George Danby | BDN
By Meryl Nass, Special to the BDN  March 28, 2019 8:39 am


Trust in the pharmaceutical business hit a low in 2018. Only 38 percent of those Americans polled by the Edelman Trust Barometer said they trusted the industry. Some of the reasons for this are likely high prices, false advertising, and concealing of side effects that harm and kill consumers, as happened with Vioxx, an anti-inflammatory medication. A Lancet study estimates that Vioxx caused 38,000 deaths from heart attacks.

Five and a half years after it was licensed, Merck was forced to withdraw Vioxx. A total of 80 million patients had taken it, and annual sales had topped $2.5 billion.

Anti-Vaccination; Pro-Science; Pro-Health; Anti-Industry

Posted on: Saturday, April 13th 2019 at 1:15 pm  

Written By: Jagannath Chatterjee
Views 36471
This article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2019
There are unanswered questions about vaccine safety. We need studies on vaccinated populations based on various schedules and doses as well as individual patient susceptibilities that we are continuing to learn about. No one should be threatened by the pursuit of this knowledge. Vaccine policy should be the subject of frank and open debate, with no tolerance for bullying. There are no sides – only people concerned about the well being of our children."
Dr Bernadine Healy, MD, Former Director, National Institute of Health (NIH)
On 17th January 2019 the WHO while unveiling its new 5 year strategic plan, The 13th Global Programme of Work, declared vaccine hesitancy among global public health threats alongside Ebola.[1] On 21st March 2019 in a meeting at Geneva to decide the post 2020 vaccine strategy, it talked of deep and broad engagement of stakeholders to take forward the vaccination agenda globally and Kate Gilmore, UN Dy High Commissioner Human Rights, stated, "There is no such thing as the right to refuse vaccines."[2]
The intent is to neutralize a growing movement that has been raising critical questions regarding vaccines since the 18th century spurred by a broad range of issues like vaccination scandals, ill advised mandates and breach of civil liberties, refusal to acknowledge adverse effects, lack of oversight and unresolved issues on matters of vaccine safety and efficacy, conflict of interest, and collusion between the industry and regulating agencies. 
Vaccination has a controversial history. Prior to vaccination there were three practices; olfaction, inoculation and variolation. These failed because they led to serious adverse effects, increased the death rate and helped the disease to spread among populations where they were practiced.[3]
Jenner's small pox vaccination was accepted upon a single case of James Phipps who after operation in May 1796 survived a disease challenge, deemed unethical by many[4], and it was assumed the immunity was for life. However the incidence rapidly increased and the promised period of immunity reduced progressively from a lifetime to six months. Repeated revaccination was suggested which suited those implementing the practice for a handsome fee.[5]
Opposition to the vaccine grew as people witnessed deaths and very serious adverse effects from "the most dangerous vaccine" that Dr Paul Offit acknowledges "has an adverse effect profile we would not accept as a vaccine today".[6] An article in the JAMA attributes the deaths to serious adverse effects and specifies not only those vaccinated but the contacts too were coming down with the disease.[7] Parents preferred to pay fines and even accept jail terms rather than having their wards vaccinated, particularly as they had previous children who had succumbed.
400 pages on Inoculation;
To those using this document: 
Although I have read much of the source information for these statements and links and have confirmed that they are true, I have not personally verified every single one. (At this point, there are thousands!) I love the meme I recently saw that said: 
“Don’t believe what I post, research what I post.”
I will continue to add to this document as time goes on. I will also try to clean it up and organize it into topics as I am able. (If you are looking for something in particular, hit “Ctrl” + “F” to use the search function.)
Feel free to share the link with anyone and everyone! That is what it is for. (Just copy and paste the link, just like a webpage.)
(The first ~115 pages are links to science studies, government statistics, physician quotes, etc. Scroll down to page ~115 for many relevant charts/illustrations/memes. The first several relate to measles.) 
(This document has also been repeatedly deleted by Facebook dozens of times, so I’m experimenting with changing the name of it occasionally. I have no idea if that will thwart their algorithms or whatever they use or not, but worth a try. Just don’t be surprised if the title throws you.)
One more thing: you are welcome to download this as you are able, but as I will be adding to it as time goes on, you may want to keep the link :).
(I am now a partially out-of-work freelancer who happens to be passionate on this topic due to my own experience related to refusing the newly mandatory flu shot at my former place of employment.  If you appreciate the months of work that have and will continue to go into this effort, please consider supporting it with a small donation. I pledge to persist in adding to and improving this source at every opportunity!  Thank you.)

