In the USA, we're in a contentious Presidential election cycle. Speaking of candidates, attached is a document from WHO that provides a chart of the current COVID-10 vaccine candidates. Can we write in, "no thanks?"
Draft landscape of COVID-19 candidate vaccines
These landscape documents have been prepared by the World Health Organization (WHO) for information purposes only concerning the 2019-2020 global of the novel coronavirus. Inclusion of any particular product or entity in any of these landscape documents does not constitute, and shall not be deemed or construed as, any approval or endorsement by WHO of such product or entity (or any of its businesses or activities). While WHO takes reasonable steps to verify the accuracy of the information presented in these landscape documents, WHO does not make any (and hereby disclaims all) representations and warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, fitness for a particular purpose (including any of the aforementioned purposes), quality, safety, efficacy, merchantability and/or non-infringement of any information provided in these landscape documents and/or of any of the products referenced therein. WHO also disclaims any and all liability or responsibility whatsoever for any death, disability, injury, suffering, loss, damage or other prejudice of any kind that may arise from or in connection with the procurement, distribution or use of any product included in any of these landscape documents.
In the USA, we're in a contentious Presidential election cycle. Speaking of candidates, attached is a document from WHO that provides a chart of the current COVID-10 vaccine candidates. Can we write in, "no thanks?"
Public Health and the media have long considered anyone who questions vaccine safety to be an "anti-vaxxer." As the world has been turned inside out because of COVID-19, people who likely never questioned pediatric vaccines are beginning to wonder how a rushed COVID vaccine can be safe and effective. People in droves are asking hard questions about a rushed vaccine that has been touted as the one and only path to a "new COVID normal." We're going to need a much bigger tent for the anti-vaxxer holiday party....
Having systematically screwed up the hydoxychloroquine (HCQ) trials for the treatment of the Covid virus and otherwise prevented its general use, all of which likely ended up in countless unnecessary deaths (see Dr Meryl Nass's despairing assessment) the WHO are now turning their attention to the first crop of vaccines, created at reckless speed with new technologies. The WHO's chief scientist told Reuters on Friday:
GENEVA (Reuters) - AstraZeneca's <AZN.L> experimental COVID-19 vaccine is probably the world's leading candidate and most advanced in terms of development, the World Health Organization's (WHO) chief scientist said on Friday.
The British drugmaker has already begun large-scale, mid-stage human trials of the vaccine, which was developed by researchers at University of Oxford.
This week, AstraZeneca signed its tenth supply-and-manufacturing deal.
"Certainly in terms of how advanced they are, the stage at which they are, they are I think probably the leading candidate," WHO chief scientist Soumya Swaminathan told a news conference.
The Oxford vaccine has a shaky history, funded to the tune of £90m million by the British government and taxpayer, and already in manufacture in billions of doses, the human trials began in April amid false reports that the animal trials had been successful: the product is arguably commercially too big to be allowed to fail. It also has the advantage that its lead developer Andrew Pollard heads the committee that will advise the British government on its use. Admittedly, last week he was in an apparently non-committal mood in conversation with Prince William:
Prof Pollard highlighted HIV, a virus for which no vaccine has been found because it mutates, saying scientists' great fear was that coronavirus could be the same. In that case, he said 'there is nothing we could do apart from social distancing forever' - a prospect William described as 'frightening'.
So much for draining the swamp. When President Trump appointed (was handed on a silver platter atop one million dollars) Scott Gottlieb to run the FDA, that was the death knell for the Vaccine Safety Commission he promised Americans. The pfox sashayed into the hen house with a million bucks and had a fine meal, leaving not so much as a feather.
Note: When I was a young woman, I remember my Dad telling me he never, ever bought a car in its first model year, no matter how snazzy or how much he wanted that shiny new GM. He said it took time to work out the kinks.
Many Americans are worried that a brand new, rushed and liability free COVID vaccine might not be safe. It's natural to worry. It's smart to worry. People who have never, ever questioned vaccines are perking up. ON THEIR OWN. We are not a club seeking fresh members. Enable us? Such nonsense. Dr. Hotez also blames the way the vaccines are being "communicated." In other words, they need a better AD CAMPAIGN. Better "optics" to use today's parlance.
'Operation Warp Speed' is fueling vaccine fears, two top experts worry
The federal government's "Operation Warp Speed" vaccine program, with its emphasis on quick production and testing of experimental coronavirus vaccines, is fueling fears already stirred up by vaccine skeptics, two experts said Friday.
The approach itself is not unreasonable, said Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine. But the way it's being communicated is scaring people, he told CNN.
"The way the message is coming out of Operation Warp Speed creates a lot of chaos and confusion. And it is enabling the anti-vaccine movement," Hotez said.A White House coronavirus task force source told CNN earlier this week that the Trump Administration's Warp Speed program had chosen five companies mostly likely to produce a Covid-19 vaccine -- whittled down from 14 last month when "Operation Warp Speed" was launched.
Well, fellow anti-vaxxers, looks like we're gonna need a bigger boat.... ONLY 27% of Americans say they WOULD (doesn't mean will, would brings in conditions, I would... IF) take the brand new, wet behind the ears, greenhorn, new kid on the block, untested, experimental Coronavirus vaccine that may or may not ever even see the light of day. YouTuber and child Re-home-girl Myka Stauffer is rumored (we're kidding) to say she will only take the vaccine during an unboxing segment at $1.00 per view. A plurality is simply the largest number in a poll - it does not mean a majority. The article also neglects to point out the MMR uptake is high because it is on the pediatric schedule.
From ABC News:
27% unlikely to be vaccinated against the coronavirus; Republicans, conservatives especially: POLL
Unpersuaded by more than 100,000 pandemic deaths in the United States, 45% of strong conservatives, four in 10 Republicans and nearly as many evangelical Christians say they’d be unlikely to get vaccinated against the coronavirus, even for free.
Overall, 27% of adults in an ABC News/Washington Post poll say they definitely (15%) or probably (12%) would not get the vaccine. Among them, half say they don’t trust vaccines in general, while nearly a quarter don’t think it’s needed in this case.
A plurality definitely would get vaccinated (43%) and 28% say they probably would. The net, 71%, is much higher than the adult vaccination rate for the standard seasonal flu – 45% in the 2018-19 flu season, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (with a wide range by state, from 34 to 56%.) It’s much lower than the 2017 child vaccination rates for polio and measles/mumps/rubella, 93 and 92%, respectively. Read more at the link below.
NOTE: We have had a technical issue on this post - but we're working on it. You will see it return shortly. Nothing nefarious, I assure you. Thank for your patience. Kim
Our Father WHO art in CDC, hallowed be thy name.
Thy vaccine come. Thy liability none.
On Earth as it is your fairytales.
Give us this day our daily dose and forgive us our questions
As we destroy those who have questioned before us
Lead us not into anti-vaccination
But deliver us from disease.
From the StatNews article below: He (Moderna test subject Ian Haydon) and his girlfriend arrived home at 7 a.m., and he slept until noon. His temperature was 101.5. He got up to go to the bathroom, and became so nauseous he threw up. On his way back from the bathroom, he fainted. His girlfriend caught him and kept his head from hitting the floor.
Do you have someone around at all times to keep your head from hitting the floor? Perhaps in addition to $1,200 to keep us afloat, Americans need funds to hire a CoVax Buddy. On Twitter, Ian Haydon said, "-- deep breath - I had a bit of an issue..." And Moby Dick was a bit of a whale. Keep all of the test subjects in your thoughts. We know what can happen, after all.
By Matthew Herper. Stat News:
Patients in clinical trials are usually faceless. But as the experimental Covid-19 vaccine being developed by Moderna Therapeutics has begun advancing through studies, it has found a much more visible advocate: trial volunteer Ian Haydon, a 29-year-old in Seattle.
Haydon has spoken about the vaccine on CNN and CNBC. He even said he’d volunteer to be exposed to the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, if researchers want to test to see if the vaccine was actually effective. But up until now he has left out a key detail: He is, apparently, one of three people in the trial who had a systemic adverse reaction to the vaccine.
Twelve hours after receiving his second dose, he developed a fever of more than 103 degrees, sought medical attention, and, after being released from an urgent care facility, fainted in his home. He recovered within a day.
He has not brought up the side effects previously, he said, out of “an abundance of caution.”
“I understand that sharing the story, it’s going to be frightening to some people,” he said. “I hope that it doesn’t fuel any sort of general antagonism towards vaccines in general or towards even this vaccine.... Read more here.
On 27 April a New York Times article reported excitedly the result animal trials of the Oxford Coronavirus vaccine:
"Scientists at the National Institutes of Health’s Rocky Mountain Laboratory in Montana last month inoculated six rhesus macaque monkeys with single doses of the Oxford vaccine. The animals were then exposed to heavy quantities of the virus that is causing the pandemic... But more than 28 days later all six were healthy, said Vincent Munster, the researcher who conducted the test.."
This would have been just as well because just four days earlier on 23 April Oxford Vaccine Group under the leadership of Andrew Pollard amid immense publicity had begun experimenting on human subjects. On 30 April a contract was announced with AstraZeneca to manufacutre the vaccine, promising to deliver an entirely new vaccine to the market at unprecedented speed by September. The only trouble was that when the results of the animal trial came to light in mid-May it was disclosed that on the contrary all the monkeys had become ill. The Daily Mail reported:
"In the latest animal trials of the vaccine carried out on rhesus macaques, all six of the participating monkeys went on to catch the coronavirus.
"Dr William Haseltine, a former Harvard Medical School professor, revealed the monkeys who received the vaccine had the same amount of virus in their noses as the three non-vaccinated monkeys in the trial.
This suggests the treatment, which has already received in the region of £90 million in government investment, may not halt the spread of the deadly disease."
Haseltine also commented in Forbes:
"There is a second troubling result of the Oxford paper. The titer of neutralizing antibody, as judged by inhibition of virus replication by successive serum dilutions as reported is extremely low. Typically, neutralizing antibodies in effective vaccines can be diluted by more than a thousand fold and retain activity. In these experiments the serum could be diluted only by 4 to 40 fold before neutralizing activity was lost."
Manifestly, human testing proceeded both against an entirely misleading background, and prematurely - which poses the most serious ethical questions. And now that we know that though the product was defective everything ploughs on regardless - Oxford/AstraZeneca now have contracts for hundreds of millions of rounds of the vaccine from both the British and the United States government.The British government has both a huge financial investment in the product and a reputational one, but it may help that Prof Pollard is both an adviser to the British regulator and chair of the committee recommends vaccine for public use.
John Stone is UK Editor for Age of Autism.
Robert Kennedy Jr "The government has been trying for almost thirty years to develop a Coronavirus vaccine..."
The Coronavirus Vaccine Uncensored | Robert F. Kennedy Jr. & Del Bigtree
Robert Kennedy, Jr.: “The government has been trying for almost thirty years to develop a coronavirus vaccine, and it’s been unsuccessful.
“Beginning in 2002 there were three outbreaks of coronavirus. We called them SARS at that point and MERS.
“The first SARS was a natural illness. It jumped from a bat to human beings. The second two were lab created that escaped and infected human beings. So the governments of China and a consortium of western governments all got together and put millions and millions of dollars into an effort to develop a coronavirus vaccine.
