious adverse events and long-term harms rightly began questioning the public relations slogan, looking into the science for themselves, and learning the truth that the vaccine had never been adequately tested for safety and was the subject of considerable controversy within the scientific community.[12]

Today, it is uncontroversial that the vaccine was highly “reactogenic” and caused “significantly” more adverse reactions than the vaccine it was replaced with, which includes an acellular rather than a whole-cell pertussis component (abbreviated DTaP). As a systematic review published in the journal Vaccine in 2018 points out, the whole-cell vaccine was “crude” by comparison, and the switch was “warranted” by the reports of the vaccine causing relatively rare but serious injuries.[13]

While the DTP vaccine was phased out in the US and other developed countries, it continues to be widely used in the developing world. The assumption made by public health officials, in the US and elsewhere, has been that by reducing incidence of the three target diseases, the vaccine will reduce childhood deaths. The scientific evidence, however, does not support that assumption.

For one, the vaccine had no obvious impact on the population-adjusted mortality rate from pertussis in the US, which had already been declining since well before the vaccine came into widespread use, as can be seen in the following graph created from the CDC’s data.[14]

pertussis mortality before the vaccine
In fact, this is true for infectious diseases in general. As noted in the AAP’s journal Pediatrics in a summary of vital statistics published in 2000, “vaccination does not account for the impressive declines in mortality” witnessed during the twentieth century. In fact, “nearly 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among US children occurred before 1940”, before most vaccines were available to help explain it.[15]

Furthermore, even if a vaccine is effective at reducing mortality from the target disease, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it will reduce overall mortality. This is because vaccines can have what are termed in the literature as “non-specific effects”, meaning long-term effects other than those intended or anticipated and distinguished from acute adverse events that are temporally associated with vaccination.

Contrary to the assumption made by public health officials when introducing the DTP vaccine, studies done in recent decades have found it to be associated with an increased rate of childhood mortality.

As a study published in the Lancet journal EBioMedicine found, “DTP was associated with a 5-fold high mortality than being unvaccinated.”

As its authors remarked, “It should be of concern that the effect of routine vaccination on all-cause mortality was not tested in randomized trials. All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus, or pertussis. Though a vaccine protects children against the target disease it may simultaneously increase susceptibility to unrelated infections.”[16]

As the world’s top researchers into the non-specific effects of vaccines noted in a BMJ article published in January 2020, the association between the DTP vaccine and increased childhood mortality is a consistent finding and is particularly pronounced among girls.[17]

“All currently available evidence suggests that DTP vaccine may kill more children from other causes than it saves from diphtheria, tetanus, or pertussis.”
The concern about vaccine trials not looking at long-term health outcomes, including mortality, is not limited to the DTP vaccine. None of the vaccines currently recommended by the CDC underwent randomized, placebo-controlled trials comparing long-term health outcomes, including all-cause mortality, between children who received the vaccine and children who did not.

The injury lawsuits against DTP manufacturers in the early 1980s incentivized the development of a less reactogenic product, which ultimately led to the DTP vaccine being phased out and replaced with the DTaP vaccine.

However, the US government had a solution in mind other than the development of safer and more effective means of reducing the burden of infectious disease. In fact, the government intervened in the market to effectively eliminate that key incentive for manufacturers to do so.

In 1986, the year that Paul Thomas adopted his first child, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed into law. Because vaccine manufacturers were literally going out of business due to vaccine injury lawsuits and the increasing parental awareness that the safety studies conducted for licensure purposes were totally inadequate, the supply of vaccines was becoming unstable.

Complicating matters even further for the pharmaceutical companies was their difficulty in obtaining liability insurance due to the insurance industry’s unwillingness to take on the risk.

Consequently, the public health policy goal of maintaining or increasing vaccination rates was threatened. To resolve that threat to public policy, the law granted broad legal immunity to manufacturers of vaccines recommended by the CDC for routine use in children. It also established the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which is funded by an excise tax on every vaccine dose administered.

The effect of the law is thus to shift the financial burden for vaccine injuries away from the pharmaceutical companies and onto the consumers—including those whose children are injured by vaccines.[18]

In 2011, the US Supreme Court upheld legal immunity for Big Pharma, judging that the “unavoidability” of vaccine injuries establishes “a complete defense” against lawsuits, provided that the vaccine was prepared according to specifications and accompanied with adequate warnings, which are found in the manufacturer’s package inserts. In the Court’s judgment, uniquely for the vaccine industry, “design defects” are “not a basis for liability.”[19]

Policymakers characterized the law as being intended to benefit the public. That is certainly arguable, but what is incontrovertible is that it greatly benefited the pharmaceutical industry. The vaccine manufacturers were back in business, and the CDC continued adding an increasing number of vaccines to its routine childhood schedule throughout the late 1980s and 1990s.

Helping the profit margins of the pharmaceutical companies even further was the artificial demand created by state laws mandating the use of their products as a requirement for school entry.

The effect of the law is thus to shift the financial burden for vaccine injuries away from the pharmaceutical companies and onto the consumers—including those whose children are injured by vaccines.
Included in many of those vaccines was a preservative called “thimerosal”, which by weight is about half ethylmercury. While public health officials, the AAP, and the broader medical community continued to insist to parents that the CDC’s recommended vaccines were “safe and effective”, nobody had bothered to consider the long-term effects on children from the cumulative exposures to mercury they were receiving by following the CDC’s schedule.

