Vaccinations

now browsing by category

Vaccinations are supposed to prevent disease, but instead they increase allergies, reduce immunity, destroy our brains, give us bad hearts by filling us with toxins. Before any vaccination, ask for one without Mercury, Aluminium, Formaldehyde, Polysorbate 80, Yeast, Egg, Viruses, etc. Vaccines without these ingredients do not exist. And yes, vaccinations DO cause AUTISM.

 

The National Plan to Vaccinate Every American


Reproduced from original article:
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/03/24/national-vaccine-plan.aspx

Analysis by Barbara Loe Fisher     

Visit the Mercola Video Library

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • The coronavirus vaccine may be the first genetically engineered messenger RNA vaccine to be fast tracked to licensure
  • The FDA has not yet licensed messenger RNA vaccines that use part of the RNA of a virus to manipulate the body’s immune system into stimulating a potent immune response
  • There likely will be lots of questions about whether the fast-tracked coronavirus vaccine was studied long enough to adequately demonstrate safety
  • The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) may recommend that all Americans get the newly licensed coronavirus vaccine
  • The government has a National Vaccine Plan designed to make sure you, your child and everyone in America gets every dose of every vaccine that government officials recommend now and in the future

Scientists at the National Institutes of Health are working with a biotech company to quickly start clinical trials of an experimental messenger RNA vaccine and fast track it to licensure.1 The FDA has not yet licensed messenger RNA vaccines that use part of the RNA of a virus to manipulate the body’s immune system into stimulating a potent immune response.2,3

It looks like the coronavirus vaccine will be the first genetically engineered messenger RNA vaccine to be fast tracked to licensure, just like Gardasil was the first genetically engineered virus-like particle vaccine to be fast tracked to licensure.4,5

There likely will be lots of questions about whether the fast-tracked coronavirus vaccine was studied long enough to adequately demonstrate safety, especially for people who have trouble resolving strong inflammatory responses in their bodies and may be at greater risk for vaccine reactions.6,7,8,9,10

However, there is no question about what will happen if the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)11,12 recommends that all Americans get the newly licensed coronavirus vaccine.

The government has a national vaccine plan. It is a plan designed to make sure you, your child and everyone in America gets every dose of every vaccine that government officials recommend now and in the future.

1986 to 1996: Establishing and Creating the Plan

Established under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act during the Reagan Administration,13 the plan didn’t really get traction until Congress funded the Vaccines for Children program in 1993 under the Clinton administration14,15 and gave the Department of Health and Human Services authority to fund a network of state-based electronic vaccine tracking registries16 that can monitor the vaccination histories of children without the informed consent of their parents.

In 1995, then Secretary of Health Donna Shalala used rule-making authority to authorize the Social Security Administration to disclose the Social Security number of every baby born in the country to state governments without parental consent.17

Federal officials explained that “public health program uses of the Social Security numbers would include, but are not limited to, establishing immunization registries” and that new routine use of Social Security numbers would help the government operate “a national network of coordinated statewide immunization registries.”18

By 1996, when Congress established a national Electronic Health Records (EHR) system under HIPPA,19 the stage had been set for a government-operated electronic surveillance system to monitor the personal medical records and vaccination status of all Americans.20,21,22,23

The justification for this big data grab by the government, which clearly violated the privacy of Americans, was to “protect the public by reducing disease.”

Advertisement

Ultimate guide to combatting coronavirus


Nationwide Electronic Health Records and Vaccine Tracking

Today, the nationwide federally funded Electronic Health Records system captures the details of every visit you make to a doctor’s office, hospital, pharmacy, laboratory or other medical facility; every medical diagnosis you get; every drug you have been prescribed and every vaccine you accept or refuse.

Your Electronic Health Record can be accessed not only by government health agencies like the Social Security Administration, Medicaid and federal and state health and law enforcement agencies,24,25 but also can be shared with authorized third parties such as doctors, health insurance companies, HMOs and other corporations, hospitals, labs, nursing homes and medical researchers.26,27,28

A new Health Information Exchange29,30,31 initiative funded by the government will make it even easier for computerized health and vaccine records databases to tag, track down and sanction Americans who do not go along with the National Vaccine Plan in the future.32,33,34,35,36,37,38

What Happened to the Duty to Prevent Adverse Reactions?

Ironically, when Congress directed the Department of Health and Human Services to create the National Vaccine Program in the 1986 Act, federal health officials were told to put together a plan to “achieve optimal prevention of human infectious diseases through immunization and to achieve optimal prevention against adverse reactions to vaccines.”39

The plan was not supposed to focus solely on vaccine development and promotion but to equally focus on preventing vaccine reactions. Yet, in the very first 1994 National Vaccine Plan only four out of 25 “objectives” and only two out of 14 anticipated “outcomes” addressed preventing vaccine reactions.40

The 2010 version of the Plan41 also largely ignored the legal duty of HHS to conduct vaccine safety research to fill in long standing knowledge gaps and take steps to make vaccines and vaccine policies less likely to cause harm.42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52

Looking back, it appears Congress was not really committed to funding research and creating substantive initiatives to reduce vaccine risks, regardless of what was stated in the 1986 Act, or there would been congressional oversight and federal agencies would have been directed to follow the law rather than ignore it for more than 30 years.53

Government’s Vaccine Marketing Plan for Big Pharma

Instead, government agencies have brazenly forged lucrative public private business partnerships with the pharmaceutical industry and the medical establishment to:

  • Develop many new vaccines54,55,56,57
  • Increase public demand for vaccines58
  • Raise vaccination rates among children to nearly 100%59
  • Create and expand electronic vaccine tracking registries60,61,62,63,64
  • Promote global vaccination programs,65,66 even though the primary purpose of the 1986 Act was to reduce vaccine reactions and protect the U.S. childhood vaccine supply,67 not fund and expand global vaccination programs

In fact, federal health officials accurately characterize the U.S. vaccination system in the 21st century as a business. A decade ago they admitted that “The 2010 National Vaccine Plan provides a vision for the U.S. vaccine and immunization enterprise for the next decade.”68

That’s because they know the National Vaccine Plan is really a Vaccine Marketing Plan for the pharmaceutical industry.69,70,71,72

So, if you are wondering why many states are trying to pass laws eliminating all vaccine exemptions and mandate every vaccine the pharmaceutical industry produces and the CDC recommends,73,74,75,76 you don’t have to look any further than the government’s well-financed National Vaccine Plan.

Implementation of the Plan Accelerated in 2011

Implementation of the Plan was accelerated in 2011 after the U.S. Supreme Court declared FDA licensed vaccines to be “unavoidably unsafe” for the purpose of removing almost all remaining liability from drug companies when vaccines hurt people.77,78

Since 2011, two powerful CDC-appointed vaccine advisory committees influenced by members associated with the pharmaceutical and medical trade industries — the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)79,80,81,82,83 and the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC)84,85,86 — have been busy coming up with new ways to meet strategic goals of the National Vaccine Plan.

When highly publicized cases of measles were reported in California’s Disneyland in 201587 and in New York in 2019,88,89 with military precision pursuit of the plan was kicked into even high gear.90,91 During the past five years, California, Vermont, New York, Maine and Hawaii have lost vaccine exemptions, even though tens of thousands of Americans rose up in protest.92

In 2019, the people managed to hold on to exemptions in Oregon, Arizona and New Jersey93 but this year, bills to force vaccine use are already threatening parental, civil and human rights in Virginia, Massachusetts, Florida, Washington, Pennsylvania and more.94

Five Main Types of Vaccine Laws Being Proposed in States

These are the five main types of laws being proposed in the states and your state may be one of them:

1.State laws that eliminate all personal belief vaccine exemptions allowing you to follow your conscience or religious beliefs and make it illegal for physicians to grant a medical exemption unless it strictly conforms to very narrow CDC-approved contraindications to vaccination.

National vaccine coverage rates among school children are at 95% for core vaccines like polio, pertussis, measles and chickenpox, yet, government health officials are not satisfied.95 They have narrowed vaccine contraindications so that almost no medical history or health condition qualifies as a reason for a medical exemption.96

If you or your child have had previous vaccine reactions, are vaccine injured, have a brother or sister who was injured or died after vaccination, or are suffering with a brain or immune system disorder that the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) does not consider to be a contraindication to vaccination, states like California97,98 denying physicians the right to exercise professional judgment and give children a medical exemption to vaccination are threatening human rights.99

No wonder less than 1% of vaccine reactions are ever reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System100 and doctors feel free to discriminate against and deny medical care to anyone who is not vaccinated according to CDC schedules.101

Laws that eliminate medical, religious and conscience exemptions to vaccination and ban citizens from getting a school education — even a college education — violate civil and human rights and so do vaccine mandates by employers who fire or refuse to hire workers based on their vaccination status.102,103,104

The two professions being targeted first for workplace vaccine mandates are health care105,106,107 and child care workers,108,109 but they certainly will not be the last.110

2.State laws that turn unelected members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices into de facto lawmakers and automatically mandate all current and future federally recommended vaccines without any public discussion or vote by duly elected state legislators.

Under the U.S. Constitution, state legislatures hold the majority of power to pass public health laws, so vaccine laws are state laws.111,112

If states hand that constitutional authority over to an unelected federal government committee, the people no longer can work through their elected state representatives to make sure laws do not force involuntary medical risk taking and punish citizens exercising civil and human rights.113

It is clear that Pharma and medical trade lobbyists partnering with government officials to implement the National Vaccine Plan are unhappy they have to spend so much time and money trying to strong arm state legislators into mandating every CDC recommended vaccine.

At the same time, some politicians are not happy that a growing number of Americans are showing up in state Capitols to oppose oppressive vaccine mandates. Today, it costs a staggering $3,000 to give a child every one of the 69 doses of 16 vaccines on the federal government’s schedule.114

In addition to coronavirus vaccine, there are more than a dozen experimental vaccines being fast tracked to market for TB, influenza, HIV/AIDS, gonorrhea, herpes simplex, strep A and B, E. coli, RSV, salmonella and malaria,115 with several hundred more being developed in a global vaccine market estimated to balloon to nearly $100 billion by 2026.116,117

State laws that automatically mandate all federally recommended vaccines are handing Big Pharma a big blank check and putting an unknown number of vaccine vulnerable children and adults at risk for serious health problems if they are forced to use every one of them.118,119,120,121,122

3.State laws that allow doctors to declare minor children mentally competent to consent to vaccination so children can be vaccinated without the knowledge of their parents.

There is plenty of scientific evidence that children’s brains are not developed enough before or during teenage years to support rational benefit and risk decision-making, especially if they are subjected to pressure.123,124

Giving doctors the legal authority to, in effect, go behind parents’ backs and persuade a minor child to get liability-free vaccines violates the legal right of parents to consent to medical interventions performed on their children.125 It also puts vaccine vulnerable children at greater risk for suffering reactions.126

Parents know their child’s personal and family medical history best and if parents are left in the dark, not only are they blocked from preventing vaccine reactions but there is no way for them to monitor a child after vaccination for signs of reactions so they can immediately take their child for treatment.127

4.State laws requiring schools to publicly post vaccine coverage rates for the purpose of shaming schools that allow students with vaccine exemptions to receive a school education.

Publicly posting school vaccination rates and numbers of students with exemptions creates a hostile community environment by targeting certain schools and families, whose children have vaccine exemptions, for discrimination and abuse.128,129,130

It is an illusion that some schools are safer based on vaccination rates. For example, even schools with 100% vaccination rates and zero exemptions have had outbreaks of pertussis131 and schools with very high vaccination rates have had outbreaks of measles and mumps.132,133

That is because vaccinated children and adults can get infected with and transmit infectious diseases but sometimes show few or no symptoms and are never diagnosed or reported.134,135,136,137,138,139,140 Children and teachers interact with many other vaccinated and unvaccinated people outside of the school setting.

It is discriminatory to require public posting of the numbers of healthy students with vaccine exemptions, when schools are not required to publicly post the numbers of students who are infected with transmissible diseases like hepatitis B and C, HIV, streptococcal, mononucleosis, cytomegalovirus, E. coli, Fifths disease, herpes simplex and more.

5.State laws that operate vaccine tracking registries and integrate them into Electronic Health Records systems without the consent of those being tracked.

The National Vaccine Information Center has a two-decade public record of opposing the creation of national or state based electronic surveillance systems that automatically enroll children and adults without their informed consent to monitor their vaccination status and health histories.141

Not only have there been past security breaches with electronic databases dumping personally identifying information into the public domain,142 but there is legitimate concern that the government should not be conducting electronic surveillance on citizens while pursuing a National Vaccine Plan that encourages punitive societal sanctions, such as the inability to get a school education or a job, for individuals who refuse to go along with the Plan.

Federal and State Police Powers to Compel Vaccine Use

For more information on the history and types of public health laws that allow the federal government and states to use police powers to compel vaccine use, go to NVIC’s website at NVIC.org.

To learn more about vaccine legislation pending in your state and talking points you can use to educate your legislators, go to NVIC Advocacy.org and become a user of NVIC’s free online Advocacy Portal.

You will be put into direct contact with your own state and federal representatives and sent emails when bills that threaten or expand your freedom to make voluntary vaccine choices are moving in your state so you can make your voice heard, including showing up at scheduled public hearings.

Making Government Work for You

In America, we are governed by laws that the representatives we elect make, so it is important to vet all candidates for positions on issues you care about before going to the polls.

Already this year, there have been more than 50 good bills introduced in a number of states that defend voluntary vaccine choices. This is a time for positive action. It’s your health. Your family. Your choice.

