Category Archives: vaccines

Anti-vaccination nurses in Australia will be prosecuted

This news is more than two years old, but I only just found out about it.

Nurses in Australia are regulated by the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia (NMBA), an agency under the government’s Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency. NMBA members are appointed for three years by the Australian Health Workforce Ministerial Council.

In October 2016, NMBA released new vaccination standards cracking down on nurses and midwives who “promote” anti-vaccination to patients and the public via social media. The new standards are justified on the grounds that promoting false, misleading or deceptive information is an offense under national law — the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act 2009and is prosecutable by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency.

On October 20, 2016, the Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia (NMBA) released a statement threatening to take action against any nurse or midwife who promotes anti-vaccination via social media. The statement, “NMBA position clear, we will take action on anti-vaccination promoters,” reads:

The Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia (NMBA) and AHPRA take their responsibility of public protection very seriously, and will take regulatory action on nurses or midwives who promote anti-vaccination statements to patients and the public.

The recently published NMBA position statement follows the Board’s awareness that a small number of registered nurses, enrolled nurses and midwives have promoted anti-vaccination statements to patients and the public via social media which contradict the best available scientific evidence. Current evidence indicates that preventative measures such as vaccination are a clinically effective public health procedure for certain viral and microbial diseases….

The NMBA’s Social media policy also provide clear guidance to nurses and midwives when using social media and is unambiguous in stating that when using social media, in any context, the National Law, the NMBA’s code of ethics and code of conduct, and the Guidelines for advertising regulated health services apply….

If the NMBA decide to take action on a nurse or midwife’s registration they can issue a caution, accept an undertaking or impose conditions which limit their practice in some way. If a nurse or midwife’s registration is restricted, this will be published on the public online register of practitioners.

The NMBA refer allegations of the most serious examples of professional misconduct to tribunals. Once a matter is referred to a tribunal it usually becomes public, and decisions are published online.

The NMBA statement also urges members of the public to report nurses or midwives who “promote” anti-vaccination.

According to The Guardian, Dr. Hannah Dahlen, a professor of midwifery at the University of Western Sydney and the spokeswoman for the Australian College of Midwives, said vaccination was essential to public health and safety, and that it is “concerning” that some midwives and nurses “are taking to social media in order to express a position not backed by science.” However, Dahlen added she was worried the crackdown may push people with anti-vaccination views further underground: “The worry is the confirmation bias that can occur, because people might say: ‘There you go, this is proof that you can’t even have an alternative opinion.’ It might in fact just give people more fuel for their belief systems.”

The World Health Organisation claims that vaccinations prevent up to three million deaths every year from diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough and measles.

See also:

~Eowyn

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Federal government admits, although required by law, it does not monitor vaccine safety

Mon, 16 Jul 2018 13:38:37 +0000

eowyn2

Did you know that vaccine manufacturers cannot be sued in state courts for damages as a result of design-defects in their products?

That’s what the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-2 in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth — that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act protects vaccine manufacturers from design-defect claims.

Congress had passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) in 1986 in response to a massive increase in litigation against vaccine manufacturers, which drove two of the largest domestic manufacturers out of business and led to a shortage of vaccines. Congress created the new law to shield vaccine manufactures from tort litigation and, in so doing, alleviate the growing shortage of vaccines. (Homeland Security News Wire)

In place of lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act created a system of federal government oversight of vaccine safety:

  1. All health care providers must report adverse vaccination events and possible side effects to a post-marketing surveillance program — the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), co-managed by the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and the FDA (Food and Drug Administration). The CDC and FDA are agencies within the federal government’s Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).
  2. To coordinate vaccine-related activities of the CDC, FDA and other HHS agencies, the NCVIA created the National Vaccine Program — an office within the HHS which is required under Title 42, United States Code, 300aa-27(c), to report every two years to Congress about vaccine safety, adverse reactions, and other aspects of vaccinations.

Indeed, the Supreme Court’s majority opinion in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth by Justice Antonin Scalia concluded (p. 55 of Bruesewitz v. Wyeth) that by passing the NCVIA, Congress had struck a “careful balance between providing adequate compensation for vaccine-injured children and conferring substantial benefits on vaccine manufacturers to ensure a stable and predictable childhood vaccine supply.” Nevertheless, the Supreme Court’s “majority’s decision today disturbs that careful balance based on a bare policy preference that it is better ‘to leave complex epidemiological judgments about vaccine design to the FDA and the National Vaccine Program rather than juries.’”

Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) is a non-profit founded by Del Bigtree to investigate “the safety of medical procedures, pharmaceutical drugs, and vaccines while advocating for people’s right to ‘informed consent’.”

On August 25, 2017, ICAN filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for those bi-annual vaccine reports that the HHS is required to send Congress, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. SS300aa-27(c).

HHS stonewalled ICAN’s FOIA request for eight months.