When the FDA finally got around to doing so, it was essentially by accident. In 1997, Congress passed the FDA Modernization Act, which included a provision requiring the FDA to compile a list of mercury-containing drugs on the market and the quantities of mercury contained in them. The FDA queried the industry, and the resulting list of products included numerous vaccines on the CDC’s schedule.[20]

When researchers at the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) did the calculations in 1999, they found that the CDC’s schedule was exposing infants to cumulative levels of mercury that exceeded the government’s own safety guidelines. The finding that the levels exceeded the guidelines of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was published by FDA researchers in the AAP’s journal Pediatrics in 2001.[21]

Before it became public, health officials were panicked. The conundrum they were facing was elucidated in an email from Peter Patriarca, the director of the FDA’s Division of Viral Products, to Martin Meyers, the acting director of the CDC’s National Vaccine Program Office. If they were to call for the removal of thimerosal from vaccines, it would “raise questions about FDA being ‘asleep at the switch’ for decades”. It would also “raise questions about various advisory bodies regarding aggressive recommendations for use.”

People would naturally ask, “What took the FDA so long to do the calculations? Why didn’t CDC and the advisory bodies do these calculations when they rapidly expanded the childhood immunization schedule?”[22]

At the same time, public health officials couldn’t very well do nothing because, obviously, if they insisted that it was “safe” to continue exposing infants to such alarmingly high levels of mercury, it would also deservedly damage their credibility.

This concern was privately expressed by FDA researcher Leslie K. Ball, the lead author of the Pediatrics study, who observed that “toxicologists seemed reluctant to state any Hg [mercury] was ‘safe’”, which opened government health officials to the criticism that they were “arbitrarily designating a certain level as acceptable when there continues to be so much uncertainty about the science in this area.”[23]

In July 1999, the announcement was made that thimerosal would be phased out of most childhood vaccines, with manufacturers switching from multi-dose vials, for which they are required by the FDA to include the preservative, to single-dose vials.[24] Today, thimerosal is still used in multi-dose vials of influenza vaccine, which the CDC recommends to be taken annually by everyone aged six months and up, including pregnant women.

To this day, the CDC self-contradictorily claims that its removal was simply “a precautionary measure”, and that there’s “no evidence of harm” from it. The CDC boldly asserts that ethylmercury from vaccines is “readily eliminated” from the body and so is “very safe”.[25]

That claim, however, is belied by its own cited sources. A PDF document linked to on that page of the CDC’s website cites six observational studies and an Institute of Medicine (IOM) review published in 2004 that acknowledged the limitations of relying on observational studies in the absence of long-term randomized trials, described thimerosal as a “known neurotoxin”, and acknowledged that ethylmercury from vaccines “accumulates in the brain” and “can injure the nervous system.”[26]

The CDC boldly asserts that ethylmercury from vaccines is “readily eliminated” from the body and so is “very safe”. That claim, however, is belied by its own cited sources.
On a Frequently Asked Questions webpage about thimerosal, the CDC says the same thing about the mercury in vaccines being “safe”. That page links to another page providing a list of references.[27] The very first one is the 2001 Pediatrics study admitting that the CDC was responsible for exposing children to levels of mercury exceeding safety guidelines and whose lead author privately worried that it would be misleading to say it was “safe” given the scientific uncertainties.

In the published study, the researchers acknowledged that ethylmercury is toxic even at low doses and that it was possible that the exposure from vaccines could cause neurodevelopmental abnormalities in children.[28]

The second study the CDC cites on that page to support its claim that the mercury in vaccines is “safe” is a study published in Environmental Health Perspectives in 2005, which showed that ethylmercury is more readily eliminated from the blood but more persistent in the brain than methylmercury.

The authors also expressed concern that the toxicological properties of ethylmercury had not been sufficiently studied, requiring the government to adopt the scientifically invalid practice of basing its risk assessments instead on the toxicology of methylmercury.

They expressed the further concern that mercury in the brain was associated with “an active neuroinflammatory process” that had in turn been “demonstrated in brains of autistic patients”.

Far from concluding that the mercury in vaccines is safe, they emphasized that studies were “urgently needed” to determine “the potential developmental effects of immunization with thimerosal-containing vaccines in newborns and infants.”[29]

These are studies that the CDC cites to try to support its claims, to say nothing of studies that the CDC simply ignores. Naturally, to support the assertion that the mercury in vaccines is “safe” and that there’s “no evidence” of toxicity at levels children are exposed to from the schedule, the CDC does not cite, for example, a review on thimerosal published in Neurochemical Research in 2011 observing that all the studies reviewed had found evidence of neurotoxicity, which together constituted “unequivocal evidence” that ethylmercury “can affect neural tissues and functions” at “low doses” relevant to vaccines, making it “a likely risk factor for neurodevelopmental delays”.

Furthermore, no studies had been done to examine the synergistic toxicity of thimerosal being administered concomitantly with vaccines containing aluminum adjuvants, “which are also neurotoxic.”

Given what is known from the available data, “it is reasonable to expect biological consequences in terms of neurodevelopment in susceptible infants.” Studies to evaluate the health consequences of continued use of thimerosal in vaccines, including in developing countries, were “urgently” needed, and its use “should be reconsidered by public health authorities, especially in those vaccines intended for pregnant women and children.”[30]

It would be superfluous to list more examples of how the CDC willfully deceives the public about the safety of vaccines.

Unbeknownst to Paul Thomas at the time, what many parents across the country had been discovering for themselves, oftentimes painfully, is that public health officials and other “experts” entrusted with determining the “standards of care” by which doctors practice medicine are demonstrably unworthy of our trust.

