Vaccine Safety

Thoughts on the Vaccination Process by Dr. Richard Moskowitz

Richard Moskowitz MDBy Dr. Richard Moskowitz

In Vaccines: a Reappraisal, my intention was to provide a comprehensive overview of the subject, including some politics and history as well.  Now I want to focus more narrowly on those parts of the book that address the science of the vaccination process in general.  Many years of practicing medicine and studying the scientific literature have convinced me that all vaccines pose a serious threat of chronic disease and death, and that these most dreadful outcomes are neither rare aberrations nor unrelated coincidences, but direct consequences of the physiological mechanisms by which vaccines achieve their intended and seemingly laudable goals.  In what follows, I will briefly mention what is and isn't known about those mechanisms, what clinical observations have led me to this hypothesis regarding them, what scientific evidence appears to support it, and what kind of research will be needed to validate or refute it.  

Immunity, True and False.

            In the early years of my practice, a deep misgiving led me to stop vaccinating before I could say why.  Reviewing basic immunology reminded me that acute febrile illnesses like the measles are essentially the concerted effort of the immune system to expel the offending virus or bacterium from the blood, requiring an elaborate array of defense mechanisms, namely,

1) inflammatory sensitization of the epithelium lining the nasal, oral, and pharyngeal cavities through which it entered,
as preparation for expelling it, by sneezing and coughing;

2) activating and signaling macrophages and monocytes, wandering phago-cytic cells that detect, engulf, and digest
invading viruses (or neutrophilseosinophils, and basophils, in the case of bacteria, allergens, and toxins, respectively);

3) activating the complement system, serum proteins that attach to and fragment them;

4) releasing interferons, interleukins, and other inflammatory cytokines, peptides that direct the phagocytes to where
they are needed;

5) synthesis of specific antibodies by lymphocytes and plasma cells in the thymus and bone marrow, which clump the viruses together, render them insoluble, and initiate phagocytosis; and

6) encryption of a permanent "memory" of the infection within the genetic material of these cells, to help them recognize and respond to viruses even more promptly and efficiently in the future.1

            In sum, it seems reasonable to conclude that natural immunity requires the removal of foreign viruses and bacteria from the blood, a collaborative project of the immune system as a whole, and cannot be achieved by any of these mechanisms acting independently of the others.

            For most healthy people, the immunity that results is absolute, lifelong, and profoundly health-giving, in two important senses. It is specific, in that virtually everyone who recovers from the measles will never again be susceptible to it, even if large-scale epidemics are active in their neighborhood.2   But it also involves a nonspecific priming of the cellular immune mechanism to respond acutely, vigorously, and in concert, to whatever other infections it may encounter in the future.3

            Since vaccination is intended to substitute for this splendid outpouring and indeed render it unnecessary, it's easy to forget that coming down with and recovering from such illnesses represent a huge net gain for the general health of individuals, their descendants, and ultimately of their communities, their country, and of human life on the planet, indeed that they are the formative experiences by which natural immunity, a fundamental prerequisite of good health, is achieved and maintained throughout life.

Continue reading "Thoughts on the Vaccination Process by Dr. Richard Moskowitz" »


Minnesota Resolutions Ask Congress To Restore Manufacturers’ Liability for Defective Vaccines

Product liabilityBy Nancy Hokkanen

Overturning a Supreme Court decision is a tall order, necessitating a constitutional amendment or a new Court ruling. Despite the effort and obstacles, the eventual repeal of SCOTUS’s 2011 Bruesewitz v. Wyeth ruling is behind four resolutions discussed by Minnesota legislators and advocates at a Capitol press conference May 14 in St. Paul.

The 2011 SCOTUS Bruesewitz verdict eliminated vaccine injury victims’ option to sue pharmaceutical companies after first working through the problem-ridden National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, or “Vaccine Court.” A 6-2 majority of the Supreme Court held that “the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act preempts all design-defect claims against vaccine manufacturers brought by plaintiffs seeking compensation for injury or death caused by a vaccine’s side effects.”

HF2862, HF2825, SF2781 and SF2831 are Minnesota resolutions to reverse Bruesewitz, by “memorializing the President and Congress to hold vaccine manufacturers liable for design defects that result in adverse side effects from vaccines.” Local vaccine safety advocates helped develop the language with legislators, in an attempt to restore the NCVIA to its original Congressionally mandated intent.

Since Oct. 1, 1988, the Vaccine Court has paid out $4.1 billion to victims of vaccine injury, and is hardly the free-and-easy road to generous compensation that industry-linked critics claim. The resolutions ask Congress to “override the Supreme Court decision, and remove Bruesewitz to allow petitioners to file suits in state or federal court,” according to speaker Wayne Rohde, father of vaccine-injured child and author of The Vaccine Court: The Dark Truth of America's Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

Minnesota’s Capitol was chaotic Tuesday because its legislative session ends May 20. Rep. Jeremy Munson (Dist. 23B) made

Rep. Jeremy Munson MN 5-14-2019
Minnesota Rep. Jeremy Munson.

time to lead the half-hour press conference, organized primarily by the Vaccine Freedom Coalition and Vaccine Safety Council of Minnesota. In attendance were reps from metro TV stations, radio and a newspaper, and lobbyists including the Minnesota Medical Association.

Rep. Munson stated that he is not anti-vaccine; rather:

“I am for making sure we that have a balance in the system that allows vaccine manufacturers to be held accountable if their products are dangerous. If everyone believes that vaccines are safe, that they cause no injury or they can’t cause injury, then there should be no problem with… going back to the law that we used to have, that allowed people to seek civil cases against vaccine manufacturers.”

Sen. Jim Abeler, chief author of SF2781, noted the large number of vaccine injury claims filed – and “how tortuous the route is to actually get a claim resolved” after an injury or death. And he questioned public health officials’ definition of “safe” – which differs from Webster’s Dictionary. “We’re in a world where the Department of Health calls them ‘exceedingly safe’ – I think that nothing is further from the truth.”

Sen. Abeler stated that vaccines are safe for some people but not all, and compared them to peanuts. “Nobody disbelieves the peanut allergy family. Unfortunately when somebody has a reaction to a vaccine, they are somehow considered to be unbelievable.”

Vaccines are classified as biologics, not drugs, so safety testing requirements differ. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration states that U.S. vaccines are “as safe as possible,” but critics point to contaminants, lack of true placebos, and data fraud in vaccine research.

A 2012 American Medical Association Journal of Ethics article states, “…[V]accine manufacturers are now not liable for failing to improve vaccine designs and defects, unlike manufacturers of other products.” When a manufacturer bears no professional or financial liability for unsafe reactions, “Then they’re much more casual with their safety testing,” said Abeler.

Star Tribune reporter J. Patrick Coolican
Minneapolis Star Tribune reporter J. Patrick Coolican.

At 4:25 in the Senate video, Minneapolis Star Tribune reporter J. Patrick Coolican suddenly interrupted Sen. Abeler’s presentation with an irrelevant question:

“Do you think that gun manufacturers should also be protected from liability? Because they currently are, by an act of Congress.”

Sen. Abeler replied that Coolican’s question was another topic for another day, but added, “I appreciate the joke.” (To folks in the know, Minnesota’s legislative progress has been held up recently by polarizing partisan gun policy debates.)

Next Coolican half-asked:

“So you’re not pro-vaccine.”

Clearly Coolican had an agenda and was baiting Sen. Abeler, rather than:

            (1) listening to the full presentation content, or

            (2) asking a question pertinent to the material being presented.

Only two minutes before (at 2:58) Sen. Abeler had stated most distinctly:

Continue reading "Minnesota Resolutions Ask Congress To Restore Manufacturers’ Liability for Defective Vaccines" »


WHO Is Misinforming?: British Politician Makes A Fool Of Himself Attacking Social Media

Jon ashworth uk
Jon Ashworth

By John Stone

"Jonathan Ashworth in his one specific example of social media misinformation has almost certainly misunderstood what he is reading. The cases he was reading about were almost certainly in the US where the Hep B vaccine is administered on the day of birth. Given that he himself seems horrified by the idea should not people be allowed to talk about it?"

(My comment in The Times, London)

Jonathan Ashworth, British Labour Party Spokesman on Health and Social Care, finds the idea of vaccinating an infant on the day of birth repugnant. He wrote in a Times of London editorial yesterday:

"The anti-vaccination content I’ve been able to find on Facebook in just a matter of minutes has been eye-opening. There appears to be a deep distrust in these closed groups of both the medical community and governments.

"I’ve found posts from terrified parents asking for advice on how to make sure their newborn babies aren’t taken away from them shortly after birth to be vaccinated.

"Other posts completely misinform the public about the science behind vaccinations. It’s why Tom Watson has called for a legally enforceable duty of care to be placed on these firms backed by hefty fines."

It is of course impossible know whether the other posts he read and felt challenged by were genuinely misinforming or whether he was just briefed to find them so, but in this instance what is almost certainly being referred to is the US practice of administering the Hepatis B vaccine to infants at birth, and it is quite interesting that he finds the idea - this does not happen in British hospitals - repugnant.

On a similar note I wrote to André Spicer, professor of organisational behaviour, Cass Business School (University of London)

Andre-Spicer-200px
Prof Andre Spicer

about his article last Friday in the Guardian(so far no reply):

Dear Prof Spicer,
 
I checked out this paper by Chiou and Tucker you linked to in your Guardian article yesterday
 
The nearest that they ever get to providing evidence of “fake news” p.8-9 fig 2, is saying a website misrepresented an article by exaggerating an associated risk of vaccines with neurological-psychological disorders. It doesn’t reproduce the “fake news” article and doesn’t link to the study they say has been misrepresented (which is also not in the bibliography) and has not as far as I can see been misrepresented at all (if I have identified it correctly). It contains very troubling information.

Continue reading "WHO Is Misinforming?: British Politician Makes A Fool Of Himself Attacking Social Media" »


Corvelva Foreign Staff - What did we find in the MMRV (Priorix Tetra) vaccine?

CorvelvaNOTE: The following is excerpted from the Corvelva website. Grazie mille a la nostra amici a Corvelva. Visit their site at Corvelva.it

###

We want to take stock of the situation together with you. Eight months have passed since July 2018 and in these lenght of time we have achieved extremely satisfying results. We have presented a ​research program ​and regarding the vaccines analysis we are able to make a point of reference, with the objectives achieved, those being finalised and those only planned for now.

To begin with, the analyses of 2 compounds for each vaccine have been verifyed by means of standards, using certified control standards with a concentration in the order of micrograms / mL. The compounds we have chosen are among those known for their critical hazard profile. We are talking about a cumulative quantity, a total amount of those recognized as identities and those to be identified, which can be estimated within the order of 50 micrograms / mL, in contrast to the EMA / FDA guidelines.

These tests have given positive results, therefore they fully confirm the analysis method! The contaminations observed are probably due to different and variable manufacturing process’ phenomena and topics. What has been observed in the course of the studies is an “inter-batches” variation of the composition, which makes us assume that there are some steps along the whole product manufacturing process that are difficult to control.

Summary table showing the results of analyses (Priorix tetra)

  1. Antigens - 3 out of 4 attenuated viruses were identified and sequenced. Rubella was detected in a very low number of copies. Varicella, mumps and measles viruses have higher mutations, probably derived from the attenuation of a large number of minor variants (quasipecies).
  2. Chemical Contaminants (signals) - 115-173 (29-43% known)
  3. Chemical toxins - NO
  4. Protein Contaminants - Sarcoplasmin calcium-binding protein, Actina e Vimentina
  5. Free peptide contaminants - NO
  6. Residual DNA/RNA deriving from cultured cells - Total amount of DNA: 1.7-3.7 μg/dose, the 80% of which was human (Human fetal DNA / RNA from the MRC-5 cell line). Other amount of DNA: chicken
  7. Adventitious viruses - Human endogenous retrovirus K, Equine infectious anemia virus, Avian leukosis virus, HERV-H/env62
  8. Other microbial contaminants - Proteobacteria, nematode-helminth
  9. Processing residues of genetic material - NO

In-depth information on the vaccines analysed

Priorix Tetra (GlaxoSmithKline) 1 Chemical composition profile study 2

READ THE FULL REPORT WITH CITATIONS HERE.

 


Three New Vaccine Safety Papers from Vinu Arumugham

CautionRubella vaccine developer Dr. Stanley Plotkin admits vaccines cause food allergies, asthma, autism and autoimmune disorders

Arumugham, Vinu

Dr. Plotkin was deposed in relation to a trial involving vaccines. Plotkin agrees that there is no proof
DTap does not cause autism. Plotkin will lie about vaccines and autism to push vaccines. Plotkin
admits calf serum proteins in vaccines can sensitize (cause development of allergy to the protein).
Plotkin speculates that calf serum protein is completely removed from vaccines. He is wrong.
Admission of this fundamental flaw in vaccines, automatically implies that vaccines cause asthma,
autism and autoimmune disorders as well.

Vaccine safety: Learning from the Boeing 737 MAX disasters

Arumugham, Vinu

Aircraft are designed and engineered for safety by experts who understand aeronautical engineering and safety engineering. Vaccines are developed by tinkerers using trial and error, who fail to apply basic safety engineering principles and admit that they lack understanding of the mechanisms involved in the immune response to vaccines.
Aircraft safety problems are immediately obvious. Vaccine safety problems manifest over a longer term and are easily hidden by other factors.

Boeing is liable for product safety. Vaccine makers have no liability.

Greed and incompetence defeated the hard work that went into engineering the 737 aircraft.
CDC lies about autism. It took the incompetent FDA 25 years to find out that the pertussis vaccine does not prevent transmission. They still don’t understand the difference between injected and ingested proteins. The incompetent CDC/ACIP flip-flopped on the Flumist vaccine - twice.

Vaccine “expert” Dr. Plotkin “believes” calf serum proteins used in vaccine manufacturing is completely removed from the product. It is not. He admits, residual protein can cause sensitization (development of allergy). He speculates that casein in milk is somehow different than calf serum proteins in regards to sensitization. He is wrong again. Dr. Richet showed us a hundred years ago, that all injected proteins sensitize. Drs. Plotkin and Offit admit it is ok to lie to parents about vaccines and autism and they do lie about it.

The Seattle Times investigated and reported the root cause of the 737 MAX disasters. They are not being dismissed as “anti-MAXXERs”. But anyone who investigates and reports the root cause of vaccine-induced diseases are dismissed as “anti-vaxxers”. Why?

Boeing has made numerous safety improvements in the past. HHS admitted there have been no safety improvement in vaccines for three decades. Aeronautical engineering is well understood. Immunological mechanisms involved in vaccines are
poorly understood The vast majority of vaccine safety claims are based on broken epidemiological studies.

Unsafe vaccines and the corrupted science that covers it up is the worst scandal in the history of medicine.

Role of NMDA receptor autoimmunity induced by food protein containing vaccines, in the etiology of autism, type 1 diabetes, neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders

Vinu Arumugham; Trushin, Maxim V

Vaccines contain numerous animal and plant proteins (soy, peanut, sesame, maize, wheat, etc.). Vaccine excipients are derived from plant or animal sources. The mechanism of animal protein induced autoimmunity was previously described. Following a report associating maternal gluten intake to type 1 diabetes in the offspring, plant proteins were investigated.