While you're here, consider signing the petition!

Autism, Made in the USA: the Undeniable Connection Between Vaccines and Autism Spectrum Disorder

By Gary Null and Helen Buyniski

“universal vaccination of pregnant women could get us into a whole new set of problems.”

Millions of parents believed that vaccines were safe and trusted that they were effective in protecting their children from various communicable illnesses. As a result, they willingly took their children to the doctor’s office time and time again to receive the full range of vaccines. The doctors, nurses and pharmacists proffering these vaccines also believed in their safety and efficacy – after all, scientists in the federal agencies comprising the US public health service, including the FDA and CDC, had decades of experience working hand in hand with pharmaceutical companies and their scientists to make sure that vaccines were safe and effective. The idea that autism or any other brain abnormality could result from the vaccines was considered anathema – simply not possible. Worse still, those people considered anti-vaccine advocates were irresponsible and uneducated shrills who had no peer review-quality science to support their impudent questioning of the safety or efficacy of vaccines. However, 10 physicians and scientists spending approximately 15,000 hours reviewing in detail every scientific study available on vaccine safety and efficacy have found that contrary to accepted wisdom, there is absolutely a connection between vaccines and brain damage, including autism spectrum disorder. The issue is no longer based upon science – it is based upon ideology, economics, and politics.
What follows are actual studies from the peer reviewed literature that were not publicized in the mainstream media and not discussed in any government committees proving the lack of safety and efficacy of these vaccines and their impact upon children’s brains. Our information is not based on politics, profits, or proprietary interests but instead represents one of the most scandalous public health debacles since the Tuskegee experiment. This should not happen – ever. But it has, due to the enormous power and influence that special interest groups, pharmaceutical companies, and their vaccine divisions have within the federal agencies; their control over the stories the media presents, which leads to enormous bias from journalists and medical magazines, and what is taught to physicians, nurses and pharmacists. We’re concerned that we are inundated with propaganda. And what about the “believe all women” movement? Why hasn’t this movement believed more than 2 million mothers who say they saw completely normal development in a child reverse following a vaccine, who saw their children regressing into autism spectrum disorder? We will present the case that indeed there is a connection between vaccines and autism and it’s in the government’s own files. It’s in the government library of medicine a hundred times over. This conclusion comes from independent investigations and respected institutions. Additionally, we will show you the dark side of science, the corruption of ethics at the CDC and the FDA. We will inform you of the Thompson cover-up at the CDC, as well as the Verstraeten collusion in the secret enclave in Georgia that was uncovered by Robert F Kennedy Jr. We have pulled together all these strands to prove our point, and everything we say is fully documented and footnoted.
While researching the controversial link between vaccines and autism – which despite repeated dismissal by all public health authorities continued to persist among parents and in-the-know doctors as autism rates skyrocketed, public health advocate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. stumbled upon a massive coverup that had taken place in June 2000 in Norcross, Georgia.  The Simpsonwood conference – officially the Scientific Review of Vaccine Safety Datalink Information – included top scientists and health officials from the FDA, the CDC, the British health ministry, and pharmaceutical industry execs, all gathered to discuss the results of a major study evaluating the negative effects of thimerosal, a commonly-used mercury-based preservative used in vaccines. CDC epidemiologist Dr. Tom Verstraeten presented his findings to the assembled luminaries, concluding,

“the screening analysis suggests a possible association between certain neurologic  developmental disorders. Namely tics, attention deficit disorder, speech and language disorders and exposure to mercury from Thimerosal containing vaccines before the age of six months.”1