“We just didn’t realize,” Thomas explained, with respect to his time spent in medical school and pediatric residency, “that to rise to the top and sit on the committees that make the recommendations, you absolutely have to follow and say the right things. I mean, if you ever have anything in your background that questions vaccine safety or vaccine effectiveness, you don’t get to move up. So it’s a process that just pulls together the best speakers for the slogan—I mean the marketing slogan of ‘safe and effective.’”

To arrive at where he is at today in terms of knowledge, Thomas had to be willing to question everything he had ever learned about vaccines. More than that, as a pediatrician, he had to be willing to acknowledge the possibility that something he was doing to children with the intent of helping them was instead causing them harm.

This is evidently a rare quality among doctors, and Dr. Thomas’s experience with the Oregon Medical Board goes some way toward helping to explain why.

e-Book
Download the e-Book

Support the author by owning the PDF version of this content.

BUY NOW
The Endemic Corruption within the Medical Establishment
The FDA building where the agency's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research division is located (US Food and Drug Adminstration/Public Domain)
The FDA building where the agency’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research division is located (US Food and Drug Adminstration/Public Domain)

When it comes to the topic of vaccines, the media go so far as to dismiss any talk of “medical malfeasance, coverups, and corruption” as “misinformation” and “conspiracy theory”. Serious discussion about public vaccine policy in the mainstream media is practically nonexistent.[31]

Yet the fact that endemic corruption exists within the medical establishment is not at all controversial within the scientific community. As a very widely cited paper published in PLOS Medicine in 2005 noted, conflicts of interest in medical research are “very common”. Rather than majority expert opinion representing scientific truths, study findings “may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.”

Scientists, policymakers, and medical practitioners are blinded by their own confirmation bias, grasping onto whatever information supports their preexisting beliefs while ignoring whatever does not. The peer-review process of medical journals served frequently “to perpetuate false dogma”. Furthermore, “empirical evidence on expert opinion shows that it is extremely unreliable.”[32]

In a New York Review of Books article in 2004, The Lancet editor Richard Horton acknowledged that peer-reviewed journals had “devolved into information-laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry.”[33]

In the same magazine in 2009, New England Journal of Medicine editor Marcia Angell wrote, “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”[34]

In a Lancet article published in 2015, Horton again lamented how “science has taken a turn towards darkness”, in which “poor methods” were accepted because they “get results”. “The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour”, he wrote, “is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours.”[35]

“To serve its interests,” a study published in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation in 2013 concluded, “the industry masterfully influences evidence base production, evidence synthesis, understanding of harms issues, cost-effectiveness evaluations, clinical practice guidelines and healthcare professional education and also exerts direct influences on professional decisions and health consumers.”[36] (Emphasis added.)

A good example of how the industry exerts influence on government policymaking is provided by the HPV vaccine. As detailed in a paper published in the American Journal of Public Health in 2012, “Merck promoted school-entry mandate legislation 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. Legislators relied heavily on Merck for scientific information.”[37]

The CDC’s role in deceiving the public about the science is acknowledged in the published literature, too. Referring to a CDC document outlining the rationale for its universal flu shot recommendation, a systematic review of the scientific evidence published in 2010 blasted policymakers for deliberately mischaracterizing the science to support its policy. The review authors remarked how policymakers within the CDC “do not weight interpretation by quality of the evidence, but quote anything that supports their theory.”[38]

In a BMJ article published in 2015, associate editor Jeanne Lenzer observed how the CDC includes a disclaimer with its recommendations that it has no financial interests or other relationships with the manufacturers of commercial products, but how that isn’t true because the CDC in fact receives millions of dollars in funding from the pharmaceutical industry through an organization called the CDC Foundation.[39]

In its own words, the CDC Foundation is “an independent nonprofit and the sole entity created by Congress to mobilize philanthropic and private-sector resources to support the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s critical health protection work.”[40] The foundation’s partners include pharmaceutical companies AstraZeneca, Bayer, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Novartis AG, Novavax, Sanofi Pasteur, and Wyeth, among a long list of others.[41]

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.”
The US Congress has also acknowledged that parents’ increasing lack of trust in public health officials is not without just cause.

In a June 2000 report, the House of Representatives’ Committee on Government Reform excoriated the CDC and FDA for endemic conflicts of interest. At the CDC, waivers from conflict-of-interest rules were routinely granted to every member of its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). The Chairman of the committee had owned shares of stock in the pharmaceutical giant Merck, which manufactures numerous vaccines recommended by the CDC.

Of the eight committee members who voted to approve guidelines for the rotavirus vaccine in June 1998, half “had financial ties to pharmaceutical companies that were developing different versions of the vaccine.” Of the five members of the FDA advisory committee who voted to approve the rotavirus vaccine in December 1997, three likewise had financial ties to companies developing different versions of the vaccine.