On April 12, 2018, ICAN filed another lawsuit, “Informed Consent Action Network v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services” in U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, demanding an answer to their FOIA filing.

On July 6, 2018, ICAN finally received a response — an admission in federal court by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the federal agency mandated by Congress under 42 U.S.C. SS300aa-27(c) to track vaccine safety, that they had never done it:

Although the HHS’ National Vaccine Program Office is required to report every two years to Congress on their monitoring of vaccines, the HHS has no such records — not even one in the 31 years since 1987.  That means the National Vaccine Program had never monitored vaccine manufacturers for vaccine safety and side effects.

Here is a screenshot of the “Stipulation” or court order in ICAN v. HHS, in which HHS made that stunning admission:

As ICAN observes:

The 1986 [National Childhood Vaccine Injury] Act created a system in which vaccines are licensed, recommended, encouraged, subsidized, and defended by HHS. The 1986 Act’s scheme thus places HHS in charge of two competing duties. On one hand, HHS is responsible for vaccine safety. On the other hand, HHS is required to promote vaccine uptake and defend against any claim they cause any harm.

Regrettably, it appears that HHS has chosen to focus almost entirely on its vaccine promotion and defense function to such a degree that it has essentially abandoned its vaccine safety function.

To summarize:

  1. Congress passed a law in 1986 protecting vaccine manufacturers from being sued in state courts.
  2. At the same time, Congress created an agency within HHS, charged with the job of monitoring vaccine safety.
  3. That agency, National Vaccine Program Office, is supposed to report to Congress every two years.
  4. As a result of two lawsuits by the non-profit Informed Consent Action Network, HHS finally admitted in federal court that it doesn’t have any reports from the National Vaccine Program Office.
  5. This means HHS had never monitored vaccine safety, although it is required by law to do so.
  6. Neither has Congress done its job. Why hasn’t Congress held HHS to account for failing to submit vaccine safety reports?
  7. This means the American people really have no reason, other than what vaccine manufacturers say, to think vaccines are safe.
  8. And yet the media demonize vaccine skeptics as “conspiracy theory” crazies.

H/t Hal Turner Radio Show

Bonus News:

Did you know that generic drug manufacturers cannot be sued for manufacturing and selling a defective drug? – even if:

  • The drug causes horrific injuries;
  • The generic company knew the drug was causing horrific injuries and did nothing to warn patients or doctors about the dangers of the drug.

That’s because the Supreme Court ruled in PLIVA v. Mensing (2011) and Mutual Pharma. V. Bartlett (2013) that while brand-name companies are allowed to add new warnings to their drug labels without getting prior permission from the FDA, generic companies are not. If a generic drug company discovers a new side effect of one of its drugs, it is not permitted to tell patients or doctors about this new information. It must first contact the FDA and request that the brand-name label be changed. Only after the brand-name label is changed is the generic company allowed to change its label. In essence, generic manufacturers are prohibited from giving any warnings to doctors or to the public that have not already been given by the brand-name manufacturer. (Spangenberg Shibley & Liber Trial Lawyers)

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Goldman Sachs: No 'sustainable' profit in curing diseases

Tue, 01 May 2018 14:36:02 +0000

eowyn2

When I began blogging some 10 years ago, I was a conspiracy theory innocent and, like many Americans, looked askance at conspiracy theories.

By the way, did you know that the CIA concocted the “conspiracy theorist” label for the express purpose of attacking and discrediting people who questioned the official narrative about the Kennedy assassination? (Source)

After ten years of daily blogging, which requires me to be attuned to both mainstream and alternative media, I have discovered that, alarmingly, most conspiracy theories turn out to be true.

One conspiracy theory has to do with Big Pharma. From the mouth of Goldman Sachs, the multinational investment bank and financial services company, now comes confirmation of the suspicion that the pharmaceutical industry has a vested interest not in curing diseases, but in keeping people sick.

Tae Kim reports for CNBC that an April 10, 2018 Goldman Sachs report for biotech companies, The Genome Revolution, asks if curing diseases is “a sustainable business model” for pharmaceutical companies because, unlike long-term management of diseases (“chronic therapies”), “one shot cures” don’t deliver “recurring revenue” or “sustained cash flow”.

In a note to clients, Salveen Jaswal Richte, 40, vice president of Goldman Sachs’ research division, wrote:

“The potential to deliver ‘one shot cures’ is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies. While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.

For a “biotech expert,” it is interesting that Ms. Richte has only a B.S. in Biomedical Engineering (and a minor in Entrepreneurship and Management) from Johns Hopkins University. She and her husband, Mark Jason Richter, owns an apartment in New York City which they’d purchased last year for $4.58 million.

I can’t help but wonder what Salveen Richte would do if her daughter comes down with a disease for which Big Pharma refuses to develop a “one shot cure” because it’s more profitable to keep her on a lifetime regimen of drugs?