The Pandemrix vaccine induced narcolepsy due to molecular mimicry between a H1N1 nucleoprotein peptide in the vaccine and the human hypocretin receptor 2. The BLASTP match score for this peptide was used as a baseline. BLASTP showed strong sequence alignment between gliadin, a wheat protein, and the human ionotropic N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR).

Analyzing further, strong sequence alignment was found between soy, peanut, sesame, maize, wheat and human glutamate receptors (GR), both ionotropic and metabotropic. There are reports of boosted wheat allergy and de novo synthesis of NMDAR antibodies following immunization. Once immunized with plant derived antigens, antibody levels will be increased by dietary exposure to these antigens.

GR are expressed in the brain, heart, pancreas and the T cells of the immune system. Vaccine induced GR antibodies (GRA) disrupt or destroy GR thus precipitating numerous disorders. This explains the epidemic of food intolerances and food associated immune mediated disorders.

Intestinal barrier disruption has been proposed as a cause for food associated autoimmune disorders. However, intestinal barrier disruption may itself be the result of GRA. GRA also disrupt the blood-brain barrier. This allows other anti-brain antibodies access to their targets. Vaccine-induced GRA can therefore explain a wide variety of disorders including autism, type 1 diabetes, attention deficit hyperactivity, epilepsy, schizophrenia, autoimmune encephalitis, Huntington’s, Parkinson’s, dementia, cancer and allergies.

The ultimate solution is to immediately remove all non-target proteins from all vaccines.

 

 


A Difficult Discussion: WI-38 and MRC-5

by Ginger Taylor, MS

Welcome to the intersection of the two most volatile issues in medicine, abortion and vaccines.  The discussion of one is controversial, for good reason.  When you try to discuss both at the same time, almost everyone either loses their minds, or completely shuts them down.  I am someone who has tended to do the latter.  

I spent almost a decade running up against the aborted fetal cell lines used for making vaccines and thinking, "I'm sure that can't be true... Alex Jones... hey look... shiny object!"

But in the last few years God has tapped on my shoulder and said, "are you sure you are not overlooking something?"  And last year I had to apologize to my readers, because I had put myself out there as offering them informed consent in vaccination, while being in denial of something on which people deserve informed consent.  And failing to inform them.

Abortion is an issue that strikes at the heart of who we are, and our base drives to keep control over our bodies and also to create our next generation.  I don't think that there is any issue that should be approached with more humility and care.  Talking about it blithely can set off landmines in the people around you, and you are unlikely to hear a bomb go off in their heart that can knock them down for a long time. 

AaprelBut the American Academy of Pediatrics proudly announced last month that their number one goal in 2019 is to remove the religious vaccine exemption from every state in the Union, before remembering that pesky 1st Amendment, and changing the headline.

Thus the need to look the difficult issue squarely in the face, as the loss of the right not to participate in the abortion industry in order to fully participate in public life is now at stake, and there are a large number of people who will be very upset when they find out after the fact that they have lost that right.  

Because if you can extort a pro-life Christian into injecting aborted fetal cell line remains, and a Muslim into injecting porcine products, and a Hindu into injecting bovine serum, and a vegan into injecting monkey kidney cells, then religious freedom is gone in America, and no one has a right to exercise their conscience.  

Our community has put a toe in the water, mostly only because we have had to, but the challenge is... how to open this discussion with individuals a political system who, more so than most, will have a fight or flight response to the phrase, "aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines?"

So last month, humbly and prayerfully, I started writing a letter to our state representatives, to prepare them for hearing this phrase, as we knew that they would be confronted with it repeatedly in our hearings on the vaccine exemption removal bill here in Maine.  

And I managed to draft a letter about the use of aborted fetal cell line remains in vaccines, without using the word "abortion," or "fetus."  It went to every member of the Maine Legislature.

I submit it to you, for your consideration, to use in broaching the difficult subject with your legislators in the most gentle way I could come up with:

Continue reading "A Difficult Discussion: WI-38 and MRC-5" »


Corvelva Updates Scientific Vaccine Purity Safety Testing

Grazie  mille a la nostra amici a Corvelva.Corvelva vaccingate

Click here to see this full report at the Corvelva site.

We want to take stock of the situation together with you. Eight months have passed since July 2018 and in these length of time we have achieved extremely satisfying results. We have presented a research program and regarding the vaccines analysis we are able to make a point of reference, with the objectives achieved, those being finalised and those only planned for now.

To begin with, the analyses of 2 compounds for each vaccine have been verified by means of standards, using certified control standards with a concentration in the order of micrograms / mL. The compounds we have chosen are among those known for their critical hazard profile. We are talking about a cumulative quantity, a total amount of those recognized as identities and those to be identified, which can be estimated within the order of 50 micrograms / mL, in contrast to the EMA / FDA guidelines.

These tests have given positive results, therefore they fully confirm the analysis method! The contaminations observed are probably due to different and variable manufacturing process’ phenomena and topics. What has been observed in the course of the studies is an “inter-batches” variation of the composition, which makes us assume that there are some steps along the whole product manufacturing process that are difficult to control.

Such analyses have allowed us to achieve the following steps:

  • Conformity assessment of composition as outlined in the vaccine datasheet
  • Screening for chemical and protein/peptide contaminations, as well as those deriving from genetic material
  • Confirmatory study of chemical and protein target compounds through con standard certificates of inspection

The following vaccines have been submitted to an initial screening:

Continue reading "Corvelva Updates Scientific Vaccine Purity Safety Testing" »


Scurrilous, Misleading Attack On Prof Christopher Exley By The Sunday Times

image from www.keele.ac.ukby John Stone

An attack on leading aluminium toxicity expert Christopher Exley in the Sunday Times yesterday begins with the false claim in the title that his funding has been halted. This seems like a blatant attempt to mislead: what was halted the week before last after political pressure was a Go Fund Me page for supporting his research, while the Keele University website has remained open for donations. Another false claim is that there were no controls for his autism brain study. While there were no "normal" brains in the study there were comparisons:

"The aluminium content of brain tissues from donors with a diagnosis of ASD was extremely high (Table 1). While there was significant inter-tissue, inter-lobe and inter-subject variability the mean aluminium content for each lobe across all 5 individuals was towards the higher end of all previous (historical) measurements of brain aluminium content, including iatrogenic disorders such as dialysis encephalopathy [13][15][16][17][18][19]. All 4 male donors had significantly higher concentrations of brain aluminium than the single female donor. We recorded some of the highest values for brain aluminium content ever measured in healthy or diseased tissues in these male ASD donors including values of 17.10, 18.57 and 22.11 μg/g dry wt. (Table 1). What discriminates these data from other analyses of brain aluminium in other diseases is the age of the ASD donors. Why, for example would a 15 year old boy have such a high content of aluminium in their brain tissues? There are no comparative data in the scientific literature, the closest being similarly high data for a 42 year old male with familial Alzheimer’s disease (fAD) [19]."

Professional concerns about the use of aluminium adjuvants in vaccine products are by no means unique to Prof Exley and colleagues.

The professional attack in the report is led by Andrew Pollard who is said to be a professor of "paediatric infection": it does not mention Pollard's manifold roles as leader of Oxford Vaccine Group, which develops vaccines with the industry (mostly containing aluminium), as chair of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation which recommends vaccines to the British schedule, as leading adviser to the British and European licensing agencies, and board member of the Jenner Vaccine Foundation. In July 2017 he also called in the Guardian newspaper for compulsory vaccination without disclosing any of these roles. Real investigative journalists might be asking what research Pollard has ever undertaken into the safety of aluminium adjuvants in vaccine products which he helps develop, recommend and license?

John Stone is British editor of Age of Autism


Catholic Citizens of Illinois: The inconvenient truth about vaccines

Syringe prayerBy Stefani Williams, April 4, 2019

“Skepticism is the first step towards truth,” Denis Diderot, 1746.

Has our government ever been wrong? Has it ever been deceptive? The answer of course, to anyone who knows our history, is yes! Here are a few examples:

Forced sterilization and eugenics

History is fraught with the horrors that eugenics inflicted on the world. The most prominent example is, of course, Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany, but what isn’t well known is that Hitler was actually influenced by eugenics-inspired policies implemented in the United States during the early part of the 1900’s. Eugenics is the belief that in order to “improve” the human species, only people with “desirable” traits should be allowed to reproduce. This philosophy was responsible for the forced sterilization, perpetuated by the U.S. government, of thousands of “unfit” or “socially inadequate” Americans.

Toxic chemicals in Vietnam

From 1962 to 1975, tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel were exposed to the toxic herbicide Agent Orange, while serving in Vietnam. Agent Orange was part of the U.S. military’s warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, and was used to eliminate forest cover and crops of the North Vietnamese army. Contamination by this toxic mix of chemicals has been linked to dozens of serious health problems in Vietnam veterans and continues to pollute portions of Vietnam where the chemicals were sprayed.

Continue reading "Catholic Citizens of Illinois: The inconvenient truth about vaccines" »


The Pharmaceutical Industry Sponsored Maine Chapter Of The AMA Admits It Wrote The Maine Vaccine Exemption Removal Bill, Then Claims That It Is Not Sponsored By The Pharmaceutical Industry.

Peter Michaud
The Face of Pharma in Maine

Maine is small. It is really hard to get away with stuff here without anyone noticing. And our legislators don't have offices, so you can just walk up to them while they are milling around in the hallways. (No one can accomplish a #PanRan here.) So news travels fast, and it didn't take long for everyone to hear that lobbyist Peter Michaud wrote LD 798, the single worst vaccine exemption removal bill ever introduced in the US.

I have been super busy fighting this bill, so apologies that I have not gotten around to telling non-Mainers about it.

Right now Maine has all three exemptions, but our medical exemption is severely restricted as of 2016. It is near impossible to get one now, but no need, right? We have both religious and philosophical.

Enter LD 798, sponsored by democratic representative Ryan "Every Child In Maine Should Have The Opportunity To Receive An Excellent Education" Tipping of Orno, Maine, which removes the religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions from all Maine education and health care law. Throwing thousands of Mainers out of daycare, preschool, k-12 (public and private, kids with 504s, all incoming kids with IEPs), colleges and universities, and all medical professions. Also any new groups, such as EVERY ADULT IN MAINE, for whom they decide to issue new mandates. (No I don't know how they plan to violate federal law and keep 504 and IEP kids out of school. They don't either. But apparently it MUST be done for the good of society.)

It is a complete eradication of 1st Amendment vaccine rights in the state of Maine if you want to fully participate in society.

And it was written by Peter Michaud, Esq. RN, lawyer and lobbyist for the Maine Medical Association (MMA) which is the Maine branch of the American Medical Association (AMA.)

Peter is trying a Reverse Pan here in Maine. California first ditched their Personal Belief Exemptions in 2015, and is now going for restricting medical. Poor Pete had to wait on messing with the PBEs in Maine because we had a Governor who vetoed it in 2015, so he and his hit squad first restricted the medical exemption by fiat (because the law allows the Maine DHHS to do it with the wave of a pen,) and had to wait for new Governor that would allow this. He got one in Janet Mills.  Sister to Dora Mills, pediatrician and primary vaccine PR Queen in Maine for as long as I can remember.

 

Maine Vaccine Debate 2015

Regular AoA readers will remember Pete. He is the guy who testified against our bill to educate health care providers on the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, while testifying that he didn't know anything about the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program? Did I mention that he is also an RN?  Which is a health care provider?

He is the guy same guy who offered the the super scientific and legally air tight case for coerced vaccination to our Health and Human Services Committee because, sure there might be some risk, but, “At some point you have to trust somebody.

Additionally, and I have never highlighted this before, Michaud testified, speaking on behalf of the MMA no less, that he didn't believe the women telling the Committee about the poor treatment they were receiving in pediatricians offices.

"As you know I represent the Maine Medical Association. I have heard a lot of horrible things about doctors today. And you'll believe what you believe based on what you've heard. I refuse to believe that so many doctors in this state are unfeeling, are horribly rude, are bullies, don't have the best interests of their patients in mind.”

The MMA officially not believing women would explain a lot.

But Peter Michaud has topped himself this year.

When I heard that he had actually written the bill, I, as I am want to do, flipped out and made a loud video announcing it. Me and all my friends then wrote to and called the MMA and pretty much demanded confirmation from them. No such confirmation or denial was forthcoming.

But we did ask our legislators to ask good ol' Pete what the deal was. And we mentioned in a flier distributed on the floor of the Maine House of Representatives that, “LD 798 is a vaccine sales bill sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry.”

Apparently that was enough to get him to respond. And his response was stunning.

Peter Michaud is General Counsel and a registered Lobbyist for the Maine Medical Association. On March 13, 2019, in his testimony in support of LD 798, and in opposition to LD 987 to expand medical exemptions, before the Joint Standing Committee on Education and Cultural Affairs, made the admission that he is the co author of LD 798, and then made the bizarre claim that he is not sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry:

“There was a claim made in a floor sheet that was distributed in the house... That, “LD 798 is a vaccine sales bill sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry.” I can assure you, that is not the case. The the bill was written in part by Representative Tipping, and in part by me. My authorship was pretty simple. X Y Z is repealed, but neither one of us is sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry.”

(Wait... isn't that "X Y Z is repealed" the important bit?)

Except that he IS sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. Very, very sponsored. Not by pejorative “Big Pharma,” in some roundabout way, but by actual PhRMA. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America®, who proudly represents “the country’s leading biopharmaceutical researchers and biotechnology companies.”

Also Merck.

Merck as in MMR II Merck.

BCG Vaccine, Gardasil, Gardasil 9, MMR II, PedvaxHIB, Pneumovax 23, ProQuad, Recombivax HB, RotaTeq, Vaqta, Varivax, and Zostavax Merck.

As in #CDCWhistleblower in that Vaxxed movie with William Thompson and Frank DeStefano, Merck.

Merck as in US v. Merck, and Chatom v. Merck, and Robi v. Merck, and Everyone Who Took Zostavax v. Merck.

Vaccine encephalopathy inducing Merck.

Vioxx Merck.

Actual friggin' Merck & Co., Incorporated.

(Begging the question... should he now be “PhRMA Pete” or “Merck Michaud”?”  Vote in the comments.)

The following are entities listed as "Corporate Affiliates” on the Maine Medical Association's website:

MERCK & CO., INC.
NOVO NORDISK
JOHNSON & JOHNSON
PhRMA:

ABBVIE
ALEXION PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
ALKERMES PLC.
ALLERGAN PLC
AMGEN INC.
ASTELLAS AMERICAS
ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP
BAYER CORPORATION
BIOGEN
BIOMARIN PHARMACEUTICAL INC.
BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY
CELGENE CORPORATION
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC.
EISAI INC.
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY
EMD SERONO
GENENTECH
GILEAD SCIENCES, INC.
GLAXOSMITHKLINE
IPSEN BIOPHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
LUNDBECK INC.
NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION
OTSUKA AMERICA PHARMACEUTICAL, INC. (OAPI)
OTSUKA PHARMACEUTICAL DEVELOPMENT & COMMERCIALIZATION, INC. (OPDC)
PFIZER INC.
PURDUE PHARMA L.P.
SANOFI
SANOFI PASTEUR
SUNOVION PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
TEVA US SPECIALTY MEDICINES
UCB

I am exceedingly proud to report that I sat perfectly still and quiet as Pharma Pete said these words to the committee not 30 feet away from me. I didn't even jump up, point at him and yell, “ARE YOU SERIOUSLY KIDDING ME! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!”