A particularly salient example of the corruption is Dr. Paul Offit, who joined the CDC’s advisory committee in October 1998 and voted three times in favor on decisions related to the rotavirus vaccine, including the vote to add it to the Vaccines for Children (VFC) program, which makes vaccines available at no cost to low-income families through Medicaid. Concurrently, Offit shared ownership with the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) of a patent for the rotavirus vaccine being developed under a grant from Merck.[42]

Offit sat on the CDC committee until June 2003. Merck’s rotavirus vaccine was licensed in 2006 under the trademark RotaTeq. The hospital sold its stake in the patent in 2008 for $182 million. Offit profited handsomely, publicly acknowledging that the deal made him “several million dollars, a lot of money”. As he told Newsweek, the “small percentage” he received of the total was “like winning the lottery.”[43]

Offit also happens to be one of the media’s go-to experts on vaccines. In 2015, he wrote an op-ed in the New York Times accusing parents who choose not to vaccinate of child abuse on the grounds that Jesus, were he walking on Earth with us today, would advocate forcibly vaccinating children against their parents’ will.[44]

The first FDA-licensed rotavirus vaccine that the CDC recommended for routine use in children was Wyeth’s RotaShield. That vaccine was withdrawn from the market in 1999 because it was found to be causing intussusception, an often excruciating and potentially fatal condition in which part of the intestine telescopes in on itself. The FDA had approved RotaShield as “safe” despite clinical trials having shown an increased incidence of intussusception in vaccinated infants.[45]

With no shortage of irony, government health officials uphold the story of RotaShield as a shining example of how the bureaucracies charged with ensuring vaccine safety are highly effective at doing so.
This finding was dismissed as “probably due to chance” by the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC)—an unsurprising judgment given the financial conflicts of interests of most of its members.

The US government itself, through the National Institutes of Health (NIH), developed, patented, and licensed technology to Wyeth for use in its rotavirus vaccine.[46] Another example of a pharmaceutical product for which the government patented and licensed technology is Merck’s human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine.[47]

Tellingly, when the FDA instructed Wyeth on which specific adverse events it should focus in postmarketing safety studies, the risk of intussusception was not among them. Researchers monitoring public postmarketing surveillance data, however, nevertheless picked up on reports of the adverse event, and studies were conducted that confirmed the association, which the CDC acknowledged as “a strong causal relationship”.

With no shortage of irony, government health officials uphold the story of RotaShield as a shining example of how the bureaucracies charged with ensuring vaccine safety are highly effective at doing so.[48]

Just as tellingly, when the CDC’s advisory committee voted to withdraw its recommendation for routine use of RotaShield, Paul Offit suddenly found a conscience and abstained on the grounds that there would be “a perception of conflict” for him to vote against Wyeth’s product while he was working on a competitor’s vaccine.[49]

Paul Offit is currently a member of the FDA’s vaccine advisory committee responsible for recommending COVID-19 vaccines to be authorized for emergency use while prelicensure trials remain underway.[50]

A Senate report in June 2007 blasted the CDC for seeking ever-increasing levels of funding year after year but having little to show for its exorbitant spending in the way of improved public health. Part of the problem was the “revolving door” by which CDC officials or contractors find lucrative ways to make their CDC connections pay off in the private sector. Exemplifying this problem was the CDC Director herself, Julie Gerberding, under whose leadership bonuses for those in management increased dramatically, including a tenfold rise in the share of premium bonuses given to those within her own office.[51]

Gerberding left her CDC job in 2009 and joined Merck in 2010 as president of its $5 billion global vaccine division. Merck’s Chief Executive Officer understandably described her as an “the ideal choice”.[52] In 2015, she sold shares of Merck worth over $2.3 million.[53] She is presently the chief patient officer and executive vice president of the company. Among her responsibilities is “strategic communications”, which is essentially to say that she is now in charge of Merck’s propaganda efforts.[54]

A 2009 report from the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services, under which both the CDC and FDA operate, found that there was “a systemic lack of oversight” at the CDC with its ethics program for special government employees—such as the people who sit on its vaccine advisory committee. Nearly all financial disclosure forms for such employees were completed improperly. Only 3 percent of forms contained no omissions, and 64 percent of employees with one or more omissions were found to have potential conflicts of interest that the CDC had either failed to identify or failed to resolve.[55]

In January 2018, CDC Director Brenda Fitzgerald was forced to resign after it was reported that she had purchased tens of thousands of dollars in corporate stocks, including shares in a global tobacco giant and in Merck.[56]

In June 2019, vaccine manufacturer Pfizer announced that former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb had joined its board. Known for having pushed for reforms under the Donald Trump administration to hasten the drug-approval process, Gottlieb remarked that joining Pfizer “uniquely positioned” him to advance “public health”—the usual euphemism for the pharmaceutical industry’s financial interests.[57]

Just as the government has an incestuous relationship with and serves the interests of the pharmaceutical industry, so, too, does the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). As CBS News reported in 2008, “The vaccine industry gives millions to the Academy of Pediatrics for conferences, grants, medical education classes and even helped build their headquarters.”[58]

As the 2007 Senate report noted, the CDC has manifestly failed in its ostensible mission to better public health. A study published in 2011 in Academic Pediatrics estimated that at least 43 percent of children had at least one chronic health condition. When children who were overweight, obese, or at risk for developmental delays were included, the figure rose to 54 percent.[59]

Among the conditions that have increased in prevalence are a broad range of autoimmune diseases, which is attributed to environmental factors that the CDC says it is at a loss to identify.[60]

Perhaps it is not really such a great mystery, given the aggressive use in developing infants and toddlers of pharmaceutical products specifically intended to permanently alter the functioning of their immune system. cont. here (https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2021/03/26/oregon-medical-board-suspends-dr-paul-thomas-for-practicing-informed-consent/)

Delight

31st October 2021, 06:35

Before too much longer, I am afraid many people will be horrified by how their faith in the medical industrial complex led to personal disaster. This moment in history is so perilous, but it is making people open their eyes and MAYBE the whole vaxx industry may topple. That is my prayer! The comments here are telling:

1454500111699034124

I am certain toxins cause autism. I know now that what we call public health is an inversion of health. People are suffering. I pray for the end of suffering.