As an example of unprofitable “one shot cures,” Richter cited Gilead Sciences’ treatments for hepatitis C, which achieved cure rates of more than 90%. The company’s U.S. sales for these hepatitis C treatments peaked at $12.5 billion in 2015, but have been falling ever since. Goldman estimates the U.S. sales for these treatments will be less than $4 billion this year, according to a table in the report.

Richte also points out the unprofitability of curing infectious diseases such as hepatitis C because it decreases the number of “carriers” — those infected with Hep C — who can transmit the virus to infect others:

“GILD is a case in point, where the success of its hepatitis C franchise has gradually exhausted the available pool of treatable patients. In the case of infectious diseases such as hepatitis C, curing existing patients also decreases the number of carriers able to transmit the virus to new patients, thus the incident pool also declines … Where an incident pool remains stable (eg, in cancer) the potential for a cure poses less risk to the sustainability of a franchise.”

The report suggests three potential solutions to deliver the big bucks for biotech firms:

“Solution 1: Address large markets: Hemophilia is a $9-10bn WW market (hemophilia A, B), growing at ~6-7% annually.”

“Solution 2: Address disorders with high incidence: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) affects the cells (neurons) in the spinal cord, impacting the ability to walk, eat, or breathe.”

“Solution 3: Constant innovation and portfolio expansion: There are hundreds of inherited retinal diseases (genetics forms of blindness) … Pace of innovation will also play a role as future programs can offset the declining revenue trajectory of prior assets.”

@PaxNostrum tweets:

I was involved in pharmaceutical litigation against big drug companies. This, or something similar, has been said thousands of times under oath by Pharma reps and their counsel. Money is made on treatment, not cures. They would bury cures & promote treatment in a NY second.

@Fruityboots tweets:

everybody with an infectious disease let’s cough on some napkins and mail em to Goldman Sachs

H/t FOTM‘s josephbc69

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

This flu season is an epidemic: Some died just 2 days after onset of symptoms

The 2017-2018 flu season is now an epidemic — a unusually deadly epidemic:

    • The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) declared this season an epidemic, stating the illness is widespread in at least 39 states.
    • Although the flu season hasn’t even peaked yet, CDC epidemiologist Lynnette Brammer said more hospitalizations are being reported and deaths are increasing: “We are starting to see cases of severe disease and we are seeing excess deaths“.
    • California public health officials said the number of deaths and hospitalizations is higher than normal. During the week of Jan. 14, 23 people reportedly died from the flu in the state, bringing this season’s total to 97 deaths. For some perverse reason, neither California nor the CDC record flu deaths among people over the age of 65, which means the number of deaths due to the flu and complications (pneumonia and sepsis) is much higher.


Whereas flu victims typically are older people (age 65 and older) and infants (age 5 and younger), what makes this flu season alarming are two things:

  1. People younger than 65 (and older than 5) have died.
  2. Death comes quickly, in some cases after only 2 days of the flu.

Some examples:
(1) Dylan Winnik, 12, of Palm Beach County, Florida. He died of the flu on January 21, 2018, just two days after he had fallen ill with what his parents thought was the common cold because his symptoms were mild.

(2) Jonah Smith, 17, died December 29, 2017 in Arizona when his heart stopped beating in the backseat of his sister’s car. Smith’s family said he showed no flu-like symptoms except he had complained of a backache. He continued to go to work at a fast-food restaurant and see friends. Doctors said Smith had the flu and pneumonia, and that he might have had “an underlying medical condition,” but the teen was not known to have one.

(3) Kyler Baughmen, 21, died five days after he became sick on December 23, 2017, with a mild cough and runny nose. The body builder celebrated Christmas and went back to work on December 26. The following day, he was rushed to the hospital. He died on December 28 from kidney failure due to septic shock caused by the flu.
(4) Katharine Gallagher, 27, died December 5, 2017 in Tustin, California, five days after she first experienced flu-like symptoms on Thursday night. She went to the doctor on Sunday, and was sent home with antibiotics. Two days later, after she appeared to be getting better that morning, her boyfriend found her dead on the bathroom floor — from severe acute bronchial pneumonia.

(5) Tandy Harmon, 36, died just two days after she went to the hospital with flu symptoms. On January 17, the Oregon mother-of-two in Oregon went to the hospital with flu symptoms, but was told to go home to rest and hydrate. Hours later, Harmon was back in the emergency room, where she quickly declined and had to be placed on life support by that evening. She died two days later on January 19, from MRSA and pneumonia.

