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! https://www.paypal.me/scientiapotentiaest Thank you.)
While you're here, consider signing the petition!
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/presidential-appointment-independent-vaccine-safety-commission
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.”
WORD AUTISM AND SYRINGE, MEDICAL INJECTION ON BLUE
BACKGROUND
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
Dan Bai, MSc1Benjamin Hon
Kei Yip, PhD1,2Gayle
C. Windham, PhD, MSPH3Richard Francis, PhD5Rinat Yoffe, MPH6Emma Glasson, PhD5Behrang Mahjani, PhD2,7,8Auli Suominen, MSc4Helen Leonard, MBChB,
MPH5Mika Gissler, PhD4,9,10Joseph
D. Buxbaum, PhD7,8,11,12,13,14Kingsley Wong, PhD5Diana Schendel, PhD15,16,17Arad Kodesh, MD18,19Michaeline Breshnahan, PhD,
MPH20,21Stephen
Z. Levine, PhD18Erik
T. Parner, PhD22Stefan
N. Hansen, PhD22Christina Hultman, PhD2Abraham Reichenberg, PhD7,8,11,14Sven Sandin, PhD2,7,8
Author Affiliations
Bauer: All vaccines are not equally safe
and effective
·
·
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)
Abstract
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.
Post a Comment