Archive for vaccines

Mercury in Flu Vaccine

Irrefutable proof that influenza vaccines routinely given to pregnant women still contain mercury

Thanks to Natural News.

vaccine

(NaturalNews) Believe it or not, there are still millions of people, doctors, pharmacists and even journalists who do not yet realize there is a very high concentration of mercury in influenza vaccines given to pregnant women. Most people, you see, have been lied to by the media which has stated over and over again that mercury was removed from all vaccines.Not true.It’s still there. And toxic mercury is present in influenza vaccines at a level that’s literally 25,000 times higher than the EPA limit of mercury in drinking water. (1) It’s 100 times higher than the highest level of mercury contamination I’ve ever tested in ocean fish.To prove the presence of mercury in influenza vaccines, I’m going to show you four irrefutable pieces of evidence:1) Photographs of a 2013 / 2014 influenza vaccine box admitting, in very small print, to the addition of mercury to the vaccine as a preservative.

2) Photographs of the influenza vaccine insert once again repeating the admission that the vaccine contains mercury.

3) A screen shot from the Centers for Disease Control website which admits that vaccines still contain the following ingredients: Aluminum, Antibiotics, Egg Protein, Formaldehyde, Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) and Thimerosal, a mercury-containing chemical compound.

4) Lab results from the Natural News Forensic Food Lab which confirmed almost precisely the same level of mercury claimed by the manufacturer (GlaxoSmithKline).

Before I show you the irrefutable evidence, there is some good news in all this testing. As part of this Natural News investigation, I tested several different vaccines, including an HPV vaccine. Mercury levels were extremely low in these other vaccines. Only the flu shot contained extremely high mercury levels. (More results will be released on other vaccines shortly…)

Influenza vaccine box admits safety never established for pregnant women

As you can see below, the box for this Flulaval Influenza Virus Vaccine readily admits the use of thimerosal which contains mercury. (Of course, you have to use a magnifying glass to see this.) In microscopic text on the package insert, it says straight out, “Register women who receive Flulaval while pregnant in the pregnancy registry by calling 1-888-452-9622.”

Yet, at the same time, the insert also admits that “safety and efficacy have not been established in pregnant women.”

In other words, this vaccine containing mercury is being promoted for use in pregnant womeneven when no safety in pregnant women has ever been established.

It’s also important to note that when people are being given flu shots, they are never handed the package or the insert, so they have no opportunity to read any of this information unless they specifically ask for it.

It’s not like a food item with a “Nutrition Facts” label. Vaccines are sold in “stealth” mode where patients have no idea what’s in them and no opportunity to read possible warnings.

As further proof of this point, consider the fact that this flu vaccine comes with only one insert, yet it’s a 10-dose vial intended to be injected into 10 different people. Clearly, if there’s only one insert but 10 people, then 9 out of 10 people can’t possibly be handed the insert.

In fact, from a legal perspective, vaccines are routinely injected into people without informed consent. Virtually no one administering vaccines ever explains the risks vs. benefits of vaccines as is required under medical ethics and state medical law. In nearly all cases, patients are simply hoodwinked and told there are no risks at all.

Vaccine insert also admits use of thimerosal and formaldehyde

The second piece of evidence to reveal here is the package insert for the influenza vaccine, a document printed in microscopic text that’s almost impossible to read without a magnifying glass.

Of course, the intention is that no one ever read this document, because it contains shocking admissions of the total quackery and marketing deception behind flu shots.

As you can see from this snapshot, the package insert readily admits that each vaccine dose “contains 50 mcg thimerosal (<25 mcg mercury).”

In case you’re wondering, “mcg” means micrograms. A microgram is 1/1000th of a milligram. Mercury is toxic at any dose when injected into the body, even in micrograms. There is no such thing as a “safe” form of mercury when injected. In fact, the ethyl form of mercury used in vaccines is many times more toxic than methyl form once it enters human cells. Click here for a fascinating interview with mercury toxicity expert Dr. Chris Shade who explains this.

The same paragraph shown above also admits the vaccine contains formaldehyde, a potent neurotoxic chemical.

Vaccine insert admits safety and effectiveness have never been established

What’s even more astonishing about this insert is that it openly admits the flu shot is a complete medical hoax, backed by nothing but voodoo woo woo faith-based dogma (and clever marketing).

Here are actual words from the insert (which is much more lengthy than the snapshot shown above):

“There have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza disease after vaccination with Flulaval.”

“Safety and effectiveness of Flulaval have not been established in pregnant women, nursing mothers or children.”

“Safety and effectiveness of Flulaval in pediatric patients have not been established.”

“Flulaval has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility.”

“Do not administer Flulaval to anyone… following previous administration of any influenza vaccine.”

CDC admits use of mercury, MSG, formaldehyde

For those “mercury denialists” who still can’t believe flu shots given to pregnant women contain high concentrations of toxic mercury, even the CDC reluctantly admits this fact on its own website.

Here’s a screen shot from the CDC’s vaccine additives page, which miraculously hasn’t yet been yanked off their site:

Laboratory results from the Natural News Forensic Food Lab

The final piece of irrefutable evidence on all this comes from my own scientific laboratory, where I run ICP-MS instrumentation to test foods, beverages, dietary supplements and other items for heavy metals contamination.

I was the first food researcher to document high levels of tungsten in brown rice protein, and I’ve exposed alarming levels of lead in pet treats. I’ve also exposed high lead in ginkgo biloba herbal supplements imported from China.

When I finally got around to testing vaccines, I was shocked to find over 51,000 ppb mercury in the Influenza Virus Vaccine.

Why was I shocked? Because I don’t recall ever seeing anything run through my ICP-MS instrument with that high a concentration of mercury. The mercury in this flu vaccine was the HIGHEST concentration of mercury I’ve ever seen in anything, period!

And this is a product that’s injected directly into the bodies of pregnant women, where mercury goes right into the developing fetus. Amazing, huh?

What’s even more interesting is that this finding once again confirms the accuracy of my lab instrumentation because it’s almost in perfect agreement with the level of mercury detailed on the vaccine package insert.

Let’s do the math together:

* Each dose of an influenza vaccine is 0.5 mL in volume
* My lab found just over 50 ppm of mercury in the vaccine liquid.
* 50 ppm (concentration) x 0.5 mL (volume) equals 25 mcg of mercury.

Guess what the package insert says? (Up to) 25 mcg of mercury per dose. Near-perfect agreement, in other words. My finding of 51 ppm rather than 50 ppm either means my own tests were off by about 2% (which is still considered very accurate for ICP-MS testing) or that GSK put 2% extra mercury into the vaccine.

And just so you know I actually did the tests, here’s what else we found with other analytes:

Aluminum: 0.4 ppm
Arsenic: zero
Cadmium: zero
Lead: zero

So, I can confidently say that the flu vaccine won’t poison you with lead, cadmium or arsenic because it contains none of those things. Even the aluminum level is quite low and not a concern at this very low level. The real problem is just the mercury, at least as far as elements go.

Why won’t vaccine makers remove the mercury?

Good question. Everybody knows mercury is toxic to inject into the human body. That’s not debated except by irrational anti-science denialists who refuse to acknowledge the Table of Elements.

You have to wonder: why choose mercury as a preservative? And why do both the CDC and FDA continue to look the other way as an entire branch of modern medicine poisons our women and children with a neurotoxic heavy metal?

And if vaccine promoters, propagandists and patent holders want the world to accept all their vaccines, why don’t they just remove the mercury and be done with it? If they take out all the toxic elements, resistance to vaccines would all but evaporate.

Why vaccines are the “anti-science” medical voodoo of the modern world

Ever wonder why they don’t conduct legitimate clinical trials on flu vaccine efficacy? Probably because they know the results would have to be faked to show any efficacy at all. That’s whatMerck did with its mumps vaccines, according to two former virologists who worked there. They spiked human blood samples with animal antibodies to fabricate positive results. Yep, vaccines work so poorly that even the manufacturers have to fake their own results to show any efficacy.

Vaccines are the one medicine where no scientific evidence of safety or efficacy is required by anyone: not the FDA, not the CDC and not the media. Congress even passed a law protecting the vaccine industry with absolute legal immunity, even when they manufacture and sell defective products that injure and kill people.

How’s that for medicine we can all trust? Think about it: this is a product that contains multiple neurotoxins in very high concentrations; a product backed by no safety trials or efficacy data; a product linked to numerous serious adverse reactions; and yet a product that enjoys absolute legal immunity thanks to the U.S. government.

If that’s not outright medical quackery, I don’t know what is.

For the record, I’m not an opponent of all vaccines. But I do believe — as do a rapidly increasing number of other clear-thinking people — that medicine should not poison our women and children. It’s time for mercury to be removed from all vaccines, once and for all. Anything less is medical negligence.

Natural News content secret: vaccine stories go viral when they tell the truth

Ever wonder why most of my stories on vaccines go viral across the ‘net? The answer is simple: People are hungry for the truth, and even when desperate naysayers try to attack what I’m saying, all they do is send more people to Natural News to check out the facts. Those people then discover the truth and share it.

When the facts are on your side, you will always win over more people to your message of truth. And when it comes to mercury in vaccines — and the hilarious medical hoax that claims flu shots are safe and effective — the truth is printed right on the package insert, in black and white. Every time we print the truth, we gain more amazing fans and readers who keep sharing that truth with others. We are powered by all those who seek the truth and seek to protect and defend our children and our planet from toxic chemicals and heavy metals.

It’s also a truism that the 99% don’t trust the lying 1% who run drug companies in the first place! Everybody knows the drug companies are criminal operations. The U.S. Dept. of Justice has proven that over and over again with criminal felony prosecutions and billion-dollar settlements against the world’s top vaccine manufacturers (including GlaxoSmithKline).

That’s primarily how we’ve grown from zero readers to over 7 million monthly readers: by boldly telling the truth and trusting in the intelligence of readers to recognize the difference between compassionate truth and for-profit corporate propaganda.

Ultimately, We the People will be victorious in the removal of mercury from all vaccines — an idea that’s already well accepted across much of Europe. And when that day comes, it will be yet another victory for the Natural News fan base, an amazing community of millions of remarkable people working together for the protection of our children, our health and our world.

This short video explains more about my personal mission and why I’m being called the “Ralph Nader” of the natural health industry:

Sources for this article include:
(1) http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/basi…

Learn more:http://www.naturalnews.com/045434_influenza_vaccines_pregnant_women_mercury.html#ixzz33eXA7Jdb

NY Times – Everett Herald – No Vaccine Exemptions

Comment: Saying all vaccines are safe and effective for all children is as extreme as saying that no vaccines are safe or effective for everyone. This unthinking doctor is an extremist. Some 73% of pertussis cases in Washington struck fully vaccinated children. Is the pertussis vaccine effective? The Vaccine Court has paid out around $2.5 billion to vaccine damaged people, an admission that some vaccines are not safe for some people. Children who are sick may have especially adverse reactions to vaccines. Only the parents should make vaccination decisions. 

Eliminate Vaccine Exemptions

Kristen A. Feemster

Kristen A. Feemster is a pediatric infectious diseases physician and health services researcher at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

Thanks to the New York Times

UPDATED MARCH 23, 2014, 7:01 PM

At the crux of this question is whether individual choice can be subverted for public good. Vaccines work by protecting individuals, but their strength really lies in the ability to protect one’s neighbors. When there are not enough people within a community who are immunized, we are all at risk.

Vaccines protect our neighbors — like following traffic laws, drug tests at work, paying taxes — they are a shared responsibility.

Personal and religious belief exemptions should be curtailed because some people, whether because of age or compromised immune systems, cannot receive vaccines. They depend on those around them to be protected. Vaccines aren’t the only situation in which we are asked to care about our neighbors. Following traffic laws, drug tests at work, paying taxes — these may go against our beliefs and make us bristle, but we ascribe to them because without this shared responsibility, civil society doesn’t work.

Public health is no different.

To justify the subversion of individual choice to public good, there are some conditions that need to be met. The behavior or intervention needs to be safe and effective, and the risk of not participating in the behavior needs to outweigh any risk from the behavior. The currently recommended vaccine schedule meets those criteria. Vaccines are safe and effective. The significant reduction in illness and death from vaccine-preventable diseases is testimony to how well they work. Yet this success likely contributes to the reason requests for personal belief exemptions have proliferated.

We are fortunate to live in an era when we rarely see many vaccine-preventable diseases — the risk of these diseases seems minimal while the perceived risk of vaccination becomes larger. This is compounded by the proliferation of misinformation, readily available from the news media and other sources. This has resulted in what many describe as the “vaccine confidence gap.” There is no doubt that this gap needs to be addressed. It is the responsibility of the scientific and public health community to ensure that vaccines are safe. It is that community’s responsibility to listen to concerns and provide accurate and clear information.

However, it is also the scientific and public health community’s responsibility to support the health of patients and ensure the health of the communities in which they live. As more people choose not to vaccinate based on personal belief, our communities are at risk — we have seen recent outbreaks of diseases like measles, mumps and whooping cough throughout the U.S. It is prudent policy to limit such exemptions to protect our own and the public’s health.

***

THE HERALD – EVERETT WASHINGTON
March 28, 2014
IN OUR VIEW / IMMUNIZATIONS

Tighten state exemptions

Fatal, infectious diseases are an abstraction for most Americans, however commonplace just a century ago. Vaccines literally are a panacea. Today, immunizations prevent between 2-3 million deaths a year around the world, primarily among children under the age of five, according to the World Health Organization. The death rate globally for measles, for example, has decreased by 74 percent since 2000, from an estimated 535,000 deaths per year to 139,300 deaths in 2010.

In the early 20th century, the childhood mortality rate before age five was 20 percent in the United States. Immunizations changed the equation. Today, many parents choose not to vaccinate their children based on the thoroughly debunked myth that it causes autism or, worse, figuring that vaccines are no longer necessary. And when parents choose not to vaccinate their children, it puts other lives at risk.


A certain level of the population must be immunized in order to fully protect the community, known as “herd immunity.” When enough people are vaccinated, then it’s more difficult for a disease to spread. Specifically, it protects the most vulnerable who cannot be vaccinated, such as infants, those with immune-system disorders, or even cancer patients.


In recent years, herd immunity has been compromised as parents choose not to immunize. One strategy to boost the immunization rate is to require proof of immunization for children to enter public schools. Today, 18 states allow parents to apply for an exemption based on religious or personal beliefs, and Washington has one of the highest rates of exemptions. In Snohomish County, 5.9 percent of K-12 children were granted exemptions for the 2012-2013 school year (higher than King County which came in at 5.2 percent.)


In 2011, Gov. Chris Gregoire signed a law that requires a physician’s signature to verify that exemption-requesting parents have been given the facts on immunization. Currently Colorado’s legislature, a state with an even higher immunization-exemption rate than Washington, is considering a bill that would require parents to participate in an online education seminar. The political response was sparked by Colorado’s whooping cough outbreak, an outbreak that also hit the Pacific Northwest. In August 2011, a 27-day old infant died from whooping cough in Lake Stevens, exposed to a carrier but sadly too young to be immunized.


Vaccinations are designed not only to protect every child, but the community as a whole. That’s why Washington lawmakers must make immunization exemptions as strict and infrequent as possible.

***

Parents Deserve to Have a Choice

Jennifer Margulis

Jennifer Margulis, a fellow at the Schuster Institute at Brandeis University, is the author of “The Business of Baby.”

Thanks to the New York Times.

UPDATED MARCH 23, 2014, 7:01 PM

This January lawmakers in the United Arab Emirates mandated that women breastfeed for two years, announcing that breastfeeding is a “duty, not an option.”

Officials should encourage childhood vaccinations, but they shouldn’t have the right to force parents to vaccinate their children.

Should public health officials do everything they can to encourage, inform and facilitate breastfeeding? Yes. Do they have the right to force women to breastfeed? Not in a country that believes in freedom of choice.

There is tremendous evidence showing vaccinations prevent childhood diseases. Should public health officials do everything they can to encourage, inform and facilitate childhood vaccinations? Yes. Do they have the right to force parents to vaccinate their children? Absolutely not.

An American parent could reasonably decide not to follow the C.D.C.’s current vaccination schedule by choosing to vaccinate on the schedule they use in Norway, which has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in the world. In Norway no childhood vaccinations are routinely given in the first three months of life whereas a 2-month-old American infant has been vaccinated against at least four diseases. At the same time, 99 percent of Norwegian infants are breastfed when they leave the hospital and generous family leave policies facilitate successful (and exclusive) breastfeeding. For an American mom who is exclusively breastfeeding and not putting her child in daycare, following the Norwegian schedule would be a philosophical, evidence-based, demonstrably better choice.

It is a news media-driven misperception that parents who claim philosophical or religious exemptions are uneducated or misinformed. Most parents who individualize the vaccine schedule are actively educating themselves, continually assessing their family’s specific health needs, and doing everything they can to keep their children safe and healthy.

Unlike in the United Arab Emirates, in America we believe parents are capable of making their own decisions about their children’s health. We believe in freedom of choice. This freedom of choice extends to when — and even whether— parents vaccinate their kids.

Hepatitis B Vaccine

Hepatitis B Vaccine: Refuse This Routine Procedure – Or Expose Your Baby’s Brain to Severe Danger…

November 03, 2010 | Thanks to Mercola.com

Hepatitis B vaccination has been recommended by federal health officials since 1991 for all infants and children.