For this act of restraint I expect your high praise. (Leave in the comments.)

No one on the committee seemed to notice or question the claim, but why would they really. They have probably never visited the MMA website, and they assume that of course, the MMA represents doctors, not pharmaceutical companies. Why wouldn't they?

But one dad did notice. He was sitting in the overflow room listening to Michaud's testimony in the afternoon and was all, “That doesn't sound right.” And he checked the MMA website.

His daughter is vaccinated, but he cares about choice, so he put him self on the list to speak and waited until 2:10am, testifying very last from his hand written notes. He asked the most important question of the day:

“How is this just not disclosed?”



James Lyons-Weiler on the New MMR/Autism Study From Denmark

James Lyons WeilerAoA links to Lyons-Weiler's review of the new paper by Hviid:"

An Autopsy on Hviid et al. 2019’s MMR/Vaccine Science-Like Activities

JUST IN TIME to be sandwiched between two one-sided Senate Hearings, a new cohort study by Hviid et al. has all of the hallmarks of a completely well-done study.  Well done as in overcooked.  Here is my initial assessment.

The burnt ends on this brisket are obvious.  Just like all the past studies on the MMR/autism question, the study focuses on one vaccine.  This is a problem because the variable they call “genetic risk” (having an older sibling), which is the most significant variable, is confounded with health user bias (there is no control over vaccine cessation).  It’s an important variable, but genetic risk of what?  Of autism?  Or of autism following vaccination?  It’s impossible to tell because the study never tests a VACCINE x FAMILY HISTORY interaction term.  Or any other interaction term that includes vaccines.

Were it not such an imporant question for which so much “science-like activities” have occurred, we could just shrug our shoulders, one could argue that defining the data analysis strategy is just about how one like to season their meat.  But there is real evidence Hviid (who did the data analysis) appears to be up real data cookery here.

(1) The smoking gun is the study-wide autism rate of 0.9-1%.  The rate of ASD in Denmark is 1.65%.  Where are the missing cases of ASD?  Given past allegations of this group’s malfeasance and fraud, the rest of the study cannot be accepted based on this disparity alone: the study group is not representative of the population being studied.....(continue reading at JamesLyonsWeiler.com)


Chief Medical Officer to the British Government Defends MMR Safety: Autism Up by 15 Times And Still No Explanation

image from upload.wikimedia.orgby John Stone

Since November I have been writing, on and and off about my correspondence with Dame Sally Davies, the out going Chief Medical Officer of England, and to the British Government. This correspondence is now published under Freedom of Information (barring my address and telephone number). It began when I asked Dame Sally to support her comment on the BBC about MMR "It's a a safe vaccine - we know that". 

Recently, I made this list of points which I believe emerged from the exchange:

-          ASD in schools is at least 15 times the level of 25 years ago

-          1.74% of all schoolchildren in the recent Northern Ireland census (the most complete data we have at the present time) had a severe/complex level of ASD disablement (education Stage 5)

-          The overall rate is 2.9% for the province but 4.7% for Belfast

-          Epidemiologists trying to explain the rise in ASD at the beginning of the millennium were still only talking about a rate of 0.2%

-          1999 National Statistics for schools’ mental health showed a rate of 0.2% for ASD/PDD for those born between 1984 and 88 but by the 2004 survey the overall rate was 1%

-          The rate appears to have risen 5 times during the years following the introduction of MMR and 3 times since, and the majority of cases are not fringe diagnoses

-          There is still no robust or adequate evidence of a large ASD population over the age of 35 and Dame Sally was unable to cite any

-          Our schools, and their finances, are breaking down under the burden of disablement, with ASD being frequently mentioned as the major cause

-          The social cost of ASD, once almost invisible, is set to outstrip old-age in the near future and is only likely to keep rising

-          There is no robust or adequate evidence base for MMR safety: the six studies in the single review cited by Dame Sally were flawed and inadequate

-          The first of these studies was only published 14 years after the products were introduced in the UK, and Dame Sally failed to cite any pre-marketing data, so the question also arises what the evidence base was for safety before they were introduced?

-          The MHRA yellow card scheme would be incapable picking up long term neurological effects of vaccination

-          The government has no coherent or convincing explanation of these events which are set to engulf everybody

A pdf of the correspondence can be read and downloaded here.

John Stone is UK editor of Age of Autism.


Hey there Julia, do you know anything about anything?

image from i.guim.co.ukby John Stone

The Guardian has been attacking charitable donations made to Age of Autism through the Amazon. Julia Carrie Wong, the journalist, seems to think she knows something about it.

"Age of Autism, for example, styles itself as the “daily web newspaper of the autism epidemic”. The site publishes a steady stream of content emphasizing the dangers of vaccination and promoting the discredited idea that autism is caused by “excessive vaccinations”. "

Well, Julia, perhaps you ought to take note that it was not Andrew Wakefield that said vaccines cause autism, it was the US government. Following the Hannah Poling award in 2008 Julie Gerberding, at the time Director for the centers for Disease Control, told Sanjay Gupta on CNN:

"Now, we all know that vaccines can occasionally cause fevers in kids. So if a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines. And if you’re predisposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage. Some of the symptoms can be symptoms that have characteristics of autism."

On separate occasions the Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services Administration told journalists Sharyl Atkisson and David Kirby:

"The government has never compensated, nor has it ever been ordered to compensate, any case based on a determination that autism was actually caused by vaccines. We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures."

But while autism spins out of control and is now approaching unsustainable 3% of children in the UK, and the cost of autism to the community is beginning to outstrip that of old age it becomes ever more difficult to get any serious or sensible answers out of our health officials. I recently had an  exchange with the outgoing government Chief Medical Officer, Dame Sally Davis, asking her what the evidence base for MMR safety was and she could not cite anything more convincing than the new paper from the Danish State Serum Institute: a review of six weak and flawed papers the first of which was published 14 years after the MMR was added the schedule in the UK. She was unable to mention any pre-marketing studies, or studies against placebo - it was a very poor answer. The full correspondence has now been published under freedom of information.The new paper like three of the six papers in the review, shows a protective effect against autism,indicative of bias. It sets the autism rate at 1% when in the UK is near three times higher. It is hopelessly conflicted with vaccine industry and CDC attachments, just as the Guardian is.

So, Julia, what do you think your opinion is really worth?

John Stone is UK editor of Age of Autism.

 


CHD Press Release: CDC’s ACIP Considers Expanding Recommendations for HPV Vaccine to Ages 27 to 45

 

 

Children’s Health Defense Chairman, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., calls such discussions “reckless” based on the available safety information.

Washington, DC – The CDC Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP) will consider recommending the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine to both women and men ages 27 to 45 in a meeting Feb. 27-28, 2019.  This recommendation would possibly expose over 80 million adults to the Gardasil 9 vaccine.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. sent a letter to Chairman Jose R. Romero and ACIP members on February 25th, on behalf of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), a non-profit organization devoted to children’s health. Kennedy has diligently followed the work of the committee to evaluate and recommend vaccines to the American public for over a decade and is well aware of the dangers of this vaccine given its track record with children.

Kennedy states that CHD considers an expansion of the HPV recommendations reckless based on the safety information available and outlined numerous reasons to support his concerns.

These include the fact that during Gardasil’s clinical trials an extraordinary 49.5% of the subjects receiving Gardasil reported serious medical conditions within seven months of the start of the clinical trials. Because Merck did not use a true placebo in its clinical trials, its researchers were able to dismiss the trial participants’ injuries as coincidences, employing the term “new medical conditions,” rather than classifying their injuries as “adverse events.”

HPV Vaccines have been reported to cause death and serious adverse events in the children and young adults age group at a rate higher than for any other ACIP-recommended vaccine. Since 2006, when Gardasil came on the U.S. market, people have reported over 450 deaths and over 61,000 serious medical conditions from HPV vaccines to the government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).[1] While these numbers reflecting reported vaccine injuries are startling, they likely only represent a fraction of injuries. A HHS-funded study established that the voluntary VAERS system captures less than 1% of vaccine injuries and deaths.

In September, CHD released an ordered stipulation from Health and Human Services (HHS) where officials admitted that they were not in compliance with statutory requirements for regular childhood vaccine safety reviews and reports to Congress, as required in the “Mandate for Safer Childhood Vaccines” section of the 1986 law: “National Vaccine Injury Compensation Act.” In early February, in a similar ruling, FDA admitted that they had no records of clinical trials relied upon to approve any currently licensed influenza or Tdap vaccine used in pregnant women.

Kennedy’s letter informs Romero that CHD will seek to hold ACIP members supporting the recommendation accountable for endangering this population with a product that has little proven efficacy but which likely puts them at higher risk of developing cancers and other grave health conditions.


US Take Action: Wed. measles hearing will be a pharma only show

Urgent call to actionFrom Autism Action Network

The US House of Representatives Oversight & Energy Subcommittee, of the Energy and Commerce Committee, will hold a hearing on the current measles outbreak and response efforts this Wednesday, February 27 at 10 am in the John D. Dingell Room 2123 of the Rayburn House Office Building. The focus of the hearing was obvious in the press release, “Measles is a highly contagious, life-threatening virus that was previously eliminated in the United States thanks to the success of the measles vaccine,” the four bipartisan Committee leaders said. “Unfortunately, measles cases are on the rise as a consequence of the virus’s transmission among unvaccinated groups.” No critics of federal vaccine policy or the vaccine industry will be allowed to speak.

Please call Rep. Frank Pallone, the Chair of the Oversight & Energy Subcommittee and let him know you do not want the federal government to endanger our right to say “no,” and to let vaccine critics speak at the hearing:

(202) 225-4671

 And call Pallone’s boss,  Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who has ultimate control over what hearings are held and who is allowed to speak, with the same message:  

(202) 225-4965

 Please click on the link below to send messages to your member of the House and the two US Senators from your state letting them know that you support vaccine choice.

http://capwiz.com/a-champ/issues/alert/?alertid=80616671&queueid=11814080981

 The hearings appear to be the next phase in a script the vaccine industry has been following around the world to eliminate vaccine choice. First, predictable outbreaks of measles, which was considered little more than a childhood inconvenience a generation ago, has been rebranded as a killer disease. Outbreaks that until recently were considered insignificant are used to whip up hysteria by corporate media outlets that rely on advertising dollars from the big four drug companies, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi and Glaxo (who also control more than 80% of the global vaccine market). Governments are frightened and bribed into eliminating vaccine choice for their populations delivering unimpeded access to captive markets. This scenario has played out in Italy, France, Croatia, Romania and California, and now appears to be slated for all of the United States.

 Please share this message with friends and family, and please post to social networks. And if you support the work of the Autism Action Network please make a donation at www.autismactionnetwork.org


Urgent Action Required to Maintain Our Medical Freedom to Choose

image from ahrp.org

From AHRP

FYI & Action
History is repeating itself! Once again, a massive propaganda machine has fomented disease hysteria, preempting rational public health policy decisions. Last time around, coercive medical sterilizations were performed in the U.S.; their goal was to “cleanse the genetic pool of undesirables”. This time around, the objective is to increase utilization of vaccines, and thereby increase ever higher profit-margins.

The pharmaceutical industry in partnership with the U.S. government is determined to increase vaccination uptake by stripping parents of their human right to exercise their parental responsibility, which is to protect their child from risks of harm.

A growing number of parents have raised doubt about the assurances given that all vaccines are “safe and effective”. Parents are raising concerns about the empirical evidence of an ever increasing number of vaccinated children who suffer from debilitating chronic illnesses as never before. The failure of public health officials to examine the evidence and identify the cause of children’s chronic ailments, focusing solely on vaccination rates, has resulted in the loss of trust...(Continue reading at AHRP)


Robert F Kennedy Jr Blocked From Giving Evidence At Congressional Hearings

Breaking newsRobert F Kennedy jr has said that he is being prevented from giving evidence at two Congressional hearings on the grounds that they are full. It is ever more essential that everyone contacts their representatives to insist that all sides should be heard, particularly if their representatives are members of those committees.

We re-publish the letter from last week giving details of the two hearings.

Maintaining Medical Freedom: Urgent Action Required!

Threats to end religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions have just been ratcheted up to an unprecedented federal level. If parents and caregivers are stripped of the ability to make healthcare decisions for their children, reinstating that ability may be nearly impossible. We need to take action now to prevent the government from dictating what is injected into our children.

On Wednesday, FDA Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb hinted in a CNN interview that if non-medical vaccine exemptions were not abolished at the state level, federal health agencies may intercede. This is especially ominous considering two critical upcoming vaccine-related hearings recently announced on Capitol Hill:

We absolutely must have representation at these hearings. It’s crucial that we have as many parents and advocates as possible in attendance at both. And if your Senator or Congressional representative is on one of these committees, it is critical that they hear from you! Click here for the Energy & Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee members and here for the HELP Committee members.

Every single one of us needs to contact our Congressional representatives and Senators starting right now. In your communications, be sure to emphasize that:

  • These hearings need to be fair, balanced, and include opposing viewpoints. We have many highly qualified individuals to present those viewpoints.
  • Issues related to vaccines should be governed by the states.
  • Over $4 billion has been paid out for vaccine injuries and deaths and HHS estimates less than 1% of adverse events are reported. Mandating any procedure involving such risks is unethical.
  • HHS has failed in its Congressional directive to study vaccine safety for 30 years.
  • Mandating liability-free vaccines that have not been properly safety tested is in direct opposition to the first tenet of the Nuremberg Code: The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

If you have a vaccine-injured child, tell your story. This personal input to those who represent you in our nation’s capital illustrates the harsh reality of a vaccine program geared towards industry profit rather than public health.

We have much more information on all the many ways our government has failed to protect our children here and factual information that may aid in the defense of health freedom and pushing back mandates here.

The future of medical freedom is at stake. Ensuring that our federally elected representatives hear from all of us through emails, faxes and phone calls to both their DC and district offices has never been more important than it is at this moment. If we are to maintain medical freedom and protect the health of generations to come, we need to raise our united voices now! Please share this alert with friends and family and urge them to do the same.

 

 


The United States Government Told You Vaccines Cause Autism

Following the Hannah Poling award in 2008 Julie Gerberding, at the time Director for the centers for Disease Control, told Sanjay Gupta on CNN:

"Now, we all know that vaccines can occasionally cause fevers in kids. So if a child was immunized, got a fever, had other complications from the vaccines. And if you’re predisposed with the mitochondrial disorder, it can certainly set off some damage. Some of the symptoms can be symptoms that have characteristics of autism."

On separate occasions the Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services Administration told journalists Sharyl Atkisson and David Kirby:

"The government has never compensated, nor has it ever been ordered to compensate, any case based on a determination that autism was actually caused by vaccines. We have compensated cases in which children exhibited an encephalopathy, or general brain disease. Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizures."

The United States Government told you vaccines cause autism.

 


Is Heidi Larson Out of Her Depth?