– Sources and References

Prestigious VACCINE Journal: Flu Vaccine Increases Coronavirus Infection Risk 36%

© 12th March 2020 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter
Reproduced from original article:
www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/prestigious-vaccine-journal-flu-vaccine-increases-coronavirus-infection-risk-36-3

Posted on:  Thursday, March 12th 2020 at 10:30 am

Written By:  GMI Reporter

This article is copyrighted by GreenMedInfo LLC, 2020

A new study published in the prestigious journal Vaccine, a peer-reviewed medical journal, published by Elsevier, titled Influenza vaccination and respiratory virus interference among Department of Defense personnel during the 2017-2018 influenza season, reveals that influenza vaccination may increase the risk of infection from other respiratory viruses — a phenomenon known as virus interference. 

The purpose of the study was to evaluate so-called “test negative study designs,” which are used to calculate influenza vaccine effectiveness without consideration for the effects the flu vaccine may have in changing the risk of infection for other viruses which can cause respiratory illness, which the authors point out may result in, “potentially biasing vaccine effectiveness results in the positive direction.” They elaborate further:

The virus interference phenomenon goes against the basic assumption of the test-negative vaccine effectiveness study that vaccination does not change the risk of infection with other respiratory illness, thus potentially biasing vaccine effectiveness results in the positive direction. This study aimed to investigate virus interference by comparing respiratory virus status among Department of Defense personnel based on their influenza vaccination status. Furthermore, individual respiratory viruses and their association with influenza vaccination were examined.

The study results fly directly in the face of recent health recommendations that one should get an influenza vaccine to protect against Coronavirus-19.

According to the study, “vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus.” More specifically,

Examining non-influenza viruses specifically, the odds of both coronavirus and human metapneumovirus in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher when compared to unvaccinated individuals (OR = 1.36 and 1.51, respectively) (Table 5). 

That represents a 36% and 51% increased risk of coronavirus and human metapneumovirus in influenza vaccinated individuals, respectively.

While the study did find there was significant protection with flu vaccination against most influenza viruses, including also parainfluenza, RSV, and non-influenza virus coinfections, previous research raises red flags. A 2018 study published in PNAS found that  receiving a flu vaccination in the current and previous season may increase aerosol shedding of flu particles 6.3 times more as compared with having no vaccination in those two seasons.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Top Health Official Cashes in on Merck Stock


Reproduced from original article:
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/03/06/julie-gerberding-merck.aspx

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola     

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • In January 2020, Dr. Julie Gerberding, former director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who after leaving the CDC became president of Merck’s vaccine division, sold half her Merck stock options for $9.11 million
  • Gerberding also cashed out in 2016, when she sold $5.1 million in Merck stocks, and 2015, when she made $2.3 million. In total, Gerberding has made $16,592,144 from her company stock options
  • Gerberding’s former high-level ties to the CDC likely has had enormous influence over Merck’s financial growth, considering Merck makes a majority of the pediatric and adults vaccines recommended by the CDC
  • Red flags have recently been raised about Merck’s HPV vaccine Gardasil, a vaccine Gerberding promoted in a 2004 report to Congress before it was fast tracked to licensure in 2006. The U.K. recently reported a 54% rise in cervical cancer among 24- to 29-year-olds, the first generation to receive the HPV vaccine
  • A January 2020 report in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine warns HPV vaccine trials have not been designed to detect whether the vaccine actually prevents cervical cancer. Trials have shown, however, that Gardasil raises the risk of cervical cancer by 44.6% among women with a current or previous HPV infection

As detailed in The Highwire video above, in January 2020, Dr. Julie Gerberding — director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 2002 until 2009, who after leaving the CDC became president of Merck’s vaccine division in January 20101 — sold half her Merck stock options for $9.11 million.

Gerberding also cashed in on her company stock options in 2016, when she sold $5.1 million-worth of Merck stocks, and 2015, when she made $2.3 million. In total, Gerberding has made $16,592,144 from selling off her Merck stocks — all of which, by the way, is over and beyond her regular paycheck — and she still owns Merck stocks worth $9 million.

And we’re supposed to believe she has been impartial about vaccine safety and has been all along? As noted by Del Bigtree in his Highwire report:

“Do you trust the information that come from your government agencies, when a year after working [at] that agency, they move into the very company that they exonerated from any wrongdoing and end up making $20-something-million dollars in stock options, plus a gigantic salary? Sounds like a payoff to me.”

Quid Pro Quo

The payoff Bigtree is talking about refers back to Gerberding’s exoneration of the MMR vaccine, which came under fire when Dr. William Thompson, a CDC research scientist, blew the whistle claiming the agency covered up a vaccine-autism connection in relation to the MMR vaccine.

According to Thompson, scientific fraud was committed for the express purpose of covering up potential safety problems so the agency would be able to maintain that the MMR vaccine had been proven safe to give to all children.

Thompson explained they simply eliminated the incriminating data, thereby vanishing the link, and this cover-up occurred while Gerberding headed up the CDC. The CDC subsequently also blocked a request for Thompson to testify in an autism lawsuit.

Indeed, you’d have to be really naïve not to see the enormous influence her former high-level ties to the CDC can have, considering Merck makes a majority of the pediatric and adults vaccines recommended by the CDC.

The vaccine industry is booming, and it’s become quite clear that profit potential is the driving factor behind it. One of the reasons for this is because vaccine patents do not expire like drugs do, so each vaccine adopted for widespread use has the potential to make enormous, continuous profits for decades to come.

Vaccine makers also enjoy a high degree of immunity against lawsuits — and in the case of pandemic vaccines, absolute immunity — so the financial liability when something goes wrong is exceptionally low, compared to drugs.

HPV Vaccine Responsible for Massive Rise in Cervical Cancer?

An article2 by Robert F. Kennedy, chairman of the Children’s Health Defense, wonders whether Gerberding’s stock dump might have anything to do with recent red flags being raised about Merck’s HPV vaccine Gardasil. He writes:3

“Last month, Cancer Research UK announced4,5,6 an alarming 54% rise in cervical cancer among 24-29-year-olds, the first generation to receive the HPV jabs.

The following day, the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine published7 a withering critique of Gardasil’s crooked clinical trials, ‘It is still uncertain whether human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents cervical cancer as trials were not designed to detect this outcome.’

As Gerberding knows, those trials8 revealed that Gardasil dramatically RAISES (by +44.6%) the risk of cervical cancer among women with a current infection or those previously exposed to HPV.

That may explain the cancer explosions in England and other nations with high inoculation rates in young girls up to age 18; Australia, Spain, Sweden and Norway. A 2019 study9 of Alabama girls found the highest cervical cancer rates in the state’s most heavily vaccinated counties.

With Merck’s efficacy pretensions circling the drain, a coalition of leading plaintiff’s lawyers are already in discovery in a suit10 alleging that Merck fraudulently concealed serious illnesses affecting half, and autoimmune diseases affecting 1 of every 37 girls in Gardasil’s clinical trials within 6 months of injection.

As Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Director from 2002-2009, Gerberding helped Merck paper over these efficacy and safety problems.”

Chances are, Gerberding’s 2004 report to Congress, “Prevention of Genital Human Papillomavirus Infection,”11 played a significant role in getting the controversial HPV vaccine fast tracked to licensure by the FDA in the first place. Needless to say, the approval of this questionable vaccine guaranteed her future employer billions of dollars-worth of profits.

Gerberding has also been a staunch defender of thimerosal, the mercury-based vaccine preservative suspected of being one of vaccine ingredients involved in the development of autism in some children. Thimerosal was removed from childhood vaccines or reduced to trace amounts between 1999 and 2001, with the exception of multidose influenza vaccines.12

Since then, there have been a number of additional biological mechanisms proposed by independent researchers investigating why vaccines cause harm.13

The use of aluminum in vaccines, for example, may cause neurological damage. In The Highwire video, Gerberding herself was in 2008 forced to admit that children with an underlying mitochondrial disorder are at increased risk for vaccine damage.

Gerberding’s admission came after Hannah Poling, who developed autism after her 18-month well-baby visit when she received nine vaccines, was granted compensation by the U.S. Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation for her injuries.

All in all, Gerberding has repeatedly demonstrated that safety is nowhere on her list of priorities or concerns when it comes to vaccines, so it’s easy to see why Merck would want her to head up their vaccine unit.

Advertisement

Regenerative Food & Farming Week 2020


HPV Maker’s Role in Vaccination Policymaking

A 2012 article14 in the American Journal of Public Health, in which the authors investigated the role Merck played in state HPV immunization policymaking, states that:

“Merck promoted school-entry mandate legislation by serving as an information resource, lobbying legislators, drafting legislation, mobilizing female legislators and physician organizations, conducting consumer marketing campaigns, and filling gaps in access to the vaccine.

Legislators relied heavily on Merck for scientific information. Most stakeholders found lobbying by vaccine manufacturers acceptable in principle, but perceived that Merck had acted too aggressively and nontransparently in this case.

Although policymakers acknowledge the utility of manufacturers’ involvement in vaccination policymaking, industry lobbying that is overly aggressive, not fully transparent, or not divorced from financial contributions to lawmakers risks undermining the prospects for legislation to foster uptake of new vaccines.”

Merck Plays Loose With HPV Vaccine Data

In June 2019, I published Kennedy’s presentation of Merck’s clinical trial data for Gardasil, in which he reveals how the company hid the truth about its side effects. One way in which Merck committed fraud in its Gardasil vaccine safety trials was by using a neurotoxic ingredient in Gardasil as a bioactive placebo. This trick effectively renders its safety testing null and void, as the true extent of harm cannot be ascertained.

Merck’s own trial data also reveals Gardasil increases the overall risk of death by 370%, the risk of autoimmune disease by 2.3% and the risk of a serious medical condition by 50%.

Kennedy also points out that National Cancer Institute data show the mortality rate for cervical cancer is 1 in 43,478 (2.3 per 100,000), and the median age of cervical cancer death is 58. To eliminate that one death, all 43,478 must pay $420 — the average cost of the three Gardasil injections.

According to Kennedy, 76 million American children have been mandated by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to receive the vaccine, providing Merck with an annual revenue of $2.3 billion. When you crunch the numbers, you realize that the cost of using Gardasil to save one life is $18.3 million.

Meanwhile, compensation paid by the Vaccine Court for the death of a child maxes out at $250,000. Put another way, $18.3 million is being spent in an effort to save one life from a disease, while the U.S. Health and Human Services values human life at just a quarter of a million dollars per person when a person dies from using a government recommended vaccine in that effort.

If you’re still on the fence when it comes to HPV vaccination, you owe it to yourself to watch Kennedy’s presentation and conduct additional research on the vaccine and HPV so that you can appropriately weigh the risks and benefits.

– Sources and References

Why Everything You Learned About Viruses is WRONG

© 26th February 2020 GreenMedInfo LLC. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of GreenMedInfo LLC. Want to learn more from GreenMedInfo? Sign up for the newsletter here www.greenmedinfo.com/greenmed/newsletter
Reproduced from original article:
www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/why-only-thing-influenza-may-kill-germ-theory

Posted on:  Wednesday, February 26th 2020 at 7:45 pm

Groundbreaking research indicates that most of what is believed about the purportedly deadly properties of viruses like influenza is, in fact, not evidence-based but myth…

Germ theory is an immensely powerful force on this planet, affecting everyday interactions from a handshake, all the way up the ladder to national vaccination agendas and global eradication campaigns.

But what if fundamental research on what exactly these ‘pathogens’ are, how they infect us, has not yet even been performed? What if much of what is assumed and believed about the danger of microbes, particularly viruses, has completely been undermined in light of radical new discoveries in microbiology?

Some of our readers already know that in my previous writings I discuss why the “germs as our enemies” concept has been decimated by the relatively recent discovery of the microbiome. For in depth background on this topic, read my previous article, “How The Microbiome Destroyed the Ego, Vaccine Policy, and Patriarchy.” You can also read Profound Implications of the Virome for Human Health and Autoimmunity, to get a better understanding of how viruses are actually beneficial to mammalian health.

In this article I will take a less philosophical approach, and focus on influenza as a more concrete example of the Copernican-level paradigm shift in biomedicine and life sciences we are all presently fully immersed within, even if the medical establishment has yet to acknowledge it. (a topic I cover extensively in my upcoming book REGENERATE: Unlocking Your Body’s Radical Resilience through the New Biology).

Deadly Flu Viruses: Vaccinate or Die?

The hyperbolic manner in which health policymakers and mainstream media pundits talk about it today, flu virus is an inexorably lethal force, against which all citizens, of all ages 6 months or older, need the annual influenza vaccine to protect themselves against, lest they face deadly consequences. Worse, those who hold religious or philosophical objections, or who otherwise conscientiously object to vaccinating, are being characterized as doing harm to others by denying them herd immunity (a concept that has been completely debunked by a careful study of the evidence, or lack thereof). For instance, in the interview below Bill Gates tells Sanjay Gupta that he thinks non-vaccinators “kill children”:

But what if I told you that there isn’t even such a thing as “flu virus,” in the sense of a monolithic, disease vector existing outside of us, conceived as it is as the relationship of predator to prey?

First, consider that the highly authorative Cochrane collaboration acknowledges there are many different flu viruses that are not, in fact, influenza A — against which flu vaccines are targeted — but which nonetheless can contribute to symptoms identical to those attributed to influenza A:

“Over 200 viruses cause influenza and influenza-like illness which produce the same symptoms (fever, headache, aches and pains, cough and runny noses). Without laboratory tests, doctors cannot tell the two illnesses apart. Both last for days and rarely lead to death or serious illness. At best, vaccines might be effective against only Influenza A and B, which represent about 10% of all circulating viruses.” (Source: Cochrane Summaries).” [emphasis added]

This makes for a picture of complexity that powerfully undermines health policies that presuppose vaccination equates to bona fide immunity, and by implication, necessitates the herd collectively participate in the ritual of mass vaccination campaigns as a matter of life-or-death social necessity.

Even the use of the word “immunization” to describe vaccination is highly misleading. The moment the word is used, it already presupposes efficacy, and makes it appear as if non-vaccinators are anti-immunity, instead of what they actually are: pro-immunity (via clean air, food, water, and sunlight), but unwilling to subject themselves or their healthy children to “unavoidably unsafe” medical procedures with only theoretical benefits.