There are now hepatitis B vaccine mandates for children to attend daycare or school in 47 states, despite strong evidence that the health risks of doing this outweighs the benefits for your child.

Three hepatitis B shots are part of the standard government-recommended childhood vaccination schedule,1 with the first dose given at 12 hours of age in the newborn nursery of most hospitals.

But hepatitis B is a primarily blood-transmitted disease associated with risky lifestyle choices, such as unprotected sex with multiple partners and intravenous drug use involving sharing needles—it is NOT primarily a “children’s disease.”

As Dr. Jane Orient of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) so eloquently testified to Congress:

“With hepatitis B vaccine, the case for mandatory immunization with few exemptions is far less persuasive than with smallpox or polio vaccines, which protected against highly lethal or disabling, relatively common, and easily transmissible diseases…

“For most children, the risk of a serious vaccine reaction may be 100 times greater than the risk of hepatitis B.”

There are more reports of serious adverse reactions in children than there are cases of childhood hepatitis B reported in America and, despite what you may hear in the media, reactions can be serious.

Just this month, China Daily reported 44 children became sick 2 and were taken to the hospital after receiving injections from a “bad batch” of hepatitis B vaccine. After examining the side effects of this vaccine, you might wonder if every batch is a “bad batch.”

In 2008, French authorities launched a criminal investigation of two vaccine company managers (from GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi Pasteur) for failing to disclose dangerous side effects of their hepatitis B vaccines.

When babies die after hep B vaccinations, most of the time their deaths are automatically attributed to SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) without investigation into whether the vaccine caused the baby’s sudden death.

When a baby’s death is listed as “SIDS,” rarely does anyone ask about the deceased infant’s vaccination history to find out whether there were symptoms of vaccine reactions before death.

Hepatitis B vaccine as a contributing cause of “sudden infant death” cannot be automatically ruled out if a baby dies suddenly after getting a hepatitis B shot, especially if there were symptoms of a potential vaccine reaction before death such as:

  • High-pitched screaming or prolonged crying for many hours or days
  • Collapse/shock (pale skin, blue lips, unresponsiveness)
  • Excessive sleepiness (failure to feed, baby cannot be easily awakened)
  • Fever, diarrhea, or vomiting
  • Hives, rashes, or swelling of the body
  • Convulsions (jerking of fingers, hands, arms, legs)
  • Other serious change in mental, emotional, or physical behavior

Is Your Baby Really at Risk for Hepatitis B?

There are two primary circumstances in which your baby would be at significant risk for contracting hepatitis B and both are quite rare in the U.S.:

  1. If you are pregnant and are a carrier for the hepatitis B virus, your baby could be at risk for being infected during childbirth. However, you can easily find out if you are hepatitis B positive by getting tested while pregnant.
  2. Your infant could be at risk for hepatitis B infection by receiving a blood transfusion using hepatitis B infected blood. In America, all blood products are required to receive proper screening3 for hepatitis B virus and other pathogens prior to use. There is no way to achieve 100 percent safety with blood transfusions, however.

Universal hepatitis B vaccination might be a good idea IF the vaccines gave lifelong immunity and were very safe but they are not.

Hepatitis B Infection, in a Nutshell

Hepatitis B is a viral infection that affects your liver, and spreads through direct contact with the body fluids (particularly blood and semen) of an infected person.

The symptoms are similar to the flu—weakness, muscle and joint pain, loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting, low grade fever, diarrhea, and in some cases, a swollen liver and jaundice (yellowing of your skin and eyes).

In many cases, carriers of the hepatitis B virus exhibit few or no symptoms. Most infected people don’t require hospital care and the majority recover without complications and are left with natural, lifelong immunity.

If the infection becomes chronic, however, it can be very serious. Twenty percent of chronic cases eventually progress to liver damage, and potentially even cancer, resulting in about 4,500 deaths annually in the United States.

There is some debate about the prevalence of hepatitis B in American adults.

As of 2005, there were 5,119 cases of hepatitis B reported in the U.S. However, U.S. authorities estimate more than one million Americans have chronic hepatitis B infections.

Other authorities say true carriers of the virus represent less than one tenth of 1 percent of the population in North American, Europe, and Australia, which amounts to about 300,000 people in the U.S.

So the range seems to be somewhere between 300,000 people and 1.25 million people in the U.S. who are carriers of the hepatitis B virus.

Adverse Reactions to Vaccines Far Outnumber Hepatitis B Infections

According to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS),4 operated jointly by the CDC and FDA, there were 36,788 officially reported adverse reactions to hepatitis B vaccines between 1992 and 2005. Of these, 14,800 were serious enough to cause hospitalization, life-threatening health events or permanent disabilities.

And 781 people were reported to have DIED following hepatitis B vaccination.

Vaccine adverse events are substantially underreported—some estimate by as much as 90 percent—even though the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 19865 mandated that all doctors and other vaccine providers report serious health problems, including hospitalizations, injuries and deaths following vaccination. The 1986 Act did not include sanctions for failing to report to VAERS and so most vaccine providers do not file a report. Many vaccine reactions are not even recognized by medical personnel as vaccine-related.

Historically, hepatitis B very rarely has infected children in America. In the U.S., less than 1 percent of all reported hepatitis B cases are in children under age 15.

Before the hepatitis B vaccine was mandated in the U.S., how many cases of hepatitis B were reported in children compared to the number of reported health problems following hepatitis B vaccination?

To answer that, let’s look at the figures for 1996 included in a special report6 and press release published in 19997 by the National Vaccine Information Center:

  • In 1996, 872 vaccine adverse events were reported in children under the age of 14 who had just received the hepatitis B vaccine, or a combination vaccine with hep B as one component
  • 48 children died following hepatitis B vaccination
  • In 1996, only 279 total cases of hepatitis B were reported in children under the age of 14 during that entire year

Are public health policies directing children to get three doses of hepatitis B vaccine creating more health problems than they are preventing?

List of Medical Conditions Now Linked with Hepatitis B Vaccines Is Disturbingly Long

What sorts of reactions have people had to the hepatitis B vaccine?

Common reactions include the following symptoms: fatigue, muscle weakness, fever, headache, irritability, and joint pain. But there have been reports of disabling neurological and immunological disorders that have developed following hepatitis B vaccinations as well.

You can find many of these tragic cases presented in peer reviewed medical journals over the past twenty years. (For scientific references, go to this page.)

The array of serious health problems people have reported experiencing after hep B vaccinations is quite shocking:

  • Multiple sclerosis (MS)
  • Guillain-Barre syndrome
  • Bell’s Palsy
  • Diabetes
  • Rheumatoid arthritis
  • Lupus
  • Idiopathic Thrombocytopenia purpura
  • Convulsions, and brain disorders such as encephalitis (brain swelling) and brain demyelination8
  • Immune dysfunction
  • Visual and hearing impairments, including optic neuritis
  • Pancreatitis

According to a study in the United Kingdom, hepatitis B vaccines may increase risks for developing multiple sclerosis (MS) by a factor of three. Researchers discovered that people showed a three-fold increase in the incidence of MS within three years of being vaccinated. They weren’t able to determine if the vaccine triggers the disease in those already susceptible, or if it speeds up the onset.

In addition to MS, studies also reveal a link between hepatitis B vaccines and the development of type 1 diabetes (insulin-dependent). In New Zealandthe incidence of type 1 diabetes rose 60 percent9 among children following a mass hepatitis B immunization campaign.

J. Barthelow Classen, MD, a researcher investigating vaccination and diabtes, estimates10 that the U.S. has 10,000 new cases of diabetes each year, costing $1 million in lost productivity and medical expenses, as a direct result of hepatitis B vaccination.

According to Burton A. Waisbren, MD, a cell biologist and infectious disease specialist, “Some babies who have little or no chance of getting hepatitis B will suffer unnecessary damage to their nervous system” after getting hepatitis B shots.

A study published September 2009 in Annals of Epidemiology found that giving hepatitis B vaccine to infant boys more than tripled their risk for an autism spectrum disorder. This was doubly concerning because an earlier study by the same researcher group, using a different database, found the same results.

Yet another study, this one published in the journal Neurology in 2009,11 revealed that children who received a particular hepatitis B vaccine were more likely to develop “central nervous system inflammatory demyelination” than children who did not receive the vaccine.

Given all of these serious risks, why did public health officials recommend that every infant be vaccinated against hepatitis B in the first place?

And why did state legislators pass laws requiring the vaccine’s use by children?

Your Baby Is an Easy Target!

If infants and children rarely acquire hepatitis B, then why must they be vaccinated at birth?

The rationale for this national vaccine policy is fundamentally flawed.

The policy was, in part, based on the fact that adults, who are at high-risk for being infected with hepatitis B (namely, mostly those who are IV drug users or are engaging in unprotected sex with multiple partners or prostitutes) are difficult to reach and do not get vaccinated. Infants and children are a much easier population to control, and easier to access.

The thinking was that hepatitis B could be prevented in the U.S. with mass use of hep B vaccine by all infants and children so they would be protected from birth and early childhood. However, a policy that attempts to prevent an infectious disease in adolescents and adults by vaccinating infants and young children assumes the vaccine provides long lasting protection.

Science has proven this is simply not the case for hepatitis B vaccine.

Of course, like a runaway train—or should I say, runaway GRAVY train—the hep B vaccine quickly became a huge moneymaker for vaccine manufacturers assured of a stable, predictable market. Hepatitis B vaccine mandates for children in almost every state has kept that market profitable ever since.

But does the hepatitis B vaccine even work the way it’s supposed to?

Hepatitis B Immunity Fades After Just a Few Years

Hepatitis B vaccine requires three doses for “seroprotection” (vaccine-induced antibodies measured in the blood). However, all vaccines only confer temporary, partial immunity and the length of time you are protected from hepatitis B after receiving the vaccine series has gotten shorter and shorter as studies have revealed antibody levels decline much more rapidly than vaccine developers and policymakers expected.

Consider these findings:

  • In a study involving dental healthcare workers published in the New England Journal of Medicine,12 it was demonstrated that within just 5 years after vaccination, antibody levels had sharply declined or no longer existed in 42 percent of hepatitis B vaccine recipients.
  • A study in the American Journal of Public Health reported a significant antibody loss in 36 percent of healthcare personnel after just 3 years.
  • Still other studies have found more than 60 percent of vaccine recipients are no longer protected from hepatitis B after 5 years, and one found that HALF of vaccinated people were not protected after 4 years!

So, if seroprotection is gone in less than 5 years, your baby is being subjected to ALL of the risks of the hepatitis B vaccine with NONE of the promised benefit.

Antibodies will have disappeared long before your child is old enough to potentially make lifestyle choices that could place them at higher risk for hepatitis B infection.

Your Baby Does NOT Respond Like You to Vaccination

Neonates are hit with their first hepatitis B injection within 12 hours of birth. Even premature infants are hit with hep B vaccine while in Neonatal Intensive Care Nurseries!

What does this do to your infant’s immature, developing brain and immune system?

Russell L. Blaylock, MD, board-certified neurosurgeon and vaccine expert, has written an extensive article about the danger of excessive vaccination during brain development.

He explains that your baby’s immune system is very complex, and at birth is incompletely formed. Studies in both humans and animals have shown that immune reactions to vaccinations differ depending on age—so, your baby will have a very different reaction to a vaccine than you will.

This has been shown to be true for hepatitis B vaccine.

How Vaccines Damage Your Infant’s Developing Brain and Immune System

A 2004 study13 looked at the immune reaction in newborns up to the age of one year who had received the hep B vaccine to see if their immune reaction differed from adults getting the same vaccine. What they found was that infants, even after age one year, did react differently. Their antibody levels were substantially higher than adults (3-fold higher), and it remained higher throughout the study.

In essence, they found that babies responded to the vaccine by having an intense, persistent and completely abnormal immune response.

To simplify this very complicated topic, this abnormal immune response to hepatitis B vaccination could ultimately result in your child developing permanent brain and immune system dysfunction.

According to Blaylock:

“The human being has an unusual brain development in that there is a prolonged period of maturation and neuroanatomical pathway development occurring years after birth.

The most rapid brain development occurs during the last trimester of intrauterine life and two years after birth – what is referred to as the brain growth spurt. It is the areas regulating higher brain functions, such as emotions, emotional control, thinking, complex memory and language function that is last to develop.

What this means is, during the first two years of life, your child’s brain is undergoing rapid and very critical development, and the more advanced cognitive portions of the brain continue their development even later – much later.”

Add to this the potentially damaging effects of hepatitis B vaccine ingredients, including aluminum adjuvant, yeast protein, formaldehyde, and other chemicals, and you have a noxious cocktail that could have permanent negative effects on your child’s health and development.

A syndrome that has recently been linked with hepatitis B and tetanus vaccines is called “macrophagic myofasciitis”—a reaction to the aluminum adjuvant in vaccines. Victims of this syndrome suffer severe muscle and joint pain and weakness.

It is known that aluminum accumulates in your brain and results in neurodegeneration, leading to diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. But aluminum also activates microglia, which can result in brain inflammation.

According to Blaylock, these neurologically damaging processes may also be contributing heavily to today’s exploding autism rates.

Government’s ‘Shoot First, Ask Questions Later’ Approach

Before we began giving hepatitis B shots to infants within their first 12 hours of life, the U.S. had one of the lowest hepatitis B infection rates in the world (unlike in Asia and Africa). Less than one half of one percent of all mothers giving birth were hepatitis B positive.

Current U.S. policy mandating that infants and children receive hepatitis B vaccine is based on an exaggerated perception of the prevalence of hepatitis B both before and after the vaccine was recommended for all children in 1991.

The pre-licensure “safety studies” for hepatitis B vaccine were woefully inadequate, consisting of only a few thousand babies, born to infected women, who were given the vaccine and monitored for less than a week.

The “long-term” vaccine studies in America,” boil down to a national, uncontrolled experiment being conducted on innocent babies, who are getting bombarded with one vaccine after another throughout childhood, starting with a hepatitis B shot at birth.

It certainly isn’t the first time American children and adults have been used by doctors and scientists as guinea pigs!

So what’s the bottom line when it comes to hepatitis B vaccination?

Your newborn infant is being deliberately exposed to life-threatening health risks from a vaccine to theoretically prevent infection with a virus that he or she has almost ZERO percent chance of being exposed to in childhood!

This is bad policy based on bad science, and it’s time to make some changes before damage to the health of future generations is beyond repair.

What You Can Do

All of this information is meaningless unless you can take some sort of action that will move you, your family and your community toward better health. So, here is a list of what you, as a consumer, can do:

  1. Educate yourself, your family, and your community by circulating this newsletter among your friends, neighbors, doctors, lawyers, teachers, school principals, nurses, local newspapers, and TV and radio stations. Send a copy of this newsletter with a personal note to your elected representatives.
  2. The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) provides information for consumers about vaccines and diseases and works to protect vaccine choices. Register today for the NVIC Advocacy Portal, an online interactive database and communication system that will help YOU protect vaccine exemptions in YOUR state.
  3. Report vaccine reactions to the federal government (VAERS) and to the NVIC Vaccine Reaction Registry by visiting theNVIC website. This reporting is EXTREMELY important and necessary if we are to accelerate change.
  4. If you are pregnant, get tested for hepatitis B disease. If you are infected, your baby is a candidate for vaccination, and you should explore all sides of the issue with your physician.
  5. Stand up for your informed consent rights. If you are opposed to the hepatitis B vaccine for your baby at birth, you can amend the “consent for medical treatment” forms you sign upon entering the hospital before giving birth by writing on the form that you do not give consent for your baby’s hepatitis B vaccination in the newborn nursery.
  6. Vaccine exemptions: Although hepatitis B vaccines may be “mandated” for your child to attend school, each state offers different legal exemptions (medical, religious, and philosophical). Research your state’s specific vaccine requirements14and find out what kind of exemption to vaccination you are allowed to exercise in your state.

My Appeal to You

Don’t sit this one out! We need to take action NOW.

NVIC Advocacy PosterTell your friends and your family. Tell everyone. With a little bit of effort, we can make big strides toward preserving our freedom to make voluntary health decisions affecting our future, especially our children’s future.

One of the top goals for NVIC is preserving your freedom of choice about when to use vaccines. This non-profit charity has been fighting for your right to make informed VOLUNTARY vaccine choices since 1982.

Mercola.com and NVIC dedicated Nov. 1-7, 2010 Vaccine Awareness Week in a joint effort to raise public awareness about important vaccine issues. Vaccine Awareness Week featured a series of articles and interviews on vaccine topics of interest to Mercola.com newsletter subscribers and NVIC Vaccine E-newsletter readers.

During the Vaccine Awareness Week, NVIC launched the online NVIC Advocacy Portal that will give you the tools you need to take action to protect legal medical, religious and conscientious belief exemptions to vaccination in YOUR state.

Your Donations to the NVIC help fund efforts that raise vaccine awareness, including the following excellent vaccine resources:

For information about legally avoiding immunizations in Canada, please see the Canadian Vaccination Liberation website
www.vaclib.org.

Stay tuned to this newsletter for more updates, or follow the National Vaccine Information Center on Facebook. Together we CAN make a difference!