H larsen Deep waterBy John Stone

Having raised the issue of Heidi Larson's intervention in the vaccine debate on the BBC last week, it is worth considering - given her global status as vaccine confidence chief - how much she actually knows, but also her lack of professional accountability. Indeed, the first time she came to the attention of Age of Autism was when she wrote an article in New Scientist helping to lobby the United Nations (successfully as it turned out)  not to place a ban on mercury in vaccines under the title: "Poison pill: Not all mercury is toxic". Troubling perhaps in retrospect apart from the very poor argument is that the case was not being made by a medical doctor or toxicologist, but someone who was not professionally accountable for such an opinion. We met the same problem with her recent broadcast:

Well, I think the main thing is there most incredibly extensive safety around vaccines - the processes that go around vaccines,  the reasons there is quite a while between when vaccines are developed and when children actually get them is because the system has become more and more and more robust around safety. Frankly, partly because of the public cry  for this,  but it has always been that way from a safety perspective because the government frankly is accountable and if it is recommending and requiring in some senses these vaccines in some senses it is not in the interest of the governments or the producer to be recommending something which is going to cause any damage. 

You could say this sounds like a satirical parody of someone defending vaccine safety. It is not merely that we find ourselves in disagreement over facts, it is actually that the language is vague and she does not seem to remotely know what she is talking about. Of course, it would be much easier to advocate that vaccine are safe, carefully trialed and monitored, if you really did not know anything much about it beyond your own propaganda.

Previously, Larson has pronounced herself concerned about vaccine safety. She told Johnson & Johnson website in 2017:

Yes, there are potential risks—there will always be potential risks with any medical treatment. And we don’t talk enough about that.

Which is all very well perhaps until you accuse the people who are talking about it of the equivalent of "hate crime". Adriana Gamondes reported in these columns last month:

The corporation was so uninterested in Brabant’s adverse reaction [to a yellow fever vaccine] that even Dr. Heidi Larson—lead researcher for the Gates Foundation’s Vaccine Confidence Project—called the company’s response “inadequate” and suggested that the vaccine formulation—which has not changed since the 1960’s—is not only outdated but being given in too large a dose. Interestingly, Larson holds up Sanofi-Pasteur’s conduct in this case as an example of the damage corporations do to public confidence in vaccination.

But is it going too far to suggest that Brabant's injuries seem real to Larson because she and he had both worked for UNICEF: they are part of the same class - the rest of us can apparently go hang. And you become credible because you move in the right circles:

Continue reading "Is Heidi Larson Out of Her Depth?" »


Heidi Larson Calls For Vaccine Criticism To Be Prosecuted As Hate Crime

 

ReallyBy John Stone

Heidi Larson, the director of Vaccine Confidence Project, was seen and heard on the BBC's Victoria Derbyshire Show on Friday morning. Here is an extract:

HL: Well, I think the main thing is there most incredibly extensive safety around vaccines - the processes that go around vaccines,  the reasons there is quite a while between when vaccines are developed and when children actually get them is because the system has become more and more and more robust around safety. Frankly, partly because of the public cry  for this,  but it has always been that way from a safety perspective because the government frankly is accountaH larsenble and if it is recommending and requiring in some senses these vaccines in some senses it is not in the interest of the governments or the producer to be recommending something which is going to cause any damage. 

 VD: Should Facebook  take these private groups down?
 
HL: I think the issue with Facebook is a difficult one because on the one hand they are asked not to dig into  people's personal areas and on the other hand being asked to go and take things down so I think from a Facebook perspective its difficult to do that. From a public health perspective as we saw in the letter from Andrew Schifft (sic) to Mark Zuckerberg that this is something in the league of like hate crime....

Of course, it is hard to know where to begin. Heidi may pronounce herself satisfied with vaccine technology but frankly she is just emoting - and she has no right to take the matter out of the public's hands. To the best of my knowledge since I have been involved in these matters, the only attempts I have seen to reassure the public have been socially repressive. Obviously, we are in a situation of accelerating unpleasantness with every last measles case being hyped as if it was Ebola. But as readers will be aware when I quizzed the UK's outgoing Chief Medical Officer about the evidence basis for MMR safety she came out only with generalities and only named the very weak Luke Taylor "meta-analysis" for the safety of the products. Dame Sally could not cite pre-marketing trials against placebo (or any pre-marketing trials at all), she could only cite a paper published 26 years after the products were introduced in the U.K. 1988, while the earliest of the papers reviewed in it was published no earlier than 2002. It may be that this is what Larson had in mind: that before the public concern there had been no proper studies, and then there were the studies our governments did produce when they were in a corner - and these studies were anything but "more and more and more  robust".  As I wrote to Dame Sally:

Continue reading "Heidi Larson Calls For Vaccine Criticism To Be Prosecuted As Hate Crime" »


Dr Jayne Donegan: "Independent, Objective and Unbiased"

Unbiased
A recent interview with British general practitioner, Dr Jayne Donegan, talking about her strange story to Polly Tommey when in 2007 she was tried before a General Medical Council tribunal and completely exonerated. With thanks to Peeps TV.

 

 

A written account by her of these events can be found at her website.


Britain's Chief Doctor Exits Having Made Poor Case For MMR Safety

image from upload.wikimedia.orgby John Stone

In November we published an extract from a letter to myself from the British Government's chief medical officer, Dame Sally Davies, and the full text of her letter has now been published by the British Government under Freedom of Information. However, the timing is somewhat interesting. While the text was apparently released by her department on 21 Dec last year it was not actually published to the web till two days before she announced her retirement on 8 February. Clearly you would expect someone in her position to present the best evidence available.Here is the full text of her letter below with my original article underneath (with thank to Angus Files for pursuing this matter). I had asked Dame Sally to support her statement "It's a safe vaccine -we know that". This was her reply:

Vaccine safety is extremely important and taken seriously, and the safety of MMR vaccines has remained under continual review. As with any vaccine, MMR vaccines can have side effects in some people, and these are listed in the product literature. The potential for side effects has to be balanced against the benefits of protection against what can be very serious and potentially life threatening infections. When safety issues have been confirmed in the past these have been acted upon. Your e-mail refers to the action taken with Urabe mumps-containing vaccines, and another example includes the identification and precautions around the risk of immune thrombocytopenic purpura with MMR vaccines. Should emerging evidence confirm any new risks, I can assure you that appropriate action would be taken.

Specifically in relation to whether MMR vaccines may be a cause of autism, a substantial body of population-based research has found no evidence to suggest a causal association. This ev-idence (not just for MMR, but other types of vaccine) is available for review in the published medical literature, and was summarised in a meta-analysis in 2014 which is free to download (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14006367?via%3Dihub).

In relation to vaccine safety monitoring more generally, I can assure you that systems are in place to keep safety under review. This includes continual review of suspected adverse reac-tion reports (such as those submitted through the Yellow Card Scheme), evaluation of GP and hospital-based health records linked to immunisations, review of worldwide data and close collaboration with international health authorities. 

We know that confidence in the UK vaccine programme is at very high levels and the vast ma-jority of parents choose to have their children protected by vaccination. Vaccines are one of the best public health interventions we have - saving lives and preventing millions of people from getting life-threatening diseases.

 

image from religion.ua.edu

 

The Junk Safety Science Which Underpins UK Government MMR Vaccine Policy

By John Stone

I recently wrote to Dame Sally Davies, Chief Medical Officer of England and to the British government, asking her for the basis of her statement to the BBC regarding MMR: "It's a safe vaccination - we know that", and was a lucky enough to receive a reply (letter of 12 November, from which I extract):

Continue reading "Britain's Chief Doctor Exits Having Made Poor Case For MMR Safety" »


Dr. Loretta Bolgan's Speech at the Vaccinating Safety Convention for the National Association of Chartered Biologists

CorvelvaNote: From Corvelva in Italy. The speech is translated by an interpreter.

###

Dr. Loretta Bolgan’s Speech at the covention “Vaccinating safely” organized by the National Association of Chartered Biologists - January 25th 2019

Dr. Bolgan reports on the studies conducted in cooperation with Corvelva association, presenting the analysis preliminary results on some vaccines vials commissioned by the association to accredited laboratories. These results have raised serious questions about the vaccines (in use in Italy and not just) safety and efficacy that need further examinations, that is why it seemed appropriate to disclose them to the public and also to the authorities responsible for protecting public health.

Dr. Bolgan mentions here the most important points, highlighting the quali-quantitative aspect of these products on the market, on both chemical-protein and metagenomic-biological profiles.

It is to be hoped these first observations will open an honest scientific debate on the topic of safety and efficacy of these products currently on the market and in use by the population, in the light of the regulations on mandatory vaccination and of the compliance with international guidelines.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZnwTpf7-s0&feature=youtu.be


No US Childhood Vaccines Were Placebo Tested: Why the Pharma/Government Complex Is Getting Desperate To Shut Down The Web

  1. image from i.ytimg.comBy John Stone

A special tribute to Del Bigtree (pictured) and his team at ICAN for his stunning 88 page letter to the HHS regarding vaccine safety. As Del reported - in the latest edition of Highwire - the letter, in response to an earlier reply from the then acting Director National Vaccine Program Office, Melinda Wharton, took virtually a year to compile, and is a meticulous piece of research. Most sensationally they researched the HHS claim through US government archives that at least some pediatric vaccines had been trialed against genuine placebo, and came to a negative conclusion. Not only that, they established that none of the vaccines those vaccines had been trialed against had ever been trialed against genuine placebo either. At the end of the line the toxic products were only being compared with other toxic products, rather than against saline.

Leave aside the sceptics, for any believer in the vaccine program as a necessary intervention in public health, this should be a devastating finding. Fundamentally, the research into the safety of any of the products before marketing was simply not there. The manufacturers apparently had no faith that their proto-products could withstand this scrutiny, and for the rest they just did not care: under the alleged imperative of protecting the population it seems anything went. So even before all the sham monitoring procedures and reviews which Del and his team dismantle in forensic detail we are left with the proposition that none of the present products being given to US children – and frequently  other children across most of the developed world – have any meaningful pre-marketing safety data all. If you are believer in the program you have been let down: if you wanted a program with any pretensions to safety - supposing such a thing to be possible - it looks like you would have to start from scratch. The manufacturers did this: the governments, the politicians and the regulators (internationally) let it happen.

This damning document is published simultaneously with a demand in the UK  from the Royal Society for Public Health (which I had never heard of) to shut down comment about vaccines on the web. It echoes calls from Seth Berkley of GAVI, Heidi Larson of the Vaccine Confidence Project and the European Parliament. The pamphlet airily dismisses concerns that vaccines have side effects or that you could possibly have too many. It is pure public relations, and if the RSPH claims to be "independent" it also admits that the publication was paid for by Merck, a detail which was reported by British Medical Journal and the Guardian, but not true to form by the BBC. We have, in truth, been building to this moment for two decades: as the evidence piles up that every single aspect of the program lacks integrity or is simply rotten to the core all the perpetrators can do is call for the silencing of their critics, and maintain the products are safe because they say so. 

Watch Del introduce the letter on Highwire January 24, 2019:

 

Please help give the ICAN letter the widest possible distribution, particularly to politicians.

The full correspondence can be found here.

John Stone is UK Editor for Age of Autism.


DTaP Vaccine and Food Allergies: Trial Underway in Australia

Epi-penAustralia has been hostile toward those who warn about vaccine injury. From the "Don't Punish Progress" files, comes this story.  Whooping cough is exhausting and dreadful. Anaphylactic food allergies are terrorizing for families. And sometimes deadly. A vaccine outcome or side effect should not be worse than the disease for which is purports to prevent. A parent should have a right to refuse this and every vaccine. Where there is risk, there must be choice.

Fears whooping cough vaccine gives children food allergies sparks major $4million trial involving 3,000 babies

A multi-million dollar trial has been launched to see if a whooping cough vaccine is linked to the dramatic rise in children with food allergies.

The number of Australian children with food allergies has skyrocketed since the late 1990s – about the same time a new whooping cough vaccine was introduced.

Researches in Melbourne and Perth will test the theory that the two are linked on 3,000 babies as part of the $4million clinical trial.


Dr. Richard Moskowitz MD On "Anti-Vaxxers"

Richard Moskowitz MDBy Richard Moskowitz, MD

Before responding to the [New York Times] editorial, "How to Inoculate against Anti-Vaxxers" (January 20, 2019), I want to point out that the opposite term, "Pro-vaxxer," is rarely seen or heard, as if belief in the safety and efficacy of vaccines were so universal and such a no-brainer that there would be no need to coin a word to single it out, much less imply that the naysayers might also have a valid point of view.  This subtext is evident throughout the editorial in question, which merely accepts as gospel the authority of the World Health Organization on the subject, as if there were nothing more to be said, other than how to combat those with the temerity to question it.

The obvious corollary is that the epithet "anti-vaxxer" is pejorative, but another less obvious is that it's inaccurate, since most  of the thousands upon thousands of parents who must live with their conviction that their kids were killed or irreversibly damaged by vaccines are not against all vaccines on principle, but simply have questions and doubts about them, want them to be made safer, and above all seek some public recognition of and validation for the truth of their experience, including their right to choose not to continue vaccinating in the future.

As a family doctor with fifty years of experience caring for many such families, I cannot remain silent about the enormous weight of vaccine-related suffering and disability, sufficient to break any heart, that continues unabated, remains largely hidden and unacknowledged, and cries out at the very least for caution, restraint, and simple compassion for the viewpoint of those whose lived experience, whatever may have caused it, is so tragically different from that of everyone else privileged enough to be ignorant of or somehow unmoved by their loss.

When these tragedies do occur, they are almost always dismissed by their doctors, friends, and relatives alike as coincidental or the result of some genetic defect, unfortunate to be sure, but in no way related to the vaccine or vaccines that more or less recently preceded them.  This amounts to saying that these parents are either lying, ignorant, or stupid, and that modern science knows what really happened to their kids better than what they have actually experienced and lived through, and that the science of vaccines is settled beyond any reasonable doubt.

Which brings me to my second reason for writing, namely, to remind your readers that questioning and doubting are at the heart of the scientific endeavor, that science by definition must never be "settled."  The late Richard Feynman of Caltech, a Nobel Laureate in Physics, said it best:

There is no learning without having to pose a question, and a question requires doubt.  Before you begin an experiment, you must not know the answer.  If you already know the answer, there is no need to gather any evidence; and to judge the evidence, you must take all of it, not just the parts you like.  That's a responsibility that scientists feel toward each other, a kind of morality.1

Continue reading "Dr. Richard Moskowitz MD On "Anti-Vaxxers"" »


John Stone Comments On NYT Article Written to Make Vaccine Choice Advocates A Dangerous Enemy

image from miro.medium.comNote: Our John Stone works tirelessly in the UK to dissect the vaccine safety narrative. Congratulations and thank you to him for this letter published on the NY Times site.  Check out the clever headline, "How to inoculated against anti-vaxxer yadda yadda." This presents those of us in the vaccination choice community as dangerous, like a disease. WHO recently named "us" a top ten public health thread. Move over Dengue and HIV, "vaccine hesitancy" just beat you in line.  Jokes aside, can you imagine that vaccine choice is deemed more of a public health threat than HIV?

The Times switched off comment at around 3 pm Eastern Time before comments got out of hand.

How to Innoculate Against Anti-Vaxxers

The no-vaccine crowd has persuaded a lot of people. But public health can prevail.

By The Editorial Board

"The World Health Organization has ranked vaccine hesitancy — the growing resistance to widely available lifesaving vaccines — as one of the top 10 health threats in the world for 2019. That news will not come as a surprise in New York City, where the worst measles outbreak in decades is now underway. Nor in California or Minnesota, where similar outbreaks unfolded in 2014 and 2017, respectively. Nor in Texas, where some 60,000 children remain wholly unvaccinated thanks in part to an aggressive anti-vaccine lobby..."