I Have Been Through This Before
Don’t wear a mask; you must wear a mask. Buy a pulse oximeter. Stock up on Tylenol, vitamin D, Pepcid. Whisper so you don’t spit. Stand six feet from others—no, 10. Wear gloves. Wear two masks! Open the windows. Close the schools. The dizzying madness of COVID, and the reliance on gurulike experts, has been eerily familiar.
BY
ANN BAUER
OCTOBER 27, 2021
(https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/arts-letters/articles/i-have-been-through-this-before-bauer)

In April 1939—as the result of a backdoor bribe—a 35-year-old lumber baron named Bruno Bettelheim was released from the Buchenwald concentration camp on the condition that he leave Germany and never return.

In addition to running his family’s sawmills, Bettelheim had earned a degree in art history and, like many Austrians of the time, dabbled in psychoanalysis and read a bit of Freud. His wife had once cared for an emotionally disturbed child in their home. When he arrived as a refugee in the U.S. he used these random details to remake himself as an expert in human behavior. A small man with a striking Viennese accent and manner, he believed he had valuable psychological insights from the 11 months he’d spent inside Dachau and Buchenwald.

Back in ’38, when Bettelheim was imprisoned, these were primarily work camps where prisoners were divided, stripped of their possessions, then beaten and herded like animals by the guards. Bettelheim noted that the men most damaged by alienation and violence, the ones who gave up hope, had similar affect: They avoided eye contact, rocked and muttered, and gazed at distant objects. He felt he had witnessed what it takes to break a person’s mind.

Bettelheim’s first job in the United States was as research assistant at the University of Chicago, studying high school art curricula. He divorced his wife (who had also emigrated) and taught briefly. In 1943, he published a paper titled “Individual and Mass Behavior in Extreme Situations,” claiming to have studied more than 1,500 concentration camp prisoners. Legendary General and future President Dwight D. Eisenhower praised the work.

Overnight, Bettelheim became a “doctor” and a star.

On the strength of that paper, his [false] claim to have worked with Sigmund Freud, and his status as an intellectual and refugee from Hitler’s Germany, Bettelheim was made full professor of psychology and director of the Sonia Shankman Orthogenic School for emotionally disturbed children at the University of Chicago in 1944.

Once established at the school, he won a grant from the Ford Foundation to start a program specifically for autistic children. Parents from around the country sought his help for their children who were mute, withdrawn, unable to follow directions, prone to “stimming” (gazing at an object or blinking rapidly into light), self-harming, or failing to toilet train.

In the mid-’50s Bettelheim developed a new theory of autism, based on his 1943 paper and the passing remark of a researcher named Leo Kanner who said autistic children “never defrost”: the “refrigerator mother.”

Bad parenting—like imprisonment in a Nazi work camp—was an “extreme situation,” Bettelheim said. He characterized the mothers of children in his program as cold, distant, abusive and uncaring, like domestic SS guards. Though no studies were done to back up this hypothesis, his theory that rejecting mothers cause autism became the accepted science of the time.

In his 1967 book The Empty Fortress, Bettelheim wrote, “Infants, if totally deserted by humans before they have developed enough to shift for themselves, will die. And if their physical care is enough for survival but they are deserted emotionally, or are pushed beyond their capacity to cope, they will become autistic.”

Dr. Bettelheim enjoyed decades as a media darling, appearing on television—he was a regular on The Dick Cavett Show—and serving as top expert for newspapers such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, which credited him with “originating many of the techniques and principles of modern child psychiatry.” Woody Allen gave the pop psychiatrist a cameo, as himself, in the film Zelig. Commonweal magazine published an article titled “The Holy Work of Bruno Bettelheim.” He wrote a series of world-famous bestselling books.

The refrigerator-mother theory of autism became gospel, not just among psychiatrists but in the zeitgeist. It made sense and was easy to grasp. Better, it turned a mysterious and heartbreaking condition into a simple problem of who was to blame. People rallied behind the idea that cold mothers caused autism because it gave them comfort. Mothers whose children developed normally knew it was because they were “good.” Fathers and other relatives of autistic children were off the hook.

Even desperate “bad” mothers embraced the idea, believing that if they could fix themselves their children would be cured. Finally, an answer: They needed to sign up for intense psychotherapy and send their autistic children to live with other families or in residential programs. Some mothers were advised to re-home their healthy children as well, lest their “refrigerator” qualities leak over and spoil another young mind. Many complied.

Occasionally families would reject the diagnosis and their children would be taken by force. Reports were made, psychiatric teams mobilized. They showed up at the homes of autistic children, packed their bags and removed them, while guards held off the screaming, protesting mothers who’d been deemed unsuitable. Bettelheim called this process “parentectomy,” a sad but necessary practice that would help autistic kids be cured. Many were taken to the Orthogenic School he ran, where they stayed for up to a dozen years.

It wasn’t until 1990—after Bettelheim’s death by suicide at 86—that residents and staff from the school began talking about his rages, name calling, constant lying, and abuse.

“I would characterize the atmosphere at the Orthogenic School, at that time, as the beginnings of a cult, with Dr. B. as the cult leader,” wrote a former counselor, W.B., in a letter to the Chicago Reader in July 1990.

But by that point, almost 50 years of damage had been done, during which any clinician who came up with a different diagnosis or questioned Bettelheim’s practices suffered immediate and devastating professional consequences. “In the Orthogenic School,” psychiatrist Richard Kaufman told the Chicago Tribune. “Bettelheim’s mind supplanted your own.”