***

Hepatitis B Disease and Vaccine Facts – Thanks to National Vaccine Information Center

  • People at high risk for getting hepatitis B disease (which is transmitted by coming into direct contact with an infected person’s body fluids) are IV drug users, prostitutes, prisoners, sexually promiscuous persons and babies born to infected mothers. (1)
  • 90-95% of all hepatitis B cases recover completely after 3 to 4 weeks of nausea, fatigue, headache, arthritis, jaundice and tender liver. (2)
  • Up to 17 percent of all hepatitis B vaccinations are followed by reports of fatigue and weakness, headache, arthritis and fever of more than 100 F.. (3) The vaccine can cause death, according to a 1994 Institute of Medicine report. (4)
  • According to Merck and Company: “The duration of the protective effect of [the vaccine] in healthy vacinees is unknown at present and the need for booster doses is not yet defined.”
  • In 1996, there were 10,637 cases of hepatitis B reported in the U.S. and the CDC stated that “Hepatitis B continues to decline in most states, primarily because of a decrease in the number of cases among injecting drug users and, to a lesser extent, among both homosexual and heterosexuals of both sexes.”(5)
  • In 1996, 279 cases of hepatitis B disease were reported to have occurred in the U.S. in children under 14 years old. (5)
  • An historic report in 1994 published by the Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, reviewed the medical literature for evidence that vaccines, including hepatitis B vaccine, can cause a variety of immune and neurological health problems. An independent committee of physician experts concluded that there were no case controlled observational studies or controlled clinical trials conducted on hepatitis B vaccine either before or after licensure to scientifically evaluate persistent reports that hepatitis B vaccine can cause sudden infant death syndrome; Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) and other central demyelinating diseases including transverse myelitis, optic neuritis, and multiple sclerosis; and immune system dysfunction including chronic arthritis.

The IOM report concluded: “The lack of adequate data regarding many of the adverse events under study was of major concern to the committee…the committee encountered many gaps and limitations in knowledge bearing directly or indirectly on the safety of vaccines. These include inadequate understanding of the biologic mechanisms underlying adverse events following natural infection or immunization, insufficient or inconsistent information from case reports and case series, inadequate size or length of follow-up of many population-based epidemiologic studies….” (5)

  • There are more than 200 vaccines being created by federal health agencies and drug companies, including Hepatitis C, D and E; Herpes simplex types 1 and 2; gonorrhea; rotavirus (diarrhea); Group A and B streptococcus; meningitis A, B and C; and HIV for AIDS. (6)

(1) CDC Prevention Guidelines: A Guide to Action (1997); (2) Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine (1994); (3) Merck & Co. Hepatitis B Vaccine product insert (1993); (4) Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines (1994; (5) Adverse Events Associated with Childhood Vaccines (1994); (6) The Jordan Report (DHHS-1995).

***

Mindless Vaccination Bureaucracy

Thanks to National Vaccine Information Center

By Michael Belkin

My daughter Lyla Rose Belkin died on September 16, 1998 at the age of five weeks, shortly after receiving a Hepatitis B vaccine booster shot. The following comments are intended to be a heads up to parents and potential parents about the risks of the Hepatitis B vaccine (HBV), and a firsthand report questioning the scientific legitimacy of the vaccine industry, which provides $800 million of annual revenue to Merck – the company which makes the Hepatitis B vaccine distributed in the US.

Lyla Rose Belkin was a lively, alert five-week-old baby when I last held her in my arms. Little did I imagine as she gazed intently into my eyes with all the innocence and wonder of a newborn child that she would die that night. She was never ill before receiving the Hepatitis B shot that afternoon. At her final feeding that night, she was agitated and feisty — and then fell asleep and didn’t wake up.

The autopsy ruled out choking. A swollen brain was the only abnormal finding. Most doctors I spoke to at the time said it must have been Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), a catch-all diagnosis for unexplainable childhood mortality.

The first instinctive reaction in such a situation is for parents to blame themselves. For many weeks, my wife and I agonized over what we might have missed or could have done differently. Meanwhile, the logical part of my brain kept returning to the obvious medical event that preceded Lyla’s death — and that internal voice kept asking the question could the Hepatitis B Vaccine that Lyla received that afternoon have killed her?

Most doctors I asked scoffed at that notion and said the vaccine was perfectly safe. But I began to search around on the Internet and Medline and discovered disturbing evidence of adverse reactions to this vaccine.

In the US, the Hepatitis B disease mainly infects intravenous drug users, homosexuals, prostitutes and promiscuous heterosexuals. The disease is transmitted by blood, through sex or dirty needles. How could a newborn baby possibly get Hepatitis B if the mother was screened and tested negative, as my wife was? It is almost impossible. Unless a newborn child is having unprotected sex or sharing needles with an infected junkie, it is extremely unlikely to get the Hepatitis B disease.

So then why are most US babies inoculated at birth by their Hospital or Pediatrician with the Hepatitis B vaccine? That is a question every parent should ask before getting this vaccination. I’ve discovered the answer is — an unrestrained health bureaucracy decided it couldn’t get junkies, gays, prostitutes and promiscuous heterosexuals to take the Hepatitis B vaccine — so they mandated that all babies must be vaccinated at birth. Drug companies such as Merck (reaching for new markets) were instrumental in pushing government scientists to adopt an at-birth Hepatitis B vaccination policy, although the vaccine was never tested in newborns and no vaccines had ever been mandated at birth before. It is widely recognized that newborns have under-developed immune systems, which can be overwhelmed or shocked.

My search for answers about a link between the Hepatitis B vaccine and my daughter’s death led me to a Hepatitis B vaccine workshop on October 26th at the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Institute of Medicine entitled Vaccine Safety Forum — Neonatal Deaths. The NAS was concerned enough about reports of Hepatitis B vaccine-related infant deaths and adverse reactions to hold a special workshop on the subject. Doctors and scientists flew in from all over the US and Europe to attend. I sat in the back and soaked it all up. It was a real eye-opener. There were basically four constituencies represented: 1) Serious scientists observing or presenting research studies. 2) Center for Disease Control (CDC) pseudo-statisticians and FDA officials. 3) Merck and other corporate drug officials and 4) Parents of vaccine-related dead or severely injured children.

The presentations included a study of Animal Models of Newborn Response to Antigen Presentation, which showed that newborn immune systems were undeveloped and strikingly different than those of adults. The message I received was that immune response in a newborn to shocks such as being injected with a vaccine was potentially unknown, since newborn T-Cells have a radically different behavior then those of adults. Another presentation was Strategies for Evaluating the Biologic Mechanisms of Hepatitis B Vaccine Reactions, in which vaccine researcher Dr. Bonnie Dunbar of Baylor College related numerous Hepatitis B vaccine related cases of nervous system damage in adults, such as Multiple Sclerosis, seizures and blindness. On the more positive side, the FDA presented a seemingly reassuring study from its Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS), which showed only 19 neonatal deaths reported since 1991 related to Hepatitis B vaccination.

I found the VAERS study data to be completely deceptive. Since I was sitting in that room and my daughter had died during their sample period and wasn’t counted — I wondered why. In fact, the New York City Coroner called VAERS to report my daughter’s Hepatitis B vaccine related infant death and no one ever returned their call! What kind of reporting system doesn’t return the calls of the NY City Medical Examiner — and how many other reports were ignored? This is supposed to be the emergency 911 number for disasters such as bad lots of vaccine that could poison thousands of other babies. With the personal knowledge that the VAERS data was completely flawed, I sat in that room and listened in amazement as CDC officials and Merck’s head of vaccine safety made disparaging comments about any possible risk from Hepatitis B vaccination, despite the evidence just presented by impartial scientists.

I studied statistics and econometrics at UC Berkeley and have developed innovative methods of applying probability to financial and economic data in my consulting business with some of the largest financial institutions in the world. That training and experience qualifies me to criticize the statistical legitimacy of the VAERS study, on which Merck and the CDC pseudo-scientists based their pro-vaccination stance. Their comments were scathingly dismissive of any possible risk from the vaccine.

But that VAERS study is not a legitimate sample of a data set from which any conclusions about the larger population can be made. VAERS doesn’t return coroner’s calls, leading to the suspicion that deaths and adverse effects from vaccination are woefully under-reported. To conclude that the Hepatitis B vaccine is safe because VAERS only reports 19 deaths is scientific fraud.

In fact, I obtained the raw data from the VAERS system and found 54 reported SIDS cases after Hepatitis B vaccination in just the 18 months from January 1996 — May 1997. That’s almost 15 times as many deaths per year as their own flawed study reported. There are 17,000 reports of adverse reactions to Hepatitis B vaccine in the 1996-97 raw data. Clearly something is fishy about VAERS.

VAERS was set up by the FDA and CDC. If there are 17,000 reports and VAERS doesn’t even return the NY Medical Examiner’s call, how many other deaths and injuries go unreported?

I came away from that NAS workshop with the distinct impression that Merck and the CDC didn’t know and didn’t really want to know how many babies are being killed or injured by Hepatitis B vaccination. This is a bureaucratic vaccination program that is on auto-pilot flying into a mountain.

The CDC bureaucrats have a vested interest in the status quo. If there were 17,000 reports of a dangerous disease in an 18-month period, the CDC would be all over the case. But when there are 17,000 reports of adverse reactions to a vaccine the CDC advocates for “public health” — the CDC dismisses it as a coincidence. Merck makes $50 a shot from the three-shot series and has sales of upwards of $800 million a year from vaccines.

Vaccination can be a lifesaver if an epidemic is raging, but in this case the risk of vaccination outweighs the risk of infants getting the disease. Surely, the hepatitis B vaccine doesn’t injure every child that gets it, but in some unknown number of cases, it appears to be a death sentence and/or a nervous system toxin to innocent children who are at no risk of getting the disease the vaccine is supposed to protect against.

My observations of Merck and CDC scientists at the Vaccine Safety Forum left me with the distinct impression that they had absolutely no idea which babies might be killed or injured by this vaccine. Furthermore, they used obviously flawed scientific data to arrogantly steamroller any opposition to their power.

Parents should be aware that the Hepatitis B vaccine is not administered for the well being of their child. Rather, it is delivered by the long arm of some incompetent and mindless bureaucracy in the name of stamping out a disease most babies can’t possibly get.

The Drug Company/CDC/FDA alliance has really pulled the wool over the medical profession’s eyes with the Hepatitis B vaccine. The American Academy of Pediatrics bought the alliance’s sales pitch and now recommends that all infants get this vaccine at birth. So now the first thing most babies get in life is a shock to their immune system from a vaccine against a non-existent risk of contracting Hepatitis B.

Clearly, the interests of newborn babies were not represented on the CDC panel that created this vaccination policy in 1991. This vaccine has no benefit whatsoever for healthy newborns born to healthy mothers, in fact it wears off and they will need booster shots later in life when they actually could get exposed to the disease. This is simply a case of ravenous corporate greed and mindless bureaucracy teaming up to overwhelm common sense

Nothing will ever bring my lovely daughter Lyla back, but other needless deaths and injuries can be prevented if this senseless Hepatitis B newborn vaccination program is halted. Please contact Belkin Limited in New York City if you are aware of other infant deaths that may be related to the Hepatitis B vaccine.

***

From vaccines.procon.org

Doctor Says No Safe Vaccines

“Never Has There Been A Safe Vaccine. Never Will There Be A Safe Vaccine” – Dr. Suzanne Humphries

Dr-Suzanne-HUMPHRIES--International-Council-on-Vaccinations

The world is constantly bombarded with the idea that vaccines are completely safe and necessary, it’s mass marketing at its best. It’s always best to do some examination and research before blindly believing what you are told. It’s good to know that  more doctors who have spent years researching the topic are sharing their professional opinions.  Sure, there are doctors that support and trust vaccinations, but just as valid are the arguments of those that don’t support them. They should not be ignored. The point I’m trying to make is that there is no definite answer, that the debate has not been settled as so many governing health authorities claim it to be.

Suzanne Humphries, MD, is a conventionally educated medical doctor who was a participant in the conventional medicinal system from 1989 until 2011. During those years she “saw how often that approach fails patients and creates new diseases.” She left conventional medicine to research “the many problems with mainstream medical theory, to write, and conduct a holistic medical practice.”

She was a Nephrologist, a specialty of medicine and pediatrics that concerns itself with the study of the kidney. Here’s what she has to say on the subject:

Those who are interested in doing the research will find papers that completely put to rest the debate. One example is a paper published by the CDC, titled “Increasing exposure to Antibody-Stimulating Proteins and Polysaccharides (antigenes) in Vaccines is Not Associated with Autism.”(1)

On the other hand, we have studies, also published in peer reviewed journals that do create a cause for concern. One example would be a study published a few months ago in the peer-reviewed journal Translational Neurodegeneration that provided epidemiological evidence supporting an association between increasing organic – Hg exposure from Thimerosal containing childhood vaccines and the risk of an ASD diagnoses. (2)

We also have multiple studies in peer-reviewed journals that suggest thimerosal should be removed from all vaccines. (3)

It’s a proven fact that vaccine manufacturers and health authorities have known about the dangers associated with vaccines for a very long time, but have chosen to withhold them from public knowledge in order to maintain “herd immunity.” This is scientific fraud and manipulation of scientific data that’s dished out to doctors worldwide. (4)

These are a few of MANY examples.

The bottom line is that we are bombarded and heavily marketed on the safety and necessity of vaccinations, when it is evidently clear that this isn’t the case. So ask yourself, why are you pushed to believe that they are completely safe, and necessary, when so many studies out there contradict those claims? At the same time, many confirm those claims. What exactly is going on here? It can be hard to know sometimes, that’s why at the end of the day you have to examine the information yourself and decide for yourself. Don’t put your trust into the corporation, into the commercials, or billionaires, put it in the research, which clearly shows that there are two sides to this debate. (I personally believe there is no debate, and that vaccines are not safe)

If the research isn’t enough for you, try researching the history of the vaccine manufacturers. Where they originate from, who started them. Research the shareholders, and see what other corporations they have control over. You will find some interesting correlations and connections, but that’s another topic.

Since we are constantly bombarded with corporate heads and billionaires testifying to the safety of vaccinations, I thought it would be good to present this information from a doctor who has been researching it herself for three years. You will never see something like this on your television screen.

Source(s):

(1) http://jpeds.com/webfiles/images/journals/ympd/JPEDSDeStefano.pdf

(2) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24354891

(3) http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/10/8/3771

(4) http://www.ecomed.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/3-tomljenovic.pdf

Related posts:
  1. CDC Forced to Release Documents Showing They Knew Vaccine Preservative Causes Autism               
  2. Should Children Get the Flu Vaccine? 
  3. BPA-free plastics may be less safe than those with chemical               
  4. CDC Not Legally Required to Tell the Truth About Anything, Including Vaccines               
  5. Scientific Evidence Suggests The Vaccine-Autism Link Can No Longer Be Ignored             

Why Vaccinate Newborns Against Hepatitis C?

The Effects of Hep C on a Fetus

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_6457495_effects-hep-fetus.html#ixzz2uzR5cbqO

According to the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, Hepatitis C, also known as HCV, is the most common bloodborne chronic infection in the U.S. A person can be infected via intravenous drug use or an infected unscreened blood transfusion (although this is very rare). It can be transmitted sexually, but would require a blood exchange during sex to be passed from carrier to non-carrier. One in four infants born to mothers who test positive for hepatitis C will acquire the condition. Have a question? Get an answer from a doctor now!

  1. Infection and Liver Disease Transmission

    • Hepatitis C refers to an infection of the liver caused by the hepatitis C virus. Newly infected carriers will normally be without symptoms. Within one to three weeks of being infected, HCV RNA (ribonucleic acid) can be detected in the blood. A quantitative test will measure the amount of HCV RNA to determine how much of the virus is present, sometimes referred to as “viral load.” The CDC notes that, on average, it takes eight to nine weeks from exposure for the HCV antibody to be identified in more than 97 percent of patients. In 60 to 85 percent of these patients, chronic HCV infection will develop. Of these, 60 to 70 percent will show signs of active liver disease.

    Hepatitis C and Pregnancy

    • There is currently no way to prevent an unborn fetus from contracting HCV from her mother. Hepatitis C can be tested for via a blood screen, although doctors generally reserve testing for at-risk mothers (such as those who have used intravenous drugs recreationally). Antiviral drugs may be needed for pregnant mothers to decrease the chance of viral infection. The baby will need to be tested to see if she has the disease when she is born. A Caesarian section is not required for mothers who test positive for hepatitis C.

    Hepatitis Effect on Fetus and Infant

    • Hepatitis C infection has a lesser rate of transmission alone (zero to 18 percent according to Hepatitis Central) than when it is not comorbid with other infections diseases, such as HIV. Conditions such as HIV weaken the bodies defenses against the HCV virus, resulting in a higher viral load. The higher the viral load, the higher the risk of transmission to the infant. Antiviral therapy has not been determined to prevent transmission. Avoiding a long labor after the mother’s water has broken can reduce the chance of transmission to the infant.

      In utero, there is no data that can determine when transmission will occur if it does, or what the effects will be. Generally, the infant will receive HCV antibodies from the mother, and they can remain present for up to fifteen months. If the parents or pediatricians require it, HCV RNA testing can be done between two and six months of age. If the diagnosis can be delayed, an anti-HCV test can be done at fifteen months. The majority of HCV positive infants show no symptoms.

    Nursing and Hepatitis C

    • Mothers who test positive for hepatitis C do not need to avoid breastfeeding. If the child’s pediatrician feels the infant is not at risk due to other possible comorbid conditions, no current medical evidence suggests that nursing will spread HCV from mother to infant. A mother with hepatitis C should avoid nursing if her nipples are cracked and bleeding, as the virus is passed through blood.