John Stone's letter:

"This article is an ideological folly, and it is also deceptive - it is deceptive because vaccine critics are already and have always been completely outgunned in the mainstream media. If the NYT are paranoid enough to claim otherwise there is surely something else going on. 

"Secondly, what is currently at issue is both freedom of choice and freedom of speech, and this is a dangerous combination. It is coming that we may not either criticize these liability free products or the lobby that produces them. Nor may we refuse the products. And this is entirely unreasonable - they are being placed on a pedestal, yet there are hundreds of things that can go wrong both singly and in combination (with the certainty that all or anything will be denied in advance as in this editorial). Furthermore, the industry has hundreds of more products in the pipeline, which in turn can and will be mandated for our children. The industry needs this debate kicked into oblivion because it cannot stand scrutiny.

"There is nothing in the history of either medicine or the pharmaceutical industry which suggests that this is a safe or wise way to proceed, not is it as if all doctors or medical scientists are in agreement about it.

Continue reading "John Stone Comments On NYT Article Written to Make Vaccine Choice Advocates A Dangerous Enemy" »


Meryl Nass MD comments on the New York Times editorial

image from miro.medium.comThe New York Times has just come out with an editorial and a backgrounder that favor the elimination of vaccine exemptions.  The means by which vaccines are coerced is via denying a public (and in some states a private) education to children who have not received every state-designated immunization.  The myth justifying this tyrannical penalty is that unvaccinated children pose a considerable risk of infection to their schoolmates and friends.

Yet vaccines are the only category of products in the United States for which manufacturers are faced with absolutely no liability when they cause injuries, cause deaths, or fail to generate immune responses.

While the New York Times has correctly gone after the Sackler family, who own Purdue Pharma, a small pharmaceutical company, for misleading marketing of Oxycontin and ushering in the opioid epidemic, the Times has shut its eyes to the epidemic of chronic neurological illnesses in children and adolescent caused by vaccines that are produced by some of the most profitable corporations on earth.  (Two examples include narcolepsy in adolescents due to Pandemrix vaccine, and Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) in adolescents due to HPV vaccine.)

After a child suffers a vaccine injury, parents subsequently often choose to reduce their childrens' vaccinations.  By requiring children from families in which there is a pre-existing vaccine injury to be vaccinated or forgo an education, we can expect a higher rate of vaccine injuries in those who are forced to comply.

Do Vaccine Mandates Improve the Public's Health or Pharma's Health?  The Examples of Measles, Mumps and Rubella (German Measles)

The NY Times editors write that "public health can prevail." And it should.  Let's examine the true magnitude of the risk to public health we face today from 3 well known childhood viruses.

MEASLES

Measles is said to be the most severe of the common childhood viral diseases, and it is the most contagious.  Yet despite all the hoopla over measles, there have been only 3 measles deaths in the US since 2000.  According to CDC, "...Measles cases in the United States occur as a result of importations by people who were infected while in other countries and from transmission that may occur from those importations..."  Apart from cases coming in from overseas, measles does not otherwise circulate in the US.

In 2003, two Americans died from measles: a 75 year old male who was exposed to measles in Israel, and a 13 year old who had received a bone marrow transplant 3 months before his death, and was severely immunocompromised"Despite an intensive search, no additional cases were detected in the surrounding area."

The next (and last) time someone died in the US with measles was in 2015.  A middle-aged, immunosuppressed woman with pre-existing conditions died from pneumonia, and on autopsy was found to have measles. 

It is unclear whether any of these 3 deaths were due to a measles virus originating from a vaccine, but it is certainly possible. The vaccine for measles is a live, attenuated virus that can occasionally cause measles disease and/or be transmitted to immunocompromised individuals by a vaccine recipient.

On average, there are about 250 cases of measles reported annually in the US, and 0.2 deaths annually.

MUMPS

On average, there are 2,500 cases of mumps reported in the US yearly.  The mumps vaccine is less efficacious than the measles or rubella vaccine, with an estimated 86% efficacy after the recommended two doses.  Immunity wanes significantly 3-5 years following vaccination.

According to CDC, "There have been no mumps related deaths reported in the United States during recent mumps outbreaks." 

RUBELLA (German Measles)

What about rubella, a virus that can cause fetal malformations?  Rubella was declared eliminated from the US in 2004. "Since 2012, all rubella cases had evidence that they were infected when they were living or traveling outside the United States."

Fewer than 10 people are diagnosed annually in the US with rubella.

I hope I have made it clear that the risk of measles, mumps and rubella posed by unvaccinated children to both healthy Americans, and to immune-compromised Americans is very close to zero.  The same holds for other conditions for which children are vaccinated.  Here is an article detailing the evidence of risk to the immune compromised from unvaccinated children that I wrote in 2015.

Vaccinating high risk children will produce a larger public health problem than not vaccinating them

In fact, there exists no reliable evidence that unvaccinated children in the US pose a serious threat to anyone; the claim that they do is an urban legend promulgated by Big Pharma and its wholly owned subsidiary, CDC.  (Note that CDC purchases $5.0 Billion in vaccines annually for the Vaccines for Children program, by far its largest line item.  Then CDC must convince the country to consume them.)

Yet how many columns inches, how many hours of TV news programs have been devoted to scaring the American public about the dire threat of measles? Fear of measles has been the major driver of the campaigns to eliminate vaccine exemptions.  Parents of immunocompromised children have been incited to frenzy about the risks posed to their children by unvaccinated classmates.  Yet they are rarely told their immunocompromised child might actually develop measles due to vaccination, or catch it from a newly vaccinated classmate.

Who really benefits from this hue and cry?  Only vaccine manufacturers, whose market is forcibly expanded, while these same manufacturers face no liability for consequent vaccine injuries.

The greater public health risk is actually posed by vaccines--to children who are at higher than average risk of a vaccine injury.  CDC acknowledges this risk in its Vaccine Information Statement for the measles, mumps rubella vaccine, which   says, "Some people should not get this vaccine."  Included in the list of who should not receive the vaccine are those with allergies to vaccine components or to a prior dose; those possibly pregnant; the immunocompromised; those with immune system problems; or those who have a close relative with immune system problems; and other conditions.

Yet some children with these conditions will surely be required to be vaccinated if exemptions are removed. In the 30 years' duration of the Department of Health and Human Services' Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, 89,000 adverse reactions and 445 deaths in total have been reported for measles vaccines.  These numbers dwarf the tiny number of infections that might be related to unvaccinated children.  Remember, no deaths--zero--from measles, mumps or rubella have been attributed to infections carried by unvaccinated children during the past 20 years in the USVery few infections have been imputed to them, either.

There is no scientific or public health reason to force children who are perceived by their parents to be at high risk of a reaction to be vaccinated, when the facts show that the threat they pose to the rest of us is marginal to none.  How could the NewSpeak Times get this so wrong?


Corvelva Releases "Vaccinegate" Analysis of Gardasil 9, Turns Out To Be Gardasil 7, With 338 Contaminants...

by Ginger Taylor MS

... 10 of which are toxic chemicals, and  264 of which are unknown.

Screenshot (2242)Google translation:
"We arrive with this analysis to the fourth vaccine analyzed with this method, which aims to determine the chemical-protein composition of the analyzed vials.

On this occasion we focused on a vaccine that is not mandatory in Italy, the one against the papilloma virus, but that has done much to discuss in the recent past for the numerous reports of suspected adverse reactions received over time. The anti-Hpv vaccines have made much debate, even outside Italy; hence the decision to dedicate our attention also to this product.

ATTENTION: Gardasil 9 is an anti-Hpv vaccine that should contain 9 antigens as a leaflet, for 9 different subtypes of the Hpv virus (subtype 6 -11 - 16 - 18 - 31 - 33 - 45 - 52 - 58). However, all the antigens that are declared are not detected, but only 7 out of 9.

With reference to the methodology, the technical complaints and criticisms made in the last few weeks, we have responded (link report https://goo.gl/WfRBJB) with the final report of the analyzes. We suggest the reading and the diffusion of this document, together with the rest, because the explanations are rather detailed and precise.

In this sample of Gardasil 9 were found, as for the previous vaccines analyzed:

Chemical contamination from the manufacturing process or cross-contamination with other production lines
Chemical toxins

ANTIGENI: as anticipated, Gardasil 9 is an anti-Hpv vaccine that should contain, from package insert, 9 antigens, for 9 different subtypes of the Hpv virus (subtype 6 -11 - 16 - 18 - 31 - 33 - 45 - 52 - 58 ). Of these, they were NOT detected:

L1 Type 11 Protein of Human Papillomavirus (one of the subtypes that are most commonly associated with cervical lesions)
L1 Type 58 Human Papillomavirus (one of the subtypes that is most frequently associated with cervical cancer)

These two subtypes were not detected with the method in use (unlike the remaining 7).

Also in this case, therefore, we are faced with a product that does not seem to contain what it should contain. That is, of 9 antigens, only 7 were detected.
This opens up an important question about product compliance. A question that is not up to us to resolve, and that as always we turn to those in charge.

In addition, 338 signals of chemical contaminants were detected, of which 22% known. This data is also in continuity with the previous ones.
Among these signals were also identified 10 chemical toxins, probably from the process of processing antigens or other production processes present at the site of production of the vaccine.

In conclusion, also Gardasil9 - as well as the hexavalents Hexyon and Infanrix hexa as well as the quadrivalent Priorix Tetra - according to the method we commissioned, leaves enormous doubts on both efficacy and safety."

The full report in Italian: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mEkosZVnZMGH7lD-U1LP83gFqDQhs2pH/view



Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Used Forced Vaccination Laws to Justify Forced Sterilization Laws

by Ginger Taylor, MS

"The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes."

- Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr, Buck v. Bell, 1927

In the horrifying 1927 case, Buck V. Bell, the Supreme Court ruled, in an 8 to 1 decision, that it was constitutional for Virginia to perform forced sterilization on its citizens.

OWHWikipedia:
"Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927),is a decision of the United States Supreme Court, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell."

This, many of us have heard of, as it is our children that the states would be targeting if this policy of Nazi eugenics was being carried out today as it was in the 20th century, both in Nazy Germany and the US during the "Progressive Era," which was embracing the idea of creating a superior society.  

The case of Buck v. Bell was the atrocious matter in which Dr. Albert Sidney Pridd (and his successor, Dr. John Hendren Bell) Superintendent of The Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded, decided that one of his patients, an 18 year old rape-victim with a sixth grade education, should not be able to give birth again. Her mother was also "feebleminded" you see, and the good doctors believed society should be rid of their kind.

Again with the Wikipedia (yes I know I being lazy by quoting the Wiki but I have to get back to my kids homework):

"The concept of eugenics had been put forward in 1883 by Francis Galton, who also coined the name. The trend first became popular in the United States, and found proponents in Europe by the start of the 20th century; 42 of the 58 research papers presented at the First International Congress of Eugenics held in London in 1912, were from American scientists. Indiana passed the first eugenic sterilization statute (1907), but it was legally flawed. To remedy this situation, Harry Laughlin of the Eugenics Record Office (ERO) at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, designed a model eugenic law that was reviewed by legal experts. In 1924 the Commonwealth of Virginia adopted a statute authorizing the compulsory sterilization of the intellectually disabled for the purpose of eugenics. This 1924 statute was closely based on Laughlin's model. Looking to determine if the new law would pass a legal challenge, on September 10, 1924 Dr. Albert Sidney Priddy, superintendent of the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and Feebleminded, filed a petition to his Board of Directors to sterilize Carrie Buck, an 18-year-old patient at his institution who he claimed had a mental age of 9. Priddy maintained that Buck represented a genetic threat to society."

But even those who know about poor Carrie Buck may not know that the mandatory vaccine laws were the justification for this decision.  They used our old friend Jacobson, the Massachusetts minister who refused to pay a five dollar fee imposed by the state on those rejecting the smallpox vaccine during a deadly outbreak in 1905, and took it all the way to the Supreme Court.

The venerated Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the decision upholding the Virginia law that ended a woman's right to be a mother, by saying it was no different than vaccination:

Continue reading "Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Used Forced Vaccination Laws to Justify Forced Sterilization Laws" »


Institutional Confirmation Bias and the United Kingdom Department of Health: Letter to Dame Sally Davies

image from pbs.twimg.comBy John Stone

Below is the text of my recent letter to Dame Sally Davies (pictured), Chief Medical Officer since 2010 to the British government. Davies has now replied twice to my original challenge to substantiate her comment on the BBC regarding the MMR: ""It's a safe vaccination - we know that". My original reply was published last November. It is evident that if she had a strong reply to make she ought to have made it the first time around, and the second reply was only an amplification of the first, to which I have in turn responded in more comprehensive detail. I believe it demonstrates how a government department had come to justify its choices made originally on weak evidence, and how as the decades went by the resulting decisions got worse and more desperate: and as the problems got more drastic the denial - even if believed - got more implausible.

It is interesting and likely significant that when I asked about MMR safety it was Davies who brought up the issue of autism (which I had not mentioned). This mirrors the situation two decades ago when I tried to raise the subject with the department of the rising autism numbers and they brought up Andrew Wakefield (though I had mentioned neither Wakefield or vaccines). The message is that they make the connection as a reflex, the safety of MMR and the claimed stability of the autism figures are inextricably entwined and in both instances the department are making a “leap of faith”.

My title refers to “the Department of Health", but to clarify at the beginning of this period when the original decisions were being made it was part of the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS), and since January last year it has been called the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), but for the three decades during which most of this happened it was the DoH or DH.

Dear Dame Sally,

Re: MMR Safety and Autism Numbers

Thank you for your further courteous reply (20 December), however I must point to a host of anomalies (apologies for the length and detail of my reply). The MMR programme was introduced to the UK in 1988 but the earliest of the autism safety studies included in the Cochrane review 2005 [1] was published only 11 years after this (and apparently based on illegally obtained children’s records, which cannot be cross checked [2]), while the first listed in the review by Luke Taylor (2014), which you cited, comes from 14 years after the introduction of the products [3]. Indeed, in 1988 the DH recklessly favoured SKB’s Pluserix MMR vaccine although it was already withdrawn in Canada [4] and contrary to your first letter it never made an attempt to withdraw the product until the decision was made to do so unilaterally by the manufacturers in 1992 [5].

The safety of the products had not been established at the time of introduction (quite the reverse as the main one in use was known to be hazardous), and the featured studies only began when, following the intervention of Andrew Wakefield, health officials came under pressure to justify the policy. The picture became further complicated in 1999 when the problem of mercury in other vaccine products, previously unacknowledged, came to light in the US. The problem of the Cochrane paper of 2005 is that the bland reassurance it gave regarding MMR and autism is in stark contrast to the cool to scathing comments about the six autism related studies it reviewed (three of which overlap with the Luke Taylor review of 2014 which you previously gave as your evidence for MMR safety and MMR not causing autism) [6]. The manifest contradiction in the review should in itself raise red flags.

Continue reading "Institutional Confirmation Bias and the United Kingdom Department of Health: Letter to Dame Sally Davies" »


Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson: Vaccines and Autism Was Top Goverment Expert was Silenced?

SharylYesterday, Sharyl Attkisson aired a critically important piece of journalism that will go unnoticed or be buried by mainstream media.  Please join us in thanking her and her guests Robert Kennedy, Jr., Rolf Hazelhurst and Beth Clay.