I was 23 when Bruno Bettelheim—a man I’d never heard of—took his own life. The following year, in 1991, my 3 1/2-year-old son, Andrew, lost language. One day he could talk; the next he was yodeling in a strange high-pitched voice, flicking the lights on and off, and staring for hours as he spun a single wheel on a toy car.

My then-husband and I were too young and poor to have a child—much less two. Our 1-year-old had respiratory problems and asthma, which consumed time and money. We were on the edge, barely able to pay our bills and buy macaroni and cheese. It was just dawning on me that I’d married a dreamy, quixotic guy who drank when he was troubled and couldn’t hold down a job.

That’s what county social workers saw when they were called to assess Andrew, following his meltdown at our public library. A tiny house, a fraying marriage, two depleted parents in cheap clothes. It was winter on the Iron Range, where advances in psychology took some time to travel. The experts—a stoic North Country man-and-woman team—decided we were the cause.

They questioned us separately and casually brought up the idea of temporary foster care. We protested and were told we could keep the boys but only if we submitted to frequent visits and attended parenting classes twice weekly, which we gladly did.

While we were being taught how to impose consequences and establish routine, Andrew and his brother were taken to a child care room where teachers helped them sing, play, and socialize. At first Andrew seemed to improve, brightening and even talking a bit, but then he regressed again, a pattern we’d see repeat on a loop for the rest of his life.

When an older relative came to visit us in spring she took one look at my 4-year-old sitting in the corner, staring at his hand. “You’ve ruined that beautiful child,” she said, her face tense with fury. “You and your careless life. Ruined him. Aren’t you ashamed?”

We eventually moved to Minneapolis, where treatments were supposedly more advanced. At 5, Andrew was diagnosed with autism and enrolled in a program that involved rocking boards, chewy toys and roughing his skin with surgical brushes three times a day.

We blamed ourselves for our son’s problems and most of the new theories did, too. His autism was because we’d had him vaccinated. Because we fed him wheat or dairy or corn. Because we hadn’t employed a team of workers to have constant “floor time” with him (the so-called Son Rise cure) or apply behavioral techniques according to the Lovaas method, beloved not only by late ’90s autism parents but also by conversion therapy folks.

Each new wave was certain: The approaches to autism that had come before were barbaric and uninformed, but this most recent breakthrough was the one clear truth. Science had spoken. Over and over for a dozen years.

We were heartbroken each time a treatment failed—and guilty because without fail, someone would insist we hadn’t tried hard enough. Sure, we’d gone gluten-free, but had we cleansed with hyperbaric oxygen? Behavioral training worked, but only if you did it 18 hours a day. Why hadn’t we taken a second mortgage and flown to the Catskills for a workshop at the Son-Rise Institute?

Just shy of his 36th birthday my then-husband gave in and began drinking in earnest. He lost his job and grew dark and silent. One day he apologized, hugged us all, got in his truck, and drove away.

Now single, I rode the waves of hope and despair alone. There were periods of clarity when I was sure Andrew was breaking through. Adolescence was oddly hopeful; he spoke haltingly but started playing tournament chess and riding a bike. It seemed hormones might bring him out of “childhood” autism—as they do, miraculously, in a tiny number of boys.

Years passed, during which my sons grew closer and more alike. Once someone asked me, “Which is the autistic one?” But along with better engagement, social skills, and speech, Andrew had chronic anxiety. When he started high school, a doctor friend at the university where I was teaching suggested Andrew be “seen.”

Around the same time there was a surge in ads for antidepressants on TV. Psychiatrists quit asking questions and plumbing the unconscious mind, becoming like tea leaf readers in white coats who studied blood test results but never looked their patients in the eyes. I took my son to such a person, who prescribed Lexapro.

This was the moment Bettelheim’s work was entirely spurned by a new group of experts who neatly whipsawed the other direction. They changed positions but held onto the religiosity. Nature was in, nurture was out. Brain chemistry became the only thing that mattered. Everything we’d done during Andrew’s childhood—talk therapy, sensory integration, cross-patterning, behavior training, biofeedback—they rejected as quackery.

Andrew responded oddly to Lexapro, as he did to so many things, becoming obsessive and manic, wandering all night. The boy’s father had resurfaced with a new wife who happened to work for a pharmaceutical company. I, too, was recently remarried. The four of us met to discuss the situation and I was relieved to have help for the first time in years.

But soon we were at odds: My husband, John, and I wanted to take Andrew off the Lexapro; but my ex and his wife insisted he really needed something stronger. When we finally saw the autism specialist we’d spent six months waitlisted for, he was entirely on their side.

“Your son is suffering from a neurological disease and I won’t permit you to withhold medication that will help him,” the doctor said, looming just like those North Country social workers. “I would call that abuse.”

He put Andrew on Abilify, an “atypical” anti-psychotic that ran commercials during the news. John and I asked for a trial of something milder, or more tested, but the psychiatrist insisted older therapies were inferior and wouldn’t work. Weeks later my son turned 18 and I lost the power to control his medical decisions. I watched as the doctor and my ex-husband, both large imposing men, insisted he take the drug.

It’s possible Andrew developed psychosis at exactly the same time he began taking psychiatric drugs, that my ex and the doctor were right and I was wrong. It’s also possible that his brain was fragile and the drugs that were loaded into it (over time, his doctor added Risperdal and a little Depakote) melted his circuitry, causing decompensation.