    Treatment for Children Born with Hepatitis C

    • The Canadian Pediatric Society states that one in four children with hepatitis C will recover from it on their own without medicinal intervention. The others will be carriers of the disease, and it will stay in the child’s liver. The majority of these children will be healthy, although they will need to have regular blood work and checkups. Children that do develop symptoms will be given antiviral drugs to prevent liver damage, cirrhosis or liver cancer.

Read more: http://www.ehow.com/about_6457495_effects-hep-fetus.html#ixzz2uzQFBmud

Pertussis Vaccine Spreads Pertussis

Vaccine lies:
Whooping cough outbreaks being triggered
by vaccinated children

Thursday, December 26, 2013 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

Thanks to NaturalNews.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043330_vaccines_whooping_cough_disease_outbreaks.html#ixzz2uz5hFoaP

(NaturalNews) It is a common myth perpetuated by both the entrenched system of monopolistic medicine and the mainstream media that unvaccinated children are the social scourge responsible for triggering outbreaks of rare diseases like pertussis (whooping cough), measles and shingles. But the scientific literature suggests otherwise, showing in many cases that vaccinated children are the ones largely responsible for triggering and spreading disease.

A recent study published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences for instance, found that, despite more than 50 years of population-wide vaccination, cases of whooping cough are on the rise. The culprit? Antigens of Bordetella pertussis that not only are completely ineffective at preventing infection with Bordetella parapertussis, a whooping cough bacterium similar to B. pertussis, but actually promote it by interfering with the body’s natural infection clearance protocols.

“[W]e show that aP [whooping cough] vaccination impedes host immunity against B. parapertussis-measured as reduced lung inflammatory and neutrophil responses,” wrote the authors. “[W]e conclude that aP vaccination interferes with the optimal clearance of B. parapertussis and enhances the performance of this pathogen. Our data raise the possibility that widespread aP vaccination can create hosts more susceptible to B. parapertussis infection.”

In other words, children who are vaccinated for whooping cough actually suffer from decreased immunity and are more susceptible to B. parapertussis infection than their unvaccinated peers. Vaccinated children, in essence, are the carriers of disease when it comes to all these whooping cough outbreaks, infecting other mostly vaccinated children and putting massive strain on local healthcare resources.

Oddly enough, it is the unvaccinated children that remain largely healthy during these outbreaks, as their immune systems are not crippled by exposure to artificial vaccine antigens. This was definitely the case as far as http://www.naturalnews.com, where more than 600 confirmed cases of whooping cough, a 10-fold increase over previous years, was documented. As you may recall, most of those infected with the disease had already been vaccinated for it.

More recently, a study funded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) verified that the whooping cough vaccine, which is also contained in the combination DTaP injection, does not even prevent the spread of whooping cough as commonly claimed. On the contrary, the vaccine allowed the disease to fester inside the bodies of test baboons for up to five weeks, debunking a widely believed myth.

“[These findings] could explain the increase in pertussis that we’re seeing in the U.S.,” admitted FDA researcher Tod Merkel, affirming what many are now suggesting about the dangers of the whooping cough vaccine.

Should parents who vaccinate their children be held liable for spreading disease?

What all this suggests, of course, is that the ongoing demonization of parents who refuse to vaccinate their children is completely misdirected. If it is public health that we are all concerned about in the vaccine debate, then it appears as though parents who choose to vaccinate are the ones about who we all need to be concerned.

Perhaps the time is ripe to set the record straight and put blame where it is truly due. The tables have turned, and based on the latest available science, it is now abundantly clear that parents who vaccinate are the ones putting everyone else’s children at risk.

Will the pro-vaccine lobby, which is all too quick to demand that non-vaccinating parents be held liable for putting others at risk, now be held to the same standard?

Sources for this article include:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.nbcnews.com

http://science.naturalnews.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043330_vaccines_whooping_cough_disease_outbreaks.html#ixzz2uz44pKMp

***

FDA study shows pertussis vaccination
spreads pathogenic bacteria

Tuesday, March 04, 2014 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer

Thanks to NaturalNews.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/044162_pertussis_vaccination_whooping_cough_FDA.html#ixzz2uz6Mxxnq

(NaturalNews) In a failed attempt to explain away why vaccinated individuals seem to be the
only ones contracting and spreading whooping cough
 during major outbreaks, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently launched an inquiry aimed at better understanding how the controversial vaccine works. But what the agency ended up discovering is that the vaccine for whooping cough, also known as pertussis, spreads the very same pathogenic bacteria that causes whopping cough in the first place, which in some people can lead to serious infections.

Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the new FDA study claims to demonstrate that vaccines for acellular pertussis are effective at preventing the disease in those who are vaccinated. But at the very same time, the agency admits that, based on its findings, the vaccine itself spreads Bordetella pertussis, the bacteria responsible for triggering the highly contagious respiratory disease.

“[A]cellular pertussis vaccines licensed by the FDA are effective in preventing the disease among those vaccinated,” claims the agency in a recent announcement, “but… they may not prevent infection from the bacteria that causes whooping cough in those vaccinated or its spread to other people, including those who may not be vaccinated.”

In other words, the whooping cough vaccine is definitely effective at preventing the whooping cough, except that it’s not. This is the essence of what the FDA is claiming here with this dichotomy — people who are vaccinated for whooping cough are somehow protected against the disease, but they might still develop it as a result of contracting the bacterium responsible for triggering whooping cough, which is contained in the vaccine.

This type of meaningless equivocation is nothing new for the FDA, of course, which two years ago tried to pull the same
say-something-while-not-actually-saying-it stunt with bisphenol A
(BPA)
, the plastics chemical that has repeatedly been shown in scientific literature to damage hormones.

FDA admits whooping cough vaccines diminish immunity, increasing likelihood of infection

Besides putting those who receive it at a higher risk of developing pertussis infection, the pertussis vaccine also admittedly lowers immunity. In a recent press release about its study, the FDA spills the beans about how decreased immunity is a common adverse effect of the childhood pertussis vaccine, and that health experts have never really understood why those who are vaccinated againstpertussis still contract the disease.

“While the reasons for the increase in cases of whooping cough are not fully understood, multiple factors are likely involved, including diminished immunity from childhood pertussis vaccines, improved diagnostic testing, and increased reporting,” says the FDA. “With its own funds plus support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the FDA conducted the study to explore the possibility that acellular pertussis vaccines… might not prevent infection.”

Based on this assessment, it is astounding that any parent would ever agree to having their baby injected with a chemical solution that just might cause the very same disease that it is supposed to prevent. We now know for a fact that children vaccinated for pertussis can still develop whooping cough and are, in fact, carriers that can spread the disease to others.

“This research suggests that although individuals immunized with an acellular pertussis vaccine may [emphasis added] be protected from disease, they may still become infected with the bacteria without always getting sick and are able to spread infection to others, including young infants who are susceptible to pertussis disease.”

You can read the full FDA announcement here:
http://www.fda.gov.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.fda.gov

http://www.naturalnews.com

http://www.anh-usa.org

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

http://science.naturalnews.com

http://science.naturalnews.com

http://science.naturalnews.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/044162_pertussis_vaccination_whooping_cough_FDA.html#ixzz2uz6k7KdP

Katie Couric and Guardasil

Gardasil and the Public Flogging of Katie Couric

February 18, 2014 | Thanks to Mercola.com

By Barbara Loe Fisher

The public flogging of veteran broadcast journalist Katie Couric began on December 4, 2013, immediately after a 17-minute report on HPV and Gardasil vaccine was broadcast on her TV talk show “Katie.”1 It was kick-started by a west coast business writer, who administered the first lash with a bizarre take-down of freedom of the press:

“The real punch of the show was its portrayal of HPV vaccination as “controversial,” he charged. “Merely to ask questions is to validate them.”

He ended with a sucker punch:

“Katie Couric established her credibility as a spokeswoman for preventive medicine more than a decade ago… now she’ll be known for promoting junk medicine instead.”2

‘Is Katie Couric the Next Jenny McCarthy?’

Then, like piranhas in a fish tank full of fresh chum, an online clique of mean girls and bully boys let Katie have it right between the eyes.

“Is Katie Couric the next Jenny McCarthy?” sneered a headline for an article in which a cub reporter sharpened her claws on Couric’s credibility by hissing “The damage a former Playboy Bunny has been able to do is bad enough. But Couric’s misdeeds are all the worse given that she’s taken much more seriously than Jenny McCarthy.”3

Continuing with that lame theme, an entertainment writer stuck it to Katie when she suggested that:

 “To some, Couric’s behavior is even more problematic than McCarthy’s, given her stature as a respected journalist and former network news anchor, as well as her previous efforts to educate the public about the fight against cancer.”4

One headline screamed “Katie Couric Hands Over Her Show to Anti-Vaccine Alarmists”5 and another one gasped “Why Is Katie Couric Promoting Vaccine Skeptics?” followed by an article written by a photojournalist sniping that “Couric needs to review her priorities.”6

Katie Couric: Presenting HPV Information and Perspective

Katie’s unforgiveable transgression? On her afternoon talk show, she gave two mothers, who had witnessed their daughters’ health suddenly deteriorate after Gardasil shots, an opportunity to speak about what happened.78

She gave an international HPV infection expert,9 who participated in Gardasil vaccine clinical trial research, an opportunity to comment about the effectiveness of Gardasil vaccine and the need for all girls – whether they get vaccinated or not – to get regular pap screening.10

She gave a pediatrician an opportunity to encourage parents to vaccinate their 11-year-old boys and girls because “HPV vaccine does not seem to be any risker than any of the other vaccines we routinely use;”1112 and Katie gave a mother and her daughter an opportunity to enthusiastically endorse the vaccine.13

Katie Couric presented information and a range of perspectives about a current topic being discussed by millions of parents and young women in homes and doctors’ offices across the country. She did it because she is an intellectually honest journalist, a compassionate mother, and a cancer prevention pioneer.

Fourteen years ago, Katie Couric almost singlehandedly put a human face on the importance of colonoscopy screening, especially for those at high risk when she publicly witnessed about the tragedy of losing her husband and the father of her children to colon cancer.14 After a long and successful career in broadcast journalism, in 2006 she became the first woman to anchor the evening news on a major US TV network.15

An Orchestrated Campaign of Intimidation

The shaming of Katie Couric for caring and daring to ask questions about Gardasil vaccine was a well-orchestrated campaign of intimidation. It was a warning delivered to all journalists that – no matter who you are – your characterwill be assassinated if you step out of line and question the safety or effectiveness of a government recommended vaccine.

The cyber lynch mob16-22 presenting opinion as unassailable fact delighted in quoting each other and did not reserve their vitriol for Katie. Two mothers on the show were ridiculed for describing their daughters’ Gardasil vaccine reaction symptoms, which are similar to those reported by many, many others in the US and around the world.23-43

The credentialed Gardasil vaccine researcher44 on the show was attacked for stating that regular pap tests are the most reliable way of detecting and preventing cervical cancer regardless of vaccination, a position held by cancer prevention experts.45-47

Katie Couric Encourages Informed Vaccine Decision Making

Two days after the public flogging began, Katie interviewed the Assistant Surgeon General48 before authoring an article for The Huffington Post responding to the firestorm with unapologetic professionalism.49 She acknowledged her report could have spent more time putting the statistical risk of suffering a vaccine reaction into greater perspective but she defended the inclusion of mothers reporting Gardasil reactions:

“Some people say their children have suffered from a variety of medical problems after the HPV vaccination, and there have even been a few reports of death,” she said. “As a journalist, I felt that we couldn’t simply ignore these reports.”

Katie reinforced a call for regular pap screening:

“There’s been troubling research out of Australia that indicates some women are skipping their Pap tests because they have been vaccinated. That’s a terrible idea.

While the vaccine protects against some of the HPV strains that cause cervical cancers, it doesn’t protect against all of them and regular Pap smears are essential for life-saving diagnoses,” she said.

Katie concluded her statement by encouraging critical thinking and informed vaccine decision-making:

“I had my own two daughters vaccinated against HPV. I hope that other parents will look at the research and the facts, and make a reasoned decision on the HPV vaccine and what is best for their children,” she said.

“Not Enough,” He Says

However, Katie’s clarification prompted one bully to bring out the whip one more time. Under a headline complaining that “Katie Couric Backs Off from Her Anti-Vaccine Show But Not Enough,” he snarled:

“The video depictions of mothers and daughters in tears will stay with thousands of Couric’s loyal viewers. Her written mea culpa, not so much.”50

Perhaps he wanted her to walk across cut glass on her knees and whimper a little on camera so he could be convinced that she would be a good girl from now on and never, ever step out of line again.

Mothers Will Not Stop Witnessing

One thing is as clear today as it was 32 years ago when mothers publicly witnessed how they watched their children suffer brain inflammation or die after being injected with the old, crude, and toxic DPT vaccine.51-64 Clearly, when mothers stand up in the public square today and describe how Gardasil vaccine risks for their daughters turned out to be 100 percent, deniers of vaccine risks get really, really emotional. They get angry and defensive. They gather together in a pack, take out the rope, and start cyber-lynching.

Mothers around the world, who give birth to babies they are responsible for nurturing through infancy and childhood, are not going to stop talking about what happened to their children after vaccination. Mothers are not going to shut up and sit down like good little girls after they witness the bodies and brains of the children they love be destroyed when Gardasil shots go wrong.

Mothers Will Not Stop Thinking Critically

They are not going to stop reading the medical literature and thinking critically about the science65-71 used to justify giving every child the most expensive federally recommended pediatric vaccine on the US market72 to prevent an infection that is cleared bymore than 90 percent of people without a problem:73,74

  • A vaccine developed by NIH researchers75 using GMO technology that was sold by NIH to Merck76 and fast-tracked to licensure using questionable surrogate markers for efficacy7778
  • A vaccine for a sexually transmitted disease that was tested in fewer than 1,200 children under the age of 1679 using a bioactive aluminum “placebo” as a bogus control in clinical trials80-84
  • A vaccine that was only tested in 1,000 adolescent girls and boys in combination with the federally recommended Tdap and meningococcal vaccines85
  • A vaccine given by pediatricians shielded from legal accountability for vaccine injuries and deaths, just like vaccine manufacturers are shielded from civil liability in US courts86
  • A vaccine that by December 13, 2013 had generated nearly 30,000 adverse reaction reports to the US government, including 140 deaths87 – which is only a fraction of the numbers of Gardasil reactions, injuries, and deaths that have actually occurred because most doctors either do not report to the government or make reports directly to Merck.88-90

Federal Awards, Lawsuits, Gardasil Recommendation Withdrawal

Yes, it is illogical to assume that every single one of the reported Gardasil reaction reports and deaths are caused by the vaccine, but it is just as illogical to assume that none of them are caused by the vaccine. But logic has nothing to do with one-size-fits-all vaccine policies that sacrifice individuals, who are biologically or environmentally at high risk for suffering vaccine harm,91 while no research is being done to identify who they are to spare their lives.

Informed mothers know that among the $3 billion in federal compensation that has been awarded to vaccine victims in the US are awards for Gardasil vaccine injuries.92 They know Gardasil vaccine injured girls are suing vaccine manufacturers in France, where citizens can still file product liability lawsuits.93 They know that public health officials in Japan no longer recommend Gardasil vaccine because Japan’s government is not writing off every death and case of brain inflammation and autoimmunity following Gardasil shots as just a “coincidence.”94

HPV Vaccination Made a Top Public Health Priority in US

In what may or may not be a coincidence, at the end of December, the Centers for Disease Control made HPV vaccination one of the top five “public health priorities” for 2014. In one media article,95 the HPV vaccination rate of 30 percent in the US was compared to the 85 percent vaccination rate in Rwanda, an impoverished, war-torn country where women have been dying in great numbers from cervical cancer because there has been no routine pap screening available to them. In 2011, Merck created a school-based vaccination program for all sixth graders in Rwanda to be injected with three doses of Gardasil vaccine.96

But the United States is not Rwanda. In America, cervical cancer has declined more than 70 percent after pap screening became a routine part of women’s health care in the 1960s and, by 2006, pap tests had driven down the numbers of new cases of cervical cancer to 9,700 per year with about 3,700 deaths97 in a US population of more than 300 million people. In the US, the 14,000 annual deaths from six cancers associated with HPV98-104 represent less than three percent of the more than 550,000 cancer deaths that occur every year.

Many Other Public Health Emergencies in US Deserve Priority Status

There are many public health emergencies in our country that cause far more deaths and disabilities but do not receive a fair share of the hundreds of billions of dollars appropriated by Congress to health agencies every year.105 For example:

  • Between 210,000 and 440,000 hospitalized patients each year suffer some type of preventable harm that contributes to their death106
  • The US has the worst infant mortality107 and maternal mortality108,109 rates of all developed nations, with 28,000 babies dying before their first birthday110
  • Millions of children are becoming disabled or dying in the unexplained chronic illness epidemic111 that costs trillions of dollars to treat: one child in six in America is learning disabled;112 one in nine suffers from asthma;113 one in 10 has ADHD;114 1 in 50 develops autism115 and 1 in 450 becomes diabetic.116
  • Millions more are suffering from mental health problems. One adolescent in five in the US experiences significant symptoms of emotional distress, and one in 10 is emotionally impaired.117

Bigger Market for Merck and HPV Vaccine Mandates?