World Health Organization: Gates Foundation Now Second Largest Funder After U.S. Government

A second look at vaccination – answers that cannot 

be questioned

29th July 2019
 ‘No man can be forced to be healthful, whether he will or not. In a free society, individuals must judge for themselves what information they choose to heed and what they ignore.’ John Locke. ‘A letter concerning Toleration’
Here, I am going have another look at vaccination, before scurrying away from the subject for a bit, and getting back to the safe ground of cardiovascular disease. Much to the relief of some of the regular readers of this blog, no doubt.
I have to say that I thought long and hard about blogging on vaccination. It is the most brutal area for discussion that I have ever seen, and a reputation shredder. If you even dare to hint that there may just be the slightest issue with any vaccine, people come down upon you like a ton of bricks.
I also know that by daring to write on this subject, there will inevitably be people moving behind the scenes to have my blog taken down. I cannot imagine WordPress management going to the wire to protect my right to free speech. A little flick of a switch, and I will be gone from the airwaves.
However, as we move towards a world where it seems that all Governments around the world are going to pass laws mandating vaccination for everyone, and people are fined, or lose their jobs, for speaking out, or refusing to be vaccinated, then I feel that some attempt to discuss the area is essential.
Because, once something becomes mandatory, and any research into possible harms moves strictly off limits, we really need to be absolutely one hundred per-cent certain that there is no possibility that we may be doing harm. Or, that we are reducing any potential harm to the lowest level possible.
Can vaccines do harm?
‘Prof Martin Gore, 67, one of the UK’s leading cancer scientists, has died, the Royal Marsden NHS foundation trust has said. His death was following a yellow fever vaccination.’ 1
A tragedy for a brilliant medical researcher and his family. It was brought to my attention by my wife, who knew him quite well.
However, even here, we can see any criticism of vaccines being toned down and deflected. The words ‘caused by’ were carefully avoided. It was reported that he died following a yellow fever vaccination – which could mean he was vaccinated, then got hit by a bus. In fact, if you read a little more deeply, it becomes inarguable that the yellow fever vaccine was the direct cause of his death.
Yes, such an event is rare, but such events do occur. People can die following vaccinations, as a direct cause of that vaccination, although the information can be very difficult to find. In Germany, the Paul-Erlich Institute [PEI] is the organisation responsible for the reporting of vaccine security/safety.
‘Between 1978 and 1993 approximately 13,500 cases of undesired effects resulting from medications for vaccinations was reported to the Paul Erlich Institute (PEI) which is the institute which is responsible for vaccine security; the majority was reported by the pharmaceutical industry. In 40% of cases the complications were severe, 10% pertained to fatalities on account of the effects.’ 2
Yes, the numbers are relatively small – although by no means vanishingly small. In a fifteen-year period that is 1,350 deaths. If the Germans are preventing tens of thousands of deaths a year through vaccination, then a thousand severe complications and a hundred deaths or so, per year, may be a price worth paying? Discuss.
Primum non nocere
My own view is that you should never compel people to undergo a medical procedure that could result in severe damage – or death. But my philosophy is very much on the radical libertarian end of the spectrum. Others feel that personal liberties should be restricted for the overall good of society. A central philosophical divide, I suppose.

The WHO-AEFI Vaccine Adverse Events Classification: an Apartheid Tool?

The promotion for the utilization of vaccines and the inadequate surveillance systems in poor, Third World countries is largely controlled by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation through the mantle of the World Health Organization (WHO) which administers public health programs in poor and middle income countries. Vaccine safety is the domain of the WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS), established in 1999.