(6) Katie Oxley Thomas, 40, of San Jose, California, died of the flu just 48 hours after falling ill. The mother-of-three and marathon runner’s condition declined so quickly that she was moved to intensive care, placed on life support and died all in the span of 15 hours on January 4, 2018. Her family said she had received a flu shot.
(7) Jenny Ching, 51, went to the hospital in Massachusetts with flu-like symptoms. After being diagnosed with the flu she developed an infection and pneumonia. The mother-of-two died on January 6, 2018, just a week after being diagnosed.
There are four flu strains:

  1. The dominant flu strain is H3N2, which often signals a severe season that affects the oldest and the youngest the hardest. CDC epidemiologist Brammer said, “We probably haven’t seen H3N2 peak yet.”
  2. Influenza A is predominating in California.
  3. H1N1 virus
  4. Influenza B: Brammer said it’s possible we will see a wave of H1N1 and influenza B before the season is over.

Brammer claims that this year’s vaccine contains all the circulating viruses. However, the vaccine is not very effective against H3N2. Dr. Michael Osterholm, who directs The Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, said the vaccine is, at best, only 10% effective on H3N2.
What to do:

  • Wash hands often.
  • Cover coughs and sneezes.
  • Stay home if you’re sick.
  • Given the virulence of this season’s flu epidemic, if you get sick, get medical help ASAP. Antiviral drugs like Tamiflu and Relenza are effective only if taken early.

If you’re in the medical field and you know more about this flu epidemic than what we are told publicly, please share your information.
Sources: WebMD; Patch; Daily Mail; Business Insider
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Michigan mom jailed for refusing vaccines cultured from aborted babies' cells for her son

Mon, 30 Oct 2017 19:13:25 +0000

eowyn2

Chris Woodward reports for OneNewsNow, October 26, 2017, that Rebecca Bredow, of Detroit, Michigan, was jailed for seven days for contempt of court after refusing to vaccinate her son with vaccines cultured with aborted babies’ tissue.

The judge told Bredow in a hearing recorded by WXYZ-TV Detroit (see video below): “You’ve repeatedly stated over the past several days publicly that you will not follow this court order.” The judge explained that while she understands Bredow loves her son, Bredow is not the child’s only parent, and that the child’s father, Bredow’s ex-husband, who wants their son vaccinated, also has a say in the decision.

Bredow has since been released, but the situation continues to have people and pro-life groups discussing the issue, including Right to Life of Michigan, which supports Bredow’s right of conscience in not wanting to immunize her son with vaccines that were cultured using aborted fetal tissue.

Right to Life of Michigan Legislative Director Ed Rivet pointed out in a press release that the vaccines are cultured using cells from healthy babies who were electively aborted – not from miscarried babies:

“There is absolutely no question that a significant number of common vaccines are directly cultured using cells from aborted unborn children. That is how the vaccines are produced. We have long supported the right of parents to refrain from using them – or to request alternative versions cultured in untainted cell lines.

The unfortunate part is that all of these vaccines can be produced without the use of aborted fetal cells. The pharmaceutical industry can eliminate this entire controversy by using other cell lines to produce vaccines.

Right to Life of Michigan will continue to expose the truth about these vaccines, continue to support parents who refrain from using them and continue to urge the creation of ethically produced vaccines.”

All of the common childhood immunizations have versions cultured using aborted fetal cells – including MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) and DTPP (Diptheria, Tentanus, Pertussis, Polio). Only a few versions are not grown using fetal cells. No abortion-free alternatives exist for Chickenpox, Hepatitis A, and MMR.

Michigan for Vaccine Choice (MVC) also supports parental rights when it comes to vaccines. MVC’s Connie Johnson said:

“As a Christian myself, I am adamantly opposed to abortion. It’s not the actual tissue that’s found in the vaccinations, but there are DNA fragments that cause a lot of problems when they’re inserted into another person. The DNA of a foreign person – going into your DNA – the body tries to absorb that DNA. It does cause some problems.”

As for Bredow, she recently told ABC News that she would “do it all over again” – if necessary: “I was trying to protect my kids. I was trying to stand up for what I believed in, and it was worth it for me to try and take the risk, because I was trying to stop the vaccinations from happening.”

The truly perverse aspect of all this is that aborted fetal issue is totally unnecessary for vaccine production or any medical research because the vaccines can be produced using animal cells. As an example, Novartis produced a flu vaccine that does not use aborted fetal cell lines.

Debi Vinnedge, the director of the pro-life group Children of God for Life, wrote in 2015:

 : “The fact of the matter is that aborted fetal tissue is absolutely unnecessary for vaccine production or any medical research. There are numerous FDA approved moral cell lines and if human cells are desired, they can be obtained from a plethora of non-objectionable sources including umbilical cord, cord blood and other adult stem cells,” :Last year, a Congressional investigative panel found that fetal tissue often was used to develop vaccines for “economic, not scientific reasons.”

“Almost 75 specific vaccine formulations have been approved by the FDA for use in the United States and not a single one has been produced using freshly isolated human fetal tissue. Eleven of these vaccines rely on fetal cell lines for historic reasons, yet all of them could be produced using animal cells.”