Perhaps the CDC is simply boosting the congressionally approved, lucrative public-private partnership with Big Pharma118-124 by securing a bigger market for Merck’s new 9-strain version of Gardasil scheduled to be licensed in the fall of 2014.125 Or perhaps the Merck-Government-Medical Trade lobby is planning another multi-state roll-out of HPV vaccine mandates for all sixth grade children in the US just like they did in 2007.126-128

Roll Up Your Sleeve – No Questions Asked

Whatever the reasons that government officials made HPV vaccination a top public health priority in the US, the cyber-lynching of Katie Couric and mothers reporting Gardasil vaccine reactions is a warning to parents everywhere. Do not forget that the cruel, dogmatic position of vaccine risk denialism is: roll up your sleeve – no questions asked – and “may the odds be ever in your favor.”129130

Andrew Wakefield – Slandered

 

BMJ admits that fraud claim against Dr. Andrew Wakefield has no basis in fact

Thursday, August 25, 2011 by: PF Louis
Thanks to NaturalNews.com

(Natural News) Big Pharma, the FDA, AMA and other medical associations falsely accuse conscientious healers of crimes that they themselves routinely commit or cover up. Unfortunately, they get away with it since they are the “authority”, and the mainstream media (MSM) usually favors authority’s version of events. Dr. Andrew Wakefield was a victim of the BMJ’s (British Medical Journal) injustice, which also helped hide vaccine injury science from public awareness.

What Wakefield Actually Did

Dr. Wakefield was organizing clinical research on Crohn’s disease, colitis and gastrointestinal disorders in young children. The research intended to determine if there was a link between those disorders and measles at the Royal Free Hospital in England. Dr. Wakefield published the results of this clinical study in the U.K. medical journal Lancet in 1998.

Children were brought to him because of his interest, but contrary to all accusations, he never treated them. He described himself as “the thinker” when Health Ranger Mike Adams recently interviewed him. In this particular study, he was the thinker for the team of doctors directly involved with the treatment.

Another accusation, that Dr. Wakefield asserted a definite link of MMR vaccines to autism was never published. He never made that claim. Some of his team colleagues put forth their interpretation that MMRs were linked to autism, but that was not part of Wakefield’s Lancet paper. Dr. Wakefield was looking into the possible link of those commonly experienced gut disorders in children under five years old as a precursor to their autism related behavior.

That link to MMRs was actually made by the parents of those 12 participating children. They were doing fine until they received MMR vaccinations, and the parents reported this to Dr. Wakefield’s team. Dr. Wakefield included the parents’ reports in the case study findings. Including parents’ observations in case study reports is highly appropriate.

Dr. Wakefield’s only conclusion was the measles/gut disorder connection to autistic behavior possibilities merited further study.

Other Discoveries that Corroborate Wakefield’s Findings

According to a Mike Adams article, fourteen months before Dr. Wakefield’s paper was published, two other researchers discovered the same problems of gut disorders and autistic behavior in seven children. Their 1996 presentation was called “Entero-colitis and Disintegrative Disorder Following MMR – A Review of the First Seven Cases.” Those seven cases became part of the final twelve cases in Dr. Wakefield’s 1998 Lancet paper. This and other facts disprove accusations that Wakefield fabricated the twelve reports.

A more recent Wake Forest University study determined that 70 of 82 autistic children they studied had measles virus in their guts. Interestingly, the measles virus strain they discovered was not a wild virus — it was the same strain used in MMR vaccines.

A Russian born U.K. pediatrician, Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, has not only established the connection of gastrointestinal tract disorders among the very young to autistic and other behavioral problems, she cures them with proper diet and supplementation. She learned how the hard way, by curing her own autistic son.

Dr. McBride coined the acronym GAPS for her book Gut and Psychology Syndrome. She describes the dietary solutions to her explanations of how the gut and the brain are connected. This relationship has been known by traditional Chinese medicine for centuries.

In a recent U.S. lecture, she mentioned that her colleagues were afraid to mention Dr. Wakefield due of the witch-hunt conspired against him earlier. But she acknowledges his research efforts as accurate contributions to her practice.

The U.K. government refuses to compensate cases of encephalitis (brain disease) due to vaccineinjury. Here we may have one motive for a conspiracy against Dr. Wakefield.

There Really Was a Conspiracy

There are other motives from the usual suspects. The allegedly corrupt Murdoch empire’s Sunday Times is run by Rupert Murdoch’s son James. The Murdoch family is heavily invested in GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a vaccine manufacturer. James Murdoch is even on GSKs board of directors.

James hired a freelance hack journalist, Brian Deer, to fabricate the Wakefield fabrication. It created a firestorm in London that ignited another vaccine promoter, Dr. Fiona Godlee, who happens to be the editor in chief for the British Journal of Medicine (BMJ). She propagated Deer’s lies officially.

This pincer move encircled the U.K. Government’s medical establishment and forced a five member GMC (General Medical Council) hearing on Dr. Wakefield. Perhaps the hearing intended to defend the U.K.’s stance on not awarding vaccine injury victim?

The Sly Admission: Too Late; Damage Done

Private admission of wrong doing by the BMJ to newsletter Age of Autism, spoken evasively out of both sides of Dr. Fiona Godlee’s mouth, is insufficient for the public damage done to Dr. Wakefield’s integrity. But it has served to inspire a stronger alliance among medical professionals and aware parents of vaccine injured children on both sides of the Atlantic.(7)

Sources for this article include:

http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=608256A4461232…
http://www.naturalnews.com/031116_Dr_Andrew_…
http://www.naturalnews.com/031056_autism_vac…
http://www.gutandpsychologysyndrome.com/
http://childhealthsafety.com/
http://www.naturalnews.com/033347_vaccines_D…
http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/04/why-age-o…

 

 

Polio in India

Confirmed: India’s Polio Eradication Campaign in 2011 Caused 47,500 Cases of Vaccine-Induced Polio Paralysis

August 28, 2012 Thanks to Mercola.com.
By Dr. Mercola

If you listen to mainstream media news, you’ll be told that polio has now been eradicated in India – an accomplishment the Polio Global Eradication Initiative (PGEI), founded in 1988 by the World Health Organization (WHO), Rotary International, UNICEF, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), are attributing to the intense polio vaccination campaign.

The Indian government reportedly had 2.3 million vaccine administrators visit over 200 million households, with oral polio vaccinations given to nearly 170 million children 5 years of age and younger;1 health officials are now doubling their efforts to conquer polio in Pakistan as well.

What you’re NOT learning from the mainstream media, however, is that there’s a growing public movement fighting the profound misinformation about these OPV campaigns being conducted repeatedly among children in India and other nations. One recent published paper has suggested that increased administration of OPV doses among children in India is associated with increases in Accute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP), which is as crippling and deadly as wild type polio paralysis.. ..

Polio Vaccine Campaigns and Increases In Deadly Polio-Like Disease in Children

A paper published earlier this year in the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics should have made headlines around the globe, as it estimated there were 47,500 cases of a polio-like condition linked to children in India receiving repeated doses of  oral polio vaccine in 2011 alone. The incidence of non-polio Accute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) in India is now 12 times higher than expected and coincides with huge increases in OPV doses being given to children in the quest to “eradicate” wild type polio infection and paralysis.

Researchers reported:2

“…while India has been polio-free for a year, there has been a huge increase in non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP). In 2011, there were an extra 47,500 new cases of NPAFP. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Though this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated. The principle of primum-non-nocere [First, do no harm] was violated.”

Another way the public is being misled about India’s claims to be polio-free is that live virus polio vaccine is causing vaccine strain polio in an unknown number of children and adults.. The problem is that, while the oral vaccine has reined in wild polio, persons recently vaccinated with the live attenuated oral polio vaccine can shed vaccine strain virus in their body fluids for weeks and, in some cases, both the recently vaccinated and close contacts of the recently vaccinated can come down with vaccine strain polio. Poor sanitation, including open sewage in underdeveloped countries, where drinking water is too often also used for bathing and disposal of human waste, can make it easy for vaccine strain polio virus to be transmitted.

Environmental surveillance for VDPV is now being conducted in a number of countries, including Australia, Egypt, Haiti, and Indonesia.

Third World Countries Using Reactive and Dated Vaccines

While most affluent nations now rely on inactivated, injectable poliovirus vaccine (IPV), many third-world countries still use an oral polio vaccine because it’s much simpler to administer drops in the mouth rather than injecting a vaccine into a child . However, because the oral polio vaccine is made from a live attenuated polio viruses, it carries a risk of causing vaccine strain polio in populations, especially among those, who are immune compromised, malnourished or suffering from serious health problems.

Genetic analysis of polioviruses associated with outbreaks of paralytic disease has linked polio vaccine strain viruses to at least seven separate outbreaks in Nigeria. Polio outbreaks in Haiti and the Dominican Republic in 2002 were also traced to an “attenuated” strain of oral polio vaccine (OPV) that was reportedly more virulent than wild polio.

According to a 2010 article in the New England Journal of Medicine, outbreaks of vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPVs) have been occurring at a rate of once or twice per year, since the year 2000.3  It is estimated that up to 180 Indian children develop vaccine-associated polio paralysis (VAPP) each year.4

The live polio virus from the vaccine can remain in your throat for one to two weeks, and in your feces for up to two months.5 So not only is the vaccine recipient at risk, but he or she can potentially spread the disease as long as the virus remains in feces – which, incidentally, turns on its head the age-old dogma that it is only the unvaccinated, who pose an infection risk to the vaccinated.

Pakistan: Over 3,000 Children Given Expired Polio Drops

Over 3,000 children under 5 years old, and some only a few months old, were given expired polio drops in Pakistan earlier this year, resulting in serious illnesses that sent the children to the hospital.

While the original story quoting the sick children’s parents was pulled from the Internet, a “cache” of the story was still available and follow-up stories reported that some Pakistani health officials had been suspended for providing the expired drops, which were distributed during a spring 2012 vaccination campaign.

Side effects reported due to the expired vaccines ranged from high fever to chest infections, and it’s said that government officials originally tried to cover up the mishap…

Media is Not Giving the Whole Picture on the Oral Polio Vaccine Controversy

Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), spoke with Voice of America (VOA) about the intensive polio vaccine campaigns in the developing world. Unfortunately, much of Barbara’s interview and insights were edited out of the video, as she explains below:

“I taped an interview with Voice of America on the subject of intensive polio vaccine campaigns in the developing world. I gave the reporter this Indian journal article6 and raised the issue of the reported increases in Acute Flaccid Paralysis among Indian children given monthly doses of OPV [oral polio vaccine]. l told him that developed countries like the US had replaced live virus polio vaccine (OPV) with inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) more than a decade ago to prevent cases of vaccine-strain polio because OPV, being a live virus vaccine, causes recently vaccinated children to shed vaccine-strain polio virus in their body fluids for a period of time following vaccination. In underdeveloped countries with poverty and poor sanitation (like open sewage), vaccine-strain viruses can contaminate water and facilitate transmission of vaccine-strain paralytic polio.

I brought up the issue of poverty, including poor sanitation, malnutrition, and limited access to health care facilities (for example, to undergo re-hydradation from diarrhea) as being an important cause of disease and poor health separate from vaccination.

I did question whether repeated mass vaccination campaigns in underdeveloped countries were more a function of pharmaceutical companies seeking to sell product rather than making investments in infrastructure that address the basic causes of poor health. And I also questioned the lack of safety science to demonstrate that it is safe to give children MONTHLY polio vaccinations when children in the developed world only receive 5 doses.

As you know, NVIC does not oppose the use of polio vaccine but we do not support excessive, repeated OPV vaccination campaigns in impoverished populations when that approach is not backed up with good safety science.

We do oppose use of government enforcement mechanisms to aggressively implement mass vaccination campaigns that fail to obtain the voluntary, informed consent of the parents of children being vaccinated. We do this because NVIC defends the ethical principal of informed consent to medical risk taking, which is a human right, and we defend that right without compromise.

It is too bad that the VOA report did not address poverty,  malnutrition and the root causes of disease versus simply giving these children OPV vaccine over and over again, when the vaccine can cause vaccine-strain polio, there are no safety studies showing that it is safe to give children monthly doses of OPV and the report out of India indicates that increases in Acute Flaccid Paralysis may be associated with repeated OPV vaccination in children.”

Has the Chemical Synthesis of Polio Virus Made Global Eradication Impossible?

In 2002, it was reported that fully infectious polio virus had been recreated in a lab. While this was heralded as a milestone in biology, it was met with great unease by the general public who worried that polio could now be used as a weapon of bioterrorism. And, the very fact that it can be synthetically created technically means that global eradication is now impossible. Sayer Ji of GreenMedInfo.com stated:

“One thing, which should not be overlooked is that the researchers who broke this story also revealed another highly disturbing fact: infectious polio virus has been known to be capable of de novo synthesis for over 10 years – essentially implying global polio eradication is now by principle impossible.”

In fact, in the journal Science in 2002 it was reported:7

“The charade about polio eradication and the great savings it will bring has persisted to date. It is a paradox, that while the director general of WHO, Margret Chan, and Bill Gates are trying to muster support for polio eradication it has been known to the scientific community, for over 10 years, that eradication of polio is impossible. This is because in 2002 scientists had synthesized a chemical called poliovirus a chemical called poliovirus in a test-tube with the empirical formula c332,652H492,388N98,245O131,196P7,501S2,340.

It has been demonstrated that by positioning the atoms in sequence, a particle can emerge with all the properties required for its proliferation and survival in nature… the test-tube synthesis of poliovirus has wiped out any possibility of eradicating poliovirus in the future. Poliovirus cannot be declared extinct because the sequence of its genome is known and modern biotechnology allows it to be resurrected at any time in vitro.

Man can thus never let down his guard against poliovirus. indeed the 18-year-old global eradication campaign for polioviruses will have to be continued in some format forever. The long promised ‘infinite’ monetary benefits from ceasing to vaccinate against poliovirus will never be achieved. The attraction that ‘eradication’ has for policy makers will vanish once this truth is widely known.”

The sentiment was repeated again in 2006:8

“…does the test-tube synthesis negate efforts to eradicate poliovirus? The conceptual answer to this is yes. Poliovirus cannot be declared extinct because the sequence of its genome is known and modern biotechnology allows it to be resurrected at any time in vitro. This is true for all viruses, including smallpox.”

Polio Vaccine Has Been Linked to Cancer

You might be like me and be an American who received polio shots in the 1950’s and 60’s. I have not been, but many have ended up being informed – 40 years later – that many of those experimental polio shots were contaminated with a monkey virus, simian virus 40 (SV40), that causes cancer in lab animals and has been linked to brain, bone, lung, and lymphatic cancers in children and adults.9 -10

They weren’t told the whole truth about polio vaccine risks, and vaccine makers and health officials are still frugal with the facts when it comes to vaccine risks. Many make blanket statements saying that “vaccines are safe,” when in fact such a statement simply cannot be made without misrepresenting the facts.

The truth is, there are risks associated with any vaccine, and they clearly do not work for everyone. And even when they do work, you oftentimes end up with more virulent and hardy viruses… Not to mention, policy makers seem to be overlooking the poignant fact that people in third-world countries are in desperate need of clean water, healthy food and sanitation, which would work wonders for preventing many of the infectious diseases they are spending billions on vaccines for…

The Underlying Causes of Polio are Being Ignored

Vaccines alone don’t eradicate disease. Polio spreads, after all, largely through feces-contaminated water, so ignoring that major risk factor while trying to eradicate the disease is not sound public health policy.  What if, just what if, the same amount of money that has been spent on repeated polio vaccine campaigns  over the past decade had been spent on sanitation facilities, toilets, healthy food and clean water instead?

Sayer Ji expands:11

“Due to the fact that polio spreads through the fecal-oral route (i.e. the virus is transmitted from the stool of an infected person to the mouth of another person through a contaminated object, e.g. utensil) focusing on hygiene, sanitation and proper nutrition (to support innate immunity) is a logical way to prevent transmission in the first place, as well as reducing morbidity associated with an infection when it does occur.

Instead, a large portion of the world’s vaccines are given to the third world as ‘charity,’ when the underlying conditions of economic impoverishment, poor nutrition, chemical exposures, and socio-political unrest are never addressed. You simply can’t vaccinate people out of these conditions, and as India’s new epidemic of vaccine-induced polio cases clearly demonstrates, the ‘cure’ may be far worse than the disease itself.”

As an aside, did you know that evidence from the polio outbreaks in the 1950’s suggested that the risks of getting polio can be reduced by cutting back on sugar? The evidence suggesting that a diet high in refined sugar (as well as other forms of fructose) increases your risk of contracting polio is discussed in the book Diet Prevents Polio, written by Benjamin P. Sandler, M.D. The book was published in 1951, at the height of the polio epidemic.

In general, it makes perfect sense that high sugar/fructose consumption could raise your risk of polio, as it, just like other infections, only tends to cause complications when your immune system is weakened, which can easily happen through poor nutrition (high fructose consumption), stress, and lack of sleep.

So, the polio vaccine is not the only, nor the ultimate, solution to staying well.  Maintaining a strong and well-functioning immune system will always be your first line of defense, as this will reduce your risk of any number of diseases, including polio – and this is, unfortunately, what most people in third-world countries are missing.

What You Can Do to Make a Difference Right NOW

I urge you to do your homework before giving your children to any vaccine. The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is a top-notch source that provides well-referenced information on vaccines and infectious diseases. For a full list of precautions for children, teenagers and adults, read the manufacturer product inserts, and get more information about how to recognize a vaccine reaction at www.NVIC.org.