Why Flu Virus Doesn’t Exist (The Way We Were Told)

But the topic gets even more interesting when we consider the findings of a 2015 study entitled “Conserved and host-specific features of influenza virion architecture.” This was the first study ever to plumb the molecular depths of what influenza virus is actually composed of. Amazingly, given the long history of vaccine use and promotion, the full characterization of what proteins it contains, and where they are derived from, was never previously performed. How we invest billions of dollars annually into flu vaccines, and have created a global campaign to countermand a viral enemy, whose basic building blocks were not even known until a few years ago, is hard to understand. But it is true nonetheless.

The study abstract opens with this highly provocative line:

“Viruses use virions to spread between hosts, and virion composition is therefore the primary determinant of viral transmissibility and immunogenicity.” [emphasis added]

Virion are also known as “viral particles,” and they are the means by which viral nucleic acids are able to move and ‘infect’ living organisms. Without the viral particle (taxi) to carry around the virus DNA (passenger), it would be harmless; in fact, viruses are often described as existing somewhere between living and inanimate objects for this reason: they do not produce their own energy, nor are transmissable without a living host. And so, in this first line, the authors are making it clear that virion composition is also the primary determinant in how or whether a virus is infectious (transmits) and what effects it will have in the immune system of the infected host.


Influenza viral particles

This distinction is important because we often think of viruses as simply pathogenic strings of DNA or RNA. The irony, of course, is that the very things we attribute so much lethality to — viral nucleic acids — are not even alive, and can not infect an organism without all the other components (proteins, lipids, extra-viral nucleic acids) which are, technically, not viral in origin, participating in the process. And so, if the components that are non-viral are essential for the virus to cause harm, how can we continue to maintain that we are up against a monolithic disease entity “out there” who “infects” us, a passive victim? It’s fundamentally non-sensical, given these findings. It also clearly undermines the incessant, fear-based rhetoric those beholden to the pro-vaccine stance to coerce the masses into undergoing the largely faith-based rite of vaccination.

Let’s dive deeper into the study’s findings.

The next line of the abstract addresses the fact we opened this article with: namely, that there is great complexity involved at the level of the profound variability in virion composition:

“However, the virions of many viruses are complex and pleomorphic, making them difficult to analyze in detail” 

But this problem of the great variability in the virion composition of influenza is exactly why the study was conducted. They explain:

“Here we address this by identifying and quantifying viral proteins with mass spectrometry, producing a complete and quantifiable model of the hundreds of viral and host-encoded proteins that make up the pleomorphic virions of influenza virus. We show that a conserved influenza virion architecture, which includes substantial quantities of host proteins as well as the viral protein NSI, is elaborated with abundant host-dependent features. As a result, influenza virions produced by mammalian and avian hosts have distinct protein compositions.” 

In other words, they found that the flu virus is as much comprised of biological material from the host the virus ‘infects,’ as the viral genetic material of the virus per se.

How then, do we differentiate influenza virus as fully “other”? Given that it would not exist without “self” proteins, or those of other host animals like birds (avian) or insects, this would be impossible to do with any intellectual honesty intact.

There’s also the significant problem presented by flu vaccine production. Presently, human flu vaccine antigen is produced via insects and chicken eggs. This means that the virus particles extracted from these hosts would contain foreign proteins, and would therefore produce different and/or unpredictable immunological responses in humans than would be expected from human influenza viral particles. One possibility is that the dozens of foreign proteins found within avian influenza could theoretically produce antigens in humans that cross-react with self-structures resulting in autoimmunity. Safety testing, presently, does not test for these cross reactions. Clearly, this discovery opens up a pandora’s box of potential problems that have never sufficiently been analyzed, since it was never understood until now that “influenza” is so thoroughly dependent upon a host for its transmissability and immunogenecity.

Are Flu Viruses Really “Hijacked” Exosomes?

Lastly, the study identified something even more amazing:

“Finally, we note that influenza virions share an underlying protein composition with exosomes, suggesting that influenza virions form by subverting micro vesicle” production.”

What these researchers are talking about is the discovery that virion particles share stunning similarities to naturally occurring virus-like particles produced by all living cells called exosomes. Exosomes, like many viruses (i.e. enveloped viruses) are enclosed in a membrane, and are within the 50-100 nanometer size range that viruses are (20-400 nm). They also contain biologically active molecules, such as proteins and lipids, as well as information-containing ones like RNAs — exactly, or very similar, to the types of contents you find in viral particles.

Watch this basic video on exosomes to get a primer:

When we start to look at viruses through the lens of their overlap with exosomes, which as carriers of RNAs are essential for regulating the expression of the vast majority of the human genome, we start to understand how their function could be considered neutral as “information carriers,” if not beneficial. Both exosomes and viruses may actually be responsible for inter-species or cross-kingdom communication and regulation within the biosphere, given the way they are able to facilitate and mediate horizontal information transfer between organisms. Even eating a piece of fruit containing these exosomes can alter the expression of vitally important genes within our body.


Exosomes

In light of this post-Germ Theory perspective, viruses could be described as pieces of information in search of chromosomes; not inherently “bad,” but, in fact, essential for mediating the genotype/phenotype relationship within organisms, who must adapt to ever-shifting environmental conditions in real-time in order to survive; something the glacial pace of genetic changes within the primary nucleotide sequences of our DNA cannot do (for instance, it may take ~ 100,000 years for a protein-coding gene sequence to change versus seconds for a protein-coding gene’s expression to be altered via modulation via viral or exosomal RNAs).

This does not mean they are “all good”, either. Sometimes, given many conditions outside their control, their messages could present challenges or misinformation to the cells to which they are exposed, which could result in a “disease symptom.” These disease symptoms are often if not invariably attempts by the body to self-regulate and ultimately improve and heal itself.

In other words, the virion composition of viruses appears to be the byproduct of the cell’s normal exosome (also known as microvesicle) production machinery and trafficking, albeit being influenced by influenza DNA. And like exosomes, viruses may be a means of extracellular communication between cells, instead of simply a pathological disease entity. This could explain why an accumulating body of research on the role of the virome in human health indicates that so-called infectious agents, including viruses like measles, confer significant health benefits. [see: the Health Benefits of Measles and The Healing Power of Germs?].

Other researchers have come to similar discoveries about the relationship between exosomes and viruses, sometimes describing viral hijacking of exosome pathways as a “Trojan horse” hypothesis. HIV may provide such an example.

Concluding Remarks

The remarkably recent discovery of the host-dependent nature of the influenza virus’ virion composition is really just the tip of an intellectual iceberg that has yet to fully emerge into the light of day, but is already “sinking” ships; paradigm ships, if you will.

One such paradigm is that germs are enemy combatants, and that viruses serve no fundamental role in our health, and should be eradicated from the earth with drugs and vaccines, if possible.

This belief, however, is untenable. With the discovery of the indispensable role of the microbiome, and the subpopulation of viruses within it — the virome — we have entered into an entirely new, ecologically-based view of the body and its environs that are fundamentally inseparable. Ironically, the only thing that influenza may be capable of killing is germ theory itself.

For an in-depth exploration of this, watch the lecture below on the virome. I promise, if you do so, you will no longer be able to uphold germ theory as a monolithic truth any longer. You may even start to understand how we might consider some viruses “our friends,” and why we may need viruses far more than they need us.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

The Jig Is Up

© 25th February 2020 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts

By Guest Contributor, 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.

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 …

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 kindergarteners 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.

But, 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 were 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 the “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.

A more imminent threat is whooping cough, which …  has reappeared with a vengeance in the last 20 years, again mainly in vaccinated individuals, and involving, in addition to the wild type, a mutant strain resistant to the vaccine, and a wholly new species that strikes mainly the vaccinated.

Claims that vaccines are safe and effective are deceptive

My second reason for writing is to show that vaccines are much less safe and effective than we’ve been led to believe. Keep in mind that they’re given purely on the basis of long-term health policy, rather than in response to a genuine public-health emergency. Most of them are directed against:

  1. diseases that were once life-threatening, but already declining in incidence and mortality before the vaccines were introduced, thanks to improvements in sanitation, water quality, and other public-health measures (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus);11
  2. ordinary diseases of childhood that most people contracted and recovered from without complications or sequelæ (measles, mumps, rubella, flu, rotavirus, chickenpox);12 or
  3. sporadic illnesses linked to mutant strains of organisms that are part of our normal flora and relatively seldom cause invasive disease (pneumococcus, HiB).13

To be pronounced effective, vaccines need satisfy just two narrow criteria: a significant reduction in the incidence, morbidity, and mortality of the corresponding illnesses following their use; and significant, prolonged increases in the level of serum antibodies against the micro-organisms targeted by them.

Vaccines achieving these objectives often prove to have been much less successful when investigated more systematically. For two reasons, the flu vaccine, for example, is virtually predestined to fail, even when it succeeds in preventing many cases of the strain it is directed against: first, because the extreme mutability of the influenza viruses virtually guarantees that a different vaccine will be needed every year, and sometimes even within the same season, with different specifications that cannot be known in advance; and second, because the generic illness we know as “the flu” is linked to many different viruses, by no means restricted to the influenza group for which it is named.

Some version of the same issue hovers over the other vaccines as well. Even when they satisfy both criteria, the viruses and bacteria they are directed against reliably mutate into different strains of the same or closely-related organisms, which are not counted in the statistics, a process which is greatly accelerated by these determined and systematic attempts to eliminate them.

The pneumococcus and HiB organisms, for example, are linked to sporadic cases of pneumonia, meningitis, endocarditis, and septicemia involving mutant strains of bacteria that normally reside in the nasopharynx of most healthy people, so that the vaccines targeting them have already elicited new, resistant, and even more pathogenic strains that are altering and will continue to alter that important ecosystem in ways that the CDC and the drug industry cannot foresee and indeed seem myopically unconcerned about.14

A more imminent threat is whooping cough, which was rapidly declining in incidence and mortality before the pertussis vaccine was introduced the 1940’s, but has reappeared with a vengeance in the last 20 years, again mainly in vaccinated individuals, and involving, in addition to the wild type, a mutant strain resistant to the vaccine, and a wholly new species that strikes mainly the vaccinated.15

Another is polio, against which both the oral and injectable vaccines have been somewhat effective in preventing large-scale outbreaks like those of the 1950’s. In India, which uses the cheaper live, oral version, an even more virulent form of paralytic disease, clinically indistinguishable from the original, has become prevalent in recent years, and was conveniently named Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis, or NPAFP, lest anyone suspect that the vaccine is to blame.16  In the United States, which declared polio officially eliminated years ago, and has reverted to the original injectable or killed vaccine, another very similar disease has emerged, named Acute Flaccid Myelitis (AFM) for the same reason, with the related enterovirus D-68 widely suspected as the cause.17

Likewise, the level of specific antibodies in the blood has dismally failed to provide an accurate measure of immune status after vaccination. Even their advocates admit that vaccines are never completely effective, since most targeted diseases continue to break out and even predominate in highly-vaccinated populations, as we saw.18

These alleged “vaccine failures” are then invoked to impose additional booster doses, based on the assumptions:

  1. that they represent “bad batches,” and nothing more;
  2. that low antibody levels in the vaccinated mean that the vaccines have simply “worn off,” leaving behind nothing but a “blank slate;”
  3. that the titer can be ratcheted up to the desired level by simply adding more shots; and
  4. that the antibody level is an accurate measure of immune status, of the extent to which the vaccinated are resistant to infection with the natural disease.

Unfortunately, none of these assumptions stands up to careful scrutiny.

First, we already know but choose to forget that the titer can’t be simply manipulated at will by adding more boosters. In 1980, Dr. James Cherry, a leading vaccine advocate, discovered that children receiving the MMR who later developed low titers responded to a booster dose only minimally and for an unacceptably short time.19 A few years later, when measles outbreaks in highly-vaccinated populations generated pressure to do something drastic, Cherry’s research was quietly shelved, the booster was mandated, and it remains in force to this day.

Then in 1986, a clustering of several hundred measles cases were reported in the Midwest, of which 94% were in vaccinated schoolchildren, and a sizable number were unusually mild, with a paler rash, no fever, and minimal discomfort, fatigue, or other systemic involvement.20  The scientists researching the outbreak were startled to learn that the milder version was commonest in vaccinated cases with no antibodies at all, while the typical acute illness affected mainly vaccinated kids with high titers in the supposedly “immune” range.21

Indicating viral activity in both subgroups that serological testing had failed to detect, these findings led me to wonder if vaccinees with low levels of antibody were being misidentified as susceptible, inappropriately revaccinated, and thus subjected to further complications that were also overlooked. Soon after, I chanced to witness just such a misfortune when asked to review a damage compensation claim following the Hep B vaccine.  The claimant was a young lab tech who developed a nasty cough lasting for many months after a series of three Hep B shots as required for her training. When she applied for a job four years later, her serum showed zero antibodies to the virus, and her new employer, supposing her to be still susceptible, insisted on a second round. This time she relapsed almost immediately, with an even more intense version of the same cough, followed by a sequence of new complaints, including nodular goiter, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, esophageal reflux, palpitations, and anxiety, requiring maintenance doses of several drugs and medical supervision all year round; and her claim was denied without even a hearing, because none of her complaints were officially-approved complications of the vaccine.22

The vaccine manufacturers design the safety trials

As to safety, vaccine safety trials, virtually without exception, are funded, conducted, and micromanaged by the manufacturers themselves, and then rubber-stamped by the government agencies that are supposed to be regulating them, a more blatant style of corruption pithily summarized by a former Vice-President of Pfizer who had witnessed and indeed helped to perpetrate it:

Everybody is out there begging for money. The big international corporations have lots of money. They give grants for research, pay doctors and researchers thousands to travel around, speak at conferences, and establish educational programs, all to make profits for their products. The safety trials are supposed to be third-party and independent, but the money won’t keep coming unless they say what you want them to say. The insiders know this is how things work. Only the public doesn’t know it.23

The basic strategies developed to conceal or minimize adverse reactions include the following:

  1. instead of inert placebo, the so-called “control” groups are given the toxic chemical ingredients of the vaccines under study, or a different vaccine entirely;24
  2. to qualify as vaccine-related, adverse reactions must occur within hours, or days, or at most a week or two after the shot, thus arbitrarily ruling out the entire chronic dimension, within which the majority of them occur.25
  3. they must appear on the vanishingly small list already recognized by the industry, thereby excluding the possibility of discovering new ones; and
  4. adverse effects reported by the recipients but not specifically asked about by the research team are subject to numerous restrictions, with the lead investigator given complete authority to disqualify them, based on criteria that are never specified.26

Naturally, the upshot of these shenanigans has been massive under reporting of adverse reactions, estimated at somewhere between 1% and 0.1% of the true figure.27

The manufacturers have been in command of the process ever since the 1980’s, when multiple lawsuits resulted in large payouts for brain damage following the DPT vaccine, whereupon they threatened to stop making vaccines entirely unless Congress excused them from all further liability.28  In 1986, Congress  acceded to their ultimatum by passing the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which created the taxpayer-funded VICP program for compensating claims, and deprived patients and experimental subjects of their right to sue the manufacturer for damages,29 a free ride granted to no other industry. In 2011, the Supreme Court actually signed off on this devil’s bargain, ruling that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe,” so that the industry must indeed be excused for whatever deaths or injuries may result from them!30

Many studies have shown that children who come down with and recover from acute diseases with fever, like measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, and influenza, are significantly less likely to develop chronic autoimmune diseases and cancer later in life than those merely vaccinated against them.