“Between 2002 and 2012, 2014, they worked very hard to do that, and what happened is they developed about 35 vaccines. Four of them were really promising. They chose the four most promising, and they gave them to ferrets, which is the animal that is most analogous when it comes to upper lung respiratory infections.
“The ferrets had a brilliant, robust and durable antibody response. Then something horrible happened. When those ferrets were challenged, when they were exposed to the wild virus they got horribly sick. They got inflammation throughout their bodies, and they died. (See Pubmed NIH: Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Vaccine Efficacy in Ferrets: Whole Killed Virus and Adenovirus-Vectored Vaccines )
“The scientists remembered that something very similar had happened in the 1960s where they had developed a virus for RSV, which is very similar to coronavirus. It’s an upper respiratory infection, ailment.
“They had skipped the animals and given them directly to 35 children, and the children again had developed a very robust antibody response. But when those children were exposed to the wild virus, they got very, very sick, much sicker than the unvaccinated children. And two of those kids had died. It was a scandal.
The media is reporting that Moderna has had a successful early phase creation of a COVID vaccine.
Moderna: Early coronavirus vaccine results are encouraging
The vaccine seems safe, the company said, but much more extensive testing is needed to see if it remains so. A high dose version is being dropped after spurring some short-term side effects.
According to Wiki, As of May 2020, none of its products have reached the final phase of a clinical trial, received approval by the FDA or been sold on the market, We know all too well, that Wiki can lie. However, imagine your very first success being the COVID vaccine. This is like getting sex tips from the 40 year old Virgin. This early report does not mean Moderna will bring a vaccine to market. But if they do, it will be their debut. And all of the liability will be on.... you.
Several companies are in the race to create "the vaccine" including Johnson & Johnson. Time will tell who "wins."
Don't clean your screen or call your optometrist, you read that correctly: WebMD is questioning the safety of a rushed COVID vaccine.
A COVID-19 Vaccine by Fall Is Possible, But at What Cost?
MONDAY, May 11, 2020 (HealthDay News) -- Efforts to create a COVID-19 vaccine are proceeding at an unprecedented pace, with eight different candidates now being tested in humans around the world.
But to have a vaccine available for widespread use by early next year could entail bending some rules regarding safety and testing -- actions that might put the health, and possibly the lives, of test volunteers at risk.
"It is possible to have a vaccine by the fall or winter," said Dr. Greg Poland, director of the Vaccine Research Group at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. "It is not possible to have a vaccine by fall or winter that has gone through the usual safety testing. Speed is a tradeoff with safety."
The government's leading vaccine expert -- Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases -- raised eyebrows in late April when he declared it "doable" to have millions of doses of coronavirus vaccine ready for distribution by January.
"We have to remember that the fastest we've ever seen this really being done is four years," said Dr. David Shulkin, former secretary of Veterans Affairs and former president and CEO of Beth Israel Medical Center in New York City. "The traditional methods and processes for developing vaccines take a great deal of time."
However, Shulkin and other experts agree that a COVID-19 vaccine could be ready for public distribution earlier than the 12- to 18-month development timetable that has been suggested.
The holdup isn't in creating a vaccine. The World Health Organization lists eight candidate vaccines currently in human clinical trials, and 100 more candidates are undergoing preclinical evaluation in laboratories worldwide.
Rather, testing each vaccine to make sure it's safe and effective is what eats up months and years, Shulkin said during a HealthDay Live Stream interview.
"It's likely we will see vaccine approvals outside the United States -- where the regulatory approvals may not necessarily be as stringent -- in a quicker time period than even the 18-month period we've discussed," Shulkin said. Read more here.
"This was one of the most informative and empowering talks I’ve ever listened to in all the years I’ve been working as an autism advocate. Every person concerned about what the COVID 19 pandemic will do to our medical freedom needs to hear these speakers and learn the truth about what’s coming. There is no walking away from this threat to our liberties."
April 4, 2020, Panel discussion the COVID 19 crisis and what a vaccine could mean to the American people.
Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Dr. Judy Mikovits, Del Bigtree, Ty and Charlene Bollinger, Robert Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, Dr. Rashid Buttar.
Here are excerpts from the discussion.
Charlene: “…the year 2020 was a big deal. … This is the year, if we don’t help people understand this critical issue we may loss our freedoms, and they may be able to come in and try …to force us into these vaccines. But we did not know what we were getting into….
“I was watching Tucker Carlson [Fox, Tucker Carlson Tonight]. He’s actually had Bobby Kennedy on… We couldn’t believe that mainstream media outlet was covering that. We felt like Tucker’s our friend…
“Last night…on Tucker Carlson Tonight … He had a guest and they talked about Operation Wrap Speed, the COVID vaccination where they’re literally going to pass through the trials that they should be doing. They’re going to skip all that safety measures to get to this vaccine. They’re going to have a hundred million ready to go. …
“The guest talked about this as if it’s a good thing, and Tucker Carlson who has interviewed our good friend Bobby Kennedy, …. I was really letdown by the fact that Tucker Carlson allowed that guest to say that and didn’t dig in. …”
5:42 Kennedy: “There’s now eighty separate vaccine projects. Bill Gates has eight of them. Bill Gates is now the biggest vaccine producer in the world, bigger than any other company.
Yesterday was the 59th anniversary of the first American manned space flight by Alan Shepard. Now imagine that NASA was granted the power to demand that EVERY AMERICAN take a space flight starting on May 6th, 1961. THAT's the COVID vaccine. For some, the vaccine might be a giant leap for health. For others? A Challenger far worse.
Pro-vax. Anti-vax. Doesn’t matter. Bloomberg is telling you that safety for a product already exempt from liability, safety is not the very first priority. Anyone who takes the new vaccine will be participating in the world's largest clinical trial. "Vaccine trials normally start by looking at safety, but in order to hasten the development of a Covid-19 vaccine, the drugmakers are looking at both safety and the immune-system response from the experimental shots."
In March, Wayne Rohde wrote an article for us titled Meet The PREP "Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness" ActMeet The PREP "Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness" Act: Here is the definition of the act. The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) added new legal authorities to the Public Health Service (PHS) Act to provide liability immunity related to the manufacture, testing, development, distribution, administration and use of medical countermeasures against chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear agents of terrorism, epidemics, and pandemics. It also added authority to establish a program to compensate eligible individuals who suffer injuries from administration or use of products covered by the PREP Act’s immunity provisions.
Bloomberg News published an article yesterday about the race to bring COVID-19 vaccines to market. Below is an excerpt and link. And I've taken a screen shot to preserve the critical phrasing.
Pfizer Starts U.S. Trials of Experimental Covid-19 Vaccine By Cynthia Koons
...New York-based Pfizer is working with BioNTech SE of Germany. The companies started testing the inoculations in patients in Germany in late April. Vaccine trials normally start by looking at safety, but in order to hasten the development of a Covid-19 vaccine, the drugmakers are looking at both safety and the immune-system response from the experimental shots.
Pfizer and BioNTech are in a race with companies including Johnson & Johnson, Moderna Inc. and dozens of other biopharmacuetical outfits and academic groups to come up with a safe and effective vaccine against the illness within the next year to 18 months. A handful are in human trials already, including Moderna’s and ones from CanSino Biologics Inc., the Beijing Institute of Biotechnology and Inovio Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Pfizer’s U.S. trial will involve 360 patients in two age groups: 18 to 55, and 65 to 85, though trials in the older population will start only after safety and immune response are established in the younger group. The University of Rochester Medical Center/Rochester Regional Health and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center will eventually provide testing sites for the vaccines as well.
This is the letter I sent to my Member of of Parliament yesterday forwarding the excellent letter to the UK's Secretary of Health and Social Care, Matt Hancock (pictured with Bill Gates), by Robert Verkerk and Damien Downing:
RE: THE CRITICAL NEED FOR TRANSPARENCY AROUND COVID-19 VACCINES
I am forwarding the excellent letter (attached) to Matt Hancock by Robert Verkerk of the Alliance for Nautal Health International and Damien Downing of the British Society for Ecological Medicine requesting transparency over the introduction of any COVID-19 vaccines in response to the current crisis, and I would suggest that it is necessary for the Secretary of State to make clear undertakings rather than vague professions of good faith. The letter can be found here on-line .
It was well understood even in the 19th century how statistics could be distorted for political purposes, since when the methods have only become more sophisticated and ultimately potentially more obfuscating. The safety, usefulness and effectiveness of universal vaccines should have to be meticulously and transparently established, yet we advance at reckless pace. It is certain that none of the candidates will have long term testing and it is questionable who on the face of it they could sensibly be given to .
There are other matters of transparency which go beyond the Verkerk/Downing letter. For example, the unusual arrangement by which the Secretary of State is also the main shareholder in the Porton Down Lab (as is now well-known). It was distressing to see how the Secretary of State began pumping public money into the speculative Porton Down vaccine project in the early stages of the epidemic, while failing to ensure that the puplic were immediately protected  (we are now heading for the worst fatality rate of any country). On the 19 March Public Health England put out a statement that they no longer considered COVID-19 to be a high risk disease  and within a day we were facing lockdown. Not much more convincing, now, are tub thumping references to British innovation by the Business Secretary or the Prime Minister.
The Dengvaxia Disaster Was Twenty Years in the Making—What Will Happen With a Rushed COVID-19 Vaccine?
Article that follows by the Children’s Health Defense Team
The Dengvaxia Disaster Was Twenty Years in the Making—What Will Happen With a Rushed COVID-19 Vaccine?
Vaccine development is a topic that is on the minds of everyone as the world grapples with ways to protect our health and the health of our loved ones from coronavirus. The team at Children’s Health Defense decided to write an article about Dengue Fever because an important part of medicine’s body of knowledge comes from the opportunity to learn from past mistakes.
Dengue fever is a common disease in more that 120 countries and, like Coronavirus, has been the target for a vaccine for many years. The development and licensure of Dengvaxia® vaccine by Sanofi spanned more than 20 years and cost more than 1.5 billion U.S. dollars. But the development of the vaccine turned out to be tricky. Dengue vaccine antibodies can also make the infection worse, especially in infants and children who have never been exposed to the virus. The virus may actually use the antibodies created by the vaccine to spread the virus throughout the body. So an infection with dengue — when your blood already has antibodies in it — can actually enhance the disease resulting in deadly complications.
Despite the fact that Sanofi tested Dengvaxia in several large clinical trials with more than 30,000 kids globally and published the results in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine, there were serious problems. According to epidemiologists who reviewed the data, the trials were riddled with “small inaccuracies, missing data, and uncalculated risks.” Buried in those clinical trials was a disease enhancement safety signal, but industry and the World Health Organization (WHO) turned a blind eye to the problem, calling it a “theoretical possibility.” Dengvaxia was subsequently administered to thousands of children in the Philippines. It was reported last year that the deaths of approximately 600 children who received the vaccine are under investigation by the Public Attorney’s Office. The vaccine has been permanently banned in the country.
What is also very concerning is that even after Dengvaxia led to tragic injuries and deaths in the Philippines, the FDA moved forward and licensed the vaccine in the U.S. According to a May 1, 2019 press release, the agency granted the application Priority Review under a program intended to encourage development of new drugs and biologics for the prevention and treatment of certain tropical diseases. Such actions by the FDA raise serious questions about safety, not only for the Dengue vaccine, but for future vaccines in development.