H/t LifeNews and Big Lug

See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

New study finds aluminum in vaccines triggers autism, esp. in boys

Despite the MSM and the medical establishment’s demonization of vaccine skeptics (see “Baylor U. professor & M.D. Carol Baker: ‘Let’s just get rid of all the whites in the United States’ (includes discussion on enforcing childhood vaccination, we actually do have compelling evidence of the deleterious effects of vaccines. See:

Particularly troubling is the association of childhood vaccination and autism. See:

Now, a new study has pinpointed the aluminum in vaccines as the agent in triggering autism, especially in boys.
The study was conducted by a team of four scientists at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, BC, Canada:

  • Dan Li, Dept. of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences.
  • Lucija Tomljenovic, Dept. of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences.
  • Yongling Li,  Dept. of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences.
  • Christopher A. Shaw, Dept. of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Program in Experimental Medicine, and Program in Neuroscience.

The four scientists reported their findings in an article titled, “Subcutaneous injections of aluminum at vaccine adjuvant levels activate innate immune genes in mouse brain that are homologous with biomarkers of autism,” in the peer-reviewed Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry, Volume 177, December 2017, pp. 39-54.
Here’s a summary of the study:

  • Vaccines contain aluminum adjuvant — a pharmacological agent added to a drug to increase or aid its effect.
  • The scientists injected aluminum into mice.
  • The aluminum had neuro-inflammatory effects on the mice’s frontal cortex.
  • The frontal cortex is  involved in emotional and social functions which are impaired in autism.
  • Male mice are especially susceptible to aluminum’s neuro-toxic effects.

Abstract

Autism is a neurobehavioral disorder characterized by immune dysfunction. It is manifested in early childhood, during a window of early developmental vulnerability where the normal developmental trajectory is most susceptible to xenobiotic insults. Aluminum (Al) vaccine adjuvants are xenobiotics with immunostimulating and neurotoxic properties to which infants worldwide are routinely exposed. To investigate Aluminum′s immune and neurotoxic impact in vivo, we tested the expression of 17 genes which are implicated in both autism and innate immune response in brain samples of Aluminum-injected mice in comparison to control mice. Several key players of innate immunity, such as cytokinesCCL2, IFNG and TNFA, were significantly upregulated, while the nuclear factor-kappa beta (NF-κB) inhibitor NFKBIB, and the enzyme controlling the degradation of the neurotransmitteracetylcholine (ACHE), were downregulated in Aluminum-injected male mice. Further, the decrease of the NF-κB inhibitor and the consequent increase in inflammatory signals, led to the activation of the NF-κB signaling pathway resulting in the release of chemokineMIP-1A and cytokines IL-4 and IL-6. It thus appears that Aluminum triggered innate immune system activation and altered cholinergicactivity in male mice, observations which are consistent with those in autism. Female mice were less susceptible to Aluminum exposure as only the expression levels of NF-κB inhibitor and TNFA were altered. Regional patterns of gene expression alterations also exhibited gender differences, as frontal cortex was the most affected area in males and cerebellum in females. Thus, Aluminum adjuvant promotes brain inflammation and males appear to be more susceptible to Aluminum′s toxic effects.

Graphical abstract

Upon peripheral injection, aluminum activates the nuclear factor-kappa beta (NF-κB) pathway in the brain, resulting in the release of proinflammatory molecules. The increased immunoinflammatory signal downregulates the activity of acetylcholinesterase to activate acetylcholine-mediated immunosuppression. If immunosuppression is not achieved, the excessive immunoinflammatory response may impair neurodevelopmental processes producing autistic pathology.

Image 1

Some other observations from the article:

  • Aluminum is an environmental toxin with demonstrated negative impact on human health, especially the nervous system, to which humans are regularly exposed.
  • Aluminum can enter the human body through various sources including food, drinking water, many infant formulas, cosmetic products, cooking utensils and pharmaceutical products including antacids and vaccines.
  • Why aluminum in vaccines is particularly toxic: Compared to dietary aluminum of which only ~ 0.25% is absorbed into systemic circulation, aluminum from vaccines is poorly excreted by the body and may be absorbed at over 50% efficiency in the short term and at nearly 100% efficiency long-term. Thus, vaccine-derived Al has a much greater potential to produce toxic effects in the body than that obtained through diet.
  • Aluminum in vaccines affect other body organs, not just the brain: In a series of experiments, a French group found that aluminum injected in vaccine-relevant amounts into 8–10 week old mice (mimicking the amount that adult humans receive through vaccinations) is able to travel to distant organs including the spleen and the brain, where it can be detected one year after injection.
  • Furthermore, aluminum not just damages specific body organs, it triggers the body’s “systemic inflammatory responses.”
  • Even dietary aluminum is deleterious, shown to accumulate in our central nervous system over time, resulting in Alzheimer’s type disease. Aluminum’s neurotoxic effect has also been observed in experimental animals fed equivalent amounts of aluminum to what humans consume through a typical Western diet.