Protecting your right to informed consent is essential. NVIC has been the leading advocate for informed consent to vaccination since its inception. Signing up to be a user of NVIC’s free online Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you access to practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. NVIC is 100 percent funded by donations, so please, take a moment right now to make a donation to the NVIC.

Your tax-deductible donation allows NVIC to furnish the public with life-saving information on informed vaccine decision-making, vaccine injury reduction and research. They support the availability of all preventive health care options, including vaccination, and the right of consumers to make educated, voluntary health care choices.

Hepatitis B and Infants

17 Children Die After Receiving Hepatitis B Vaccine

January 07, 2014 | 35,384 views
 

By Dr. Mercola

If you’re a parent-to-be or are planning to have children in the future, one of the first decisions you’ll need to make is whether or not to give your child the hepatitis B vaccine.

Even if you consider yourself to be in favor of vaccinations and the current US vaccine schedule, this is one vaccine that deserves special consideration. In fact, the hepatitis B vaccine for newborns and young children is the least justifiable of any vaccine I can think of…

Hepatitis B is only transmitted via contaminated needles, blood transfusion, or contact with contaminated blood and/or body fluids. If the mother is negative, there’s very little risk of a baby contracting this disease, and the vaccine’s effectiveness is highly questionable, anyway.

Further, serious side effects and even deaths have also been reported following receipt of this vaccine, including eight recent newborn deaths in China. Over a period of two months, eight infants in China died within hours, and in some cases minutes, of receiving hepatitis B vaccines. In all, 17 deaths among Chinese children aged 5 and younger have been reported following hepatitis B vaccines administered in late 2013.

China Investigates Makers of Hepatitis B Vaccine After Baby Deaths

Six of the deaths occurred in infants who had received the vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai Biological Products, while two occurred after hepatitis B vaccine produced by drug maker Beijing Tiantan Biological Products (shares of this company plunged by up to 10 percent following media reports of the deaths).

Health authorities in China have since launched an investigation and have suspended the use of millions of doses of hepatitis B vaccine made by Shenzhen Kangtai. So far the drug companies have denied that their products played a role in the deaths, and Chinese health authorities have also said that nine of the 17 deaths were unrelated to the vaccine.

According to China’s National Health and Family Planning Commission, those deaths were due to acute pneumonia, suffocation, kidney failure, severe diarrhea, death of intestinal tissue, sudden infant death, congenital heart disease and other causes.1

As for the remaining eight deaths, Chinese authorities have also said that a preliminary investigation has found no link between the deaths and the vaccines. However, firm conclusions have yet to be reached, pending the results of autopsies to confirm the causes of death.

Victim’s Father Speaks Out, Calls Official Report “Absolute Rubbish”

In a report by Radio Free Asia,2 the father of one of the 17 children who died after receiving a hepatitis B vaccine called Chinese health officials’ claims that the deaths had nothing to do with the vaccine “absolute rubbish.”

Many others commenting on social media also expressed doubts about the government’s analysis and conclusions, especially in light of a series of product safety and health scandals in recent years. Often, those who dare to speak out are persecuted or punished for questioning the status quo.

Radio Free Asia reported:3

China’s pharmaceutical industry is highly lucrative but poorly regulated, resulting in a string of fatalities blamed on counterfeit or shoddy medications in recent years.

An investigative report in the China Economic Observer newspaper in 2010 said that improperly stored vaccines administered by Shanxi health officials for encephalitis, hepatitis B, and rabies between 2006 and 2008 had killed four children and sickened more than 70 others, with tainted vaccines being used as late as March 2009.

Top investigative reporter Wang Keqin, who exposed the vaccine scandal among others, was forced out of his job at the newspaper in February 2013.

Parents who complain about mishaps linked to health and safety issues say they are frequently themselves targeted for official harassment and punishment.

In 2011, authorities in Beijing sentenced parent activist Yang Yukui to five months’ “re-education through labor” on charges of “provoking disputes and causing trouble” after he complained that his son had been in and out of the hospital since being given a bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) tuberculosis vaccination shortly after birth.”

Vaccine-Related Deaths a Coincidence?

Unfortunately, it’s not at all unusual for a vaccine maker to rule a child’s death shortly after vaccination as a “coincidence.” In the US, when babies die after hepatitis B vaccinations, most of the time their deaths are automatically attributed to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) — without investigation into whether the vaccine caused the baby’s sudden death.

One of the most famous cases of hepatitis B vaccine was Michael Belkin’s daughter who died in his arms 15 hours after receiving the absolutely unnecessary hepatitis B vaccine. Below is his testimony to Congress in 1999.

When a baby’s death is listed as “SIDS,” rarely does anyone ask about the deceased infant’s vaccination history to find out whether there were symptoms of vaccine reactions before death, even though the biomedical literature has repeatedly signaled this connection.4

In China, the deaths occurred so close to vaccination, and in so many infants, that a potential connection could not be ignored. But even in the US, deaths following hepatitis B vaccine are far from unheard of. According to the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):5

“…hepatitis B vaccine-related adverse events reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) [include] reports of headache, irritability, extreme fatigue, brain inflammation, convulsions, rheumatoid arthritis, optic neuritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and neuropathy.

There have been more than 1,500 hepatitis B vaccine-related deaths reported, including deaths classified as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).”

Shenzhen Kangtai has posted a statement suggesting that the deaths may be related to an underlying disease, noting that “coincidental diseases… are the easiest to misinterpret.”6 But Dr. Zeng Guang, chief epidemiologist with the China Center for Disease Control and Prevention, warned against taking the drug maker’s conclusion as fact, stating:7

“We should not treat the company’s statement like a conclusion… They may be trying to protect their self-interest. Or they may have a lot of confidence in their product.”

Merck’s Role in Building China’s Largest Hepatitis B Vaccine Maker

It’s interesting to note that US pharmaceutical giant Merck actually helped the Chinese build Shenzhen Kangtai in the 1990s. Merck also granted the company the biological technology to produce a hepatitis B vaccine royalty free in what the New York Times described as an “unusual joint venture aimed at improving health standards in China.”8

The company has since become China’s biggest producer of hepatitis B vaccines, where it holds 60 percent market share. A new $140-million research and development and drug manufacturing facility is also in the works…The infant deaths come on the heels of Chinese vows to tighten up food and drug safety and crack down on violators. The country has faced a slew of scandals in recent years, yet this hasn’t stopped to US from eyeing it as a key contender for future business. As Fierce Pharma reported:9

China is a key emerging market for Big Pharma, which sees great opportunity there. One example is French drugmaker Sanofi, whose vaccine unit Sanofi Pasteur got approval in October to begin manufacturing influenza vaccines at a new plant in Shenzhen. But China has struggled to keep up with oversight on health and food issues.

Five years ago, tainted Chinese heparin killed dozens of dialysis patients in the U.S., which made the FDA realize it needed to keep a closer look on production there. The FDA is currently investigating Chinese-made pet treats that have killed hundreds of dogs in the U.S. To get in a better position to deal with China’s growing place in the U.S. drug supply chain, the FDA is significantly adding to its own presence in China, planning to station another 10 drug inspectors and 9 food inspectors there over the next year.”

The ‘Worst Case of Research Fraud’ in Decades

In related vaccine news, Dong-Pyou Han, assistant professor of biomedical sciences at Iowa State University, recently resigned after faking AIDS vaccine test results. The researcher apparently added human blood that contained HIV antibodies to rabbit blood to skew the results. The human HIV antibodies in the rabbit blood made it appear as though the experimental AIDS vaccine was working and prompting the animals to build defenses against HIV.

Not only were the results presented at scientific meetings over a period of several years, but the findings were instrumental in helping the research team gain $19 million in federal grants ($10 million of which was awarded after the fraudulent results were reported). James Bradac, who is involved with AIDS vaccine grants for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), called the case “the worst case of research fraud” in his 24 years at NIH.10 It just goes to show you, again, that even scientific “truths” can be falsified, and even work from widely respected university researchers must be closely examined and supported before being accepted as fact…

Serious Questions Remain About Hepatitis B Vaccine Effectiveness

Another issue to consider if you are weighing the benefits and risks of giving your newborn infant or young child hepatitis B vaccine is that vaccine acquired immunity often does not persist until a child reaches his or her teenage years – the time when acquiring a hepatitis B infection may be more likely. Research shows that by that time, the protection from the childhood vaccine may have long since waned.11

Further, a recent study found that hepatitis B vaccine was not effective in preventing asymptomatic occult (hidden) HBV (hepatitis B virus) infection in babies, which may occur in up to 40 percent of babies born to hepatitis-B-positive mothers.12 Except in the case of a hepatitis-B-positive mother, the medical justification for vaccinating infants against hepatitis B simply doesn’t exist. In addition, the result of this above-mentioned study even refutes the commonly held assumption that hepatitis B vaccine is effective in preventing mother-to-infant transmission of all forms of hepatitis B.

The serious questions regarding effectiveness, coupled with the low transmission rates among babies and the steep risk of side effects, makes this vaccine’s use very hard to justify for healthy newborns.

Is Hepatitis B Vaccine Even Effective in Newborns?

Vaccine-derived immunity is thought to be short lived. Between 30-50% of vaccinated individuals lose their antibodies within 7 years. Up to 60% of persons who initially respond will lose detectable antibodies within 12 years. So that means that these vaccines will provide little to no protection to the real risks of acquiring hepatitis B, promiscuous sexual behavior, and IV drug abuse.

How Many Children Are Reportedly Hurt by Hepatitis B Vaccine?

Hepatitis B is a rare, mainly blood-transmitted disease. In 1996, only 54 cases of the disease were reported to the CDC in the 0-1 age group. There were 3.9 million births that year, so the observed incidence of hepatitis B in the 0-1 age group was just 0.001%. In the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there were 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0-1 age group, with 47 deaths reported.

Let us put this in simpler terms. For every child with hepatitis B, there were 20 that were reported to have severe complications. Let us also remember that only 10% of the reactions are ever reported to VAERS, so this means: traditional medicine is potentially harming 200 children to protect one from hepatitis B.

How Serious Is a Hepatitis B Infection?

The numbers speak for themselves. Approximately 50% of patients who contract hepatitis B develop no symptoms after exposure. However, the exposure ensures that they will have lifetime immunity. An additional 30% develop only flu-like symptoms, and again, this group will acquire lifetime immunity. The remaining 20% exposed to hepatitis B will develop the symptoms of the disease. 95% of this 20% will fully recover, with lifetime immunity.

Therefore, less than 5% of people who contract hepatitis B will become chronic carriers of the infection. The numbers get even smaller: of that 5%, nearly 75% (or 3.75% of the total exposed) will live with an asymptomatic infection and only 25% (or only 1.25% of the total number of people exposed) will develop chronic liver disease or liver cancer, 10-30 years after the acute infection. (Hyams, K.C. (1995) Risks of chronicity following acute hepatitis B virus infection: A review. Clin. Infect. Dis. 20, 992-1000.)

Think of that in terms of probability: the possibility of contracting the disease is exceedingly difficult for children, and only 1.25% of those that are exposed will actually develop the most serious complication! This type of a “protecting the needle in the haystack” medicine is absurd at best, deadly at worst.

How Many Safety Studies Have Been Done On Hepatitis B Vaccine?

None. A manufacturer’s representative was asked in a 1997 Illinois Board of Health hearing to show evidence that the hepatitis B vaccine is safe for a 1-day old infant. The representative stated: “We have none. Our studies were done on 5- and 10-year-olds.” — The Congressional Quarterly, August 25, 2000, pg. 647

One would think that these would be mandatory, but they are not. All that is required is to show efficacy, (i.e. that the vaccine stimulates an antibody response after it is give), not safety. In most other industries, the fraud represented here would lead to criminal charges.

Hepatitis B Vaccine: It’s Your Choice

Since 1991, a series of three hepatitis B shots has been part of the standard federally recommended US childhood vaccination schedule, with the first dose given within the first 12 hours after birth, the second dose given between one and two months of age, and the third dose given between six and 18 months of age. But while it’s part of the federal vaccine schedule, it’s your choicewhether or not to allow your baby to be vaccinated.

If you’re expecting, the time to research the risks versus the benefits of this vaccination is now, before you deliver, so if you conclude, like many concerned health care professionals and educated parents have, that subjecting all healthy newborns to hepatitis B vaccination within hours of birth is both risky and unnecessary, you can do something to stop it…

If you decide the hepatitis B vaccine is not appropriate for your baby, you can amend the “consent for medical treatment” forms you sign upon entering the hospital before giving birth by writing on the form that you do not give consent for your baby’s hepatitis B vaccination in the newborn nursery. You should let any nurses or other medical staff taking care of you and your baby know this directly as well.

However, there are reports that some newborns are being vaccinated in the newborn nursery against the parent’s wishes. So it is a good idea to keep your newborn with you at all times or have a family member stay with the baby while in the hospital.

That said, it is important to be tested for hepatitis B if you’re pregnant, as it’s possible to have a chronic infection with no symptoms and not know it. If you are pregnant and are a carrier for the hepatitis B virus, your baby could be at risk for being infected during childbirth.

And although hepatitis B vaccines may be “mandated” for your child to attend school or daycare, most states offer different legal vaccine exemptions (medical, religious, and philosophical). On NVIC.org, you can research your state’s specific vaccine laws and requirements and find out what kind of exemption to hepatitis B vaccination you are allowed to exercise in your state for your child to attend daycare or school. You can also sign up to be a user of NVIC’s free online communications network, the NVIC Advocacy Portal, and take action to protect the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in your state.

Bill Gates Funds New Vaccines

Coming Soon: “On-Demand” Nano-Vaccines Funded by Bill Gates

Brandon Turbeville
Activist PostAccording to a press release recently posted by the University of Washington, a new type of vaccine may soon be created that will allow for its immediate creation and application. This new vaccine, however, will be formed by using nanoparticles created from genetically engineered proteins.

The researchers, who have already tested the vaccine in mice, are hopeful that the vaccines will soon make “on-demand” vaccines that can be administered within minutes for a low price a common reality in the medical community.

The vaccine would mostly be aimed at “developing countries” and would cut the costs of vaccination programs “by not having to rely on refrigeration, and vaccines could be produced with rudimentary equipment in more precise, targeted numbers. The vaccines could be manufactured and delivered using a disposable patch, like a bandage, which could one day lessen the use of trained personnel and hypodermic needles.”

Francois Baneyx, the lead author of a recent published paper in Nanomedicine and UW professor of chemical engineering stated, “We’re really excited about this technology because it makes it possible to produce a vaccine on the spot. For instance, a field doctor could see the beginnings of an epidemic, make vaccine doses right away, and blanket vaccinate the entire population in the affected area to prevent the spread of an epidemic.”

The University of Washington press release explains the nature of the vaccines and how they work as follows:

In typical vaccines, weakened pathogens or proteins found on the surface of microbes and viruses are injected into the body along with compounds called adjuvants to prepare a person’s immune system to fight a particular disease. But standard formulations don’t always work, and the field is seeking ways to manufacture vaccines quicker, cheaper and tailored to specific infectious agents, Baneyx said.

The UW team injected mice with nanoparticles synthesized using an engineered protein that both mimics the effect of an infection and binds to calcium phosphate, the inorganic compound found in teeth and bones. After eight months, mice that contracted the disease made threefold the number of protective “killer” T-cells – a sign of a long-lasting immune response – compared with mice that had received the protein but no calcium phosphate nanoparticles.

The nanoparticles appear to work by ferrying the protein to the lymph nodes where they have a higher chance of meeting dendritic cells, a type of immune cell that is scarce in the skin and muscles, but plays a key role in activating strong immune responses.

In a real-life scenario, genetically engineered proteins based on those displayed at the surface of pathogens would be freeze-dried or dehydrated and mixed with water, calcium and phosphate to make the nanoparticles. This should work with many different diseases and be especially useful for viral infections that are hard to vaccinate against, Baneyx said.

Baneyx did point out, however, that the ability of this vaccine to achieve its goal of the researchers and those who funded the experiment has only been allegedly established in mice, not in humans.

As one may suspect, the development of these new nano-vaccines are funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation by virtue of the organization’s Grand Challenges Explorations grant as well as money from the National Institutes of Health.

The very fact that this research was funded by Bill Gates is enough to raise the eyebrows of many. After all, it was Bill Gates that once tellingly stated “The world today has 6.8 billion people… that’s headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.”

Adding to Gates’ statement is the fact that, time and again, international vaccination programs have ended disastrously for third-world nations. Case in point: the Meningitis vaccine program that resulted in the paralysis of at least 50 African children and a subsequent cover-up operation by the government of Chad. This large number of adverse events occurred in one small village alone, leaving many to wonder what the rates of side effects might be on an international scale.

Even more concerning is the fact that paralysis rates have flourished in countries where Gates’ polio vaccine, the one he is dedicating his life to, have been administered the most. Indeed, nowhere is this any more apparent than in India. As Aaron Dykes writes,

But the real story is that while polio has statistically disappeared from India, there has been a huge spike in cases of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP)– the very types of crippling problems it was hoped would disappear with polio but which have instead flourished from a new cause.

There were 47,500 cases of non-polio paralysis reported in 2011, the same year India was declared “polio-free,” according to Dr. Vashisht and Dr. Puliyel. Further, the available data shows that the incidents tracked back to areas were doses of the polio vaccine were frequently administered. The national rate of NPAFP in India is 25-35 times the international average.