Evidence of harm

As a GP caring for families, I’ve always felt uneasy about giving vaccines routinely, because the diseases they’re designed to prevent are acute illnesses, with high fever and a massive, concerted outpouring of immune mechanisms that succeed in expelling the invading organism from the body, whereas vaccination, by contrast, is by definition a chronic process, involving long-term antibody production as an isolated phenomenon that requires the vaccine organism to remain inside the cells of the host for years, with no obvious path or mechanism for getting rid of it.31

In light of the industry’s successful campaign for concealing the harm done by vaccines, the simplest way to approximate the extent of it is to look at it in reverse, at the major health benefits to be acquired by not vaccinating, and simply allowing our children to acquire the ordinary diseases that most of them would naturally be exposed to. Many studies have shown that children who come down with and recover from acute diseases with fever, like measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, and influenza, are significantly less likely to develop chronic autoimmune diseases and cancer later in life than those merely vaccinated against them.32

Another important finding is that the risk of death, hospitalization, and major adverse reactions following vaccines depends much less on which one, than the total number of individual vaccines administered, both simultaneously at the same visit,33 and cumulatively over the patient’s lifetime.34  That purely quantitative threat makes it clear that these worst outcomes are not simply idiosyncratic aberrations or genetic mutations of a very few hypersensitive individuals, but regular, predictable consequences of some fundamental property built into the vaccination process itself.

All by themselves, these studies provide ample justification for questioning and doubting the prevailing assumptions that vaccines are uniformly safe and effective, that they save vast sums of money from not having to care for patients suffering from the corresponding diseases, and that it is OK and even desirable to pile on as many different ones as the traffic will bear.

According to the CDC’s current guidelines, children are mandated or strongly recommended to receive a total of 70 doses of individual vaccines by the age of 18,35 and 149 by age 65.36  That doesn’t even count the 200-plus vaccines still in the pipeline,37 and the others sure to follow, with no regulation or restraint, and often for no better reason than that we possess the technical capacity to make them. Incentivized with a blank check of that size, it becomes ever more unlikely that children who obey these guidelines will get to live out a full lifespan, with no autoimmune diseases and cancers to make them suffer and die before their time.

Human rights under attack

Another bottom line of the fake emergency, and the bad science cited to justify it, is the aggressive campaign by the drug industry, the CDC, and the doctors who follow their lead to dispense with fundamental human rights that have long been inseparable from our democratic way of life, upheld in our courts, and still loudly proclaimed even by those most determined to take them away.

Without a real emergency, forcing parents to vaccinate their children against their will, their best judgment, and their deepest instincts:

  1. denies them the right to choose the form of health care that they feel is best for their children;
  2. forces them to accept an unnecessary and unsafe medical procedure without their fully-informed consent; and
  3. forfeits their children’s right to an education if they persist in refusing the procedure.

In contemporary case law, the legal right of parents to decide which form of health care will be given to their children is not absolute, and has been suspended temporarily in life-threatening situations where courts have granted physicians and hospitals temporary custody to perform emergency surgery, for example, when their parents refused to allow it on religious grounds.38 But most vaccinations are given routinely, to prevent diseases that are not imminent, only rarely dangerous, and may never even be in the vicinity.

In any case, the right of medical patients and experimental subjects to refuse any medical intervention or procedure without their fully-informed consent was unequivocally affirmed in both the Nuremberg Code, which the United States helped write and almost all developed nations adopted in the wake of atrocious Nazi medical experiments in World War II, and the Helsinki Declaration, “Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects,” which elaborates on the same issues in a passage that could almost have been written with the vaccine mandates in mind:

In medical research involving competent human subjects, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, and any other relevant aspects of the study.

The potential subject must be informed of the right to refuse to participate in the study, or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. After insuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing.39

Regarding children’s right to an education, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sums it up perfectly:

All children living in the United States have the right to a free public education. The Constitution requires that all be given equal educational opportunity, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or sex, and whether rich or poor, citizen or non-citizen. Even those in this country illegally have the right to go to public school.40

It is not difficult to imagine a genuine public health emergency, such as a deadly plague or imminent bioterrorist attack, in which it might be necessary to suspend all of these rights temporarily. But small, localized outbreaks of ordinary childhood diseases are no such emergency, and don’t justify depriving children of their right to an education for the rest of their lives.

…even the fiercest critics of Big Pharma shy away from questioning their motives when it comes to vaccines, and even recycle their favorite talking points…

The upside-down politics behind the mandates

I have always felt that protecting the rights of parents and children by defeating the new mandates should logically be a popular, winning issue for liberal and progressive politicians, as well as organizations protecting civil liberties, public radio and TV stations, and a majority of the news media.

At the moment, however, the strictest of the new laws have been enacted or proposed in the blue-est of blue states, while their main opponents seem more closely aligned with the GOP, claiming descent from Ronald Reagan and seeing government regulation itself as the problem. As for the Democrats, even the fiercest critics of Big Pharma shy away from questioning their motives when it comes to vaccines, and even recycle their favorite talking points.41, 42  Meanwhile, as if in lockstep, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, and various NPR radio and TV stations have likewise maintained a united front on the issue, uncritically accepting the alleged emergency as settled fact, stigmatizing “anti-vaxxers” as deluded or ignorant crazies, and declining to publish or give credence to dissenting views.43,44  Some like Congressman Adam Schiff have gone even further, directing Facebook and Google to censor all content opposing vaccines or questioning the mandates, in overt defiance of the First Amendment.45

Yet the politicians, the news media, and the general public deserve blame mainly for believing without questioning, for taking on faith what they’re being told by medical and and scientific “experts” in a position to know, that vaccines are safe and effective, that the science is settled, that the emergency is real, and that vaccinating everybody is the only solution. In an ideal world, or even the well-functioning democracy that we habitually claim to be, we should be able to trust our doctors to know and speak the truth, and to be open to changing our minds when new facts are brought to light. The fact that we aren’t shows that we continue to believe because we need to believe, because we want to have faith in the religion of modern medicine,46 even when it forbids the questions and doubts that true science requires.47

… caring parents are much better judges of what really happened to their children than those giant multinationals who make and sell vaccines, profit so lavishly from them, and cannot even be sued for the tragedies that result.

The jig is up

In any case, a number of signs and portents lead me to prophesy that this topsy-turvy politics may be on the verge of total collapse. The most obvious reason is the sheer aggressiveness of the campaign to enforce the stricter mandates, as if knowing that the end is near. A good example is the CDC’s latest agenda item, Healthy People 2020, which seeks to extend the existing mandates to adults,48 and may well backfire, since having to stand in line and roll up their own sleeves might stimulate parents to think about vaccines in a new way, to walk the talk they now righteously impose on their children.

Another is the sheer number of vaccines that are out there, with all the boosters and multiple vaccines being given together at the same visit, which have meant and will continue to mean more and more casualties, each with his or her own little ecosystem of grieving parents, relatives, and friends, not to mention the skyrocketing costs of medical care and special education in the schools that must follow in their wake.

Even though still largely “under the radar,” unacknowledged as legitimate or vaccine-related by most doctors, hospitals, schools, and even some family members and friends, the sheer numbers of aggrieved parents convinced that vaccines were responsible have already mobilized a formidable online presence, demonstrated and testified before state legislatures, and even persuaded some of them to leave their religious and philosophical exemptions in place. The increased number and volume of such casualties have also brought about a subtle change in the attitude of and coverage by the news media, including more objective reporting of anti-vaccination protests by nurses refusing to take the flu and Hep B shots that some hospitals are requiring as conditions of their employment,49 which suggests that the religious aspect may slowly be wearing thin and giving way.

Similarly, many of the women asserting the right to control their own bodies, whether by demanding access to abortions and birth control, or by exposing sexual abuse and harassment, will eventually want to have children, and will then have to fight for the right to decide on what kind of health care to give them. Whether or not to vaccinate will thus finally, inevitably, and rightly come to be recognized as a woman’s issue, a mother’s issue, and ultimately a father’s, too, one supremely worth demonstrating, protesting, and otherwise fighting for, engaging with politicians about, and even running for office themselves, to make it happen.

So in the end it comes back to parents as the spearhead or leading edge for change. If the industry, the CDC, and most doctors are right that vaccines are truly safe, then those thousands upon thousands of aggrieved parents who claim that vaccines have killed or crippled their children and must live every day in the shadow of those tragedies, whatever may have caused them, must be either lying, deluded, ignorant, or stupid. Having cared for many such children over the years, I can attest to the fact that their parents are none of these. By no means ignorant “anti-vaxxers,” the derogatory term meant to ridicule and defame them, their only mistake was to have done exactly what they were told, and now they want answers — to learn the truth about vaccines, and to insure that they be made as safe as possible: “ex-vaxxers” would be a more accurate label.

After 52 years of practicing family medicine, I can also say with complete assurance what should have been obvious all along—that caring parents are much better judges of what really happened to their children than those giant multinationals who make and sell vaccines, profit so lavishly from them, and cannot even be sued for the tragedies that result.

References:

  1.   “Measles Elimination in the United States,” CDC, cdc.gov, 2019.
  2. “Graph of Reported Measles Cases, 1956-2008,” College of Physicians of Philadelphia, historyofvaccines.org, 2015.
  3. “Vaccine-Preventable Diseases: Measles,” Mass.gov, 2019.
  4. Ibid.
  5. Cf., for example, Matson, D., et al., “Outbreak of Measles in a Fully-Vaccinated School Population,” Pediatric Infectious Diseases 12:292, 1993.
  6. Cf. “Mumps Outbreak at Harvard,” NBC News, April 2016.
  7. Cf., for example, Payne, D., et al., “Sibling Transmission of Vaccine-Derived Rotavirus,” Pediatrics 125:938, 2010, and Murti, M., et al., “Case of Vaccine-Associated Measles 5 Weeks Post-Immunisation,” Eurosurveillance 18:12, 2013.
  8. Cf., for example, Althouse, B., and Scarpino, S., “Asymptomatic Transmission and the Resurgence of Bordetella pertussis,” BMC Medicine 13:1186, 2015.
  9. Cf., for example, Cantekin, E., Letter, New England Journal of Medicine 344:1719, 2001, and Greninger, A., et al., “Enterovirus D-68 Strain Associated with Acute Flaccid Myelitis,” Lancet Infectious Diseases 15:671, 2015.
  10. Roy, F., et al., “Rapid Identification of Measles Virus Vaccine Genotype by Real- Time PCR,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, https://jcm.asm.org, 2017.
  11. Cf., for example, Dauer, C., “Reported Whooping Cough Morbidity and Mortality in the United States,” Public Health Report 58:661, 1943.
  12. Cf., for example, “Varicella,” American Academy of Pediatrics Brochure, 1996.
  13. Cf., for example, Cantekin, op. cit.
  14. Ibid.
  15. Cf. Althouse and Scarpino, op. cit.; Martin, S., et al., “Pertactin-Negative Bordetella pertussis Strains,” Clinical Infectious Diseases 60:223, 2015; and Long, G., et al., “Acellular Pertussis Vaccination Facilitates Bordetella parapertussis Infection,” Proceedings of the Royal Society of Biological Sciences 10:1098, 2010.
  16. Cf., for example, Vashisht, N., and Puliyel, J., “Polio Programme: Let Us Declare Victory and Move On,” Indian Journal of Medical Ethics 9:1146, 2012.
  17. Cf. Greninger, et al., op. cit.
  18. Vide supra, notes 5, 6.
  19. Cherry, J., “The New Epidemiology of Measles and Rubella,” Hospital Practice, July 1980, p. 52 et seq.
  20. Edmondson, M., et al., “Mild Measles and Secondary Vaccine Failure During a Sustained Outbreak in a Highly-Vaccinated Population,” JAMA 263:2467, 1990.
  21. Ibid.
  22. T. O. vs. Secretary of HHS, VICP Claim #99-635V.
  23. Dr. Peter Rost Interview, in Gardasil Documentary, One More Girl, posted by Arjun Walia, collective-evolution.com, July 2015.
  24. Cf. vaccine package inserts, and “How Are Vaccines Evaluated for Safety?” insidevaccines.com.
  25. Ibid.
  26. Ibid.
  27. Kessler, D., “Introducing MEDWatch,” JAMA 269:2765, and “Guerilla RN,” communitybabycenter.com, October 22, 2015.
  28. Holland, M., “Unanswered Questions from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program,” Pace Environmental Law Review 28:480, 2011.
  29. Holland, M., and Krakow, R., “The Right to Legal Redress,” Vaccine Epidemic, Holland, M., and Habakus, L., eds. Skyhorse, 2012, pp. 39-40.
  30. Bruesewitz vs. Wyeth, 2011.
  31. Cf., for example, Moskowitz, R., Vaccines: a Reappraisal, Skyhorse, 2017, Chapter 1, pp. 9-12.
  32. Cf., for example, Albonico, H., et al., “Febrile Infectious Childhood Diseases and the History of Cancer Patients and Matched Controls,” Medical Hypotheses 51:315, 1998.
  33. Cf. Goldman, G., and Miller, N., “Relative Trends in Hospitalization and Mortality Among Infants by the Number of Vaccine Doses and Age,” Human Experimental Toxicology 31:1012, 2012.
  34. Cf. Glanz, J., et al., “A Population-Based Cohort Study of Under-Vaccination in 8 Managed-Care Organizations across the United States,” JAMA Pediatrics 167:284, 2013.
  35. “Recommended Immunization Schedule for Persons Age 0-18 Years,” ACIP, cdc.gov/vaccines/acip, 2016.
  36. “Recommended Adult Immunization Schedule,” ACIP, cdc.gov/vaccines/acip, 2016.
  37. “Medicines in Development: Vaccines,” Press Release, PhRMA, pharma.org, September 11, 2013.
  38. Cf. Black, L., “Limiting Parents’ Rights in Medical Decision-Making,” AMA Journal of Ethics, October 2006, pp. 676-80.
  39. “Ethical Principles for Research Involving Human Subjects,” World Medical Association, Helsinki, 1964, amended 2008, 24, p. 3.
  40. “Your Right to Equality in Education,” ACLU, htpps://www.aclu.org, 2020.
  41. Panetta, G., “What Every 2020 Presidential Candidate Said about Vaccines: Bernie Sanders,” Business Insider, March 15, 2019.
  42. Panetta, op. cit., “Elizabeth Warren.”
  43. “How to Inoculate against Anti-Vaxxers,” Editorial, New York Times, January 20, 2019.
  44. “With Vaccine Rejection Reaching Alarming Levels, the State Should Act,” Editorial, Boston Globe, February 10, 2019.
  45. Rodrigo, C., “Schiff Calls Out Facebook, Google over Anti-Vaccination Information,” The Hill, February 14, 2019.
  46. Cf., for example, Dubos, R., Mirage of Health, Harper, 1959, p. 157: “Faith in the magical powers of drugs often blunts the critical senses, and comes close at times to a mass hysteria, involving scientists and laymen alike. Men want miracles . . . and [may] satisfy this need by worshipping at the altar of modern science.”
  47. Cf. Feynman, R., The Pleasure of Finding Things Out, Basic, 1999, pp. 99-112, passim: “Scientists’ statements are approximate, never absolutely certain. We must leave room for doubt, or there is no progress and no learning. There is no learning without having to pose a question, and a question requires doubt. Before you begin an experiment, you must not know the answer, [or] there is no need to gather evidence; and to judge the evidence, you must take all of it, not just the parts you like. That’s a responsibility that scientists feel toward each other, a kind of morality.”
  48. “Immunization and Infectious Diseases,” Healthy People 2020, CDC, cdc.gov, 2019.
  49. Cf., for example, “Boston Nurses Speak Out Against Mandatory Flu Shots,” Health Impact News, healthimpactnews.com, October 20, 2014.

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

Cochrane Founder Warns Flu Vaccine Research Is Corrupted


Reproduced from original article:
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/02/25/cochrane-collaboration-flu-vaccine.aspx

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola   

February 25, 2020

cochrane collaboration flu vaccine

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Professor Peter Gøtzsche is a Danish physician-researcher who co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre. He has been an outspoken critic of conflicts of interest and bias in research
  • After Gøtzsche co-wrote a scathing review of Cochrane’s 2018 review of HPV vaccine safety, Cochrane’s governing board expelled him and, in a February 9, 2020, tweet, Gøtzsche took aim at Cochrane’s review of influenza vaccine by alleging that a “financially conflicted” individual “rearranged” vaccine trial data to make it appear as though the influenza vaccine reduces mortality, when it doesn’t
  • In the 15 years prior to Gøtzsche’s expulsion, Cochrane had published several meta-reviews, showing flu vaccinations are ineffective for preventing influenza and influenza-like illness, and have no appreciable effect on hospitalizations and mortality
  • March 3, 2020, Maine residents will have the opportunity to go to the polls and repeal LD 798 to reinstate religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions by voting YES on ballot referendum Question 1
  • The “No on 1” ad campaign primarily financed by Big Pharma has already spent $476,000 on misleading television ads to defeat the ballot referendum that would restore vaccine exemptions in Maine. All but $56,000 for the ad campaign has been paid by vaccine manufacturers, which will profit from keeping the state’s “no exceptions” vaccine mandates (LD 798) in place

While the drug industry is quick to claim that anyone questioning its integrity is part of a “war against science,” the evidence of industry malfeasance is simply too great and too disturbing to ignore.

From my perspective, the drug industry itself is to blame for the public’s dwindling confidence in scientific findings. Loss of confidence is a natural result when lie after lie is unearthed, and there’s been no shortage of scientific scandals to shake public confidence in recent years.

One researcher who has helped expose industry bias in research is professor Peter Gøtzsche, a Danish physician-researcher who in 1993 co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration and later launched the Nordic Cochrane Centre.

Cochrane publishes hundreds of scientific reviews each year, looking at what works and what doesn’t, and was for decades considered the gold standard for independent scientific meta-reviews.

The organization’s reputation remained remarkably unblemished all the way up until 2018, when Gøtzsche and Cochrane-affiliated researchers Lars Jørgensen and Tom Jefferson published a scathing critique of Cochrane’s review of the HPV vaccine,1 pointing out methodological flaws and conflicts of interest.

Gøtzsche was subsequently expelled by the Cochrane governing board (although the board insists his removal from the board was due to “repeated misuse of official letterhead to espouse personal views” and had nothing to do with his criticism of Cochrane’s HPV review2). Four board members (Gerald Gartlehner, David Hammerstein Mintz, Joerg Meerpohl and Nancy Santesso) resigned in protest of Gotzsche’s removal from the Cochrane governing board.3

In a three-page letter4 to the Nordic Cochrane Centre, Gøtzsche addressed his expulsion and questioned the path Cochrane’s leadership has chosen in recent years, noting “the central executive team of Cochrane has failed to activate adequate safeguards … to assure sufficient policies in the fields of epistemology, ethics and morality.”

Cochrane Founder Highlights Corrupted Flu Vaccine Research

In a February 9, 2020, tweet, Gøtzsche wrote:5 “Cochrane corruption. A Cochrane review did not find that flu shots reduce deaths … ‘After invitation from Cochrane,’ a financially conflicted person ‘re-arranged’ the data and vaccines reduced deaths. They don’t …”

This information, he says, is included in his new book, “Vaccines: Truth, Lies and Controversy.” Indeed, in years’ past, Cochrane has repeatedly found flu vaccinations are ineffective and have no appreciable effect on influenza-related hospitalizations and mortality. For example:

Its 2006 systematic review6 of 51 studies involving 263,987 children, which sought to “appraise all comparative studies evaluating the effects of influenza vaccines in healthy children; assess vaccine efficacy (prevention of confirmed influenza) and effectiveness (prevention of influenza-like illness)” found:

“Live vaccines showed an efficacy of 79% and an effectiveness of 33% in children older than two years compared with placebo or no intervention. Inactivated vaccines had a lower efficacy of 59% than live vaccines but similar effectiveness: 36%. In children under two, the efficacy of inactivated vaccine was similar to placebo.”

Cochrane’s 2010 review7 of 50 influenza vaccine studies found that:

“In the relatively uncommon circumstance of vaccine matching the viral circulating strain and high circulation, 4% of unvaccinated people versus 1% of vaccinated people developed influenza symptoms …

Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions … Inactivated vaccines caused local harms and an estimated 1.6 additional cases of Guillain-Barré Syndrome per million vaccinations … There is no evidence that they affect complications, such as pneumonia, or transmission.”

This review also included the following notice:

“WARNING: This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size.

Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.”

Cochrane’s 2010 review8 of 75 studies of vaccines for preventing influenza in the elderly concluded that:

“Due to the general low quality of non-RCTs and the likely presence of biases, which make interpretation of these data difficult and any firm conclusions potentially misleading, we were unable to reach clear conclusions about the effects of the vaccines in the elderly.”

Cochrane’s 2018 review9 of 52 clinical studies on vaccines for preventing influenza in adults, including pregnant women, found only 15% of the studies were well-designed and conducted. Based on 25 studies that looked at inactivated influenza vaccines, Cochrane concluded they have only a minor protective effect against influenza and influenza-like illness (ILI), noting:

“Inactivated influenza vaccines probably reduce influenza in healthy adults from 2.3% without vaccination to 0.9% and they probably reduce ILI from 21.5% to 18.1% … 71 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing influenza, and 29 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing an ILI …

We identified one RCT and one controlled clinical trial assessing the effects of vaccination in pregnant women. The efficacy of inactivated vaccine containing pH1N1 against influenza was 50% in mothers (NNV [number needed to vaccinate] 55), and 49% in infants up to 24 weeks (NNV 56).

No data were available on efficacy against seasonal influenza during pregnancy. Evidence from observational studies showed effectiveness of influenza vaccines against ILI in pregnant women to be 24% (NNV 94), and against influenza in newborns from vaccinated women to be 41%.”

In its 2018 review10 of 41 clinical trials on live and inactivated vaccines for preventing influenza in children, they found:

“Compared with placebo or do nothing, live attenuated influenza vaccines probably reduce the risk of influenza infection in children aged 3 to 16 years from 18% to 4%, and they may reduce ILI by a smaller degree, from 17% to 12% …

Seven children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza, and 20 children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one child experiencing an ILI …

Compared with placebo or no vaccination, inactivated vaccines reduce the risk of influenza in children aged 2 to 16 years from 30% to 11%, and they probably reduce ILI from 28% to 20%.

Five children would need to be vaccinated to prevent one case of influenza, and 12 children would need to be vaccinated to avoid one case of ILI …

Adverse event data were not well described in the available studies. Standardized approaches to the definition, ascertainment, and reporting of adverse events are needed.”

Advertisement

Click here to find out why 5G wireless is NOT harmless


Two States Rejecting Big Pharma’s Vaccine Mandates

In recent years, medical freedom has come under intense attack. In state after state, vaccine makers and their lobbyists have rammed through legislation that implements forced vaccination by eliminating vaccine exemptions. People in California, New York, Washington and Maine all lost vaccine exemptions last year, as detailed in the National Vaccine Information Center’s annual state legislation report “Vaccine Exemptions Under Attack in 2019.”

Although 4 states lost vaccine exemptions last year, exemptions were protected from removal in 22 other states by the active participation of vaccine choice advocates who educated legislators about why it is important to have flexible medical, religious and conscience exemptions in vaccine laws.

In New Jersey, bill S2173 was halted in the Senate, both in December 2019 and again in January 2020, due to persistent public protests against the bill proposing to eliminate the religious belief vaccine exemption.11,12,13

The fact that New Jersey managed to thwart this broad attack on freedom is an encouraging sign. Never underestimate the power of the people! The key is numbers — you have to actually take action by contacting your legislators ahead of time to communicate your concerns about a bill you oppose (or support) and showing up at public hearings and on days when votes are taken in your state Capitol.

Thousands of individuals gathered in hallways and outside the Capitol building in Trenton in protest of S2173 on multiple occasions, and it was undoubtedly the sheer size of the opposition that greatly helped to defeat the bill that many considered to be an attack on religious freedom.

Another ray of light shines brightly in Maine. While the state legislature repealed the religious and philosophical belief vaccine exemptions in May 2019 by passing LD 798, residents rapidly succeeded in collecting more than enough signatures of registered voters to get an opportunity to repeal the new vaccine law, and it is now referendum Question 1 on the March 3 ballot.14

So, March 3, 2020, residents will have the opportunity to go to the polls to repeal LD 798 and reinstate religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions by voting YES on referendum Question 1.15 As noted by RejectBigPharma.com:16

“A YES vote is a vote to:

Reject Big Pharma and government overreach
Restore equal access to education for all Mainers
Defend parental rights
Protect religious freedom
Preserve informed consent and medical freedom”

Why Everyone Needs to Support Maine’s ‘Yes on 1’

It’s important to realize that a victory in Maine would be a victory for all states, as it would set a crucial precedent. The good news is that it’s far easier to win in a state with a small population like Maine because there are fewer people to educate, which means less money is required for advertising.

Maine has an advertising saturation point of about $3 million, meaning if you spend $3 million, you will reach a majority of residents and further advertising will not make a significant difference.

Since Maine will be the first state to put government vaccine mandates and repeal of exemptions to a popular vote, it’s important to support Maine’s Yes On 1 campaign regardless of where in the United States you live. By helping them succeed, they will set a precedent for other states to follow.

As of February 6, 2020, the “Yes on 1 Reject Big Pharma” campaign had raised just over $300,000.17 The campaign needs to raise at least $1 million to stand a chance against the vaccine industry’s deep pockets. So, please, make a donation to this campaign today!

Donate today

Of course, if you’re a registered voter in Maine, you can cast a YES vote on March 3, 2020, to restore vaccine exemptions in your state.

Also remember to register to become a user of the free online NVIC Advocacy Portal, operated by the National Vaccine Information Center, to stay up to date on vaccine-related bills that are moving in your state this year, including bills proposing to take away (or expand) your right to obtain a vaccine exemption for yourself or your child.