Next week Over Vaccine Group begin human testing for a COVID-19 vaccine with a with a view to marketing by the autumn. The speed of the process may be accelerated by the fact that Professor Pollard who heads the OVG is also advisor to the the UK's licensing body, the MHRA, and chair of the JCVI, the body which recommends vaccines to the British schedule. He very likely also sits on the British government’s mysterious Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies. Age of Autism has been higlighting the manifold and apparently contradictory roles of Prof Pollard for more than four years. In 2014 as recently appointed chair of the JCVI he recommended Bexsero meningitis B vaccine of which he was lead developer to the UK infant schedule, leading to a sudden leap in its commercial prospects. Even the package insert discloses serious dangers for Bexsero including a 3 in 1000 risk of Kawasaki Disease for an infant having three doses.
While Pollard and likely the British government's plans rush forward many scientists have questioned either the wisdom of the COVID-19 vaccine or how fast one could be brought to the market. On the present time scale we will know nothing of the long term effects. Tests will be carried on healthy people 18-55 but rolled out for children, the sick and the elderly. It will be trialled against "a control injection" not genuine placebo, (in fact a Men ACWY vaccine). At present we do not even know if the disease itself results in long term immunity or any immunity against all the other mutations which are beginning to proliferate. Meanwhile, the OVG promotes discussion about whether vaccination should be made compulsory. Indeed, if it were it would be Prof Pollard's committee which would decide what every man, woman and child in the United Kingdom would receive, and would not be able to refuse.
This is Pollard’s most recent disclosure in the JCVI minutes:
Professor Pollard receives no personal payments from the manufacturers of vaccinesHe is Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group in the Department of Paediatrics, University of Oxford and has current research funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the National Institute for Health Research, the European Commission, Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, InnovateUK, Meningitis Research Foundation, and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation. Hechairs the scientific advisory group on vaccines for the European Medicines Agency and is a memberof WHO’s SAGE.Other investigators in the Department conduct research funded by vaccine manufacturers and theDepartment has received unrestricted educational grant funding for a three-day course on paediatricinfectious disease from Gilead, and GSK in June 2019.
While it is inevitable that any scientist is going to be an enthusiast for is or her own research the long term indifference of the British government to traditional checks and balances is deeply concerning, and no less so at this difficult time.
Professor Andrew Pollard, Vice Master of St Cross College, is the Chief Investigator on a new study developing a possible vaccine for COVID-19. The 'ChAdOx1 nCoV-19' vaccine, as it is called, was developed by a team of University of Oxford researchers based on an adenovirus vaccine vector. A collaborative team from the Jenner Group and the Oxford Vaccine Group is now recruiting over 500 healthy volunteers for clinical trials of the vaccine. While applications for volunteers have closed, those interested in volunteering for future COVID-19 studies can register interest here.
Pollard is one of a team of academics, which includes himself, Professor Sarah Gilbert, Professor Teresa Lambe, Dr Sandy Douglas and Professor Adrian Hill, who began the project on Friday 10 January 2020. Pollard said, ‘Starting the clinical trials is the first step in the efforts to find out whether the new vaccine being developed at Oxford University works and could safely play a central role in controlling the pandemic coronavirus that is sweeping the globe.’
You can read more about the study here.
7 April 2020
Tylenol. Risperdal. Baby powder. Trusted brands. Huge lawsuits. And now the vaccine that may be mandated for you to access society soon... Johnson & Johnson has been tapped by the US Government to create a Coronavirus vaccine. Imaging the market - and no product liability.
From DRUGWATCH: Johnson & Johnson is the world’s largest health care company. It is also the highest paid drug company in the world. J&J remains at the top of the Big Pharma list of powerful corporations. It is well known for consumer products like Band-Aids, Johnson’s Baby Powder and Tylenol. Its drugs, devices and products have led to scandals and lawsuits. A Huffington Post investigation called J&J “America’s most admired lawbreaker.”
HUFFINGTON POST: Over the course of 20 years, Johnson & Johnson created a powerful drug, promoted it illegally to children and the elderly, covered up the side effects and made billions of dollars. This is the inside story.
And in current news:
The U.S. Just Signed A $450 Million Coronavirus Vaccine Contract With Johnson & Johnson
The Trump administration is spending nearly half a billion dollars on one company in the race to find a coronavirus vaccine.
That’s according to a $456 million order with Johnson & Johnson’s Pharmaceuticals arm Janssen, which specified a “new vaccine asset for 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19),” Forbes found. It’s the largest reported amount spent on a vaccine project to date, even though the pharma giant hasn’t yet started any clinical trials as other firms have.
The deal was signed with the Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) on March 27, 2020. It followed another order, made as part of the same contract with Janssen, for $150 million on March 20, 2020, for a “new antiviral” for COVID-19.
A spokesperson from Johnson & Johnson didn’t provide any more details on the specific order, but confirmed the $456 million award related to a collaboration with ASPR’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), as announced in February. That work was built on previous contracts for developing countermeasures for other influenzas. The value of the coronavirus-specific work hadn’t previously been revealed and is the largest known contract for a coronavirus vaccine to date.
These are Paul Offit’s comments posted on his Facebook page earlier this week: an acknowledgment that vaccines are dangerous. Whatever happened to ten thousand vaccines are safe for an infant?
Which will do more harm, the virus or the fear of the virus?
Why are we so scared of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19? People are usually scared of viruses for three reasons:
One: the virus causes gruesome, disfiguring, permanent symptoms. Smallpox, for example, not only caused life-long facial scarring, it also was a frequent cause of blindness in those who survived.
Two: the virus has a predilection for children. Polio paralyzed tens of thousands of young children every year until a vaccine finally eliminated the disease from the United States.
Three: the virus is likely to kill you. Rabies kills virtually 100 percent of people who develop symptoms after a bite from a rabid animal.
The novel coronavirus currently circulating in the United States—the one that has caused us to shut down schools, restaurants, sporting events, and virtually every aspect of our culture—falls into none of these categories. Nonetheless, people are scared. Really scared. The reason is they think that if they catch COVID-19, they have a high likelihood of dying from the disease. Most public health officials have done little to lessen this fear, arguing that people are ten times more likely to die from this novel coronavirus than from influenza. Unfortunately, these officials haven’t made clear the difference between relative risk and absolute risk. Although people are more likely to die from COVID-19 than from influenza, they are far more likely to catch influenza. Therefore, they are far more likely to die from influenza.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as of March 7, 2020, 36 million to 51 million people have suffered from influenza, 370,000 to 670,000 have been hospitalized, and 22,000 to 55,000 have died from the disease. To put these numbers in perspective, let’s look at countries that have dealt with COVID-19.
China, where COVID-19 originated, has reported roughly 3,000 deaths. The population of China is about 1.4 billion, three times greater than ours. If we suffer an equivalent proportion of deaths, then 1,000 Americans will die from COVID-19, one-twentieth to one-fiftieth of the number who have died from influenza.
Italy has reported roughly 2,000 deaths from COVID-19 and, as a result, has shut down the country; only grocery stores and pharmacies remain open. Italy has a population of 60 million, about one-fifth of the U.S. population. If we suffer an equivalent proportion of deaths, then 10,000 Americans will die of COVID-19, about one-half to one-fifth of the number of deaths from influenza.
Not everyone, however, is at equal risk of dying. The virus primarily kills the elderly and those suffering from chronic diseases, which explains the situation in Italy, where 25 percent of its population is more than 65 years of age; in the U.S. it’s 16 percent. Wouldn’t it make more sense, then, to ask people who are elderly and infirm to stay away from crowds, thus lessening their chances of contracting the disease. Also, to ask people who are sick with respiratory symptoms to stay home. Focus on common sense things like washing hands several times a day and standing clear of people who are coughing or sneezing. The federal government can also help by making it easier for businesses to allow people who are ill to stay home.
In 2009-2010, the world suffered an influenza pandemic caused by swine flu; about 203,000 people were killed by the virus; 12,000 in the United States. The novel coronavirus has killed about 6,000 people to date; 62 in the United States. It doesn’t make sense to shut down our entire way of life to try and stop a virus that is unlikely to harm healthy people and will be far less devastating than the influenza epidemics that we experience every winter and the influenza pandemic we experienced ten years ago. Let’s take common sense measures to stop the spread. The precautionary principle dictates caution to prevent harm. But the precautionary principle also dictates that you don’t cause harm in the name of preventing harm. It will take years to recover from the draconian measures that we are currently instituting.
Note: Excerpted from Children's Health Defense. I took a look at the package insert for this new 6 in 1 vaccine called Vaxelis. Take a look at the contraindications for yourself.
Severe allergic reaction (e.g., anaphylaxis) to a previous dose of VAXELIS, any ingredient of VAXELIS, or any other diphtheria toxoid, tetanus toxoid, pertussis-containing vaccine, inactivated poliovirus vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, or Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine.(4.1) •Encephalopathy within 7 days of a previous pertussis-containing vaccine with no other identifiable cause. (4.2)•Progressive neurologic disorder until a treatment regimen has been established and the condition has stabilized.
How does one KNOW if one is going to have a severe allergic reaction if there is no test for who may be susceptible? This vaccine contains both yeast and soy. And Each 0.5 mL dose contains 319 mcg aluminum from aluminum salts used as adjuvants. There's an admission that pertussis vaccines can cause encephalopathy. "With no other identifiable cause,"? What doctor has ever said, "Oh! That's a vaccine injury, Mom." In fact, world "renowned" doctors testify in vaccine court on behalf of the pharma companies that this type of injury is so rare as to be negligible. Would autism be considered a progressive neurological disorder and what would doctors call a treatment regimen: early intervention??
A Six-in-One Vaccine Associated with Sudden Infant Death
The childhood vaccine schedule in the U.S. features numerous combination vaccines—formulations that bundle multiple antigens for multiple diseases into one injection. Examples of combination vaccines currently given to American children include Merck’s four-component ProQuad vaccine against measles, mumps, rubella and varicella and Sanofi’s five-in-one Pentacel vaccine against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio and Haemophilus influenzae type b.
The inclusion of Recombivax raises an instant red flag, given that it contains a problematic proprietary aluminum adjuvant possibly linked to serious autoimmune conditions.
Now, the U.S. is preparing to up the combination vaccine ante still further. At the close of 2018, the FDA approved the nation’s first six-in-one (hexavalent) vaccine—a Merck and Sanofi joint effort called Vaxelis intended for infants at ages two, four and six months. Like hexavalent vaccines given to infants in other countries, Vaxelis combines the five components featured in Pentacel along with Merck’s genetically engineered Recombivax vaccine against hepatitis B (HepB).
The inclusion of Recombivax raises an instant red flag, given that it contains a problematic proprietary aluminum adjuvant possibly linked to serious autoimmune conditions. In fact, when a Merck cyberattack in the summer of 2017 temporarily forced Recombivax out of the U.S. pediatric market and American children received GlaxoSmithKline’s HepB vaccine instead, annual reports of HepB vaccine-related deaths to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) dropped by roughly 75% and injury reports halved. Read more at Children's Health Defense here.