In addition to this data, it appears that the polio vaccines are themselves the leading cause of polio paralysis in India. In relation to the flawed data reported by the Polio Global Eradication Initiative which attempts to minimize the numbers of both vaccine-induced cases of polio paralysis and polio in general, Sayer Ji remarks,

According to the Polio Global Eradication Initiative’s own statistics there were 42 cases of wild-type polio (WPV) reported in India in 2010, indicating that vaccine-induced cases of polio paralysis (100-180 annually) outnumber wild-type cases by a factor of 3-4. Even if we put aside the important question of whether or not the PGEI is accurately differentiating between wild and vaccine-associated polio cases in their statistics, we still must ask ourselves: should not the real-world effects of immunization, both good and bad, be included in PGEI’s measurement of success? For the dozens of Indian children who develop vaccine-induced paralysis every year, the PGEI’s recent declaration of India as nearing “polio free” status, is not only disingenuous, but could be considered an attempt to minimize their obvious liability in having transformed polio from a natural disease vector into a man-made (iatrogenic) one.

Gates’ polio vaccines have likewise been blamed for deaths and disabilities in neighboring Pakistan, with offices of the government in that country even recommending that the vaccines be suspended.

In India, doctors heavily criticized the program not only for the heavy cost to human health and quality of life but also the massive financial burden hoisted upon the state. This is because the program was only partially funded by the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations, which is itself partnered with the World Health Organization, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, World Bank, and United Nations.

The doctors criticized the GAVI-alliance by stating,

The Indian government finally had to fund this hugely expensive programme, which cost the country 100 times more than the value of the initial grant,” their report stated.

From India’s perspective the exercise has been an extremely costly both in terms of human suffering and in monetary terms. It is tempting to speculate what could have been achieved if the $2.5 billion spent on attempting to eradicate polio, were spent on water and sanitation and routine immunization.

. . . . . the polio eradication programme epitomizes nearly everything that is wrong with donor funded ‘disease specific’ vertical projects at the cost of investments in community-oriented primary health care (horizontal programmes) . . . . .

. . . . .This is a startling reminder of how initial funding and grants from abroad distort local priorities.

Indeed, as the doctors assert, one cannot vaccinate away diseases like polio. Apart from the fact that there has never been a study conducted which proves a vaccine either safe or effective that was not connected to a drug company or a vaccine maker,[1] the so-called cure, if it comes under the guise of a vaccine, may well be as bad if not worse than the disease itself.

Again, Sayer Ji writes,

Polio underscores the need for a change in the way we look at so-called “vaccine preventable” diseases as a whole. In most people with a healthy immune system, a poliovirus infection does not even generate symptoms. Only rarely does the infection produce minor symptoms, e.g. sore throat, fever, gastrointestinal disturbances, and influenza-like illness. In only 3% of infections does virus gain entry to the central nervous system, and then, in only 1-5 in 1000 cases does the infection progress to paralytic disease.

Due to the fact that polio spreads through the fecal-oral route (i.e. the virus is transmitted from the stool of an infected person to the mouth of another person through a contaminated object, e.g. utensil) focusing on hygiene, sanitation and proper nutrition (to support innate immunity) is a logical way to prevent transmission in the first place, as well as reducing morbidity associated with an infection when it does occur.

Instead, a large portion of the world’s vaccines are given to the Third World as “charity,” when the underlying conditions of economic impoverishment, poor nutrition, chemical exposures, and socio-political unrest are never addressed.

The fact is that the root cause of diseases like polio are not a lack of vaccination but poor sanitation standards, poverty, lower living standards, chemical pollution, and lack of proper nutrition. If money were spent correcting these ills, as opposed to providing ineffective (in their stated purposes) and dangerous vaccinations, then polio and many other such diseases could indeed be eradicated.

In the end, the answer is about raising living standards, reducing pollution, increasing knowledge and access to proper nutrition and clean drinking water – not chemical and virus-laden needles. Even more so, not vaccines involving nano-particles and even more genetically engineered ingredients.

Notes:
[1] Flu and Flu Vaccines: What’s Coming Through That Needle. Dr. Sherri Tenpenny.

California 2014 Vaccine Law

California’s New Vaccine Exemption Law – Above the Law?

Vaccine Enthusiasts Want To Do The Same Thing In Washington (December article in Everett Herald. Send the link if you can find it.)

See: http://www.nvic.org/Vaccine-Laws/state-vaccine-requirements.aspx

Tuesday, December 17, 2013 by: Alan Phillips, J.D.

Thanks to http://www.naturalnews.com/043266_California_vaccine_exemptions_Constitutional_rights.html.

(NaturalNews) California’s AB 2109 was passed into law in 2012 and takes effect January 1, 2014. The new CA law (http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov) will require parents exercising an exemption to immunizations to provide a letter or affidavit to document which required immunizations have been given and which have not been given on the basis that they are contrary to the parent’s beliefs; and beginning on January 1, 2014, the letter or affidavit has to be accompanied by a State Department of Public Health form signed by a health care practitioner saying that he or she provided the parent “information regarding the benefits and risks of the immunization and the health risks of specified communicable diseases,” and a written statement by the parent indicating that he or she received the information from the health care practitioner. (Seriously? the doctor’s signature alone is not convincing?) California’s Governor Brown, when signing AB 2109 into law, directed the Department of Public Health to allow for a separate religious exemption on the form, so that people whose religious beliefs are opposed vaccinations won’t be required to seek a health care practitioner’s signature. The Department complied, and included a religious exemption in its form.

This article addresses the Constitutionality of: 1) the new law, 2) the Governor’s authority to direct the Health Department to allow for a separate religious exemption on the form, 3) the Constitutionality of the current version of the Health Department’s proposed form, and 4) what can be done about these Constitutional problems.

I.Is the new law Constitutional?

While state legislators each take an oath to uphold the state and federal Constitutions, that oath really means little to nothing, as laws are not officially unconstitutional unless and until a court says so. That is, in practice, legislators are free to ignore their oaths and any Constitutional problems in bills; they need only be concerned with getting enough votes and the governor’s signature. If they get that, the bill becomes law.

The problem with California’s new law concerns those with religious objections to immunizations. While what specific beliefs qualify for a religious exemption is beyond the scope of an article, the starting place is that the “free exercise” clause of the First Amendment as interpreted by federal courts provides protection for any belief that is religious in nature and sincerely held. If you meet those two criteria as the law defines them, you qualify for any exemption that includes religious objections. And since the Constitution is a higher legal authority than state law, states cannot add additional requirements.

California’s new law refers only to “beliefs” – it says nothing about religion or religious objections. Does California’s new exemption law include those with religious objections to vaccines? Technically, that depends on California’s statutory construction rules, which explain how to interpret California’s statutes. In California, like most if not all other states, statutes must be interpreted to give the intent of the legislature, and unambiguous laws are deemed to state the intent of the legislature. So, California’s exemption law does, implicitly and per applicable statutory construction rules, include a religious exemption. The state Department of Public Health has acknowledged this with respect to California’s current exemption law; see, e.g., http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/immunize/Documents/imm488e.pdf.

The Constitutional problem with the new statute comes from the fact that it requires *all* persons claiming an exemption, including those with religious beliefs, to jump through additional hoops, which places an unconstitutional burden on those with religious objections, who need only have a sincerely held religious belief under the Constitution. Therefore, the new law is unconstitutional as to those parents with qualifying religious objections to immunizations.

Governor Brown seemed to be acknowledging this when he directed the Department of Public Health to provide for a separate religious exemption on the health department form, so kudos for Governor Brown. But did he have authority to do this?

II.The Governor’s Authority to Direct the Health Department…

Under general principals of separation of powers, the three branches of government – executive (which at the state level is the governor’s office), legislative and judiciary – provide checks and balances for one another. No branch has direct control over any other branch. So, the governor probably could not legally require the health department, which was created by the legislature and is therefore a part of the legislative branch, to do anything. However, the health department may, as a function of its discretionary authority, choose to cooperate with the governor and attempt to implement his directive, so long as the department does so within the boundaries of its statutory authority. So while the governor may have exceeded his authority to direct the health department to include a religious exemption, the health department may have authority to cooperate with the governor by adding a religious exemption to its proposed form, which it has in fact done. However, did the health department follow the law in its attempt to appease the governor?

III. The Department of Public Health’s New Vaccine Exemption Form (http://eziz.org/assets/docs/CDPH-8262.pdf)

The good news is that the health department’s new exemption form provides a separate religious exemption – parents with religious objections don’t have to get a lecture about vaccines or a doctor’s signature. The bad news is that the wording on the new form appears to require membership in an organized religion with tenets opposed to immunizations, which is unconstitutional. As stated above, the First Amendment, a higher legal authority than state law, requires only a sincerely held religious belief.

In summary, the California State Legislature passed an unconstitutional exemption law; Governor Brown probably exceeded his authority when issuing a directive to the California Department of Public Health telling it to include a religious exemption in the exemption form, and the California Department of Public Health has created an unconstitutional exemption form. Does anyone besides me see a pattern here? I’ll let you decide whether this is incompetence or politics, but these errors have resulted in a bad law that will probably unlawfully discriminate against some California parents.

What Can California Parents Do?

The simplest short-term solution would be for the Department of Public Health to modify their form to bring it into compliance with the Constitution – to remove the “member” requirement and require only a sincerely held religious belief or practice opposed to immunizations. The long-term solution would be for the legislature to correct this by amending the state statute. Citizens in California should contact their representatives and the state health department to demand this. Go in numbers if possible, with a petition or group; and see your state representative in person if at all possible; letters and emails tend to get little or no real attention.

Parents adversely affected by the new law could also file a lawsuit challenging the Constitutionality of the law. However, there’s a risk there. When others states’ unconstitutional religious exemption laws were ruled to be unconstitutional by a court, the result, most of the time, was that the entire exemption was stricken, leaving the state with no religious exemption option at all until the state legislature enacted a new exemption law. So, this needs to be analyzed carefully by attorneys contemplating such a suit. Meanwhile, with respect to the health department form as currently drafted, parents who qualify for a religious exemption but who don’t meet the Department of Public Health’s form requirement of “membership” in a religion could theoretically refuse to provide a doctor’s signature anyway, since that requirement is arguably unconstitutional. You may need an attorney backing you up to pull that off, but the legal argument is there. If enough parents around the state objected in this manner, perhaps the legislature would be forced to pay attention to proper legal boundaries for a change, and would amend the statute to bring it into compliance with the Constitution.

————–

Alan Phillips, J.D. is a nationally recognized vaccine rights attorney. He advises clients, activists and other attorneys throughout the U.S. in over a dozen different vaccine exemption and waiver contexts, and supports activists nationally with vaccine legislative initiatives. Learn more at www.vaccinerights.com

About the author:
Alan Phillips, Vaccine Rights Attorney
attorney@vaccinerights.com, 1-828-575-2622
Vaccine Rights (www.vaccinerights.com)

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/043266_California_vaccine_exemptions_Constitutional_rights.html#ixzz2ninMpaz0

 

Reactions from Gelatin in Vaccines

Saturday, November 9, 2013

Flu Vaccine Reactions From the Same Gelatin in Gummy Bears

Catherine J. Frompovich
Activist Post

What’s the difference between an allergic reaction, an adverse event, or a contraindication with regard to vaccines? Apparently there are very little or no differences because all those events mean that a vaccinee is in trouble with his or her health due to having received a vaccine.

The American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI) reported at its Baltimore, Maryland, meeting early in November 2013, a case report

notes that individuals with a gelatin allergy can have a mild to severe reaction from the [flu] shot. [1]

Severe reactions can include anaphylaxis, which can result in death!

Apparently the ACAAI considered the case report – supposedly about a four-year-old toddler who received a flu vaccine according to radio news reports this writer heard – serious enough that it advised its membership to take some fairly drastic precautionary measures about giving flu vaccines to children with known allergic reactions to marshmallows and gummy bear candies, which contain gelatin made from animal trimmings not used in food processing, or even from discarded animal parts.

Gelatin [2] is an animal protein that is used as a gelling agent in pharmaceuticals, candy making, yogurt [3], ice cream [4], and as a clarifying agent in beer [5]. As with any food, especially protein, people may or may not know they are allergic to it or may not have recognized an allergic reaction to a food, since there can be many allergic reactions in addition to hives, itching, rashes, or even asthma. When I studied nutrition, I learned there can be as many as a thousand different types of reactions in the human body, depending upon an individual’s immune system, constitution, and the offending allergen. In today’s chemical world, more and more individuals are allergic to man-made chemicals, something the medical profession deals with almost exclusively, i.e., pharmaceuticals to which there can be numerous adverse reactions. Vaccines are not exempt!

Some claim there is a difference between food intolerances and allergies. Try telling that to parents who see their little ones experiencing reactions no matter what label is put on them, especially after receiving a vaccine. It’s frightening stuff, and as ACAAI member Stephanie Albin, MD, points out,

Because it is found in the vaccine, those with a known allergy to gelatin can experience allergic reactions, such as hives, sneezing and difficulty breathing. [1]

Furthermore, Dr. Albin elaborates with,

Gelatin reactions can cause hives, swelling, itchiness, shortness of breath and a severe life-threatening reaction known as anaphylaxis. Because of this, precautions should be taken, such as having a board-certified allergist administer the vaccine in a person with known gelatin allergy in case a reaction occurs.

That’s all well and good advice for those who want to take that chance, but there are numerous other proteins in vaccines, along with neurotoxins and other toxic chemicals that can and apparently do cause allergic reactions and adverse events, as verified by the CDC/FDA’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System where physicians and parents can and should file reports.

Furthermore, “While the vaccine is recommended for those six months of age and older” [1], can anyone tell what an infant that young is allergic to? Isn’t that a reasonable question to ask? Maybe the ACAAI ought to consider recommending testing be done on all infants before any vaccines are administered to determine whether there will be adverse mitochondrial involvement that can precipitate the Autism Spectrum Disorder, the MTHFR mutation [6], or allergic reactions. Right now it’s a ‘crap shoot’ and you take your chances of having a damaged child after vaccination.

There also is a nasal flu vaccine, i.e., nasal spray, which contains gelatin that the ACAAI is concerned about. However, it contains MSG (monosodium glutamate), an excitotoxin that doesn’t seem to arouse their interest. MSG affects the brain to produce what’s been called the “Chinese Restaurant Syndrome” or the MSG Symptom Complex. See this YouTube “FluMist Contains MSG” that talks about MSG in the nasal flu vaccine.

According to Dr. Michael Roussell, PhD, [7]

Concerns regarding a link between MSG and obesity have been raised, especially following the publication of a 2011 study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Furthermore, in 1978 two possible psychiatric reactions to MSG were reported to The New England Journal of Medicine. [8]

According to the CDC’s “Ingredients of Vaccines – Fact Sheet” [9]

Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity.

For children with a prior history of allergic reactions to any of these substances in vaccines, parents should consult their child’s healthcare provider before vaccination.

That last statement presents a real problem for everyone, as far as this writer is concerned. The reason lies in the fact that no one knows who will have a reaction to a vaccine ingredient. Furthermore, everyone is told by the medical profession, the media, governments, and school systems that vaccines are safe and necessary. No, they are not on both counts!

Vaccines contain numerous ingredients [10] that pose hidden adverse reactions or events for numerous children of all ages, including adults. VAERS confirms that! Any previous vaccine reaction should preclude a child – or anyone for that matter – from receiving other vaccines in the future in order to prevent an anamnestic response [11], which really doesn’t seem to be taken very seriously by those promoting vaccines, as is exemplified in the recommendation that a board certified allergist should administer vaccines to children with known allergies to vaccine ingredients. No vaccine warrants the possibility of an anamnestic response, in my opinion.

As we have seen with gelatin and MSG, there are real problems that can and do occur from vaccine ingredients from supposedly ‘mundane’, edible, or GRAS ingredients. I have not addressed in this article the more serious ingredients in vaccines, e.g., neurotoxins, which I talk about in my recent book, Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines. That being said, I would like to congratulate the ACAAI for warning about the possible vaccine gelatin reaction. Please don’t stop there! You have an entire roster of ingredients, which can cause adverse reactions, intolerances, or allergies – whatever you want to call them – that are causing serious health problems for innocent children. It’s time to take responsibility; it is time to “bell the cat”. [11]

Notes:

[1] http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/609629/?sc=dwhn
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gelatin
[3] http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Suppliers2/Ingredion-rolls-out-cost-saving-gelatin-replacer-for-yogurt
[4] http://ask.metafilter.com/59218/Gelatinfree-ice-cream-brands
[5] http://www.bertusbrewery.com/2012/06/how-to-clear-your-beer-with-gelatin.html
[6] http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/MTHFR
[7] http://www.shape.com/healthy-eating/diet-tips/ask-diet-doctor-truth-about-msg
[8] Colman, A.D. Possible psychiatric reactions to monosodium glutamate. New England Journal of Medicine 299: 902, 1978.
[9] http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm
[10] http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/b/excipient-table-2.pdf
[11] http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/bell-the-cat.html

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008).

Vaccine Studies and Autism

Note: I do not oppose all vaccination. I do oppose vaccination with vaccines which have not been thoroughly tested for safety, vaccines which are cranked out industrial style, and whose producers are completely exempted from any liability for negligent manufacture.

***

Sunday, October 20, 2013

The Study That Proved Vaccines Caused Autism-like Symptoms

Cartoon Courtesy of René Bickel
and his book, Vaccination: The Great Illusion

Catherine J. Frompovich
Activist Post

The study that showed vaccines were responsible for causing autism-associated or autism-like symptoms from mercury in vaccines was done by CDC epidemiologist Tom Verstraeten using the CDC’s massive Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) and presented at the Simpsonwood Conference Center (Atlanta, GA area) in June 2000 with only 52 vaccine manufacturers invited to discuss the problem and how to change the science.