The study concludes:

Altogether, these observations show that the adjuvant form of Aluminum has a unique potential to induce neuroimmune disorders, including those of the autism spectrum.
Given that infants worldwide are regularly exposed to Aluminum adjuvants through routine pediatric vaccinations, it seemed warranted to reassess the neurotoxicity of Aluminum in order to determine whether Aluminum may be considered as one of the potential environmental triggers involved in ASD (autism spectrum disorders).

You can read/download the entire article in PDF format here.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Flu vaccine linked to significantly higher rate of miscarriages

In his speech on how to reduce global warming at the 2010 TED conference, billionaire Bill Gates touted vaccines as a means to reduce the world’s population by as much as 10-15%. He said:

“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 service, we could lower that by perhaps 10 to 15 percent.

Don’t think what Gates said was a Freudian slip. As the video below shows, Gates had said it at least four times:

And now, we have a study on exactly that — anti-fertility vaccine.
A team of 13 medical scientists conducted a study that found a significant association between flu vaccine and miscarriages (“spontaneous abortion”). The scientists are:

  • James G. Donahue, Ph.D. & MPH (the lead author), Burney A. Kiekea, Jennifer P. King, Maria A. Mascola and Edward A. Belongia, of Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, WI.
  • Frank DeStefano and Eric Weintraub of the Immunization Safety Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
  •  Stephanie A. Irving, T. Craig Cheetham, Allison L. Naleway, Jason M. Glanz and Nicola P. Klein, of Kaiser Permanente (in Portland, OR; Pasadena, CA; Denver, CO; and Oakland, CA).
  • Lisa A. Jackson, of Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA.

Donahue & colleagues published their findings in an article titled “Association of spontaneous abortion with receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine containing H1N1pdm09 in 2010–11 and 2011–12,” in the peer-reviewed journal Vaccine, 35:40 (September 25, 2017), pp. 5314–5322.

Objective

Donahue et al. described their study’s objective:

“Inactivated influenza vaccine is recommended in any stage of pregnancy, but evidence of safety in early pregnancy is limited, including for vaccines containing A/H1N1pdm2009 (pH1N1) antigen. We sought to determine if receipt of vaccine containing pH1N1 was associated with spontaneous abortion (SAB).

Methodology

Using data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, Donahue et al. identified 485 eligible women aged 18 to 44 years who had a miscarriage (cases) and 485 women who had live births or stillbirths (controls), and matched them on site, date of last menstrual period and age. Participants who were vaccinated with the inactivated influenza vaccine before the miscarriage date were considered exposed. Primary exposure was 1-28 days before miscarriage, called the “exposure window”.

Results

Donahue et al. had determined that the random probability or odds (“adjusted odds ratio” is “a measure of association between an exposure and an outcome) of a woman having a miscarriage 1-28 days after having had a flu vaccination was 3.7 (95% CI, 1.4-9.4) for the 2010 to 2011 flu season, and 1.4 (95% CI, 0.6-3.3) for the 2011-2012 flu season.
But Donahue et al. found that among the women in their study (Healio):

  • A “significantly” increased 7.7 (95% CI, 2.2-27.3) odds radio (aOR) for miscarriage in women who had received pH1N1-containing flu vaccine in the 1–28 days “exposure window” and who had also been vaccinated in the previous season.
    At the time of miscarriage, the median gestational age was 7 weeks. There were no statistically significant associations between miscarriage and receipt of inactivated influenza vaccine during any other exposure windows.
  • In contrast, regardless of current influenza vaccination status, women who did not receive the vaccine in the previous season were not at an increased risk for miscarriage. Their aOR was only 1.3 (95% CI, 0.7-2.7).
  • “This effect modification was observed in each [flu] season” in 2010-2011 and 2011-2012.

Conclusion

Donahue et al. concluded that:

“SAB [spontaneous abortion or miscarriage] was associated with influenza vaccination in the preceding 28 days. The association was significant only among women vaccinated in the previous influenza season with pH1N1-containing vaccine. […]
It is important to note that this study does not and cannot confirm a causal association, but the validity of the major findings is supported by the effect modification across two influenza seasons and the observation of elevated odds ratios in the 1 to 28 day exposure window only. More research is needed regarding the immunologic effects of influenza vaccination during pregnancy. A follow-up study funded by CDC is currently underway to evaluate the risk of [miscarriage] after repeated influenza vaccination during the 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 influenza seasons; results are expected by late 2018.”

“Significant association” means a statistically significant correlation, i.e., a correlation that is a result of more than random chance.
In other words, the study found that flu vaccination is associated with a higher incidence of miscarriages — an association that could not have occurred by pure chance alone — in pregnant women who:

  • had the flu vaccine 1-28 days before miscarriage;
  • were vaccinated in the previous influenza season with pH1N1-containing vaccine.