But each time I raised the question, I was lectured. Andrew should have been medicated earlier; I’d been negligent; the doctors were playing catch-up. It would take at least three months to see benefits, possibly six. I must not think of taking him off because withdrawal was dangerous. Two doctors threatened to report me for mistreatment of a vulnerable adult if I tried. I wrote an article for a local magazine telling our story and questioning the widespread use of anti-psychotics. A University of Minnesota psychiatrist, director of autism services, submitted a scathing rebuttal calling me an anti-science nut.

‘You’ve ruined that beautiful child,’ she said, her face tense with fury. ‘You and your careless life. Ruined him. Aren’t you ashamed?’

Meanwhile, Andrew went from a shy, smart, autistic teenager to a stuporous man who gained 100 pounds and erupted in rage. My ex and his wife faded away around the time a county worker told a judge our son was out of control and the state of Minnesota mandated electroshock (this was 2011, and common practice). John and I sued and ended up with a court-appointed guardian who was granted all powers of control over Andrew’s life and later was indicted for doping his clients and stealing from them.

Again we went to court and this time we won. In 2014, John became Andrew’s legal guardian and began the process of detoxing him from the most dangerous medications. For two years we lived quietly, Andrew in an apartment complex for adults with autism, us in a small house we planned to will to him and his brother, who had asked to be successor guardian. Every Sunday, we had dinner together and took a walk.

Andrew had grown into himself, resigned and weary. No longer angry, he lived in easy silence and aged precipitously, appearing decades older. When we went out, he and I, people assumed he was my husband—this tall, grave, balding man.

On a dazzling Friday morning in November 2016, Andrew was found dead on the floor of his living room. John got the call and took me to a park near our house, awash with crisp red and orange leaves, to tell me the news. Fall has filled me with dread ever since.

My son was 28 years old when he died. An autopsy was performed but no official cause of death was found. Traditional methods of suicide were ruled out. Yet he’d told me at our last dinner that there was no happiness for him in this world—seeming clearer of mind than he had in years. He’d wiped his phone and computer and erased his music from Spotify.

When we cleaned out his apartment there was a pile of foil-wrapped pharmaceuticals in the back of a drawer. But the coroner’s report showed low/normal levels of only two drugs in his blood—neither withdrawal nor overdose. My personal explanation is that he was tired of being controlled by the fickle czars of autism and he was just done.

The time between late 2016 and 2019 is mostly lost to me. Grief, it turns out, doesn’t feel like sadness. It’s more like terror, being chased through oily blackness. My husband, younger son and I isolated. We drank. We drove, looking for Andrew. He’d loved mountains: South Dakota, Colorado, Oregon. We swore we felt him in the trees.

We’d started to function again, slowly, by late ’19. In January ’20 we traveled to Bellevue, Washington, for a conference where John was speaking. I fell ill soon after with a fever and breathless cough I couldn’t shake for six weeks. This friend of ours—a corporate lawyer with business in China—raised an eyebrow and told us a pandemic was coming. All around there was tension, something uncontrolled and wicked in the air.

John is an internet security expert with a background in mathematics. He’ll often talk about the “shape” of a problem. This is its outline, its gestalt. He envisions it like dots on a chart, or waves on a graph. I see holographic images—the shape of an ambitious refugee, white coats and flimflam men, glimmering under the figures we see today. In March, April, May, familiar shapes began to emerge.

Suddenly there emerged a cadre of pandemic experts who recommended—then quickly required—extreme and unprecedented things. People shouldn’t see their parents, visit friends, hold funerals or hug. We could never shake hands again. Wearing masks was useless! We MUST mask, both indoors and out. There were hotlines set up in many cities—including mine—for citizens to report their neighbors who did not comply. Police were sent to break up a Jewish funeral in New York City.

Day after day, media rained down information about who was to blame. Millennials, spring breakers, Southerners, motorcyclists. Scientists who proposed different theories were muffled, derided, sidelined. They were deemed dangerous, their ideas “misinformation.” To question was sacrilege.

I had lived through all of this before.

In the last days of May 2020, police murdered a man in my city, setting off worldwide mass protests. But these gatherings were proclaimed to be different, sanctified. A service was held—indoors, packed with people including an unmasked U.S. senator and our Minnesota governor who’d pledged to send the National Guard to break up anyone else’s funeral. They sang and gripped hands. This, too, was blessed by those in charge.

Just as they had all the years of my son’s life, recommendations changed at a furious pace, echoed by not only public health officials but their inner circle of a tech giant, a nutritionist, a sociologist, a health care entrepreneur, which now enjoyed the support of both the U.S. government and the monopoly tech platforms that control what we are allowed to see and read. The experts rocketed beyond the reach of scientific gravity into an evidence-free atmosphere where every passing theory became both law and truth.

The year of COVID continued with a drumbeat of warnings nationwide. Sanitize your mail with bleach and a UV light. Don’t wear a mask; you must wear a mask. Buy a pulse oximeter. Stock up on Tylenol, vitamin D, Pepcid. Form a pod. Get an air filter. Whisper so you don’t spit. Stand six feet from others—no, 10. Wear gloves. Put on goggles because the virus can get in through your eyes. Don’t pet the dog. Keep your teenager in the garage. Isolate a sick toddler in your basement with a bell. Wear two masks! Stay out of restaurants, nail salons, gyms. Open the windows. Close the schools.