This is part of evidence I presented to the United Kingdom House of Commons Science and Technology Committee Inquiry into Research Integrity in 2017. It was never published by the Committee but after much argument they were forced to amend their discussion document, known as POSTnote 544, so that it did not directly allege that Andrew Wakefield committed fraud by only attributing the claim to British Medical Journal. It is dismaying that we are still having to rebut so many false claims so many years after the events. The publication of Brian Deer's book is now only a couple of months away, but it has also been sad to see distinguished Danish scientist, Peter Gøtzsche, recycling these allegations in a book of his own. Prof Gøtzsche is in many respects a hero because of his stand against SSRI antidepressants (which are also implicated in autism) and on the safety HPV vaccines, but when he sides with Deer on the subject of Andrew Wakefield we wonder whether he has on this occasion done due diligence.
An Extract From Evidence to House of Commons Science and Technology Inquiry into Research Integrity 2017 by John Stone on Behalf of Age of Autism
I am grateful to the committee for the invitation to submit evidence on behalf of Age of Autism. This evidence has been shaped by statements made in the Committee’s prior publication POSTnote 544 singling out the Wakefield “Lancet paper” as an example of fraud, and particularly in relation to the defence of a public health programme and policy . If these statements had not been made I might have presented somewhat different evidence, but in the circumstances it is necessary to address these claims and their underlying assumptions. It becomes particularly relevant in the light the latest campaign, led by Times Newspapers, to further discredit Andrew Wakefield.
This submission is not motivated by indifference to the control of infectious disease. What I am saying is that even though the control of disease is important it is not a good enough reason to stand the rules of research integrity or public discussion on their head. For this reason I have things to say not only about the Wakefield paper but the problematic nature of vaccine science, and also the general exclusion of the subject from contemporary mainstream public debate. Even the reasons for going to war at times of national peril are debated, but here it is as if everything has been conceded in advance to an industry and its public advocates. In these circumstances reasonable comment is driven to the margins with unreasonable, even to the extent of being buried by search engines such as google.
It is also problematic that virtually every public defence of the vaccine programme begins with an attack on the integrity of Dr Andrew Wakefield, as if the public humiliation of one man could provide scientific justification in perpetuity for an entire class of products. Wakefield has been globally transformed into the Emmanuel Goldstein of public health (to reference Orwell’s 1984) but we should not mistake that this is actually occurring at the level of propaganda and not of scientific (or historic) fact: indeed when people cite Wakefield as an example few have the remotest idea what body of facts they are citing, and this has reduced to zero the quality of informed public discussion. Meanwhile Wakefield’s fate serves as a warning to anyone else who might professionally step out of line. In this context I pose the question in what other field of human activity would this means of controlling public discussion and opinion be considered politically tolerable? I also pose the question how we can possibly know the vaccine programme is safe if we control opinion in this way?
Michelle Rowton is neonatal nurse practioner, specializing in the care of children ages 2 years old and younger. She has worked for over 17 years working in NICU, with pre-mature and sick babies.
Michelle Rowton does not herself give vaccines to babies.
She recently sat down and conducted an interview with Polly Tommey during the VAXXED II film bus tour.
Michelle relates that in her undergraduate training to prepare her to be a nurse, that the only thing she was taught about vaccines was how to give the injections.
When she was in graduate school studying for her master’s degree to become a neonatal nurse practioner, she says she was taught “coercive rhetoric” to get the parents to agree with vaccines.
Michelle discusses her early years of working in the NICU with premature babies, and the negative effects vaccines would have on these babies.
Polly then relates how vaccine apologists in the medical field will rationalize giving vaccines to young babies by stating that they have seen many deaths related to vaccine-preventable deaths among unvaccinated babies.
So she asks Michelle how many of these deaths by diseases that are allegedly prevented through vaccination that she has seen during all her years as a nurse, and she replies, “zero.”
They’re lying. Especially when they bring up chicken pox. I’m like, what nation were you in when that happened? Because it hasn’t happened here.
Michelle also works as a Functional Medical Nurse practioner in the field for the past 7 years, where her focus is working with babies out in the field.
I moved out of the hospital and into the clinic, because I got to the point where I thought, this is the same thing over and over again. Yeah, I’m really good at putting in central lines, and putting in chest tubes, and saving these critical babies.
When they get to the convalescence stage, it is terrible what we’re doing, and everybody’s doing the same thing.
I can have more effect out in the community, in having these babies from birth until two – no antibiotics, no ear infections, no medications, setting them up for life to have a far less chance of autoimmune disease, chronic disease – all of that kind of stuff.
That’s what I want to do now.
Michelle has three children of her own, all unvaccinated, and never been on antibiotics. READ MORE HERE.
Thank to The Highwire for posting this report. If there has been a serious breach in ethical standards on a program to eradicate malaria, a disease man has been fighting forever, can you imagine what might happen in order to get a Coronavirus vaccine out quickly to the masses? Our Dan Olmsted broke the story of the dangerous malaria drug Lariam with his writing partner Mark Benjamin almost two decades ago. As always, we miss his presence and his take on this current situation.
By Peter Doshi, associate editor THE BMJ
A large scale malaria vaccine study led by the World Health Organization has been criticised by a leading bioethicist for committing a “serious breach” of international ethical standards. The cluster randomised study in Africa is already under way in Malawi, Ghana, and Kenya, where 720 000 children will receive the RTS,S vaccine, known as Mosquirix, over the next two years.123
Mosquirix, the world’s first licensed malaria vaccine, was positively reviewed by the European Medicines Agency, but its use is being limited to pilot implementation, in part to evaluate outstanding safety concerns that emerged from previous clinical trials.3 These were a rate of meningitis in those receiving Mosquirix 10 times that of those who did not, increased cerebral malaria cases, and a doubling in the risk of death (from any cause) in girls.2“
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Atlanta, GA
February 26, 8:00 am – 5:00 pm
February 27, 8:00 am – 2:30 pm
Agenda includes Ebola and Flu vaccine. One would assume Coronavirus will be featured.
Webcast instructions here.
Listen via phone:
Toll Free: 1-877-925-7916
Any member of the public can submit a written public comment to ACIP. Written comments must be received on or before February 28, 2020. You may submit comments for the February 2020 ACIP meeting, identified by Docket No. CDC-2020-0002, using the Federal eRulemaking Portalexternal icon. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. All submissions received must include the agency name and Docket Number.
All relevant comments received will be posted without change to http://regulations.govexternal icon, including any personal information provided. For access to the docket or to read background documents or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.govexternal icon. Comments submitted by 72 hours before the meeting will be made available to ACIP members in advance of the meeting. Comments will be accepted up to 48 hours following the end of the ACIP meeting
Note: I have had the pleasure of meeting Dr. Moskowitz. He personifies the dignified doctor of "yore" when patients came first. He is the author of Vaccines: A Reappraisal from Skyhorse Publishing.
I invite you to share this article he has written to address the current crushing slate of vaccine mandates. Here in my state of Connecticut, we are waiting for a vote on HB 5044 which will remove our religious vaccination exemption. Kim
By Richard Moskowitz, M. D.
As a GP with more than 50 years' experience in treating children and their families, I feel it my duty to speak out against the new vaccine mandates, for three main reasons. The first is that there is no emergency to justify vaccinating children against their parents' wishes, let alone keeping them out of school if they refuse.
The second is that the research cited to prove that vaccines are safe and effective falls far short of the rigorous standards that valid medical science must follow. The third is that the Nuremberg Code and the Helsinki Declaration, both of which we helped write and still profess to abide by, explicitly forbid any medical procedure, treatment, or experiment undertaken without the fully-informed consent of the recipient.
There is no emergency.
I'll take the easy one first. The public hysteria that has led a number of states to declare an emergency arose largely in response to measles outbreaks in 2016 and 2019. While a little larger than in the recent past, these were still quite small, localized, and in most respects similar to those recorded in every year since the vaccine was introduced, numbering just over 1000 cases in 2019, compared to a few hundred in the years since 2000, when the CDC prematurely declared the disease eliminated from the United States,1 and anywhere from 400,000-800,000 cases annually in the pre-vaccine era.2 If the CDC would just admit that they were a little hasty, and that such outbreaks are bound to occur, they could still claim a historic victory over this formerly ubiquitous disease. It's also worth remembering that virtually everyone of my generation came down with measles in grade school and recovered without complications; nobody thought it an emergency back then, so there was no urgent need for a vaccine in the first place.
In any case, the hysteria behind the present campaign to eliminate all religious and philosophical exemptions is utterly disproportionate to the facts on the ground. My own state of Massachusetts has seen 0-3 measles cases per year for the last 5 years, and only 44 cases in the past decade,3 with 97% of our kindergartners and 99% of our seventh-graders already vaccinated with the MMR,4 well above the official target of 95% for the stricter new mandate that it has in mind.
The alleged emergency rests on two assumptions so widely regarded as self-evident that they are rarely challenged:
1) that these measles outbreaks are spread mainly by the unvaccinated, and
2) that vaccines are so effective that only the unvaccinated are still susceptible and thus capable of transmitting the disease to others.
Unfortunately, there is ample scientific evidence that exactly the opposite is true. Although public health officials rarely admit it, the vast majority of the cases of measles, mumps, chicken pox, whooping cough, and influenza in both past and recent outbreaks, typically from 75-95%, have been in vaccinated individuals;5 in the case of mumps, the figure is typically 95-100%.6 So even if everyone was vaccinated, and all non-medical exemptions eliminated, as the new laws require, similar outbreaks are virtually certain to continue.
We also know that individuals receiving the "live" vaccines (measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, rotavirus, and oral polio) "shed" them for weeks afterward, and are contagious to family members, friends, and close contacts.7 As for "non-living" vaccines, recent studies show that current outbreaks of whooping cough are likewise being spread mainly by vaccinated individuals, through the development of vaccine-resistant strains,8 while analogous mutations have been documented in the case of HiB, pneumococcus, IPV, HPV, and other non-living vaccines as well.9 In short, the push to vaccinate everybody, and the bullying that typically accompanies it, actually help to propagate the diseases that the vaccines were meant to eradicate.
The only scary feature of the 2019 outbreaks is that a large number of those infected have been shown to bear the genotype of the vaccine virus, rather than the wild type,10 so that for the first time a significant proportion of the cases are unvaccinated, providing still more convincing proof that the vaccine is spreading the disease, because the disease itself has mutated in response to it, an ominous sign for the future.
Claims that vaccines are safe and effective are deceptive.
European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance is organizing a protest over the encroachment of the pharmaceutical industry on our civil rights and pyhysical integrity in Munich on 21 March, to be addressed by Robert F Kennedy Jr, Vera Sharav (holocaust survivor and founder of Alliance for Human Research Protection), Del Bigtree, Sherry Tenpenny, Senta Depuydt, Kris Gaublomme (EFVV), Jusyna Socha (Stop Nop Poland), and the will be presentation by CORVELVA regarding their investigation of vaccine vials. Details are available from the EFVV website. The protest will start (and end) in Odeonsplatz at 11.30 am and close at 5pm. There will be a stage there and during the day we'll also march in the city center.