You can read the full article excerpted below at  the Full Measure website.
Visit her YouTube channel for replays as well.
###

Today we investigate one of the biggest medical controversies of our time: vaccines. There’s little dispute about this much-- vaccines save many lives, and rarely, they injure or kill. A special federal vaccine court has paid out billions for injuries from brain damage to death. But not for the form of brain injury we call autism. Now—we have remarkable new information: a respected pro-vaccine medical expert used by the federal government to debunk the vaccine-autism link, says vaccines can cause autism after all. He claims he told that to government officials long ago, but they kept it secret.

Yates Hazlehurst was born February 11, 2000. Everything was normal, according to his medical records, until he suffered a severe reaction to vaccinations. Rolf Hazlehurst is Yates’ dad.

Rolf Hazlehurst: And at first, I didn't believe it. I did not think that, I did not believe that vaccines could cause autism. I didn't believe it.

But there's a hard reality for Yates. The trademark brain disease, pain and inability to communicate that’s common with severe autism.

Continue reading "Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson: Vaccines and Autism Was Top Goverment Expert was Silenced?" »


"Liability-Free Vaccines"

By Ginger Taylor, MS

Vaccine refusalIt is a phrase that I first read in a comment by “cmo” here on Age of Autism in 2010, and we should have been using it this whole time.

We have all heard it from our peers (and our elders) when we say that we are not vaccinating any more because the vaccine program is corrupt and high risk.

“But I was vaccinated and I am fine.”

Then we attempt to launch into a 30 minute educational session on the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, Hannah Poling, Poul Thorson, William Thompson, Thomas Verstraeten, Julie Gerberding, HHS's failure to do their legally mandated vaccine safety research for 32 years, and no this is not really about Andrew Wakefield.

In an attempt to stop having to tell my story over and over again, I even managed to get a Johns Hopkins bioethics journal to print my very wordy reason for “No,” so that I could just hand it to people rather than explaining over and over and over.

Narrative Inquiry in Bioethics: “Families are Under No Obligation to Put Their Children at Risk By Participating in the Corrupt Current US National Immunization Program”

I ended my piece with this statement:

“The controversy surrounding vaccinations will never be resolved until the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act is repealed, and until families 7th amendment rights to have their complaints heard in civil court, under established legal procedure and ruled on by a jury, is restored.

Until there is a way to force public health officials, vaccine industry representatives and medical professionals to testify under oath, and under penalty of perjury, to either defend or retract their fraudulent claims, to pay for the damages done to children (including my child) for their institutionalized abuse and negligence, I will never consent to another member of my family participating in the vaccine program under any circumstances.”

I could have put it more succinctly by just saying, “we won't use liability-free vaccines any more.”

After doing this for 15 years I am a bit exhausted by the whole exercise of explaining, and expounding, and reminding, so as we here in Maine start up our fight against what promises to be an “SB277” type bill coming to our legislature, I have decided there is a more simple way to make this case without a 30 minute conversation, 30 times a day.

As there has not been a simple “vaccine” administered to a child for school entry since the 80s, I am going to stop talking about “vaccines,” and talk about “liability-free vaccines.”

I am going to point out that what the Maine mandatory vaccine law was written before 1985, was applicable to “vaccines,” when families had legal recourse against vaccine makers for corruption and hidden risks, and that current law should not apply to “Liability-Free Vaccines.” Which is what we have now.

I am philosophically opposed to my child receiving liability-free vaccines. Boom. Done.

“But you HAVE to! Do you want polio to come back?!”

No, I don't have to. If you were really afraid of polio coming back, you would replace liability to vaccine makers and fix the corruption in the vaccine program. You have not done your job to protect my children for the last 30 years. I'm out.

What I received as a child, even though in some cases they may be sold by the same company under the same brand name, was a fundamentally different product than what my children were given.  Vaccine makers were subject to liability to harm from their products. That ended the year I graduated from high school.

Justice Sotomayor and Justice Ginsburg have correctly pointed out that vaccines free from liability when they are defectively designed, give no reason for vaccine makers to improve design, to mind how they are distributed, or to even keep up with basic or emerging science:


SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 09–152
RUSSELL BRUESEWITZ, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. WYETH LLC, FKA WYETH, INC., FKA WYETH LABORATORIES, ET AL.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
[February 22, 2011]
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE GINSBURG joins, dissenting.


Vaccine manufacturers have long been subject to a legal duty, rooted in basic principles of products liability law, to improve the designs of their vaccines in light of advances in science and technology. Until today, that duty was enforceable through a traditional state-law tort action for defective design. In holding that §22(b)(1) of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (Vaccine Act or Act), 42 U. S. C. §300aa–22(b)(1), pre-empts all design defect claims for injuries stemming from vaccines covered under the Act, the Court imposes its own bare policy preference over the considered judgment of Congress. In doing so, the Court excises 13 words from the statutory text, misconstrues the Act’s legislative history, and disturbs the careful balance Congress struck between compensating vaccine-injured children and stabilizing the childhood vaccine market. Its decision leaves a regulatory vacuum in which no one ensures that vaccine manufacturers adequately take account of scientific and technological advancements when designing or distributing their products. Because nothing in the text, structure, or legislative history of the Vaccine Act remotely suggests that Congress intended such a result, I respectfully dissent.

Legislatures are ignorant of vaccine liability protection, and think vaccination has not changed since the mid-20th century. 

“But I was vaccinated and I am fine.”

Continue reading ""Liability-Free Vaccines"" »


To Hex: Vaccinate for SIX Diseases in One Syringe

Voodooo dollPoor Moms. We want to do what's best for our infants. It's our instinct to protect and raise them out of childhood.  Merck and Sanofi have a partnership for a new vaccine that covers six diseases. SIX.  Moms will think they are protecting their kids while avoiding multiple needles into the body and feel good. Until that spell wears off.  That's the voodoo that you do when you are Sanofi Merck.

###

Sanofi developed the new vaccine, dubbed Vaxelis, in partnership with Merck.

Vaxelis is designed for children aged 6 weeks to 4 years old and is designed to keep them from contracting diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, poliomyelitis, hepatitis B, and invasive disease due to haemophilus influenza type B.

Sanofi and Merck are now working on the production and supply of Vaxelis aiming to make it available on the market in 2020 or later.


Read more at NBC.


Three New Papers from Vinu Arumugham

Science post imageBelow are the three recent papers from independent vaccine safety and autism researcher Vinu Arumugham et al. You can see more at ResearchGate.net.

Autism pathogenesis: Piecing it all together, from end to beginning …

Vinu ArumughamMaxim V Trushin

Increased extra-axial cerebrospinal fluid (EA-CSF) have been observed in imaging studies of infant brains, who go on to develop autism. Folate deficiency can cause defects in neural development that can affect CSF production and drainage. Folate receptor alpha antibodies (FRAA) are observed in 75% of autism patients. Maternal FRAA have also been observed in the case of neural tube defects.

Folate deficiency can cause aluminum accumulation in the brain. Autistic brains have been shown to accumulate aluminum. FRAA in the child or mother can therefore explain all the observations.

Further, autism patients have a higher genetic risk for cancer but have lower cancer rates. Many cancer cells express folate receptor alpha to transport folate required for rapid growth. Once again FRAA in autism can thus explain lower rates of cancer occurrence as FRAA block FRA expressed on cancer cells, affecting folate transport.

A majority of FRAA are of the IgG4 subclass and bind with higher affinity to the bovine folate receptor than the human folate receptor. The human and bovine FR have 90% protein sequence homology.

From allergies and parasite infections we know that IgG4 is the second stage of the immune response. The first stage is IgE against FRA. The US Institute of Medicine concluded that antigens in vaccines do cause IgE mediated sensitization. Many vaccines contain cow’s milk proteins, one of which is the bovine folate receptor protein. Bovine casein and casamino acids used as growth media for vaccine manufacture are derived from cow’s milk.

The solution for vaccine-induced IgE against FRA, is to immediately remove all non-target proteins from all vaccines by using processes such as affinity chromatography.

Correlation of type 1 diabetes trends in European countries to the number of bovine insulin and GAD65 contaminated chick embryo cell culture containing vaccines in the schedule, as predicted by the autoimmunity mechanism involving immunization with homologous xenogeneic antigens and EPIT as a potential treatment

Arumugham, Vinu

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) affects millions and is a growing problem worldwide. The etiology of T1D is considered to be unknown.
Many vaccines are manufactured using bovine milk derived proteins such as bovine casein and casamino acids as growth media to grow bacteria. These vaccines contain trace quantities of all bovine milk proteins.

Continue reading "Three New Papers from Vinu Arumugham" »


China Sets Tough New Rules for Vaccine Safety But Is It Just Lipstick on a Pig

Child pigNote: Many of our readers will scoff at this article below. We're skeptical as well. Is there any such thing as a fully safe vaccine? Here in America, where manufacturers are indemnified from any lawsuits and liability, the answer is "no." There is not way a profit based company is not going to cut corners, bend rule and outright lie to sell more product when they know that they are protected and that their products are required by stringent laws. To think otherwise is folly. What's particularly ironic is that we know that many Chinese products are tainted and unsafe. How many of you will buy toothpaste at a Dollar Store? Or pet food? And yet here is China trying to make safer vaccines and pass tough punishments while America simply smiles and takes the needle.

###

Shaken by a scandal over the summer, authorities move to pass new laws

A draft law that aims to impose "the strictest" regulations on vaccines to ensure their safety and quality was submitted to China's top legislature for review on Sunday. The draft vaccine management law, which was released by the State Administration for Market Regulation in November, had been approved by the State Council.

Elaborating on the draft for members of the National People's Congress Standing Committee on Sunday, Jiao Hong, chief of the National Medical Products Administration, said it imposes the strictest regulatory system to date on vaccines, including on research, development, production, distribution and use.

The draft was made to improve China's vaccine management system and eliminate regulatory loopholes exposed by the scandal involving Changsheng Bio-technology Co in Changchun, Jiao said.

The vaccine manufacturer, which is based in Jilin province, was found to have committed serious law violations by China's drug authorities in July and August in connection with the production of a rabies vaccine. The violations included fabricating production records and using expired ingredients.

Under the draft released on Sunday, health and drug authorities will supervise the entire production chain of vaccines. Drug authorities should also be more thorough in inspecting vaccine production sites, it says.

Manufacturers must digitally record data related to production and inspection of vaccines, and must also certify the authenticity, integrity and traceability of the data, according to the draft.

Approval procedures and inspections must cover every batch of vaccines before they enter the market. Authorized institutes must inspect and approve vaccines, and report to China's top drug authority and provincial-level drug authorities if there are any major safety or quality risks found, so that they can be dealt with immediately.

Serious violations of the law, such as producing fake or substandard vaccines, will receive harsh penalties.

According to the draft, senior executives and those involved in the violations will have all their pay confiscated and will be fined as well. They may also be banned for life from conducting business in the pharmaceutical industry.  Read more here.


CORVELVA VACCINEGATE: GSK's Infanrix Hexa Exposed

Corvelva vaccingateThe latest press release below from Italian organization that campaigns on vaccine rights,  which has just received a grant from the Italian National Order of Biologists to the fury of GSK funded scientists from Padua University.  Now read why.


###

When we started these analysis, from the metagenomics to the chemical ones, we had a lot of questions and we were only looking for answers… After these first results, more questions have arisen and so did the concerns!

The quali-quantitative analysis of organic compound is of great importance in the pharmacological field, as potential safety problems arise from the new production processes of biological drugs and from the complex structural and biological characteristics of these products.

In Infanrix Hexa we found

  • chemical contamination from the manufacturing process or cross-contamination with other manufacturing lines;
  • chemical toxins;
  • bacterial peptide toxins;
  • insoluble and indigestible macromolecule that reacts to the protein assay, but cannot be recognized by any protein databases.

We have not found:

  • Protein antigens of diphtheria toxoids, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, haemophylus influenzae B, Poliomyelitis 1-2-3;
  • Formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde, phenoxyethanol, antibiotic residues indicated in the composition;

In Infanrix Hexa there are six antigens

Tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis toxoids, D antigens of Poliomyelitis 1-2-3, hepatitis B proteins obtained with genetic engineering and Haemophylus polysaccharides chemically linked to tetanus toxoid as carrier. Toxoids are created by treatments with formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde that should remove toxicity keeping intact their ability to stimulate protective antibodies against original toxins.

Continue reading "CORVELVA VACCINEGATE: GSK's Infanrix Hexa Exposed" »


Actor Lou Ferrigno Injured by Pneumonia Vaccine

HulkNote: While most media is using "HULK HURT!" headlines to report on actor Lou Ferrigno's hospitalization as a result of a pneumonia vaccine injury, I decided to go with a straight forward headline, no mention of his most famous role. Why? Because vaccine injury is a real phenomenon that strikes and strikes down real people. Like the man, Lou Ferrigno, who happened to play The Hulk 30 years ago. Or my daughter Mia, who turns 24 years old today. When a child is injured, the media calls us parents morons looking to blame someone, something, anything. I am glad to see the reporting on this injury.

While fluid in the bicep is probably not life threatening, any American hospitalization costs significant time and money. And what better place to catch a disease, maybe even pneumonia.  Makes me see.... green.  (Yeah, I had to go there. ;) )

###

Even the Hulk isn't invincible.

"The Incredible Hulk" star Lou Ferrigno was hospitalized this week after he claimed a pneumonia vaccine was administered to him improperly.

"Went in for a pneumonia shot and landed up here with fluid in my bicep," the 67-year-old former bodybuilder captioned a photo of himself with an IV in Providence St. John's Health Center in Santa Monica, Calif., on Wednesday. Read more here.


"Smart Power": Reasons for Disaffection in Italy, and the Destruction of the Post-War Liberal Order



image from upload.wikimedia.org
by John Stone

The term "smart power" was new to me when I encountered it recently in a British Medical Journal blog as part of the new-speak vocabulary of J Stephen Morrison 'senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and director of its Global Health Policy Center".  Morrison's article is interesting both because it discloses explicitly how 9/11 was made an opportunity  to draw health into the global security agenda of the United States while failing to understand how such a move might result in the shattering of "consensus" and the post war "Western post-war liberal order": "smart power" even if it is smart is not "liberal" and will not lead to consensus. But it also spells out that the global vaccine program has become a covert instrument of US power. If Morrison by any chance laments the passing of the centre-left government in Italy, then perhaps the White House putting Italy and its health minister, Beatrice Lorenzin, in charge of global vaccine strategy was an error.  

Morrison thinks it is a paradox but it is scarcely so if a government is seen to pursue coercive health measures over its citizens at the behest of a foreign power - even those who favor vaccination could be concerned at the state's new found powers over their bodies (which might also be indefinitely extended). If that was not so smart a political move perhaps the technology is not so smart either - as I remarked  to Steven Salzberg a few years ago: "The unwelcome news is that the “cruise missiles and drone helicopters” of the war on disease often hit the wrong target, and the more cruise missiles and drone helicopters you unleash the greater the risk".

Frankly, no one knows what they are going to be injected with next. Smart bombs become too easily the agents of international chaos and mistrust: just so the smart bombs of the war on disease, both for what they can do to your body and what they can do the political landscape, including destabilizing friendly governments. “Smart power” is also duplicitous: Italy is just the surrogate of the US. Why could the citizens of the world not have it directly from the mouth of Obama saying in effect your bodies are not your own and we inject into them what we like?