In fact, as J.B. Handley Jr. of GreenMedInfo points out, flu-vaccine manufacturer Sanofi Pasteur precisely had warned about the safety of their flu vaccine for pregnant women. This is the warning in the package insert of Sanofi Pasteur’s 2016 flu vaccine:

“Safety and effectiveness of Fluzone Quadrivalent have not been established in pregnant women or children less than 6 months of age.”


Given the importance of the Donahue et al.‘s findings, you can imagine that the CDC would be inundated with questions about the high correlation of flu vaccination and miscarriages.
Isn’t it interesting, then, that the CDC put a gag order on its employees. On August 31, 2017, the CDC’s public affairs officer Jeffrey Lancashire sent an internal email to its employees, instructing them not to speak to reporters. The email, obtained by Axios, says:

“Effective immediately and until further notice, any and all correspondence with any member of the news media, regardless of the nature of the inquiry, must be cleared through CDC’s Atlanta Communications Office. This correspondence includes everything from formal interview requests to the most basic of data requests.”

H/t FOTM‘s MomOfIV
See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Baylor U. professor & M.D. Carol Baker: 'Let's just get rid of all the whites in the United States'

On May 9, 2016, in Atlanta, Georgia, the National Meningitis Association (www.nmaus.org) hosted a panel discussion, “Achieving Childhood Vaccine Success in the U.S.,” before its “Give Kids a Shot” Gala. The panel addressed a range of issues including parents who opt out of childhood vaccine requirements, physicians who stray from the recommended vaccine schedule, and the role of the media in creating or removing barriers to vaccination.

The panelists were (from left to right):

  • Paul Lee, M.D., Director of the International Adoption Program and Pediatric Travel Center at Winthrop-University Hospital in Mineola, New York (moderator).
  • Carol J. Baker, M.D., Professor of Pediatrics, Molecular Virology and Microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
  • Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, PhD., Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley’s Hastings College of Law. Reiss favors legal liabilities for parents who opt for non-vaccination, and is noted for her support of California Senate Bill 277, which reduced exemptions to vaccination requirements for enrollment in California schools and daycare centers.
  • Arthur Caplan, PhD., Professor of Medical Ethics at NYU Langone Medical Center.
  • William Schaffner, M.D., Professor of Preventive Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.
  • Alison Singer, President of Autism Science Foundation.
  • Paul Offit, M.D., Director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.


Beginning at the 53:35 mark in the video below, Dr. and Professor Carol J. Baker speaks, with surprising inarticulateness and incoherence for a professor who should be used to public speaking — sentences and thoughts begin, then trail off to something else entirely. (Dorit Rubinstein Reiss is an even worse speaker — furtive, incoherent, inarticulate — and she’s a full professor of law at UC Berkeley!) At the 53:58 mark, Dr. Baker says:

“The fight, the battle is being fought — one family, one physician, one health center. That’s why we’re doing as well as we are.
We’re talking about the minority [of vaccine refusers], and strategies against the minority. So I have the solution: Every study published in the last five years, you look at vaccine refusers, I’m not talking about people we can talk them into coming to terms, but refusers. (54:28 mark) Let’s just get rid of all the whites in the United States, because Houston is the most diverse city in the entire United States. There are seven Asian languages spoken in that city. I’ve been in the [racial] minority for more than 20 years in the city of Houston. The majority of them are what we all ‘Hispanics’ — it’s not a race or an ethnicity, it’s a political designation. A lot of them are from Central or South America, Mexico. Guess who wants to get vaccinated the most in Houston? Immigrants! It is the ‘well educated’ — in terms of pieces of paper and the paper on the wall — [who are the vaccine refusers], people that have been here for a long time, and it’s very unfortunate and.
But I think we need not lose the big picture. The big picture is there are physicians out there — family practitioners, pediatricians, internists — talking one on one with either the older child — I don’t know when a child stops being a child. For me, I was 30, I wrote my mother and said ‘Hey, I’m a grown-up’. They’d already given me an M.D. degree by then, so it’s a good thing I was grown up.
I think that we need to do things as an articulate media-trained group to encourage that conversation, and encourage our health care system to value what vaccines do. Give people enough time to talk to individual families. Most hesitant people, it’s absolutely right, someone said it earlier, some families are having ‘pre-natal visits’. That’s the time to talk about vaccines. This war is fought one on one, with individual families. We need to support those policies that give health care providers, nurses, I mean nurses are really really important, they’re the ones who are probably giving the shots, and if they’re not on board with accepting vaccines, then do you think they’re gonna be supportive of you recommending a vaccine? You have to have your whole [health care] practice situation on board.”