The NVIC Advocacy Portal also provides access to bill analyses and talking points that you can use to educate your legislators about what the bills will mean to you and your family.

Pharma-Led Opposition Cranks Out Misleading Ads

To win, it’s crucial we make sure Maine’s Yes on 1 campaign gets the funding it needs. Make no mistake, the opposition has no financial constraints, as it is led and supported by the drug industry itself.

Ironically, the opposition is accusing the “Yes on 1: Reject Big Pharma” campaign of misleading voters, saying the drug industry has nothing to do with the removal of vaccine exemptions, and doesn’t make any money on vaccines.

In reality, vaccines are a primary profit driver for the drug industry.18 Merck, which is just one of several vaccine makers, reported over $6.1 billion in sales of their childhood vaccines during the first three quarters of 2019 alone.19

A January 2020 vaccine market report20 states the global vaccine market was worth $41.7 billion as of 2019, and is estimated to hit $58.4 billion by 2024. One of the factors attributed to this rapid growth is “the rising focus on immunization.” Anyone thinking this focus isn’t manufactured by the drug industry itself is fooling themselves.

What’s more, as reported by Yes on 1 at a February 11, 2020, press conference, “No on 1” has already spent $476,000 on just three weeks’ worth of television ads. Yet the opposition — which claims to be a grassroots organization without any pharma funding or connections — report raising only $56,000 in donations. So, where did the rest of it magically come from? At the press conference, a spokeswoman for the Yes on 1 campaign revealed the obvious truth:

“As reported in the Bangor Daily, Bobby Reynolds, spokesman for the ‘No’ campaign … answered this question when he announced that the massive ad buys were funded by — wait for it — vaccine manufacturers.21 Let that sink in.

After months of denying any connection to Big Pharma, the No on 1 campaign yesterday admitted that they were funded by Big Pharma themselves — the very vaccine manufacturers whose products would be mandated under this law.”

Eliminating Exemptions Is a Big Pharma Business Strategy

Of course, vaccine makers have enormously deep pockets, which is how many of these laws are getting passed in the first place. One of the reasons they have so much money to spend on lobbying for the removal of vaccine exemptions is because they don’t have to pay for the damage their products cause.

As noted by Dr. Meryl Nass in a February 11, 2020, post on CentralMaine.com, in support of referendum Question 1:22

“Pharmaceutical companies face no lawsuits for vaccine injuries, so long as their vaccine has been added to the childhood schedule by CDC. Pharmaceutical companies don’t need to advertise required vaccines, since the government mandates them and 94% of Maine children already receive them.

But the industry wants 100% guaranteed uptake, because it is about to roll out a number of new vaccines. The 21st Century Cures Act, passed in 2016, abbreviated the process for testing, licensing and adding vaccines to the childhood schedule. Over 200 vaccines are currently in development.

How many of those vaccines will be required over the next few years is anybody’s guess. There is a huge financial incentive to having your vaccine placed on the childhood schedule by the CDC: no liability for injuries. The right to choose which vaccines your child receives will disappear unless referendum Question 1 passes.”

No-Liability Industry Has No Right to Influence Policy

At the press conference (see video above), Yes on 1 also clarified the opposition’s deceptive message that Yes on 1 would “repeal Maine’s vaccine law.” This is a wildly inaccurate statement.

Yes on 1 simply repeals LD 798, i.e., the law that removes religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions, thus restoring Maine’s vaccine law to what it was before. In other words, certain vaccines will still be required for school attendance, but you will have the right to opt out by claiming a religious or philosophical exemption to one or more of those vaccines — just as you did before LD 798 was written into law.

“The Yes on 1 campaign is, and always been, about speaking truth to power … The truth is that mandate laws like this one have nothing to do with public health, and everything to do with Big Pharma profit, Big Pharma control, and Big Pharma deception,” Yes on 1 says.23

“While this law [LD 798] masquerades as a public health issue, there’s no evidence it would do anything to improve outbreaks of vaccine targeted disease in schools. Countless cases across the country have shown that these diseases occur in fully vaccinated populations …

Why do we care about Big Pharma’s involvement? Because, a hated industry with no liability, no reason to improve the safety of its products, and an ever growing and aggressive schedule, should not be allowed to influence policy to mandate these very products.”

– Sources and References

Chickenpox (Varicella) Vaccine: This Is Why a Shingles Epidemic Is Bolting Straight at the U.S.


Reproduced from original article:
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/11/02/chicken-pox-vaccine-creates-shingles-epidemic.aspx

November 02, 2010

  • Before the chickenpox vaccine was licensed in the US in 1995, children acquired natural immunity to the illness by age six. While it is contagious, chickenpox is a mild disease without any long-term or fatal complications.
  • Normally, when you recover from chickenpox, the virus remains dormant in your nerve roots for many years, unless triggered by physical or emotional stress. When the virus is awakened, it surfaces as shingles, a painful illness marked with a blister-like rash on one side of the body.
  • The chickenpox vaccine only provides temporary immunity, unlike the long-lasting immunity you get from getting the condition. At the same time, there are reports of serious reactions, injuries, and deaths from the mass use of the vaccine.
  • Voluntary health choices are important in preventing vaccine issues. Help raise public awareness by arming yourself with vaccine information.
medical syringe

Diane Murphy, MD, is the Director of the FDA’s Office of Pediatric Therapeutics (OPT). The mission of OPT is to enforce a Congressional mandate that assures access for children to innovative, safe, and effective medical products.

Historically, many medical products have not been tested for use in children, leading to an increase in adverse events and the use of ineffective products.

Murphy notes that young children and neonates require the development of a new directional endpoint that can better help us to not treat children with our best guess, but with knowledge.

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

What had always been regarded as a relatively benign childhood illness was suddenly reinvented in the 1990s as a life-threatening disease for which children must get vaccinated or face dire health consequences.

But wait—Merck to the rescue!

As is true with many new and potentially unnecessary medical interventions used on a widespread basis, there are often unintended consequences. The chickenpox (varicella) vaccine is a perfect example.

By trying to prevent all children from experiencing chickenpox naturally, this policy may have actually created a NEW epidemic—not in children but in adults, especially elderly adults.

Vaccinating children for chickenpox may very well be causing a shingles epidemic.

Chickenpox—Another False Epidemic

Before the live virus chickenpox vaccine was licensed in the United States in 1995, most children acquired a natural, long-lasting immunity to chickenpox by age six. For 99.9 percent of healthy children, chickenpox is a mild disease without complications.

It is estimated there were about 3.7 million cases of chickenpox annually in the U.S. before 1995,1 resulting in an average of 100 deaths (50 children and 50 adults, most of whom were immunocompromised). This hardly represents a dire, life-threatening epidemic that requires mass vaccination of all children!

Chickenpox is caused by the varicella zoster virus, which is a member of the herpesvirus family and is associated with herpes zoster (shingles). Chickenpox is highly contagious but typically produces a mild disease characterized by small round lesions on your skin that cause intense itching. Chickenpox lasts for two to three weeks, and recovery leaves a child with long-lasting immunity.

Half of all cases of chickenpox occur in children ages five to nine. Before the vaccine was licensed in 1995 and states started passing laws mandating that children get it to attend school, it was estimated that only 10 percent of Americans over the age of 15 had not had chickenpox.

Up to 20 percent of adults who get chickenpox develop severe complications such as pneumonia, secondary bacterial infections, and brain inflammation (which is reported in less than one percent of children who get chickenpox). Most children and adults who develop these serious complications have compromised immune systems or other health problems.

Although chickenpox is typically not dangerous, there is a related disease that is more of a cause for concern: shingles.

Chickenpox’s Evil Cousin: Shingles

Chickenpox and shingles are related. They are caused by similar viruses, both in the herpesvirus family. After you recover from chickenpox, the virus can remain dormant (“asleep”) in your nerve roots for many years, unless it is awakened by some triggering factor, such as physical or emotional stress. When awakened, it presents itself as shingles rather than chickenpox.

Shingles is marked by pain and often a blister-like rash on one side of your body, left or right. Other symptoms can include headache and flu-like symptoms. Shingles typically runs its course in three to five weeks.

Although very painful, most people who get shingles will recover without serious complications and will not get it a second time. However, in people with weakened immune systems, shingles complications can be severe or life threatening. The most common complication is postherpetic neuralgia,2 or PHN, where the pain may last for months or even years after the rash has healed. The pain is caused by damaged nerve fibers, which then persist in sending pain messages to your brain.

Other less frequent complications include bacterial skin infections, Hutchinson’s sign, Ramsay Hunt Syndrome, motor neuropathy, meningitis, hearing loss, blindness, and bladder impairment.

A person with shingles can infect someone who hasn’t had chickenpox, who may then develop chickenpox rather than shingles.

If you do develop shingles, as I mentioned earlier this summer, you can use topical honey to treat shingles symptoms and it appears to work better than the drugs.

Chickenpox Is Nature’s Way of Protecting You from Shingles

Nature has devised an elegant plan for protecting you from the shingles virus.

After contracting and recovering from chickenpox (usually as a child), as you age, your natural immunity gets asymptomatically “boosted” by coming into contact with infected children, who are recovering from chickenpox. This natural “boosting” of natural immunity to the varicella (chickenpox) virus helps protect you from getting shingles later in life.

This is true whether you are a child, adolescent, young adult, or elderly—every time you come into contact with someone infected with chickenpox, you get a natural “booster shot” that protects you from a painful—and expensive—bout with shingles.

In other words, shingles can be prevented by ordinary contact, such as receiving a hug from a grandchild who is getting or recovering from the chickenpox. But with the advent of the chickenpox vaccine, there is less chickenpox around to provide that natural immune boost for children AND adults.

So as chickenpox rates have declined, shingles rates have begun to rise, and there is mounting evidence that an epidemic of shingles is developing in America from the mass, mandatory use of the chickenpox vaccine by all children.

As hard as scientists try to come up with ways to “improve” human biology, they just can’t outsmart Mother Nature. In trying to tinker with the natural order of things, we tend to destroy processes that nature has masterfully orchestrated to keep us healthy.

This dance between chickenpox and shingles is a perfect example.

Vaccine Protection Is Only Temporary

The chickenpox (varicella) vaccine is made from live, attenuated (weakened) varicella virus. But chickenpox vaccine provides only TEMPORARY immunity, and even that immunity is not the same kind of superior, longer lasting immunity that you get when you recover naturally from chickenpox.

It’s important to realize that naturally acquiring a case of chickenpox is the ONLY way you can establish longer lasting immunity that will protect you until you come in contact with younger children with chickenpox and are asymptomatically boosted, which will not only reinforce your chickenpox immunity but will also help protect you against getting a painful case of shingles later in life.

When the chickenpox vaccine was licensed for public use in 1995, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) estimated it was 70 to 90 percent effective in preventing disease.3 The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) later reported, “The effectiveness of the vaccine is 44 percent against disease of any severity and 86 percent against moderate or severe disease.”

But the vaccine may be LESS effective than that—around 40 percent—according to an investigation of a chickenpox outbreak among 23 children at a New Hampshire daycare center. The outbreak began with a child who had already been vaccinated.

And a Washington Post article reported that, in another outbreak, 75 percent of the children who came down with chickenpox had previously been vaccinated for it!

It is also interesting to note that most 10 year-old children with no known history of chickenpox are actually immune.

A study in Quebec, Canada, involving 2,000 fourth graders was done to determine the proportion of children who would need to be vaccinated in a “catch-up” program.

Of the youngsters with negative or unknown chickenpox histories, 63 percent had antibodies against the virus, presumably from having had such a mild case that they didn’t even realize they had it. This isn’t terribly surprising given that healthy children occasionally have minimal symptoms (such as a low fever and headache), without manifestation of blisters, indistinguishable from a mild case of the flu.

Bottom line is, the vast majority of children who do NOT get the chickenpox vaccine wind up immune to chickenpox anyway.

The Chickenpox Vaccine Itself Can Cause Injury or Death

As is true with most vaccines, mass use of the chickenpox (varicella) vaccine has been followed by many reports of serious reactions, injuries and deaths.

Before consenting to your child’s receiving this vaccine, consider the following:

  • Between March 1995 and July 1998, the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) received 6,574 reports of health problems4 after chickenpox vaccination. This translates to: one in 1,481 chickenpox vaccinations is followed by an adverse health event.
  • Four percent of reported adverse events (about 1 in 33,000 doses) involves  serious health problems such as shock, encephalitis (brain inflammation), and thrombocytopenia (a blood disorder)
  • 14 of the 6,574 chickenpox vaccine adverse event reports ended in death
  • As a result of the reported vaccine reactions, 17 warnings for adverse events were added to the manufacturer’s product label5 AFTER the vaccine was licensed and being used on a mass basis (including cellulitis, transverse myelitis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, and shingles)
  • There have been documented cases of accidental transmission of varicella vaccine strain virus from a vaccinated child to household contacts, including transmission to a pregnant woman
  • Adverse vaccine events are notoriously underreported—by as much as 90 percent, according to some experts—making the safety profile potentially even worse than the above statistics would suggest

The chickenpox vaccine may be even more risky when combined with other vaccines, like MMR.

According to Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):6

“We have been getting reports from parents that their children are suffering high fevers, chickenpox lesions, shingles, brain damage and dying after chicken pox vaccination, especially when the vaccine is given at the same time with MMR and other vaccines.”

Many questions remain unanswered.

For example, will a young pregnant woman, who got varicella vaccine as a child instead of recovering from natural chickenpox, pass on vaccine induced antibodies to her newborn baby like mothers used to pass on natural maternal antibodies to chickenpox to their newborns?

This is one of many questions about mass use of chickenpox vaccine that is being debated today.

The Birth of an Epidemic

Now, 15 years into the mass use of chickenpox (varicella) vaccine , there are signs a shingles epidemic is underway.