Germany is the latest European country to introduce mandatory vaccinations (measles only, but they don't provide the single vaccine) and the German associations are now asking the intervention of the Constitutional Court to try and stop the law, that will otherwise start its effects from March 1st.
It's the only Country that extended the obligation to all the categories working with children: healthcare pratictioners, doctors, nurses, teachers...
EUROPE IS FINALLY RISING UP
We’ve finally had enough of an almighty pharmaceutical industry censoring our internet, controlling our media, our courts and our governments.
Mandatory vaccination is a violation of our physical integrity, of our freedoms guaranteed to us by the Charter the UN and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and is limiting our access to education, employment and the free circulation of citizens.
The global agenda of mandatory vaccination is marching fast. After Italy in 2017 and France in 2018, many other countries are following suit. The latest country to fall is Germany in 2020. These mandates will soon be extended to adults, pregnant women and the elderly.
The Network for Vaccine Choice Germany, in collaboration with the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance is organizing a massive protest to show the world that we are here, more determined than ever.
This is not the time to hesitate. It is high time to act.
Join us in Munich on March 21st, 2020. It is easy to register on the EFVV web site: just enter your details (name, surname, country, email for updates, intended travel plans).
Let's show Europe how many we are. Large numbers will affirm our connectedness, our commitment and our strength.
By Nancy Hokkanen
As legislatures across America debate coercive vaccine mandate bills, pharmaceutical lobbyists and their paid proxies are barraging lawmakers with questionable industry-friendly information. How many more state and federal lawmakers will be manipulated into letting profit-focused corporations set vaccine policy for all citizens, regardless of inability to tolerateinjections with potentially hazardous ingredients?
Pharma-funded vaccine bills have become a litmus test of legislators’ knowledge, priorities and ethics – and a chilling testament to corporations’ metastasizing abuse of civil rights and democratic processes.
- In June 2019, New York’s legislature repealed religious exemptionsto vaccines – without public hearings. Governor Andrew Cuomo signed that bill into law after pressure from vaccine profiteers, incentivized by a promiseto invest $48 million for jobs in Albany.
- In September 2019, California passed SB-276, which forces physicians to file exemption forms with the state’s immunization registry for approval – interfering with doctor/client confidentiality, while adding a layer of biased bureaucracy to intimidate taxpaying citizens.
- Vaccine mandates have created a wave of medical refugees – people who cannot be safely vaccinated are forced to move out of state. Californians are migrating to neighboring Oregon or Idaho to escape laws that paradoxically will harm their health.
If results measure success, then America’s public health policies are failing:
- The U.S. has dropped to 27th worldwide in healthcare and education.
- 54% of children suffer chronic illnesses and disorders, including seizures, tics, ADD/ADHD, autism (1 in 36), OCD, asthma (1 in 10), allergies, anaphylaxis and more.
- U.S. infant mortality ranks worstbehind 20 other affluent nations, as of 2018.
- In public schools, 13% of children receive special educationservices; its high costsare crippling school districts.
- Autism will cost the U.S. $460 billionyearly by 2025.
How many lawmakers would pass oppressive vaccine mandates if they knew that government evidence showed 1 in 39 people suffer health damage from vaccines?
In 2010, the Federal Agency for Health Care Research (AHCR) ran a pilot study “to test the efficiency of a state-of-the-art machine counting (AI) system on data records from the Harvard Pilgrim HMO,” reported the advocacy group Children’s Health Defense:
“Those government researchers found that 2.6% of vaccination resulted in injuries – a ratio of one for every 39 vaccines administered.
“[U.S. Centers for Disease Control] officials were so panicked by AHRC’s revelations that they killed the AI system-wide roll-out.”
The widespread rot of vaccine misinformation is rooted in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, its Centers for Disease Control, and the World Health Organization.
At a Dec. 2, 2019 closed-door meeting, WHO officials admitted alarming limitations in their knowledge of vaccines’ effects. Said Prof. Heidi Larson, Ph.D.: “We need much more investment in safety science,” adding that most doctors receiveonly a half-day of college vaccine education. A number of WHO officials voiced concerns about:
- frequency of adverse reactions,
- adjuvant reactogenicity and cross-reactivity,
- lack of post-vaccination follow-up,
- inadequate database management.
The factual disparity between WHO’s public relations content versus their members’ empirical observations is shockingly clear in a video posted by The HighWire with Del Bigtree. In a Nov. 28, 2019 promo video, WHO’s Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, M.D. confidently announced to the camera:
“Vaccines are very safe. If someone gets sick after vaccine, it is usually either a coincidence, an error in administering the vaccine administration, or very rarely a problem with the vaccine itself. That’s why we have vaccine safety systems – robust safety systems... thoroughly monitored with support from the W.H.O.”
Yet just five days later, in the closed-door WHO meeting, Dr. Swaminathan said the opposite:
“[W]e really don’t have very good safety monitoring communication in many countries... we’re not able to give clear-cut answers when people ask questions about the deaths that have occurred due to a particular vaccine... in most cases there is some obfuscation... and therefore less and less trust in the system.”
Such disturbing revelations of ignorance are amplified when set against the backdrop of a far-away disease outbreak – which, as the CDC frequently states, is just a plane ride away.
Below is a 1:38 video about flu vaccine facts from Robert Kennedy, Jr's Children's Health Defense:
"Flu Vaccines: What are the Facts?
Is the annual flu vaccine sales pitch (evident not just in the U.S. but around the world) working? Given predictions of a 50% increase in the global influenza vaccine market by 2023 (from $5 billion to $7.5 billion), it would seem so. On the other hand, recent estimates of influenza vaccine coverage in U.S. adults show that Americans are growing more, rather than less, skeptical. In 2017-2018, influenza vaccine coverage fell for every adult age group (and all but one racial/ethnic group), reaching the lowest level in eight flu seasons. While influenza researchers may be “hesitant to discuss problems with the vaccine ‘because they’re afraid of being tainted with the antivaccine brush,’” the bottom line is flu shots are big business and vaccine injuries aren’t rare.
This video is a quick review of the flu vaccine facts."
RT America interviews Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman of Children’s Health Defense. RFK, Jr. discusses the problems with HPV vaccine clinical trials and the subsequent cervical cancers in the generation that first got the shot, Julie Gerberding, lack of CDC-FDA regulatory oversight, “anti-vaxxers”, pharmaceutical industry corruption and more.
Imagine the horror of learning your young daughter has cervical cancer, once a rare disease, after having trusted that the HPV vaccine would prevent this disease.
From Children's Health Defense:
Bombshell Study Questioning HPV Vaccine Efficacy Appears as the UK’s Cervical Cancer Rates Rise in Young
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines hit the global marketplace in the mid-2000s. From the start, public health agencies enthusiastically promoted HPV vaccination as the “best way to protect [young people] against certain types of cancer later in life.” However, a blistering new study by British researchers—and new data showing that cervical cancer rates are surging in British 25- to 29-year-olds—raise numerous questions about officials’ inflated claims. The study’s results indicate, instead, that the jury is still out on whether HPV vaccination is effective.
The question is far from academic because, prior to Britain’s introduction of HPV vaccination in 2008, cervical cancer rates had been trending sharply downward. In fact, between the late 1980s and mid-2000s, cervical cancer rates halved. Now, Britain’s leading cancer research charity (Cancer Research UK) reports a steep 54% rise in cervical cancer in one of the very age groups that first received the vaccine.
The 2020 study, published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, critically appraises twelve published randomized controlled trials that HPV vaccine makers GlaxoSmithKline and Merck used to buttress assertions about their vaccines’ efficacy (Cervarix and Gardasil). The British authors do not beat around the bush in presenting their conclusions, which include the following:
- The trials’ questionable methodology generated “uncertainties” so significant that they undermine claims of efficacy.
- The ages of the women who participated in the trials were not representative of the younger adolescents who constitute HPV vaccination’s primary target groups.
- The studies used highly restrictive criteria to exclude many potential participants, limiting the trials’ “relevance and validity for real world settings.” (During Science Day presentations for the Jennifer Robi vs. Merck and Kaiser Permanente Gardasil lawsuit in January 2019, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. made the same point, describing the “elite club of superheroes” who constituted the study group and noting that Merck purged anyone with the slightest vulnerabilities to the vaccine or its ingredients despite the fact that the vaccine would ultimately be marketed to girls with the very vulnerabilities excluded during the clinical trials.)
- The trials used “composite and distant surrogate outcomes” that essentially made it “impossible to determine effects on clinically significant outcomes.” The authors explain that the surrogate outcomes used (forms of cervical dysplasia called CIN1 and CIN2) often regress on their own “and are of limited clinical concern.” They also note that different forms of cervical dysplasia each have “their own different natural histories, prevalence and incidence and strength of association with cancer.” Lumping together vastly different forms of dysplasia into the trials’ composite surrogate endpoints, therefore, was “problematic.”
Read the full reports at Children's Health Defense here.
“However, the vaccine gives an attenuated infection, and it is not the case that antibody levels remain permanently elevated in vaccinees. The current situation is responsible for reevaluation of the long-term efficacy of measles vaccine" (Plotkin)
"..the circulation of new genotypes of measles virus (as well as mumps) make vaccination campaigns ineffective"
"It is finally admitted that vaccinees can spread the virus!!!"
By Nassim Langrudi
EXPLOSIVE NEW PUBLICATION BY STANLEY A. PLOTKIN - Order to retreat: vaccines are neither safe nor effective! Undersigning it is the world leading expert on vaccination.
An article was published on November 1, 2019 which was to say the least explosive , that strangely enough has nevertheless gone under the radar: no one is talking about it, at least in public. Perhaps because the impact of its contents is remarkable. However, rumors tell us that the World Health Organization would be rather worried about these black-and-white admissions that unequivocally certify those problems that have been reported for a long time - on the one hand by doctors, epidemiologists and researchers an on the other hand, by a large slice of the population that questions the enforced expansion of vaccination practice today.
First of all, the weight of these considerations is considerable because of the author: we are not talking about just any university professor or any immunologist, but Stanley A. Plotkin, regarded for all intents and purposes as "the father of world vaccinology" - author of the book "Vaccines"  which is the reference text with regard to vaccinations in general.
Plotkin has lately ringed-up a series of public admissions of enormous importance. He was summoned as an expert witness in favor of forced vaccination in a legal dispute between parents divided over whether or not to vaccinate their daughter. Aaron Siri, the mother's lawyer who was opposed to her daughter being vaccinated, questioned the doctor under oath in New Hope, Pennsylvania, on January 11, 2018. The footage of the deposition is easily available on youtube. 
Subsequently, just last November, the same Plotkin published this article, entitled: "Is there a correlate of protection for measles vaccine?", which aims to re-establish the effectiveness (in other words revising current beliefs about the effectiveness) of measles vaccinations in the light of the latest "epidemics" found or declared in Europe and the USA. The article contains facts and deductions that demonstrate the bad faith of the whole propaganda operation underpinning global vaccination programs. In practice, many of the doubts that parents have when they critically consider whether to have their children administered vaccines are justified. The doyen of vaccinology certifies in black and white the same issues that parents who are against compulsory vaccination are calling for. Many concepts are exposed, let us move on to the points. It turns out that:
1) It is not possible to rely on the antibody titer that has so far been deemed appropriate to confer immunity. More precisely, “the fully protective level of neutralizing antibodies is not known".