Finally, the vaccines came and they seemed, at first, to be a miracle. But still there were certain things you weren’t allowed to discuss, like side effects, transmissibility, and natural immunity. The shots were immaculate and all-powerful! Then suddenly … they were not. Vaccinations were undone by the unvaccinated; they couldn’t save the faithful because of the sinful. And the drug alone wasn’t enough. True believers wore a mask as well and those who did not were causing the cure to fail.

Whatever the experts said on television became reality, became “science.” Meanwhile people died and died and died and just as the ongoing tragedy of autism of a child was somehow the mother’s fault, over and over again, doctors and officials blamed their audience of 3 billion for the disease. The more the cures failed, the greater the fault of the public. The flaw was never in the remedy, but in those who failed to “behave” and thereby brought the plague upon themselves.

After schools were closed and our city shut down in March of ’20, I lay awake nights imagining all the children like my son who were mute, sensitive, bound to routine, friendless, in desperate need of services and incapable of learning on Zoom. The adults with already-isolating disabilities whose programs and activities, supported jobs and social work visits were canceled. The ones who were returned with COVID to their group homes and left to die. Occasionally I’d panic, my heart pounding, and my husband would awaken to comfort me.

More than once he actually said the words, “It’s OK, you can sleep. Andrew’s gone.”

But I was haunted, driven, obsessed the way my child with autism had been. It was so clear to me that politicians and public health were flailing and doing harm. With every new order and unprecedented decree, I saw the shape of that army of autism experts. I questioned everything—school closures, lockdowns, masks—talking compulsively about the inevitable consequences, the ways we were breaking people. Fully half of my friends, people who sat with me in the hours after my son’s death, quit speaking to me in 2020. My editors, clients, and work colleagues simply disappeared.

Of the friends who remain, most are sympathetic but also loyal to the COVID narrative, and therefore frustrated by my stance. They’ve suggested that I don’t trust today’s experts because I’m so broken by my past. And I cannot swear this isn’t true. But are today’s experts provably better than past experts? Why should that be? Perhaps I learned from experiences that other people were fortunate enough not to have—until now.

In the end, what I believe doesn’t really matter. History will out. Ten or 15 or 25 years from now there will a reckoning, deep research, a spate of biographies and memoirs from the people who spent 2020-21 under the sway of gurus. News media that trumpeted their wisdom and methods will issue brisk, researched, documentary-style reports. People will swarm out of the shadows to claim they didn’t really believe the experts embodied science and were secretly resisting all along; even those who preached their gospel and strong-armed the public’s obedience will insist they actually did not.

Because controversy sells, stories may get lurid and over the top—that whipsaw effect. A few of the people who worked with Bettelheim—such as Dr. Jacquelyn Sanders, who was his second-in-command and successor as director of the Orthogenic School—felt the pendulum swung too far upon his death. He was never the oracle media made him out to be, Sanders said, but he began his career with a true desire to help. Then came the media spotlight, the book deals, celebrity status, and wealth. What started as medicine became corrupt bombastic certainty, a willingness to destroy people if it meant never having to admit he was wrong.

There were no studies to support Bettelheim’s work, Joan Beck reminded readers in her 1997 Chicago Tribune article “Setting the Record Straight About a Fallen Guru,” so he required the unquestioning, devout allegiance of his team to constantly remake reality so that it conformed to his recommendations.

After Bettelheim’s death, when allegations of abuse started streaming in from both workers and residents, a journalist and former literary editor at The Nation, Richard Pollack, began working on a memoir about his brother who had been a resident at the Orthogenic School. Among the things Pollack uncovered in his research for The Creation of Doctor B: A Biography of Bruno Bettelheim: Under Bettelheim’s directorship researchers routinely mislabeled children as autistic or retarded who were not, in order to raise their “cure rate” and increase funding and grants.

In his 2007 book, Madness on the Couch: Blaming the Victim in the Heyday of Psychoanalysis, science writer Edward Dolnick reported that papers show Bettelheim knew his methods couldn’t cure autism in 1964 but continued publishing, pushing the refrigerator-mother theory and removing children from their families for decades, admitting only in his final manuscript—published posthumously—that “nobody knows how to treat these children.”

Since Bettelheim took his life, the Orthogenic School has undergone major changes. Their own Family Handbook makes glancing reference to Bettelheim’s “highly controversial” theories and credits him (briefly) for drawing attention to the problem of autism. In 2014, the school moved from the somber brick buildings where it had been housed for almost 100 years to a sunny campus in Chicago’s Woodlawn neighborhood. Earlier this year, they announced they are closing their residential program for good.

At some point—I cannot say when, because there were years that went by like dark water—I went to Chicago and visited the site of the old Orthogenic School where Bruno Bettelheim once ruled. A psychiatry fellow I’d contacted showed me around, talking gravely about the bizarrely ignorant methods that had once dominated his field. He showed me the rooms where the children lived, far from their parents, and the courtyard where in Bettelheim’s era there had been a statue in the shape of a mother that he’d encouraged his young male students to urinate on.

I don’t know what I thought I’d find there. Maybe I was looking for the answer to how terribly and repeatedly we as people can get our responses to nature so wrong. The courtyard was empty, brilliantly sunny. The brick buildings were old and graceful, like hallowed monuments to science. I had to remind myself there were decades of abuse, psychological terror, and forced separation from parents within the walls of this place. And for all those years, staff watched and participated without a single one of them speaking out.

Ann Bauer is the author of four books, including the novels A Wild Ride Up the Cupboards and The Forever Marriage. Her essays have been published in The New York Times, ELLE, Salon, Slate and The Sun. Follow her on Twitter @annbauerwriter.