This is not surprising when you consider that the mechanism keeping shingles largely at bay has been drastically reduced, if not eliminated because older children and adults are no longer coming into contact with younger children experiencing chickenpox and there is less and less natural “boosting” of immunity occurring in our population.

The natural “herd” immunity to chickenpox among Americans is being lost and we are becoming vaccine dependent. PLUS a shingles epidemic is taking shape.

Research done by Gary S. Goldman, Ph.D. who served for eight years as a Research Analyst with the Varicella Active Surveillance Project in Los Angeles County with funding from the CDC, revealed higher rates of shingles in Americans since the government’s 1995 recommendation that all children receive chickenpox vaccine.7

According to an article describing his work:

“Dr. Goldman’s findings have corroborated other independent researchers who estimate that if chickenpox were to be nearly eradicated by vaccination, the higher number of shingles cases could continue in the U.S. for up to 50 years; and that while death rates from chickenpox are already very low, any deaths prevented by vaccination will be offset by deaths from increasing shingles disease. (Emphasis mine)

Goldman was so concerned about an epidemic of shingles that he has co-written a book on the matter, entitled The Chickenpox Vaccine: A New Epidemic of Disease and Corruption.

Dr. Goldman isn’t the only one who is concerned about a potential shingles epidemic.

A team at Britain’s Public Health Laboratory Service (PHLS) found that adults living with children enjoy higher levels of protection from shingles. They stated that, although chickenpox can be life threatening for the immunocompromised, thousands of elderly people could also die from the complications of shingles. PHLS called for a re-evaluation of the policy of mass chickenpox vaccination in the U.S., as well as other countries implementing this practice.

For decades, shingles was thought to increase with age as older individuals’ immune systems weakened. However, research suggests this phenomenon is more a result of the fact that older people receive fewer natural boosts to immunity as their contacts with young children decline.

In fact, the effectiveness of the chickenpox vaccine itself depends on natural boosting, so as chickenpox disease rates decline, so will the effectiveness of the vaccine.

Are These Predictions Coming True?

Absolutely.

The incidence of adult shingles has increased by 90 percent from 1998 to 2003, following the release of the chickenpox vaccine for mass use. Shingles results in three times as many deaths and five times as many hospitalizations as chickenpox, and accounts for 75 percent of all medical costs associated with the varicella zoster virus.8

Even children are beginning to come down with shingles,9 as evidenced by school nurse reports since 2000, which was one of the concerns prompting Dr. Goldman to warn the CDC that it may be bringing about a shingles epidemic.

Prior to chickenpox vaccination, shingles was seen only in adults.

All evidence points to the fact that we have traded a relatively mild illness (chickenpox), which does NOT involve complications for 99.9 percent of healthy children, for a more serious illness in our elderly (shingles) that has the potential for compromising the health of an entire population.

Another peer-reviewed article by Dr. Goldman presents a cost-benefit analysis of the chickenpox vaccination program,10 with disturbing findings. chickenpox (varicella) vaccine would have to be universally used for at least 50 years to demonstrate a cost benefit, due to the substantial additional medical cost of a shingles epidemic. This is CLEARLY not worth it, when chickenpox disease presented such minimal risk to society in the first place!

What do you think was the CDC’s answer to a potential shingles epidemic, when presented with Goldman’s findings?

Another vaccine—of course.

Merck – the pharmaceutical giant that makes the chickenpox vaccine – rides in on their white horse with the very answer the CDC was hoping for: A shingles vaccine! Yes, shingles vaccine was developed by the same manufacturer who markets and is the sole source of chickenpox vaccine in America.

What an incredible profit-making scheme – the same drug company that profits from mass, mandatory use of the chicken pox vaccine also profits from sales of a shingles vaccine in a market created by the chickenpox vaccine!

Sound the Horns! Merck ‘to the Rescue’—Again!

The FDA approved Merck’s shingles vaccine (Zostavax) for use in people age 60 and older in May of 2006. So they have come out with a vaccine (shingles) to reverse the damages to your health caused by their earlier vaccine (chickenpox).

Sound familiar?

It is very much like the polypharmacy used to “treat” chronic disease. You get a drug to supposedly make you better, but it causes adverse side effects, so you are given another drug to treat those side effects. Then, THAT drug creates more problems, and pretty soon, no one can tell what’s causing what, and down the drain of poor health you go.

Meanwhile, you are taking a long list of drugs, and the only people truly benefiting are the pharmaceutical companies who make money each step of the way.

In the case of varicella vaccines, they are profiting from the cause of an epidemic, as well as the supposed cure…

But is it REALLY a cure? Will a shingles vaccine prevent a shingles epidemic?

Vaccines: Public Health or Profit Center

Adult vaccination programs have rarely proved successful.

The cost of the shingles vaccine itself ($200) is prohibitive, especially for many older Americans struggling to meet monthly expenses on fixed incomes. Research shows that few adults are making use of it.11

And what unanticipated health effects might the shingles vaccine have on the elderly—particularly those who are immunosuppressed or already challenged with chronic illness or cancer?

The conflicts of interest between vaccine manufacturers and vaccine researchers, and government bodies entangled with both, represent another layer of trouble.

How reliable and unbiased is the vaccine information you get if it’s provided by researchers with financial ties to both vaccine manufacturers and government health agencies promoting mass, mandatory use of vaccines?

In the words of Dr. Goldman:12

“When research is sponsored by agencies that promote vaccination, and reimbursed by the pharmaceutical company itself, and receive enrichment by immunizing children, my experience is that they demonstrate certain biases which allow them to continue operating as profit centers and unfortunatelyat least sometimes promoting vaccination to the detriment of public health.”

Hundreds of Vaccines on the Way

U.S. public health doctors say your child should receive 69 doses of 16 different vaccines before age 18. And 145 more are on the way!13 Yes, believe it or not, Big Pharma has 145 more vaccines in the pipeline and most are in their final stages of approval, in clinical trials or under FDA review.

Vaccine Awareness Week: November 1 — November 6, 2010

Mercola.com & the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) dedicated the first week of November 2010 as Vaccine Awareness Week!

In a collaborative effort to raise public awareness about important vaccination issues, Dr. Joseph Mercola and NVIC published a series of articles and interviews on vaccine topics of interest to Mercola.com newsletter subscribers and NVIC Vaccine E-newsletter readers. The article you’ve just finished reading is one of those.

Vaccine Awareness Week arose from the following shared goals:

  1. Raising public awareness about the need to take an active role in preventing vaccine injuries and deaths
  2. Protecting and expanding legal exemptions to vaccination by securing broad medical, religious, and conscientious belief exemptions in all state vaccine laws
  3. Promoting the human right to voluntary, informed consent to medical risk-taking, including vaccination
  4. Raising funds for NVIC, a non-profit charity that has been working since 1982 to educate the public about vaccination and defend the ethical principle of informed consent.

My Appeal to You

Don’t sit this one out! We’ve got them “on the run.”

NVIC Advocacy Poster

Tell everyone. Tell your friends, your family. With a little bit of effort, you can make significant strides toward preserving your freedom to make VOLUNTARY health care choices – including vaccination choices – that affect you and your children’s health and future.

NVIC has launched the NVIC Advocacy Portal, an online interactive database and communications network that gives you the tools you need to take action to protect legal, medical, religious, and conscientious belief exemptions to vaccination in YOUR state.

Go there now and register! And while you’re at it, please make a donation to NVIC so they can continue fighting to preserve our freedom of make voluntary health choices.

Your Donations to the NVIC help fund efforts that raise vaccine awareness, including the following excellent vaccine resources:

For information about legally avoiding immunizations in Canada, please see the Canadian Vaccination Liberation website
www.vaclib.org.

For more vaccine related news and information, visit the Mercola vaccine information site.

Stay tuned to this newsletter for more updates, or follow the National Vaccine Information Center on Facebook. Together we CAN make a difference!

– Sources and References

The Shingles Epidemic

Written by Brenton Wight, LeanMachine – Health Researcher
Updated 20th February 2020

In 1995, the Chicken Pox vaccine was approved, despite warnings from educated immunologists that this would cause an outbreak of shingles!
What happened?
There is now an epidemic of shingles as predicted.
Seniors are more likely to be affected if they have had the Chicken Pox vaccine, but the biggest increase is now seen in  children and young adults after having the Chicken Pox vaccine.
And everyone is now at a higher risk of Shingles, even if they have not had the vaccine, because of the large number of people who had the vaccine can now give Shingles to everyone they contact.
Of course, the CDC has attempted to bury this data because if the public knew the truth, they would no longer trust the very organisation who was entrusted to protect them.
Read more here.

What is Shingles?

People in the 80+ age group are in the highest risk for Shingles. Risk is significant at 60+ and increases every year as we age. Risk doubles by the time we are 70, and increases again in the 80’s.
Although at one time rare to occur in children and teens, Shingles can happen in any age group, but is now occurring more in the young.
Up to 30% of the population can expect an attack at some time in their life, but the risk can be substantially reduced to near zero by using these guidelines.
Shingles is caused by the varicella-zoster (Chickenpox) virus, which is similar, but not quite the same as the herpes virus that causes cold sores and genital herpes, although the treatments listed here such as Lysine are effective against all of these.
People who had Chickenpox as a child are more likely to get Shingles.
The virus can lay dormant in the body for decades, usually sitting in the spinal cord or other nerves, appearing as Shingles often in the 60 to 90 age group after being triggered by a compromised immune system.
Typical triggers are stress, illness, a poor diet, lack of vitamin D3, antibiotic treatments.
The first sign is nerve pain such as burning or tingling sensations along affected nerves. Two to three days later, the virus reaches the skin, and red bumps or blisters develop above the affected nerves. More cases happen in Summer, so heat appears to be a contributing factor.

Symptoms

Nerve tingling or sensitivity is usually the first symptom, followed by painful red blisters along the nerve lines. Often an attack can be felt coming on by neuralgia around the scalp and/or along nerve lines.
Pain can be burning or stabbing, increasing as the condition progresses.
Blister patches can occur anywhere, but most often on the neck or upper trunk, usually only on one side of the torso, or face, arm, or leg. Often flu-like symptoms, chills, or headache accompany the condition.
The pain ranges from very annoying in mild cases, to unbearable in severe cases.
Pain is often reduced when atmospheric pressure is high, and worse when atmospheric pressure is low.

Is Shingles Contagious?

Yes, it can be transmitted by contact to others, even babies and newborns. It is much more likely to be transmitted to others who have never had Chickenpox or never had a vaccination. Regular washing of hands, sheets, pillow cases, towels, and disposal of dressings is essential.
While the risk is not as high as some other diseases, the results can be serious in some cases, so care is always required.

Prognosis

Some people recover well without any treatment in 3 weeks, others suffer for many months or even years. In very severe cases, damage to eyes or brain may develop, causing blindness or hearing loss, but this is very rare. Bell’s Palsy is another possible complication, where one side of the face can become paralyzed.
Usually the younger a patient, the faster the recovery and the milder the symptoms.
Recurrence is rare, but I would suggest permanent use of Lysine as a preventive measure, as this can be a very painful condition.

PHN or postherpetic neuralgia

This is the severe nerve pain associated with Shingles, coming on after the blisters have formed and when the disease is well established. It is much more severe than the original nerve pain when it starts. Pain may be burning, throbbing, or stabbing and can continue long after the blisters have healed.

Shingles Diet

The ratio between Lysine and Arginine is important. We need to increase Lysine and decrease Arginine to treat Shingles.
Arginine is another Amino acid.
Foods containing Lysine include meat, fish, yogurt, milk, eggs, cheese, apples, pears, avocados, apricots, pineapples, green beans, asparagus.
Avoid foods containing Arginine such as tomatoes, wheat germ, brussels sprouts, cashews, peanuts, blackberries, blueberries, grapes, pumpkin seeds, chocolate, sugar, anchovies, tuna, pine nuts and oats.
Just a handful of peanuts for example, contain enough Arginine to cause aggravation of Shingles.
Many weight-loss and body-building products contain arginine, so always check the ingredients.
Of course, many of these Arginine-containing foods are very good for our nutrition, and Arginine has some very beneficial properties, so this diet is only for those with Shingles.
When the Shingles symptoms are gone, we can safely return to a normal diet, as many of the foods listed containing arginine are very good for overall health.
However, I suggest that Lysine supplements be continued for several months, or longer if attacks reoccur.

Foods with Lysine
(Encouraged)
Foods with Arginine
(Avoid)
All meats
Fish
Yogurt
Cheese
Milk
Eggs
Apples
Pears
Apricots
Avocados
Pineapples
Green beans
Asparagus
Tomatoes
Wheat Germ
Brussels sprouts
Cashews
Grapes
Pumpkin Seeds
Pecans
Blackberries
Blueberries
Peanuts
Chocolate
Sugars

Supplements

Two supplements are vital for prevention and recovery, and work well for both Shingles and Chicken pox.

Number one: L-Lysine, an essential amino acid.
L-Lysine (called simply Lysine hereafter) is essential because it must come from the diet or supplements, as the body cannot manufacture it from other components.
Take 1/4 teaspoon dissolved in a glass of water every day as a preventive measure. This product gives over 2 years supply.
To treat Shingles, increase the dose to 1 teaspoon a day until symptoms disappear, then go back to 1/4 teaspoon forever to help prevent a recurrence.
To treat the blisters topically, use Lysine Ointment to apply direct to the affected areas.

Number Two: Vitamin C, very important to build the immune system and reduce nerve pain.
This Vitamin C is pure pharmaceutical grade Ascorbic Acid powder, 453 gram tub. Avoid cheap vitamins made from Sodium Ascorbate which is not the same thing.
Preventive dose is 1/2 teaspoon (2.5 grams) daily.
This can be increased to around 1.5 teaspoons for Shingles treatment, but more may cause loose stools.
See also the IV treatment below.