So, how can we establish the effectiveness of the vaccine?
2) It is not possible to say with certainty that the measles vaccine gives permanent (lifetime) immunity as the natural disease does-and this is contrary to what has so far been propagated with regard to vaccinations: “However, the vaccine gives an attenuated infection, and it is not the case that antibody levels remain permanently elevated in vaccinees. The current situation is responsible for reevaluation of the long-term efficacy of measles vaccine".
Some readers may recall back in August following the pronouncements of British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, about clamping down on vaccine misinformation. I tried to help by reviewing our National Health Service webpage 'Vaccines are safe and important'. It may be said the web-managers were perfectly courteous but referred my comments to "Public Health England Immunology Team" who took no less than 106 days to reply. I was expecting something really good, considered expert replies to all my criticisms. What actually arrived was nothing but links to other web-pages committing similar solecisms and evasions. Reproducing the letter could apparently open me to draconian penalties but fundamentally the taunt about the "echo-chambers of social media" turns out to be nothing but projection: all they can do when challenged is repeat the propaganda. MISINFORMATION IS INFORMATION THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT LIKE
Review of the United Kingdom National Health Service webpage ‘Why vaccination is safe and important’ (media reviewed 30 July 2019).
I am responding to claims or statements in this web-document ' Why vaccination is safe and important'  (not following the original order of presentation).
I begin with the statement:
“(Vaccines) do not overload or weaken the immune system - it's safe to give children several vaccines at a time and this reduces the amount of injections they need”
It is not clear what the evidential basis is for this statement. Formerly, at least, British health officials were keen to cite a paper by Offit et al (2002) which suggested absurdly an infant could withstand 10,000 vaccines at a time. However far-fetched, this was based on a theoretical claim about routine exposure to environmental antigens. Evidently some environmental exposures are more dangerous than others, otherwise people would not be at risk from infectious diseases at all, but the basis of exposure through vaccination is different (injected), and involves adjuvants so it is perhaps not relevant at all to talk about the number of antigens (as in Offit). In August 2004 Dr Salisbury distinguished in an e-letter to me between the increased risk of adverse reactions in an extended schedule and “overload”, which begs the question what is meant by “overload” and what people are supposed to understand by such a statement. A paper by Aaby et al (2012) was entitled “Vaccine programmes must consider their effect on general resistance”, which is evidently a warning that there is no such blank cheque for expanding the schedule. I covered this ground in my published submission to the House of Commons Health and Social Care Committee inquiry into anti-microbial resistance last year . The NHS need to clarify what they mean, but also state what the evidential basis is for this claim.
Another statement apparently contradicts the proposition that there is anything inherently safe about vaccinating:
“(Vaccines) get safety tested for years before being introduced - they're also monitored for any side effects”
Recently, British Medical Journal has been signalling an ambitious intent to rid public health of commericial influence 'COMMERCIAL INFLUENCE IN HEALTH: FROM TRANSPARENCY TO INDEPENDENCE', but how serious is it? In this regard I wrote first to its on-line correspondence column, Rapid Responses, and then when my letter was not published to the lead author of the pilot paper Roy Moynihan and journal's editor in chief, Fiona Godlee, which in turn was not replied to. I was drawing their attention to the story familiar in the pages of Age of Autism of Prof Andrew Pollard.
Prof Pollard is the lead developer among other things with Oxford Vaccine Group (OVG) of the Meningitis B vaccine, Bexsero. OVG, which is also part of Oxford University, develops vaccines in partnership with the pharmaceutical industry. Back in 2013 Oxford Vaccine Group became affiliated to the newly created agency Public Health England (PHE), a mysterious agglomerate body working within the United Kingdom National Health Service which seems to have been created with the intention of escaping normal governmental accountability.
Shortly after its creation the then Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt, wrote to the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), the committee which recommends vaccines to the NHS schedule (and is also affiliated to PHE), to urgently consider the case for Bexsero. The JCVI passed over this unusual request in June 2013 but Prof Pollard was himself appointed to head the JCVI for the very next meeting in October 2013, and under his chairship the vaccine was recommended to the infant schedule at his second meeting in February 2014. Soon after this event negotiations began for GSK to take over the vaccine division of Novartis which manufactured Bexsero, and these were completed early in 2015. This was by chance just in time for Hunt to come to an agreement with GSK over the provision of Bexsero and for him to announce the deal before the May 2015 general election. The commercial prospects of the product took off.
This is just part of the picture. Prof Pollard is adviser to the British and European licensing agencies, he sits on the board of the Jenner Vaccine Foundation until earlier this year with Dr Norman Begg Vice-President and Chief Medical Officer of GSK Biologicals: he has connections with many products which are recommended by the JCVI. If BMJ did not think the instance was relevant Moynihan could have written to explain their position. Instead there is silence, while they back off discussing facts which are well inside the public domain, if largely hidden.
BMJ need to show they mean business.
The correspondence to - but not with BMJ - is below.
Dear Prof. Moynihan,
I do not know whether there could be legal reasons why...has not posted on-line my letter of 5 December (see below) but there could not be a network of influence more germane or central to the issues you and BMJ are raising. This is certainly not a personal issue about Prof Pollard, but the ubiquitousness of his name poses extremely serious questions. The director of Oxford Vaccine Group (an agency of Public Health England) which develops vaccines with the industry is also the Chair of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (another agency of PHE) which recommend products to the UK schedule. He also acts as an advisor to the MHRA and EMA, which was extensively discussed in the Nordic Cochrane complaints about HPV vaccines. OVG took part as well in trials of the controversial Pandemrix vaccine in 2009 prior to marketing. I am just sketching in a few issues which could extend over many products.
It is not my view that Prof Pollard is individually to blame for this opaque situation since all these institutions are presumably aware of the potential conflicts and allow them to continue. I personally raised the problem of the OVG/JCVI conflict with the DH, PHE and in the Scottish Parliament to no effect. But I do believe there is an obligation for those who know about these problems to bring them into the light of day, and this could not be an area of greater legitimate public concern. I hope BMJ will see fit to act.
I also attach for information the GSK document 'Evening of Evidence' 30 September 2015.
With all good wishes,
John Stone (UK Editor, Age of Autism)
34 Outram Road, London N22 7AF
44 20 8888 7109
cc Fiona Godlee, ...
Re: Pathways to independence: towards producing and using trustworthy evidence - the case of vaccines
I express concern about the prestige and doctrine of quasi-infallibility accorded to vaccines, which even put them in a different category from other medical products . The assumption that all medicines are double blind placebo safety tested was called into question in these columns in relation to vaccines earlier this year and unfortunately not satisfactorily answered . It often seems that the imperative to ward against infectious disease has itself become reckless.
Take a look at this Tweet from Dorit Reiss, pharma mouthpiece for vaccination.Clearly someone told her that vaccines recommended for pregnant woman (forced upon them really) have never been tested on pregnant women, because this is considered unethical. Unethical is bad. But unprofitable is worse.
On what planet does her Tweet make any sense. Mercury, perhaps? And who the heck LOVED that Tweet?
FACE-OFF: A face-off is used to begin and restart a game like hockey and lacrosse. We need to begin and restart our writing freedom.
Good morning. Each day we see more and more censorship on Facebook on the topic of vaccinations. Facebook ages are being stamped with WARNINGS to readers, as if they are entering the XXX'iest of porn sites. In fact, every one of our pages about vaccines should start with: "LIFE AND DEATH CONTENT! ARE YOU HUMAN?"
We go to Social Media because it's the fast food of online communication. We used to blog. We used to Yahoo Group. Now? We Tweet and Insta and Pin and Facebook. I'm trying an experiment and I need your help. Every so often, I will create a post with the same headline, changing only the date. Maybe I'll throw out a conversation starter. Or a link. And readers can go to the comments and write what they want about vaccines. Other readers can respond to the comments with their own. You can also include URL links in your comments to direct readers to posts you think are important. We are NOT changing our position, and we will monitor for courtesy and outright rudeness.
Today is the first day of this trial. As we say in martial arts at the start of a sparring match: "Hajime!"
Controlled Human Infection Method: ‘Unethical’ clinical trials of vaccines pose threat to human lives
In the USA, we might call this "The Tuskegee method." As I watched Vaxxed II last week, it was the Gardasil stories that affected me the strongest. The fact that the placebo in testing was not by even the lowest scientific standards a placebo haunts me. As for CHIM - controlled human infection method, it's astounding how easily those in medicine can pencil in the ethics line under the guise of science for the greater good. We have featured Dr. Puliyel's writing many times. We thank him for his diligent, surely lonely, work.
By Dr. Jacob Puliyel, Pediatrican
Published 11/11/19 in Sunday Guardian Live, an Indian e-paper
Primum non nocere—“first, do no harm”—is a basic tenet of medical ethics. That is about to change in India. “Controlled Human Infection Method” (CHIM) studies are planned to be introduced here. Humans are to be deliberately infected with diseases to test the efficiency of experimental vaccines. It will provide a shortcut to vaccine licencing and reduce costs to manufacturers.
At Hotel Taj Palace, from 19 -21 November, under the rubric of the “World Conference on access to medicinal products”, the ICMR and the DBT plan to introduce CHIM studies. According to the Economic Times, even vaccine manufacturers are advising caution before allowing such a radical departure from standard practice.
The Translational Health Science and Technology Institute (THSTI), under the DBT, is spearheading the efforts under the banner of a mysterious “India Volunteer Infection Research Consortium”. Dr Y.K. Gupta, principal advisor, THSTI, has said that “initially, such studies should only be allowed in high-quality academic institutions… Similarly, at least initially, only healthy, educated adults should be included in a CHIM study”. The promoters are clear that such concessions are needed only initially.
So, the “initial” studies are to be done on drug-responsive malaria, typhoid and flu (which is self-limiting). It is claimed that CHIM volunteers are to be infected with a weakened strain of the pathogen. However according to biologics development consultant Dr K.B. Walker “a safe, well characterised strain will lose some semblance to the real “challenge” organism and so weaken the relevance of CHIM in informing further clinical development”. This defeats the main objective of doing such studies. Read more at Sunday Guardian Live.
Washington, DC – Thousands of advocates for children’s health will gather Thursday at the Vaccine Injury Epidemic (VIE) Event on the National Mall to mark the 33rd anniversary of National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA). The rally on Nov. 14th will spotlight the devastating impact NCVIA has had upon the state of children’s health. While children continue to be injured by vaccines daily, vaccine makers cannot be held accountable, thereby eliminating incentive for vaccine safety.
In his remarks, RFK, Jr. will address the ramifications of NCVIA and honor those whose lives have been impacted by vaccine injury and death. “It’s time to call out Congress, the CDC, and drug companies for allowing industry profits to trump children’s health,” said Kennedy. “There is no crisis more urgent than the epidemics of chronic health conditions among our nation’s children.”
Following NCVIA’s passage creating the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), the childhood vaccine market sparked a gold rush for Pharma as more vaccines for routine childhood illnesses were developed. Coterminous with the burgeoning vaccine schedule, chronic health conditions in children rose from 12% to 54%. As vaccine industry profits grew to $50 billion annually, so did diagnoses of asthma, autism, ADHD, allergies, anxiety, depression, diabetes, obsessive-compulsive disorder and auto-immune diseases. Here are the facts:
- An HHS-funded study found only 1% of vaccine injuries are reported.