To make measles a key issue in global security is an unforgivable distortion of policy. It really is not clear why we are at more risk from disease now (apart from by the sinister development of viral technology) than at any time since the end of the Second World War, we are simply being gripped by a new manipulative rhetoric. Nor could we be further from the consensus that gave rise to the Nuremberg Code 70 years ago. Everything we have learnt has been stood on its head.

*            *            *

Below is a letter I recently wrote to British Medical Journal (unfortunately not so far published):

 

"Smart power": reasons for disaffection in Italy, and the destruction of the post-war liberal order and consensus

Owen Dyer presents a rather incomplete background to recent political events in Italy [1]. The is is not to say that I have any insight into what Giulia Grillo - the Italian Health Minister - intends, but there are  some gaps in the narrative regarding the defeat earlier this year of the  governing centre-left coalition, in which Grillo's predecessor - Beatrice Lorenzin - was a key player over several years. This is to say that there are reasons for discontent which apart from anything else fall well short of outright rejection of vaccination.

In the first place we seldom if ever hear mention in mainstream reports of the appointment of Lorenzin, and Italy, to head global vaccine strategy by the Obama administration in September 2014. An Italian government press release states [2]:

"Washington, 29 September 2014 - Italy will lead vaccination strategies and campaigns in the world over the next five years. This was decided by the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) held last Friday at the White House. Our country, represented by the Minister of Health Beatrice Lorenzin, accompanied by the President of the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA) prof. Sergio Pecorelli, has been commissioned by the Summit of 40 Countries, at which also spoke US President Barack Obama...."

Equally, demonstrators against mandated vaccinations in Summer 2017 will likely have been aware of the statement by GSK's Italian administrator - Daniele Finocchiaro in 2015 [3]:

 "Recently I accompanied our global CEO, Andrew Witty, to Matteo Renzi. The premier told us clearly that he considers - and rightly so - the pharmaceutical sector as strategic for Italy. Further, he said that the pharmaceutical is precisely the future of our country ... I then met also Minister Lorenzin and other members of the government who reiterated the sensitivity of the government to those who invest, create jobs and opportunities for young people. So we started on the right foot. To find such sensitivity in Roman palaces is not to be discounted. As for us, Andrew Witty asked few things: certain rules and stability in the face of very strong investments in advanced research and production equipment. We understood each other."

Citizens may also have been sceptical of Lorenzin's claim that 270 children had died in a recent outbreak of measles in London [3,4], and they may have wondered why ten vaccines had to be mandated to protect against one disease.

It is interesting in this light to view the complaint of  J Stephen Morrison (senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and director of its Global Health Policy Center) in BMJ Opinion that post-war consensus has broken down [5]:

"Global health is a product of the Western postwar liberal international order—an order that is today besieged, says Stephen Morrison"

"In the past two decades, we have witnessed an expansion of investments into global health that have been rooted in humanitarianism, the rule of law, and democracy. Underlying this action have been the principles of multilateralism, alliances, and partnerships. It has been consistently argued that investments outside home borders will not only save and improve lives but also promote economic growth and the stability of communities.

"In surprising and unforeseen ways, global health also benefited enormously from the post 9/11 counter terror doctrine that came to dominate the security strategies of the major Western powers. That doctrine aggressively advanced the argument that uncontrolled infectious diseases pose major transnational threats. It put a spotlight on smaller countries beset by weaker governance and fragile infrastructure, where grave health challenges can fuel armed, internal violence. Counter terror gave rise to the belief that focused investments—“smart power”—would achieve concrete results in improving lives while also winning hearts and minds in a global struggle."

But there is a paradox here that "smart power" is necessarily what everyone wants, or that the consensus is any longer "liberal". The Italian people were in effect being told that they must cede rights over their bodies and those of their children to the state because of the demands of global security strategy (starting apparently in the White House). Even if they accepted ten vaccines where would this end in principle? Could it be that the global strategists are themselves smashing the consensus, by  arrogating extraordinary rights over ordinary people? Morrison assumes this is a benefit of 9/11, but if so it was not one that the citizens of the world were consulted about, it was something which happened within US and global hierarchies and we were all just supposed to do as we were told.

[1] Owen Dyer, 'Italy’s health minister fires country’s top health board', BMJ 2018; 363 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k5158 (Published 05 December 2018)

[2] John Stone, 'Re: MEPs devise strategy to tackle vaccine hesitancy among public -Echoes of WMD', 26 March 2018, https://www.bmj.com/content/360/bmj.k1378/rr

[3] John Stone, 'Re: Too many vaccine mandates subvert measles vaccine update', 24 August 2018, https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3596/rr-6

[4] John Stone, 'Re: Compulsory vaccination and growing measles threat - Prof Melegaro's response', 21 October 2017, https://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3429/rr-7

[5] J Stephen Morrison,  'Global health disruptors: Decay of the postwar multilateral Western order', BMJ Opinion 29 November 2018, https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2018/11/29/stephen-morrison-decay-of-the-postwar-multilateral-western-order/

 

John Stone is UK and European editor of Age of Autism


Laissez Les Mals Temps Rouler: Quebec Conducts HPV Vax Experiement To Save Money

RouletteNote: This article discusses a change in Quebec, Canada which will substitute the GlaxoSmithKline HPV vax in place of the Merck vax in an effort to save money for the province. I can't help but wonder if a GSK Rep got to a Quebecois politician to convince him or her that the money savings was wise. In fact, it's a money loser for Merck and a win for GSK.  I won't even combine Eveready and Duracell batteries in a toy - here we have students being experimented upon with two separate brands and formulations of a vaccine that is meant to be given in multiple doses.  HPV vaccination will topple the myth of vaccine safety - croyez nous.  And bonne chance to these poor students.

###

Students in Quebec are the first in Canada to be vaccinated in a program that uses two different vaccines to protect against the human papillomavirus, a change that has divided experts.

Under the new program, which started this fall, students receive one shot of Gardasil 9, which protects against nine strains of HPV, including 16 and 18, the two that cause the majority of cervical, anal and other HPV-related cancers. Early next year, students will receive a shot of Cervarix, which protects against HPV 16 and 18 only.

The new schedule is expected to save the Quebec government $3-million a year.

Several experts and organizations call the change a risky experiment that puts savings over health. None of the experts dispute the safety of Cervarix. The concern is that students who do not get two doses of Gardasil 9 will not build sufficient immunity to seven of the nine strains. Cervarix, produced by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), costs about $110 per dose, while Gardasil 9, made by Merck, costs about $190.

“[The change] took a lot of us by surprise,” said Nancy Durand, a gynecologist at Toronto’s Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. “It’s a living experiment."

But members of Quebec’s immunization committee say clinical evidence shows the amended vaccine program will protect young people. Committee member Vladimir Gilca says much of the backlash originates from Merck, which stands to lose if provinces reduce use of its vaccine. School-based HPV vaccination programs in every other province use two doses of Gardasil 9.

“It’s nothing new to change a vaccination program. The most of these changes pass without a lot of attention,” said Dr. Gilca, a scientific adviser for the National Public Health Institute of Quebec.

Some of the opposition is because Cervarix has been approved for use only in girls and women in Canada. That does not mean it is unsafe for boys, but it is unusual for policy-makers to use vaccines in this off-label way, said Marc Steben, who works in the unit for sexually transmitted infections of the National Public Health Institute of Quebec.

Some experts fear one dose of Gardasil 9 could leave students vulnerable to genital warts and other less common forms of cancer not covered by Cervarix.

“This is based on pretty skimpy evidence, particularly in terms of long-term outcomes,” said Zeev Rosberger, a psychologist who studies HPV prevention and is on the board of advocacy group HPV Awareness.  Read more at The Globe and Mail.


The Junk Safety Science Which Underpins UK Government MMR Vaccine Policy

image from religion.ua.eduBy John Stone

I recently wrote to Dame Sally Davies, Chief Medical Officer of England and to the British government, asking her for the basis of her statement to the BBC regarding MMR: "It's a safe vaccination - we know that", and was a lucky enough to receive a reply (letter of 12 November, from which I extract):

Specifically in relation to whether MMR vaccines may be a cause of autism, a substantial body of population-based research has found no evidence to suggest a causal association. This evidence (not just for MMR, but other types of vaccine) is available for review in the published medical literature, and was summarised in a meta-analysis in 2014 which is free to download (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X14006367?via%3Dihub).

In relation to vaccine safety monitoring more generally, I can assure you that systems are in place to keep safety under review. This includes continual review of suspected adverse reaction reports (such as those submitted through the Yellow Card Scheme), evaluation of GP and hospital-based health records linked to immunisations, review of worldwide data and close collaboration with international health authorities.

It is noteworthy that the "meta-analysis" by Luke E Taylor is identical to the one cited by Thomas Insel to a US Congressional committee in 2014, but it constitutes no more than a bureaucratic fig-leaf. Dame Sally - who is the UK's leading government adviser on medical matters - ought to be able to do a lot better than this if every child is to be subjected to these products. It is, if anything, a rather naive response citing a shallow collection of studies which were published under political pressure decades after the policy was introduced. I have since attempted a conscientious and detailed reply:

 

21 November 2018

Dear Dame Sally,

Thank you for your letter of 12 November. I would point out that though you are quite right I am concerned about the rise in autism I specifically asked about the evidence base for MMR safety. That said it is reasonable to point out autism for a whole host of reasons is a much more serious problem in modern Britain (and elsewhere) than measles. When the DHSC last surveyed this problem in 2004-5 the overall ASD rate among school children was ~1% which was 5 times higher than the rate for those young people born between 1984-8 mostly before MMR was introduced, as reported in the equivalent 1999 survey. Since then your department has neglected to look at the issue (apart from a couple of failed adult autism surveys) as everything manifestly got worse, year on year [1,2].

As it is, a recent survey carried out by the Department of Health in Northern Ireland showed that the rate had risen from 1.2% in 2009 to 2.9%, while in Belfast it was as high as 4.7%. Moreover, 60% are educational Stage 5 [3], ie the most severe level of disability, so these are not cases that could previously have been missed because somehow subliminal. Educational data from across the nation and reports of collapse in educational services in the media testify that Northern Ireland is not an isolated case, but just better documented [4].

Regarding the meta-review by Taylor 'Vaccines are not associated with autism' [5] which you cited I note that there are just six MMR related studies included all of which have major problems. Three of the studies show apparent protective effect of MMR vaccines against autism (Madsen 8% [6], Smeeth 14% or 22% [7] and Mrozek-Budzyn 83%!!! [8]) which suggests bias. Of the Madsen paper Cochrane 2005 warned [9]:

"The follow up of diagnostic records ends one year (31 Dec 1999) after the last day of admission to the cohort. Because of the length of time from birth to diagnosis, it becomes increasingly unlikely that those born later in the cohort could have a diagnosis"

It remains troubling that as with a number of studies from this Danish group the co-ordinator on behalf of US Centers for Diseases Control, Poul Thorsen, is wanted for financial fraud from the CDC, though not extradited to the US now after nearly 8 years [10].

Of the De Stefano paper Cochrane commented [9]:

“The conclusion, however, implied bias in the enrollment of cases which may not be representative of the rest of the autistic population of the city of Atlanta, USA where the study was set.”

And indeed in 2014 the paper was repudiated by one of the leading authors, William Thompson [11]:

“I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”

The study by Smeeth [7] is compromised by its patchy data source, the General Practice Research Database where the autism rate represented is perhaps only one tenth of cases diagnosed [12]. Cochrane commented [9]:

“In the GPRD - based studies (Black 2003; Smeeth 2004) the precise nature of controlled unexposed to MMR and their generalisability was impossible to determine…”

It remains problematic whether the unvaccinated in this study were genuinely unvaccinated.

Of the Uchiyama study [13] Cochrane commented [14]:

“The cohort study of Uchiyama 2007 was potentially affected by a different type of bias, considering that the participants were from a private clinic and that definitions of applied Autistic Spectrum Disorders (ASD) diagnosis and of methods used for ASD regression ascertainment were not clearly reported.”

And the Uno study [15] will suffer from similar issues since the cases came from the same clinic. Moreover, in both instances the studies were far too small (904 persons and 413) to necessarily provide any clear result even if they had been better controlled.

Nor can the Taylor meta-analysis [5] cover up the entire absence of pre-marketing studies. In 1988-9 when the British government was persuaded to introduce Pluserix, MMR2 and Imravax there were no safety studies at all, and successive governments have been forced into the defence of a policy which they had embarked on without safety evidence.

As to the robustness of the yellow card reporting system I note the recent correspondence in the columns of BMJ On-Line regarding monitoring of Pandemrix vaccine from Wendy E Stephen and Clifford G Miller [16], which has serious implications for how the MHRA monitor all products. The MHRA has, of course, the ultimate conflict of being entirely funded by the manufacturers. It may be mentioned that in 1992 the Pluserix and Imravax vaccines were withdrawn not apparently by the British Government concerned about patient safety but by the manufacturers catching the government on the hop [17].

We are confronting a catastrophic situation among our young people with chronic illness replacing infectious illness as the main issue and cost to the state, and laying the emphasis on infectious diseases (with endless hate campaigns in the media against critics labelled “anti-vaxxers”) is a distraction, and a distortion of policy. It would be unfortunate if ministers were being advised about the safety of the programme on such a threadbare and inadequate basis. Re-examining the policy is both essential and urgent.

[1] John Stone,  ‘Response to David Oliver I (The Indisputable Rise in Autism)’, BMJ Rapid Responses 28 August 2018, https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3596/rr-12

[2] John Stone, ‘What about autism?’ BMJ Rapid Responses, 21 August 2018, https://www.bmj.com/content/362/bmj.k3596/rr-0

[3] Information Analysis Directorate 'The Prevalence of Autism (including Asperger Syndrome) in School Age Children in Northern Ireland 2018', published 10 May 2018, https://www.health-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/health/asd-children-ni-2018.pdf

[4] Responses to Viner RM, 'NHS must prioritise health of children and young people', https://www.bmj.com/content/360/bmj.k1116/rapid-responses

[5] Luke E Taylor et al, ‘Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies’, Vaccine 2014, https://autismoevaccini.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/vaccines-are-not-associated-with-autism.pdf

[6] Madsen et al, ‘A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism’, NEMJ 2002, https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134

[7] Smeeth et al, ‘MMR vaccination and pervasive developmental disorders: a case-control study.’ Lance 2004, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15364187

[8] Mrozek-Budzyn et al, ‘Lack of association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and autism in children: a case-control study.’ Pediatric Infectious Diseases Journal 2010, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19952979

[9] Demicheli et al, ‘Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children.’, Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Oct 19;(4):CD004407.

[10]  Office of Inspector General, US Department of Health and Human Services, Fugitive Profiles, https://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/fugitives/profiles.asp

[11] https://legislature.vermont.gov/assets/Documents/2016/WorkGroups/House%20Health%20Care/Bills/H.98/Witness%20Testimony/H.98~Jennifer%20Stella~William%20Thompson%20Statement~5-6-2015.pdf

[12] John Stone, ‘An old story: the GPRD does not provide credible autism data’ 11 February 2014 https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/3/10/e003219.responses

[13] Uchiyama et al, ‘MMR-vaccine and regression in autism spectrum disorders: negative results presented from Japan.’ J Autism Dev Disord. 2007 Feb;37(2):210-7.