“Let’s just get rid of the whites in the United States” – Carol J. Baker, M.D. & Professor.
But not one person — on the panel or in the audience — challenged or asked Dr. Baker what she meant by that.
Instead, beginning at the 1:03:06 mark, a fat blonde woman in salmon pink, who identifies herself as a public health nurse in New Jersey who audits immunization and works with pediatrics, suggests that medical insurance companies deny coverage for children whose parents refuse vaccines. The woman says:

“My question is legally, would it be possible to go to the insurance companies that cover vaccines, if a parent refuses to have vaccines, would they be willing to not cover the medical care for a child.”

At some time, while we were sleeping, the United States was taken over by insane tyrants.
See also:

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Some thoughts on the globalist agenda, vaccines and population control

I highly recommend you read this excellent, well-reasoned, and well-sourced article on the shadowy elites’ use of vaccines to reduce the world’s population.
Source: Some thoughts on the globalist agenda, vaccines and population control

Please follow and like us:
0
 

German government officials get 'safer' vaccines

Mon, 26 Dec 2016 14:56:31 +0000

eowyn2

Although the Spiegel report below is from 2009, there is no reason for us to think that the German practice of a 2-class vaccine system had ended, or that there isn’t one in the U.S. as well, wherein U.S. politicians have access to “safer” versions of the vaccines they inflict on us little people.

angela-merkel

From “Second-Class Medicine: Germans Unhappy with Alternative Swine Flu Vaccine for Politicians,” Spiegel, Oct. 19, 2009:

One might think that the arrival in Germany of the first of 50 million doses of swine flu vaccine on Monday might be cause for celebration. But with news breaking over the weekend that top government officials in Berlin will be injected with an alternative vaccine — one widely seen as safer — a debate about an alleged two-class medical system has erupted.

SPIEGEL over the weekend reported that Chancellor Angela Merkel, a number of her ministers and other government officials would receive a vaccine manufactured by the pharmaceutical company Baxter — the same vaccine that the German military opted for, as was reported last week. […]

The controversy centers on an additive included in the vaccine manufactured by pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline. The additive includes an inactive strain of the entire flu virus as opposed to virus fragments. Critics say the additive can increase the risk of side effects from the flu vaccine such as fevers and headaches.

Supporters counter that the additive is safe, and its use allows the drug manufacturer to quickly produce more doses of the vaccine. […]

An Interior Ministry spokesman told SPIEGEL that the Baxter vaccine had been ordered for all ministries and other agencies as well as for the employees of the Paul Ehrlich Institute, the authority responsible for approving vaccines.

Merkel’s spokesman Ulrich Wilhelm on Monday denied that Merkel was taking a different vaccine than the one available to ordinary Germans. He said that the Baxter vaccine had been ordered four months ago as part of a deal hammered out one year ago and has nothing to do with recent concerns surrounding the GlaxoSmithKline vaccine [aka Pandemrix]. […]

Leading physicians also complained about the planned vaccination. The head of the Institute for Hygiene and Public Health at the University of Bonn, Martin Exner, said: “The fact that politicians and top civil servants in ministries will be vaccinated with a vaccine other than the people is a terrible sign. Today politicians must take what they recommend.”

Virologist Alexander Kekulé Hall of the University Hospital said the fact “that the members of the Federal Government and the authorities have any other vaccine is a scandal.” […]

Some German politicians have joined Merkel in opting out of the alternative vaccine. Health Minister Ulla Schmidt said in Bild, “I will allow myself to be vaccinated with the same vaccine as the people. It is exactly like the other approved vaccine, safe and effective.”

The weekend scandal has drowned out a second debate which has been raging in recent weeks in the US and which has also found resonance here in Germany: whether such a massive vaccination program is necessary in the first place.

Wolf-Dieter Ludwig, chairman of the Drug Commission of the German Medical Association, has called the planned vaccination campaign a “scandal.” “The health authorities have fallen for a campaign from the pharmaceutical companies, who simply want to earn money with an alleged threat,” he told SPIEGEL.

H/t Thought Crime Radio

Meanwhile, I still have not received a response to an email I’d sent 20 days ago to the Editorial Office as well as Editor-in-Chief Joav Merrick of the journal Frontiers in Public Health, inquiring why the journal deleted, without explanation, an article on childhood vaccination and autism after the journal had published it in its 2016 issue (4:270). The article was even scrubbed from Google Cache.

The article was a report by Dr. Anthony Mawson, Dr. Brian D. Ray, Dr. Azad R. Bhuiyan and Binu Jacob, of the findings of their study that found a statistically significant association between childhood vaccination and autism.

In an email, the study’s lead author Dr. Anthony Mawson informed me that Frontiers in Public Health‘s chief editor had pulled the article because of “complaints” based simply on the article’s Abstract, although the paper had been approved for publication by two peer reviewers, Kelly Hsieh and Linda Mullin Elkins, as well as by an editor, Amit Agrawal.

All of which means that Frontiers engaged in post-publication censorship.

See “New study finds link between child vaccination and autism – CENSORED”.

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0