Here is what Dr. Verstraeten found:

We have found statistically significant relationships between exposure [to mercury in vaccines] and outcomes. At two months of age, developmental delay; exposure at three months, tics; at six months, attention deficit disorder. Exposure at one, three and six months, language and speech delays–the entire category of neurodevelopmental delays.

Dr. Verstraeten also discussed previous studies showing a link between mercury and neurodevelopmental disorders.

Instead of doing the right thing about what was going on, they powwowed over two days to change the science, sending Verstraeten back to redo his work. However, here are some of the statements made by some of the Simpsonwood conference members:

“But there is now the point at which the research results have to be handled, and even if this committee decides that there is no association and that information gets out, the work has been done and through the freedom of information that will be taken by others and will be used in other ways beyond the control of this group. And I am very concerned about that as I suspect that it is already too late to do anything regardless of any professional body and what they say.

“My mandate as I sit here in this group is to make sure at the end of the day that 100,000,000 are immunized with DTP, Hepatitis B and if possible Hib, this year, next year and for many years to come, and that will have to be with thimerosal containing vaccines unless a miracle occurs and an alternative is found quickly and is tried and found to be safe.” — Dr. John Clements, World Health Organization (WHO), Simpsonwood Meeting, June 2000

“I have to say the number of kids getting help in special education is growing nationally and state by state at a rate not seen before. So there is some kind of increase. We can argue about what it is due to.”

“I have taken a lot of histories of kids who are in trouble in school. The history is that developmental milestones were normal or advanced and they can’t read at second grade, they can’t write at third grade, they can’t do math in the fourth grade and it has no relationship as far as I can tell to the history we get of the developmental milestones. So I think this is a very crude measure of neurodevelopment.”

“To think there isn’t some possible problem here is unreal.” — Dr. William Weil, a pediatrician representing the Committee on Environmental Health of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Simpsonwood Meeting, June 2000

“I wonder is there a particular health outcome that is related to aluminum salts that may have anything that we are looking at today.” — Dr. Tom Sinks, Associate Director for Science at the National Center for Environmental Health at the CDC and the Acting Division Director for Division of Birth Defects, Developmental Disabilities and Health, Simpsonwood Meeting, June 2000

As a result of the Simpsonwood Meeting, Dr. Verstraeten effectively reworked the data; found no implication / causation for autism; and that’s what the CDC/FDA say is factual science. Dr. Verstraeten then went on to work for GlaxoSmithKline (vaccine manufacturer) in its European Union facility.

And, finally this, which may be the apparent ‘defense’ at the Simpsonwood meeting: “We just don’t know the effects of ethylmercury.” [as Thimerosal in vaccines]

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.

Her 2012 book A Cancer Answer, Holistic BREAST Cancer Management, A Guide to Effective & Non-Toxic Treatments, is available on Amazon.com and as a Kindle eBook.

Two of Catherine’s more recent books on Amazon.com are Our Chemical Lives And The Hijacking Of Our DNA, A Probe Into What’s Probably Making Us Sick (2009) and Lord, How Can I Make It Through Grieving My Loss, An Inspirational Guide Through the Grieving Process (2008).

Vaccine Court Awards Millions

I do not oppose all vaccines. I oppose vaccines which are not thoroughly tested. I oppose vaccines produce where the producer is protected from liability, as is the case with the “Vaccine Court“. I oppose a factory fast production and marketing system that churns out new vaccines and sets up a regimen where a child receives scores of vaccinations before age 12. We should think critically about vaccines because the published warnings admit that serious complications occur, and the Vaccine Court has paid out some $4 billion in damages to children the Court admits were harmed by the vaccines.

‘Vaccine court’ awards millions to two autistic children damaged by vaccines

Monday, January 28, 2013 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Quietly and without much fanfare, the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program(VICP), or more accurately the congressionally-sanctioned kangaroo court whose sole purpose is to shield the vaccine industry from liability for vaccine injuries, has essentially admitted that vaccines cause autism. As reported by the Huffington Post, two more children who developed autism following routine vaccinations have been awarded millions of dollars to help pay for the lifetime of specialized care they will need to address their injuries.

The first case involves a 10-year-old boy named Ryan from California who quickly regressed into an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) following routine vaccinations he received between 2003 and 2005, and specifically the combination measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Prior to getting vaccinated, Ryan was a perfectly healthy young boy who was actually quite advanced for his age, according to reports. But after getting the MMR vaccine on December 19, 2003, he rather quickly developed an encephalopathy, or serious inflammation, in his brain.

Ryan’s family and friends testified before the kangaroo court that the cumulative effect of the boy’s receiving multiple vaccines from 2003-2005 caused him to suffer “neuroimmunologically mediated dysfunctions in the form of asthma and ASD,” a claim that the federal government eventually admitted to be true several years later. Ryan’s family eventually received compensation for his “Vaccine Table Injury,” but pertinent details about the case have been sealed, including particulars about whether or not the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) agreed with the court’s decision.

You can read further details about Ryan’s case here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html

Similarly, a young girl named Emily developed a seizure disorder and a form of ASD known as pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specific (PDD-NOS) following vaccination with DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis), as well as MMR, HiB (haemophilus influenzae type B), and Prevnar (pneumococcal conjugate vaccine), at 15 months old. According to Emily’s court filing, the young girl developed a fever of 105.7 degrees Fahrenheit following the vaccines, which developed into seizures, shaking episodes, and a measles-type rash.

Initially, the government attempted to deny that Emily’s injuries were caused by vaccines. The defendants even tried to deny that Emily was even sick in the first place. But it was eventually determined that young Emily had indeed developed an ASD, and the government agreed to settle the case by awarding Emily’s family for her vaccine-induced injuries. In Emily’s case, the government never came right out and admitted that vaccines were the cause of her injuries, but its actions in dropping its defense prove that there is no other logical explanation.

Emily’s case is spelled out further here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html

Courts have quietly admitted in the past that vaccines cause autism, brain damage

Back in 2008, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims also admitted that vaccines, and particularly those that contain the mercury-based preservative Thimerosal, can cause autism. A young girl, whose identity was sealed for the family’s protection, was awarded compensation after a series of vaccines caused her to develop severe autism symptoms, including loss of language skills, no response to verbal direction, and no eye contact, among other things.

A year prior, a young boy named Bailey was also awarded compensation after suffering a seizure and developing Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (ADEM) following vaccination with MMR. Bailey’s family was eventually awarded compensation for the boy’s injuries, which the court reluctantly admitted were caused by the vaccine.

Sources for this article include:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/BANKS_CASE.pdf

Vaccine Study

30 years of secret, official transcripts prove vaccine schedules in US and UK  are based on government lies
Learn more:  http://www.naturalnews.com/036652_vaccines_government_lies.html#ixzz22Na5qGvU

(NaturalNews) A comprehensive investigation into the inner workings of the  U.K.’s nationalized healthcare system has revealed a shocking legacy of  corruption and lies concerning the country’s vaccine policy. According to Dr.  Lucija Tomlijenovic, Ph.D., from the University of British Columbia in  Canada, the advisory and governing bodies that set vaccination policy in the  U.K. have, for many decades now, hidden the truth about vaccine dangers, and  deliberately pushed unsafe vaccines on the public in order to uphold the  official vaccination schedule.
Official documents uncovered from secret  meetings of the U.K.’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation  (JCVI), an independent body that helps set vaccination schedule policy in the  U.K., reveal that JCVI ignores independent data showing vaccines to be unsafe,  and reinforces questionable data produced by vaccine companies claiming that  vaccines are safe. The group also discourages all research that might question  the safety of vaccines, and knowingly lies to parents in order to increase the  overall vaccination compliance rate.
“[T]he JCVI made continuous efforts  to withhold critical data on severe, adverse reactions and contraindications to  vaccinations to both parents and health practitioners in order to reach overall  vaccination rates which they deemed were necessary for ‘herd immunity,’ a  concept which with regards to vaccination, and contrary to prevalent beliefs,  does not rest on solid scientific evidence,” writes Dr. Tomljenovic in her  paper.
“Official documents obtained from the U.K. Department of  Health (DH) and the JCVI reveal that the British health authorities have  been engaging in such practice for the last 30 years, apparently for the sole  purpose of protecting the national vaccination program.”
The 45-page  paper blows the lid off the myth that government vaccination policy is based on  sound science, and instead shows that vaccine advisory committees, which help  set vaccine policy, are typically padded with vaccine industry shills that  specifically promote vaccines in spite of evidence showing their dangers. This  has been true in the U.K. since at least the early 1980s, and it is certainly  true in the U.S. as well. (http://www.naturalnews.com/033455_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html)
Dr.  Tomlijenovic explains; for instance, how JCVI has known since as early as 1981  that the measles vaccine, which is part of the government’s official vaccine  schedule, is linked to long-term neurological damage and death. She also  outlines, with full citations, evidence showing that JCVI has long been aware  that many of scheduled vaccines cause permanent brain damage in children, but  have continued to promote those vaccines anyway.

JCVI knew MMR vaccine was capable of causing brain damage

Another  stunning discovery in Dr. Tomlijenovic’s paper deals with the MMR vaccine, and  how JCVI was aware that this controversial jab can cause brain damage. The  transcript from a 1990 meeting of the JCVI CSM/DH Joint Sub-Committee on Adverse  Reactions notes that JCVI was aware that MMR was definitely linked to causing at  least 10 known cases of both meningitis and encephalitis.
JCVI addressed  the issue of MMR safety again in 1991, noting that in a follow-up review of the  earlier cases of meningitis and encephalitis that were definitively linked to  the vaccine, two of the children developed permanent neurological damage as a  result. One other developed behavioral problems, which are linked to autism, and  another developed cerebral astrocytoma, a type of brain tumor. None of this  critical information was publicly disclosed.
You can read Dr.  Tomlijenovic’s full 45-page paper on vaccine corruption here: http://www.ecomed.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/3-tomljenovic.pdf
Sources  for this article include:
http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com
http://www.naturalnews.com/Vaccines_Get_the_Full_Story.html
Learn more:  http://www.naturalnews.com/036652_vaccines_government_lies.html#ixzz22NaOmy18

Thanks to Natural News.

Vaccine Adverse Reactions

Access VAERS
Before searching the data, please read the
U.S. Government disclaimer

http://www.medalerts.org/

 

Search Now
 

The search engine examines vaccines, symptoms, doses, dates, places, and more. It produces tables, graphs, maps, and full event reports. Online documentation and popup help messages guide you through the use of the search engine.

You can also download the data to do custom analysis.

FDA Admits Vaccines Still Contain Mercury

FDA admits in court case that vaccines still contain mercury

by Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) It is a common myth today that the vaccines administered to children no longer contain the toxic additive thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative linked to causing permanent neurological damage. But a recent federal case involving the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has revealed that, contrary to this widely-held belief, thimerosal is actually still present in many batch vaccines, including in the annual influenza vaccine that is now administered to children as young as six months old.

Filed by a citizen-backed coalition advocating vaccine safety, the lawsuit against the FDA alleged that the agency’s continued endorsement and approval of thimerosal as a vaccine additive is a serious public health threat, especially since safer alternatives already exist and are widely used voluntarily by many vaccine manufacturers. But Judge Brett Kavanaugh, siding with antiquated pseudoscience, decided that thimerosal is not a health threat, and that those who wish to avoid it can simply choose thimerosal-free alternatives.

Ignoring the evidence of thimerosal’s dangers brought before him on behalf of the millions of children across the country who continue to be injected with this mercury-based additive, Judge Kavanaugh declared that the plaintiffs, which include groups like the Coalition for Mercury-Free Drugs (CMFD), did not have proper standing to file the lawsuit. And in the process, both he and the FDA inadvertently admitted that thimerosal is still present in many childhood vaccines, which counters popular claims to the contrary.

FDA admits on its website that thimerosal is still in vaccines

The fact that Judge Kavanaugh refused to hear the case is tragic in and of itself, as thimerosal, which is composed of 50 percent mercury, has been proven to cause serious health damage. But what may be even worse is the fact that many people falsely believe that thimerosal is not even included in vaccines anymore, which is leading them to blindly allow them to be administered to their children. And the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the FDA have continued to provide dubious and misleading information on the subject, which the mainstream media has been complicit in spreading over the years.

But the FDA explains, in no uncertain terms, directly on its website that thimerosal is still added to certain vaccines. For this reason alone, it is crucial that parents who choose to vaccinate their children ask for an ingredients list for each and every vaccine before allowing them to be administered to their children.

“While the use of mercury-containing preservatives has declined in recent years with the development of new products formulated with alternative or no preservatives, thimerosal has been used in some immune globulin preparations, anti-venins, skin test antigens, and ophthalmic and nasal products, in addition to certain vaccines,” writes the FDA on its Thimerosal in Vaccines page (http://www.fda.gov).

Don’t believe the lie: Thimerosal is eventually converted by the body into highly-toxic inorganic mercury

Another myth often spread by thimerosal advocates claims that the ethylmercury compounds that compose roughly 50 percent of the preservative are not actually harmful because they are different from the type found in a can of tuna. But a comprehensive review conducted by Dr. Paul G. King has proven otherwise, showing that ethylmercury is first metabolized by the body into toxic methylmercury, which is then metabolized into inorganic mercury (http://www.infowars.com).

Both methylmercury and inorganic mercury are listed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as toxic substances responsible for causing neurological problems, brain disorders, nervous system illnesses, gastrointestinal problems, kidney failure, respiratory illness, and death (http://www.epa.gov/hg/effects.htm).

Sources for this article include:

http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/03/23/44979.htm

http://www.fda.gov

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/protect/children.htm

Bill Gates buys positive press spin on vaccines

Bill Gates buys positive press spin on vaccines, GMOs

(NaturalNews) Aaron Dykes of Prison Planet recently gave an insightful TV news presentation analyzing The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s influence over the media to promote their “world health and agriculture” agendas while soft pedaling the downside of all they’re doing.

Such items as “Gates using his money to save lives … etc” have been appearing in several news outlets, including ABC news (2). Meanwhile, items that question Gates’ “philanthropic” endeavors are muffled or marginalized. Those endeavors deal with vaccinations, sterilization, and GMOs. These are depopulation favorites.

The Gates Foundation donated $1.5 million to ABC’s News Project “Be the change; Save a Life,” extolling the virtues of ensuring Africans don’t starve. The NY Times mentioned Gates as the principal private funding source and adviser for world food policy and agricultural development.

What’s really behind this media shell game

An audience tittered respectfully as Bill Gates once announced how vaccination programs could help reduce the world population by 15%. Those with megabucks tend to be idolized in this culture. They have an edge with getting away with such statements and also lying publicly. (Video Source 1 & 5)

While defending childhood vaccinations in a TV interview, Gates lied so obviously about Dr. Andrew Wakefield that he had trouble speaking for a couple of moments. (Video Source 3)

Gates also promotes how GMOs will prove themselves in time, even as thousands of Indian farmers commit suicide because they’re trapped by Monsanto terminator seeds’ low cotton yields and terrible financial terms.

In addition, small farmers in other third world countries as well as in North America suffer negative consequences from Monsanto’s technology and mafia like policies. It’s no secret that Bill Gates has 500,000 shares of Monsanto stock, valued at $27 million.

This is an investment, not a grant, that gives him some say with Monsanto. A French/German public TV alliance did a great documentary in English a few years ago called “The World According to Monsanto.” How come so few world leaders and mainstream journalists ignore this gem? (Video Source 4)

Bill is shrewd enough to offer 78 grants at smaller amounts, $100,000 each, to cover as many depopulation tactics as possible. They include research for vaccine delivery mosquitoes to ultrasonic mechanisms for reducing human sperm counts (http://www.naturalnews.com/034834_Bill_Gates_sperm_infertility.html).

Partners in crime

The Gates Foundation is in step with the Rockefeller foundation. At the turn of the 20th century, the original Rockefeller, John D. and family, managed to create the allopathic medical system and Big Pharma dominance that have become today’s Medical Mafia for profit and power. They were also and still are depopulation eugenicists.

Both foundations are financially linked with the evil Monsanto, Cargill (a large multinational food distributor), the Doomsday Seed Vault, AGRA (Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa), and GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccinations and Immunization).

America’s Green Revolution was initially funded by the Rockefeller Foundation in the 1940s. It led to Big Ag’s mass monoculture farming that has depleted topsoil while demanding toxic pesticides and herbicides along with synthetic fertilizers that, in turn, help provide fluoride poisons for public water supplies.

All this farming and food distribution has fallen into fewer hands. Among them is Cargill. Control the food and you control the people. Of course, Cargill wants in on the action to exploit Africa with AGRA and Monsanto, the new “green revolution” group.

Just in case these billionaires destroy the food chain for most of the world, they’ll have the Doomsday Seed Bank for their future farming needs.

Along the way, Gates promoted and funded vaccinations that will assist the depopulation agenda through disease and infertility (5). Gates is now also partnered with Gardasil manufacturer Merck for research into creating infertility vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/034848_Microsoft_Merck_eugenics.html)

Sources for this article include:

(1) http://www.prisonplanet.com

(2) http://abcnews.go.com

(3) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFlhBYwLbf8&feature=player_embedded

(4) http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/the-world-according-to-monsanto/

(5) http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article17644.html