The US Vaccine issue is more than just about "The Shots", it's the Totalitarian Tiptoe

[onawah]

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/n...urce=mailchimp

"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]

New vaccines will permanently alter your DNA
by Jon Rappoport
February 6, 2020
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020...lter-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]

I doubt this helped matters in China.

[onawah]

How the CDC Combats Health Freedom Through Front Groups
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
February 11, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a..._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]

Vaccine Failures, Part 3: Influenza Vaccination
FEBRUARY 11, 2020
By the Children’s Health Defense Team
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/n...urce=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.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=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]

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/s...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]

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...E-OF-DEATH.php

http://toxcenter.org/artikel/Max-Dau...Chronology.php

[onawah]

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

(HALLELUJAH!!)

"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...-of-the-union/

Ba-Ba-Ra also posted the above here: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1336058

[onawah]

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

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=hL9ImEW6TKE

[onawah]

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-i...l-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-worl...et-hpv-vaccine





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]

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

https://www.foxnews.com/health/whoop...-ieS2n_YOkkwVA

[onawah]

Weighing Down Childhood: Are Vaccines and Glyphosate Contributing to Childhood Obesity?
By the Children’s Health Defense Team
FEBRUARY 18, 2020
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/c...dhood-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]

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]

That sure does sound like the truth.

Posted by James Newell (here)
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

[onawah]

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]

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."

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Xeqa9Fsf-Lg

[onawah]

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


"Awesome testimony, lots of questions answered."

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=nT6I864vwbE

More from the hearing as Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai speaks:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/8316...5161294373458/

[onawah]

"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...0b910ba8#/main

[Philippe]

Posted by onawah (here)
That sure does sound like the truth.

Posted by James Newell (here)
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]

Cochrane Founder Warns Flu Vaccine Research Is Corrupted
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
February 25, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a..._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