- Despite NVICP’s high burden of proof and two out of three claims dismissed, over $4.2 billion has been paid for claims of vaccine injury or death.
- The vaccine-injured find NVICP to be a years-long, litigious program with no jury, discovery and precedent. While medical bills mount, the injured are up against DOJ lawyers and HHS “Special Masters” that act as judges.
- The Department of Justice and the NVICP are accused of fraud and obstruction of justice in the Autism Omnibus Proceeding.
- The Institute of Medicine reports that the vaccine schedule as recommended has never been studied for long-term health effects despite independent research suggesting that unvaccinated children are healthier.
- Modern medicine acknowledges that not everyone responds the same to vaccination and the “one size fits all” vaccine policy is not science based.
Note: It's with no pleasure that we share this story written by a Dad who realized that his son had been injured by the Gardasil vaccine. We welcome him to the Vax Injury "club" without joy. No one wants to watch their precious child fall ill after a vaccination. I've said for many years now, Gardasil is the vaccine that will tip the scales forcing Americans recognize vaccine injury as a common threat. Babies scream and cry. But teens and young adults speak. They explain their feelings, their pain, they lose out on being able to participate in life, they don't just lie in crib or on a paper covered table where the doctor pooh poohs Mom and Dad's concerns.
We wish his son Quentin well. Please take a look at the comments, in agreement. Gabler is learning the worst way possible, as we did. Please be respectful if you comment about his point of view or his son. Thank you.
By Wolfgang Gabler
I'm writing this post as the dad of a young 12 year old tennis player. My son, Quentin, was ranked Top 5 in Florida and was doing pretty well.
In April, May and June of 2019 he played good tennis, but was certainly not winning all the time. It’s also healthier for young tennis players, if they do not win more than 60 to 70% of their matches.
Quentin was normally practicing twice a day. Two hours with his coach and most of the time another 2 to 3 hours with other tennis players. Once a week he was doing match play in a very good group with some other very good kids from Florida, often several other Florida Top 10 players.
One evening in April while participating in the above mentioned match play, Quentin was complaining about his legs getting weak and heavy. I did not take this seriously, because he already played 4.5 hours when it happened. So I told him, that it’s okay to be exhausted after so much tennis. He actually didn’t want to go home anyway.
In the next two months he was complaining about the same symptoms maybe 4 more times. He was also visibly growing. So I thought, nothing to be concerned about.
Note: Final part of our series. Vaxxed II debuts THIS Week! Join us in congratulating and thanking Polly and her team, and all of the professionals and parents who had the courage to participate. XOX
Vaxxed From Cover up to Catastrophe launched a firestorm when, in 2016, it was abruptly removed from the Tribeca Film Festival, Robert De Niro's event in New York. As angry as so many of us were at the time, the cowardice and dismissal provided an efficient fuel that fired the campaign, and continues to do so. From the Vaxxed II site:
In 2016, a media firestorm erupted when Tribeca Film Festival abruptly censored its documentary selection, VAXXED: FROM COVER-UP TO CATASTROPHE, amid pressure from pro-pharmaceutical interests.
In response to media silence on CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, who admitted to fraud on a pivotal vaccine safety study, VAXXED catapulted to notoriety and became a worldwide trending topic, opening to sold out theater audiences nationwide.
Stunned by the immense volume of parents lining up outside the theaters with vaccine injury stories to share, VAXXED producer Polly Tommey began to livestream worldwide reaching millions, and a community that had once been silenced were empowered to rise up.
In VAXXED II: THE PEOPLE'S TRUTH, Polly and the team travel over 50,000 miles in the USA and around the world. Interviews of parents and doctors with nothing to gain and everything to lose exposed the vaccine injury epidemic and asked the question on every parent’s mind, “Are vaccines really as safe and effective as we’ve been told?”
Many Age of Autism readers have seen the bus, which is a rolling memorial to vaccine injured children. Some are included in the interviews, including me, Kim Rossi.) Perhaps your child's name is on the bus. Vaxxed II the People's Truth continues the stories from families and includes many medical professionals, who risk everything when they talk about vaccination policy and injury. Anne Dachel interviewed Executive Producer Polly Tommey. The series will run here on Age of Autism. The transcript follows each video clip.
Q: Parents with thriving, healthy, high achieving UNVACCINATED children tell their stories on Vaxxed II. What do you see these stories doing to the vaccine debate? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtDoqYaZwCU
Polly: Make no mistake that the other side, without a doubt, do not want the public, the people, the parents to hear the stories of the unvaccinated. They want us to talk about the MMR, autism, Andrew Wakefield. They want that to go down the same path every single time because they can attack us. But you cannot attack the generations and generations of the health of the unvaccinated.
Vaxxed II doesn’t even begin to cover the health of the unvaccinated. We uncovered so much. We uncovered generations and generations standing there saying, “We’ve never had any cancer in our family.” “We’ve never had rheumatoid arthritis in our family.” “We’ve never had diabetes.” “We’ve never had any of these things that you see that are just common elderly conditions.”
They don’t have them in their families. And as we went deeper and deeper into the world of the unvaccinated, I could see, the team could see, this is why they don’t do the vaxxed/unvaxxed study. This is why they’re trying to censor us and stop us, and they’re petrified of these people speaking out. Because when the world knows about the health of the unvaccinated, game over. They’re done.
According to our Anne Dachel, when she went to post this video on Facebook, she was blocked from doing so with a content warning. The information in this post is a mix of true and false statements or it could simply be incomplete. In some cases, the information is misleading.
Thank you to Bill Maher. Go to the 6:15 mark. Share far and wide. The hell with Zuckerberg, his pediatrician wife and Facebook.
A big shout out to symposium organizer, Kristen Chevrier. She and her Your Health Freedom team planned an informative 2-day event featuring a wonderful and well-spoken array of speakers, for whom video links will soon be available at Your Health Freedom.
As always, I am hoping my presentation will open eyes and ears to the terrible truth about vaccines.
Please share...together, we might just save a child and their family from a lifetime of needless suffering.
“Why Is This Legal?” by Laura Hayes, delivered on 11-2-18 in Utah
This evening, I am going to be speaking to you about vaccines, specifically, their inexcusable lack of safety, the toxic and hazardous ingredients contained in them that have no business being injected into any human, and the catastrophic results we continue to witness due to their use. In the time I have, I will only be able to scratch the surface of the harm that vaccines cause, both to the individual recipient, and to subsequent generations, if the recipient is still able to reproduce. I won’t have time to delve into the lack of efficacy or necessity for vaccines, but suffice it to say that their failure rate is high, their “efficacy” is based on measures which are unproven and unreliable, and injecting poisons, toxins, neurotoxins, carcinogens, immune- and nervous-system destroyers, endocrine disruptors, ingredients that have never been clinically approved, and unknown ingredients that are not required to be disclosed, is in no way health-inducing or protective, for any one, at any age. As I like to say, one does not need to be a PhD in biology or chemistry, or an MD, or even academically astute to understand that the practice of vaccination is not founded on any valid science. Common sense, basic science, and parental instincts are more than enough to discern the truth about vaccines. Now, let’s launch into the topic of vaccine safety, an oxymoron if ever there was one.
Not too long ago, in a vaccine-related forum to which I belong, someone proposed that we launch a meme campaign titled, “Why Is This Legal?”. It was in response to yet another teenager becoming paralyzed after receiving Merck's Gardasil vaccine. I find why is this legal to be a compelling question to ask with regard to vaccines, our nation’s vaccine program, and vaccine mandates.
My hope today is to stimulate thinking, questioning, researching, and analyzing, resulting in drawing your own conclusions versus relying on those of the self-proclaimed “experts”.
With regard to the question why is this legal, we are going to cover a number of pertinent questions specific to vaccines:
These days history happens by stealth: the big shifts in power are often only incidentally reported in our mainstream news-media and can be hard to detect even by experienced watchers. Until a year ago almost no one had heard of the Global Health Security Agenda, although the project started in 2014 under the Obama administration and has already destabilised nations: something which is neither conjecture or “conspiracy theory” but easily established from public documents [1, 2] . Late last year I highlighted a column in electronic BMJ by J Stephen Morrison “senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and director of its Global Health Policy Center" :
“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 to 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?’.”
But the heat was turned up again at the beginning of 2019 when the World Health Organization declared “the vaccine hesitant” to be a threat to world health , and the Global health terror over measles was launched despite inadequate evidence either for the spread, or the casualties[1,4-6]. Also, of course, pinned to the tails of the largely artificial measles scare, was the demand for compliance with a host of other products to combat other diseases. Implausibly, health officials continue to stick to the baseless proposition that a two-month old infant can benefit from unlimited barrage of biological products without risk of harm, and never seem to have heard of the concept of “over-medication” .
AoA is grateful to Vinu Arumugham who has written an analysis of an article in MedPageToday by Diana Swift ("expert critique" Melinda Engevik): "Biologics Tied to New-Onset IBD and Other Autoimmune Events - Though mechanism is unclear patients need monitoring for de novo disorders". He writes:
They quote: "We don't really understand the mechanism behind this yet, and the effect might apply to agents other than etanercept," Korzenik told the Reading Room
It is absolutely ridiculous for people to claim that the mechanism is “unclear” or not understood. I predicted that animal protein containing biologics would induce de novo autoimmune disorders (1). Most biologics are produced using Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cells. All biologics thus contain residual CHO host cell proteins. We have described the exact immunological mechanism involved in the induction of autoimmunity by immunization with homologous xenogeneic antigens (2). Bailey-Kellog et al. developed CHOPPI specifically because induction of autoimmunity by residual host cell proteins is a known problem (3).
Autoimmune disorders induced by biologics represent the second wave of iatrogenic diseases.
The first wave of iatrogenic diseases are of course all the autoimmune disorders induced by animal protein containing vaccines (1,4–9). The biologics that are now prescribed to “treat” these vaccine induced disorders are creating their own disaster, exactly as predicted.
Says: “You may be wondering how an autoimmune reaction can occur. The autoimmune reaction may be triggered: ... If a foreign substance that is similar to a normal body substance enters the body.”
Having just succeeded in foisting Gardasil 9 on to boys in the UK the operation is on the move again - the idea now, as spotted by Christina England in Health Impact News, is that everyone including the elderly should have it.
This is how it goes: 12 September an article is published on-line in International Journal of Infectious Diseases but not yet in hard copy 'HPV vaccination: are we overlooking opportunities to control HPV infection and transmission?' (Vorsters, Van Damme & Bosch). it states in conclusion:
Based on the discussion above, we would like to call for further investigation and documentation of the potential public health benefits of vaccination of HPV-positive women. For modellers, these data would provide an additional effect that should be considered when designing HPV vaccination impact models exploring and quantifying the herd protection observed in population programmes. Finally, these additional modes of protection may also reduce the existing reluctance to vaccinate (young) women post-sexual debut or known high-risk groups such as sex workers.