[14] Demicheli et al, ‘Vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella in children.’, Cochrane Systematic Review - Intervention Version published: 15 February 2012, https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004407.pub3/full

[15] Uno et al, ‘The combined measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines and the total number of vaccines are not associated with development of autism spectrum disorder: the first case-control study in Asia’, Vaccine. 2012 Jun 13;30(28):4292-8. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.01.093. Epub 2012 Apr 20.

[16] Responses to Godlee, ‘A tale of two vaccines’ BMJ 2018, https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k4152/rapid-responses

[17] Report, BMJ 26 September 1992, https://www.bmj.com/content/305/6856/777

When your government, the BBC or the mainstream media tell you that MMR is safe,  this the best that the British government can do. After three decades of pure bluster they need to go back to the drawing board.

 

 


Top Pediatrician Bob Sears Presents Podcast Series on Vaccination

Vaccine conversationDo you remember the old acronym, FOB, "Friend of Bill," meaning President Clinton? We'd like to bring it back except today, it's Friend of Bob. Dr. Bob Sears. Please check out his podcast series on vaccination at Apple iTunes. We're often reviled and ridiculed when we discuss vaccine injury, safety, etc., because we are not doctors. Except some of us are, like Dr. Sears. Tune in.

Listen here: The Vaccine Conversation with Melissa and Dr. Bob Sears

When a topic as complex as vaccines becomes socially taboo, where do you go to talk about it? Join pediatrician Dr. Bob Sears and Melissa, mother and health freedom educator, on this informative journey where we will discuss everything from disease outbreaks to vaccine risks and side effects, the vaccine schedule, media hype, vaccine laws and controversies, and everything in between. Learn more at our non-profit website ImmunityEducationGroup.org


The Supreme Court Did Not Deem Vaccines "Unavoidably Unsafe," Congress Did.

CongressBy Ginger Taylor, MS

There is an error that is often made when we talk about the "Unavoidably Unsafe" status of FDA approved vaccines.  It may seem like a small point, but it is important to be accurate.

Someone, somewhere, sometime, long, long ago and far away, said that, "The US Supreme Court has ruled that vaccines are unavoidably unsafe," referencing the use of the term in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth.  And it has been repeated over and over.  But it is not accurate.

Congress placed vaccines in that category, and SCOTUS was merely referencing the already established status of the products.

It is correct to say that "US Law regards vaccines as unavoidably unsafe."

But Congress itself did that, not the Supreme Court.  

Feel free to remind a member of Congress of that fact if he makes the false claim that, "Vaccines Are Safe."

From Mary Holland JD, Director of the Graduate Legal studies program at NYU Law School:

"The key language about “unavoidable” side effects comes from the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, 42 USC 300aa-22, re manufacturer responsibility (see highlighted text below).

That language was based on language from the Second Restatement of Torts (a legal treatise by tort scholars), adopted by most state courts in the mid-1960’s, that considered all vaccines as “unavoidably unsafe” products. The Restatement opined that such products, “properly prepared, and accompanied by proper directions and warnings, is not defective, nor is it unreasonably dangerous.”

The Bruesewitz v. Wyeth case interpreted the highlighted text below from the National Vaccine Injury Act to find that it did not permit design defect litigation – that issue had been unclear since 1986, and different state high courts and federal circuits had decided the issue differently. So, [it] is correct that the US Supreme Court never decided that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” directly, but it acknowledged that Congress considers them to be so.

Sec. 300aa-22. Standards of responsibility

Continue reading "The Supreme Court Did Not Deem Vaccines "Unavoidably Unsafe," Congress Did." »


Letter to HHS Secretary Azar on Contradictory Vaccine Safety Positions Held by HHS

62D0DF49-7658-4D46-A9C7-6A63E8F4981Dby Ginger Taylor, MS

Did you know that the Secretary of HHS, Alex Azar, holds FOUR different opinions on the question, "Do Vaccines Cause Autism?"

I decided to write him a letter about it:

###

"November 11, 2018

Dear Secretary Azar,

I am the mother of a vaccine injured child, and I am looking for an explanation as to how four of your departments within HHS can hold four different positions on the question: "Do Vaccines Cause autism?"

At present, as the US Secretary of Health and Human Services, you currently hold four incompatible positions on the relationship between vaccines and autism in the four different departments that you manage and that contribute information to the public on vaccine safety.

In answering the question, "Are vaccines linked to autism?" Your responses are:

The Health Resources Services Administration's position is: Yes.

David Bowman, a spokesman for HHS’s Health Resources and Services Administration commenting on a case of vaccine encephalopathy and autism responded:

“[Vaccine Induced] Encephalopathy may be accompanied by a medical progression of an array of symptoms including autistic behavior, autism, or seizuresi.”

The Food and Drug Administration's position can be summed up as: Maybe sometimes.
On the FDA approved Tripedia vaccine insert:

"Adverse events reported during post-approval use of Tripedia vaccine include idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, SIDS, anaphylactic reaction, cellulitis, autism, convulsion/grand mal convulsion, encephalopathy, hypotonia, neuropathy, somnolence and apnea. Events were included in this list because of the seriousness or frequency of reporting. Because these events are reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not always possible to reliably estimate their frequencies or to establish a causal relationship to components of Tripedia vaccineii."

The National Institutes of Health's position can be summed up as: Probably not.
While NIH has not responded to my request for an official position statement on the matter, Dr. Francis Collins wrote on June 13th of 2017 in his NIH Director's Blog, in a post entitled Autism Spectrum Disorder: Progress Toward Earlier Diagnosis:

"Research shows that the roots of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) generally start early—most likely in the womb. That’s one more reason, on top of a large number of epidemiological studies, why current claims about the role of vaccines in causing autism can’t be rightiii."

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention assert: Absolutely not.

Continue reading "Letter to HHS Secretary Azar on Contradictory Vaccine Safety Positions Held by HHS" »


Educational Conference Call on The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program 11/12

NvicpDon't miss this opportunity to learn about the United States' controversial NVICP, National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in an educational conference call.

LISTEN AS Mary Holland, Louis Conte and Dr. James Lyons-Weiler discuss the history of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program's Autism Omnibus hearings on MONDAY, NOVEMBER 12 AT 7PM EST.

Details of the call, including the phone number and your access code will be provided after you register. Be sure to include your email and a phone number for SMS text reminders.

Register here now!




Meet The Authors of HPV Vaccine on Trial in Rye, NY November 8

Hpv presentation Rye NY


You're invited to meet the authors of this important book from Skyhorse Publishing called HPV Vaccine on Trial this Thursday, in Rye New York.

A Groundbreaking Exposé to the HPV Vaccine and the Science, Safety, and Business Behind It

Cancer strikes fear in people’s hearts around globe. So the appearance of a vaccine to prevent cancer–as we are assured the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine will–seemed like a game-changer. Since 2006, over eighty countries have approved the vaccine, with glowing endorsements from the world’s foremost medical authorities. Bringing in over $2.5 billion in annual sales, the HPV vaccine is a pharmaceutical juggernaut. Yet scandal now engulfs it worldwide.

The HPV Vaccine on Trial is a shocking tale, chronicling the global efforts to sell and compel this alleged miracle. The book opens with the vaccine’s invention, winds through its regulatory labyrinths, details the crushing denial and dismissal of reported harms and deaths, and uncovers the enormous profits pharma and inventors have reaped. Authors Holland, Mack Rosenberg, and Iorio drill down into the clinical trial data, government approvals, advertising, and personal accounts of egregious injuries that have followed in countries as far-flung as Japan, Australia, Colombia, India, Ireland, the U.K. and Denmark. The authors have written an unprecedented exposé about this vaunted vaccine.

Written in plain language, the book is for everyone concerned – parents, patients, doctors, nurses, scientists, healthcare organizations, government officials, and schools. Ultimately, this book is not just about the HPV vaccine, but about how industry, government, and medical authorities may be putting the world’s children in harm’s way.


Harassment and silencing of vaccine and GM critics by the University of Exeter

image from ngw.nlBy John Stone

I am publishing this brief correspondence to highlight how our higher educational institutions are becoming the enemies of freedom of speech and intellectual curiosity, not to mention purveyors of falsehood. I am not suggesting that Exeter University is particularly unusual: there are lots of publications of this kind from many academic sources, arguing how to limit and close down debate while using ad hominem tactics posing as hard science. It is interesting to note how the university dealt with this matter. The vice-chancellor and CEO, Sir Steve Smith - who is an expert in the politics of globalisation - handed the matter on to the provost, Prof Janice Kay, a cognitive neuropsychologist, who does not really tell us what she thinks, but passes the buck to the politics department, the publishers and the peer reviewers. She must however know that our schools are by now drowning in unprecedented and unexplained neurological impairment. It seems that the university's coat of arms with the motto  lucem sequimur 'we follow the light' has fallen into disuse, and frankly the spirit of enlightenment is dead as GSK and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation take over the world.

From: John Stone .....
Sent: 24 October 2018 16:20
To: Vice Chancellor.....
Subject: Harassment and silencing of vaccine and GM critics

To Prof Sir Steve Smith, Vice-Chancellor and CEO University of Exeter

Dear Sir Steve,

I would like to express grave disquiet regarding the paper by Lyons et al and the additional publicity given to it by your university. It really will do no good to target people while not addressing their arguments - it is to say the least an open question who is indulging in "innuendo" as your publicity department put it.

A case in point would be the paper's attack on the competence and integrity of Robert F Kennedy Jnr. The article does not address any specifics of Kennedy's argument in his article while labelling him as "a conspiracy theorist". In this regard it is worth noting that by 2004 the British government, without of course admitting any error, had removed mercury from vaccines - the subject of Kennedy's article - and it was only to make a return to doing so in the highly unfortunate and still unaccounted Pandemrix episode. The safety of using the mercury salt preservative thimerosal/thiomersal has been criticised in many scientific publications.

A further problem is that if people are not allowed to express their concerns - or even their unpleasant experiences - a class of product becomes protected and the hazards to the public increase. There can be no automatic assumption that products are safe, and what is proposed is the intellectual and social suppression of views, experience and knowledge inconvenient to global interests and governments. This does not mean that all opinions are equally valid but it does mean that public debate should be tolerated. The very failure to tolerate debate places a question mark of the motives of the people trying to deny it, and it leaves the public in a dangerous position. It is always possible that this or that product has been slandered, but it does not mean that all products or all public bodies meet the standard, and we cannot proceed on this basis.

I believe by promoting "research" of this kind the University of Exeter is placing itself in an invidious historical position, and I look forward to your views.

Yours sincerely,

John Stone, UK and European Editor, AgeofAutism.com

###

On 26 Oct 2018, at 15:18,

Dear Mr Stone, (if I may?)

Continue reading "Harassment and silencing of vaccine and GM critics by the University of Exeter" »


Weighing HPV Vaccine For Yourself, Your Child? Real Answers Now Available.

Jessica
Jessica Ericzon

Note:  Below is the introduction from a new book called HPV Vaccine on Trial, written to give parents and adults of vaccine receiving age complete information.  The book is ranked #1 on Amazon's Preventive Medicine category. That's Jessica Ericzon in the photo. Had this book been available in 2008...

Introduction

Cancer strikes fear in people around the globe. So a vaccine to prevent cancer—as the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is touted to do—seemed like a game changer. Since 2006, when the US approved the first HPV vaccine, over 125 countries have intro­duced it to prevent cervical and other HPV-related cancers. The three HPV vaccines bring in over $2.5 billion in annual sales for Merck (Gardasil, Gardasil 9) and GlaxoSmithKline (Cervarix). They have been pharmaceutical juggernauts, yet scandal has followed worldwide. The HPV vaccine is on trial—literally and figuratively—around the world in courts of law and public opinion.

No one disputes that cancer is a ravaging disease that leads to death, if uncontrolled. But the fact that cancer is a grave disease does not necessarily mean that a vaccine purporting to prevent it is safe and effective for everyone. The US Food and Drug Administration, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the European Medicines Agency, the World Health Organization, and many oth­er public health agencies have embraced the HPV vaccine as a safe and effective way to prevent HPV-related cancers. Here are a few representative statements:

FDA: Based on the review of available information by FDA and CDC, Gardasil continues to be safe and effective, and its benefits continue to outweigh its risks.

CDC: The HPV vaccine is very safe, and it is effective at preventing HPV. Vaccines, like any medicine, can have side effects. Many people who get the HPV vaccine have no side effects at all. Some people report having very mild side ef­fects, like a sore arm, from the shot. The most common side effects are usually mild.

WHO: The WHO’s Vaccine Safety Committee considers HPV vaccines to be extremely safe.

EMA: The benefits of HPV vaccines continue to outweigh the known side effects.

These official statements contrast starkly with the reports of dev­astating injuries and death that we recount in this book. You’ll get to know these and other children and young adults.

Christina Tarsell, 21 years old.

Chris was an undergrad at Bard College, New York. A tal­ented athlete, artist, and honor student, she received three Gardasil doses when she was twenty-one. Shortly after the third dose, she died in her sleep. After eight years of hard-fought litigation in the only judicial forum available, Chris’s mom “won”—the Court of Federal Claims finally acknowl­edged that Gardasil more likely than not caused the heart attack that led to Chris’s untimely death. You can see Chris, and a memorial to her, in the photo insert.

Alexis Wolf, 13 years old.

In 2007, when Alexis was in 7th grade, she began the Gar­dasil series. After the second dose, her health deteriorated. After the third, she could no longer focus, sleep, eat, or be­have normally. She started to have many seizures every day. She was put in psychiatric hospitals. A year and a half after her symptoms began, Alexis tested at a 4th grade level. Today, at 25, Alexis still suffers from severe neurological injury, in­cluding daily seizures. You can see pictures of Alexis both before and after receiving the vaccine in the photo insert.

Continue reading "Weighing HPV Vaccine For Yourself, Your Child? Real Answers Now Available." »


The HPV Vaccine On Trial: Seeking Justice for a Generation Betrayed

HPV Vaccine On Trial“This book reveals the tragedy of the HPV vaccine scandal.”

—Dr. Luc Montagnier, Nobel Prize Winner for Discovery of HIV

Please join us in supporting Holland, Mack Rosenberg and Iorio on the debut of their book!

Purchase your copy here.

The HPV Vaccine on Trial: Seeking Justice for a Generation Betrayed paints a devastating picture of corporate and government conflicts of interest, negligence, and malfeasance in approving and promoting human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, touted to prevent cervical and other cancers. Coming out on the heels of recent New York Times revelations about astounding financial conflicts of interest at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, this groundbreaking book highlights the lack of transparency, manipulated science, and abuse of state power to market this medical juggernaut, already raking in over $2.5 billion per year.

Authors Holland, Rosenberg, and Iorio conclude:

  • HPV vaccines have never been proven to prevent cancer of any kind.
  • No participants in the original HPV clinical trials received true saline placebos.
  • The clinical trials never investigated the vaccine’s possible effects on human fertility or potential to cause cancer.
  • The clinical trials show that the vaccines contribute to HPV lesions, and potentially cancer, in some women. Despite this, neither the manufacturers nor government agencies recommend prescreening to eliminate those with clear risk factors.
  • Although the vaccine is targeted for 11-12-year-old children, only a small fraction of clinical trial subjects was in this age range.

Continue reading "The HPV Vaccine On Trial: Seeking Justice for a Generation Betrayed" »