Association of Genetic and Environmental Factors With Autism in a 5-Country Cohort

Author Affiliations
JAMA Psychiatry. Published online July 17, 2019. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.1411

Bauer: All vaccines are not equally safe and effective


Henry Bauer
By Henry H. Bauer
Bauer is Professor Emeritus of Chemistry & Science Studies and Dean Emeritus of Arts & Sciences at Virginia Tech.
Recent outbreaks of measles have brought widespread unrestrained criticism of parents who have avoided vaccinating their children under the presumed influence of misguided ideological “anti-vaxxers.” But at least some of the anger and blame should be directed at official sources for refusing to admit that some vaccines occasionally do bring sometimes very serious harm to some individuals. By not admitting that, officialdom provides unwarranted credibility to allegations of official cover- ups, allegations then expanded to blanket warnings against vaccinating in general.
There are three main ways in which vaccines can sometimes cause harm to some individuals.
One is the presence in some vaccines of preservatives to protect against contamination by bacteria. Being toxic to bacteria, they can also be toxic to higher forms of life. A commonly used preservative, thimerosal, is a mercury-containing organic substance, and organic-mercury compounds are indeed often toxic to human beings.
A second possible source of harm in some vaccines is the use of so-called adjuvants. These cause a non-specific stimulation of the immune system, in the belief that when the immune system is already aroused it will respond better to the specific components in the vaccine. Adjuvants work through being recognized by the immune system as foreign and undesirable, in other words as being potentially harmful to the person receiving the vaccine. Commonly used adjuvants include organic aluminum compounds, which are known to be harmful if they accumulate in the nervous system, particularly the brain; some people of my age may recall the long-ago warnings against aluminum cookware because of that possible harm.
A third possible danger lies in the inherent specific action of the particular vaccine. Some vaccines sometimes, though quite rarely, actually bring about the very disease against which they are intended to act. More generally, since vaccines are intended to cause the immune system to do certain things, it is far from implausible that the immune system may sometimes react in a different fashion than desired, for example by setting in process an autoimmune reaction. Our present understanding of immune-system functioning does not warrant dogmatic, supposedly authoritative pronouncements alleging that all vaccines are safe for everyone.
The known sources of possible harm from vaccination makes it not unreasonable, for instance, to recommend that babies be vaccinated against mumps, measles, and rubella separately, at intervals, rather than with a single dose of a multiple (MMR) vaccine. The known nervous-system toxicity of organic aluminum and mercury compounds makes it unreasonable to dismiss out-of-hand that these additives in some vaccines may produce such neural damage as symptoms of autism; reports and claims need to be investigated, not ignored or pooh-poohed. Moreover, wherever possible we should be offered the option of vaccines free of adjuvants and preservatives.
Is vaccine dissent based on science?
(A scientific paper published in Oatext)


The mere mention of a possible link between vaccines and disorders such as autism will instantly elicit a visceral response from many pediatricians. In most cases the response is to point out that the paper linking the MMR vaccine to autism authored by Dr. Andrew Wakefield and colleagues has been discredited, with Wakefield, vaccine advocates whipping boy losing his license to practice medicine in the UK. The implication being that anti-vaccine groups are relying on flawed or fraudulent data or that this is only study to ever make a connection between vaccines and autism, so the issue has been put to rest.

Medicine has a history of exercising its cultural authority to suppress opposition opinion. These include Dr. William Coley, who observed one of his patients began recovering from cancer after he was infected with Streptococcus pyogenes. This led Coley to theorize that post-surgical infections helped defeat cancer by mobilizing the immune system, but almost all his scientific peers rejected the idea, writing it off as “crazy and dangerous”. Coley died in 1936, and with his death his theory and work which were looked down on as “quack medicine” died too. Coley’s theory of immune system stimulation to fight cancer was “surpassed” by “scientific” chemotherapy and radiation.

Francis Peyton Rous was a pathologist who discovered that certain viruses were linked to the development of certain cancers was ostracized by his peers and both he and his findings were largely discredited. However, in 1966, over 50 years after his initial findings, he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.

This paper is not about Wakefield nor is it a defense of him or his research, it is however intended to point out that there has been an organized attempt to silence vaccine opponents, both professionals and parents who, backed with valid research as defined by pro-vaccine’s definition of “real science” have raised legitimate concerns as to the safety and efficacy of certain vaccines. Before latching onto the Wakefield case as the holy grail to prove that vaccine opposition groups rely on fraudulent or weak data to advance their agenda, vaccine advocates need to examine their own science and those who are supplying it.