Other important supplements are:

  • Vitamin D3 to help build the immune system, also to strengthen bones and reduce risk of cancer and other diseases. This is a high dose of 10,000 IU so as a maintenance dose 1 to 3 times a week is fine, but to treat any disease, use daily for 2 to 4 weeks, taken with a meal containing some healthy fat
  • Zinc will also help the immune system
  • Active B12 helps prevent replication of the virus

Note that as we age, we tend to have less Vitamin B-12, Vitamin D3 and Zinc, which is obviously a contributing factor for higher risk of Shingles in seniors.

Herbal Supplements

Herbal supplements can help many conditions, but unfortunately, there are few herbal supplements that have any significant effect on Shingles treatment, but herbs such as
Astragalus can help build the immune system and may help reduce risk of Shingles developing.

Standard Medical Treatment

The Shingles vaccine – Zostavax – Sould I get the jab?

When we start getting old, doctors tell us to get vaccinations for the Flu every year, the Pneumococcal pneumonia vaccine, the Tetanus vaccine every 10 years, and now the Shingles vaccine.
Should we get them all? LeanMachine says no, but this is an individual choice for everyone.
Doctors can give a Shingles vaccine – Zostavax – for prevention, and works for 5 out of 10 people (so the drug manufacturers say), although 3 of every 1000 will get Shingles directly from the vaccination.
In Australia, this is free for the elderly, but will do nothing for an existing condition.
In the USA, the FDA recommends those over 50 get the jab, but the CDC (Centre for Disease Control) says only those over 60.
They all say that we need the jab, whether we have ever had Shingles or not, but this contradicts their own advice that a repeat occurrence is rare.
Zostavax is a live vaccine given in the upper arm as a single injection, and is said to last around five years.
Zostavax, made my Merck, is the same as the Chickenpox vaccine that is given to children, only fourteen times as strong!
Manufacturers claim that the vaccine may reduce the severity and duration of Shingles, but this is what they always say about the flu vaccine. We now know that a glass of water with lemon juice in the morning will also reduce the risk and the severity of the flu, equal to the vaccination in effectiveness. Add some Vitamin D3 and a few other supplements in my upcoming Immunity article, and say bye-bye to the flu.
The worst thing about the Chickenpox vaccination many of us had as children, is that it can cause Shingles, and the Shingles we get from the Chickenpox vaccination is actually far worse than Shingles from a previous Chickenpox infection.

Some side effects of the vaccination

  • Redness, pain, swelling, itching at the injected site
  • A rash similar to Chickenpox
  • Headaches
  • 3 in 1000 will get Shingles directly from the vaccination
  • The Shingles vaccine is only 50% effective at first, dropping to zero effectiveness after 5 years

The vaccine is NOT recommended if:

  • You are allergic to gelatin
  • You are allergic to the antibiotic Neomycin
  • You have a weakened immune system
  • You have HIV/AIDS or any other immuno-supressive disease
  • You are on steroids, Adalimumab (Humira), Infliximab (Remicade), Etanercept (Enbrel)
  • You are on any other immune system suppressing drugs
  • You have received any transplants
  • You are receiving radiation or chemotherapy
  • You have a cancer such as Leukemia or Myeloma that affects the bone marrow
  • You have a cancer such as Lymphoma which affects the lymphatic system
  • You are pregnant or at risk of becoming pregnant

The Shingles Prevention Study

This trial of 39,000 people showed that around HALF the time, the vaccine did NOT protect people against Shingles, a 50% success rate. LeanMachine calls this a 50% failure rate.
That is in the first year.
Successive years had an even higher failure rate, and by year five, failure rate was 100% meaning the vaccine was completely ineffective.
This trial was also carried out by Merck, a drug company with a vested interest in the outcome. When such trials are conducted, results can be misleading. For example, many people drop out of a study, often due to unpleasant or even intolerable side-effects, but all drop-outs are excluded from the results because they did not complete the study. Some people died, and this may have been from cancer, heart attacks or other disease, but who is to know if the vaccine accelerated or delayed their death? No one will ever know as their results are never included because again, they could not complete the study. Many of the results are also distorted because of vaguely-worded questionnaires about side-effects which can be interpreted in different ways. Many drug companies, including Merck, have been taken to court and sued because of deliberate “doctoring” of study results.
However, the study, if we can believe it, showed that the vaccination helped reduce severity of Postherpetic neuralgia, which otherwise in 10% to 15% of patients, continues for some time after the rash disappears, sometimes months, even years. The benefit of vaccination for Postherpetic neuralgia is apparently a 66% or two-thirds success rate in helping to relieve painful symptoms and shortening recovery time. Still not an outstanding success rate (a one-third failure rate), helping tho thirds of about 1 in 8 people who are affected (8%), but for those who have a fear or intolerance of pain, they may consider the jab to be worth the risk, but for those with Shingles already, the vaccination has zero effect on nerve pain. We all know that Vitamin B group helps protect nerves, so this should be added to the Shingles prevention list. No studies have been carried out on Shingles nerve pain with vitamins, but this seems logical to me.

The LeanMachine Study

This is a two-person study (myself plus Mrs LeanMachine) from from early 2010 to 2020, ten years.
Sure, two people is not a significant study as far as the scientific community is concerned.
But for LeanMachine, the improvement in health, the weight loss, the lower blood pressure and triglycerides, the almost elimination of allergies, the extra strength, fitness, energy, and lack of all disease proves to me that no vaccinations are required for anything. Neither of us has had a cold, flu or any other sickness ever since the diet, supplements and lifestyle were all improved at age 63.
Now as I edit this article at age 73, I have still not had even a headache or an upset stomach, so I do not believe I will ever get Shingles, Flu, Tetanus, Pneumonia or anything else.
Check back here in another 27 years to see how I am going!

Alternatives to the Vaccination

As a preventive measure, L-Lysine may be at least just as effective, and possibly much more effective, without any side-effects. After all, Lysine is a natural food and an essential Amino acid which we all need for good health.
Lysine, when combined with Proline, another Amino acid, has been shown to destroy Pancreatic cancer cells, and may well offer some protection against other cancers, and also helps build strong bones.

Intravenous Vitamin C

The amount of Vitamin C that can be taken orally is limited. Most people can take up to around 9000mg (9 grams, or around 4 teaspoons) but higher doses may cause stomach upset. The doctor can organise a much higher dose of Vitamin C using IV (Intra-Venous) drip, typically 50,000mg (50 grams) or more.
The doctor can also prescribe an anti-viral medication such as Acyclovir or Valacyclovir, often (but not always) effective to reduce the time to recover from Shingles, generally more effective in the early stages (first 3 days).
The doctor can also inject a nerve-block anesthetic into the affected nerve to reduce pain, but this wears off after 10 days or so, and does not always work.

What the doctor should NOT do

  • Prescribe painkillers, especially opiates. Painkillers have shown little or no effect for Shingles
  • Prescribe Paracetamol (Acetaminophen or Tylenol in the USA), which destroys glutathione, the “master antioxidant” of the body, impacts liver function and reduces fever. Fever is the body’s mechanism for fighting viruses, so why reduce it?
  • Prescribe anti-depressants. Patients may feel depressed because of pain, but anti-depressant drugs can clobber the immune system, aggravating Shingles
  • Prescribe anti-seizure medication. Can also clobber the immune system, aggravating Shingles
  • Prescribe statin medication, again clobbering the immune system – see below
  • Prescribe antibiotics, which knock out good gut bacteria, our first line of defense for the immune system

If the patient is currently on statin medication (Lipitor, Crestor, Zocor, Simvastatin, etc), they are invariably low on vitamin D3 and Co-Enzyme Q10 and after kicking the doc in the backside, (metaphorically speaking), quit the statins and get some Vitamin D3 and some Co-Enzyme Q10.

Other things to relieve symptoms

  • Take a bath in cool water
  • Use a towel soaked in cool water as a compress to affected areas, but do NOT use ice packs
  • A bath in cool to lukewarm water treated with starch or colloidal oatmeal may help relieve symptoms
  • A cloth soaked with apple cider vinegar applied to the affected areas can help reduce pain and itching
  • A teaspoon of Apple Cider Vinegar daily can help rebuild the gut bacteria and immune system
  • Calamine lotion on affected areas may help relieve symptoms
  • Capsaicin cream (or Red Cayenne Pepper) may help reduce pain when applied to affected areas (keep away from eyes!) but best applied before the blisters open
  • Mix a paste of hydrogen peroxide and baking soda and apply to affected areas and surrounds to help stop spreading. Works best if caught in early stages
  • Peppermint oil applied to the blisters may help
  • A paste made from Epsom Salts (Magnesium Sulfate) and water may help heal blisters
  • Drinking Celery Juice daily may help
  • Spinal manipulation, Reiki, Meditation, and acupuncture may help in some cases
  • Try spraying Colloidal Silver on affected areas. Science says there is no evidence it works, but anecdotal evidence claims it does work
  • To prevent spread or recurrence of infection, wash towels and sheets in the hottest water possible, or at least leave to dry in direct sunlight
  • Wash hands immediately in hot water after touching any affected areas, even more important if there are open blisters

Disclaimer

LeanMachine is not a doctor, and everyone should consult with their own health professional before taking any product to ensure there is no conflict with existing prescription medication.
LeanMachine has been researching nutrition and health since 2010 and has completed many relevant studies.

Coronavirus UPDATE: Massive coverup exposed by bioweapons expert

Reproduced from original article:
www.naturalhealth365.com/coronavirus-death-toll-3285.html

(NaturalHealth365) As we continue to report on the latest news about the coronavirus epidemic, we’re beginning to realize there’s so much more to 2019-nCoV than mainstream media would have you believe. We only need to start with the virus’s origin story to start pulling back the layers of deception and misinformation.As we’ve stated in an earlier article, the prevalent theory has been that the coronavirus began in a wet market in the central Chinese city of Wuhan. Now, blistering new revelations from an American bioweapons expert shatter this theory and point to a much more sinister beginning for the virus, which has amassed a current death toll of over 800 people.

Deadly virus created in a Wuhan laboratory, says U.S. international law professor – a laboratory specially designated by the World Health Organization

Dr. Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He holds multiple prestigious degrees, including a doctor of law degree from Harvard Law School and a PhD in Political Science from Harvard University. He’s best known for drafting The Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989.

In a recent interview published on January 30 to YouTube, Dr. Boyle gave a detailed account of how 2019-nCoV didn’t originate in the wet market of the Hubei province. Was the virus ever actually present in the market, and could its presence have accelerated the rapid viral outbreak? Absolutely, Dr. Boyle and others argue.

But that doesn’t mean the virus actually began there.

So, where did this dangerous strain of coronavirus begin?  Dr Boyle contends that the virus was manufactured and bio-engineered in a Biosafety Level 4 laboratory – a laboratory that just so happens to be located directly in Wuhan.

Do NOT ignore the health dangers linked to toxic indoor air.  These chemicals – the ‘off-gassing’ of paints, mattresses, carpets and other home/office building materials – increase your risk of headaches, dementia, heart disease and cancer.

Get the BEST indoor air purification system – at the LOWEST price, exclusively for NaturalHealth365 readers.  I, personally use this system in my home AND office.  Click HERE to order now – before the sale ends.

This laboratory is specially designated by the World Health Organization (WHO) as the only lab in China that can contain and work with the world’s deadliest viruses.  Dr. Boyle asserts this is proof that the WHO knows far more about the outbreak than they are letting on.

The allegation is consistent with a January 2020 paper published by The Lancet, which found that more than a third of the patients tested in their sample had NO contact with the Wuhan wet market, including “Patient Zero.”

In other words, growing evidence suggests that 2019-nCoV leaked out of the Wuhan laboratory and into the surrounding community, where it would go on to infect thousands of unsuspecting people – a number that’s steadily rising.

Now scrambling to contain the epidemic, the Chinese government initially tried to cover it up. They even threatened and attempted to silence a Chinese doctor named Li Wenliang who first warned of the coming outbreak.

Sadly, breaking reports tell us that Wenliang succumbed to the virus on February 7.

New coronavirus has links to manufactured SARS virus, HIV virus

Why manufacture and design a lethal and unprecedented virus? Simple, Dr. Boyle asserts: to create biological weapons for warfare.

In the interview (which hopefully won’t be removed from YouTube), he hypothesizes that WHO-affiliated Wuhan scientists genetically tinkered with the coronavirus responsible for SARS (SARS-CoV) until it became the monstrosity it is now (2019-nCoV).  The current coronavirus reportedly has a 15 percent greater fatality rate and 83 percent greater infection rate than SARS did, which ransacked the world in 2002 to 2004.

Dr. Boyle also cites evidence indicating that Chinese officials smuggled coronavirus materials out of a Canadian lab that’s known for leading research, development, and testing of biological warfare weapons.

Additionally, a team of Indian virologists just revealed in a January 2020 paper that the 2019-nCoV shares an “uncanny similarity” of genetic inserts with the virus that causes AIDS. (Their paper has been withdrawn…another thinly-veiled cover up attempt?)

Tellingly, Chinese doctors have reportedly been using the HIV drug lopinavir/ritonavir as an off-label treatment for people with 2019-nCoV…so clearly there’s no denying at least some link between these two viruses.

Meanwhile, other scientists seem to be wasting no time to continue tinkering with viruses and trying to capitalize on the outbreak.

In an article published by CNN on February 7, Robin Shattock, head of mucosal infection and immunity at Imperial College London, states rather bluntly: “What’s important is that as a global community we maximize our effort to get a vaccine available in the shortest possible time.”  Big Pharma experts are hopeful that a vaccine will be available as soon as 2021 – “faster than it’s been done before,” brags Shattock.

Stay tuned for regular updates about the coronavirus and more tips on keeping your family healthy.

Sources for this article include:

Greatgameindia.com
CDC.gov
WSJ.com
Businessinsider.com
Reuters.com
Livescience.com
TheLancet.com
Law.illinois.edu
Biorxiv.org

How the CDC Combats Health Freedom Through Front Groups


Reproduced from original article:
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/02/11/naccho.aspx

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola     

February 11, 2020