The article is couched in speculative terms, yet two weeks later Xavier Bosch is in the Mail on Sunday with cheer-leader Margaret Stanley of the University of Cambridge demanding that the vaccine be given to everybody: 'Now give every Adult the cancer-fighting HPV vaccination and 'save thousands of lives', experts demand as evidence shows the jab can slash cancer risk for grown ups too'.
If this seems like jumping the gun it is actually how it has always been: the benefits were always entirely speculative, the vastly documented harms relentlessly denied. Once again, we are seeing a piece of theater: the evidence of benefit is conjectural, the experts in the study conflicted up to their eye-balls:
SAFE: officially listed side-effects for the 4 vaccine products routinely given to British infants at 8 weeks of age
Infanrix hexa https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/files/pil.2586.pdf
If your child has an allergic reaction, see your doctor straight away. The signs may include:
- rashes that may be itchy or blistering
- swelling of the eyes and face
- difficulty in breathing or swallowing
- a sudden drop in blood pressure and loss of consciousness.
These signs usually start very soon after the injection has been given. Talk to a doctor straight away if they happen after leaving the doctor’s surgery.
See your doctor straight away if your child has any of the following serious side effects:
- times when they lose consciousness or have a lack of awareness
- fits – this may be when they have a fever
These side effects have happened very rarely with Infanrix hexa as with other vaccines against whooping cough. They usually happen within 2 to 3 days after vaccination.
Other side effects include:
Very common (these may occur with more than 1 in 10 doses of the vaccine): feeling tired, loss of appetite, high temperature of 38°C or higher, swelling, pain, redness where the injection site was given, unusual crying, feeling irritable or restless.
Common (these may occur with up to 1 in 10 doses of the vaccine): diarrhoea, being sick (vomiting), high temperature of more than 39.5°C, swelling larger than 5 cm or hard lump where the injection was given, feeling nervous.
Uncommon (these may occur with up to 1 in 100 doses of the vaccine): upper respiratory tract infection, feeling sleepy, cough, large swelling at the injected limb.
Rare (these may occur with up to 1 in 1,000 doses of the vaccine): bronchitis, rash, swollen glands in the neck, armpit or groin (lymphadenopathy), bleeding or bruising more easily than normal
Two New Papers Suggest Rotavirus Vaccines Including Paul Offit's Rotateq Are Undermining Immunity (Abstracts)
Julia E. Maguire, Keira Glasgow, Kathryn Glass, Susie Roczo-Farkas, Julie E. Bines, Vicky Sheppeard, Kristine Macartney, Helen E. Quinn
BACKGROUND: Rotavirus vaccine has been funded for infants under the Australian National Immunisation Program since 2007, with Rotarix vaccine used in New South Wales, Australia, from that time. In 2017, New South Wales experienced a large outbreak of rotavirus gastroenteritis. We examined epidemiology, genotypic profiles, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) among cases.
METHODS: Laboratory-confirmed cases of rotavirus notified in New South Wales between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2017 were analyzed. VE was estimated in children via a case-control analysis. Specimens from a sample of hospitalized case patients were genotyped and analyzed.
RESULTS: In 2017, 2319 rotavirus cases were reported, representing a 3.1-fold increase on the 2016 notification rate. The highest rate was among children aged <2 years. For notified cases in 2017, 2-dose VE estimates were 88.4%, 83.7%, and 78.7% in those aged 6 to 11 months, 1 to 3 years, and 4 to 9 years, respectively. VE was significantly reduced from 89.5% within 1 year of vaccination to 77.0% at 5 to 10 years postvaccination. Equinelike G3P (48%) and G8P (23%) were identified as the most common genotypes in case patients aged ≥6 months.
These latest analyses were made possible thanks to the active contribution of the French associations Association Liberté Informations Santé (ALIS), Ligue nationale pour la liberté des vaccinations (LNPLV) and the Australian Association Australian Vaccination-risks Network (AVN), that we thank.
New generation sequencing have become the preferred tool for in-depth analysis in the field of biology and medical science, especially high precision ones. Thanks to these tools, we can approach in a more modern and comprehensive way a number of applications such as de novo sequencing, metagenomic and epigenomic studies, transcriptome sequencing and genome re-sequencing.
This last one (re-sequencing) is largely used in human field, both for research and diagnostic purposes and consists of NGS - Next Generation Sequencing of an entire single genome, to map the Single Nucleotide mutations (SNP), insertions and deletions of more or less long sequences that have occurred in certain locations of the genome, and variations in the number of copies of genomic portions/genes (CNV, Copy Number Variants).
This procedure helps to understand the development mechanism of some pathologies, in order to identify the directions for a future clinical treatment as in the case of cancer for example. Indeed, by this method the genetic heritage of a cancer patient can be fully decoded in both normal and cancerous tissue, thus allowing us to comprehend what exactly has changed within the genome, and, if possible, how to intervene with targeted measures.
The re-sequencing procedure requires that the DNA of an individual is mechanically broken into small dimension fragments (400-500 base pairs) and artificial DNA parts named adapters are tied to these fragments; adapters make it possible to tie the human DNA fragments to a glass surface on which the bases reading (A, C, G, T) is performed. The DNA base pairs reading takes place by means of chemical reactions, namely the incorporation of nucleotides that have been marked by fluorescent molecules. The million sequences (reads) thus obtained are then mapped on the human reference genome by specific software and all the variants are identified comparing the analyzed genome with the reference genome.
This same procedure has been performed on the human genome in Priorix® Tetra lot n. A71CB256A, genome which belongs to cell line MRC-5 (of fetal origin); the work has been carried out by a company in the USA, that routinely deals with human genome re-sequencing analysis. *
*the name of the laboratory that has performed the analysis will be included in the next formal complaint we will file at the Public Prosecutor of Rome and as well at the Italian and European regulatory bodies. The associations who are filing the analysis funded by Corvelva will be promptly kept up to date with these shocking results too. We are no denying that we feel, especially as parents, distressed by these results we are reporting - as if what we have found out so far was not enough to worry about.
Autoepitopes (22 of 27) in rheumatoid arthritis differ from vaccine antigens by a single amino acid residue, ideal for low affinity self reactive T cell mediated autoimmunity and aluminum adjuvant promotes citrullination of vaccine antigens thus the synthesis of ACPA
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is an autoimmune disorder. Rheumatoid factor (RF) and anti-
citrullinated protein antibodies (ACPA) are known to play a role in RA. RF and ACPA origin is
Vaccines contain numerous residual proteins of food, animal, plant, fungal and bacterial origin,
from the manufacturing process. Protein sequence analysis shows that 14 of 14 known RF
autoepitopes differ from vaccine antigens by just one amino acid residue. The immune system’s cancer surveillance system looks for exactly such antigens. Cancer begins with a single DNA mutation where one base-pair is modified. Proteins encoded by this DNA segment will therefore also exhibit a single amino acid change. So such peptides with a single amino acid change (neoantigens) are strong markers for cancer and result in an anti-cancer immune
response, when accompanied by innate immune system co-stimulation. With thousands of such proteins in vaccines, there is an overwhelming anti-cancer immune response following vaccine administration. The adjuvant or live virus in the vaccine provides the requisite innate immune system co-stimulation. Since cancer cells/proteins are very similar to normal cells/proteins, attacking cancer always carries the risk of autoimmunity (collateral damage). Therefore vaccines cause numerous autoimmune diseases by triggering unnecessary anti-cancer immune responses.
This evening the BBC screens its documentary The Conspiracy Files: Vaccination Wars. While vaccine program critics on both sides of the Atlantic have cooperated with this production do not expect any fair reporting: in fact the BBC long ago committed itself to the doctrine of false equivalence i.e. it does not matter how strong or rational the evidence is they will defer to the government-industry consensus. Even the use of the term "conspiracy" has slid into innuendo. Meanwhile, the documentary has been shared with the media but not the participants. Betrayal is their watchword.
Age of Autism's British editor, John Stone, writes:
Pre-publicity suggest the program makers will try to make out that commercial conflict is not an issue. Given such preposterous stance it is very hard to know where to begin or end. Nevertheless, it might be instructive to post three submissions to UK Parliamentary bodies published by them.
PB 1584 John Stone’s response to letters from the Scottish Government and the JCVI
I hope it is in order for me individually to respond to the letters from the Scottish government and the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation as supporting witness in Angus File’s petition.
The JCVI Secretariat (1) have now responded with a defence of Prof Pollard’s appointment which I would like briefly to answer from public documents.
The code of practice of 2013 (cited by Mr Earnshaw as current in his letter) states in section 42 (2):
If a member has in the last 12 months received, or plans to receive a financial payment or other benefit from a business or representative body relating to vaccines or any other product or service that could be under consideration by JCVI...including... holding a directorship or other paid position...the member must declare this interest... If this interest is specific to an agenda item and the payment or other benefit is connected specifically with the product under consideration, the member will be required to absent him/herself from the discussion and any subsequent vote.
Tomorrow evening the BBC screens its documentary The Conspiracy Files: Vaccination Wars. While vaccine program critics on both sides of the Atlantic have cooperated with this production do not expect any fair reporting: in fact the BBC long ago committed itself to the doctrine of false equivalence i.e. it does not matter how strong or rational the evidence is they will defer to the government-industry consensus. Even the use of the term "conspiracy" has slid into innuendo. Meanwhile, the documentary has been shared with the media but not the participants. Betrayal is their watchword.
Age of Autism's British editor, John Stone, writes:
According to a preview in the Dundee Courier by Paul Whitelaw:
"This depressing report canvases the opinions of people who believe that the authorities are hiding the truth about vaccines. We also meet scientists who know for a fact that immunisation saves lives. Harmful side-effects are extremely rare. The conspiracy theorists refuse to accept this. Why? Widespread online misinformation and alarmist media coverage, all of which dates back to a thoroughly discredited study of whooping cough vaccines in the 1970s."
This is a story, of course, about gullible journalists. The "thoroughly discredited study" is no doubt the one by that good and honorable man Prof Gordon Stewart - later, Bill Inman, one of the founders of the UK yellow card reporting scheme reported in his memoirs 'Don't tell the patient' the he had never seen anyone worse treated than Stewart was by the UK Department of Health. Inman himself commented how very few of the severe injuries from the old DPT vaccine ever got recorded. He states that from his data analysis it was at least ten times higher than the 1 in 300,000 that the Department of Health “was clinging to”. He noted:
Children who had developed a temperature or had screamed repeatedly or had muscular spasms or convulsions after the first injection, had sometimes been given further doses of the vaccine with catastrophic results.
In a recent letter to BMJ Rapid Responses 'The Benefits of DPT' I wrote recently:
Mara Kardas-Nelson  should also note that as result of DPT controversy and the UK Vaccine Damage Payment Act of 1979 there were 600 payments in the period 1978-81 (1978/9: 36, 1979/80: 317, 1980/1: 256) [2,3]. The rhetoric behind the legislation was that injuries were rare but this was not borne out by the record [2,3]. The act enabled the government to retrieve the reputation of the programme amid adverse publicity by acknowledging the principle of harm but no one knew how many awards there had actually been - and initially there were a lot. This would also not take account of any deaths.
According to Mogensen et al, the introduction of DPT to Guinea-Bissau in 1981 was associated with a 5 fold increase in the rate of death :